How Crunchy do you like your Traveller?

[Dragoner]

Well, I like a. Lot of crunch, as long as it is logical and the gm can handle it. I started out as a wargaamer after all. And I gm HackMaster...

This post got me thinking of a poll. For me, I started out as a wargamer as well, but nowdays, doing things online, the more streamlined the better, because it takes way more work for the GM to explain the crunch. I know that when I was younger, I liked more crunch as well, until about the middle of getting my degree in mechanical engineering; there I must have reached an apex, as I have been slowly move towards: "Whatever, I just shoot it" playing style. Too much making spreadsheets and doing calcs in real life; a lot of the crunch I also see as not making a huge amount of sense, and then I really don't care much for filler.

 

[Greylond]

Like I said, as a GM, I like a lot of crunch, but then I've gotten good at being able to translate things for new Players and know when be able to accurately predict an outcome and take shortcuts. For example, I used to GM the original Twilight 2000 and I was one of the few GMs that actually liked the entire vehicle damage system and could use it effectively. Using that system there were times when you just had to know when not to roll damage and just declare the vehicle toast...

 

[PFVA63]

Hi,

I don't mind having a lot of info available if needed, but I don't really like having to feel like I need to get bogged down in details for everything.

 

[robject]

As the OTU code implies, sort of middling, I guess, but, all else being equal:

ge- Playability trumps realism.

 

[HiverLord]

Crunchy is great, as long as it's not too piddly or insane. But my players... well, not so much. I'm forced to shorten a lot of things up for their sake.

 

[aramis]

I like my science solid, and my rules fairly light.

 

[warwizard]

Crunchy for me, esqcueing the grav drives in favor of the Heplar or more archeaic drives. Power plants sip fuel, Fusion produces a LOT of energy for a little bit of fuel, run your fusion products through the fuel purifier and get your D2 and H2 back, and send the He through the Heplar.

 

[LiamKerrington]

I like my science solid, and my rules fairly light.

^ This ^

I voted for the middle-option, although I felt very inclined to hit the fourth option. Truth is: I don't play so much SF games as I would like to; in my region people stick with elven *itches in chainmail-bikinis hurling fireballs and demons and dragon while drinking dwarves under the table ... (Well, yawn to some degree ...) And worse then that: they play just D&D and Pathfinder and houserule anything that gets too complicated ... Thus my personal experience with crunchy games is based on the times when I used to be GM and what I wish to see in a game, which makes my choice a very theoretical one.

 

[theatrix]

Medium crunchy to crunchy is where most of my games play.

Tim

 

[Baron]

K.I.S.S. for me. Give me a target number, forget all the silly modifiers. It's a game.

 

[Leitz]

As a DM I prefer to play the players; figure out what they want and build a story around that. As a player I bring a lot of back story in with the character and let the DM take the parts they want and run with it.

It's a game, but it's more a shared author story. Drama, action, risk, reward.

 

[jp42]

I'm pretty much a heretic, as I like my Traveller with a side of GURPS. I want a system that'll let me get down to the nitty-gritty and with as the abstractions as few and as subtle as possible.

 

[Leitz]

I'm pretty much a heretic, as I like my Traveller with a side of GURPS. I want a system that'll let me get down to the nitty-gritty and with as the abstractions as few and as subtle as possible.

Heretic! Who needs more than 2d6 for anything?

 

[Riik O'Shae]

CRUNCHY like in Captain...

Sugar-coated outer with plenty of bite needed.

Riik

 

[mike wightman]

Crunch for between games preparation - world/scenario/ship/equipment design.

During an actual gaming session I want rules light fast play - the emphasis is on the characters and what they do, not the number of rivets on the secondary airlock.

 

[soloprobe]

I like mine medium crunchy . The science I add to my games usually has somthing to do with the adventuer's plot . I try to keep play fast and loose the figures don't come out until the players get into trouble..........

 

[PFVA63]

Crunch for between games preparation - world/scenario/ship/equipment design.

During an actual gaming session I want rules light fast play - the emphasis is on the characters and what they do, not the number of rivets on the secondary airlock.

Hi,

I think that sounds good to me.

 

[oldgamergeek]

I like my science solid, and my rules fairly light.

Same here.

 

[Merxiless]

Grand Survey plus Scouts 6, plus 2300 AD atmospheric density by Grav charts crunch.

 

[robject]

As a DM I prefer to [...] figure out what they want and build a story around that. [...] It's a game, but it's more a shared author story. Drama, action, risk, reward.

Crunch for between games preparation [...] [But] During an actual gaming session I want rules light fast play [...]

I'm somewhere between these two. I like the option to drill down a bit, but my players and I like a game that runs at a good pace with a good storyline. I also like rules that give me guidelines, because the players will do all sorts of unexpected things, and knowing the rules helps me react on an even keel.