The Grognard Problem

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Why does Traveller need another RPG system? Well, it doesn't need just another system, Traveller needs its own RPG system.

Traveller HAS its own RPG system. It has three of them in fact (four if you count TNE, though that was GDW's house system at the time).

How many of "its own system" does a game NEED for crying out loud?

We have CT. We have the MT task system. We may or may not have TNE. We have T4. We may have yet another in T5.

What's T5 going to have that's so special that CT, MT, TNE, and T4 didn't? And frankly, I absolutely do not believe that even T5 would be the last iteration of the system either (unless of course it tanks so badly that nobody ever wants to touch Traveller again).

At best, CT+ would be a valid option IMO. A lot of the existing fans know CT, just cut, nip, tuck, trim and give it an upgrade while staying close to its heart and I think that will do well... among the older RPGers. And it could even pull in a few new people too. Might even *shock horror* convert me too if it's done well enough .

T5 has nothing of the sort. Nobody is familiar with it, the fans don't want it, it has no appeal to or place in a modern market at all.

But really, Traveller's had 'its own system' several times. More than most games, in fact. How many chances does it need to 'get it right'?

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by flykiller:
we don't want some guy with only two available players to look at the "number of players required" and turn away.

Fly,

Gotcha. The number of players is listed as '2 or more' and the GM is given options that tailor the adventure for his group's size; i.e. if you have 2-3 PCs, four thugs show up, if you have 4-6 PCs, eight thugs show up...

pregenerated base characters, with a selection of optional career paths. chargen lite. example: (snip)

Good example. We also provide more pregenerated PCs than most parties will use like in the classic adventures. For example, how many people used all 8 characters available in Death Station? We provide a selection that can be further customized by the players.

in fact the task system should be the central rule, with the others minimized and if possible mentioned only in passing (such as chargen).

Agreed. The task system should be the only rule presented in full. No chargen, no sysgen, no vehicle building, none of that. That's stuff that can be presented later.

What's more, we should provide a small task library and plenty of examples of how to create and adjust tasks during game play. The basic tasks used in the module should be presented both in the text and in an index.

generalize it to a good equipment selection. some adventures could emphasize guns, others could emphasize other requirements. grav belts, pgmp's, a good introduction to traveller tech.

Agreed. A boiled down basic equipment list with various Traveller-specific goodies; grav belts, NAS sensors, air/rafts, etc.

Equipment in the module should be divvied up between those things the players should have and those things they can buy if they wish.

single-session adventurettes that can easily lead to others... (snip)

Agreed. Now the question is how many encounters are required for an average gaming session? Five? Eight?

back up each one with appropriate support materials. (snip) these need not be extensive.

Yes, keep it 'lite' and playable right out of the box. No need for system details if the players won't be leaving the planet, no need for detailed planetary maps if they won't be leaving a continent, etc. Basic equipment only, what they need plus Trav-specific goodies. Barebones NPCs, no need for life histories for bar thugs.

terminate each adventure with a list of adventure seeds that naturally follow from the module. this will get the players thinking about how they themselves can continue their game, rather than just sitting back and saying "that was nice, what's next?"

Good idea. Follow-on adventure suggestions and - perhaps - one or two of those suggestions fleshed out at a the basic Amber Zone level just to show a GM how it can be done.

don't try to introduce a sector or the entire spread and reach of the imperium at all. you'll scare them away.

I was thinking more along the lines of linked modules, like the Giants trilogy in old school D&D. You're absolutely correct in not smacking them with the entire dead weight of the OTU at once. The OTU is both a boon and bane to TRaveller

(Re: the introductory fiction - WRC) I'd say critical. each adventure is introduced with simple background material necessary for the adventure hinting at, not explaining, the vast traveller setting. a supervisor's instructions, a lieutenant's orders, a brief overview. traveller's biggest selling point has always been it's "realism" - this should get included one way or another in every introduction.

Agreed. 'Small scale' introductory fiction, nothing that starts with 'The Ancients removed humans from Terra 300,000 years ago...'. That'll make their eyes glaze over. Keep it along the lines of 'It will take months for another survey party to get here and we need to know what that volcano is doing now...' or 'You're the best we have available, so board that ship and get the hostages out...'

So, does anyone have any suggestions for the first module? I think a ship should be involved somehow, this is sci-fi after all!


