Mongoose Traveller Pocket Edition

[infojunky]

Errata....

Now if real life had a errata file, we all would be fine.

RPGs are written as hobbies, by hobbyists for hobbyists for the most part. In this I personally realize that any product I receive will be less that perfect in the editing department.

Part of the problem with current gaming products are their gross sizes. With the growing level of word counts and included graphics the concentration on the words themselves have become less a priority.

Link that with the these all inclusive "Main" books that try to have all aspects of game play all in one book dilutes the attention one can pay to any one topic.

With all that I will state that I personally believe that we should go back to smaller gaming products, I prefer digest sized books, that are essentially monograph's of one aspect of the overall game system.

The funny thing is that the current preliminary release of T5 is a good example of this, with each pdf being limited to a single topic.

 

[Echo]

The point I got and attempted to reinforce about the complaint of it being difficult to know if you have the latest (corrected) print was that unless you know such and such about the book there's no way to know. And you have to flip through the book. But if each had simply used a print code it would be obvious and easy. It's about knowing if the edition for sale in the flgs is the most current and worth buying or if maybe it's one that should be on sale due to errata.

You'd have to check the inside pages of the books for a printing code anyway.

Moreover, the changes made don't make the older printings obselete anyway - it doesn't constitute a significant revision. Whilst I recongnise the concern that gamers may have for wanting to get the updated ammendums, the fact that the game has had to go through three previous print runs to warrant a 4th print run, would probably mean that those older books have all sold out anyway. So the books in shops now, are almost certainly updated 4th printing books. Indeed, the only corebooks that you can actually buy in the local shops around here are the new pocketbooks anyway (which appear to be selling out again, fast!)- so I'm pretty sure that this is true.

Now, in terms of customer service, the question you have to ask is would it have been right for Mongoose to a) pass up on an opportunity to correct a few of the highlighted issues, as a new print run gave them the opportunity to?, and b) promote the new print run as some sort of revised edition, to encourage gamers to go out and buy the book again only six months after they had bought their last copy? I mean, OK the pocket edition is one thing, but heck...it's a bit much otherwise.

And that may be your point but the vibe I got from the post I replied to was that complaints in general were wrong. And then someone said they'd just tell the manufacturer instead of going public. Two things wrong there imo. The manufacturer may not listen, care, or even be reachable in every case (not so in this case I presume). And if nobody says anything is wrong in public how many sales will be made based on the idea it's got nothing wrong with it. Public reviews work. The manufacturer will see sales stall or die if people are putting complaints out there and nothing is being done about them. That will encourage them to do better and fix problems much more quickly than dashing off a note to them.

Well, obviously this is all true. But like I say, the question I have is the legitimacy of some of the complaints in this instance.

 

[aramis]

I am also aware that Mr. Sprange &/or one of his staff does read the Mongoose section of COTI, using Mongoose's account.

Not that any of my complaints about Mongoose's quality would be new issues on their traveller sub-board. Every one of them has been mentioned on Mongoose's boards. Some of them were deleted there.

So complaining here as well as there insures that others have the chance to see the complaints.

I genuinely like much of MGT. MGHG PDF has a major usability flaw in that I can't print clear deckplans for many of the ships, nor read them on my laptop, due to the low resolution bitmap images used by mongoose. T&G PDF has the same issue, as does the corebook PDF, but it's not as bad, since the items are presented larger.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Paranoia is done out-house;

No it isn't.

Sprange was bought out.

No I wasn't.

He's just an employee now.

I always was - that is a function of a limited company. However, I am, and always have been, a Director also.

 

[spinwardpirate]

I flipped through a copy the other day at the FLGS, and wow! Does it ever look nice! The new art is aces! Two thumbs up from this old pirate!

Fwiw, I work in a major print industry, doing QA. I don't believe I have ever seen anything leave this place 100% perfect. The most embarrassing mistake... well... I can think a quite a few. The classic that always gets mentioned in the commemorative chart for the Statue of Liberty. The chart was all spruced up, with lots of neat little text blocks and art around the border. Hundreds of people looked at it. It went out to the printer. Came back. Hit the streets. And someone noticed, there next to Liberty Island, right next to the symbol of Liberty herself, was the label Statute of Liberty. Somehow it had slipped through unseen. And this was before computers. Computers have brought the art of mistake making to new highs.

 

[Allensh]

No it isn't.



