Interesting Traveller Article

[Jeffr0]

Originally posted by jrients:
I thought the article made some good points. Pegging CT as 'noir adventure in space' nicely articulates a gut feeling I have been unable to state before now.

Me, too.

Most rpg commentators have this patronizing attitude that vicarious law breaking was the only thing the CT creators knew at the time... and the only thing players could comprehend at the time.

(You know... we all need to grow up and quit playing with our little wargame toys... buy a bunch of GURPS books... and go out and have a mature role-playing experience where we enter Nirvanah with our Meisner method preparations... blah... blah... yeah... we're so much more sophisticated that the CT audience. Yawn.)

I'm all for Flynn's Ethical Patrons Contest... but looking at the original Patrons Supplement as a legitimate extrapoliation of the sci-fi source material that Traveller is based on.... Yeah! Dig it!

I just feel so authenticated.

Other notes:

A lot of the odd ball material in Books 1-3 that I could never quite figure out is explained by this article. I've never heard of E. C. Tubb’s Dumarest of Terra, but that book seems to nail it. The weird drugs... the unusual weapons/armor for sci-fi... the deadly low berth.

I disagree with this part: "CT’s emperor “Cleon I” is the sole minutia mined from Asimov’s Foundation." 'Mined' is way too strong a term. Dumarest of Terra was apparently mined to build CT. Asimov simply scored a minor homage with Traveller.

 

[Jeffr0]

Originally posted by jrients:
I thought the article made some good points. Pegging CT as 'noir adventure in space' nicely articulates a gut feeling I have been unable to state before now.

Me, too.

Most rpg commentators have this patronizing attitude that vicarious law breaking was the only thing the CT creators knew at the time... and the only thing players could comprehend at the time.

(You know... we all need to grow up and quit playing with our little wargame toys... buy a bunch of GURPS books... and go out and have a mature role-playing experience where we enter Nirvanah with our Meisner method preparations... blah... blah... yeah... we're so much more sophisticated that the CT audience. Yawn.)

I'm all for Flynn's Ethical Patrons Contest... but looking at the original Patrons Supplement as a legitimate extrapoliation of the sci-fi source material that Traveller is based on.... Yeah! Dig it!

I just feel so authenticated.

Other notes:

A lot of the odd ball material in Books 1-3 that I could never quite figure out is explained by this article. I've never heard of E. C. Tubb’s Dumarest of Terra, but that book seems to nail it. The weird drugs... the unusual weapons/armor for sci-fi... the deadly low berth.

I disagree with this part: "CT’s emperor “Cleon I” is the sole minutia mined from Asimov’s Foundation." 'Mined' is way too strong a term. Dumarest of Terra was apparently mined to build CT. Asimov simply scored a minor homage with Traveller.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
Wow. I know when I've been insulted.

Originally posted by ranke:Bill obviously disagrees with you about the article in question, and he does express himself somewhat forcefully, but all his colorful expressions seem to be directed at the article, not you.

Originally posted by ranke:Yes, I'll grant you that that was a bit harsh (Though it is true that Piper is far from obscure). Still, I have to agree that Bill was out of line there.

I have to agree with Hans here. Bill is out of line.

There's really no reason to rail on a poster (a fairly in-frequent poster at that) like that. There's a thousand other ways to make the same point in a polite way.

Do we want this forum to become like the TML?

Many people complain that the TML is populated by old-timers who will slap you silly if you breathe one word about an opposing veiw of canon or what not. Just look at the TML today. It's dead. Nobody hardly posts anything worth talking about any more (just look at the archive). I've tried to spice it up there a bit lately, but I think most of the newer posters have been run off. (I know I've received some personal e-mails to that effect by some newbies on the list.)

I can remember a time when the TML was an incredible resource for a Traveller gamer. There was always something cool and insteresting to discuss there. People would post rules, stories, tech discussions...all things Traveller.

It used to be such a comfortable place.

Alas, it's not any longer.

I really like the people I've met on this forum. This place is comfortable. Good people, interested in Traveller.

I really don't want this forum to turn into the TML (and I hope the TML comes back to its greatness).

How are we going to encourage new players to come play our favorite game if we bite thier heads off when they chance to speak?

So, Bill, I've laughed my ass off at the way you've put things before. You can be quite funny.

But, I've also seen you alienate a lot of folks--when there was no need.

All I'm asking is that you consider the way your words will be taken bofore you hit the "add reply" button.

Let's keep this forum the comfortable place it is.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
Wow. I know when I've been insulted.

Originally posted by ranke:Bill obviously disagrees with you about the article in question, and he does express himself somewhat forcefully, but all his colorful expressions seem to be directed at the article, not you.

