The easiest rules of the different versions of Traveller

[Mad Russian]

First, I apologize if this question has been asked before.

What is everyone's opinion on the easiest of the various Traveller rules sets available?

Which rules set has the most users?

Curious to know what you great ones have to say.

 

[sabredog]

Classic Traveller has the cleanest and most open-ended.
MegaTraveller seems to have the most comprehensive.

GURPS has zillions of rules and things in it.

I dunno about T5 or T20.

I stick with just Classic since it's worked just fine for me for over 30 years.

 

[mike wightman]

I would have to say that Mongoose Traveller is by far the easiest ruleset to actually use.

CT suffers from a chaotic skill system - you have to look each one up either until you memorise them or you house rule a task system.

I also never cared for the CT combat tables.

 

[aramis]

I would have to say that Mongoose Traveller is by far the easiest ruleset to actually use.

CT suffers from a chaotic skill system - you have to look each one up either until you memorise them or you house rule a task system.

I also never cared for the CT combat tables.

While I prefer Mega's Combat and Tasks, just about everthing else in Mongoose's Core is really good. (The Mongoose supplementary books are not nearly as good... HG has a very few WTF spots, but is overall a very useful book. Merc, well, about 1/3 of the book is useful, IMO...)

Spica's Career Books for Mongoose are awesome.

TNE and T20 are also very good rulesets, tho' they are not as easy to get, and don't have as wide a fanbase. Each has a few bits, however, that just realy bother a small but widespread minority. (T20: its literally D&D3 in the OTU, with HG bolted on... really well done, but still, at its core, D&D3. TNE: combat damages in d6 are just too low, NPC and PC hits figured very differently, NPC's have one track of HP, PC's have 6, yada yada yada...)

 

[spinwardpirate]

While the simplicity of Classic Traveller has appeal, I think on the whole you would be better off with Mongoose.

 

[spinwardpirate]

Oh! And GURPS is great, if you like GURPS. But it's going to give you a different feel than straight-up Traveller. I'd recommend GURPS as a system if you were looking to do almost any game, but stick to one of the more traditional versions of Traveller for Traveller (but still buy the GURPS books for fluff!).

 

[Mad Russian]

Thank you for your responses

I thank everyone who has responded.

How does everyone like the different combat systems?

 

[grendelttroll]

I always liked MT's system: it was quick to resolve and kept the action going. The one thing to get used to was that you didn't figure out in detail exactly how your character was injured - until AFTER the combat session was over. It still worked; the only thing you really needed to know was if your opponent was healthy enough to fight back or not. After the dust settled, you then checked out the bodies for your handiwork...

TNE's combat system is very detailed. You can use it to handle most planetary-scaled situations. It can be a bit daunting to new players at first, but if you want to really do a militaristic campaign where you really need to know what a PGMP-13 will do to the Traveller equivalent of an M1-A1 Abrahms, then TNE is for you.

 

[Darkhstarr]

CT is the easiest, though I tend to add items in from all the versions, like sanity from T5.
Never played MT, so can't judge. Playing TNE & Space 1889 I didn't feel comfortable with the combat rules ( and my players didn't like it ), so reverted to CT rules. Admittedly, with newbie players I got used to using the Judge Guild GM shield for running combat. T5, I can't comment, like MT, I've read the rules, but never actually ran combat with it.

 

[aramis]

TNE's combat system is badly broken, IMO.

1st off, no one-shot kills with a .22 are possible on standard NPC's... it takes 21 points to kill an NPC, and a critical hit with a 22 to the head does (1d6-1)x4 damage...

2nd, the multiple damage locations require a lot of tracking.

3rd, I've seen PC's survive FGMP shots at point blank.

4th, PC toughness is just too darned high.

5th, due to the way damage is calculated, it's possible to get some insanely high damage with highly focussed characters. High enough to damage tanks bare fisted.


The problem with MT is the process for interrupts instead of an initiative system.

I find the damage system exquisite in concept, merely decent in execution.

I've found that altering the thresholds for Pen vs Armor makes it both easier to remember and a better fit to the effects in Striker:
Pen< (Av/10), Dam=0
(Av/10) ≤ Pen < (Av/2), Dam x0.1
(Av/2) ≤ Pen < (Av), Dam x0.5
(Av) ≤ Pen < (2*Av), Dam x1
(2*Av) ≤ Pen, Dam x2

I really like the delaying of damage to atts until, as I tell new players, "... the adrenaline wears off." It reflects well my experiences, and what I've seen in the FBI and DOD gunshot data, as well as what I've seen in various melee manuals from the rapier period.

The To Hit process in MT is smooth, and works really well both in personal combat and in large scale combats.

MT can be used as is in larger scale combats, and the large scale rules work REALLY well. You can have PC's run around on the same battlefield as companies, and make a difference...

 

[beowulf2044]

Just my opinion: any combat procedure where you're using fractions in your equations is just stupid. For a perfect example, find Joe "They Call Me Mr. Rules" Fugate's personal combat example, the one where your TL15 Vacc Suit suddenly goes from armor value 7 to armor value 5 just because you took off your helmet (forgetting the fact that the thing comes with a folding soft helmet).

Mega Traveller combat also includes the increased complications where you calculate your "hit points" (by any other name) and then when combat's done, you go back and calculate the damage to your STR, DEX, and END. Just like original Traveller, only with more useless over-complication.

Needlessly over-engineered, to my way of thinking.

 

[aramis]

Beowulf: it's just as easy to precalc it... but MT uses fractions throughout. It works really well, but it does help to be able to do multiplications quickly in one's head. The math is the slowest part of it.

It's highly simulationist, and that alone will put some off; that the simulation has some bad physics puts others off... TNE has the same issue of being highly simulationist.