I went through something similar, but in the end found it easier to take some of the ideas in MgT (multiple careers, skills providing +1 DM/rank) and apply them to CT. You may want to look around here for "Proto-Traveller" or "LBB1 - LBB3" only threads, where folks have tried distilling CT down to its original essence of DIY settings and fewer rules (though rougher as a "system" as a result). Some have taken most (all?) of the skills from the CT books and supplements and redone all the career tables to use them where they thought made sense. I took the opposite approach of using all the LBB1 careers and those in Supplement 4, but with just the skills from LBB1.
Does Classic Traveller need an update?
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Just read the Traveller Book, page for page, cover to cover. Pay particular attention to the skill descriptions.
Do that. Post any questions that you might have in the CT forum. And, boom, you'll be rolling.
I suggest reading the skills closely, a few times, because the descriptions show you how to use the skills.
Get yourself a default throw method. I suggest Rule 68A (see my sig) and the Roll stat or lower on 2D to start off with.
Rule 68A is easy. Roll 6+, 8+, or 10+. Pick one of those. Some Refs go simpler and just use 8+ or 10+ as their go-to roll.
I typically use the Roll Stat or Lower checks for attribute only rolls.
As you read the skills, you get a feel for how to use the skill levels. You can default to +1 per level, but in some cases, experience is very important, and you'll get +2 or even +4 per level of skill.
SUMMARY.
(Roll 1D and read these in the order rolled. :rofl
1. The Traveller Book. Take the time to read the Traveller Book from cover to cover. Pay particular attention to the various throws that you come across. Notice how skill levels are used, and notice how stats are used.
Pay attention to the roll to throw blades in the combat section. Compare this to the roll to avoid a mishap in zero-G under the Vacc Suit skill. And, compare that to the roll to revive a person from low berth in the starship section. Look at the short roll for dog fighting under the Ship's Boat skill.
I also suggest that you look at the From the Management article, by Loren Wiseman, in JTAS #2. It will give you some insight on how to create new weapons.
2. Skill Descriptions. Read the skill descriptions a few times. Get to know them. They show you how to play the game mechanically.
#1 and #2 will give you a good grounding in how to run the game.
3. Uses of Die Rolls. If you can, check out the Traveller Adventure, page 28, under The Uses of Die Rolls. It was written by Marc Miller, and it is great insight into Classic Traveller mechanics.
4. Typical Actions. For combat, pay particular attention to the Typical Actions section and chart. Everything that a character can do is summed up in those typical actions. In a 15 second round, each character can move and act, or he can act and move. Let the player describe what he wants to do, then you break it down in your head into its simplest form by choosing the typical actions that apply. Each PC will have two parts of his action for the round. Match everybody's first part; play those out. Then play out everybody's second part. Boom, you've just conducted a simultaneous action round. Ask questions, if you need to, about Range Bands or Typical Actions or whatever. Combat rounds in Classic Traveller are simultaneous. Every character gets to attempt his action. Wound are applied after every character has finished his actions.
5. Have a "Go-To" Mechanic. As I said above, I use two. When in doubt, I pick one of these two mechanics, and I just go with it. You can always adjust, learn, and make things better as you get experience. Do this between games. In-game, use your go-to's.
I use Rule 68A. I pick, quickly, a target number of 6+, 8+, or 10+. And, I'll pick a stat to modify the roll by +1 (I'll pick if stat is 6+, 8+, or 10+, depending on how important I think the stat is to the roll). Of course, I'll allow a skill modifier, too, if needed.
And, I use the 2D for stat or less a lot on pure attribute rolls. Want to open a stuck hatch? Roll 2D for DEX or less. I can make the roll harder or easier by going with 1D or 3D.
You may want to use, say, Flux, from T5, as your go-to. Maybe you want to use D66. Maybe you want to use the UTP. Whatever you feel most comfortable with--just have a default. You'll move away from the default as you get more experienced as a Classic Traveller Ref.
And...the game master in Traveller is called a Referee, not a Game Master.