No I wasn't.



I always was - that is a function of a limited company. However, I am, and always have been, a Director also.

Thank you for correcting misinformation...it's always a good thing to have accuracy.

Allen

 

[aramis]

Yes, thank's Matt. Paranoia I thought was done out house because the author implied strongly such.

Your own blog on the purchase and your role as director (and comments about ownership) implied strongly otherwise. I would suggest clarifying the buyout on the blog; several others in my locale came to the same conclusions as I on the buyout.

 

[Echo]

Yes, thank's Matt. Paranoia I thought was done out house because the author implied strongly such.

Your own blog on the purchase and your role as director (and comments about ownership) implied strongly otherwise. I would suggest clarifying the buyout on the blog; several others in my locale came to the same conclusions as I on the buyout.

Well, I looked - but did not see the word 'sorry' anywhere there.

 

[aramis]

Nor will you, Echo. I shared information as I understood it. I stand corrected, but no apology is needed. I don't feel sorry for it; it resulted in (1) proof that Matt is reading (2) more correct information being presented.

I did, however, get a bit harsh on you, with the "Need not even like yourself" comment. Shouldn't have gone there.

 

[Echo]

All bridge under the water as far as I'm concerned. Last post - I'm leaving today.

Have a good Christmas.

 

[IronCzar]

This site indeed has got a bad reputation for lots of flames and few information, and I know more than a few
people who have stopped to visit it because of this - and none of them was a MGT fanboy.

*raises hand*

Not that I want to tar the whole of the CotI with the same brush, but the tone in some quarters of this community is relentlessly negative in many respects, and not just toward Mongoose's new edition. As somebody who spends rather a lot of time in other online RPG communities, I can say that CotI is widely considered a snakepit of aging grognards forever raging about this or that bit of minutiae, and attacking any step forward. Obviously this is not 100% true, but it has enough of a kernel of fact behind it to keep me participating only sporadically on this board.

I think there's a lot to complain about when it comes to Mongoose's quality control, and always has been. Over the life of the company, they've been very uneven, with stuff that ranges from near-perfection to products that are, indeed, virtually unusable, and editing snafus that I'd put down to sheer sloppiness.

I haven't got Mercenary, so I can't comment on it, and haven't dug into High Guard enough yet to comment fully on those, but it does contain some fairly sloppy and amateurish mistakes even at first glance.

That said, Matthew Sprange has always been pretty up-front about it, and this year's Year in Review (or whatever it was called) indicates that they are working on it. Also, the MGT books I do already have and have read are really not all that bad, by any reasonable standard... and I'm inclined to be very picky in this particular case, given the history of Traveller, against more than one previous edition of which MGT is practically error-free in comparison.

Given the history and status of Traveller just a year ago, it's very clear that what Mongoose has done is exactly what the game needed. Mongoose did what TNE and T4, and even GT, failed to do... it made Traveller live again as a vital and viable game line. One can say many positive things about various publishers who have carried the torch for many years, but none of them managed to do that ether. Gripes about particulars are not thereby invalidated, but by any reasonable measure MGT is now a very credible option for Traveller players and referees. I am not about to say that it's perfect, but I will say that it's as close to as perfect for me as I have any reason to expect from any other effort, including T5.

I love Traveller, own every iteration of the game, have played them all and have wanted for years to get a fresh game going with my group, all of whom have either no or negative experiences with the game. It's hard, though, to sell them on a new campaign when I can't hand them a book and say "here are the rules we're using," instead having to produce LBBs (or whatever) and explain a bunch of house rules or rules from diferent editions. MGT is solid out of the box, and that greatly simplifies the task of getting people playing.

I understand that many folks hereabouts long ago found a ruleset they were 100% happy with, have been using that for years, and see no need to replace a time-tested solution with a new edition. What I don't understand and see no need for is the practice of taking a dump on something others are clearly happy with. As Traveller fans, we should all be happy that there's a successful new edition out there that has people talking about and playing the game in the broader audience, even if we decide that it's not for us as individual GMs and players.

 

[DaveChase]

IronCzar,


Yeah, good points.

Thanks for thoughts. I hope people will come to realize that the game is only as good as the players and followers allow it to be.

Old players of Traveller need to look at MgT and the upcoming T5 as a welcome mat for new players, ideas and fun to be had with their favorite universe/game.