Have fun,
Bill

 

[jonathonbarton]

http://www.steved.org/roleplaying/rules/eltonfirefly.html
http://www.steved.org/roleplaying/rules/elvisbuffy.html

I picked this up yesterday in another thread (like an encephalaphillic virus, it's been multiplying uncontrollably in my brain ever since...).

I like the source of inspiration - I think it will likely inspire new GMs to search for their own source of unique PC story inspiration in things familiar and close at hand. (not that I'm looking for plot material off of Metallica's Black album or anything...)

I like the style in which the information is presented. (as opposed to, say, the EPIC style.) It's far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far removed from "It was a dark and stormy night, and you and your party took shelter in the nearest bar, for that is where, statistically speaking, 97.38% of all people willing to pay complete strangers to do exciting things lurk when it's a dark and stormy night..."

...and I think between "Fun Stuff" and "Themes", there is plenty of food for thought to make everything from the most pedestrian 'bean counter' Subsidized Merchant game to the "Just Once, Why Can't It Be Trained Attack *Supermodels*!" espionage missions have a deeper meaning for the PLAYERS, as well as the CHARACTERS.

 

[Whipsnade]

Fly,

How's this idea for our module? It involves a ship, so we can include deckplans, but also takes place on a world so the players can deal with critters, weather, terrain, opponents, etc., without worrying about vacc suits.

The players get rousted to locate a downed merchantman that has pancaked some distance from the port. They're given the usual laundry list of tasks; pinpoint the crash site, save any survivors, salvage certain cargo containers, gather information about why the crash occurred, etc.

The players can be either a newly arrived SAR team assigned to a backwater port or an ad-hoc group thrown together specifically for the incident. They'll be issued that equipment they should have and can bring along whatever other goodies they choose to buy.

The wreck site is remote and the starport's orbital sensor network can only provide a general location; down do a kilometer or so. Enviromental issues; i.e. bad weather, prevent the players from simply flying their air/raft right to the wreck site, so they need to walk in the last half dozen kilometers or so.

The hike in allows us to present some animal encounters and/or 'We're not on Earth' terrain. Perhaps something like the old CT encounter tables?

Of course, the wreck is not what it seems. The crew or certain members of the crew were doing something dodgy. They may not want help or they may be busy covering their tracks. They'll also have 'friends' on-world trying to reach the wreck to either recover evidence or make 'embarrassing' things disappear. All that let's our new players use their guns along with NPC reaction tables and interpersonal tasks like interrogation.

So, the players get to fly an air/raft, hike a bit on a alien world, deal with odd critters, search a ship, help injured spacers, have a firefight, and solve a mystery.

There may be too much crammed in there...

Follow on adventures could be more SAR missions only this time in space, investigating the on-world 'friends' who showed up at the wreck site, salvaging the rest of ship, leading an expedition of off-world types to study the local critters, etc.

Thoughts?


Bill

 

[Malenfant]

What about this hypothetical 'module'/demo game is unique to Traveller exactly? This sounds like it could be from any random scifi adventure. Could be Star Wars. Or Shatterzone. Or Heavy Gear.

I don't see anything here that highlights anything unique about Traveller... (unless an air/raft counts)

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Traveller HAS its own RPG system. It has three of them in fact (four if you count TNE, though that was GDW's house system at the time).
How many of "its own system" does a game NEED for crying out loud?

Dr. Thomas,

Times have changed. The way we play RPGs has changed. What we want from RPGs has changed.

CT met the needs of the early RPG era. It had it's faults and role-playing evolved, so MT was developed. It met our RPG needs for a while. It too had its faults and role-playing continued to change, so TNE came about. And then the cycle stopped.

T20 and GURPS are stop gaps, not solutions. We need a system for Traveller and not something borrowed and bashed to fit Traveller.

Role-playing continues to evolve, so RPG systems must continue to evolve too. Traveller can either evolve or die. You know my preference. I am unsure of your's.

We have CT. We have the MT task system. We may or may not have TNE. We have T4. We may have yet another in T5.

All those systems no longer meet our needs, mostly because they are no longer 'alive' and can no longer 'evolve'. We all use bits and pieces of them all in our homebrews but it could be better than that. Who knows, maybe a new system can take the best of each and allow Traveller to continue to evolve along with the RPG hobby.

