Kicking it off ... with a question!

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Sol Pniering:


<snip>

Also awaiting answer is the confirmation of a rumoured release of "Traveller Heroes: Fighter Jocks" that is alluded over the Internet from dealer sources always with the caption "Out-of-Print". ?

According to SJG : June 10, 2003: Delayed Products: A Status Report...

6881 GURPS Traveller: Heroes 2 - Fighter Jocks
The first "Traveller Heroes" character book, to our disappointment, didn't sell well, so we canceled the series.

 

[Whipsnade]

Sol Pniering wrote:

"SJG is reprinting "Far Trader" and "Star Mercs" by popular demand. An outstanding query is whether these will incorporate existing errata or be plain and simple reprints."


Mr. Pniering,

Errata would be helpful, especially for GT:SM and the oft-whined-about 'mecha' battledress. (I actually like the idea of a huge, clunky, easily targetted, low-tech battledress myself!)

GT:SM does have a very, very, VERY nice mass combat system.

"No reply yet. Also awaiting answer is the confirmation of a rumoured release of "Traveller Heroes: Fighter Jocks" that is alluded over the Internet from dealer sources always with the caption "Out-of-Print".?"

The party line at JTAS regards 'Fighter Jocks' as a non-starter. It's predecessor; 'Bounty Hunters', tanked and the GT line seems to be taking a different development path; i.e. the 'Traveller Guide' formula of which GT:Sword Worlds will be the first release.


Sincerely,
Larsen

 

[TJP]

Malenfant, I stand corrected. I dunno, maybe it *seemed* like that to me because I never really cared for the Humaniti book and didn't even remember it had been released, and it took a long time for Starships to get published (IIRC, it was scheduled to be released a year or two ago). It *seemed* to me that for a year nothing happened in GT. My apologies, didn't mean to sound negative. As I said, it *seemed* like that, I'm glad it isn't so. Peace.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by TJP:
My apologies, didn't mean to sound negative. As I said, it *seemed* like that, I'm glad it isn't so. Peace.

No worries.

Either way, it seems that GT is certainly alive and well and doing fine now. It did have a dry patch before Humaniti came out though, but good new stuff is going out of the warehouse door again.

Now, if only QLI could get some hardcopy setting books out too...

 

[Elliot]

No, QLI should bring out too many adventures - too many setting books spoil the broth!!

CT developed the Imperium by way of adventures - it left enough for player manouevre.

GT with its obsessively scientific style and setting books on everything you developed yourself (generally better for gaming than GT and its ultra coherent logical mathematical style!!) just does leaves me cold. I think QLI should follow the original Marc Miller route of developing the setting through adventures (and setting books that left more, rather than less to be done) rather than endless detailed boring setting books.

One mans opinion is another persons move to another game.

 

[kaladorn]

Where do you figure they didn't detail the setting?

There was (by the end) a lot of detail about the spinward marches, plus alien modules for various humans: darrians, sword worlders (well, not a whole module, just a write up), zhodani, solomai, vilani, and you can add on write ups for hivers, vargr, aslan, and kkree, as well as ithklur. They weren't exactly detail lacking.

And if you don't like GT, you don't play it. Similarly, if you don't like QLIs domain books, then don't buy them. But people want them - and unlike the person who doesn't want it so doesn't buy it, if they weren't in existence, these people could not be satisfied. By making them, they satisfy the people who want them, and the people who won't buy them are still satisfied as they weren't going to be using them in any case.

QLI should continue to do exactly whatever it takes to get new players into the game and to keep its meagre revenue stream going. And everyone should consider supporting that, just to keep the game alive.

I don't play GT, but I buy GT books as 'reference material' and crib the good stuff.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Elliot:
CT developed the Imperium by way of adventures - it left enough for player manouevre.

That methodology is exactly why Traveller canon is in the mess it's in today. Since the setting was developed piecemeal via adventures, you have some (usually later adventures) disagreeing with others. I've heard that some of the CT adventures just plain can't work with canon as it was developed later on. And another major part of the problem is that many canon nuts refuse to admit that the earlier work is just plain incompatible, and insist that everything else has to fit to that - rather than the IMO more sensible alternative of having the later stuff supersede the earlier stuff.

So no, I'd much rather than Traveller wasn't developed using adventures (or at least, adventures written by different people), thank you very much.

Also, if you don't like the GT 'overwriting' what you've done yourself, then don't use it. Simple, eh? Repeat after me - "Just because it's written in a book, doesn't mean my own work is suddenly irrelevant or useless".