6. 1-11 Spots on a Pyramid Distribution. Remember that a 2D6 roll is a pyramid distribution, with 7 average, and only 11 numbers, 2-12. A +1 modifer is a hefty mod in this game (unlike, say, in D&D when using a d20). If you're not already, become familiar with the 11 percentages of rolling each number higher or lower. If you don't know these (and that's OK), ask and I'll write them out for you. You can also find them on the net, but it's probably quicker for me to just jot them down for you. If you can get your hands on Book 0: An Introduction to Traveller, look at Appendix IV on page 47. There's a nice chart showing the percentages for 1D-4D and for D66.
If you've got Book 0, I suggest reading the entire book, cover to cover. It's not that long (only 48 pages). There's some great advice packed into that short book for new CT Refs. There's a chapter that focuses on Refs, and a chapter that focuses on players. But, be sure to read the chapter on Modifications closely. That chapter should be required reading for any CT Ref.
The Traveller Book - about $70 on Amazon and $90 on eBay.
It's a good thing I bought the CT CD from Marc.
I've been trying to read through the hardcopy reprints of FFE001 Classic Books and FFE002 Classic Supplements.
Guess it is time to switch directions. And do some printing.
Thanks for the advice.
I copied your tutorial to word doc and stuck it in my CT folder.
It's a good thing I bought the CT CD from Marc.
I've been trying to read through the hardcopy reprints of FFE001 Classic Books and FFE002 Classic Supplements.
Guess it is time to switch directions. And do some printing.
Thanks for the advice.
I copied your tutorial to word doc and stuck it in my CT folder.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Or...go to DriveThruRPG and have them print you a brand new hardbound copy for $20 bucks....
(You'll probably spend more than that in ink if you print from the CD.)Here's the link: THE TRAVELLER BOOK AT DRIVETHRURPG
If you run across questions, just post 'em in the CT forum. Lots of people around here know their stuff on CT (though you're likely to get different answers! But, I think that's good!
)You'll get some good answers. Pick the answers that you like best and enjoy the heck out of your Traveller game.
Welcome to CT!
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
It likely does need an update. But, it has to be done correctly or it becomes a morass of complex rules that can't be played and enjoyed.
On the one hand, making the design tools for systems, ships, weapons, vehicles, or whatever, complex isn't really a problem. Go for it. Make them detailed and lengthy. These don't affect play. They affect setting up scenarios and will add color and depth to the game.
As for the game itself, you need a system that is as simple as CT originally was. The fewer die rolls to do things the better. The more stuff is left up to the referee the better it works. This part of the game needs to be "beer and pretzels." That is, it has to be simple enough to move along at a good pace and not get bogged down in minutia and massive amounts of charts and die rolling.
On the one hand, making the design tools for systems, ships, weapons, vehicles, or whatever, complex isn't really a problem. Go for it. Make them detailed and lengthy. These don't affect play. They affect setting up scenarios and will add color and depth to the game.
As for the game itself, you need a system that is as simple as CT originally was. The fewer die rolls to do things the better. The more stuff is left up to the referee the better it works. This part of the game needs to be "beer and pretzels." That is, it has to be simple enough to move along at a good pace and not get bogged down in minutia and massive amounts of charts and die rolling.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Also, check out my Sig. THROWS is a good thread to read. At the start of it, I cover lots of types of throws used in CT.
RULE 68A is a good read. It's an easy go-to mechanic usable for most task throws.
After you're more familiar with the game, you might want to check out:
PERSONAL COMBAT ROUND NOTES & DISCUSSION.
READING A SUBSECTOR is for more advanced Refs that are already comfortable with the rules.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
The Traveller Book is a nice thing to have. I have it in both hard copy and digital format.
Looking back at an earlier post of mine, I would not change much. I am actually going back to the 1977 rules for some of the ship design process, plus using the Cepheus Engine rules for additional types of drives. That tweaks the ship building rules sufficiently.
