T5 discussions at rpg.net

[Jamus]

Most of the Traveller fans who have seen T5 know two things about what they want to see - that they don't want the rules that Marc's coming up with, and they're not interested in the direction he's taking the game. It seems that more people are saying that they're not even interested in another ruleset anyway.

QFT

when T5 was first announced I through a fit. I am uninterested in yet another hobbled together edition of traveller, what I would pay money for is a cleaned up and unified version of CT with tech actually brought up to date with current science and a quick and dirty combat system. that is what I would like.

T5 or at least the bits I have seen of it is not fitting the bill.

 

[GypsyComet]

Chuck Gannon can write small scale stuff for Traveller all he likes, but he let his personal campaign intrude on the OTU in large ways with his secret organization that claimed power of confirmation over the Emperor. They had their use, but the dismantling of their legitimacy in the words of Strephon's diary (in Survival Margin) was the only fate they deserved. Had the great 20-20 vision of history shown them to be a carefully run Varianist organization, Mr. Gannon might have been redeemed, but he never gave any indication that they were anything but the real deal, forcing Dave Nilsen to de-legitimize them in Survival Margin. Nope. Sorry. Non-starter.

Dave Nilsen did a lot of damage to Traveller when he took the path of TNE with him into obscurity. He has since rectified that in THIS forum, and the respect I had during TNE's run has returned.

Marc lost me at the T4 product launch seminar at GenCon 96. The disconnect that was evident at the time is still pretty obvious, so I can't blame it all on the unfortunate choice of ringleaders at Imperium Games.

That said, the new blood seems to be doing fine.

 

[aramis]

Chuck wrote some good stuff (Wet Navy), and some real drekh (IRIS)

No author is going to produce quality every time. Most don't try to sell the stuff that doesn't live up. Others Ideas of what is good or bad don't coincide with consensual reality.


Others will alienate one fanbase for another.

 

[ravells]

The T5 I would like to see would be:

One in which the data source (eg. system info, weapons, ships, races etc.) was avaiable online as a 'living' data source.

One in which the community could buy a stake in the game to flesh it out (there are enough players who are already doing this - it makes sense that all this creativity should be channeled towards a coherent whole): e.g.

1) by paying FFE a small sum to have a corporation of their choice put into the game. The objects of the corporations would determine what the company manufactured e.g. space-craft, pharmaceuticals etc.

2) by paying FFE a small sum to detail a system - this is already happening in the great land grab, so why not put it to good use.

Of course all contributions would have to follow a style guide, be subject to editorial cuts and changes, but at least it puts all the creativity moving towards a single goal.

Although it seems a bit odd that contributors should actually pay rather than be paid to have their contributions accepted, I think it would work because the Traveller community is passionate enough about the game to get value from the fact that they have put something of themselves into the game they love so much and it has been accepted as official.

However any new version of Traveller pans out, I believe it should take advantage of 1. The technology available and 2. the talent available. We are after all playing a far future RPG so we ought to be able to come up with something new!

Ravs

 

[Malenfant]

Although it seems a bit odd that contributors should actually pay rather than be paid to have their contributions accepted, I think it would work because the Traveller community is passionate enough about the game to get value from the fact that they have put something of themselves into the game they love so much and it has been accepted as official.

Ugh, I think that's an awful idea (but then I say that as an ex-scientist, where we are screwed over by journal publishers because we have to pay them a lot of money to get our work published).

I'd much rather that contributers were paid. It also means that you (a) don't exploit the fanbase and (b) don't get anyone's random crap put into canon just because they paid for it to be there.

 

[RandyT0001]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
...(but then I say that as an ex-scientist,...

WHAT?!??!!? Did you loose your degree???? Did you get defrocked by the scientific community???? Did you forget all that you used to know????

 

[Malenfant]

Well, ex-scientist in the sense that I'm no longer working as a scientist...

