Is this Really such a good idea?

[T. Foster]

While getting exposure for the brand name and introducing newbies to the setting are undeniably good things, I'm very uncertain about the desirability of subdividing the fan-base even further, especially into a system which is IMO not only wildly inappropriate in genre/style (Heroic High Fantasy vs gritty 'hard' SF) but also significantly inferior as a system (classes, hit points, armor classes, blah). At this point Traveller may carry more cachet as a setting than as a game, but it wasn't always that way -- when I gave up on D&D all those years ago, it wasn't just for the OTU setting.

I'll probably buy the d20 Traveller rulebook, just like I bought GURPS: Traveller, but I'd never actually play it, and I'm very concerned about what this means for the viability of T^5 -- with three mutually incompatible systems for 'Traveller' already on the market (GT, T^20, and CT reprints) is there any conceivable market left for yet another system, even if ruleswise it's the best of the lot?

Surely I'm not the only one to feel this way.

 

[Shiara]

Hmmm, in some ways I agree, in others I'm not so certain. there are many of us who play more than one version of Traveller. For myself I play only CT, though I have tried the others for short periods of time. Each time I return to CT because something seems to be 'out of sync' with each of those others. It's probably just me.

I'm not so concerned about the fan base, that will grow and shrink over time and there are always those who cleave to only one and they won't shift.

However, I *am* concerned over the whole hit points, armor class, etc. bit. One thing I've always liked about CT was the way you had none of those things, especially levels. I found it much easier to keep track of things wihtout several categories of 'points'. I'm uncertain if the 'flavor' that is Traveller can be maintained if the T20 system alters things in this way. <shrug> I'll get the book, no doubt, and give it a thorough read, but until then I won't really know.

 

[PVernon]

No you are not! Over on the SJG JTAS boards people are expressing the same feelings.
Peter V.

 

[Elliot]

I personally welcome the move to have a company with a relatively large amount of resources developing a previously unexplored era of the Traveller universe. As Marc Miller holds the intellectual property in Traveller, I assume that what comes out from D20 will be subject to his warrant, so I can’t see what harm their development will do. My only fear is that T5 will not be a viable commercial product as a result.

While it is possible that the D20 rules might be inappropriate for Traveller (I’m sitting on the fence on this one, but I do remember Gamma World, ugh) there is no reason why you can’t use the rules from whatever edition of Traveller you like and adapt it to the setting and the scenario material that will be published. Surely, it is better that Traveller survives and expands into the new generation of players than become an RPG fossil.

 

[GypsyComet]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shiara:

However, I *am* concerned over the whole hit points, armor class, etc. bit. One thing I've always liked about CT was the way you had none of those things, especially levels. I found it much easier to keep track of things wihtout several categories of 'points'. I'm uncertain if the 'flavor' that is Traveller can be maintained if the T20 system alters things in this way.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since CT used an armor system that made you harder to hit (as opposed to "taking less damage") the concept of armor class doesn't bother me that much. The translation of prior experience, a staple of Traveller, into a class-level system is sort of worrisome. The freely multiclassing environment of WotC's d20 makes this a little better, and at least we have a pretty obvious set of "classes" to work from already...

 

[Mexal]

It all depends on just how it is all to be implemented.

As a task resolution system, d20 is elegant and straightforward. OK, it's not 2d6 (but then, neither was Traveller TNE).

Some of the 'baggage' that accompanies many of the ports of the d20 mechanic from D&D to other systems just don't work as well elsewhere as they do for D&D (or even not there if you don't happen to go for the 'heroic high fantasy' approach and get too bogged down in what it says in the books).

Certainly, putting anything like 'levels' into TRAVELLER would be a mistake. Even 'classes' don't really work in quite the same way as TRAVELLER careers do, but could perhaps be sort of warped to fit. Equating the skills is no problem, your <<skill>>-1 translates into a +1 on your d20 roll easily enough.

Making a d20 version of TRAVELLER available is probably a good idea, if only to widen the coverage of the game. And a new area and era being developed can only be to everybody's advantage... well, unless you prefer to write your own material, and fortunately the universe is a big enough space

Hugs and kisses,

Mexal.

 

[hunter]

If we (QuikLink and Marc Miller) didn't think it was a good idea, we wouldn't be doing it.

It is our opinion that D20 Traveller has the best potential to introduce new players to Traveller than any other version currently available.

As for hurting the other versions, why? Both the CT reprints and the GURPS material can still be used as source material for D20 Traveller and vice versa.

