parallel universes in Traveller

[aramis]

Hans:
In TNE, jump-to-jump times are about 3 weeks, not the two weeks of prior editions, due to the limited delta-v carried. DRASTIC change to merchant economies.

CT/MT travels to/from mainworld use constant accelleration plots to null V end-points.

TNE uses constant SPEED plots, with usually minimal accell/decell, and high fuel costs to land.

The history of the prior imperium is only negligibly "TNE-Canon"... The apparent motivations of Norris differ, slightly; the vast majority of the "details" are not brought forward into TNE. Only the vague, macro-scale issues are the same. In MT, Norris is a power-hungry traditionalist. In TNE, he's a pro-democracy reformer. In MT, it's fairly clear the "Real Strephon" isn't; in the first TNE product (Survival Margin), it makes out the previously seen as a strong figure Strephon into a fairly morally weak man, but the Real Strephon is the Real Strephon, schlub that he is.

T4, likewise, produces a different, slightly contradictory canon set.

Late CT and MT are, if anything, the only two in one universe.

There is a good reason each traveller ruleset is a different product line: each is a different physical universe, or more, with similar (but NOT identical) histories. MT even has a world missing from the marches... and several with different stats; stats a 15 year difference is unlikely to make.

FF&S implies this quite strongly in the section on altering the tech level system.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
In TNE, jump-to-jump times are about 3 weeks, not the two weeks of prior editions, due to the limited delta-v carried. DRASTIC change to merchant economies.

Exactly my point.

The history of the prior imperium is only negligibly "TNE-Canon"... The apparent motivations of Norris differ, slightly; the vast majority of the "details" are not brought forward into TNE. Only the vague, macro-scale issues are the same.

But the macro-scale issues are the ones that would inevitably be hugely affected if those tech differences were real. Since the overall history is the same, there can't be any major differences between the technology of those universes. There's always the possibility that they are, indeed, alternate universes, but the only discrepancies that can be reasonably explained away be that notion are the small stuff. And that's exactly the kind of stuff that you don't need to explain away that way, since there are much simpler ways of explaining them away (such as viewpoint writing and reinterpretation of evidence).

As an example, it would be perfectly possible to say that the Aslans of the CT universe did invent the jump drive themselves while the MT universe is an alternate universe where they copied the jump drive from a derelict human ship. I certainly couldn't disprove it. And, to take one of your examples, the Real Strephon could be a fake in the MT universe and the real deal in the TNE universe. But there is no reason to complicated things that way, because it is perfectly possible that the Real Strephon was the real Strephon all the way through.

The discrepancies you can't explain away by invoking alternate universes are precisely the ones that concerns major technological differences. In other words, those pesky rules changes.


Hans

 

[TheEngineer]

Political Pulpit ??

 

[Malenfant]

Isn't this all completely irrelevant though? Whatever the technologies used in whatever the version of Traveller (or any game), the change is only actually relevant if you're literally going from one universe to the other.

If you're just converting characters between one system (eg MT) and the next (eg TNE) then as they are converted, they also become part of the new rules paradigm. An MT character converted to TNE wouldn't ever think "hey, I remember flying around on Grav Plates, why are we suddenly using HEPLaR?", because when they are converted to TNE it's as if they always WERE part of that universe's paradigm.

That's the only possible way any conversions (in any game, not just Traveller) can make any sense at all. The GT universe and TNE universe and CT universe may be different to eachother, but that's totally irrelevant in terms of actual gameplay because no character is ever going to be hopping from one game to the other all the time. If you're going to convert rules or ships or settings then you'll convert them to fit into the destination setting's paradigm.

 

[Liam Devlin]

I pass the popcorn to TheEngineer, watching the show go on.

To the author of this thread, Andy Fralix

There is it seems an "OTU" & many "ATU's". As you may see and read above us now, in the debate of what constitutes a parallel universe, etc. While GT (GURPS TRAVELLER, SJG) is a clearly a definite ATU from the "OTU-line of Traveller universe linked events, ignoring the MT-TU events from the assassination of Strephon onwards. No denial there.

