The problem with Atmospheres

[Malenfant]

I figure I'd let people know what's going on with my Realistic UWP Generation System... I've got Size sorted out now, but I'm stuck on Atmospheres.

Having bashed my head against this for a few weeks now in trying to make a realistic atmospheres UWP consistent with the current codes, I have come to the conclusion that the current system for atmospheres in the UWP is too problematic to retain.

The problem is that the current system mixes atmosphere thickness with composition, largely seen through a rather subjective (and flawed) filter of how much protection a PC needs to walk around on the planet. The problems can be illustrated in several ways:

- If you have a Trace atmosphere, what is its composition? Trace atmospheres could be corrosive, how would this be denoted?

- If you have an Exotic atmosphere, what is its pressure?

- If you have atm 4-9 in worlds outside the habitable zone, what is their composition? They can't be breathable N2/O2 mixes, because you can't get those outside the habitable zone since there's no life to generate them, and it's far too cold anyway.

- If you have an exotic (A) atmosphere in the outer zone, you’ll need more than just an air mask to survive if you don’t want to freeze solid (this is currently the case for Titan in our own solar system, which is clearly wrong). So does that make it corrosive (B), even if there’s nothing actually corrosive in the atmosphere?

- Do all Dense, High (D) and Thin, Low atmospheres have to be N2/O2 mixes? How would you denote a Thin, Low exotic atmosphere?


This leads me to the conclusion that it’s much easier to split up the atmosphere definition into pressure, and composition (and possibly surface temperature). Which would require different UWP digits for each.

The pressure digit would be a range from 0 to 6, with 0 being “no atmosphere” and 6 being “very dense”. (possibly with higher values denoting weird things like Dense,High and Thin,Low).

The composition digit would be used to denote whether the atmosphere is breathable, tainted, exotic, corrosive, or worse.

The temperature digit would be used to denote the planet's average temperature.


Right now, I can't see how to put all that into a single digit. The current system won't work for making atmospheres in my realistic UWPs system because I first determine the atmosphere pressure based on the mass of the planet - it's not just a simple scale from 0 to F now (which had lots of problems in itself, since small worlds couldn't have corrosive atmospheres, and small worlds could also have breathable atmospheres that they couldn't hold on to).

Thoughts?

 

[Pompe]

I think the UWP's are ultimately sucky for making and describing realistic worlds. They are good for making lots of space-operaish worlds and list them in an immense Imperium, which makes sense since Traveller is space opera to me. But they are not good for hard-SF-world building, IMNSHO.

I don't think UWPs are fixable without making the UWP's so much larger that a different system of data condensation would be a better solution, I think. And expanded UWP's sort of erode the basic idea of having these rather quick short data strings.

The other solution is to fix Traveller world generation and remake the UWPs from scratch, but that's also a problem because it would carry new assumptions and be more or less incompatible with the worlds generated over 25+ years, many which are detailed and part of a system lots of oldtimers likely will not want to exchange and possibly will be too detailed for many new Traveller players as well.

Still, if one wants a quick description I'd advocate replacing (or adding as an alternate system) the UWP with sort of a "habitability profile", with entirely new codes and more suitable for the habitable worlds Traveller is packed with. Worlds not habitable without serious aid would be an own categories with less detail in the profile, as it seems a lot of people (though not me) don't think it is fun to generate dead rockballs.

That could be coupled to an index, where say a world is given a number from 1 to 100, where say, 75 and up are tolerable without aid and 90+ would be garden worlds.

Then again, I'm not a fan of the UWP-part of Traveller world building. Both the WBH and GT:FI do well (better) without them. I don't know if 2320AD will use UWPs, but I hope not - 2300AD's better world generation standard was largely because it wasn't as UWP/Space Opera related.

/ Pompe (who on occasion rants about world building here )

 

[Malenfant]

Well, I'm pretty sure I can get a realistic system done using UWPs. Frankly, Traveller needs it - the worldgen system is a quarter of a century out of date (barring GT:First In), and that happens to be the 25 years that we learned pretty much everything we know about planets in . Plus in some cases it was wrong to start with.

Sure, a revised system probably wouldn't be considered realistic in another 25 years, but it beats using one then that's fifty years out of date

.

