What's YOUR Core Rule Book Reboot?

[saundby]

So we're about halfway through Mongoose's Traveller license period. Hard to believe it's been that long already! While T5 is getting a lot of eyeballs right now, based on my own experience with it so far, I expect that MGT is going to be my core rule set for the foreseeable future.

What I'm running right now is MGT core book with bits from other MGT books and a whole lot of CT setting and material in my own TU.

With T5, I'm expecting to use T5 as a ref's Lego box, while still running a game that's core MGT with CT and some other MGT stuff.

Folks at game stores I visit tell me that Trav has pretty well flagged in sales. Time for a reboot?

If you had carte blanche to put together an MGT core book reboot, without any of those pesky real world restrictions, what would you do?

Here's mine:

Author: Gareth Hanrahan, again.

Book Format: Same as present; hardback full and pocket size.
Cover: Move down the "Traveller Core Rulebook" to just above the "Science Fiction Adventure in the Far Future" (drop the hyphen), change the font to the original LBB font. Then, to differentiate things a bit, put a stripe of illustration about 3/4" from the top edge, 1-1/4" wide, like a window into a larger illo, wraps around the spine and back cover.

Interior design would have the look and feel of a technical trade journal like Semiconductor Engineering, Avionics, or Circuit Cellar.

Rules: as they are now, incorporating all current errata. Some fixes to Psionics.
Add the following to the core rules:
Vehicle design system
Expanded star system/world design (perhaps a simplified version of T5's)
A sample adventure
Some pages of sample patrons, and statted out animal encounters.

Art:
Character Creation: David Redington
Spacecraft: Winchell Chung
Incidental art:Nik Kraakenes
And some others. But high quality stuff.
Include some full page color plates.

That's what comes off the top of my head.

What's would you do?

 

[Poppyseed45]

I'd ask Mongoose to fix all the careers in all the books, not just the corebook (but there too, especially because it's the flagship product of the line, obviously). Long rant follows.

What I mean is, many, MANY of the careers have three assignments each for actual job, but they aren't needs, and often, don't make a lick of sense. A large number are entirely redundant, often within the splatbook where they appear. Conversely, some of them aren't even needed!

For example, take Mercenary. I won't touch on how wrong it gets military stuff (seriously, why would a "close combat" platoon be bigger than a "regular" platoon?). But just talking careers. Take the Warmonger one. The first two sort of go together - Gun Runner and Arms Dealer. Same thing, right, but okay, they called it two different things. But the last one is called Gun Slinger. What does that have to do with selling weapons?

Or how about the Commando career? Again, two assignments are synonyms: Raider and Special Ops. And the third one? Technician. As if the tech for a Commando group is vastly different than the one for others military pursuits.

If we come back to the corebook, we find the Agent career with both government and corporate agents. Why? Why not just have a generic "agent" and let the player figure out which one it fits? (all it would take is a few extra words in the blurb line).

So, I think Mongoose should abandon the 3 Assignments for every career model. Most don't need it - two, or one, would do nicely. And perhaps some need 4 (both the Army and Marines, for example, could have a Special Ops Assignment. Why not the Navy as well? Many nations IRL have such troops...).

With that in mind, I think, for a revamp, Mongoose should hire writers that know the material. For Mercenary and High Guard, former military folks, or people who at least know quite a lot about it (say, David Pulver, who did GURPS Mass Combat). And then a think about what is game useful or interesting.

Reading old Classic Trav Mercenary today, for example, gave me two nice charts that gave me a rank breakdown of how much "command" each rank gets and how much to pay such a mercenary. It also gave some solid guidelines for creating pay for the mercenary tickets (i.e. it gave a number like 60000 creds as a base pay for a platoon, assuming certain costs were soaked by the employer, etc).

So, I'd like to see this sort of stuff tightened. Both Mercenary and High Guard have great potential, but they get the details wrong. For former military guys, or those of us familiar with such, it hurts my head to read either book.

 

[Jame]

My standard bugaboo:

Take the equipment. Use what they have right now for Melee weapons but use CT 2nd Edition for firearms with the change that rifles do 4d damage. Then take the gear and reduce the Tech Level of the majority of it.

Take the port and tie it to TL and population, i.e. an A port needs at least TL 9 and Population 4 to qualify.

Make mid-tech MUCH more common.

 

[Nightwind1]

I'd ask Mongoose to fix all the careers in all the books, not just the corebook (but there too, especially because it's the flagship product of the line, obviously). Long rant follows.

What I mean is, many, MANY of the careers have three assignments each for actual job, but they aren't needs, and often, don't make a lick of sense. A large number are entirely redundant, often within the splatbook where they appear. Conversely, some of them aren't even needed!

