Why do they change the Spinward Marches UWPs?

[Able Baker]

I don´t understand the reasoning behind this.

Especially as I´m very suspicious of "EDG"´s reasonings. He and MJD seem to concur that some UWPs are "daft".

Isn´t that the point of Traveller, to explain UWPs?

Also, why mess with the single sector that has so much canon tied to it?

I don´t see the need, I only see danger in these changes. Hopefully nobody will notice these changes, but who knows?

 

[Supplement Four]

I don´t understand the reasoning behind this.

Especially as I´m very suspicious of "EDG"´s reasonings. He and MJD seem to concur that some UWPs are "daft".

Isn´t that the point of Traveller, to explain UWPs?

Also, why mess with the single sector that has so much canon tied to it?

I don´t see the need, I only see danger in these changes. Hopefully nobody will notice these changes, but who knows?

Why can't I find something about MGT I like? I don't want 'em messing around with the Marches, either. I think the Marches has been set in canon for decades. Messing with it, even if they are "daft", is just wrong.

I like the "daft" worlds, anyway. It makes them more "alien" and "foreign".

Besides, the real world isn't as nicely ordered and perfect as some UWP revisionists would like to think it is. The real world grows organicaly, and one can find some very strange things in nature and non-natural aspects of the world. The "daft" UWPs, as they say, actually make the world more "real" for me.

Remember "Don't Tread on Me!"

Well, I say, "Don't Mess with the Marches!"

 

[robject]

I don´t understand the reasoning behind this.

...

Also, why mess with the single sector that has so much canon tied to it?

I don´t see the need, I only see danger in these changes. Hopefully nobody will notice these changes, but who knows?

Most of them prefer Traveller to look more like 2300AD. That is, they want it to look like reality. Explaining away worlds that can't hold onto an atmosphere is hard work, and gets old fast.

Nevertheless, I think that's not a good enough reason. People who know enough to understand and care about atmospheres are going to feel hamstrung by the UWP anyway, and really ought to get something like Heaven & Earth, or code their own world-building sector generators. The best will be adopted as de facto, and the rest will fall in line. But making changes for a percentage of a "fractured and dwindling fanbase" is the tail wagging the dog.

 

[far-trader]

I applaud the changes for sake of reality and it should have been fixed many times over already rather than perpetuating the impossible worlds idea.

It's one of the many little broken bits in Traveller. Everyone has their own personal issues (worlds, ships, economics, combat, TL, etc. etc.).

A new rule set is the only chance to fix them and the little I looked at EDG's work on it looked spot on. It maintains the simplicity of CT but discards the idiocy of the extremely impossible worlds.

Sure, making up fantastic stories for weird contradictory impossible UWPs is kinda fun and neat, the first dozen times, not so much so the next dozen times, and that's all in one sector typically.

Are you the same guys saying MGT is gonna kill Traveller by perpetuating the old myths about how backwards the game is? Well, impossible worlds is one of those big problems.

 

[hunter]

I applaud the changes for sake of reality and it should have been fixed many times over already rather than perpetuating the impossible worlds idea.

It's one of the many little broken bits in Traveller. Everyone has their own personal issues (worlds, ships, economics, combat, TL, etc. etc.).

I've got no problems changing the system to generate more 'realistic' worlds, but I have a big problem with changing those worlds in the OTU.

 

[far-trader]

I've got no problems changing the system to generate more 'realistic' worlds, but I have a big problem with changing those worlds in the OTU.

But the point of doing the first is moot if you don't change the problems already created.

It'd be like creating the T20 ship design system and then saying "Oh, but all the previously created ships are already canon, even the B2 1st ed versions that don't need a powerplant for jump drives, so you can't fix those, and you can't use those old rules for new ships."

Granted it does change the OTU, though not in a significant way imo. And not in a bad way. It may require a small change in some old adventures, and I guess there's a whole whack of TML Landgrabs that will need to be redone (if they are still around anywhere).

Anyway, I'm sure Marc is none too happy either. With either the change to the world generation rules or the UWPs of some worlds.

Not that said worlds were rolled by the rules anyway...

 

[hunter]

But the point of doing the first is moot if you don't change the problems already created.

No it's useful for Referee's creating their own sectors. It doesn't have to be retroactively applied to the OTU.

