• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

T5 discussions at rpg.net

Warning: entire post is in <tongue in cheek mode>.

The entire thread was summed up by the opening statement of one guy:

I think the fanbase has fractured the interest to the point where no new edition can actually succeed.
Well, it's obvious that you can't please all the people all the time.

I know we're all grognards on these boards when I hear (and think) things like "as long as it has these items on the list (A B C D E F G H J K L M N P Q R S T U V W X and Y -- I'll let Z be reserved for designer discretion), then I'll officially like it".


So, the kinds of things I see there narrow the scope to these options:

</font>
  • CT or MT or T4 or T20 or GURPS or Wushu. Or all those plus Exalted, Unisystem, True 20, FATE, FUDGE, Tri-Stat, MURPG, Palladium, Fuzion, HERO...</font>
  • Book 2 or Book 2 Extended or HG/T20 or GURPS or FFS3, or some complicated mix of them.</font>
  • "Simplified" (?) MT task system or UGM or CODA or (strangely enough) something closely resembling Sigg's CT+ task system.</font>
  • Book 3 or Book 3 hard-statted or GT: First In.</font>
  • Use old art. Use new art. Use Deitrick art.</font>
  • Just reprint CT (e.g. French version into English).</font>
  • Support the CT setting. Support the Proto-Traveller setting. Scrap all old settings. Do all of the above.</font>
  • Use metric. Don't use metric.</font>
  • Advanced careers. No advanced careers.</font>
  • And provide every possible alternative as supplemental material, where "alternative" is defined as whatever the poster doesn't think is critical.</font>
Also discussed on the thread are such tidbits as:

There is no entry market for Traveller.

There is an entry market for Traveller.

Unify the disparate chunks.

Unify and cancel all other licenses.

Diversify the disparate chunks.
 
People can't even agree on what Traveller actually is now, let alone decide what an ideal version should be ;)

Fans are the wrong people to decide what Traveller should be. So I guess Marc is doing the right thing by going his own way and making T5 something that none of the fans want... ;)
 
Heh! Yeah, looks that way. Put something up for a vote and you'll please nobody, including yourself.


First, most of us players appear to be on the wrong page. Before we can answer a question like "What should XYZ be?", we first have to answer the question Mal put up so long ago: why create a new version of Traveller?

If we're all for CT modified or MT modified or this or that modified, well then just house rule them to one's satisfaction. I've done that, and Sigg has done that. Like CT, but want a task system? Graft one on. Like LBB2, but want to wargame with it too? Tack on bits from HG. Lots of us have. Want to change the UWP to include atmospheric pressure and mass? Use your preferred world building system to figure them out and add a new couple fields to the UWP. Some of us have. But as Mal has pointed out, none of those reasons, even grouped together, warrant a "new" set of rules!


New rulebooks are for new rules. Expansions on current ideas that help the player interact with his world. Rules which help supplemental material focus on its subject rather than patching a weak core engine.

For CT, career-based or "lifepath" chargen and skills was the fundamental new rule (although, was there a precedent?). For MT, the task system was the fundamental new rule. All versions of Traveller extended and refined rules, but the fundamental rules are the most powerful. They are core to "when" and "why" the player rolls the dice. Where the player character meets the universe.

With that in mind, what could Traveller add, as an organic extension, to the rules? We already have at least a hazy idea of what Traveller, in most of its versions, is like in general. How could it GROW?
 
I don't know, but I do think that T5 should be the LAST version. It's become information overload. Rules, schmooles - between the different versions, we can't even agree on whether or not Emperor Strephon died. You can only look at combat in so many ways, the same with your carousing roll. Kill, flirt, talk, or fix doesn't need that much variation. And everything else is 'history' or information. We need a very consise Imperial Encyclopedia. Wihtout a ruleset. And it should be pretty, and... and...

...and I've got 42 books last count!
 
Originally posted by Sir Dameon Toth:

...and I've got 42 books last count!
Yeah, sounds like Travellers have information overload, though as Aramis has mentioned before, there is a core set of Traveller assumptions that the game is built on that don't change. Keep the books you use and sell the ones you don't.

Clutter is bad!
 
I think what we want is a ruleset that is playable out of the box with no inconsistencies and no errata and that holds as far as possible to the laws of physics.