"I had a dream, a terrible dream..,"--Prince Varian, GT, SJG

May I postulate then that the essential historical lines have remained the same, while the mechanics by which those lines were drawn has changed with each variance of the game Traveller (TM) (CT-MT-TNE-T20-T4/5)?

Such game-mechanical changes Hans debates, do not constitute making a parallel Traveller Universe. Aramis' line of logic not only includes that the game mechanic changes, but also how certain leaders of the intersecting time eras behaviors changed (Norris, Strephon, Margaret, etc.). Such changes in these leaders views, actions, and fates could be construed as alternate-parallel event related, and not just "historical retconning/ revisionism".

Therefore, may I postulate that each (as Aramis suggests) are subtle ATU's from the out-of the box LBB era CT-days of "OTU".

My logic for my take on the above bears not on Einstein, Helsinger, or of a SF writer (insert your favorite here) postulating. It bears on when we use the simple phrase "In My Traveller Universe" (IMTU). For each of us has added onto our own campaigns what we wished, & discarded what we didn't, in order to present the game we play today (game mechanic of your choice here inserted!) to some extent.

So the question I see remaining here is this:

"Is there such a thing as Official Traveller Universe anymore, or is it actually the 'Original Traveller Universe'?"

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Liam Devlin:
May I postulate then that the essential historical lines have remained the same, while the mechanics by which those lines were drawn has changed with each variance of the game Traveller (TM) (CT-MT-TNE-T20-T4/5)?

That's pretty much it, I think. The only real "alternate universe" is the GT universe, in which the Rebellion never happened. Otherwise, chronologically speaking it goes from: GT: IW --> T4 --> CT --> MT --> TNE --> 1248. That timeline is exactly the same universe historically - it may have different rules in places but I think that's a reflection of how WE as players interface with it, not a change in the universe itself.

Maybe TNE's the odd man out there with its slightly different technologies... so work around it - either just use the same old techs from before or assume that TNE tech applies to all timelines. Either way the history doesn't change though.

 

[aramis]

Liam: No... there is no ONE OTU. The "Official" part really is an illusion, in that the historicity of the setting wasn't asserted until after the universe changed with MT.

AS far as the Original Traveller Universe, that died in 1982, with the release of HG....

Mal, Hans: If they had not retconned every time, I'd agree that it was one universe. But they have.

CT PT is Marc's Original TU
CT '84 is GDW's joint TU
MT is Joe & Gary's TU
TNE is Frank's TU and then Dave's TU.
T4 is committee work
GT is Loren's TU, plus committee work
T20 Is Hunter's TU, having been reshaped by the playtesters, myself included.
1248 is MJD's TU.
2320 is Colin's TU, and just might be close enough to remain the OT2300U... but I've not read all the Playtest files.

In looking at the credits, Loren did more shaping of the "Official Traveller Universe" than Marc during the late CT era.

Each GM running the TU is almost guaranteed to turn it aside to a parallel universe from the OTU as portrayed in CT 84. The thing is that the official materials for the different editions have differing views and takes on the various other eras, from T4's mute silence on what comes later, to GT's nailing down everything in sight....

Each leads to a different understanding of what must have happened to achieve the setting. Each leads to different understandings of what a man can do. And, aside from T20, each stands on its own nicely; I've not kept up on T20 lines so I can't speak to that one as a stand alone.

Now, I've run games using T20 vehicle and spaceship tech and MT everything else. I've mixed and matched rules. I've even allowed MT and TNE characters in the same game without conversions... (that was a wild ride, BTW, since I simply stated tasks by difficulty, skill, and attribute. Damage was taken under one's native system.)

Outside of GT, we don't get enough details to make valid pronouncements of just how a particular battle was fought, and I've only seen rumor of that from GT. Norris, Dulinor, and Strephon have radical changes in personality between the CT presentation (No Dulinor in this one, that I've found), the MT presentation, and the TNE presentation.

Another issue: Unlike FASA, GDW was not good at doing long term plot lines. So new players were introduced just to become plot hooks; we get snapshots, unlike the Battletech continuous narrative.

 

[Liam Devlin]

Thank you Aramis!

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by Liam Devlin:
Thank you Aramis!

