Traveller Theme 1: Proto-Traveller

[Vargr Breath]

could. but given that lbb1-3 involve navies, armies, titled nobility, and social ranking (as an inherent personal characteristic, no less), "proto-traveller" and "proto-imperial" seem distinctions without a difference.

Hi
That's true, but the imperial setting could be in any universe you wanted to make up using LBBs 1-3. But the Imperium is OTU, and most of the other books listed seem to lead to the OTU. That's why I thought Proto-Imperium would be a better name when using any other books then LBB 1-3.

 

[aramis]

Hi
That's true, but the imperial setting could be in any universe you wanted to make up using LBBs 1-3. But the Imperium is OTU, and most of the other books listed seem to lead to the OTU. That's why I thought Proto-Imperium would be a better name when using any other books then LBB 1-3.

In the "4-4-4" plan, only one supplement is actually tied to the OTU at all - S3 Spinward Marches.

Sups 1, 2, & 4 are generic. 1001 NPC's, Animal Encounters, and Citizens. The only mechanical changes from Bk 1-3 are the addition of bows.

Adventures 1-4 are not imperial centered - 2 of them are explicitly beyond the boarders (1 Kinunir, 4, Leviathan), and two are pretty generic despite being part of the OTU's initial presence (2 - Research Station Gamma, 3- Twilight's Peak). But the Imperium in these isn't quite the same as the OTU in later materials.

When the Prototraveller discussion began on COTI, it was a search for that Early Dark Imperium; the evil imperium which it was ethical to rail against. A "What if?" that ignored the game-changing book 5.

It's also the style of play that Many of us Grognards started on.

 

[Vargr Breath]

Redefining long established (over a dozen years now) terms is NOT a good idea.

Hi
True, but after 18 pages it seems that there is still a lot of discussion on what Proto-Traveller is exactly . But as long as everyone is having fun it really doesn't matter what they call it. I've enjoyed the the whole idea of Proto-Traveller, but think I'll go with just the 1977 LBBs 1-3 for my own Proto-Traveller. That's the nice thing about Traveller , everyone can make their own Traveller universe.

 

[flykiller]

the imperial setting could be in any universe you wanted to make up using LBBs 1-3.

oh sure, absolutely. but if you stick with lbb1-3, it'll wind up looking like 3i-mini or 3i-lite.

most of the other books listed seem to lead to the OTU.

heh. including lbb1.

That's the nice thing about Traveller , everyone can make their own Traveller universe.

if anyone really truly wants to escape the 3i, they can always start at the beginning. drop lbb1-3 and just do it all themselves from scratch, new stats, new chargen, new "careers", new setting, new tech, new everything.

 

[Whipsnade]

Hi
After reading all of these post I wonder if we should call the use of only LLBs 1-3 Proto-Traveller.
Using LBBs 1-4, Supplements 1-4, Adventures 1-4 and all of the Double Adventures could be called Proto-Imperium.

We shouldn't and we won't because there's no real distinction between the two.

As Wil pointed out, your proposal only muddies the situation instead of clarifying it.

As Fly points out, using LBB1-3 alone still results in something 3I-ish.

The idea that Traveller originally was some sort of do-it-yourself generic sci-fi RPG setting kit is as old as the game. It's also fundamentally incorrect or, putting it more politely, greatly optimistic. From the first and thanks to it's technological and sociological choices, Traveller constrained the range of settings which could be constructed from it's rules.

This article discusses that constrained range of settings as part of it's examination of Traveller's source texts. The article contains a chart listing 14 of those sources and the ease at which Traveller could be used to create each source's setting. The results are eye opening. On a scale of one to five, only 3 of the sources rate 4 or better.

You can, for example, use Traveller to create a Star Wars setting IF you make your own rules for FTL comms, give fighters weapons that can damage ships, change jump drive's range and size requirements, and dozens of other things.

