I agree. I've been playing (admittedly intermittently) since 1986, and I have to look up the UWP Every Single Time.
If someone set out to make the game as inaccessible as possible to new players, the end result might be the UWP.
Reading the UWP (one page)
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
I agree. I've been playing (admittedly intermittently) since 1986, and I have to look up the UWP Every Single Time.
If someone set out to make the game as inaccessible as possible to new players, the end result might be the UWP.
I agree: from a player's perspective, the star port code indicates the basics at least of what to expect when visiting, the tech level what is available / what they may be up against in terms of equipment. A small paragraph (filters are required, and dress warmly due to sub-zero temperatures at the port) fleshes things out.
The referee needs the UWP so they can flesh out the world beyond the minimum snippet the players need.
Back when I as an active player/ref (sadly 30+ years ago1) I did have most of the various USP/UPP/UWPs memorized. But being a computer science student, and hex coding being done a lot, Traveller's coding meshed with a lot of what I did at the time.
1Although I am vaguely hoping to start playing/refereeing next summer.
Agreed. What is the starport like, what technology can we expect to see, and what protective gear is needed to survive? Aside from that,
Is there a gravity issue (low/high)?
Is there an atmosphere issue (need suit/mask/respirator)?
Is it a desert world, water world, or in between?
Is it crowded, sparsely populated, or in between?
What government/law restrictions will be encountered (if any)?
These are the important things players need to know. The UWP is for the GMs use.
Cheers,
Baron Ovka
Is there a gravity issue (low/high)?
Is there an atmosphere issue (need suit/mask/respirator)?
Is it a desert world, water world, or in between?
Is it crowded, sparsely populated, or in between?
What government/law restrictions will be encountered (if any)?
These are the important things players need to know. The UWP is for the GMs use.
Cheers,
Baron Ovka
For me, everything but Government was internalized within the first year of play. For casual players it never was.
It's intentionally information dense. It was the cheapest way to present a large body of data in a small page footprint.
Largely, UWPs and USPs are part of why Traveller succeeded at presenting a big picture.
Space Opera's format was 1/3 page per world, and ~100 worlds per sector... and it was hard to use.
GT-BTC paragraphs are even worse. Sure, they're 1/8 to 1/12 page each, but they don't give nearly as much data as a Space Opera world column, nor do they normally present much more than the UWP one-line format does. The domain book for TNE was about 3/4 the thickness, and had a LOT more history and other fluff, while covering 4x the space to about the same level of detail.
A UWP plus 1-3 column•lines (2/3 column•inches overall) gives about the same level of information as the BTC paragraph of 2-3 column•inches.
Mind you, page space was much more at a premium in the late 70's. Layout was expensive, printing was expensive, but at least paper was cheap. Electronic databases make layout cheap, with laser printers and digital plate cutters making printing cheap, but paper is not frightfully expensive, so...
An accurate observation. However, page space is not at such a premium today, and many pages are digital. A corresponding discussion on these boards is "how to engage a younger generation". That younger generation is perfectly comfortable with digital pages, so solve two problems at once. Present information in an accessible format, and make use of digital space in a way that may be more attractive to younger players.
The younger generation (the college age kids I've shown how traveller does things) tend to be fine with UWP's once they realize the utility. It hasn't, after all, Hurt Mongoose's sales.
Compared to what? Their sales of products without UWP's?
And did those college kids immediately begin to use the UWP? Or did they nod at the end of the discussion, and expect you to break the code down into usable English?
I note that T5+ has more trade codes than any other version on my shelf. The trade codes themselves are perhaps a step toward making the UWP more accessible.
Yes, they did.
As far as the Trade Codes - I think too many makes for less legibility.
In/NI, Ag/NA, Hi/Lo, As, Fl all make for key elements in trade.
TP/TN, Va, Ba, Ic are all pretty obvious from the UWP if you can read it
Cp Cs are both politcal and not actually derived from the UWP.
In my advancing age, I've come to realize I'd prefer the trade codes to be not entirely tied to the UWP values... It works for the OTU, tho', and it's quite playable.
The wiki has come up with standard long versions of the codes.
They can be found here: [http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Trade_classification/summaries Trade Classifications]
All constructive criticism, positive comments, good feedback, etc. is welcome.
I like the two letter system, but sometimes it is very limiting.
Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.
If you need longer than two letter codes, you're using too many, IMO. T5 uses too many.
It's more that some letters occur more commonly than others so to-letter combinations needing R's, S's, and T's are often repeated, but only one word combinations can use them.
Look at the base codes.
We could just have just two sets of everything: Imperial and non-Imperial
NS vs. KM
Instead there are custom codes for many of the major races.
Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.
I agree that good Huffman coding would use variable lengths wisely.
