Is CT still enjoyable today?
- Thread starter rsitalyct
- Start date
Hmmmm, have to disagree about CT being that usable.
I came lately too to Traveller, and while I admire the minimal elegance and most especially the prior history, I haven't found it particularly playable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys
, that most people on these boards have been breathing CT for 2 decades, and solved alot of the problems when they were nippers. For a newcomer, it may seem simple but is dense as hell when you open it up.
I came lately too to Traveller, and while I admire the minimal elegance and most especially the prior history, I haven't found it particularly playable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys
Hmmmm, have to disagree about CT being that usable.
I came lately too to Traveller, and while I admire the minimal elegance and most especially the prior history, I haven't found it particularly playable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys
, that most people on these boards have been breathing CT for 2 decades, and solved alot of the problems when they were nippers. For a newcomer, it may seem simple but is dense as hell when you open it up.
I came lately too to Traveller, and while I admire the minimal elegance and most especially the prior history, I haven't found it particularly playable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
I agree on a number of points, but I disagree on one point and sorta disagree on another.Originally posted by Klaus:
Hmmmm, have to disagree about CT being that usable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys, that most people on these boards have been breathing CT for 2 decades, and solved alot of the problems when they were nippers. For a newcomer, it may seem simple but is dense as hell when you open it up.
I like the UWP -- it allows you to generate key details of the key world quickly and index that information so that players can easily access it. Some grousing is justified about how population is completely unrelated to environment. That's an easy fix, though. In Marc Miller's defense, I'd note that Traveller predates widely available homecomputers, so an overly fussy system to generate population might have been unattractive to Marc for that reason. But the UWP gives the players a very useful *summary* of key information. I seldom use the more involved system generation routines myself.
I agree that the 2d6 Classic Traveller system is broken -- but only if you add Books 4+. If you play just the original 3 little black books (or the Traveller Book; I agree that it's the best of the bunch), the system works very well.
And the good news is that I may have found a way to keep the CT combat system yet allow weaponry from Mercenary. My other thread "Fixing CT Combat Yet Keeping It Intact" has details.
One suggestion that I'd make regarding CT is to make (or download) a composite weapon chart, showing the to hit numbers for each armor type and range. For guns, you can eliminate Jack armor and Reflec; treat them as no armor. Treat lasers as no armor vs reflec, but apply a -8 modifier. That cuts the chart down by about a third. I've got a spreadsheet that will do this for me. When I get it done, I'll see if I can post it in the fLibrary. (You could use the chart from Snapshot, but it (a) contains the system-breaking weaponry from Mercenary; and (b) does not necessarily match up to CT.)
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
I agree on a number of points, but I disagree on one point and sorta disagree on another.Originally posted by Klaus:
Hmmmm, have to disagree about CT being that usable.
i) inconsistency - all the various rules aren't consistent with each other, and can be sometimes contadictory
ii) not user friendly - you have to reference dozens of books, without a handy index. Most galling of this is having to use 2 seperate sets of tables for your weapons (LBB1 and Mercenary)
iii) the probability range of 2D6 does not seem to be well understood by many of the designers (see the thread about that that's currently goin gon)
iv) the UWP is awful, it's a false promise, claiming to encode all the useful info about a planet in a 6 number string. In fact, it lacks most of the useful info, just contains enough to restrict the ref (ie, you're looking for a mid tech, low law crime world, and there's none within 20 parsecs of the players), the rules used to generate them are broken and unrealistic, and it encouraged the designers to sell products that were quite literally just pages and pages of numbers. Also, it takes time to learn what each number means. It is irritating to have to constantly refer to definitions (especially when there's no index). I have to keep explaining it to my player (!) all the time, and he's not that slow.
Having said all that, the flavour's fantastic - you just have to cook it yourself, as it were. To make it playable, I had to rewrite all the rules, from combat to chargen, to even skill definitions. In the end I got halfway through and gave up and used T20 (tho I might get round to finish it off).
T20 is probably the closest emulation of CT I've seen, even given the d20 clunkiness.
You have to remember, and no offense guys, that most people on these boards have been breathing CT for 2 decades, and solved alot of the problems when they were nippers. For a newcomer, it may seem simple but is dense as hell when you open it up.
