Mongoose - traveller returns

[Flynn]

I think the biggest reason I like the 2d6 Roll High approach over the Dice Pool approach, from a Referee's perspective, is that I can pursue a sliding success with the 2d6 Roll High.

For example, if a PC wants to see how much they remember about an incident in the past, I can have them make the roll and determine how much information they remember based on how high (what difficulty) they achieve with their roll.

With a dice pool, you don't have as much freedom, since you decide the difficulty before hand.

In short, you can't do the "Gather Information" or "Knowledge (Local)" skill checks from D20 with a Dice Pool Roll Low as easily or smoothly, in my opinion. There are other reasons, game mechanically, but they fall back on this inability to perform a sliding success which I enjoy as part of my personal Referee style.

From a nostalgic perspective, 2d6 is Classic Traveller to me, and it's that kind of pure emotional response that tends to impact my purchasing.

Figured I'd Just Get It Out There,
Flynn

 

[Flynn]

While I prefer 2D6 roll-high (Its hard to shout "Hooray, I got snake eyes!"), it would seem a formidable challenge to create a '2D6 Roll-High' and a 'Fistful of dice Roll-low' rules system that can be easily swapped going from the basic (RTT) Traveller to the advanced (T5) Traveller systems.

BITS has handled it for years with their Task Resolution system, which I've been using in Stellar Reaches. Task Descriptions are generic, and both systems could use the same descriptors to implement the task resolution die-rolling method of their choice. Same sourcebook, same task descriptors, different dice conventions based on RTT or T5.

Just a thought,
Flynn

 

[BlackBat242]

I guess I'll have to give in, and join the RTT movement.


Now, if only someone will start a company named "Cobra", and buy the Star Frontiers & Space Opera licenses... :smirk:

 

[Takei]

Marc and Matthew are currently discussing the 2D Roll-High rules that Marc had drafted for T5 last year (at Hunter's suggestion).

That's good to hear. I definately prefer roll high. Hopefully it might look like the proposed CT+ and be a d20-like task system.

I also like RTT, although MongTrav was a nice play on words for a dumbed-down T5

 

[ravells]

While I prefer 2D6 roll-high (Its hard to shout "Hooray, I got snake eyes!"), it would seem a formidable challenge to create a '2D6 Roll-High' and a 'Fistful of dice Roll-low' rules system that can be easily swapped going from the basic (RTT) Traveller to the advanced (T5) Traveller systems.

I'm with Arthur on this. High rolls are good rolls....unless you're playing Advanced Squad Leader....but that's an entirely different story.

Ravs

 

[Takei]

We hang out...everywhere.

(Mongoose Gar on the Mongoose forums, mytholder everywhere else on the intertubes.)

So is it worth asking specifics about the game yet? Or expressing preferences? Will there be any kind of playtest/proof-read?

 

[Mytholder]

It's much too early to talk specifics (Mongoose's turnaround time on games is... pretty rapid, to put it mildly.)

I'm discussing playtest options with Matthew at the moment.

And I'm always eager to hear what people are hoping for from the game.

 

[Echo]

Picked up this from the rpg.net forum:

"I don't have the link anymore, but I saw an alternative CT task resolution system that seemed to handle this well. It used difficulties of 1-15 vs. 2D6 + Skill: fairly standard so far. The clever part was a +1 bonus if your stat was equal to or greater than the difficulty, or +2 if it was double or greater.

Thomas"

Please, please, please, could the new editions of Traveller use this core Task Resolution system?

It's simple, intuitive - has Task Difficulties recorded on the same scale as the Characteristic scores and makes them relevant, yet keeping Skills as the primary factor.

I'll say it again: please, please, please could this system be used. It'll make a huge difference to the successful outcome of both T5 and Mongoose Traveller.

 

[far-trader]

Picked up this from the rpg.net forum:

"I don't have the link anymore, but I saw an alternative CT task resolution system that seemed to handle this well. It used difficulties of 1-15 vs. 2D6 + Skill: fairly standard so far. The clever part was a +1 bonus if your stat was equal to or greater than the difficulty, or +2 if it was double or greater.

