Why do some people want Traveller to fail?

[jimg]

Am I just missing an obsessive-compulsive gene needed to be a "proper" Traveller fan?

Obviously. Being a typical forum-active Traveller fan is not about playing
Traveller, it is about bashing Traveller versions. :smirk:

If you just like Traveller without hating at least one of its versions, and
being convinced that you have to tell the world at least several dozen
times, you are not a real fan - you are only a player.

Like me.

In my experience, the obsessive-compulsiveness and the bashing that you see has more to do with this being an online forum than with Traveller fandom itself. The only RPG forums I frequent are Traveller related ones, but you see the same kind of behavior in computer/console game forums and in movie forums.

IMHO, the relative anonymity and the text-only communication serve to exaggerate disagreements, and seems to give people license to state to their opinions in extreme terms.

 

[Supplement Four]

I"ll bet only a very tiny group does NOT houserule and that if a vote for any particular ruleset assumes using that ruleset ONLY, the poll would be hugely lopsided with most having '0' players.

No, asking pollers to just choose one game system would give you a much clearer indication of which game system is preferred.

Always assume GMs houserule unless they tell you otherwise (like me).

Allowing people to choose multiple editions muddies the results.

For example, a player who uses 70% MT, 20%TNE, and one chart out of T4 (for the last 10%) would choose all three, representing 100% vote for all three editions.

Obviously, this player prefers MT over all other systems, but that's not represented in the vote.

It would be had Aramis allowing only one choice in the poll.

 

[robject]

Always assume GMs houserule unless they tell you otherwise (like me).

I wonder how common house-ruling is in other game systems? I can see where an odd variant rule or two can crop up in other games, but how often does a referee graft in whole chunks of one rules system into another one?

Ah, I guess it happens.

Anyway, I'm glad Mongoose Traveller is doing well. Here's to nine more years of Mongoose Traveller successes.

 

[Ishmael]

No, asking pollers to just choose one game system would give you a much clearer indication of which game system is preferred.

Always assume GMs houserule unless they tell you otherwise (like me).

And the game system most would choose would have to be "houseruled" unless the players run un-modified rules...like you.
My point is that all rule-systems are modified at some point ( even you did that in the past ). As such no rule-system is without flaws that don't have to be patched.
All the negative crap being tossed at one system can be tossed at other systems too...it means nothing.

heck, you can play Traveller using 'Toon' rules ( yes, its fun )
I do not play MongTrav. Not because I dislike the rules, but because it adds too little to my vision of the game for the cost... I do not want to pay for a game I already own and am happy with ( heavily modded MT ).

 

[Vargas]

I wonder how common house-ruling is in other game systems?

I've yet to see a rule set survive contact with a group of players intact.

 

[Supplement Four]

I wonder how common house-ruling is in other game systems?

I think it's extremely common. I would say the vast majority of rpgers play more than one game. Chances are, they find things they like in other game systems, and then convert.

I try to minimize house-ruling, myself, because of the rule of unintended consequences and the fact that it's just easier to run things straight from a book.

Anyway, I'm glad Mongoose Traveller is doing well. Here's to nine more years of Mongoose Traveller successes.

Despite what people think, I'm glad its doing well, too. I haven't changed my position. I don't like the game. But, a successful Traveller game I don't like is still a win for Traveller as a whole.

And, MGT seems to be extremely compatible with CT, which means that I'll be buying some new adventures (but probably not any rules-heavy books).

 

[Supplement Four]

And the game system most would choose would have to be "houseruled" unless the players run un-modified rules...like you.
My point is that all rule-systems are modified at some point ( even you did that in the past ). As such no rule-system is without flaws that don't have to be patched.

But, the point of the poll is to guage how many of the pollers pefer a certain Traveller system. "House-Rule" shouldn't be an option.

We're trying to find out how many people prefer, say, TNE, to T4.

That can only be done by allowing each of those polled to give one answer.

 

[tbeard1999]

I myself can testify to the reactions of about 12 people that I have showed the game to, and of those four have also played CT. This in no way represents "all of the MGT players". I also know what has been said elsewhere on how well the game is selling. That is the extent of the knowledge I claim.Allen

Then perhaps your assertions should be limited to the knowledge you claim, and/or speculations clearly labeled as such.

And you made certain (presumably) factual assertions that went beyond speculation about motives.

For instance, you said:

Is it because they are so locked into the nostalagia of the past that they can't recognize that a game has to evolve or it will die?

As I noted in my initial response to you, this statement contains two unconceded assumptions:

First of all, your assertion that a game "has" to evolve is (a) conclusory; (b) unsupported by evidence and (c) not conceded by everyone.