CT+ may be the way, but we'd want it published nicely with good production values and an 'official' stamp. House rules are all well and good but it seems Traveller has always required house rules just to be minimally playable.

We all like the core concepts of Traveller else we wouldn't all still be here (I see these as Prior History and generalist skillsets, for the most part, with a hard-headed conservative bent when it comes to future history and technology), but not one version has achieved a completely usable system.

CT had it all there but was compromised by some lazy fudging (ship design, world generation) and inconsistent chargen (Bk4 etc compared to COTI)

MT just complicated matters with an unneccessarily arcane Task system and skill bloat, even before the controversy over the setting.

I've not seen TNE (there's only so many pdf's one can buy) but from what I can gather it changed the fundamental system along with trying to rationalise the post-cyberpunk technology.

T4 was again over complicated, and has some very awkward rule systems, along with atrocious production values and the least interesting setting.

Hate GURPS, but the campaign resources are good. Just very hard ot convert back into CT/T20 if you don't speak GURPS (and not willing to learn)

T20 is a successful iteration, with the central core concepts of Traveller translated into D20 as far as they go, along with some great D20 innovations (such as the armour rule). The problem here is that Prior History is almost incompatible with D20 style advancement - it's a reet bugger to juggle and calculate all those skill points. I have great mental arithmentic but the tally of skill points the pc should have with whats marked down on the sheet never seem to match. There's almost too many choices, and I often end up with a character quite different from what I first envisaged.

Btw, one way around this is to use the expanded CT prior history tables for the careers that have them instead of the T20 ones, to get more detail (for instance, Commando school can denote multiclassing into Mercenary, and Intelligence school Rogue).

A second issue is the surprising lack of depth in the OTU. Having collected the reprints, then T4 and MT, I see a huge amount of data just reprinted. There seems to be a deep reluctance to embellish and develope the setting. Instead we have pages and pages of more or less worthless UWPs (the biggest rules error ever in Traveller).
GT has at least added detail and richness to the setting, and Avenger's sourcebooks have at last done the same within a CT/T20 framework. Notice that MJD has concentrated on District 268, which is the almost the only interesting subsector in nigh on 30 years of published material.

What I'd like to see is CT+ worked up into a publishable pdf (complete with artowrk). I'd also like to see a proper consistent chargen, more detailed than basic but not as complicated as the expanded tables, with 18 careers listed (see list below). I have some ideas on this. A proper world generation ruleset (over to you Mal), and crucially a comprehensive weapons and armour table on a single (or double) page. No referencing half a dozen books for a short firefight.

Alot of those CT weapon rules were alot more complicated than they needed to be, and lookup tables slow down combat.

Careers list: Army, Navy, Marine, Scout, Merchant, Rogue, Technician, Colonist, Belter, Traveller, Bureaucrat, Field Scientist (inc. Medic), Academic, Noble, Barbarian, Professional (like lawyer, teacher, businessman etc), Entertainer/Sportsophont, Law Enforcer.
 
I'm interested in CT+ as well, but it won't be T5. At best, it will be a cleaned-up, hopped-up CT, which is cool. But it's a different goal.
 
Klaus: THe MT Task system is HARDLY "Arcane" unless one is mentally incapable of addition and integer division.

It is simple in execution, and includes a wider flexibility than any of the alternatives put forth. It is clearly a baseline from which other games on the market have grown.

It fits on a single page cheat sheet, including all the options.

The 5 page section in the ref's manual is excessively detailed.

As for skill bloat, it reduced 40+ firearms skills down to a half dozen: Rifleman, Pistol, Combat Rifleman, Shotgun, Heavy Weapons, High-Energy Weapons, Laser Weapons. It narrowed the dozen melee weapon skills to Small Blade, Large Blade, and Polearm.

And yet you accuse it of Bloat? The dozen skills added are mroe than made up for by not having individual weapon skills.
 
Originally posted by Aramis:
THe MT Task system is HARDLY "Arcane" unless one is mentally incapable of addition and integer division.
This coming from a guy who claimed that my revised stellar generation tables were "too mathematical" because they had lots of conditional (plus/minus) modifiers? ;)
file_23.gif


It seems that people clearly have different standards for what they consider to be "arcane" or "over-complex" or "too mathematical".

