A review of T5
- Thread starter pendragonman
- Start date
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Jonathan Sherlock's review http://zho.berka.com/2013/05/19/t5-review/ is the most informative one I've seen yet. He doesn't diminish an honest critique of T5 faults, nor does he become a rabid defender.
He presents a great, though brief, seemingly accurate overview that would tend to "sell" the book to any serious Traveller fan.
I received my copy a few days ago, and for lack of sleep, haven't finish an in depth read yet. From a thorough scan I feel my past criticisms are all accurate.
That being said, I am glad I bought it. It does tend back toward Classic Traveller, which makes me very happy. It also adds a lot of depth.
I'll be picking it for ideas, many being there that I though should have been a long time ago. It's a wealth of information (If you can find it!).
In spite of it's many publishing and editing faults it's worth adding to any Traveller collection.
He presents a great, though brief, seemingly accurate overview that would tend to "sell" the book to any serious Traveller fan.
I received my copy a few days ago, and for lack of sleep, haven't finish an in depth read yet. From a thorough scan I feel my past criticisms are all accurate.
That being said, I am glad I bought it. It does tend back toward Classic Traveller, which makes me very happy. It also adds a lot of depth.
I'll be picking it for ideas, many being there that I though should have been a long time ago. It's a wealth of information (If you can find it!).
In spite of it's many publishing and editing faults it's worth adding to any Traveller collection.
Baltech Budapest
SOC-12
What an excellent review!!
Now I am even more excited about delving into the book.
Now I am even more excited about delving into the book.
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
The T5 book is, in its current form, a collection of tools that happen to add up to a game system. It can be played as a game, but you will need some time to come to terms with the tools and how they are presented.
One side note that has been largely forgotten in the last five years is that the Mongoose ship design rules were informed by the T5 draft, so Mongoose ships from the core book are already pretty compatible, with only a few details to be determined or back traced. In the other direction, the T5 ship building rules function as an addition to the Mongoose ship building rules.
One side note that has been largely forgotten in the last five years is that the Mongoose ship design rules were informed by the T5 draft, so Mongoose ships from the core book are already pretty compatible, with only a few details to be determined or back traced. In the other direction, the T5 ship building rules function as an addition to the Mongoose ship building rules.
When it comes down to it, I will probably use something of a mix between Mongoose Traveller, T5 and Classic Traveller.
There are some conventional differences, but the core of the each game is broadly adaptable and compatable. Not sure if we'll see Judge Dredd zooming around the Imperium any time soon though.
There are some conventional differences, but the core of the each game is broadly adaptable and compatable. Not sure if we'll see Judge Dredd zooming around the Imperium any time soon though.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Just started reading the review, but there's a red flag about the reviewer in the first paragraph. "The central mechanic, the task system, combines the traditional “roll under a characteristic” of Classic Traveller with the universal tasks of later versions of Traveller, especially T4."
Sure, you can roll under a stat in CT. You can do anything you want, roll any way you want. But there's no way CT can be characterized as having a "tradition roll under characteristic".
This makes me wonder if Jonathan has even played Classic Traveller.
As for the review, Combat sounds gawd-awful, like an RPG version of High Guard battles. Highly abstract two-lines of bad guys and good guys, with rolls made for attack and damage, can be OK for space combat. It can be OK to resolve mass battles in the RPG. But, as a base RPG personal combat system, it sounds lousy.
Hmmm....not liking what I'm reading.
Sure, you can roll under a stat in CT. You can do anything you want, roll any way you want. But there's no way CT can be characterized as having a "tradition roll under characteristic".
This makes me wonder if Jonathan has even played Classic Traveller.
As for the review, Combat sounds gawd-awful, like an RPG version of High Guard battles. Highly abstract two-lines of bad guys and good guys, with rolls made for attack and damage, can be OK for space combat. It can be OK to resolve mass battles in the RPG. But, as a base RPG personal combat system, it sounds lousy.
Hmmm....not liking what I'm reading.
Baltech Budapest
SOC-12
My apologies if this link has been posted elsewhere but I just found it:
http://www.penultimateharn.com/blog/?p=115
If the author of this review is a CotI member, or indeed if he/she should read this post. Thanks a lot for taking the time to write it.
http://www.penultimateharn.com/blog/?p=115
If the author of this review is a CotI member, or indeed if he/she should read this post. Thanks a lot for taking the time to write it.
the.barwickian
SOC-8
I am a CotI member, though I'm not prolific.
And your comment and linkage is appreciated.
FYI, I wrote a 'second impressions' follow-up last week: http://www.penultimateharn.com/blog/?p=122
I'm behind schedule on testing the makers and running a T5 session, but I'll manage both those this week, work permitting, and then I think I'll be ready to bring all the impressions together for a proper, and hopefully thorough, warts'n'all review - don't get me wrong, I'm still loving T5, but there are warts.
Last edited:
CT had a tradition of not standardizing the die mechanics it used. Some people remember the types of rolls they used the most from that game.
Also, a lot of people say they played CT back in the day, but they house-ruled the crap out of the game. So were they really playing CT?
Last edited:
Baltech Budapest
SOC-12
Thanks for another excellent review.
I'm glad that serious reviews like this are being posted, as opposed to the rubbish I was reading a few weeks ago.
