What is "Proto-Traveller"?

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

Can you tell I didn't hang out on the TME back in 1752?

So, what is it?

Books 1-3 only? But if so, what's "proto" about it? The absence of the setting?

But, really, it's Traveller with or without it.

Or does that amount to an inflammatory statement?

Lastly, Darrians should be catapulted into the sun.

 

[Kaveman Koder]

google search:

"proto-Traveller", ie. of Traveller before it grew the OTU, Traveller mechanics used to play RPGs of science-fiction adventure in different far futures. And the Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society publishes "alternatives" and articles that bear on SF adventure RPGs in the far future in general, not relating directly either to Traveller mechanics or to the OTU.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

Aha.

That brings up an interesting fundamental question. Before Greyhawk (the setting, not the supplement) was published, was D&D "proto-D&D"? Clearly, no.

Then again, one major diff between D&D and Traveller is that while there's a million billion homebrew settings run with D&D rules, I suspect the number of homebrew TUs is smaller, absolutely and proportionately, and that their deviance from the OTU is much less radical.

Why? Probably because it's much harder for a GM to come up with a hard scifi setting that's a) original, b) internally consistent. That's why there are all these TU discussions but very, very few Greyhawk discussions. I mean, how many epic flamewars have there been about Tenser or the Scarlet Brotherhood? Admittedly that changed, to an extent, with Dragonlance, the Realms and all that stuff.

Even so, in that sense, Traveller is more like RQ than like D&D.

 

[aramis]

And the google answer isn't quite right.

Locally (as in COTI), Proto-Traveller is the pre-Atlas non-Bk5 "OTU." Essentially, it's the implied TU of Adv 1-4, supps 1-4, and Books 1-4, based as much on the tables as the text.

It's still a variant of the OTU. It has the Marches, but they are not quite so remote. It might also have the Aslan, Vargr, and the Solomani Rim.

The Nobility are just as much the bad-guys as the Zhodani are.

The OTU is a bit smaller and a lot more Star-Wars-esque.

Traffic is low, and every ship matters. Cruisers are 1000-2000 tons.

Note that Prototraveller will probably work nicely with MGT, too.

I've run Prototraveller type one-off adventures using MT rules except for ship design (which I subbed in Bk2), but never a campaign.

The old Judges Guild sectors could easily be used in a Prototraveller setting. I'd love to see them redone and the Danin detailed out.

 

[mike wightman]

Aramis has summed it up very nicely.

If you do a search of these boards you will find a couple of discussions about it.

MTU is almost entirely proto-Traveller these days - the Imperium of the early adventures is a very different place to the Imperium that grew out of LBB5 and Library Data supplements.

 

[BlackBat242]

Actually, D&D grognards DO differentiate that very point. But being such, they cannot agree on the terms used for that hair-splitting.


excerpts from the Dragonsfoot Acronym Thread http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=5100:
italicised parts mine

OD&D : Original/old D&D. The original 3 booklets in a boxed set c. 1973. Some people also use it to refer to the entire pre-2000 D&D (not AD&D) line. an alternate term is "White Box D&D", from the original 3-booklet boxed set.

Classic D&D : common term for OD&D plus the 4 supplements. Some people also use it to refer to the entire pre-2000 D&D (not AD&D) line.

0.5e : Basic D&D edited by Dr. Eric Holmes, considered by many to belong in the AD&D family and not the later BD&D family, hence this witty designation. also called "Holmes D&D", this was designed as an "intro" for novice players to get them ready for AD&D

BX or BE : Basic/Expert. Often refers to the D&D box sets edited by Moldvay/Cook/Marsh c. 1981. Could also be used to refer to the later Basic/Expert sets, though.

BECM or BECMI : Basic/Expert/Companion/Master/Immortal. The D&D box sets edited by Frank Mentzer c. 1983.

RC : Rules Cyclopedia. This applies to the BECMI series of D&D, and is a great supplement. this is actually an edited, single-volume compilation of the BECMI sets

OAD&D : Original AD&D. The original MM, PHB, & DMG (c. 1978).

1E or AD&D1E : OAD&D (q.v.) as well as Dieties & Demigods, Fiend Folio, & Monster Manual II

1.5E : AD&D 1e plus Unearthed Arcana. and Oriental Avdentures, Manual of the Planes, and the Wilderness & Dungeoneer's Survival Guides

2E or AD&D2E : AD&D c. 1989.

2.5E : AD&D 2e plus Players Option/Skills & Powers. and the other Player's Option books



There are often "discussions" about which variant is "correct", and "when 1E (or 2E, or BD&D) jumped the shark", whether Gygax's Greyhawk is the same as the post 1985 1E Greyhawk, etc.

Some discussion boards strongly discourage discussion of anything in the BD&D/1.5E AD&D range and later, (Knights & Knaves Alehouse), and so on.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

The Nobility are just as much the bad-guys as the Zhodani are.

The OTU is a bit smaller and a lot more Star-Wars-esque.

That's interesting. Are those facts (bad nobility, SW) extrapolated from adventures, from tables, both?

