Hunter, I agree with you completely. Frankly, I think Traveller benefits from a more heroic play style, and that's the way I have always run it, whatever the system. if I wanted to play Normal Guys In Space, I'd design the d20 Space Shuttle roleplaying game. Traveller works very well for epic, heroic space opera.
Some Basic Notes on the Development
- Thread starter hunter
- Start date
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rupert Boleyn:
Most of these environments are the sort of thing that are bad for any vehicle. They're custom made for infantry. What's more a bipedal 'mech is way too easy to see and shoot at from a nice safe distance.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
True but then Sci isn;t about Limits and what can;t be done, it's about imagination and pushing back boundaries.
I think also we have the tendency of thinking of whats plausible and implausible and possible and impossible by todays's technological and scientific standards... but that far on in the future, whose to say those problems wouldn;t be resolved by some technical or scientific wonder?
And as implausible as Mechs may seem to some they are engaging, appealing, and not being the mphasis or basis of T20 a great addition to add to the pot, which can only benefit it's sales.
Mechas would also allow it to appeal across the board from the High Sci Fi Fan,. hardened Traveller fan, and all because of the mechs theAnime and B/Tech fans, the Heavy Gear and Robotech fans... which can only be a good thing for any of us, as more sales and more popularity of for T20 means more future supplements, more development and the greater chance of continued enjoyment for all of us.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
Most of these environments are the sort of thing that are bad for any vehicle. They're custom made for infantry. What's more a bipedal 'mech is way too easy to see and shoot at from a nice safe distance.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
True but then Sci isn;t about Limits and what can;t be done, it's about imagination and pushing back boundaries.
I think also we have the tendency of thinking of whats plausible and implausible and possible and impossible by todays's technological and scientific standards... but that far on in the future, whose to say those problems wouldn;t be resolved by some technical or scientific wonder?
And as implausible as Mechs may seem to some they are engaging, appealing, and not being the mphasis or basis of T20 a great addition to add to the pot, which can only benefit it's sales.
Mechas would also allow it to appeal across the board from the High Sci Fi Fan,. hardened Traveller fan, and all because of the mechs theAnime and B/Tech fans, the Heavy Gear and Robotech fans... which can only be a good thing for any of us, as more sales and more popularity of for T20 means more future supplements, more development and the greater chance of continued enjoyment for all of us.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
But, but, but, but, but, but, Mechas just seem so very, very wrong. I just don't know what else to say. It's like Samurai appearing in a Horatio Hornblower story or one of the Sharpe's Rifles novels. Sure it's possible, maybe, but it's just wrong.
------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson
------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson
Antares Administration
SOC-12
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
The point of T20 is to introduce people who are familiar with the D20 system to the Traveller universe. Traveller is not CT, MT, TNE, T4, GT, T5, or T20. Those are all rules systems. Traveller has survived them all because it is something beyond the rules. It is a vast, well-developed universe full of intrigue and adventure adaptable to just about any style of play.
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
BINGO!
Traveller is as much a role-playing epic as Greyhawk (p.s. I played City-State of the Invincible Overlord for the first time 23 years ago this summer, and went searching for Ancients sites in the Spinward Marches 22 years ago).
Traveller, more than anything else, is the Imperium, the Aslan, the Zhodani, and those lovable little Chirpers! It's a milieu that allow you to play space opera/heroic or gritty realism/hard sf. The best thing that could happen would be for T^20 to reproduce that flexibility. CT did. Compare Books 1-3 to Striker. If you want Mecha, fine. If you want "warp drive", fine. We each use what we want (the basics) and embellish on it with the detail (the "supplements" and our imaginations). IMHO, that's what T^20 should strive to be.
AA
The point of T20 is to introduce people who are familiar with the D20 system to the Traveller universe. Traveller is not CT, MT, TNE, T4, GT, T5, or T20. Those are all rules systems. Traveller has survived them all because it is something beyond the rules. It is a vast, well-developed universe full of intrigue and adventure adaptable to just about any style of play.
Hunter
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
BINGO!
Traveller is as much a role-playing epic as Greyhawk (p.s. I played City-State of the Invincible Overlord for the first time 23 years ago this summer, and went searching for Ancients sites in the Spinward Marches 22 years ago).
