Why Other Versions of Traveller Failed

[Prometheus]

Gee did I steal someones lollie pop!. Lets see I play both T20 and CT(anecdotal).. depends on who I play with. I believe it is safe to presume that the fan base for both would use it. But then Daryan reminds me too much of the GWs in the world.

Oh well this is getting silly Like WOTC.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff:
Gee did I steal someones lollie pop!. Lets see I play both T20 and CT(anecdotal).. depends on who I play with. I believe it is safe to presume that the fan base for both would use it. But then Daryan reminds me too much of the GWs in the world.

Just because what you want has little chance of happening doesn't mean you need to be nasty about it.

(BTW, just what is a "GW"? If you are going to take the time to try and insult someone, you can at least put out enough effort to make sure he knows what the insult is.)

Regardless, this is not my supposition. It has already been stated (in this forum, though I believe a different topic) that T5 will not come out while T20 and GT are still in business.

 

[Prometheus]

whoopdie do .. it is a forum about T5.. I expressed an opinion.. Bite me

 

[Jame]

Traveller hasn't really failed, neither is it as much of a success as some other games. What it has done, in my opinion, is survive in a way that very few other games have done while maintaining a recognizable spirit (T4 being near the only exception, and that had the spirit on occasion) through all the rule changes. As several others have said, if T5 ever comes out, there should be updated computer rules. Of course, GT is my favorite version, as it's the most accessible (in terms of content, at least, if not playability). Do what you will with that, but it's my opinion.

 

[RocketTurtle]

Don't see T5 as something that's trying to appease and bring together all the followers of past or present Traveller. That's where your argument fails.

You see, T5 is something that will give new players, like myself, a chance to experience all facets of the Traveller universe. Sure, there are the reprints, along with T20 and GT, but the thing is, I don't like GURPS, and nor do I want to play T20.

CT is nice, but it's really out of date, especially in terms of book formatting (it's a very hard book to get through and memorize, especially if you're a busy person in this modern world) and speed of play, and then there's no mention of the other traveller timelines that I'll never get to see if T5 isn't released.

Sure, there's no way every old fan of Traveller will be pleased with T5, but that's no reason to shortchange many other future players of a good, up to date version of Traveller for them to play with.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by RocketTurtle:
Don't see T5 as something that's trying to appease and bring together all the followers of past or present Traveller. That's where your argument fails.

Well, out of curiousity, and at the tremendous risk of "whining" too much, which version of T5 are you thinking of? The "Cleaned up MT" version or the "T4.1" version?

... and then there's no mention of the other traveller timelines that I'll never get to see if T5 isn't released.

As I mentioned before, we have 2 timelines being actively explored and we have been promised 2 more timelines very soon. When T5 comes out it will most likely only focus on a single timeline. (The one mentioned before is M:200, but I imagine that would probably change by the time T5 came out.)

Sure, there's no way every old fan of Traveller will be pleased with T5, but that's no reason to shortchange many other future players of a good, up to date version of Traveller for them to play with.

I don't know about "shortchanging" anyone. From what I can see from these boards, it is mostly the old timers who want T5. It seems most newcomers are more interested in a Traveller that uses the system they are most familiar with (i.e. T20).

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by RocketTurtle:
Don't see T5 as something that's trying to appease and bring together all the followers of past or present Traveller. That's where your argument fails.

That said, where does one draw the line? There are *six* different versions of Traveller around, three of which are currently active. Two more are in the pipeline (GURPS:IW and TNEd20:1248, hopefully). Releasing another Traveller - even after GURPS and d20 have gone - will only fragment the community further. Now that T20's here, there's a new, exciting banner for Traveller fans to rally under, yet people are still ignoring its potential and waiting for something that will never happen.

You see, T5 is something that will give new players, like myself, a chance to experience all facets of the Traveller universe. Sure, there are the reprints, along with T20 and GT, but the thing is, I don't like GURPS, and nor do I want to play T20.