 

[Elliot]

I agree QLI should do what keeps it going financially - I ABSOLUTELY agree with that, QLI in my view is the light that will allow Traveller to carry on (which is why I come here so often) - It just seems to me that too many reference materials to the TI tends to kill the imagination rather than assist it.

I note that QLI is producing excellent (and those who have not seen them, should) EPIC system adventures and has scenarios in the pipeline. I also note that their sourcebooks contain hooks and scenarios that a group of players can sit around and use. I wish the same was true of many (but not all) GURPS products.

I dont consider Traveller canon a mess at all - I consider it a constant creative opportunity. The fact that people debate it is clearly a good thing, hell taxpayers pay people to debate the causes of the English/American Civil War and that is not 'a mess', its just that with complex scenarios (real or gaming) various voices have to be heard.

On the otherhand I consider GURPS Traveller, with its ultra logical scientific bent (i.e. this has become a collectors game that is remembered fondly but no-one plays anymore except as solo play) to be utterly stifling and without a modicum of the original style of CT or MT (strangely, it seems from comments on the TML, I like BTC).

In fact I do ignore GT in my Traveller universe (mainly as I play the GDW/DGP version) - I dont buy the books, but I have read them

However, I say that I have freedom to raise my view of GT (which I variously like or hate depending on who is writing) in a constructive fashion - I dont try to be offensive and please censure me if I am (I will edit my post immediately).

Otherwise, if you dont like what I say ignore me, or respond to me with constructive argument or give me 1 star on the silly voting thing. I would prefer the middle option, but the other two are fine by me (I value your response by the way, as that is how these boards progress the game).

I disagree as to the CT supplement thing. Go out and buy them. The Third Imperium was developed in CT in adventures, JTAS and in 'gaming orientated' supplements: the alien modules were mainly character generation, e.g. AM6:Solomani had 50 pages and only 15 were dedicated to history and background, the SM Campaign was alot of old reprinted stuff with a few new hooks, 50% of the Supplements were pregen characters, random encounters or ship diagrams

The non adventure stuff was not in the 'lets show that we read political and economic history as a major and now want to use it' style sourcebook. CT and to a lesser extent MT was a game written for people who played around a table, that is why is was a phenomenon, not because it was the most technical, realistic game going. FGU did that, they went into obscurately long before GDW.

QLI have produced some worthy adventures that really develop the Gateway 996 era mileau. If only GT had done that with its heretical variant on the canon timeline.

Sorry guys, rant over.

 

[ACK!!]

Originally posted by Elliot:

....
I dont consider Traveller canon a mess at all - I consider it a constant creative opportunity. The fact that people debate it is clearly a good thing, hell taxpayers pay people to debate the causes of the English/American Civil War and that is not 'a mess', its just that with complex scenarios (real or gaming) various voices have to be heard.

...

Speaking that truth Elliot!!

I am so tired of people complaining about mileu related cannon like it is a pain but it is really a boon.

You want to play the traditional frontier setting on the edge of Empire go for CT.

If you want players trapped inside the great epic of a truly huge interstellar war and on the edge of apocalyptic style descruction go for MT.

You want to play that militaristic epic of taking back the stars through the edge of fushion gun main portable then play TNE mileu.

You want to play a campaign about the expanding empire then that is mileu 0.

What is so damn awfull about choice in a campaign setting?

What is so bad about having different eras from the same setting with a half dozen or so different feels to it available?

Its confusing for the newbie? Give me a break. Why do we feel the need to explain the entire history of an Empire that has existed for thousands of years.

When I DM'ed my Greyhawk campaign it was not like the players demanded the entire history of Oerth and certainly not like they all sat around and debated its plausability.

People are missing one of the biggest more important strength of the Traveller system is a huge mileu with a lot of different eras and feels in play style.

That is a bonus not a minus people.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Elliot:
I also note that their sourcebooks contain hooks and scenarios that a group of players can sit around and use. I wish the same was true of many (but not all) GURPS products.

Whether it's "true" or not is entirely a matter of opinion. I think there are plenty of hooks and scenarios in the GURPS books.

I dont consider Traveller canon a mess at all - I consider it a constant creative opportunity.

Ah yes, the old "it doesn't make any sense, but that's good because it means we can spend time thinking of a solution that does!" argument - that's just daft, IMO. If the darn thing's broken, then it's broken - you're claiming that a bug is actually a feature. If the early writers of the game were actually co-ordinating then they'd have made it all consistent and coherent straight off the bat and saved the fans a lot of effort. This isn't computer programming where you can release a half-baked product and then fling patches at customers to fix it. As a system CT may work fine, but as a setting the 3I was full of more holes than swiss cheese.