I still do not use the combat rules as written, as I use the percentile system of Don Featherstone. One roll tells me if I hit and if I did hit, what damage did I do.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Since you've ordered The Traveller Book, here is something to keep in mind:
The rules found in The Traveller Book are overall identical to the rules and mechanics found in Traveller Books 1, 2, and 3.
The Traveller Book is more wordy than the original three books, it assumes you'll be playing in the Third Imperium (there is no specific setting in the original books), and it contains a couple of adventures, but the rules are pretty much the same.
This matters because when Traveller was first published it was never assumed that it was the "start" of a game lime if books. Instead, Miller thought he was pretty much done with it upon publication. He thought people would create their own settings, creating their own rules as they needed them, and make their own adventures. (Miller said this back in 1981 -- and he's been consistent about saying this till as recently as a few months ago.)
Gary Gygax, by the way, assumed the same thing about his D&D rules. Neither man assumed there would be a market to support their games... Because their games were designed to be a starting point for people to, essentially, make their own games. This is what the miniatures war gaming community did with rules for miniatures all the time. RPGs grew out do this tradition. Moreover, both sets of rules depended on strong refereeing in the tradition of Strategos (a 19th century American war game rules set) and the Free Krigsspiel rules from Prussia. Both games assumed open, free actions in the part of the players that no rules set could ever cover -- and thus depended on a referee to make on the fly rulings about how things turned out. Note that this sort of play is the inverse of board games or Avalon Hills war games (as an example) in which the procedures are detailed, clear, and easily repeatable. No referee is required because the rules guide the players and the choices of the players are constrained.
But both Gygax and Miller were wrong about the potential market. RPGs as a hobby jumped the boundaries of the miniature hobby field and the rules found themselves in the hands of folks who had lots of questions about how to play the game, wanted more information about what the setting was like, and wanted help creating adventures. The market wanted something closer to (but not identical to) board games.
And so TSR and GDW began offering more and more material to fill this need. Again, when Traveller was published, there was no expectation on the part of GDW that there would be a published setting or additional Books expanding the rules. The rules found in Books 1, 2, and 3/The Traveller Book were considered complete.
Which is why, if one reads the FFE floppy reprint it can be such an odd experience to discovers skills scattered across so many books and so on. The Books (and the setting) were built out book by book and publication by publication. There was no big plan, but people wanted more information and details, and so GDW provided what people wanted.
Keep in mind, too, the later Books were considered optional. If one want to use Mercenary or Scouts one could. But it was not assumed one would or required. The material was there if a group wanted to use it, but the game was built to function with the core rules.
These core rules will be what you will find in The Traveller Book. The book will not list the skills from the later Books or Supplements because the game does not require them and works fine without them. If one wants to use these later rules one adds them in, and if not, one doesn't. But at that point you are creating the game and setting you want. Which is still how the game was designed to be played!
As for a revised edition then, the question becomes "Which Classic Teaveller?"
For some people Classic Traveller is the sum total of ALL the Books, Supplements, Adventures, and even every issue of The Journal of the Rravellers Aid Society. For me it is Books 1, 2, and 3. I know all the other stuff is out there... But it isn't material I really need. And I prefer the stripped down, straightforward simplicity of the original rules and the "toolkit" approach they espouse.
As a specific, additional example: for some people the Task Resolution system introduced in Traveller's Digest magazine #1 in 1985 (and later incorporated into MegaTraveller) "fixed" what they perceived as the flaws of the Classic Traveller rules and they became the default for method for playing Classic Traveller. But I'm much happier with the rules as written in Books 1, 2, and 3 and find the Task Resolution system stifling. (The original rules play more like Strategos, which I prefer, while the Task Resolution system moves the game more toward the "board game" end of the spectrum, which doesn't intrigue me much.)
So which version of these choices (and all the variations possible) should be used for the "updated" version of Classic Traveller?
I know I have my version of what such a book would be (it's very clear in my head!). But I know it would be very different than what other people would want!
The rules found in The Traveller Book are overall identical to the rules and mechanics found in Traveller Books 1, 2, and 3.