Originally posted by ranke:Yes, I'll grant you that that was a bit harsh (Though it is true that Piper is far from obscure). Still, I have to agree that Bill was out of line there.

I have to agree with Hans here. Bill is out of line.

There's really no reason to rail on a poster (a fairly in-frequent poster at that) like that. There's a thousand other ways to make the same point in a polite way.

Do we want this forum to become like the TML?

Many people complain that the TML is populated by old-timers who will slap you silly if you breathe one word about an opposing veiw of canon or what not. Just look at the TML today. It's dead. Nobody hardly posts anything worth talking about any more (just look at the archive). I've tried to spice it up there a bit lately, but I think most of the newer posters have been run off. (I know I've received some personal e-mails to that effect by some newbies on the list.)

I can remember a time when the TML was an incredible resource for a Traveller gamer. There was always something cool and insteresting to discuss there. People would post rules, stories, tech discussions...all things Traveller.

It used to be such a comfortable place.

Alas, it's not any longer.

I really like the people I've met on this forum. This place is comfortable. Good people, interested in Traveller.

I really don't want this forum to turn into the TML (and I hope the TML comes back to its greatness).

How are we going to encourage new players to come play our favorite game if we bite thier heads off when they chance to speak?

So, Bill, I've laughed my ass off at the way you've put things before. You can be quite funny.

But, I've also seen you alienate a lot of folks--when there was no need.

All I'm asking is that you consider the way your words will be taken bofore you hit the "add reply" button.

Let's keep this forum the comfortable place it is.

 

[Supplement Four]

BTW,

The article says that T2300 was originally a Traveller game. It wasn't. Traveller 2300 and 2300AD were always set in the Twilight 2000 universe, not the Traveller universe.

My guess is that the GDW folks ventured some name recognition with their flagship game, Traveller, in a push to make their new game, T2300, more visible.

I agree it was a bad decision on GDW's part, and a better idea when they changed the name to 2300AD in the game's second edition.

It doesn't look like the writer of the article understood that--assumption on his part that T2300 was a Traveller game.

And, FWIW, I did think the article was an interesting read. It's not 100% correct in all areas, but an interesting take.

Can't say I agreed with all of it, but I'm glad I read it.

 

[Supplement Four]

BTW,

The article says that T2300 was originally a Traveller game. It wasn't. Traveller 2300 and 2300AD were always set in the Twilight 2000 universe, not the Traveller universe.

My guess is that the GDW folks ventured some name recognition with their flagship game, Traveller, in a push to make their new game, T2300, more visible.

I agree it was a bad decision on GDW's part, and a better idea when they changed the name to 2300AD in the game's second edition.

It doesn't look like the writer of the article understood that--assumption on his part that T2300 was a Traveller game.

And, FWIW, I did think the article was an interesting read. It's not 100% correct in all areas, but an interesting take.

Can't say I agreed with all of it, but I'm glad I read it.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
Uh, there are two instances where he says "you," meaning me. One where he says I know little about Traveller and one where he says I know just as little about science fiction. I find that insulting.

Zog10701,

If you find it insulting you have my apologies.

What I found inconcievable was that someone who has been playing Traveller since 1982 - as one of your few posts here explicitly said - and who has played so many in so many different styles of campaigns - you list a few in the same post - could agree so enthusiastically with the article. (After reading your post I checked you out.)

While playing Traveller, you've been "... mercenaries to penniless beggars to super-rich nobles and everything in between. and have met ... the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise, battled Aliens, done cyberpunk adventures..." besides changing "... Sorel/Glisten into the World of Greyhawk for more than a few D&D adventures." As you yourself put it; "We've done it all. And, to me, the beauty of Traveller is, that it's all possible!"

Yet, despite your own experiences, you called an article that pegged CT as 'Noir in Space' Facinating.... You then went on to call an article that wholly mispresented the relationships between various Traveller versions and the relationships between various GDW SF RPGs article "Well-researched and well-written." and wrapped up your post by saying it was "A must-read for anyone playing any form of Traveller.".

There's 'wrong' and then there's 'oblivious'.

You aren't someone new to Traveller, by your own admission you've been playing it for over 20 years. Your own experiences with the game prove the author of the article completely wrong. So why the gushing fanboy post praising the author and the article?

If I'm wrong about something, fine, tell me, I'm a big boy, I can take it. I just don't see the need to insult me while you correct me. I don't think that's cool.

Going by your own post, you do know little about Traveller and little about science fiction. You've used the gasme to play a wide variety of genres, yet agree with the author's 'one trick pony' statement. And as far as science fiction goes, not knowing who Piper is - knowing about Piper mind you, not reading Piper - is akin to not knowing who Asimov is.

