• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Traveller renaissance

I also think that in the last 30ish years there is an interesting line of thought regarding what it means to play any particular game. Does it have to be slavishly followed by number edition? Does it count if it is the setting but not the engine? How about the engine but not the setting?

I've run far more "CyberTraveller" in the last 25 years (Cyberpunk 2020 engine plus vaguely-OTU setting) than any bog-standard Traveller edition - and I know that I'm not the only person who actually combined these two games in some way.

The OSR seems to have simultaneously embraced and rejected this idea. It's devoted to the purity of particular editions while at the same time being devoted to heartbreaker projects based on those without actually being them.

Here on COTI there is a fair amount of simultaneous acceptance of either the setting or the engine as defining a game as "Traveller" - but even that signal gets lost in the noise at times. In such I suspect that yes, there's lots of stands of Traveller DNA out there in various games that people are playing - the interesting question is where you draw the line at calling it Traveller...

D.
For me, Traveller means the game mechanic 80% of the time. 20% of the time, I'm meaning the 3rd Imperium. It depends on who I am talking to.

There is also the whole edition thing. And I'll mention the various ones if asked about editions. I default to both MgT editions when choosing mechanics for a game. Often times, my players don't know what game they're playing because I just tell them we'll do some simple role-play. I pass out pre-gen characters, and I teach them the basic mechanic of doing task rolls right quick while we do a sandbox session in a setting resembling The Fifth Element (my default), or whatever setting the players prefer (maybe Blade Runner, maybe a new one I'd have to see a movie of like Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 to know how to run such a setting).

I couple players will ask later, "How do you know this game?" And I'll mention how, "We were all using Mongoose Traveller rules just now for our game." So the players start to think the mechanic can be used for different movies, ha! Lights go on above their heads, sort of thing. And then we talk about settings and other sandboxes for later sessions maybe. Or stay in the sandbox we started building in.

Eventually players buy the game and start making characters. Great stuff.
 
The last time I ran a face to face Traveller game was about 2008, and I used the LBB with a few house rules whereby I was trying to see if there was a way to mash together Alternity and Traveller.

My group were all boys between the ages of 16 and 24 (with my two youngest sons).

All but one of the players was dead on seriously enthralled about the system (the game system) how it described the careers, the "lawless fringes of the Imperium" sort of feel I was going for, and the overall game mechanic.

It was the oldest player, who had a greater background in other games, like Star Wars d6 and d20 who seemed to have no patience for how I was running the game (but that just might have been a personality thing between us).

I run a few PbP games over at Paizo and there is usually at least one Traveller recruitment thread going each week over there, and I know people are playing a few different versions of it there as well.

I tried running an Annic Nova campaign there, but couldn't find enough players willing to play without having an SRD available to them. I think that this was a few years ago before such an online reference was available.

Does anyone know anything about this?

http://www.traveller-srd.com/core-rules/trade/

Anyway I've enjoyed reading the comments here, and it is sort of making me want to try to run my own PbP game here on these boards.
 

A very interesting point, about playing. Of course you’re right, and I see that in my own behavior as well. It’s not accurate at all to tightly pair RPG brand advocacy with playing. Sloppy of me. I do wonder if players bring more money to a gaming company/brand, or if it’s the not-playing-right-now group that spends more, or more consistently, or over longer time. Not impossible to know, but hard.

Your other points made me reflect, as well. I have a repository of Traveller material I’ll never be able to fully grok just by its sheer amount, but I’d like water to keep flowing from the faucet, so to speak. I don’t really need Traveller the brand to be successful in any sense of the word for me, or my games to run well, often, or for a long time. I guess I want it to happen because I’d like other people to have a heightened chance to be exposed to something that gives me such reward in hopes some of them could have a similar experience.

Another riff on this - I don’t really have trouble forming in-person gaming groups to play, but I know some people do. I feel like some amount of renaissance for the brand, whatever that means, would probably make it easier for more games to start, for more people. I understand this point is foofy, but it feels true to me.

Thanks for making me think more about this, to tighten up my thinking. All of you.
 
LB was more miniatures rules than roleplaying.

So was D&D in 1974, at least as written. Very detailed characters for minis rules purposes, but for not a few groups, it was a character scale minis wargame more than RPG. So was 1975's GDW offering, En Guarde!

For that matter, the Space Patrol/Star Patrol/Heritage Trek lineage also was this: combat rules and not much else.
 
Some groups (forums/players/publishers) are very devoted to particular editions of D&D and hewing as closely to the rules of that edition as possible

I understand. I was dating someone and in part we broke up because of arguments of AD&D vs AD&D 2e. She was playing in a group that did not switch over and always resented that I would not renounce 2nd ed...
 
Marc at some point in the 90's posted the total corebook/corebox units sold. At that point, IIRC, CT was some 175K units sold...

