The importance of having an Official Traveller Universe

[rancke]

This is MGT. Anything can now happen. The Fifth Frontier War could start, or it might never happen because Something intervenes to prevent the key events leading to the war from ever happening.

I sincerely hope this is not what the Mongoose people think when they speak of multiple Traveller universes. Other Traveller universes are fine by me, but the whole point of having an Official Traveller Universe is to have a baseline that keeps new products set in the baseline universe compatible with old ones.

Does that mean I think they shouldn't publish a module where Strephon decided to promote Duke Norris instead Dulinor, set 350 years later when the 3rd Imperium has been brought down by a coalition of Vargr and Aslan ihatei? Of course not (At least, not if the module explains how the basic nature of Aslans and Vargr changed enough to allow them to cooperate at any level much bigger than the subsector -- but that's irrelevant to my main point). If Mongoose thinks such a module would sell enough to be worth publishing, they should absolutely go ahead and publish it. But they should label it clearly as an alternate universe ("All new! All different! What if Strephon had promoted Norris instead of Dulinor?! Mongoose proudly presents: The Norrisverse!)

For one thing, it's only proper to warn me that I'm not going to want to buy this module, but that's not the main reason. No, the main reason is that when, in a couple of years, Brilliant and Innovative Newcomer Author sits down to write an adventure set in the Spinward Marches in 1116, he doesn't grab a copy of Norrisverse: After the Meltdown! and writes an adventure that assumes that Norris has been Archduke for 20 years, the 5th Frontier War resulted in the Zhodani getting kicked out of the Marches, and Regina is a smoking ball of dirt that glows in the dark.

I do have one objection to alternate universes, but it's a small and entirely practical one. Describing a slice of a universe the size of Charted Space is a big task. Really big. You just won't believe how hugely, mindbogglingly big it is . So any effort that distract other people from producing material that fits seamlessly into my own TU is a minus to me. That's what I disliked most about MT and even more about TNE, and that's why I welcomed GT, even though I'm not particularly comfortable with GURPS.

And all the rumours about Grandfather being the progenitor of the Ancients can all be utterly bogus. Yaskoydray turns out to be a role they play on TV; every generation or so, they generate a Sport whose sole function is to be a Trickster and muck things up for everybody, just to keep the gene pool filled with interesting genetic combinations.

What rumors? Just because you and I have read the official information about Yaskoydray doesn't mean there are any rumors about him in the OTU. At best, a handful of adventurers has told a story about visiting him and been promptly ridiculed. Everything we know about Yaskoydray was told in authorial voice for the benefit of referees.

This also means that it can be retconned with little or no difficulty. If Mongoose decides to make him a Trickster sport generated every couple of centuries to muck things up (and gets Marc Miller's permission to do it), they can retcon the OTU without spoiling any previously published material other than Secret of the Ancients. But if they do, they should make it clear that this is the new official truth, that this is the way it is now and always were. That's what retroactive continuity is all about.

The Traveller Universe could be anything. Anything you want.

Your TU can be anything you want. It always could. My TU can be anything I want. It always could. But the OTU needs to be a fixed, relatively constant and dependable baseline. That's how I see it, anyway.

Note the 'relatively'. There is one thing more important than having a dependable baseline, and that is to have a self-consistent dependable baseline. Which is why I advocate explicitly fixing canonical discrepancies. If they can be fixed the way I like best, so much the better (for me, that is), but the really important part is that they be fixed (and fixed explicitly, so that half the grognards don't think it's just a mistake and debate endlessly if it's this or the previous version that is "The Truth" ).


Hans

 

[BeRKA]

I agree! An alternate universe must be labeled as such!

 

[mike wightman]

I agree with you completely Hans, a baseline OTU is needed for the Imperium setting and alternative universes clearly labeled as such.

The only trouble is even GDW never stuck with one paradigm for their OTU - they treated it more as a sandbox where they could change things and damn the consequences for continuity.

 

[Whipsnade]

The only trouble is even GDW never stuck with one paradigm for their OTU - they treated it more as a sandbox where they could change things and damn the consequences for continuity.

Mike,

Agreed.

Mixing setting materials into the rules was one mistake GDW made and not locking down on the setting was another. Of course, at the time the idea of a setting separate from the rules and the idea of a locked down setting weren't developed yet.

However, just because GDW made mistakes thirty years ago, it doesn't mean we should make the same mistakes now.


Regards,
Bill

 

[MongooseMatt]

I sincerely hope this is not what the Mongoose people think when they speak of multiple Traveller universes. Other Traveller universes are fine by me, but the whole point of having an Official Traveller Universe is to have a baseline that keeps new products set in the baseline universe compatible with old ones.

_Mostly_ agree, and we won't change the OTU just for the heck. But neither will we guarantee that everything that has gone before will be the same.

