Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Maybe not.
But Traveller Worlds does exist in the current timeline.
You don't HAVE TO make everything up from scratch anymore ...
You CAN (if you want to) ... but you don't HAVE TO ...
General Problem with assumption: Why would players be 1 week in starport?
- Thread starter altidiya
- Start date
But Traveller Worlds does exist in the current timeline.
You don't HAVE TO make everything up from scratch anymore ...
You CAN (if you want to) ... but you don't HAVE TO ...
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
You can make up an entire system using nothing more than LBB:3
Generate the mainworld as normal. Roll or decide how many planets there are in the system. Generate them with one or two changes - population should be at least 1 less than the main world, government type and law level can be set as being the same as the mainworld if you want, or roll if you want a bit more fun...
Generate the mainworld as normal. Roll or decide how many planets there are in the system. Generate them with one or two changes - population should be at least 1 less than the main world, government type and law level can be set as being the same as the mainworld if you want, or roll if you want a bit more fun...
The biggest problem for me is always atmosphere, and possibly hydrographics. I would convert any non-tainted Thin/Standard/Dense atmosphere for a non-Mainworld to Exotic of the same pressure. Tainted might remain the same, or become corrosive in the Inner Zone, and become Nitrogen or trace and/or frozen to the surface in the outer zone, depending on world size.
Hydrographics in the outer-zone is ice (or sub-surface ocean), is "0" in the Inner zone.
Unless of course there is another world around a companion star in the system in its habitable zone which might be somewhat "shirtsleeve environment" . . .
Last edited:
Ah, I get it -- mainworld is the most hospitable one, so any other has to be less-so.
When I see a Main World with Atmo A, B, C, Vacuum, or Asteroid Belt, I can't help but wonder how much worse the other 'Planets' in the system are.
It's possible that a better world doesn't want visitors, so it has the Star Port on a less welcoming world, but how often is this the reality?
Badenov
SOC-13
I think, based on the entries for Glisten and Bowman, the two Ateroid Belt systems out campaign deals with most frequently, that if the 'main world' in a system is rolled as Asteroid belt, then that asteroid belt takes the place of every planet in the system and all places in that system are on asteroids of one sort or another.
For actual planets, I could totally see the owners of land on the nice planets in a system charging the starport developers way too much for the land and water rights they'd need, and the Starport people just moving to a cheaper location rather than pay through the nose for services.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
If I'm not mistaken, Imperium starports are extraterritorial, and likely built on Imperial reservations.
And, there's eminent domain.
And, there's eminent domain.
Badenov
SOC-13
So, they're definitely extraterritorial. Eminent Domain is a bit tricky, because it requires 'just compensation' to the landowner in most jurisdictions. If what the court decides 'just compensation' is more than the imperium wants to pay, then they may decide it's cheaper to plop down a cheapo starport on less expensive or unclaimed land.
It may also be a case of landing and building a starport on a planet before the whole system was looked at. I can imagine developers would love to bribe scouts to omit findings in a report on a new system, so that the Imperium builds on suboptimal land while the briber sails in and claims another planet in system and 'discovers' that it's more than what was in the scouting report.
I believe the original map for the OTU, only the main worlds were made, and later the rest of the system could be filled in? As a matter of fact, I think that's how it is in all of the Traveller rules? But there is also the option to make the whole system first and choose the best world for the Main World later in some of the rules (T20 in my case).
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
We could let an artificial intelligence programme populate a system, and get even weirder results.
well, not AI but I am playing with writing a system generator. Notes in my blog, linked in the my sig below.
slowly playing with. And as I note in at least one of those posts, TravellerMap I think already populates the entire system via another's really nice software they've linked to. I think TravellerWorlds
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
Not necessarily, but given the sheer size of nearly any belt, it isn't a bad place to start.
A parallel to start thought would be Babylon 5. The station is where most everything in that system happens. BUT, the world it orbits is, essentially, an Ancients site. A boring and largely useless Ancients site, but one nonetheless.
A belt with rare carbon rocks will harvest those as it finds them, but may have to visit the frigid outer moon with the methane seas if the rocks appear too infrequently.
The Scouts were here first, setting up on a couple outer moons. The actual settlers instead picked the belt farther in for the free solar power and the lack of mercury salts all over the surfaces of everything else in the inner system.
