Reinventing Traveller

[Enoki]

That's a really fun scale to play with. Thank you!

His metric is consistent rules. (8,7) Modern physics trumps all; (6,5) followed by "new" physical rules (the fewer, the harder); (4) then "toys" that have no consistent-rules new-physics basis; (3) then a casual surrender of consistency for the sake of story; (2) then a dash of supernaturalism; (1) then no need to bother about any science at all.

As a game system, Traveller requires consistent rules for a lot of its technology. In fact it's the rules inconsistencies that bother us the most, and Traveller tries to keep a lid on the craziness. That's what guides my rating for Traveller.


I don't think Traveller is a "2", because psionics is not defined as "supernatural", but rather a poorly understood science (of a strange sort).
I don't think Traveller is a "3", because even the rules care how all the fantastic things "work" and there's care taken to manage consistency.
I don't even think Traveller is a "4". Even though there is antigrav and other neater things, we attempt to describe them with consistent rules which amount to what could be loosely defined as a "new physics".

Traveller is, at most, a "5", although I can see arguments aplenty for a lower score.

There are some obvious inconsistencies in this scale with how things are defined. Some examples:

Levels 4 and 5 are one-in-the same in many ways. Anti-gravity is just adjusting the laws of physics where how gravity is generated is now understood and one has a way to generate it. On the other hand, transporters like Star Trek are a clear 4, possibly and even likely a 3. FTL travel might be a 4 or 5 depending on the system used. Other 4's would be "new" types of say radiation--particularly ones that have 'strange,' specific effects, or elements that have properties that defy the laws of physics (unobtanium for example). The split needs far better definition.

Or level 1. Never underestimate nature. Just because it's difficult to interbreed doesn't mean it's impossible everywhere in the universe... That means something this scale puts as a 1 could be a 2, 3, 4 or higher.

I'd say 6 should read more like, A few new things.. It is also, again largely interchangeable with 7 on reasoning that if we can imagine it, and have some idea of how to make it work, then there's a good possibility down the road we will get it to work. 5 also starts to cross into 6 with a pretty big grey zone.
What's the difference between "a new thing' and something that requires far more understanding of physics, engineering, materials, whatever than we have or currently conceive? Is the mass use of Carbon 60 (buckyballs) or graphene to make things we can barely conceive of now a 5 a 6 or a 7?

Another thing this scale leaves off is that it focuses solely on technology. Other sciences hard and soft should be included. For example, where does a society that hasn't technologically and / or socially advanced over time fit without giving a reasonable explanation for it? Or, how do humans pop up in some odd corner of the universe out of nowhere and haven't evolved even a little bit from other humans a gazillion light years away? Is that classed as a 1, 2, 3, or 4?

The scale idea isn't a bad one, but the execution here is poorly thought through.

 

[whartung]

Get rid of grav focusing and laser range would be reduced to the point ship combat could be a bit more interesting...

The issue here is the speeds start to become too high. The high G drives and "close" range don't mix very well. Very fast starships with autocannons. It could be an interesting experiment, essentially boiling space combat down to the tactical level (say, 30s turns or whatever they are) in order to operate at "terrestrial" ranges. Need to overpower the lasers to so they can fire more often.

Consider what it's like to operate within the "white out" areas from a missile detonation. In space scale, thats "one turn" and, what, 100K km of white noise? That's 60 turns -- probably the entire combat -- in tactical turns.

 

[infojunky]

Get rid of grav focusing and laser range would be reduced to the point ship combat could be a bit more interesting...

You might want to look at the ranges in the 77 edition of Book2 then. Which is closer to what is in my head than later versions.

Frankly things like Gravity focusing rarely come up in my games.

 

[mike wightman]

77 edition 150" = 150000m = 190000km - equal to or less than this no DM to hit.

81 edition 2500mm = 250000km

Without grav focusing the range would be reduced to around 19,000km and 25,000km respectively

 

[kilemall]

77 edition 150" = 150000m = 190000km - equal to or less than this no DM to hit.

81 edition 2500mm = 250000km

Without grav focusing the range would be reduced to around 19,000km and 25,000km respectively

There is also the 500000 km DM which requires predict/gunner superiority over evade/pilot to allow hits, extending to the 900000 km tracking limit.

 

[kilemall]

There is more that can be done to make laser interesting then reduce time/distance scales. I have them doing less damage even if they do hit with range, and armor can deflect depending on rating vs battery, so maneuver matters.

 

[kilemall]

The issue here is the speeds start to become too high. The high G drives and "close" range don't mix very well. Very fast starships with autocannons. It could be an interesting experiment, essentially boiling space combat down to the tactical level (say, 30s turns or whatever they are) in order to operate at "terrestrial" ranges. Need to overpower the lasers to so they can fire more often.

