Traveller Theme 1: Proto-Traveller

[Whipsnade]

A note about Dungeons & Dragons and Chainmail ...

It was Chainmail that introduced my teen-aged friends and my teen-aged self first to D&D and thence to other RPGs. At first we used D&D more as a "quick & dirty" man-to-man combat system than a dungeon-crawling RPG. That did change over time.

The first GDW RPG we played was En Garde and again we emphasized the combat system over the other bits. Our use of Traveller went through the same stages.

It was either December of '77 or January of '78 and we were all playing various SPI folios at a friend's house. Tom Connelly came in with that Little Black Box with the Red Stripe we all know so well and passed out the Little Black Books within it to anyone who was interested.

"It's like D&D, but with guns," Tom said.

My first look at Traveller was LBB:3 Worlds and Adventures. The first thing I ever rolled up was an animal.

Initially, all we did was use the combat system in LBB:1 to run all sorts of WW2 Eastern Front small unit action. Within a few months, I distinctly remember a few guys running LBB:2's ship combat system and remarking it's mapless nature reminded me of AH's Jutland. I also remember someone borrowing the books, rolling up a subsector, and then pushing a free trader through it in a simplistic merchant/economics game.

We eventually drifted into running one-session adventures of the "Patron wants you to do X" variety. I can't remember much about them except that combat was always involved. The first "real", multi-session, adventure I remember playing was Across the Bright Face and that's only because my PC died one hex away from the starport! That had to have been in 1980 at the earliest.

 

[creativehum]

"It's like D&D, but with guns," Tom said.

I loved that.

****

My introduction to RPGs was a friend's father (who had just won (again) at the Origins DIPLOMACY tournament) coming back with the Blue Box D&D game. Tom wasn't that interested. But I borrowed it from Tom and was hooked.

***

All of these discussions, of course, are complicated by:
1. When someone started in the hobby
2. What games they started with
3. Their own personal tastes

The "assumption" button gets set with details like those above.

 

[Whipsnade]

The "assumption" button gets set with details like those above.

That's an important observation and one we should all keep in mind.

Lew Pulsipher wrote in interesting column at Gamasutra earlier this month in which he talked about the displacement of consequence-based gaming by reward-based gaming. He believes that MMO's are the reason; you need something to entice players into returning and continuing to play. I've often written both here and elsewhere that I believe it's a consequences of video games with their multiple lives and game saves.

Whatever the reason, I completely agree when Lew writes "Consequences are a form of constraints, and contemporary players do not like constraints." He goes onto to note that complaints about D&D's alignment system was perhaps the first example of this mindset.

This dislike of constraints also figures into Omer Joel's Three Creeps; Complexity Creep, Modifier Creep, and Scale Creep. Insisting on more complexity exemplified by adding more skills, feats, and otehr geegaws, insisting on more modifiers to cram into a rather small 36-option 2D6 roll, and insisting on more scale exemplified by what we call the Big Ship Imperium are all attempts to escape constraints in the game.

Whether you're running campaigns or writing supplements, you'd be wise to determine just where your players and readers fall on the consequences - rewards spectrum.

 

[creativehum]

He goes onto to note that complaints about D&D's alignment system was perhaps the first example of this mindset.

I agree with your whole premise in that post.

I'd like to add an additional example: People who complain about death in Classic Traveller's Character generation system. The whole point is the gamble of wanting more skills and benefits against the risk of death. The gamble of death is the constraint that makes the system more than "I keep piling on skills until I can't get anymore," rather than, "I don't know if I should go for another term with this awesome character or not!"

Original Traveller, in my view, was built with LOTS of constraints across all of the elements of the games:

Ships with limited Jump range, fuel, navigation capability (1977 rules); ship hull size and limits on ship components; amor that works well against some weapons but not others; the communication limited to the speed of ships; financial constraints on starships; aging (especially important in a game where journeying to another world and back eats up at least a month of a character's life); the desire for exploration with the limits on refined fuel; and so on...

One of the things I have always loved about Traveller is its proper value of constraints.

 

[Condottiere]

Which is fine, until frustration sets in.