I like the UWP -- it allows you to generate key details of the key world quickly and index that information so that players can easily access it. Some grousing is justified about how population is completely unrelated to environment. That's an easy fix, though. In Marc Miller's defense, I'd note that Traveller predates widely available homecomputers, so an overly fussy system to generate population might have been unattractive to Marc for that reason. But the UWP gives the players a very useful *summary* of key information. I seldom use the more involved system generation routines myself.
I agree that the 2d6 Classic Traveller system is broken -- but only if you add Books 4+. If you play just the original 3 little black books (or the Traveller Book; I agree that it's the best of the bunch), the system works very well.
And the good news is that I may have found a way to keep the CT combat system yet allow weaponry from Mercenary. My other thread "Fixing CT Combat Yet Keeping It Intact" has details.
One suggestion that I'd make regarding CT is to make (or download) a composite weapon chart, showing the to hit numbers for each armor type and range. For guns, you can eliminate Jack armor and Reflec; treat them as no armor. Treat lasers as no armor vs reflec, but apply a -8 modifier. That cuts the chart down by about a third. I've got a spreadsheet that will do this for me. When I get it done, I'll see if I can post it in the fLibrary. (You could use the chart from Snapshot, but it (a) contains the system-breaking weaponry from Mercenary; and (b) does not necessarily match up to CT.)
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I think the exact opposite of CT. It's so minimalistic, it's extremely easy to run a game--any game (not just set in the OTU).
I'm talking vanilla CT, too. Not House Rules.
You need the three little black books, or Starter Traveller, or the Traveller Book. That's all. And, you're on your way.
I think the problem is that most modern games are loaded with rules upon rules upon rules. Modern GMs are afraid to use their brains and think outside of the box.
Modern GM: "Oh my gawd! My player wants to attempt to open the ship's airlock from the outside. How do I do that? Where's the task library? I need to be told how to do that!"
Classic Traveller GM: "Oh, my player wants to open the airlock from the outside. Hmm... (thinks for a second) OK, roll 15 or better on 2D. You can use Mechanical skill if you've got it as a bonus DM. And, if you've got a starship intrusion kit, you'll get a +4 on the roll."
Modern GM looks over at Classic Traveller GM: "What's a 'starship intrustion kit'? What supplement did you get that out of?"
Classic Traveller GM: "Um, I made it up."
Modern GM: "You made it up! Well...uh...what does it do? How can you know anything about it if its not printed in an official supplement?"
Classic Traveller GM shrugs: "What does it do? It's a set of tools that allows a person to enter a starship, through the airlock, from the outside. (He thinks quick...) The Imperial Navy uses them. Scouts sometimes use them too. A few find their way into the black market. (Pausing, thinking some more) They're available starting at TL A, but the TL of the intrustion kit must be at least equal to the TL of the starship. Without mechanical expertise, the bonus drops to only a +1 DM. In the hands of someone who knows how to use the tools, i.e. someone with Mechanical skill, the bonus jumps to +4."
Modern GM: "Well, I don't think I'll allow that in my game. It's not 'official', and I'm not sure if I like it. And, besides, I think you were making all that up as you went along."
Classic Traveller GM smiles because Modern GM just doesn't get it: "I was."
(I meant this not as a slight to you Klaus. It's just that, when someone says CT is unplayable out of the box, it makes me think the GM needs his hand held for every roll that takes place in a game.
CT is a differnt animal. It's a set of "rules suggestions" meant to guide GMs in telling science fiction stories.
GMs are encouraged to take the ball and run with it.)
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I think the exact opposite of CT. It's so minimalistic, it's extremely easy to run a game--any game (not just set in the OTU).
I'm talking vanilla CT, too. Not House Rules.
You need the three little black books, or Starter Traveller, or the Traveller Book. That's all. And, you're on your way.
I think the problem is that most modern games are loaded with rules upon rules upon rules. Modern GMs are afraid to use their brains and think outside of the box.
Modern GM: "Oh my gawd! My player wants to attempt to open the ship's airlock from the outside. How do I do that? Where's the task library? I need to be told how to do that!"
Classic Traveller GM: "Oh, my player wants to open the airlock from the outside. Hmm... (thinks for a second) OK, roll 15 or better on 2D. You can use Mechanical skill if you've got it as a bonus DM. And, if you've got a starship intrusion kit, you'll get a +4 on the roll."
