Pre-Melieu 0 Campaign: Sylea or Solomani?

[Sturn]

Lengthy post. Lots of explanation but you can skip to the bold text below to see what I'm actually asking for.

Through the last year or so I've been nibbling at a project for a campaign setting within the Traveller universe that involves key items I like such as: smaller campaign area, lower TL, smaller big ships, and "pocket empires". I planned on making consolidated star maps, world information, timeline, library entries, ships, vehicles, and equipment for this campaign and making it available for others if there was interest and it was legal.

I began by gathering information for a campaign set just before Melieu 0 as detailed somewhat in T4. I ran into many problems, notably all the contradictions with and even within the T4 material. I started with trying to make historical maps of Core sector and beyond in the years -200, -100, -35 (tentative campaign start), and 0. Loads of trouble. The T4 Core map contradicted older Core maps (different names, different world locations, even a missing world). Even the large M0 T4 campaign book had historical text that seemed to be using the older Core map instead of the Core map within the same book! After hours of work comparing data, collecting everthing I could, I wanted to pull my hair out.

I thus started considering a campaign set in the Solomani Rim somewhere near the end of the Long Night (no set date yet, somewhere around -400 to +200). From what I've researched thus far, the area would have much strife and several pocket empires (Easter Concord, Vegan Polity, Old Earth Union, etc). This would be set just before or during initial contact from the far off and recently established 3rd Imperium/Sylean Federation.

What I need is some help deciding which of these two campaign projects I should move along into researching. Both have advantages and disadvantages for me (see below). Whichever I choose, I would prefer a campaign 'sourcebook' that others are interested in which would help motivate me into the hours spent on such a project.

Pre-Melieu 0 (Sylean Federation rises to become the 3rd Imperium)

Likes

• Campaign involves 'living' the history of the 3rd Imperium, coolness factor.
• Centered on one sector (Core).
• Lots of source material to begin with (also a dislike).
• Smaller fleets, biggest ship around is 90k tons.
• TL 11-12.

Dislikes

• Source material is a mess, many contradictions.
• Lots of material makes it more difficult for me to make up new stuff.
• Players will all be from the Sylean Federation, knowing the other nearby pocket empires don't have a chance.
• Some of what I create I won't be able to share due to copyrights, much of the information will include copying what was done before by others.

Dawn on the Rim (Solomani Rim Pocket Empires at the end of the Long Night)

Likes

• More pocket empires with no dominance by one.
• Less contradictions in source material.
• Due to less background material, more fun filling in the blanks myself.
• Less set in stone, so can decide what I want without making contradictions to canon.
• TL 10-11?
• Lots of nearby fun areas for campaign 'expansions' (Aslan border wars, reaver pocket empires, Hivers, odyssey to find the Sylean Federation, etc).
• Less trouble with copyrights since most of the project will be original, just based upon earlier works.

Dislikes

• Not much out there detailing the Rim duing this time period (also a like).
• Predict less interest from other Traveller fans then the pre-M0 setting.

 

[Gray Lensman]

Dawn on the Rim

The Dawn scenario would get my vote, mostly for the same likes youu list. Kind of where I was going with my Massilia Sector bit (which I found already masseged data at Zho.Berka).

 

[rancke]

I began by gathering information for a campaign set just before Melieu 0 as detailed somewhat in T4. I ran into many problems, notably all the contradictions with and even within the T4 material. I started with trying to make historical maps of Core sector and beyond in the years -200, -100, -35 (tentative campaign start), and 0. Loads of trouble. The T4 Core map contradicted older Core maps (different names, different world locations, even a missing world). Even the large M0 T4 campaign book had historical text that seemed to be using the older Core map instead of the Core map within the same book!

That's because Imperium Games really messed up the manuscript to Milieu 0. Try getting one of the authors to tell you about it one day.

After hours of work comparing data, collecting everthing I could, I wanted to pull my hair out.

I can imagine. I think the best thing to do would be to regard the old Core map as the correct one and simply ignore anything in the new material that contradicted it.

