• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

What would you like to see changed about MGT?

Ok, if one thing is obvious about these boards, is that there are some very unhappy people about MGT. So ... what WOULD make you happy? It is OGL afterall.

Examples of answers I am NOT looking for:
Mongoose to cease existing.
Anything regarding the OTU or T5.
"Better" ... quality, playtesting, etc

Examples of answers I AM looking for:
ATUs
Different system (i.e. d20 based)
Changes to the skill list (i.e. adding swim)
 
1. A different combat system. I've given examples of what I think are better mechanics elsewhere, so I won't repeat them here.

2. Fidelity to established Traveller canon. If the game is gonna be called Traveller then it seems to me that it should remain reasonably faithful to Traveller. Things like shuriken catapults should be clearly labeled as non-canon. (Note that I don't necessarily object to implausible weaponry like shuriken catapults and lightsabers; I object to their inclusion as Traveller canon.)

3. Elimination of Timing/Effect system legacies from various systems (like combat).

4. Official options for paring down the number of skills received in character generation.

5. Respect for the gamer. Products should go through at least a rudimentary quality control filter -- editing and playtesting, in other words. The purchaser is not a playtester and shouldn't be treated as such.

6. Better matching of author competence with the subject matter he opines on. People who lack basic knowledge of military affairs should not be tapped to write military supplements. Someone who can't be bothered to learn about guns shouldn't write the 76 Guns supplement. Etc.

7. A comprehensive Fair Use and OGL policy. I'm confident that this will happen, by the way. But since it's not yet finalized, it's on the list.

8. A more careful distinction between Traveller the apparently universal sci-fi RPG system and Traveller, the setting and game series created by GDW and beloved by many fans.
 
Last edited:
I'm generally pleased with the quality of product that I've been getting from MGT.

But my gruffs are similar to TBeard's.

I can't comment too much as to Traveller canon as I'm somewhat new. (Though "Artillery Battle Dress" sounds a little munchkin and out of place.) While I'm all for mecha, future suppliments should atleast pay attention to TBeard's notion of mentioning that it "isn't canon".
Though Traveller has its roots as a generic sci-fi system, The 3rd Imperium has a life of its own. MGT is encroaching on that fuzzy area by use of its namesake.

I'd like to see more complex ship construction(multiple simultaneously running reactors, engines, specialized atmospheres, etc)... more complex damage (like hull punctures, fires, coolant leaks, viruses)... maintenance related failures('Apollo 13' or K-19 for inspiration, mwuahaha)... more complex planet generation (something a little more organic)... ship combat rules that aren't so abstract and "1 dimensional", small craft construction...

Aside from small craft construction, I'm in the process of homebrewing all of that. But a suppliment would be nice.
I'm sure it is already in the works. So long as the art quality stay above "760 Patrons", I'll continue to be happy.
 
Last edited:
What TBeard said.

Plus, there's a general "sloppiness" to the Mongoose products. To me, it's evidence of the non-Traveller-competence TBeard spoke of. The game feels, to me, as if it were just slapped together house rules--as if the authors said, "Hey, we've got to make a game, let's slap one together real quick." And, what we got was what they could come up with within the time period allowed, for better or worse. I feel as the authors were not going for excellence. They weren't trying to win any awards or write the best possible set of Traveller rules ever made. It feels to me that it's just another rendition--something anybody could have done. Milktoast.

So, what I object to with MGT is rather nebulous. But, I also feel its evident all over MGT. For hard examples, look at 760 Patrons as an entire book or some of the things TBeard mentioned in Mercenary.

But, I know you want hard example. First, I'll refer to the hard examples TBeard mentioned, because I feel he's spot-on with some of his assessment. From the main book, take a look at the general amount of skills passed out in chargen. It's too many for a 2D6 system. There's potential to break the system there.

Another hard example is the rule to assign stats to taste. That should be an optional rule--not the main rule. It doesn't "fit" Traveller at all. Traveller is hard core and errs towards the realistic. Rules like that are "gamey" rather than "simulationist".

If I went down and listed all the "gamey" rules I see in Mongoose's version of Traveller, the list would be long, indeed.

So, without trying to be purposfully vague, my real object with Mongoose (and what I'd like to see fixed) is the general "so-what-this-will-do" attitude I read in the rules.

