Rules Only: Generic or Official Traveller Universe

[Samog]

i use the otu with a hefty dose of customization. it seems traveller is a very personal thing. ive never seen forgotten realms users be as passionate about that setting, or anyone about any other setting. i think its because many traveller players are intelligent, well educated, and like hans' sig says it has to make sense. well traveller players think about and tweak the otu until it makes sense to them. its a personal understanding, a creative work of the imagination, and like an artistic creation the creator is passionate about it. the act of creating why i think many traveller players enjoy creating ships worlds gear and adventures. alternate tus and cuztomized ous are an expression of it too. and when it makes sense the creative inquisitive mind can rest and enjoy what it beholds. of all the games ive played only traveller gives so much opportunity to create. some other games i cherish make sense but only with traveller can i create whole civilizations down the the cigarette lighters. oh would that i vould live a thousand years.

i have t5 but i only have scratched the surface. if it comes with an otu ill just hand the players an info sheet with a summary of my customizations and away well go.

 

[Blue Ghost]

A most excellent response. I think the setting issue is something that has evolved as the game has evolved (broken record mode on); because Traveller was more generic in the late 70s up through the mid 80s, but there were lots of tidbits (and huge chunks) of the official setting given to players to manipulate and use as they saw fit. I still think that's true, but the official setting has, for some, crept into actually becoming the game.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Aramis; granted, but there's still lots of gray all over the map. Norris has "house cav". How many other nobles have forces that the Emperor can call upon? Is there a medieval feudal setup where nobles send either forces or money to help in some conflict, that is in addition to the standing forces (navy, marines, army...scouts), or are they simply part of an honorific class?

Our group rarely used nobles, and when we did, they were NPCs (I think we had a retired major general who was a duke or something, but he totally ignored it, and considered himself part of the "platoon" as opposed to a man of influence who could help his fellow adventurers). Our understanding ran to what was extrapolated on my Noble Militaries thread; there is some power there for some, not as much for others (or none), and depending on world of origin, there may or may not be political influence.

Yeah, there's bits and pieces dropped here and there, and I guess GT Nobles outlines the definitive GURPS version of nobles, but my gut tells me they act as nobles, and not just holdovers from when Europe transitioned from a purely feudal system, to something more bureaucratic.

Oh man, I'm tired, and I have to yard work tomorrow....more later.

 

[rancke]

A most excellent response. I think the setting issue is something that has evolved as the game has evolved (broken record mode on); because Traveller was more generic in the late 70s up through the mid 80s, but there were lots of tidbits (and huge chunks) of the official setting given to players to manipulate and use as they saw fit.

The huge gaps in the setting wasn't given to the players (with the exception of the Foreven Sector). It was an inescapable result of the impossibility of covering a setting the size of Charted Space (or just the Imperium for that matter) with any feasible amount of published setting material. Instead, new material was added in bits as time went by. And as Robert Prior so wisely said once, "The very act of writing a Traveller book closes the doors on possibilities. Any game supplement does that, assuming the publisher cares about internal consistency."

To complain that later material reduced the options available to players is to complain that water is wet.

Besides, GT: Nobles (to take a prominent example) didn't actually reduce the options for any referee; they were and are free to ignore anything they don't like. It just reduced the options for later writers of Third Imperium setting material.

I still think that's true, but the official setting has, for some, crept into actually becoming the game.

The official setting is a setting. No more, no less. You can play in the Third Imperium setting using other rules than Traveller¹ and you can use Traveller rules for other settings. To believe that you can only play Traveller in the Third Imperium setting would be a fallacy that should be refuted, not catered to.

¹ That's not to say that all non-Traveller rules are suitable, just that some are.​

Aramis; granted, but there's still lots of gray all over the map.

Of course. Descriptions of the setting has only had 35 years to cover the map and a lot of that has been repeats. That's nowhere near enough wordage to describe it adequately.

Norris has "house cav". How many other nobles have forces that the Emperor can call upon?