Putting it another way, Traveller isn't a pile of lumber waiting to be shaped into a house, boat, dinner table, or whatnot. Instead, Traveller is a preexisting object which with varying levels of effort and success can be reshaped into a house, boat, dinner table, or whatnot.

 

[Vargr Breath]

We shouldn't and we won't because there's no real distinction between the two.

As Wil pointed out, your proposal only muddies the situation instead of clarifying it.

As Fly points out, using LBB1-3 alone still results in something 3I-ish.

The idea that Traveller originally was some sort of do-it-yourself generic sci-fi RPG setting kit is as old as the game. It's also fundamentally incorrect or, putting it more politely, greatly optimistic. From the first and thanks to it's technological and sociological choices, Traveller constrained the range of settings which could be constructed from it's rules.

This article discusses that constrained range of settings as part of it's examination of Traveller's source texts. The article contains a chart listing 14 of those sources and the ease at which Traveller could be used to create each source's setting. The results are eye opening. On a scale of one to five, only 3 of the sources rate 4 or better.

You can, for example, use Traveller to create a Star Wars setting IF you make your own rules for FTL comms, give fighters weapons that can damage ships, change jump drive's range and size requirements, and dozens of other things.

Putting it another way, Traveller isn't a pile of lumber waiting to be shaped into a house, boat, dinner table, or whatnot. Instead, Traveller is a preexisting object which with varying levels of effort and success can be reshaped into a house, boat, dinner table, or whatnot.

Hi
I not trying to be argumentative but I don't see how rolling up one or two subsectors and playing in them have to be 3I-ish unless you add the 3I history into it yourself. Sure it will be Traveller ,and that's a good thing, but I still don't see how it has to lead to a 3I or 3I-lite setting. As far as changing the name, this has been your baby so you get to name it So "Proto-Traveller" it is.

 

[aramis]

Hi
True, but after 18 pages it seems that there is still a lot of discussion on what Proto-Traveller is exactly . But as long as everyone is having fun it really doesn't matter what they call it. I've enjoyed the the whole idea of Proto-Traveller, but think I'll go with just the 1977 LBBs 1-3 for my own Proto-Traveller. That's the nice thing about Traveller , everyone can make their own Traveller universe.

Not really. Just people like you who haven't READ the corpus of discussion on prototraveller in total (and I'll admit, finding it all isn't that easy), and come in with ill-informed and ill-advised redefinitions that only annoy those of us who have been through that holy-war topic a dozen times or longer.

Robject is trying to pin down exactly what to put in a formal milieux book for Prototraveller.

That's what this thread is about.

Noting that the general consensus was reached about 10 years ago that PT was, mechanically, B1-4, A1-4, S-1-4. A5 is clearly big ship stuff. Bk 5 is big ship stuff.

Thematically, it's different from the OTU.

• Small ships, big drives.
• J4 available at TL9... in a 200 Td hull
• No armor on ships
• The Imperium is an autocratic nightmare... and rules with an iron fist, but ignores on-planet behavior. (Very Dune-esque - think CHOAM.)
• Many worlds are unpleasant hell-holes.
• Criminal conspiracies run rampant.
• Blatant slavery via company store. Sometimes via kidnapping and impressment.
• The Spinward marches ARE a frontier - only a few hundred years settled, if that.
• The only detailed aliens are Chirpers, Droyne, and Ancients.
• The Zhodani are an enemy, but not a defined one.
• The Sword Worlds and the Darrians are not well defined except as astropolitical borders. (Via S3)⓪
• The space-lanes are bloody dangerous.
• Cr400 is ordinary living for a month. Assuming 10% above cost income after taxes①
  • Average income is thus about Cr5300/year per person.
  • Unskilled crewmen on ships make about KCr12/year.
    Skilled make up to KCr60/person.
  • assuming taxation and tithing total out to about 20% of income, that ups per person income to Cr6400 or so.
• Character skills matter in ship combat a lot.②
• Fighters make sense for warships.③

⓪ The polities exist in the maps - noted mostly by their bases. It's unclear where the borders actually are in S3. Later maps are MUCH clearer.
① These numbers don't play at all well with Striker/TCS econ. Nor with MT's.
② Bk5 combat minimizes the effect of skills on big ship combat, probably for simple playability. Bk2, however, makes skills matter a good bit more. This is compounded by the smaller scale making individuals more important.
③ They're the only way to up the damage per ton that can be done under bk 2

The question becomes, in re T5, how to generate this feel.
Hell, I've struggled on how to accomplish it in MegaTraveller and/or Mongoose.

