Corrected Milieu 0 sector data?
- Thread starter SType
- Start date
Sadly, I don't think it was ever done. However, if you are looking for a way to do it yourself, I'd recommmend that you look at the following link:
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/convert/1100to0.html
Enjoy,
Flynn
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/convert/1100to0.html
Enjoy,
Flynn
Sadly, I don't think it was ever done. However, if you are looking for a way to do it yourself, I'd recommmend that you look at the following link:
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/convert/1100to0.html
Enjoy,
Flynn
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/convert/1100to0.html
Enjoy,
Flynn
Commander Drax
SOC-12
I Agree, I dont think that it was ever done, I understand that Imperial Games used a different logarithem when compiling the sector data that resulted in the world names changing and lots of worlds having zero population.
I don't think it's possible to change it now (in a big way) as many of those materials have passed into canon and will probably be adapted in the upcoming T5 and its new milieu 200. Still it's your game and if you want to change them, then do so by all means, you could build it into the plot as a flaw/unreliable database made up of rumours and bad sector data but taken as real by the Imperium in much the same way that ancient cartographers used to put 'There be dragons...' on blank spots of early maps, believing earnestly that such things existed.
It's this quality of known facts and unreliable information that makes Milieu Zero such a big draw for me, I love the setting...
Hope this helps.
I don't think it's possible to change it now (in a big way) as many of those materials have passed into canon and will probably be adapted in the upcoming T5 and its new milieu 200. Still it's your game and if you want to change them, then do so by all means, you could build it into the plot as a flaw/unreliable database made up of rumours and bad sector data but taken as real by the Imperium in much the same way that ancient cartographers used to put 'There be dragons...' on blank spots of early maps, believing earnestly that such things existed.
It's this quality of known facts and unreliable information that makes Milieu Zero such a big draw for me, I love the setting...
Hope this helps.
Commander Drax
SOC-12
I Agree, I dont think that it was ever done, I understand that Imperial Games used a different logarithem when compiling the sector data that resulted in the world names changing and lots of worlds having zero population.
I don't think it's possible to change it now (in a big way) as many of those materials have passed into canon and will probably be adapted in the upcoming T5 and its new milieu 200. Still it's your game and if you want to change them, then do so by all means, you could build it into the plot as a flaw/unreliable database made up of rumours and bad sector data but taken as real by the Imperium in much the same way that ancient cartographers used to put 'There be dragons...' on blank spots of early maps, believing earnestly that such things existed.
It's this quality of known facts and unreliable information that makes Milieu Zero such a big draw for me, I love the setting...
Hope this helps.
I don't think it's possible to change it now (in a big way) as many of those materials have passed into canon and will probably be adapted in the upcoming T5 and its new milieu 200. Still it's your game and if you want to change them, then do so by all means, you could build it into the plot as a flaw/unreliable database made up of rumours and bad sector data but taken as real by the Imperium in much the same way that ancient cartographers used to put 'There be dragons...' on blank spots of early maps, believing earnestly that such things existed.
It's this quality of known facts and unreliable information that makes Milieu Zero such a big draw for me, I love the setting...
Hope this helps.
Could someone post a brief explanation of the discrepencies between First Survey and previous canon?
I am aware of the mis-identification of Sylea in the T4 rulebook, but this mistake was not repeated in First Survey.
I am interested in exactly what ARE the problems with First Survey. How many of the world names were changed? Can the worlds with zero population be explained as die-offs during the Long Night, or are there too many of them? If all this is considered "early canon" within the OTU timeline, how would it be reconciled with "later canon" (Milieu 1000 and the Classic Era)?
This is important because I am considering writing a wide-ranging T20 adventure for Milieu 0, and I need to decide whether or not to use the published stats.
Any clarification of this issue would be appreciated.
I am aware of the mis-identification of Sylea in the T4 rulebook, but this mistake was not repeated in First Survey.
