No more Imperium...
- Thread starter jackleg
- Start date
Another problem an Imperium Prime setting can address (and no variation upon the old imperium can): canonista's using older materials to justify hoow things are in the new setting. THis was the joy of Traveller:2300, when I was playing it in the 1980's: It was an OTU, but not THE OTU, and it was strongly tied between rules and setting. Very few contradictions. (Some are inevitable.)
Scott Martin
SOC-13
Hi Aramis
As one of the folks who dates from "the dawn of time" and can't keep track of what is canon and what isn't, it would be really nice to have a single source for the "official" universe. This "history is told by the victors" thing may be all well and good from a 21st century relativist revisionist point of view, but if I'm trying to run a *game* I don't need the world shifting under my feet (and my players feet) all the time.
That said, I feel the need to point out some errors with some of the technical points you made.
The FF&S rules probably will allow you to build an AHL class cruiser, and other ships up to "Freaking Enormous" sizes. That said, just because you *can* doesn't mean that you *should*. I mostly mention this because FF&S looks like the best bet for the "core hardware" of a new Traveller (T5?) even if some of the rules around the completed gear are a bit clunky. The surface area issues you mention are real, but they're pretty minor below the 100 Kton range, but they do kybosh the Supplement 9 Tigress (unless it uses thruster plates). More analysis below (non-gearheads are encouraged to skip to the next post from here)
On the starship construction side it is possible (even using FF&S-2) to build useful starships in the 1 MdT range. Just don't try to do it a tech/9 where Power Plant radiator volume is a serious issue.
Heplar surface area limitations mean that you can't build a spherical ship with 6G's over about 15 Ktons, but you're OK up to about 100 Ktons for an open frame hull at 6 G's. A 1 MdT hull open frame tops out at about 3 G's, but an AHL cruiser at 60 Ktons should have no problem with its paltry 2G of accelleration. Note that these numbers are based on only using the rear quarter of surface area for HEPLAR: it doesn't actually *say* anywhere that this is where the HEPLAR area should be
If you go with the back *half* for HEPLAR placement then your cutoffs are at 100 Ktons (sphere) and 1 Mton (open).
Obviously this is not an issue with Thruster Plates, and thus CT or MT ships.
Scott Martin
As one of the folks who dates from "the dawn of time" and can't keep track of what is canon and what isn't, it would be really nice to have a single source for the "official" universe. This "history is told by the victors" thing may be all well and good from a 21st century relativist revisionist point of view, but if I'm trying to run a *game* I don't need the world shifting under my feet (and my players feet) all the time.
That said, I feel the need to point out some errors with some of the technical points you made.
The FF&S rules probably will allow you to build an AHL class cruiser, and other ships up to "Freaking Enormous" sizes. That said, just because you *can* doesn't mean that you *should*. I mostly mention this because FF&S looks like the best bet for the "core hardware" of a new Traveller (T5?) even if some of the rules around the completed gear are a bit clunky. The surface area issues you mention are real, but they're pretty minor below the 100 Kton range, but they do kybosh the Supplement 9 Tigress (unless it uses thruster plates). More analysis below (non-gearheads are encouraged to skip to the next post from here)
On the starship construction side it is possible (even using FF&S-2) to build useful starships in the 1 MdT range. Just don't try to do it a tech/9 where Power Plant radiator volume is a serious issue.
Heplar surface area limitations mean that you can't build a spherical ship with 6G's over about 15 Ktons, but you're OK up to about 100 Ktons for an open frame hull at 6 G's. A 1 MdT hull open frame tops out at about 3 G's, but an AHL cruiser at 60 Ktons should have no problem with its paltry 2G of accelleration. Note that these numbers are based on only using the rear quarter of surface area for HEPLAR: it doesn't actually *say* anywhere that this is where the HEPLAR area should be
If you go with the back *half* for HEPLAR placement then your cutoffs are at 100 Ktons (sphere) and 1 Mton (open). Obviously this is not an issue with Thruster Plates, and thus CT or MT ships.
Scott Martin
Do all player's these days believe in a commercial publication telling you what setting the game should be played in?
Aramis is doing a great job drawing up the divisions between the different Imperiums. I hope an Imperium Prime can be produced. Would some people not buy it because it dumps their prized view of the Imperium? Probably. I imagine what it would take to turn me off to a product, and the answer is "things that would probably convince others to buy it". It's almost a no-win situation...
...Except for new people and those who care more about internal consistency than the actual points being argued.
It is unsettling, though. Would I be willing to have my decisions governed by an Imperium Prime? Suppose it supported MT-Style control points, radiator fins, powerless nobility except for owning ALL starports, and BD training for all marines. Sigg (just as a fer-example) might not mind these. On the other hand, I may not be able to live with them.
So, such a product may draw in newer players, and not all decade+ codgers.
Actually, that's okay. There are probably fewer codgers than it seems.
Here's what I think is emerging: it's a Big Ship Imperium. How "many" Big Ships? Well, I suspect that will be left to the referee. And nobility has local power of some kind -- but I bet that won't be too strictly defined, either. And marines do get battledress skill, but I suspect not all of them will.
...Except for new people and those who care more about internal consistency than the actual points being argued.
It is unsettling, though. Would I be willing to have my decisions governed by an Imperium Prime? Suppose it supported MT-Style control points, radiator fins, powerless nobility except for owning ALL starports, and BD training for all marines. Sigg (just as a fer-example) might not mind these. On the other hand, I may not be able to live with them.
So, such a product may draw in newer players, and not all decade+ codgers.
Actually, that's okay. There are probably fewer codgers than it seems.
Here's what I think is emerging: it's a Big Ship Imperium. How "many" Big Ships? Well, I suspect that will be left to the referee. And nobility has local power of some kind -- but I bet that won't be too strictly defined, either. And marines do get battledress skill, but I suspect not all of them will.
daryen
SOC-14 1K
Jame and Aramis,
Technically, under CT and MT (and GT and T20) the Gazelle is a completely illegal design. It is a 300dton ship that mounts four hard points. (Under TNE, it doesn't matter, as there are no hard point limits based directly on dtonage. I assume T4 is like TNE.)
The better comparison is the Fiery and the Type T. Both are 400 dtons, and the Fiery has the Gazelle's armament (legally, this time).
But remember, ignoring MT's pushing everything to TL 15, it isn't a fair comparison. The Fiery is a TL 14 design, whereas the Type T is only TL 12.
Technically, under CT and MT (and GT and T20) the Gazelle is a completely illegal design. It is a 300dton ship that mounts four hard points. (Under TNE, it doesn't matter, as there are no hard point limits based directly on dtonage. I assume T4 is like TNE.)
The better comparison is the Fiery and the Type T. Both are 400 dtons, and the Fiery has the Gazelle's armament (legally, this time).
But remember, ignoring MT's pushing everything to TL 15, it isn't a fair comparison. The Fiery is a TL 14 design, whereas the Type T is only TL 12.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
But "completely illegal design" is so harsh daryen
I prefer "creatively applied rules design"
I make it "work" by building it as a 400ton hull (for bridge and hull cost and such) which includes the 100ton of drop tanks (with the drop tank costs for the mounting of same) so it may be allowed the 4 hardpoints.
I make it "work" by building it as a 400ton hull (for bridge and hull cost and such) which includes the 100ton of drop tanks (with the drop tank costs for the mounting of same) so it may be allowed the 4 hardpoints.
My approach to the Imperium setting has always been that it is ONE single, self-consistent universe[*]. Each Traveller ruleset is a different roleplaying game set in this universe. Each Traveller ruleset is chock full of simplifications, deliberate omissions, and, alas, quite a few egregious errors.
[*] Well, two, but the GTU is just an alternate version of the exact same universe.
So when the CT rules tells us that power plants needs several tons of refined hydrogen to generate so-and-so many MW for four weeks while MT, TNE, and T4 tells us that it only needs so-and-so much to run for a year, I don't think that CT describes one universe and T4 descrives another. I thinnk that one or the other (or, of course, both) got it wrong. In this case I think CT got it wrong.
And when MT tells us that jump drives need 15% of the ship's volume in fuel to make a jump-2, I don't think MT is describing a different universe, I think MT got it wrong.
It's the same universe.
My opinion: All regular Imperial Marine Force marines are trained to use BD, but whether they're actually equipped with BD depends on the situation. Marines beloning to Duchy marine forces may or may not be trained in BD. (The marines aboard the Luuru were Duchy of Regina marines, not IMF marines).
My opinion: The minimum size bridge is a rule of thumb used as a simplification by a set of roleplaying rules.
MO: Since the universe has 1,000,000 million ton ships (the Garuda, mentioned in FS), rules that makes it impossible to build million ton ships are faulty.
MO: There are many armies. Each member system has an army. Each duchy has an army. The Imperium may not formally have an army, but if there's no formal Imperial Army, some other organisation would have stepped in to fill the void. The Domain of Sylea Army (if there is such a thing) or the Sylean Army. Historical example is the British Horse Guards who administered commisions and promotions for all British regiments because there was no 'Generalty' to do it.
Hans
I think I prefer Hans' way of looking at things. It's certainly easier.
But I do prefer CT power plant fuel usage, for some reason. I think it's because it suits my games better.
And I'd call systems that don't allow building million-ton ships and outfitting them with nifty accessories to be simply incomplete rather than faulty.
But I do prefer CT power plant fuel usage, for some reason. I think it's because it suits my games better.
And I'd call systems that don't allow building million-ton ships and outfitting them with nifty accessories to be simply incomplete rather than faulty.
Well, Hans, once again, you've reiterated a view that is non-constructive...
We only know the 3I from the materials published. To date, a large part of that is rules. Lots of differing, incomplete, contradictory rules, fill text, and adventures.
It is obvious that TNE is NOT the same universe mechanically; things work differently there. Hence, if it's supposedly describing this hypothetical "3I", which, it has been implied by LKW and MWM, as well as Joe Fugate, was NOT a fully concieved thing, and to some extent, rules drove setting, in such a case, then it's actually describing an evolving view of an incomplete setting.
In short, Hans, idealistic as it is, it's a flawed way to look at it. The OTU is described by 6 different rulesets as 7 different places. (CT, Late CT, MT, TNE, T4, T20, GT), plus the "Other TU" of 2300. Plus there is the expanded universe CT with all the third party non-DGP materials.
You are seeing order where none exists. According to Dawkins, a common human failing.
Each of these editions can be seen as a different person's Universe: CT was Marc & Loren's, MT was Joe and Gary's, TNE was Frank and Loren's, T4 was Marc and the TML's, T20 is Hunter and Crew's, and GT is Loren & the TML's. They are each similar, but to borrow from Star Trek, Mirror Universes.
We only know the 3I from the materials published. To date, a large part of that is rules. Lots of differing, incomplete, contradictory rules, fill text, and adventures.
It is obvious that TNE is NOT the same universe mechanically; things work differently there. Hence, if it's supposedly describing this hypothetical "3I", which, it has been implied by LKW and MWM, as well as Joe Fugate, was NOT a fully concieved thing, and to some extent, rules drove setting, in such a case, then it's actually describing an evolving view of an incomplete setting.
In short, Hans, idealistic as it is, it's a flawed way to look at it. The OTU is described by 6 different rulesets as 7 different places. (CT, Late CT, MT, TNE, T4, T20, GT), plus the "Other TU" of 2300. Plus there is the expanded universe CT with all the third party non-DGP materials.
You are seeing order where none exists. According to Dawkins, a common human failing.
Each of these editions can be seen as a different person's Universe: CT was Marc & Loren's, MT was Joe and Gary's, TNE was Frank and Loren's, T4 was Marc and the TML's, T20 is Hunter and Crew's, and GT is Loren & the TML's. They are each similar, but to borrow from Star Trek, Mirror Universes.
I've always wanted to toy with a 'thin on the ground' type setting. Not the howling wasteland thin-on-the-ground of TNE or the Ziru Sirka enforced thin-on-the-ground of GT:IW, but lack of biospheres thin-on-the-ground kind of thing.