Was I harsh in pointing out you ignoring your own Traveller experiences? Perhaps. Was I harsh in suggesting that, as a player of a science fiction RPG, your knowledge of both the game and science fiction is rather limited? Perhaps. As you write, you're a big boy and someone should be able to point these things out to you without needing to sugar coat their observations.

I do not feel I insulted you. I merely pointed out that you knew little of what your own posts claim you know. YMMV.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
Uh, there are two instances where he says "you," meaning me. One where he says I know little about Traveller and one where he says I know just as little about science fiction. I find that insulting.

Zog10701,

If you find it insulting you have my apologies.

What I found inconcievable was that someone who has been playing Traveller since 1982 - as one of your few posts here explicitly said - and who has played so many in so many different styles of campaigns - you list a few in the same post - could agree so enthusiastically with the article. (After reading your post I checked you out.)

While playing Traveller, you've been "... mercenaries to penniless beggars to super-rich nobles and everything in between. and have met ... the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise, battled Aliens, done cyberpunk adventures..." besides changing "... Sorel/Glisten into the World of Greyhawk for more than a few D&D adventures." As you yourself put it; "We've done it all. And, to me, the beauty of Traveller is, that it's all possible!"

Yet, despite your own experiences, you called an article that pegged CT as 'Noir in Space' Facinating.... You then went on to call an article that wholly mispresented the relationships between various Traveller versions and the relationships between various GDW SF RPGs article "Well-researched and well-written." and wrapped up your post by saying it was "A must-read for anyone playing any form of Traveller.".

There's 'wrong' and then there's 'oblivious'.

You aren't someone new to Traveller, by your own admission you've been playing it for over 20 years. Your own experiences with the game prove the author of the article completely wrong. So why the gushing fanboy post praising the author and the article?

If I'm wrong about something, fine, tell me, I'm a big boy, I can take it. I just don't see the need to insult me while you correct me. I don't think that's cool.

Going by your own post, you do know little about Traveller and little about science fiction. You've used the gasme to play a wide variety of genres, yet agree with the author's 'one trick pony' statement. And as far as science fiction goes, not knowing who Piper is - knowing about Piper mind you, not reading Piper - is akin to not knowing who Asimov is.

Was I harsh in pointing out you ignoring your own Traveller experiences? Perhaps. Was I harsh in suggesting that, as a player of a science fiction RPG, your knowledge of both the game and science fiction is rather limited? Perhaps. As you write, you're a big boy and someone should be able to point these things out to you without needing to sugar coat their observations.

I do not feel I insulted you. I merely pointed out that you knew little of what your own posts claim you know. YMMV.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
If you find it insulting you have my apologies.

(snipety)


Was I harsh in pointing out you ignoring your own Traveller experiences? Perhaps. Was I harsh in suggesting that, as a player of a science fiction RPG, your knowledge of both the game and science fiction is rather limited? Perhaps. As you write, you're a big boy and someone should be able to point these things out to you without needing to sugar coat their observations.

I do not feel I insulted you. I merely pointed out that you knew little of what your own posts claim you know. YMMV.

Bang up job there on the apology, Bill. I'm sure he felt your sincerity.

So much for my plea to keep things comfortable around here.

Oh well.

Let's just drop this, yes? And move on with the Traveller discussions?

Sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
If you find it insulting you have my apologies.

(snipety)


Was I harsh in pointing out you ignoring your own Traveller experiences? Perhaps. Was I harsh in suggesting that, as a player of a science fiction RPG, your knowledge of both the game and science fiction is rather limited? Perhaps. As you write, you're a big boy and someone should be able to point these things out to you without needing to sugar coat their observations.

I do not feel I insulted you. I merely pointed out that you knew little of what your own posts claim you know. YMMV.

Bang up job there on the apology, Bill. I'm sure he felt your sincerity.

So much for my plea to keep things comfortable around here.

Oh well.

Let's just drop this, yes? And move on with the Traveller discussions?

Sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[jcrocker]

I don't agree that _all_ CT was noir; if you wanted it to be, it was - but there was plenty of stuff that wasn't.

And I think everyone should read Piper, too.

 

[jcrocker]

I don't agree that _all_ CT was noir; if you wanted it to be, it was - but there was plenty of stuff that wasn't.

And I think everyone should read Piper, too.