Modern GM looks over at Classic Traveller GM: "What's a 'starship intrustion kit'? What supplement did you get that out of?"
Classic Traveller GM: "Um, I made it up."
Modern GM: "You made it up! Well...uh...what does it do? How can you know anything about it if its not printed in an official supplement?"
Classic Traveller GM shrugs: "What does it do? It's a set of tools that allows a person to enter a starship, through the airlock, from the outside. (He thinks quick...) The Imperial Navy uses them. Scouts sometimes use them too. A few find their way into the black market. (Pausing, thinking some more) They're available starting at TL A, but the TL of the intrustion kit must be at least equal to the TL of the starship. Without mechanical expertise, the bonus drops to only a +1 DM. In the hands of someone who knows how to use the tools, i.e. someone with Mechanical skill, the bonus jumps to +4."
Modern GM: "Well, I don't think I'll allow that in my game. It's not 'official', and I'm not sure if I like it. And, besides, I think you were making all that up as you went along."
Classic Traveller GM smiles because Modern GM just doesn't get it: "I was."
(I meant this not as a slight to you Klaus. It's just that, when someone says CT is unplayable out of the box, it makes me think the GM needs his hand held for every roll that takes place in a game.
CT is a differnt animal. It's a set of "rules suggestions" meant to guide GMs in telling science fiction stories.
GMs are encouraged to take the ball and run with it.)
P
Prospero
Guest
I think the exact opposite of CT. It's so minimalistic, it's extremely easy to run a game--any game (not just set in the OTU).
I'm talking vanilla CT, too. Not House Rules.
You need the three little black books, or Starter Traveller, or the Traveller Book. That's all. And, you're on your way.[/QUOTE]
I have to agree. Many of my favorite games have fewer and fewer rules, or are at least simple.
P
Prospero
Guest
I think the exact opposite of CT. It's so minimalistic, it's extremely easy to run a game--any game (not just set in the OTU).
I'm talking vanilla CT, too. Not House Rules.
You need the three little black books, or Starter Traveller, or the Traveller Book. That's all. And, you're on your way.[/QUOTE]
I have to agree. Many of my favorite games have fewer and fewer rules, or are at least simple.
Its not only the GM its the players as well -
some players will 'role' with the description - ask an intelligent question (Is the starship Intrusion Kit (S4 - tm) restricted by law level?) and play along. Some players will demand the supplement ISBN and page number...
Now its your choice (or at least I hope you have a choice) who you 'employ' as players.
some players will 'role' with the description - ask an intelligent question (Is the starship Intrusion Kit (S4 - tm) restricted by law level?) and play along. Some players will demand the supplement ISBN and page number...
Now its your choice (or at least I hope you have a choice) who you 'employ' as players.
Its not only the GM its the players as well -
some players will 'role' with the description - ask an intelligent question (Is the starship Intrusion Kit (S4 - tm) restricted by law level?) and play along. Some players will demand the supplement ISBN and page number...
Now its your choice (or at least I hope you have a choice) who you 'employ' as players.
some players will 'role' with the description - ask an intelligent question (Is the starship Intrusion Kit (S4 - tm) restricted by law level?) and play along. Some players will demand the supplement ISBN and page number...
Now its your choice (or at least I hope you have a choice) who you 'employ' as players.
That style of play can be great when the ref and the players are on the same wavelength.
When the ref is just making stuff up to antagonize the players, it can be a serious turn-off.
There is much to be said, IMHO, for play-tested and marketed adventures that are crafted in an attempt to entertain a broad audience. A ref given full creative freedom often does not have the self-restraint to treat players well.
That style of play can be great when the ref and the players are on the same wavelength.
When the ref is just making stuff up to antagonize the players, it can be a serious turn-off.
There is much to be said, IMHO, for play-tested and marketed adventures that are crafted in an attempt to entertain a broad audience. A ref given full creative freedom often does not have the self-restraint to treat players well.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The quality of your players is important, no doubt.
But rpgs live and die by the story telling skills of the games master.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The quality of your players is important, no doubt.
But rpgs live and die by the story telling skills of the games master.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Good GMs don't antagonize players. They don't consider themselves as "playing against" the players.
A good GM should be an impartial judge, and if he's on anybody's side, it should be that of the players.
It's not about the GM vs. the player. It never has been. The GM will always win anyway, since he decides the rules.