It's one of the things that attracts me to Classic Traveller and the main thing that steers me away from MGT.
 
What would make me happy would be if MGT fans answered the question I asked a while ago:

What is MGT's "zip"?

What makes it sing?

What's the wow factor?

What are some of its "OMG Awesome" moments?

Put another way, how is MGT not just another game with a more or less workable ruleset on a bloated market that's coasting on a big name from the past to lend it the luster that it itself does not seem to possess?

Note these are actual questions. I'm asking for real, concrete answers, answers made salient using as many examples in as much detail as you wish.
 
For me:

1) I dislike the current, very vanilla task system.

2) better combat system, using pen vs av as a modifier to damage.

3) Better editing. As in, proof that there is an editor...

4) Deliver what you promise. 760 Patrons isn't. It's 760 Casual Encounters... a different thing.

5) Power system should be in the core rules, not an add-on.

6) Accurate deckplans and designs.

7) spell check and grammar check. They use MS Word; it's obvious they turned these default-to-on features off and/or ignored them.

8) stop dissing the 3I; Traveller and the OTU are nearly synonymous, and have been for 25+ years.

To Answer Rhialto's questions:

MGT's zip is the new trade mechanics. The new CGen is pretty slick, too.

It doesn't sing, but belts merrily along off key. And it's the off key that's a problem.

The wow factor was lost between playtest draft 3 and publication: The T/E driven combat systems.

I loved the playtest combat systems. (I know ty hated them.) Draft 3.2, my players and I ran combats with blades that felt very much like slow-motion SCA Rapier melees. We found fire combat fairly good. Players were taking cover, making scoot-shoot-scoot actions, etc.

Yes, they were a bit boardgamish. But they worked really well for my group.
 
If they're planning on going the route that was expressed in the other thing, then the only that I would like to see changed is the name.
 
I'm seeing some great suggestions and I'm seeing some I just can't do anything about, hense why I stated in my first post some types of suggestions I am not looking for.

2. Fidelity to established Traveller canon. If the game is gonna be called Traveller then it seems to me that it should remain reasonably faithful to Traveller. Things like shuriken catapults should be clearly labeled as non-canon. (Note that I don't necessarily object to implausible weaponry like shuriken catapults and lightsabers; I object to their inclusion as Traveller canon.)

5. Respect for the gamer. Products should go through at least a rudimentary quality control filter -- editing and playtesting, in other words. The purchaser is not a playtester and shouldn't be treated as such.

6. Better matching of author competence with the subject matter he opines on. People who lack basic knowledge of military affairs should not be tapped to write military supplements. Someone who can't be bothered to learn about guns shouldn't write the 76 Guns supplement. Etc.

7. A comprehensive Fair Use and OGL policy. I'm confident that this will happen, by the way. But since it's not yet finalized, it's on the list.

8. A more careful distinction between Traveller the apparently universal sci-fi RPG system and Traveller, the setting and game series created by GDW and beloved by many fans.

I can't comment too much as to Traveller canon as I'm somewhat new. (Though "Artillery Battle Dress" sounds a little munchkin and out of place.) While I'm all for mecha, future suppliments should atleast pay attention to TBeard's notion of mentioning that it "isn't canon".
Though Traveller has its roots as a generic sci-fi system, The 3rd Imperium has a life of its own. MGT is encroaching on that fuzzy area by use of its namesake.

Plus, there's a general "sloppiness" to the Mongoose products. To me, it's evidence of the non-Traveller-competence TBeard spoke of. The game feels, to me, as if it were just slapped together house rules--as if the authors said, "Hey, we've got to make a game, let's slap one together real quick." And, what we got was what they could come up with within the time period allowed, for better or worse. I feel as the authors were not going for excellence. They weren't trying to win any awards or write the best possible set of Traveller rules ever made. It feels to me that it's just another rendition--something anybody could have done. Milktoast.

So, what I object to with MGT is rather nebulous. But, I also feel its evident all over MGT. For hard examples, look at 760 Patrons as an entire book or some of the things TBeard mentioned in Mercenary.

But, I know you want hard example. First, I'll refer to the hard examples TBeard mentioned, because I feel he's spot-on with some of his assessment. From the main book, take a look at the general amount of skills passed out in chargen. It's too many for a 2D6 system. There's potential to break the system there.

