I think this has already been touched on, but Annic Nova was a bit of a yawner, and I'm guessing it was once more the referee's job to "spice things up" as it were.
New thought about the course of Traveller
- Thread starter Garyius2003
- Start date
So, tell the truth: is that docking port on the cargo bay just available for use by the two pinnaces present, or was there originally a third pinnace docked there? Are those two pinnaces all there ever where, or is the third pinnace missing. We've been debating the fate of the original crew for decades.
Garyius2003
SOC-13
12yo me figured there was a third pinnace, but older me wonders about jump ability with the extra displacement.
I always figured, though, that the jump rules were different for this ship. The two times I ran it (first time very poorly), the players had to give it to the 3I, because it was all new jump methods.
If I re-ran it today the players would have a chance to out jump the 3I for a while.
I always figured, though, that the jump rules were different for this ship. The two times I ran it (first time very poorly), the players had to give it to the 3I, because it was all new jump methods.
If I re-ran it today the players would have a chance to out jump the 3I for a while.
I like the "third boat, larger, now missing" hypothesis.
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
There is a fair amount of decent lineart in the T4 line, but it is spread across the entire line.
It is significant that of all of T4's aliens, only one of them is ever revisited by artwork outside the core book and the Aliens Archive.
When all is said and done I just want to write for the game, and add my version of Travellerness to the pantheon of material.
A "new" direction? What, something OTHER than Virus or Rebellion? Meh, new geopolitical or interstellar tectonics of somekind don't do it for me. The official setting is there, but the Traveller system is just that, a system, and I'm somewhat shocked that no one bothered to spend the cash on another setting, other than Judges Guild or Gypsy Knights.
Oh well.
A "new" direction? What, something OTHER than Virus or Rebellion? Meh, new geopolitical or interstellar tectonics of somekind don't do it for me. The official setting is there, but the Traveller system is just that, a system, and I'm somewhat shocked that no one bothered to spend the cash on another setting, other than Judges Guild or Gypsy Knights.
Oh well.
Well, write!
If you're interested in writing for the OTU, drop me an e-mail. If you're interested in one of the third party settings, e-mail them.
Everyone is looking for a good Traveller writer.
salochin999
SOC-13
my thoughts
The big question is the question of scale imo. The two extremes of sci-fi settings are mega-city worlds with massive fleets and corporations and the frontier worlds setting, wild west or explorer.
There are a lot of different campaign types: cyberpunk industrial espionage, military, trader, horror, adventure etc but they all require a decision on the scale and some options *require* one scale or the other. A free trader campaign doesn't make much sense outside of the frontier scale. A Broadsword scale mercenary campaign doesn't make sense outside of a frontier scale. A cyberpunk corporate espionage campaign or a Judge Dredd cops and robbers campaign doesn't make much sense outside of a megacity world.
So how do you create both the magacity scale and the frontier scale at the same time in the same setting?
This to me has always been the Traveller setting's big problem. The rules can work for either Asimov or Firefly but how do you create a setting that fits both at once.
#
Imo the Traveller setting's big problem is...
drumroll
rolling for star ports first in the world generation.
If you roll back to imagining early colonization who in their right mind is going to want to raise a family on some horrible rock with a poisonous atmosphere. They're not. The only big colonies (pre terra forming) are going to be on garden worlds with earth-like atmospheres. There would be resource extraction colonies as well on less favored worlds but they'd be more like oil rigs imo where people went to work for n months at a time while their families were on the nice planets.
So how might that work in a Traveller setting?
Have 90% of the people, 90% of the trade and 90% of everything on the scattered Grade A worlds. The sucky systems in between would have orbital refueling stations around gas giants and the trade routes would jump from one refueling station to the next completely ignoring the rest of the system. The mining colonies in those systems would transfer ore etc to warehouses near the refueling station and the big merchant ships would never go anywhere near the system's worlds - but the free traders would.
That's your frontier. The bits in between the Grade A worlds.
If you roll up a Traveller sub-sector in the usual way (or take a canon sub-sector and roll it back in time) except you roll for size, atmosphere and hydro first not star port then the Grade A planets (garden + rich) are the ones that will develop A grade star ports and large populations linked by a chain of orbital gas stations in the sucky systems in between.
The frontier isn't on the border - although it could be as well - it's in between.