I thus started considering a campaign set in the Solomani Rim somewhere near the end of the Long Night (no set date yet, somewhere around -400 to +200). From what I've researched thus far, the area would have much strife and several pocket empires (Easter Concord, Vegan Polity, Old Earth Union, etc).

Those three and the Dingir League are the four mentioned in canon.



Hans

 

[epicenter00]

tl;dr - Ask your players. See what they think.

The long version:

It sounds like you're between a rock and a hard place.

It seems like you'd have more fun (as a GM) writing material for the Solomani campaign, while you're under the impression your players would have more fun playing in a game around Sylea.

Have you brought it up with the players - are you sure they'd be less interested in a Solomani campaign? That problem might clear itself up if you talk to the players (if you haven't already) and gauge their interest before writing your campaign out.

As a side-note, I'm not sure if you've noticed this, but as a whole players like to feel like they make a difference - that their characters are relevant and important in some way. In a historical game, they usually like to make their mark.

Regarding Traveller canon, perhaps I'll be greeted with gasps (or derision) but it's my opinion that letting go the of the need to be "canon-inoffensive" is an important part in being someone who actually plays Traveller as a GM or a player. Don't spend so much time pulling your hair out over inconsistencies and realize those things exist because the original material writers didn't have the same reverence for the source material as you do - they just wrote what sounded good. I think that's what you should too - the canon materials aren't commandments, they're guidelines.

As for your campaigns:

Milieu 0

Consider some ideas from the Pocket Empires book. You state that knowing the 3I will eventually swallow up everything makes it less fun. While that's true, if you set your campaign in a Pocket Empire, you can have the players make a difference. How will the Pocket Empire they're a part of be absorbed into the 3I? Will they be able to bargain from a position of strength or of weakness? Will they be absorbed piecemeal or will their Pocket Empire's name survive all the way to the end of the 3I with a regional name of its own "The (something) Autonomous District."

Cleon's Federation does some pretty vile and underhanded things to get people into the 3I (or what will be the 3I). Thwarting Cleon's agents, trumping the Zhunastu Corporation in some product so that you have them by the "short hairs" instead, and so on all have their possibilities. Remember, it's not that there is an end, but how you meet that end, which is important.

If your players are more interested in this, I'd say go with this.

Dawn on the Rim

The Solomani Rim War breaks out because of the fallout of the "power of Solomani nobles at Court" in Capital is broken. This suggests that from the time the Solomani re-contact the Syleans up until that point (which is pretty late in Imperial history) the Solomani dominate the affairs of the 3I.

It's an interesting exercise to imagine exactly how that came out, and how the players could have had a hand in creating such a mighty Solomani powerbloc.

 

[rancke]

Regarding Traveller canon, perhaps I'll be greeted with gasps (or derision) but it's my opinion that letting go the of the need to be "canon-inoffensive" is an important part in being someone who actually plays Traveller as a GM or a player.

Very true. Canon is mainly for authors. And for people who like to produce stuff that others can use straight away, and people who like to be able to use stuff produce by people who like to produce stuff that others can use straight away.

Don't spend so much time pulling your hair out over inconsistencies and realize those things exist because the original material writers didn't have the same reverence for the source material as you do - they just wrote what sounded good.

Though in this particular case it's more down to clueless publishers and editors. The authors put a lot of effort into getting it right.

I think that's what you should too - the canon materials aren't commandments, they're guidelines.

But Sturn indicated a desire to get his stuff out to a bigger circle than just his players. That means that keeping an eye on canon is useful. (As long as canon is neither self-contradictory nor contradicts other parts of canon. If it does, it becomes a major pain).

Consider some ideas from the Pocket Empires book. You state that knowing the 3I will eventually swallow up everything makes it less fun. While that's true, if you set your campaign in a Pocket Empire, you can have the players make a difference. How will the Pocket Empire they're a part of be absorbed into the 3I? Will they be able to bargain from a position of strength or of weakness? Will they be absorbed piecemeal or will their Pocket Empire's name survive all the way to the end of the 3I with a regional name of its own "The (something) Autonomous District."