Traveller, more than anything else, is the Imperium, the Aslan, the Zhodani, and those lovable little Chirpers! It's a milieu that allow you to play space opera/heroic or gritty realism/hard sf. The best thing that could happen would be for T^20 to reproduce that flexibility. CT did. Compare Books 1-3 to Striker. If you want Mecha, fine. If you want "warp drive", fine. We each use what we want (the basics) and embellish on it with the detail (the "supplements" and our imaginations). IMHO, that's what T^20 should strive to be.
AA
PinkSplice
SOC-12
I agree about the continuing importance of the Traveller Background (see my post on the subject "Game Over: Traveller Is The Third Imperium"), but Mecha are as out of place in the Traveller background as can be. Powered armor and infantry fit better.
hunter
Ancient - Absent Friend
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PinkSplice:
I agree about the continuing importance of the Traveller Background (see my post on the subject "Game Over: Traveller Is The Third Imperium"), but Mecha are as out of place in the Traveller background as can be. Powered armor and infantry fit better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
{warning heresy follows}
Heh, the way I see it a trooper in Battledress and wielding a FGMP is pretty much a small mech...whats the real difference? He is protected and enhanced by the powered battle armor, and the FGMP is the attached weaponry. Add chameleon capabilities and targeting systems and your gonna tell me that's not really the same as what a small mech might have? Add grav belt and you have flight capabilities.
It's terminology and scale really. The Imperium has and uses mechs, they're just small and called Battledress....
{/end heresy}
That said, I don't plan to use them in my campaign but what the hell? If someone whats to allow the use of mechs why should they not be allowed to? Are we to specify in the vehicle design rules 'You can build any type of vehicle BUT Mechs'...
Hunter
I agree about the continuing importance of the Traveller Background (see my post on the subject "Game Over: Traveller Is The Third Imperium"), but Mecha are as out of place in the Traveller background as can be. Powered armor and infantry fit better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
{warning heresy follows}
Heh, the way I see it a trooper in Battledress and wielding a FGMP is pretty much a small mech...whats the real difference? He is protected and enhanced by the powered battle armor, and the FGMP is the attached weaponry. Add chameleon capabilities and targeting systems and your gonna tell me that's not really the same as what a small mech might have? Add grav belt and you have flight capabilities.
It's terminology and scale really. The Imperium has and uses mechs, they're just small and called Battledress....
{/end heresy}
That said, I don't plan to use them in my campaign but what the hell? If someone whats to allow the use of mechs why should they not be allowed to? Are we to specify in the vehicle design rules 'You can build any type of vehicle BUT Mechs'...
Hunter
Gallowglass
SOC-12
QUOTE: That said, I don't plan to use them in my campaign but what the hell? If someone whats to allow the use of mechs why should they not be allowed to? Are we to specify in the vehicle design rules 'You can build any type of vehicle BUT Mechs'... ENDQUOTE
I hate to say this, but if (as the debate here and elswhere on these discussion boards has tended), Traveller is not the rules systesm, but at least also a background, then IMO yes, because Mech's just don't fit the 3I.
If T20 is not going to have either the Traveller rules, NOR the Traveller Canon background, then why call it Traveller (and why do you have to pay MWM?!
). Quite seriously, if subsequently there is interest in a d20 Hard SF game, using T20 as the core and doing a supplement for variant technologies and settings (Stutterwarp, CJ Cherryh's FTL drive, etc) go for it. But including such variants as Warp drives, Hand Blasters and Mecha in T20 seems to me to ignore the coherence of vision that is the primary appeal of the Imperium background.
The point of appeal of the enduring game settings (Glorantha, Tekumel, the Imperium, Jorune) I would argue is that they are rich and coherent. I don't believeanyone runs games perfectly to canon in any of these settings (and trying to is the biggest flaw of many tekumel and Glorantha games) but there are lines beyond which the material ceases to fit. Mecha, in the sense of 3m+ humanoid vehicles, really seem over that line for the canon Traveller universe. Battledress (i.e. 3m- armoured suits you wear) do not and addditional info on them should inspire a lot of the mecha fans.
Or put more simply, Rimrunners I could always see adapting into a Traveller Universe game, not Transformers
I hate to say this, but if (as the debate here and elswhere on these discussion boards has tended), Traveller is not the rules systesm, but at least also a background, then IMO yes, because Mech's just don't fit the 3I.
