Saving T5 or How to make an old Traveller actually accept and like T5?
- Thread starter Spaceresearcher
- Start date
- Status
And that's the thing that struck me as I read the "non violent resolution" table. It seemed like there were a lot of "designers' notes" placed within the rules that probably need to be trimmed.
I'm wondering if one of the moderators or authors of the game could create a "Referee's Manual" thread so we can discuss issues apart from the proposed Players' Handbook.
I'm wondering if one of the moderators or authors of the game could create a "Referee's Manual" thread so we can discuss issues apart from the proposed Players' Handbook.
I second this!
While I do so love my B3, if we are going back to breaking it up, then this is a damned good idea.
Last edited:
That's triggered a thought:
Preveous versions of Traveller have suffered to varying degrees from many rules being bolt-ons that weren't as seamless as they should have been. I see the BBB as a sort of rules SRD from which we can distill more marketable subsets (avoiding the 'bolt-on' effect). These subsets can be stripped of designer notes (which usefully remain in the SRD) and enhanced by improved explanations and setting material.
We could split it up into...
- A Players Book that contains character definition, character generation (with an end-to-end worked example), tasks, personal combat (with one full round worked example), and psionics.
- An Equipment Book that contains weapon maker and weapons, armour maker and armour, thing maker and equipment, vehicle maker and vehicles, robots, and the TL section.
- A World Book that contains world generation, mapping, beast maker, sophont maker, map of the galaxy, map of Spinward Marches, map of a subsector.
- A Ship Book that contains ship ACS construction, ACS combat, worked examples of the standard ACS ships and small craft. Also BCS (which is missing from the core book).
- And a Referees Book for everything else.
I guess the point I'm trying to make (in a rambling, roundabout way) is that if we can decide what all the books are it might help us decide what goes into the Players' one. For example, if we are going to have an equipment book we don't need to include equipment in the Players book.
But the trick would be to give players enough to start playing the with except for the Ref's Book. Or does the ref have everything except the material in the Player's Book.
How much is necessary to start play, or a couple of adventures, without the need for further supplements?
The critical factor here may be adventures more than other supplements. They'd need to be detailed and complete enough that a new group could get into the game without buying further material. If they had several game sessions worth of stuff, they'd be cursed, uh, hooked and have to, I mean want to buy more.
How much is necessary to start play, or a couple of adventures, without the need for further supplements?
The critical factor here may be adventures more than other supplements. They'd need to be detailed and complete enough that a new group could get into the game without buying further material. If they had several game sessions worth of stuff, they'd be cursed, uh, hooked and have to, I mean want to buy more.
I had to spend some time in a waiting room a little earlier, and took the old MT Ref's Companion to read up on starship ops and procedures. However, I was surprised at rereading some of the material on the other major races. That material would be great in a primer for new players and refs. That is the sort of thing that needs to be reproduced or updated!
Spaceresearcher
SOC-12
Imperial Lines Jornal/letter??
Could Imperiallines be a possible solution?
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/137322&affiliate_id=4209
Personally I don't think it can really fix the current BBB but perhaps it can add some magic to the new galaxiad???
Could Imperiallines be a possible solution?
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/137322&affiliate_id=4209
Personally I don't think it can really fix the current BBB but perhaps it can add some magic to the new galaxiad???
To pile on:
Imperiallines' charge is to showcase Traveller5 through examples. 1105 is a convenient starting place because we don't have to create the setting before we show you how to create a sophont, build a gun, or design a starship.
Adding new material to the setting or showing how it has been changed in T5 are both worthwhile in themselves.
Hans
Flushed out by who? There needs to be a game designer involved, first of all.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I for one won't be.
I dislike two things about T5 - the task system and the inflated skill levels it forces on character generation.
I already have the ideal combat system for MTU and I will not be switching to one based on a task system I dislike.
My biggest single issue with T5 is the same as with T4... and as Mike said, "the task system and the inflated skill levels it forces on character generation."
I like the concepts involved in T5 personal combat, but not enough to deal with the task system of T5. I'm still largely playing with the same people I played T4 with, and we switched to an MT derived task system right quick...
3d6 for success, roll high, atts +1/2 level, skills +level. TNs: Simple=5 Routine=10 Difficult=15 Formidable=20 Tasking=25 Impossible=30, DM limit of +12. Time roll goes to 4d-DM's. But it was just cumbersome enough that we never played T4 again, but went back to MT and on to T20.
I like the concepts involved in T5 personal combat, but not enough to deal with the task system of T5. I'm still largely playing with the same people I played T4 with, and we switched to an MT derived task system right quick...
3d6 for success, roll high, atts +1/2 level, skills +level. TNs: Simple=5 Routine=10 Difficult=15 Formidable=20 Tasking=25 Impossible=30, DM limit of +12. Time roll goes to 4d-DM's. But it was just cumbersome enough that we never played T4 again, but went back to MT and on to T20.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
There will be some. T5 does have a certain magnetic appeal to it. It's pure scope is amazing.
But, I think the majority of the people who have turned away from T5 have already made their decision. I think it would take a huge number of people saying, "T5 is Great!" to make T5 something more than just a niche of a niche, flash in the pan.
As for myself, I am trying hard to fix the combat system, but I know I will never play this game. I can't stand the task system. That, right there, is enough to keep me from playing it. But, more than that, I suspect (and have found some) that other sections of the game outside of combat need a lot of work, too. I don't trust the game's mechanics. And, at the present rate, it's going to take years to fix this game, I think.
Plus, I think the game philosophy is too muddled. We use abstract range bands for PCS but not tactical movement, but we have hit locations for every type of weapon effect without counting ammo use. It's a mix of the abstract with simulation. I'm not sure it's a good mix. We'll see.
Marc Miller is an award winning game designer. He's the dude in charge. It's his baby. He's writing the game.
I'd love to see a T5 Draft that doesn't use a task system. Take the concepts from T5 but integrate it in a supplement that you would have been likely to see during the prime CT days.
It'd be a bear to go through the book, rip out the task system, then replace it with some various CT type rolls. But, I think even that would be easier than fixing this game.
David Johansen
SOC-12
I'm fine with nd6 but I think the number of dice by difficulty needs shifted up one or two dice because the stats and skills can come out so high. I'm not as bothered by the high skills as the high stats as personal development and mustering out can still out strip the aging process.
I also think the task system is overly cluttered but it does put tools in for many specific needs that come up later in the system.
I also think the task system is overly cluttered but it does put tools in for many specific needs that come up later in the system.
It seems like most of those who didn't like the T5 PCS didn't like T5 in general. So fixing the bugs in PCS are unlikely to make a difference to them. But if the PCS bugs are fixed ... we get more errata, an index, and plenty of examples explaining how to do stuff ... and source material starts to come out, then I think acceptance of T5 within the wider Traveller community will grow.
- Status
Similar threads
