Confused

[Mark Morgan]

given there is a difference bewtween Monngoose travelr and T5 is/how is t5 going to realeased just as cd from FFE or printed in some form as well?

 

[Stainless]

The plan was to release a CD-ROM containing info. of something like 1000 pages in total. That would be sold to people and comments/house rules/etc. gladly accepted for consideration by MWM. After a period, he would then condense the material into a printed form, which all would have to pay for yet again. The initial plan was that T5 would be a seamless extension of what has become Mongoose Traveller.

Despite Marc repeatedly advertising the CD-ROM as ready for sale early this year (2008), it turned out to be completely delusional as it was reportedly in such a sorry state that it was not ready even for a beta stage (admitted by even his most staunchest supporters). Instead, those who had pre-paid for the CD-ROM have been given access to the alpha form of the documentation and an online forum. Apparently they have been helping to turn it into a beta form. I'm unsure if the plan is to still release a CD-ROM followed by a book or to go straight to the book. Either way, MWM appeared/s to have or have had little grasp of reality and a signifcant proportion of the finally released work (if it is ever released) will have been created by paying volunteers.

DISCLAIMER: All of this info/interpretation is my own and does not come from any experience of the T5 documents, just what I have observed from forum posts.

Put your money down if you want to and wait for some form of product some time in the future (if MWM should die before it is finally published, which apperas to be within the bounds of possibility, I'm sure the fan-base will find a way to postumously finish off his work as a hagiographic tribute.)

Otherwise, buy the current and actively developing Mongoose Traveller version (or past versions that are still available in varous formats).

 

[DonM]

The plan was to release a CD-ROM containing info. of something like 1000 pages in total. That would be sold to people and comments/house rules/etc. gladly accepted for consideration by MWM. After a period, he would then condense the material into a printed form, which all would have to pay for yet again. The initial plan was that T5 would be a seamless extension of what has become Mongoose Traveller.

I'm not sure that was the plan.. Yes, the CD-ROM release is still the plan. Your mention of house rules being accepted by Marc is a new one to me, but perhaps I missed something before March 2008...

Despite Marc repeatedly advertising the CD-ROM as ready for sale early this year (2008), it turned out to be completely delusional as it was reportedly in such a sorry state that it was not ready even for a beta stage (admitted by even his most staunchest supporters). Instead, those who had pre-paid for the CD-ROM have been given access to the alpha form of the documentation and an online forum. Apparently they have been helping to turn it into a beta form. I'm unsure if the plan is to still release a CD-ROM followed by a book or to go straight to the book. Either way, MWM appeared/s to have or have had little grasp of reality and a signifcant proportion of the finally released work (if it is ever released) will have been created by paying volunteers.

Sadly, the first half of your paragraph is true. In late 2006 and throughout 2007, Marc radically changed T5's vision, dropping the "T4+" (my words) view of development. Probably more significant, Marc did massively underestimate the effort required to develop a new release of Traveller by himself, and when he did get commentary, it broke down into three categories:

1. Too vague to be of use (this sux, drop in the TNE rules)...
2. Personal attacks (this document shows that Marc was never a game designer, but simply edited other peoples work)
3. Not in Marc's vision (Marc, I looked over your short notes, but decided to send you my personal design of the ultimate sci-fi [insert here: robots, fighters, missiles, gun design, et al])

And, yes, this changed in April of 2008, with my proposal of the T5 Private Access Forum here at CotI. I had come to the conclusion that there were significant issues with the direction and progress of the overall T5 effort (most notably to me, important criticisms NOT being passed to Marc), and finally talked to Marc about it (his answer was to make me part of the solution...) o:

So, we chopped the T5 material up into logical sections (starting with Chargen), and began passing that material to those who had paid for T5 already for review. This broke the logjam, and also overcame Marc not getting details on his work problem. Also, in my view, those people who put their money out there deserved something, and making them part of the creative process hopefully did something to partially offset that.