If T20 is not going to have either the Traveller rules, NOR the Traveller Canon background, then why call it Traveller (and why do you have to pay MWM?!
The point of appeal of the enduring game settings (Glorantha, Tekumel, the Imperium, Jorune) I would argue is that they are rich and coherent. I don't believeanyone runs games perfectly to canon in any of these settings (and trying to is the biggest flaw of many tekumel and Glorantha games) but there are lines beyond which the material ceases to fit. Mecha, in the sense of 3m+ humanoid vehicles, really seem over that line for the canon Traveller universe. Battledress (i.e. 3m- armoured suits you wear) do not and addditional info on them should inspire a lot of the mecha fans.
Or put more simply, Rimrunners I could always see adapting into a Traveller Universe game, not Transformers
Gaming Glen
SOC-12
You're all wrong about Traveller being the setting. Traveller is hard SF role-playing, the setting came later (at least in publications).
Now that I got your dander up...
The CT Books 1-3 are generic, and I think Books 4-5 are, also.
Maybe someone might want to run their version of "long long ago in a galaxy far far away" or "a rag tag fleet" or near future colonization of the solar system. They might not care about the Imperium, the Aslan, or the FFW. My first run of Traveller was in the Klingon Empire (yeah, I had some difficulty with jump vs warp drive conversions.. which is why I hope some optional rules for alternate FTL drives are included).
Leave the "Traveller" universe out of the rules. Examples can hint at that universe but they shouldn't force it on players. The D&D core books don't give a setting, the supplements do. T20 should be the same. If the canon universe is in the rules then players may think that is the only place Traveller can be played. Add an appendix, or a separate supplement, that details the canon universe. Btw, can we give this a name? "The Imperium" doesn't apply since it didn't always exist. How about "Stellar Empires of Mankind" (the focus is always around humans and its offshoots)?
Now that I got your dander up...
The CT Books 1-3 are generic, and I think Books 4-5 are, also.
Maybe someone might want to run their version of "long long ago in a galaxy far far away" or "a rag tag fleet" or near future colonization of the solar system. They might not care about the Imperium, the Aslan, or the FFW. My first run of Traveller was in the Klingon Empire (yeah, I had some difficulty with jump vs warp drive conversions.. which is why I hope some optional rules for alternate FTL drives are included).
Leave the "Traveller" universe out of the rules. Examples can hint at that universe but they shouldn't force it on players. The D&D core books don't give a setting, the supplements do. T20 should be the same. If the canon universe is in the rules then players may think that is the only place Traveller can be played. Add an appendix, or a separate supplement, that details the canon universe. Btw, can we give this a name? "The Imperium" doesn't apply since it didn't always exist. How about "Stellar Empires of Mankind" (the focus is always around humans and its offshoots)?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PinkSplice:
I agree about the continuing importance of the Traveller Background (see my post on the subject "Game Over: Traveller Is The Third Imperium"), but Mecha are as out of place in the Traveller background as can be. Powered armor and infantry fit better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well for myself i just don;t see them as out of place, afterall we aren;t even talking about true mecha per se. were talking about Heavy Gear style Armoured Suits, which are mini mecha if anything... glorified Power Armor, with basic A.I. to allow them to be more intuitive and beneficial to thier operator by learning from thier operations.
These mini mecha don;t have to be sued after all everyones version of the setting will be different, some will go low tech, others will go high... each is great in thier own right. But if the facility to add mini mecha exists in the rules on release at least then both parties are catered for. Those who don;t want them can skip that section, those who do will be able to.. To much is never a bad thing, and if the basics for them are included in the main T20 rules, there is no reason why later on they could not be expanded upon in an option supplement for those who want them to be more mainstream.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
I agree about the continuing importance of the Traveller Background (see my post on the subject "Game Over: Traveller Is The Third Imperium"), but Mecha are as out of place in the Traveller background as can be. Powered armor and infantry fit better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well for myself i just don;t see them as out of place, afterall we aren;t even talking about true mecha per se. were talking about Heavy Gear style Armoured Suits, which are mini mecha if anything... glorified Power Armor, with basic A.I. to allow them to be more intuitive and beneficial to thier operator by learning from thier operations.
