Which Edition? Differences between CT and Mongoose

[aramis]

It's worth noting that 1e also had several games using the core rules, such as 2300 AD and Babylon 5 (and the too-short Cowboys and Xenomporphs). Unfortunately all are out of print now, but you can still find some around.

2300 is now on MGT2E; Colin just sent the manuscript final this month. Expect MGT2E:2300 to hit shelves by Christmas.

C&X, if it returns, is likely to be for CE, not MGT2, simply due to the onerous terms of the free license for MGT 2E. I've no direct knowledge of whether the author will do so, tho'.

 

[ffilz]

fundamentally, MGT 1E:

It's got a clear unified resolution mechanic. CT does not.
It's got a more interesting character generation, in that it provides more information with only a tiny bit more effort.
Uses armor as damage reduction instead of deflection.
Has ship armor.
You can easily use CT Bk2 ship designs and plans and be within 10%. Bridge tonnage for small ships halved, and for big ones, capped at 30 Td.

It's a more consistent to itself set of mechanics, albeit a bit less modular because of that.

Of course some of us prefer Classic Traveller because it does have a unified resolution mechanic, but it has variation in exactly what provides modifiers to the roll and how important they are.

I find the character generation plenty interesting, and find the change in philosophy of what skills represent not to our liking.

I like armor as to hit rather than damage reduction (hey, I like me my armor as damage reduction, but I also like the way armor and weapon combine in different ways to affect to hit - it's like the D&D weapon vs armor adjustments table but is more usable because animal armor is always represented in terms of one of the CT armor types).

I'm happy with Book 2 ships and combat, and don't feel a need to have armor on ships.

So really it is all a matter of preferences. Not everyone finds the newer game systems to their liking, or maybe we like the new systems while still being able to like and enjoy the old systems.

Frank

 

[Brandon C]

2300 is now on MGT2E; Colin just sent the manuscript final this month. Expect MGT2E:2300 to hit shelves by Christmas.

This is rather unfortunate for me. I have passed the point where I can afford to dump the 1e books and move to 2e.

 

[Baron]

Well, I agreed to give MgT2 a try when it's my new pal's turn to run an adventure, and I let it be known that when it's my turn I'll be running CT. Who knows, maybe they'll all fall in love with CT, and it will be thanks to me! Thanks for the insights, gang, and wish me luck.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I'm a confirmed fan of Classic Traveller, and I really dislike learning new systems. I may have a chance to join a live game, but it looks like the system they'll use will be Mongoose. Can anyone describe or point me to a comparison of my beloved CT with (I guess) the latest edition of the Mongoose version? How much is truly different? Thanks.

The main difference is the D&D-style "to hit" die roll, where you look at a weapon/armor matrix chart to figure the hit result from. There is no such thing in Mongoose Traveller. Task Check rolls are now standardized in Mongoose. In Mongoose Traveller, armor soaks damage.

OK, I can't resist asking this. Really not trolling, just frustrated. What's the point of switching? What morefun does MgT provide, in and of itself, that CT is lacking? Maybe the potential GM and I can thrash it out and settle on one or the other.

CT is a 1st-gen RPG. MgT is a 2nd-gen RPG. That should be your main decision as to which system to use.

As far as how fun the rules are for each... that all depends on the players at the table. So find the best players you can.

 

[Baron]

CT is a 1st-gen RPG. MgT is a 2nd-gen RPG. That should be your main decision as to which system to use.

OK, now that statement I have to call out. What justifies a comment like that? If you somehow assigned a "generation" to a game, a game being a routine you go through to have fun, how could the isolated fact of when it was written add to or detract from fun? This isn't technology, it's taking turns and rolling dice. It's cowboys and indians. It's army men.

And just to pick nits, how would MgT2 be considered a "second" generation? It's way, way, way beyond the second iteration of Traveller role-playing games.

More to the point, I have the option of playing the game that was written by its creator, Marc Miller. Or, I can play a re-write by some guy who never actually created anything in his life. That's not a game designer, that's a copy editor. I don't need to pay money for that. And this particular 2nd edition of MgT is a re-write of a re-write!