It seems likely that at least the other high dukes would also have housecarles, but there is no evidence of that anywhere prior to Nobles. At the very least the Duke of Rhylanor's housecarles ought to have been in FFW, but there's nary a sign of them.

Nobles established that all high nobles receive permission to raise a unit of housecarles. How big a unit is subject to the Emperor's whim, but Nobles lists the usual sizes.

Is there a medieval feudal setup where nobles send either forces or money to help in some conflict, that is in addition to the standing forces (navy, marines, army...scouts), or are they simply part of an honorific class?

No. The dukes function as a sort of hereditary royal governors. As such, the units they command are at the disposal of the Emperor, no matter how they are raised. Paids for out of duchy coffers or out the duke's privvy purse, it's all the same.

Yeah, there's bits and pieces dropped here and there, and I guess GT Nobles outlines the definitive GURPS version of nobles...

Actually, Nobles outlines the definitive Third Imperium version of nobles. The problem, as I understand it, is that Marc Miller is unsatisfied with that version and intends to retcon it. As is his right. But until he does, we're left with the current version.

...but my gut tells me they act as nobles, and not just holdovers from when Europe transitioned from a purely feudal system, to something more bureaucratic.

They're certainly not holdovers of anything. They have a well-defined and deliberately crafted function in Imperial government and society. The high nobles have specific duties and the other nobles constitute a 'labor pool' from which Imperial officials are mainly recruited.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Aramis; granted, but there's still lots of gray all over the map. Norris has "house cav". How many other nobles have forces that the Emperor can call upon?

Every subsector duke has permission to raise an army as a function of his office. By implication, no one below subsector dukes routinely has significant huscarles due to rank.

But note also - there seems to be no blanket prohibition on private armies.

 

[rancke]

Every subsector duke has permission to raise an army as a function of his office.

This is true, but such an army wouldn't be his huscarles. They'd be duchy (subsector) forces.

By implication, no one below subsector dukes routinely has significant huscarles due to rank.

Pre-Nobles material says nothing about that one way or another. And as I said above, Nobles says that all high nobles receive permission to raise a limited number of huscarles.

Keep in mind that even the full huscarles division of an archduke is scarcely much of an Army. Rhylanor has at least 24 divisions (probably 8 times that -- it's that pesky problem with the population multiplier again) and Mora must have something like ten times as many (240).

But note also - there seems to be no blanket prohibition on private armies.

No Imperial prohibition, no. Individual member worlds may have regulations prohibiting private armed units. But huscarles have special legal status; they're not subject to regulation by member worlds. When they're in uniform and accompanying their noble, they're something akin to Roman lictors; shooting at them can be treason.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

rancke; I think the gaps in the setting, which includes nobles, is the result of wanting to keep the game open ended, while still maintaining the space opera flavor that is the game itself. Because if you get too specific, as GT has, then you're establishing what actually is, and creating a texture that may be difficult to adjust for the sake of individual player groups.

I don't want to split hairs, but, GURPS Nobles is after all meant for GT, although I'm sure much of the particulars are probably salient for the non GURPS editions.

Bottom line, I think the setting is permeable for individual groups, and to this end I think Nobles in the game have more power and leeway than what you are perhaps suggesting. Historically nobles were the local administrators, the "polis" for the royal house. They were the government. There's some flavor of that in Traveller, but powers remain undefined, in my view.

As per Aramis and your observation; there appears to be a framework for raising house-cav, but there's no prohibition on private forces. I think leaving the game in the frame allows for richness of creation for referees and players, as opposed to setting down a hardline what is and isn't as far as Noble powers go.

 

[rancke]

rancke; I think the gaps in the setting, which includes nobles, is the result of wanting to keep the game open ended, while still maintaining the space opera flavor that is the game itself.

So I understand. What I don't understand is why you believe that. It's not as if the original writers had any choice but to leave huge gaps in the setting, so Occam's Razor says they did it because they had no choice. Do you have any evidence that this was a concious choice?