Etc.
I've always thought that the main planet is the one in the habitable zone (the one that can have liquid water), or the most inhabitable one if there are many (usually, because some are GG satellites).
So the otehr ones are quite less likely to be inhabitable, as they are either too hot or too cold to have liquid water and breathable athmosphere...
So the otehr ones are quite less likely to be inhabitable, as they are either too hot or too cold to have liquid water and breathable athmosphere...
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Actually, you need to think of the question more from a standpoint of colonization ... because (almost) ALL star systems on the (hex) maps are colonized from interstellar sources, aside from the odd major/minor race out there with a homeworld.
Viewed from a standpoint of colonization, there are going to be two criteria to meet for colonization efforts to be "successful" over the long term:
- Habitability
- Ease of access to resources (matter, energy, food, fuel, biosphere, etc.)
Point 2 can be "solved" by a richness of exploitable resources for export, particularly during the "boot up" phase of a campaign of colonization. Once a world reaches Population: 7+ it can become more or less self-sustaining, economically, although it may still have "deficiencies" that make the world a reliable importer of goods (see: Desert, Industrial, Non-agricultural, Poor trade codes).
These two factors essentially "conspire" together in a way that can bias colonization efforts towards worlds that are expected to become Rich and/or Agricultural (with the right amount of Population and type of Government). Everywhere else that is Population: 6- (and especially 4-) is basically left "fighting for scraps" in the colonization game of trying to attract immigrants (in addition to nativist baby booms) so as to reach Population: 7+ and move from a resource extraction (for export) economy to a more balanced economy for domestic production and consumption (while still retaining some export/import potential).
Therefore, the "jobs" in a colonization effort (and therefore the people needed to DO those jobs) will tend to gravitate towards the location where it is "cheapest" to achieve the goals of that colonization.
If there's a shirtsleeves environment Garden World ... go there. Never underestimate the draw of a land of milk and honey!
If there's a "resource rich" planet/moon/belt that can be exploited easily ... go there. Think boom/bust mining towns for an historical example.
However, not EVERY world is ideally suited for colonization.
Some worlds have a history of "failed" attempts at colonization.
Some worlds already went through the "boom" times and are now sliding down the "bust" end of the economic cycle, as the demand for work and workers dries up and the population emigrates away to "better pastures" (if they can).
And some places were strip mined for everything they had and are now in the process of being abandoned/left stranded, because there's nothing left there to exploit (economically) ... so the "money" left.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
The world tapped as primary would be the one that the starport is attached to.
Then, you have to guess what the criteria was to nominate that.
Then, you have to guess what the criteria was to nominate that.
The Main World is the world Generated (usually with a star port) and then placed in the Life/Goldilocks Zone using Traveller World Generation Rules. That's what it was in the '81 rules if I remember correctly, and that's how it is in T20. The Scouts Supplement has an extended System Generator to build a system around the Main World or generate the system first and choose the Main World later. T20 allows both options, but I can see how just doing the Main World would make things a lot easier, while for those who want a little more detail can go the other way.
I remember when I first found Travellermap.com and looked at all the different worlds, and wondering 'why this world and not a better one. or is this the best world in the system?' or 'I bet there's a better world, but the inhabitants don't want the star port on it.' And there's a LOT of worlds that need explanations like that.
Or how about the star port is on the planets moon (if the planet has any moons).
One thing I've always wondered, does 100% of every star have a main world in a life zone? (Don't answer this, as it should be in a Thread of it's own)
Lastly, as others have mentioned, a week in the star port is usually about doing trade or Travellers going from world to world looking for Adventure or Adventure finding the Travellers. But there's no reason you couldn't just spend a few hours refueling and jumping out again or spending longer than a week for any good/average/bad reason...
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
1. It is safe to assume that the UWP for the main world is the best the system has to offer. There may well be a fraught history that has led to that being the case.
2. Every case can be different, of course, but I would typically go so far as to say that a moon facility is *part* of the starport, but that there will almost always be some sort of free-orbital facility as well. Otherwise the UWP should be for the moon...
3. Short answer is "no". Airless rockballs and Icy worlds need not be in the goldilocks zone.
Similar threads