A good GM is akin to a good movie director, guiding the players (actors) to great academy-award-winning performances.
It's always been my experience that I have the best time during a game when the players are having a good time.
Drama is conflict. If a GM is to be a good story-teller, then he must hit the group with a hefty amount of conflict. But, it's only the bad GMs that consider themselves "winners" when/if they use whatever device it is to cause the conflict at the expense of the group's enjoyment.
Good GMs are writing "novels" with their best selling characters. How interesting would later Fleming books be if Bond had been killed off?
What it all boils down to is trust. A good GM will have his player's trust.
Players have to believe that the GM has the best intentions for the mutual story they are creating at heart, even when the GM is enforcing conflict.
If the the GM is trusted, though, players will follow him anywhere.
A good GM should be an impartial judge, and if he's on anybody's side, it should be that of the players.
It's not about the GM vs. the player. It never has been. The GM will always win anyway, since he decides the rules.
A good GM is akin to a good movie director, guiding the players (actors) to great academy-award-winning performances.
It's always been my experience that I have the best time during a game when the players are having a good time.
Drama is conflict. If a GM is to be a good story-teller, then he must hit the group with a hefty amount of conflict. But, it's only the bad GMs that consider themselves "winners" when/if they use whatever device it is to cause the conflict at the expense of the group's enjoyment.
Good GMs are writing "novels" with their best selling characters. How interesting would later Fleming books be if Bond had been killed off?
What it all boils down to is trust. A good GM will have his player's trust.
Players have to believe that the GM has the best intentions for the mutual story they are creating at heart, even when the GM is enforcing conflict.
If the the GM is trusted, though, players will follow him anywhere.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Good GMs don't antagonize players. They don't consider themselves as "playing against" the players.
A good GM should be an impartial judge, and if he's on anybody's side, it should be that of the players.
It's not about the GM vs. the player. It never has been. The GM will always win anyway, since he decides the rules.
A good GM is akin to a good movie director, guiding the players (actors) to great academy-award-winning performances.
It's always been my experience that I have the best time during a game when the players are having a good time.
Drama is conflict. If a GM is to be a good story-teller, then he must hit the group with a hefty amount of conflict. But, it's only the bad GMs that consider themselves "winners" when/if they use whatever device it is to cause the conflict at the expense of the group's enjoyment.
Good GMs are writing "novels" with their best selling characters. How interesting would later Fleming books be if Bond had been killed off?
What it all boils down to is trust. A good GM will have his player's trust.
Players have to believe that the GM has the best intentions for the mutual story they are creating at heart, even when the GM is enforcing conflict.
If the the GM is trusted, though, players will follow him anywhere.
A good GM should be an impartial judge, and if he's on anybody's side, it should be that of the players.
It's not about the GM vs. the player. It never has been. The GM will always win anyway, since he decides the rules.
A good GM is akin to a good movie director, guiding the players (actors) to great academy-award-winning performances.
It's always been my experience that I have the best time during a game when the players are having a good time.
Drama is conflict. If a GM is to be a good story-teller, then he must hit the group with a hefty amount of conflict. But, it's only the bad GMs that consider themselves "winners" when/if they use whatever device it is to cause the conflict at the expense of the group's enjoyment.
Good GMs are writing "novels" with their best selling characters. How interesting would later Fleming books be if Bond had been killed off?
What it all boils down to is trust. A good GM will have his player's trust.
Players have to believe that the GM has the best intentions for the mutual story they are creating at heart, even when the GM is enforcing conflict.
If the the GM is trusted, though, players will follow him anywhere.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The Games Master is the coach of the team. One of the duties the title of GM holds is to help his players grow in their ability to role play.
The player you cite here obviously has some growing to do. He's playing the game as if the GM were his opponent.
The player cited is a slave to modern rules-bloated games. Once he finds enlightenment (hopefully at the hands of a good GM), it will be only then that he discovers he's enjoying rpgs on a level he never knew existed.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The Games Master is the coach of the team. One of the duties the title of GM holds is to help his players grow in their ability to role play.
The player you cite here obviously has some growing to do. He's playing the game as if the GM were his opponent.
The player cited is a slave to modern rules-bloated games. Once he finds enlightenment (hopefully at the hands of a good GM), it will be only then that he discovers he's enjoying rpgs on a level he never knew existed.
