(The FFW as a Vehicle for) Canon Facts

[robject]

can•on (kănˈən)

An established principle: the canons of polite society.

Canon = fact about the OTU specifically, or Traveller's basic cultural assumptions in general.


Fifth Frontier War as a Vehicle for Canon

So now consider one major element of the setting: the Fifth Frontier War. GDW used it to draw together a lot of disparate elements of the OTU.

On role-playing levels, the movement of marine units across the Marches, as well as the role of mercenary tickets and unit composition (Broadsword). Social stratification comes out strongly with nobility running the navies -- but people are still clearly human.

The War strongly underscored the remoteness of authority, speed of jump, starports as "deep water" ports, explicit feudalism (and even piracy)... these things empower and require the players to make their own decisions and act.

On a higher conceptual level, the war touched on tradewar, communication routes (including escorts and drop tanks), skulking by Zhodani Patrol Frigates in BT and McClellan Factors space. High Guard as a concept underscores the benefits and risks of wilderness refueling. The Scout service plays a part of intelligence-gathering in the war.

It dealt with Zhodani, Vargr, Swordies, and Darrians, and (perhaps) touched on the Droyne. The War itemizes military starships, vehicles, and equipment. The War deals with the interactions between worlds and the Imperium. The War touches on megacorporate deal-making, and their relationship with the Imperial Navy.


Where To Find Canon

It's scary that there's so much canon, and yet it's so scattered about.

(Here's a guide to help understand what materials represents canon)

Not counting canon that invalidates other canon - that's a judicial decision. We're not even at that point yet. We're still living with the "scattered about" problem.

Offhand it seems that every piece of Traveller material published could be a potential source of canon.

So what's the potential volume of the primary sources?

• T5. As Marc's latest statement along CT/MT lines, when a source disagrees with T5, pick T5.
• Mongoose has several Third Imperium works, largely restating CT/MT. But when CT/MT disagrees with Mongoose, it is not always clear which is correct.
• GURPS has a lot of material. Material unique to G:T is canonical.
• TNE has some new material. Material unique to TNE is canonical.
• MT is a correction to CT. When CT disagrees with MT, pick MT.
• Material unique to CT is canonical.

T4's canon is a strict subset of CT: I don't think it needs to be consulted. (And yes, we can talk about HEPlaR).


This is how it currently looks to me:

|<---- Scope of Classic Traveller ---->| 
----------------------------------------------------------      
|         Traveller 5                  |           |     | 1248 |
----------------------------------------           |     |      |
|                                      |           |     |      |
|         Mongoose Traveller           |           |     |      |
|                                      |           |     |      |
----------------------------------------           |     |      |
|                                                  |     |      |
|         GURPS: Traveller                         |     |      |
|                                                  |     | HIWG |
|---------------------------------------           |     |      |
|   Clay Bush writings                 |           |     |      |
----------------------------------------           |     |      |
|               |                 |    |           |     |  PP  |
|   Classic     |  MegaTraveller  |    |           |  T  |  GO  |
|   Traveller   |                 |    |   GURPS   |  N  |  JG  |
|               -------------------    |           |  E  |      |
|                                      |           |     |      |
----------------------------------------------------------

That final, open-ended column represents secondary sources, including 1248, HIWG, Paranoia Press, Group One, Judges Guild, et al. Things from which good ideas can come.

 

[robject]

The Sieve of Canon

I propose that canon be approached like Don did it: you assume the current published materials are canon and build the list from them. After that, you use progressively older materials to add to that list.

When you find a problem or a conflict -- and you will -- find out what Marc has ruled about it, and note a redaction in the list.

Your last source is probably 1977 Book One, or perhaps Imperium. At that point, you're done.


What is a Canonical Fact?

Here's where my brain stops working. I know that "the Imperium hates psionics" is a canon fact that should be recorded, but should every TAS Bulletin be considered canon? Does the fact that the Trimkhana Brilliance blew up on such-and-such a date constitute "canon"?