I am interested in exactly what ARE the problems with First Survey. How many of the world names were changed? Can the worlds with zero population be explained as die-offs during the Long Night, or are there too many of them? If all this is considered "early canon" within the OTU timeline, how would it be reconciled with "later canon" (Milieu 1000 and the Classic Era)?
This is important because I am considering writing a wide-ranging T20 adventure for Milieu 0, and I need to decide whether or not to use the published stats.
Any clarification of this issue would be appreciated.
Could someone post a brief explanation of the discrepencies between First Survey and previous canon?
I am aware of the mis-identification of Sylea in the T4 rulebook, but this mistake was not repeated in First Survey.
I am interested in exactly what ARE the problems with First Survey. How many of the world names were changed? Can the worlds with zero population be explained as die-offs during the Long Night, or are there too many of them? If all this is considered "early canon" within the OTU timeline, how would it be reconciled with "later canon" (Milieu 1000 and the Classic Era)?
This is important because I am considering writing a wide-ranging T20 adventure for Milieu 0, and I need to decide whether or not to use the published stats.
Any clarification of this issue would be appreciated.
I am aware of the mis-identification of Sylea in the T4 rulebook, but this mistake was not repeated in First Survey.
I am interested in exactly what ARE the problems with First Survey. How many of the world names were changed? Can the worlds with zero population be explained as die-offs during the Long Night, or are there too many of them? If all this is considered "early canon" within the OTU timeline, how would it be reconciled with "later canon" (Milieu 1000 and the Classic Era)?
This is important because I am considering writing a wide-ranging T20 adventure for Milieu 0, and I need to decide whether or not to use the published stats.
Any clarification of this issue would be appreciated.
I no longer have Milieu:0 Campaign >.< but I'm under the impression that somebody online at least attempted to fix the botched ?social? attribute from First Survey.
http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt
(note: ~330kb text file)
Is this file the exact info that's in the T4 book(s) or is it "corrected" in some way? The T4 directory may have some other useful stuff, the t4.sector.txt file for example.
There's a website called VAG Central that evidently has 4 corrected sectors but I can't access it at this time.
HTH,
Casey
http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt
(note: ~330kb text file)
Is this file the exact info that's in the T4 book(s) or is it "corrected" in some way? The T4 directory may have some other useful stuff, the t4.sector.txt file for example.
There's a website called VAG Central that evidently has 4 corrected sectors but I can't access it at this time.
HTH,
Casey
I no longer have Milieu:0 Campaign >.< but I'm under the impression that somebody online at least attempted to fix the botched ?social? attribute from First Survey.
http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt
(note: ~330kb text file)
Is this file the exact info that's in the T4 book(s) or is it "corrected" in some way? The T4 directory may have some other useful stuff, the t4.sector.txt file for example.
There's a website called VAG Central that evidently has 4 corrected sectors but I can't access it at this time.
HTH,
Casey
http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt
(note: ~330kb text file)
Is this file the exact info that's in the T4 book(s) or is it "corrected" in some way? The T4 directory may have some other useful stuff, the t4.sector.txt file for example.
There's a website called VAG Central that evidently has 4 corrected sectors but I can't access it at this time.
HTH,
Casey
OK. I spent some time over the holiday weekend comparing sector data from First Survey with sector data from the Golden Age. Thanks for your link, Casey. The file at http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt does appear to be uncorrected data.
It seems to me that the First Survey data is not unusable, but requires interpretation and imagination, much like the Traveller world generation system in general (the old "low TL civilization in an asteroid-belt problem.")
The physical data in First Survey seems to be correct. The world names and the sociological data are the main problems.
Before addressing these problems, I want to touch on an important point. The data in First Survey are not from the First Survey of the Imperial Interstellar Scout Service, which was conducted in 300. Canon tells us of no such comprehensive survey which would have existed as early as the Milieu 0 time-frame.
Therefore, we can only assume that the physical data available to players in the First Survey book have been gathered from various pre-3I sources. These data are apparently accessible to the characters either piece-meal (via Library Data searches) or through compilations provided by an institution such as the Sylean/Imperial bureaucracy or the Travellers' Aid Society.