I've had to add a couple of digits to the 'extra bits' of the UWP. Instead of just having a PBG code, I now have a World Density digit and Orbital Zone digit too. I could just add the Pressure and Temperature there too, and leave the Composition in the UWP between Size and Hydrographics, since that will tell you whether the world has a breathable atmosphere or not.

Existing UWPs could easily be converted to such a system - an atm 6 garden world in the current system might have UWPS of Composition H (N2/O2), Pressure S (standard), and Temperature 5 (earthlike). Similarly, a Venus-like worlds would have Composition C (Corrosive), Pressure V (Very Dense) and Temperature A (hundreds of kelvin). Or something like that.

I'm not really concerned with making things 100% compatible with the old system - it's mostly compatible, but the atmospheres are where the big differences are. I thought I could at first, but I don't think it's going to work. I'd rather go for realistic and meaningful rather than make things ambiguous for the sake of compatibility. I'm still thinking about it though.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Malenfant:

<snip>

This leads me to the conclusion that it’s much easier to split up the atmosphere definition into pressure, and composition (and possibly surface temperature). Which would require different UWP digits for each.

The pressure digit . . .

The composition digit . . .

The temperature digit . . .

Right now, I can't see how to put all that into a single digit. The current system won't work for making atmospheres in my realistic UWPs system because I first determine the atmosphere pressure based on the mass of the planet - it's not just a simple scale from 0 to F now (which had lots of problems in itself, since small worlds couldn't have corrosive atmospheres, and small worlds could also have breathable atmospheres that they couldn't hold on to).

Thoughts?

Yes! Absofeakinlutely! Etc.

I had pretty much stated that this would be necessary in earlier threads.

Collapsing multiple attributes into an attribute whose values each express multiple kinds of data is ultimately painful, and just plain criples the usefulness of the data those values represent (information is lost, irretrieveably so, in the collapse of the data into the new values in the multi-attribute).


The problem I ran into was in deciding what sort of values to give to the Atmospheric Density attribute. You're going for a more organic named list, while I was flailing around with trying to pin the values to real-world pressure systems (which was also futile, given that even with hexadecimal expression, there just weren't enough digits).


So, unless it isn't completely obvious, I'm entirely in favor of using multiple attributes to express the state of the atmosphere.

 

[LordVince]

You know, much the same issue will be encountered when you move on to Hydrographics. I mean, just like the current UWP code is intended to indicate the conditions of an N2/O2 atmosphere -- which all planets most definately do NOT all possess -- I understand that Hydrographics is supposed to represent H2O. But that's unrealistic -- especially in the outer system. A cold planet could have oceans of liquid ammonia, or CO2 ice caps. And this would likely be influenced by the Atmosphere. I can't imagine a world that has an N2/O2 atmosphere supporting oceans of liquid ammonia, or CO2 ice caps.

If it's an Exotic atmosphere, then it will most likely be an Exotic "hydrography". Ditto for Corrosive.

 

[Malenfant]

I don't think hydrographics will be a problem, because we don't need that level of definition for that. It'd probably be safe to say that any world with a breathable, tainted or exotic atmosphere in the habitable zone would have liquid water hydrographics. Any liquid outside the habitable zone wouldn't be water.

The oceans under the ice of things like Europa are conveniently irrelevant to all this, since hydrographics is the liquid exposed on the surface on the planet. Europas could be handled by saying that any icy world of size 2+ in the outer zone has a subsurface ocean (which is probably true).

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi !

I agree, that a subdivision into pressure and composition really would make sense. And one digit more would perhaps be a valid compromise between simplicity and detail.
Condensing a temperature profile of a world into one digit is perhaps not a good idea.

As always, one should try to find a balance between details/realism and actual gameplay value.

Honestly I would leave the basic UWP as it is, but concentrate on adding realism during a sophisticated process of detailing the world.
Here I would fix or clarify given UWPs.
This leaves some flexibilty in interpreting a worlds "barebone" UWP.
Too much pre-defined detail could make it even more difficult to find a right world at a right place in a given OTU astrography.

And a question:
As Malenfant stated a small world could not hold an breathable athmossphere.
Does that mean, that this kind of athmosphere could NEVER exist on such a world, or that it just could not develop for a limited time (geological scale) at all ?
I often tweaked density of smaller planets anyway, in order to get rid of those low g situations

Just thoughts, too.

