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

[Supplement Four]

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.

Or...we can not settle for less, just not buy the crap, and ignore Mongoose Traveller until/if/when they decide to do it "right".

I vote with my dollars.

 

[aramis]

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).

It is no more generic than D&D. And D&D isn't truly generic, either.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Or...we can not settle for less, just not buy the crap, and ignore Mongoose Traveller until/if/when they decide to do it "right".

You are anything but ignoring it

 

[MongooseMatt]

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.

Ah ha - but, if we do our job right, in two years (likely less), that assumption will no longer be the case.

This is another mistake that Mongoose has made.

Well, let's be both clear and fair here - it is not a mistake, it is a decision.

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

Yes.

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.

Well, Traveller 2300, when it comes round again (maybe in the latter part of next year) will be using the Traveller rules. . .

Traveller does not equal a rules system.

Assuming it does is costing you sales.

Our general approach is gaining us a great deal more. It is a harsh thing to say, but clearly true. There are a handful of the veterans that have obviously been 'left behind' with this decision. The thing is, we don't feel too bad about that, primarily because said veterans already have their own game, and have had it for years. Others, of course, have bought into the idea of a more expansive Traveller.

By opening Traveller up to more people, more gamers are included - which could _not_ have been done if we had stuck with OTU alone.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Well, at least once Mongoose clearly voices their desire to ride on the Traveller name and their dislike for the universe / will to destroy it. Clears the fronts, unmasks the enemy.

Well, only nine years left on the licence. Let's see Mgt like Voyager - it will end some day

 

[rancke]

Well, only nine years left on the licence. Let's see Mgt like Voyager - it will end some day

And, who knows, maybe T5 will be published before then. :devil:


Hans

 

[Madarin Dude]

Well MGT by all accounts is selling well. My quibble is the lack of a vehicle design sequence included in the original rules. Keeps me from having a proper DannOverse. Waiting over a year for such a key part of a campaign. Like the character generation etc.

 

[Icosahedron]

If I may make an observation (hopefully a neutral one):

The difficulty seems to lie in whether the implicit assumptions that have built up like 'case law' over the past thrirty years are part of what constitutes 'Core Traveller' or whether they are part of the 'OTU setting'.

Mongoose (and Marc Miller) intend to use the Traveller brand name (which is their property to do with as they please) as the basis for games in all conceivable scifi universes and, clearly, many such universes are fundamentally incompatible. How, then, are they to proceed with their (sensible and lucrative) business plan?

Perhaps a new term, 'Established Traveller' should be coined, though since the OTU is such a large subset of Established Traveller, I'm not sure the distinction is worth the effort, nor whether it would stand the test of time.

Ideally, the Core Ruleset should include only the material that is common to all Traveller (brand) settings. eg, in all probability a revolver and engineering skill will both be common to all conceivable settings, from the OTU to Trek, to Dredd, and so belong in the core ruleset. (You may not use a revolver in a Trek game, but nobody could argue that revolvers were incompatible with the Trek universe and a reasonable GM wouldn't prevent you from obtaining one).

A meson gun will probably only be used in the OTU (or Established Traveller if you really prefer), and so belongs in an OTU weapon list. A phaser will only be used in the Trek verse, so should be in a Trek weapon list, etc.

A shuriken catapult belongs either in a specific universe weapon list (40k, if you're allowed to say so) or, if it is an option for all universes but not compulsory for all universes, then it belongs in an 'optional' weaponlist.

Having said that, I believe that the Mongoose standpoint is basically "all rules are optional, pick what you want and discard the rest." (which I have to admit is very close to the original Traveller concept) and I believe they have overlooked (by design or accident) that there are some players for whom 'rules must be obeyed', and who are unable or unwilling to houserule a 'pick n mix' game.

To what extent Mongoose (and Mr Miller) feel a need to listen to those players is their decision. Like it or not, they own the game.


Personally, I'm perfectly happy to ignore/disallow a catapult or hyperdrive if I don't want it - my players are playing in MTU, they either accept my decisions or play in someone else's game.
However, it would be easier to houserule if all the controversial devices/skills were in an optional list that I could exclude in its entirety. eg "we use (core - options + OTU)."


BUT...

There is one point which is completely separate from the 'what is Traveller' question:

I'm very unhappy if weapons I want to use are described with unrealistic characteristics (eg ranges), because I'm not at liberty to ignore that, I'd have to redesign all the tables, and I don't want to buy a dog and bark myself.

If I'm paying a software developer to design a program, I expect it to be right. If I'm paying a game developer to design a game, I expect it to be right too. I'm paying you to do your homework so I don't have to. Good science fiction should add to, but never contradict, science fact.

If the latest versions have corrected these errors, fine; if not, they should.

 

[dmccoy1693]

It is no more generic than D&D. And D&D isn't truly generic, either.