The Traveller Book is more wordy than the original three books, it assumes you'll be playing in the Third Imperium (there is no specific setting in the original books), and it contains a couple of adventures, but the rules are pretty much the same.
This matters because when Traveller was first published it was never assumed that it was the "start" of a game lime if books. Instead, Miller thought he was pretty much done with it upon publication. He thought people would create their own settings, creating their own rules as they needed them, and make their own adventures. (Miller said this back in 1981 -- and he's been consistent about saying this till as recently as a few months ago.)
Gary Gygax, by the way, assumed the same thing about his D&D rules. Neither man assumed there would be a market to support their games... Because their games were designed to be a starting point for people to, essentially, make their own games. This is what the miniatures war gaming community did with rules for miniatures all the time. RPGs grew out do this tradition. Moreover, both sets of rules depended on strong refereeing in the tradition of Strategos (a 19th century American war game rules set) and the Free Krigsspiel rules from Prussia. Both games assumed open, free actions in the part of the players that no rules set could ever cover -- and thus depended on a referee to make on the fly rulings about how things turned out. Note that this sort of play is the inverse of board games or Avalon Hills war games (as an example) in which the procedures are detailed, clear, and easily repeatable. No referee is required because the rules guide the players and the choices of the players are constrained.
But both Gygax and Miller were wrong about the potential market. RPGs as a hobby jumped the boundaries of the miniature hobby field and the rules found themselves in the hands of folks who had lots of questions about how to play the game, wanted more information about what the setting was like, and wanted help creating adventures. The market wanted something closer to (but not identical to) board games.
And so TSR and GDW began offering more and more material to fill this need. Again, when Traveller was published, there was no expectation on the part of GDW that there would be a published setting or additional Books expanding the rules. The rules found in Books 1, 2, and 3/The Traveller Book were considered complete.
Which is why, if one reads the FFE floppy reprint it can be such an odd experience to discovers skills scattered across so many books and so on. The Books (and the setting) were built out book by book and publication by publication. There was no big plan, but people wanted more information and details, and so GDW provided what people wanted.
Keep in mind, too, the later Books were considered optional. If one want to use Mercenary or Scouts one could. But it was not assumed one would or required. The material was there if a group wanted to use it, but the game was built to function with the core rules.
These core rules will be what you will find in The Traveller Book. The book will not list the skills from the later Books or Supplements because the game does not require them and works fine without them. If one wants to use these later rules one adds them in, and if not, one doesn't. But at that point you are creating the game and setting you want. Which is still how the game was designed to be played!
As for a revised edition then, the question becomes "Which Classic Teaveller?"
For some people Classic Traveller is the sum total of ALL the Books, Supplements, Adventures, and even every issue of The Journal of the Rravellers Aid Society. For me it is Books 1, 2, and 3. I know all the other stuff is out there... But it isn't material I really need. And I prefer the stripped down, straightforward simplicity of the original rules and the "toolkit" approach they espouse.
As a specific, additional example: for some people the Task Resolution system introduced in Traveller's Digest magazine #1 in 1985 (and later incorporated into MegaTraveller) "fixed" what they perceived as the flaws of the Classic Traveller rules and they became the default for method for playing Classic Traveller. But I'm much happier with the rules as written in Books 1, 2, and 3 and find the Task Resolution system stifling. (The original rules play more like Strategos, which I prefer, while the Task Resolution system moves the game more toward the "board game" end of the spectrum, which doesn't intrigue me much.)
So which version of these choices (and all the variations possible) should be used for the "updated" version of Classic Traveller?
I know I have my version of what such a book would be (it's very clear in my head!). But I know it would be very different than what other people would want!
