Class B starport facilities
- Thread starter rancke
- Start date
And so I think that this change in nomenclature breaks with previously published material for no good reason, losing the useful distinction between spacecraft (no jumping) and starships (jumping) for no corresponding gain.
What part of that statement is unclear?
New game? Not to me. A new version of an old game. And the "closely related to CT" part is important to me. And note that this is a setting-specific detail, not a rules-specific detail. In Charted Space (or perhaps only in parts of Charted Space), 'boat' is the technical term for non-starships. It's not so much a CT/MT/TNE/T4/T20/GT/etc./etc. issue as it's an OTU issue.
If you don't appreciate the distinction between changes for good reasons and changes for no reasons, further discussion seems moot.
It's not even close.In any case, as you say, a very minor problem, and they can be proud if it's the worst problem you find on it (but I asume this won't be the case, as it has its flaws, as anything made by men).
Hans
So why is it an "X-Boat"?
Because humans are not known for being absolutely consistent?
Which, come to think about it, is an argument against my position too.
Perhaps I should just assume that in the Judge Dredd Universe and the Hammer's Slammers Universe and other so-called Traveller universes the distinction between spaceboats and starships don't exist. It's just in the Third Imperium. :devil:
Hans
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
How big does a System Defence Boat have to be before it becomes a monitor? :devil:
And then what's the difference among a monitor and a battle rider?
It's just the mision (system defense against mobile naval unit on a tender)?
And, if so, does a monitor become a battle rider if it joins a squadron on a tender (and opposite)?
Nomenclature is always a tricky thing... And I must agree about inconsistncy of human race (not enough data to tell about other sophonts)
.
So why is it an "X-Boat"?
It occurs to me that perhaps because it needs a tender too (though in this case for lack of maneuver drive and to move in real space, so fully opposite to what is usually called a boat in Traveller).
Yes.
Yes. No. Probably. Maybe. Who knows what lurks in the minds of military pundits?
Hans
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Which makes sense, sort of
Yes, a new game. It's "Traveller in name only" - mechanically, and setting wise, it's a nearly totally new game engine that happens to overlap significantly, but has zero respect for what came before.
T20 was more respectful of avoiding change than MGT is.
So what? You can use different game engines (by which I assume you mean rules sets) to play in the same universe. Or the same game engine to play in different universes. Mongoose's Third Imperium setting is not a nearly totally new game engine, and not just because settings are not game engine.
Hans
Hans - I can't put this any more simply:
Your "rules don't matter" belief is grossly naive.
Most people play a single set of rules. Rules therefore are part of the canon they work within (or ignore, as they see fit). MGT players as a general rule are not fans of other editions, and from what I've seen elsewhere, most aren't even playing in the OTU. For every one OTU MGT game I've come across mention of, I've seen 3-5 non-OTU; and most of those are homebrewed settings.
Further, Mongoose has no obligation to people like you or me - only to Marc - and they have no love of the OTU. Matthew has stated categorically that "There is no Official Traveller Universe" - and Gareth shows in his MGT writing (including the public playtest draft) that he was unfamiliar with it.
Mongoose, as a corporate entity, neither knows nor cares about prior art for the setting, and doesn't need to support the OTU.
I dislike their cavalier attitude, and the incompatibility, but they have no compelling financial reasons to adhere to the past. Matthew explicitly didn't care at the time when it was relevant. And Gareth wasn't familiar with the OTU at the time.
Matthew's also been publicly criticized by a corporate partner for a cavalier approach to a different canon more recently - SV Cole and Jean Sexton of Amarillo Design Bureau have made it clear that Matthew was at one point making promises he couldn't keep about what would be in Traveller Prime Directive. And were not exactly polite about it, either. And, much as I like what Matt was promising, I realized the moment he read it SVC was going to excrete large rectangular 19g/cc masses...
S4's noted some irregularities in their approach to Conan canon, too.
They're noted for a similarly cavalier approach to Glorantha, as well - changes that don't fit; things in rules that don't support the setting and don't belong in a game with a strong setting. Contradictions of prior rulesets for no apparent reason. At least there, they had a different milieux to work in from the prior art. But at least he got the RQ trademark.
Mongoose writes decent, playable rules - but I have come to realize they can't be trusted to support a setting.
(Gareth Hanrahan has shown great respect for a canon he's familiar with in more recent works - for C7's The One Ring RPG. My own email correspondence with Gareth indicated that he was unfamiliar with the OTU. )
Wil - I had a reply all written out, but tell you what: You can have the last word this time. Just please don't take that as aquiesence with your opinion.
Hans
Last edited:
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Rules and Setting?
Rules do matter to me. I like CT therefore that's what I use. (Modified a bit and "Cherry Picking" other sets.)
Also, Setting matters to me. I DON'T want it constantly changing just because someone new rents a license from Marc, and sets about FUBARing everything that went before.
If I understand Hans correctly, any one set of rules can be used in a setting, such as the Spinward Marches. Also, a certain set of rules, like CT, can be used to play in any setting. (Oversimplified in all probability.)