 

[Pompe]

Well, I'm pretty sure I can get a realistic system done using UWPs. Frankly, Traveller needs it - the worldgen system is a quarter of a century out of date (barring GT:First In), and that happens to be the 25 years that we learned pretty much everything we know about planets in . Plus in some cases it was wrong to start with.

This is the main problem. It wasn't intended to be a realistic world gen system, I'd say at a glance, it was intended to be a workable system for massive-setting space opera. Not squishy-soft, but certainly not rock-hard either. A quick way to generate decent-looking worlds for a vast universe of cat-aliens and psionics. So that it was scientifically "wrong" 25 years ago - which it was already then - isn't really a big deal. I'd bet Traveller's view of psionics is in contradiction with current mainstream scientific thought too.

Now, one can argue this is no reason to not fix the UWPs for a more scientifically realistic setting. That is also true. But I'd still argue it is better to add an "extra" string of data of some sort than to mess with the original UWPs, which players possibly know by now after a long time of looking up what that third digit meant.

And I still think the UWP's are sucky, at least as something to build world building around. They are a lousy way to describe a world from any sort of story-telling sense, to make it come alive - but they are an excellent way to list 200 mainworlds on pages after pages of reference. Some people love to do that.

A lot of Traveller worlds come across as very bland, and I'd blame the UWP structure in part for that. "Oh, it is a size 8 world with a Standard Atmosphere and 10 billion inhabitants".

If I'd have a choice, I'd generate the world first, and then assign the UWPs - if one wants the UWPs at all. Not generate the UWPs first and then try to hammer out what makes it interesting from the mold, which generally makes it more or less necessary to re-generate the system.

So the UWP system would be entirely optional, a tiny add-on to system generation, an optional finishing touch. Not something to design the system generation around. Would work in settings without a history of UWPs, too, with minimum fuzz, so the generation system would be as generic as I think some of us would like Traveller to potentially be.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:
Condensing a temperature profile of a world into one digit is perhaps not a good idea.

That's why I'm least convinced about adding this one .

As always, one should try to find a balance between details/realism and actual gameplay value.

That said, temperature would be a good thing to know for a planet... I guess you could get a good idea of that from what orbital zone the planet is in though.

As Malenfant stated a small world could not hold an breathable athmossphere.
Does that mean, that this kind of athmosphere could NEVER exist on such a world, or that it just could not develop for a limited time (geological scale) at all ?

It means "never" for size 1 worlds (unless the world is in the deep outer zone). They simply aren't massive enough (at reasonable/realistic densities) to hold onto any gases.

I often tweaked density of smaller planets anyway, in order to get rid of those low g situations

Yes, I ran into this when designing Enos for the GT:Sword Worlds book... there we had a tiny size 1 world with a standard atmosphere... and a Hot average temperature - absolutely THE worst combination possible. The density for Enos had to be something like 16,000 kg/m3 (about three times the density of Earth!) to be able to hold onto its atmosphere. That's obscenely dense. So I had to come up with the explanation that it was a "cannonball", a leftover inner core from a planetary collision that was mostly made of the densest elements around. That explanation might work once or twice in Charted Space, but there are a lot more of those worlds around...

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi Quick - Replier !

(I still wonder, if You sleep sometimes )

Ok. A Size 1 world athmo really is a bit harder to explain.
Would a agree, that it might be possible to accept breathable athmos on size 2 or 3 as a temporary geological phase (just like we had different athmospheric compositions on earth over time) ?

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Pompe:
This is the main problem. It wasn't intended to be a realistic world gen system, I'd say at a glance, it was intended to be a workable system for massive-setting space opera. Not squishy-soft, but certainly not rock-hard either. A quick way to generate decent-looking worlds for a vast universe of cat-aliens and psionics. So that it was scientifically "wrong" 25 years ago - which it was already then - isn't really a big deal. I'd bet Traveller's view of psionics is in contradiction with current mainstream scientific thought too.