And T20 is giving a LOT of new players the chance to experience the Traveller Universe. So has GURPS. And if more settings books come out for it, then they'll get more of that universe. Like it or not, d20 is a very popular system - GURPS is fairly popular too (not as much as d20 though). I think if there's a choice to be made between going for the biggest market (thus having money to make more books) and going for another system that is not guaranteed to please anybody, is it any surprise that they went for a d20 conversion?
Besides - the setting info is still surely useful to you. The GURPS Trav books are a goldmine of information that vastly improve and update the info in CT. You can't tell me that's all unusable for you.

CT is nice, but it's really out of date, especially in terms of book formatting (it's a very hard book to get through and memorize, especially if you're a busy person in this modern world) and speed of play, and then there's no mention of the other traveller timelines that I'll never get to see if T5 isn't released.

See above. There are many other timelines around already, both in book form and talked about on the web. There are many other timelines on the way anyway. If you don't like the system, use the setting with one that you do like!
From the sound of it, T5 advocates don't really have much of a problem with the CT game mechanics - just aspects of the background. Fine - so keep the system that you like, and pilfer the settings from the other Travellers. If you do that, then that eliminates the need for anyone to publish a whole new Traveller!

I think this endless yearning for T5 is something pretty unique to the Traveller community. I can't think of any other game where there is a vocal portion of fans who continually wish that some other version of the game was out other than the one that is - particularly when the new version has barely had any time to prove itself. With other games, if people don't like the system they'll usually adapt it to another one - heck, I don't like the chargen in T20, so I'm planning on changing it til I do. If they don't like the setting, they'll tweak it til they do like it. They generally don't demand or expect someone to make a whole new version of the game. Why doesn't this happen with Traveller?

 

[Prometheus]

Jesus, Mary, Joesphe, Buddha and Allah!

this is absurd... anyway points for you evil doc!.. and rocket turtle i am delighted about your interested in CT. I do encourage tou to give a t20 a chance ... it is the open gaming system that is going to make it take off...so be open minded
daryen your whining is amusing at best ...pax zhodatls

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff:
daryen your whining is amusing at best ...pax zhodatls

YES! I knew I could bait you into a pointless reply! I love predictability.

(Just like I know this will force out yet another pointless reply. )

 

[RocketTurtle]

GURPS and D20 both make trade offs in certain areas that don't flow with my play style or the play style of my group. There's no point in me getting either GT or T20 if I don't like the system.

As I said, there may be six versions of Traveller, but most of the other versions are out of print. So they really don't count considering I couldn't casually get my hands on them.

One of the active versions is just a reprint of old material that turns off many new players due to formatting and various older methodologies. I don't plan on getting either T20 or GT for reasons already stated.

I don't think T20 is a banner to rally around, T20 is really just Traveller converted so players can play the setting using D20 rules. And I don't see how it will fragment the community. People will play what they want to play, whether it's D20 or GURPS. People will also not play what they don't want to play, and in my case, I don't want to play either T20 or GURPS. And with CT, I can barely get the information memorized there due to all the old formatting and writing methodology.

As for the popularity of systems. I'm not arguing that. But why make people buy books for other systems that they're not going to use? They could convert, yes, but who has the time and patience for that anymore? Setting information is nice and all, but when there's other games that I can pickup and not have to convert just so I can play, I'd rather play that system rather than Traveller, which in fact is what is bothering me right now. I really want to play Traveller, but I don't want to deal with D20, GURPS, deciphering CT, or converting info from many different books.

I have a feeling a lot of people here are Traveller old timers, perhaps having access to many of the older books with years of experience in the Traveller universe. Others here were lured in by T20. It's all fine. If you don't like what T5 turns out to be, don't buy it. Stick with the reprints or T20, that's fine. T5 is for the new generation of gamers who want a modern quality Traveller book, and don't play D20 or GURPS. Just another option to get another different group of players into Traveller.

 

[Prometheus]

Yes daryen we know your a dork!
Damned if I do and damned if i don't, right Daryen?
anyway .. lets have a truce and pick on someone else.

