Mongoose is just CT?

[hdan]

After finally getting the chance to read the MegaTraveller rules, I'd go so far as to say that Mongoose Traveller (MgT) is actually a cleaned up version of MegaTraveller (MT). Or maybe more accurately, a "re-imagining" of MT that doesn't adopt some of MT's less successful ideas (like MT's damage system and more complex starship construction system). (I'm defining "success" only in the sense of whether those rules survived into other editions of the game.)

Where both MT and MgT differ from CT is, as others have said, the Task Resolution system. Mongoose's system is not quite the same as MT's, but it accomplishes the same goal - provide a unified mechanism involving rolling 2D+DMs against a target number.

So I would say that Mongoose Traveller is an attempt to re-imagine the "upgraded" version of CT that was MegaTraveller, if that makes any sense.

Mongoose Traveller "feels" like Traveller to me in a way that neither T4 nor GURPS:Traveller did, so that's a win in my book.

 

[Shonner]

So I would say that Mongoose Traveller is an attempt to re-imagine the "upgraded" version of CT that was MegaTraveller, if that makes any sense.

I've tried reading rules to MegaTraveller. The task system is so un-interesting to me (I remember Twilight 2000 having a more boring task system that's similar). First thing I note still, after all these years later, is that there is no "=" or ">" or "<" sign in the frackin' UTP diagram/chart equation. And there's nothing universal about skills in MegaTraveller. Tasks may be universe, but certainly not any skills are universal as they are described.

But... Classic Traveller... Classic Traveller (the 1981 and later editions) started with at least some effort to use "add +1 DM to your roll if Intelligence is 9 or greater. Add +2 DM if Intelligence is 12 or greater." for some of its skill rolls. A lot of skills had their own custom rolls contained in their descriptions.

I like that Mongoose removed those custom roll rules from the skill descriptions (MegaTraveller went the other direction and added even more custom rules in its skill descriptions) and settled on a standard die-roll mechanic ("Roll 8+." Not "roll 9+" or "roll 10+", but "roll 8+.") found in their patterns of use.

I would argue that Mongoose is a much needed upgrade and rules clarification to Classic Traveller, and Traveller 5 is MegaTraveller on steroids. MegaTraveller players will gravitate towards Traveller 5 more so than other players will.

 

[robject]

After finally getting the chance to read the MegaTraveller rules, I'd go so far as to say that Mongoose Traveller (MgT) is actually a cleaned up version of MegaTraveller (MT). Or maybe more accurately, a "re-imagining" of MT that doesn't adopt some of MT's less successful ideas [...]

MT clearly advanced the game (as did TNE, to a greater or lesser degree, depending on where you sit), and many of their good ideas were re-used in both Mongoose Traveller and Traveller5.

 

[robject]

I'll throw my rock on the pile and note that CT was one of MgT's primary sources for development. The other was the 2008 draft of Traveller5.

The first stop Matthew made when he was carving out the core rules was Marc, who gave him CT and early chapters from T5. As we all know, Matt liked the CT/MT task system -- and I think that goes a long way to define a game. But the amount of structure borrowed from T5 is significant. Some of the subsystems for T5 weren't drafted at the time, so Matt used CT, which turns out to be just fine and quite usable.

T5 in MGT

The careers come directly from T5. It is slightly different (adding the interesting "Drifter" career, and dropping a couple others), and the method is MGT's take, but the list is otherwise the same.

The skills come directly from T5. It is slightly shorter in MGT (48 vs 64), and folds in some concepts (e.g. persuasion) which in T5 were moved under the task system in general, but the two lists are still closer to each other than anything else.

Mongoose's starship design system stems from that draft of T5, blending in a bit of other rulesets (e.g. for armour, which wasn't written for T5 at the time) and some of their own neat stuff (drones). Some parts are verbatim from Early T5 -- the hull, bridge, drives, fuel, drive performance table. Some parts are simply influenced -- the sensor packages and computers are not the same, but show Early T5's influence. Check out page 107 -- see the power plant fuel requirements table? Does it look like an afterthought to you? It was missed -- I had to have it tacked on. And the table was generated from .... that early draft of T5.

Despite that, chargen and ship design "feels" quite different between the two systems. I am just pointing out the origin of many of MGT's rules are T5.

MGT in T5

On the other hand, MGT has also influenced T5. The example that comes to my mind is page 110, the "Luxuries" section. That didn't exist in Early T5, but has been adapted into the final document. Another example is on the next page, with "Fixed" weapon mounts. In Early T5 that didn't exist, but showed up in a modified way as "Firmpoints".

T5 and MGT

Finally, MGT was vetted by people who also vetted T5. This subtly allowed both rule systems to inform each other. For example, some MGT personal armor values were vetted by me, as Marc was also developing the armor build rules for T5. At one point I had to establish a correlation function between MGT and T5's armor ratings, to gauge whether or not the armor ratings were reasonable (especially when they climbed into the stratosphere). I would then submit suggestions for value tweaks (seldom).