Noticibly lacking are the "out of date" sociological data from prior to the Long Night. Perhaps these data are not available to the characters because none of the possible providers have considered them worth including, as such data are now almost certainly obsolete. It would have been nice if such data had been included, even if they were "grayed out." As a traveller, I would like to know that such-and-such a world was an oppressive religious dictatorship 1800 years ago. The neighborhood might be better today, but I might still be more inclined to visit the worlds that used to "play nice" before looking in on those with less sterling reputations.
OK. So much for the source and nature of the data the players have to work with. How do we deal with the world-names, as well as the altered sociological data in the Referee's sections?
After looking into the issue with the world-names, I decided this is really a non-problem. The key here is that the world names have mostly changed--but have not been swapped around. So, Jagd has been renamed Pim, for example, but there is not some other world which has been renamed Jagd. I am not 100% certain of this in every case, as I did not do a comprehensive survey--but it was true of the examples I checked. A few world names are the same as in the Golden Age data.
So why are the changed world-names a non-problem? Because the data available to the players is 1800 years old. Most of these planets have been cut-off from outside contact for nearly two millenia. How many of our place names today are exactly the same as they were in 4 A.D.? Given migrations, conquests, language changes, shifts within languages, and the preferences of the residents, most places today have names different from their names of 2000 years ago. I see no reason why most of those living during the Long Night would not have come up with new ways of referring to their worlds.
Also--the world names in the First Survey book are evidently names used during the Rule of Man, and before that by the First Imperium. As such, we can conclude that most of these names were assigned by the Scout Service of the Ziru Sirka. They may be entirely different from the names used by the denizens of the worlds in question, and many of the official names may be in an archaic form of Vilani.
As players explore the M:0 setting, they may travel to worlds with one name on their out-of-date star-charts, only to find that the inhabitants use an entirely different name. Eventually, when the IISS undertakes their ambitious First Survey in 300, world names on the offical charts will be updated to reflect common usage. Pim will finally become Jagd (which may be what the residents always called it, anyway...)
Regarding the problematic sociological data in the Referee's Section--this will require some creative explanation, especially the low Pop figures for key worlds. It appears that Sylea has a maximum population of 399,999. Can this be satisfactorily explained? Perhaps there was a huge population die-back during the Long Night, and as Sylea recovered, the planet was divided up into manors for the few remaining (and now very wealthy) survivors. It is possible that the Syleans, because of their low population, were forced to develop efficient trade and business practices, which is how they managed to found and maintain the Federation. Maybe the bulk of the population of the Sylean Federation hailed from nearby systems, and Sylea's primary role was as the seat of government. Perhaps today, immigration is greatly restricted, as the patrician Syleans like their seclusion and don't want a bunch of plebeians running down property values.
I don't know whether or not this explanation is convincing, but it does give some unique possibilities for Sylean history. Similar explanations could be developed to explain other anomalies in the sociological data.
I am interested in any feedback you may have on these ideas--so feel free to weigh in with your comments, criticism, or corrections.
It seems to me that the First Survey data is not unusable, but requires interpretation and imagination, much like the Traveller world generation system in general (the old "low TL civilization in an asteroid-belt problem.")
The physical data in First Survey seems to be correct. The world names and the sociological data are the main problems.
Before addressing these problems, I want to touch on an important point. The data in First Survey are not from the First Survey of the Imperial Interstellar Scout Service, which was conducted in 300. Canon tells us of no such comprehensive survey which would have existed as early as the Milieu 0 time-frame.
Therefore, we can only assume that the physical data available to players in the First Survey book have been gathered from various pre-3I sources. These data are apparently accessible to the characters either piece-meal (via Library Data searches) or through compilations provided by an institution such as the Sylean/Imperial bureaucracy or the Travellers' Aid Society.