 

[Ron]

GURPS and d20 are rules heavy games. They introduce rules to cover almost any situation and, thus, take some effort to master them. Many people enjoy that approach and it is fine with me. However, I would rather play a game with simpler rules. Classic Traveller is very light in this aspect. It may have complicated rules in order to design stuff, but this was never a issue with me as I believe that the setting feeling is more important than any design rules.

Classic Traveller was a landmark in RPG design back when was released. Still, it is a dated game nowadays. Marc Miller's Traveller represented a return to the original Classic Traveller design with several improvements. Although editorial aspects may have doomed this version, I still believe it may be the basis of a new version of Traveller.

The Evil Dr. appears to support the idea that a few systems may be sufficient to run the whole diversity of RPG settings available. It may be even true, but I dispute if this is a desirable strategy. Personally, I have no patience to run either GURPS or d20 and, therefore, I look forward to see the next interaction of Traveller rules.

 

[Gallowglass]

As a suggestion, and to avoid some acrimonious exchanges, here are some definitions that I have found useful:

There have been three (arguably four) versions of the Traveller RULES (CT, MT, T4 and T:TNE (which was developed in other games, then adapted to the OTU)).

There have been a number of eras "officially supported": Classic, Rebellion, New Era, Milieu 0, Milieu 1000 and Interstellar Wars.

There have been two (arguably three) adaptations of the Official Traveller Univers to "non-native" rules: GURPS Traveller, T20 and (arguably) T:TNE (since the GDW House system was developed in other games, and then adapted to the OTU).

The Official Traveller Universe is (as with any work of fiction) a product of it's time. It therefore has certain, to early 21st Century perceptions, arcghaic assumption about technology.

Most of the people pro T5 want a fifth generation of the Traveller RULES. Many of us would like it to be a true generic SF game as well.

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by Gallowglass:

The Official Traveller Universe is (as with any work of fiction) a product of it's time. It therefore has certain, to early 21st Century perceptions, arcghaic assumption about technology.

If you* wanted Traveller a hard-sf game with 90s/00s sensibilities (the QLI Traveller designers at least refer to Traveller as being "Hard SF"), then you're going to land up with something like "Transhuman Space" or "Blue Planet" (with Jump Drives, psi and aliens). You'll have AI, uploads, huge amounts of genetic tinkering with Solomani, uplifts, and so on - the tech level advance more rapidly too. Hell, it's the 56th century or something isn't it? Solomani (if it's even recognisable as such) would probably be off the TL chart by then!
Or if you wanted a more 80s Hard SF feel, then you'll probably land up with something similar to 2300AD.

Is that what people want to see in a T5? Hell, I wouldn't mind either of those, but I suspect that many who want T5 really want an updated CT system, a setting that's the same as CT, and more advanced "updated" tech. The only problem is that the more advanced tech will *totally* change the setting. So it looks like they can't have their cake and eat it too - unless you abandon the idea that Traveller is supposed to be hard SF.

Most of the people pro T5 want a fifth generation of the Traveller RULES. Many of us would like it to be a true generic SF game as well.

That seems odd to me - I've never viewed Traveller as anything BUT a truly generic SF game, with this optional 'Imperium' background attached. We've got planet-building rules in things like Book 6, WBH, and First In, we've got some fantastic tech-building rules in "Fire Fusion and Steel", fairly detailed trading rules in "Far Trader", we've got a core system that's pretty generic and adaptable in pretty much any of the incarnations of Traveller (and we have all of those qualities in T20 and G:T). How can Traveller NOT be truly generic? All you need to do is snip away the Imperium background, which is very easy to do, and you've got your generic SF setting!

*: I should note that when I say "you" in these posts, I'm not necessarily referring to the person I'm replying to - I mean "you" in a general sense here.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by RocketTurtle:
I have a feeling a lot of people here are Traveller old timers, perhaps having access to many of the older books with years of experience in the Traveller universe. Others here were lured in by T20. It's all fine. If you don't like what T5 turns out to be, don't buy it. Stick with the reprints or T20, that's fine. T5 is for the new generation of gamers who want a modern quality Traveller book, and don't play D20 or GURPS. Just another option to get another different group of players into Traveller.

