Traveller's direction; history and future

[creativehum]

So on one hand you had this set of rules that said "create anything want!", and then on the other hand said "you can't do this in the official setting!"

That's kind of my "core beef" with Traveller, if I ever had one.

I hope that make sense.

It does make sense. I now get where you're coming from. I misread your original post.

Does anyone think that Traveller can still be a generic RPG, or is it more now a creature unto itself with its own established background?

I would say this in reply:

Before Proto-Traveller there is Basic Traveller. (LBBs 1-3. And Basic Traveller is the term I should have used in my post above.)

I believe Basic Traveller is a generic game to a degree. The edge is the Jump technology (specific and purposefully limiting) and, much more lightly, the notion of a social structure and careers for characters.

I addressed the value (in my view) of the limited J-Drive in my previous post.

As of the limited careers, Marc Miller presented an outline for creating new character generation life paths in JTAS 15. And anyone could have cobbled together something similar even before Miller wrote up that article. Just like Miller suggests, one can create his or her own career paths for their setting using the tables in Book 1 as a framework and toolkit.

As for the social class... anyone could strip it out, simply replacing Social Standing benefits from character generation with other benefits. Or define Social Standing any which way they wanted without reference to nobility. (In a similar way, the Psionics institute could be stripped out as The Organization of psionics and replaced with the Jedi, the Bene Gesserit, or any other organization that the Ref creates for the color and fiction he wants for his setting.)

Again, in my view, Basic Traveller is a toolkit and framework that allows players to create lots and lots of kinds of setting using the tools and examples at hand in the the three LBBs. In this view, nothing is set in stone. The Psionics Institute is a generic notion that says, "Here's a framework for Psionics. They need to be learned, they need to be trained. There will probably be an organization for that. Do what you will." And I think the whole game is like that. Samples and examples and pieces of material like an Erector Set waiting to be picked up and used to construct what the Ref and Players want.

I know this point-of-view might seem odd to some. But I've come to respect this point of view. Which I think were very much a part of how the Basic Traveller books were conceived and written.

Here are the last words of Volume 3: The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, the third book of the Original Dungeons & Dragons boxed set:

AFTERWARD:
There are unquestionably areas which have been glossed over. While we deeply regret
the necessity, space requires that we put in the essentials only, and the trimming will
oftimes have to be added by the referee and his players. We have attempted to furnish
an ample framework, and building should be both easy and fun.

In this light, we urge you to refrain from writing for rule interpretations or the like unless
you are absolutely at a loss, for everything herein is fantastic, and the best way is to
decide how you would like it to be, and then make it just that way! On the other hand, we
are not loath to answer your questions, but why have us do any more of your imagining for you?

Write to us and tell about your additions, ideas, and what have you. We could always do
with a bit of improvement in our refereeing.

The original three books for OD&D in a boxed set were obviously an inspiration for Basic Traveller. And I think the rules were written in the spirit of those words quoted above. It was part of the time, before the publishers began creating a publishing mill of material that might or might not ever be used. It was the way RPGs would be assumed to be played.

To draw the comparison completely, here are the original closing words of Book 3 - Worlds and Adventures of the Basic Traveller boxed set:

A Final Word
Traveller is necessarily a framework describing the barest of essentials for an
infinite universe; obviously rules which could cover every aspect of every possible
action would be far larger than these three booklets. A group involved in playing a
scenario or campaign can make their adventures more elaborate, more detailed,
more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination.

The greatest burden, of course, falls on the referee, who must create entire
worlds and societies through which the players will roam. One very interesting
source of assistance for this task is the existing science-fiction literature. Virtually
anything mentioned in a story or article can be transferred to the Traveller environment.
Orbital cities, nuclear war, alien societies, puzzles, enigmas, absolutely
anything can occur, with imagination being the only limit.

The players themselves have a burden almost equal to that of the referee: they
must move, act, travel in search of their own goals. The typical methods used in life
by 20th century Terrans (thrift, dedication, and hard work) do not work in
Traveller; instead, travellers must boldly plan and execute daring schemes for the
acquisition of wealth and power. As for the referee, modern science-fiction tradition
provides many ideas and concepts to be imitated.

Above all, the players and the referees must work together. Care must be taken
that the referee does not simply lay fortunes in the path of the players, but the
situation is not primarily an adversary relationship. The referee simply administers
the rules in situations where the players themselves have an incomplete understanding
of the universe. The results should reflect a consistent reality.

Note that neither Starter Traveller or The Traveller Book end on such a note. Book texts roll the reader directly into a Third Imperium subsector, with rumors, patrons and adventures specific to that setting, and the logic and fictional feel of that setting. The implication being, "This is how you play Traveller." Which, of course, was not at all the content or spirit of Basic Traveller. The rules might have remained the same, but in my view they are distinct products because of this difference.


So, in summary, when I look at your original question, I think the answer is without doubt, "Yes!"

But only if one strips away any of the GDW setting materials (adventures, library data, all of it).

One might use the Third Imperium as inspirational material -- the same way one might use Piper's books or Star Trek as a mine for ideas. But it is never a given. It is never how one plays Traveller. It's an example of a house setting and no more.

So, I think the key is this -- and it answers why I've sometimes been confused by your posts --

I step back all the way to the LBBs (or the FFE 0000 reprint of The Basic Books 1-3 http://www.farfuture.net/hardcopy.html) and start from there. Not Starter Traveller, not The Traveller Book -- though the chart/page layouts in those books are awesome. You take out anything that is the GDW house setting.

When I read your post originally, that's the position I thought you were were working form. If one starts adding in the Third Imperium, no, the game is no longer generic. One is now playing that game in that setting. But if one goes back Basic Traveller, I think there is, almost endless possibilities to create an adventure driven science fiction universe of whatever kind one wants.

 

[robject]

Norton's Solar Queen series works as well, along with some of her other books. Ordeal in Otherwhere, set on Warlock, has a nice concept for Free Traders as well. There is a lot of what I would call "Classic Science Fiction" from the 1950's and 1960's that would work well.

Oh, the Solar Queen, you are so right.

And Heinlein's Citizen of the Galaxy, to some extent. It requires long acceleration times to reach jump speeds, but *shrug*.

 

[mike wightman]

In LBB3 the notes on the TL table encourage referees to fill the gaps.

The most obvious gaps are above TL15. World design can throw up TL20 worlds.

Note the 3I setting doesn't use the TL drive paradigm of CT (lower TL drives can achieve high jump numbers in small hulls), it uses the paradigm introduced in HG, that maximum jump number is limited by TL.

Think how the Imperium would be different if the core worlds were TL20 instead of capped at TL15.

 

[Blue Ghost]

It does make sense. I now get where you're coming from. I misread your original post.

*snip*

When I read your post originally, that's the position I thought you were were working form. If one starts adding in the Third Imperium, no, the game is no longer generic. One is now playing that game in that setting. But if one goes back Basic Traveller, I think there is, almost endless possibilities to create an adventure driven science fiction universe of whatever kind one wants.

Well, in the Big Black Book, and sporadically in the LBBs, there are instructions to creating your stuff, and in that kind of presentation, I felt like it was classic 3-basic-books time all over again. And yet at the same time there's the preamble with Yaskodray's history in T5, therefore the setting is again infesting the generic rules. Eh, that's not really a problem, but I just get a sense that there's a kind of schism of what Traveller wants to be verse what it's historically presented.

I mean in the end it's not such a big deal unless you want to tackle genres that Traveller, in theory, is not designed to address.

More later

 

[creativehum]

I look forward to hearing more!

Just two things:

1) I think BBB refers to Traveller 5? Because there's no way anything I'm talking about can have any bearing on a product that is so intimately tied to the Third Imperium. Again, I am speaking only of Basic Traveller as the way to go in this regard. So, when you write, "But I just get a sense that there's a kind of schism of what Traveller wants to be verse what it's historically presented," all I can say is, "Yes! I agree with you!" But that schism doesn't exist in Basic Traveller. (Books 1-3 and nothing else.)

If I'm misreading your BBB reference, let me know!

2) I'm not understanding this:

Sporadically in the LBBs, there are instructions to creating your stuff, and in that kind of presentation, I felt like it was classic 3-basic-books time all over again.

Aren't the LBBs the classic 3-basic-books. Like, isn't that what they are?

Because, if the LBBs are Books 1-3 of Basic Traveller, then the advice to create your own stuff isn't sporadic. It is how the game is written.

I admit, I'm not up on all Traveller versions. I am familiar with Classic Traveller, and poured over MegaTraveller years ago. I have become aware that on these boards all versions of Traveller are one big sort of Traveller-stew. But I am blind to some of the references that get thrown around.

So, is LBBs Books 1-3? Or are you using "LBBs" to also mean the additional Books, Adventures, and Supplements.

NOTE: Now that I've written this out, I think this last point is what you mean. If that's the case... it's awesome and all GDW suggested people make up their own stuff in a ever-more-detailed setting... but that honestly makes no sense. The wriggle room is only getting smaller and smaller.

As a thought experiment, I really suggest reading only LBBs 1-3 and seeing what starts stirring in your head. I did that. And the game became awesome i a whole new way.

 

[Blue Ghost]

My mistake. I was trying to draw a parallel between the old three basic books, the BBB, and T5. T5 has all of the classic bits and pieces, plus a lot of expansion on various things, including instructions on how to create your own devices for the game. But, the rules proper begin with Grandfather's story, which means the setting is again baked into the game regardless of T5's Gunmaker, Thingmaker, what have you.

Nap time.

 

[Timerover51]

Well, in the Big Black Book, and sporadically in the LBBs, there are instructions to creating your stuff, and in that kind of presentation, I felt like it was classic 3-basic-books time all over again. And yet at the same time there's the preamble with Yaskodray's history, therefore the setting is again infesting the generic rules. Eh, that's not really a problem, but I just get a sense that there's a kind of schism of what Traveller wants to be verse what it's historically presented.

I mean in the end it's not such a big deal unless you want to tackle genres that Traveller, in theory, is not designed to address.

More later

The problem is that a company has to continually sell product to stay in business. TSR started publishing all of the D&D modules both to stay in business and also provide the DM who did not have the time to build his/her own adventure area with something to run. However, D&D is a fantasy RPG, so while it did develop several fantasy worlds, they all could be different with no problems for the players. You could take the basic rules and build whatever you wanted. Sometimes I designed my own adventures, and sometimes I used the published ones, with maybe a "bit" of modification. Designing your own stuff does take time in order to do it right.

With Traveller, GDW and Marc went to a much more fixed Traveller Universe. The additional books did fill in holes and provide expansion on the original LBBs, but also as a by-product "fixed" the setting.

What would have been more interesting is if two or three alternate Traveller Universe had be set up. One in the early period of expansion to the Spinward Marches, but with few Imperial planets, and lots of areas to explore and expand. Drop the Zhodani, and allow for more "lost" colonies to be discovered.

Another could have been to rimward to the Solomani, with no Imperium around, and things wide open for exploration. Use the Solomani Rim book for the basic planets, but all you know is size and maybe atmosphere and hydrographics. After that, until you reach it, you do not know.

Another, allow for more than one group of prior Space Farers besides the Ancients of 300,000 years ago. Andre Norton's Bald Space Rovers of roughly 15,000 years ago, and the Solar Queen series Fore Runners, with installations like the one on Limbo running would be good candidates for examples. There are the underground areas on Arzor that would be fascinating to play around with.

The question now is, can material like that be still published, using Traveller as a starting point? Or is Marc locked onto the existing Traveller Universe?

 

[rnadams2]

The problem is that a company has to continually sell product to stay in business. TSR started publishing all of the D&D modules both to stay in business and also provide the DM who did not have the time to build his/her own adventure area with something to run. However, D&D is a fantasy RPG, so while it did develop several fantasy worlds, they all could be different with no problems for the players. You could take the basic rules and build whatever you wanted. Sometimes I designed my own adventures, and sometimes I used the published ones, with maybe a "bit" of modification. Designing your own stuff does take time in order to do it right.

For this reason, I love the Third Imperium setting. Say what you will, there's a lot of work involved in building a setting as detailed. Some of us want to do it--it's a game unto itself, to randomly generate a chunk of space and then try to imagine ways to make it all work and make sense. But even the really creative among us have to admit that you could spend countless months building to the kind of detail already provided in the 3I.

With Traveller, GDW and Marc went to a much more fixed Traveller Universe. The additional books did fill in holes and provide expansion on the original LBBs, but also as a by-product "fixed" the setting.

What would have been more interesting is if two or three alternate Traveller Universe had be set up. One in the early period of expansion to the Spinward Marches, but with few Imperial planets, and lots of areas to explore and expand. Drop the Zhodani, and allow for more "lost" colonies to be discovered.

Another could have been to rimward to the Solomani, with no Imperium around, and things wide open for exploration. Use the Solomani Rim book for the basic planets, but all you know is size and maybe atmosphere and hydrographics. After that, until you reach it, you do not know.

Another, allow for more than one group of prior Space Farers besides the Ancients of 300,000 years ago. Andre Norton's Bald Space Rovers of roughly 15,000 years ago, and the Solar Queen series Fore Runners, with installations like the one on Limbo running would be good candidates for examples. There are the underground areas on Arzor that would be fascinating to play around with.

The question now is, can material like that be still published, using Traveller as a starting point? Or is Marc locked onto the existing Traveller Universe?

I've asked this same question elsewhere: would it be worth the effort to strip the setting--at least as much as possible--from the Traveller⁵ rulebook, then offer the Third Imperium as a (not the) setting for the game?

The "sixth attribute" has already been folded into a culture-specific characteristic, as seen as far back as the CT Alien Modules, so Social Standing need not be a setting-specific thing. And, to my mind, Character Generation is pretty much generic, at least to the point where you could call Scouts "Explorers" and make minor tweaks here and there to unlock them from the setting.

You have the Makers to play with technological stuff--you really only need to offer a way to nail down FTL travel. Suggestions could be made, with the Jump Drive as an example, offered with the reasoning behind the limitations. But really, how hard is it to say, as a referee, "I'm gonna use jump gates: devices built in space that are aimed at specific points in space and take x amount of time to get you there," or some such thing?

I also wonder how many new players are joining the game with the advent of T⁵? Has it sold to mostly existing Traveller players? If so, would giving a degree of separation between the game and the setting open it up to new players? Would it if there were some third-party settings available, a la D&D?

Sorry--more questions than answers, and I'm rambling a bit (and repeating myself to boot).

 

[Blue Ghost]

creativehum; sorry I wasn't clear. Very much my mistake, and I hope I can clarify things in this post.

I'm actually referencing "The Traveller Book" which is the expanded version of Books 1 - 3 when I say Big Black Book. I guess BBB means T5 now. Oh well

Years back someone posted an interview with Marc Miller about the genesis and evolution of the game. And in that interview Marc Miller (Avery) stated that according to their sales and marketing data people were interested in background material; i.e. I read that as him saying people wanted flavor fiction on the Third Imperium and its surroundings. Ergo the game expanded on the official setting as opposed to expanding to address other sci-fi venues and tropes.

So where we don't have parallel universes, time travel, hollow Earths, Japanese kaiju nor mecha, nor magic-tech super races, we have a system that, with some finagling, can be outfitted to embrace some of the more prosaic sci-fi settings. You can do Honor Harrington, but not Dr. Who. You can do 2001 Space Odyssey, but not Macross.

And I guess there's just been a part of me that has really been desirous for Traveller to break out into fantastic genres, but, at the same time, I'm glad has kept with its conventionalizations. Read that as me being glad that Traveller hasn't gone all sci-fantasy in supps, but it would be interesting to see how Traveller might tackle other sub-genres.

timerover51; as a consumer of Traveller, I can only note that D&D became wildly successful by addressing all of the fantasy sub-genres. You had Arthurian Legends existing next to Conan, existing next to Tolkien, existing next to whatever else was out in bookstores at the time. Should Traveller have done the same? I'm just a customer, and don't really have the foggiest. But it would be interesting see read what the powers that be have to say.

 

[DonM]

Interesting. Very interesting because I happen to know Marc would desperately love to see someone work up EC Tubb's Dumarest saga for Traveller. I actually thought I had an author last year for Marc.

So I don't think Marc's totally locked on the OTU; the notion that the rules can be used for other universes is still there. He actually expected most folks to create their own sectors around Charted Space, as a best of both worlds (I did this... my personal Mikelian Space campaign was based on an ancient ship loaded with humans misjumping at the end of a Final War battle some 18 sectors spinward of Theta Borealis, and my longest RPG campaign ever was a decade-long fantasy HERO conversion of that Traveller campaign).

But if you are a Dumarest fan and a budding Traveller author, contact me...

 

[creativehum]

creativehum; sorry I wasn't clear. Very much my mistake, and I hope I can clarify things in this post.

I'm actually referencing "The Traveller Book" which is the expanded version of Books 1 - 3 when I say Big Black Book. I guess BBB means T5 now. Oh well

Hi Blue Ghost,

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, I agree. The Traveller Book might mention that the system can be used in many ways to create your own setting (I just went through it and couldn't find any examples but I remember seeing some). But the last third of third of the book belies this message. It ties the game and system of Traveller to the Third Imperium intimately. The book says, "As you read through these rules, you end up here... playing in the Third Imperium, our house setting."

However, I really need to stress that LBBs 1-3 really make it clear that you SHOULD be making up your own setting. It is literally stated time and time again. The rules are there to help facilitate this, the text says clearly. You should be making the thing you want -- with as many bizarre SF anomalies or straight up hardware-in-space tales you wanted to tell. (Or a mix anywhere in-between.)

In LBBs 1-3, the word "Imperium" never appears. It is suggested that competing empires or federations might exist within the same subsector. There is no assumption of what sort of political entity the PC life paths map to. Not a single mention of an alien life form or civilization (or any human civilization) is made in any of the books -- apart from those suggested in the random World creation process.

While there are elements that bake in certain setting details, there is no specific setting implied. And the notion that The Third Imperium is the thing you would get, and the only thing you would get, once you extrapolate those baked in elements would be bizarre. It is only one permutation of a setting built out from Basic Traveller.) I'm not saying you think that. I'm saying I get the feeling some people make that assumption a priori about Traveller's setting and its relation to the game.

Maybe because I encountered the basic Traveller boxed set back in 1977 at the Compleat Strategist, I've never considered the Third Imperium and Traveller as joined at the hip. Traveller is, to me, a cool rules set for making your own setting as a place of adventure for the PCs. The Third Imperium is GDW's example of a setting in motion.

I bring this all up because of the following:

The differences between Basic Traveller (LBBs 1-3) and every edition of Classic Traveller released later might seem to be only that in Basic Traveller there is no mention the Imperium, and the later editions detail the Imperium right into the rules. But in my view that single difference is the jumping off point of a huge difference. The big difference is that the fundamental nature of what play is and you're going to do changes.

In Basic Traveller you are starting from scratch. It is assumed you will be making your own setting -- since you have nothing else to use. Whereas in the later editions of Classic Traveller, it is assumed you are using the rules to play in the setting of the Third Imperium. The expectation of the activity at hand is altered drastically. In one you are starting with one or two subsectors (tops!) and growing outward from that. In the other there is a maze of already published details that the group is reading and digesting and the PCs are put into that environment -- an environment already bigger than will possibly be useful.

Fun, yes! Useful for PC driven play, not so much. As Book 3 of the 1977 edition states:

"Initially, one or two sub-sectors should be quite enough for years of adventure (each sub-sector has, on the average, 40 worlds), but ultimately, travellers will venture into unknown areas and additional subsectors will have to be charted."

And note, the word "sector" never appears in the 1977 edition. There are "sub-sectors," but no "sectors" discussed. The term "sub-sector" implies there is "more out there" beyond the edge of the sub-sector... but that's all.

And here's the pertinent quote from the 1988 edition of Book 3. Sectors as a concept are introduced, and here's what the book says:

Sixteen subsectors (arranged in four rows of four subsectors each) form a sector, probably the largest size practical for a continuing Traveller campaign.

So that, with the logic of the 1981 edition, even if there's a empire beyond the edges of the mapped sector, you wouldn't worry about mapping it, since it won't have a practical impact on play. And you'll figure out that single sector as you go, since you don't need them all at one time anyway.

Now, listen: The Third Imperium is an awesome piece of fictional work, in both scope and dedication. I'm not knocking it as fun and cool thing. Because it is fun and cool.

What I am saying is that the nature of what play is and what play is about changes between Basic Traveller and the later editions of Classic Traveller. Its how the setting is created (or not created); the random rolling of worlds on a limited scale to build a suitable setting for PCs versus the GM reading up on someone else's creation of other worlds; the sense that "where the action is" is right here, on this single subsector map the Referee rolled up against a massive backdrop of multi-sector empire that might make the subsector at hand (let alone the PCs) not matter really much at all.

I'm not saying one way of playing is better than the other (though clearly I've made my preference clear!). I am saying that the approach to what play is is very different. And its baked into the rule books themselves.

 

[aramis]

Empire appears in reference to nobles the setting in Bk 3, in the preface to Starship combat in Bk 2.

The Imperium or Empire is built into the rules. Much of the setting is built-in to the rules. That it isnt referenced until Book 4... Well...

 

[Blue Ghost]

Hi Blue Ghost,

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, I agree. The Traveller Book might mention that the system can be used in many ways to create your own setting (I just went through it and couldn't find any examples but I remember seeing some). But the last third of third of the book belies this message. It ties the game and system of Traveller to the Third Imperium intimately. The book says, "As you read through these rules, you end up here... playing in the Third Imperium, our house setting."

However, I really need to stress that LBBs 1-3 really make it clear that you SHOULD be making up your own setting. It is literally stated time and time again. The rules are there to help facilitate this, the text says clearly. You should be making the thing you want -- with as many bizarre SF anomalies or straight up hardware-in-space tales you wanted to tell. (Or a mix anywhere in-between.)

In LBBs 1-3, the word "Imperium" never appears. It is suggested that competing empires or federations might exist within the same subsector. There is no assumption of what sort of political entity the PC life paths map to. Not a single mention of an alien life form or civilization (or any human civilization) is made in any of the books -- apart from those suggested in the random World creation process.

While there are elements that bake in certain setting details, there is no specific setting implied. And the notion that The Third Imperium is the thing you would get, and the only thing you would get, once you extrapolate those baked in elements would be bizarre. It is only one permutation of a setting built out from Basic Traveller.) I'm not saying you think that. I'm saying I get the feeling some people make that assumption a priori about Traveller's setting and its relation to the game.

Maybe because I encountered the basic Traveller boxed set back in 1977 at the Compleat Strategist, I've never considered the Third Imperium and Traveller as joined at the hip. Traveller is, to me, a cool rules set for making your own setting as a place of adventure for the PCs. The Third Imperium is GDW's example of a setting in motion.

I bring this all up because of the following:

The differences between Basic Traveller (LBBs 1-3) and every edition of Classic Traveller released later might seem to be only that in Basic Traveller there is no mention the Imperium, and the later editions detail the Imperium right into the rules. But in my view that single difference is the jumping off point of a huge difference. The big difference is that the fundamental nature of what play is and you're going to do changes.

In Basic Traveller you are starting from scratch. It is assumed you will be making your own setting -- since you have nothing else to use. Whereas in the later editions of Classic Traveller, it is assumed you are using the rules to play in the setting of the Third Imperium. The expectation of the activity at hand is altered drastically. In one you are starting with one or two subsectors (tops!) and growing outward from that. In the other there is a maze of already published details that the group is reading and digesting and the PCs are put into that environment -- an environment already bigger than will possibly be useful.

Fun, yes! Useful for PC driven play, not so much. As Book 3 of the 1977 edition states:

And note, the word "sector" never appears in the 1977 edition. There are "sub-sectors," but no "sectors" discussed. The term "sub-sector" implies there is "more out there" beyond the edge of the sub-sector... but that's all.

And here's the pertinent quote from the 1988 edition of Book 3. Sectors as a concept are introduced, and here's what the book says:


So that, with the logic of the 1981 edition, even if there's a empire beyond the edges of the mapped sector, you wouldn't worry about mapping it, since it won't have a practical impact on play. And you'll figure out that single sector as you go, since you don't need them all at one time anyway.

