Game system you play (TNE)

[G K Zhukov]

I am quite astonished to see the amount of response TNE gets in the CotI boards, especially when compared with the critics GDW received when that 3rd edition of Traveller came out in the 90's - so I guess we are quite a group after all. :-D

The question that most intrigues me is - okay, you like TNE, but... do you use GDW House rules to play it?

If the answer is "no" then what's your choice?

And how about Striker II, Brilliant Lances, Battle Rider and of course FF&S1? Are they dear to your hearts?

IMHO, GURPS make a fine ruleset, but it's not metric (a real minus for me, pity poor European) and it lacks wargaming support (something GDW supplied us with abundantly).

As per T20 - well, I am rather allergic to levels and classes, and generally like a more detailed approach to personal combat.

I have looked into Greg Porter's CORPS (and even TimeLords - would you believe it?), but they do sound like a LOT of work to convert.

The LBB's are alas dated, though they are still the mainstay in the Traveller Canon.

...and GDW House Rules? I would love to like them, but dunno...

Thanks very much for your thoughts.

PS - I already asked that question in the IMTU forum, but I wanted to ask it again especifically for TNE.

 

[Malenfant]

Doesn't answer your quetsion, but one of the reasons for the response to TNE here is the upcoming TNE:1248 that QLI is producing (no idea when it'll be released... later this year hopefully?). And Dave Nilsen recently showed up to answer a lot of long-standing questions (which was very nice of him).

Keep in mind that a lot of the critics in the early 90s were loud - that doesn't necessarily mean they were numerous. TNE certainly attracted ME to Traveller and made the setting interesting.

 

[mike wightman]

I like everything about TNE except for the GDW d20 house system, specifically the amount of damage the PCs can take.
The former is easily dealt with, since you can just plug any version of Traveller rules into the setting (or even a heavily modified house ruled system based off BRP/Twilight 2000 ), while the latter can be dealt with by modifying the number of hits per location.

 

[Zparkz]

I like the TNE rulesystem as it uniform and internally consistent. That PCs can take a lot of damage is fixed by rolling D10 instead of D6. And I like that PCs can take a bit more punishment than the average joe.

 

[jalberti]

For the times I played TNE, we continue to use the MT rules and use the TNE background material.

 

[G K Zhukov]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
I like everything about TNE except for the GDW d20 house system, specifically the amount of damage the PCs can take.

Well, you can also divide by two the number of hits per location a PC can take.

 

[Fang the Kat]

Ive Been running TNE and T2Kv2.2 for some time now and borrowing many different ideas from others have ben putting together a set of House rules for combat and t2k char creation.

the basics too it are you average your str and con to get life level ( LL ).

Base hits are
Head LL x 0.5
Chest LL x 1.5
Other Locations LL x 1.0

Wound levels for that location are
Scratch= base x 1
Slight = base x 2
Serious= base x 3
Critical=base x 4

Now these are the max damge in locations so if you take over 4x the base damage in any location it is considered destroyed.

you use all the regular rules for actions and listed damages. this makes it a bit more lethal.
but so far it seems to work.

Most of my other house rules deal with character creation and recovery of wounds.

 

[Fang the Kat]

Oh yeh one other important addition to this is for every level of success that you get other then the one you need you add 1d6 to the damage.

example if you need and average task to hit some 0ne and make a difficult you get 1d6 added to damage. if you make a fromidible you get 2d6 added, etc.

Also there is an opptional targetting to use, i cant remeber where i got it from as my comp crashed with the original records and links. so if you recognize it as yours then say so, im not claiming originality and will give credit were credit is due.

Its called accurate shot, adds one level of dificulty to your to hit but uses center of mass target table.

1 head
2 chest
3 chest
4 chest
5 abdomen
6 abdomen

also for every level of success beyond what you need too hit as in above discription, except that 2d6 are added instead of 1d6.

 

[ChaserCaffey]

Originally posted by G K Zhukov:

The question that most intrigues me is - okay, you like TNE, but... do you use GDW House rules to play it?

If the answer is "no" then what's your choice?

And how about Striker II, Brilliant Lances, Battle Rider and of course FF&S1? Are they dear to your hearts?

When I've played TNE, I've used the GDW house rules system. It's a bit cumbersome, but I've found it to be workable once you have a bit of experience. Really, the deciding factor is that I'm a giant gearhead, and like being able to use my FF&S1 designs in the games I play.

FF&S1 is indeed near and dear to my heart, and I'm actually very impressed with Brilliant Lances. It's one of the best tabletop space combat games I've ever seen, and a pretty decent implementation of vector movement.

Edit: Welcome aboard, Fang. Nice to see another TNE player.

 

[aramis]

I hate the Setting. Flying purple passion.
I don't mind the rules, except for damage to people; I just happen to like MT far better. TNE applied towards my gearheadism at the time... but I have NEVER, EVER liked the setting.

