World Creation - Population Question

[kaijupanda]

I just realised something which confuses me in my pocket rulebook. To determine the population of the world, you're rolling 2d6-2. The highest you're going to roll is 10, but the table goes up to 12. Is there a mod somewhere I'm missing?

 

[far-trader]

I don't see a mod in the large main rulebook either. I suspect there might have been a mod in the original playtest docs that didn't make the cut (edited or overlooked) but the table retained the higher Pop codes.

 

[aramis]

no, you're not missing a mod.

However, if you want a more realistic setting,

if world is garden, pop = 2d6+1d3-3, and if not, pop = 2d6-4 or so...​

 

[Icosahedron]

I'd guess the higher numbers are included for reference, for the benefit of those GMs who like to step beyond the rules occasionally.
A pop-12 world wouldn't be generated normally, but would be a 'plant' by the GM, perhaps the Capital of your empire/federation...

In the original CT books, populations up to 12 (Hong Kong) were described. I imagine MgT is simply showing its CT roots here.

 

[aramis]

In the original CT books, populations up to 12 (Hong Kong) were described. I imagine MgT is simply showing its CT roots here.

Which ones?
Not TTB, B3 (1981 on, at least), Starter, S3:SM, S10:SR, SMC...

 

[far-trader]

...In the original CT books, populations up to 12 (Hong Kong) were described. I imagine MgT is simply showing its CT roots here.

Which ones?
Not TTB, B3 (1981 on, at least), Starter, S3:SM, S10:SR, SMC...

Something doesn't add up. Pop 12 would be Trillions of people. The Pop of Hong Kong was then/still is only Millions, aka Pop 6. Even Earth today is only Pop 9 at some 7 Billion.

I think you're mis-remembering Icosahedron.

 

[Tobias]

Something doesn't add up. Pop 12 would be Trillions of people. The Pop of Hong Kong was then/still is only Millions, aka Pop 6. Even Earth today is only Pop 9 at some 7 Billion.

I think you're mis-remembering Icosahedron.

No, that was in there. These were examples to demonstrate population density, though. As in: If the whole planet had the same population density as Hong Kong, it would be pop level 12.

 

[far-trader]

Ah, I do recall vaguely some population density example but I've (obviously) totally forgotten it was worded as a Pop code 12 format. Thanks for the clarification Tobias

 

[McPerth]

No, that was in there. These were examples to demonstrate population density, though. As in: If the whole planet had the same population density as Hong Kong, it would be pop level 12.

I have serious doubts that could be possible, and few doubts about it being not sustainable. For Hong Kong to have such a density, more terrain is needed to have quite less density and be agricultural, and more to be forested if the atmosphere is to be kept breathable.

I guess sucha a planet should need lots of food imports (more or less as Capital is described in Fundation series), and some form to renew oxigen in atmosphere should be needed, if vegetals enough to do it are ruled out (as I guess this population density will).

Perhaps on a planet quite larger than earth (but less dense enough to keep the gravity on human tolerance range), and with enough water to sustain the population and plants needed, population could attain level 12, but not (IMHO) by raising so much the population density planetwide.

 

[Tobias]

I have serious doubts that could be possible, and few doubts about it being not sustainable. For Hong Kong to have such a density, more terrain is needed to have quite less density and be agricultural, and more to be forested if the atmosphere is to be kept breathable.

Oh, I fully agree. Such a planet-sized city is very much unfeasible even with OTU technology. I was immediately reminded of this:
http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/comic.php?current=393&theme=7&dir=prev

If you took the population density of a comparably densely settled country such as South Korea and expanded it to the entire land area of Earth, you'd end up with ~70 billion people, or in other word, a solid population A. That looks reasonably acceptable.

Of course, in Traveller it is just as likely to have population A on a size 1 world - or on a water world. And it does not even matter what the tech level is.

 

[McPerth]

Of course, in Traveller it is just as likely to have population A on a size 1 world - or on a water world. And it does not even matter what the tech level is.

True, that's why I like what Aramis suggested above:

However, if you want a more realistic setting,

if world is garden, pop = 2d6+1d3-3, and if not, pop = 2d6-4 or so...​

 

[rancke]

Of course, in Traveller it is just as likely to have population A on a size 1 world - or on a water world. And it does not even matter what the tech level is.

Yes, IMO that is a bug, not a feature. Sadly, TPTB apparently consider it a feature, not a bug. :nonono:


Hans

 

[rancke]

However, if you want a more realistic setting,

if world is garden, pop = 2d6+1d3-3, and if not, pop = 2d6-4 or so...​

And if you want a more realistic setting with the rare occasional fascinating outliers, use the old system and then go through the results and see if you can come up with quick explanations for each UWP. Any you can't explain easily, give it a "saving throw vs. implausibility"; if it doesn't make it, adjust the UWP to work; if it makes it, spend 10 minutes coming up with an explanation that's possible even if implausible. If you can't come up with something that works, give it another saving throw; if it doesn't make it, adjust the UWP; if it makes it, spend another 10 minutes looking for an explanation, this time invoking Ancients or cosmic coincidences if necessary. If you still can't think of anything, adjust the UWP.

The difficulty of the saving throw I leave up to you. I use 1 to 5 on a D6 depending on how implausible/impossible I think the UWP is.

From experience, it takes about 4 hours to vet a subsector's worth of systems.


Hans

 

[Tobias]

Yes, IMO that is a bug, not a feature.

I absolutely agree, and I also agree that the best method to make sense out of the various result is to sift through them manually. Then again, some of the world creation oddities (like the size-atmosphere disconnect) could be addressed with very simple rule changes.

