Vent-Rant MegaTraveller what I hate about it.

[LiNeNoiSe]

what the botched was ship combat, quite badly; the lack of newtonian motion...

Why would "reactionless drives" require Newtonian Mechanics?

 

[aramis]

Why would "reactionless drives" require Newtonian Mechanics?

because they are not warp drives. They explicitly are described using newtonian thrust everywhere else in the rules.

 

[Barsanuphius]

First Flaw: I never played MT.

Second Flaw: Very Bright art for a Galatic Civil War.

Third Flaw: Never Played MT.

 

[Graham2001]

Never actually played it, but I've never been able to escape the feeling that GDW created the biggest Hiver manipulation ever with MT/TNE, there was just too much metaplot for Referees to deal with, had there been more scenario material published I might be more generous with my assessment.

 

[sfchbryan]

So I'm going to try to summarize the original topic.

Executive Summary:

a. "MegaTraveller's basic concepts were sound, but the actual execution and the design of several subsystems was lacking." [Tobias]

b. Wargamers create unified tools for Traveller: simultaneously a blessing and a curse. [Rob]


Pros

1. The Task System.
2. Chargen consolidated.
3. System generation updates.
4. Reference material usefully gathered (IE, RC).
5. Good artwork (for the time).
6. Hard Times.
7. More components for starships.
8. Support for greater-than-Imperial advanced tech.
9. The flowcharts.
10. We get most of the interesting OTU characters from MT.
11. The campaigns and DGP supplements.

Cons

1. The Task Library.
2. Rules got in the way; their complexity overall was an unreasonable barrier to use.
3. Extreme measures taken with setting actually damaged playability.
4. Rebellion too "stage managed" and not well developed or differentiated until too late (contrast with the great NPC character profiles).
5. Use of sophonts as aggressors is rather unlikely (Vargr in particular, but even Aslan).
6. Pre-internet days meant the excessive errata was a big problem. (Get the final printing; it has all the corrections).
7. No robot rules.
8. The new jump fuel formula.
9. "The total lack of anything for players to do." [Mike Wightman]
10. DGP seemed to take a bit of liberty with canon (just a bit). Example: the Primordials, while interesting, appear to be a symptom of a problem in the setting. Maybe not DGP's fault, either.

About those Cons....
1. The Task Library is useful as examples - there isn't a requirement to slavishly use it (or any other part of the rules set if it isn't working for your group). Example, if I have no clue on Mariner Operations, the Task Library in "Wet Navy" is invaluable.
2. Rules got in the way - Seriously? MT is nothing more than consolidated CT with a task system bolted onto it (and a flawed setting).
3. Nobody can force you to use the Rebellion setting - Cthulhu knows that quite a few of us ignored (and are still ignoring) it.
4. Yep. (but see #3)
5. Yep.
6. Final printing is difficult to find. OTOH, a completely errata corrected version of MT is coming.
7. The Robot issue was addressed with the MT Robots manual. A replacement for the DGP robots manual is doable.
8. The new jump fuel formula is a plus in my book - it forces design decisions. OTOH, there are ways to get around the most egregious issues. There are numerous walk-thru examples available - some even make sense.
9. Sounds like a job for the GM.....
10. Every version takes liberty with canon. It's the GM's job to decide what is or isn't canon. We are stuck with the Pimordials, and the Empress Wave is coming, whether anyone likes it or not.

 

[Murph]

Too gearheaded, Uh, no Empress Wave, really stupid idea, Too much errata.

About those Cons....
1. The Task Library is useful as examples - there isn't a requirement to slavishly use it (or any other part of the rules set if it isn't working for your group). Example, if I have no clue on Mariner Operations, the Task Library in "Wet Navy" is invaluable.
2. Rules got in the way - Seriously? MT is nothing more than consolidated CT with a task system bolted onto it (and a flawed setting).
3. Nobody can force you to use the Rebellion setting - Cthulhu knows that quite a few of us ignored (and are still ignoring) it.
4. Yep. (but see #3)
5. Yep.
6. Final printing is difficult to find. OTOH, a completely errata corrected version of MT is coming.
7. The Robot issue was addressed with the MT Robots manual. A replacement for the DGP robots manual is doable.
8. The new jump fuel formula is a plus in my book - it forces design decisions. OTOH, there are ways to get around the most egregious issues. There are numerous walk-thru examples available - some even make sense.
9. Sounds like a job for the GM.....
10. Every version takes liberty with canon. It's the GM's job to decide what is or isn't canon. We are stuck with the Pimordials, and the Empress Wave is coming, whether anyone likes it or not.

 

[Murph]

Chivalry and Sorcery with starships maybe? MT never had a really good combat system, and allowed a little too much "rules-lawyering". Starship and vehicle design was a nightmare unless you were a gear-head and had a good Ti-84 calculator.

Thanks Mike.



You're right - I noticed that as well and wondered at the lack of adventures for MT.

Thanks Major B.

(bolding mine)

Yes. We need safe paths into a new, complex system. Many become discouraged by seeing the Wall of Complexity. Traveller5's Core Rules.

My summary was that wargamers made MT. Typically, I believe wargamers have their own terminology and shorthand, and understand one another well. But non-wargamers don't speak that language natively.

 

[aramis]

6. Final printing is difficult to find. OTOH, a completely errata corrected version of MT is coming.

Your handiwork?

 

[GM Joe]

If an errata-corrected version of MT were available via POD, I'd give the system a second chance.

 

[Hyphen]

OTOH, a completely errata corrected version of MT is coming.

(Tigger bounce, bounce, bounce) Woo-hoo-hoo-hoo!

Need help with proof-reading? (I'd be happy to haul out my pencilled-in corrections and do a cross-check, if you like!!!)

 

[mctesla]

About those Cons....

6. Final printing is difficult to find. OTOH, a completely errata corrected version of MT is coming.

YES PLEASE!!!! Leather bound....? :devil::devil:

 

[aramis]

If an errata-corrected version of MT were available via POD, I'd give the system a second chance.

Sfchbryan was asking a while a ago about how to do one for others, I suggested he talk to Marc. I am hoping he did and Marc said, You make it, i publish it"

I want one, too. But i have reinvented MT from CT sources for my own use. ...

 

[infojunky]

But i have reinvented MT from CT sources for my own use. ...

See that is the problem I have too most days. Everytime I touch CT and now by extension CE it starts looking like a flavor of MT.

 

[whulorigan]

Sfchbryan was asking a while a ago about how to do one for others, I suggested he talk to Marc. I am hoping he did and Marc said, You make it, i publish it"

I want one, too. But i have reinvented MT from CT sources for my own use. ...

Sfchbryan talked to Marc about it at Lancaster TravellerConUSA two weeks ago, and Marc was quite receptive to the idea.

 

[Hyphen]

Sfchbryan talked to Marc about it at Lancaster TravellerConUSA two weeks ago, and Marc was quite receptive to the idea.

YES!

BTW, Wil, now's the time to suggest taking up some of your modifications...

(They probably won't like mine: divide starship weapon damage dice by a factor of 10...)

But they may incorporate some of my fixes for Robots, since they're in Don's official errata...

 

[sfchbryan]

Your handiwork?

Yes.

 

[sfchbryan]

YES!

BTW, Wil, now's the time to suggest taking up some of your modifications...

(They probably won't like mine: divide starship weapon damage dice by a factor of 10...)

But they may incorporate some of my fixes for Robots, since they're in Don's official errata...

If it's in Don's errata, it's getting fixed.

 

[sfchbryan]

See that is the problem I have too most days. Everytime I touch CT and now by extension CE it starts looking like a flavor of MT.

So does my version of CE. OTOH, a number of MT concepts were in CE.

 

[Swiftbrook]

Not just the jump fuel formula, but also the enormous power plants required to build any agility into a design. Also, the tremendous amount of fuel required by the enormous power plants. These combinations made it mostly impossible to recreate CT ships unless the construction TL was bumped up to 15 and even at 15 there were problems.

I am definitely in the 'Gearhead' crowd. I have played around with the MT starship design sequence for years decades. I have gleaned and incorporated every tweak that I can find. Like not having food service in the fuel tanks, and revising jump fuel consumption when not making a maximum jump as mentioned in MegaTraveller Journal, and more. In the process, I have redesigned most CT ships using MT rules with very good results - even having a TL 12 Far Trader.

I (nervously) look forward to a cleaned up version of MT.

 

[whartung]

Is this going to be done from the original sources (do they even exist?) or is a complete rewrite and reformat based on original text?

And what's going to be published, just the first 3 books?