The more negative you are about everything the more people stay away. or you could say the less people want to be involved with you or the game.

Dave Chase

 

[infojunky]

Yeah, good points.

Thanks for thoughts. I hope people will come to realize that the game is only as good as the players and followers allow it to be.

Old players of Traveller need to look at MgT and the upcoming T5 as a welcome mat for new players, ideas and fun to be had with their favorite universe/game.

Dave, I agree about MgT, but not T5. While chunks the chunks of T5 I have read all have some merit, they are in now way written for a new player. But, this is a Alpha release document so this sould also change.

 

[opensent]

Aside from the list of accredited playtesters in each book, you mean? All game companies, from the biggest to the smallest have errata in their book releases. The better companies produce errata documents after their releases, as Mongoose does. There is no real evidence, beyond your own assertions and anecdotes to suggest that Mongoose is any different in standards.

And to bring it back to the Pocket book again, it again needs to be restated what the criticisms were: that one sidebar table got nerfed by mistake, and one of the deckplans has gone wonky. All the deckplans are already available as free pdfs, and indeed on the practicable level you would need to download them to use them anyway. The missing table is more of an issue, although it is quite easy to remember a ratio of accumulating a level of 1 ton of fuel per week, per level of Power Plant rating.

But lets put this into context:

- The D&D 4th edition Player's Handbook, released this year, had 11 pages of errata in it to correct from it's initial print run;
- The Star Wars Saga edition had an entire print run with several blanked out pages in it;
- SJGames' GURPS actually has an errata mailing list you can join.
- Ars Magica 4th edition forgot to include a difficulty table for it's core mechanic and left it like this for about 8 years;
- Wraith the Oblivion forgot to include any concrete rules for Willpower, Pathos and Passions in both editions of the game;
- The Great Pendragon Campaign didn't include an index;
- Serenity RPG didn't include an index or a character sheet;
- Call of Cthulhu's Beyond the Mountains of Madness had a contents page that had every chapter listed with identical page numbers;
- Castles and Crusades frequently gets pillared by fans for it's 'standards';
- Classic games like Call of Cthulhu, Vampire: the Masquerade and Feng Shui are littered with errata, as have been loads of Traveller releases in the past too.
- Loads of 'Indie' games have terrible writing habits and poor grammar.


Sure, there is a couple of mistakes in the Pocket book, and some of the other Mongoose releases, but you are being one-eyed in your criticisms by suggesting that Mongoose are on a different level to any other gaming company.

Please don't post examples of other companies releasing errata UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY RELEASE SOME ERRATA FOR YOUR PRODUCTS.

Your argument seems to be this:

Our product contains lot of mistakes
Most RPG Products contain lots of mistakes
Therefore our product is fine

What you appear to be missing is that these other companies have provided errata for their products. Where is the errata for Mercenary? This is the 2nd book in the series, it's been out for months, there are numerous issues with it... Where is the errata for it??

 

[Allensh]

Please don't post examples of other companies releasing errata UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY RELEASE SOME ERRATA FOR YOUR PRODUCTS.

Your argument seems to be this:

Our product contains lot of mistakes
Most RPG Products contain lots of mistakes
Therefore our product is fine

What you appear to be missing is that these other companies have provided errata for their products. Where is the errata for Mercenary? This is the 2nd book in the series, it's been out for months, there are numerous issues with it... Where is the errata for it??

ECHO DOES NOT WORK FOR MONGOOSE PUBLISHING.

Therefore they are not "his" products, except inasmuch as he has purchased them like many of us.

I'm not sure where this misconception got started but I thought it important to reiterate that it is NOT accurate.

Also, the issues with Mercenary (that I have seen people complain about) don't seem to be errata issues as much as "I don't like this stuff because it isn't logical milspec" etc.; I doubt there would be errata issued for something like that anyway. Mind you, I haven't looked at Mercenary closely enough to spot typos and the like.

Allen

 

[aramis]

The most obvious "militaria" issue is defining infantry as " Infantry – Any basic combat unit made up of men on foot or single-driver vehicles (bikes, sleds and so one) equipped with rifles, energy weapons and other automatic firepower."
(emphasis mine)

The bolded text is absolutely bogus. Mounted troops fight very differently than foot. They are distracted by having to drive and shoot, and have the vehicle's mobility, not foot mobility, both for better and worse.

It doesn't even pass casual sensibility, let along military experience.