Or will the absorbtion be so far into the future that the PCs won't care? Or is this an alternate universe where their pocket empire becomes the seed of the 3rd Imperium? Or are the events they influence at a lower level than empire-building? There are plenty of way to make a historical campaign fun.


Hans

 

[kafka47]

Also, I would want to point out that Terra was not contacted until mid-Milieu 200. Therefore, if you are playing around with the Solomani Pocket Empires - you have at least 200 years of mechanicians and politics to resolve. Also, who is to say that the Third Imperium absorbed them all. I had always fancied the idea the Rimward colonies retained much of the Terran Confederation aspects rather than 2nd Imperium culture. Here you could populate a vast array of balkanized pocket empires that might resent the encroachment of the Old Earth Union into their domestic affairs but really too weak to stand on their own thus forging alliances and counter alliances akin to rennaissance city-states with either the Old Earth Union or nancient Third Imperium acting as the Holy Roman Empire or the Papal See.

 

[savage]

Solomani

How about paperwork. I'm thinking the expanding solomani would have less paperwork vs a 3rd empire...

 

[Sturn]

I can imagine. I think the best thing to do would be to regard the old Core map as the correct one and simply ignore anything in the new material that contradicted it.

This what I was going to do, but there are other problems. Such as, the Chanestin Kingdom and the Santry-Cordova Cluster are put in basically the same place even though their histories rule this out. You end up having to completely move one of these two pocket empires and/or re-write histories, further messing with canon.

 

[Sturn]

But Sturn indicated a desire to get his stuff out to a bigger circle than just his players.

Ask your players. See what they think......<snip>.......It seems like you'd have more fun (as a GM) writing material for the Solomani campaign, while you're under the impression your players would have more fun playing in a game around Sylea.

Yes, my players don't even know much about the official Traveller Universe. I was thinking that if I tackle such a large project, I might as well make it available for others to use.

The Solomani Rim War breaks out because of the fallout of the "power of Solomani nobles at Court" in Capital is broken.

The setting for the Solomani Rim campaign I was envisioning would be towards the end of the Long Night, or only a few years after it came to an end. The pocket empires on the Rim are just a rumor to Sylea/Capital. Only late in such a campaign would 3rd Imperium scout ships come snooping around the Rim, leading to further adventures. I think young 3rd Imp scouts first showed up around the year 100 if I recall correctly.


THANKS FOLKS!!

I was really surprised to open this thread back up and see so many responses already. Sorry I didn't reply to all of the responses. It looks like I'm leaning even further towards dumping my pre-M0 Sylean Confederation attempt and going for the Solomani Rim near the end of the Long Night campaign. Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[rancke]

This what I was going to do, but there are other problems. Such as, the Chanestin Kingdom and the Santry-Cordova Cluster are put in basically the same place even though their histories rule this out. You end up having to completely move one of these two pocket empires and/or re-write histories, further messing with canon.

I haven't studied Core so assiduously (I mainly work in the Spinward Marches), but I thought Santry and Cordova were about 5 or 6 parsecs rimwards of the Interstellar Confederacy. What is it about their histories that rule that out?


Hans

 

[Sturn]

I haven't studied Core so assiduously (I mainly work in the Spinward Marches), but I thought Santry and Cordova were about 5 or 6 parsecs rimwards of the Interstellar Confederacy. What is it about their histories that rule that out?

Chanestin Kingdom is stated as being rimward of Sylea, not the IC. The exact location of its capital is given.