Well, psionics isn't even considered "mainstream science" at the moment . So you can hardly use that to show whether the game is realistic or not

But I disagree - Traveller was clearly meant to have the option of a realistic world generation system (at least as of Book 6). Otherwise why would MWM have gone to all the hassle of coming up with the expanded world generation system and all that stellar luminosity stuff in the Scouts book? (and as it stands it's not all that bad an effort, considering). He wouldn't have put that in there if he didn't want to give the illusion of realism.

But I'd still argue it is better to add an "extra" string of data of some sort than to mess with the original UWPs, which players possibly know by now after a long time of looking up what that third digit meant.

That's probably what I'm going to do - add extra info rather than lengthen the UWP... but that said, they're gonna have to relearn what the atmosphere digit means anyway, since it's not going to be from 0 to F.

And I still think the UWP's are sucky, at least as something to build world building around. They are a lousy way to describe a world from any sort of story-telling sense, to make it come alive

Well, I can probably give you the world's history and a ton of other data given the physical UWP and the star size and types. If you know what you're doing, you can get a hell of a lot of info from the UWPs.

A lot of Traveller worlds come across as very bland, and I'd blame the UWP structure in part for that. "Oh, it is a size 8 world with a Standard Atmosphere and 10 billion inhabitants".

It's possibly also down to there being so many worlds that you can't possibly describe them all in any detail.

If I'd have a choice, I'd generate the world first, and then assign the UWPs - if one wants the UWPs at all.

But how would you generate the world in the first place then? Do you fancy writing up 10,000 worlds of the Imperium by hand and from scratch, individually?

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:
[QB] Hi Quick - Replier !

(I still wonder, if You sleep sometimes )

It's not even midnight here - you're about 10 hours ahead of me.

Would a agree, that it might be possible to accept breathable athmos on size 2 or 3 as a temporary geological phase (just like we had different athmospheric compositions on earth over time) ?

Nope. They can hold onto gases, but the smallest world that can hold onto oxygen for any geological length of time in the habitable zone is size 5. Anything smaller will have an exotic atmosphere (probably a Thin one at most), if it has one at all.

 

[TheEngineer]

OK

Have you ever thought of providing a set of "tweaking" explanations for some of Travellers typically strange UWP combinations ?
(Just like the heavy core tweak a la Enos)

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:
OK

Have you ever thought of providing a set of "tweaking" explanations for some of Travellers typically strange UWP combinations ?
(Just like the heavy core tweak a la Enos)

No, because there'd be far too many different tweaks to make - plus they'd all be very unlikely . As I've said plenty of times before, I don't like a universe full of exceptions - it's clunky, inelegant, and unrealistic. Exceptions should be... exceptional

 

[Pompe]

But I disagree - Traveller was clearly meant to have the option of a realistic world generation system (at least as of Book 6). Otherwise why would MWM have gone to all the hassle of coming up with the expanded world generation system and all that stellar luminosity stuff in the Scouts book? (and as it stands it's not all that bad an effort, considering). He wouldn't have put that in there if he didn't want to give the illusion of realism.

Haven't read Book 6. But I'd counter your statement, because it is not entirely reliable. But why put habitable worlds around supergiant stars if one wants realism? Why allow tiny worlds to have breathable atmospheres?

Because it isn't realism, it is an illusion of realism, as you yourself note. An illusion given by detail "cool, all star types are in" - "not so cool, shouldn't star age be in?", with the Ancients caveat hopefully built in to explain the weirder canon worlds.

Well, I can probably give you the world's history and a ton of other data given the physical UWP and the star size and types. If you know what you're doing, you can get a hell of a lot of info from the UWPs.

You can, because you work with the stuff. I can, because I work with the stuff - with a different focus, but still. A weapons engineer likely can do wonders with weapon stats too. But does the UWP generation rules give the game master a decent chance? WBH tried, yes, but I don't think the UWPs aid. Is the UWP suitable for a generic game, or is it more of color for a specific setting? I'd say the latter.

But how would you generate the world in the first place then? Do you fancy writing up 10,000 worlds of the Imperium by hand and from scratch, individually?

Okay.

Do you want Traveller to be a generic SF game? If you don't, it is simple. UWPs are part of the OTU, an important part. There is no reason to get rid of them, no reason to revise them too much either or canon takes a beating.