For example, take Mercenary. I won't touch on how wrong it gets military stuff (seriously, why would a "close combat" platoon be bigger than a "regular" platoon?). But just talking careers. Take the Warmonger one. The first two sort of go together - Gun Runner and Arms Dealer. Same thing, right, but okay, they called it two different things. But the last one is called Gun Slinger. What does that have to do with selling weapons?

Or how about the Commando career? Again, two assignments are synonyms: Raider and Special Ops. And the third one? Technician. As if the tech for a Commando group is vastly different than the one for others military pursuits.

And for Ghu's sake, "Merchant Marine" is NOT a marine on a merchant ship!

 

[saundby]

When I started out, I only mentioned the core book (TMB or CRB, whichever) because of the problems with HG and, especially, Mercenary. Taking on those is a bigger reboot.

And I *think* I've heard some objections to the "Merchant Marine" career before...
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=349348&postcount=3
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=365291&postcount=72
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=365392&postcount=73
etc. :rofl:

Equipment: If the equipment lists in the main book were updated from the CSC, would that solve any of the problems? I don't have the CSC, though I've heard good things about it (and intend to buy it, probably before my next campaign starts at the end of the month.)

Good stuff, keep it coming!

 

[aramis]

Were I to reboot MgT core...

1) Move small craft design from HG into the core.
2) genuinely decent art, not the barely passable stuff Mongoose seems to like
3) more CT/MT-style cascades on the CGen skill tables
4) The longer form of events tables from Spica Career Book 1
5) Make personal damage rules match CT 2E
5.1) This includes no weapons with Xd+Y, only Xd
6) use letter step damage for ship combat, rather than the Dinged/down/replace-it of current
7) Add 1-2 more subcareers to most careers
8) Add more alternate drive techs in the core
8.1) clearer keyhole rules (mimic Alderson drives)
8.2) add starfire/trek style fixed PSL M-drives
8.3) 2300 stutterwarp
9) move the better Fission PP rules from HG into the core
10) Power points instead of the current PP requirement rules
11) MT/2300 Task Mechanics, but adjusted slightly.

Task variant in spoiler (for space reasons)

Spoiler:

The variant task mechanics I'd use (differences from MT listed):
Attribute DM=Attribute/3 (rather than Attribute/5), round down
Change difficulty levels to

Impossible (can't be done)
Staggering = 21+ (Can only be done by taking extra Time)
Formidable = 19+
Very Difficult = 16+
Difficult = 13+
Average = 10+ (corresponds to 8+ level in MGT
Routine = 7+
Easy = 4+
Simple = 1+ (Automatic unless hasty task)​

Exceptional success or failure is made/failed by 3 or more (instead of 2 or more)
Mishap roll results

1-3 None (1d3-1% repair cost, Simple repair)
4-6 ding (1 point of correct scale) (1d6% repair cost, Routine repair)
7-9 Minor (1d6 points of correct scale)(2d6% repair cost, Moderate repair)
10-12 Moderate (2d6 points of correct scale)(1d6%x5% repair cost, Difficult repair)
13-15 Severe (4d6 points of correct scale)(1d6%x10 repair cost, Formidable repair)
16-18 Destroyed (8d6 points of correct scale)(1d6%x25 repair cost, Impossible repair)
19-21 Rubbled - (16d6 points of correct scale) (can't be repaired - no longer present)
22+ shattered/absent/fine red mist - 32d6 damage if insistent. Nothing there to be repaired.
​

Possibly add mass as an optional rule, with realistic thrust design numbers based upon 10 DWT per Td, unless optional mass rules used.

 

[mbrinkhues]

TNE Style non random chargen

Mega/TNE style integrated build system for all gear

Mass, Energy use, Energy output

No damage scaling


Keep the random lifepath stuff but as a clearly marked optional rule

 

[Jacqual]

The game I'm running now uses the CT setting and a modification on the the careers from CT. I do not have any PC's from any of the optional books just book 1 and citizens. The modifications is more cascade skills which allows players to get characters closer to what they wanted in the first place. But I am using MGT's task resolutions system. So all together I have 18 careers for human PC's careers 1 to 6 are book 1 and have a draft roll just like normal CT. It works out quite well, the character generation document I use has 40 pages to it.

 

[jappel]

TNE Style non random chargen

Mega/TNE style integrated build system for all gear

Mass, Energy use, Energy output

No damage scaling

I'm going to differ with you on some of these. For one, there is already an option in the rulebook for non-random chargen; I don't think it needs to be made the default.

The rest is great for gearheading, but IMHO, you don't need that much detail to actually play the game.. Not that I don't enjoy building stuff from time to time, but really, do you really need that much detail about the equipment to put PCs into situations and then resolve them?