Noticibly lacking are the "out of date" sociological data from prior to the Long Night. Perhaps these data are not available to the characters because none of the possible providers have considered them worth including, as such data are now almost certainly obsolete. It would have been nice if such data had been included, even if they were "grayed out." As a traveller, I would like to know that such-and-such a world was an oppressive religious dictatorship 1800 years ago. The neighborhood might be better today, but I might still be more inclined to visit the worlds that used to "play nice" before looking in on those with less sterling reputations.
OK. So much for the source and nature of the data the players have to work with. How do we deal with the world-names, as well as the altered sociological data in the Referee's sections?
After looking into the issue with the world-names, I decided this is really a non-problem. The key here is that the world names have mostly changed--but have not been swapped around. So, Jagd has been renamed Pim, for example, but there is not some other world which has been renamed Jagd. I am not 100% certain of this in every case, as I did not do a comprehensive survey--but it was true of the examples I checked. A few world names are the same as in the Golden Age data.
So why are the changed world-names a non-problem? Because the data available to the players is 1800 years old. Most of these planets have been cut-off from outside contact for nearly two millenia. How many of our place names today are exactly the same as they were in 4 A.D.? Given migrations, conquests, language changes, shifts within languages, and the preferences of the residents, most places today have names different from their names of 2000 years ago. I see no reason why most of those living during the Long Night would not have come up with new ways of referring to their worlds.
Also--the world names in the First Survey book are evidently names used during the Rule of Man, and before that by the First Imperium. As such, we can conclude that most of these names were assigned by the Scout Service of the Ziru Sirka. They may be entirely different from the names used by the denizens of the worlds in question, and many of the official names may be in an archaic form of Vilani.
As players explore the M:0 setting, they may travel to worlds with one name on their out-of-date star-charts, only to find that the inhabitants use an entirely different name. Eventually, when the IISS undertakes their ambitious First Survey in 300, world names on the offical charts will be updated to reflect common usage. Pim will finally become Jagd (which may be what the residents always called it, anyway...)
Regarding the problematic sociological data in the Referee's Section--this will require some creative explanation, especially the low Pop figures for key worlds. It appears that Sylea has a maximum population of 399,999. Can this be satisfactorily explained? Perhaps there was a huge population die-back during the Long Night, and as Sylea recovered, the planet was divided up into manors for the few remaining (and now very wealthy) survivors. It is possible that the Syleans, because of their low population, were forced to develop efficient trade and business practices, which is how they managed to found and maintain the Federation. Maybe the bulk of the population of the Sylean Federation hailed from nearby systems, and Sylea's primary role was as the seat of government. Perhaps today, immigration is greatly restricted, as the patrician Syleans like their seclusion and don't want a bunch of plebeians running down property values.
I don't know whether or not this explanation is convincing, but it does give some unique possibilities for Sylean history. Similar explanations could be developed to explain other anomalies in the sociological data.
I am interested in any feedback you may have on these ideas--so feel free to weigh in with your comments, criticism, or corrections.
OK. I spent some time over the holiday weekend comparing sector data from First Survey with sector data from the Golden Age. Thanks for your link, Casey. The file at http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt does appear to be uncorrected data.
It seems to me that the First Survey data is not unusable, but requires interpretation and imagination, much like the Traveller world generation system in general (the old "low TL civilization in an asteroid-belt problem.")
The physical data in First Survey seems to be correct. The world names and the sociological data are the main problems.
Before addressing these problems, I want to touch on an important point. The data in First Survey are not from the First Survey of the Imperial Interstellar Scout Service, which was conducted in 300. Canon tells us of no such comprehensive survey which would have existed as early as the Milieu 0 time-frame.
Therefore, we can only assume that the physical data available to players in the First Survey book have been gathered from various pre-3I sources. These data are apparently accessible to the characters either piece-meal (via Library Data searches) or through compilations provided by an institution such as the Sylean/Imperial bureaucracy or the Travellers' Aid Society.
Noticibly lacking are the "out of date" sociological data from prior to the Long Night. Perhaps these data are not available to the characters because none of the possible providers have considered them worth including, as such data are now almost certainly obsolete. It would have been nice if such data had been included, even if they were "grayed out." As a traveller, I would like to know that such-and-such a world was an oppressive religious dictatorship 1800 years ago. The neighborhood might be better today, but I might still be more inclined to visit the worlds that used to "play nice" before looking in on those with less sterling reputations.