 

[flykiller]

Sure it will be Traveller ,and that's a good thing, but I still don't see how it has to lead to a 3I or 3I-lite setting.

there are ways around the 3i.

probably the easiest is to play in the time period before the 2nd imperium is established or in its decline. open conflict between expanding terra and the retreating vilani, or between retreating terra and whatever-else-is-popping-up. free-lancing terran characters who do not (should not) have a "social standing" stat, two empires and hundreds of worlds in various stages of transition (pre-, in-, post-). lots of opportunity for conquering or last-stand military action, world foundation, hazardous trading opportunities, you name it, in a galaxy where "empire" may or may not mean anything.

or just terra expanding into a galaxy with no vilani empire. the terrans just move out, with no centralized authority but the blessing of mother earth. huge corporate colony ships heading out to displace the natives and seize resources, individually-owned ships in wagon trains (can just hear john wayne, "jump drives, HO!") looking to start a new life, angry loners just striking out and jumping over and over again trying to find the empty spot where they can be free, conquistadores looking to spread the faith and gain glory for god. all kinds of possibilities.

 

[flykiller]

The question becomes, in re T5, how to generate this feel.
Hell, I've struggled on how to accomplish it in MegaTraveller and/or Mongoose.

the reason you are struggling is because it can't be done.

space travel involves large-scale tech, which will involve large-scale industry and finances and government and society and corporate interests and legal standing, established and enforced long before any player character is born. jump drive dictates communication/authority issues, best resolved by "nobility", established and enforced long before any player character is born. and you're right back where you started. you can change the names, you can change the aliens, but the game itself will look pretty similar.

consider luke skywalker. without the empire he is never anything more than a farmer. with the empire, and with his super powers, he is not a part of that empire, rather he strides above it. but in traveller the characters are never heroic and never rise above their setting, rather they are ordinary and are a part of it.

 

[Whipsnade]

I not trying to be argumentative...

You not being argumentative. You are being willfully obtuse however.

... but I don't see how rolling up one or two subsectors and playing in them have to be 3I-ish unless you add the 3I history into it yourself.

You don't "see" because you haven't yet bothered to understand.

Wil's post beat mine and his explanation is far more detailed than the one I was preparing. The polity described in the 4-4-4 is the Third Imperium. It's the 3I prior to GDW's make-over.

Sure it will be Traveller ,and that's a good thing, but I still don't see how it has to lead to a 3I or 3I-lite setting.

The rules have certain assumptions built into them. When you follow the assumptions within the 4-4-4 rules you end up with the "dark" Imperium of proto-Traveller. When you follow the assumptions built into GDW's post-LBB:4 work, you end up with a benign or good Imperium.

When using LBB1-3, in order to avoid a dark Imperium or even a small "I" imperium, you need to ignore the assumptions within the rules.

The rules as written produce something akin to the 3I. That's why the OTU/3I is the default setting of the rules. Understand?

As far as changing the name, this has been your baby so you get to name it So "Proto-Traveller" it is.

Don't be cute. Proto-Traveller is neither my baby nor did I name it. The Proto poject is the work of people far better versed in Traveller and RPGs than I'll ever be.

Read the thread, then make suggestions.

 

[Vargr Breath]

You not being argumentative. You are being willfully obtuse however.



You don't "see" because you haven't yet bothered to understand.