Realistically, every last bit of potential canon probably can't be gathered up. I mean, the task would be impossible, and the result would be nearly pointless. Not worth the effort anyway (which is why so few people have tried to build a list of canon).

A canon index, such as Don's timeline, might be more doable. Referencing sections of documents instead of importing the text itself might be easier, and doesn't suffer from the problem of creating Yet One More Document to Consider when Researching Canon.


Canon Ratings

Is it worth the bother to even RATE documents according to the quality of their information? Saying that GURPS Traveller: Sword Worlds is a "Class A" canon document feels nice, but is ridiculous. Either it's "probably all canonical", or it has distinct, known problems which must be itemized, or it has distinct, known canon that must be itemized and the rest ignored.

In other words, a document cannot reliably be rated, but it can be dissected.

 

[Reban]

TAS bulletins are journalism or reportage and hence are prone to error, spin and bias.

I wonder could you employ a historian's eye to canon material and divide it into Primary Sources and Secondary Sources.

Core rule books and Marc's own writings are probably primary sources and given more weight.

Third party materials are probably secondary sources, prepared after the fact and so may be reinterpretations or versions of canon.

 

[robject]

Tier I: Probably All Canonical

This is the highest "rating" that I can think of, and the easiest category to handle: by calling it "probably all canonical" you've marked the document as trustworthy, and therefore friendly to those who don't spend their days memorizing Traveller facts.

Can you think of one document that fits this definition? Is there a document that Marc would say is "probably all canonical"?

Candidates:

• Traveller5 Core Rules
• Mongoose Traveller: Zhodani
• Mongoose Traveller: Droyne (when it eventually gets finished)
• GURPS: Traveller Sword Worlds
• Clay Bush's writings. He had a knack for writing within the setting while expanding organically on its ideas.
• Spinward Marches Campaign
• The Traveller Adventure?

How about the Mongoose Alien Modules? CT Alien Modules? How about JTAS?


Tier II: Mostly Canonical but with Known Problems

I figure most documents are going to fall into this category. Various sections have been redacted, or are flat out wrong, even though the rest of the material is perfectly fine.

This is where the canonista has to exert the most effort: sifting out canon from not-canon is hardest when it is known that there are land mines here.

For example, 1248, even though a secondary source, seems to be more canonical than not.


Tier III: Some Canon Present

This is the opposite of Tier II: the document is mostly invalidated or superseded, except that it has a good idea or two that has become canon. This is essentially the definition of secondary source, and so many secondary sources go here.

Were it not for the sheer numbers of documents, it would be easy to mark them for canon.

• Judges' Guild material
• Group One material
• Paranoia Press material

How about Beltstrike?

 

[creativehum]

Clearly I'm not the guy to delve too deeply into this debate. But I thought I'd point out two things when it comes to "in fiction" source material like TSA bulletins.

First, early source material (the Proto-Traveler period) suggests that the Imperium was unreliable when it comes to facts. It seems as if over the years people buying game products (and the text of the game products themselves) assumed that the Imperium was a straight shooter. But that's not what Miller baked in from the start.

Second, in The Escapist interview he did Marc stated plainly that the whole Great Race thing was a boondoggle of people trying to raise their own status and put down other races with ultimately flawed logic. But the consumers weren't told that at the time, and so had endless debates that picked up on the in-fiction debates that, at their core, were specious (again, according to Miller himself.)

So, I think you need to have the Objective Canon (stuff with no in-fiction spin) and the In-Fiction Canon where you plainly state, "Here is what people said, here are the conflicts and arguments..." without, sometimes, declaring it true or not.

 

[robject]

I think you need to have the Objective Canon (stuff with no in-fiction spin) and the In-Fiction Canon

Just so you know, here's my purpose:

To assemble an index of canon, starting with primary and available sources, for those who wish to write for Traveller.

 

[Whipsnade]

Interesting question...

To begin with, T5 Trumps All. It is canon.

