What is Traveller?

[rancke]

I don't agree with this, *especially* if we're talking about 1977 (when Traveller was released).

But we're not, are we? At least not unless you wish to argue that everything added to Traveller since then isn't really Traveller. Remember, this thread is called "What is Traveller?". To me, the three LBBs that came out in 1977 provided a bare-bones skeleton for Traveller. Over the years, lots and lots of muscle has been added to that skeleton (along with some unsightly fat, some organs that are heading down evolutionary dead ends at the speed of light or more, and even a few cancerous growths ). Those additions are also part of what traveller is today, in 2009 (Except for the cancerous growths and useless organs and unsightly fat, of course).

I note that the Azhanti High Lightning class cruisers had a chart room where physical maps and charts were stored. So much like most sci-fi writers, Marc Miller missed the impact of computers on information storage density.

The physical maps are merely backup in case the electronic ones fail. They're about as much use as a hand-crank on a Rolls Royce, but they're there.

If information must be shipped in a physical, printed format, and if travel is expensive and time consuming, then it seems self-evident to me that it will far harder to distribute technological expertise compared with societies that can transmit via FTL radio (or that can store thousands of books on a single DVD).

In relative terms you're right, but in absolute terms the difference is pretty moot. Transporting a library full of books may cost considerably more than transporting a package of DVDs, but you'd have to be a pretty poor society not to be able to afford a library, which can then be copied and printed with primitive methods.

Keeping up with the latest, cutting edge, early TL-16 discoveries may be impractical, but TL15 has been around for over a century. Lack of communication is not the reason why every world in Charted Space don't have TL15.

100 years later, we have instantaneous worldwide communications. Now, even the most economically primitive areas have cellphones and understand modern medicine (although they may lack the tools to make the cellphones or the medicine to take full advantage of medical knowledge).

Whereas in the TU, even the most economically primitive worlds can have cellphones and understand modern medicine, although they may lack the tools to make the cellphones or the medicine to take full advantage of medical knowledge.

In any event, large technological disparities is dramatically desirable (as is a lack of FTL communication) IMHO, so I think it a Good Thing.

I couldn't agree more.


Hans

 

[Jason]

Is there anything about the rules that you think is fundamental and distinctive to Traveller? If so, please tell us what.

Sure, there are lots of things.
An obsession with the number six.
Character generation that involves a lot of rolling on random tables and very little character development after generation.
Skills ranging generally from 0 to 5.
Projectile weapons remaining competative with energy weapons.
A mercantile system that presupposes most players will actually use it.
A quirky world generation system that produces unintuitive results.
A system for designing enormously expensive spacecraft with turrets that take hours to shoot each other.
The jump drive.

There area lot of things that I feel are more fundamental to how the rules were written than the absence of FTL communications.

Now, as the OTU developed it certainly did have this as one of its fundamental premises, and the entire setting would be drastically different if it were not the case. But that's the OTU.

 

[Jason]

Jason,
All that example proves is that you're a very poor RPG writer, nothing more.

Yes, such an author would be a poor RPG writer, but perhaps you see my point?

It's a faulty analogy too. The game describes magic and then fails to deliver rules for its use while Traveller describes FTL comms limited to the speed of transportation and then delivers rules for FTL comms limited to the speed of transportation.

It's not a perfect analogy, no, but I wanted an extreme example.

The rules in any RPG are an extension of the themes and assumptions making up the game's design. Because rules cannot cover every possible contingency, text is used to convey the game's themes and assumptions to the players so that they will be able to carry on in the absence of specific rules.

You seem to be drawing a distinction between text and rules here. Perhaps you agree with me after all that the text is not the rules.

 

[rancke]

You seem to be drawing a distinction between text and rules here. Perhaps you agree with me after all that the text is not the rules.

Of course it isn't. The text (if held in the authorial voice) describe how things "really" are (the quotation marks acknowledge that we're talking about a fictional setting) whereas the rules are merely imperfect simplifications designed to make it possible to run a game in that setting. Thus the text is more authorative than the rules. "Yes, the process of joining the Navy is a lot more complicated than just throwing a die and involves a lot more factors than a couple of modifiers based on characteristics. But we pretend it's that simple to make it playable."


Hans

 

[aramis]

Jason:

The "text" which isn't explicitly rules, in CT, is very little. It is written in a conversational style, much like some other great games of the era: Tunnels and Trolls, Runequest, Mayday, Snapshot.

The Prose in these (as opposed to technical imperative rules, ala Striker, or tables and flowcharts, as in TTB pages 58-59) is still rules; it's just rules written in an informative mode rather than imperative mode.

It's the same kind of deal as a teacher saying "Good students use the bathroom whenever the schedule makes it so they don't miss instruction. Those good times are before class, and between math and reading, and again at lunch, and after school." The rules mode is "Students need to use the restroom before class, between subjects, at lunch, or after school." Both convey the same information, but in different manners. I do use both.

 

[Jason]

It's the same kind of deal as a teacher saying "Good students use the bathroom whenever the schedule makes it so they don't miss instruction. Those good times are before class, and between math and reading, and again at lunch, and after school." The rules mode is "Students need to use the restroom before class, between subjects, at lunch, or after school." Both convey the same information, but in different manners. I do use both.

