I've been using a similar explanation for why TL12 pop 8 Regina is the capital of the Duchy of Regina and not TL13 pop 9 Efate. Regina got in early, before Efate overtook it in tech and population.
Hans
OTU Only: T5SS Semi-Official Thread
- Thread starter DonM
- Start date
Hans
Garnfellow
SOC-13
Yeah, once established it seems that a capital would be VERY difficult to move based just on the latest GDP data. It's hard to imagine that every time the census data is ready to be issued the entire subsector government has to prepare to relocate.
Even in the OTU it seems like capitals would be more likely to be assigned based on location, history, and some political calculus rather than demographic data. Intentionally putting a capital somewhere other than the most economically powerful system could be a very rational decision, just like Springfield, Sacramento, or Albany.
I think moving a subsector capital would be a very interesting event that would create oodles of potential game scenarios, but it's so disruptive the Imperium probably wouldn't make it a regular occurrence.
Even in the OTU it seems like capitals would be more likely to be assigned based on location, history, and some political calculus rather than demographic data. Intentionally putting a capital somewhere other than the most economically powerful system could be a very rational decision, just like Springfield, Sacramento, or Albany.
I think moving a subsector capital would be a very interesting event that would create oodles of potential game scenarios, but it's so disruptive the Imperium probably wouldn't make it a regular occurrence.
That's why I was (and is) very much against the idea of the sector dukeship being up for grabs every time a sector duke dies. It's based on a line in the CT essay about how one duke rises to become the sector duke. But I've always thought that the proper interpretation of that line was that during the early days of the Imperium, one duke worked his way up to become sector duke, whereupon his family tended to retain that position unless something extraordinary happened. And if the family was deprived of the position, the position would tend to stay with the new family.
For example, even though there's no express statement to that effect, I believe the dukes (and duchesses) of Mora have been the sector dukes of the Spinward Marches ever since one was appointed in 376 [IMTU history, not canon].
Hans
Noble Patents
If you buy a set of T5 Dice from FFE, it comes with a randomly awarded Knighthood Patent.
If you purchase a Moot membership on CotI, you receive a Patent of a level commensurate with the Moot-level that you purchased (and if you e-mail Marc at his "onlooker" address with your order confirmation number, you may be able to request a particular world of the appropriate patent-level, if it has not already been taken).
If you buy a set of T5 Dice from FFE, it comes with a randomly awarded Knighthood Patent.
If you purchase a Moot membership on CotI, you receive a Patent of a level commensurate with the Moot-level that you purchased (and if you e-mail Marc at his "onlooker" address with your order confirmation number, you may be able to request a particular world of the appropriate patent-level, if it has not already been taken).
Last edited:
Buy a moot membership! While supplies last, each moot membership is supposed to get a title card with world.
salochin999
SOC-13
I think there are very plausible (and historical) explanations for situations where the Imperial center is different to the local alpha system. Say those alpha systems already existed and were the centers of the local pocket empire in that sub-sector before they were incorporated into the Imperium that system might well have a population and/or political elite who were hostile to the Imperium.
Building up a nearby system with colonists from the core could be a way of stabilizing the sub-sector.
It's probably inconsistent with canon in places but what I do is say clusters where the alpha system is the same as the sub-sector capital were incorporated into the Imperium peacefully and those where the two are different were incorporated by military force or were coerced in some other way or the political elite signed up to the Imperium against the wishes of the population etc.
So IMTU systems like Rhylanor were initially a kind of off-world legion garrison for systems like Porozlo which then gradually built up into a major system.
(This can lead to all sorts of interesting conflicts in game for example with native Porozlons disliking "outlander" Rhylanorans descended from colonists from the Imperial core worlds.)
It might contradict canon somewhere but I treat Paya and Aramis systems in Aramis sub-sector similarly i.e they are in the process of being pro-actively built up as colonies, as they both have A star ports and a naval base without a large enough population. (I treat Imperial personnel as separate from population stats so systems can have a large naval/military population.) I take Aramanx as the original sub-sector alpha planet that got so smashed up during the conquest it has never quite recovered. (edit: and the population are still hostile to the Imperium.)
All these anomalies create potentially interesting stories imo.
#
edit: If you do use the idea of designated colonies to explain certain world stats then that leads to interesting scenery of hundreds of colonist ships from the Imperial core full of low berths regularly off-loading at the designated systems. IIRC i have about ten in the Spinward Marches (low pop A or B star port systems in remote areas or on the border) and at for example 40,000 colonists a year each that's a lot of ships.
Last edited:
I hate to state this, but GT's Behind the Claw is NOT considered a canonical source (and SJGames knows the issues there). And the wiki has never been canonical. That would leave T5SS, of the three sources stated in the question about ownership above.
I'm willing to review specific items in the T5SS on a one-on-one basis (and let's make those their own topics, for discussion purposes). But don't cite either the wiki or Behind the Claw. Never cite the Wiki. It should be a pointer to references, not a reference unto itself. That being said, the wiki probably needs a good review, but I leave that to its caretakers.
I'm willing to review specific items in the T5SS on a one-on-one basis (and let's make those their own topics, for discussion purposes). But don't cite either the wiki or Behind the Claw. Never cite the Wiki. It should be a pointer to references, not a reference unto itself. That being said, the wiki probably needs a good review, but I leave that to its caretakers.