Hunter
The D20 Traveller Team

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mexal:
Certainly, putting anything like 'levels' into TRAVELLER would be a mistake. Even 'classes' don't really work in quite the same way as TRAVELLER careers do, but could perhaps be sort of warped to fit. Equating the skills is no problem, your <<skill>>-1 translates into a +1 on your d20 roll easily enough.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The more I think of it, the more the concept of 'levels' seems to be a spectacularly bad fit with Traveller-as-we-know-it. Unless the rules include some sort of system to allow characters to start out around 10th level, the structure of adventures/campaigns and in fact the entire tone of the game will have to be drastically altered. Traveller (at least up to now) has always been about trained mid-career professionals going about their business; the idea of callow inexperienced novices advancing through a series of adventures to eventually become superheroes is not only totally incompatible with 'traditional' Traveller, I daresay it's downright antithetical.

I really hope the developers of T^20 have thought (or at least are thinking) these sorts of things through, because as many misgivings as I have about d20 Traveller at all, I have even graver misgivings about a Bad d20 Traveller (surely the last thing anybody needs is for a bunch of kids to pick up d20 Traveller only to decide "this game sucks" -- we had more than enough of that already with T4).

 

[RazerD]

I have never played any version of Traveller. Sorry. However, if I like what I see from the D20 conversion (it is supposed to have D20 AND Traveller info, right?) I might like the Traveller version better and buy into it.

I, too, have problems with D&D, but bottom line is simply put: They have a lot of stuff out, so if you don't like one "thing" (Dark Sun, Greyhawk, Planescape, Complete Elves Handbook, etc.) you an play something else. All that matters are the rules, but the setting/supplements can inspire the imagination. That and D&D is NOT sci-fi space/alien stuff, and I really want to play some non-fantasy stuff really bad now that I don't get to watch Star Trek: DS9.

------------------
Hollywood: More than just a city, it's a state of mind!

[This message has been edited by RazerD (edited 12 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by RazerD (edited 12 May 2001).]

 

[Christopher Jennings]

I have to agree with those who think that yet another edition of Traveller is not what is really needed. If I could just make one suggestion to Miller it would be to return to the beginning, clean-up and maybe update the rules that really need it but to keep the mechanics of the game simple. The real strength of CT was that while the system was simple the environmest to play in was well thopught out and fun to explore. While I may purchase some new material from other editions, esp.from sjgames as they have always done a good job with source materials, I will always end up adapting it to work with CT mechanics. So while I wish both GT and T5 good luck, I honestly don't know of anyone who will play them for themselves. Its kind of sad really, all this effort going in so many different directions that cannot hope to suvive while if they joined their resources we could see a true revival of the only RPG that really challenged D&D and provided a viable alturnative.

 

[DaveShayne]

I'm stunned. Completely and utterly stunned.

David Shayne

 

[Murph]

I am not sure I like levels in Traveller at all. If I want levels, I will play D&D or C&S.

 

[Mar_Sane]

I thoughts they were combining the d20 system with Traveller. Not D&D with Traveller. I thought that the level system everyone is talking about is based on D&D and not the d20 system.

Personally I have always wanted to take my D&D group through Traveller. We have tried but the difference in the rules means that we have to learn a whole new system, which is time consuming. If they incorporate the d20 system in place of the of the traveller task or matrix system, sure I think it will be a good thing.It will be easier for current D&D groups to play both.

Who says they are going to change Traveller to be D&D in space? If they change it to be more like D&D with HP, Levels etc, the may as well add spells and call it Spelljammer.

--------------------------
Hey, I'm only Marginally Sane...

 

[dsmart]

As much as I hate to see _another_ rules set (geez!) for Traveller come into being and as much as I especially loath the AD&D way of doing things, I'm going to wait and see until I get more details on the game mechanics.

If D20 Traveller allows for the ridiculous levels of hit points AD&D does or the stupid skill limitations (fighters can't climb a tree) poorly offset by additions of more and more rules, forget it.

 

[AndreaV]

Okay, I think this is an interesting idea. I'm not too concerned about the mechanics (I use T4 in my own games and have no difficulty in mining CT, MT, TNE and GT for material). I am a little concerned about different companies all pulling canon in different directions (I know Gateway in 1000 goes a long way but still). However this is nothing that the various publishers talking to each other can't fix.

Brand identification is a small concern. Mind you, it seems as if Traveller is rapidly becoming the Generic SF Roleplaying Setting (GSFRPS). Doesn't matter what system you use, you can just bolt Traveller into it :*>

 

[Unreal John]

The bottom line: I cannot forsee any conditions under which I would buy the thing, or play it.