CK is rimward of Sylea 2 subsectors, "25 star systems within 5 parsecs of Keshi". Both old and new maps of Core place Keshi at 1938. Problem is, Santry and Cordova, capitals of the "cluster" are placed only 2 parsecs from Keshi, smack in the middle of an area you would assume CK would cover. I tried squeezing them in, finding 25 worlds that were still within 5 parsecs of Keshi with Santry-Cordova nestled right up against CK's capital 2 parsecs away. But, then you look at the history of both pocket empires. Sylean scouts contact CK in -107, then has a long war with them from -102 through Year 2. Sylean scouts make their first contact with Cordova in -16. The esteemed Sylean scouts never contacted a pocket empire 2 parsecs from the capital of an enemy they had been at war with for almost nine decades?! Doesn't make sense. You could try to explain that the scouts knew they were there, but never contacted them directly until -16, but this is not what the text actually implies.

On a related note, Keshi, the capital of the jump-drive capable empire of CK is finally conquered by the 3rd Imperium in Year 2 after 100 years of holding them off. Keshi's UWP shows this mighty pocket empire's capital has a TL of 4 and a few hundred occupants. I thought about explaining that only the palace was on Keshi, the industrial capital was elsewhere. I also thought about changing Keshi's UWP and moving the entire Santry-Cordova cluster two subsectors spinward of its original location. These changes plus many others led to the hair pulling when I realized the inconsistentcy's really had no fix to make them all work togather without directly changing the canon sources. I couldn't meld and explain all the contradictions away.

It's scary that I typed most of the above directly from memory. I did lots of work on this before coming to the hair pulling point.

 

[rancke]

I haven't studied Core so assiduously (I mainly work in the Spinward Marches), but I thought Santry and Cordova were about 5 or 6 parsecs rimwards of the Interstellar Confederacy. What is it about their histories that rule that out?

Chanestin Kingdom is stated as being rimward of Sylea, not the IC. The exact location of its capital is given.

Right, the IC is spinwards of Sylea, in Bunkeria and Cemplas. Santry is in 1328, rimwards of the IC. Cordova is in 1730.

CK is rimward of Sylea 2 subsectors, "25 star systems within 5 parsecs of Keshi". Both old and new maps of Core place Keshi at 1938. Problem is, Santry and Cordova, capitals of the "cluster" are placed only 2 parsecs from Keshi, smack in the middle of an area you would assume CK would cover. I tried squeezing them in, finding 25 worlds that were still within 5 parsecs of Keshi with Santry-Cordova nestled right up against CK's capital 2 parsecs away.

That seems to be the problem. My old data places Santry at 1328 and Cordova at 1730. My old data is at second and third hand, from Galactic. Where do you get your placement of Santry and Cordova?

But, then you look at the history of both pocket empires. Sylean scouts contact CK in -107, then has a long war with them from -102 through Year 2. Sylean scouts make their first contact with Cordova in -16. The esteemed Sylean scouts never contacted a pocket empire 2 parsecs from the capital of an enemy they had been at war with for almost nine decades?! Doesn't make sense.

Can't argue with you there. And placing Cordova at 1730 doesn't help much, because it's more or less directly between Sylea and the Chanestin Kingdom. Not to mention that both Santry and Cordova seems to get jump drive around -250, so how did their scouts miss spotting Federation activity less than twelve parsecs away? I mean, isolationism and ignoring the outside world works best when you're a lot more powerful than the outside world.

You could try to explain that the scouts knew they were there, but never contacted them directly until -16, but this is not what the text actually implies.

It's an explanation I've used to explain several impossibly late first contact dates in the Spinward Marches.

On a related note, Keshi, the capital of the jump-drive capable empire of CK is finally conquered by the 3rd Imperium in Year 2 after 100 years of holding them off. Keshi's UWP shows this mighty pocket empire's capital has a TL of 4 and a few hundred occupants. I thought about explaining that only the palace was on Keshi, the industrial capital was elsewhere. I also thought about changing Keshi's UWP...

I'd favor changing the UWP myself, but I do have to point out another possible explanation: That when the flag of the new Imperium was raised above the Chanestin palace on Keshi, the palace was in ruins and the planet depopulated.