What's T5 going to have that's so special that CT, MT, TNE, and T4 didn't?

Re-read my post again. Pay special attention to the only time I mention T5. I know you've got your knickers in a knot about T5, especially since you were tossed from the playtest, but I now believe that T5 as it currently is comprised will either never be published or will eclipse T4 in its wretchedness.

So, what will a new Traveller RPG system give us? How about more accurate and correct star system generation for one? Would that make a new version worthwhile?

At best, CT+ would be a valid option IMO.

Yes. I wrote that in my post too. An updated and streamlined CT with additonal goodies would work wonderfully.

Might even *shock horror* convert me too if it's done well enough.

Whether it converts you or not is moot. By your admission you don't even play Traveller in any if its editions. Which makes your continual presence here and your well known vehemence regarding the various Traveller RPG systems all the more odd.

Tell us, why are you so passionate about a game you don't even bother to play?

But really, Traveller's had 'its own system' several times. More than most games, in fact. How many chances does it need to 'get it right'?

As many chances as D&D has had I'd guess. AD&D got to 3.5 so d20 counts as what, Version 4.5? GURPS is up to Version 4. So why complain if Traveller is mulling over a possible Version 5?

Of course, YM most certainly V.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[alanb]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
I don't see anything here that highlights anything unique about Traveller... (unless an air/raft counts)

Well, clearly there has to be some kind of connection to the TU. Definitely the Imperium, and maybe the Vargr or Zhodani. Megacorps are a bit too generic.

So somebody (the PCs or NPCs) is on a mission for the Imperium or one of its factions. Norris? Santanocheev?

Hmm. Actually, the Admiral deserves a revival, doesn't he? Stick a brief biography of him in the Library Data.

Brief Library Data entries, similar to those in the CT Adventures, are a nice way of providing a simple introduction to the TU.

What mysteries need to be solved? A good mystery is a good hook. Oops, sorry, that's "Enigma", not mystery.

 

[Antony]

How do people who havn't played Traveller even know that there is or will be a T5 or even know that this list exists.

Until there is a lot of advertising and promotion of the game it will not really grow.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Times have changed. The way we play RPGs has changed. What we want from RPGs has changed.

Yes. But the way Traveller fans play RPGs hasn't. That's the problem.

CT+ at least is a viable option, planned at least by someone (Hunter) with some inkling as to what the current RPG market is like and what it would take to give something a chance in it. But honestly, a lot of the ideas I've seen from everyone else on this board for how to 'save' Traveller are extremely unrealistic, simplistic and idealistic, mostly because the people who propose them don't seem to play anything other than Traveller and certainly don't have much of a clue about how the RPG industry works or has evolved or what the market is after nowadays. Heck, you got the likes of flykiller railing against art in games as if it's going to turn it all into a spectator sport - that's a totally unfounded, pie-in-the-sky assertion for which there is no evidence whatsoever (and a lot of evidence against, for that matter).

How many people who come up with ideas to 'save' Traveller here really have any experience of how the RPG industry works? Or of what people want today? How many of those people have ever written or contributed to a published, hardcopy RPG? Most people here are living in a bubble where Traveller is the best scifi game EVAR and nothing comes close. Well, I hate to bust the bubble here but Traveller fans are a minority in the larger RPG community. And nobody outside the existing Traveller community really cares about whether another version of Traveller comes along. As it stands, Traveller is pretty much a closed market, it's the same people that buy the books over and over again.

I get the impression that almost every idea that people come up with here is considered to be some 'golden bullet' that's going to save Traveller. But it's not. For example, this idea here won't bring people into the game any more than a demo game at a con would bring someone into any other game. That's all it is, an introductory adventure. Great at a convention sure, and I'm sure it would work as well as any other there. But it's not necessarily going to make people drop everything and say "wow, I just gotta play this!". Sorry, but that's just the way things work now.

I mean, talk about it all the cool-sounding ideas you like, but you've got to be realistic about it - they're not going to be the thing that 'saves Traveller'. All your scenarios should basically be prefaced with "in an ideal world...".

CT met the needs of the early RPG era. It had it's faults and role-playing evolved, so MT was developed. It met our RPG needs for a while. It too had its faults and role-playing continued to change, so TNE came about. And then the cycle stopped.

