beowulf2044
SOC-12
Everyone is free to use or modify anything they wish. I just wanted a solid set of rules to start from. I do not believe mistakes are inevitable. It just takes a professional attitude to the product you are producing for sale.
S4 was WRONG about CT Combat!
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
I don't think that there are that many "mistakes" in CT, nor would I consider it a less than "solid set of rules". Back in that day, people were so used to the rules being explicit and without modification that Rule 1 was stated explicitly to tell Referees (and players) that this game was different, and that because of it's open-endedness, nothing was written in store. Again, in '77, that was a very novel concept.
As a player myself, I don't even try to understand a system I don't run. Tell me what kind of dice to roll and I am good. Easier for me
beowulf2044
SOC-12
You may want to take a look at the thread marked 'Errata' for Classic Traveller. Then again, you may not, if as a player you're content with the rules your Referee uses.
OK, let's flashback to 1977.
I'll bet the CT was written out by hand, and then maybe typewritten later. Photocopying in that day was horrendously expensive. The RPG industry was just a fledgling affair, and no one really knew if it would take off or if money could be made. A few guys, with college degrees and some great ideas about how this "D&D" concept might be changed to SciFi and made to be different, certainly, and perhaps better, get together and write Traveller.
GDW, then a small outfit making war games, probably doesn't want to unnecessarily delay the release of their new product, and editing without the WYSIWYG editors of the next decade is expensive and time consuming. Perhaps a few ditto copies get floated around, some friends playtest the rules, but overall, everyone who is involved in the production plays through the earliest versions, so of course they all understand what the rules mean (even if it's not exactly apparent that they actually say that.
The manuscripts are set up at the printers - also a very expensive proposition back in that day - and the first print run is made. Without the Internet, instant feedback about how the rules are, in some places, poorly worded, need a bit of clarification, or just plain are misprinted in the whole manuscript-to-final version process, mistakes happen. Some are corrected in the next edition, perhaps, but typesetting and printing is still pretty costly in 1981. Computer editors are not that widespread, have poor utility in many cases, and most publishers and printers simply don't accept dot-matrix printed output. Errors remain, because who bothers to write the publisher and rant when Rule 1 exists and everything is fungible anyhow?
Etc, etc.
My point is that, in the context of it's origins, at the beginning of the RPG industry 30 years ago, in the absence of certain technologies including computer editors, computer offset printing, the internet, etc, Classic Traveller is a good, solid set of rules. And Rule 1 was then a huge departure from the practices of the day, and was innovative for it's time. It's not perfect. But I have seen a dozen games published WITH all the aforementioned advantages to creation, editing and feedback that STILL stink, and can't hold a candle to what Miller & Co did 30 years ago on a shoestring budget (IMO, I believe) without those technologies.
beowulf2044
SOC-12
That brings up an interesting point : Does anyone know where I could find errata for early D&D? Or even first-publication Gamma World, for that matter. I'd be interested to see a comparison.
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
Well, I can't offhand think of a single RPG (or wargame) that didn't have an errata. I've published a set of miniature wargame rules myself and went to a *great* deal of trouble to comb out mistakes and yet there were *still* errors. Relatively few, but they were there. In addition, there were several clarifications (a couple of rules turned out not to be a clearly written as I thought they were) and a few omissions. For a 200 page rulebook, it's not much really, and far less than most rules sets.
Of course, like most things in the Real World, I think that while perfection is impossible, it's worth pursuing. And while I understand a few mistakes, I do think that there's some point at which they become "too many".
I don't think that CT falls in that category. 22.5 pages of errata seems rather light considering it covers 8 LBBs, 160 page TTB, 150 page TTA, 100 page ST, 7 wargames, 13 supplements, 19 adventures, 5 modules and the FASA adventures.
What I think is far less excusable than simple errors are ill-conceived game mechanics. IMHO, far to many modern RPGs simply have crappy mechanics. And given the kinds of tools we have today, that is inexcusable IMHO.
Last edited:
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
In 1985, I worked at a typesetting shop that did phototypesetting on a $40,000 photo typesetting machine. Customers paid about $140 per page for galleys (in 2009 dollars; $70 in 1985 dollars). They then had to pasteup the galleys themselves. The price was about $200/page (in 2009 dollars) in 1977, BTW, because 1985 laser phototypesetters like the L300 were much cheaper than 1977-era typesetters.
But the workflow was the same -- (1) customer types or handwrites manuscript; (2) typesetter retypes and sets text into galleys; (3) customer manually pastes up galleys. Corrections were typically done by line or paragraph, then manually pasted in. (Old books will often have paragraphs in a smaller font -- this is a correction in which the replacement was much longer, so font size was reduced).
And it cost a *lot* of money. Pasting up a product was labor intensive (and at $200 per page, very expensive).
On the plus side, game authors had a strong incentive to produce information dense, tersely written products.
Thanks for the comments and information. It's nice to hear one's own opinion confirmed from some one with first-hand knowledge, and experience.
