Saving T5 or How to make an old Traveller actually accept and like T5?

[Spaceresearcher]

Hello fellow Travellers,
T5 has been on my mind of late.

A friend(who is a long time Traveller fan and therefore worthy of such statements)recently declared: "T5 is dead in the water."

Essentially he tried to get a character generated and without updating the tables(as per the continually updated Errata) it's essentially not 100% possible. Agreed?

There is a wealth of great new material in T5 but so far, dedicated Travellers and I'll have to admit, even myself at times are finding the task of going through this tomb and correcting errors we honestly shouldn't have to a real turn off.

I've tried to promote T5 and will continue to try as it's the future of Traveller. However without even an update(that I'm aware of, please do correct me if I'm mistaken), with a complete correction and ready to go out of the box format, is it in fact 'dead in the water'?

I'll be honest and declare that upon looking through Mongoose Traveller, it is much better in terms of layout and in providing a complete ready to go, no nonsense game(having said that I also find Mongoose Traveller to simply be CT with polishing and a varied combat system upon initial examinations).

In short, I must agree with my fellow Travellers that T5 should have been better than Mongoose Traveller and been the least bug free of all Traveller rules to date. Instead what we actually received is in fact 'the un-tested, un-corrected' draft. That's the only way I can justify T5 and accept it myself.

Myself, what I'd love to see for the Traveller universe is a set of rules that the majority of Travellers go 'OH YEAH' on and not want to dive back into previous editions due to alienation or unfamiliarity of which they no longer have time to familiarise themselves, being that these days everyone is MEGA BUSY in there day to day lives. Perhaps 600 pages in one hit was just a touch too ambitious.

Perhaps it should have come in smaller installments that were well tested, well edited and superbly laid out. It makes me think of something like Asimovs Foundation trilogy versus L.Ron Hubbards Battlefield Earth.

The Foundation Trilogy was much shorter but featured a terrific quality story. Battlefield Earth on the other hand was pulp Sci-Fi with lot's of material but lacking in quality.

Any how any suggestions fellow Travellers? I'd like to see this become the ultimate edition but it's going to need something special to convince even many hard core fans it's worth a 2nd chance.

 

[mike wightman]

I often find myself mining T5 for ideas - which I then convert into my own CT+ homebrew terms.

T5 could have been a re-write of CT, updated with a task system and better combat system. The ship rules could have been based on a fixed version of HG - simplified for modular construction for LBB2 but with the immediate potential to design the big ships.

The makers could have been designed to churn out CT stats for equipment etc. The technology - explanations and new TL scale - updated a bit.

It could have been almost completely compatible with MgT.

 

[Supplement Four]

I said T5 was dead a long time ago. I think what I'm seeing now is that people have had some time to dig into the rules and see that the game doesn't work.

I predict that if there is a Players Manual or some sort of errata that comes out that makes the game playable without house ruling it, that there will be a little commotion for a while. But, I think even that will die down. It's too late. Too many people are turned off by T5.

I had high hopes for T5, and my hopes were trampled the more I read in the book. There's some good ideas in T5 that are not fully worked out. I can't trust the game. If I see a rule, I have to spend a lot of time working it out to see if it works mathematically.

There's a big part of me that hopes that I'm wrong about all this--that T5 isn't dead and will rise from the ashes like a great Traveller Phoenix, making T5 the best edition of Traveller ever.

But, at this point, I think that's just encouraged thinking.

Reality tells me that T5 is, indeed, dead.

 

[Hemdian]

Sure, there are issues with T5, but most are to do with the opaqueness of the rule explanations being a barrier. The core concepts are sound (though not some of the details).

The problem I have with MgT is that it left me cold. It felt like reheated leftovers from CT but with worse artwork (seriously, the AHL is unrecognizable). But T5 has reinvigorated my interest in Traveller. Suddenly everything is shiny and new. I haven't felt like this since I first played Traveller, back in the early 80s.

So to 'save' T5 we need...

• The bulk of the errata worked out (as I understand it Marc's was sidetracked with a personal matter but he's now back at work).
• Clear end-to-end examples to dispel ambiguities.
• A setting book that opens up a new aspect of the OTU.

 

[whulorigan]

I said T5 was dead a long time ago. I think what I'm seeing now is that people have had some time to dig into the rules and see that the game doesn't work.

I predict that if there is a Players Manual or some sort of errata that comes out that makes the game playable without house ruling it, that there will be a little commotion for a while. But, I think even that will die down. It's too late. Too many people are turned off by T5.

I had high hopes for T5, and my hopes were trampled the more I read in the book. There's some good ideas in T5 that are not fully worked out. I can't trust the game. If I see a rule, I have to spend a lot of time working it out to see if it works mathematically.

