Does Classic Traveller need an update?

[Jeffr0]

So a "good" referee should pick through all of the editions to make his game?

Just how much time/money/effort do you expect us to spend? Like you need to get a PHD in Comparative Gaming and RPG History or something....

Why is this so hard?

All of that work needs to be done by someone that has a keen eye for synthesis... and that knows the point at which adding anything more can ruin something. As it stands, the Traveller family of games assume that the buyer will want to do that-- in place of the game designer. And no... I really don't care that AD&D used to be like that: other games grew out of that phase and I wish Traveller would, too.

This goes deeper than just shopping around and assembling various subsystems like Legos(r). (I'll take T4's combat and psionics... TNE ship design... First In and my homemade computer program for world design... and my own homebrew chargen based on Book 1 and COTI.) The rules systems have to imply the setting, too. There needs to be accurate commentary on the implications of the rules and their ramifications.

(On a recent thread, Hans pointed out that, based on his analysis of the trade rules, there'd really be no Jump-1 traffic on the mains and that most traffic would be of the back and forth ad infinitum variety. I'm sorry, but I want to game in a universe where tramp freighters drop into port and decide the next stop based on starport gossip-- and that while most freighter captains might hang out in a single subsector, many could end up travelling through the entire sector.)

 

[BigBadRon]

So a "good" referee should pick through all of the editions to make his game?

Well, that all depends. Does he want it to be HIS game, or somebody else's. And no, he doesn't have to pick through ALL editions of the game. He might not even own them all. But there's no harm in borrowing ideas from other editions, if he has access to them (or even from entirely different games).

All of that work needs to be done by someone that has a keen eye for synthesis... and that knows the point at which adding anything more can ruin something.

Afraid I disagree. It needs to be done by the person running the game, because he knows, much better than the designer, what his particular universe is like.

There needs to be accurate commentary on the implications of the rules and their ramifications.

Though the "accurate commentary" may not be particularly accurate IMTU.

I'm sorry, but I want to game in a universe where tramp freighters drop into port and decide the next stop based on starport gossip-- and that while most freighter captains might hang out in a single subsector, many could end up travelling through the entire sector.

Oddly, that is exactly what I find does tend to happen, with any version of Traveller.


Like some others in this thread, I run CT, pretty much straight from the box (a few minor tweaks). I have, over the course of 30 years in the hobby, collected all versions of Traveller, and played every version. I keep coming back to CT though, because it's the simplest one to run, and I find it's the version that's easiest to find players for.

 

[Supplement Four]

But there's no harm in borrowing ideas from other editions, if he has access to them (or even from entirely different games).

Of course not. If that's what the GM wants to do, then more power to him. Only he knows what's best for his own game.

But, Gypsy's implication is: If you don't pull from ALL the Traveller editions for your game, then you've got a blindspot.

You've got blinders on. You can only see one edition.

My reaction to that is: But, what if you see the other editions and don't like them?

My game is solid CT. I don't use anything from any other edition of Traveller. And, I'm runnin' it straight out of the box (99.99%).

That doesn't mean I have a blind spot as Aramis and Gypsy have said.

That means I prefer CT and not the other editions of the game.

 

[Garyius2003]

Yes, the computers and com equipment were way off. Weapons may be about right with some tweaks.

BTW: Where is my grav tech?

 

[far-trader]

...BTW: Where is my grav tech?

The US government has had it safely compartmentalized and secure since 1947. They make limited use of it in experimental craft.

:smirk:

 

[BigBadRon]

My game is solid CT. I don't use anything from any other edition of Traveller. And, I'm runnin' it straight out of the box (99.99%).

That doesn't mean I have a blind spot as Aramis and Gypsy have said.

That means I prefer CT and not the other editions of the game.

Yes, I agree with you on that.

 

[Antony]

New players will not be interested in what happened in multitudes of rule systems (except perhaps as an historical exercise). But they will be interested in what systems are available now and how well they are supported.

 

[aramis]

Actually, WJP, your blind spot was that you didn't/wouldn't even consider looking in T20. Not that you rejected post-look.

There are numerous modules in T20, some of which are specifically deisgned to work in CT.

Like you, I find TNE sits unused. The WV and Initiative rules are simple enough to pull out without the rulebook to hand!

T4, I use the psionics from, and the attribute inheritance rules, the various pools (swings, dodge).

 

[Supplement Four]

Actually, WJP, your blind spot was that you didn't/wouldn't even consider looking in T20. Not that you rejected post-look.