In the BFB 0 - 8 (copyright 2000) he lists:

Basic Traveller (1977): 64,320
Basic Traveller revised (1981): 72,410
The Traveller Book: 39,932
Deluxe Traveller: 37,882
Starter Traveller: 34,041

So ~248k units sold for some version of CT, in all the print runs. If MgT1e has sold >40k that's pretty fair, and with 2e apparently selling well I'd be willing to accept "renaissance" to describe that (even though it's going on ten years now).
 
In the BFB 0 - 8 (copyright 2000) he lists:

Basic Traveller (1977): 64,320
Basic Traveller revised (1981): 72,410
The Traveller Book: 39,932
Deluxe Traveller: 37,882
Starter Traveller: 34,041

So ~248k units sold for some version of CT, in all the print runs. If MgT1e has sold >40k that's pretty fair, and with 2e apparently selling well I'd be willing to accept "renaissance" to describe that (even though it's going on ten years now).

And that was 17 years ago, and doesn't count Traveller CD's, Traveller BFB's.
We can estimate at least 4K units of the BFB's - any smaller, and printing would have been too expensive. And Marc is nearly, if not totally, out of BFB's.

TTB in PDF is an Electrum seller - at least half a K there.
Each of Bks 1 2 and 3 are individually silver sellers.
ST is copper, Deluxe is silver. Enough to count CT's core share in DTRPG as 1-2K. And that's in the last 3 years or so.

And doesn't count Hunter's run of 4K combined B1-2-3's. But that was at least 4K as well (and for the same reasons)

Nor Hunter's several hundred sales of PDFs of Bks 1-2-3.
 
Discussing how we can attract more players and stuff fine.

My answer to this question was to start a blog where I talked about the ability to use the Classic Traveller rules without having to concern oneself with 40+ years of OTU cannon setting.

I did this because when I first arrived here I had questions about playing the game and creating a setting... but was constantly interrupted by people showing up in threads to tell me I was doing everything wrong. I wasn't using such-and-such information provided in such-and-such volume of GURPS: Traveller, and so on. And therefor whatever idea I wanted to talk about didn't make sense or couldn't exists because it didn't comport with cannon.

This startled me (naively, perhaps) because I had always considered Traveller a game first, and the OTU as a setting you could use if you wanted it.

As I noted unthread my clever plan has worked. I've gotten notes from folks who have read my blog and are happily playing Traveller again after realizing they could make their own setting and didn't need to master the OTU before the could play.


So I have a question -- a genuine question about this site -- because I really don't know and am really curious.

Is COTI about using Traveller to play any setting one wants with the tools offered in the rules? Or about playing in the OTU (whether one uses Traveller rules or not.)

I ask this because if someone arrives excited to play Traveller but is told -- essentially if not literally -- here are 24 issues of the OTU house magazine along with 14 volumes of rules across three editions you have to read before you can really play the game I would consider that a challenge to getting people to play the game. Because who wants to do that much work to play a roleplaying game?

The fact is, several of the rules sets for Traveller are quite functional without any concern for the OTU. So I'm not talking about "dumbing down" play for "beginners." I'm pointing out that while the OTU is awesome, it is not required for play and if someone doesn't want to deal with it there is no need for anyone to deal with it.

I also want to make it clear that if COTI is about playing in the OTU and that's the site's focus then that's fine. That's great.

I would offer, however, that if that's the purpose of the site then it should be more front and center somewhere. Because the fact is telling people that "If you want to play Traveller you have to master the OTU" is in fact a false statement. But telling people that who have heard about this thing called Traveller and are looking for more information and told "Here's your syllabus of 40 years of books" is going to turn off at least some people.

So I really want to know:

What is the purpose of COTI? Is to encourage the use of the Traveller rules (across editions)? Or to encourage the use of and understanding of the OTU?

i understant that these two agendas are not mutually exclusive. But certainly the focus of one can come at the expense of the focus of the other.

Again, either focus is fine.

But I've never asked this question before (and again, when I arrived it didn't occur to me that I would have to ask). But given this thread and conversation I am really curious: What is the focus of this site? What is its purpose? Because how new players are greeted and what answers are given and what subforms are available will be colored by the answers to those questions.
 
Last edited:
What is the focus of this site? What is its purpose? Because how new players are greeted and what answers are given and what subforms are available will be colored by the answers to those questions.

Actually, in a sense you have answered your own question. The forums and sub-forums define the purpose and focus of this site as it has evolved from inception to the present.

There is a Forum on "General Traveller Discussions" because COTI accomodates discussions on Traveller that are general in nature and span across rules editions ... like new creatures, or interseting characters or the Official Traveller Universe or sharing artwork.

There is a Forum dedicated to "T5" (all by itself) because COTI is the de facto home of T5 and the official site of FFE.

There is a Forum on "Other Versions of Traveller" with sub-forums dedicated to every imaginable version of the Traveller rules because COTI is a place to facilitate edition specific conversations as well.


There is a Forum on "2300/2320" because COTI is a place that supports conversations on the 'alternate tech' of the 2300 universe.