This is perfectly true.
Now if I look at it from the position of aramis, it appears he thinks rules matter:
He's right. People do adopt a rules set and stick with it (adding a few "improvements" along the way.) In addition "their" setting become a unique place.
In neither case does it have to matter for players to enjoy the game and have fun.
If I go to Alaska, or Denmark, I'm guessing we would play some standard rules set, modified by house rules, and those house rules made known. Hopefully my ship and side arms work in the way I've come to expect, etc.
In the setting, take the Spinward Marches, date: any. Everything should be basically OTU by expectation. Any significant different should be made known.
Now if Capt. Jones just sold a case lot of nuclear warheads to terrorists on Planet xyz, who cares? What we should care about is if they were used to the degree that they altered the setting overly much. Like destroying the atmosphere and drying up the oceans, etc.
If it's a house setting, cool, something new to explore.
Seems you are both right, to a degree, but approaching it from opposite sides.
Now, back to neutral corners and at the sound of the bell...:devil:
Rules do matter to me. I like CT therefore that's what I use. (Modified a bit and "Cherry Picking" other sets.)
Also, Setting matters to me. I DON'T want it constantly changing just because someone new rents a license from Marc, and sets about FUBARing everything that went before.
If I understand Hans correctly, any one set of rules can be used in a setting, such as the Spinward Marches. Also, a certain set of rules, like CT, can be used to play in any setting. (Oversimplified in all probability.)
This is perfectly true.
Now if I look at it from the position of aramis, it appears he thinks rules matter:
He's right. People do adopt a rules set and stick with it (adding a few "improvements" along the way.) In addition "their" setting become a unique place.
In neither case does it have to matter for players to enjoy the game and have fun.
If I go to Alaska, or Denmark, I'm guessing we would play some standard rules set, modified by house rules, and those house rules made known. Hopefully my ship and side arms work in the way I've come to expect, etc.
In the setting, take the Spinward Marches, date: any. Everything should be basically OTU by expectation. Any significant different should be made known.
Now if Capt. Jones just sold a case lot of nuclear warheads to terrorists on Planet xyz, who cares? What we should care about is if they were used to the degree that they altered the setting overly much. Like destroying the atmosphere and drying up the oceans, etc.
If it's a house setting, cool, something new to explore.
Seems you are both right, to a degree, but approaching it from opposite sides.
Now, back to neutral corners and at the sound of the bell...:devil:
But it doesn't become MY unique place. More to the point, it doesn't become the common frame of reference that I share with like-minded Traveller fans.
In gross details, yes. But if someone shoots at your character with a handgun, you're not guaranteed to avoid a fatal wound even if your character has above average physical stats
. (CT: Physical attributes 19+, gun damage 3D = guaranteed survival.) 1 Don't worry, though. As long as you haven't run out of hero points, you're not going to die even from a fatal would.
You're right about us approaching from opposite sides, anyway. I realized that a long time ago, but I find it difficult to refrain from responding when I'm confronted with the same arguments yet again.
I just quit the ring. For now. I can't guarantee that I won't be drawn in again at a later date.
Hans
I think you may have missed the other point I was making: Mongoose doesn't support the "Official Traveller Universe" so they feel no need for their rules to conform to the OTU-isms encoded in prior editions. And they have explicitly stated that the rules do not default to the OTU, either, for MGT.
MGT isn't a retcon to any other edition, in the same way that GURPS Reign of Steel isn't a Retcon to GURPS, and GURPS Prime Directive isn't a Retcon to GURPS nor to the SFU which GPD is set in. Mongoose Matt has said it's not the Official Traveller Universe, in text on the web in official organs. Since he denies it being Official, it's just another ATU.
MGT isn't a retcon to any other edition, in the same way that GURPS Reign of Steel isn't a Retcon to GURPS, and GURPS Prime Directive isn't a Retcon to GURPS nor to the SFU which GPD is set in. Mongoose Matt has said it's not the Official Traveller Universe, in text on the web in official organs. Since he denies it being Official, it's just another ATU.
I am pretty sure that Matt has responded to this claim on COTI and stated that you are reading more into his statement than he intended. IIRC, Matt said that his intent was that the Traveller Rules were not JUST for the Third Imperium and that he viewed the terms Official Traveller Universe and Original Traveller Universe as synonymous.
You may not believe him, but I think that it may be misleading to claim that 'Mongoose does not support the Official Traveller Universe' as a simple statement of fact.
[EDIT: HERE IT IS.]
Last edited:
I don't think you're right about that, but be that as it may, I gather that your point is that posting about changes I disagree with (and mistakes) is an exercise in futility. Well, so what if it is? When did that stop anyone from posting? And why should it stop anyone from posting?
That said, I don't intend to bring up this particular problem again. As has been pointed out, it's a change that shows up in several places and would probably be more trouble to change back than it would be worth.
Hans
Similar threads
