New member - questions

[dr fre0n]

Hey everyone

I recently came across CotI forum and registered - and before I begin to post in I am in the process of reading what is going on in the various boards.

First thing, I see that there is threads posted in here since a decade or so. This mean that several 'green guy' like me must had come around since the beginning asking the same questions. Other than the FAQ and sticky's, is there any threads that address usual questions for newcomers ?

Also is this board (The Lone Star) appropriate for out of character general questions from a new player ? Else which one would be the best ?

Any other tips regarding the forum use for new users?

Knowing this I will be more at ease posting more specific questions and interacting. Thank you for your time

 

[Vladika]

Welcome to CotI, land of never ending arguments and a generally great bunch of helpful people. Lone Star should be fine.

Don't worry to much about what you don't know, somebody else who doesn't know either will be happy to set-you-straight .

Seriously, dive in and have fun. We enjoy the old arguments almost as much as the new.

 

[atpollard]

Official Rules found HERE.

The short version ...
1. No personal attacks (keep it polite).
2. No politics or religion (history after WW2 tends towards 'politics').
3. No posting spam.

With respect to posting general questions, Lone Star is fine.
(If you post anything in the wrong place, a moderator will just move it.)

If you have questions related to a specific version of the game, posting it in the sub-forum for that game will get a quicker response.

Some common abbreviations that a new member will find useful:

CT = Classic Traveller
MT = MegaTraveller
TNE = Traveller The New Era
T20 = d20 Traveller
MgT = Mongoose Traveller

Welcome and have fun.

 

[rancke]

CT = Classic Traveller
MT = MegaTraveller
TNE = Traveller The New Era
T20 = d20 Traveller
MgT = Mongoose Traveller

T4 = Marc Miller's Traveller
GT = GURPS Traveller

And welcome to CotI.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Official Rules found HERE.

The short version ...
1. No personal attacks (keep it polite).
2. No politics or religion (history after WW2 tends towards 'politics').
3. No posting spam.

With respect to posting general questions, Lone Star is fine.
(If you post anything in the wrong place, a moderator will just move it.)

If you have questions related to a specific version of the game, posting it in the sub-forum for that game will get a quicker response.

Some common abbreviations that a new member will find useful:

CT = Classic Traveller
MT = MegaTraveller
TNE = Traveller The New Era
T20 = d20 Traveller
MgT = Mongoose Traveller

Welcome and have fun.

You left off

HT as well - Traveller for Hero System (AKA HeroTraveller)

And a note on CT "Editions"...
If people say "CT 1E" or "CT-77", they're referring to the original edition of Traveller, which is slightly different from the 1981 and later printings in terms of mechanics.
If they list "CT-81" or "CT 2E", that's the 1981 to 1986 printings of CT; as implied, some rules changed. The trade dress, however, didn't.

LBB = Little Black Book (probably CT, may be MGT)
BBB = Big Black Book - in older threads, it may refer to The Traveller Book; in newer ones, it's probably T5 Core Rulebook.
Bk: short for Book - used in CT and MGT for rules addition expansions. CT Bk1-3 are the core rules; additions start with book 4. MGT, Supplements start with Bk 1; the Core Rules are not numbered.

HG = High Guard - the big ships supplement.
HG1 or HG-79: 1st Edition CT Book 5: High Guard
HG2 or HG-80: 2nd edition CT Book 5: High Guard. Different construction and combat mechanics.
MHG or MGTHG or Bk2-HG: High Guard

GTIW: GURPS Traveller Interstellar Wars.

Oh, and paid moot members have access to a politics & religion allowed board area, the political pulpit. If you aren't a moot member, you don't even see it. It's the exception to the "Mods will just move it" policy. They'll move it, all right, but right after writing an infraction for politics/religion outside the pit.

 

[dr fre0n]

Seriously, dive in and have fun. We enjoy the old arguments almost as much as the new.