It was generic enough to do Traveller. If someone wanted to, they could adapt the Traveller rules to do D&D.

Well, only nine years left on the licence.

The rules will still be OGL.

 

[Supplement Four]

You are anything but ignoring it

I haven't purchased a sinlge MGT book yet. I don have the core book, but that's because one of my group members bought it, hated it, and was going to throw it away. I had him give it to me.

Ah ha - but, if we do our job right, in two years (likely less), that assumption will no longer be the case.

You understand that I'd have no problem with what you were doing if you didn't mix-n-match Traveller with non-Traveller material.

For example, d20 doesn't start off with a book just about d20. That core book is the Dungeons & Dragons book.

And, that's what you're trying to do.

The difference is: In the D&D book, you won't see anything that contradicts the universe. You won't open the D&D book to the weapons section and see an AK-47, with the publisher explaining, "Well, that's a Core book, and the AK-47 is meant to give non-Greyhawk playing players a little something to think about.

The D&D book serves as the core d20 book and stil doesn't break the conventions associated with the Greyhawk universe (I'm talking about 3E, here, in this example).

Not so, with Traveller. You're using Traveller as a core book, which is fine, but you're suggesting uplisted Aslan and inserting crazy weaponry, and that's not fine.

See what I'm getting at?

If you don't want to have a system book (like the D6 or GURPS system books), that's no problem. If you want to follow the d20 model, that's cool.

If it says Traveller on the cover, though, you've got to remain consistent to Traveller.

THAT'S one of your big problems.

d20 didn't do what you're doing. If they did, you'd have all sorts of bitching about how WoC included armor made from ploymers and AK-47 rifles and all sorts of stuff that doesn't fit in the D&D universe.

SAVE that stuff for a book that is clearly marked something besides Traveller. Let it sell on its own.

And...get some writers who know what they're doing with regards to Traveller.

Well, at least once Mongoose clearly voices their desire to ride on the Traveller name and their dislike for the universe / will to destroy it. Clears the fronts, unmasks the enemy.

Well, only nine years left on the licence. Let's see Mgt like Voyager - it will end some day

Despite my voiced dislike of MGT, I'm trying to keep an open mind, hoping like hell they'll do something that worthy of Traveller praise.

But, to be honest, I'm starting to feel the exact same way.

Some day it will end.

And, who knows, maybe T5 will be published before then. :devil:

And...maybe it will actually be good?

Maybe it will be Traveller?

Hope so.

 

[dmccoy1693]

For example, d20 doesn't start off with a book just about d20. That core book is the Dungeons & Dragons book.

Well, that's because D&D is the system. So your examples supports Mongoose Matt's point.

The difference is: In the D&D book, you won't see anything that contradicts the universe. You won't open the D&D book to the weapons section and see an AK-47, with the publisher explaining, "Well, that's a Core book, and the AK-47 is meant to give non-Greyhawk playing players a little something to think about.

3.5 Dungeons Master's Guide has guns in it. Specifickly for those that want to role play games like the Colonization of America. No where in the DMG does it say that there are no guns in the Forgotten Realms.

 

[rancke]

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.

Ah ha - but, if we do our job right, in two years (likely less), that assumption will no longer be the case.

I see. You want to cash in on name recognition, but you don't feel obliged to deliver something that those who recognize more than the name will recognize.


Hans

 

[Allensh]

I see. You want to cash in on name recognition, but you don't feel obliged to deliver something that those who recognize more than the name will recognize.


Hans

There's a considerable amount of stuff in MgT that is quite recognizable to any fan of the OTU. That does not mean that everything done under the name of "Traveller" has to be for the Original Traveller Universe. I recognize a lot of stuff as being "Traveller". Yes, there are items that go outside the regular defintion of "Traveller" that a lot of the posters here have, and yes, I would like to see those things labelled as "non-OTU" although I marvel at why anyone who can read can't determine these things for themselves - I did very quickly and compiled a list for my own use of what things would not be used. Took me all of fifteen minutes.

Mongoose is not catering to the old guard; I think some folks (who seem to think they are a majority of the Traveller buying public when they are in fact a minority) need to get used to this fact.

Allen

 

[CosmicGamer]

...You want to cash in on name recognition...

I do believe mongoose is a company looking to make money. Perhaps if they were a non profit organization they would be more interested in accommodating altruistic goals of doing whats best for all the old players of Traveller. As a company looking to make a buck, I think it was wise (considering that the majority of 'Traveller/OTU' content is just refreshed old material) to look at new players as their source of revenue and not just old players that already own, and are tied to the game they already know and love.

 

[Allensh]

Well, that's because D&D is the system. So your examples supports Mongoose Matt's point.



3.5 Dungeons Master's Guide has guns in it. Specifickly for those that want to role play games like the Colonization of America. No where in the DMG does it say that there are no guns in the Forgotten Realms.