Because if you get too specific, as GT has, then you're establishing what actually is, and creating a texture that may be difficult to adjust for the sake of individual player groups.

No difficulty at all. Individual groups can simply ignore the bits they dislike.

And what GDW did establish about Imperial nobles seems pretty specific to me, as far as it goes. It certainly rules out some possibilities even if it leaves others open. And when you come right down to it, 'The Imperium is a feudal structure' is pretty specific too. If that was the only statement we had about Imperial nobles, British Empire style nobles would be ruled out with a vengeance. The statement isn't vague at all; it just happens to be incompatible with a goodly number of other canonical statements.

I don't want to split hairs, but, GURPS Nobles is after all meant for GT, although I'm sure much of the particulars are probably salient for the non GURPS editions.

The GT universe is supposed to be identical to the OTU up until some fairly recent (in 1117) change point. As such all the historical data are quite salient to the Third Imperium setting, no matter what edition.

Bottom line, I think the setting is permeable for individual groups, and to this end I think Nobles in the game have more power and leeway than what you are perhaps suggesting.

Yes, but you have little or no evidence to support your view.

I think leaving the game in the frame allows for richness of creation for referees and players, as opposed to setting down a hardline what is and isn't as far as Noble powers go.

This is an all too common fallacy. What you claim as freedom to do your own thing is actually lack of support for anything. The freedom you have anyway. There's no Canon Police that will knock on your door at dawn and drag you away for non-compliance with canon. Rest easy. Do your own thing. It's all good. All it costs you is that you won't be able to use stuff published for the official setting, and you appear doggedly determined not to do that anyway.


Hans

 

[lspitz]

Sorry I'm late to the dance. Two weeks of camping and a week of getting everything cleaned and put away and adjusting to modern civilization again have kept me away from the forums.

I'm happy to borrow elements from the OTU when it suits my purposes, but mostly I prefer to roll my own universe. The more tightly Traveller rules are bound to the Third Imperium setting, the less likely I am to use them.

CT was the most setting-free rules set, and with a few house rules, it's is the one I still prefer. Although, as Aramis pointed out a few pages back, the CT rules are not entirely divorced from setting. But neither are they so tightly intertwined that they can't be separated. E.g., it's easy enough to come up with alternate character generation tables/careers/life paths if the social and governmental structure implied by the standard ones doesn't suit your campaign.

I understand Hans's point about not wanting to have to do all the work creating his own setting. It has never been a problem for me, but I am not everyone. I can totally see why some people would want to stay close to the OTU just so that they won't have to do a lot of tweaking of published materials. It's a real time-saver for the referee, and players who are familiar with the OTU don't have to be brought up to speed on How The Universe Works in order to join your campaign.

So yeah, two very different audiences. Some of us want a toolkit so we can go off and build something cool with it, others want something already built so they can play with it right out of the box.

 

[Blue Ghost]

lspitz; I'm thinking there's probably more players like yourself than are letting on. But I'm also guessing that they're older players who grew up with the little black books.

rancke; well, I'm getting the impression that you want to really hash out and debate this. I've already stated my reasons, and there's ample evidence to support my position. We'll just have to wait and see what a new revised T5 says about nobles. I'm hopeful it'll be as gray as it is now, and left open for interpretation. But hey, who knows...

 

[rancke]

rancke; well, I'm getting the impression that you want to really hash out and debate this.

No, I just have a hard time walking away from an erroneous statement. It comes from an upbringing that taught me that to fail to speak up is the same thing as to acquiesce. But there always comes a point where I've refuted the same wrong statement several times and I give it up as futile. For this "debate" I've reached that point now.

I've already stated my reasons, and there's ample evidence to support my position.

No there isn't. Or if there is, you've failed to provide it. Repeating an erroneous claim doesn't make it true.