Great to know it gives me the kind of mood to expect and a bit of perspective !

thank you

 

[dr fre0n]

[...]

Welcome and have fun.

Yes I really feel I will ! thanks for the tips

 

[dr fre0n]

You left off

HT as well - Traveller for Hero System (AKA HeroTraveller)

And a note on CT "Editions"...
If people say "CT 1E" or "CT-77", they're referring to the original edition of Traveller, which is slightly different from the 1981 and later printings in terms of mechanics.
If they list "CT-81" or "CT 2E", that's the 1981 to 1986 printings of CT; as implied, some rules changed. The trade dress, however, didn't.

LBB = Little Black Book (probably CT, may be MGT)
BBB = Big Black Book - in older threads, it may refer to The Traveller Book; in newer ones, it's probably T5 Core Rulebook.
Bk: short for Book - used in CT and MGT for rules addition expansions. CT Bk1-3 are the core rules; additions start with book 4. MGT, Supplements start with Bk 1; the Core Rules are not numbered.

HG = High Guard - the big ships supplement.
HG1 or HG-79: 1st Edition CT Book 5: High Guard
HG2 or HG-80: 2nd edition CT Book 5: High Guard. Different construction and combat mechanics.
MHG or MGTHG or Bk2-HG: High Guard

GTIW: GURPS Traveller Interstellar Wars.

Oh, and paid moot members have access to a politics & religion allowed board area, the political pulpit. If you aren't a moot member, you don't even see it. It's the exception to the "Mods will just move it" policy. They'll move it, all right, but right after writing an infraction for politics/religion outside the pit.

Yes, I have not mentioned it but not only I am a new forum user but a new Traveler player as well. I am preparing my first campaign as a ref - and realize that a lot of stuff happened to be released in the Traveler Universe since the early beginnings. I approximately understand 80% of what you just mentioned so I guess I already made some homework ! Still a lot to do to get through !

For Moot - great I am taking note. I will begin to get familiar in here with what is offered / available to general users and see if I will upgrade to Moot eventually. Thanks for the tips

 

[Chuck Anumia]

Welcome!

You will find our community here on the older side of life for the most part.
Many people take questions seriously and will provide all the information backing up their opinions about the questions you (or anyone else for that matter) post here and in the various sub forums.
We are not only glad to have new people here we look forward to making friends with more all the time we also encourage everyone to share their knowledge and interest in all things Traveller here.
Spread the news about us and help our community grow!
Cheers!
Chuck

 

[dr fre0n]

You will find our community here on the older side of life for the most part.
Many people take questions seriously and will provide all the information backing up their opinions about the questions you (or anyone else for that matter) post here and in the various sub forums.
We are not only glad to have new people here we look forward to making friends with more all the time we also encourage everyone to share their knowledge and interest in all things Traveller here.
Spread the news about us and help our community grow!
Cheers!
Chuck

Roger that kind sir! Steadily getting to the older side as well - and as a spacethings enthusiast and long time rpger I am already finding tons of interesting reads and info in here.

Thanks for your reply

 

[aramis]

You will find our community here on the older side of life for the most part.
Many people take questions seriously and will provide all the information backing up their opinions about the questions you (or anyone else for that matter) post here and in the various sub forums.

COTI can be thought of, in many ways, as the Traveller Debate Society; just about anything posted will get discussed, except when it falls down the "black hole of quality" - certain things that are excellent wind up with nary a comment. Really unnerves a few people.

We are not only glad to have new people here we look forward to making friends with more all the time we also encourage everyone to share their knowledge and interest in all things Traveller here.
Spread the news about us and help our community grow!
Cheers!
Chuck

S'truth.

 

[BlackBat242]

I wish this thread was still a sticky (hint, hint, nudge):
Who are we?

It is an "introduce yourself" thread.

 

[Amber Chancer]

Hi and welcome.