I played a gnome cleric in the Realms (in 2nd edition) whose ranged weapon was an arquebus...the preists of Gond had discovered smoke powder (sort of an alchemical version of gunpowder) long ago.

This debate over whether Mongoose should stick to one setting and not put stuff in the generic books that isn't OTU would be like if the D&D loyalists said "Greyhawk is the D&D setting, and no stuff should be in any D&D books that isn't Greyhawk". Yes, there are people like that...and Wizards rightfully ignores them. Mongoose needs to carry on (improving whereever they can, of course). Any sales they might be losing to rigid "this and only this is what Traveller is" types are being replaced by new players anyway.

Allen

 

[dmccoy1693]

This debate over whether Mongoose should stick to one setting and not put stuff in the generic books that isn't OTU would be like if the D&D loyalists said "Greyhawk is the D&D setting, and no stuff should be in any D&D books that isn't Greyhawk".

That actually is a great analogy. Both D&D and Traveller started off as being generic systems by which you could make your own setting. Eventually a setting came for both: Blackmoore and Spinward Marches. But then Gygax make his own world and Greenwood made his own world and others made their own worlds. Traveller has not had someone else to say that this alternate universe is equally valid. Until now. In that sense, Mongoose Matt is Traveller's Gygax.

 

[mbrinkhues]

There's a considerable amount of stuff in MgT that is quite recognizable to any fan of the OTU. That does not mean that everything done under the name of "Traveller" has to be for the Original Traveller Universe. I recognize a lot of stuff as being "Traveller". Yes, there are items that go outside the regular defintion of "Traveller" that a lot of the posters here have, and yes, I would like to see those things labelled as "non-OTU" although I marvel at why anyone who can read can't determine these things for themselves - I did very quickly and compiled a list for my own use of what things would not be used. Took me all of fifteen minutes.

Mongoose is not catering to the old guard; I think some folks (who seem to think they are a majority of the Traveller buying public when they are in fact a minority) need to get used to this fact.

Allen

a) I don't have to accept anything. I can fight them, hassle them, give them bad reviews, support "everything BUT Mgt" and do a dozend other things that might or might not hurt their sales.

b) I don't pay for a rather costly set of books to do all the "seperate gems from spoils" work myself

 

[drh]

a) I don't have to accept anything. I can fight them, hassle them, give them bad reviews, support "everything BUT Mgt" and do a dozend other things that might or might not hurt their sales.

Very mature of you. At least you have admitted that your primary motivation is spite. :nonono:

You have a choice: like or dislike the new Mongoose Traveller. If you like it, that's great! If you don't like it... just don't play it. Nobody else needs to hear or needs to care about why you don't like it and you people certainly not going to change anybody's mind with the obnoxious attitude that you have displayed here.

You and your Mongoose hating buddies aren't going to change Mongoose's minds about their approach, especially if you have the gall to tell them (and Marc Miller of all people!) that they are wrong. Get over yourselves, you're nobodies. You haven't paid anyone for a license for the game, so you don't get to tell the actual license holders what to do. If they're really doing it "wrong" then the sales will show it - and so far Mongoose Traveller has been pretty successful by modern standards. And the sales they have gained with their new approach are much higher than the sales that they've lost due to a handful of disgruntled, bitter egomaniacs who think they have the right to dictate to them what is or what isn't Traveller.

If you want to play Traveller, kindly shut up and play whatever version of Traveller you like and leave the rest of us to whatever we prefer.

 

[Klaus]

a) I don't have to accept anything. I can fight them, hassle them, give them bad reviews, support "everything BUT Mgt" and do a dozend other things that might or might not hurt their sales.

A very grown-up attitude to have..... :nonono:

And not negative in any way, huh?

b) I don't pay for a rather costly set of books to do all the "seperate gems from spoils" work myself

And that's up to you. Fine.

Why then try and spoil it for everyone else that does quite like the game? Why the trolling, why the constant tantrums?

Why can't you just feck off and play your own game?

What's wrong with live and let live?

 

[mbrinkhues]

Sorry but there is a think called "Freedom of Speech" and I will use it. It's my right to try and convince everyone who'll listen that MT/GT/TNE/CT/whatever IS better than Mgt. It's their choice ultimately but it's MINE what system I support/argue for/against. If one tells me he's not interested I'll have to accept that. Untill then all legal means to change his mind can be used.

After all if the Mgt fans get to strut out/support THEIR version and call it "the best" I have the right to do the same with mine. It's not as if one can measure "better" in an RPG so it's all opinion. And as soon as someone puts a product out he has to live with critizism. And Mgt has a lot to critizise in my opionion.

If OTOH I take YOUR attitude and apply it to other purely "Opinion" things then we won't have a democracy (Can't critizise the other party) and no one would keep the NeoNazis from making big marches (After all they are just doing a peaceful march). Sorry but if one dislikes something one can try to convince others.