What is canon in every other line, product, and whatnot depends on two questions:

• Whether the canonical fact in question agrees with T5.
• Whether T5 is silent on the canonical fact in question.

That's your "sieve" when considering canon from any source. Does it agree with T5? Does T5 even mention it?

Taking the second case - Does T5 mention it - will still leave a lot of questions unanswered. For those, a simple hierarchy could be used with the oldest GDW sources taking precedence in order, followed by the oldest Miller sources, followed by the oldest vetted by Miller or his designates sources, etc. Thus:

CT > MT > TNE > T4 > DGP > GT > T20 > MgT and so forth.

Putting it another way, the older and closer to Miller the better.

 

[aramis]

The Sieve of Canon

I propose that canon be approached like Don did it: you assume the current published materials are canon and build the list from them. After that, you use progressively older materials to add to that list.

The problem with that idea is two-fold - two current editions in distribution, AND as every new book comes out, canon potentially changes drastically.

Further, the bulk of the fanbase outside of MGT seems to be the CT revival happening amongst the (rather vocal) OSR crowd. Some via POD reprints, some via the CD-Rom, some via PDFs (Legal and non).

 

[robject]

SO two thoughts. No, three or four.

Yes, T5 is canon. But no, when ranking older sources, older is often not better.

Consider original material:

Sources "closer to Marc" may be better, but I suspect that sources close to Loren may be just as good. I.E. GURPS Traveller material seems to have a lot of faithful, high quality writing.

Consider overlapping material:

Some old sources are clearly overruled by newer old sources. For example, MT trumps CT, but is a subset. If you lump them together ("CT/MT") I would not complain. CT itself is not one uniform lump anyway; what's one more revision?

And despite "close to Marc" being a rule of thumb, much of TNE probably trumps CT/MT.

Thus I tend to see CT/MT as one big jumble of data, GURPS as an extension, and TNE as unique extra material (see my diagram in the OP).

And I'm starting to form an opinion about Mongoose material. Looks like the most canonical bits are already out of print: the problem may solve itself.

 

[mike wightman]

Canon describes the setting.

T5 describes the rules to describe the setting, and introduces guidelines to stuff that was in no previous edition.

Marc's novel is a better description of canon since it finally describes the setting in detail.

 

[kilemall]

Hrmph.

Why not go with the standard being Canon Within Version?

And if there are discrepancies, well, someone wrote history wrong, or everyone did and the truth is somewhere between all published versions?

Just like Real History.

 

[aramis]

SO two thoughts. No, three or four.

Yes, T5 is canon. But no, when ranking older sources, older is often not better.

Consider original material:

Sources "closer to Marc" may be better, but I suspect that sources close to Loren may be just as good. I.E. GURPS Traveller material seems to have a lot of faithful, high quality writing.

Consider overlapping material:

Some old sources are clearly overruled by newer old sources. For example, MT trumps CT, but is a subset. If you lump them together ("CT/MT") I would not complain. CT itself is not one uniform lump anyway; what's one more revision?

And despite "close to Marc" being a rule of thumb, much of TNE probably trumps CT/MT.

Thus I tend to see CT/MT as one big jumble of data, GURPS as an extension, and TNE as unique extra material (see my diagram in the OP).

And I'm starting to form an opinion about Mongoose material. Looks like the most canonical bits are already out of print: the problem may solve itself.

Note that Loren's Articles and Marc's Articles are often at odds with each other... in subtle ways.

Note also - GT often defines in detail things that were better left vague.

GT descriptions, when faced against Agent, clearly show "Loren's TU isn't Marc's"...

 

[ovka]

I would love it if all canon issues were officially resolved and collected into a single source. That gives authors a clean base to work off of when creating new canon.

Such a source would also include the conflicting material. Why? As someone pointed out, that's the way history is written in RL. It also gives GMs other options. For example:

Given: Source x trumps source y in canon
1. I don't have source x. I have source y. I want to use source y because it is the one that I have.

