Difference between MT and CT?
- Thread starter Jame
- Start date
Differences in the setting or differences in the game-system?
The primary difference in the setting is the Rebellion. The Rebellion was deliberately structured so that every one of the 35 sectors from Atlas of the Imperium is embroiled in some kind of chaos/warfare. Other than that the setting is the same as the CT OTU (except that the canonical IN fleet structure was changed to make it more centralized).
As for difference in rules, the primary difference is that the Universal Task Profile (originally developed by Digest Group Publications in The Travellers' Digest) was used for (almost) all of the die rolls in the rules -- where CT would have "roll 8+ on 2D for success, adding +1 DM per point of Recon skill" MT would say "Routine, Recon, Int (unskilled OK)." The roll itself is pretty much the same (tasks are rolled on 2D, success for Routine is 7+), only the format is different (CT is ad hoc, MT is standardized and consistent). Other than that, MT combined all of CT's optional/advanced systems into the core rules and occasionally tweaked/changed bits to try and make everything compatabile. Sometimes this worked wonderfully(char-gen), sometimes not so well (combat, craft design). In general, if you use CT + Books 4-7 + AHL/Striker + the DGP task system you're pretty much already playing MT.
The primary difference in the setting is the Rebellion. The Rebellion was deliberately structured so that every one of the 35 sectors from Atlas of the Imperium is embroiled in some kind of chaos/warfare. Other than that the setting is the same as the CT OTU (except that the canonical IN fleet structure was changed to make it more centralized).
As for difference in rules, the primary difference is that the Universal Task Profile (originally developed by Digest Group Publications in The Travellers' Digest) was used for (almost) all of the die rolls in the rules -- where CT would have "roll 8+ on 2D for success, adding +1 DM per point of Recon skill" MT would say "Routine, Recon, Int (unskilled OK)." The roll itself is pretty much the same (tasks are rolled on 2D, success for Routine is 7+), only the format is different (CT is ad hoc, MT is standardized and consistent). Other than that, MT combined all of CT's optional/advanced systems into the core rules and occasionally tweaked/changed bits to try and make everything compatabile. Sometimes this worked wonderfully(char-gen), sometimes not so well (combat, craft design). In general, if you use CT + Books 4-7 + AHL/Striker + the DGP task system you're pretty much already playing MT.
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Evening James,
Here is one site that can get you started with links to most of the versions of Traveller:
Open Directory
Hope this helps.
Here is one site that can get you started with links to most of the versions of Traveller:
Open Directory
Hope this helps.
CT was the precursor to MT. Therefore, MT represented the distilation and collacing of the best of the CT era. However, not all ideas from all the licences (notably, Judges Guild) were incorporated into MT.
For instance, you could have Space Cities and real quirky aliens in CT whereas MT tried more for realism (withing the parameters of unreality of the game). Sadly, also the genie of the Rebellion did put a damper on some of the wonder that was present in CT where the emphasis was more geared toward exploration. With the emphasis on fighting, it was sort of lost, the idea of exploring new worlds, but, the founders of MT tried to get back to it in the MT Journal...
CT was also always work-in-progress, an art form that was constantly been added to by numerous contributors without a clear vision of what next. Although, presumbably John Hershman(?) kept on top of all articles making sure that they conformed to some sort of GDW vision. But, what we saw as consumers was only a partial vision as it was expected that we would make our own universes, with the Imperial Campaign providing a tether that would anchor general discussion.
There were naturally very many bad copies of movies (Laurence of Arabia in Space or Aliens) during the CT era, whereas, MT was meant as evolution of the players to a higher moral plane (however, ambigous the Rebellion was, it was about making moral choices in immoral times) thus producing a kind of alignment between the consumers and the creators.
CT did not create contraversies as much as it created inconsistancies. Whereas, MT is rife with potential rifts that would drive an inquisator mad with sin.
If you really want to learn about the CT storyline you can pick up GT, as it largely CT put into a GURPS format. Naturally, if you wanted to see how things were evolving toward MT, the the offerings from FFE are your best bet.
Hope this helps, if you have any specific queries I am sure that any of the gaming historians here with at least 3 different answers.