 

[AllenS]

I am all in favor of a d20 version of Traveller. First of all d20 does not have to mean D&D. Star Wars is not D&D, it has some significant differences. Secondly, d20 does not even actually HAVE to have classes, although CT basically does with it's Services, so why not? D20 doesn't have to have levels either actually, but all they are is a conveinent way to track character growth. As for hit points, those can be tweaked; one way would be simply to give all classes a d6 for hit dice. Another method which was one I found on the d20Deadlands site, is to do away with hit dice; your hit points are equal to your Constitution, and you get the con modifier every level but no HD.
The bottom line is this; d20 Traveller has a potential audience MUCH larger than any other version has ever had, including the excellent GURPS version. The potential income only INCREASES your chance of seeing a T5 in the future. And with conversion the old material is available for use, including the Reprints. And I personally LIKE the d20 system. Imagine the possibilties of being able to seamlessly use things in Traveller from the upcoming d20 Deadlands, Call of Cthulhu, Weird Wars and yes, even Star Wars.
I think this is a GREAT idea.

Allen Shock

 

[Shade]

Bottom line for me is this:

Keep the background canonical with other Traveller lines.

Otherwise this is useless and meaningless. Hopefully, those of us Traveller grognards can help out with that.

John Watts


------------------
" Hokey Religions and Ancient Weapons Are No Match for a Good Blaster" - H. Solo, respected Solomani Philosopher

 

[The Shoveller]

Imagine the greatest RPG ever created. The combat system is perfect. The character creation system fuels your imagination to never-achieved heights. The drool just pours down your chin ever time you open the gamebooks.

How good is that perfect RPG if you can't get anyone else to play it?

Like it or not, D20 is reviving the RPG industry. Kids are actually spending a little of their Magic/Pokemon card/Playstation 2 money on RPGs again. I thought this hobby was dead when TSR went under. I'm not a TSR fan at all, but they were the place almost everyone went when they dropped their first-time gamer dollars down. Now WotC has resurrected the RPG hobby as a whole with the D20 system. We have new gamers by the boatload. Why shouldn't we make it easy for them to discover SFRPGs by having an excellent D20 SF system? Star Wars sure isn't it [Lovely starship combat rules, there].

As for levels, characters in all forms of literature grow as the storyline progresses. They are almost always better at doing what they do at the end of a story than they are at the beginning of the story. What's wrong with allowing an SFRPG character get better at what they do. Level increases don't have cause a huge increase in hit points. Skill increases, new feats, etc. are fine. And if there are a bunch of hit points, so what. As long as the encounters are balanced, it doesn't matter. More experienced PCs are supposed to be hard for a novice to kill.

As for the comment that Traveller characters are supposed to represent the highly trained individual in the prime of their career, did that highly trained individual get dumped out of a clone vat that way? Why not roleplay their youth? I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, but most of the people I know that whine about playing low-level characters are unrepentant powergamers who step into character as often as Nosferatu step into sunlight. There is a reason the process of good roleplaying is called character DEVELOPment. Character growth is a large part of the fun.

 

[Uncle Bob]

It sounds like the D20 licence will require me to buy or borrow D&D3 to learn the core rules. I'm afraid I will have to stick to CT or T5.

Still, since none of us has seen it, I might as well sound off.

2D6 vs D20? Either can be made to work. I learned to play before the internet in a town with no game store. D6 you could get at Krogers.

Characer classes vs skills. I hear D&D3 is unusually flexible, so I shall reserve judgement.

Hit points. These an be made to work, at least for boxing or fighting in armor of proof. There should still be a limit so Conan only has ten times the hit points of Casper Milquetoast.

Most importantly, there are times when the critical hit overwhelms hit points. Besides getting lucky, if the injury bypasses armor (like falling out a window) or a weapon overwhelms armor (a knife vs. shirt or ACR vs flak jacket) a critical hit should be automatic. As long as critcal hits include less than lethal injuries (see C&S).

But XPs don't work. Winning fights doesn't make you a better fighter, only a tired one. Sir Richard F. Burton used to pick up a foil and drill as soon as he returned to England, to get rid of those sloppy habits he had picked up sword fighting for real. You don't learn much nursing a deisel across half an ocean, but if you fail, you can learn by sitting down with the manual and trying to fix it. The most adventures will give you is a desire to learn and improve, and that comes from failure, not success.

One of the joys of Traveller was that characters had real motivation like Defeating Evil or Becoming Wealthy or Getting People to Leave Me Alone. Also, a new chracter had the skills and abilities to be part of the party right now, so we didn't have to "carry" him until his level caught up. The scrabble for level will spoil all that.

[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 13 May 2001).]