Proto-Traveller
- Thread starter Jeffr0
- Start date
Good call, Parmasson.
It doesn't seem to be worth the trouble to reconcile the Rim star systems to the Proto-Rifted Imperium maps people have toyed with. I like the subsector sized Sol Confederation idea, though-- it just feels right.
(And if earth shows up at all in Traveller, I'd rather it be the home of intrepid underdog sorts as opposed to an Orwellian-Soviet style psycho-state.)
It doesn't seem to be worth the trouble to reconcile the Rim star systems to the Proto-Rifted Imperium maps people have toyed with. I like the subsector sized Sol Confederation idea, though-- it just feels right.
(And if earth shows up at all in Traveller, I'd rather it be the home of intrepid underdog sorts as opposed to an Orwellian-Soviet style psycho-state.)
Ah, barbarians. So nice to have them back. I think the term went away when the Zhodani were turned into a massive empire in their own right. I'm not even sure "Barbarians" originally precisely meant "Zhodani"; it might have been fuzzier than that, perhaps referring to rogue worlds out beyond the Imperial frontier.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Library data in Adventures 1-3 also refers to the Centaurs - no mention of K'kree - and the Hive 
Some other highlights from early library data IMHO:
A1: Forboldn Project, Interdiction
A2: Research Station (for the list of projects)
Some other highlights from early library data IMHO:
A1: Forboldn Project, Interdiction
A2: Research Station (for the list of projects)
Interesting...
So you basically just keep laying out subsectors until the map looks just how you want it. Each subsector (or sector) would essentially be a modular unit you could use, replace or ignore as you see fit.
The Dark Nebula maps might be inspirational here.
The X-Boat routes might be a problem.
Still, if we could achieve a decent compromise/fix for that problem, we could set up a library of subsectors which people could pick and choose from.
That way, we could pool the resources of peoples' fiendish imaginations. Of course, there wouldn't be much point in simply churning out numbers - that's easy - but the idea would be for people to do some actual design work, explaining at least roughly what is going on in the subsector, and providing at least some plot seeds.
Because each sector or subsector would be modular, we could have a collection of different Zhodani elements (for example), which people could use to create their own versions of the Zhodani Consulate, or simply ignore if they don't want the Zhodani to exist in their game. Ditto the Solomani, K'kree, etc.
Actually, I guess the smallest modular unit would be individual worlds/systems, since they could be swapped into subsectors to replace worlds that don't appear to make sense, or are boring.
I don't know how feasible it would actually be, but a "component library" model does seem to neatly balance the ability to home-brew with the ability to lift stuff from other, more fevered minds.
So, how could we deal with the X-boat problem?
There is a heuristic for building Xboat routes; however, laying that aside, I think as long as legs on the route are no more than 4 parsecs distant, then the referee could set up the subsectors and connect the dots.
But yes, I also think getting existing Xboat route markings to match up would be problematic.
Parmasson is right. The only way to do it is to force XBoat stations at specific points, which may tend to look a little boring?
The heuristic, which we are free to ignore, is here. For all, fresh from the vault:
But yes, I also think getting existing Xboat route markings to match up would be problematic.
Parmasson is right. The only way to do it is to force XBoat stations at specific points, which may tend to look a little boring?
The heuristic, which we are free to ignore, is here. For all, fresh from the vault:
I've generated a subsector with two large, competing powers for use at one of the Imperium's borders. There's really not much that I've made of it in terms of background, because I intend it to be taken and developed under the YMMV rules.
And I've developed the Book 5 heresy: anyone can use Book 5 for starships, so long as they are built no larger than 5,000 tons, have very light armor at most and no bay weapons (particle accelerator barbettes and plasma weapons of any shape are allowed, but discouraged). This is as much because I like the jump being limited by TL, and see the High Guard tonnages as being mildly more realistic than Book 2.
And I've developed the Book 5 heresy: anyone can use Book 5 for starships, so long as they are built no larger than 5,000 tons, have very light armor at most and no bay weapons (particle accelerator barbettes and plasma weapons of any shape are allowed, but discouraged). This is as much because I like the jump being limited by TL, and see the High Guard tonnages as being mildly more realistic than Book 2.
By alanb
The seal is broken, the heresy committed and the Rubicon crossed so let us not fence ourselves in. I thought early Traveller, this proto-Traveller was less steeped in tradition and canon and more back to basics YTU style.
Traveller Fundamentalists
I think this might be an option or with “core” areas that can be customized. The Traveller map poll tells me anything it is that we like to spice up official stuff with our own worlds. Whatever the map ends up looking like it will need customizable spaces we can make our own.
The seal is broken, the heresy committed and the Rubicon crossed so let us not fence ourselves in. I thought early Traveller, this proto-Traveller was less steeped in tradition and canon and more back to basics YTU style.
Traveller Fundamentalists
Well, duh. *Everything* is an option. The Imperium itself is an option.
My idea is for a collection of "stuff that can be used or not" to make it easy for Referees to design their own universes. This was something that was absent "back in the day".
However, for the sake of maximum use, we should mostly provide stuff that would support GMs who want to create their own version of the early "OTU".
Of course, if we look back at the earlier pages in this thread, a lot of us have our own ideas about how big the Imperium is, and what its astrography is. We can support this, to some extent, by providing interesting plugins for anyone who wants to map their own versions of the Imperium.
It doesn't actually matter if a particular Referee's "Imperium" consists of 70 worlds or 70 sectors, much less what shape it is, or what other states are on its border. We can still provide inspiration and stuff to borrow.
And that was my point.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
Perhaps the proto-Traveller map should be a customizable map of moveable subsectors that are interchangeable with x-boat routes that match up. As long as alien races occupy a subsector or less they can be added as subtracted at will. </font>[/QUOTE]You mean like those rugs for kids? The ones with roads and such on them, where the roads go off the edges in such a way that you can place any of the designs together and they all connect?
Pretty much. The technical word is "geomorphic", although "astromorphic" might be more appropriate in this case.Originally posted by Fritz88:
You mean like those rugs for kids? The ones with roads and such on them, where the roads go off the edges in such a way that you can place any of the designs together and they all connect?
I've been thinking about this stuff over lunch. It should be possible to allow for a certain amount of variation in how subsectors relate to each other. This would ease the tendency for all subsectors to look too much alike.
What you would do would be to define a code for describing subsector edges. Essentially, you have a four digit code, with each digit referring to "Coreward/Top", "Trailing/Right", "Rimward/Bottom" and "Spinward/Left" respectively. If a particular subsector edge matched the standard set of connections, you would code that edge with a "1", if there were no routes crossing that edge you would code it with a "0", and if there was a non-standard connection, you would code it with an "X".
So a subsector described as 0010 would have no routes crossing the Coreward, Trailing and Spinward edges, but would match according to the standard connections to Rimward. You could then put it next to a subsector with a complementary code. For example, you would place a subsector to spinward of it with a 0 code in its trailing position, while the subsector to rimward would need a 1 in its coreward position.
Am I being clear enough? If not, I can give more examples later.
Furthermore, of course, we could also define other standard connections, and code them as "2", "3" and so on. But that would need the standard to be maintained somehow.
In the case of non-standard edges, it should be the norm to create at least one subsector that matches it.
Similar threads