There are certainly some things within the OTU that do need to change, and our discussions with Marc on this is one of the reasons OTU-specific books have been slower in coming out.

To give an example, we are taking a good look at the 'visuals' of the OTU - basically, how things look. We have an option for a miniatures licence for Traveller, but we already know that we cannot build a decent miniatures line on the strength of an RPG alone - it needs a solid miniatures game behind it. This means we need to appeal to the wider miniatures market, and not just Traveller fans.

In turn, this means we need to 'pep up' (sex up?) many of the designs that were first laid down in the 70's and 80's, and turn them into something more attractive for today. The Aslan are the first step in this, and you will see them slightly different from before in terms of physique and dress, but we are also looking at ships, vehicles and armour (for example) across the board.

Basically, we are looking at these things and thinking 'could we later develop a decent miniature out of this?'

 

[Madarin Dude]

Thanks for the heads up. While i agree with sexing up the look of the miniatures the last thing I want is traveler miniatures that look like 40K. Get some clues from the Japanese traveller site they have some good looking vehicles on it some logical anime references. It is nice to have style but keep it with some logic too.

 

[Gallowglacht]

Traveller miniatures and a wargame would be awesome.
Even just the mini's I got rules....when are the previews, put me down for 5 boxes...damnit.
Seriously man I need my fix, I've got every 40K army bar Orks, Necrons and witchhunters.

Remember when I told you I was an ex-mongoose fan. This would make me current again.

 

[rancke]

The only trouble is even GDW never stuck with one paradigm for their OTU - they treated it more as a sandbox where they could change things and damn the consequences for continuity.

Yes and no. They mucked about with the rules without regard for the ramifications and then pretended it didn't affect the background. Which in many cases was true. It doesn't matter to the background whether you use CT or GURPS Cinematic or GURPS Regular or GURPS-toned-down-so-that-PCs-and-NPCs-are-equally-skilled to run combat (It can make a big difference to the kind of adventures you run in that background, but not to the background itself). But some rules do affect the background -- or rather, creates huge discrepancies between the background and what the background should logically be. Prime example are technological changes. If streamlined ships had 20% less effective tonnage than unstreamlined ships with the same tonnage, the economics of employing streamlined ships and orbital stations would be radically different than if they had the same effective tonnage. If the standard maneuver drive is thrusters, economics and use would be quite different than if it was fusion rockets.

It didn't help that some of the CT rules were at odds with the background from the start. My particular bête noires are the ridiculously high power plant fuel consumption rates and the per-jump ticket costs, both of which have been corrected in other Traveller versions, but which, sadly, keeps coming back because they're CT and thus per definition better than anything else (OK, the last part is my personal assumption :devil.

Another one is the assumption, expressed in the description of how important Mains are, that jump-1 is more effective than higher jumps for long-distance transport when jump-2 and jump-3 are more effective both in terms of time and money and jump-4, while a bit more expensive than jump-1, is much faster. I've wondered if changing the cost of jump drives to <jump rating squared> MCr per dT (i.e. 1 MCr per dT for jump-1, 4/dT for jump-2, 9/dT for jump-3, etc.) wouldn't fix that, but since I regard my chances of convincing Marc Miller to allow that as non-existent, I've never actually sat down and done the calculations. Instead, I've tried to heighten people's awareness of the true effectiveness of the various jump ratings .


Hans

 

[Supplement Four]

In turn, this means we need to 'pep up' (sex up?) many of the designs that were first laid down in the 70's and 80's, and turn them into something more attractive for today. The Aslan are the first step in this, and you will see them slightly different from before in terms of physique and dress, but we are also looking at ships, vehicles and armour (for example) across the board.

Hmmm....this could be good. And, this could be bad.

IMO, the Vargr and Aslan have few illos. where they come across "cool". There are a couple in Traveller-dom, but few. DGP had some cool Vargr pics. Occassionally, I'd see a cool Aslan pic. Mostly, though, these two aliens are represented like crap in Traveller's history.

If you "fix" that, it won't be a bad thing.

As far as ships go, you're messing with fire there. I agree, many of the ships in Traveller are not very sexy. I've always thought that many of them could use a face lift.

Then again, many of the Traveller ship designs are iconic, especially some of the adventure class vessels. You start messing with those designs, and you'll lose more old guard.

There are ways to make the Beowulf class Free Trader and the Marava class Far Trader "sexier". But, what you want is people saying, "That's the best looking Donosev I've ever seen!" and not, "Oh my God! Whadda they do with tha Sulieman!"





Plus, let's face it, a lot of the art in MGT hasn't been inspiring, so it does kinda scare me when you say Mongoose will be "sexing up" the old, iconic designs and looks.

I do like the Vargr picture on page 46 of the MGT rule book, but the pic of the Aslan on pg. 42 is rather silly.