There's a big part of me that hopes that I'm wrong about all this--that T5 isn't dead and will rise from the ashes like a great Traveller Phoenix, making T5 the best edition of Traveller ever.

But, at this point, I think that's just encouraged thinking.

Reality tells me that T5 is, indeed, dead.

I think a lot will depend on the forthcoming Player's Manual. If the Player's Manual is presented in a format that is clear explanatory narrative with examples, and is specifically (and only) the basic parts of the ruleset needed for regular play (say something laid out like T4's or MgT's Core Rulebook) with all of the necessary errata, and a reworking (or clarification) of some of the problematic parts, then T5 has got a chance.

It can't just be a copy-and-paste of the current relevant sections of the T5 Core Book with errata into a smaller Player's Book - clearer narrative composition and editing needs to occur.


EDIT:

• A setting book that opens up a new aspect of the OTU.

Agreed. Some setting information definitely needs to be added as well. (Or, at least some clear statements on what has been retconned in previous settings, or is different from previously published setting material, and in what way).

 

[robject]

I think a lot will depend on the forthcoming Player's Manual.

My goal is to continue to work through examples. This not only helps me (and hopefully you) understand the systems, but it also provides a feedback mechanism to Marc. I find that I tolerate a lot less 'dirt' than wargamers do, when it comes to design systems, but I do like design systems which describe and circumscribe the OTU.

 

[Vladika]

I agree with Mike W about mining T5 for goodies to be used elsewhere. In fairness, T5 does in fact have some hidden goodies that were long overdue.

DonM should receive the "first year of therapy" free, mentioned in another thread. How many years of his life have been spent on errata?

And now for robject...(I still, almost, believe he's one of the undead who never sleeps...). If it wasn't for his dedication to working through literally dozens of ship designs, and posting them, with the thought process and rational behind them, I'd have never touched T5 again. He's been a one man ambassador for T5 without being an apologist. IMO, if T5 pulls out of it's current crash dive, Marc owes him big time for work he's done.

Knowing what I know about T5, I wouldn't have bought it intending to game from. I would have purchased it to "keep the collection complete" (and that's a piss poor reason to spend the $100).

T5 is a potential diamond, but right now it's not even "in the rough", but still in the mine.

 

[ken at sunrise]

So to 'save' T5 we need...

• The bulk of the errata worked out (as I understand it Marc's was sidetracked with a personal matter but he's now back at work).
• Clear end-to-end examples to dispel ambiguities.
• A setting book that opens up a new aspect of the OTU.

I would prefer a new downloadable release with all errata and corrections part of it. Rewrite the new system if necessary but make it truly what T5 was suppose to be. The version we turn to. It may not match the books we have at all; okay. It may be toward the end of this year; okay. But an entire new release. If you already purchased T5 then your copy is free. Otherwise T5 version II.

A separate pdf of errata is difficult to navigate.

 

[Supplement Four]

I would prefer a new downloadable release with all errata and corrections part of it.

Ditto. But, I like hard copies. I don't want a second book full of errata.

What would really make me happy is a completely re-worked, re-edited and fixed version of the core rulebook that I have--at cost.

I think that's meeting Marc halfway. In my eyes, he didn't deliver, at all, on the promise of this game. If he made the game system work, then allowed me to buy, at cost, another hardback that was "fixed", that would make me happiest.

I think I'm dreaming, though.

 

[Hemdian]

I would prefer a new downloadable release with all errata and corrections part of it.

That would be good. Though I've been waiting more than 25 years for the same thing to be done for MT, and even longer for CT. On the other hand, when those were new the internet wasn't as ubiquitous as now, so maybe T5 will get better treatment than its predecessors.

 

[David Johansen]

The original plan was digital files and I really think they should have done the digital release before going to press with the hard backs.

That said, I've played T5 several times and think it's pretty neat. Indeed, it's only the lack of progress and clear answers on a very few issues that bother me and they mostly bother me because some people insist on arguing the intent of unclear rules simply because that kind of argument is their thing.

They're called gamers...

Anyhow, I love what T5 is trying to do and what it's trying to be. And I can appreciate the scope of the thing so I'll be holding out hope for a cleaned up set of files and perhaps even one day, cleaned up book.

 

[Daddicus]

I think T5 is pretty good as it sits + errata. But, it needs examples badly. Not the short "illustrate this concept" examples, but start-to-finish examples.

Could we do some of that here? Or perhaps on a wiki? (Does T5 have a wiki?)

 

[Hemdian]

I think T5 is pretty good as it sits + errata. But, it needs examples badly. Not the short "illustrate this concept" examples, but start-to-finish examples.

Could we do some of that here? Or perhaps on a wiki? (Does T5 have a wiki?)

I set up a YouTube channel that has a few videos. I want to redo the Personal Combat one but I'm waiting on the errata to clarify some things I missed the first time round.