Not to mention they would now have to go through and restat every world in every sector ever published.

It'd be like creating the T20 ship design system and then saying "Oh, but all the previously created ships are already canon, even the B2 1st ed versions that don't need a powerplant for jump drives, so you can't fix those, and you can't use those old rules for new ships."

What you mean like Bk2 vs Bk5 ships?

Granted it does change the OTU, though not in a significant way imo. And not in a bad way. It may require a small change in some old adventures, and I guess there's a whole whack of TML Landgrabs that will need to be redone (if they are still around anywhere).

Depends on the degree of change. If it starts changing worlds that are already detailed in canon it could have significant impact.

Anyway, I'm sure Marc is none too happy either. With either the change to the world generation rules or the UWPs of some worlds.

I have no idea on that.

 

[robject]

If MJD is re-doing UWP gen, and he's helping MGT, and Marc is allowed to use the system in T5 (I recall something about EDG forbidding Marc from using his stuff before), then something may happen.

If any of those is not true, then nothing will happen.

 

[RandyT0001]

I don´t understand the reasoning behind this.

Especially as I´m very suspicious of "EDG"´s reasonings.

What do you suspect his reasons are? Is he trying to 'take over' Traveller? Do you think he has sinister motives to destroy Traveller? :devil:

He and MJD seem to concur that some UWPs are "daft".

"Daft" in that they are physically impossible to exist such as very small worlds (size3 or less) that have breathable atmospheres (4-9) and/or water retention (hydro 1+).

Isn´t that the point of Traveller, to explain UWPs?

Yep, that's why I bought the game, to explain the UWP's, yessir! There I was in the game store and I said to myself, "Randy, you need to find a game where you have to routinely try your best to explain nonsensical worlds to your players." Then I saw the Traveller box and bought it and boy o' boy was I lucky to pick the one game in the entire store that let me do that. And when the Spinward Marches supplement came out I had to clean my shorts I was so excited to have an entire sector with numerous examples of UWP's to explain.

Also, why mess with the single sector that has so much canon tied to it?

Yeah, when I bought my copy of Supplement 3 it weighed a couple hundred pounds. I had no idea stone weighed so much but I didn't care because it was written by the Traveller god himself, Marc.

I don´t see the need, I only see danger in these changes. Hopefully nobody will notice these changes, but who knows?

If they make the changes they want to make then all of the adventures and double adventures become useless. The JTAS and it's histories - out the window! I mean why change the computer rules or the starship construction rules or the combat rules? Why even have a new ruleset, why have Mongoose Traveller, why have T5? Look, it's not Traveller unless it has "daft", nonsensical worlds for me to explain, that IS the definition of Traveller isn't it? I mean EDG and MJD are trying to take over Traveller, maybe even destroy it, right?

I just don't understand this 'chicken little - the sky is falling' attitude that some Traveller canonistas have when a few common sense changes to the game are presented and/or are made. It reminds me of the sterotypical immature little boy who runs home with his toys when he doesn't win.

 

[Supplement Four]

I've got no problems changing the system to generate more 'realistic' worlds, but I have a big problem with changing those worlds in the OTU.

Yep. Exactly.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Everyone has pretty much homebrewed Traveller from the beginning, haven't they? Would this really be any different. I'm working on a campaign for the Regina subsector and I've made changes that didn't seem to work. Made it sound the way I wanted it. It's not canon, but it doesn't have to be if I'm not publishing it. I guess the point is that it's being published this way.

Nothing they do is going to be exactly what everyone wanted. If they were going to do it your way, they would have hired you to do it.

Me personally, I've been wanting them to do a Traveller version in full color with all live models and digital ships and backgrounds for about 5 years now. I'm not holding my breath.

 

[hunter]

If MJD is re-doing UWP gen, and he's helping MGT, and Marc is allowed to use the system in T5 (I recall something about EDG forbidding Marc from using his stuff before), then something may happen.

If it ends up in an official Traveller product EDG has no say in whether Marc can use it or not.

 

[Able Baker]

Well, my suspicions with EDG are that I don´t think he´s up for the task.

Most of his reasoning wasn´t convincing, and he has shown several methodical shortcomings.

Like: not understanding statistics.

EDIT: Or even worse: not understanding UWPs.

