Canon Problems with G:T books

[robject]

I'm calling for specific canon problems found in GURPS:Traveller books.

Frankly, I don't expect many problems or discrepancies to show up. The reason for this is because Loren is, well, Loren, and because the writers tend to be very knowledgeable about Traveller (what we call "canon").

But, there might be some. If so, please let me know.

 

[Highorbit_drifter]

I'm calling for specific canon problems found in GURPS:Traveller books.

Frankly, I don't expect many problems or discrepancies to show up. The reason for this is because Loren is, well, Loren, and because the writers tend to be very knowledgeable about Traveller (what we call "canon").

But, there might be some. If so, please let me know.

Canon was pretty well vetted, but, for example, the Nobles book was made obsolete by T5's take on nobility. I might be wrong but I think that book had a lot of original work anyway, so while it sourced canon, it built on it make its assumptions about nobility, and could probably be safely ignored.

Note that this is not to say I really liked that book. Its one of my favorites. But it is problematic on how or what to adopt from it into T5 compliant material.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Perhaps, another related issue might be which books have a large amounts of material considered non-canon such as Beyond the Claw.

I have heard similar issues being discussed for Starmerc and Ground Forces.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[GypsyComet]

Many of the added aliens in BtC are certainly MOARN concerns, but few are real Canon problems in the same way as, say, the Valkyrie. The aliens added in the Alien books are a slightly higher Canon concern as some of them are poor fits, repetitive, or straight up Setting Breakers. My understanding is that the Addaxur thing has been resolved for the Addaxur themselves, but the Clotho could be reassigned.

I found some of the Major Race treatments to be subtly off, but that may be my own biases.

Whether the organizational extrapolations in Ground Forces, First In, and elsewhere are Canon concerns is probably moot, as those have not been revisited since. Some points for comparison might be gleaned from Marc's novel.

A few assertions in Interstellar Wars might be questionable, but that is also not the modern era so there aren't many outside points for comparison.

 

[mike wightman]

Canon issues with GT?

Far Trader - fine if you accept the authors assumptions, pants if you don't
Alien books - many non canon aliens added that have no place in the OTU
Behind the Claw, Starmercs and Ground Forces conflict with CT canon and MT canon.
Sword Worlds, while being an excellent book, re-write canon (better than original, so keep)
Nobles - brilliant book, but T5 overwrites (unless T5 nobles are for Galaxiad in which case keep).

 

[aramis]

I'm calling for specific canon problems found in GURPS:Traveller books.

Frankly, I don't expect many problems or discrepancies to show up. The reason for this is because Loren is, well, Loren, and because the writers tend to be very knowledgeable about Traveller (what we call "canon").

But, there might be some. If so, please let me know.

Aside from the "GURPS Authors put way too many niggling details in"

BTC wasn't checked against extant canon - it redefines a lot of worlds features

GTGF erroneously states that regiments exist only on paper, and uses the british approach of Battalions directly in Brigades.... which is counter to SMC, 5FW, CT Bk4, MT IE, MT RC, MT RSB, and a handful of T4 sources.

GT preserves the "Loren says all marines are trained in battledress armor" controversy, which is contradictory to CT, MT, and T4 - where only some marines can even wear the stuff; further not all CT imperial marines have vacc suit as a formal skill, and we see Imperial Marines in other armors in multiple sources, which also postdate loren's article, so the assertiion that they wear it as a field uniform are also counter indicated. In MT and T4, all marines are capable of wearing a vacc suit, but lack the requisite skill to don Battledress - which requires either Battledress 0 or Vacc Suit 1. (I cannot tell which way T5 falls on this - T5 CGen still leaves me baffled.)

GT:FT presumes a high trade, low local reliance, model that is counter to MT Hard Times and to T4, and also CT's TTA. TTA shows a much lower number of freighters than should be in port by GT rules - by TWO orders of magnitude. Similarly, other portraits of starport traffic are one to two orders of magnitude lower than GTFT.

GT Nobles pretty much simply needs to be scrapped. It's counter to several T4 sources, doesn't jive with CT/MT nobles articles, doesn't match the later T5 system (which may be Galaxiad, not 3I), introduces new levels of government counter to the CT & MT articles on government... Cluster Counts, for example - CT says flat out that in the imperium, there is no category between individual world governments and subsector governments. Further still, Canon says the Subsector Duke rules a Subsector, not a "duchy"; this is a niggle, but the term Duchy has connotations of control that a Subsector canonically explicitly does not have.

GT's ship designs as a whole are built with different assumptions for power plants than any other edition. Further, the GT ship system is derived from G:V (for GURPS 3rd Revised), and so has numerous minor niggles and disconnects.

 

[Highorbit_drifter]

Canon issues with GT?


Alien books - many non canon aliens added that have no place in the OTU
Behind the Claw, Starmercs and Ground Forces conflict with CT canon and MT canon.
Sword Worlds, while being an excellent book, re-write canon (better than original, so keep)

The added aliens, in most cases, are questionable. BUT does that make them non-canon?