OK. So much for the source and nature of the data the players have to work with. How do we deal with the world-names, as well as the altered sociological data in the Referee's sections?
After looking into the issue with the world-names, I decided this is really a non-problem. The key here is that the world names have mostly changed--but have not been swapped around. So, Jagd has been renamed Pim, for example, but there is not some other world which has been renamed Jagd. I am not 100% certain of this in every case, as I did not do a comprehensive survey--but it was true of the examples I checked. A few world names are the same as in the Golden Age data.
So why are the changed world-names a non-problem? Because the data available to the players is 1800 years old. Most of these planets have been cut-off from outside contact for nearly two millenia. How many of our place names today are exactly the same as they were in 4 A.D.? Given migrations, conquests, language changes, shifts within languages, and the preferences of the residents, most places today have names different from their names of 2000 years ago. I see no reason why most of those living during the Long Night would not have come up with new ways of referring to their worlds.
Also--the world names in the First Survey book are evidently names used during the Rule of Man, and before that by the First Imperium. As such, we can conclude that most of these names were assigned by the Scout Service of the Ziru Sirka. They may be entirely different from the names used by the denizens of the worlds in question, and many of the official names may be in an archaic form of Vilani.
As players explore the M:0 setting, they may travel to worlds with one name on their out-of-date star-charts, only to find that the inhabitants use an entirely different name. Eventually, when the IISS undertakes their ambitious First Survey in 300, world names on the offical charts will be updated to reflect common usage. Pim will finally become Jagd (which may be what the residents always called it, anyway...)
Regarding the problematic sociological data in the Referee's Section--this will require some creative explanation, especially the low Pop figures for key worlds. It appears that Sylea has a maximum population of 399,999. Can this be satisfactorily explained? Perhaps there was a huge population die-back during the Long Night, and as Sylea recovered, the planet was divided up into manors for the few remaining (and now very wealthy) survivors. It is possible that the Syleans, because of their low population, were forced to develop efficient trade and business practices, which is how they managed to found and maintain the Federation. Maybe the bulk of the population of the Sylean Federation hailed from nearby systems, and Sylea's primary role was as the seat of government. Perhaps today, immigration is greatly restricted, as the patrician Syleans like their seclusion and don't want a bunch of plebeians running down property values.
I don't know whether or not this explanation is convincing, but it does give some unique possibilities for Sylean history. Similar explanations could be developed to explain other anomalies in the sociological data.
I am interested in any feedback you may have on these ideas--so feel free to weigh in with your comments, criticism, or corrections.
It seems to me that the First Survey data is not unusable, but requires interpretation and imagination, much like the Traveller world generation system in general (the old "low TL civilization in an asteroid-belt problem.")
The physical data in First Survey seems to be correct. The world names and the sociological data are the main problems.
Before addressing these problems, I want to touch on an important point. The data in First Survey are not from the First Survey of the Imperial Interstellar Scout Service, which was conducted in 300. Canon tells us of no such comprehensive survey which would have existed as early as the Milieu 0 time-frame.
Therefore, we can only assume that the physical data available to players in the First Survey book have been gathered from various pre-3I sources. These data are apparently accessible to the characters either piece-meal (via Library Data searches) or through compilations provided by an institution such as the Sylean/Imperial bureaucracy or the Travellers' Aid Society.
Noticibly lacking are the "out of date" sociological data from prior to the Long Night. Perhaps these data are not available to the characters because none of the possible providers have considered them worth including, as such data are now almost certainly obsolete. It would have been nice if such data had been included, even if they were "grayed out." As a traveller, I would like to know that such-and-such a world was an oppressive religious dictatorship 1800 years ago. The neighborhood might be better today, but I might still be more inclined to visit the worlds that used to "play nice" before looking in on those with less sterling reputations.