As far as most of the material being written by the volunteers, that's actually NOT the case. Far from it (as some posters will tell you). I've made a few people mad by insisting that Marc's vision drive T5, not volunteer insertions.

DISCLAIMER: All of this info/interpretation is my own and does not come from any experience of the T5 documents, just what I have observed from forum posts.

And unfortunately, that detail has grown much smaller since April. I'll confess to enforcing a draconian policy of keeping T5 behind the curtain. So most of what your reading outside the private area is from someone who walked away a long time ago.

Put your money down if you want to and wait for some form of product some time in the future (if MWM should die before it is finally published, which appears to be within the bounds of possibility, I'm sure the fan-base will find a way to postumously finish off his work as a hagiographic tribute.) Otherwise, buy the current and actively developing Mongoose Traveller version (or past versions that are still available in various formats).

Yes, Marc could have a tragic accident tomorrow, but I am confident that Marc will finish the T5 core, and probably more. My view is, if you are curious, if you don't have a belief that Marc personally insulted you sometime in the storied past, and if you would like to perhaps have an influence in the direction T5 takes, yes, invest in the T5 CD. Otherwise, you can buy it when it is released in print form.

But, by all means, look at the Mongoose offerings -- there's much to like there... and as far as past versions, I'd recommend CT or MegaTraveller.

 

[Stainless]

As far as most of the material being written by the volunteers, that's actually NOT the case.

Thanks for the extra info DonM, but just to put the record straight, I said "...a signifcant proportion..." not "most".

Good luck with it all. It really is an exceptional process, so it will be very interesting to see what comes out in the looooong run.

 

[aramis]

Don:

I know for a fact that not all the commentary fell in those three categories, as I myself sent feedback of the "I don't like this because..." and "This doesn't make sense..." variety.

And on one, "neat, but not practical." (The font based small craft.)

Marc, by his own remoteness in 2005-2007, and by use of intermediaries instead of direct participation with playtesters, put barriers to effective feedback and playtest. (Sorry, Rob, but you having been the "voice" of T5 was an issue... I always got the sense that you were filtering feedback towards your own vision...)

I'm glad to hear he is moving away from T4.x... But I also have to ask... Is there really feedback? Is Marc actually listening? (I never got a response from Marc directly on any feedback, including that emailed direct to him, over the more than a year I was following the early T5 playtest materials.) What little response to my feedback (2+ years ago) was all filtered via Robject.

I've seen good playtests: EABA, Corps Bestiary, Stuff, B5W, T20. Heck, T20 was one of the best... Hunter listened, and showed he was listening, even when he disagreed. Greg Porter does his with blind playtesters, but his feedback is included as notes with revisions, and acknowledgement of input. Even if only, "Oh, yeah, several others caught that."

And I've participated in one really bad one: WFRP2E... the Corporate Rep insulating the designer from the playtest feedback, and in fact deleting anotations of problems. Chris was great; Simon damaged the game by his methods. And BI learned after release what a problem it had been, as it was fixed in Dark Heresy. (Day late, dollar short.)

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

In late 2006 and throughout 2007, Marc radically changed T5's vision, dropping the "T4+" (my words) view of development.

Seriously???

That change of tack passed me by completely. So task resolution is no longer T4-ish? And in general, T5 is its own unique thing?

That would be pretty spectacular news.

Personally, I'm not averse to either the delay or the volunteer effort, so long as people get heard.

 

[DonM]

Don:

I know for a fact that not all the commentary fell in those three categories, as I myself sent feedback of the "I don't like this because..." and "This doesn't make sense..." variety.

And on one, "neat, but not practical." (The font based small craft.)

Marc, by his own remoteness in 2005-2007, and by use of intermediaries instead of direct participation with playtesters, put barriers to effective feedback and playtest. (Sorry, Rob, but you having been the "voice" of T5 was an issue... I always got the sense that you were filtering feedback towards your own vision...)

OK, you're right, I'm basing my knowledge of the 2005-2007 activities on what Marc forwarded to me. Honestly, during this period, I wasn't interested in T5... Marc kept sending me stuff asking me to get involved, but I didn't actually give in until maybe October 2007?