#
Example
IIRC "garden" is size 5+ atmos 4-9 + hydro 4-8 and "rich" is atmos 6 or 8
so make (for example)
Grade A: size 5+, atmos 6 or 8, hydro 4-8
Grade B: size 5+, atmos 6 or 8, hydro < 4 or > 8
Grade C: size 5+, atmos 4,5,7 or 9, hydro 4-8
Grade D: size 5+, atmos 4,5,7 or 9, hydro < 4 or > 8
Grade E: not garden at all
Grade X: not garden + no gas giant or water
etc
and assume over time the star port grade will gravitate to planet grade.
The planet profile would change to: planet grade, star port, size, atmos, hydro etc so it might be AA686etc for a grade A planet with a grade A star port. A grade A planet that has only been recently colonized might be AD686etc. A sucky world that becomes a trade hub because there's a long chain between grade A worlds might be EB600etc.
The big question is the question of scale imo. The two extremes of sci-fi settings are mega-city worlds with massive fleets and corporations and the frontier worlds setting, wild west or explorer.
There are a lot of different campaign types: cyberpunk industrial espionage, military, trader, horror, adventure etc but they all require a decision on the scale and some options *require* one scale or the other. A free trader campaign doesn't make much sense outside of the frontier scale. A Broadsword scale mercenary campaign doesn't make sense outside of a frontier scale. A cyberpunk corporate espionage campaign or a Judge Dredd cops and robbers campaign doesn't make much sense outside of a megacity world.
So how do you create both the magacity scale and the frontier scale at the same time in the same setting?
This to me has always been the Traveller setting's big problem. The rules can work for either Asimov or Firefly but how do you create a setting that fits both at once.
#
Imo the Traveller setting's big problem is...
drumroll
rolling for star ports first in the world generation.
If you roll back to imagining early colonization who in their right mind is going to want to raise a family on some horrible rock with a poisonous atmosphere. They're not. The only big colonies (pre terra forming) are going to be on garden worlds with earth-like atmospheres. There would be resource extraction colonies as well on less favored worlds but they'd be more like oil rigs imo where people went to work for n months at a time while their families were on the nice planets.
So how might that work in a Traveller setting?
Have 90% of the people, 90% of the trade and 90% of everything on the scattered Grade A worlds. The sucky systems in between would have orbital refueling stations around gas giants and the trade routes would jump from one refueling station to the next completely ignoring the rest of the system. The mining colonies in those systems would transfer ore etc to warehouses near the refueling station and the big merchant ships would never go anywhere near the system's worlds - but the free traders would.
That's your frontier. The bits in between the Grade A worlds.
If you roll up a Traveller sub-sector in the usual way (or take a canon sub-sector and roll it back in time) except you roll for size, atmosphere and hydro first not star port then the Grade A planets (garden + rich) are the ones that will develop A grade star ports and large populations linked by a chain of orbital gas stations in the sucky systems in between.
The frontier isn't on the border - although it could be as well - it's in between.
#
Example
IIRC "garden" is size 5+ atmos 4-9 + hydro 4-8 and "rich" is atmos 6 or 8
so make (for example)
Grade A: size 5+, atmos 6 or 8, hydro 4-8
Grade B: size 5+, atmos 6 or 8, hydro < 4 or > 8
Grade C: size 5+, atmos 4,5,7 or 9, hydro 4-8
Grade D: size 5+, atmos 4,5,7 or 9, hydro < 4 or > 8
Grade E: not garden at all
Grade X: not garden + no gas giant or water
etc
and assume over time the star port grade will gravitate to planet grade.
The planet profile would change to: planet grade, star port, size, atmos, hydro etc so it might be AA686etc for a grade A planet with a grade A star port. A grade A planet that has only been recently colonized might be AD686etc. A sucky world that becomes a trade hub because there's a long chain between grade A worlds might be EB600etc.
If anyone's wondering about what robject means by that hypothesis, I have a copy on my website.
Look under:
--> Tavonni Repair Bays
----> Canon Problems
------> CANON PROBLEM 4: The Annic Nova Backstory
And Marc disagrees with this approach. I used to agree with this, but I had a discussion with Marc, and he got me to see his view on this. He really should write an article on it, but priorities...