I've skimmed through it at the store. It looks like any other d20 game. I understand its a damn fine adaptation of the d20 rules, but d20 it remains.

So, you're suggesting I should buy T20 just so I can take a real hard look at it? I should buy T20 when I know I don't like the over-complicated, over-DMed d20 system? I should buy T20 when CT covers all my needs?

If that's a blind spot, then sign me up. I'm not gong to see the new sequel to National Treasure because the film doesn't look interesting to me. I didn't see the first one either. And, I'm not going to plop down cash for something that doesn't look like something I'd want.

That's crazy.

 

[aramis]

No, I'm suggesting you should borrow a friend's copy, and see whether or not the parts whch are not d20 are improvements, rather than a simple "It's not CT so it's worthless."

 

[vraymond]

Going in a slightly different direction....

Rather than talking about different versions of Traveller (which increasingly seems like a religious debate), I'd like to mention some things about CT that could be improved:

- Aliens. There's no system for generating alien sophonts in CT (Books 0-8). It's a fairly big hole, either within the Third Imperium universe, or more generally if you want to use Traveller for other SF settings.
- Implications of technology. While the tech chart from Book 3 is great, a ref has to do a fair bit of work to extrapolate how technology (particularly civilian tech) affects society. Something akin to Book 4's treatment of military tech by tech level would be great.
- Star system generation. Don't get me wrong - I like the simplicity of Book 3, but frankly, for depth, an update to Book 6 with better explanations would go a long way to make even a single subsector a rich and exciting place for adventure.
- Better conceptual integration of robots. This goes along with observations about aliens and technology - Book 8 is great, but some examples along with some guidelines for use in game would help.

I suspect that S4 would say most of what I've mentioned is already there, just spread out. That's correct. However, what this suggests is that CT needs a fairly complete re-edit and revision, to take what is in Books 0-8 and fit that into the original three volume format. T5 might actually be this, and MT may have been this at one point, if there had been better editing.

But here's a different way of looking at this: can you play a perfectly decent SF game using CT? Sure. Does it have holes? Definitely. Does that mean it needs an update? Depends on each and every gamer's personal threshold for improvement.

 

[robject]

...CT needs a fairly complete re-edit and revision, to take what is in Books 0-8 and fit that into the original three volume format. T5 might actually be this, and MT may have been this at one point, if there had been better editing.

MT is that in a nutshell; as an integrator, it's everything you need to run CT.

T5 uses a rules framework to produce aliens. And its robot rules are aimed towards generating characters instead of equipment. In both cases, the outputs are characters which can be run through chargen.

There's always room for updating CT. Officially, though, it won't happen.

CT could have alien and robot creation rules which output characters, too, with a reasonable amount of effort, I believe.

Here's how I think robots could work in CT:

(1) For robots with organic brains: there's a whole classification scheme between constructed organics versus cybernetics, etc. That's a discussion I'd like to see on COTI.

(2) For robots with electronic brains: replace EDU with PRG, where PRG is the maximum level of programs it may contain. A "program level" is equivalent to one level of any typical skill. Set a price tag on both skills and skill levels, and robots become point-buy. And they're reprogrammable.

(3) Starship programs take twice the space for robot brains. In other words, a typical INT 6 PRG 6 robot brain is like a 3/3 starship computer.

(4) In other words, robot brains and starship computers can be thought of as the same thing. The robot brain perhaps requires 2 liters of volume for containment. Use the robot brain's volume to reduce starship computer sizes, and use the computer prices as a guide to robot brain costs.

 

[DaveChase]

MT is that in a nutshell; as an integrator, it's everything you need to run CT.

...

Here's how I think robots could work in CT:

(1) For robots with organic brains: there's a whole classification scheme between constructed organics versus cybernetics, etc. That's a discussion I'd like to see on COTI.
....

I like the way you think (again of course).

If you get a Organic brain in a robot body discussion going please let me know.

I have a system(solar) that does this in MTU. Due to a virus/disease that killed most livestock the people build robot bodies for the remaining livestock that had a practial application and inserted the animals brains. This was done due to the culture of the people not because it was the most effecient way to replace the livestock. Currently the animals are born/via test tube in a clean controled enviroment and then afterbirth the brain is inserted into the body.
During the first 3-10 months after insertion the brain is stimulated via computer controled (virtual reality) to promote growth and training.

Dave Chase

Dave Chase

 

[Commander Drax]

hmmm, robot brains in cows, that would take some justification, after all most livestock is bred to be eaten, I'd love to see any organic citizen subsist on a diet of robot steaks.

