Does Classic Traveller need an update?

[mike wightman]

I dislike the way the MT task system loses the granularity across values for the characteristic effect - divide by five, drop fractions means 5,6,7,8,9 are all functionally equivalent.

I'd use S4's UGM instead.

There are many task systems superior to both - mine for example

But MT has the advantage that MWM owns it and so can include it - and we know it works.

You could probably use the MgT task system instead since it is OGL I believe.

 

[mike wightman]

[Apologies for double-post; I should have read Vargas's post before responding to Mike's]

There are loads more advanced careers knocking around that could be integrated - Flyers from MT COACC; police, secret service, scientists and medics from JTAS.

I like the computer programs. Just say switching from, say, Predict to Multi-target means reconfiguring the ship's sensors (rather than swapping round rolls of, ahem, magnetic tape).

The only problem with the advanced careers is that they would add a significant page count.

The CoTI character gen. should make it into appendix 3

 

[Supplement Four]

I like the computer programs. Just say switching from, say, Predict to Multi-target means reconfiguring the ship's sensors (rather than swapping round rolls of, ahem, magnetic tape).

I agree. I'm a fan of the computer programs, too. I can invent a reason why they are needed in view of the computing power we have even today. I picture them as different operating systems that must be switched out in order to use the various features--or programs so big that they dominate the ship's system leaving little room for anything else.

Another way to think of the programs is not as a program at all but a method of taking the ship's computer and dedicating it to one purpose--making it a dedicated server for evading incoming laser fire. If you think about it, that would take a lot of computing power, as the laser fire comes in at the speed of light and the ship has to react defensively to it.

I like the programs for a number of reasons. One, your computer program load, is a tactical choice in combat. What you have and how you switch it out can effect the outcome of a battle.

Second, it's something that the characters can strive to maintain, improve, and spend their credits upon.

Adventures can happen just because the players are trying to upgrade either their ship's computer or the programs that they have.

 

[aramis]

I dislike the way the MT task system loses the granularity across values for the characteristic effect - divide by five, drop fractions means 5,6,7,8,9 are all functionally equivalent.

I'd use S4's UGM instead.

UGM is inherently less flexible, since it always uses one attribute and one skill.

But note also: for combat tasks†, which are the only tasks† in CT, the attribute modifiers are –1 to +1. I get why they used Att/5. Personally, I use Att/3 when running MT.

† By task, using the MT and TNE terminology as a unified systemized method of resolving character actions.

 

[Supplement Four]

UGM is inherently less flexible, since it always uses one attribute and one skill.

Saying that the UGM is "less flexible" implies that it cannot handle the situation. It can, easily. It just does it differently than the UTP.

Therefore, the UGM is just as flexible as the UTP.

But note also: for combat tasks†, which are the only tasks† in CT, the attribute modifiers are –1 to +1. I get why they used Att/5. Personally, I use Att/3 when running MT.

Yes, CT Refs should think of the MT stat modifier in CT terms: +1 DM if STAT 5+, +2 DM if STAT 10+, +3 DM if STAT 15.

 

[aramis]

Saying that the UGM is "less flexible" implies that it cannot handle the situation. It can, easily. It just does it differently than the UTP.

Therefore, the UGM is just as flexible as the UTP.

Wrong, on both counts.

It doesn't imply it's incapable of handling situations; it does explicitly mean the users options are fewer.

UGM is, as last written on COTI, ALWAYS Stat & Skill.
DGP's Task system is choice of Stat & Skill, Stat & Stat, Skill & Skill.

UGM doesn't have a time system as part of it. DGP's does.

I'm not saying it's a bad choice; I am saying it's got fewer options because of the very nature of its use of attributes.

 

[Supplement Four]

Wrong, on both counts.

WRONG!

(Hey, how does that feel, huh? You, as The Mod, should have better manners than that. You come across just itching for a fight, with your superior "Wrong on both counts" BS.)

It doesn't imply it's incapable of handling situations; it does explicitly mean the users options are fewer.

UGM is, as last written on COTI, ALWAYS Stat & Skill.
DGP's Task system is choice of Stat & Skill, Stat & Stat, Skill & Skill.

UGM doesn't have a time system as part of it. DGP's does.

