CT Only: house rule for Book 3, world generation rules

[BwapTED]

Population modifiers for human worlds

Atmosphere
• Atmosphere anything other than thin, standard, or dense -1 DM
• No atmosphere or trace atmosphere -1 DM
• Corrosive -1DM
• Insidious -2 DM
These modifiers are cumulative. A world with atmosphere type C (insidious), would have a -3 DM.

Hydrographic
• -1 DM if Hydrographic 0 or A


This is meant for my ATU, but it might be useful in any Traveller campaign that assumes:

Humans will mostly remain human as we understand it, and not go in for radical modification to the point of creating new species or becoming "post-humans"


People like to be able to walk around outside, breathe the air, drink the water etc. Harsher and more forbidding worlds (compared with Earth) will tend to attract fewer colonists/support smaller populations.



Some notes/observations:

Vacuum worlds top out at population 7. Bustling arcologies and tunnel-cities with millions or even tens of millions of people are still possible, but quite unlikely.
Most airless worlds will have small populations. Starports, mines, industrial complexes, etc.


Let's say we have a vacuum world. Airless, and dry (hydro 0)-- not a garden spot.

Roll for population.

Throw a 7.

-2 because that's standard.

-3 for atmo and hydro conditions.

Pop= 2


Hundreds of people live on this world.

Let's say we get an average result for gov't type, too. Another unmodified 7.
After the math it comes out to a gov't code 2: Participating Democracy. That makes sense for such a small population. Type 1 and type 3 would result if we rolled a 6 or an 8 instead, also pretty likely results. Company/Corporation and Self-Perpetuating Oligarchy. Those also seem like really good fits to me.




What's not going to come up at all for a vacuum world, whatever its population rank? Only Type D: religious dictatorship. And of course the Referee can always place such a world by design.

 

[Timerover51]

Population modifiers for human worlds

Atmosphere
• Atmosphere anything other than thin, standard, or dense -1 DM
• No atmosphere or trace atmosphere -1 DM
• Corrosive -1DM
• Insidious -2 DM
These modifiers are cumulative. A world with atmosphere type C (insidious), would have a -3 DM.

Hydrographic
• -1 DM if Hydrographic 0 or A


This is meant for my ATU, but it might be useful in any Traveller campaign that assumes:

I use something very similar in my universe as well.

Let's say we get an average result for gov't type, too. Another unmodified 7.
After the math it comes out to a gov't code 2: Participating Democracy. That makes sense for such a small population. Type 1 and type 3 would result if we rolled a 6 or an 8 instead, also pretty likely results. Company/Corporation and Self-Perpetuating Oligarchy. Those also seem like really good fits to me.

What's not going to come up at all for a vacuum world, whatever its population rank? Only Type D: religious dictatorship. And of course the Referee can always place such a world by design.

Given the number of historical "Utopian" and off-shoot religious colonies, I would say that government Type D might be somewhat common on very low population worlds.

 

[McPerth]

Have you seen the variations for Space Opera World Creation and Hard Science World Creation from MgT (Core Book page 180 sidebar)?

While not exactly what you say, they go a similar way.

 

[HG_B]

Have you seen the variations for Space Opera World Creation and Hard Science World Creation from MgT (Core Book page 180 sidebar)?

While not exactly what you say, they go a similar way.

Yes, nice alt gen rules. I'm using as inspiration for my house rules.

 

[Timerover51]

Have you seen the variations for Space Opera World Creation and Hard Science World Creation from MgT (Core Book page 180 sidebar)?

While not exactly what you say, they go a similar way.

I had not noticed that side bar, McPerth. Thank you for pointing it out.

 

[rancke]

My house rule (which ISTR is actually a part of the original rules, just one that GDW tended not to apply) is to do up the UWPs, warts and all, and then vet them, changing all the ones that I can't come up with an explanation for.

There's also the more elaborate one of doing physical and social stats separately, arranging them in order of respectively habitability and population size, and then match the one at the top of one list with a randomly chosen one of the six topmost ones of the other list.


Hans

 

[HG_B]

My house rule (which ISTR is actually a part of the original rules, just one that GDW tended not to apply) is to do up the UWPs, warts and all, and then vet them, changing all the ones that I can't come up with an explanation for.

Hans

The Gen system I'm designing will have no unreal results. That way I can add them if and where I want without having to vet in the first place.

 

[rancke]

The Gen system I'm designing will have no unreal results. That way I can add them if and where I want without having to vet in the first place.

But will it have really unlikely results? The sort of results that inspire one to come up with unusual and ingenious worlds, unique and fascinating worlds?

And will your system take neighboring worlds into account? Two identical worlds can make very different amount of sense depending on the astrography and history of the region.


Hans

 

[HG_B]

But will it have really unlikely results? The sort of results that inspire one to come up with unusual and ingenious worlds, unique and fascinating worlds?

I don't need inspiration from a bad World Gen system.

And will your system take neighboring worlds into account? Two identical worlds can make very different amount of sense depending on the astrography and history of the region.


Hans

It is actually going to be 3 separate systems depending upon how long the area has been settled by advanced cultures. From Long time to unexplored territory.

 

[rancke]

I don't need inspiration from a bad World Gen system.

So your system provides the highly unlikely kinds of worlds too? That's nice.


Hans

 

[HG_B]

So your system provides the highly unlikely kinds of worlds too? That's nice.


Hans

I think that your Danish to English pgm. is on the fritz. o:

 

[GypsyComet]

Based on what is being reported with a straight face about the growing population of exoplanets, the unusual fringe cases may be atmo 5,6, and 8.

 

[HG_B]

Based on what is being reported with a straight face about the growing population of exoplanets, the unusual fringe cases may be atmo 5,6, and 8.

Too bad it is so dang hard for us to detect smaller, Earth like planets. We don't eve have a half way decent idea of what's in our local neighborhood, much less have a representative sampling to base sys gen on.

 

[BwapTED]

Have you seen the variations for Space Opera World Creation and Hard Science World Creation from MgT (Core Book page 180 sidebar)?

While not exactly what you say, they go a similar way.

No, I haven't seen those.

Almost all of my Traveller stuff is CT.

Given the number of historical "Utopian" and off-shoot religious colonies, I would say that government Type D might be somewhat common on very low population worlds.

One could always use the unmodified population roll (that is, the roll before applying any negative DMs for atmo and hydro) when calculating gov't type.
Fincky?

Yes, a bit.


I like the tables and I do enjoy interpreting/justifying the occasional highly improbable UWP.
But for human worlds in my ATU, with its particular tech and cultural assumptions, lower populations on deathtrap worlds and airless rocks makes sense. I'm shifting the table results a little bit to make the random system world for my needs.

Hans's way also looks fun.

 

[Marchand]

GURPS Space is great for plausibility, but the output does tend to seem a bit bland and same-y when you roll up more than a few worlds. I think it's partly because it uses a lot of 3D rolls which cuts down on the variability (i.e. the averages come up more often).

The fact that religious dictatorships are more likely at high pop levels (edit: in CT, not GURPS) has always struck me as odd. Slight tangent, but does anyone know of anything to explain it in the kind of 60s/70s SF Traveller is most obviously based on?

 

[whulorigan]

The fact that religious dictatorships are more likely at high pop levels (edit: in CT, not GURPS) has always struck me as odd.

I had never noticed that before, but you are right: it is odd. It seems to me that lower population worlds would be great candidates for Religious Dictatorships (e.g. either the "cult" or the "persecuted minority religious sect" that set up its own colony on an otherwise unclaimed world in order to freely practice their "faith" - and then slowly grows in population over time).