A few questions for a newbie

[paxx]

Ok, I’ll admit I’m behind the curve here, I played Mega Traveller and own and ran a few modules of the re-release of Traveller, And I just found out about T20…I have played am ran D&D 3E since it came out, I bought the StarWars book just to see how D20 transfers to Sci-fi…not well.

I was saddened to learn about the T20 project though I can imagine it’s being built with great care, However I have a major problem with the fact that D20 is level based, Traveler is a great semi-realistic system and I can’t see that with a scout having 200 hit points or even 50 while a merc starting out with decent armor will have only 10-20.

Perhaps the comic-book type art is, appropriate to the game they are building, Not the Traveller of old but the weird adventure based game that is (up till now) every D20 game.

I’m not saying that T20 will be D&D in space but it might be D&D in the Imperium. Traveler was a game based on cash and influence, and maximizing life experience to maximize cash and influence, with level based games that is near impossible. Who cares how influential you are if a Lv 20 character can take you and your bodyguards out, and hardly break a finger nail.

If anyone has any info that this will not be the case, please inform me on how the system differs from D&D and what are the viabilities of a level 1 encounter still being a challenge for level 10-15 characters, this is what Travaller provided, you where never too powerful, except that you may be well armed, that didn’t keep you out of deadly situations while you where at a dock or planet side.

Thanks for any replies.

 

[tjoneslo]

As one of the playtesters, I'd say your concerns are largely addressed by the tone of the presentation of the material. I was distressed at the cover because it did't represent Traveller, but also because it didn't represent the T20 material in particular.

The inclusion of the Prior History system, also core to Traveller means characters don't have to start at 1st level. And there are enough things which require skills (like the original Traveller), that even a 20th level character can't have them all. Or can have them all, but not a sufficent level to outcompete someone of a much lower level who specialises.

Yes, T20 combat retains the deadly legacy from Traveller. The Combat system has been altered in a similar manner to the D20 Star Wars, allowing characters of any level an equal oppurtunity to be killed by the many high tech Weapons. A laser gun or plasma cannon fired at your character, regardless of 1st level or 20th, will kill them. Armor stops damage so it can help, some. And with all your favorite toys (FGMP-15s, RAM Grenade launchers, VRF Gauss Guns, 500 MW starship Laser cannon, Code T Spinal mount Meson guns) i'm sure we can find something meet your requirement to kill anything.

 

[DrSkull]

Yes, even your fiercest 20th level mercenary can be blown away by a shotgun. Don't worry, be happy! It won't play like D&D in space at all.

------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson

 

[GypsyComet]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrSkull:
Yes, even your fiercest 20th level mercenary can be blown away by a shotgun. Don't worry, be happy! It won't play like D&D in space at all.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. That particular legacy/curse/whatever is probably going to land on Dragonstar. Talk about cheesy looking...

 

[Reginald]

I wouldn't dismiss Dragonstar any more than T20.

Besides, I am planning on buying BOTH of them.

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

 

[Nurd_boy]

hmmm, lets see here...

traveller (in any incarnation) has a proven track record over 20+ years now..

dragonstar...not even out yet.

for this old space barnicle, there can be only one...

even if d20 in general is a fad, and the concept explodes in wotc's face...i'll still get the t20..and keep trav'ln.

 

[Shadow Bear]

I am a player in a T20 play test game. I cannot comment on the rule set at this time but will be willing to discuss it when the play test period is over. What I can tell you is that we are enjoying the game as we have an exceptional game master and an interesting scenario.

 

[Beholder]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shadow Bear:
...as we have an exceptional game master and an interesting scenario.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are we to understand that the fact that you are leaving the rules out of your success story comment is intentional??

It is a proven fact and quite normal that a game will be good if the game master is good
and the scenario is good, even with the vampires rules, the living steel rules or even the paladium rules(yuk!!).

 

[Reginald]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>for this old space barnicle, there can be only one...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Fading Sun d20 RPG?

So many sci-fi d20 RPG's to choose ... might as well obtain them all (but not in one lump).

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

[This message has been edited by Reginald (edited 15 November 2001).]

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beholder:
Are we to understand that the fact that you are leaving the rules out of your success story comment is intentional??

It is a proven fact and quite normal that a game will be good if the game master is good
and the scenario is good, even with the vampires rules, the living steel rules or even the paladium rules(yuk!!). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my experience, a Good GM can make any marginal or better game system an enjoyable experience, and a bad GM can make even the best system suck. But the average GM needs a good system (not of need a great one, just good) or better to make the game enjoyable, and said average GM must enjoy the rules he/she/it uses.

Now, i have run systems as bad as MarvelSH and as convoluted as ICE's RM/SM/MERP run smoothly for even novice players, and have never found a system which my players couldn't enjoy so long as they understood how to roll the appropriate dice. I've found a great many systems I don't enjoy running, but none that my players didn't enjoy the story. I've had a few where the players lost their suspension of disbelief due to mechanics issues (TNE, for one).

T20 is one that, due to player familiarity with the mechanics, should be an easy reach for most players, and even average GM's. Anyone who can run a decent story will be able to use T20 to run good traveller stories. Yes, the feel is slightly more, uhm, larger than life than most editions of traveller (on par with TNE), but the T20 rules don't interfere with telling enjoyable stories any more than the core D20 rules do.

And don't worry about 20th level PC's being terribly tough... they can die from a good shot with a rifle just as fast as 1st levels. And they will most likely be PC's... the prior service system puts levels beyond 12th well beyond Prior Service limits, and 20th level is beyond prior service for even ancient vilani.

------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

[This message has been edited by aramis (edited 19 November 2001).]