I am still curious as to what version of T5 you are looking for. Do you want the cleaned up MT rules, the T4.1 rules, or something else?

The reason I ask is because I am trying to bring out my main point here. If they come out with a "T4.1" version of the rules in a standard rules packaging, using an all new M:200 setting (which is still Marc Miller's stated intention), will you be interested in it?

From what I can see on this board, most won't.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Gallowglass:
As a suggestion, and to avoid some acrimonious exchanges, here are some definitions that I have found useful:

I don't know that definitions will help with any acrimony as the bad speller seems to be offended by anyone with a differing viewpoint.

Most of the people pro T5 want a fifth generation of the Traveller RULES. Many of us would like it to be a true generic SF game as well.

I am curious as to your answer to my question above, too. Would you be satisfied if T5 turned out to be T4.1 with a M:200 setting? If not, what are you hoping for?

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by Evil Dr Ganymede:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gallowglass:

The Official Traveller Universe is (as with any work of fiction) a product of it's time. It therefore has certain, to early 21st Century perceptions, arcghaic assumption about technology.

If you* wanted Traveller a hard-sf game with 90s/00s sensibilities (the QLI Traveller designers at least refer to Traveller as being "Hard SF"), then you're going to land up with something like "Transhuman Space" or "Blue Planet" (with Jump Drives, psi and aliens). You'll have AI, uploads, huge amounts of genetic tinkering with Solomani, uplifts, and so on - the tech level advance more rapidly too. Hell, it's the 56th century or something isn't it? Solomani (if it's even recognisable as such) would probably be off the TL chart by then!
Or if you wanted a more 80s Hard SF feel, then you'll probably land up with something similar to 2300AD.

Is that what people want to see in a T5? Hell, I wouldn't mind either of those, but I suspect that many who want T5 really want an updated CT system, a setting that's the same as CT, and more advanced "updated" tech. The only problem is that the more advanced tech will *totally* change the setting. So it looks like they can't have their cake and eat it too - unless you abandon the idea that Traveller is supposed to be hard SF.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually, I want a rule set (T5) that lets me play in the OTU, in 90's trendy buzzword land (Transhuman SPace etc) or whatever setting I choose, rather than having underpinning setting assumptions built in. Which is why most of those who discuss T5 as a generic SF game have long been saying that whist their are mechanics aspects from CT, MT (hell and T:TNE and T4) that have merit, the system needs to be modular to allow easy adaptation to different settings.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Most of the people pro T5 want a fifth generation of the Traveller RULES. Many of us would like it to be a true generic SF game as well.

That seems odd to me - I've never viewed Traveller as anything BUT a truly generic SF game, with this optional 'Imperium' background attached. We've got planet-building rules in things like Book 6, WBH, and First In, we've got some fantastic tech-building rules in "Fire Fusion and Steel", fairly detailed trading rules in "Far Trader", we've got a core system that's pretty generic and adaptable in pretty much any of the incarnations of Traveller (and we have all of those qualities in T20 and G:T). How can Traveller NOT be truly generic? All you need to do is snip away the Imperium background, which is very easy to do, and you've got your generic SF setting!

*: I should note that when I say "you" in these posts, I'm not necessarily referring to the person I'm replying to - I mean "you" in a general sense here.</font>[/QUOTE]What is generic about Jump Drive, STL Communication, Laser Weapons, Gauss Weapons, Fusion and plasma Weapons, AI's (lack there of), cyber technology (lack thereof), biological modification, Interstellar Feudalism etc etc? To varying degrees, these things are assumed in every set of Traveller RULES. Snip away THESE bits of the "optional 'Imperium' background" leaves some major holes... as both T:TNE and T4 acknowledged, hence FF&S and it's entries for variant technologies...

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by daryen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gallowglass:
As a suggestion, and to avoid some acrimonious exchanges, here are some definitions that I have found useful:

I don't know that definitions will help with any acrimony as the bad speller seems to be offended by anyone with a differing viewpoint.

Most of the people pro T5 want a fifth generation of the Traveller RULES. Many of us would like it to be a true generic SF game as well.