I'm not saying it's a bad choice; I am saying it's got fewer options because of the very nature of its use of attributes.

And, I'm saying that the job gets done by both systems.

By your definition of "flexible", the CT make-it-up-as-you-go is more flexible than either of those two systems.



Flexible, to me, answer the question, "Can this task system handle the problem at hand."

If it can, then great. It's flexible.

If it can't, then it's not so flexible.

 

[aramis]

WRONG!

(Hey, how does that feel, huh? You, as The Mod, should have better manners than that. You come across just itching for a fight, with your superior "Wrong on both counts" BS.)





And, I'm saying that the job gets done by both systems.

By your definition of "flexible", the CT make-it-up-as-you-go is more flexible than either of those two systems.



Flexible, to me, answer the question, "Can this task system handle the problem at hand."

If it can, then great. It's flexible.

If it can't, then it's not so flexible.

Your personal definition of flexible is nonsense.

Yes, the non-system of CT is more flexible - but it's also incapable of being evaluated as a single standard.

Flexibility is defined (froma quick google) as

able to be easily modified to respond to altered circumstances or conditions.
"flexible forms of retirement"
synonyms: adaptable, adjustable, variable, versatile, open-ended, open, free
antonyms: inflexible
​

Your personal definition being something else does literally NOTHING beneficial to your claims. It comes across to me as trolling.

You accused me of something, then take exception when I correct you on your major misinterpretation. That's also coming across as trolling.

 

[Marchand]

UGM is, as last written on COTI, ALWAYS Stat & Skill.

Quite probably true but easily tweaked surely.

Scholar character is confronted with a complex puzzle in Old Vilani. Throw a task against Old Vilani skill with both INT and EDU in play. You need to roll <= to both of INT and EDU to get your +1.

 

[McPerth]

I dislike the way the MT task system loses the granularity across values for the characteristic effect - divide by five, drop fractions means 5,6,7,8,9 are all functionally equivalent.

I'd use S4's UGM instead.

And CT system were a weapon DMs may be (as in the Body Pistol case, CT:LBB1, page 45¹) -3 if dex 7- and +1 if 11+, and so it makes functionally equivalent having dex 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7; or having 8, 9 or 10; or having 11, 12, 13, 14 or 15, but the quality jump from 7 to 8 being abysmal should be seen as worse, for this reasoning....

note 1: yes, I choosed an extreme case, as other weapons are less extreme, but in most of them similar issue raises​

 

[Gardensnake]

Doesn't Classic Traveller have an update? Isn't that what T5 is?

William

 

[Supplement Four]

Doesn't Classic Traveller have an update? Isn't that what T5 is?

No, T5 is just the latest version of rules to support the game. It really has nothing in common with CT, mechanically.

 

[atpollard]

T5 would be closer to a T4 update.
MgT is closer to being a CT update ... just too updated for some and not updated enough for others.

 

[Gardensnake]

No, T5 is just the latest version of rules to support the game. It really has nothing in common with CT, mechanically.

What are the realistic chances that CT will get an update though? Surely Marc wouldn't allow a 3rd version of Traveller to be in print along with T5 and the Mongoose version. The 3rd party stuff is one thing, but having 3 core books competing with each other is a bit much. I see T5 as being a progression of the Traveller rules. It to me is every bit an update of CT just as D&D 5 is an update to the original D&D. Mechanics change. At least the mechanic change wasn't as drastic as New Era.

Respectfully,

William

 

[Sir Brad]

I think the problem across all editions of Traveller is that they never have "finished" an edition, in each edition the game grows and matures, so much amazing stuff gets added then one day the Developers and players turn around and see that the game has gotten to big to "finish", so an other edition is put in to development.

I think a Revised version of Classic Traveller back in the day would have bean a better option than jumping to Mega Travller, but MT worked well, unfortunately the CT campaigns I was in where well beyond 1120 and had almost bean written in to a corner by the various GM's so we jumped to MT and started over, same thing happened with MT, TNE hadn't started to go that way but stuff happens.

A revised Traveller could have taken the LBB's to 13 giving us expanded Citizens careers. the AM's could have given us the Vilani then a Minor Human Races of the Marchers an other for the Rim then Non Human Races for each. but it had grown too big, so today CT fans tinker with and hybridise it keep the game alive in there harts and minds. An Official CT Revised game would take too much talent and market shear away from T5 all for the sake of a few Grey-beards and a smaller number of Legalese's.