2. I have both source x and source y, but I don't like source x (the publisher, the artwork, the author, the writing style, Bambi died, whatever).

3. I have both sources, but I think the events in source y are cooler or better match my personal vision than source x.

4. I want to use source x, but I want to mislead the players into thinking that source y tells what really happened.

5. I want to use source x, but I want to find and read source y to get some additional ideas for MTU.

I'm sure there are lots of other reasons for wanting to know both, but you get the idea.

My end game for the perfect canon product would be something that would give me information that would assist me in creating an OTU campaign set in any time period and any location. Obviously the majority of those time/location combinations would have no information and would be poor choices for my campaign (e.g. 3 billion years ago sophonts didn't exist). Some would have scant information which would allow me to fill in the blanks if I wanted to do a lot of work for my campaign (e.g. the rise of the ancients in charted space). Some would have lots of canon to draw on (e.g. 1107 Spinward Marches).

Anyway, I am back after a hiatus of 3 1/2 months, and wanted to throw in my 2 Cr. It'll take me a while to get caught up on all of the various discussions.

Cheers,

Baron Ovka

 

[pendragonman]

I believe the root of the problem is that canon is a continuum. As such, it is always changing, and short of actually having every piece and reference to the 3I setting there isn't, and likely won't be, a single source completely detailing what is, and what is not, canon.

If you are looking to publish, my suggestion is to present what you want to MWM or his assigned appointees to verify if what you have is canon or heresy.

If it is strictly for your gaming use, my suggestion is to take what you need of what you have for canon reference and do the best you can.

 

[mike wightman]

If you want to know what the OTU was like pre psionic-suppressions read Marc's novel.
The sequel will move the timeline forward a bit I would imagine and continue to define the OTU as Marc sees it.
Alternatively MgT is in the process of putting together a definitive guide book for the Third Imperium.

 

[ovka]

My post above just represented a pie-in-the sky product. I don't really expect anybody to put that together. I have most of the sources so could theoretically do it myself, but I don't think I would live long enough to see it completed.

Cheers,

Baron Ovka

 

[Timerover51]

Where exactly does all of the material in the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society fit into this?

Is that part of canon, or only parts of it are canon?

And if only parts of it are canon, then which parts? Only the ones written by Marc?

 

[aramis]

Where exactly does all of the material in the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society fit into this?

Is that part of canon, or only parts of it are canon?

And if only parts of it are canon, then which parts? Only the ones written by Marc?

It's all canon with a lowercase c, as in, "It's part of the list of material released"...

Much but not all is OTU-Canon, capital C, as in, "it is definitional to the OTU".

Some is Rules-Canon, capital C, as in, "Official rules expansions for CT, Striker, and Imperium."

Marc has not made clear lists on an article by article basis.

The articles written by Marc can generally be considered completely authoritative for the OTU if they touch on the OTU. (Not all Marc's Traveller articles do... for example, in Dragon, The Miller Milk Bottle maybe isn't OTU canon. (but it makes little difference either way. It's a perfect example of Marc's humor in action.)

 

[Timerover51]

It's all canon with a lowercase c, as in, "It's part of the list of material released"...

Much but not all is OTU-Canon, capital C, as in, "it is definitional to the OTU".

Some is Rules-Canon, capital C, as in, "Official rules expansions for CT, Striker, and Imperium."

Marc has not made clear lists on an article by article basis.

The articles written by Marc can generally be considered completely authoritative for the OTU if they touch on the OTU. (Not all Marc's Traveller articles do... for example, in Dragon, The Miller Milk Bottle maybe isn't OTU canon. (but it makes little difference either way. It's a perfect example of Marc's humor in action.)

Then how much of the JTAS material is relevant to Traveller 5?

 

[aramis]

Then how much of the JTAS material is relevant to Traveller 5?

Well, it's not the 3I, and hasn't been for 8 centuries, so...

some, but not a lot.

The Jumpspace article is superseded by T5 itself.

Most of JTAS is actually 3I specific setting materials.