Second, even if we grant the first statement, you've failed to demonstrate that MGT shows much "evolution". In point of fact, I'd argue that it is an almost completely derivative product that has little in the way of innovative mechanics or concepts. This, of course, is No Problem for me, since I have generally found that the bullsh*t quotient of a game design (and the degree of design incompetence) is often directly proportional to its claimed "innovation", "evolutionary leaps", etc.

You've failed to address either of these specific criticisms.

In addition, you seem to exclude a very obvious explanation for someone not liking MGT -- maybe they just don't like it.

And it isn't always easy to articulate why you like or dislike something. For instance, I am unable to explain why I like the Britney Spears video Toxic or why I dislike the music that accompanies the video...

Myself, I applaud Mongoose for catering to the fanbase with their (admittedly confusing, but well-intentioned) Open Game License, SRD and logo license. I fully expect that the replacement policy will be well-received by the fans.

I was impressed that Mongoose revised the deckplans to correct a mistake -- thoughtful (especially since they had to spend money to have it done). I think that Traveller could have landed with a company with far worse motives and conduct. And while this is just an opinion, I get the sense that Mogoose is trying hard. In my book that counts for a lot. So I will cut the company a lot of slack for the time being. They've earned it, IMHO.

I also applaud them for making significant changes to the combat and task system immediately before printing. That move (IMHO) dramatically improved the game, although I don't think that the replacement combat system was well-tested. But it was a risky move and one with a lot more potential downside than upside. For instance, some of their most vocal supporters claimed to love those mechanics. It took stones to risk alienating some of their loudest fans, so I commend them.

However, the resulting game, in my opinion, has flaws that will preclude me from choosing it over my own variant of CT (or my upcoming Basic Roleplaying variant). The good news for me is that I play very few games I buy, so I don't worry much about spending the $$. I haven't bought any supplements or adventures yet, but I expect them to be useful. (Dunno if I need Yet Another Version of the Spinward Marches, though).

The worst thing about MGT in my opinion, is the plethora of arrogant and condescending attitudes coming from certain fans of the system. They have made the debate far more acrimonious than it needs to be IMHO. Worse, by leaping to defend EVERY aspect of the game, they look follish when Mongoose winds up agreeing with the critics. And understandably they get more bitter <cough> Echo <cough> and contentious. Ironically, by trying to shout down reasonable criticisms of the game, they are making it harder for the designer to improve the game.

I think that I and others have made plenty of specific and well-reasoned critiques of the game. And I would note that Mongoose ultimately agreed with the two strongest critiques I made. Those who try to shout down all criticisms might want to consider this fact before casually dismissing any criticisms I and others might make. Or before impugning our motives.

 

[Allensh]

We're trying to find out (or more accurately, Aramis is trying to find out) which system is more popular among those presented ON THIS BOARD. The sample would be too small to be statitically significant even if everyone who is registered on this board voted. As this will not happen, it really isn't going to tell us anything. It certainly is not going to be indicative of anything regarding the larger audience.

As an experiment, Im going to conduct virtually the same poll over on RPG.net; we'll see what they have to say.

Allen

 

[Chronus]

Anyway, I'm glad Mongoose Traveller is doing well. Here's to nine more years of Mongoose Traveller successes.

Here, here!

Or is it . . . hear, hear!

Anyway, these are probably the two best, and most sane, sentences spoken in this entire thread.

 

[Supplement Four]

As an experiment, Im going to conduct virtually the same poll over on RPG.net; we'll see what they have to say.

I'd be interested in how that poll turned out. You should only allow one choice per poller, though. And, only have official editions listed (no House-Rule options).

Otherwise, your data will be muddied.

 

[far-trader]

I'd be interested in how that poll turned out. You should only allow one choice per poller, though. And, only have official editions listed (no House-Rule options).

Otherwise, your data will be muddied.

If the poll isn't exactly the same (muddied as you call it) then any comparison is worthless.

 

[Klaus]

T
The worst thing about MGT in my opinion, is the plethora of arrogant and condescending attitudes coming from certain fans of the system. They have made the debate far more acrimonious than it needs to be IMHO. Worse, by leaping to defend EVERY aspect of the game, they look follish when Mongoose winds up agreeing with the critics. And understandably they get more bitter <cough> Echo <cough> and contentious. Ironically, by trying to shout down reasonable criticisms of the game, they are making it harder for the designer to improve the game.

Being one of those 'vocal supporters' of T/E, yes I did rather like it, with my own 'fixes', but the replacement is perfectly servicable, and doesn't require fixing, so Im quite happy, thank you. And it didn't need 'us' to make the debate acrimonious: you were quite capable of doing that all by yourself (on the Mongoose boards). And continue to, as evidenced above.