 

[hunter]

Well, my suspicions with EDG are that I don´t think he´s up for the task.

Most of his reasoning wasn´t convincing, and he has shown several methodical shortcomings.

Like: not understanding statistics.

EDIT: Or even worse: not understanding UWPs.

Whatever issues he has with me, I'll give him is props. Ganymede know his stuff when it comes to planetary science and has the real world credentials to back it up. I don't have an issue with his rules for planetary generation. I like them. He'd be my first choice to design such a system.

I just don't think the OTU should or really needs to be changed. At least with regard to what is already published (this does not include the Genie sector data). OTU sectors that are not already detailed in canon I think would and should be fair game. The Spinward Marches, Solomani Rim areas, Gateway, etc., I think should remain as they are.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

What is the percentage of OTU UWPs that would change? 5? 25? 50?

Are key OTU worlds among them, are there OTU rationales for their daftness, and would their keyness change in any way were the daftness removed?

Trying to figure out whether this is a storm in a teacup or something serious.

 

[merlin]

For fear of awakening the slumbering beast known as the "moderator"

Well, my suspicions with EDG are that I don´t think he´s up for the task.

Most of his reasoning wasn´t convincing, and he has shown several methodical shortcomings.

Like: not understanding statistics.

EDIT: Or even worse: not understanding UWPs.

That's pretty close to a personal attack, which I believed was contrary to the rules of this board no matter what your personal opinion of the person may be.

Now if you wish to back your claim up with a reasoned examples of why you believe the above to be true...

Or is reasoned argument out of the question?

But the fact of the matter is that people who actually "do" rather than "talk" when it comes to Traveller believe he is up to the task.

Now as far as retconning the UWP's go RandyT0001's and Far Traders replies state pretty much what I feel about the subject so I won't repeat them (just scroll down and take a look yourselves).

Everything changes and for Traveller and UWP's this cannot come too soon.

 

[Ishmael]

Whats the big deal?
If MGT changes the UWP, which pretty much everyone thinks has bad points, then they'll have to change canon UWP's to match. Otherwise you'll have people howling because it'd be impossible to make the OTU with the official rules.
So long as major already detailed worlds aren't bothered, it won't make much difference and who knows?..maybe only a few folk would even notice.

I think the biggest hinderance to improving Traveller as a game is the insistence of 100% backward compatibility with the OTU and canon...including the crap parts of it.

OTU needs traveller...traveller doesn't need the OTU...get over it

<-- heretic and champion of Trav's version of "The Reformation" period

 

[Able Baker]

EDIT: @Hunter regarding EDG

Anyone with a scientific and intellectual upbrining should immedeately understand the limitations and strengths of of Traveller.

And he should have a grasp of statistics, or even moreso stochastics. See Mongoose boards for some funny stuff by him. In one thread he doesn´t see where the difference is between [his humungous] sample and the Statistical population [someone else calculated]. Stuff like that.

No, the EDG guy from the Mongoose forum just isn´t up to it in my book.

Really, he actually said stuff like: [paraphrase] "An A class starport should be impossible on a Lo pop world."

It´s also pretty moronic to dwell on some size/atmosphere goofs, when there are other way bigger "problems".

There´s SO many assumptions made in Traveller, to rap on planet size or pop size is begetting of someone with a very limited view on things.


I mean he actually posts thousands of UWPs to "prove something".
That shows he doesn´t know what he´s doing.

Sorry to be so harsh.

I´m sure he loves Traveller as anyone does.

But if he´s to have any influence on the OTU, I´m out or against it.

EDIT: I do not know how to question someones abilities without somehow attacking the person. So if that´s an offense here, i digress.

 

[hunter]

That's pretty close to a personal attack, which I believed was contrary to the rules of this board no matter what your personal opinion of the person may be.

Next time just report the post please and leave it to the moderators.

Now if you wish to back your claim up with a reasoned examples of why you believe the above to be true...

Or is reasoned argument out of the question?

Speaking of coming close to a personal attack...

 

[hunter]

It´s also pretty moronic to dwell on some size/atmosphere goofs, when there are other way bigger "problems".

I didn't consider your previous post to be a personal attack, however using terms like 'moronic' to describe someone's actions I do consider a personal attack. Avoid such loaded words in the future please. There are less obnoxious ways you could have said it.