BtC, Starmercs and Ground Forces. Personally I found them 'weak', especially as compared to most of the rest of the GT line. But I hadn't heard they had canon conflicts. Then again I stayed away from their conversations since I didn't care for them.

Can you (or anyone), give some examples about non-canon Behind the Claw entries?

 

[mike wightman]

Here is a link to the errata - sort of sums up the canon issues nicely:

http://www.sjgames.com/errata/gurps/traveller-behind-the-claw.html

 

[Hal]

GT Nobles pretty much simply needs to be scrapped. It's counter to several T4 sources, doesn't jive with CT/MT nobles articles, doesn't match the later T5 system (which may be Galaxiad, not 3I), introduces new levels of government counter to the CT & MT articles on government... Cluster Counts, for example - CT says flat out that in the imperium, there is no category between individual world governments and subsector governments. Further still, Canon says the Subsector Duke rules a Subsector, not a "duchy"; this is a niggle, but the term Duchy has connotations of control that a Subsector canonically explicitly does not have.

Thanks for making that statement above. The reference to The Traveller Adventure made me re-read it more closely in an effort to see what it says about Nobility versus some of the material in GURPS TRAVELLER NOBLES.

On such item that caught my attention was on page 35 of The Traveller Adventure (henceforth abbrev as TTA):

"The Marquis owes allegiance to the Count Knowln of Celepina (in nearby Rhylanor subsector), who in turn owes allegiance to the Duke of Rhylanor, one of several Dukes in the Spinward Marches."

Now, ordinarily, I wouldn't much worry about that above as anything special but for the fact that page 9 of Characters and Combat lists the various Nobility status values as:

Marquis: 13
Count: 14
Duke: 15

It is one thing to be overseen by a higher ranking noble (Per GURPS TRAVELLER NOBLES), but another thing to owe allegiance. Now for the other fun fact...

There is a Duke of Aramis MUCH closer than is the Duke of Rhylanor. That implies to me that the owing of allegiance is not a "sector job" with a superior above you in the same subsector, but something akin to the older meaning of Allegiance. Ah well, older material forgotten in the mists of time and new material written despite the older - all come into play for "inconsistencies" <sigh>

In all, struggling to make Nobility Relevant to the Traveller Universe consistent with observed historical behavior of humanity in positions of power is something that bugs me a LOT about the Third Imperium background material. It is one thing to say that something is "thus" - but another thing to say HOW it is thus in a way that fits observable human nature and human behavior.

 

[aramis]

Thanks for making that statement above. The reference to The Traveller Adventure made me re-read it more closely in an effort to see what it says about Nobility versus some of the material in GURPS TRAVELLER NOBLES.

On such item that caught my attention was on page 35 of The Traveller Adventure (henceforth abbrev as TTA):

"The Marquis owes allegiance to the Count Knowln of Celepina (in nearby Rhylanor subsector), who in turn owes allegiance to the Duke of Rhylanor, one of several Dukes in the Spinward Marches."

Now, ordinarily, I wouldn't much worry about that above as anything special but for the fact that page 9 of Characters and Combat lists the various Nobility status values as:

Marquis: 13
Count: 14
Duke: 15

It is one thing to be overseen by a higher ranking noble (Per GURPS TRAVELLER NOBLES), but another thing to owe allegiance. Now for the other fun fact...

There is a Duke of Aramis MUCH closer than is the Duke of Rhylanor. That implies to me that the owing of allegiance is not a "sector job" with a superior above you in the same subsector, but something akin to the older meaning of Allegiance. Ah well, older material forgotten in the mists of time and new material written despite the older - all come into play for "inconsistencies" <sigh>

In all, struggling to make Nobility Relevant to the Traveller Universe consistent with observed historical behavior of humanity in positions of power is something that bugs me a LOT about the Third Imperium background material. It is one thing to say that something is "thus" - but another thing to say HOW it is thus in a way that fits observable human nature and human behavior.

Mongoose left those in, tho', in the reprint. Pissed Hans, made me happy.

Oh, and by the same token, a historical Baron's knights owe fealty and service to the baron, and obedience and allegiance to his officers, and to the crown's Knight-Marshal, too...

 

[Hal]

Got a cite for the Knights you mentioned above?

 

[aramis]

Got a cite for the Knights you mentioned above?

Any good history of Feudal France and/or Britain, as few high nobles took the field directly unless officers to some other noble/royal. AC Fox-Davies mentions it, too.

The feudal obligation was not JUST to the liege, but his officers.

 

[Condottiere]

There's a higher density of nobility and aristocracy, comparatively.

While there would be any number of willing candidates to replace them, you have to reason that the training they received, the practise of governance, and probably top secret information residing in their brains, would be harder.

 

[aramis]

GTFT - page 14 - uses the methodology (and I suspect, converted credits by TL) from Striker. Which Marc has said not to use for the OTU.

 

[Hal]

GTFT - page 14 - uses the methodology (and I suspect, converted credits by TL) from Striker. Which Marc has said not to use for the OTU.

It would be interesting to see where/what the conversion rate is between old style CT credits and GURPS TRAVELLER credits. I'm not entirely certain that the methodology for GURPS matches that found on Striker page 36 of book 2. Similar methodologies, but not necessarily the same.