Wil's post beat mine and his explanation is far more detailed than the one I was preparing. The polity described in the 4-4-4 is the Third Imperium. It's the 3I prior to GDW's make-over.



The rules have certain assumptions built into them. When you follow the assumptions within the 4-4-4 rules you end up with the "dark" Imperium of proto-Traveller. When you follow the assumptions built into GDW's post-LBB:4 work, you end up with a benign or good Imperium.

When using LBB1-3, in order to avoid a dark Imperium or even a small "I" imperium, you need to ignore the assumptions within the rules.

The rules as written produce something akin to the 3I. That's why the OTU/3I is the default setting of the rules. Understand?



Don't be cute. Proto-Traveller is neither my baby nor did I name it. The Proto poject is the work of people far better versed in Traveller and RPGs than I'll ever be.

Read the thread, then make suggestions.

Hi
I wasn't trying to be cute. The "your baby" was to all the people who had been developing Proto- Traveller, and explaining it to me, I guess I just didn't explain myself well . Aramis post has been the best explanation on what Proto-Traveller is to this group. And Flykiller's post on the ways around 3I was helpful also. So I'm done.

 

[RandyB]

After re-reading through this thread, I have an observation about Book 4 and Advanced Chargen.

Book 4 was intentionally titled Mercenary. It was a deliberate attempt at introducing a new SF genre into Traveller, the mil-SF genre. Advanced Chargen in Book 4 was intended to be balanced against itself, to produce characters suitable for a mil-SF Traveller campaign - not for producing characters for a "regular" Traveller campaign.

Accordingly, I concur with those upthread who would not use Advanced Chargen in a "regular" proto-Traveller campaign. However, if I were going to run a mil-SF proto-Traveller campaign, then all PCs would use Advanced Chargen.

Different standards for different genres. Sounds Old School to me...

 

[flykiller]

to produce characters suitable for a mil-SF Traveller campaign

perhaps to produce characters suitable for mil-SF players. after all the lbb1 description of (for example) electronics skill being applicable to "all manner of electronics systems" may work for rpg players, but it just wouldn't work for rpg mercs if gun skill were said to be applicable to "all manner of gun systems".

 

[mike wightman]

A method I have found that works is to use LBB4/5 yearly assignments and decorations etc, but skills are still gained as per LBBB1.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Yes, especially the geopolitics part. That's one of my main attracting factors to this game - building universes with their own complex politics and wars. Though I do suspect that from a law enforcement angle, the PCs usually tend to be more on the criminal side than on the cop side.


I like this - an interesting observation.

My own take on this is that Traveller, when you decode it, is a western, or at most - a 1920's/1930's crime show. You got shotguns and six-shooters starring prominently; a BAR (Autorifle) and a Tommygun (SMG) for all your Bonnie & Clyde shootout needs and Al Capone affairs; a frontier as the explicit setting with a "remote but industrially powerful" polity with a relatively limited presence on the frontier (i.e. US GOV in the Old West); a lot of remote colonies with their old-west-small-town mentality; and most importantly - a band of desperados, again armed with shotguns and six-shooters, who ride into town and get into all sorts of trouble. Or the few lawmen or Treasury Agents who try to bring down all sorts of outlaws and mobsters - typically with little or now organisational support from the state. It's a cowboy/gangster show.

EDIT: Note that in the vast majority of such stories, neither the protagonists nor the antagonists are active-duty soldiers brandishing military hardware or commanding large military formations. The cavalry may arrive as part of the plot, but they are a parameter in a plot in which the heroes have to hold out until the cavalry arrives. The story is not about the cavalry. The same goes in Proto-Traveller for the most part - the action is typically small-scale and rarely involves heavy military hardware.

I probably shouldn't talk too much, but both my parents had mental health backgrounds, as well as security. My father put forth some concepts for reforming rehabilitation, some of which took, others I'm not sure. My mother was in the business of rehabbing down and out folks, as well as investigating a number of things for the state of California (and other stuff).