Consider what it's like to operate within the "white out" areas from a missile detonation. In space scale, thats "one turn" and, what, 100K km of white noise? That's 60 turns -- probably the entire combat -- in tactical turns.

Considered doing combat via Striker. Can technically get into the slanted armor issues, which means things like the type S hull goes to armor 1 in HG resolution.

Striker 250mw lasers end up having CT ranges too with the 1000x range vacuum environment rule too.

 

[pshrynk]

Wait... There's some other way to power a starship through the luminiferous aether besides phlogiston?

Let's not forget the diesel powered ships in the Lensman sagas.

 

[Dragoner]

I like the closer ranges, and would like to make pulse lasers rail guns. That, just all single mounts, only say that there could be a 1-3x d6 laser etc.; and have the max accel be 3G or roll end vs GLOC, the rest (4-6) applying a -1 to -3 DM to evade.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Let's not forget the diesel powered ships in the Lensman sagas.

A. Bertram Chandler (Comodore Grimes series) had diesel engines on gausjammer starships.

 

[mike wightman]

Rail guns don't have the velocity to be of any use, plus the rails wear out too quickly. Coil guns can get much higher velocities but require extreme precision in the timing of the energising of the coils sequentially. Basically pellet guns but shooting ball bearings at thousands of km/s.
Rail guns would be better for firing large but slow projectiles, even if we could improve on the 5 km/s projectiles currently achievable they are too slow for engagements out to thousands of km. Railguns do have potential for throwing plasma at much higher velocities (100 to 1000km/s), so it could be that plasma and fusion guns are basically rail guns.

 

[Dragoner]

Rail Guns have issues, though are popular in literature, so swapping the nomenclature from pulse lasers, I feel works w/o over thinking it. I have had people ask about them often enough to think it is worthy to include.

 

[infojunky]

I like the closer ranges, and would like to make pulse lasers rail guns. That, just all single mounts, only say that there could be a 1-3x d6 laser etc.; and have the max accel be 3G or roll end vs GLOC, the rest (4-6) applying a -1 to -3 DM to evade.

Range is my Bugaboo. I have been asking for years "Where does Combat take Place?"

My current plan is to use a 1000 km hex based Fullthrust Cinematic movement with damage loosely based on Book2 with bits of Mayday thrown in for good measure.

 

[Dragoner]

Range is my Bugaboo. I have been asking for years "Where does Combat take Place?"

My current plan is to use a 1000 km hex based Fullthrust Cinematic movement with damage loosely based on Book2 with bits of Mayday thrown in for good measure.

It would be interesting to hear how it works out. I have mostly used LBB2 and MgT1/CE (though MgT1 and CE are slightly different); LBB2 I dropped a digit from the ranges on page 30 to 25,000km -2 DM, and 50,000km -5 DM which adequately discouraged fighting at those ranges. Cepheus, it's ok, I also messed around with LBB5, in the last twenty years, I think with Cepheus, because it is OGL, I will stick with mostly for now, and maybe to shorten ranges, just shift everything one space to the left on the range table, or something. Looking at it, the numbers have to be gone through. I still find having single turrets sort of a waste if they are never used.

 

[mike wightman]

I spent time looking at real world weapons, finding out what their best real world velocity is in km/s and then extrapolating a bit for sci fi purposes.
Next consider how big ships are and how far they can travel at their maneuver rating to avoid being auto hit and how long that takes.

From those factors establish a game scale.

 

[infojunky]

It would be interesting to hear how it works out. I have mostly used LBB2 and MgT1/CE (though MgT1 and CE are slightly different); LBB2 I dropped a digit from the ranges on page 30 to 25,000km -2 DM, and 50,000km -5 DM which adequately discouraged fighting at those ranges. Cepheus, it's ok, I also messed around with LBB5, in the last twenty years, I think with Cepheus, because it is OGL, I will stick with mostly for now, and maybe to shorten ranges, just shift everything one space to the left on the range table, or something. Looking at it, the numbers have to be gone through. I still find having single turrets sort of a waste if they are never used.

Under Mayday Laser suffer -1 dm per hex of range. Related to that I have contemplated using a Triplanetary scaled play space

 

[mike wightman]

Bothe games have ridiculously long laser ranges...

unless the lasers have "spinal mount" sized mirrors.

 

[Dragoner]

Under Mayday Laser suffer -1 dm per hex of range. Related to that I have contemplated using a Triplanetary scaled play space

I think I remember some rules sets, like T5 are more missile oriented.

 

[mike wightman]

And the issue with Traveller missiles is that they are magic of the Gandalf level. A 50kg missile cannot have the performance that is attributed to them in most versions of the rules.

 

[Spinward Flow]

A 50kg missile cannot have the performance that is attributed to them in most versions of the rules.

For reference, an AIM-9 Sidewinder (short range) air-to-air missile has a mass of 85kg ... and nowhere NEAR the range of a Traveller missile ...