But if you like me think Traveller could be a more generic SF game suitable for other settings, the UWPs are not necessary. There may not be 10 000 worlds to generate, but ten, and ten you need other (more) detail for. The setting might have entirely different assumptions. The game master might devleop own UWP-likes, habitability indexes, rough named categorizations - oh, it is an Oceanian world - or whatever.

Second, I guess few people are generating 10 000 Traveller worlds. I guess a fair deal of them have already been generated by the old UWP system. But maybe you generate ten worlds. No problem, generate the worlds and translate what you need to UWPs, keep the rest in your Referee's Leaflet and you have a lot more colorful data to give when the players arrive at a planet to their database just fourteen letters long. If you intend to use the world in your setting, you likely need that extra data anyway, so why start with UWPs?

Third, if you are into the idea of generating 500 worlds with your favorite Traveller program, I'd strongly recommend doing it the canon way if it is to be compatible. If not, making the program translate data to UWP can't be an impossible programming project. And hey, it would work with non-UWP settings too.

The advantage of having system first, UWP later?
You could use your favorite world gen system, Traveller or not (GURPS:Space, 2300AD, WBH, GT:FI...). Then translate into UWP, if needed. Generic. Versatile. Easily tweakable. Ease of use for people who don't think the world generation system is Traveller's strongest point, but still want to make their worlds UWP-ish.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Pompe:
Haven't read Book 6. But I'd counter your statement, because it is not entirely reliable. But why put habitable worlds around supergiant stars if one wants realism? Why allow tiny worlds to have breathable atmospheres?

To be fair they put a world around a supergiant ... once, I think (Antares)? And even then IMTU I've explained that problem by having it orbit a brown dwarf that itself is orbiting around Antares.

The tiny worlds/breathable atmospheres thing is a product of the UWP system, which isn't in itself realistic. The supporting data in book 6 tries to be (and largely was, based on what was known at the time).

But the UWPs themselves are the problems - if they're not generated realistically, then all the other effort at realism is for naught.

But does the UWP generation rules give the game master a decent chance? WBH tried, yes, but I don't think the UWPs aid. Is the UWP suitable for a generic game, or is it more of color for a specific setting? I'd say the latter.

I've used UWPs for sf settings that are wildly different from the OTU and not had any problem. It's a very generic, and I think very elegant, way of presenting world information - if done right.

But if you like me think Traveller could be a more generic SF game suitable for other settings, the UWPs are not necessary.

Maybe not, but I don't think the concept of UWPs is bad. It gives you all the important info on a world in a few characters.

If you intend to use the world in your setting, you likely need that extra data anyway, so why start with UWPs?

Because they give you a point to start from. You could come up with a world off the top of your head, sure. But you should have the option of being able to roll a few dice and getting a result that's realistic too, in case you run out of inspiration.

The advantage of having system first, UWP later? You could use your favorite world gen system, Traveller or not (GURPS:Space, 2300AD, WBH, GT:FI...). Then translate into UWP, if needed. Generic. Versatile. Easily tweakable. Ease of use for people who don't think the world generation system is Traveller's strongest point, but still want to make their worlds UWP-ish.

Well, what I'm wanting to do is to set up the UWP generation process to create realistic UWPs - so you wouldn't need to use other systems and then convert to UWP afterwards.

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi !

Well, if we dont like an universe of exceptions, we might need to know, what the rule is

Actually I am not sure, if there is a base of scientists, who agree about some common rules for that.
As far as I noticed scientific news, many of those people are surprised again and again about this universe (or about manipulated sensor readings..).
Isnt that nice ?

So, though I am a bit more relaxed regarding strange UWPs, I will be glad to get rid of the worst cases here.
I really like Pompes approach to first generate a system in the best possible way and deduct an UWP lateron as a very useful way to generate new data.

Mal, which UWP combinations would You generally regard as completely wrong ?

 

[Pompe]

To be fair they put a world around a supergiant ... once, I think (Antares)? And even then IMTU I've explained that problem by having it orbit a brown dwarf that itself is orbiting around Antares.

And that brown dwarf is the same age as Antares, then? Can't be a very old world, a few hundred million years at most? Possibly even less, given Antares mass and the B-type companion?