Thomas"

Hmm, I like it, and it seems familiar. I wonder if it could be (drat, the user name escapes me )... It'll come to me, he posted a lot of CT enhancements here a while back. It doesn't sound quite like what he ended up with (got too complicated for my liking), more like where he started or one of my early suggestions which may be why it seems familiar. Or maybe it was somewhere else. The old grey cells are sleepy, too big a supper

 

[LKW]

It's much too early to talk specifics (Mongoose's turnaround time on games is... pretty rapid, to put it mildly.)

I'm discussing playtest options with Matthew at the moment.

And I'm always eager to hear what people are hoping for from the game.

I'll be happy to sound off in private. Hopefully my opinions have some value . . .

Contact me at GDWgames at aol dot com

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

I guess I'll have to give in, and join the RTT movement.


Now, if only someone will start a company named "Cobra", and buy the Star Frontiers & Space Opera licenses... :smirk:

Oddly enough, Star Frontiers has been declared "Open Source" by WotC and is available for free download. Fantasy Games Unlimited is still around, and you can still order hardcopy Space Opera material from them (I admit, I ordered some. Hate the game system, but I love the Jeff Dee artwork in the books).

 

[hunter]

Oddly enough, Star Frontiers has been declared "Open Source" by WotC and is available for free download.

I know that there has been some special dispensation given to Star Frontiers, but did then finally go ahead and make it fully open source? I'd be interested in seeing that

Fantasy Games Unlimited is still around, and you can still order hardcopy Space Opera material from them (I admit, I ordered some. Hate the game system, but I love the Jeff Dee artwork in the books).

Yes, the FGU material is still considered 'in print' from pretty much most of the line if I remember correctly.

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

I know that there has been some special dispensation given to Star Frontiers, but did then finally go ahead and make it fully open source? I'd be interested in seeing that

I'm probably confused in my use of the term "Open Source". Lemme try to clarify.

I do know that the original Star Frontiers material published by TSR is available in PDF and HTML format for free download online legally. I do not know if new material can be made, published, and sold legally (although WotC has converted some ships and aliens from Star Frontiers to d20 Future in a Web Enhancement of theirs). I have no idea who, if anyone, owns the IP rights for Star Frontiers.

 

[hunter]

I do know that the original Star Frontiers material published by TSR is available in PDF and HTML format for free download online legally. I do not know if new material can be made, published, and sold legally (although WotC has converted some ships and aliens from Star Frontiers to d20 Future in a Web Enhancement of theirs). I have no idea who, if anyone, owns the IP rights for Star Frontiers.

I know that someone is doing what appears to be a reasonably popular fanzine on it from what I've seen on RPG.net, and I'm familiar with the Star Frontiers website where you can download the files legally. Be interested to see if they did open source it or if they have just a singular agreement with the folks running the SF website.

But this is off-topic (sorry I did it too!). Feel free to start a SF topic if you'd like.

 

[Berg]

Hopefully my opinions have some value . . .

I should think so!....

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

But this is off-topic (sorry I did it too!). Feel free to start a SF topic if you'd like.

I'd rather not start a new topic and I'm going to disagree with you about it being so off-topic.

Since my last post, I thought a bit about Star Frontiers and Space Opera, and asked myself why those two games haven't had the same popularity as Traveller. One of the differences that immediately came to mind is accessibility and organization. Taking a look at this could help with RTT.

For every design sequence in CT, there was a checklist given with the tables for that design sequence. By having a checklist, a new player could go through combat, worldbuilding, animal creation, character generation, starship construction, and trade & commerce step by step (like a cookbook) and teach themselves the rules of the game. This made CT extremely accessible for those unfamiliar with the rules and allowed them to learn them quickly.

Just a thought, mind you.

 

[GJD]

I also think the open nature of CT compared to the reletivly closed nature of SF was a big factor. SF was also quite preachy at times, forcing you into the "good guy" role. It wasn't until the SFUK missions came along that you weren't either working for the Star Law or saving the UPF, or working for a captain Birdseye look-alike saving fuzzy-wuzzy aliens from the evil blob man (anyone who can ID this plotline wins a dronga).