It's my personal belief that a game that puts too much emphasis on the gearhead aspects is going down a blind alley.

 

[mbrinkhues]

I'm going to differ with you on some of these. For one, there is already an option in the rulebook for non-random chargen; I don't think it needs to be made the default.

The rest is great for gearheading, but IMHO, you don't need that much detail to actually play the game.. Not that I don't enjoy building stuff from time to time, but really, do you really need that much detail about the equipment to put PCs into situations and then resolve them?

It's my personal belief that a game that puts too much emphasis on the gearhead aspects is going down a blind alley.

The „non random" option in the book is barely an NPC generator and a yoke compared to TNE's system. And it got no further support, has no option to integrate Lifepath [a 10min exercise with TNE's system] is a pure point buy, has no links to mustering out...

Depending on your group/interests the details are needed. An MgT „engineer" has no hard data, depends on the GM's good will. Same for runnig silent, reducing power needs etc. MT/TNE give the data if the players like them. Sensors have hard rules too. 'gnoring numbers is easier than making them up. And the MT build system is as fast as the Mongoose one, quite compact and ONE system not five. Additional data for the „hard facts not GM fiat" groups for no extra costs

 

[jappel]

I'll concede the point on the non-random chargen.

But in my experience, the vast majority of gamers and games don't need the weight of detail produced by the heavy design systems. Your mileage may vary, of course.

I also wouldn't characterize the MegaTraveller design system as "as fast as the Mongoose one", though I'll admit to not having built anything with the MT system since about 1994.

Providing that sort of system is fine for those who want it, sure, but I don't think it belongs in the core book.

 

[Poppyseed45]

When I started out, I only mentioned the core book (TMB or CRB, whichever) because of the problems with HG and, especially, Mercenary. Taking on those is a bigger reboot.

Aye aye. How about college/university in character generation? Something like what's in HG, for example, but make it core. Let people take it twice to be PhDs or something. If they flunk out, let them be Masters.

Also, doesn't it seem a bit silly that you can call a guy "Doctor" after a mere 2 levels of Medic? Why not make it Medic 3? Seems very easy to get Medic two, rules as written, than to get Medic 3, no? Shouldn't the title "Doctor" not be thrown around to just anybody who randomly survived two terms somewhere?

 

[aramis]

I'll concede the point on the non-random chargen.

But in my experience, the vast majority of gamers and games don't need the weight of detail produced by the heavy design systems. Your mileage may vary, of course.

I also wouldn't characterize the MegaTraveller design system as "as fast as the Mongoose one", though I'll admit to not having built anything with the MT system since about 1994.

Providing that sort of system is fine for those who want it, sure, but I don't think it belongs in the core book.

I've used both MGT and MT in the last 4 years. MT's actually faster due to far less page-flipping. MT is also less background detail, and more control over the outcome due to more cascades.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi,

I was going to write a post here, but as I thought things through I began to realize that in the end I wanted to go back through pretty much all the base components of the game and re-evaluate how to handle each part to such an extent that I'm not really sure that the resulting game should be called Traveller any more.

Its not that I didn't like Traveller in the past, or how it is currently being handled, but rather that, over the last 30+ years so many new ideas and approaches have come up, and the exisitng rules and premises have been stretched and tugged and massaged to accommodate things that I've begun to wonder if a complete, blank page, ground up, relook at everything might not be an interesting idea.

By that, I think I mean pretty much everything, from character creation to ship design, combat and damage resolution, all the way through to how skills are aquired, maintained and used.

PF

 

[mbrinkhues]

I'll concede the point on the non-random chargen.

But in my experience, the vast majority of gamers and games don't need the weight of detail produced by the heavy design systems. Your mileage may vary, of course.

I also wouldn't characterize the MegaTraveller design system as "as fast as the Mongoose one", though I'll admit to not having built anything with the MT system since about 1994.

Providing that sort of system is fine for those who want it, sure, but I don't think it belongs in the core book.

The funny thing is that the MegaTraveller system is "lighter" than the MgT system:

+ No "how many segments is my post 2000dton ship"
+ No "a small ship, use that reactor/drive table"
+ No "remember you need option x for each segment"

The whole system (Equivalent to Core, HighGuard and Vehicles) is barely 40 pages.

 

[aramis]

The funny thing is that the MegaTraveller system is "lighter" than the MgT system:

+ No "how many segments is my post 2000dton ship"
+ No "a small ship, use that reactor/drive table"
+ No "remember you need option x for each segment"

The whole system (Equivalent to Core, HighGuard and Vehicles) is barely 40 pages.

