GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
There is quite a list of RPGs that are also tactical skirmish wargames. The entire existence of RPGs started as an extension of wargames.
The difference is that Traveller, in Classic and TNE at least, *admits to the connection*.
Traveller Rules As Written
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
There is quite a list of RPGs that are also tactical skirmish wargames. The entire existence of RPGs started as an extension of wargames.
The difference is that Traveller, in Classic and TNE at least, *admits to the connection*.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The key is to understand that everything in the LBB 1-3 is there for player character interaction, there is little wargame element in LBB 1-3, more was added as GDW tied the setting down and introduced more rule books.
Many of the wargames could be adapted to Traveller, but they would take over the evening. Role playing would be in the background while the wargame/boardgame becomes center stage.
Mayday, Snapshot, AHL, Striker - all boardgame/wargames that you can have your characters involved in.
Many of the wargames could be adapted to Traveller, but they would take over the evening. Role playing would be in the background while the wargame/boardgame becomes center stage.
Mayday, Snapshot, AHL, Striker - all boardgame/wargames that you can have your characters involved in.
As others have said. most RPgs include parts of both.
IMHO, Traveller is an environ, full of RPGs (yes, in plural, as some versions are different enough) and wargames, be for miniatures or board, and in several scales (from tactical, to s trategic(operational)..
One problem with RAW is when rules don't work or are outright contradictory.
I will give again the example of MT starship combat rules (all of them discussed in other threads, so I would only cite here):
And always remember: the fun police will not prosecute you for adapting/changing rules, though this may make discussions difficult, as everyone would have adapted/changed on his/her own way.
I will give again the example of MT starship combat rules (all of them discussed in other threads, so I would only cite here):
- movement does not work, when you may spend some of your speed (remember, a vector that you must change with acceleration) in the same square (MT:RM, page 92) by cilcing on it
- Skill use (mostly Gunnery and Ship Tactics) are too easy to abuse with RAW
And always remember: the fun police will not prosecute you for adapting/changing rules, though this may make discussions difficult, as everyone would have adapted/changed on his/her own way.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 1K
It's the divergence that's the hazard ... especially when dealing with "my way or the highway" personality types who will not budge for anything.
I disagree...
it's the mentality "I have the correct answer" and not hearing others that is the hazard.
Of course, any change I made to MT combat rules to allow it to be played was "the correct one" for me (or at least, the "most correct to be able to play"). Others have suggested other "correct ones" changes, and I read them, thought about them, and in some cases reached the conclusion their adaptation were not "correct" form me and my game style (and my gaming group, of course), while others i found my own adaptation was just the "maybe not so correct", and either changed it, adapted to the visions presented or commented with other people to reach a "better" one.
But both, "correct", "not so correct" or "better" is for me and my gaming stylo, not absolute, and my perfectly become "incorrect" or "worst" to yours, and that does not make anyone of us better nor wiser, just different. And that's the greatness of RPGs (in general, and Traveller in particular), even people quite different may enjoy them by adapting them to their own gaming styles,
There's only one "Rule 0": we play for fun
Last edited:
It is a strange movement system, to be sure, where, apparently, you can build up "speed" while not "moving" and then "rush off".
The nature of vector combat is ships flying past each other, or slowing to engage and being stuck close together as they accelerate out.
But MT you can build up all the speed you want, move in close, blast away for a turn or three, then, zzzing! you're far away again. Don't seem to be any facing rules or anything, so if you've built up a speed of, say, 20, you can go anywhere in a 20 hex radius on any turn.
"Before we engage in combat, my fleet is going to accrue 100 movement points."
Strange indeed. May as well just play the game "I place my ship where I want, you place your ship where you want, we alternate doing that, then fire. Next turn flip a coin as to who goes first, and do it again."
I dunno, maybe it works. It reminds me off Master of Orion 2, where you could get a teleporter like drive system that places your ship almost where ever you want.
Sigh, now we are going to have to have an argument about what wording of rule zero is canon….
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 1K
"It didn't say anything about ENJOYMENT, so that means we can't ENJOY having any FUN!"
There is no such thing as Foolproof ... merely varying degrees Fool Resistant ...
I won't participate in this argument, as this is a mater of beliefs, but just asking one question:
Do you play to keep canon or to have fun?
Personally, I see canon as a means to te end of having fun.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
What does your character want to achieve, and how do you want him, or her, to get there, within the context of the game and setting.
I believe it was the '80s when those who became role-players first went back and became wargamers. Sure everyone has ego, but those who were wargamers first had a more strongly developed detachment to loss and death in a game. You are fielding stacks of chits or rows of stands, each chit/stand representing squads or larger combat units. They are not you. Sometimes you have leader stands. They are not you either.
Now look at the tabletop roleplayer. He fields one unit. One. To be effective and fun, you have to be cooperative and collaborative. You make sketches of you character, you create an accent, you make goals to get to 9th level Fighter Lord and build your castle. Put six months in, a year in. Unless you played wargames or Paranoia where death is just a two minute penalty box, that's a lot of time and ego put in. This is not you, but it feels like it.
There was a similar situation in the 1990's with those who came into gaming via Vampire LARP. Not a joke here. So much time trying to get your costume right. Selecting your vampiric disciplines. So much intense acting your part. Then go into Torpor after three rock/paper/scissor challenges.
Book 2 Starship combat would indicate otherwise.
We never had enough floor space or tape measure. I never played miniatures before and thought it was crazy until I went to a con and saw a naval miniature battle. I had only done hex/chit wargames prior and wondered why Mayday was sold separately. 
It's why when I made stuff up it was for "proto" Traveller., The "gee whiz" version of the game.
When the game gelled into the OTU .... circa 83 or thereabouts, it didn't alter my perspective on what I and my groups wanted from the game, but years later wen I came to this forum and read other forums, it really seemed to polarize people on what was what.
I like the OTU. But I like the open ended "port anything you want" version of the game infinitely more. Like I've stated, I didn't like making up saving throws, but the combat rules made up for that -- although the armor mechanic didn't stand the test.
Like a lot of post WW1 scifi Traveller is future-security matters in space. And I got a little dismayed some five to ten years ago when my time travel adventure didn't pass muster because time travel isn't part of the OTU. But, if I were still playing as opposed to mouthing off here, I could run it for any group.
The game that was introduced to me had that really cool sorta-kinda Luke Skywalker type on the Starter Box cover, with what I assume are Mister Miller and his wife facing opposite directions flanking him. I liked the guy's armor, his helmet, his face and haircut looked like most of the dudes I grew up with in the San Joquin valley and SF Bay Area. To me that was one type of combat armor.
The wedge scout ship was one type of many. You just needed to create your own.
And that was the attraction of the system. It offered guidance without being too didactic. At the same time we thought the armor and combat matrix was spotty.
Just my opinion.
Even then, and unlike HG, LBB2 spaceship combat is very character oriented, with skills and individual decisions being as bit as important as the starship itself.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 1K
{snerk}
Just because it wasn't then, doesn't mean it can't be now ... because, you know ... time travel ...
LBB2 is ACS scale where crews matter as much (or more) than ships.
LBB5 is BCS scale where ships matter and crews are very nearly an afterthought (although crew skills do still have some limited influences on outcomes).
Only overall commanders's Fleet Tactics, ship OC's Ship Tactics and Pilot.
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
In context and hindsight, HG is a space combat simulator with just enough detail to support frantic PC action onboard either a participant or an observer. It isn't a particularly engaging wargame.
It could probably be converted to a "Eurogame" with playmats, cards, and tokens pretty readily (multiple dice rolls per attack aside) though the design system would not be part of that.
Similar threads