G.

 

[Flynn]

Mytholder,

There have been a lot of assumptions about what will be in the SRD and thus be available as Open Game Content. I would hate to act on those assumptions and then be disappointed later when something isn't included. Therefore, I would like to ask which, if any, of the following "core CT" systems will be in the Basic Traveller rules and/or the SRD:

• character generation
• personal combat
• space combat
• world generation
• animal/encounter creation
• starship construction
• trade & commerce

If you don't have answers yet, what would you like to be in there? We can understand a caveat of "I want to see this, but I don't know what I'm going to be allowed to put in," if that helps.

As feedback, I personally would hope that all of the above are in the SRD, as this is the general contents of Books 1-3, which serves as the most basic core rules for CT, and it opens up the most options for diversity in supporting the Traveller OGL.

Please let us know when you can,
Flynn

 

[Takei]

It's much too early to talk specifics (Mongoose's turnaround time on games is... pretty rapid, to put it mildly.)

I'm discussing playtest options with Matthew at the moment.

And I'm always eager to hear what people are hoping for from the game.

My hopes are thus;

CharGen as per basic CT but with one skill per year. A limited skill list please. Definately not into triple digits!

Tasks; d20-like with DCs and attributes giving constant mods like d20.

Combat damage; I'm torn between T4-like with armour absorbing damage (and damage applied to stats) or True20-like with damage saves. This is actually similar to CT Striker so could still be considered CT
Thinking about it, Jeremiah has a similar system called a Life Bar which makes tasks harder the more you're wounded.

Ships; LBB 5 was fine and not too complicated, but get rid of computers. Two criticisms are constantly levelled against CT; you can die in chargen and computers are the size of a room! I liked the way T4 handled computers and fire control.

Ship Combat; if you adopted the True20/Striker style damage saves you could also apply the same rule to ship and vehicle combat. The more damaged a vehicle is the harder it is to perform tasks like combat and manoeuvering.

Economics; CT certainly wasn't accurate but it was quick, which I think is more important for playability. Starships must be able to at least make a profit on paper; no bank would give a mortgage on something that cannot turn a profit when running full of cargo and passengers!

System generation; again, CT might not have been accurate but it gave enough information to be useful in the game. I have never once in 25 years had a player ask me about life zones, albido values or even star type. They ask what starport the world has, what atmosphere, what government and law level.

Overall, keep it simple. Only include details that will be needed in play.

I've waffled enough, but you did ask for comments

 

[Mytholder]

Mytholder,

There have been a lot of assumptions about what will be in the SRD and thus be available as Open Game Content. I would hate to act on those assumptions and then be disappointed later when something isn't included. Therefore, I would like to ask which, if any, of the following "core CT" systems will be in the Basic Traveller rules and/or the SRD:

• character generation
• personal combat
• space combat
• world generation
• animal/encounter creation
• starship construction
• trade & commerce

If you don't have answers yet, what would you like to be in there? We can understand a caveat of "I want to see this, but I don't know what I'm going to be allowed to put in," if that helps.

As feedback, I personally would hope that all of the above are in the SRD, as this is the general contents of Books 1-3, which serves as the most basic core rules for CT, and it opens up the most options for diversity in supporting the Traveller OGL.

Heh. In my initial outline for the game, I listed the six core subsystems we'd need to get right for the core book, and it's almost exactly the same as your list there (I folded encounters and animals into 'personal combat and encounters'. While the final contents of the SRD will be out of my hands, I'd be very surprised if it didn't include everything on that list in some form.

Take a look at the Runequest SRD (http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/detail.php?qsID=1180&qsSeries=39), which should give you some idea of how much stuff will be made available.

EDIT: Actually, there's a non-zero chance that ship design would be spun off into a supplement. The main book would have stats and rules for flying and modifying basic ships, but the meat of the design rules would be in a supplement. It'll depend on what level of complexity we end up using for ships.