T5 World Gen - Red Zones for LL+Gov

[mike wightman]

The thing is a type X starport in the setting of the Third Imperium also means a world interdicted by the Imperium - there could be a type A starport there but offworlders are not allowed...

The other thing is that travel zones change - see early JTAS News items in JTAS.

 

[whulorigan]

The thing is a type X starport in the setting of the Third Imperium also means a world interdicted by the Imperium - there could be a type A starport there but offworlders are not allowed...

I have heard this idea before. Where does this idea come from?

CT: Book 3 (1977), p.4:
Starports: The starport digit ranges from A (the best) through E (the worst); also included is X (indicating no starport).

CT: Book 3 (1977), p.5:
X No starport. No provision is made for any starship landings.

TTB, p.84:
X No starport. No provision is made for any ship landings.

CT: Sup 3, p.36:
Class X starports are generally indicative of Imperial (or other) interdiction; there is no provision for starship landings, and such landings are probably prohibited.

X- No starport. No provision is made for any starship landings.

CT: Sup 10, p.43:
X: No starport. No provision made for starship landings. Most such worlds in this sector are interdicted.

T5.09, p. 267
X. No Spaceport Or Starport. The world has no space access capability.

T5.09, p. 268:

STARPORTS on the Mainworld
Type X
Quality None
Yards No
Repairs No
Fuel No
Downport No
Highport No
Time To Refuel --

It seems to me that Starport X simply means no port at all. While it often might also mean an interdiction, it does not have to be so. An interdicted Red Zone that has a port of some sort should probably list the port type (e.g. C, D, or E) along with the Red Zone marker. Is there a SysGen rule somewhere that says if a world is assigned a Red Zone, the Starport should be changed to X?

That would certainly make the UWP codes more versatile and clear, as well as allowing unexplored/distant worlds to receive the "X" Starport, instead of "E" (implying that there is necessarily a beacon of some sort).

 

[mike wightman]

Look a bit deeper:

Lewis (0707-X427402-D) is a small world with a diameter of approximately 6400 kilometers, a very thin, tainted atmosphere, and large oceans covering three-quarters of the surface of the planet. A young world, Lewis is one of several satellites of the only gas giant in the system.
The world has a population of just over 73,000 persons, mostly farmers. There is no government established on the world; among the farming communities family ties predominate-a system which has worked very well for several generations. A D-class starport facility exists on the world (as well as several smaller landing fields of even lower quality); this is controlled by the Tukera family and reserved for their use.

Consider Zykoca 0604 X994542 6 Agricultural. Non-industrial. R

Zykoca is an agricultural world under interdiction. Local society is extremely xenophobic, and all contact offworld has been suspended. Foreigners are distrusted and have no standing in local society. The world was interdicted after a local mob broke into the starport, killing several offworlders.

So there is still a starport...

 

[whulorigan]

Look a bit deeper:

Consider Zykoca 0604 X994542 6 Agricultural. Non-industrial. R
So there is still a starport...

Interesting.

So it would seem the Classic Traveller authors eventually interpreted "No Starport" as "No Accessible Starport", despite the original descriptions that would seem to suggest the contrary. But even so, it doesn't necessarily mean that all Type-X Starports imply an interdiction, only that they can go hand-in-hand with one in some cases in which a starport of some sort is still nevertheless present.

I wonder if this is still the intent in T⁵? A genuine "No Starport of any sort" code would seem to be a necessity, and Type-E doesn't really fit the bill.

 

[agorski]

I wonder if this is still the intent in T⁵? A genuine "No Starport of any sort" code would seem to be a necessity, and Type-E doesn't really fit the bill.

Travellermap rigorously enforces the T5 rules, so you can use the checker with a small file and check for errors:

https://travellermap.com/tools/lintsec.html

 

[mike wightman]

The Traveller setting - the OTU - has never been entirely based on the rules as written. There have always been subtle differences between the rules and the setting.

To rigidly enforce rules that do not produce the setting that is described doesn't make a lot of sense. Applying this rule to the original S3 Spinward Marches applies red zones to worlds so not have or need such a designation.

Travel zones should be for the referee to determine based on the needs of their game, they should be able to change over time, and a rigid rule such as this causes more problems than it solves. Unintended consequence?