Well, and then T4 came out, actually - which supposedly was Marc's crack at 'getting it right'. And the faults - or even peoples' opinions - really didn't have much to do with it. If GDW felt it was time for a new edition, they changed it. With GDW gone after that, all Marc could do was license it out to other companies. But the cycle most certainly didn't stop.

T20 and GURPS are stop gaps, not solutions. We need a system for Traveller and not something borrowed and bashed to fit Traveller.

There's your problem. You don't see T20 and GURPS as 'really being Traveller', do you. Well, in practise that doesn't actually matter a jot. Fact is, they attracted new people to the game - people who didn't care a bit whether what they were really playing was 'real Traveller" or not. All that mattered to them is that there's this new scifi setting for the systems that they know - systems that are very popular (d20 being the #1 in popularity by far, GURPS being #4 I think). The Traveller purists may rail against that, but I think GT and T20 satisfied a lot of people. All things being equal, Traveller's future would be pretty secure in SJG and QLI's hands. Unless Marc decides to kill those licenses so T5 can have a chance, which would be one of the stupidest business decisions ever made.

Role-playing continues to evolve, so RPG systems must continue to evolve too. Traveller can either evolve or die. You know my preference. I am unsure of your's.

But that's the point, it HAS evolved. It's evolved into GURPS and T20. GT and T20 are based on VERY solid systems. They also allow a Traveller GM to access a mindboggling vast library of resources for GURPS and d20. Want an alien design system? Get GURPS Uplift (the T5 alien generation system is basically a poor man's carbon copy of this anyway). Got a world where the machines have taken over? GURPS Reign of Steel. A post-apocalyptic planet? Maybe you can use d20 Darwin's World, or Gamma World. Alien monsters? d20 Monster manuals galore for that. A remote colony world? Dawning Star d20. A detailed water world? GURPS Blue Planet.

The door is wide open for a huge realm of possibility in either one of these games. The potential market for d20 or GURPS utterly dwarfs anything Traveller has ever had, or that a T5 could possibly have. T5 wouldn't even register as a drop in the ocean compared to this market. And how could anything else possibly compete with the availability of ready made resources for the GM? Could T5 give you that?

All those systems no longer meet our needs, mostly because they are no longer 'alive' and can no longer 'evolve'. We all use bits and pieces of them all in our homebrews but it could be better than that. Who knows, maybe a new system can take the best of each and allow Traveller to continue to evolve along with the RPG hobby.

Yes, but do you really, honestly think that people would drop their homebrews at the first sign of a new system in T5? Why should they? They've been playing with those systems for years. They're happy with what they've cobbled together. What guarantee is there that a new system would be better than their homebrew anyway? Heck, some people have even converted Traveller to FUDGE or BESM or other systems and are happy with that. Most people probably gave up waiting for a mythical T5 to solve their ills and bring world peace while it was at it, and just cobbled something together themselves anyway. The "needs" of most people in the Traveller community have already been met - either through existing Traveller systems, homebrew cobbled systems, or conversion to other systems. The more iterations you get of the game, the less people you have to market it to - it's diminishing returns. There's probably not more than a hundred diehards at most who even want another new system for Traveller.

And as it stands T5 is certainly not an 'evolution' in terms of gaming mechanics. It's a regression if anything - there's nothing innovative about it.

So, what will a new Traveller RPG system give us? How about more accurate and correct star system generation for one? Would that make a new version worthwhile?

Honestly? No, it wouldn't. It'd be nice to have, but you don't need a whole new system just for that. Hell, even Marc's gonzo random alien generation system could just be published as a standalone thing to tack onto any other version of Traveller. We don't really need yet another new combat system, or another new tech system that's incompatible with everything else, or another new character generation system on top of the six others that are already around.

How many times is Marc going to reinvent the wheel here? How many times does he expect fans of the game to buy the same books with different rules over the years?

By your admission you don't even play Traveller in any if its editions. Which makes your continual presence here and your well known vehemence regarding the various Traveller RPG systems all the more odd.

Playing Traveller is not a requirement to know a lot about it and to know enough to talk to it about it on a forum.

Hell, most people aren't politicians but they talk about politics anyway and get quite het up about it. Would you tell them that their opinions are invalid because they don't work in politics themselves? That they're wasting their time? Actually practising something is not a requirement for discussing it.

Tell us, why are you so passionate about a game you don't even bother to play?

Beats me. It's something to talk about. I'm interested in its development. In case you hadn't noticed, I don't really bother with anything Traveller-related here other than world-building questions anymore. I've seen most of the same OTU arguments come and go a zillion times, and they just don't interest me anymore.

As many chances as D&D has had I'd guess. AD&D got to 3.5 so d20 counts as what, Version 4.5? GURPS is up to Version 4. So why complain if Traveller is mulling over a possible Version 5?

Version 7 actually. Like it or not, GT and T20 are their own valid editions of Traveller - the fact that they're based on other systems is irrelevant. Treating them otherwise is just ridiculous.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
I like your introductory modules idea. Where should we begin then? How about tackling these questions/tasks in turn:

- Party size? (I'm guessing 4 to 6)

I agree that 2+ is a good idea.

- Pregenerated characters? (Perhaps with custom options?)

I like the custom options idea. I'd keep the number of different skills to pick from as small as possible because each will need at least a sentence describing it.
I'd also keep the skills relevant to the adventure.

- Which sort of 'dirt simple' rules? (I'd plump for the DGP/MT task system bolted onto CT.)

The DGP version fits on a page, or it could be simplified even further.
Personally I'd go with 8+, 12+, don't roll a 2.

- A good weapon selection. ('gun ⌧' gotta love it!)

Weapons, equipment, vehicles, and ships as relevant to the adventure.

- What sort of adventure(s)?


The last is the biggy. What are the common Traveller adventure tropes? Trading? Raiding? Ship crawls? Strange worlds? Any others? One module for each trope? Or two or three tropes in each module? Or perhaps a theme?

I'd look to the old double adventures for inspiration. A more modern spin on adventures like:
Shadows
Annic Nova
Mission on Mithril
Across the Bright Face
Death Station
Marooned
Chamax Plague
Horde
Night of Conquest

Or would a 'dirt simple', stripped down version of The Traveller Adventure work instead? A main plot with a handful of detailed scenarios backed up by several Amber Zones the GM can use or not use at will?

It would be too big, I think. It could be broken up into the separate scenarios, with each one forming a booklet, but I'd stick to one-offs to start with.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
How's this idea for our module? It involves a ship, so we can include deckplans, but also takes place on a world so the players can deal with critters, weather, terrain, opponents, etc., without worrying about vacc suits.
<snip>The players can be either a newly arrived SAR team assigned to a backwater port or an ad-hoc group thrown together specifically for the incident. They'll be issued that equipment they should have and can bring along whatever other goodies they choose to buy.

I like the adventure premiss. Again, you can build in options as to what sort of crew/ship the PCs start off as:
SAR
Navy
Merchant
Detached Scout

<snip>
Of course, the wreck is not what it seems. The crew or certain members of the crew were doing something dodgy. They may not want help or they may be busy covering their tracks. They'll also have 'friends' on-world trying to reach the wreck to either recover evidence or make 'embarrassing' things disappear. All that let's our new players use their guns along with NPC reaction tables and interpersonal tasks like interrogation.

It wouldn't be Traveller if it was all straighforward
Options again:
gun running - how about a warbot of some description?

drugs
slave trading
illegal tech trade

This could also tie into a wider story arc if so desired.

<snip>
There may be too much crammed in there...

Follow on adventures could be more SAR missions only this time in space, investigating the on-world 'friends' who showed up at the wreck site, salvaging the rest of ship, leading an expedition of off-world types to study the local critters, etc.

Thoughts?

I think the content should be fine as is. I like the idea of providing adventure seeds to keep the group going until the next booklet...

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
What about this hypothetical 'module'/demo game is unique to Traveller exactly? This sounds like it could be from any random scifi adventure. Could be Star Wars. Or Shatterzone. Or Heavy Gear.

Good, that means more people will be attracted to them and hopefully explore the possibilities of the full system.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by alanb:
Brief Library Data entries, similar to those in the CT Adventures, are a nice way of providing a simple introduction to the TU.

I agree, it's a good idea to include them.

 

[alanb]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
It wouldn't be Traveller if it was all straighforward
...
This could also tie into a wider story arc if so desired.

First: the story arc. Obviously there has to be a story arc. It should be possible to play some or all of these things in any order desired, and still play a role in the story arc.

That should still be true even if a different set of characters were played every time.