For instance, you could have Space Cities and real quirky aliens in CT whereas MT tried more for realism (withing the parameters of unreality of the game). Sadly, also the genie of the Rebellion did put a damper on some of the wonder that was present in CT where the emphasis was more geared toward exploration. With the emphasis on fighting, it was sort of lost, the idea of exploring new worlds, but, the founders of MT tried to get back to it in the MT Journal...
CT was also always work-in-progress, an art form that was constantly been added to by numerous contributors without a clear vision of what next. Although, presumbably John Hershman(?) kept on top of all articles making sure that they conformed to some sort of GDW vision. But, what we saw as consumers was only a partial vision as it was expected that we would make our own universes, with the Imperial Campaign providing a tether that would anchor general discussion.
There were naturally very many bad copies of movies (Laurence of Arabia in Space or Aliens) during the CT era, whereas, MT was meant as evolution of the players to a higher moral plane (however, ambigous the Rebellion was, it was about making moral choices in immoral times) thus producing a kind of alignment between the consumers and the creators.
CT did not create contraversies as much as it created inconsistancies. Whereas, MT is rife with potential rifts that would drive an inquisator mad with sin.
If you really want to learn about the CT storyline you can pick up GT, as it largely CT put into a GURPS format. Naturally, if you wanted to see how things were evolving toward MT, the the offerings from FFE are your best bet.
Hope this helps, if you have any specific queries I am sure that any of the gaming historians here with at least 3 different answers.
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Sorry Jame, just a bad habit which has been reinforced by the people who have the name James. Also, you are welcome for the link, my reason for sharing that link is that it appears to be among the best at consolidating the many Traveller related sites.
S
Sophiathegreen
Guest
Also the first 3 book have only laser pistol and rifle as energry weapon instead of fussion gun and graus gun. The main weapon was basely the weapon we have in the 1960's and 1970's. Even today the weapon of most cop's are pistol (mostly revoler) over mortar
and other hight power weapon. Than .38 cal special bullet is more than enought to kill most people.
and other hight power weapon. Than .38 cal special bullet is more than enought to kill most people.
Mechanically, MT is evolved striker, with more skills per term in basic generation (to better equal the advanced characters). The HG combat system was included, too. Anything not covered by striker/ahl was grabbed from CT. (I love it, myself, because everything is on similar scales of damage, except starship combat, which can be approximated from extant tables).
Don't worry, Tom (mind if I call you Tom?), since my real name is only in the "Who Are We" post.
Now, I thought that CT Book 4 had Gauss weapons and Plasma weapons. Maybe that was around the time that MT began coming out?
One more question. Were Striker and AHL part of CT, or were they separate and adapted to CT and then MT?
Now, I thought that CT Book 4 had Gauss weapons and Plasma weapons. Maybe that was around the time that MT began coming out?
One more question. Were Striker and AHL part of CT, or were they separate and adapted to CT and then MT?
Book 4 (1978) did introduce gauss and plasma weapons to CT. I think Sophiathegreen's point was that it wasn't until MT (1987) that such weapons were included in the core rulebook.
Striker and AHL were both 'Traveller-compatible' games that ignored/simplified parts of the Traveller system that weren't necessary for a board/miniatures game (i.e. units in AHL & Striker don't have UPPs or skills), though both games gave suggestions for combining them with Traveller (and a couple of JTAS articles gave even more). Old rumors from c. 1986 (in The Imperium Staple and The Travellers' Digest) had GDW planning to release a new combat system for Traveller based on AHL & Striker (Book 9?). That idea was evidently scrapped when they instead decided to upgrade the entire system (which became MT).
Marc Miller wrote most of the original CT rules that were compiled to form MT (which is why he is credited as sole author on the covers). Frank Chadwick, Loren Wiseman, John Harshman, Timothy Brown and the brothers Keith also contributed material to CT that found its way into MT. Very little of the text of MT was actually new material -- even most of the flavor text, examples, and introductions were word-for-word cut&pastes from existing CT books.