I am curious as to your answer to my question above, too. Would you be satisfied if T5 turned out to be T4.1 with a M:200 setting? If not, what are you hoping for?</font>[/QUOTE]NOT T4.1, that's for certain. I loathe the half-dice. I think their are elements from CT, MT and T4 that are promising and I think T:TNE's FF&S is a key model. Something with the streamlining and modularity that T4 promised (but lost in a haze of typos and poor product), built on the clean simple and logical foundations of the CT/MT systems (MT tasks, basic systems for design like CT, EASY to follow advanced sequences like MT) sounds like a winner for me.

As to setting, I quite like the Milieu:200 era idea, although I think the two with commercial potential would be either MJD's New Era (1248, founding of the 4th Imperium) or Nightfall: The Collapse of the Rule of Man. But part of the point is I'd like a set of rules taht capture teh Traevller feel, but also is easily adaptable to other settings, so I'm not patricularly partisan about setting.

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by Gallowglass:

Originally posted by Evil Dr Ganymede:
Actually, I want a rule set (T5) that lets me play in the OTU, in 90's trendy buzzword land (Transhuman SPace etc) or whatever setting I choose, rather than having underpinning setting assumptions built in. Which is why most of those who discuss T5 as a generic SF game have long been saying that whist their are mechanics aspects from CT, MT (hell and T:TNE and T4) that have merit, the system needs to be modular to allow easy adaptation to different settings.

Well, in that case you don't want anything specific "Traveller" at all. If you really want something that's totally generic and adaptable to any technology or sci-fi setting, why even bother making any suggestion of a link to Traveller at all?

What you're really asking for is a more evolved rules-set from the previous editions of Traveller, freed from any and all setting info - but that Traveller can be created from. Arguably, T20 is something along these lines.

But from the sound of it, you're basically wanting the ex-GDW folks to produce something like a combination of GURPS Space and FF&S, but with the CT rules instead of GURPS.

What is generic about Jump Drive, STL Communication, Laser Weapons, Gauss Weapons, Fusion and plasma Weapons, AI's (lack there of), cyber technology (lack thereof), biological modification, Interstellar Feudalism etc etc?

Most of those are very generic indeed - they can potentially be found in any sci-fi setting (not necessarily ALL sci-fi settings, though). A generic technological architecture should be able to cover all the possibilities, and allow people to select the ones that they want from there for their games - so by necessity, it should include all of the above (the Interstellar Feudalism isn't tech, but could certainly be covered in the 'government' section of such a book). Indeed, this sort of thought process is covered in GURPS Space quite nicely.

[qb]
To varying degrees, these things are assumed in every set of Traveller RULES. Snip away THESE bits of the "optional 'Imperium' background" leaves some major holes... as both T:TNE and T4 acknowledged, hence FF&S and it's entries for variant technologies...

That's true, to an extent. But that said, many of the tech aspects of Traveller are pretty standard fare in sci-fi, and the tech level progression makes them fairly generic too.

If you add the missing things *to the Traveller setting* - AI, biotech, and so on - then you're changing that setting quite significantly. If you just want to add rules for these things to a generic sci-fi toolkit, and from there pick out the bits that make it Traveller, then that's something else entirely.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Gallowglass:
What is generic about Jump Drive, STL Communication, Laser Weapons, Gauss Weapons, Fusion and plasma Weapons, AI's (lack there of), cyber technology (lack thereof), biological modification, Interstellar Feudalism etc etc? To varying degrees, these things are assumed in every set of Traveller RULES. Snip away THESE bits of the "optional 'Imperium' background" leaves some major holes... as both T:TNE and T4 acknowledged, hence FF&S and it's entries for variant technologies...

Here is where I think you had me a bit confused. When I hear people talk about "no background", I had assumed that they meant no "history" (i.e. no Imperium), but that the technological base remained (e.g. jump). If you get rid of the underlying technology, then (to me, anyway) you cease to have Traveller. All you really have at that point is a generic SF roleplaying game.

And at that point, what you are effectively asking is for a new "GURPS" or "D20" that uses better mechanics. While I agree that is a good request, that is a pretty tall order.