I don't have the Atlas, and have never parsed the Library Data for differences from earlier info, so I struggle to see the break.

Mike, I know, I'm familiar with the discussions on Dragonsfoot, K&K, Finarvyn's OD&D board and other places. But the criterion for distinguishing the pre-2E editions is always rules, not setting. I.e., OD&D suxx/roxx because it doesn't have variable weapon damage, not because it doesn't have Greyhawk.

 

[mike wightman]

They are from the Adventures 1-3, most notably adventure 1 the Kinunir.

The library data in the early adventures is also slightly different to what appears in the later Library Data supplements.

The big disconnect between proto-Traveller as a setting and the Imperium it morphed into is LBB5 High Guard IMHO.

 

[aramis]

Agreed, Mike. Big Ship universes are very different from small ship ones, and especially given that the small end is the same in both.

In a Bk2 universe, a merchantman has up to 50% of a small ship of the line's armament. (Assuming, for the moment that the type T is a ship of the line.) The largest Bk2 ships have 50 turrets, for 150 weapons, and thus the maximum 6 weapons for a Type A is 4% that of the largest possible battleship. A group of merchants can hurt a ship of the line badly, and a large number can take out even the biggest baddest battleships.

In a Bk5 universe, a Battleship is 500,000 tons, 5000 turrets, 15000 weapons... the Type A maxes at 0.04%... practically insignificant. Only the smallest escorts are subject to annihilation by freighters.

Further, Bk5 introduces many weapons that put planetary populations at risk, most notably, the meson bay and spinals, and the PAWS. PAWS are no threat to worlds with atmospheres, but stations, moon & asteroid popuations... and Meson guns are just plain nasty.

But there are other big disconnects, too, besides Bk 5.
Bk7 implies trade as a major flow, where Bk3 implies it's not a major impact on most worlds economies.

Supp 8: Library Data A-M redefined the Imperium... and gave maps.

 

[whartung]

Bk7 implies trade as a major flow, where Bk3 implies it's not a major impact on most worlds economies.

This is interesting.

Not being a Traveller historian, I'm certainly not going to challenge the "right" or "wrong"-ness of it.

But it does make an interesting puzzle as to why one universe would be trade heavy and another not so much.

It's easy to simply claim "There is as much trade as necessary, no more, and no less."

That is, over some unspecified amount of time with, effectively, unlimited resources, enough trade traffic will develop as is necessary.

If the largest ships are limited to 5000 tons, then the traders will operate the most profitable size and configuration of ships as possible. If that's 5000 ton ships, then that's what they'll run. If not, then something else.

Obviously, today, not every cargo ship is a monster sized container ship. But I'll wager that most are. For the types of goods that are amenable to be shipped in containers, I bet a large majority travel on these large ships, benefiting from the efficiencies and scale of the operation.

But if the Bk3 "universe" did not have much trade, it's just an interesting puzzle as to "why not". Perhaps the systems were so self sufficient as to only need start up materials and rare luxury goods. Why ship in some commodity when you can grow/mine/build it locally? Once the system is mature. In the beginning, then, sure, more trade may be necessary. Simply bringing in the bootstrapping goods. But then, the populations are probably lower as well.

Even on our little rock of a planet, we move manufacturing etc. all over the planet. We'd move the mining and such also, but unfortunately, the ore kinda likes staying where it is. So instead, we import labor to the mining site and export the material.

Heck, look at someplace like Iran. They EXPORT raw crude and IMPORT distillates as they don't have the actual capacity and infrastructure to meet internal demand for the finished goods.

Now some planets may well have exhausted their raw materials, and these would then become attractive markets for raw material.

Of course all of this revolves around the cost of trade. There's a baseline cost to trade -- the costs of the ships, crews, maintenance, etc. as well as the infrastructure to support them (starports, cargo handling facilities, etc.).

So, it's just a curiousity about "what changed" that made trade more viable and bigger in the post-BK5 TU than the Bk3 LittleVerse TU.

 

[aramis]

The costs of shipping are reduced in the big (1KTd+) ships, in part due to efficencies and rounding in crew and the minimum size of bridges. Further, under Bk2, a 5000Td frieghter is only possible at TL 15.

Under Bk5, that same 5000Td can be built at TL9.

 

[robject]

But if the Bk3 "universe" did not have much trade, it's just an interesting puzzle as to "why not".
[...]
So, it's just a curiousity about "what changed" that made trade more viable and bigger in the post-BK5 TU than the Bk3 LittleVerse TU.

I'd like to know what changed, as well. But, I do know that Marc preferred/prefers backwaters to busy ports.

 

[BlackBat242]

As Aramis noted, the size & TL limits of Bk2 ships make large-scale inter-stellar commerce impractical/impossible, while the rules of Bk5 make them very possible and actually cheaper than the "independent planet" system forced by Bk 2.

That is the watershed change from "Proto-Traveller" to "Imperial Traveller"... the rules change, not anything in the official setting.

It was the rules change that made the setting changes possible, not the other way 'round.