You're most welcome. Now, which part(s) are you thanking me for?

 

[Liam Devlin]

Liam: No... there is no ONE OTU. The "Official" part really is an illusion, in that the historicity of the setting wasn't asserted until after the universe changed with MT.

AS far as the Original Traveller Universe, that died in 1982, with the release of HG....

That part, Aramis. It clears the air with Sallust-ian style brevity & breadth. Bravo & well said!

Sincerely,

 

[Border Reiver]

As a side note as to who "owns" which Traveller Universe I note that most everything for CT was run past John Harshman who had the final say as to whether or not it was suitable for the OTU, complied with previous publications or would be an official change.

The Keith Bros interview in MTJ 3 refers to this as does some of Loren's comments in various sources.

John Harshman, the unsung hero of Traveller? Worth checking out some zoology forums just to see him ripping into creationists (his current hobby).

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Isn't this all completely irrelevant though?

Irrelevant to who? [whom?] For my part I just disagreed with Aramis' statement of 'fact' to the effect that it was logical to consider the setting for each Traveller incarnation a separate universe. He thinks that the fact that there are irreconcilable rules differences between them proves that they are different universes. I think that the fact that their common history is very much alike proves that the rules differences don't reflect true technological differences in the setting. He expressed one opinion, I expressed another. Aramis finds my notions ludicrous. I think that the notion of letting game rules define a setting ludicrous. Game rules reflect a setting, they don't define them. The fact that two different historical RPGs based on The Three Musketeers give d'Artangan different capabilities don't mean that the two sets of authors are deliberately describing two parallel versions of Paris 1625. It means that the two sets of authors interpreted the same setting in two different ways. And if two sets of rules reflect the setting in ways that are incompatible, it odesn't mean the two settings are actually different, it just means that one (or both) has made a mistake.

I'm not denying that there are great, sometimes irreconcilable, differences between various Traveller versions. But then, there are irreconcilable differences embedded within each version. Setting details that can't be true if the rules are completely true. Rules that can't be true if this or that setting detail is true. Setting details that can't be true if other setting details are true.

Aramis way to 'deal' with such discrepancies is to ignore the one he dislikes. My way is to try to figure out the best way to explain it away given the premise that the OTU is one ond only one universe (two in the cases where the OTU and the GTU differs). I find my way more useful than Aramis'. Obviously he finds his way more useful than mine.

(Note that sometimes there is no other way to 'explain' a discrepancy than 'writer error'. That's why they're called irreconcilable.)

In practical terms it only makes a difference in two cases: 1) If you're trying to write a bit of Traveller material that you hope Loren or Martin will buy, and 2) if you like the amateur stuff you produce to be as useful as possible to other members of the Traveller community.

Whatever the technologies used in whatever the version of Traveller (or any game), the change is only actually relevant if you're literally going from one universe to the other.

No, the differences are important if you're trying to explore the ramifications of the rules and the setting. Mind you, despite what Aramis may think, I don't automatically prefer setting to rules. For instances, the rules says it takes around a week to make a jump. So when one setting detail says that a Zhodani fleet arrived at Ruie on 187-1107 and another says that the news of the Zhodani arriving at Ruie got to Regina on 187-1107, I don't say that the rules must be wrong, I say that one or the other setting detail must be wrong. I simply prefer whatever makes for the most self-consistent (and, of course, fun) game universe. If that involves changing the setting and preserving a rule, then that's what I prefer. If it involves saying that a rule is wrong and preserving the setting, then that's what I prefer.

If you're just converting characters between one system (eg MT) and the next (eg TNE) then as they are converted, they also become part of the new rules paradigm. An MT character converted to TNE wouldn't ever think "hey, I remember flying around on Grav Plates, why are we suddenly using HEPLaR?", because when they are converted to TNE it's as if they always WERE part of that universe's paradigm.

Except that when a TNE character says that a historical event took place the way it was described in an MT or CT product, he very often is saying (by implication) "People used to fly around on grav plates".


Hans

 

[aramis]

As to rules defining a setting:

That IS the norm in 1970's game design, not developing a rule-set to reflect a preconceived setting. (Gygax, Roleplaying Mastery.)