As it turns out, that opens up the possibility of using T5 to generate weapons and armor (for example) for Mongoose Traveller, and porting innovative equipment from MGT to T5.

 

[madmike]

I will be starting a MgT campaign shortly and to that end began chargen with half the group last Friday night.

I made the decision to only use the core rules chargen, because of the skill-0 mechanic, which provided enough skills for each character.

I wanted the group to have less capable characters that the previous CT campaign, so as to encourage more out of box gaming.

MgT chargen was simple, effective and a whole lot of fun. Events and mishaps added to the characters backstories and rolling as a party was innovative. Already event links were connected to allow early backstory contacts to be established.

Three of the players benefited with ships on mustering out. However they all decided to convert their mustering out ships to ship shares and pool that to purchase a ship once the other group half went through chargen.

As the referee, I was delighted at how the chargen session went (5 hours) and how the players interacted to build party esprit.

 

[GypsyComet]

I made the decision to only use the core rules chargen, because of the skill-0 mechanic, which provided enough skills for each character.

I wanted the group to have less capable characters that the previous CT campaign, so as to encourage more out of box gaming.

A common misconception brought to MGT from CT/MT is that the later career ("splat") books make for more competent characters, as CT Mercenary etc did. This is not the case in MGT. While most of the MGT class books do take each of the subdivisions in the core book careers and redivide them, they do *not* amp up the availability of skill ranks.

 

[pennshome723]

I will say this about Mongoose Traveller line, they have rewritten many of the books and updated and added much more details and from a GM's point of view that is good resource material to have and read and draw from. Now I use my own In House Rules set mostly but it is based off the basic Traveller line and am extremely happy to buy each MGT book and will also by any and all T5 books too. Everything is an possible resource material for me.

 

[cuTTer]

T5 and MGT

As it turns out, that opens up the possibility of using T5 to generate weapons and armor (for example) for Mongoose Traveller, and porting innovative equipment from MGT to T5.

Really? MongTrav gifts TL13 Battle Dress 16 points or Armour, ArmorMaker generates TL13 Battle Dress with 45 points of armour, IIRC.

Doesn't sound very compatible.

 

[Shonner]

T5 is a different RPG from every other game out there. Not sure why people are not getting this. And without any conversion tables from Marc Miller, why bother trying to make T5 fit into every other RPG?

 

[robject]

Really? MongTrav gifts TL13 Battle Dress 16 points or Armour, ArmorMaker generates TL13 Battle Dress with 45 points of armour, IIRC.

Doesn't sound very compatible.

Never fear, armor is cross-portable -- why you'd want to port the TL13 Battle Dress from one to the other is beyond me, though, since they both exist in their respective rules systems.

 

[cuTTer]

-- why you'd want to port the TL13 Battle Dress from one to the other is beyond me, though, since they both exist in their respective rules systems.

It's a benchmark. As a GM, if I look at ArmorMaker output and see it produces values that appear to be roughly triple those of MongTrav's Core Rules I conclude the rulesets are not compatible.

 

[GypsyComet]

It's a benchmark. As a GM, if I look at ArmorMaker output and see it produces values that appear to be roughly triple those of MongTrav's Core Rules I conclude the rulesets are not compatible.

Different damage mechanics can produce different numbers. Just the fact that both use their armor value in roughly the same way makes them more compatible than either is with, for example, CT and its Armor DM on the to-hit roll.

If *all* armor types come out at about 3x of Mongoose values, then the conversion is simple.

 

[HG_B]

It's a benchmark. As a GM, if I look at ArmorMaker output and see it produces values that appear to be roughly triple those of MongTrav's Core Rules I conclude the rulesets are not compatible.

Are you factoring in weapon damage (differences if any) from T5 to MgT? Just curious.

 

[robject]

It's a benchmark. As a GM, if I look at ArmorMaker output and see it produces values that appear to be roughly triple those of MongTrav's Core Rules I conclude the rulesets are not compatible.

AH! Yes, I understand your point now. You're coming at it from a theoretical point of view.

In fact, T5 is not triple that of MgT, it's a square root relationship, because Mongoose AV is quite efficient, becoming more powerful than it looks at higher levels. This is due to the way the task system works.

However, that relationship is mappable; my function is MgT AV = 5 + sqrt( T5 AV) x 2.07 (No, I don't remember why the .07 is there, but I do know it came out that way through spreadsheet experimentation). This results in consistency across MgT's armor levels -- more or less to the degree that Mongoose Traveller's own armor levels are internally consistent. Yes, if we had this mapping function when MgT was being written, we could have pinned its AV exactly; however, it turns out they're close enough.