Constraints during play can help the ambiance and play style; if during character generation it ends with your creation dead, it's pretty much like playing a one armed bandit. The pay off is actually playing the game, not dicing up continuously until you get Indiana Jones.

 

[creativehum]

Which is fine, until frustration sets in.

Constraints during play can help the ambiance and play style; if during character generation it ends with your creation dead, it's pretty much like playing a one armed bandit. The pay off is actually playing the game, not dicing up continuously until you get Indiana Jones.

You mean Indian Jones at age 54 or something? Because after the third term a PC needs to rolling 7/8+ or start dropping his physical stats every term. And the odds get worse (way worse) at 50.

I understand lots of people don't like the system. But I look at all the gears and I think they interlock wonderfully well.

But I also treat the potential of death for PCs in play n Classic Traveller as a given. So, for me, working too hard to get that perfect character (if someone really is going to do that) is going to drive a person nuts anyway if a stray bullet takes the PC out. I can't worry about that guy.

 

[Condottiere]

It works as a one-off for me, or even NPCs; but if I'm investing time in playing the character, I want control over the creation process, within given constraints.

 

[kilemall]

You mean Indian Jones at age 54 or something? Because after the third term a PC needs to rolling 7/8+ or start dropping his physical stats every term. And the odds get worse (way worse) at 50.

I understand lots of people don't like the system. But I look at all the gears and I think they interlock wonderfully well.

But I also treat the potential of death for PCs in play n Classic Traveller as a given. So, for me, working too hard to get that perfect character (if someone really is going to do that) is going to drive a person nuts anyway if a stray bullet takes the PC out. I can't worry about that guy.

What, no clerical resurrection from the autodoc at the MedHospital?

 

[creativehum]

What, no clerical resurrection from the autodoc at the MedHospital?

No.

 

[creativehum]

It works as a one-off for me, or even NPCs; but if I'm investing time in playing the character, I want control over the creation process, within given constraints.

Okay.

 

[kilemall]

No.

COLD!

I approve, of course.

 

[creativehum]

COLD!

I approve, of course.

Of course you do.
Because you are awesome.

 

[aramis]

In the interview Miller discusses the inspirations and influences on Traveller as originally published. The interview can be found here.

Nope. That version linked removed all non-GW content.

 

[McPerth]

Chatting with Cryton, and remembered the metric for "ProtoTraveller" for us...
The "4-4-4" plan.
Books 1-4
Supplements 1-4
Adventures 1-4

If the Advanced Chargen from LBB4 is accepted, why not the one in LBB5 (though i understand that the ship design system in HG is out of question)? Otherwise, you'll give too large an advantage to those in the Army/marines.

ANd same can be said about LBB6 and 7 advanced Chargen...

The limitation on ship size in LBB2 is due to maximum hull a drive can support and the limitation that multiple drives can not be installed to improve performance (allowed in T5)
A Z drive produces performance of 2 in a 5000t hull. There is a possible fudge available in that the Z drive in a 4000t hull is performance 3 - so technically a Z drive could produce performance 1 in a 12000t hull, the theoretical fudge limit to drive size.

See that this is probably a must if featuring the K'Kree un your campaign, as they don't tolerate too small ships. AM2 talks about using the formulas in HG to build those ships, though...

CT 81 is similar, but not quite the same.
You have to have a computer model at least as high as the jump, so TL 9 is J3, TL A is J4, TL B is J5, TL C is J6, TL D+ are theoretically higher, but you can't build higher than J6 (and J7 won't fit with fuel and bridge anyway).
Also TL 9 is A-D, TL10 is E-H, 11 is J-K, 12 L-N, 13 P-Q, 14 R-U, 15 V-Z...

If using so, how to define the TL for K'Kree ships?

See that their mínimum ship size is 1000 dton, so needing at least drives E, so not achieving star travel until TL 10...

 

[whulorigan]

Chatting with Cryton, and remembered the metric for "ProtoTraveller" for us...
The "4-4-4" plan.
Books 1-4
Supplements 1-4
Adventures 1-4

[FONT=arial,helvetica]If the Advanced Chargen from LBB4 is accepted, why not the one in LBB5 (though i understand that the ship design system in HG is out of question)? Otherwise, you'll give too large an advantage to those in the Army/marines.