Hi,
Whilst there is a lot to be said for your approach Traveller isn't Star Trek, it's more Warhammer 40K.
The Terrans were forced to settle worlds the Vilani hadn't in order to try to outflank them, so lots of war torn and poor choice worlds then the Ramshackle Empire and Long Night, doesn't really improve things, even the refound 3rd Imperium has it's borders wars and in you go beyond 1116+ even worse stuff.
However, bear in mind that the Second survey was 1065 and in T5 we find massive investment in RU's in a huge number of worlds, which probably turn things around by 1105.
Regards
David
That really doesn't speak to the situation of the player using the rules to develop his own sector. Seems to me the player should get to decide whether he wants to play Star Trek or Warhammer.
Not true. Or rather, only true until the Terrans broke out of their pocket fairly early in the Interstellar Wars.
A lot of fringe cultures would have settled on sub-optimal worlds in order to get one of their very own, but most emigration during the Diaspora would have been to established Vilani worlds, and they tended to be human-compatible.
I believe the UWPs published with T5 imprimatur are for 1105.
Also, I can't believe there would be any radical changes in just 40 years. Lots of small ones, yes, but not a drastic overall trend. Inertia seems to be the Imperium's middle name.
Hans
salochin999
SOC-13
salochin999
SOC-13
Yes if you roll up a sector/subsector and want a mixture of Coruscant and Tattoine then roll for planet stats first and assume the sequence of colonization was driven by the presence of grade A planets. You end up with a relatively small number of grade A planets linked together in a long chain with some trade hubs and deep space stations filling the gaps and 80% frontier type planets.
Fun.
If T5 survey data is a new Third survey data, I would have anticipated more changes. The negative RU's imply huge amounts of external investment, therefore you would expect worlds in receipt of such aid to become the new China, or India, or Taiwan in the 70's.
OK, if they take a century to go from TL14 to 15, not so much change in developed worlds, but I would anticipate massive changes in low tech worlds in receipt of aid. I'd also like to know what the 3I is building on all those red zoned worlds with negative RU's.
Also are the negative RU's just the repayment of interest on the investment, or is the actual investment ten or twenty times greater?
To me the massive investment programme is the opposite of inertia, but I'd like to know when it took (takes) place.
Regards
David
I was just making a comparison of the OTU to other major products, not aware I was talking about YTU or MTU, if so I apologise.
Please assume in future my comments only apply toOTU.
Kind regards
David
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
There is absolutely no reason for a TL9+ (10+ in some versions of the rules) culture to ever bother with settling on a world.
They can hollow out asteroids and build fusion plants, they can install grav plates and hydroponics, they can make a garden world to raise their young inside.
Meanwhile they harvest the resources of other asteroids, comets and moons for the raw materials for their industries.
Systems with Earth like worlds could be set aside for agriculture, recreation and the arts, no need to mine resources when it is just as cost effective to harvest space.
I don't think people appreciate just how safe, common, and easy space travel is in TL9+ cultures.
They can hollow out asteroids and build fusion plants, they can install grav plates and hydroponics, they can make a garden world to raise their young inside.
Meanwhile they harvest the resources of other asteroids, comets and moons for the raw materials for their industries.
Systems with Earth like worlds could be set aside for agriculture, recreation and the arts, no need to mine resources when it is just as cost effective to harvest space.
I don't think people appreciate just how safe, common, and easy space travel is in TL9+ cultures.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
But...you're forgetting one aspect of this point of view. Cost.
IRL, why aren't we going back to the moon right now, or on to Mars? Why is manned space exploration on hold? Reason: economics. Cost.
At TL 9, it's probably a lot cheaper to live on an Earth-like world than it is to hollow out an asteroid and construct a habitat in there.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Nope, cost is a trivial issue once you have cheap fusion and magic manoeuvre drives. 
Just look at how much modern passenger/cargo aircraft cost and compare. $300million for a 777, $250million for a 787, $400million for an A380
Cheap spaceflight means cheap resources from space, much cheaper than going down to an inhospitable world and gathering them there.
Just look at how much modern passenger/cargo aircraft cost and compare. $300million for a 777, $250million for a 787, $400million for an A380
Cheap spaceflight means cheap resources from space, much cheaper than going down to an inhospitable world and gathering them there.
Last edited:
Similar threads