On the otherhand I consider GURPS Traveller, with its ultra logical scientific bent (i.e. this has become a collectors game that is remembered fondly but no-one plays anymore except as solo play)

Gee, that'll explain why it's selling well enough for new books to be coming out every few months and why old ones are being reprinted, and why they're working on Interstellar Wars then. Because obviously nobody is playing it anymore or buying the books.

And I think you're confusing "ultra-logical scientific bent" with "goes to some some effort to make things internally consistent". Or do you like your settings to lack internal consistency?

(strangely, it seems from comments on the TML, I like BTC).

BtC is generally disliked on account of an errata list that probably holds the world record for sheer length. There isn't a page in the book that doesn't have something that's just plain wrong. But hey, if you like it, more power to you.

However, I say that I have freedom to raise my view of GT (which I variously like or hate depending on who is writing) in a constructive fashion - I dont try to be offensive and please censure me if I am (I will edit my post immediately).

Well, you're factually just plain wrong about some of your statements. You're making sweeping statements about the popularity of GURPS Traveller when you clearly don't have a clue what you're talking about.

I disagree as to the CT supplement thing. Go out and buy them.

I have. Twice. I'm very familiar with them.

QLI have produced some worthy adventures that really develop the Gateway 996 era mileau. If only GT had done that with its heretical variant on the canon timeline.

"heretical" eh? That alone says to me that you need to step back from the game. Right now you're coming across as another one of these frothing pseudoreligious canon nuts that think CT is The One True Way.

The fact is that the GT timeline is exactly what one might expect to happen if the CT timeline was continued without Strephon's Assassination. If you think that's "heretical", then you must think pretty poorly of the basic CT timeline, since the GURPS one is nothing more than a logical extension of the same thing carrying on as before.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by ACK:
What is so damn awfull about choice in a campaign setting?

What is so bad about having different eras from the same setting with a half dozen or so different feels to it available?
[/QB]

That's not what the problem is though, and I'm certainly not complaining about the differences between CT, MT, TNE, and all the other versions of the game.

The problem is that within CT itself, you have early adventures contradicting later ones, or you have statements made that utterly screw up any sense of reasonability and rationality when you scratch below the surface and extend them to their logical conclusions. The long term consequences of some of those early statements about how the 3I works are still plagueing authors today, from worlds and systems that just can't exist in anything resembling reality to the viability of piracy in the setting.

 

[flykiller]

[QB]as a setting the 3I was full of more holes than swiss cheese.

any other substitute setting is likely to be just as full of just as many holes. the subject matter is extensive and frequently unreal to begin with, and coordinating all of it into a logical whole is problematic at best.

 

[Malenfant]

Probably true - but the early Traveller 3I setting seemed less planned out than thrown randomly together. It could do with a good "cleanse and purge" of all the broken bits and a going over to make it more consistent - of course, the canon nuts would have a fit if that were to happen.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Probably true - but the early Traveller 3I setting seemed less planned out than thrown randomly together. It could do with a good "cleanse and purge" of all the broken bits and a going over to make it more consistent - of course, the canon nuts would have a fit if that were to happen.

Danger Danger! You could get burned (i.e. flamed) playing with that kind of idea

As a self-proclaimed small "c" canonnista I wish it would be doable (never mind actually done) but yes even if it were left to such moderates as myself you still have the problem of everybody having their own personal bits they like and dislike. Or you could put only people who had no preconceptions in charge, but they won't end up with anything most Traveller players would recognize and I suspect you'd have something like GURPS Space and Tech

Better to delude ourselves that there exists a "pure and perfect" Canon from high and as mere mortals all we can hope for is the occasional glimpse of "truth" as we endlessly debate. Canon, such as it is, forms a background of sorts for those who want to expand upon it through being published, or those who like (sometimes pointless) debates, even just for the sake of a good argument.

In other words Canon be damned IMTU and IYTU and Worlds for Travellers without end using what we like.

 

[RandyT0001]

On Feb 15th Malenfant wrote:
"The problem is that within CT itself, you have early adventures contradicting later ones, or you have statements made that utterly screw up any sense of reasonability and rationality when you scratch below the surface and extend them to their logical conclusions. The long term consequences of some of those early statements about how the 3I works are still plagueing authors today, from worlds and systems that just can't exist in anything resembling reality to the viability of piracy in the setting."
and
"... but the early Traveller 3I setting seemed less planned out than thrown randomly together. It could do with a good "cleanse and purge" of all the broken bits and a going over to make it more consistent - of course, the canon nuts would have a fit if that were to happen."