...and moving the entire Santry-Cordova cluster two subsectors spinward of its original location. These changes plus many others led to the hair pulling when I realized the inconsistentcy's really had no fix to make them all work together without directly changing the canon sources. I couldn't meld and explain all the contradictions away.

Welcome to the wonderful world of reconciling 30 years' worth of canon sources .

It's scary that I typed most of the above directly from memory. I did lots of work on this before coming to the hair pulling point.

I can spout a lot of information about the Spinward Marches directly from memory. (Although sometimes I misrember the most obvious details).



Hans

 

[Sturn]

That seems to be the problem. My old data places Santry at 1328 and Cordova at 1730. My old data is at second and third hand, from Galactic. Where do you get your placement of Santry and Cordova?

Santry 1736 and Cordova 1836 from T4's M0 books. Is your data from the DGP Traveller's Digest series covering the Core sector? This is one source I don't have, I've looked at information from them only indirectly. I looked at the locations you have, and they make more sense with the textual history I have. Santry-Cordova is supposed to be a "cluster". There is an easily noticeable jump-1 cluster using your coordinates.

But, it still doesn't explain, as you mentioned, how the Sylean scouts missed the closer pocket empire when waging war with the CK beyond it.

One key problem is the dates from new material in T4 not matching up with dates from the older sources (and with the newer QLI Gateway sources for that matter). If you seperate the old from the new, the dates match up within their own groups. When you meld them togather, you have the problems of contradictory dating due to two different sources of history.

I think I'm going to avoid all of this mess and start researching a near year 0 Solomani Rim campaign instead. From the collection of sources I have, it appears less contradictions thus far. Back to having fun doing research instead of work trying to get contradictions to meld.

If someone wishes to continue with consolidating the M0 sources, I would say the easiest fix would be to use the older maps combined with the M0 textual histories which have lots of good information. You would then have to alter some of the timeline dates so they mesh better with each other (a.i. having Santry-Cordova discovered earlier in our above example). Some canonical dates would need to be changed so they don't contradict each other. Throw out the T4 world coordinates within the text of the campaign guide, but actually keep the textual history which is strangely at odds with its own map, but not the older ones.

 

[Starviking]

Personally speaking, I'd cut Santry and Cordova out - it's later than the Traveller's Digest stuff and just doesn't mesh. Stick 'em somewhere else.

That said, the Chanestins are also problematical - IIRC they managed to sustain an interstellar state for centuries with just one starship.

 

[The Dragon Master]

I haven't really studied the core stuff, but it does seem that you could just ignore the inconsistencies. Given the time it takes to travel across space you could (not so much in the "two pocket empires occupying the same space" section but others) just say that the core has recieved conflicting reports from scout ships sent to investigate. You could even turn to that for part of the campaign. "The 3I has decided to update their maps to correct inconsistencies, you've been shanghai'd into helping straighten out this subsector." Just a thought.

 

[Sturn]

That said, the Chanestins are also problematical - IIRC they managed to sustain an interstellar state for centuries with just one starship.

They dwindled to one jump ship in -200. They didn't make contact with the Sylean Federation until -107. While it isn't stated, they could have pulled back up to a jump-capable TL in that almost 100 year gap. Also, first contact with Sylea included CK killing off the "formal trade mission" of the Syleans. So, the CK were able to seize the Sylean ships which were capable of up to Jump-2 at the time. Reverse engineering the Sylean technology could have helped their own jump-drive production.

I think you have to assume the CKs began re-building jump capable ships between -200 and their contact with the Syleans, but yes I agree the author should have stated so.

 

[rancke]

Santry 1736 and Cordova 1836 from T4's M0 books. Is your data from the DGP Traveller's Digest series covering the Core sector? This is one source I don't have, I've looked at information from them only indirectly. I looked at the locations you have, and they make more sense with the textual history I have. Santry-Cordova is supposed to be a "cluster". There is an easily noticeable jump-1 cluster using your coordinates.