There is a Forum dedicated to "Play By Post" (one of my personal favorites) because COTI is also a place where you can come and actually play Traveller if you want.

There are more, but you get the idea. It really is all about "Citizens of the Imperium" ... the only thing they have in common is a desire to be Citizens (interact with other people) and discuss something about this "Imperium" called Traveller (OTU, ATU or 23xx) that Marc seems to have created.

Since I am a fan of The Traveller Book (CT), but prefer a stripped down version of Rule 68A for tasks & a strippede down version of Striker for Combat, and have a PbP that shamelessly mixes OTU/IMTO and non-TU data together ... I would suggest that the litmus test for 'Traveller/OTU Purity' is set pretty low around here.

If you come out saying "The OTU is THUS and SO", you should be prepared to back that up with data and be prepared to encounter other viewpoints. Otherwise, I think that the goal is to have fun.

My observation is that new players who post questions, get them answered. The more specific the question, the easier it is to answer. "Where can I find data on damage from a hand grenade in MgT 2ed?" is a lot easier to answer than "Can someone explain how combat works in TNE?" :)
 
Is COTI about using Traveller to play any setting one wants with the tools offered in the rules?


Yes.

It's your version of the Traveller universe, pick and choose what you want.

Is there 40 years of background scattered across half a dozen versions? Yep. If you post something and someone tried to correct you, the phrase "we're not using that in our game" becomes your friend.
 
Yes.

It's your version of the Traveller universe, pick and choose what you want.

Is there 40 years of background scattered across half a dozen versions? Yep. If you post something and someone tried to correct you, the phrase "we're not using that in our game" becomes your friend.

Oh, I'm well familiar with the phrase.
At some point I simply got tired of repeating it.
 
...you are saying that discussions are grounded in either the OTU or variations from that OTU, yes?

I don't think so. Perhaps at one time, in theory, but my experience is COTI (defined as the users, not the staff) uses the corpus of canon and decannonized Traveller material as a common set of metrics to discuss and talk about Traveller (the engines, the OTU, and various MTU's).

Certainly since the advent of MgT1 there has been an explicit "opening up" of Traveller the engine to different settings than the OTU in an explicit way that hadn't been found since the days of ProtoTraveller (perhaps more so with it's alternate drives and printed other setting materials).

D.
 
If I understand this statement, however...

...you are saying that discussions are grounded in either the OTU or variations from that OTU, yes?
No.

I am saying that the majority of people who come here (old players and new players) are aware of this thing called the Third Imperium that is the default setting for Traveller as Greyhawk was the default setting for AD&D.

VERY, VERY, VERY few people will be aware of LBB1-3 or the MgT Core Book and NOT know at least a little about the Third Imperium. Thus to assume that someone says 'Traveller' and means some setting other than the Third Imperium is not reasonable. The burden falls on the person to make clear they are not using the common default setting.

Once that information is conveyed, there is no difficulty. I (personally) do not like or use the Third Imperium because I found it too large for the style of play that I enjoy. When talking about IMTU (using the Rules but not the setting), I just state that at the beginning to make the point clear.

Let's be very specific. If we want to discuss CT LBB 1-3 Chargen, but I want to create a sub-sector more like the Honorverse, then I will need to mention that at the start of our conversations. Otherwise the discussion of Traveller SOC 11+ will be based on assumptions closer to the 3rd Imperium since that is what the rules suggest with Dukes and Marquis. Even more so if we include High Guard for more detailed Navy Characters (like in Honor Harrington). There would be nothing to prevent our having that conversation and many people would probably contribute, but the responsibility falls on me to say that this is not the OTU but a completely different setting.

There are sub-forums that make that easier and clearer. "General Traveller Discussions: In the OTU" would be a bad choice to host that discussion. ;)
 
As just two examples of "it really is anything" on CotI: just search for "Mercator"(someone using CT for an Imperial Rome game on ancient Earth) and "Traveller Fantasy RPG". Nothing to do with the OTU.
 
If I understand this statement, however...

...you are saying that discussions are grounded in either the OTU or variations from that OTU, yes?
Actually, there is also a sense in which this is "yes" even if your universe has NOTHING to do with the OTU.

Based on any version of Traveller Rules ...
  • Is FTL Travel possible?
  • Is it called "Jump", take about a week and require a 'Jump Drive'?
  • Is there FTL communications?
  • Can I buy a shotgun? a cutlass? a laser rifle? a gauss rifle?
  • Is there a Nobility?
  • Do merchant ships have 'turrets' with missiles, lasers or sandcasters?
  • Is there a 100 dT Scout Ship? a 200 dT Free Trader?
  • Is a ship less than 100 dT called a small craft? Can it 'Jump'?
... How many of these did your answer match the OTU? Is your Traveller Universe really so different from the OTU or is it "grounded in either the OTU or variations from that OTU"?
 
Back
Top