To give you an example of the uneven art coming out of Mongoose lately, I'll point to the game I am currently playing, your Conan rpg and a couple of your recent releases.

This first pic is iconic Conan, from Howard's story Rogues In the House, as Conan leaps on Thak. Very cool. Very "Conan".

But, then....there's the cover to the upcoming Thief's Companion that is anything but inspiring. Kinda looks like Stallone in Rambo XXVII, battling his way through hordes of enemies during the turbulent, psychodelic 60's with his pal Twiggy, from Khitai, on the rope behind him.

Good, cool, "Conan" art. Top pic.

Not-so-good, not-inspiring, "Conan" art. Bottom pic.

I'm hoping your Traveller choices will be more consistent with the universe than this latter one is to the Conan univierse.

 

[atpollard]

Another one is the assumption, expressed in the description of how important Mains are, that jump-1 is more effective than higher jumps for long-distance transport when jump-2 and jump-3 are more effective both in terms of time and money and jump-4, while a bit more expensive than jump-1, is much faster. I've wondered if changing the cost of jump drives to <jump rating squared> MCr per dT (i.e. 1 MCr per dT for jump-1, 4/dT for jump-2, 9/dT for jump-3, etc.) wouldn't fix that, but since I regard my chances of convincing Marc Miller to allow that as non-existent, I've never actually sat down and done the calculations. Instead, I've tried to heighten people's awareness of the true effectiveness of the various jump ratings .

Link please.

 

[rancke]

_Mostly_ agree, and we won't change the OTU just for the heck. But neither will we guarantee that everything that has gone before will be the same.

I'm not asking you to. I am asking you not to change things without good reason. Also, if you accidentally change something (and you will), to be willing to errata it rather than adopting it as a retcon.

My philosophy on changing canon is this: If it works, don't change it (Not even if your idea is a tad better; slight improvements are not worth the damage to continuity)[*]. If it doesn't work, fix it. If you can't think of a good fix, then and only then change it.


[*] Vast improvement is a different matter, but how often do the ideas for vast improvements crop up?

There are certainly some things within the OTU that do need to change, and our discussions with Marc on this is one of the reasons OTU-specific books have been slower in coming out.

That's good to hear.

To give an example, we are taking a good look at the 'visuals' of the OTU - basically, how things look. We have an option for a miniatures licence for Traveller, but we already know that we cannot build a decent miniatures line on the strength of an RPG alone - it needs a solid miniatures game behind it. This means we need to appeal to the wider miniatures market, and not just Traveller fans.

I would suggest introducing new ship designs -- cognates of the old ones, of course -- instead of changing the ones we already know and love. I've always assumed that the reason every freetrader jumps around in a Beowulf isn't that it's the only 200T jump-1 ship design in the universe, but because it's the only 200T jump-1 design anyone ever published[*]. In "reality" there must be dozens, scores, hundreds of different designs all over the place. I, for one, would welcome a 200T jump-1 Songbird Class.


[*] Amend this statement to account for other 200T jump-1 designs that I've forgotten about.


But if you do retcon the Beowulf and all the other old favorites, please make sure everybody is aware that it is a retcon: "We're not in a different OTU where the Beowulf looks different; this is the way the Beowulf looks and that's the way it always looked."

In turn, this means we need to 'pep up' (sex up?) many of the designs that were first laid down in the 70's and 80's, and turn them into something more attractive for today. The Aslan are the first step in this, and you will see them slightly different from before in terms of physique and dress, but we are also looking at ships, vehicles and armour (for example) across the board.

I'm much more interested in you taking Aslan society back to the way they were described in Alien Module 1 than in how they look (within reason, of course ).

Something I wish you would do is decide on how Imperial uniforms look and make the illustrators stick to that. I find it very irritating to show people a portrait of a new NPC and have to tell them "He looks like this, only he's a regular Imperial Navy officer, so his uniform actually looks like the one on the commander you met back on Regina during the 'Affair of the Screaming Noodles'. "

My suggestion for Imperial uniforms is that an Imperium-wide service would use the same uniform from one end of the Imperium to the other, but the ducal (subsector) services run the gamut from regular Imperial lookalike with different patches to rivalling Vargr uniforms. That way every picture of someone in a naval uniformcan be used, just not all of them as Imperial Navy regulars.

On a related note: Portraits are by far the most useful form of illustration for me. Being able to show my players a picture and tell them that the NPC they just met looks like that without having to qualify it ("...only, he's sitting quietly behind a desk, not brawling with four Vargr and a Hiver in a starport bar") is real nice. I just adore portraits.



Hans

 

[aramis]

I agree! An alternate universe must be labeled as such!

I concur, as well.

As for uniforms, yes, an official uniforms of the IN, IM, and IISS with color plates would be useful.