Milieu 0 Core Sector is included in Jim Vassiliakos' Galactic program. The credits for the sector goes like this:

If I recall correctly, Idiot/Savant <idiot@sans.vuw.ac.nz>
sent me this version of the Core Sector, not necessarily
for inclusion into Galactic, but just for advice on how
to fix some things that were going wrong with it. I went
ahead and included it even though it's far from being in
a finished state. -jimv

Jo Grant, jaymin@maths.tcd.ie merged in the names from
T4's First Survey.

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 18:07:30 -0500
From: "Commander X (aka Arcanus)" <cmdrx@magicnet.net>
Subject: Year 0 Core sector now available

A side project I've been working on. I have input core sector from M:0
into a Gal2.3 file.

Implemented in the data are:
Volker's Core Sector Corrections
Some personal corrections based on CT Core sector Data
Chanestin Kingdom and Interstellar Confederacy worlds hilighted
Sylean Federation Worlds hilighted, data from CT used
Santry and Cordova placed using Jo Grant's TML suggeestions.
Barren Worlds hilighted in grey, and are not included in any polity
Barren worlds which had a Scout base upgraded to D clss starport, given
1d3 population and 1d6 pop multi. Scout bases are only present on world
with type 'D' or better starports according to the rules.

The worlds selected for the CK and IC are based on worlds mentioned by
Volker, which in turn were refrenced from Traveller Digests, and by the
M:0 information. The Ck had up to 25 worlds, the IC 32. Most worlds
follow a main. Barren worlds were not included.

In all a rather decent sector. And its a compatible Gal2.3 directory.

Go to my new FTP site. http://www.magicnet.net/~cmdrx/ftp the file is
year0.zip. Download and unzip it. place the year0 directory in your
Gal2.3 directory. You will have to edit the gal.lst file to include the
year0 directory. Once thats done, you have the whole of core sector
ready for play.

Hans

 

[Sturn]

I don't use Galactic, but this map would be of interest to me if I ever attempted to finish my M0 research. From the above description, it appears the same errors were found, and similar corrections were thought up, which is encouraging.

 

[Starviking]

They dwindled to one jump ship in -200. They didn't make contact with the Sylean Federation until -107. While it isn't stated, they could have pulled back up to a jump-capable TL in that almost 100 year gap.

True, but one of the consequences of the Chanestins dropping to only one jump-capable ship would be the collapse (or near-collapse) of their interstellar polity. This Hard Times-esque situation merits a mention - which it doesn't get.

Also, first contact with Sylea included CK killing off the "formal trade mission" of the Syleans. So, the CK were able to seize the Sylean ships which were capable of up to Jump-2 at the time. Reverse engineering the Sylean technology could have helped their own jump-drive production.

Maybe then a Chanestin reconquest/pacification campaign in their original territory?

I think you have to assume the CKs began re-building jump capable ships between -200 and their contact with the Syleans, but yes I agree the author should have stated so.

Perhaps not even that - a Meiji Japan style build-up on the backs of captured Sylean ships could do the job from -107.

The other alternative is that the '1' jump-capable ship could be seen as one military starship being kept in service at any one time? Others would be kept in reserve.

 

[Gadrin]

True, but one of the consequences of the Chanestins dropping to only one jump-capable ship would be the collapse (or near-collapse) of their interstellar polity. This Hard Times-esque situation merits a mention - which it doesn't get.

I think that the STL Multi-system theme occurs fairly often in Traveller.

I know in GURPS Alien Races I, the Zhodani artifact "prophesizes" that a battle will take place with a multi-system empire/whatever that doesn't have jump, which I assume uses generation ships to build itself and hold itself together. There's no reason the Chanestins couldn't do the same, or at least not fold up just because they couldn't jump. Each member world would simply look out for itself, until the time where jump was restored.

Was the STL kingdom in the Zhodani Core route, in the Marc Miller Core interview? Or was that just David Pulver (or perhaps input from Loren) ?

I just starting reading the Fate of the Sky Raiders from FASA (I don't own the other books). I'll have to see if it offers anything along those lines.


>