We'll just have to wait and see what a new revised T5 says about nobles. I'm hopeful it'll be as gray as it is now, and left open for interpretation. But hey, who knows...

Well, if it is left as grey as it is now, it will be quite clear. And whatever Marc Miller eventually comes up with for the Third Imperium will never change what has gone before, so I don't see much point in bringing that up.

Feel free to present some actual evidence if you can come up with any, but untill and unless you do, I'm finished with this subthread. Without conceding anything.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

whatever

care to list your citations OTHER than GURPS nobles?

 

[rancke]

whatever

care to list your citations OTHER than GURPS nobles?

You're kidding, right?`Why should I repeat myself when it didn't do any good the first time?

No, I'm done until and unless you come up with some backing for your claims.


Hans

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Sorry I am late as well.

Hey folks,

As a fellow Traveller noted earlier I am getting in this a smidge late, but I do have a bit to say regarding Nobles and their Fiefs.

1) The obnoxious first. I can't speak for the other new Nobles, but when I was created 1st Marquis Malory the inscription does say "...Rule your new world well! Strephon, Emperor" so either I just got handed a planet of my very own (in which case I can as the sole owner do what I please if it doesn't break Imperial Law) or His Imperial Majesty expects me to have some sort of hand in how the world is run. :devil:

2) The serious second. I have approached the issue of Imp Nobs and Fiefs as the Imperial Noble owns outright (T5 RAW) the Local Hex(es) (10 Km) as Private Property, it requires legal action to remove those from the individual. The Terrain Hex(es) (100 Km) that are awarded are Imperial Property and maybe stripped by the Senate, Moot or of course HIM for all sorts of reasons that may not also bring a case, or you know just because the Sovreign being the Font of All Honors decided to give it to some else (you evil or worse incompent boob). The Terrain Hexes are covered under the Imperial extraterritorial lands that Member Worlds are required to cede to the Imperium when they are granted Membership. It goes with the Starport and generally covered under the same Imperial Laws as the Starport is, or as the Noble has decided. Scout Discovery Grants also fall into this category, property and legal wise.

And since the tablet is acting hinky, I will close with those two CrImps.

3) ATU third. And because I have yet to meet a set of rules I didn't think needed a smidge of tweaking (Hunter Planet, whose combat rule I use in meatspace games and Paranoia, because seriously that game is just insane as is thus awesome, being the exceptions), I have added Landless Grants which are paired with Imperial Office like say Warden of Starport.

Okay, now done. Plus long day and I am tired.

 

[rancke]

1) The obnoxious first. I can't speak for the other new Nobles, but when I was created 1st Marquis Malory the inscription does say "...Rule your new world well! Strephon, Emperor" so either I just got handed a planet of my very own (in which case I can as the sole owner do what I please if it doesn't break Imperial Law) or His Imperial Majesty expects me to have some sort of hand in how the world is run. :devil:

I've avoided bringing this up, partly because I didn't want to be suspected of crying sour grapes and partly because I didn't want to rain on people's parades, but I hope and trust that Marc Miller intends for these noble titles and land grants to be on some sort of meta-level. And I would say the same thing even if I had a noble title of my own, yeah, even if that title was Duke of Regina.

But even if MM intends to promulgate an Official Traveller Universe where Marquis Magnus Thornwood¹ rules the world of Malory as an Imperial fief, he's going to have to do it as a retcon, because in the OTU as it has been published up to now, there is no sole ruler of all of Malory (it's balkanized).

¹ 'von' denotes a mere baron, not a marquis. ​

(To say nothing of the people who have received titles that canonically belong to NPCs).

I'm not arguing about the future noble rulers of Imperial fiefs. I'm arguing about the current noble holders (but not rulers) of Imperial fiefs. As outlined in the current canon.


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

You're kidding, right?`Why should I repeat myself when it didn't do any good the first time?

No, I'm done until and unless you come up with some backing for your claims.