GURPS uses the concept that items produced at 1 tech level after introduction (say a TL 8 invention being produced at TL 9) end up being half the price. After two tech levels - the item is 1/4 price. So, while going for the same goal and using similar formulas, it seems that they're not entirely related to each other.

 

[aramis]

It would be interesting to see where/what the conversion rate is between old style CT credits and GURPS TRAVELLER credits. I'm not entirely certain that the methodology for GURPS matches that found on Striker page 36 of book 2. Similar methodologies, but not necessarily the same.

GURPS uses the concept that items produced at 1 tech level after introduction (say a TL 8 invention being produced at TL 9) end up being half the price. After two tech levels - the item is 1/4 price. So, while going for the same goal and using similar formulas, it seems that they're not entirely related to each other.

Well, technically, per the GURPS designers' notes, the GURPS $ is 1 1985-86 US dollar.

CT Cr correspond highly to 1977 US dollars.
T5 Cr explicitly correspond to 15 minutes of base level labor. Which, in the US, varies from $7.25/hour to $15.00/hour... or even as low as $3.40/Hour + Tips. So let's use federal, which puts the Cr at 2016 US $1.81...

 

[Hal]

Well, technically, per the GURPS designers' notes, the GURPS $ is 1 1985-86 US dollar.

CT Cr correspond highly to 1977 US dollars.
T5 Cr explicitly correspond to 15 minutes of base level labor. Which, in the US, varies from $7.25/hour to $15.00/hour... or even as low as $3.40/Hour + Tips. So let's use federal, which puts the Cr at 2016 US $1.81...

Much as it pains me to say this, do NOT put much stock in the financial rules for use with GURPS. The "Wealth rules" for GURPS in my opinion STINK (I had other more harsh words to utilize, but what I wrote gets the idea across well enough).

The cost of living rules in GURPS stink even worse. The rate of exchange rules in GURPS TRAVELLER are a travesty that has me rolling my eyes even now after all these years past the publishing date.

For what it is worthy, any time I use any kind of currency in GURPS campaigns that I run, I almost invariably toss out those rules from GURPS and use the rules from other campaign games. Notably HARN rules for any fantasy campaigns, and my own attempts at rationalizing the cost of living rules to approximate something closer to what I've experienced in my life (ie that cost of living tends to be around 80 to 85% going income rates, with the discretionary spending hovering around the 1 in 6 dollars free. Those whose lifestyle is better than mine, tend to be living close to their means as well - just that their house costs more than mine does, or the price of their luxuries tend to be higher than I can afford (ie their discretionary spending) etc.

But to go with the idea that a GURPS dollar is worth about X amount money, becomes more readily clear as an exercise in futility when one attempts to translate costs in GURPS to more closely resemble historical values (such as the old west in the 1870's for example). Lord knows, I've used GURPS since the late 1980's, and even I have given up on that aspect for GURPS.

 

[aramis]

Much as it pains me to say this, do NOT put much stock in the financial rules for use with GURPS. [snip]
But to go with the idea that a GURPS dollar is worth about X amount money, becomes more readily clear as an exercise in futility when one attempts to translate costs in GURPS to more closely resemble historical values (such as the old west in the 1870's for example). Lord knows, I've used GURPS since the late 1980's, and even I have given up on that aspect for GURPS.

Using the G$ as 1985 US $, and the Cr as 1977 US $, the G$ is about half (the dollartimes.com calculator shows 1985 $100 as 1977 $55.20... a 9/5 Cr/G$.

It's also worth noting that most later GURPS books used whatever the current US dollar values were unconverted - essentially, everything after Dr. Kromm took over.

Late CT, the dollar values for TCS planetary values seem to be based upon 1981 US GDP per capita as the baseline - which is part of why it fails to match Striker, which is based upon 1977 US GDP ...

It's a common problem. Especially considering that a ZX81 was 50 hours base level labor in 1980, and an almost identical architecture Z80-EEPROM based single-chip computer can be had for under 2 hours, now.

 

[Hal]

Using the G$ as 1985 US $, and the Cr as 1977 US $, the G$ is about half (the dollartimes.com calculator shows 1985 $100 as 1977 $55.20... a 9/5 Cr/G$.

It's also worth noting that most later GURPS books used whatever the current US dollar values were unconverted - essentially, everything after Dr. Kromm took over.

Late CT, the dollar values for TCS planetary values seem to be based upon 1981 US GDP per capita as the baseline - which is part of why it fails to match Striker, which is based upon 1977 US GDP ...

One of the reasons I gave up on GURPS 4th edition rules for incomes and cost of living rules were because discretionary spending levels (income less cost of living for a given social status) was way too high (i.e. Unrealistic). I ended up creating my own set of rules for cost of living levels to compensate. The newer income levels based on tech levels in GURPS 4th look like the were influenced by GT:FT.

 

[MThompson016]

Just something that kind of fits here, but I noticed on the wiki that portions of the book aren't canon. Other than Smade's Planet/Gemini (SR 2433), what else is there?