Another hard example is the rule to assign stats to taste. That should be an optional rule--not the main rule. It doesn't "fit" Traveller at all. Traveller is hard core and errs towards the realistic. Rules like that are "gamey" rather than "simulationist".

If I went down and listed all the "gamey" rules I see in Mongoose's version of Traveller, the list would be long, indeed.

So, without trying to be purposfully vague, my real object with Mongoose (and what I'd like to see fixed) is the general "so-what-this-will-do" attitude I read in the rules.

It's one of the things that attracts me to Classic Traveller and the main thing that steers me away from MGT.

The way the OGL is designed to work is that I, a 3rd party freelance writer, can write to the tastes of a specific crowd because they feel they are not served by the core game's design goals/system/etc. But I am not Mongoose and therefore there are certain things I simply will not be able to do anything with. The above are some examples. If you feel that Mongoose's products/policies are not serving you, there is nothing I can do to help remady that. And I definitely not going to be able to do anything about what is and isn't OTU. I feel for you guys, but it is simply beyond my control.

However, the following I CAN do something about:

1. A different combat system. I've given examples of what I think are better mechanics elsewhere, so I won't repeat them here.

3. Elimination of Timing/Effect system legacies from various systems (like combat).

4. Official options for paring down the number of skills received in character generation.

I'd like to see more complex ship construction(multiple simultaneously running reactors, engines, specialized atmospheres, etc)... more complex damage (like hull punctures, fires, coolant leaks, viruses)... maintenance related failures('Apollo 13' or K-19 for inspiration, mwuahaha)... more complex planet generation (something a little more organic)... ship combat rules that aren't so abstract and "1 dimensional", small craft construction...

Comments: tbeard1999 - can you provide a link to your combat suggestions that you have posted elsewhere, please? I'd also like to hear more about your points 3 & 4 as well.

Ran - excellent suggestions, thank you.

S4 - To be honest, your gamey/simulationist is possible, but an overhaul of that magnitude that you are describing really is beyond my capabilities at this point in time. I will keep it in mind for the future, though.

And just to be completely upfront, I'm currently working on a non-Traveller project. When its complete, I'm going to be shopping around various publishers to see if they are interested in doing something with Traveller. Having fan suggestions like these are quite helpful when trying to sell a publisher on a project. Thank you, please keep the suggestions coming.
 
Last edited:
Excellent thread, dmccoy1693!

:)

Thank you. I have been kind of wondering for a while what would the game's detractors more interested in the game. With all the threads getting closed for being "unproductive", giving those voices a way to use their feelings constructively would be a great way to help change the tone. Plus it gives me (and other writers here) ideas to pitch at companies.
 
ship combat rules that aren't so abstract and "1 dimensional"

Just to be fair here, in the classic, typical 1 on 1 starship encounter, it pretty much truly is a one-dimensional affair. The only things that matter when the guns fire is range, and maybe ship facing.
 
To answer dmccoy1693

Well lets see....

Timelines:

Alternate Traveller Universes are a dime a dozen. There is the CT universe, The Rebellion Era, The Hard Times, The New Era, Milleu 0, The Interstellar Wars, GURPS (aka the DALLAS timeline) and on and on and on.

And then there are the variations on the above universes. As an example, I ran one campaign where the players were Sword Worlders. How did that change the universe? Take a look at the tech levels in the Sword Worlds. Folks that were used to TL 15 technology suddenly were living between TL 8 - 11. (I had just gotten the "One Small Step" articles by Charles Gannon.) The 3I are now the bad guys & you are surrounded by enemies (3I, Darrians, Aslan etc) and at the same time your "allies" (The Zho's) are not trusted by anyone. Same universe but it put a whole new perspective on things.

To build an alternate universe will bring comparisons to the official universe & anyone who does that will be competing against 30 years of history.

It is real easy to graft Traveller to a different Universe. The MT ruleset I built has no mention of the OTU in it at all. For a while I ran a MT based campaign with Call of Cthulhu background. It was fun, it was traveller, but it wasn't at the same time.

Have you considered building a sourcebook for an area in the OTU that hasn't been done already? That would mean a great deal of work up front, mainly to insure that you don't step on canon. But there could be some rewarding opportunities on the Rimward side of the Solomani Sphere. Or spinward where the Solomani Sphere bumps up against the Aslan Hierate. Or Trailing where the Sphere meets the Hiver Federation.

