Why pay more for less (from What you like about MGT)

[MongooseMatt]

"TRAVELLER" -- AS TERM HAS BEEN USED FOR 30+ YEARS -- INCLUDES FAR MORE THAN THE 3I SETTING (AND ITS DERIVATIVES).

Because, _today_ that statement is wrong. It is no longer the case. It is an ex-statement. It is moribund. Defunct. Without life. Pushing the daisies. Buying the farm. Exterminated.

That is what we have spent _26_ pages discussing and, as has been pointed out, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[MongooseMatt]

As we say in Germany "Verarschen kann ich mich alleine" Sorry but the rubber-sector of Foreven is a YOKE when one wants to publist OTU material.

So. . . you wouldn't have bothered?

 

[mbrinkhues]

So. . . you wouldn't have bothered?

It should by now be clear that:

+ I consider the OTU the main if not the ONLY reason for Traveller

+ I won't be using any Traveller rules set except GURPS for a SciFi game

So anything NOT set in the OTU I don't care about nor would I publish anything SciFi under a Traveller label that's not OTU. If I'd ever go to the length of creating a complete environment (And that's what the yoke called Foreven requires) I might as well use a better system than Mgt.

 

[rancke]

The difference of opinion is not with the Traveller Universe - it is with Traveller itself. What some people regard as a set of assumptions and conventions, we call a rules system.

As far as I'm concerned, it's the exact opposite. I don't much care what you do to the rules, but I very much care what you do to the the Official Traveller Universe. Mind you, if you tell me that a particular rule applies to the OfTU (Yes, the 'f' is intentional; it's to distinguish between the Official Traveller Universe and the Original Traveller Universe (OrTU)), then I care about what that particular rule says about it.

Frankly, after the number of different Traveller rules sets that has been published, I don't understand how anyone can believe that Traveller is really about the rules and not the OfTU, but I know some people do, so I'll just have to agree to disagree on that part.

If it does become all about the rules, I'm not buying another Traveller book. I have my own house rules that (IMO) are better than any commercial rules I've come across. None of the various Traveller rules sets really impresses me as absolutely fabulous. Those three little black books impressed me enormously 30 years ago, but that was 30 years ago. As a 1st generation RPG, CT was, indeed, absolutely fabulous; as a 4th (or whatever generation we've reached today) RPG, not so much.

Incidentally, I got those first three LBBs as a gift from a friend who didn't like them at all .

I _think_ I would be right in saying that there have been no massive issues with the one OTU book yet published (Marches), and I am fairly confident about Aslan (about to go to print).

I bought Marches and except for one huge dissapointment, have no massive issues with it. But neither am I impressed by it. It has the same unresolved UWP problems, the same lack of tying together the individual worlds into a collection of neighboring worlds. As a 2nd generation version of the Spinward Marches, it would have been OK, I guess.

The huge dissapointment? I've hesitated to bring it up because I'm obviously very biased, but I'm disappointed that you've almost totally ignored everything that was established in GT:Swords Worlds. Note that I'm not saying that you had no right to ignore it. I'm saying, why in the world did you ignore it? It takes a lot of effort to detail a world down to to the level Paul Drye, Robert Prior and I did for all the Sword Worlds (which isn't very far down, really), not to mention tying them together into a neighborhood with a rich, detailed history. Why throw away all that work? There isn't enough other worlds in the Spinward Marches that still hasn't received that amount of attention?

Yes, I know GT:SW details the Sword Worlds 15 years later than MGT:TSM (and in an alternate universe to boot), but 95% of the history, maybe 90% of each world writeup, and a lot of the library data are perfectly applicable to the year 1105.

In a similar vein (and also with an acknowledgement of a personal bias), may I suggest that you (your authors) make a habit of searching JTAS Online for writeups of and adventures set on worlds you intend to detail? Sure, JTAS Online is not canon, and there certainly are some world details that I'd very much prefer not become canon, so you'd need to be careful, but some of it is pretty good (and not just my own stuff ), and if someone else has already done the work, why not take advantage of it? As I understand it, you can't quote anything verbatim without the permission of the author, but all of it can be used as background. (Incidentally, you have my permission, in case you need it, to use anything I've ever had published on JTAS Online. The way I see it, I'd much rather have my ideas perpetuated than overwritten . Of course, if you do quote large slabs of text verbatim, I would expect an "additional material by" credit and a complementary copy).


Hans

 

[tbeard1999]

Well, you not only have an entire sector to play with in the OTU, but you can also publish YTU, with whatever conventions you like.

This is the point you are trying make, is it not? That Traveller and TU is one and the same.

No, it isn't.

"Traveller" -- as that term has been used over 30+ years -- can encompass the 3I and its derivatives, but does not have to. It also means the underlying technological assumptions that have been part of every version of Traveller until MGT -- plausible, well-conceived weapons and military tech; jump drive; communications limited to speed of travel; etc. In addition, Traveller has always been characterized by careful consideration of how these things interact and how they are likely to develop.*

So...

"Traveller" is a particular set of underlying tech assumptions used with a number of different roleplaying systems.

The 3I and its derivatives are a particular setting that uses all of these Traveller assumptions, in several different rules systems.

All MGT really has to do to satisfy me is:

1. Identify all elements in the core rulebooks that deviate from classic Traveller assumptions -- much like you did with the alternative drives and power plants.

2. Buy up all copies of Mercenary and burn them. Well, maybe not. But it really is an absolute embarrassment. Have someone who actually knows something about military tech (and about Traveller military tech) write or at least review its replacement. Again, if you include absurd weapons, mark them as "non-Traveller".

In other words, respect the 30+ year investment that many of us have in Traveller.

(I'd prefer a better core system, but candidly, that isn't a deal breaker for me.)

*Of course, Traveller's designers are not perfect. Some weapons turned out to be less plausible than originally thought; there are obviously a few handwaves (FTL and gravitics). But a lot of thought went into Traveller and it is foolish and presumptous for someone to discard this merely because it isn't kewl or because they can't be bothered to learn about it.

 

[tbeard1999]

The huge dissapointment? I've hesitated to bring it up because I'm obviously very biased, but I'm disappointed that you've almost totally ignored everything that was established in GT:Swords Worlds. Note that I'm not saying that you had no right to ignore it. I'm saying, why in the world did you ignore it? It takes a lot of effort to detail a world down to to the level Paul Drye, Robert Prior and I did for all the Sword Worlds (which isn't very far down, really), not to mention tying them together into a neighborhood with a rich, detailed history. Why throw away all that work? There isn't enough other worlds in the Spinward Marches that still hasn't received that amount of attention?

To be fair, I don't think that Mongoose had the legal right to use SJG's intellectual property (presumably, as a work for hire, you guys no longer own the IP). So GT material is probably effectively "off the table" for MGT. I don't think that SJG has much interest in allowing a competitor to use their IP in a competing product.

Though I suppose nothing would prevent you from writing a MGT Sword Worlds supplement...

 

[rancke]

To be fair, I don't think that Mongoose had the legal right to use SJG's intellectual property (presumably, as a work for hire, you guys no longer own the IP).

No, we no longer hold the IP. Most of one article wound up in Nobles without me being asked about it (Which I'm perfectly OK with). But I did get credit for it and would have gotten a comp if I hadn't already earned one (If SJG had had a policy of multiple comps, I would have earned three for Nobles ).

So GT material is probably effectively "off the table" for MGT. I don't think that SJG has much interest in allowing a competitor to use their IP in a competing product.

First, after the DGP rights debacle, I've simply assumed that Marc Miller would have included the right to use any new material explicitly in all future 3rd party licenses. Secondly, Loren (or was it Jon at the time?) did all he could to coordinate with Hunter for T20 (ISTR that one of the GT:Survey's were located in Gateway Sector). I doubt he did that in despite of instructions from Steve Jackson. Third, Steve is a Traveller fan. I doubt very much he'd object even if the contract allowed him to.

But if that is the explanation, I'll shift the focus of my dissapointment from MGT to Marc Miller or Steve Jackson as the case may be.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Let's not paint Mongoose's predecessors with too rosy a brush. The interest in exploring ramifications and the willingness to retcon discrepancies has never been a characteristic of any Traveller incarnation.

However, if the worst that could be said about Mongoose was that they were no worse in this respect than their predecessors, I'd consider that plenty bad enough.


Hans

 

[MongooseMatt]

So anything NOT set in the OTU I don't care about nor would I publish anything SciFi under a Traveller label that's not OTU.

Unfortjantely, we have to write a system for more players than just yourself - not intended as an insult, just something a games manufacturer has to live with.

 

[MongooseMatt]

I bought Marches and except for one huge dissapointment, have no massive issues with it. But neither am I impressed by it. It has the same unresolved UWP problems, the same lack of tying together the individual worlds into a collection of neighboring worlds. As a 2nd generation version of the Spinward Marches, it would have been OK, I guess.

The huge dissapointment? I've hesitated to bring it up because I'm obviously very biased, but I'm disappointed that you've almost totally ignored everything that was established in GT:Swords Worlds. Note that I'm not saying that you had no right to ignore it. I'm saying, why in the world did you ignore it? It takes a lot of effort to detail a world down to to the level Paul Drye, Robert Prior and I did for all the Sword Worlds (which isn't very far down, really), not to mention tying them together into a neighborhood with a rich, detailed history. Why throw away all that work? There isn't enough other worlds in the Spinward Marches that still hasn't received that amount of attention?

When it comes to the OTU, Mr Miller very much has the last word. We treat it as God.

 

[MongooseMatt]

It also means the underlying technological assumptions that have been part of every version of Traveller until MGT

That is what we are saying. That is the point we'll have to disagree about.

1. Identify all elements in the core rulebooks that deviate from classic Traveller assumptions -- much like you did with the alternative drives and power plants.

Okay - would an article in S&P be sufficient for that, with the possibility of reprinting in some future Traveller 'Companion' book?

2. Buy up all copies of Mercenary and burn them.

We did.

Seriously. I suspect the copy you have of Mercenary is not the same one that is on release now.

Not saying you will suddenly like it (!).

 

[mbrinkhues]

Unfortjantely, we have to write a system for more players than just yourself - not intended as an insult, just something a games manufacturer has to live with.

Oh, I don't mind. I just won't use it/buy it/recommend it.

 

[rancke]

When it comes to the OTU, Mr Miller very much has the last word. We treat it as God.

If by this sentence you meant to imply that Marc Miller specifically instructed you to ignore Sword Worlds, please say so instead of dropping oblique hints. If not, just what are you trying to say? To point out that you follow the instructions of the license holder seems pretty redundant. Who says you don't?


Hans

 

[tbeard1999]

That is what we are saying. That is the point we'll have to disagree about.

Well, I don't really think that there's much scope to *disagree*. I was telling you how I have defined "Traveller" and how most (all?) Traveller fans I've ever met have defined it.

Okay - would an article in S&P be sufficient for that, with the possibility of reprinting in some future Traveller 'Companion' book?

It certainly wouldn't hurt, although I don't see why it can't be added to the next editions when they are reprinted (assuming that you revise them). You might want to make a separate PDF for players to download. That would pretty much shut me up about MGT's deviations from canon...

Seriously. I suspect the copy you have of Mercenary is not the same one that is on release now.

Not saying you will suddenly like it (!).

This is the first time that anyone has ever mentioned that Mercenary got pulled. Since I bought it immediately after release, I suspect that I do not have the latest version.

 

[MongooseMatt]

If by this sentence you meant to imply that Marc Miller specifically instructed you to ignore Sword Worlds, please say so instead of dropping oblique hints. If not, just what are you trying to say? To point out that you follow the instructions of the license holder seems pretty redundant. Who says you don't?

I am not saying _anything_ specific other than when it comes to the OTU, Mr Miller is not just the final word, he is _the_ Word.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Well, I don't really think that there's much scope to *disagree*. I was telling you how I have defined "Traveller" and how most (all?) Traveller fans I've ever met have defined it.

