I think the answer is neither. Technically, in T5 a UWP pop of 0 requires a population multiplier of 0, but Barren worlds demonstrate a bizarre quirk in T5 world generation.
T5 Version 5.0 basically omits the population multiplier completely. Page 431 explains what the “P” in PBG means, and page 31 explains how to generate a range from 0-9, but there is no designated place in the worldgen sequence where the Population Digit is determined.
T5 Version 5.09 addresses this omission, but overcorrects: generation of the population multiplier occurs in two places in the sequence: on page 408, Chart B, step 4p (before the Pop code is generated), and again on page 409, Chart C. Step 4p notes that if Pop = 0, then the pop multiplier = 0 but unfortunately this note is not carried over to Chart C and so is easily missed.
In T5 Version 5, the summary of SAHPGL-T on page 432 notes that “if Pop=0, Gov=0” and “if Pop=0, Law=0.” This does not appear to have been carried over to version 5.09 and I honestly don’t know if this was intentional or not. Personally, I think this omission is a mistake.
If you put this together, if Pop=0 then the Population Digit=0, Gov=0, and Law=0. This is about 2.8% of all worlds.
The next question then, is, do we generate a TL for Pop 0 worlds? Though illogical at first blush, T5 seems to suggest that we do, even though there are no TL modifiers for a Pop 0 world.
Starports, of course, are generated independently of population. T5 provides that Pop 0 worlds can still have starports: “A character born on a world with Trade Classification = Ba Barren or = Di Dieback was born at the local starport.” This strongly suggests that the population of the starport (and by extension I would include any associated base) is not included in the mainworld population count.
As starports are probably the most significant driver of TL, a Pop 0 world with a Class A starport could have a TL ranging anywhere from 8 up to 16 (A000000-G).
This is where things get a bit strange. The Barren and Dieback Trade classifications both require Pop=0, Gov=0, and Law=0.
Barren further requires TL 0 and “Starport E, X” per the note at the top of Chart D on page 410. Putting this all together, barren worlds are Starport E, X; Pop=0, Gov=0, Law=0, and TL=0.
The “Dieback” trade classification requires a non-zero TL and is described as a world “once extensively settled and developed, but at some time in the last thousand years its inhabiting sophonts died out leaving behind the remnants of their civilization.” (page 490). Imagine a “City on the Edge of Forever” type dead world.
Fine, but because there are no TL modifiers for Pop 0 worlds, Barren worlds are almost impossible to generate. Consider: we can never generate a Barren world with a Class E starport. Remember, there is no TL modifier for Pop 0, but Pop 0 = Gov 0, and Gov is a +1 mod to TL. So the lowest possible TL for a Pop 0 world with an E starport is TL 2.
This means that the vast majority of Pop 0 worlds are diebacks. But not all Pop 0 worlds are great candidates for having been “once extensively settled and developed.” In fact, because there is an inverse relationship between planetary habitability and Tech Level, the worlds least likely to support native life are the ones most likely to get a Dieback trade classification.
Consider a world with a UWP like A000000-B. Sure, it could have once been the site of a large mining habitat that suffered a catastrophic failure of its atmo processing center. Or it could just be the equivalent of a major truckstop in the middle of the desert: a starport strategically located on an important trade route. We don't need a dead civilization to justify a Pop 0 mainworld and a TL above 0.
Although the prevalence of diebacks probably fits with the commonality of Native Intelligent Life as detailed on Chart F (page 410), it seems really hinky to me. It seems easier to just impose a negative modifier for Pop 0 worlds when determining TL – maybe something like -2 or -4. It would slightly increase the number of barren worlds, reduce the number of dieback worlds, but still give us plenty of diebacks to explore. I would also be inclined to restrict the Di trade classification to Starports E or X.
Last edited:
