T20, and Darwin: Adapt or DIE!

[Bishop Odo]

This is my first post to the board, and I haven't even bought the new T20, but The simple fact is I love the Traveller. I have quite a bit of stuff from all the versions, but one thing bugs me. Why another version, (OK stop, don't shoot), I'm not trying to start a flame war, and I want to see T20 take off in a big way, We need good RPG rules, but CT presented technology rules for the future based on logic of the 70's the new versions or systems that have evolved from has been always rooted in that era. I know many people have comment on the computer size, but what about bring Traveller's technology into and up to 2002 standards. I'm not talking about digital or halo cameras, wrist computers, CD player, but the core technology or ship building. I'm not a futurist or a physicist, but I believe the size requirements of engines and fuel are as antiquated and the original 10 ton computer. That's the evolution I would like to see, because this is a business and what will cause us all to buy new books and spend money to keeps this game alive. Traveller must, adapt or die.and I afraid it will die. I know a lot of people have house rules, added gate jumps, Star Gates, and light sabers, cyber body modification, but I want to play codified Traveller. It's easier.

 

[themink]

I like the engine requirement. The Size seems reasonable to me.

Keep in mind that the Jump drives are not something that we can place any "modern" calculation on - Ditto the Reactionless drives.

The Power Plant is something that we can possibly extrapolate - but without knowing how big an "EP" is, it is still problematic.

I still like the Consensual traveller universe - Heavily armed tramp merchants in seedy spaceport bars. These rules strongly support that image.

Most of the "obvious" technology that should be included if these rules are to follow the current "likely" progression of tech, radically change the universe: -
Von Neuman machines, Cybernetics, NanoTechnology, gene rebuilding, quantum computers, etc etc

They all change the universe so much that it wouldn't feel like traveller any more.

I strongly support this set of SF rules which include a universe that is probably unjustifiable in real terms - but I'm happy to accept.

Any world you build will need to be rebuilt every 20 years when the tech vears in a direction nobody expected. Better to leave them somewhere constants.

(I hope this wasn't a flame - I was very happy when they kept so close to my memory of classic trav)

 

[Ben W Bell]

I like the feel of Traveller. It is a future based on the 1970s tech. To me this means that the universe is nowhere near as high tech as a future based on todays tech would be, but I like it that way. It allows for more roleplaying where the technologies don't get in the way, and there isn't all the miracle gear that can do anything.

I've been reading my copy of Transhuman Space (they finally released the full colour hardback which is lovely by the way) and the tech there is a lot higher in some area than Traveller, and that is only in 100 years time.

Lets just say Traveller is the golden age of Sci-Fi futures. The Asimovs and Clarkes view of the future. It may no longer be a plausible future but it allows more scope for role-playing, in my opinion anyway. Plus having a lower level of technology means theres less to explain to people which makes it more accessible to new comers.

 

[Ellros]

Every Sci-fi author extrapolates their own future. Even from the 30's and 40's (a la buck Rogers serials. They thought that by now we would have that kind of tech.
Even Clarke thought we mihgt have more of Space 2001 tech now than we do.

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by BenBell:

<snip>

Lets just say Traveller is the golden age of Sci-Fi futures. The Asimovs and Clarkes view of the future. It may no longer be a plausible future but it allows more scope for role-playing, in my opinion anyway. Plus having a lower level of technology means theres less to explain to people which makes it more accessible to new comers.

I agree.

Let us also say that anyone who can prove (for sake of argument) that Transhuman Space is more "accurate" is either in possession of a time machine or siting on some of the most valuable patents in history.

ANY SF future is speculation, based more or less on current understanding. Just because of the explosive potential of certain current developments in modern science, doesn't mean everything William Gibson said will come true. I am frankly bored of people swallowing the latest trendy sub-genre and quoting it back as chapter and verse about how the future will be*.

