Saving T5 or How to make an old Traveller actually accept and like T5?

[Hanson's Roughriders]

I wish we could see the type of support Star Ship Troopers or Battlefield Evolution got for Traveller.

Sorry being there for Starship Troopers etc - its a count your blessings situation, though in Mongoose's defense mongoose was originally a second their publisher for D20 stuff and then they got their own system.

A starter edition perhaps with fluff equipment and a few adventures.

 

[mike wightman]

I think a T5 Starter Edition would help keep the game thriving.

That's the thing though.

providing the plug isn't pulled the next edition of Traveller will be the 13 mann introductory set called Traveller:Liftoff.

it will be a boxed set that feeds into MgT.

 

[Ulsyus]

The "raw newbs" are tending to be doing Star Wars (FFG version), D&D, Pathfinder, or Dragon Age. Why?

Could it be that they've got profile? Star Wars: biggest profile. D&D: profile from age and survival. Dragon Age: not sure, is this an RPG of the computer game? Pathfinder: this is a model of how to build an RPG line. Have you seen what they do with their scenario/campaign competitions?

If there was a reasonably successful Traveller TV series, say a couple of seasons, wouldn't Traveller's profile be lifted by an order of magnitude? If there was an OGL for Traveller as per AD&D by WotC, would the profile lift with publications released?

(Uh, is there a Traveller OGL?)

Considering the interest in old school gaming I think a cleaned up re-issue of the CT boxed set would have made more of an impact than T5.

Why would FFE look at putting work into CT when T5, even with it's bugs, is a superior set of mechanics? If games were cars, wouldn't CT be a 70's muscle car (powerful and fun and looks like it can do anything) and T5 a modern roadster (damn fast but with superior handling, interior, finish, and lots of potential when the bugs in the electronics are sorted...)?

I don't know. I'm tired of waiting for Traveller to step up. Traveller is awesome. It is one of my favorite things. But it strikes me as a long string of failures and missed opportunities.

Do you think it's as badly off as Runequest was? A game that looked in the early 80's like it could have been as big as D&D but then subject to several bad development and marketing decisions after another?

 

[mike wightman]

T5 superior mechanics?

ROFLMAO

 

[Blue Ghost]

That's the thing though.

providing the plug isn't pulled the next edition of Traveller will be the 13 mann introductory set called Traveller:Liftoff.

it will be a boxed set that feeds into MgT.

Well, something for T5 though.

I was reading the rules last night on characteristics; exertion, weariness, and what not. It feels like the stats are now essentially your SFB equivalent of a ship's system display combined with an energy allocation form.

It feels a touch complicated for an RPG that you would want to introduce to your friends and "play right out of the box". The presentation is okay for old timers like me, but if I were a newcomer to Traveller, I might be daunted some by a very elaborate (though well thought out) "saving throw" system.

 

[rhialto]

Considering the interest in old school gaming I think a cleaned up re-issue of the CT boxed set would have made more of an impact than T5.

As a somewhat newish Traveller GM I concur. I only ever played back in the early days as we had a great GM who always ran campaigns for us, and now lives a half-world away. So I picked up the baton a few years ago with the FFE CT CDROM (worth every credit!) and MgT (I mostly missed MT & T4, dabbled in 2300 AD & TNE, but none of our group took to those). I've been happily running a MgT game off and on, heavily influenced by my CT CDROM and 3rd party Traveller stuff (Paranoia & FASA), but have been thinking about a TTB + S4 + house-ruled version instead.

T5 (which I have the CD for) is just too different and not nearly as intuitive as CT/MgT: much as it does have some neat ideas, the dice-pool system alone is a deal-killer for me ever running it. Even if all the system issues and errata are resolved the core mechanic just isn't as easy for a new player to grasp. I might buy a separate volume of the Makers (but I haven't kept track of all the errata in the Makers sections: the shear volume of errata pushed me into the "wait until the next revision" position).

 

[aramis]

A pure CT cleaned up would NOT do so well. The big complaints are still the big complaints, 40 years on, and they are the biggest benefits that MGT has over CT: lack of meaningful choices in CT Char Gen, computers the size of small apartments, and table-heavy combat. Likewise, the lack of a unified task mechanic is a major issue.

A game somewhere between CT and MT would have been better - the increased number of cascades vastly improves character gen in terms of getting a character one likes and in terms of meaningful choices. The combat system is far less table heavy (and can be entirely front-loaded). MT's not without warts - the ship and vehicle design system is clumsy and convoluted.

Liftoff is looking pretty sweet. The intent was a MGT beginner box — not a new edition — but it's looking like a new edition, a beginner's edition. An edition streamlined for newbs.

 

[Hemdian]

It still seems like non-RPGers expect games to come in boxes.

Not disagreeing but there is also a geographical issue to consider. In the UK (back in the day) there was an incentive to reissue games as books. No box or included dice or anything, just books. Why? Because books (regardless of content) were exempt from sales tax and games were not. So putting a book in a box added 15% (then) to the sales price. (I'm no longer in the UK but I assume that exemption is still in place and I believe the rate is now 17.5%.). A significant portion of potential game buyers are very price conscious ... a 17.5% markup could be a deal breaker for many.