Side note: Only one of the two alternate, mutually exclusive, equally non-canonical writeups of Forine on the Wiki has Elixabeth owned by Forine. The one I wrote up has it owned by Dallia.
Hans
Last edited:
Garnfellow
SOC-13
OK, let's try this. The Regency Sourcebook, which should be a canonical source, has 1117 data for the Marches with owner world information. Here are the discrepancies:
| WORLDNAME | T5SS | GT:BtC | Regency Sourcebook | |
| 0703 Indo | O:0605 Algebaster | O:0704 Nerewhon | O:0704 Nerewhon | |
| 1401 Foelen | O:1103 Clan | O:1102 Riverland | O:1402 Farreach | |
| 3016 Kegena | O:2716 Rhylanor | O:3216 Bevey | O:3216 Bevy | |
| 3220 Powaza | O:3124 Mora | O:3218 Tacaxeb | O:3218 Tacaxeb | |
| 3029 Palique | O:3025 Fornice | O:3124 Mora | [No Data] | |
| 0837 Ochecate | O:1040 Kuai Qing | O:0838 Mewey[TD][No Data] | ||
| 1532 Elixabeth | O:1435 Dallia | O:1535 Forine | [No Data] | |
| 2534 Burtson | O:2733 Edenelt | O:2536 Squanine[TD]O:2536 Squanine |
In the same 1117 dataset Palique (Spinward Marches 3029), Ochecate (Spinward Marches 0837), and Elixabeth (Spinward Marches 1532) are all owned worlds, but ownership information is not provided. I do not see where this is errata'd.
So, how about those changes? Are we better off with any of them? All? None?
Last edited:
Garnfellow
SOC-13
My quick take on all of these based just on UWP and location is that the T5 revision is generally superior. Foelen is a little marginal, but the rest just seem outright stronger.
I would want to check GT:BtC, though. For all its problems, there are a great many good things in that book, and I would hate to chuck out a really interesting story or hook based solely on an algorithm.
I would want to check GT:BtC, though. For all its problems, there are a great many good things in that book, and I would hate to chuck out a really interesting story or hook based solely on an algorithm.
Isn't that throwing the gold (and silver and copper and lead
) nuggets out with the dross? There's a lot of good stuff to be found in BtC as long as one knows enough to recognize the contradictory bits.(After all, the same could be said of MgT. :devil
Hans
Isn't that throwing the gold (and silver and copper and lead
Some of them may be reconcilable with each other. For example, perhaps Bevy struck some sort of deal with Rhylanor permitting the Bevians to settle on Kegena for some mercantile or resource-development purpose in return for a share of the proceeeds.
Unless one (or more) of the original colonies for some reasons did not work, a revision is always inferior (IMO, of course). If it's not broken, don't change it. Even if the new version is a bit better, it's not worth the damage to verisimilitude.
Hans
Yes, and we have the 15 years difference between 1105 (T5) and 1120 (GT) to play with, so reconciliation should be possible in at least some cases.
Hans
Isn't that throwing the gold (and silver and copper and lead
(After all, the same could be said of MgT. :devil
Hans
Not my decision. I can post the "What is canon?" answer again, if you really need it.
But if anything relies only on BtC as a source, then it isn't.
T5SS and remark codes
Went to Traveller Map and downloaded data files for the 35 main sectors to update the data in my path finding app.
While perusing the data files, I found exactly two worlds with the Sa (satellite) remark, both in the Spinward Marches. For kicks, I started looking for hot, cold, and some of the others related to habitable zone. I found virtually nothing.
This indicates (to me) that almost every mainworld out there is an asteroid belt, planet in the habitable zone, or left up to the discretion of the referee.
Personally, I will be generating that data for use IMTU, and if T5SS updates it I will incorporate those new remarks. (See my T5 threads about stellar generation, specifically the part out PoSH, at http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=33669)
At some point will those codes be generated for the T5SS ?
Went to Traveller Map and downloaded data files for the 35 main sectors to update the data in my path finding app.
While perusing the data files, I found exactly two worlds with the Sa (satellite) remark, both in the Spinward Marches. For kicks, I started looking for hot, cold, and some of the others related to habitable zone. I found virtually nothing.
This indicates (to me) that almost every mainworld out there is an asteroid belt, planet in the habitable zone, or left up to the discretion of the referee.
Personally, I will be generating that data for use IMTU, and if T5SS updates it I will incorporate those new remarks. (See my T5 threads about stellar generation, specifically the part out PoSH, at http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=33669)
At some point will those codes be generated for the T5SS ?
inexorabletash
SOC-14 1K
While I just host the data, I think it's safe to say that any codes that (1) aren't implied by the UWP itself - that is, that would be left up to the discretion of the ref when rolling a world - and (2) weren't present in pre-T5SS data, e.g. Cp, Cs, will have been added only sparsely - e.g. in places like the Marches. That would include the new climate codes (Fr, Ho, Co, Lk, Tr, Tu, Tz), Re, Sa, Ab or An, etc.
I'm sure Don & Marc would welcome any notes about places where canon indicates a world should have one of those codes but does not.
Similar threads