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shadow Bear:
I am a player in a T20 play test game. I cannot comment on the rule set at this time but will be willing to discuss it when the play test period is over. What I can tell you is that we are enjoying the game as we have an exceptional game master and an interesting scenario.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Shadowbear is one of my playtest group. My thanks for the compliment, BTW.

I'll go ahead and address a few rules items (and hunter may edit out anythign whihc reveals to much with my blessings):
System and World generation: Pure traveller.
Ship design: modified Bk 5 high guard.
trade and commerce: similar to bk 2, but hybridized rules mechanics. Still in some flux. much of the material portable to other editions without changes.
Combat: works well, will be familiar (with some minor changes) to d20 players.
Psionics: nearly pure d20 in mechanics; doesn't replicate traveller literally, but is playable and fairly well ballanced.
CG to first level: provides raws who ARE playable.
Prior service: provides more levels, plus a good bit of background. Term based, not year based. (Hence Bk 2 rather than Bk4-7 in feel.)
Setting materials: pretty good, IMHO, but I'm not using them in my playtest campaign, as they were developed about 2/3rd of the way through the campaign. Instead, we're running in the marches.
Equipment: the list has some holes, but is pretty good.
Classes: most work pretty well, but the playtest comments STILL have some grousing (including my own) on a few (relatively minor but yet significant) issues.
overall feel: as a GM, i can unequivocably state that T20 is slightly more heroic a feel than other editions rules. Kind of on the level of using Att/3 in place of att/5 in MT: not badly epic, but somewhat cinematic.

overall, the system is a good hybridization. It covers a lot of ground, and covers it in a travelleresque way, without beinng un-d20-ish most of the time.

Starship combat, by the way, is gruesome at the last few drafts... ships can be ruined with out much work. I like it. YMMV.

------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

 

[Bezique]

I have just borrowed the reprints books from a friend of mine who raves about Traveller, myself being a Star Trek fan. We both have D&D3E campagins going and just recently (yesterday) learned of the d20 version of Traveller.

My friend has a concern that T20 may not have the "look and fee;" of the original, err, Classic Traveller. How can I explain that T20 will be better/worse than Classic Traveller?

 

[GypsyComet]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bezique:
I have just borrowed the reprints books from a friend of mine who raves about Traveller, myself being a Star Trek fan. We both have D&D3E campagins going and just recently (yesterday) learned of the d20 version of Traveller.

My friend has a concern that T20 may not have the "look and fee;" of the original, err, Classic Traveller. How can I explain that T20 will be better/worse than Classic Traveller?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That really depends on what the two of you liked and dislike about CT (which, along with MT, TNE, T4, G:T and T20, is the shorthand term for one of the various editions...) and like/dislike about D20 (since both of you are familiar with it). The post a couple up from this one goes into T20's components a little, which might help a little...

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bezique:
I have just borrowed the reprints books from a friend of mine who raves about Traveller, myself being a Star Trek fan. We both have D&D3E campagins going and just recently (yesterday) learned of the d20 version of Traveller.

My friend has a concern that T20 may not have the "look and fee;" of the original, err, Classic Traveller. How can I explain that T20 will be better/worse than Classic Traveller?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it doesn't have the L&F of CT. It has a L&F more akin to MT or T4. It does do traveller justice, but it isn't CT. Just a reasonable approximation.

Some of the good stuff, though, will be able to be pulled for CT/MT/TNE/T4 games just as easily, and are improvements. The Ship design system is HG based, with several improvements. Some bits from TCS are missing...



------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

 

[Wraithcat*]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aramis:


trade and commerce: similar to bk 2, but hybridized rules mechanics. Still in some flux. much of the material portable to other editions without changes.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is the trade system going to scale?

With the earlier editions, it was pointless to run a big ship, doing long haul, because there were never enough passengers, or cargo to fill up.

Also, it would be nice if costs were adjusted according to the DISTANCE of the jump, rather than being the same, irrespective of the jump involved.

Is it actually going to be profitable to run a big ship, or are we supposed to be stuck with small packages of goods to take from port to port?

And while, I am at it, are there any rules for keeping ships going, beyond saying "1000" credits per week for X? I hated that in TNE when a bumbly trader is living hand to foot in a post Collapse universe, where credits don't actually exist.

Enough for now!

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wraithcat*:
Is the trade system going to scale?

With the earlier editions, it was pointless to run a big ship, doing long haul, because there were never enough passengers, or cargo to fill up.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Due to the ability to get multiple cargoes per week, to a certain degree it scales. Monstrous (>50KTd)cargo haulers are not part of the CT setting. But 5KTd is, and it will be possible (with a few weeks prep time, aka a broker on world) to fill on freight alone, and then to add enough cargo to top out.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Also, it would be nice if costs were adjusted according to the DISTANCE of the jump, rather than being the same, irrespective of the jump involved.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would not be in keeping with canon. (And don't bother with GT Arguments. GT is Not canonical... except for GT.) Canon (CT, MT, TNE, T4) clearly kept per jump, despite (in T4's case) much demand upon Marc Miller to change it to per parsec.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Is it actually going to be profitable to run a big ship, or are we supposed to be stuck with small packages of goods to take from port to port?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've done the math. It will be slightly more profitable than in CT under Bk2 (assuming each broker gets to roll for cargo lots once per week). You can support large craft by having brokers on your route who live there and you come in to a waiting hanger-full of cargo.

But as for just "tramping" in 1000Td+ ships, no, it won't be profitable most of the time, as you'll not fill out.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
And while, I am at it, are there any rules for keeping ships going, beyond saying "1000" credits per week for X? I hated that in TNE when a bumbly trader is living hand to foot in a post Collapse universe, where credits don't actually exist.

Enough for now!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, there are hints at it, but nothing clear yet.


------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!