OK. So much for the source and nature of the data the players have to work with. How do we deal with the world-names, as well as the altered sociological data in the Referee's sections?
After looking into the issue with the world-names, I decided this is really a non-problem. The key here is that the world names have mostly changed--but have not been swapped around. So, Jagd has been renamed Pim, for example, but there is not some other world which has been renamed Jagd. I am not 100% certain of this in every case, as I did not do a comprehensive survey--but it was true of the examples I checked. A few world names are the same as in the Golden Age data.
So why are the changed world-names a non-problem? Because the data available to the players is 1800 years old. Most of these planets have been cut-off from outside contact for nearly two millenia. How many of our place names today are exactly the same as they were in 4 A.D.? Given migrations, conquests, language changes, shifts within languages, and the preferences of the residents, most places today have names different from their names of 2000 years ago. I see no reason why most of those living during the Long Night would not have come up with new ways of referring to their worlds.
Also--the world names in the First Survey book are evidently names used during the Rule of Man, and before that by the First Imperium. As such, we can conclude that most of these names were assigned by the Scout Service of the Ziru Sirka. They may be entirely different from the names used by the denizens of the worlds in question, and many of the official names may be in an archaic form of Vilani.
As players explore the M:0 setting, they may travel to worlds with one name on their out-of-date star-charts, only to find that the inhabitants use an entirely different name. Eventually, when the IISS undertakes their ambitious First Survey in 300, world names on the offical charts will be updated to reflect common usage. Pim will finally become Jagd (which may be what the residents always called it, anyway...)
Regarding the problematic sociological data in the Referee's Section--this will require some creative explanation, especially the low Pop figures for key worlds. It appears that Sylea has a maximum population of 399,999. Can this be satisfactorily explained? Perhaps there was a huge population die-back during the Long Night, and as Sylea recovered, the planet was divided up into manors for the few remaining (and now very wealthy) survivors. It is possible that the Syleans, because of their low population, were forced to develop efficient trade and business practices, which is how they managed to found and maintain the Federation. Maybe the bulk of the population of the Sylean Federation hailed from nearby systems, and Sylea's primary role was as the seat of government. Perhaps today, immigration is greatly restricted, as the patrician Syleans like their seclusion and don't want a bunch of plebeians running down property values.
I don't know whether or not this explanation is convincing, but it does give some unique possibilities for Sylean history. Similar explanations could be developed to explain other anomalies in the sociological data.
I am interested in any feedback you may have on these ideas--so feel free to weigh in with your comments, criticism, or corrections.
Commander Drax
SOC-12
Hi Stype, when you've completed your adventure how about posting it at pocketempires.com
http://www.pocketempires.com/
I've got lots of stuff there already supporting T20 campaign material in MO and I know for a fact that Jo who manages the site wants more materials from other authors as he is planning to do monthly updates.
Aside from that, All of your other ideas seem reasonable and are explanations that I have also adopted for my own M0 campaigns etc.
I had the same problem when writing up my Rebin Empire Campaign as the world of Rebin in Massilia sector circa 1100+ was named Ande in M0, so in the world description I included a note saying that there was a popularist movement gaining momentum to change the world's name to Rebin in honour of the original colony ship that brought settlers to that world.
Coming soon at pocket empires is a full scale T20 epic adventure called 'Breaker's rock' (part one of a trilogy) set in and around a pocket empire called the Freeworlds Union that is engaged in hostilities with the Rebin Empire.
So dont delay post your stuff to Jo Grant at Pocket Empires, I am sure it will be welcomed and readily accepted.
http://www.pocketempires.com/
I've got lots of stuff there already supporting T20 campaign material in MO and I know for a fact that Jo who manages the site wants more materials from other authors as he is planning to do monthly updates.
Aside from that, All of your other ideas seem reasonable and are explanations that I have also adopted for my own M0 campaigns etc.
I had the same problem when writing up my Rebin Empire Campaign as the world of Rebin in Massilia sector circa 1100+ was named Ande in M0, so in the world description I included a note saying that there was a popularist movement gaining momentum to change the world's name to Rebin in honour of the original colony ship that brought settlers to that world.