Hans

Rancke,. I read that essay backwards and forwards, and I stand by my posts. You point to me what sentence and phrases in the Library Data supports your view.

 

[rancke]

Rancke,. I read that essay backwards and forwards, and I stand by my posts. You point to me what sentence and phrases in the Library Data supports your view.

You're still not providing any support for your claims, just attacking mine. I don't care if you stand by your posts. What I want is some hard evidence to support them.

(Just for the record, if anyone else feels that I haven't backed my own statements adequately already, I'm quite willing to elucidate for them.)


Hans

 

[Blue Ghost]

I actually have. The essay states that that in order to be part of the Imperial government (hold office) a person must of the peerage (above the rank of knight or baronet).

Nobility is hereditary

Nobility can be obtained through recognition of service, and issued through letters.

Nobles are part of the feudal system of the Imperial government.

Rank can be taken away by the Emperor.

Nobles are subject to all laws.

Anyone can be knighted by an archduke or arch duchess. Baronets, same thing.

Barons can be granted a fief, (usually) no more than 100km^2

Marquis are "associated" with single worlds. "Association" is not defined.

Counts are "associated" with two to three worlds.

Dukes are associated with subsectors, but may rise to rule sectors.

Archdukes are associated with whole domains; containing whole sectors and/or portions of other sectors.

Above nobility are either the royal or imperial family.

Fiefs themselves are granted parcels of land at the discretion of the Emperor to be used as said noble sees fit.

Nothing, no where, is anything I mentioned forbidden by these rules, and I think a lack of addressing my points means that they're up for grabs. I'm not going to engage in a rules argument. I've had enough of those in my life time.

House-cav is not addressed in this essay, but in The Spinward Marches Campaign, and, as Aramis stated, even though nobles may be limited by what they can raise for their personal protection, there's nothing prohibiting private armies. In fact the Imperium is RIFE with legal mercenaries. How nobles interact with those groups is addressed through the adventure being administered.

If you have something OTHER to tell me, then you can PM me.

 

[aramis]

Hans, Blue Ghost - you're apparently talking past each other.

[m;]Give it a rest for a few days, guys.[/m;]

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Two things.

I've avoided bringing this up, partly because I didn't want to be suspected of crying sour grapes and partly because I didn't want to rain on people's parades, but I hope and trust that Marc Miller intends for these noble titles and land grants to be on some sort of meta-level. And I would say the same thing even if I had a noble title of my own, yeah, even if that title was Duke of Regina.

But even if MM intends to promulgate an Official Traveller Universe where Marquis Magnus Thornwood¹ rules the world of Malory as an Imperial fief, he's going to have to do it as a retcon, because in the OTU as it has been published up to now, there is no sole ruler of all of Malory (it's balkanized).

¹ 'von' denotes a mere baron, not a marquis. ​

(To say nothing of the people who have received titles that canonically belong to NPCs).

I'm not arguing about the future noble rulers of Imperial fiefs. I'm arguing about the current noble holders (but not rulers) of Imperial fiefs. As outlined in the current canon.


Hans

Well, first off the Marquis Malory is Craig A. Glesner, not Magnus von Thornwood. (Also 'von' is part of the family name, and preceded any Imperial title.) In addition my readings of the OTU materials 'von, hault-, and the other I am forgetting' are first used by Baron, but I don't recall them being limited to Barons only. Pretty sure once you get to add a Surname Prefix you get to keep it even if you are elevated to a higher title. I thought (the character, not the Mod) Aramis had a 'hault' before his family name and was like a Duke. EDIT: And going by reported responses by Marc, I suspect they are not OTU per sé, but meta-game fun as you hope.

Second by your comments earlier, I thought any world with an Imperial Noble who ruled part of the world would have to be balkenized, so seems to work under your comments.

And last under current canon I only get a bunch of Terrain hexes which belong to HIM/The Imperium (excepting my Local hexes), so honestly I don't think it means I get to rule the world of Malory, just some territory on Malory.