And finally, role-playing games are a genre routinely house-ruled. I can house-rule games as well as anyone, and better than most, since I've been doing that since the 70's. These guys don't have anything to sell me.

No. I'll get this gaming group going, I'll be nice and play this guy's game using his preferred books. I won't buy a thing. And then we swap positions and I'll run the original game. Then I'll get to evaluate whether the arrangment is providing me enough fun to justify my time. But the "generation" of a game? That is absolutely meaningless. Whether it was written by an actual game designer or a copy editor should be the deciding factor.

Sheesh.

 

[Adam Dray]

Check your Kool-Aid before drinking.

 

[ffilz]

OK, now that statement I have to call out. What justifies a comment like that? If you somehow assigned a "generation" to a game, a game being a routine you go through to have fun, how could the isolated fact of when it was written add to or detract from fun? This isn't technology, it's taking turns and rolling dice. It's cowboys and indians. It's army men.

And just to pick nits, how would MgT2 be considered a "second" generation? It's way, way, way beyond the second iteration of Traveller role-playing games.

More to the point, I have the option of playing the game that was written by its creator, Marc Miller. Or, I can play a re-write by some guy who never actually created anything in his life. That's not a game designer, that's a copy editor. I don't need to pay money for that. And this particular 2nd edition of MgT is a re-write of a re-write!

And finally, role-playing games are a genre routinely house-ruled. I can house-rule games as well as anyone, and better than most, since I've been doing that since the 70's. These guys don't have anything to sell me.

No. I'll get this gaming group going, I'll be nice and play this guy's game using his preferred books. I won't buy a thing. And then we swap positions and I'll run the original game. Then I'll get to evaluate whether the arrangment is providing me enough fun to justify my time. But the "generation" of a game? That is absolutely meaningless. Whether it was written by an actual game designer or a copy editor should be the deciding factor.

Sheesh.

Don't let folks get to you. You like CT and that's way cool (I do too). Some folks here don't and that's cool too. What's not helpful is applying judgemental labels to any particular version of Traveller. Newer is different not better. Any kind of different may be better for some folks, tolerable for others, and horrible for others.

Frank

 

[kilemall]

No. I'll get this gaming group going, I'll be nice and play this guy's game using his preferred books. I won't buy a thing. And then we swap positions and I'll run the original game. Then I'll get to evaluate whether the arrangment is providing me enough fun to justify my time. But the "generation" of a game? That is absolutely meaningless. Whether it was written by an actual game designer or a copy editor should be the deciding factor.

Sheesh.

Er.


I think there is more thought that went into MgT then 'copy editor', they got the franchise IMO partly because of the quality of add-on material they had put out before for previous versions, so I don't agree with your assertion.


Now ignoring what 'generation' a game is and refuting that as some sort of primary criteria, that I can agree with. A 1st Gen game that is fun vs. a 4th Gen game that isn't is no contest- roll with the fun.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

OK, now that statement I have to call out. What justifies a comment like that? If you somehow assigned a "generation" to a game, a game being a routine you go through to have fun, how could the isolated fact of when it was written add to or detract from fun? This isn't technology, it's taking turns and rolling dice. It's cowboys and indians. It's army men.

And just to pick nits, how would MgT2 be considered a "second" generation? It's way, way, way beyond the second iteration of Traveller role-playing games.

More to the point, I have the option of playing the game that was written by its creator, Marc Miller. Or, I can play a re-write by some guy who never actually created anything in his life. That's not a game designer, that's a copy editor. I don't need to pay money for that. And this particular 2nd edition of MgT is a re-write of a re-write!

And finally, role-playing games are a genre routinely house-ruled. I can house-rule games as well as anyone, and better than most, since I've been doing that since the 70's. These guys don't have anything to sell me.