Just one or two 'shirt-sleeve' worlds per subsector with the rest being belts, rockballs, and hellholes. The 'shirtsleeve' worlds would have large populations; pop code 8 or 9, with the population of the rest ranging from empty to ten thousand or so. Maybe the area hasn't been settled long, maybe building and maintaining long term habitats is extremely expensive, who knows?
Lots of 'outback' and long trade routes might mean lots of fun.
Have fun,
Bill
Just one or two 'shirt-sleeve' worlds per subsector with the rest being belts, rockballs, and hellholes. The 'shirtsleeve' worlds would have large populations; pop code 8 or 9, with the population of the rest ranging from empty to ten thousand or so. Maybe the area hasn't been settled long, maybe building and maintaining long term habitats is extremely expensive, who knows?
Lots of 'outback' and long trade routes might mean lots of fun.
Have fun,
Bill
I think it's extremely constructive. For instance, it gives a reason to dismiss the contradictory parts of each Traveller incarnation while keeping the part that are not incompatible with the other incarnations.
I think that dismissing everything that MT, TNE, T4, T20, and GT (or dismissing CT, etc. in favor of one of the later incarnations) has to contribute on the grounds that they cover different universes than the one CT covers is the non-constructive view.
Exactly my point. A lot of these rules may be perfectly fine in themselves, but what's the good of that if they are mutually exclusive? We need to agree on one set of rules and apply them to all the settings retroactively. At least, we need to do so if we want to draw on all the incarnations for background material. Which I was under the impression that you do.
No, they don't. It's much simpler to assume that the rules that says so are wrong. If TNE was a different universe, it wouldn't have had exactly the same history.
Note that despite the fact that things work differently in TNE, the background blithely assumes that it is a continuation of the universe described by CT and MT material.
Well, if you'll pardon the expression, DUH! That's just what I was saying. These different incarnations describe an evolving view of an incomplete setting. Note the singular. The very fact that the view of the setting is evolving requires a thorough vetting of all the available information, with a subsequent revision of some of the earlier parts.
The alternative is to ignore a major part of the available material, something that I think would be throwing a lot of nuggets out with the dross. (OK, I don't so much mind ignoring TNE
)Hans
If I was to run a "hard science" non-OTU setting, I would have two kinds of worlds: worlds that have been terraformed, and those that haven't.
I would completely eliminate the entire notion of naturally habitable worlds, aside from Earth.
There would be life-bearing worlds, of course, but humans wouldn't live on them, except, perhaps, in sealed enclaves. Even most of those would be orbital stations.
The general run of the mill inhabited world would be a Mars-like rock. Some of these might be located in the same system as a world which is being terraformed, or has been terraformed. In the latter case, it's quite likely that the transfer of population from the rock to the newly habitable world would take years, or even generations, and never be totally complete.
Population would still be sparsely distributed, since there aren't a lot of reasons to spread a population over a whole bunch of relatively uninteresting rocks.
Systems including worlds that could potentially be terraformed would attract attention, as would systems containing interesting indigenous life, but most inhabited systems would contain little more than outposts and fuelling stations.
(I would also ban gas giant skimming, so fuelling stations would be meaningful on regularly travelled routes).
I would completely eliminate the entire notion of naturally habitable worlds, aside from Earth.
There would be life-bearing worlds, of course, but humans wouldn't live on them, except, perhaps, in sealed enclaves. Even most of those would be orbital stations.
The general run of the mill inhabited world would be a Mars-like rock. Some of these might be located in the same system as a world which is being terraformed, or has been terraformed. In the latter case, it's quite likely that the transfer of population from the rock to the newly habitable world would take years, or even generations, and never be totally complete.
Population would still be sparsely distributed, since there aren't a lot of reasons to spread a population over a whole bunch of relatively uninteresting rocks.
Systems including worlds that could potentially be terraformed would attract attention, as would systems containing interesting indigenous life, but most inhabited systems would contain little more than outposts and fuelling stations.
(I would also ban gas giant skimming, so fuelling stations would be meaningful on regularly travelled routes).