The Official Traveller Universe is based on one set of extrapolations about the future. If you like them use them, if you don't, then come up with your own; but it strikes me as missing the point of still calling something Traveller to attempt to retroactively adapt the OTU to SF ideas that arose after it was conceived. That Traveller d20 (as a rule set) would benefit commercially from a supplement to cover cyber-tech, bio-tech etc is a reasonable position I have some sympathy for. I just don't see the need to tamper with the OTU to that degree.

Now, I am an unreconstructed curmudgeon and am still holding out for T5 mind, but I am glad that T20 is a round and I wish it well.

*I still recall JMS' bemusement for the vitriolic attacks on usenet for DARING to suggest that personal communications devices in the 23rd century might not be small insignia badges worn on the chest...

 

[BluWolf]

Most of this post was from another thread but I think it applies here.

"I'm not that familiar with Traveller canon but it seem to me there needs to in "any" Sci-Fi setting some issues that need to be addressed. Well NEED is a little harsh of a word. Rather, SHOULD be addressed and can go a long way to providing some over arching flavor to a setting."

I guess part of my point here is how you look at Traveller. I for one have never been that enamored with parts of MWM's setting. The core concept and ideas, yes. It just starts to loose its appeal to me in the details.

As a rule set, however, I think many of the baseline concepts are exactly what I like. Call it Traveller or not. That is just someones opnion (quaint little saying about possesion of said concept and the odor quality of such follows).

Particularly with the release of T20 I think folks who like Traveller but want to homebrew it have a very rich field of fodder with which to kit-bash a universe together. (sounds simple huh?).

I would say make a list of assumptions of how you want the setting to work and then work backwords from there. Collect material from various aspects of the D20 multiverse. Select what you like and see if you can develop a coherent setting from the parts.

Short list, feel free to add:
Aging/Lifespans - what tech level affects these the most. Why are they or aren't thye affected?

Uplifting Life-Forms- What is the appropriate tech level. Has it happened? why or why not?

Robots/Androids/AI-Appropriate tech level? Why do they or don;t they exist? What role do they play? Why?

Cybernetics-

Genetic Manipulations-

religion-

Jump Gates??

on and on........

I for one think this would be an amazing concept for a Traveller's Aide article.

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by BluWolf:

Particularly with the release of T20 I think folks who like Traveller but want to homebrew it have a very rich field of fodder with which to kit-bash a universe together. (sounds simple huh?).

I would say make a list of assumptions of how you want the setting to work and then work backwords from there. Collect material from various aspects of the D20 multiverse. Select what you like and see if you can develop a coherent setting from the parts.

I'm surprised this wasn't in the T20 THB actually - it just needed a "GURPS Space"-like chapter on how to build your own sci-fi universes using the T20 toolkit and that would have really rounded it off nicely. Sure, the default setting would be Traveller, but there'd be no reason (other than the obvious "that'll take the book to over 500 pages" reason

) not to do something like that.

A generic Technical Architecture book like FF&S done for T20 would rock, I think.

 

[BluWolf]

Traveller's aide could even take the example used in Dungeon/Polyhedron with the Mini-game concept.

Start with a list of source material.

T20
D&D PHB
CoC
4CtF

State what elements you are using;

T20 - everything
D&D PHB- Psionics & Monks
CoC - Sanity Rules
4CtF - Feats list

Then explain how they relate;

T20 - baseline for the universe
D&D PHB - Psionics are more prevalent and religion has evolved from the wide spread presence of psionics into a "transcendental-all species awareness-movment". Monks are the brethern and clergy of this philosophy. They deliver a message of the Old Ones and the dangers of the universe. Constanlty combating Cthulhu and the other Old Ones.

CoC- The sanity rules are used to define the dangerous and slippery slope that is the cosmos

4CtF- reflects the various mutations and varous evolutionary developments of the various races of he universe.

Just an example.

 

[lord irial]

Originally posted by BluWolf:
4CtF- reflects the various mutations and varous evolutionary developments of the various races of the universe.