And actually I'd agree with Klaus there, it's "arcane" because you've got all these variables to worry about - you've got to formulate and express the task in the correct manner, gauge the difficulty correctly, figure out how long the time increment of the task should be, etc. It's a bit more complicated than saying "Ok, you need a 7, roll the dice".
 
please, not yet another chewing of the same old fat regarding this or that version of traveller rulesets!

After 25 years(!) of seeing the same old thing, hashing the very same arguements I've seen at cons in the 80s and 90s, and on the web since, its all really rather old. Don't the guys at RPG.net ( and all the other grognards) ever get tired of this?
 
Apparently not.

The "fractured fanbase" is one of the big reasons I generally push for the auxiliary systems to be as system transparent as possible.

I *expect* character construction and task systems to vary, however, since those are much more prone to strongly held opinion, and you should be able to play what you like. Traveller is one of the few settings to be represented on both sides of the ancient "linear vs. bell-curve" religious war, and I don't mind that a bit. BUT, I'd like the elements of setting to be as system transparent as possible.

Most editions of Traveller ship-building and world-building have managed this to some extent, but they have varied amonst themselves as well, sometimes considerably, thus furthering the discord instead of reducing it.

If we're going to do this stuff AGAIN, further competition in ship-building systems is just not called for.
 
I think the last thing we need is yet another ruleset.

Screw rules, just publish settings. Traveller fans don't seem to mind having to do more setup work than most for their games, so they probably won't care about having to figure out the stats for ships or aliens in whatever system they choose to play with (which in all likelihood is going to be an ungodly mishmash of all the other systems anyway).
 
I think a cleaned up, hopped-up CT would be a good thing to have around.

I completely agree the setting needs more depth. There's lots of room for maneuver within canon. Alot of Traveller material seems a bit samey. This is already happening with the Avenger stuff.

I'd like to see the whole of the Spinward Marches done to the same detail as District 268 is getting.
 
I think the last thing we need is yet another ruleset.

Screw rules, just publish settings. Traveller fans don't seem to mind having to do more setup work than most for their games, so they probably won't care about having to figure out the stats for ships or aliens in whatever system they choose to play with (which in all likelihood is going to be an ungodly mishmash of all the other systems anyway).
This is precisely why I am talking the approach I am to my own published setting ( I would not be averse to discussing these elements in more detail, just on TAS boards, as it has no real venue here)and keeping it systemless. With the exception of glaring setting specific aspects, why re-invent the wheel?
 
I tend to agree that there is no need for another ruleset yet another attempt at refining the CT system is a worthy enterprise. The main reason I enjoy MT (and to some extent T4 for that matter) is because it tried to improve CT without losing sight of it.

GT, T20, Traveller Hero (and even TNE to some extent) may use the Imperium setting but they ain't Traveller as I remember.
 
What people think is or isn't Traveller is another source of pointless argument. They're all Traveller whether we like it or not, because it says so on the cover. Obviously there's no obligation to like every version of the game that comes out, but it's pretty meaningless to claim that a version "isn't Traveller" when it clearly says that it is.

Personally I think Traveller is defined by its setting (i.e. the OTU), not the rules, since that's the only thing that all the versions (yes, even TNE) have in common.
 
Originally posted by Malenfant:
What people think is or isn't Traveller is another source of pointless argument.
I used to be unsure about this, but now I can't agree more. I get so bored on all of these Traveller forums that I get drawn into arguments over trivia.

That's it. As of today, I'm renouncing my grognardliness.
 
So if I'm using the CT rules to play in a completely homebrew universe (which all of us had to do at one point ;) ) I'm not playing Traveller?

Traveller to me is the rules and the setting, the odd thing is you can play in the OTU using EABA, Storyteller, D20 Modern etc. etc. and you can use the CT, MT, TNE, T4 etc, rules to make up your own homebrew setting.

I have to be honest and say that though I'll buy T5 I doubt I'll use it. I'll borrow anything from it that's better than what I've already got, and I'll also get it for the additional setting material.

But when I run a game I'll use the rules I've come to like.

What I really think Traveller needs is a stripped down intro/entry level game with a few adventures and setting support material to get new players hooked.

Even a CT lite free pdf just to get them hooked...
 
I made a totally homebrew sf universe and the only connection with Traveller was FF&S and the ship combat rules, and heavily modified worldgen - I don't and wouldn't call that Traveller at all.
 
Back
Top