As for straightforward, wheels within wheels is part of what Traveller is about, of course.

Having said that, I've watched enough Jackie Chan films to get a feel for how he makes his movies. Essentially, the plot is an excuse for transitions between setpieces - action scenes, stunts, and things that make you go "cooolll".

We would need to find a way to include setpieces, without railroading the PCs. Why? Because we want people to remember the game, and tell people about it for years afterwards.

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Enviromental issues; i.e. bad weather, prevent the players from simply flying their air/raft right to the wreck site,

I can hear most people I play with groaning at that bit, though it might be easier to put it past new players.

Otherwise, it looks perfectly reasonable.

 

[mike wightman]

I don't think that an ongoing story arc is a necessity, very few CT adventures were actually linked in any way.

Sometimes a story arc can get in the way.

 

[alanb]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Sometimes a story arc can get in the way.

Sometimes, yes. Then again, having a "bigger picture" is good too. It's a trade-off.

We want to encourage a gradual immersion into the setting, in the same way we grognards got it Back In The Day.

There was a very very loose plot arc through the early CT adventures, if you recall. They gradually set up a lot of the concepts involved in the whole Ancients thing, as well as the Fifth Frontier War. And, of course, there was also stuff that belongs entirely in the realm of Proto-Traveller, like the veteran glue sniffer who claimed that four Kinunirs could defend a subsector.

The level of "plot arc" in this case was simply an introduction to a bunch of concepts, rather than an actual plot line, but then we wouldn't necessarily need much more than this.

On the other hand, if it just happened to turn out that two factions were maneuvering against each other during the whole series, it would be just too bad, wouldn't it?

 

[flykiller]

Until there is a lot of advertising and promotion of the game it will not really grow.

somewhat true. we're hoping to put together something worth advertising. one step at at time.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Malenfant:
What about this hypothetical 'module'/demo game is unique to Traveller exactly? This sounds like it could be from any random scifi adventure. Could be Star Wars. Or Shatterzone. Or Heavy Gear.

Good, that means more people will be attracted to them and hopefully explore the possibilities of the full system. </font>[/QUOTE]Or that it won't stand out from any other demo game. Or that people might get this entirely hypothetical product and just toss out the system and replace it with d20/Silhouette/Synergy/Masterbook/GURPS whatever.

I mean, if it's the system you're selling then you've got to have something that makes that system worth using. You're running before you can walk here - what's going to make people want to try a new system in the first place? Especially now when you have d20 there.

 

[RickA]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Case in point: here's a thread over on the T20 forum in which the poster is asking for advice concerning disperate character levels in his T20 campaign. Some of the advice he is getting is a reminder that low level players will gather XPs more quickly than high level players and thus catch up. XPs? Levels? In Traveller? What's next, hire a Darrian ranger to help you steal iridium from a Geonee's underground warehouse?

Speaking of grognards! Oh, the horror, "levels" in our beloved Traveller! Actual character advancement! Oh noes!

/sigh/

Maybe there is a reason that games that allow level progression at a reasonable pace appeal to gamers and GM's? Maybe there are good reasons that the CT died 20 years ago?

Time to catch up to the current era in game design for goodness sakes. T20 is a good first step, but it needs to go further. A revamp of that classic (I love it) tech certainly is at the top of the list. Mainframe sized computers that require TONS of powerplant to operate? Which have less processing power than the desktop PC I'm typing this on? Has to go, it just has to.

The rules in T20 are a mishmash in many ways too. Effort was made to "D20" CT. With all of the errors and problems of CT brought over (Speculative Trade anyone?) when there could have been improvements and fixes included.

The OTU is a grand setting. Why do I use it? Because there are very few (if any) good "generic space opera" sci-fi games out there. If you love sci-fi but don't like Star Wars or Star Trek your options are limited. An epic sector spanning empire ala Niven or Asimov (et al) is a wonderful setting for an RPG, imho. Traveller has that and does it well.

That's why I bought T20. I'm not giving it a 5 star rating because of all of the problems in the rules set and the average quality of source material/modules, but hey, it's better than anything else out there imho. And COULD be the future of Traveller. Not for the die hard grognards who can't stand the idea of the Germans marching through their beloved Paris... I mean, the idea of Levels in their beloved Traveller, but maybe for a lot of other gamers out there.