You will find that a recurring theme in the debates we have here is the question of whether we should be slavish followers of "Canon", or "The Offical Traveller Universe" (or OTU) - what I call the "D&D role-playing mindset" - or whether we should be using the rules as a framework to create our own universes in which we adopt and make use of only so much of the Traveller "setting" material as suits our purposes (what I call the "IMTU mindset"; IMTU standing for In My Traveller Universe).

Some of these debates can be quite entertaining, as neither side can understand or relate to the other's standpoint (or, more probably, neither side is prepared to admit to understanding or relating to the other's standpoint :file_21: )

It helps to be clear from the outset which mindset will condition your approach to running Traveller games

 

[whulorigan]

Hi and welcome.

You will find that a recurring theme in the debates we have here is the question of whether we should be slavish followers of "Canon", or "The Offical Traveller Universe" (or OTU) - what I call the "D&D role-playing mindset" - or whether we should be using the rules as a framework to create our own universes in which we adopt and make use of only so much of the Traveller "setting" material as suits our purposes (what I call the "IMTU mindset"; IMTU standing for In My Traveller Universe).

Some of these debates can be quite entertaining, as neither side can understand or relate to the other's standpoint (or, more probably, neither side is prepared to admit to understanding or relating to the other's standpoint :file_21: )

It helps to be clear from the outset which mindset will condition your approach to running Traveller games

I think it would be a little clearer if phrased slightly differently as regards the Third Imperium OTU-setting.

The two primary camps are (broadly speaking):

1) RULESET & GAME MECHANICS SHOULD INFORM SETTING-CANON (i.e. The ruleset/mechanics should determine or modify the setting-canon [Rules precede/have precedence over setting]);

2) SETTING-CANON SHOULD INFORM RULESET/GAME MECHANICS (i.e. Internally-consistent setting-canon should be used to determine the best use of game-mechanics & rulesets, including house-rules as necessary [Setting precedes/has precedence over rules]).
​

(I am personally of the latter persuasion).

 

[aramis]

I think it would be a little clearer if phrased slightly differently as regards the Third Imperium OTU-setting.

The two primary camps are (broadly speaking):

1) RULESET & GAME MECHANICS SHOULD INFORM SETTING-CANON (i.e. The ruleset/mechanics should determine or modify the setting-canon [Rules precede/have precedence over setting]);

2) SETTING-CANON SHOULD INFORM RULESET/GAME MECHANICS (i.e. Internally-consistent setting-canon should be used to determine the best use of game-mechanics & rulesets, including house-rules as necessary [Setting precedes/has precedence over rules]).
​

(I am personally of the latter persuasion).

There's a third camp as well:

3) Rules and Setting are unrelated
This group thinks the setting and rules don't interface at all.

I'm in the 1st camp, myself. Especially since

• Rules were written first
• The game bends several genres together
• Over half the CT players didn't seem to use the OTU

The first edition to integrate the two explicitly was MT... but note that CT encoded a lot of setting elements into the rules.

 

[Amber Chancer]

I think it would be a little clearer if phrased slightly differently as regards the Third Imperium OTU-setting.

The two primary camps are (broadly speaking):

1) RULESET & GAME MECHANICS SHOULD INFORM SETTING-CANON (i.e. The ruleset/mechanics should determine or modify the setting-canon [Rules precede/have precedence over setting]);

2) SETTING-CANON SHOULD INFORM RULESET/GAME MECHANICS (i.e. Internally-consistent setting-canon should be used to determine the best use of game-mechanics & rulesets, including house-rules as necessary [Setting precedes/has precedence over rules]).
​

(I am personally of the latter persuasion).

No ... that's an altogether dichotomy from the one I'm proposing.

The dichotomy I was referring to is essentially the same as the "D&D or T&T?" dichotomy.

Do you want to adventure in a ready-made world (or universe) with everything prescribed for you except the adventure itself? Or do you want to adventure in a universe which the referee has come up with himself, using the rules as a framework within which to design his own adventures, but ignoring those parts of "canon" setting which don't fit with the universe he wants to create?