 

[rancke]

Link please.

I can't find any of the threads where I brought it up, but I can give you the gist:

A jump-2 ship costs more and carries less than a jump-1 ship of the same tonnage. But because a jump-1 ship has to jump twice in order to reach a destination two parsecs away, the jump-2 ship delivers much more cargo for not nearly as much cost and twice as fast to boot.

Say (and these figures are grabbed out of thin air, but the real figures work out similarly) that a jump-2 ship costs 125% of what a jump-1 ship costs and carries 85% of the cargo. The jump-1 ship makes two jumps and delivers 100% cargo for 200% of the operating cost. In the same time, the jump-2 ship makes two jumps and delivers 170% for 250% of the operating cost, equivalent to 147% of the cargo for 200% of the cost. So the per-ton cost of delivery across two parsecs by jump-2 is 68% of the delivery cost by jump-1 AND twice as fast.

The actual figures depend on which ship design system you believe is closest to "reality", but jump-2 and jump-3 are both cheaper than jump-1, and jump-4 not all that much more expensive (about 25%).


Hans

 

[MongooseMatt]

My suggestion for Imperial uniforms is that an Imperium-wide service would use the same uniform from one end of the Imperium to the other,

You know, given just how large the Imperium is, I am not sure that is possible. . .

 

[rancke]

As for uniforms, yes, an official uniforms of the IN, IM, and IISS with color plates would be useful.

I'd buy a Sea Eagle: Uniforms of the Imperium.


Hans

 

[Icosahedron]

Other Traveller universes are fine by me, but the whole point of having an Official Traveller Universe is to have a baseline that keeps new products set in the baseline universe compatible with old ones.

Hmm, I can't help thinking that this is a circular argument: The point of an OTU is to ensure that there is an OTU...

Your TU can be anything you want. It always could. My TU can be anything I want. It always could. But the OTU needs to be a fixed, relatively constant and dependable baseline. That's how I see it, anyway.

Which reduces the point of an OTU. Nobody plays in the OTU. Everybody plays in a universe that's almost-but-not-quite-OTU.

Note the 'relatively'. There is one thing more important than having a dependable baseline, and that is to have a self-consistent dependable baseline. Which is why I advocate explicitly fixing canonical discrepancies. If they can be fixed the way I like best, so much the better (for me, that is), but the really important part is that they be fixed (and fixed explicitly, so that half the grognards don't think it's just a mistake and debate endlessly if it's this or the previous version that is "The Truth" ).


Hans

And the endless debate about canon is one of the best arguments against an OTU IMHO.

Personally, my favourite supplemental material is the stuff that is truly generic: the BITS 101 series, old JTAS designs for weapons, or descriptions of flora and fauna that you can include or not as you see fit. I don't like the "On <date> <world> attacked <world> and the result was..." Especially if it's taking up valuable space in a supposedly generic rulebook.

I suppose that's why I run an ATU.

These are just my musings, Hans, cos I've got a spare five minutes and that first statement struck me as circular. I'm not looking for a 'discussion'. If you accept a need for an OTU, then your stance regarding consistency is right, and I'll back your desire to have an OTU and to keep it pure even if I have no use for it myself.

 

[rancke]

Hmm, I can't help thinking that this is a circular argument: The point of an OTU is to ensure that there is an OTU...

No, its to ensure that new material is compatible with previously published material. You may not think that this is desirable, but I do, and there's nothing circular about that.


Hans

 

[Hemdian]

And the endless debate about canon is one of the best arguments against an OTU IMHO.

Are you sure about that? For some people, sure, it’s a turn off. But Traveller is many games in one and I wonder if, for the fan who has been without a group for a while, arguing over canon isn’t one of them. You get a basic idea about the Imperium, someone posts something that contradicts that idea, and it sends you scrabbling through your old Traveller material looking for evidence to refute that post. It can be fun. Over the years it’s boosted my understanding of the OTU, and when I do get to run a campaign that improved knowledge translates into a more confident and competent Referee. Maybe the canon wars are what has kept Traveller alive all these years.

Meanwhile, I agree with Hans’ original post. And I’m only buying OTU products (so variants need to be clearly labelled as such).

 

[Allensh]

You know, given just how large the Imperium is, I am not sure that is possible. . .

Actually, I think it could be, at least for the Imperial forces themselves...subsector and local forces would likely have different uniforms...and I would expect the various branches would of course have differences. But I could see a common uniform style for the Imperial Navy, for example.

Allen

 

[atpollard]

Actually, I think it could be, at least for the Imperial forces themselves...subsector and local forces would likely have different uniforms...and I would expect the various branches would of course have differences. But I could see a common uniform style for the Imperial Navy, for example.

Allen

Did the British Army have the same uniforms for their Australia, India and Canadian troops? (1700's)