So when I started rewatching Star Trek over the last couple of years, a lot of things clicked as to what the stories "really" were about, so to speak. And applying some of that reduction to the CT adventures and double adventures, one begins to see some of the inspiration.

I'm a scifi guy. I like all kinds of science fiction because it's cool, but crime tropes, even if they're tried and true, to me get tiring. So the challenge becomes how do you write "real" science fiction that doesn't rely on some bad guy or miscreant in society.

Warning; broken record time here; in the past I used to rail about how Traveller was not living up to its name of being a "do-all" scifi RPG, and has become more background specific as a scifi property unto itself.

You see people fighting evil corporations, interacting with hyper-paranoid aliens, or even dealing with "mind readers" and so forth, but you never see kaiju or mecha. You'll see fleets of starships slugging it out, or ACS rocketing out of space/star-ports, but you don't see "the blob" devouring a city population. Time travel is a no-no, pocket universes are okay, but I'm suspecting travelling to parallel universes where maybe there are "mirror" versions of your players' characters running amuck, or perhaps trying to put things aright as your players run amuck, are not on Traveller's radar.

A good story is a good story, regardless of the setting. I now understand what Star Trek, original Star Trek that is, as well as Traveller, is all about and where a lot of the inspiration comes from.

It was a fun hobby. When my friends and I were playing it was another cool game to have along with a bunch of other pocket RPGs and scifi war sims.

I guess my interest in scifi leans more towards George Pal, George Lucas and Irwin Allen, and not so much Gene Roddenberry or other producers who codify crime drama as scifi.

Like I say, it's been interesting. I hope this post has been useful.

 

[Golan2072]

[*]No armor on ships

Actually, Book 2 ships have armor (of sorts). What does armor mean in the Black Books rules? It is a defense which makes it harder to hit you. Book 2 provides Sandcasters and Evade programs which do the same. A military ship with an expensive computer, expensive high-level Evade program, and multiple Sandcasters will be much better protected than civilian spacecraft.

 

[aramis]

Actually, Book 2 ships have armor (of sorts). What does armor mean in the Black Books rules? It is a defense which makes it harder to hit you. Book 2 provides Sandcasters and Evade programs which do the same. A military ship with an expensive computer, expensive high-level Evade program, and multiple Sandcasters will be much better protected than civilian spacecraft.

That's still not Armor, and the benefits of sand are limited by ammo in Bk2, and also by maneuver.

In HG, moreover, Sand is more armor like, as it's not ammo limited, uses similar penetration rules, and is much more useful. Further, HG, you don't even have to buy the software, you just get the computer modifier for a wide variety of defensive uses.

If anything, HG has two Armors - the armor belt and the computer. Than all screens work the same way in Bk5/MT...

 

[Golan2072]

I probably shouldn't talk too much, but both my parents had mental health backgrounds, as well as security. My father put forth some concepts for reforming rehabilitation, some of which took, others I'm not sure. My mother was in the business of rehabbing down and out folks, as well as investigating a number of things for the state of California (and other stuff).

So when I started rewatching Star Trek over the last couple of years, a lot of things clicked as to what the stories "really" were about, so to speak. And applying some of that reduction to the CT adventures and double adventures, one begins to see some of the inspiration.

I'm a scifi guy. I like all kinds of science fiction because it's cool, but crime tropes, even if they're tried and true, to me get tiring. So the challenge becomes how do you write "real" science fiction that doesn't rely on some bad guy or miscreant in society.

Warning; broken record time here; in the past I used to rail about how Traveller was not living up to its name of being a "do-all" scifi RPG, and has become more background specific as a scifi property unto itself.

You see people fighting evil corporations, interacting with hyper-paranoid aliens, or even dealing with "mind readers" and so forth, but you never see kaiju or mecha. You'll see fleets of starships slugging it out, or ACS rocketing out of space/star-ports, but you don't see "the blob" devouring a city population. Time travel is a no-no, pocket universes are okay, but I'm suspecting travelling to parallel universes where maybe there are "mirror" versions of your players' characters running amuck, or perhaps trying to put things aright as your players run amuck, are not on Traveller's radar.