 

[Ptah]

I enjoy those random table results that seem beyond all comprehension. I don't find the food issue a major one at all or that the enitre planet is necessarily covered in city at Pop 12.

Consider the following,
(1) Rome at it's height had about 1 million inhabitants. That's at waht TL2-3. Based on a myopic view of what medievil Europeans could do, and a handful of internet facts, such a feat is impossible. Yet the Romans did it for decades if not centuries.

(2) Consider that in the last century we have increased crop yields by about 100 fold. The population of the planet we have now would be considered unthinkable only 200 years ago (is that TL 4?).

(3) Who says the food is good? Likely it will all be some form of myconoid substance balanced in nutrients but grown in vats, add energy and watch it grow.

(4) Who says the planet is covered with city? Hong Kong only goes up a couple hundred stories max. and then not everywhere. With fusion power, anti-gravity, and the advanced materials at TL 12; isn't the ski the limit, or digging deep down?

(5) Speaking of the sky, I thought pop might refer to system population with just the primary world noted. But you could imagine a band in geosync orb about the planet. How many people could it hold? My guess is a fair amount, double digit billions.

(6) Your not going to be detailing the spaceport for a system like this. You'll take it in generalities, there will be thousand of ports, hundreds of thousands of ships. This system, even with dedicated food vats is going to be sucking in resources from all the systems around, and it's prime export (people) will dominate the sector. It is a mini-Imperium to itself, the size of an empire comprised of a hundred "worlds" of pop 10 billion. A balakanized form of government in this system can take on a whole new meaning.

(7) A pop 12 system could make for an excellent setting where FTL travel is not as easy or the universe is hard where habitable planets are few and far between. You don't need countless star systems for variety when one system alone is a sector in itself.

 

[rancke]

Then again, some of the world creation oddities (like the size-atmosphere disconnect) could be addressed with very simple rule changes.

But then you won't get the world with the very heavy core surrounded by a mantle of more earth-like composition. Or the one with a small black hole in its center (How cool is that?)[*]. Or the one I try to use sparingly, but do use occasionally: The "it's a mystery" explanation ("No one knows why the planet Oddone has a gravity strong enough to retain a breathable atmosphere.")

[*] Yes, yes, I've been told that it wouldn't work in reality, but it's such a cool idea that I'm willing to cut reality some slack and overlook its deficiencies.​

Hans

 

[Tobias]

But then you won't get the world with the very heavy core surrounded by a mantle of more earth-like composition. Or the one with a small black hole in its center (How cool is that?)[*]. Or the one I try to use sparingly, but do use occasionally: The "it's a mystery" explanation ("No one knows why the planet Oddone has a gravity strong enough to retain a breathable atmosphere.")

[*] Yes, yes, I've been told that it wouldn't work in reality, but it's such a cool idea that I'm willing to cut reality some slack and overlook its deficiencies.​

Well, it's mostly a balancing act. Is it easier to manually put in occasional oddball planets or to remove an excess number of them? If they pop up by the dozen, the latter.

 

[Tobias]

I enjoy those random table results that seem beyond all comprehension. I don't find the food issue a major one at all or that the enitre planet is necessarily covered in city at Pop 12.

Consider the following,
(1) Rome at it's height had about 1 million inhabitants. That's at waht TL2-3. Based on a myopic view of what medievil Europeans could do, and a handful of internet facts, such a feat is impossible. Yet the Romans did it for decades if not centuries.

(2) Consider that in the last century we have increased crop yields by about 100 fold. The population of the planet we have now would be considered unthinkable only 200 years ago (is that TL 4?).

(3) Who says the food is good? Likely it will all be some form of myconoid substance balanced in nutrients but grown in vats, add energy and watch it grow.

(4) Who says the planet is covered with city? Hong Kong only goes up a couple hundred stories max. and then not everywhere. With fusion power, anti-gravity, and the advanced materials at TL 12; isn't the ski the limit, or digging deep down?

(5) Speaking of the sky, I thought pop might refer to system population with just the primary world noted. But you could imagine a band in geosync orb about the planet. How many people could it hold? My guess is a fair amount, double digit billions.

(6) Your not going to be detailing the spaceport for a system like this. You'll take it in generalities, there will be thousand of ports, hundreds of thousands of ships. This system, even with dedicated food vats is going to be sucking in resources from all the systems around, and it's prime export (people) will dominate the sector. It is a mini-Imperium to itself, the size of an empire comprised of a hundred "worlds" of pop 10 billion. A balakanized form of government in this system can take on a whole new meaning.

(7) A pop 12 system could make for an excellent setting where FTL travel is not as easy or the universe is hard where habitable planets are few and far between. You don't need countless star systems for variety when one system alone is a sector in itself.

All these creative ideas are good - but you'd really be talking about an alternative TU. Basically, such a world is special enough that it shouldn't just randomly result from the world generation rules.

 

[rancke]

Is it easier to manually put in occasional oddball planets or to remove an excess number of them? If they pop up by the dozen, the latter.

Is it easier to randomly generate a dozen bizarre worlds and use them to inspire one or two interesting ones than to cudgel the brain to produce a couple of worlds that aren't completely trite? As far I myself am concerned, you bet it is.


Hans

 

[Icosahedron]

Which ones?
Not TTB, B3 (1981 on, at least), Starter, S3:SM, S10:SR, SMC...

LBB3 p9 1st ed.

No, that was in there. These were examples to demonstrate population density, though. As in: If the whole planet had the same population density as Hong Kong, it would be pop level 12.

Thanks Tobias, yes pop density, sorry I was too brief.