• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

CT Only: Multi jump1 ships

It's absurd because you have to roll for every cargo available to every world on the jump 1 main under AD's interpretation - Occam's razor this interpretation is false.
Your interpretation (which is the same as mine by the way) is the correct one I think because you only roll for cargos to adjacent worlds, not every world on the jump 1 main.
THat's not Occam's razor, which is "pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate". Which Encyclopedia Britannica translates as, "plurality should not be posited without necessity.” Occam himself used it to dispense multiplicity of explanation, with a modern common understanding of "all things being equal, the simpler explanation is truth."

The simpler explanation, not the simpler to execute. Tho' I'm fairly certain Occam himself would balk at generating all within reach... until one taught him Applesoft or BBC Basic, or VBA & excell... At which point the simpler would be a two question UI... "Hex number? Range?"
2 seconds later, list of available cargos per world, based upon a sector data file.

in the modern era, where almost everyone in the western world has a supercomputer in their pocket, the GM needing to roll for each is itself absurd; the automation is readily available and has been since the early 1990's.

britannica.com html Merriam-webster.com html Math.UCR.edu html:
 
Travel time for jumping may have been baked in at one week, as it's long enough to give that feel of separation and isolation, without it becoming a major stumbling block for continuity in the campaign.
 
It's long enough to force decentralized interstellar government, because the resulting OODA loop is too long for centralized decisionmaking.

Oh, and ideally it matches the real-world interval between game sessions.
 
Travel time for jumping may have been baked in at one week, as -
I've always assumed it was because when the players decided to Jump to another system, the referee needed time to write up the details of the next world, and so ended the game session and said, "Okay, you Jump, see you all next Sunday," and started packing up the books and notes.
"How long will the trip take us?"
"The next session is a week from now. So it takes you a week. Bring snacks."
"But we've still got 45 minutes we could be playing in."
"Do you want to roleplay the cleaning and maintenance you'll be doing on the ship during that week?"
"If only Jumps were instantaneous..."
"No because that would violate causality," says another player who recently studied physics.
"Idiot, all faster-than-light-travel violates causality."
"Oh yeah, smartarse? What about quantum entanglement, then?"
And then the referee got up and left them to argue about it.

Jumps take a week because lots of people game once a week.

Now, as for how people pay for travel... I recently took a train interstate home, Adelaide to Melbourne. I assume it would have been cheaper if I'd stopped somewhere along the way. But I didn't want to hear about that when I bought the ticket. And I certainly wasn't willing to pay more just because they stopped at one of the stations along the way to pick up some other passenger. Just tell me the price to get where I want to go!

Of course, whatever the official rates, the passengers the players get may be willing or able to pay less or more than the standard rates. Will you take people who want to or can only pay less? And if they are willing or able to pay more, are you sure it's going to be worth it?
 
Travel time for jumping may have been baked in at one week, as it's long enough to give that feel of separation and isolation, without it becoming a major stumbling block for continuity in the campaign.
Wasn't it to enable game play involving movement of fleets and squadrons in the FFW boardgame, or was that purely coincidence?
 
Wasn't it to enable game play involving movement of fleets and squadrons in the FFW boardgame, or was that purely coincidence?
Fifth Frontier War was published LONG after the LBBs had been in circulation.
LBB1-3 were first published in 1977.
Fifth Frontier War was published in 1981.
 
Wasn't it to enable game play involving movement of fleets and squadrons in the FFW boardgame, or was that purely coincidence?

Fifth Frontier War was published LONG after the LBBs had been in circulation.
LBB1-3 were first published in 1977.
Fifth Frontier War was published in 1981.

That does not mean it was coincidence. FFW was played with week turns to match with OTU...
 
With Dungeons and Dragons, when you travelled, you had random wilderness encounters.

The mode of transport and the distance to the destination determined journey time.

With Traveller, it's a pretty much fixed interval, unless you dropped in Cthulhu warpspace, you were very much in a safespace.
 
With Traveller, it's a pretty much fixed interval, unless you dropped in Cthulhu warpspace, you were very much in a safespace.
"I met this old guy in a bar once, he told me that way back in the early days, before there was even a Solomani Empire, they tried to make a Jump ship. It Jumped, alright... somewhere. Came back, all quiet, way out beyond this cold, cold gas giant. A crew went out to rescue it. They came back... or some of them did. Not really themselves any more. I tried to forget most of what the old guy told me, but what I can't forget is him telling me about a guy with a bloodied face saying, where we're going we don't need eyes to see."
 
It's absurd because you have to roll for every cargo available to every world on the jump 1 main under AD's interpretation - Occam's razor this interpretation is false.

Actually this works well in one particular case:

When the players' ship is travelling on a particular route to a particular destination, they could roll up cargoes that are being shipped along their planned route.

It's not great (and it's a bit of a gamble), but sometimes it's better than shipping air.
 
Back
Top