Last edited:
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Wargaming does have their own submilieus, that have their own logic as to which armed forces can be in opposition or alliance, usually based on history, or pseudo history, some leeway with historical accuracy being tolerated.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
For clarity:
I was referencing specifically Charles A. L. Totten's Strategos: The American Art of War (1880) which includes this passage:
This is very open-ended ("anything can be attempted") and this philosophy fueled David Wesley's Braunstein games (which were multiplayer, chaotic affairs -- for example one modeled a coup in a banana republic), which Dave Arneson's played in and eventually ran, which in turn fueled Arneson's Blackmoor game, which in turn fired Gygax's imagination and inspired him to codify Arneson's gamestyle in the original Dungeons & Dragons rules, which in turn (as Miller has stated clearly) inspired the Traveller rules.
So I'm not speaking of miniatures rules generically, but of specific game style and spirit from a specific rules set that inspired game hobbies to in the Twin Cities in the 60s and 70s that fed directly into the creation of the RPG HOBBY. This playstyle is very open-ended and driven by a strong referee -- given the assumption that the players will not be restrained by lists of pre-existing possibilities but challenging themselves to solve problems with what seems like the best idea the time.
I point to, as I often do, this passage from the 1977 edition of Book 1:
For myself, I see a direct line of thinking between passage quoted from Totten's book and the passage written by Miller in the first edition of Traveller.
I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't play this way is wrong, nor that there is a right way to play either Traveller or RPGs. After all, RPGs only became more codified with time -- so clearly many people wanted more codification in the rules, less open-ended play from the players, and less Referee driven play. Over time RPGs changed and became something different than they were before -- and this made lots of people happy. I'm glad these people are happy!
My point is only that this spirit and playstyle is right there in the original Traveller rules as written -- not as a bug but as a feature -- and that if I did my updated version of Classic Traveller I'd lean into that and be explicit and clear about it in the text.
But that's the rules in general. When it comes to building a specific game or setting, absolutely the Referee should establish whatever sets of rules and logic for the world as he wishes.
I was referencing specifically Charles A. L. Totten's Strategos: The American Art of War (1880) which includes this passage:
This is very open-ended ("anything can be attempted") and this philosophy fueled David Wesley's Braunstein games (which were multiplayer, chaotic affairs -- for example one modeled a coup in a banana republic), which Dave Arneson's played in and eventually ran, which in turn fueled Arneson's Blackmoor game, which in turn fired Gygax's imagination and inspired him to codify Arneson's gamestyle in the original Dungeons & Dragons rules, which in turn (as Miller has stated clearly) inspired the Traveller rules.
So I'm not speaking of miniatures rules generically, but of specific game style and spirit from a specific rules set that inspired game hobbies to in the Twin Cities in the 60s and 70s that fed directly into the creation of the RPG HOBBY. This playstyle is very open-ended and driven by a strong referee -- given the assumption that the players will not be restrained by lists of pre-existing possibilities but challenging themselves to solve problems with what seems like the best idea the time.
I point to, as I often do, this passage from the 1977 edition of Book 1:
For myself, I see a direct line of thinking between passage quoted from Totten's book and the passage written by Miller in the first edition of Traveller.
I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't play this way is wrong, nor that there is a right way to play either Traveller or RPGs. After all, RPGs only became more codified with time -- so clearly many people wanted more codification in the rules, less open-ended play from the players, and less Referee driven play. Over time RPGs changed and became something different than they were before -- and this made lots of people happy. I'm glad these people are happy!
My point is only that this spirit and playstyle is right there in the original Traveller rules as written -- not as a bug but as a feature -- and that if I did my updated version of Classic Traveller I'd lean into that and be explicit and clear about it in the text.
But that's the rules in general. When it comes to building a specific game or setting, absolutely the Referee should establish whatever sets of rules and logic for the world as he wishes.
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
This is why I would definitely include the use of dice section from The Traveller Adventure in a new edition of Classic Traveller.
My moment of lucidity came when I realised the examples of throws listed in the skills descriptions of LBB:1 are not 'hard rules' in that you always use engineering like this, you always use streetwise like that, but rather are just examples, the referee can change the weighting of the DM a skill level provides to a throw, a high or low characteristic may or may not provide a DM etc.