 

[Hemdian]

Liftoff is looking pretty sweet. The intent was a MGT beginner box — not a new edition — but it's looking like a new edition, a beginner's edition. An edition streamlined for newbs.

A T5 equivalent probably wouldn't be that difficult (once the errata is done). If you want it in a box (primarily for the North American market):

• For the rule book ... take the BBB, strip out the makers (leave lists of pregenerated weapons/armour/ships/whatever), prune off a few career types, limit PCs to human (no aliens, chimeras, clones, robots, etc), and probably a host of other stuff can go too. Include walk-throughs of character generation and combat. You'd have to be quite savage with the cuts, you'd be aiming at a page count of 100 to 150 at most I'd think.
  
  
• Include a starter adventure. Probably an updated version of Kinunir, which ties in nicely with the deck plan set you can buy and also has an introduction to the OTU. (The original Kinunir was where the OTU got started.)
  
  
• Throw in some blank character sheets and a few obligatory dice.
  
  
• Add a flyer advertising the full version BBB.

 

[Supplement Four]

T5 superior mechanics?

ROFLMAO

Exactly. Most seem to either dislike T5's mechanics or tolerate them. Those that play T4 and T5 seem to be neutral about the system. I haven't seen too many people come out and say how much they love the T5 system and how superior it is to other mechanics.

 

[Blue Ghost]

What is "table heavy combat" ?

Minis on a map sort of thing? I don't understand.

 

[rhialto]

A pure CT cleaned up would NOT do so well. The big complaints are still the big complaints, 40 years on, and they are the biggest benefits that MGT has over CT: lack of meaningful choices in CT Char Gen, computers the size of small apartments, and table-heavy combat. Likewise, the lack of a unified task mechanic is a major issue.

A game somewhere between CT and MT would have been better - the increased number of cascades vastly improves character gen in terms of getting a character one likes and in terms of meaningful choices. The combat system is far less table heavy (and can be entirely front-loaded). MT's not without warts - the ship and vehicle design system is clumsy and convoluted.

Liftoff is looking pretty sweet. The intent was a MGT beginner box — not a new edition — but it's looking like a new edition, a beginner's edition. An edition streamlined for newbs.

Well, I see what you're saying about the simply-cleaned up version of CT, but some might consider the "lack of choices" a "streamlined feature", since one can gen a CT character in much less time than a MgT one precisely because one doesn't have the choices to bog it down: similar to older versions of the first fantasy game and it's more recent incarnations (OSR aside). I'm not familiar enough with MT, though the combat system seemed significantly more complicated than CT (just based on a read-through of the MT CDROM, not actual play, so I could be completely wrong here). But in any case the genetic similarities between CT, MT & MgT are enough that you could identify them as the same "game", and roughly compatible. I can use CT & MgT material interchangeably, on the fly (based on actual play): T5, not so much...which means it's a tougher sell right out of the box.

And Liftoff is indeed looking like its own game now, not MgT-lite.

 

[fridge]

What is "table heavy combat" ?

Minis on a map sort of thing? I don't understand.

table heavy = having to look up tables in the rules/GM screen all the time

 

[Supplement Four]

And Liftoff is indeed looking like its own game now, not MgT-lite.

And, that's fine....but wasn't Liftoff supposed to be a starter version of the game?

Now, it's going to be it's own version of the game?

New Players who buy Liftoff, like it, and look for more detailed rules after they are hooked...where will they look?

I'm confused about Liftoff's purpose.

 

[Blue Ghost]

table heavy = having to look up tables in the rules/GM screen all the time

Ah, thanks. Thinking here....yeah, cross referencing weapons and armor for DMs was kind of a pain...but that was more CT, not MT, or so I recall.

 

[aramis]

I'm confused about Liftoff's purpose.

Its purpose is to (1) make money for 13Mann, and (2) be a playable starting ruleset for Traveller.

 

[Supplement Four]

Its purpose is to (1) make money for 13Mann, and (2) be a playable starting ruleset for Traveller.

So, it's really not a starter edition at all. Even if its emphasis is to be simple, it's really just another rule set.

 

[aramis]

So, it's really not a starter edition at all. Even if its emphasis is to be simple, it's really just another rule set.

The first purpose of ANY and EVERY commercial game release is to make money. The stated goal is to be a playable starting player's first Traveller rulebook.

Those who don't want to make money do Kickstarters and only produce the amount needed to meet the preorders.

Those who commercial releases and don't make money don't stay in business.

From the customer's perspective, the second objective is usually more important - the good game portion.

A starter set should be a playable ruleset. If it isn't, it's a preview. It can be missing large chunks (most released games are, simply due to economics of print production). But it has to be playable.

 

[mike wightman]

Liftoff is a starter set of rules built to feed into MgT core. It is being built to maintain complete compatibility with MgT (and therefore be usable with CT and MT with very little adaptation - something T5 doesn't do).

Lots of play aids, several introductory adventures, web support (hopefully).

 

[aramis]

Liftoff is a starter set of rules built to feed into MgT core. It is being built to maintain complete compatibility with MgT (and therefore be usable with CT and MT with very little adaptation - something T5 doesn't do).

Lots of play aids, several introductory adventures, web support (hopefully).

You apparently read a different rulebook than I did.