4CtF? I didn't catch the reference from the abbreviation. Don't mean to hijack the thread, but huh?

 

[BluWolf]

Originally posted by lord irial:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BluWolf:
4CtF- reflects the various mutations and varous evolutionary developments of the various races of the universe.

4CtF? I didn't catch the reference from the abbreviation. Don't mean to hijack the thread, but huh?</font>[/QUOTE]Sorry. 4CtF = Four Color to Fantasy. Its a PDF D20 rules supplement published by Natural 20 Press.

http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=235&

Its a super-hero toolkit. ie no setting info just straight game mechanic chrunchy bits.

I reference it as a resource for "wierd" alien abilities that could be simulated by some of the feats in there.

 

[Mithras]

Originally posted by BenBell:
I like the feel of Traveller. It is a future based on the 1970s tech...It allows for more roleplaying where the technologies don't get in the way, and there isn't all the miracle gear that can do anything.

I agree with this. One of the big problems with plotting a good SF scenario is that basic fact that tech makes things easier. For example, setting a good horror game in the modern day is awash with problems (usually of a forensic nature) that similar games set in the 1930s don't have.

You might notice that in Star Trek/DS9/whatever the script writers have to constantly come up with plot reasons why tech can't do the job this time round. There's just too much tech in that universe for my liking. I mean, life sensors for a start, would make plotting scenarios damn hard!! Even lots of Classic Traveller scenarios had to find excuses to limit travel on a world by air/raft (because the characters would miss the 'events and encounters').

That make sense?

.. and I'm waiting for T20 to be delivered. I'm not expecting much ... and should hopefully be surprised!!

Paul

 

[Luddite]

In DnD, you get the question, "Why put some obstacal up if the party can teleport/fly/whatever spell they may have around it?" You have the same thing with Tech. There are two ways to get around this. Come up with some reason why the tech (or magic) wont work. Or, require that the tech (or magic) is needed. Now in the case of TV script writing both solutions can be a little dull. But when desinging an adventure for your characters, you can still come up with means to challenge the players.

Okay, so scaning a ship for life sings is trival. It may not show that the ship has some dormant virus that has infected the remaining crew.

-The Luddite

 

[Psion]

Y'know, whenever I hear people complain that computers would be much smaller in Traveller, I have to conclude that they obviously don't work in military or space electronics.

Incidentally, I do.

First off, I would imagine a space vessel would have some pretty rigorous requirements like a military sea vessel would. A seagoing vessel has loads of differenct sensors and interfaces. Though the CPU(s) themselves may be rather small, these interfaces and sensors take up a lot of space and weight.

Second, when deploying a system in military vessels or space, you aren't always working at an optimum. For example, chips for computers we deploly in space typically have to be bulkier and slower than equivalent computers on your desktop because they have to be designed to work reliably in areas of increased radiation.

 

[Bishop Odo]

Technology have changed a lot since the 70's, I think everyone can agree about that, but this reminds me of a line from a Harry Potter book about waiting a long time for universal popularity, or in this case some form of concensus. Some interesting ideas have been floating around on this little thread. However, my original post tried to make a point, very poorly it would seem,: If you re-print or reincarnate a game today and based it's on a 1970's conceptual future technology, that game is going to fail. Why? Because all the 13 year old sega junkies, cyber fiends, Star Wars babies, and Star Trek fans won't buy it. You can cry all you want about this future technology or that game systems technology is not "Traveller" and that fine.

I'm worried about the Game's survival. Using the 70's mindset only qualifies you for a nostalgic retro-game like Gangbuster,
Boothill, and Flash Gordon. I think this tread and the subject is suffer from a generation gap. I understand game balance and the Traveller experience, but we need new players, not recycled ones, if the system will survive. The joke at GAMA, the game shop owners convention, was that Traveller is the game that refused to die. Well I'm not getting any younger how about you....