In statements at the time (from Challenge and The Travellers' Digest) Marc Miller is said to have been a big fan of the DGP task system and to have had lots of brainstorming discussions about it with the DGP crew. I believe MWM is credited with creating the "Hasty" and "Cautious" mechanics and the Uncertain tasks procedure. Note that MWM also adapted an earlier incarnation of the DGP task system into Traveller:2300 in 1986, a year before MT, and it was purportedly Marc Miller's idea to do a complete revision of the CT system integrating the task system into all the key mechanics.
Per Loren Wiseman (on either the TML or JTAS, I don't have the exact reference handy) the Rebellion situation was created and the broad strokes outlined by Marc Miller, Frank Chadwick and Timothy Brown. The exact details were then filled in largely by DGP and the HIWG. Loren himself was heading the Twilight:2000 line at the time and apparently had very little involvement with MT (though I think he may take credit for having come up with "the Real Strephon").
Although DGP did the compilation and editing of MT, it was actually produced by GDW (layout and typesetting are credited to GDW's in-house team -- and look much more professional than DGP's efforts of the time (i.e. Grand Census, 101 Robots)). Marc Miller chose DGP for the job and gave them his full and complete trust and the finished project received his blessing (and wouldn't have been published if it hadn't). He doesn't seem to have had much hands-on involvement in the actual development, but that was apparently by his own deliberate choice.
In the TNE era Dave Nilsen (and possibly Frank Chadwick and/or Loren Wiseman) bemoaned allowing DGP too much influence over MT and wished they'd kept more in-house control but AFAIK Marc Miller has never made any similar statements (at least publicly), and, in fact, at the Traveller seminar at GenCon in 1990 (the height of MT) proudly proclaimed that Traveller was "safe" in DGP's hands (by way of explanation for why GDW was providing so little support for MT and devoting most of their resources to the likes of Space:1889 and Cadillacs & Dinosaurs).
If anyone (especially any of the "Ancients") wants to dispute or correct any of this, please do. I'm not and have never been an insider and claim no more authority or knowledge in this manner than any other longtime fan (and amateur Kremlin-watcher
).
In statements at the time (from Challenge and The Travellers' Digest) Marc Miller is said to have been a big fan of the DGP task system and to have had lots of brainstorming discussions about it with the DGP crew. I believe MWM is credited with creating the "Hasty" and "Cautious" mechanics and the Uncertain tasks procedure. Note that MWM also adapted an earlier incarnation of the DGP task system into Traveller:2300 in 1986, a year before MT, and it was purportedly Marc Miller's idea to do a complete revision of the CT system integrating the task system into all the key mechanics.
Per Loren Wiseman (on either the TML or JTAS, I don't have the exact reference handy) the Rebellion situation was created and the broad strokes outlined by Marc Miller, Frank Chadwick and Timothy Brown. The exact details were then filled in largely by DGP and the HIWG. Loren himself was heading the Twilight:2000 line at the time and apparently had very little involvement with MT (though I think he may take credit for having come up with "the Real Strephon").
Although DGP did the compilation and editing of MT, it was actually produced by GDW (layout and typesetting are credited to GDW's in-house team -- and look much more professional than DGP's efforts of the time (i.e. Grand Census, 101 Robots)). Marc Miller chose DGP for the job and gave them his full and complete trust and the finished project received his blessing (and wouldn't have been published if it hadn't). He doesn't seem to have had much hands-on involvement in the actual development, but that was apparently by his own deliberate choice.
In the TNE era Dave Nilsen (and possibly Frank Chadwick and/or Loren Wiseman) bemoaned allowing DGP too much influence over MT and wished they'd kept more in-house control but AFAIK Marc Miller has never made any similar statements (at least publicly), and, in fact, at the Traveller seminar at GenCon in 1990 (the height of MT) proudly proclaimed that Traveller was "safe" in DGP's hands (by way of explanation for why GDW was providing so little support for MT and devoting most of their resources to the likes of Space:1889 and Cadillacs & Dinosaurs).