Coming soon at pocket empires is a full scale T20 epic adventure called 'Breaker's rock' (part one of a trilogy) set in and around a pocket empire called the Freeworlds Union that is engaged in hostilities with the Rebin Empire.
So dont delay post your stuff to Jo Grant at Pocket Empires, I am sure it will be welcomed and readily accepted.
Commander Drax
SOC-12
Hi Stype, when you've completed your adventure how about posting it at pocketempires.com
http://www.pocketempires.com/
I've got lots of stuff there already supporting T20 campaign material in MO and I know for a fact that Jo who manages the site wants more materials from other authors as he is planning to do monthly updates.
Aside from that, All of your other ideas seem reasonable and are explanations that I have also adopted for my own M0 campaigns etc.
I had the same problem when writing up my Rebin Empire Campaign as the world of Rebin in Massilia sector circa 1100+ was named Ande in M0, so in the world description I included a note saying that there was a popularist movement gaining momentum to change the world's name to Rebin in honour of the original colony ship that brought settlers to that world.
Coming soon at pocket empires is a full scale T20 epic adventure called 'Breaker's rock' (part one of a trilogy) set in and around a pocket empire called the Freeworlds Union that is engaged in hostilities with the Rebin Empire.
So dont delay post your stuff to Jo Grant at Pocket Empires, I am sure it will be welcomed and readily accepted.
http://www.pocketempires.com/
I've got lots of stuff there already supporting T20 campaign material in MO and I know for a fact that Jo who manages the site wants more materials from other authors as he is planning to do monthly updates.
Aside from that, All of your other ideas seem reasonable and are explanations that I have also adopted for my own M0 campaigns etc.
I had the same problem when writing up my Rebin Empire Campaign as the world of Rebin in Massilia sector circa 1100+ was named Ande in M0, so in the world description I included a note saying that there was a popularist movement gaining momentum to change the world's name to Rebin in honour of the original colony ship that brought settlers to that world.
Coming soon at pocket empires is a full scale T20 epic adventure called 'Breaker's rock' (part one of a trilogy) set in and around a pocket empire called the Freeworlds Union that is engaged in hostilities with the Rebin Empire.
So dont delay post your stuff to Jo Grant at Pocket Empires, I am sure it will be welcomed and readily accepted.
Thanks for the invite, Commander Drax. The adventure is just a concept at the moment, but I will consider posting it to pocketempires.com if and when it is finished.
I was giving some more thought to my explanation of the low Pop on Sylea. Rather than a die-back, perhaps it makes more sense to say that Sylea always had a low population, because the planet was originally reserved for the estates of Ziru Sirka nobles. This would help explain the late move of the ROM capital to Sylea, and would mean that the core of the Sylean aristocracy could trace its lineage back to the ROM and the First Imperium. When the Long Night fell, the nobles who relocated to their estates on Sylea may have been able to retain a remnant of their power and influence. If the aristocracy jealously guarded its remaining resources and authority, this could explain why Sylea never completely lost the capability for instellar travel.
The nobles' proud history of Imperial rule would have been a living link to the past. They could have preserved this link throughout the period of decline, eventually forming and initiating the slow expansion of the Sylean Federation. When Cleon announced his plans for a restored Imperium, he would have found sympathetic ears among the nobles, as their heritage would have pre-disposed them to favor such a course of action.
Perhaps, Sylea had a low population throughout the collapse of the ROM and the rise of the Federation. If it had originally been home to the estates of First Imperium/ROM nobles, then the surviving resident lords could have retained their claims until the birth of the 3I and beyond. This would have been feasible, since Sylea never lost Jump capability. The aristocracy could have continued to import the goods required to support a wealthy upper-class--although probably not in the style to which their predecessors had been accustomed.
