Some of us believe that the universe described by MT material is the same as the universe described by CT material. We call it the Official Traveller Universe.
Back when the three LBBs were first published, a credit was the equivalent of one $US. Around 2000 we were talking about a credit being the equivalent of 3$. I suppose it must be a bit more by now, but probably not 5$.
I agree that a star trip would be a once or twice in a lifetime deal (And you would spend a lot more than one week at the destination). But the upper middle class of TL15 worlds has more money at their disposal than the upper middle class of a TL7-8 world like Earth.
Yes, but some of those are simple errors. When MT claimed that jump fuel was less than 10% per jump number, it was just plain wrong. Some times RPGs get things wrong, you know
. HEPLAR may work like TNE describes it, but practically no one uses it in 1105; they all use thrusters. And the undefined M-drive of CT turned out to be thrusters when it was defined (there was some reference to using fusion exhaust as a weapon, but that was obviously another mistake ).It was first mentioned in T4, sure. But since it was invented in -30 or whenever, it must, of course, still exist in 1105, so even though CT doesn't name it, the CT fusion plants are Fusion+[*].
Ah, but you see, that's another mistake. Or, if you prefer, a feature introduced by an RPG to make play more exiting even if less accurate. Sure, if you take a trip with a 50 year old free trader whose medic got his license from a forger, then the survival rate may be 92% percent, but if you go with a reputable company, the risk is minimal. Just check the rules in MT and GT.
It was first mentioned in T4, sure. But since it was invented in -30 or whenever, it must, of course, still exist in 1105, so even though CT doesn't name it, the CT fusion plants are Fusion+[*].
Just as the capacitors that allow drop tanks was invented around 1080, so if T20 features a ship with drop tanks, it's a mistake.
See, it's wasy when you know how, right?
Hans
[*] Unless there's some reason why Fusion+ is no longer used in 1105.
Funny, I was just reflecting that we needed a forum dedicated to the OTU setting (as reflected in all the different incarnations).You need to start another thread and call it, "Reading a game system with multiple editions."
But the other editions did come out. Either they're talking about different universes or one or more of the editions are mistaken. Whether it's one or the other is a matter of opinion, but they can't all be right AND be talking about the same universe.
But that's exactly what I suggested: That the extremely high mortality rate applies when you don't have someone competent to monitor the process.
Not quite. Whenever I run across an apparent discrepancy, I try to figure out a way to reconcile the contradictory statements. If I can't, I then decide which one I think is the most likely (Or the most fun
). I guess the last qualifies as picking and choosing what I like best, but in this case, I submit that the two statements can be reconciled in the way I suggested.No, my house rules I decide for myself. I don't get to decide on what the OTU is. For that, I need to persuade Marc Miller or a Traveller editor that what I suggest makes sense (I've had mixed success with that so far
). However, I suspect that precisely because MT and GT had less deadly low berth survival rules than CT, I'd have a good chance of persuading an editor to let me describe the low lottery as an urban myth. I could be wrong, but I certainly intend to have a try some day! In my opinion, there is no such thing as 'the OTU of CT'. There's the CT Universe (several of them, in fact -- the CT rules changed along the way), but there's only one Official Traveller Universe. Only one. And in any given universe things usually can't both be true and not true at the same time.
Each edition, yes. Just as Flashing Blades, Lace & Steel, and GURPS Swashbucklers each describe a different Paris anno 1625, yet are all three based on a single truth.
But given that the prior histories of the TNE universe, the MT universe and the CT universe are identical, the ships CAN NOT behave differently, since different technologies would inevitably have resulted in divergent histories. It's a circular argument that can't be resolved if you insist that every statement must be regarded as true. Since the part I'm interested in is the history, I prefer to go with the "Same universe, same technology" option. You're free to go with the alternative, but then you're not discussing The OTU.
My mistake. I must have been thinking about another Three Musketeer RPG. Doesn't affect my point, though. It's perfectly possible to have rules sets that are so different you'd think they described different worlds that are nevertheless based on the same setting. All it takes is rules sets that focus on different aspects and skimp on research on other aspects.
Didn't I just point out that I can't decide what is and isn't true in the OTU? Only Marc Miller and his minions can do that. What I'm doing is discussing the OTU. Identifying discrepancies and suggesting ways to reconcile them. Sure, it's my vision of the OTU I'm describing. What's wrong with that? Whose vision should I be describing?
Sorry about that. I thought the "Ah, but you see" that I preceded the statement with would indicate that I wasn't being entirely serious. Still, I guess that you are right. When discussing a discrepancy where the resolution is more or less six of one and half a dozen of the other (i.e. both are equally likely, they just can't both be true at the same time), I try to be careful to mention that. But in the case of the deadly low berths, I really think that, given the basic assumption that there is only one OTU, the massed statements taken together means that the statement "low berths are always very dangerous" is downright wrong. Specifically, I think that applying those mortality figures to regular passenger traffic is wrong.
But there is an OTU. We talk about it all the time. And Traveller authors have to pay attention to previously published material. When we wrote Sword Worlds we based a lot of it on CT information. The things we changed deliberately (e.g. population levels of Hofud and a couple of other worlds) we had to get specific permission to change (And we got that permission only because we could point out conflicting CT statements). Other changes that we wanted to make we weren't allowed. Why bother with all that unless the information provided by CT applied to the GTU? And why would it, unless it was the same universe? (OK, two parallel universes, but they were identical up until 1114.)
But they can't both be correct in the same universe, unless there's a reasonable explanation for the difference. Such as one applying when there's no proper medical supervision and the other applying when there is. "Well, that was CT, this is MT" is not a reasonable explanation.
No, I'm synthesizing a version that IMO best reconciles the different statements.
IMO it's a mistake to apply it to all low berth travel across the board, yes.
And so I think it is, since I think MT (and, as far as technology goes, GT) is just as good OTU canon as CT.
No, it's how it is with the CT rules. Not the same thing.