I think that passage you quote that was cut from future editions is of critical importance to be put back into later versions of Traveller, especially important to me is this bit:
My moment of lucidity came when I realised the examples of throws listed in the skills descriptions of LBB:1 are not 'hard rules' in that you always use engineering like this, you always use streetwise like that, but rather are just examples, the referee can change the weighting of the DM a skill level provides to a throw, a high or low characteristic may or may not provide a DM etc.
I think that passage you quote that was cut from future editions is of critical importance to be put back into later versions of Traveller, especially important to me is this bit:
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Without doubt. And I agree with you about the material from The Traveller Adventure.
But because we are so far removed from the spirit and playstyles in which these early games were published I'd want to go further in explaining the opportunities such play offers. Perhaps as a companion Referee book or part of the rules.
But, again, that would be my version!
From a Book 1-3 perspective, the changes I want are:
(1) armor reduces damage, not the chance to hit.
(2) revise the skill list. In particular, decrease the number of combat skills and increase the number of interpersonal skills.
(3) All characters get one more skill per term.
(4) split mass and volume in starship design and base acceleration on mass divided by the thrust of the M-Drive.
There are other changes, but they are minor.
(1) armor reduces damage, not the chance to hit.
(2) revise the skill list. In particular, decrease the number of combat skills and increase the number of interpersonal skills.
(3) All characters get one more skill per term.
(4) split mass and volume in starship design and base acceleration on mass divided by the thrust of the M-Drive.
There are other changes, but they are minor.
Creativehum: Gygax wasn't "inspired by Blackmoor" - Arneson went to Gygax with it as a proposal, and wrote much of the mechanics with a back-and-forth (see Petersen, Playing with the World); I also have seen this from Arneson himself, as well as from other TSR alumni.
Keep in mind: TSR was already extant as Gygax's publishing label for his minis wargames.
Keep in mind: TSR was already extant as Gygax's publishing label for his minis wargames.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Hi Aramis,
I'm sorry if my quick sketch confused or misled anyone. In no way did I want to slight Arneson's contributions to D&D.
As a side note: I happen to be reading Playing at the World right now. (I was going nuts with someone making all sorts of ahistorical and counter factual claims in a series of videos being posted about the early days of the hobby -- so I decided to check out the most solid source I could think of to make sure what I thought to be true was true. (The book is fantastic! Everyone with a strong love of the hobby should read it.)
As for the order of events ... while I did not drill down deep, I think I did indeed get the gist of it. Gygax (who had already worked with Arnson on a naval battle game) read details of the Blackmoor in a zine Arneson published. Gygax invited Arneson to come up to Lake Geneva and demonstrate the game. Arneson did, Gygax fell in love with the experience, and asked to see Arneson's rules. (Gygax was still being published by Guidon Games at this time.)
Arneson's response was "Rules? What rules?" And sent 20 pages of handwritten guidelines. Gygax hammered out a set of rules... And then, as you said, a fruitful collaboration back and forth began.
Everything I've summed up above is from sections 1.10 BLACKMOOR and 1.11 THE FANTASY GAME from Playing at the World.
I'm sure the debate about who did what wil continue as far as D&D goes. But like Peterson I easily attribute the game to both Gygax and Arneson. But if one is using Peterson as a guide, it certainly seems as if Gygax sparked to the possibilities of what Arneson was doing as something that could and would be written as something usable by other people and a product that could be sold.
That, in no way, as far as I'm concerned, slights Arneson and his vital ideas and his part in the collaboration in any way.
I'm a little confused. Isn't Mongoose Traveller supposed to be an updated form of CT?
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
For some people it is.
For other people it is different enough to no longer be much like CT at all.
For other people it is different enough to no longer be much like CT at all.
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Supposed to be but isn't.
It is closer to MegaTraveller than CT.
It is closer to MegaTraveller than CT.
Only in a theoretical sense.
It's mechanically barely related... CE is closer. MGT2 is further still.'
The skill list conceptions are very different. The approach to careers is different. The Up-or-out built into MGT is alien to CT.
Similar threads