These mini mecha don;t have to be sued after all everyones version of the setting will be different, some will go low tech, others will go high... each is great in thier own right. But if the facility to add mini mecha exists in the rules on release at least then both parties are catered for. Those who don;t want them can skip that section, those who do will be able to.. To much is never a bad thing, and if the basics for them are included in the main T20 rules, there is no reason why later on they could not be expanded upon in an option supplement for those who want them to be more mainstream.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
Antares Administration
SOC-12
There's a good point, Glen. What is Traveller? Or more to the point, what is T^20?
Introduction to Traveller in Book 0 tried to describe what made Traveller unique. In a nutshell:
a. the Character Generation System,
b. animal and animal encounters (filter vs. worm, trapper vs. spider),
c. flexibility - ANY MYTHOS, ANY TIME,
d. economics - in the good capitalist tradition,
e. psionics - for those who want "a sixth sense or two",
f. starship construction - because the game is about interstellar travel and exploration, and
g. expansion - what eventually became the adventures, books, and supplements.
Rules, yes. There has to be an engine. Now, how complex or simple those rules are remains to be determined. I think we all agree that the rules "engine" is essential to how Traveller plays.
Now the milieu, or universe - in or out? If T^20 were to be published as a vanilla set of generic sci-fi rules, would people be interested? As soon as Book 1 described the six services, or Book 2 described the 100 ton Scout/Courier (that later became the ubiquituous wedge-shaped starship that we all recognize), it started to define the milieu, and not just the rules.
I guess the question is, "How much content?"
AA
Introduction to Traveller in Book 0 tried to describe what made Traveller unique. In a nutshell:
a. the Character Generation System,
b. animal and animal encounters (filter vs. worm, trapper vs. spider),
c. flexibility - ANY MYTHOS, ANY TIME,
d. economics - in the good capitalist tradition,
e. psionics - for those who want "a sixth sense or two",
f. starship construction - because the game is about interstellar travel and exploration, and
g. expansion - what eventually became the adventures, books, and supplements.
Rules, yes. There has to be an engine. Now, how complex or simple those rules are remains to be determined. I think we all agree that the rules "engine" is essential to how Traveller plays.
Now the milieu, or universe - in or out? If T^20 were to be published as a vanilla set of generic sci-fi rules, would people be interested? As soon as Book 1 described the six services, or Book 2 described the 100 ton Scout/Courier (that later became the ubiquituous wedge-shaped starship that we all recognize), it started to define the milieu, and not just the rules.
I guess the question is, "How much content?"
AA
PinkSplice
SOC-12
Yes, the LBB's provided an excellent generic SF system.
What got CT going was adventure and setting material to use with it. The 3I really, really got people interested in PLAYING.
FYI: I had my own universe run with CT, as did at leat one other ref that I knew. Nether of them generated as much interest as the 3I setting. Let's face it, most of us are pretty lame when it comes to creating either systems OR setting. The downfall of CT has as much to do with the abandonment of the 3I as GDW's financial difficulties.
PERSONAL RANT: If you wanna go play anime/mecha, don't piss in the 3I setting. Please.
What got CT going was adventure and setting material to use with it. The 3I really, really got people interested in PLAYING.
FYI: I had my own universe run with CT, as did at leat one other ref that I knew. Nether of them generated as much interest as the 3I setting. Let's face it, most of us are pretty lame when it comes to creating either systems OR setting. The downfall of CT has as much to do with the abandonment of the 3I as GDW's financial difficulties.
PERSONAL RANT: If you wanna go play anime/mecha, don't piss in the 3I setting. Please.
The Shoveller
SOC-9
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PinkSplice:
If you wanna go play anime/mecha, don't piss in the 3I setting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, now I consider the gauntlet thrown down. Let's make it real simple. If there are no rules for mechas, I will not buy nor support T20 products. I will not run T20 games. That's sales lost from me, the people playing my game, and the word of mouth that would be generated by my group at local game stores.
I've tried to be nice about this, but you Traveller "vets" who have managed to not to generate significant support for Traveller in multiple versions of this game system are utterly inflexable. Traveller is supposed to be a generic SF system. Mechs MUST BE A PART OF A 2001 generic SF rules system. If the rules aren't there, I won't buy the product when it's released. PERIOD.
[This message has been edited by The Shoveller (edited 30 May 2001).]
If you wanna go play anime/mecha, don't piss in the 3I setting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, now I consider the gauntlet thrown down. Let's make it real simple. If there are no rules for mechas, I will not buy nor support T20 products. I will not run T20 games. That's sales lost from me, the people playing my game, and the word of mouth that would be generated by my group at local game stores.