Another such error: lumping all vehicles that are not "close air support" into vehicle... grav tanks are WAY more mobile, but the large scale system doesn't reflect that. In fact, horse-carts are the same as grav tanks under the large scale system.

 

[rust]

" Infantry – Any basic combat unit made up of men on foot or single-driver vehicles (bikes, sleds and so one) equipped with rifles, energy weapons and other automatic firepower."
(emphasis mine)

The bolded text is absolutely bogus.

Yes and No.

Remember, even the Mechanized Infantry - which uses vehicles up to light
fighting vehicles - is an infantry formation, and most Panzergrenadiers
would have considered it an insult to be called anything but infantrymen.

In the end, infantry just means that the unit fights on foot, it says nothing
about the way the unit gets to the battlefield, whether by air (paratroopers
are infantry in most countries), by sea (many countries' marines are infantry)
or by bike or armoured fighting vehicle.

 

[spinwardpirate]

*raises hand*
Not that I want to tar the whole of the CotI with the same brush, but the tone in some quarters of this community is relentlessly negative in many respects

I wonder if that has changed? I popped in here years ago, and found the place rather disheartening. Now, it seems different. Or maybe I'm just different? Who can say for sure.

 

[DaveChase]

I believe the following

It (postive and negative) comes and goes in cycles no matter where you are (website/forum wise).

I believe that the regular users (daily, weekly posters) set the tone more than any admin or mods.
I believe the reason people come to a website are as different as the people. But all expect some sne to listen to them, not critize them.

That is why it is important that the users self moderate them selves and help other posters understand ways to post critiques and comments with out being nasty, angry or personal.

There is where understanding the reasons for the preceptions and determining how to address those preceptions are sometimes more important than the content of the site to keep people coming back.

On to Mongoose, Traveller and positive/negative. As soon as you were born, someone in the world does not like you. As soon as you start a business, someone in the world 'knows' that they can do it better than you.
As soon as you state an opinion, fact, or question, Someone has decided against you.

IF you allow all those negative, Normal human attitudes to bother you, They win. Does not mean you have to like it, but just either deal with it, politely.
Stop dealing with it.
Or allow someone else deal with it.

Mongoose with the Traveller license has brought a new live to Traveller. Does not mean Traveller was dead. But with out new commerical input, advertising and support, Traveller would just fade away as the diehard fans faded away.

Take a look around the www some time just typing in Traveller. You will find many sites with lots of work from the individual covering some favorite part in detail that might not be cannon but definitely has passion and thought and purpose behind it. Some of these sites are decades old. With Mongoose and (don't groan) T5 products coming out over the next decade, the number of players and game can grow. CAN Grow, If as a fan of Traveller, you decide to not fight amongst your selves over each little detail.
Look at how many other company/licensors allow all their versions of a game to still be purchased and supported. (let me know when you find them.)

Since each player/GM runs/plays differently, each by the book, Cannon game you sit down to with will be different, it does not matter why the other guys is 'different'. That is why there are so many different genre's and looks in the real world. We all eat food. We all read something and we all live somewhere. And as different as each of those are we are still human beings.

CT to Mgt to T5(future release), who really cares which is the best. It only matters that the version that you like is the one you play. You Will Find Players who will want to play the same version as you do, some where, If you are not a negative, nasty person.

I know this is off specific topic but this whole thread has turned in to who's better. I would suggest that you take the same passion put into these posts and place into your favorite version or company to make them better or more successful.

Just my Opinion.

Dave Chase

 

[Allensh]

The most obvious "militaria" issue is defining infantry as " Infantry – Any basic combat unit made up of men on foot or single-driver vehicles (bikes, sleds and so one) equipped with rifles, energy weapons and other automatic firepower."
(emphasis mine)

The bolded text is absolutely bogus. Mounted troops fight very differently than foot. They are distracted by having to drive and shoot, and have the vehicle's mobility, not foot mobility, both for better and worse.

It doesn't even pass casual sensibility, let along military experience.

Another such error: lumping all vehicles that are not "close air support" into vehicle... grav tanks are WAY more mobile, but the large scale system doesn't reflect that. In fact, horse-carts are the same as grav tanks under the large scale system.

I will bow to your obvious expertise here because I have no clue.

This is obviously a failure of research (or research gleaned from the wrong sources) however, and not errata in the typical sense.

Allen