No. I'll get this gaming group going, I'll be nice and play this guy's game using his preferred books. I won't buy a thing. And then we swap positions and I'll run the original game. Then I'll get to evaluate whether the arrangment is providing me enough fun to justify my time. But the "generation" of a game? That is absolutely meaningless. Whether it was written by an actual game designer or a copy editor should be the deciding factor.

You went off the rails somewhere. 1st-gen RPGs used index cards for character sheets. Anyway, if you've been doing this since the '70s, then you should already know the answer to your post.

 

[aramis]

The first generation games were pretty much a scaffold holding the combat system to Character generation and/or advancement. Most were pretty close to Minis games with permission to go beyond the rules. D&D, V&V, EPT, Metamorphosis Alpha, Gamma World.

While CT may be 1977, it and RuneQuest (1978) are pretty much the early versions of the second generation: the character has backstory and advancement along a pseudo-Campbellian monomyth is usually absent. Skills take over in their generation - which lasts to about 1983, really...

A third wave of approach was the skills by class & Level approach of a number of 1979-1985 introductions: Palladium's Mechanoids and Palladium FRPG; Bard Games' The Arcanum; ICE's Rollmaster, Spacemaster, MERP, and the later Cyberspace (1989); and the later Justifiers (StarChilde 1988). These games also tend to either have a unified resolution system, or two - combat vs non-combat.

A fourth wave, which starts early, but really doesn't hit stride until later, are the point-builders: TFT, Champions, GURPS, several smaller superhero games, Mechwarrior 1E. Again, most of these have either one or two resolution systems, used consistently.

The 5th wave tends to be the dice pool games of the late 1980's onward. WEG Star Wars; WWG's VTM, WWTA, MTA, WTO, CTD; FASA's Shadowrun. Mostly, these continue the unified resolution mechanic.

An alternate identity for 5th wave is priorities based character design. Mechwarrior 2E, all the WWG games, Shadowrun...

the 6th wave is mid-90's... the rise of the Story-Game. Many RPGers don't encounter them until the early 00's... mechanics become less about simulating a (sur)reality and more about guiding the story. These rise out of reactions to (most especially)

The 7th wave is d20... Further despondence sayeth not.

The 8th wave is the Retroclones (S&W) and Pseudoclones (C&C) - games aiming for the feel of the first gen, but with smoothed mechanics.

After that, the model breaks, because all the prior waves continue to have market presence. Rifts is still skills by class and level. HARP is a lighter version of Rolemaster... but RMSS is still available for the hardcore.

Some games are hard to fit...
RTG's Cyberpunk is class providing one unique skill, lifepath providing background, and points spent for everything else; other interlock games vary from starting skill package to just spend the points...

FASA Trek is a skills and background, but is a cadet of RuneQuest... essentially, a bunch of Traveller Grogs used a traveller like lifepath with a Chaosium style skill system, and Snapshot-like combat system...


The first skill driven (rather than class & level driven) game really seems to be Traveller. Chaosium's RuneQuest is second.

Hero System is the best known point-builder of the early 1980s... but it wasn't the only one.

TFT can be seen as a point builder - atts are race base plus X points, and talents are by filling "slots" equal to IQ; more talents needed? Get more IQ. The new edition is changing that...

Twilight 2000 1E is skill driven, feels earlier than it's mid 80's writing date, and is a unified skill mechanic. It feels very much like what FASA did with Star Trek... Traveller CG mode, and RQ skills and action resolution mode.

T2K 2E goes to lifepath earns points to spend on skills.

Later Traveller: MT is pretty much CT+Task System; unification of the mechanic, but still being predominantly a 2nd wave game. T2300, however, is a hybrid lifepath and point builder. TNE is T2K 3e... in the remnants of the OTU. T4 is, like MT, CT with a task system, but with a change in how many skills, and a bunch of "You may pick instead" options on the tables.

T20 is the D20 system flavor.
GT is the GURPS system flavor.
HT is the Hero System flavor.

MGT is a pseudoclone. It wasn't trying to be the original, but to be compatible enough, yet while having a unified mechanic.