I've tried to be nice about this, but you Traveller "vets" who have managed to not to generate significant support for Traveller in multiple versions of this game system are utterly inflexable. Traveller is supposed to be a generic SF system. Mechs MUST BE A PART OF A 2001 generic SF rules system. If the rules aren't there, I won't buy the product when it's released. PERIOD.
[This message has been edited by The Shoveller (edited 30 May 2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrSkull:
But, but, but, but, but, but, Mechas just seem so very, very wrong. I just don't know what else to say. It's like Samurai appearing in a Horatio Hornblower story or one of the Sharpe's Rifles novels. Sure it's possible, maybe, but it's just wrong.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I just don't see that, everyones campaign is going to be different, you could line every Traveller Campaign side by side, and i doubt you'd ever find two the same.
Some will have things others don't, some will use established timelines and events, others will have made thier own, some will have low tech campaigns, others will have high tech.
I suspect some probably made up rules of thier own for mini mecha use already..just because they do not fit or feel right for you, does not mean they wont; for someone else.
At least if there are some rules for them in the book, those who want them have the choice, and an additional book can always be added later to expand upon the basi rules given.
A Rulebook is only the base setting, and guidelines, what happens thereafter is down to each group, each GM and each campaign to determine...
Things being fixed in stone and unmutable will make the game an anachronism.. and noones saying what exists and has been established is a bad thing.
but neither is more as opposed to less a bad thing either..
The more otpinons for use from the get go the better i say.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
But, but, but, but, but, but, Mechas just seem so very, very wrong. I just don't know what else to say. It's like Samurai appearing in a Horatio Hornblower story or one of the Sharpe's Rifles novels. Sure it's possible, maybe, but it's just wrong.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I just don't see that, everyones campaign is going to be different, you could line every Traveller Campaign side by side, and i doubt you'd ever find two the same.
Some will have things others don't, some will use established timelines and events, others will have made thier own, some will have low tech campaigns, others will have high tech.
I suspect some probably made up rules of thier own for mini mecha use already..just because they do not fit or feel right for you, does not mean they wont; for someone else.
At least if there are some rules for them in the book, those who want them have the choice, and an additional book can always be added later to expand upon the basi rules given.
A Rulebook is only the base setting, and guidelines, what happens thereafter is down to each group, each GM and each campaign to determine...
Things being fixed in stone and unmutable will make the game an anachronism.. and noones saying what exists and has been established is a bad thing.
but neither is more as opposed to less a bad thing either..
The more otpinons for use from the get go the better i say.
------------------
Neo
"Et semel emissum volat ireevocabile verbum".
PinkSplice
SOC-12
Ah, Shoveller. We indeed have our division here.
Why would people want to play mecha in Traveller, when there is Heavy Gear, or MechWarrior with mecha quite well done. And why mecha?- because of the influence of anime. Traveller is not anime. Nor is it "dark future", or "trans-human", or "Trek", or any of some of the more current SF RPG offerings. Some newer games, like Blue Planet, are well done, and need no gainsaying- but they're not Traveller, either.
Go ahead and laugh at us "lifers". We've watched several attempts to blow up Traveller to appeal to new audiences. There's a reason we're cynical, my dear chap. It's called experience. Have your mecha, dear boy. My computer budget will appreciate it.
Why would people want to play mecha in Traveller, when there is Heavy Gear, or MechWarrior with mecha quite well done. And why mecha?- because of the influence of anime. Traveller is not anime. Nor is it "dark future", or "trans-human", or "Trek", or any of some of the more current SF RPG offerings. Some newer games, like Blue Planet, are well done, and need no gainsaying- but they're not Traveller, either.
Go ahead and laugh at us "lifers". We've watched several attempts to blow up Traveller to appeal to new audiences. There's a reason we're cynical, my dear chap. It's called experience. Have your mecha, dear boy. My computer budget will appreciate it.
The Shoveller
SOC-9
Pink Splice, you Traveller "lifers" have two big problems with anybody considering your opinions important. Lifers have never provided decent sales. Lifers have never provided a large player pool. So let's see... when making the market strategy of this new product, should the wishes of a small group of fanatics who have never provided market share or recruited a large player pool be considered over the wishes of a group of gamers who consistently drop tons of cash down, buy products by the millions, and are potentially every bit as loyal? Oh yeah, you're brilliant, Pink.