I think that I and others have made plenty of specific and well-reasoned critiques of the game. And I would note that Mongoose ultimately agreed with the two strongest critiques I made. Those who try to shout down all criticisms might want to consider this fact before casually dismissing any criticisms I and others might make. Or before impugning our motives.

And now you are making totally insubstantiated assertions. While I agree that many of your criticisms were worth considering, all the evidence offers that Mongoose ditched T/E for very different reasons than you suggest. And I won't impugn your motives if you refrain from impugning mine (see above).

 

[atpollard]

Polls and debates are a silly way to settle this argument. COTI should host two on-line PBP games - one Mongoose Traveller and one Classic Traveller - both 100% by the book rules. The group that has more fun, wins!

 

[aramis]

I've yet to see a rule set survive contact with a group of players intact.

I'm running Dark Heresy with Rules as Written including Errata.

Going quite well.

I ran RAW (Rules As Written) under MT for years. I made a few changes about 3-4 years into it. Changes I've used since; I seldom hybridize, and when I do, it's tiny chunks.

For MT: I change the pen vs armor breakpoints, and I divide stats by 3 to get stat mods, and up task target numbers by 1 to compensate. That's it. (I also use the vehicle combat rules for starships, which is specifically allowed, but is not normal use; technically not a house rule, just an optional rule.)

If players want, I add contacts and wear values from TNE to it.

I ran RAW for TNE for about 2 months. Rapidly discovered the non-lethality, switched to d10's for damage dice. Can't think of any other house rules I ever used with TNE.

I've not run CT since 1997; I've not run CT RAW since 1985, and stopped running CT in 1987, except for a couple one-shots by request of players.

I ran T4 RAW for two months. We then adopted an MT variant task system, and ran with only that variant for 3 months.

I ran T20 RAW for 8 months... of course, the rules changed every other week during that time... (it was during playtest).

But now, I'm considering a wholesale hybrid: MGT Character Gen, trade and ships, MT combat systems.

First time in 24 years that hybridizing the rules makes a whole lot of sense.

 

[Klaus]

Polls and debates are a silly way to settle this argument. COTI should host two on-line PBP games - one Mongoose Traveller and one Classic Traveller - both 100% by the book rules. The group that has more fun, wins!

Well there's at least one, and perhaps 2 or 3, PBPs being run here that do use MGT.

 

[tbeard1999]

And it didn't need 'us' to make the debate acrimonious: you were quite capable of doing that all by yourself (on the Mongoose boards). And continue to, as evidenced above.

Once again, I challenge you to produce a single post in which I attacked another poster, except in response to an attack. You've been unable to do so in the past, so I can only conclude that you are (a) intentionally misrepresenting what actually occurred; or (b) simply making stuff up. Which is it?

And now you are making totally insubstantiated assertions. While I agree that many of your criticisms were worth considering, all the evidence offers that Mongoose ditched T/E for very different reasons than you suggest.

And what evidence is that, exactly?

In any case, I and others stridently criticized those systems. We were assured by fans (like you, I believe, although I could be mistaken) that we were in the distinct minority. Then, when Mongoose changed the mechanics, fans (like you, I believe) then assured us that lots of people criticized the mechanics.

At the end of the day, Mongoose agreed that the mechanics needed to be ditched. So when MGT fans try to shout down critics, they might bear this in mind.

 

[tbeard1999]

But now, I'm considering a wholesale hybrid: MGT Character Gen, trade and ships, MT combat systems.

First time in 24 years that hybridizing the rules makes a whole lot of sense.

My $0.02 -- The MGT chargen system is pretty good, although I contend it yields too many skills. This is easy to fix. I am also concerned that the "dangerous" careers have survival rolls that are too high. Again, an easy fix.

The MGT starship design system is a nice replacement for Book 2, although I'd like to be able to make larger ships. Not at all impressed with either the combat system or the starship combat system. MGT's trade and economic systems are just as broke as any other version of Traveller, so I can't see much benefit in using them.

 

[Echo]

The worst thing about MGT in my opinion, is the plethora of arrogant and condescending attitudes coming from certain fans of the system. They have made the debate far more acrimonious than it needs to be IMHO. Worse, by leaping to defend EVERY aspect of the game, they look follish when Mongoose winds up agreeing with the critics. And understandably they get more bitter <cough> Echo <cough> and contentious. Ironically, by trying to shout down reasonable criticisms of the game, they are making it harder for the designer to improve the game.

Personal attack, moderator?

 

[rust]

Would someone please call for an exorcist with bell, book and candle ?

This thread must be cursed, there is no other explanation for what is
going on here. :nonono: