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

[rancke]

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?

Because he wanted to publish new material set in a shared universe owned by someone else, of course.

I didn't say that how the license was worded. I said that I assumed, as a matter of course, that after the problems there were with the DGP rights, Marc Miller would make sure such problems did not arise ever again. I really don't see the point in arguing about it when the license holder in question doesn't want to either confirm or deny it.


Hans

 

[tbeard1999]

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

Deal.

<sigh>

I feel like Michael Corleone in The Godfather III. "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in."

Or maybe I'm just Fredo...

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

Yeah, that's what I'm telling my partner...

 

[tbeard1999]

Because he wanted to publish new material set in a shared universe owned by someone else, of course.

I didn't say that how the license was worded. I said that I assumed, as a matter of course, that after the problems there were with the DGP rights, Marc Miller would make sure such problems did not arise ever again. I really don't see the point in arguing about it when the license holder in question doesn't want to either confirm or deny it.

Settle down; I'm not arguing, I'm only musing about business. And it's a pretty central concept that businesses are intended to be profitable. It's hard to see the business sense in spending considerable resources to develop a product, then giving that product to a serious competitor.

What you might want to lobby for would be some kind of arrangement where GT supplements can be re-packaged by Mongoose. Although SJG would reasonably want compensation, if they were interested in such a deal.

A lot of this depends on just how profitable the GT line is.

 

[rancke]

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?

Not really. By 'anyone' I guess I unconciously thought of people who did know about previous versions. If you'd like me to amend my statement to that effect, please consider it amended.

I have never seen any great deal of agreement on what the OTU is anyways.

Ain't that the dismal truth! However, I try not to think any less of people who disagree with me.

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.

True, but what's your point? The purpose of a shared universe isn't to have everybody play in it but to ensure that anything that does get published about it is compatible with everything else that's published about it. If people want to make their own changes (and who doesn't?), they have my blessings (Not that I imagine for a moment that they need them).


Hans

 

[atpollard]

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.

As reported by the author (MJD), he wanted to 'resolve' a few of the more obvious UWP problems, but wild speculation by others forced the issue before he could even present what he proposed to do. The result was that (I believe Marc himeslf) selected a previously published set of UWPs and said "these are Official".

Other writing likes and dislikes you are free to lay at the author's feet, but UWPs appear to have been beyond his control.

 

[rancke]

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.

I shall treasure these words of wisdom for as long as I remember them.


Hans

 

[tbeard1999]

As reported by the author (MJD), he wanted to 'resolve' a few of the more obvious UWP problems, but wild speculation by others forced the issue before he could even present what he proposed to do. The result was that (I believe Marc himeslf) selected a previously published set of UWPs and said "these are Official".

Other writing likes and dislikes you are free to lay at the author's feet, but UWPs appear to have been beyond his control.

To be fair, it's a tough job to sell a Spinward Marches supplement. Seems to me that almost all of the material will be repeated from one Traveller supplement or another. This creates a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. If you are faithful to the original material, folks may grouse about the lack of new information. If you change some things, folks will grouse about changing classic information.

And the sheer size of the Marches militates against the kind of supplement that would *really* be nice -- every world detailed with a map and a 1-2 page writeup. With 439 systems, such a product would be 1300+ pages long.

 

[rancke]

As reported by the author (MJD), he wanted to 'resolve' a few of the more obvious UWP problems, but wild speculation by others forced the issue before he could even present what he proposed to do. The result was that (I believe Marc himself) selected a previously published set of UWPs and said "these are Official".

Other writing likes and dislikes you are free to lay at the author's feet, but UWPs appear to have been beyond his control.

Did I lay any blame at the author's feet? I said the book didn't impress me. That's all.

Incidentally, when we did Sword Worlds, we asked for permission to change a number of physical UWP stats, but was refused. With the exception of three changes of population levels that we got permission for (and a fourth that we made accidentally), every world description is based on what I presume is the set of UWPs that Marc Miller mandated. We did it by overusing the Ancients (the theory is that the cluster is a "laboratory" where the Ancients first developed and tested terraforming techniques), and I sincerely hope that Marc reconsiders his attitude to retconning a few judiciously chosen UWPs before someone has to tackle another subsector (the "Ancients laboratory" story will wear a trifle thin if it's used much more), but it is possible to tie neighboring worlds together into a coherent picture without changing UWPs.


Hans

 

[MongooseMatt]

Deal.

Cool - drop me a line about this too.

 

[MongooseMatt]

And the sheer size of the Marches militates against the kind of supplement that would *really* be nice -- every world detailed with a map and a 1-2 page writeup. With 439 systems, such a product would be 1300+ pages long.

Oh, we intend to return to the Marches. . .

 

[rancke]

To be fair, it's a tough job to sell a Spinward Marches supplement. Seems to me that almost all of the material will be repeated from one Traveller supplement or another. This creates a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. If you are faithful to the original material, folks may grouse about the lack of new information. If you change some things, folks will grouse about changing classic information.

You can be faithful to the old material if you add new material that fits with the old material. And there are a few new world writeups (which I thoroughly approve of and will consult if I ever write an adventure that touches those worlds). If anything, I'm grousing because it didn't overwrite a few of the more egregious bits of old material .

And the sheer size of the Marches militates against the kind of supplement that would *really* be nice -- every world detailed with a map and a 1-2 page writeup. With 439 systems, such a product would be 1300+ pages long.

Agreed. No one could reasonably expect anyone to publish something like that. Still, there has to be something in between leaving every world an isolated UWP and giving every one of them the treatment TTA gave Aramis subsector and SW gave the Sword Worlds.


Hans

 

[tbeard1999]

Oh, we intend to return to the Marches. . .

Well, to do it justice will require a LOT of effort. But it could be a world beater...

 

[tbeard1999]

You can be faithful to the old material if you add new material that fits with the old material. And there are a few new world writeups (which I thoroughly approve of and will consult if I ever write an adventure that touches those worlds). If anything, I'm grousing because it didn't overwrite a few of the more egregious bits of old material .


Agreed. No one could reasonably expect anyone to publish something like that. Still, there has to be something in between leaving every world an isolated UWP and giving every one of them the treatment TTA gave Aramis subsector and SW gave the Sword Worlds.


Hans

If I were doing it, I'd tackle blocks of 4 subsectors at a time. That's about 110 worlds on average. Still a hefty tome, but doable. Ideally, have most of the work done so that the wait between volumes is minimized. Resource intensive, though.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Traveller is only a few months old, give us a chance

Technically, Traveller hit game stores a year ago last month. Happy Belated Birthday.

 

[Allensh]

I support the idea of an article listing the elements in the book so far that are not part of the OTU. I also very much support these sorts of "disclaimers" being included in future books. It seems like a relatively small thing, and might help those who want to keep their OTU "pure", so to speak.

Allen

 

[Colin]

My Take

As a writer, MgT is the only version I can write for and get paid. So I support it myself. Are there things I would change? Yes, though only two come to mind immediately. In ship design, I would dearly like to see power allocation (power points, MW, EP, whatever.) The harder sort of SF that I favour largely requires that kind of detail. And I would like to see technology, equipment, ships, whatever that are OTU-compatible marked that way. Note that I would like to see OTU stuff marked, not non-OTU. Largely a personal preference.

Oh, and editing. However, they are far from the worst, and even GDW has had some horrific issues with errata (MegaTraveller, Traveller:2300, HG 1st Ed, TNE, not to mention T4. CT may not have had published errata, but it did have consistency issues). However, I would like to see the editing improved, if only to improve the reputation of the line.

 

[atpollard]

And I would like to see technology, equipment, ships, whatever that are OTU-compatible marked that way. Note that I would like to see OTU stuff marked, not non-OTU.

... with an Imperial Sunburst. I like that.

But realisticly, that is not in the spirit of 'MgT:Traveller' = a generic sci-fi game system, and 'The Third Imperium' = OTU.
'The Third Imperium' needs a setting book that defines which parts of the 'system' apply to the Original/Official Traveller Universe.
(which is the pdf that Matt has proposed and Tbeard1999 has accepted the challenge).

 

[Allensh]

... with an Imperial Sunburst. I like that.

But realisticly, that is not in the spirit of 'Traveller' = a generic sci-fi game system, and 'The Third Imperium' = OTU.
'The Third Imperium' needs a setting sourcebook that defines which parts of the 'system' apply to the Original/Official Traveller Universe.

I agree with both ideas

Allen

 

[Supplement Four]

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

(snip)

A fair point. However, to take the analogy to Traveller;

D20 = Traveller
Conan = OTU

We are _still_ debating about the difference between setting and system. It is our position that the two are different things.

Yeah, this is a problem.

Ya see, if a person sees the name "Traveller" on a product, that title comes with a lot of assumptions as to what the game is about: Jump Drive taking a week in J-Space no matter the distance travelled; Aslan/Vargr/Humani/K'kree/Hivers as major aliens; No "blasters", but heavy back-pack lasers and regular old shotguns instead...etc.

When a person sees "d20" on a product, there are no assumptions about the universe that game inhabits.

If one sees "Dungeons & Dragons" on the product, then, yep, there are assumptions about the type of world that is used in the game.

When a game reads "d20", the question is open as to what kind of game it is: Is it d20 modern? Is it Conan? Is it D&D? Is it Star Wars? Is it Spycraft? What universe is the d20 rules being applied to?



This is another mistake that Mongoose has made. Traveller is not a set of rules. In fact, a number of various rule systems have been assigned to Traveller in it incarnations of the past: d20; CT's free for d6 system; MT's more structured UTP; TNE's switch to d20's. T4's roll a fist-full of d6 low, system. The HERO System. GURPS.

All of those rule sets have been assigned to Traveller in the past, but Traveller as remained Traveller (well, for the most part).



What you're saying is that Traveller is a rule system, and the Traveller OTU is gaming universe.

This is a big mistake in thinking of Traveller that way.

If MWM is in on this, as you say, then he's downright wrong, too. It's as bad a mistake as naming a game Traveller 2300 when the acutal game didn't even take place in the same universe as Traveller.

Bad decision.



Traveller is not a rules system. It's a gaming universe.

You need to name your generic, portable game system something else.

When people buy a book that has "Traveller" on the cover, that title brings with it certain expectations.

I'd hate to open a book that has "Star Wars" on the cover and see the characters using flint lock pistols.

I'd hate to open a book that has "Star Trek" on the cover and see the characters using shotguns.

I'd hate to open a book that has "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover and see the characters using a tommy gun.

In this same fashion, you've got people bitching about opening a book with Traveller on the cover and seeing the Shirenkien Catapults and MagRifles.



Traveller does not equal a rules system.

Assuming it does is costing you sales.

Some people are brand new to Traveller and know nothing of the previous versions and any OTU, OrTU or OfTU.

Yep. We know. Those people are writing the Mongoose books! :smirk:

 

[atpollard]

What you're saying is that Traveller is a rule system, and the Traveller OTU is gaming universe.

This is a big mistake in thinking of Traveller that way.

If MWM is in on this, as you say, then he's downright wrong, too.

Traveller is not a rules system. It's a gaming universe.

While I share your sentiments about the connotations of the name 'Traveller', the COTI critics make one valid point ... it is done and we need to accept it and move on.

'MgTraveller' IS a generic sci-fi rule system and the MgT Core book, Mercenary, High Guard, Scouts, Psions, etc. have all been written as a set of generic sci-fi rules (some parts OTU compatible and some not).

'The Third Imperium' is what Mongoose calls the OTU and products designed for it.

Like it or not, that is the way the terms will be used under this license. Since Traveller seems to be one of Mongoose's best selling game lines, I don't see them changing tactics in the near future. To deny the reality of the situation is to invite aggrivation.