As much as I'd love a Revised Classic it would be a less than optimal use of the Traveller development resources.

 

[aramis]

What are the realistic chances that CT will get an update though? Surely Marc wouldn't allow a 3rd version of Traveller to be in print along with T5 and the Mongoose version. The 3rd party stuff is one thing, but having 3 core books competing with each other is a bit much. I see T5 as being a progression of the Traveller rules. It to me is every bit an update of CT just as D&D 5 is an update to the original D&D. Mechanics change. At least the mechanic change wasn't as drastic as New Era.

Respectfully,

William

You mean 4th...
GT is still going (in the GTIW flavor), albeit not entirely actively.
At one point, there were 4 active in-print rulesets: CT Big Floppy's, T20, GT, and MGT. Didn't seem to hurt MGT's sales nearly as much as people reading the first two expansion books did... :devil:

And then, there is the issue that Marc has made certain that all the GDW and IG editions are available on CD. The content is available. So, essentially, there are 9 editions available for those willing to do PDF - CT 1E, CT2E, MT, TNE, T4, T5, GT, GTIW, MGT. And 2 that aren't: T20 and HeroTrav. (With the caveat that T20 may go to CD soonish. Just have to scrub off the d20 logos.)

 

[Gardensnake]

You mean 4th...
GT is still going (in the GTIW flavor), albeit not entirely actively.
At one point, there were 4 active in-print rulesets: CT Big Floppy's, T20, GT, and MGT. Didn't seem to hurt MGT's sales nearly as much as people reading the first two expansion books did... :devil:

And then, there is the issue that Marc has made certain that all the GDW and IG editions are available on CD. The content is available. So, essentially, there are 9 editions available for those willing to do PDF - CT 1E, CT2E, MT, TNE, T4, T5, GT, GTIW, MGT. And 2 that aren't: T20 and HeroTrav. (With the caveat that T20 may go to CD soonish. Just have to scrub off the d20 logos.)

While you are correct that there are technically 9 editions available, what I'm referring to are editions currently being published. There is no new product being released for the GDW or IG editions and almost nothing from GURPS. Mongoose is putting out product semi-steadily and Marc is also still working on T5. The thread asking about an update of CT assumes that new product would be forthcoming and I just don't see that happening. It's possible, there are technically at least 4 different versions of D&D in print and producing new product. Sadly though, Traveller doesn't enjoy the success of D&D so I don't think it could pull this off

William

 

[Gardensnake]

I think the problem across all editions of Traveller is that they never have "finished" an edition, in each edition the game grows and matures, so much amazing stuff gets added then one day the Developers and players turn around and see that the game has gotten to big to "finish", so an other edition is put in to development.

I think a Revised version of Classic Traveller back in the day would have bean a better option than jumping to Mega Travller, but MT worked well, unfortunately the CT campaigns I was in where well beyond 1120 and had almost bean written in to a corner by the various GM's so we jumped to MT and started over, same thing happened with MT, TNE hadn't started to go that way but stuff happens.

A revised Traveller could have taken the LBB's to 13 giving us expanded Citizens careers. the AM's could have given us the Vilani then a Minor Human Races of the Marchers an other for the Rim then Non Human Races for each. but it had grown too big, so today CT fans tinker with and hybridise it keep the game alive in there harts and minds. An Official CT Revised game would take too much talent and market shear away from T5 all for the sake of a few Grey-beards and a smaller number of Legalese's.

As much as I'd love a Revised Classic it would be a less than optimal use of the Traveller development resources.

Sir Brad,

Could you elaborate please as to what exactly you mean by an edition being "Finished" or not?

Thanks,

William

 

[mike wightman]

If you add pod to the mix there are even more versions still in print.
You can get The Traveller Book, T4 rulebook, TNE rulebook all as pod from drivethru.
MgT, GT, T5 -- I make that six version available in print.

 

[aramis]

And, as of the days when T20 was in new print, pre 2009... all the T20 stuff was dual statted CT/T20, so CT was truly in print as an edition at the time.