It was cool to have all the T2K crossover.

I crib the contacts out to my MT house rules.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by G K Zhukov:
The question that most intrigues me is - okay, you like TNE, but... do you use GDW House rules to play it?

And how about Striker II, Brilliant Lances, Battle Rider and of course FF&S1? Are they dear to your hearts?

As per T20 - well, I am rather allergic to levels and classes, and generally like a more detailed approach to personal combat.

I have looked into Greg Porter's CORPS (and even TimeLords - would you believe it?), but they do sound like a LOT of work to convert.

I liked TW2K 2.0 so wouldn’t mind the house rules. I’m meh on the setting but wouldn’t be adverse to a playing a game of it with a good GM.

I’m not a fan at all of Chadwick’s later GDW wargame rules though I understand he’s using some newer techniques in his latest works. More power to him there, esp. since he seems to have tried out Piquet and that’s a good thing in my book. As for FF&S1 it’s well done and a good read but IMO needed something like what T4 had in mind. The big book of gearheadedness, derived quick and simple sequences in the main book, and specific simpler sequences in other books if needed.

Not quite sure what you mean about detailed but T20 mods base d20 combat quite a bit. YMMV as always.

Have you looked into EABA? It’s IMO better than Corps. Offhand DP9’s Silhouette would work pretty good and of course…BESM (2d6 rollunder though the dice and number of can be tweaked, skills map pretty much 1:1 to CT etc., and combat can get crunchy with bits from Tri-Stat dX and HKAT). ^_^

As for CotI being “TNE-friendly” many of the people who do work for QLI are TNE heretics and QLI has TNE: 1248 in the works and some TNE fiction so that’s not too surprising.

 

[Fang the Kat]

i like the TNE t2k system of coarse im a bit of a gearhead , just tweeked it to my liking, its been thru many diff changes but over all familiarity is the best rule. It realy dont matter a whole lot as long as the rules work both ways. I run TNE using the TNE ruleset with house rules. Though i do play in a campaign using D20 for TNE (its a bit of a wierd cross over campaign that all started with this wierd ancients artifact.

 

[aramis]

I can heartily recommend EABA, or CORPS, depending upon nature of gaming you want. CORPS will be gritty, deadly, and leave every firefight making you thing "How wonderful cover is"; EABA is far more cinematic.

I in fact ran Traveller-EABA as part of Playtesting EABA (It followed right on after the end of the T20 playtest) - use the MT target numbers directly, and all tasks convert right over!

 

[macquibban]

For the most part I like the old TNE System as an improvement on Mechanics Brilliant Lancers was for me the Greatest Table top simulation of Space Combat around.

Yes I am a Gearhead I have done Physics and have a good grasp of the basics and Have a reasonable Understanding of Lasers>.....Blah Blah blah
Blowing hot air again

The TNE Science just makes more sense to me

But I hate what they did to my Campaign!!...
Sorry for the rant I must Say Good recovery in 1248 is very interesting place to play
Thanks to Hunter

Mechanics for me are TNE I am looking at move too T5 .
Star Ship Combat and Science will be TNE

Settings 980 Rift Span Reaches and there Descendants in 1248

980 rather straight setting
1248 includes Cyberware and Computer Empathy is an important thing for players

T20 polished product great Backgroud info but cannot get the Old buddys to play " DnD in Space " Grrr

Running and Playing Trav 23 years

 

[mike wightman]

I'd agree with you that Brilliant Lances is the greatest, but it comes at a price of complexity.

I found that using the Battle Rider movement system makes things a bit quicker.

I also agree that the tech paradigm for TNE was well thought out - what annoyed many was that it changed some of the underlying tech of the OTU. T4 then showed how this could be partially reconciled.

TNE definitely had more of the features found in modern sci-fi, and I'm looking forward to the 1248 book too

 

[Ghakis]

My first encounter with the TNE rules was with TW2K 2.0. And I have to say that my reaction to that system was "WOW!" It was lean, consistent and easy to learn. I had 3 friends who had never seen TW2K before up and running with characters and combat in 30 minutes, and they loved the system. When TNE came along using the same basic system I was all over it like Oprah on a baked ham (to quote Bart Simpson).

I've tried running the TNE setting, but I have to say that as someone who started with Classic Traveller, the CT setting will always be my favorite no matter what any subsequent versions come up with. MT and TNE created universes where big things were happening and characters were expected to be part of it. CT was completely open - you could be involved with big things or just get involved with local affairs - whatever the group wanted to do.

This is why my latest resurrection is TNE rules with CT setting. I'll have to do a little re-jigging to mesh some stuff, but I think my players will find the rules easy to live with and I'll be happy with a campaign universe that I'm more familiar/comfortable with.