Does Classic Traveller need an update?

[Fovean]

Last I've heard, the set was not safe before the incident ... the union people walked off the set in protest, got replaced (because of course) and the tragedy happened after the walkout due to the replacement people NOT following proper safety procedures (because they weren't union people who "knew the rules" surrounding such things and WHY those rules exist the way they do).

Yes that is true. In particular, the original camera team walked.

It’s entirely possible the replacements were non-union, or that the entire production was being done under a non-union contract but that last is very unlikely. It is likely that much of the crew were “getting their days” in order to qualify for full membership. I don’t know the particulars but I have friends in Santa Fe and I’m sure I’ll hear the ugly details soon enough.

For the record, I’ve been a member of the camera union - the International Cinematographers Guild - for about 15 years. It makes me really angry that this happened.

 

[Spinward Flow]

It makes me really angry that this happened.

Especially since it was such a promising cinematographer who was the fatality.

 

[whartung]

Using game engines and assets to tell stories is a subgenre called Machinima.

It's kind of stalled, but the engines just get better and better. At some point someone will break out with some quality production.

I simply point it out that the quality of the in-game renderer is high enough to warrant the company doing long form content without having to go to the expense of high end CGI. Especially pertaining to something like WoW which historically has maintained its exaggerated "cartoon" art style since the start rather than trying for anything remotely "photorealistic" (and I think it's has fared and aged better because) of it.

Mind, their high end CGI is very good, but it can't be cheap. I'm just trying to think of ways they can keep costs down in order to drive content. At the same time avoid something awful like the old school cartoons from the 70's where they reuse everything (have you seen "Fat Albert" recently? You...you can't unsee it. Not anymore. Just...wow.)

 

[Spinward Flow]

Mind, their high end CGI is very good, but it can't be cheap. I'm just trying to think of ways they can keep costs down in order to drive content.

Machinima definitely lends itself more easily to "mass production" of character acting content within a game for dramatization purposes. It's certainly something that can be done faster/more profusely than high end photorealistic CGI in a lot of cases (not all, but certainly a lot of them).

From what I hear, FFXIV made this kind of "casual machinima aspects" one of the storytelling features of their game in a way that is highly immersive.

 

[Condottiere]

In regard to guns, and reality, apparently it's easier and cheaper if the scene calls for plinking, like shooting cans or bottles, and for the reality part, they haven't mastered the recoil visual, which may or may not need the computing power of simulating accidents or weather patterns.

Hair effects, with thousands of individual strands.

 

[Fovean]

In regard to guns, and reality, apparently it's easier and cheaper if the scene calls for plinking, like shooting cans or bottles, and for the reality part, they haven't mastered the recoil visual, which may or may not need the computing power of simulating accidents or weather patterns.

Hair effects, with thousands of individual strands.

Much like Traveller, it is often risk vs reward. Most often the calculus is driven by the story, and the time required for the effect. It’s true that having an actor just shoot bottles will be cheaper and easier than using candy glass props and hard wired explosives and dust hits fired from paintball guns. Almost no one would consider serious CGI or VFX for such a simple scene.

Might not save much time though, depending on the actor. Tangentially, you’d probably be surprised by the vast number of actors who are unable to drive a car down a straight road and perform at the same time. Sure, gunplay is different but the risk of a serious time suck is very real.

Wow talk about some thread drift!

 

[Condottiere]

I kinda suspect that with the potential complexity of space combat, at some point Traveller will develop a computer aid for that.

In terms of driving, there's that complaint that Thurman made about Tarantino's insistence she drive, instead of a stuntperson, and she had an unnecessary accident.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Especially since it was such a promising cinematographer who was the fatality.

Washington Post article reporting on what happened.

 

[Timerover51]

The weapon used was a replica of the 1873 Colt Single-Action Army in ,45 Colt caliber. Single action means that the hammer of the revolver has to be manually cocked back prior to the trigger being pulled. For the weapon to fire means that the user pulled the hammer back to full cock and then pulled the trigger. The weapon did not accidentally go off.

 

[mike wightman]

In the thread "What one thing would you change,,," the one thing that get mentioned most often is replacing the combat matrices with an armour as damage reduction system.

 

[whulorigan]

In the thread "What one thing would you change,,," the one thing that get mentioned most often is replacing the combat matrices with an armour as damage reduction system.

That would be the biggest thing for me. As I mentioned in that thread, I would substitute the T4 damage-dice reduction / armor-value system in place of the CT combat matrices.

 

[Fovean]

In the thread "What one thing would you change,,," the one thing that get mentioned most often is replacing the combat matrices with an armour as damage reduction system.

Yeah that was a comment of mine as well. I rather like the Mongoose iteration, it’s straightforward and intuitive. Of course I’ve messed with it by allowing every 6 rolled in damage to reduce the armor’s Protection by 1 point. I mean c’mon, the stuff’s not magic

 

[Spinward Flow]

Of course I’ve messed with it by allowing every 6 rolled in damage to reduce the armor’s Protection by 1 point. I mean c’mon, the stuff’s not magic

Compromising armor integrity with damage (even randomly lucky damage) makes perfect sense. Armor should not be "impervious" to degradation/damage.