As a Traveller 'lifer' I thought I'd throw my Cr2 in.
The core T20 book should be background free, as per the LBBs. Sure, throw in a couple of generic scenarios to get people going. Maybe even a subsector from Gateway for those that go that route. (Personally, I like the J6 maps in the back of the Planetary Survey books).
Whether you use mecha or not is up to you, but they should be covered in any design rules.
Paul Bendall
The core T20 book should be background free, as per the LBBs. Sure, throw in a couple of generic scenarios to get people going. Maybe even a subsector from Gateway for those that go that route. (Personally, I like the J6 maps in the back of the Planetary Survey books).
Whether you use mecha or not is up to you, but they should be covered in any design rules.
Paul Bendall
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PinkSplice:
[BGo ahead and laugh at us "lifers". We've watched several attempts to blow up Traveller to appeal to new audiences. There's a reason we're cynical, my dear chap. It's called experience. Have your mecha, dear boy. My computer budget will appreciate it.
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually some of us "lifers" (I'm currently introducing the *third* generation of newbies to Traveller) aren't quite so cynical. MT and TNE were indeed disasters when it came to introducing new players (neither system was intitive or easy to learn). But I found that T4 (yes I did say T4) is good for drawing in new players (has a similar feel to CT and you can understand the system in one session tops, usually in minutes). And it does appear that GURPS Traveller is drawing in new players (how many is uncertain, but it is happening).
I'm excited about T20 exactly because it is set to appeal to new players.
[BGo ahead and laugh at us "lifers". We've watched several attempts to blow up Traveller to appeal to new audiences. There's a reason we're cynical, my dear chap. It's called experience. Have your mecha, dear boy. My computer budget will appreciate it.
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually some of us "lifers" (I'm currently introducing the *third* generation of newbies to Traveller) aren't quite so cynical. MT and TNE were indeed disasters when it came to introducing new players (neither system was intitive or easy to learn). But I found that T4 (yes I did say T4) is good for drawing in new players (has a similar feel to CT and you can understand the system in one session tops, usually in minutes). And it does appear that GURPS Traveller is drawing in new players (how many is uncertain, but it is happening).
I'm excited about T20 exactly because it is set to appeal to new players.
Gallowglass
SOC-12
Re Mecha and the background etc might I suggest we go to the source? http://www.downport.com/traveller/foundation.shtml is MWM "Foundational description of Traveller".
The LBB's were indeed generic, but Hunter has made it quite clear that T20 will be set in the caon Traveller universe, as described in the foundational description. I therefore still strongly believe that Mech's do not fit. I also (as I tried to say, but am not sure people noticed) that Battledress is and think that that is someything that could be pushed to entice the mecha fans.
T20 will be good for Traveller, I don't dispute that. I personally doubt it is the future of Traveller (or gaming in general), but that's beside the point. But it has to keep basic faith with the setting it is trying to capitalise on. Would Cthulhu d20 be acceptable if it decided that all the horrible monsters were holoprojections sent by the super genius chipmunks living on the moon?
I don't think so, because that sort of idea is what individual game groups should be exploring.
What is published is the common ground on which all our disparate games are based. I think the positive side of T20 is the chance to take the Traveller universe to the currently widest audience in gaming, the d20 players, NOT to re-arrange the established Traveller background to appeal to them at the expense of consistancy with established canon.
The LBB's were indeed generic, but Hunter has made it quite clear that T20 will be set in the caon Traveller universe, as described in the foundational description. I therefore still strongly believe that Mech's do not fit. I also (as I tried to say, but am not sure people noticed) that Battledress is and think that that is someything that could be pushed to entice the mecha fans.
T20 will be good for Traveller, I don't dispute that. I personally doubt it is the future of Traveller (or gaming in general), but that's beside the point. But it has to keep basic faith with the setting it is trying to capitalise on. Would Cthulhu d20 be acceptable if it decided that all the horrible monsters were holoprojections sent by the super genius chipmunks living on the moon?
What is published is the common ground on which all our disparate games are based. I think the positive side of T20 is the chance to take the Traveller universe to the currently widest audience in gaming, the d20 players, NOT to re-arrange the established Traveller background to appeal to them at the expense of consistancy with established canon.