MT is more flexible than MGT, for sure - but it's not simpler/lighter. It's unified, tho'.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Hi guys,

Just to let you know that we are watching this thread very carefully - as we passed the halfway point of the (current) licence, we too have been giving a lot of thought as to what, if anything should happen to the core rules.

In the immediate future, it is possible that you may see 'second editions' of High Guard and Mercenary (and maybe CSC) before a revised rulebook but, on the other hand, we may just say 'sod it' and compile all that into a new rulebook!

A few comments on what has been raised here;

1. The task system is not going to change. It just... works. And does so pretty invisibly in-game, and we cannot really ask much more of a mechanic than that.

2. It would be tempting to do to ships what we did with vehicles (a design system based on effect not components), but I think Traveller die-hards might revolt. On the other hand, we have no issues with different design systems for ships and vehicles, so long as the end results are fully compatible.

3. Random lifepath as an option? Probably not - that is one of the defining features of this Traveller, and fans far outweigh the detractors. On the other hand, a points build system for non-random characters will also always be present (maybe something based on the system we had in the Living Traveller campaign).

4. Energy Points probably need to be in the ship rules, but they would have to be done oh so simply.

5. I like the idea of weapons (well, everything) having rounded dice, with no additions. Perhaps round dice and an addition of common 'traits?' CSC already started that with AP and SAP, and it would be easy to add others to produce other effects quickly and easily.




Starting to get the itch to put all of this into action now, curse you all

 

[aramis]

Power points in the draft 3.2 were only broken because it took more power to power Maneuver Drive of letter _x_ than PP of letter _x_ produced, and the same for sustaining JD _x_. Cure that, nothing else need change from Draft 3.2 power rules. (But several, over a dozen, as I recall, people pointed that out during the playtest.)

It also would cure the insanity that PP C on a 100Td ship can power a meson gun, but on a 400 tonner, it can't...

 

[mbrinkhues]

Hi guys,

Just to let you know that we are watching this thread very carefully - as we passed the halfway point of the (current) licence, we too have been giving a lot of thought as to what, if anything should happen to the core rules.

In the immediate future, it is possible that you may see 'second editions' of High Guard and Mercenary (and maybe CSC) before a revised rulebook but, on the other hand, we may just say 'sod it' and compile all that into a new rulebook!

A few comments on what has been raised here;

1. The task system is not going to change. It just... works. And does so pretty invisibly in-game, and we cannot really ask much more of a mechanic than that.

2. It would be tempting to do to ships what we did with vehicles (a design system based on effect not components), but I think Traveller die-hards might revolt. On the other hand, we have no issues with different design systems for ships and vehicles, so long as the end results are fully compatible.

3. Random lifepath as an option? Probably not - that is one of the defining features of this Traveller, and fans far outweigh the detractors. On the other hand, a points build system for non-random characters will also always be present (maybe something based on the system we had in the Living Traveller campaign).

4. Energy Points probably need to be in the ship rules, but they would have to be done oh so simply.

5. I like the idea of weapons (well, everything) having rounded dice, with no additions. Perhaps round dice and an addition of common 'traits?' CSC already started that with AP and SAP, and it would be easy to add others to produce other effects quickly and easily.




Starting to get the itch to put all of this into action now, curse you all

The task system and general rules work fine and have a (Mega)Traveller feel. I could do without damage scaling but that is a minor problem. And since the Cannon Companion<<<Central Supply Catalog the weapons are fixed from Merc.

If you go for a "point buy" any chance you can licence the TNE system? Characters are resonably compatible with MgT, the system is not a pure "point buy" a la GURPS but has a lot of players choice while still "feeling Traveller" and your lifepath system is a simple plug-in (either add it or drop the "special duty" roles for lifepath roles)

As for the lifepath being optional: Basically it is (I can ignore/forbid it as a GM). A small box "system works without lifepath" is all the "optional" it would take

Energy points and an effects based system sounds like a nice compromise. I have not yet seen the new vehicle guide but used DP9s old "Heavy Gear" system and that worked nicely. MegaWatt would be appreciated but EP is enough to feed the engineer and likely fits better to the "generic system" approach of MgT

Some more "civilian" equipment for ships would be nice. Maybe a "consolidated ship part list" gathering the stuff from all supplements (I would pay for that as a PDF) to speed up designs.

Some "in-universe" ship books would be nice. Say one for Traveller, one for 2300AD. Giving the ships a more "alive" feeling

Artwork! It is an on/off thing (some of the ship designs where "phallic" ) and I would pay to have a book/PDF with DGP style descriptions and simple drawings (civilian gear prefered)

 

[saundby]

Hi guys,
...
Starting to get the itch to put all of this into action now, curse you all

This was one of my desired objectives when I started this thread.

Go, go, go!