ANd same can be said about LBB6 and 7 advanced Chargen...[/FONT]

Or use ATPollard's method, which nicely harmonizes Basic & Advanced CharGen:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=494471&postcount=8

 

[creativehum]

https://talestoastound.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/white-dwarf-magazine-023-miller-interview.pdf

Nope. That version linked removed all non-GW content.

Well, this was embarrassing.

I forgot there were two runs of White Dwarf... and linked to the newer, all GW one.

It's an incredibly informative interview for anyone interested in the design and early years of Traveller.

You can read it here:

White Dwarf Magazine #23
"An Interview with Marc Miller, the Inventor of Traveller"
p. 10-12

 

[creativehum]

1. If the Advanced Chargen from LBB4 is accepted, why not the one in LBB5 (though i understand that the ship design system in HG is out of question)? Otherwise, you'll give too large an advantage to those in the Army/marines.

And same can be said about LBB6 and 7 advanced Chargen...

2. See that this is probably a must if featuring the K'Kree un your campaign, as they don't tolerate too small ships. AM2 talks about using the formulas in HG to build those ships, though...

If using so, how to define the TL for K'Kree ships?

See that their mínimum ship size is 1000 dton, so needing at least drives E, so not achieving star travel until TL 10...

Well, Proto-Traveller is an exercise without hard boundaries. At some point, what kind of setting based on early materials will come down to what the Referee is willing to bend or break on.

As for me, when I get excited about Proto-Traveller, stirring as it does memories of my original reading of early material, when I look at you questions I have the following answers:

1. I'd be using Book 4 only for the weapons and gear, as needed. Not the advanced character generation. (From what I understand, several people in this thread use it in this way, but I might be wrong.)

2. This where things get tricky. Doing a quick Google search, it seems as if the K'kree don't get introduced till well after the period defined in by the Proto-Traveller era. That is, if one is starting with Proto-Traveller as a premise, is one obliged to shoe-horn in everything that comes later? Does one want to?

I don't think it's possible to shoe horn in everything. As Aramis has pointed out, correctly, there is no Third Imperium as we know it without Highguard. The size of the ships, the lack of concern about refueling (due to the purifiers), and so on. So, that's just a given out of the gate.

But what about the K'kree, and other elements of the Third Imperium that a reader in 1979 knows nothing about? Should they be included?

Or is Proto-Traveller a chance for the Referee to grow his own setting out from the clutch of materials GDW had published before and around 1980?

As someone who watches countless threads spring up around here where people talk about all the retrofitting and retconning and constant debates about how things work, and don't work, between all the materials published over the decades of the game, I would not be the guy trying to figure out how to make all these pieces work together using only the early materials. I'd be growing it out from scratch, using the Proto-Traveller materials as a jumping off point.

But that's just me. Others will have different answers.

But it is a necessary point of discussion in a thread about Proto-Traveller.

 

[ffilz]

But, inspired by a post by Supplement Four a while back, I’m creating a set of Weapon Cards that have one weapon listed per card. Range and Armor are cross-referenced in a small table for the Throw value. And each card will contain the +/-DMs for Characteristics and penalties for Weakened Blows or Swings.

The idea is that if a Player Character has such-and-such a weapon, that card sits in front of the Player for reference. If a Player Character hands a weapon over to another Player Character, the Player hands the card to that Player. They’re coming out nice!

Nice. The Judges Guild screen has a row for each weapon with all the numbers figured out. I have some tables more in the format you're doing from my work at helping Paul Gazis digitize his Eight Worlds game (a Traveller variane), but he never put them up on the web.

One thought for the cards, maybe add some little dots or something to track ammo.

Frank

 

[ffilz]

I loved that.

****

My introduction to RPGs was a friend's father (who had just won (again) at the Origins DIPLOMACY tournament) coming back with the Blue Box D&D game. Tom wasn't that interested. But I borrowed it from Tom and was hooked.

***

All of these discussions, of course, are complicated by:
1. When someone started in the hobby
2. What games they started with
3. Their own personal tastes

The "assumption" button gets set with details like those above.