Ugh, don't get me started on the base codes. FAR FAR too Imperio-centric. Since the T5 BBB is non-setting dependent, and it only mentions N and S bases, therefore N and S should not be restricted to the Third Imperium in general. It CAN be restricted to the Third Imperium in a Third Imperium SETTING. But that's SETTING DEPENDENT, not RULES DEPENDENT.
Rats, I got started on the base codes. Alas.
I do think Research Stations could've been a base code, though...
As long as I'm ranting: I see usefulness in the following base code meanings. I use the term "core" to represent the main polity in a cluster, and "halo" to represent a secondary polity. For example, in the Third Imperium setting, the core codes belong to the Third Imperium, and the halo codes are used by others.
C: Corsair Base
D: Naval Depot (any polity)
E: Embassy (any polity)
M: Military Base (any polity)
W: Way Station (any polity)
N: Naval Base, core polity
S: Scout Base, core polity
K: Naval Base, halo polity
V: Scout Base, halo polity
There's no need to make specific depots, military bases, embassies, and way stations, since they will be highly contextualized: i.e. you'll know to whom they belong by context. And the Corsair base is owned by no polity.
Ugh, don't get me started on the base codes. FAR FAR too Imperio-centric. Since the T5 BBB is non-setting dependent, and it only mentions N and S bases, therefore N and S should not be restricted to the Third Imperium in general. It CAN be restricted to the Third Imperium in a Third Imperium SETTING. But that's SETTING DEPENDENT, not RULES DEPENDENT.
Rats, I got started on the base codes. Alas.
I do think Research Stations could've been a base code, though...
As long as I'm ranting: I see usefulness in the following base code meanings. I use the term "core" to represent the main polity in a cluster, and "halo" to represent a secondary polity. For example, in the Third Imperium setting, the core codes belong to the Third Imperium, and the halo codes are used by others.
C: Corsair Base
D: Naval Depot (any polity)
E: Embassy (any polity)
M: Military Base (any polity)
W: Way Station (any polity)
N: Naval Base, core polity
S: Scout Base, core polity
K: Naval Base, halo polity
V: Scout Base, halo polity
There's no need to make specific depots, military bases, embassies, and way stations, since they will be highly contextualized: i.e. you'll know to whom they belong by context. And the Corsair base is owned by no polity.
Last edited:
Allegiance is part of the ExUWP; has been for decades. Separate base codes and symbols are confusing.
I agree completely. So which thread do I resurrect to start this conversation going again?
IIRC, Don or Marc mentioned accounting for Imperial bases in non-Imperial systems as an intentional aspect of the coding.
The inner circle mailing list?
Smiling. Yes, Huffman coding would rock.
I have a table of bases, races, and codes here:
External Link: [http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Talk:Trade_classification/summaries#Bases Base Summaries]
It would really be a good idea to have an Imperial and non-Imperial base code designation.
Rs and RsX are too limited. I tend to use Rs for non-imp and RsX for Imperial.
Enjoy! I agree about your Corsair bases designation. I tend to think of that code as Vargr for "army base" as in ground force base.
*** What do you mean by halo polity? ***
Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.
re "Halo" polity. More than a client state, it's an independent empire or pocket empire which nevertheless relies on a central, or "Core" empire, due to the center's location or size (or both). The "Core" polity is of primary importance.
re Base codes. I agree with Wil that having duplicate codes based on Imperial or non-Imperialness seems unnecessary and feels bulky. So I prefer:
C: Corsair Base
D: Naval Depot
E: Embassy
M: Military Base
N: Naval Base
S: Scout Base[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]W: Scout Way Station
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]... with no allegience baked in.
I'm unsure about bases designating local versus regional control (e.g. Clan vs Tlaukhu bases).
I can be talked into accepting an "X" base for communication bases, but I think they're unnecessary: each stop in a marked trade route includes one implicitly. Import that fact forward into T5 from CT.
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]
re Base codes. I agree with Wil that having duplicate codes based on Imperial or non-Imperialness seems unnecessary and feels bulky. So I prefer:
C: Corsair Base
D: Naval Depot
E: Embassy
M: Military Base
N: Naval Base
S: Scout Base[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]W: Scout Way Station
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]... with no allegience baked in.
I'm unsure about bases designating local versus regional control (e.g. Clan vs Tlaukhu bases).
I can be talked into accepting an "X" base for communication bases, but I think they're unnecessary: each stop in a marked trade route includes one implicitly. Import that fact forward into T5 from CT.
[FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT]
Don argued against listing corsair bases - they should, generally, be temporary, and aren't the kind of thing that the survey would publish.
Actually, in some cases, whether or not the system is on the route or is bypassed is unclear. EG: SM 1711-1810-1910 (Extolay-Jenghe-Regina) is Jenghe on the route or not?
Actually, in some cases, whether or not the system is on the route or is bypassed is unclear. EG: SM 1711-1810-1910 (Extolay-Jenghe-Regina) is Jenghe on the route or not?
Similar threads
For Use With Mongoose Traveller:
Has Mongoose thought about...?