CT's inclusion of these inconsistencies are a part of the official 'canon' of Traveller and just the suggestion of fixing them with a 'cleanse and purge' makes you a canon heretic!

[Violent shaking, the canine teeth lengthen, hair sprouts from the deforming face and the mouth begins to foam]

Sir, you have offered heresy, prepare to be flamed !

Just kidding. The 3I was not planned out beforehand. It is a haphazard collection of various individuals' different Traveller universes molded into the Third Imperium based upon the few details and guidelines offered by GDW in the beginning (from what I have been able to ascertain). I agree with you in the hope that one day the 'canon' of Classic Traveller will be streamlined but the only person who could do that would be Marc Miller. He is probably the only person the fans would accept as the authority to re-write CT canon into a consistent form. I doubt that's going to happen because 1) the necessary fan base to sell the 'revised' CT canon is too small and 2) it would be too difficult to do without de-stabilizing later eras of Traveller canon (MT, TNE).

'Canon' is only for Traveller authors to worry about. Write something, submit it to QLI or SJG and if they print the piece then it is acceptable as far as 'canon' goes. Once a referee's game starts, it stops being OTU and begins to become IYTU. It is that way with all RPG's, once a game starts the deviations from any 'official' game setting begins.

[Ramble mode off]

 

[flykiller]

Probably true - but the early Traveller 3I setting seemed less planned out than thrown randomly together. It could do with a good "cleanse and purge" of all the broken bits and a going over to make it more consistent

well, that's what referees are for.

the problem is getting everyone else, or anyone else, to agree on the "cleanse and purge". I myself am in the process of drawing up my own combat system - it makes perfect sense to me, but I doubt anyone else would look twice at it. anyway, have at it, and good luck.

 

[flykiller]

..., or those who like (sometimes pointless) debates, ...

"sometimes"!

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by flykiller:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Probably true - but the early Traveller 3I setting seemed less planned out than thrown randomly together. It could do with a good "cleanse and purge" of all the broken bits and a going over to make it more consistent

well, that's what referees are for. </font>[/QUOTE]No, that's what editors are for. I'm a referee and I'd much rather spend my limited time working on plots and NPCs than on fixing bits of the background that I consider broken.


Hans

 

[ACK!!]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
....

The problem is that within CT itself, you have early adventures contradicting later ones, or you have statements made that utterly screw up any sense of reasonability and rationality when you scratch below the surface and extend them to their logical conclusions. The long term consequences of some of those early statements about how the 3I works are still plagueing authors today, from worlds and systems that just can't exist in anything resembling reality to the viability of piracy in the setting.

As long as the big 3I is part of the canon itself I do not mind a clean and purge of the canon.

Making it more consistent is one thing I would not mind at all. Why? I am going to do it my way anyway so more consistent is cool anyway.

It is the "slash and burn" approach of completely and totally starting over that bothers me.

It is the opposite of my rules dilemma. Half of what makes Traveller is the mileu and settings.

To completely abandon it kind of chunks away half the cool factor of Traveller in my opinion.

The other half is the rules through it various incarnations based on the core of CT.

My favorite is Megatraveller with errata in place is a somewhat complex but completely playable system.

It has the advanced chargen, Universal Task Profile, and lot of things one would expect from a CT-Advanced. Others like T4 with the Task System adjusted. Actually the more I hear about that system the more I end up being interested in it and Aramis has now given us CT/MT fans the perfect task system for the thing.

It is the reason I could never get into T20 or GT. Not that either systems suck. They do not. I am sure they are very cool. But it does not feel like Traveller to me.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by ACK:
As long as the big 3I is part of the canon itself I do not mind a clean and purge of the canon.

Obviously. I'm not saying ditch the 3I setting, I'm just saying "go through it with a toothcomb, find the bits that are contradictory and/or don't make sense and either remove the ambiguity/contradiction or rewrite it so it DOES make sense."

It is the "slash and burn" approach of completely and totally starting over that bothers me.

If I had my way, I wouldn't be entirely ruthless - most of it would probably stay, it's just the inconsistencies that would go.

The other half is the rules through it various incarnations based on the core of CT.

Rules are very much down to individual taste. I don't believe that they influence the feel of the setting itself though - ultimately they're pretty much all the same apart from in character generation, and all that does is determine how the player makes his character - it should be fairly straightfoward to make as close as dammit exactly the same character given any rule system though.