 

[Supplement Four]

I set up a YouTube channel that has a few videos. I want to redo the Personal Combat one but I'm waiting on the errata to clarify some things I missed the first time round.

I'm actually quite impressed with your T5 Combat vid, Hemdian. This should be required viewing for anybody wanting to play T5 combat.

Question: At 9:44, how do you know that allows Snap Fire allows Speed 2 movement? Was that in the errata? And not AutoFire?

Question: At 13:08, so, you're saying that Brawling attacks are auto hits, since they would use 1D difficulty? What about the HTH rules under the Fighting skill?

Question: At the end, you're sure that wound effects are computed at the end of every round and not at the end of combat?

 

[Draconian]

...It can't just be a copy-and-paste of the current relevant sections of the T5 Core Book with errata into a smaller Player's Book - clearer narrative composition and editing needs to occur.

Pro tip: page headings! and an Index! We thought it went without saying for the last 30 years of RPGs, but maybe someone should start to say. As was said, the presentation was rather opaque to "getting" the rules. You get the regular musings about what a RPG is, but then you are zapped with dice-rolling probability tables best handled as an appendix.

Poor editing caused the world generation information for habitable zones to be repeated for: Range and Distance (p.45), Character Generation (p. 80), Worldgen Fillforms (p. 438 ff.) and Sophonts (p.548). An error on p. 80 was not properly corrected in the errata, and would have to be checked in 4 places for consistency.

Likewise for repetition of the economic codes for Homeworlds. Corrections were done but I had to enter it in two places. Luckily, Thalassogen took those errata into account in his SectorMaker utility. I had to edit and tweak a datafile with names, "zones" and planetary affiliations suited to my (overdue!) campaign, and the World Count column got corrupted, but feeding it back into the utility presents a glorious interactive map of a sector, its subsectors, and orbit tables for about 6,000 worlds! Squee! Not sure what to do if I roll a mainworld with 9 quadrillion people on it! [short-scale or American style, meaning 9 x 10^15] Can bacteria talk?

Also I am unsure if all the Fillforms are necessary if the final sheet has all the same blanks as a fillform with no summing or processing of stats to do. I have not identified a duplication of effort yet, but there might be.

Thanks to Hemdian's videos, and Thalassogen's and Robject's web utilities, for making the T5 dream achievable.

When Hemdian gave a video of the combat system, I had come close to grokking the combat-system but Hemdian clinched it. The "one-minute rounds" has some resemblance to original D&D where you could conceive of multiple attacks and actions in a minute. For a more direct action-by-action process I confess I might play hooky and play a Chaosium system or Star Frontiers (these have a crazy little thing called a direct per cent expression of odds), but I pronounce the combat system "livable" if it keeps on taking its medications and has a nurse on call...

 

[ken at sunrise]

Where can I find the web utilities?

 

[Draconian]

Where can I find the web utilities?

I'm talking about Thalassogen's site for T5:

http://www.heldenhaufen.de/T5

In it, he gave a link to Robject's site, notably the T5 dice roller in the "Tools" section, but many "Makers" also.

http://eaglestone.pocketempires.com/

Fans helping fans. It's beautiful, man. I get all choked up thinking about it...

 

[Hemdian]

I'm actually quite impressed with your T5 Combat vid, Hemdian. This should be required viewing for anybody wanting to play T5 combat.

Thanks. Anything I can do to help.

Question: At 9:44, how do you know that allows Snap Fire allows Speed 2 movement? Was that in the errata? And not AutoFire?

I'm basing that on the table on p218 and assuming that the contradictory note on p214 is in error. The errata has not confirmed this yet but it seemed logical. There's a 50% chance this is correct.

Question: At 13:08, so, you're saying that Brawling attacks are auto hits, since they would use 1D difficulty? What about the HTH rules under the Fighting skill?

Hmm ... that doesn't look right does it. I haven't paid close attention to non-firearm combat. I'll have to get back to you on that one. The rule on p158 does seem to look better.

Question: At the end, you're sure that wound effects are computed at the end of every round and not at the end of combat?

It is clear that wound effects that temporarily reduce characteristics are computed each round ... otherwise you could never die in combat, only afterward. But you could probably leave calculating the wound severity (and thus healing time) until combat is over.

 

[Supplement Four]

It is clear that wound effects that temporarily reduce characteristics are computed each round ... otherwise you could never die in combat, only afterward. But you could probably leave calculating the wound severity (and thus healing time) until combat is over.

Yet, T5 combat is very abstract. I could easily see damage being applied at the end of combat and not at the end of the round.

If it's at the end of the round (and you're probably right about this), it seems very clunky to me to have to deal with it the way it is in T5.

 

[Shonner]

I have no problem waiting for someone else (not Marc) to write Traveller 6. The pedigree of Marc Miller's Traveller should have stopped at T4.