Skill sets.

Sorry but you are about 20 years too late on this one. The Keith brothers did them all.

Different Systems.

Why? No, really. Currently there are the following -
1. Classic Traveller
2. MegaTraveller (which is just CT with a task system bolted on)
3. T:TNE (Aka the Twilight 2000 version of Traveller)
4. T:4 (less said the better)
5. GURPS Traveller (Kinda, sorta like Traveller, but IMO too much doesn't work like CT or MT for me to take seriously.)
6. T20 Traveller (the d20 version - See #5)
7. Traveller for the Hero System (Don't own it, so I can't comment on it.)
8. Mongoose Traveller (from what I have seen, it is just a lukewarm rehash of CT with very bad editing. It may be great, but I haven't seen anything in the system that would get me to go and spend money on it. The fact that it says Traveller on the cover isn't enough.)

Game Mechanics:

I have yet to see anything better than the MT task system. Quick, easy, and keeps the emphasis on "role-playing" not "roll playing". Any action can be made a task. Players don't even have to own the game to play.

I for one have absolutely no use for a points based character generation system. I also have no use for levels. If I wanted levels, I would still be playing AD&D.

Just about any major subsystem has already been done.

Naval Combat - "Wet Navy" by Terry McInnes
Air Combat - "COACC" by Terry McInnes
Low Tech - "Wood, Wind, Iron, & Steam" - Charles Gannon
Early Stellar - "One Small Step" - Charles Gannon

Environments:
The Underwater Environment, The Desert Environment, The Mountain Environment, The Arctic Environment, Exotic Atmospheres - All done already by the Keith Brothers.

Adventures:

What hasn't been done already? Personally, I prefer adventures that don't call for gunplay. In Traveller, people that let their weapon do the thinking have a tendency to come down with a bad case of dead. I prefer adventures that require thinking.
 
Have you considered building a sourcebook for an area in the OTU that hasn't been done already?

Considered and not off the table, but not a strong contender at the moment. My understanding is that all OTU stuff has to go through Marc Miller and Mongoose and has to be published by Mongoose (Flaming Cobra). While this isn't a big deal, one of the nice things about being a freelancer is a greater degree of control over your own work. This is more inline with where I am looking to go ATM.

Having said that, I already have picked out a OTU sector that I think would be prime for some serious development. *Cough*Hiver*Cough* Excuse me, I had a little frog in my throat.

Sorry but you are about 20 years too late on this one. The Keith brothers did them all.

Yes, there is quite a bit of history with Traveller, but there are plenty of Traveller players that joined up with MGT and never heard of any of those books. Plus there are plenty of variations still possible: aliens invade earth during the great depression and you're in the resistance, post-apocalyptic, distopias, etc. Not to mentioned licenses settings: Alien, Tri-Gun, Matrix, Logan's Run, Blade Runner and more.
 
At the moment, there is nothing I feel like changing or house ruling. It seems to do the job quite well (better than previous versions).

I am waiting to see what happens in High Guard as right now the starship construction rules limit me to 2000 tons. I am desperately hoping that they don;'t do a CT and give us a second construction and combat system for starships (that was a one of many major failings of CT as far as I was concerned).

I'm also waiting to see if a new World Design module comes out, so I can generate entire systems.

But overall, I am pretty happy with what I see right now. I see MGT as a much improved version of CT. They absolutely nailed it with character creation, so simple, fun and resulting in sensible characters.
 
I have only read the main book draft as it was published on the Mongoose site. That was enough to deter me from buying the book.

I prefer the TNE system. The task system is close enough to the MT task system that it works for me.

What I perceive as the major hurdle for MgT is the 30 year old history. It is the game best strength, but also its weakness. Mongoose has basically two choises.
1) Write new stuff and risk the old grognards wrath as something breaks the canon, which will happen. As even the games canon now is all over the place.

2) Publish the old material again rewritten to fit the MgT system.

A third option exist. Going the middle way, however you get the same problems as with option 1.

So Mongoose actually find themselves between a grognard and a hard place.

Even though I likely will not buy any of the MgT books, I hope it will succeed because it will likely be an inspiration none the less for everyone that plays Traveller one way or the other. Secondly, if MgT fails Traveller will probably wither and die, leaving us with only the CDs from FFE to browse.
 