Now, listen: The Third Imperium is an awesome piece of fictional work, in both scope and dedication. I'm not knocking it as fun and cool thing. Because it is fun and cool.

What I am saying is that the nature of what play is and what play is about changes between Basic Traveller and the later editions of Classic Traveller. Its how the setting is created (or not created); the random rolling of worlds on a limited scale to build a suitable setting for PCs versus the GM reading up on someone else's creation of other worlds; the sense that "where the action is" is right here, on this single subsector map the Referee rolled up against a massive backdrop of multi-sector empire that might make the subsector at hand (let alone the PCs) not matter really much at all.

I'm not saying one way of playing is better than the other (though clearly I've made my preference clear!). I am saying that the approach to what play is is very different. And its baked into the rule books themselves.

It just seemed nebulous. "You can do anything you want!....but don't do that!" Eh, erm, okay. "There's no setting, but you'll be playing in our default setting, *drum roll* .... the IMPERIUM!" Huh, okay then. "Interstellar travel is the do-all for warp drive, hyperspace, what have you .... but it's ALWAYS jump drive, and ALWAYS takes this amount of time, and it ALWAYS works like this...."

I mean, that previous paragraph was tongue in cheek, as I don't think anybody who helped author Traveller back in the 80s really thought too much about long range ramifications (i.e. a bunch of middle aged fanboys talking about the game three decades hence via something called "the internet").

I guess what it comes down to is maybe the powers that be can get all fundamentalist on us, and examine what they intended back in 1977, and what the game's become now.

Okay. I'm off for a bit

 

[creativehum]

Hi Aramis,

Yes, absolutely. The word "empire" is used at those points in the rules. You'll note that I referenced that opening section of the Starship Combat section (as a paraphrase) in my previous post.

There are three uses of the word empire in the LBBs 1-3. Here are all of them:

Book 01 references to “empire”
1977, 1981 none

B02 reference to “empire”
1977, 1981 (The beginning of the Starship Combat section) "These rules serve well in nearly all situations, from simple circumstances where a free trader attempts to outrun a pirate or revenue cutter, to the complex engagements between starship squadrons of rival systems or empires."

B03 reference to “empire”
1977 p. 22 Ranking above duke/duchess are two levels not reflected in social standing: prince/princess or king/queen are titles used by actual rulers of worlds. The title emperor/ empress is used by the ruler of an empire of several worlds.

1981 p. 5 “If the subsector is an isolated community, the routes may not leave the map; if it is part of a larger confederation or empire, the routes will probably leave the edges to join with other parts of the sector.”

So, great. The word is used. And, obviously, governments with an interest in interstellar travel are part of the baked-in setting as well -- since they finance ships.

And...

Now what? If one looks at the quotes one sees that they are references to possibilities within the game, not a definition of an empire's existance to make the game work.

There's still a million ways to set up the game even without an empire. The titles in the noble section are given -- but that does't mean they have to be used. One could easily set up a game of competing interstellar duke without a unified ruler. That's just on example. Surely everyone on this board could come up with others.

But let's say there's an empire...

What sort of empire? (Or confederation, as the rules also speak of.) How big an empire? What is it like? How is ruled? What are its politics? What is its history? Who are its enemies? Is it falling down? Is it rising? How weak is it structurally? Is there a lot of infighting within the nobility? Are the nobles powerful? Are they weak, with a strong emperor who has robbed them of power?

My only point is that one can start with the LBBs and build up an interstellar government vastly different in scope, scale, fictional quality of the Third Imperium.

This isn't a point that can be argued against, is it?

 

[creativehum]

Hi Blue Ghost,

All I can do is agree... again.

"You can do anything you want!....but don't do that!"
"There's no setting, but you'll be playing in our default setting the IMPERIUM!"

There is a split between the rules of Basic Traveller and all the version of Traveller to come after Basic Traveller (including the later editions of Classic Traveller).

In one you are encouraged to do and make your own thing. In the other, you are playing in a setting with the Third Imperium. And they conflict. They really, simply, don't match up.

There's an easy solution to his conundrum: Blow of all Third Imperium materials. It isn't that hard. Mongoose's Traveller line does exactly this, neatly separating all Third Imperium material into a kind of imprint of their Traveller products. But anyone can do this -- even with any edition of Traveller. One simply does it.

