Will the "real" Spinward Marches please stand up?

[MJD]

Yes.

There are some... interesting... myths and misconceptions floating around, typically of the 'author was a complete idiot for using this data instead of that data; why would anyone do that?' sort. The usual answer is 'because I was told to use that source verbatim by the people commissioning the book, the people approving it, or both.'

One of my favourites was the idea that I was somehow trying to reset the OTU to Supplement 3 and eradicate the changes, because apparently I had an agenda to do this. I'm not sure why I would want to do that, but I do know that I never had any such agenda.

What actually happened was that I was told to use Supplement 3 as the data source. That's it.

 

[MJD]

Statements like 'the author used the wrong source material' tend to imply that the 'fault' is mine (and that fault exists; there are various opinions about that). It would be much fairer to say that 'the author was instructed to use this data source, which I think was a flawed decision because.....'.

 

[MJD]

The reality of writing for something like Traveller is that you can't always do what you think is best. The publisher has requirements, and so does Marc. I have at times been given very strict instructions to use (or not use) a particular piece of information or to interpret it a certain way, and I have not always agreed with these decisions.

It can be a little galling to receive mails along the lines of 'your interpretation of X is idiotic' when in fact my interpretation is somewhat different but was overruled. It's inevitable I suppose, since my name is on the front of the book, but it's not pleasant.

By way of example, I got a torrent of hate mail from some guy when Behind the Claw came out. He particularly hated the 'Dandelions' and wanted me to know I was some kind of fool for ruining Traveller by introducing them.

Pointing out that this race was invented by Marc Miller, not me, achieved nothing. He hated them and they were my fault because... well, presumably because I included them in a book that kind of had to include them.

Anyway, it would be nice if folks could remember that everything that is published for Traveller is commissioned by a publisher after being agreed with Marc, and the manuscript is reviewed and approved. Any given concept has been agreed and accepted by Marc. The contents of any given book may not be exactly what the author would have done given creative freedom; they are a melding of what the publisher asked for, what the author thought was the best way to implement those requirements, and any strictures imposed by those overseeing the game. Final decision on what is published for Traveller rests with Marc.

So statements like 'the author got this wildly wrong' are implicitly followed by 'and/but Marc accepted it'. Which raises another set of questions.

In any case, from time to time I read posts along the lines of 'the author did this because....' and think 'I did? Hmm, I did not know that. How enlightening.'

A great deal of misinformation and outright vilification have been spread by this sort of assertion, usually made by someone who was not involved in the process and who could not know the reasons why a given decision was made. It's really not very helpful, and often borders on a personal attack. It's also contributed to persistent myths about certain products or writers, few of which are beneficial to the Traveller brand as a whole.

 

[robject]

The reality of writing for something like Traveller is that you can't always do what you think is best. [...]

It can be a little galling to receive mails along the lines of 'your interpretation of X is idiotic' when in fact my interpretation is somewhat different but was overruled. It's inevitable I suppose, since my name is on the front of the book, but it's not pleasant.

You're right. And it doesn't help that there are few (or no) easy guides to writing in the OTU.

It sucks, though. Fans ought to be fans without biting our hands, and could be a little more understanding.

 

[RandyB]

Fans ought to be fans without biting our hands, and could be a little more understanding.

Yes, we ought to. I try to, personally.

And there are many fans, in many fandoms, who express a sense of ownership of their beloved published properties, some of whom go so far as to assert that ownership openly (I have personally seen this among Star Wars fandom) on the basis of "the creator(s) released their work into fandom, and now fandom owns that work; because without the fans, the work would have been null." These, to whatever degree they hold or express such a view, are where most fan problems originate and proceed.

 

[MJD]

I suspect I have more experience of writing for the OTU than anyone currently writing for it, and I struggle to navigate the maze. It's not just about the canon content, the contradictions and interpretations, there's also style and tone to consider, and the implications of apparently quite little things.

I did my best to provide guidance on this (and Philip Athans did too) during the novel project, but it became clear that some of the novelists did not even look at the materials I provided/wrote for them. Still, there is a basis in that work for a guide to writing for the OTU.

It would be a big or at least tricky project, I suspect, but it could be done. Question is, who's got the time?

 

[MJD]

Quite.

There's all manner of other problems, one of which is this:

Author is told to use source A and does so.

Fan has developed an interpretation based upon an analysis of costs and numbers in X and Y books which suggests that the canon version written in source A is wrong, and that there should be more, less, bigger or smaller whatnots in the universe. Fan has held this view for 20+ years.

Author extrapolates from source A but has to take it as a true and correct baseline.

Fan denounces author as some kind of idiot and basically hounds him from the mailing lists by endlessly repeating his denunciation every time the author appears.

Author finds something else to write about.

Yes, we ought to. I try to, personally.

And there are many fans, in many fandoms, who express a sense of ownership of their beloved published properties, some of whom go so far as to assert that ownership openly (I have personally seen this among Star Wars fandom) on the basis of "the creator(s) released their work into fandom, and now fandom owns that work; because without the fans, the work would have been null." These, to whatever degree they hold or express such a view, are where most fan problems originate and proceed.