The way the OGL is designed to work is that I, a 3rd party freelance writer, can write to the tastes of a specific crowd because they feel they are not served by the core game's design goals/system/etc. But I am not Mongoose and therefore there are certain things I simply will not be able to do anything with.

I did a comprehensive review of Mongoose's OGL/Fair Use Policy/Logo License awhile back.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=16345&page=10

Mongoose is apparently reworking the policies in response to player feedback, but the analysis might still be of use.

Comments: tbeard1999 - can you provide a link to your combat suggestions that you have posted elsewhere, please? I'd also like to hear more about your points 3 & 4 as well.

Here's the thread explaining my adaptation of Striker. I've used this combat system since the mid 1980s and have been happy with it.
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=10755

Here's the thread about using T4's damage mechanics in CT
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=14974

I'll post my current combat system in the CT forum. It takes the sequence of play from the Striker derived system and uses T4's damage system.

I don't have my copy of MGT with me, but I did not care for adding the Effect die to weapon damage. It is fiddly (requires players to do math and remember to add the result to the damage roll), has a relatively modest "effect" on damage, and makes armor even less useful than it already is. I also found the scatter system for grenades, etc., to be needlessly fussy because it still includes some Effect-based mechanics.

Regarding the number of skills, I think that the character generation system produces characters with "way too many" skills. Jamison, for instance, gets the equivalent of about 20 skill levels (counting 0 level skills as about 0.7 skill levels each).

I realize that this is a matter of taste, but I'd like to see some acknowledgement that this might be a bit much for larger parties. Unless you like games where there is considerable overlap in skills among the PCs--I don't. And I'd like an official mechanic to gear that down a bit.
 
Last edited:
I think there is scope for re-making some of the previously covered material - just as MGT as a whole is re-making CT.

Books on the wet navy, low-tech, environments, etc have been written, sure, but AFAIK they're no longer in print, so unless I go trawling Ebay month after month, avoiding the jokers with the 3-figure price tags, I can't get the stuff - even if I know it exists (which isn't a given).

A re-write of this material, currently available at your local game-store, could be quite useful. Not for those who already have it, perhaps, but I could see myself and others buying it - $20 for a brand-new book from the store tomorrow, or $20 for a dog-eared 'collectors item' from Ebay maybe next month, maybe next year? Ermm...

A personal thing (and I know others have opposing views) is that I would prefer to buy a thin rule-book with no pictures for $20 than the same book fattened with artwork for $40.

Maybe Mongoose (and freelancers) could benefit by clearly dividing their material into a hard science core (compatible with Old Traveller) and a soft science option (suitable for those who want to use the Traveller mechanic to play NTUs (Non-Traveller Universes).
I think many of the objections I have read here stem from the fact that although Mongoose have sensibly separated out the OTU stuff, they don't seem to have distinguished between ATU and NTU.

IMO an ATU uses the same science (jump drives, MRLs, snub pistols) in a different setting (no 3I, no Aslan) whereas a NTU uses different science and a different setting (warp drives, shuriken catapults and lightsabres featuring in 'Buck Rogers on Barsoom') but still uses 'Traveller' CharGen, SysGen, combat, trade rules, etc.

Poor editing, whilst it would make me shake my head and think 'how are kids supposed to learn if the people who write books are providing incorrect examples; they ought to be ashamed of themselves', wouldn't affect my use of the rules on the tabletop, so I wouldn't feel robbed - I'm buying the ideas, not the prose (or the pictures).

Just my Cr2 whilst I await the Pocket Edition to see what all the fuss is about.
 
Last edited:
I realize that this is a matter of taste, but I'd like to see some acknowledgement that this might be a bit much for larger parties. Unless you like games where there is considerable overlap in skills among the PCs--I don't. And I'd like an official mechanic to gear that down a bit.

Thank you, I'll start reading these over the next several days.

And these may be your tastes, but its a safe bet that someone else has similar tastes. The real question is that if there are enough people that share that taste for a company to make a profit off it. We'll see. :)
 
I'd like an OGL which would allow third parties to develop non-cannonical material for the OTU. I'm aware of all the reasons why Mongoose doesn't want to let this happen, but it's what I want it nonetheless.
 
Back
Top