* I don't sweat the j-drive as the default travel method as you do. As I've described above, I think it's a clever and smart method for making sure that the space of space remains large and isolates worlds -- the better to make travel, exploration, and novelty viable as a solid option for PCs.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Not sure if I am repeating myself...

I for one fully support the idea of using T5 as a toolbox. It is what I really love about T5 and why for all the ragging it gets still quiet proud to have my name in it. It gave me a lot of groovy new tools and cleared up some questions and added new nifty stuff on top of the old Traveller goodness.

Mind you before I got involved in its development I was almost as bad a Canonista as Hans (right down to keeping my OTU as close as I could to the published one), but once I started messing with things and running stuff by my meatspace crew the more I remembered the joys of building your own universe using Traveller's rules. I haven't done that since I had Books 1-4, 7 and MT for data. (Okay, I lied I wasn't a complete Canonista I kinda skipped the Rebellion, but used the rules for advanced CharGen and the Encyclopedia. )

Once I got to finding exploits and building characters, gear, sophonts, a sector, many systems and a few worlds I found that I can't stop and now find myself with a very not-OTU. Which I find rather liberating as I can use the TL-F+ tech, have über ancient civilizations just on the edge of explored space culling the high entropy races, possible time travel (but that is just kooky tinfoil hat rumors), Jump+ Drives and Blue Ghost's fave unexplored regions to discover.

Thank Don, Blue Ghost for that last, he told me to "leave room for the Death Star" when I handed the complete data set of the Far Stars for him to check for errata. If he hadn't I would have fully detailed my sector (in fact I am going to use pieces of it anyway for stuff happening off screen). But since I am also using the Jump+ drives I can have scattered pockets of Imperium/Civilized Space throughout the nine sectors that comprise the Riftborne Domains.

So, in conclusion I would say that the ethos of CT Book 1-3 of make some stuff up and play is still there, just rare these days.

 

[creativehum]

Huh. Now you're made me curious about T5.

Also, your re-discovered love of making stuff up delights me.

 

[mike wightman]

History

It began as a set of rules to make up your own setting, but with some basic tropes from the sci-fi it sought to emulate.

A setting was added to act as a sandbox for the designers and as an example of a setting (first mentioned in LBB4)

The setting endured paradigm shift after paradigm shift.

Future

T5 - tied to the technological paradigm of the jigsaw 3I - it tries to fit it all in and then build upon it. The Imperium and its history/future remain the setting outlined in the book.

MgT - divorces rules from setting. The 3I line sticks to the 3I setting, but there are lots of books with stuff in that is of no use in a 3I setting but are very useful for a homebrew setting

 

[creativehum]

History

It began as a set of rules to make up your own setting, but with some basic tropes from the sci-fi it sought to emulate.

A setting was added to act as a sandbox for the designers and as an example of a setting (first mentioned in LBB4)

The setting endured paradigm shift after paradigm shift.

Future

T5 - tied to the technological paradigm of the jigsaw 3I - it tries to fit it all in and then build upon it. The Imperium and its history/future remain the setting outlined in the book.

MgT - divorces rules from setting. The 3I line sticks to the 3I setting, but there are lots of books with stuff in that is of no use in a 3I setting but are very useful for a homebrew setting

That seems about it to me.

 

[rancke]

So on one hand you had this set of rules that said "create anything want!", and then on the other hand said "you can't do this in the official setting!"

That's kind of my "core beef" with Traveller, if I ever had one.

I don't see the problem. The official setting is one universe. Every time you establish a fact about a setting, you establish a multitude of corrolary facts, many of them things you can't do in that setting. If an ordinary jump takes 168 hours +/- 10%, then you can't have an ordinary jump that takes one day. If the Zhodani were beaten back in the 5FW, then you can't have a Zhodani-occupied Rhylanor in 1117. If you need TL15 to do something, then you can't do it if you don't have TL15. As Robert Prior once said, ihis is true for any setting, provided you care about self-consistency.

And if you want to do something that you can't do in the official setting, the solution is simple: Don't use the official setting.



Hans