 

[MJD]

During the time I've been writing for Traveller (Starting in 1994, I think) I've seen various authors come and go. How many have published more than one product? Some, true, but not many.

It can be hard enough to find anyone able to write even just one. When I used to be Line Editor at QLI I got a lot of mails from people who had this huge fantastic epic idea that they wanted to tell me about. A couple even got as far as the broad outline stage.

Point is, finding writers is difficult. It was announced on these boards some years ago that 'The (T5) sourcebooks are just waiting to be written!' which I have always found a rather odd statement. Yet it expresses part of the problem - there are good ideas and exciting concepts just waiting for someone to write them down, but a dearth of people who can actually do that.

The Traveller brand is littered with part-written sourcebooks that never got finished, big ideas that never got past the talking-about-it stage, various flavours of vapourware and the like. A guide to writing for the OTU would be helpful in remedying this situation, I think, and might help more of these projects come to fruition.

 

[Timerover51]

The reality of writing for something like Traveller is that you can't always do what you think is best. The publisher has requirements, and so does Marc. I have at times been given very strict instructions to use (or not use) a particular piece of information or to interpret it a certain way, and I have not always agreed with these decisions.

Actually, that pretty much holds true for writing for anything, as both the publisher and whatever editor an author is working with are going to set guidelines as to what the finished product looks like, which might not be with the author had in mind.

So statements like 'the author got this wildly wrong' are implicitly followed by 'and/but Marc accepted it'. Which raises another set of questions.

That does place the responsibility where it belongs, and it is not on the author.

In any case, from time to time I read posts along the lines of 'the author did this because....' and think 'I did? Hmm, I did not know that. How enlightening.'

C. S. Lewis voiced the same complaint in one of his essays with respect to reviewers claiming that he did this "because", and in Lewis' view, the reviewers were 100% wrong in every case. You have good company.

A great deal of misinformation and outright vilification have been spread by this sort of assertion, usually made by someone who was not involved in the process and who could not know the reasons why a given decision was made. It's really not very helpful, and often borders on a personal attack. It's also contributed to persistent myths about certain products or writers, few of which are beneficial to the Traveller brand as a whole.

It also makes people very reluctant to attempt to write any material. Getting savaged online is no fun at all.

 

[Timerover51]

By way of example, I got a torrent of hate mail from some guy when Behind the Claw came out. He particularly hated the 'Dandelions' and wanted me to know I was some kind of fool for ruining Traveller by introducing them.

Pointing out that this race was invented by Marc Miller, not me, achieved nothing. He hated them and they were my fault because... well, presumably because I included them in a book that kind of had to include them.

I am not sure when "Behind the Claw" came out, but the "Dandelions" or more properly, the "Llellewyloly", appear in The Traveller Adventure, copyright 1983 by Game Designer's Workshop. The authors were Frank Chadwick, John Harshman, J. Andrew Keith, Marc Miller, and Loren Wiseman.

Edit Note: According to the Traveller Wiki, "Behind the Claw" was produced by Steve Jackson Games for GURPS Traveller in 1998, with one of the authors being Martin Dougherty. Therefore, the "Dandelions" preceded the publication by 15 years.

 

[MJD]

Yes indeed. But this didn't prevent someone from sending me a truckload of hate mail about how I'd ruined Traveller by creating the concept. Pointing out the reality of the situation acheived nothing.

 

[Timerover51]

Yes indeed. But this didn't prevent someone from sending me a truckload of hate mail about how I'd ruined Traveller by creating the concept. Pointing out the reality of the situation acheived nothing.

That does tend to discourage one from making another attempt, and for others to make an attempt at all.

 

[flykiller]

The reality of writing for something like Traveller is that you can't always do what you think is best.

what if you wrote what you wanted, just for fun? can you do that?

Fans ought to be fans without biting our hands, and could be a little more understanding.

well ... some of them are emotionally invested in the game. worse is when they have nothing better to do other than become emotionally involved in traveler. see that in politics, in anime ....

Fan denounces author as some kind of idiot and basically hounds him from the mailing lists by endlessly repeating his denunciation every time the author appears.

Author finds something else to write about.

(laugh)

The Traveller brand is littered with part-written sourcebooks that never got finished, big ideas that never got past the talking-about-it stage, various flavours of vapourware and the like. A guide to writing for the OTU would be helpful in remedying this situation

I dunno man, that sounds like a big vaporware project itself ....

 

[MJD]

I agree that a writer's guide to writing for Traveller would likely end up being vapourware, which is a shame because it really would be useful.

As to writing for fun, of course you can. And you can publish it as fan stuff under the fair use policy etc. But when you're writing for an offical Traveller publication, the additional constraints become very significant.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

Now then. Martin, first being the gushing fanboy, I have appreciated your writings. Even when it was ATU and not OTU (well, I do have preferences).

Your statements confirm what I have suspected. That is that OTU licensed products have gone thru some approval process that involves Mr. Miller and/or an approved delegate.