A good story is a good story, regardless of the setting. I now understand what Star Trek, original Star Trek that is, as well as Traveller, is all about and where a lot of the inspiration comes from.

It was a fun hobby. When my friends and I were playing it was another cool game to have along with a bunch of other pocket RPGs and scifi war sims.

I guess my interest in scifi leans more towards George Pal, George Lucas and Irwin Allen, and not so much Gene Roddenberry or other producers who codify crime drama as scifi.

Like I say, it's been interesting. I hope this post has been useful.

Thank you for your detailed reply.

Note that George Lucas does have his share of interstellar rogues, especially Han Solo and the related storylines. The adventures of such rogues make up a major part of the original Star Wars plot. I actually like this quite a lot, especially in gaming terms. Playing a "Han Solo" sandbox campaign will probably be easier than a "Luke Skywalker" big-plot campaign. Han does what he wants (to the limits of what his debts to Jabba the Hutt allow him), lacks a chain of command, and lacks an overriding destiny. Just like PCs. He gets entangled in all sorts of messes, just like PCs. Luke's plot is very cool on screen, but in a game, it will much more difficult to implement, especially as this is one character who gets the main spotlight unlike the Han/Chewie team.

My own sci-fi education began (in the 1990's - my teens) from old 1950's to early 1970's sci-fi you could get in 1990's Israel, which was translated into Hebrew - and thus you rarely saw new titles. This included Clarke, Heinlein, and Niven for the most part. Each had a different style, but all shared a focus on a "sense of wonder" and strange things among the stars. They also tended to have a strong focus on the frontier, on colonies, and on deep space - "here be dragons". The second part of my sci-fi education came from the industrial sci-fi horror of Alien(s) and System Shock*, and the high space opera of Babylon 5, Star Control 2*, and Andromeda Ascendant (and later Mass Effect). Traveller did "click" with my sci-fi "education", especially as the first three books did evoke a certain "sense of wonder" in me. It had similarities with the sci-fi literature I grew up on and seemed to support space opera as well.

Now I see its strong Western and Film Noir influences, which were less apparent back then. But it still evokes my "sense of wonder".

* DOS-era Computer games.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I think Lucas states that his stuff is space opera. That it's actually a soap opera dressed up in a space suit.

A young couple forbidden to marry, marry anyway, have a couple of kids, they get divorced over a political upheaval, the kids are hidden from the father, and the son comes back to redeem his dad and protect his sister.

That fits Traveller perfectly. But throw in King Ghidorah or the Doomsday Machine from classic Trek, and things get a bit more dicey or untenable in a space opera sort of way.

It's why I think Traveller almost necessitates traditional crime drama tropes, other than it's laboratory function.

Anyway, I'm out for a bit.

 

[Straybow]

I'm curious, why is this about reinventing the wheel without fixing the flat tire?

A whole bunch of things in LBB1-3 were broken or nonsensical because the game design wasn't well tested, especially compared to playtesting we can do in today's computerized distribution world. Most of those things were cast in concrete as "canon" by later revisions instead of being fixed.

For example, Robject has published a modified shipyard document. He added some stuff, but didn't fix things like integer math only for equipment sizes (with the occasional 0.5 ton thrown in), room-sized computers and control stations harkening back to the days of vacuum tubes, and no clarification of mass vs displacement.

Heck, Robject extended drive/power tables but left them coupled to fixed 100-ton increment hulls. We can replace all tables with a simple set of formulae that anybody with a 1977-era calculator could use competently (and a table that shows common and efficient solutions that would therefore be standardized in commerce).

There is a longer list of LBB1-3 bugaboos, but I'm not interested in complaining. I'm only interested in fixing things that never really worked well.