PinkSplice
SOC-12
The Shoveller wrote:
"Oh yeah, you're brilliant, Pink."
Why, thank you.
Other posters key on the need to gain access to a larger base of players, through the D20 system. The gentleman who claims to be introducing a third generation of players to Traveller has my sincere congratulations, though he is not yet using the D20 mechanics. Shoveller, quite correctly, notes that the existing fanbase of Traveller hasn't expanded all that much over the years. I think that both persons are making my point, indirectly.
What?
In my experience, newcomers to a game are brought in by others who are already playing it. And the single largest variable of any game, and gaming group, is the quality of the game master and players. The gentleman who is bringing in the next generation is probably a superior GM, regardless of system. That's not something that you can package or sell. And since the fraction of the player population who are consistently good GM's remains constant, and with a smaller player pool, well...
We suck at the same rate as the general population of gamers, there are fewer of us, therefore we bring in far fewer new players. Simple. d20 can't and won't change that. It may temporarily bring in newbies, but it won't KEEP them.
"Oh yeah, you're brilliant, Pink."
Why, thank you.
Other posters key on the need to gain access to a larger base of players, through the D20 system. The gentleman who claims to be introducing a third generation of players to Traveller has my sincere congratulations, though he is not yet using the D20 mechanics. Shoveller, quite correctly, notes that the existing fanbase of Traveller hasn't expanded all that much over the years. I think that both persons are making my point, indirectly.
What?
In my experience, newcomers to a game are brought in by others who are already playing it. And the single largest variable of any game, and gaming group, is the quality of the game master and players. The gentleman who is bringing in the next generation is probably a superior GM, regardless of system. That's not something that you can package or sell. And since the fraction of the player population who are consistently good GM's remains constant, and with a smaller player pool, well...
We suck at the same rate as the general population of gamers, there are fewer of us, therefore we bring in far fewer new players. Simple. d20 can't and won't change that. It may temporarily bring in newbies, but it won't KEEP them.
hunter
Ancient - Absent Friend
Ok lets clear one thing up right now. Somehow 'you will be able to build mechs if you are so inclined' (paraphrasing here) to the seeming implication that mechs are going to somehow start appearing in printed material we produce.
We will NOT be introducing mechs into the Traveller universe. We are creating a vehicle design system (hopefully!) that will allow GMs and players to design vehicles fairly quickly and simply. IF a GM wants to allow mechs, it will be possible to build them using this system.
Now that's a far cry from 'introducing mechs into Traveller'. We don't plan on mentioning mechs in our printed material (jeez, I'm almost sorry I mentioned it here in the first place...). No specific rules on mechs and mech combat (though again if a GM wants to use the vehicles rules to have mech battles thats THEIR choice), and no Mech supplements.
For those who don't know me and those with me working on T20, we are as someone put it 'lifers' also. I have been playing Traveller for 20+ years now and have a 'fair' idea of what the game is all about and so do the others on board with me.
You don't want mechs fine, don't build them or allow them to be built in YOUR Traveller Universe. You want them, again fine allow them in YOUR Traveller Universe.
We are just putting a framework together. What is done with it after we print it is the GM's business, not ours.
Hunter
(who is still shaking his head at this uproar over the whole thing)
We will NOT be introducing mechs into the Traveller universe. We are creating a vehicle design system (hopefully!) that will allow GMs and players to design vehicles fairly quickly and simply. IF a GM wants to allow mechs, it will be possible to build them using this system.
Now that's a far cry from 'introducing mechs into Traveller'. We don't plan on mentioning mechs in our printed material (jeez, I'm almost sorry I mentioned it here in the first place...). No specific rules on mechs and mech combat (though again if a GM wants to use the vehicles rules to have mech battles thats THEIR choice), and no Mech supplements.
For those who don't know me and those with me working on T20, we are as someone put it 'lifers' also. I have been playing Traveller for 20+ years now and have a 'fair' idea of what the game is all about and so do the others on board with me.
You don't want mechs fine, don't build them or allow them to be built in YOUR Traveller Universe. You want them, again fine allow them in YOUR Traveller Universe.
We are just putting a framework together. What is done with it after we print it is the GM's business, not ours.
Hunter
(who is still shaking his head at this uproar over the whole thing)