I was giving some more thought to my explanation of the low Pop on Sylea. Rather than a die-back, perhaps it makes more sense to say that Sylea always had a low population, because the planet was originally reserved for the estates of Ziru Sirka nobles. This would help explain the late move of the ROM capital to Sylea, and would mean that the core of the Sylean aristocracy could trace its lineage back to the ROM and the First Imperium. When the Long Night fell, the nobles who relocated to their estates on Sylea may have been able to retain a remnant of their power and influence. If the aristocracy jealously guarded its remaining resources and authority, this could explain why Sylea never completely lost the capability for instellar travel.
The nobles' proud history of Imperial rule would have been a living link to the past. They could have preserved this link throughout the period of decline, eventually forming and initiating the slow expansion of the Sylean Federation. When Cleon announced his plans for a restored Imperium, he would have found sympathetic ears among the nobles, as their heritage would have pre-disposed them to favor such a course of action.
Perhaps, Sylea had a low population throughout the collapse of the ROM and the rise of the Federation. If it had originally been home to the estates of First Imperium/ROM nobles, then the surviving resident lords could have retained their claims until the birth of the 3I and beyond. This would have been feasible, since Sylea never lost Jump capability. The aristocracy could have continued to import the goods required to support a wealthy upper-class--although probably not in the style to which their predecessors had been accustomed.
Thanks for the invite, Commander Drax. The adventure is just a concept at the moment, but I will consider posting it to pocketempires.com if and when it is finished.
I was giving some more thought to my explanation of the low Pop on Sylea. Rather than a die-back, perhaps it makes more sense to say that Sylea always had a low population, because the planet was originally reserved for the estates of Ziru Sirka nobles. This would help explain the late move of the ROM capital to Sylea, and would mean that the core of the Sylean aristocracy could trace its lineage back to the ROM and the First Imperium. When the Long Night fell, the nobles who relocated to their estates on Sylea may have been able to retain a remnant of their power and influence. If the aristocracy jealously guarded its remaining resources and authority, this could explain why Sylea never completely lost the capability for instellar travel.
The nobles' proud history of Imperial rule would have been a living link to the past. They could have preserved this link throughout the period of decline, eventually forming and initiating the slow expansion of the Sylean Federation. When Cleon announced his plans for a restored Imperium, he would have found sympathetic ears among the nobles, as their heritage would have pre-disposed them to favor such a course of action.
Perhaps, Sylea had a low population throughout the collapse of the ROM and the rise of the Federation. If it had originally been home to the estates of First Imperium/ROM nobles, then the surviving resident lords could have retained their claims until the birth of the 3I and beyond. This would have been feasible, since Sylea never lost Jump capability. The aristocracy could have continued to import the goods required to support a wealthy upper-class--although probably not in the style to which their predecessors had been accustomed.
I was giving some more thought to my explanation of the low Pop on Sylea. Rather than a die-back, perhaps it makes more sense to say that Sylea always had a low population, because the planet was originally reserved for the estates of Ziru Sirka nobles. This would help explain the late move of the ROM capital to Sylea, and would mean that the core of the Sylean aristocracy could trace its lineage back to the ROM and the First Imperium. When the Long Night fell, the nobles who relocated to their estates on Sylea may have been able to retain a remnant of their power and influence. If the aristocracy jealously guarded its remaining resources and authority, this could explain why Sylea never completely lost the capability for instellar travel.
The nobles' proud history of Imperial rule would have been a living link to the past. They could have preserved this link throughout the period of decline, eventually forming and initiating the slow expansion of the Sylean Federation. When Cleon announced his plans for a restored Imperium, he would have found sympathetic ears among the nobles, as their heritage would have pre-disposed them to favor such a course of action.
Perhaps, Sylea had a low population throughout the collapse of the ROM and the rise of the Federation. If it had originally been home to the estates of First Imperium/ROM nobles, then the surviving resident lords could have retained their claims until the birth of the 3I and beyond. This would have been feasible, since Sylea never lost Jump capability. The aristocracy could have continued to import the goods required to support a wealthy upper-class--although probably not in the style to which their predecessors had been accustomed.