So I have to confess, the only feedback I saw was what I was forwarded, and that was not pretty. And the www.traveller5.com forum activities I was never involved in.

But what I did see and hear actually made me not want to be involved. I finally gave in because I was tired of saying no to Marc.

I'm glad to hear he is moving away from T4.x... But I also have to ask... Is there really feedback? Is Marc actually listening? (I never got a response from Marc directly on any feedback, including that emailed direct to him, over the more than a year I was following the early T5 playtest materials.) What little response to my feedback (2+ years ago) was all filtered via Robject.

Let's see... I get e-mails from CotI and pretty much forward them straight on. And if they disagree with Marc (such as ship design), that's Marc's business. What I filter is generally tone (things like "This whole chapter pretty much shows that Marc never really understood Traveller" won't get passed on; they might get a thread lock in the forum), and I also stop people from submitting their designs (here's my percentage based skill system, which is way cooler than this). But I also have tried very hard to make sure the forum participants are aware of the box I'm asking them to work in.

And I try to be public with any actions, because if there are going to be rumors, I want to at least get castigated for what I did do, not what I didn't.

I've seen good playtests: EABA, Corps Bestiary, Stuff, B5W, T20. Heck, T20 was one of the best... Hunter listened, and showed he was listening, even when he disagreed. Greg Porter does his with blind playtesters, but his feedback is included as notes with revisions, and acknowledgement of input. Even if only, "Oh, yeah, several others caught that."

And I've participated in one really bad one: WFRP2E... the Corporate Rep insulating the designer from the playtest feedback, and in fact deleting anotations of problems. Chris was great; Simon damaged the game by his methods. And BI learned after release what a problem it had been, as it was fixed in Dark Heresy. (Day late, dollar short.)

I try to keep up with the back and forth. I send Marc feedback, I post his responses. Marc does occasionally defer a decision, but at the moment, I think things are pretty good with the back and forth. Some forum members could probably agree and/or disagree.

I'm not going to say I don't filter or have a bias. I almost assuredly do. I'm not sure what it is.

Also, Marc has posted directly to the forums, and has also received direct input. It's probably not the perfect playtest; but it certainly has to be an improvement over September 2007, or even March 2008.

 

[DonM]

Seriously???

That change of tack passed me by completely. So task resolution is no longer T4-ish? And in general, T5 is its own unique thing?

That would be pretty spectacular news.

Personally, I'm not averse to either the delay or the volunteer effort, so long as people get heard.

Well, I don't consider it T4-ish. However, I'd be violating my own rules explaining... :nonono:

 

[Supplement Four]

In late 2006 and throughout 2007, Marc radically changed T5's vision, dropping the "T4+" (my words) view of development.

This is exceptional news. I wonder if it took the success of MGT for Marc to change that system (which is not well liked, from my experience).

Or, maybe it's an effort to keep T5 compatible with MGT?

My view is, if you are curious, if you don't have a belief that Marc personally insulted you sometime in the storied past, and if you would like to perhaps have an influence in the direction T5 takes, yes, invest in the T5 CD. Otherwise, you can buy it when it is released in print form.

This is a poor decision. Obviously some people have, but I'm not going to pay for the right to work for Marc. That's crazy, in my book.

Would I volunteer, without cost. Probably. But, there's no way I'm actually paying money to participate in a playtest where my ideas would have a slight chance of being used anyway.

But, by all means, look at the Mongoose offerings -- there's much to like there... and as far as past versions, I'd recommend CT or MegaTraveller.

As the resident-forum CT fanatic, I woud recommend CT. Of course.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

Don, fess up:

Dice pool, yes or no?

 

[DonM]

The answer to dice pools is Yes, T5 uses at least what I would call dice pools. Not like Shadowrun, or Storyteller, or WEG's Star Wars.

Why do I have the suspicion that your question about "dice pools" represents something bigger?