 

[Zob10701]

OK, until today, I'd never heard of H. Beam Piper. Really. And the only Sword Worlds I'd ever heard of were in the Spinward Marches where they all talk with funny accents.
Just. Never. Heard of him.
Know who Asimov is (or was). Know who Clarke is. Know who Bester, Ellison, Heinlein and Niven were and are. Now I know about Piper. Terro-Humans, Fuzzies, Paratime. Gun nut. Shot himself. Left dropcloths for the mess. Nice. Got it. Got something new to read on my list now.
As for the article, read it, enjoyed it. Thought it painted a good picture of some of the aspects of Traveller. Maybe I need to read it again, maybe I missed something.
As for Traveller itself, I love it. Started with CT in '82 in High School. Rolled up my first character during lunch period. An Aslan, died in generation. Rolled up my second. Human from Efate. Tough little Marcher bastard. Still alive, just turned 162.
My partner (a friend of mine's character) is just two years younger. He and I have been playing these same characters since '82. Our ref would run games in the lunchroom, after High School, in his apartment. At first, a lot of my High School friends would play, these days, it's just me, him, our ref and one other High School chum that meet on a semi-regular basis.
So you can see why I got just a little irked when you said that I know little about Traveller. Piper, I'll give ya. But, as that's behind us, I hope we can move on and have some wonderful discussions about the game we love.

 

[Zob10701]

OK, until today, I'd never heard of H. Beam Piper. Really. And the only Sword Worlds I'd ever heard of were in the Spinward Marches where they all talk with funny accents.
Just. Never. Heard of him.
Know who Asimov is (or was). Know who Clarke is. Know who Bester, Ellison, Heinlein and Niven were and are. Now I know about Piper. Terro-Humans, Fuzzies, Paratime. Gun nut. Shot himself. Left dropcloths for the mess. Nice. Got it. Got something new to read on my list now.
As for the article, read it, enjoyed it. Thought it painted a good picture of some of the aspects of Traveller. Maybe I need to read it again, maybe I missed something.
As for Traveller itself, I love it. Started with CT in '82 in High School. Rolled up my first character during lunch period. An Aslan, died in generation. Rolled up my second. Human from Efate. Tough little Marcher bastard. Still alive, just turned 162.
My partner (a friend of mine's character) is just two years younger. He and I have been playing these same characters since '82. Our ref would run games in the lunchroom, after High School, in his apartment. At first, a lot of my High School friends would play, these days, it's just me, him, our ref and one other High School chum that meet on a semi-regular basis.
So you can see why I got just a little irked when you said that I know little about Traveller. Piper, I'll give ya. But, as that's behind us, I hope we can move on and have some wonderful discussions about the game we love.

 

[Supplement Four]

FWIW, this is what LKW said about the article on the TML...

Interesting. He managed to deduce from internal evidence that E.C.Tubb's
Dumarest series was a major inspiration for Traveller . . .

Wow . . . who'd have thought it : )


No statements like "I think GDW did X because . . ."

Many statements like "GDW did X because . . . " I don't remember him working
at GDW . . . how does he know what was going on in the inner workings of the
company.

The statement "Traveller: 2300 (1986) was initially a prequel to CT," is flat
out wrong. It was a different future history from Traveller (the fact that we
named it "Traveller" was a serious error, and confused/angered many people).

All that said, it is interesting reading.

Loren Wiseman

 

[Supplement Four]

FWIW, this is what LKW said about the article on the TML...

Interesting. He managed to deduce from internal evidence that E.C.Tubb's
Dumarest series was a major inspiration for Traveller . . .

Wow . . . who'd have thought it : )


No statements like "I think GDW did X because . . ."

Many statements like "GDW did X because . . . " I don't remember him working
at GDW . . . how does he know what was going on in the inner workings of the
company.

The statement "Traveller: 2300 (1986) was initially a prequel to CT," is flat
out wrong. It was a different future history from Traveller (the fact that we
named it "Traveller" was a serious error, and confused/angered many people).

All that said, it is interesting reading.

Loren Wiseman

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
OK, until today, I'd never heard of H. Beam Piper. Really.

If it makes you feel any better, Zob, I only heard about Piper about a month and a half ago. Many people on the TML raved about him, so I picked up two of his books the other night.

I'll check him out once I get around to trying his work.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Zob10701:
OK, until today, I'd never heard of H. Beam Piper. Really.

If it makes you feel any better, Zob, I only heard about Piper about a month and a half ago. Many people on the TML raved about him, so I picked up two of his books the other night.

I'll check him out once I get around to trying his work.

 

[Jeffr0]

[Deletes post.]

I'm staying out of this.

This is really disappointing.

Some of y'all really should know better.

 

[Jeffr0]

[Deletes post.]

I'm staying out of this.

This is really disappointing.

Some of y'all really should know better.