The more I read about the book, the more excited I am to finally see it. It sounds like it's just what I am looking for. At 650+ pages though it could be several months before I make the transition from CT.
Baltech Budapest
SOC-12
That's an interesting thought.
That's also why I love CT. Referee's are encouraged to do it 'their way'.
A prime example of this can be found on page 28 of The Traveller Book regarding the uses of die rolls.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
That's fair. Maybe every time he played CT, he used roll under stat for everything.
That type of roll is mentioned here and there in the game, but if you look at the example throws spread throughout the game, the vast majority are 2D roll higher type throws.
This is why I can't imagine anyone who has played CT would characterize it as a roll lower game. Heck, I use roll lower in my CT games all the time, but I wouldn't agree with or make the statement he made.
I remember seeing "ROLL 8+" (or something similar) in giant print in some printings of CT. Others didn't have it. Some editions had Jamison standing (full art). Some had just his face shown. Three prints of first edition. 2nd edition (1981) got edits in its print runs also, not as many though (character death became optional).
That's why I don't house-rule home-brew. It clouds the mind decades later.
Agree with this big time.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
That's in the combat chapter. All weapons hit on a throw of 8+.
I usually run games by the book, too. Oh, yeah, I'll tweak a rule here and there, if needed. But, usually, that's one or just a handfull of rules that are touched. The rest, with most every game I've run, is straight out of the book.
Oh, and I don't really cross editions, either. I have with AD&D and AD&D 2E. And, I have with CT and MegaTraveller. But, those are very easy cross-overs--almost the same game, with a few changes.
I won't be one of these that designs things in T5 and uses it in his CT game.
Yey! I finally got my new 7-wheel car! So Awesome! Can't wait to give it a spin and see what parts can I strip from it and bolt onto my Ford Pinto.
Roll-under in Classic Traveller
Using my best Kirk Douglas voice, let me say "I'M Jonathan Sherlock!".
Thanks to all commentators here. You all now know what I look like. I have now been accused of "bias" in the comment thread under my blog post, and I will be addressing that at some point.
I do agree with others that there are problems with T5, but I am really excited (if it wasn't obvious already) about this core rule book. Marc Miller has made careful, balanced choices to stitch a universe together without becoming totally bogged down.
Now, admittedly, the Roll-under tradition is not in the core 3 LBB's (at least, not that I could see). But within the broad Traveller Canon dating back to the original game, this mechanic existed. It was certainly not the dominant mechanic, but it did exist quite prominently. Effectively we had a variety of mechanics to do with dice, and starting with Mega Traveller these were unified in UTPs at which point roll-under characteristic checks were subsumed into tasks that did not have a skill, e.g. To push the boulder off the edge of the cliff: Difficult, Strength, 1 combat round (absolute).
In published adventures there were a few variations of "check a characteristic" by rolling 2 dice and comparing the result to the relevant score.
Many examples can be found, but check in particular page 28 of The Traveller Adventure where this mechanic is spelled out under the heading "The Uses of Dice Rolls".
For the record, I refereed The Traveller Adventure for a group of players at my high school in the mid 1980's.
It was loads of fun and we had a few side adventures along the way drawn from JTAS Amber Zones. Best Traveller campaign I ever ran.
Using my best Kirk Douglas voice, let me say "I'M Jonathan Sherlock!".
Thanks to all commentators here. You all now know what I look like. I have now been accused of "bias" in the comment thread under my blog post, and I will be addressing that at some point.
I do agree with others that there are problems with T5, but I am really excited (if it wasn't obvious already) about this core rule book. Marc Miller has made careful, balanced choices to stitch a universe together without becoming totally bogged down.
Now, admittedly, the Roll-under tradition is not in the core 3 LBB's (at least, not that I could see). But within the broad Traveller Canon dating back to the original game, this mechanic existed. It was certainly not the dominant mechanic, but it did exist quite prominently. Effectively we had a variety of mechanics to do with dice, and starting with Mega Traveller these were unified in UTPs at which point roll-under characteristic checks were subsumed into tasks that did not have a skill, e.g. To push the boulder off the edge of the cliff: Difficult, Strength, 1 combat round (absolute).
In published adventures there were a few variations of "check a characteristic" by rolling 2 dice and comparing the result to the relevant score.
Many examples can be found, but check in particular page 28 of The Traveller Adventure where this mechanic is spelled out under the heading "The Uses of Dice Rolls".
For the record, I refereed The Traveller Adventure for a group of players at my high school in the mid 1980's.
It was loads of fun and we had a few side adventures along the way drawn from JTAS Amber Zones. Best Traveller campaign I ever ran.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
OK, so why did you say in your review, "The central mechanic, the task system, combines the traditional “roll under a characteristic” of Classic Traveller with the universal tasks of later versions of Traveller, especially T4."
I don't think, and you just agreed, that CT cannot be described as having a "traditional roll under characteristic" just because roll under was one of the sometime options.
AD&D has some roll under type rolls too. 3d6 for an Attribute or under is used a few times. But, I don't think anyone would consider AD&D a traditional roll under game, and the same can be said for Classic Traveller.
From my point of view, that really colors your review in a negative light.
You mention that you refereed CT back in the 80's during high school. If that's your most recent involvement with Classic Traveller, that would make your comments even more suspect, in my opinion.
To be clear: I'm not questioning your review of T5--just the parts of it that compare the game to Classic Traveller.