 

[aramis]

Fundamentally, the T4 mechanical problem was dice by difficulty. (The editing issue was annoying, but in the mid-90's, not inherently fatal.)

If it is still Xd6 ≤ (Stat + Skill), where X varies by difficulty, that's still the T4 task system.

That's the big question for many of us... has that fundamental problem been changed?

(The why: x dice by difficulty makes "Roll and then I'll tell you the difficulty" and "Roll and tell me what level difficulty you make" impossible. It seriously cramps the Ref's flexibility.)

 

[Supplement Four]

If it is still Xd6 ≤ (Stat + Skill), where X varies by difficulty, that's still the T4 task system.

That's the big question for many of us... has that fundamental problem been changed?

(The why: x dice by difficulty makes "Roll and then I'll tell you the difficulty" and "Roll and tell me what level difficulty you make" impossible. It seriously cramps the Ref's flexibility.)

Agreed. When Don said that T5 was no longer using T4.x, I read it to mean this entire diceology had been tossed.

Plus, since Mongoose didn't make their game compatible with T5 as promised, I thought that maybe Marc would go the other way around and make T5 compatible with MGT.

A +1 modifier means a whole other thing if it is modifying a 3D roll under system as oppossed to a 2D roll higher for 8+ system. Modifiers need to be compatible between the two games to make the supplements useful to both games.

In other words, the weight of a +1 DM must be the same in both games.

 

[aramis]

No, S4, they don't need to be weighted the same, but they need to be reasonably well convertable.

EG: T20 vs CT/MT. It's about 1.5:1 by the dice, or 2:1 by 5 term character prime skills... but since both are consistent in how they roll, then modifiers can be consistently converted.

 

[Supplement Four]

No, S4, they don't need to be weighted the same, but they need to be reasonably well convertable.

EG: T20 vs CT/MT. It's about 1.5:1 by the dice, or 2:1 by 5 term character prime skills... but since both are consistent in how they roll, then modifiers can be consistently converted.

If you want to take the modifirs straight out of the book, then they do need to be weighted the same.

A +1 DM on a d20 is a +5% proposition. The +1 DM makes you 5% better than the other character without the +1 DM.

If you're talking a +1 DM on a 2d6 throw, the benefit is variable. It can be anywhere from 3% to 16% improvement.

So, if you're saying that you divide d20 DM in half when converting to CT or MT, then I'd agree that's a decent eyeball average. (A good argument could also be made for a one third ratio: Every +3 DMs in d20 Traveller = +1 DM in CT.) But, the two game systems are incompatible. One can eyeball any system and come up with a rule of thumb.

But, to truly have two systems be compatible, then the DMs need to be weighted the same.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

Why do I have the suspicion that your question about "dice pools" represents something bigger?

It doesn't. I dislike dice pools all by themselves. Besides Aramis's very important point, it's because I can't figure out the probability as easily as I can in CT or most other non-dice pool systems. And in T4 I absolutely have to be able to do that as GM.

I really, really wanted to like EABA, but couldn't for that reason, even and particularly after Tom B sent me a probability graph for that game.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

But, there's no way I'm actually paying money to participate in a playtest where my ideas would have a slight chance of being used anyway.

You're not. You're buying the game, with the playtest thrown in for free.

 

[Supplement Four]

You're not. You're buying the game, with the playtest thrown in for free.

I'm not? OK, let me look at the playtest forum then...oh? I've got to spend money to do that? I thought the playtest was free?

 

[dean]

I'm not? OK, let me look at the playtest forum then...oh? I've got to spend money to do that? I thought the playtest was free?

You've got it backwards. You're technically pre-ordering the game, and the preview and playtest (if you are interested or have the time) are thrown in as a bonus.

You can't pay for the playtest. Kind of a "fine-print" distinction, but there it is...

 

[far-trader]

If you want to talk "fine print" I've long had the feeling "playtest" is not the proper term for what is being done there either. Something more like proofing and editing is the impression I've been getting, from an outside perspective.