Anyway that's not why I am here, like most members of COTI I have been with Traveller a very long time, since 1987 when I first bought MegaTraveller (thinking that it was "Traveller", because I didn't know that Traveller had a previous edition).

Having read these posts, sitting back and warming my hands against the rising flames. All I can say is that so far no one has designed a perfect RPG rule set, regardless of milieu. Personally I think we're doing ourselves a great deal of harm as a community by fighting amongst ourselves for the sake of arguments such as "classic traveller is better than mega traveller". We must all accept that we're all going to have differing opinions with regards to the best rules ever.

What we should be doing is debating the direction we'd like to see future Traveller products go in, do we want to see more realistic combat in later editions or more cinematic rules used, where is the balance between fast, fun and flexible combat or ship design or over complexity, at what level do we want to work at? Is there a way of building a simple system like book2 that allows for the quick design of ion engines, nuclear tea-kettles, VASIMIR thrusters or mass driver propulsion systems all of which add character to the Traveller universe.

What about up to date star system design, as we learn more do we want to integrate this cutting edge knowledge into our 'hard science' game, at what point does having hundreds of dull and lifeless exotic atmosphere worlds to visit stop being interesting. What about the realistic biological design of alien life forms (not just intelligent ones). In other words what balance do we want in future products and how much realism do we really need in a role playing game.

Lets look at what makes us all of the same, because if as a community we can agree on anything then getting it published to support everyone is a piece of piss!

 

[Supplement Four]

I suspect that S4 would say most of what I've mentioned is already there, just spread out. That's correct. However, what this suggests is that CT needs a fairly complete re-edit and revision, to take what is in Books 0-8 and fit that into the original three volume format.

Correct, I would say that. There are plenty of examples--especially in JTAS--of developing aliens for the game.

But, also remember that I said a CT "clean up" would be nice. Like your tech chart comment. I agree. More explanation would be great.

Consolidation and expoundation. Those are the two things I mentioned for a CT "clean up".

 

[Supplement Four]

Here's how I think robots could work in CT:

Are we forgetting Book 8?

Or the rules in JTAS...in the Traveller's Digest...in White Dwarf?

Four different sources (and one official LBB) for using robots in CT.

 

[Supplement Four]

Lets look at what makes us all of the same, because if as a community we can agree on anything then getting it published to support everyone is a piece of piss!

Lofty goal that I suspect will never happen.

Me, for example. I'm not interested in anything Traveller unless it's designed for CT. I've got a bunch of newer Traveller stuff (BITS, Avenger,. QLI adventures and some supplements), but only stuff that is specifically designed with CT in mind. I don't care for the T20/T-Hero/GT/TNE/MT/T4/MGT/T5 stuff.

The actual rule set used is important (at least to me--and I suspect to some others).

Otherwise, I might as well be adapting from other science fiction games.

 

[Commander Drax]

Most people are adapting from other science fiction games, that's how sad its's getting. I had a lofty dream of a rules set called traveller unification, designed to unify all of the versions of the game that went before it. It's not too hard to do until you try and get everyone to agree on what makes a rule set great, as mentioned, it's damaging to say these rules with x supplement are the best, because someone else will say, that some other version of traveller with Y rules are better and so on. What we should continue to do is support the development of stat less and rule less resources and adventures like the 1248 books that anyone can adapt to their own preferred rule set.

With OGL traveller coming soon, this fracturing of the community will only get worse.

 

[robject]

Are we forgetting Book 8?

Or the rules in JTAS...in the Traveller's Digest...in White Dwarf?

Four different sources (and one official LBB) for using robots in CT.

I'm not forgetting JTAS/Book 8 at all; I'm ruthlessly ignoring it. And, I don't know TD and WD's robots rules.

Book 8 is pushing in the wrong direction. If I want a robot brain in a vehicle, then let me design the vehicle then put a brain in it. If I want C-3PO, then let me design an artificial humanoid and put a brain in it, based on some fundamental similarities with player characters. In other words, design it with the UPP in mind from the beginning, instead of starting out with a metal box with appendages.

Anyway, Book 8 apparently forgot about starship computers (justifiably so, but there's no mention of a retcon, so that leaves me hanging).

 

[Supplement Four]

If I want a robot brain in a vehicle, then let me design the vehicle then put a brain in it.

But, what about being faithful to the hard science roots of Traveller? That seems a bit over TL16. Are you suggesting that Traveller design system be capable to designing everything rather than what is most likely for the genre?