Honestly, I don't know if Traveller places many habitable worlds around supergiants, or bright giants, or giants, or white dwarves. But I know it was a feature of some related world generation systems that it was at least possible.

I've used UWPs for sf settings that are wildly different from the OTU and not had any problem. It's a very generic, and I think very elegant, way of presenting world information - if done right.

Well, obviously I disagree. I don't think it is generic or elegant, I think it is a bad way to over-numberify worlds. The UWP's miss a lot of the really interesting info. We see it in SFRPGs all the time - worlds with lots of numbers and no soul, no "wow"-factor, nothing. (To be honest, that applies to non-UWP settings too, but it isn't quite as easy there to make the numbers-instead-of-color thing)

About as dead as presenting a spaceship by data only when it as much is the picture which makes it come alive.

Maybe not, but I don't think the concept of UWPs is bad. It gives you all the important info on a world in a few characters

It only does if you really think the important info about a world _is_ only the numbers. Me, I think four sentences likely would give more important info for the game master trying to describe the world to his characters who have just landed on the spaceport. Does it really matter if the world is size code 7 or 8? Is that important info? Is it important to know if hydrographics is 4 or 6? Maybe it is more interesting to have codes for what the world is like - old, young or how the biosphere looks - terraformed, microbial, precambrian, etc...

A world is like a book, or a painting. Telling its dimensions, when it was painted, its colors and if it shows A: a portait B: a landscape C: Fruits on a Bowl D: Abstract Lines might be a good way to list paintings in a database, but it won't make the painting come alive. Or like telling what a country is like by listing population, language and highest point. That isn't the description of a country, it is data you use to complement the country description _with_.

The UWPs are a complement to the description of a world, not a good description itself of anything but very rough physical data. (Data which can be presented in different ways, to be sure) That's why I think it is both optional and best applied after world generation, not the exact opposite.

You could come up with a world off the top of your head, sure. But you should have the option of being able to roll a few dice and getting a result that's realistic too, in case you run out of inspiration.

Did I argue for complete lack of world generation guidelines? No. But generating a world with more or less inspiration is not the same as generating an UWP, _that_ is what I argue.

People should be able to use Traveller - if it is to be generic, that is - to generate non-UWP worlds, I think. And I think people should be able to use the OTU Traveller guidelines to generate UWPs for worlds generated from other systems with minimal difficulty. This is best made, I think, by separating the descriptive process - the UWP - from the generation process - which could be any. And preferrably, if Traveller is to be generic, generic as well.

Well, what I'm wanting to do is to set up the UWP generation process to create realistic UWPs - so you wouldn't need to use other systems and then convert to UWP afterwards.

You'd probably still want a system to translate UWPs anyway. You might want to translate old UWPs to the new ones you work on. People might want to translate worlds from other games or SF sources, from world building systems from other games, or real-universe ones, to UWPs.

Then, I don't _like_ the UWPs as a concept. So I'd rather see they were optional add-ons and stuff for quick world lists, not an integral feature of world building. And I don't think UWPs can ever give the realism and detail I'd like in a world, or give more significant inspiration compared to a non-UWP system.

 

[Flynn]

Speaking as someone who likes UWPs, it's my preference that the final product of a world generation system such as this will still be compatible with prior Traveller UWPs, at least in what each position and data element represent. I realize that this becomes a great issue in terms of Atmosphere, but what I want out of such a system as its end result is a single Atmosphere code that matches in its meaning what the Atmosphere code has always represented. The means to arrive at that code can be as scientifically accurate as you like, but when I see that a world has an Atmosphere of 5, I already know that it's a thin atmosphere with some form of atmospheric taint that requires a Traveller to wear a filter mask outdoors. I would like it to remain that way with the output of this system.

Of course, that's only one man's opinion, so please take it as you will. If such doesn't fit your desires, that's cool. In general, though, the greater the differences and the more the changes, the less likely you're going to find general acceptance among the Traveller community.

My two credits on this experiment,
Flynn

 

[mike wightman]

Book 3 world generation:

Note: World sizes greater than A may be created by the referee

Or, to put it another way, there are plenty of letters not used in the UPP's that can be referee defined
If you want a world that doesn't fit the standard UPP's then make it up, just define what each letter means. Book 6 gives us more atmosphere types, for example.