The Big Caveat:
Any such cladistic analysis ultimately fails to capture the whole of the gaming ecosystem.

 

[Adam Dray]

the 6th wave is mid-90's... the rise of the Story-Game. Many RPGers don't encounter them until the early 00's... mechanics become less about simulating a (sur)reality and more about guiding the story. These rise out of reactions to (most especially)

Nice post!

I'm curious: What did you mean to say at the end of that paragraph?

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

And just to pick nits, how would MgT2 be considered a "second" generation? It's way, way, way beyond the second iteration of Traveller role-playing games.

Classic Traveller is basically what OSR players look for these days. Save rolls are based on attributes. Each skill has its own rule contained in them. "To Hit" rolls are an abstraction, rather than what seems natural.

 

[Timerover51]

The first generation games were pretty much a scaffold holding the combat system to Character generation and/or advancement. Most were pretty close to Minis games with permission to go beyond the rules. D&D, V&V, EPT, Metamorphosis Alpha, Gamma World.
. . . . . . . .
The Big Caveat:
Any such cladistic analysis ultimately fails to capture the whole of the gaming ecosystem.

A very interesting and useful analysis. Thank you, Aramis.

 

[Timerover51]

Classic Traveller is basically what OSR players look for these days. Save rolls are based on attributes. Each skill has its own rule contained in them. "To Hit" rolls are an abstraction, rather than what seems natural.

I apologize for my ignorance, but what does "OSR" mean?

 

[Grav_Moped]

I apologize for my ignorance, but what does "OSR" mean?

Old-School Rules.

 

[aramis]

I apologize for my ignorance, but what does "OSR" mean?

Old School Renaissance. Basically, the guys who are trying to recreate the feel of pre-1982 D&D using modern OGL rules to reverse engineer them into something that feels to them like a fixed version of either original D&D, Moldvay/Cook BX, or AD&D, or some hybrid of those.

To a lesser extent, it also includes a number of non-D&D games doing the same to other pre-1982 systems - including RuneQuest/BRP, and Traveller - tho only Cepheus Engine has had any serious traction for the Traveller OSR games. (6-stat lasted about 1 year on a guy's web page, but then disappeared. Not before I pointed him out to Marc.)

And, since CE did get traction, especially with the MGT 1E crowd, Marc chose to welcome the CE community here.

CE isn't official Traveller, but it is, per Marc (and me) a flavor of Traveller, and welcome here.

 

[Timerover51]

Old School Renaissance. Basically, the guys who are trying to recreate the feel of pre-1982 D&D using modern OGL rules to reverse engineer them into something that feels to them like a fixed version of either original D&D, Moldvay/Cook BX, or AD&D, or some hybrid of those.

To a lesser extent, it also includes a number of non-D&D games doing the same to other pre-1982 systems - including RuneQuest/BRP, and Traveller - tho only Cepheus Engine has had any serious traction for the Traveller OSR games. (6-stat lasted about 1 year on a guy's web page, but then disappeared. Not before I pointed him out to Marc.)

And, since CE did get traction, especially with the MGT 1E crowd, Marc chose to welcome the CE community here.

CE isn't official Traveller, but it is, per Marc (and me) a flavor of Traveller, and welcome here.

Sort of what Paul Elliot is trying with the Fast Magic rules for Cepheus, to catch the flavor of the Little Tan Books for 1st Edition D&D.

 

[aramis]

Sort of what Paul Elliot is trying with the Fast Magic rules for Cepheus, to catch the flavor of the Little Tan Books for 1st Edition D&D.

Not "sort of"... but "exactly."

What we used to refer to in the 90's in WWIVnet and UseNet as "heartbreakers"... D&D modified for variant rules that "fixed" some problems for the "designer" but really was only differently problematic.

 

[rhialto]

...modified for variant rules that "fixed" some problems for the "designer" but really was only differently problematic.

Pretty much true of any game with house-rules: I imagine anyone who runs a game would nod in agreement. Some may be less "designers" and more "artiste", though.