The games themselves created certain assumptions, out of which settings grew. Settings like the Forgotton Realms, Greyhawk, and The OTU all grew out of the rules, then were codified into settings that got published. Not the other way around.

T&T's Trollworld was defined solely by being the world where the rules worked.

AD&D's Greyhawk and D&D's Mystara likewise grew cleanly out of the rules, with setting materials added to justify new rules, or to highlight old ones.

Setting first games did exist; EPT, Thieves World, Runequest.

But Traveller has always been presented first in rules, then adventures. A traveller sub-universe is described by mechanics then in prose. Neither matches between editions.

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi !

Hans noted:

Setting details that can't be true if the rules are completely true. Rules that can't be true if this or that setting detail is true. Setting details that can't be true if other setting details are true.

Thats a typical effect of the Traveller Uncertainty Principle. If you look too close at things, their shape becomes blurred and you start to loose the view of the complete picture

Or another note:
Equality is a matter of the level of detail

(Liam, is there a beer left..?)

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
As to rules defining a setting:

That IS the norm in 1970's game design, not developing a rule-set to reflect a preconceived setting. (Gygax, Roleplaying Mastery.)

The games themselves created certain assumptions, out of which settings grew. Settings like the Forgotton Realms, Greyhawk, and The OTU all grew out of the rules, then were codified into settings that got published. Not the other way around.

I doubt that even Greyhawk originated solely as a setting where the rules worked. Even at the start it seems to have been more of 'a pseudo-medieval world where these rules work'. That alone gave it a huge baggage of reality that covered aspect of the universe that wasn't covered by the rules. Likewise, even the LBBs referred to a greater reality outside the rules.

But even if you were right, it would be pretty irrelevant, since how the OTU began isn't nearly as important as how it evolved over time. The OTU most certainly never were just a universe where the CT rules worked. It was a universe that developed from a universe with an Earth that looked pretty much like the real Earth looked in 1970. That alone means that the power plant fuel consumption rates from Book 2 and HG were flat out wrong from day one. The authors made a mistake. It's just that simple.

But Traveller has always been presented first in rules, then adventures.

That's just not true. Except for the very first LBBs, Traveller has has always presented the OTU as a universe with a specific history that resembled our universe on most points (With some important exceptions, of course).

A Traveller sub-universe is described by mechanics then in prose. Neither matches between editions.

Repeating an assertation over and over again does not make it any more or less true, you know.


Hans

 

[Ptah]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:
Hi !

Hans noted:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Setting details that can't be true if the rules are completely true. Rules that can't be true if this or that setting detail is true. Setting details that can't be true if other setting details are true.

Thats a typical effect of the Traveller Uncertainty Principle. If you look too close at things, their shape becomes blurred and you start to loose the view of the complete picture

Or another note:
Equality is a matter of the level of detail

(Liam, is there a beer left..?) </font>[/QUOTE]

The perfect analogy, I'd swear the instantaneouos change of drives from reactionless to HePLAR is a classic action-at-a-distance quatum correlation. That's it! The OTU is actually a supperposition of all the Traveller Universe(s), as you say, it's only when you look at it does it collapse to a specific universe, whatever that may be.

 

[TheEngineer]

Ptah, you just got it

Ho, ho, another note:
The deeper you dig, the darker it gets around you.

And there are master diggers around here

 

[Liam Devlin]

Yes, there is..one moment!

Sheds light down in the darkness, & hands TheEngineer a beer, and gets a bratwurst on a sourdough bun

"We could be here a while, an' I'm fresh out of Snickers/chocolate..."

 

[aramis]

Well, considering the rules predate the OTU, Hans....

At least, the rules defining the basics of the universe appear in Imperium, and then in the CT core books, before any of the schlock actually defining the setting other than in rules material.

 

[Straybow]

Yep, I have the original LBBs. Never mentioned one word about setting. Could easily be a completely fictional universe with no Earth. Characters don't even have to be "human" as long as they're bipedal, bimanipal, oxygen-breathing, visible-spectrum sensitive beings.

Could be wookies.