Weapon damage has a related function, which takes dice of damage into account rather than points.

 

[cuTTer]

AH! Yes, I understand your point now. You're coming at it from a theoretical point of view.

In fact, they're not triple, it's a square root relationship, because Mongoose AV is quite efficient, becoming more powerful than it looks at higher levels. This is due to the way the task system works.

However, that relationship is mappable; my function is MgT AV = 5 + sqrt( T5 AV) x 2.07 (No, I don't remember why the .07 is there, but I do know it came out that way through spreadsheet experimentation). This results in consistency across MgT's armor levels -- more or less to the degree that Mongoose Traveller's armor levels are internally consistent.

Weapon damage has a related function, which takes dice of damage into account rather than points.

Thanks for clarifying, I think the community would appreciate any translation formulas, should they be made available at some point in the future.

 

[robject]

Thanks for clarifying, I think the community would appreciate any translation formulas, should they be made available at some point in the future.

Inter-exhange between MgT and T5 is an undeveloped concept. Mainly because Mongoose and FFE have many much higher priorities. It deserves a new, stickied thread.


My online Armor Maker script generates both armor values for armor.

http://eaglestone.pocketempires.com/scripts/armormaker.html

When I Assume...

Assume first that Traveller5 is the benchmark. Now assume that Mongoose weapons and armor is as reasonably consistent with that benchmark as can be expected. Assume therefore that we can move on from first principles. What then?

So the real question is what level of compatibility do we need?

It's nice that BD13 exists in both systems and functions more or less in the same way, but what we really want is to be able to port things which are present in ONE system into the OTHER. Right?

Character Portability

So my thoughts turn to characters. Characters are complicated and personal; you can't just grab them off the shelf.

Most elements port. The characteristics port. Color data is systemless. Skill levels are mappable, and reasonably so. Mapping psionics, on the other hand, is quite tricky. So the biggest issue with characters is psionics.

Starship Portability

Is it important to port over starships? Not typically -- common designs exist in both rulesets. But with a personally designed starship? You bet.

The trickiest parts are with AV and sensors. The remaining components tend to exist -- specifically or implied -- in both systems, although I suspect there are some items to watch.

I helped a friend port his fancy rules-bending MegaTraveller starship over to Mongoose, and also gave him pointers on converting to Traveller5. Since his ship is over the top in most regards, I have an ideal test case for conversion notes. I've also got the Sydkai-class Cruiser, which I converted from MT for the Deneb book, but also converted to T5. At the other end are the "canonical" Traveller starships, of which we must have at least a dozen.

 

[Shonner]

I don't remember Marc Miller saying anything about Mongoose Traveller being sucked into his Traveller 5. Traveller 5 is supposed to be the ultimate edition of Traveller, Marc's true vision of what Traveller is for him. Mongoose Traveller stands just fine on it's own.

If anything, Traveller 5/6 should be addons for Mongoose Traveller, like Orbital and Chthonian Stars are. Using the MgT core rules to run.

 

[GypsyComet]

I don't remember Marc Miller saying anything about Mongoose Traveller being sucked into his Traveller 5. Traveller 5 is supposed to be the ultimate edition of Traveller, Marc's true vision of what Traveller is for him. Mongoose Traveller stands just fine on it's own.

If anything, Traveller 5/6 should be addons for Mongoose Traveller, like Orbital and Chthonian Stars are. Using the MgT core rules to run.

Most editions of Traveller are toolboxes to be parted out or used (mostly) whole. When asked what I'm playing I would start with which set of core mechanics I'm using and briefly describe the imported tools. My current default is "MGT with setting references and starship components from just about everywhere else". Difficult as T5's interface can be to use, it is still part of that continuum.

 

[Jacqual]

I actually see MGT as a direct descendant of CT, if your looking at editions. Look how AD&D changed from 1st to 2nd to 3rd, yes it is different but it is based very closely to the origional ideas of the game. I honestly think that MGT is what CT would be if it was written today and not in the late 70's. I know that I am gonna get flamed for that comment, but it is how I feel if someone disagrees with me that's fine I like opinions it means folks have a brain. I have like 10 MGT books and I enjoy them greatly, but the Traveller I play is CT with MGT task resolution, I just use books LBB's 1-3, and Citizens of the Imperium then the alien books with the basic chargen systems. But the armor and equipment is from MGT and it works very well.

 

[hdan]

I actually see MGT as a direct descendant of CT, if your looking at editions. Look how AD&D changed from 1st to 2nd to 3rd, yes it is different but it is based very closely to the origional ideas of the game. I honestly think that MGT is what CT would be if it was written today and not in the late 70's. I know that I am gonna get flamed for that comment, but it is how I feel<snip>

No flames from me, I agree with you, even your comparison to D&D's editions.

Though I'd say CT->MgT is more analogous to AD&D 1e->2e than 3e.