The entertaining thing about the arguments surrounding this dichotomoy (or at least, I find it entertaining, as a student and keen observer of human nature) is that it doesn't matter WHICH side you view it from, it will always appear as though the other side's position is an exercise in making the tail wag the dog.

 

[aramis]

No ... that's an altogether dichotomy from the one I'm proposing.

The dichotomy I was referring to is essentially the same as the "D&D or T&T?" dichotomy.

Do you want to adventure in a ready-made world (or universe) with everything prescribed for you except the adventure itself? Or do you want to adventure in a universe which the referee has come up with himself, using the rules as a framework within which to design his own adventures, but ignoring those parts of "canon" setting which don't fit with the universe he wants to create?

The entertaining thing about the arguments surrounding this dichotomoy (or at least, I find it entertaining, as a student and keen observer of human nature) is that it doesn't matter WHICH side you view it from, it will always appear as though the other side's position is an exercise in making the tail wag the dog.

You're not grasping that the underlying dichotomy you're claiming is different isn't actually different, but merely an outgrowth of the trichotomy of setting vs rules. Further, your chosen systems to illustrate it don't actually illustrate it - most old-school D&Ders didn't run in a prepped world, either.

If anything, D&D models the "Rules should be changed to fit the setting" mode, while T&T typically is "Rules and Setting don't mesh." Why does D&D do the Rules changed to fit setting? Because TSR and Wizards consistently have produced modification sets to adapt D&D to specific subsettings that were already extant.

 

[BlackBat242]

And then there are the large numbers of D&D players (note that I refer to the original D&D, B/X, and BECMI/RC editions as well as both AD&D versions) who use the rules of their versions more or less as written (house-rules are the norm) but place the adventures in worlds of their own devising, often with entirely different cultures/"settings" and available races.

Note that this was the default form of D&D play - the very first published "adventure module" was from a 3rd party, as TSR felt that publishing adventures was contrary to the spirit of the game. To Gary Gygax, et al, the adventure was supposed to be the DM's creation, as most of the fun for the DM was considered to be in the creation of your own world and adventures!

Even after TSR began publishing its own modules and settings (Greyhawk in the OD&D/AD&D1E era) the modules mostly had to be both compatible with and not dependent on the setting, so they could be dropped into a DM-created world setting.

I've played AD&D1E since December 1982, and DM'ed it since July 1984, and have yet to run a game using a published module or placed in a published setting, and most of the DMs I have played under over the years do the same (or at most adapt modules for their own game-world).

Of the last 12 games I've played in since 2000 (several of which were (and two are) multi-real-year campaigns), only 2 used a published module in its published setting (both 1E Greyhawk).



Judging the D&D world based only on 3.X/4.X/Pathfinder is a misleading activity.

 

[BlackBat242]

Yes, I have not mentioned it but not only I am a new forum user but a new Traveler player as well. I am preparing my first campaign as a ref - and realize that a lot of stuff happened to be released in the Traveler Universe since the early beginnings. I approximately understand 80% of what you just mentioned so I guess I already made some homework ! Still a lot to do to get through !

For Moot - great I am taking note. I will begin to get familiar in here with what is offered / available to general users and see if I will upgrade to Moot eventually. Thanks for the tips

I think I told a newbie this before...

To quote some famous Sci-Fi author... "You Lucky Bast@rd!"


I forgot the name , but it means: "you are going to have a lot of fun discovering all the things we now view as "old hat"... YLB".

 

[Draconian]

Hey everyone
First thing, I see that there is threads posted in here since a decade or so. This mean that several 'green guy' like me must had come around since the beginning asking the same questions. Other than the FAQ and sticky's, is there any threads that address usual questions for newcomers ?

Welcome!

If you think you are bringing up an "old" subject discussed before, you can always use a simple or advanced Search box globally (the down-arrow up top), by Forum or in a Thread.