Yea, definitely. My path to role playing:

Born 1963 (as of this posting, age 53)
Early 1970s - picked up Avalon Hill's Tactics II at a yardsale (the seller needed to talk to my parents to get the ok to sell a wargame to a little kid...)
A few years later Little Wars
And then Donald Featherstone's books (I remember with one of them, feeling like sloped armor should be accounted for)
And then c. 1976 or maybe summer 1977, seeing TSR games at the hobby shop, looking at D&D and rejecting it as to abstract and coming home with Tractics instead
And then fall 1977, my best friend's birthday party - he got Holmes D&D. I was initially skeptical and watched the other participants play. But I stayed up all night reading and re-reading the book. And the next morning, declared i would start running the game. I immediately felt that different weapons should do different damage (hey, different classes got different hit points, and monsters got varying attacks...).
1979 we got Traveller (not sure if it was initially my copy, or the first exposure was a friends - I have a 1977 box, so I almost certainly got it before 1981), but I really didn't get into it that much.
c. 1985 Started a SF campaign by modding up RuneQuest. It lasted one session, but also saw Paul Gazis's Eight Worlds campaign and became hooked on Traveller
2007 Started to get into the return to OD&D movement and also started looking into SF gaming again
2015 While reading all the Traveller Books 1-3/Proto-Traveller discussion realized that the answer to my frustration with how to justify space trade in a "realistic" universe was to dump the idea, and embrace early Traveller.

Through that journey I've gone from rolling up quick PCs to elaborate character design (Gurps and Hero and others) and now back to wanting a quick roll up, and playing the character rolled rather than trying to force a concept (not that I'm totally opposed to playing a concept, one of the other games I would play in a heartbeat is Burning Wheel, on the other hand, while it is a character design system, it is one with LOTS of constraints). So for me, just Book 3. I'm not even jumping at Supplement 4 because it introduces too many new skills. I may over time work on a few additional careers, but I'm also curious what a setting looks like where "travellers" come from the original 6 careers.

For me personally, the only bits I plan on taking from published setting materials is interesting worlds and ideas. I won't feel compelled to try and fit any given piece in. So with a small ship universe, I don't thing the K'kree as presented would be travellers. On the other hand, figuring out how such a race MIGHT travel in a small ship universe would be an interesting exercise.

Frank

 

[creativehum]

So with a small ship universe, I don't thing the K'kree as presented would be travellers. On the other hand, figuring out how such a race MIGHT travel in a small ship universe would be an interesting exercise.

Here's a thing:

What was contained in the LBBs was never supposed to be the sum total of what the PCs were supposed to experience and encounter. It was a baseline set for the culture and science they came from.

The idea wasn't that all those blank spaces in the Tech Level Table were supposed to be filled in in a consistent, across the universe way.

The idea was, in original Traveller (sans any setting details, apart from those implied in the rules), that the PCs would go off on adventures and encounter lots of things that didn't exist in their culture, or seemed impossible, or boggled their brains. They would be there as puzzles, or threats, or opportunities.

Thus, in a "small ship" universe, the PCs might wander into space where they encounter a 50,000 ton ship. (Or such a ship might wander into a system where humanity is already established.) The PCs board this monstrous thing, and find K'kree, or 15' tall ogre aliens, or whatever.

GDW's OTU took that tact that whatever was in the Books 1-3 was pretty much what science and reality is like. Which produces a certain kind of hard-feeling SF that is fun to play in along the lines of Outland, Alien, and certain SF novels.

But, if one links to the article I posted above, one will read Miller stating the books that inspired Traveller... and all of them involved lots of fantastical worlds, with some sort of unique, exotic, SF premise per world.

A choice was made to limit exotic and unique SF possibilities fiercely in the OTU. But that does't mean it has to be that way. The moment the Referee cuts ties with the OTU, one can still be using Books 1-3 as a baseline for the PCs... but introduce whatever wonders and terrors and rewards and threats he or she wants to for the setting.

A huge ship works wonders in a Traveller game even if on is using Book 2 only... because it means the PCs get to encounter and explore something they don't understand yet.