Still, it did astound me how much money was being wasted on getting journals to publish papers, it's an utterly ridiculous way to do things IMO. I mean, we were talking about hundreds of dollars to publish a paper here, that was coming out of an already small budget that could have been put aside for something much more useful. Er, but anyway, I digress

 

[BillDowns]

Okay, I'll ask

What made you quit and what are you doing now?

If you don't mind, that is.

 

[Spinward Scout]

What were your Mustering Out benefits, Mal?

 

[Berg]

Originally posted by Sir Dameon Toth:
What were your Mustering Out benefits, Mal?

If he rolled a six, he got a Lab Ship!

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Berg:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sir Dameon Toth:
What were your Mustering Out benefits, Mal?

If he rolled a six, he got a Lab Ship! </font>[/QUOTE]That would have been nice...

 

[Pierce_Inverarity]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Ugh, I think that's an awful idea (but then I say that as an ex-scientist, where we are screwed over by journal publishers because we have to pay them a lot of money to get our work published).

Tell me about it... I'm an art historian, and I made the mistake of writing an article on Picasso. I'm about to pay $800 for 7 illustrations (not to the journal but to the museums and the estate).

For what? For promoting the artist's work and making people want to visit the museum?

Today we're losing money for doing our job. It's crazy.

What does this have to do with T5? Uh, nothing, really...

 

[aramis]

Pierce, Malenfant:

If you've not looked at the educational journals, do so. The level of "bad science" in them is astonishing. 3 subject studies. No Pre/Post comparisons. Methodologies without assessment details.

Making people pay to get published ensures that they are willing to put something tangible on the line, since reputation is obviously not enough for at least some fields.

Not that I disagree with the drawbacks of it for Traveller. But, in the world of journals, it makes a certain amount of sense.

Clearing rights is a copyright issue; paying to clear rights on Picasso is, well, counter to the ideals of copyright, but the ideals are not what the law has been held to.

Take, for example, the removal of the 20 year renewal requirement and the 2 year limit on hand-copyrights... it means that a great many games that would have required renewals didn't, and hence did not pass in to the public domain in the last few years. It also means that a copyright on a post or email or draft is as good as a registered, if provable as to date.

The whole vast array of issues with publication is a morass of politics, legalism, and cross purposes.

 

[Pierce_Inverarity]

Not meaning to derail the thread any further, BUT... the best antidote to bad science/scholarship is peer review. If it were money, then you can be sloppy provided you are rich.

Sure, there are tons of bad journals out there--but the people working in a given field are very aware of it. So, if X has an article out in the Journal of Craptitude, we know what to think of X.

Think about it: I'm seriously considering rewriting my article--cutting a Picasso or two--so I'm able to afford it. It's silly.

 

[Plankowner]

Pierce makes a good point, but the problem is that as a Layman, I don't know what is good and what is crap. So during an discussion about some obscure Traveller subject, someone references that Journal of Craptitude article. How am I supposed to know that it is crap? To the rest of the world, it sounds like legitimate science.

 

[Malenfant]

Well, Pierce and I were talking about how journals work, not how useful they are as references for Traveller .

 

[laughpol]

This has gone off topic too far.

Please return to the thread topic.

Any discussions as to the validity of the contents of scientific journals should be reserved for either Random Static, or for scientific community forums.


LP

 

[Berg]

There is now discussion on What books to produce if you were Marc or Martin

 

[Merxiless]

I really wish the MT were Eratta-Corrected. I so wanted to have a better version of CT, and I thought MT was that, until I hit the space combat rules. C'est la vie. I was hoping T5 would be T4, cleaned up.

If those comments about MWM being stuck in the old mode of gaming are true, then I guess that's it.

Long Live Traveller.

Thanks to those who read my post, and commented, either way. I'm glad I am not the lone candle of cinematic gaming in the darkness.

 

[Ptah]

Originally posted by BillDowns:
Okay, I'll ask

What made you quit and what are you doing now?

If you don't mind, that is.

I'll second that, being an "ex-scientist" myself.

From your posts Malenfant I thought you were still in science as a profession.