If anyone (especially any of the "Ancients") wants to dispute or correct any of this, please do. I'm not and have never been an insider and claim no more authority or knowledge in this manner than any other longtime fan (and amateur Kremlin-watcher
William's post on this subject has solved a lot of the problems. I have to say that as a Traveller player since 1980 I am in the camp that thinks that DGP had the right idea and Frank Chadwick, Dave and Co. were in the wrong. Its just a shame that DGP weren't big enough to take the Rebellion further and to make a place individual groups could adventure in.
I have slagged Dave off too much (to be honest I wish I hadn't) in the past and I still don't agree with his vision, but he was an able writer and knew how to develop a story. He was perhaps still too much of a wargamer to fully understand that Traveller was no longer a war game and developed a world that no longer 1979 + irony rather than 1995 roleplaying. I think MWM, Hunter, MJD and LW and the staff at SJG have, in their own way, all understood that Traveller has become something more than the thinking-wo/man's D&D in space.
Rant over.....(for now)
I have slagged Dave off too much (to be honest I wish I hadn't) in the past and I still don't agree with his vision, but he was an able writer and knew how to develop a story. He was perhaps still too much of a wargamer to fully understand that Traveller was no longer a war game and developed a world that no longer 1979 + irony rather than 1995 roleplaying. I think MWM, Hunter, MJD and LW and the staff at SJG have, in their own way, all understood that Traveller has become something more than the thinking-wo/man's D&D in space.
Rant over.....(for now)
I would have to give a qualified agreement to Elliot. What I think happened to MT was that there was a vision to do something really different in Traveller. One has to remember this was a time when the new was fashionable and old CT was starting to look rather old. The problem was what constituted the new. Most agreed that a consolidation of Traveller was in order, especially, when you look at Traveller it was a mix and match system with all sorts of adjustments left right and centre. (but the beautiful thing was that it worked... and rather well, too)
The Rebellion was an attempt at consolidation under Challenge but it was also an attempt to build upon all the success that had gone before by building a unified storyline that we could all follow. Also, the quality of the ventures of DGP, Seeker and FASA were simply phenomenal. So GDW probably thought how do I get excitement back into Traveller. Thinking of Rome, maybe, lets kill Caesar and play it like the Generals rise up like before Caesar's rise (ie Civil War). As I indicated in an earlier post, the Rebellion was also to clear up some moral quandries. [Remember, 1987 RPGs were still very much viewed as evil. Much as Neopets are by some of my colleagues back in Toronto...]
With the arrival DGP really starting taking over the Traveller marketplace. And, indeed, sadly the parent company had a great repore with their child but like the fate of Saturn and his children... Plus, GDW had two other and soon four other RPGs to feed, as each was bringing GDW to new heights.
Then probably came the idea to consolidate everything under one umbrella. As I remember when the house rules unification discussions were coming out. It was thought that TNE was going to be the new GURPS and especially Dark Conspiracy emphasis on other Dimensions including other Times...made Dangerous Journeys and Twilight seem very compactible. But that left out Traveller and the rosy future, as might have guessed the Imperium would eventually heal back together or at least exist in fractured domains. So came the idea to get rid of the Imperial Campaign and create something all together different. TNE was the result and in the process they lost DGP...
Now, I think even those hardcore CT fans found something really slick and nice in DGP, even if it was just the artwork. It seemed like that DGP really loved the game and it showed. But, because of whatever philosophical difference in direction the two parted. So that created a huge burden to create something really exciting for Traveller in the New Era stage. Sadly, GDW did not manage to pull it off because with each successive change they lost more of their fan base added to fact that the recession and aging of Traveller players. It could not put it all back together again.
But, also we saw the rise of a new form of Science Fiction...darker and more mysterious (here I refer not only to the cyberpunk genre) but a sort of collapsing phenomena where the frontiers of the imagination seem to have been limited. And, Traveller built upon the 1950s Science Fiction model seemed just too old fashioned. So GDW collapsed because of the shift in interests and lost fan base. It would be interesting to look at the sale of Challenge magazines and also the rating of Traveller articles to see how much support was actually there. GDW also had stopped giving away prizes, so even as the new TNE system was there, I thik, if I can extrapolate from myself felt the company wasn't listening and were producing crap. (Not true but the early releases of TNE and Challenge articles signalled a kinda clean break with the past.)