Actually, in an RPG I see the rules as being in something in the form of "Throw 8+ to determine if any students need to use the restroom during any given class hour. 1d6-3 students (minimum 1) will have to go."

 

[Jason]

Thus the text is more authorative than the rules.

Is it? If I have a group of players who are playing with all the rules as written, but are ignoring things that just appear in the text rather in a game mechanics form, are they not still playing the game?

 

[beowulf2044]

I always liked the quirky results for planet generation. It took imagination to create a world out of the raw stats that would be viable, and in the end made for some great, unusual settings that made sure you're players knew they weren't in Kansas anymore.

 

[rancke]

Is it? If I have a group of players who are playing with all the rules as written, but are ignoring things that just appear in the text rather in a game mechanics form, are they not still playing the game?

Depends on what kind of game. If it's a boardgame, yes, absolutely. If it's a roleplaying game, no, definitely not.


Hans

 

[Jason]

Depends on what kind of game. If it's a boardgame, yes, absolutely. If it's a roleplaying game, no, definitely not.

What about players who use house rules to change rules they don't like in an RPG. Are they still playing the game?

 

[Jason]

I always liked the quirky results for planet generation. It took imagination to create a world out of the raw stats that would be viable, and in the end made for some great, unusual settings that made sure you're players knew they weren't in Kansas anymore.

Me too. I have to admit that coming up with a reason why 4 billion people are living in an Asteroid belt with a class D starport when there is a garden world with a class A port and about 10 people on it a parsec away is at least entertaining.

 

[aramis]

What about players who use house rules to change rules they don't like in an RPG. Are they still playing the game?

They are playing their own game, not the game. Depending upon how close, if the base is some version of traveller, it may still meet the expectations of the "traveller feel"... it depends upon how close to the list of things encoded into CT/MT/T4/MGT it is.

 

[Jason]

They are playing their own game, not the game. Depending upon how close, if the base is some version of traveller, it may still meet the expectations of the "traveller feel"... it depends upon how close to the list of things encoded into CT/MT/T4/MGT it is.

So the only people who are really playing a role-playing game are those who religiously adhere to every rule? The threshold is that as soon as you fail to apply a rule from the book you are playing a variant?

 

[tbeard1999]

So the only people who are really playing a role-playing game are those who religiously adhere to every rule? The threshold is that as soon as you fail to apply a rule from the book you are playing a variant?

Well...yes.

By definition, a variant is something that varies.

Now as a practical matter, most folks would probably agree that within some minimal range, deviations from the rules aren't enough to classify the rules as a "variant". Call it the "98% Rule" (or "95% Rule" or whatever).

In gaming usage, I think a "variant" generally connotes a significant deviation from the rules as written (or the setting definition). Of course, opinions may vary on whether a deviation is significant enough to be called a "variant".

 

[travlar]

Actually, in an RPG I see the rules as being in something in the form of "Throw 8+ to determine if any students need to use the restroom during any given class hour. 1d6-3 students (minimum 1) will have to go."

Would you consider the text that says a character can only have one career a rule? If so, then how is text that says there is no FTL communication not a rule? And if not, why isn't it a rule?

 

[rust]

So the only people who are really playing a role-playing game are those who religiously adhere to every rule? The threshold is that as soon as you fail to apply a rule from the book you are playing a variant?

To give an example: If you are a member of a game publisher's support team
and demonstrate one of its games on a con, you are expected to play this
game exactly as written - even the slightest change would most probably be
considered a variant.
However, if you play the same game with friends and invite a guest player in,
he will likely expect that you will use a certain number of house rules, and
will hardly complain that you are playing a variant because of a small number
of rules changes.
So, what is considered a variant depends a lot on the circumstances.

 

[Jason]

Would you consider the text that says a character can only have one career a rule?

Yes, because it directly affects and restricts game mechanics - the career system, to be specific.

If so, then how is text that says there is no FTL communication not a rule? And if not, why isn't it a rule?

It may not be considered a rule if it has no affect on any other game mechanic or aspect of play. If it's just a statement that stands by itself without any relevence to the rest of the game then I might not consider it a rule.

 

[Jason]

To give an example: If you are a member of a game publisher's support team
and demonstrate one of its games on a con, you are expected to play this
game exactly as written - even the slightest change would most probably be
considered a variant.
However, if you play the same game with friends and invite a guest player in,
he will likely expect that you will use a certain number of house rules, and
will hardly complain that you are playing a variant because of a small number
of rules changes.
So, what is considered a variant depends a lot on the circumstances.

So you're answer to "what is Traveller?" is "it depends on the circumstances."

 

[rust]

So you're answer to "what is Traveller?" is "it depends on the circumstances."

More precisely: It depends on whom you ask under what circumstances.

While it may be possible to come to a "majority definition" of Traveller after
a very long debate, there will always be "minorities" with other ideas of the
right definition of Traveller, and there - luckily - is no final authority which
could enforce a specific definition on all Traveller players.

 

[rancke]

What about players who use house rules to change rules they don't like in an RPG. Are they still playing the game?

Much too vague a question. It depends on what game and what changes. If you were playing a GURPS Age of Napoleon campaign and the GM introduced a tribe of telepathic gypsies, are you still playing GURPS Age of Napoleon? After all, there's not a word in the rules that says there aren't any telepathic gypsies in the world.


Hans