_We_ disagree with it (and by we, I mean Mongoose and Mr Miller). That is what we have been talking about, and the difference we'll have to respect with one another.

It certainly wouldn't hurt, although I don't see why it can't be added to the next editions when they are reprinted (assuming that you revise them). You might want to make a separate PDF for players to download. That would pretty much shut me up about MGT's deviations from canon...

Would you like to write it? We pay money and everything

This is the first time that anyone has ever mentioned that Mercenary got pulled. Since I bought it immediately after release, I suspect that I do not have the latest version.

Then you must get in contact with me immediatly, Sir (msprange@mongoosepublishing.com)! We'll furnish you with a new one immediatly!

 

[tbeard1999]

First, after the DGP rights debacle, I've simply assumed that Marc Miller would have included the right to use any new material explicitly in all future 3rd party licenses.

I'm not privy to the licensing agreement, but I seriously doubt that SJG would agree to such an arrangement. Why would they pay to have material produced, only to enable competitors to use it?

Secondly, Loren (or was it Jon at the time?) did all he could to coordinate with Hunter for T20 (ISTR that one of the GT:Survey's were located in Gateway Sector). I doubt he did that in despite of instructions from Steve Jackson.

Agreed, but the owner of IP can always allow it to be used by others. Frankly, I don't think that SJG considered T20 much of a competitive threat. No offense to Hunter; it was a fine product. But it was clearly something of a vanity project and I doubt that SJ felt he was enabling a serious competitor.

Mongoose is rather different, it seems to me.

Third, Steve is a Traveller fan. I doubt very much he'd object even if the contract allowed him to.

Well, business is business. I can't imagine him (or Matt, for that matter) making a serious investment in material and then just giving it away to a competitor. (SRDs acknowledged and appreciated on Mongoose's part).

Of course, should SJG ever drop GT, I suspect that SJ would be willing to work something out.

But if that is the explanation, I'll shift the focus of my dissapointment from MGT to Marc Miller or Steve Jackson as the case may be.

Well, I don't think that it's very reasonable to ask SJ to spend money and resources to develop a supplement, then just give it away to a competitor. Of course, if you and your co-authors were willing to disgorge your payments, he might change his mind...

 

[tbeard1999]

_We_ disagree with it (and by we, I mean Mongoose and Mr Miller). That is what we have been talking about, and the difference we'll have to respect with one another.

Well, the good news is that you can pretty easily accomodate us grognards by simply marking the new material.

After all, no one can reasonably complain if the non-Traveller stuff is clearly marked as such, can they?

Of course, that won't resolve issues with starship economics and so forth, but starship economics have been broke since CT. Seems unreasonable to single MGT out for criticism.

Would you like to write it? We pay money and everything

I don't have all the MGT supplements -- I stopped at High Guard. And sadly, my partner on "A Fistful of TOWs 3" would strangle me if he found that I was writing *another* game supplement. I'll pull what I have and email you a list gratis.

Then you must get in contact with me immediatly, Sir (msprange@mongoosepublishing.com)! We'll furnish you with a new one immediatly!

A gracious offer, sir.

And if it has been common knowledge that Mercenary was substantially revised, then I withdraw my criticisms (to the extent that they are no longer valid).

 

[CosmicGamer]

I don't understand how anyone can believe that Traveller is really about the rules and not the OfTU, but I know some people do, so I'll just have to agree to disagree on that part.

Some people are brand new to Traveller and know nothing of the previous versions and any OTU, OrTU or OfTU. Does this help you understand?

I have never seen any great deal of agreement on what the OTU is anyways. The TU people play in is most likely very different from other peoples because each group uses the things they like and adds things of their own.

 

[MongooseMatt]

I don't have all the MGT supplements -- I stopped at High Guard.

Well, you could start with Mercenary and High Guard, and we could send you new ones as some sort of part payment?

And sadly, my partner on "A Fistful of TOWs 3" would strangle me if he found that I was writing *another* game supplement.

Hardly a supplement, more of a list - shouldn't be more than 2-3 pages in a PDF. . .