Then we had to live through T4 and GT both also very different version of Traveller and each having strengths and merits but also drawbacks and sacrifices from what people hoped (maybe) what constituted Holy Canon. But, in the end it is only a game.
But, fans and designers can create a truly beautiful thing, if they choose to. This is why I really like T20, it a building process that we are all learning together and we are trying to create the new through collabouration.
The Rebellion was an attempt at consolidation under Challenge but it was also an attempt to build upon all the success that had gone before by building a unified storyline that we could all follow. Also, the quality of the ventures of DGP, Seeker and FASA were simply phenomenal. So GDW probably thought how do I get excitement back into Traveller. Thinking of Rome, maybe, lets kill Caesar and play it like the Generals rise up like before Caesar's rise (ie Civil War). As I indicated in an earlier post, the Rebellion was also to clear up some moral quandries. [Remember, 1987 RPGs were still very much viewed as evil. Much as Neopets are by some of my colleagues back in Toronto...]
With the arrival DGP really starting taking over the Traveller marketplace. And, indeed, sadly the parent company had a great repore with their child but like the fate of Saturn and his children... Plus, GDW had two other and soon four other RPGs to feed, as each was bringing GDW to new heights.
Then probably came the idea to consolidate everything under one umbrella. As I remember when the house rules unification discussions were coming out. It was thought that TNE was going to be the new GURPS and especially Dark Conspiracy emphasis on other Dimensions including other Times...made Dangerous Journeys and Twilight seem very compactible. But that left out Traveller and the rosy future, as might have guessed the Imperium would eventually heal back together or at least exist in fractured domains. So came the idea to get rid of the Imperial Campaign and create something all together different. TNE was the result and in the process they lost DGP...
Now, I think even those hardcore CT fans found something really slick and nice in DGP, even if it was just the artwork. It seemed like that DGP really loved the game and it showed. But, because of whatever philosophical difference in direction the two parted. So that created a huge burden to create something really exciting for Traveller in the New Era stage. Sadly, GDW did not manage to pull it off because with each successive change they lost more of their fan base added to fact that the recession and aging of Traveller players. It could not put it all back together again.
But, also we saw the rise of a new form of Science Fiction...darker and more mysterious (here I refer not only to the cyberpunk genre) but a sort of collapsing phenomena where the frontiers of the imagination seem to have been limited. And, Traveller built upon the 1950s Science Fiction model seemed just too old fashioned. So GDW collapsed because of the shift in interests and lost fan base. It would be interesting to look at the sale of Challenge magazines and also the rating of Traveller articles to see how much support was actually there. GDW also had stopped giving away prizes, so even as the new TNE system was there, I thik, if I can extrapolate from myself felt the company wasn't listening and were producing crap. (Not true but the early releases of TNE and Challenge articles signalled a kinda clean break with the past.)
Then we had to live through T4 and GT both also very different version of Traveller and each having strengths and merits but also drawbacks and sacrifices from what people hoped (maybe) what constituted Holy Canon. But, in the end it is only a game.
But, fans and designers can create a truly beautiful thing, if they choose to. This is why I really like T20, it a building process that we are all learning together and we are trying to create the new through collabouration.
Striker and AHL were wargames set in the traveller universe, and NOT based upon CT statistics. (They did have interfaces for adaptation for use with CT.) The Pen values and design tables from MT are almost all Striker derived.
Invasion Earth was another wargame (this time different scale) that also was integrated in part into MT. (In fact, the Traveller integration materials are waht was adapted... it makes a GREAT "Major Planetary Invasion" mechanic for MT.
Mayday, Snapshot: both these games were pure CT mechanics adapted to boardgaming; they seem to have been ignored by the DGP guys.
Invasion Earth was another wargame (this time different scale) that also was integrated in part into MT. (In fact, the Traveller integration materials are waht was adapted... it makes a GREAT "Major Planetary Invasion" mechanic for MT.
Mayday, Snapshot: both these games were pure CT mechanics adapted to boardgaming; they seem to have been ignored by the DGP guys.