So for good or bad, how do products a person does not like get thru and Marc did not see them coming or allow his licensed delegate to let them go thru and say they are not canon? Since I am not subject to an NDA or such or part of the "in crowd", I will present these impertinent questions as a logic stream of sorts. I read that Mr. Miller is busy and does more thing than just gaming. Fine, but that is just an apologist statement for not thinking thru these questions or going thru to find the heart of the matter. To generate thought or discord (depending on your point of view):
:CoW:
For Mongoose Traveller
What, did Mr. Miller cede overall approval to Mr. Sprange? If so, then Mr. Miller is saying that Mr. Sprange is determining canon. What is the problem with that? So why are you cherry picking which products in that product line are canon?
If not, then you accept that Mr. Miller was involved in the process? Has Mr. Miller decanonized the product line as a whole or just a particular product? So why are you cherry picking which products in that product line are canon? Did Mr. Miller make a statement publicly?

Switch to the next product line, say 1248. Substitute Mr. Sprange for the person responsible for that line. Rinse and repeat.
Switch to the next product line, say Traveller20. Substitute Mr. Sprange for the person responsible for that line. Rinse and repeat.
Switch to the next product line, say TNE. Substitute Mr. Sprange for the person responsible for that line. Rinse and repeat.
and so on.

 

[MJD]

I'm not sure I follow all of that, but there is an approval process, yes. Marc and some other people (I don't know exactly who it is offhand) decide what must be revised, excised or whatever, and some concepts are a non-starter.

Certain writers have hit that particular barrier, for whatever reason, by writing something that would never be approved. This is not just canon compliance; some types of content and certain themes are off-limits. I know this happened in the novel series, despite the best efforts of myself and Philip Athans to show the writers what they could or could not do.

I know what is off limits, and I have some idea of what stands a chance of acceptance and what does not. Someone coming in new to the process would have to start from scratch, although a lot of the off-limits stuff is just common sense.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

What I was trying to drag people into realizing and accepting is that if your experiences in getting your writing out are representative then:

A.Each and every product that has been published with OTU information IS/WAS CANON at publication time or Marc Miller would not have let it be published in the first place and get the
"Approved For Use With Traveller" or "Traveller Compatible Product" or whatever the appropriate license logo is these days.

B.If A above is true, then it truly is "Whatever Marc Says, Until He Says It's Not". So in the cases of contradictions, the newer source IS THE CURRENT CORRECT CANON, or else Marc would not have approved the new one.

C.Conflicts between what makes sense in a buyer/fan's mind and what is in a source material is pretty much a IMTU/OTU because the source IS CANON due to A and B above.

So MgT Darrians/Sword Worlds/Solomani/etc. ARE OTU canon in the year 1105.
1248 has happened (thinking about Galaxiad) in the OTU
Same with TNE

Disagree? Run thru A B and C again.

 

[Quint]

You know, sometimes I expect that we really are holding Marc to an unobtainable standard in most respects. Fundamentally I don't care that some fiddling detail was canon in CT and was changed in MT, I do care about big details with large ramifications (like, say, J-Torps).

But...

As a DM/GM/Keeper/StoryTeller/Judge I cannot count how many times over the last 35+ years that I've said something was ok, or generated some bit of setting fluff, for a game only to realize later what kind of precedent I'd accidently set and now needed to either explain away (my preference) or just simply rewrite because it was simply That Bad And Needed To Change Right Now. Moreover, I'm not entirely sure I could always explain to you how I made the original call in the first place - just that it conflicts with things as I understand them now.

That's in my game worlds (including a homebrew rule engine) where I have essentially 100% creative control - not a commercial product where I'd be trying to vet the ideas of everyone who came to me with a cool idea.

Sure, as we've seen (and has been described) there are some hard-coded limits in what gets done in Traveller - some for "science" and some for "content" - and ultimately I don't think anyone is that unhappy with that fact. 1E MgT shows that Marc isn't wedded to an exclusively OTU version of the game science, and while I'm certain someone out there wants to write the _Book of Erotic Fantasy_ for Traveller I'm also sure that most of us are ok with the (evident) fact that Marc isn't interested in that sort of product being associated with his IP.

Sometimes it seems like people think that there is a conspiracy to ruin their version of canon...

D.

 

[ManOfGrey]

Something you might consider...

While all this discussion about what is canon, and what is not, is all well and good, are you sure we’re not missing something? I suppose the argument could be made “what is canon” is implicit in the question this poll was actually asking -- what is everyone’s favorite version of The Spinward Marches? But, if so, then the canon police are in for something of a shock.

Supplement 3: The Spinward Marches may not be “canon,” but it is leading in this poll by a wide margin. (At least according to the numbers presently at the top of this page.)

I would suggest anyone who follows this web-site on a regular basis is a pretty die-hard Traveller fan. And those fans seem to have expressed a clear preference, canon or not.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

I would suggest anyone who follows this web-site on a regular basis is a pretty die-hard Traveller fan. And those fans seem to have expressed a clear preference, canon or not.

Though I have played Traveller since '77, I am not one of those fans.
Fandom is not canon. Canon says Greedo shot first and missed, and will be forevermore. Just how it is.