 

[Condottiere]

You'd have to include body location.

Though, of course, armour/protection doesn't usually have consistent coverage.

 

[daryen]

You'd have to include body location.

Any combat system that includes body location loses me immediately. I want to roll to hit, then roll for damage if a hit is scored. Penetration style approach is cool by me, but I just want the two rolls and move on to the next segment/round/turn/interval/whatever. This is a roll-playing game of the impossible future with magic tech. It is not a highly realistic combat simulator. Combat is a means to an end, not the end itself.

But that's just me.

And again, getting back to the core question of this topic, no, Classic Traveller does not need an update. It simply needs a clean-up and reprint (like I outlined above). If you want an "updated Traveller", go play MgT, T5, or Cepheus. Those are your actual "updated Traveller" systems. Seriously.

 

[mike wightman]

Snapshot, AHL, Striker - what do they all have in common? They are rules variants/add ons for CT and thus are part of CT.

Note that the vast majority of replies have been for cleaning up, including all the bits that were cut between editions. To get a complete set of basic rules for CT you need to look at CT 77, CT 81, CT SE, SS:3

Seriously, look at what people actually want.

And armour as damage reduction as per T4/MgT/CE appears to be pretty high on the list.

I agree that only two rolls should be needed for combat - attack and damage. You can use the damage rolled to describe the hit location and wound effect/severity easily enough.

 

[whulorigan]

Snapshot, AHL, Striker - what do they all have in common? They are rules variants/add ons for CT and thus are part of CT.

Note that the vast majority of replies have been for cleaning up, including all the bits that were cut between editions. To get a complete set of basic rules for CT you need to look at CT 77, CT 81, CT SE, SS:3

I would add Supplement 4: CotI to that list as well.

 

[daryen]

Note that the vast majority of replies have been for cleaning up, including all the bits that were cut between editions. To get a complete set of basic rules for CT you need to look at CT 77, CT 81, CT SE, SS:3

That's why I asking for a cleaned up version of TTB. Putting it all together.

Note that I don't want to use the CotI section of SS:4 (which I assume is what you meant). I want to use a corrected version of CotI from SMC. The reason is because it has some subtle changes made. Too bad the actual skill charts were completely screwed up. (Again, why I want a collated update.)

Seriously, look at what people actually want.

I know what people want. They want their own perfect version of CT that is unique to them. However, that would never sell, as everyone's version is unique to them. However, having a collated version of CT that includes the missing pieces and the errata, would be pretty cool and would useful to everyone. It would be the common platform everyone's house rules are built on, but still allows for all of those house rules.

And, again, I can't stress enough that Cepheus, MgT, and T5 *are* what CT would look like once all of the inputs, requests, suggestions, and years of improvements are added in. A cleaned up CT would be great because we don't have it. A "corrected" or "updated" CT isn't necessary because we *do* already have it. In multiple forms.

 

[HanleyTucks]

the one thing that get mentioned most often is replacing the combat matrices with an armour as damage reduction system.

The two basic approaches are,

1. Armour makes you harder to hit, but once hit, you take full damage, and
2. Armour makes no difference to how hard it is to hit you, but reduces damage.

Over many combats, these are equivalent. For example, being hit 50% of the time but then taking 6 damage works out to an average of 3 damage, whereas being hit 100% of the time but then taking 50% damage works out to an average of 3 damage. So it's just a different route to the same place.

For my part, I prefer the first approach. It's a bit simpler to calculate, since the first one has "roll to hit with modifiers, then roll for damage" whereas the second has "roll to hit with modifiers, then roll for damage with modifiers". And the second one leads to that disappointing moment where you hit, but do little or no damage. But this is personal taste.

 

[mike wightman]

Note that I don't want to use the CotI section of SS:4 (which I assume is what you meant). I want to use a corrected version of CotI from SMC. The reason is because it has some subtle changes made. Too bad the actual skill charts were completely screwed up. (Again, why I want a collated update.)

No, you assume wrong, I do not mean S:4; I mentioned SS:3 Missiles which is where you will find the radiation damage chart for ship combat and the only explanation of what a crew hit does in CT ship combat. I hadn't noticed changes in the text of the CotI section of SMC - will have to go look at them again, but you are right about the generation tables, a complete mess due to a cut n paste error.

And, again, I can't stress enough that Cepheus, MgT, and T5 *are* what CT would look like once all of the inputs, requests, suggestions, and years of improvements are added in. A cleaned up CT would be great because we don't have it. A "corrected" or "updated" CT isn't necessary because we *do* already have it. In multiple forms.

No they are not. T5 has a broken task system and a dysfunctional combat system, MgT has issues and as a result so does CE.

As to you deciding what 'we' want a lot of the 'we' on this thread do want it.