the target market
- Thread starter jackleg
- Start date
RobertFisher
SOC-12
I can't imagine the reprints are pulling anyone away from GT or T20.
People buy the reprints to:
</font>
- Collect them</font>
- Provide additional source for their GT/T20/or hybrid games</font>
- Play CT because they wouldn't be playing any form of Traveller if their only choices were GT & T20</font>
- Play CT in addition to playing GT (inclusive) or T20</font>
As much as I might like to see a CT+, I prefer the current situation of starting with a proven system & tinkering with it myself.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Well, the way I see it, the reprints make CT a competitor to T20 and GT - it keeps CT in the public eye and as an option to play instead of a hard to find relic for collectors. I've seen people asking about Traveller on places like rpg.net and being pointed to the CT Reprints. If those weren't around, then they would be pointed to GT or T20 instead.
So we have people buying an old game that hasn't been tweaked, edited, updated, or altered - just basically been photocopied and shoved in an awkward landscape format - instead of buying a new, current version of the game that a lot of people have worked hard on and are still actively supporting. I don't think that's right at all.
And funny you should mention CT+. On the T5 playtest board, I asked what people would prefer to see - a CT+ (tweaked, modernised version of CT) or T5 (new rules written from the ground up). I don't think any of the respondents on that thread said they would prefer to see a T5. That alone should be telling Marc that he's wasting his time.
I think a lot of this community would much rather see Hunter's idea of a CT+ come to pass instead of T5. There is at least a demand for a CT+.
So we have people buying an old game that hasn't been tweaked, edited, updated, or altered - just basically been photocopied and shoved in an awkward landscape format - instead of buying a new, current version of the game that a lot of people have worked hard on and are still actively supporting. I don't think that's right at all.
And funny you should mention CT+. On the T5 playtest board, I asked what people would prefer to see - a CT+ (tweaked, modernised version of CT) or T5 (new rules written from the ground up). I don't think any of the respondents on that thread said they would prefer to see a T5. That alone should be telling Marc that he's wasting his time.
I think a lot of this community would much rather see Hunter's idea of a CT+ come to pass instead of T5. There is at least a demand for a CT+.
Originally posted by Jeffr0:
Oh, Strephon. Not this complaint again...
Jump masking is very simple. You can't jump through a jump limit. That's all. If a jump limit exists between your departure point and arrival point, it stops your jump. What's the mystery?
Ever play pool or billiards? Ever want to hit a certain ball or use a certain pocket but another ball was in the way of your shot? That's jump masking. If a jump limit is between where you are and where you want to go, you can't get there. What's so hard about that?
What is the strategic consequence? It means that sometimes your fleet or your enemy's flee can't appear at the 100D limit of a mainworld.
What are the tactical consequences? It means that sometimes you can't jump to where you want to go from your current position and sometimes you'll need to choose another point to jump from.
IMEHO, it seems that many of the people who don't understand jump masking don't want to understand jump masking.
And the other shoe drops.
Chris Thrash has spent way too much time trying to explain this to too many people, so I'll give it a try.
Jump masking is inherent in the 1977 description of jump. It is a logical extension of the 100D limit.
Jump masking is implied in the 1985 JTAS jump space essay. It is there for anyone who read the essay and cared to think.
Jump masking is finally explained to all who missed it previously in the 1998 release of GT.
Jump masking is canonical and you don't need to use any canonical tidbit IYTU. Don't like jump masking? Don't use it. Our Olde Hobby doesn't have a canonical enforcement arm. Don't use it, it's really that simple.
Just don't use it.
Bill
M
Malenfant
Guest
(I know, this is way OT... maybe people should start another thread elsewhere about this?)
While I don't have a problem with jump masking as a concept, I wonder if part of the problem that other people have is that you have to actually visualise a spaceship path through space, figure out whether it'd intersect the jump limit, and generally know where stuff is relative to other things in order to figure it out?
I mean, one issue is that if you intersect the jump limit coming from a particular direction (say, a system 1 pc to coreward) then you'll have to remember that for next time you jump from that direction.
Or can it just be abstracted away as a simple probability of intersecting the limit?
While I don't have a problem with jump masking as a concept, I wonder if part of the problem that other people have is that you have to actually visualise a spaceship path through space, figure out whether it'd intersect the jump limit, and generally know where stuff is relative to other things in order to figure it out?
I mean, one issue is that if you intersect the jump limit coming from a particular direction (say, a system 1 pc to coreward) then you'll have to remember that for next time you jump from that direction.
Or can it just be abstracted away as a simple probability of intersecting the limit?
Dr. Thomas,
As you surmised, it has been abstracted away. In GT:FT, jump masking by a world's primary star is expressed by a percentage. You may be masked a certain percentage of the time. Roll the dice, beat the percentage, and - voila - no masking to worry about.
Still, if you don't like jump masking you don't need to use it.
(I know this is OT for this thread so this will be my last post on the subject too, okay?)
Have fun,
Bill
P
Pickles
Guest
Schadenfreude
I recall that the situation was that [hey! nested relative clauses! i wonder how hard that would be to write in Vilani?] CT had just enough demand to drive the LBBs into collector's prices, thus a rather small niche market existed. That niche has been pretty much filled by now, I assume.
Makes me wonder how many reprints have been sold. 500 at $30 each is a small but nice boost to a 2-person company.
Makes me wonder how many reprints have been sold. 500 at $30 each is a small but nice boost to a 2-person company.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
C'mon, Bill, you've been on these boards long enough to know better! The only problem (for them) is they can't find most of us through our profiles.
Simplest bit for jump masking: You can't jump to a point closer than 100 diametrs of the planet or the star; it is not uncommon for the bubble of the planet to be partially or fully inside the star's bubble of no exit.
If your target point is inside the bubble, extend it straight out from the object until you hit the skin of the bubble.
in parsec+ ranges, intermediary objects may be safely ignored save for GM's plot lines.
If your target point is inside the bubble, extend it straight out from the object until you hit the skin of the bubble.
in parsec+ ranges, intermediary objects may be safely ignored save for GM's plot lines.
I've moved this part of the discussion to this thread:
http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/Trav/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000124
What I try to invent whenever I kick around campaign ideas is the system I describe there. I'd really like to have all of my CT reprints, GT books, and JTAS articles organized into an accessible/useable framwork like what I describe there.
Without it, Traveller is more like a research project than a game. It's endlessly fascinating either way, no doubt.... But I think Marc Miller might be in a unique position to pull something off along these lines.
Jame,
This is all the math you need from Chris' web page:
It's simple. Roll 3D6 to see if your origin and target points. If the origin is, your PCs must spend more time in normal space travelling to a point that isn't masked before jumping. If the target is, your PCs must spend more time in normal space travelling from an unmasked target point to whatever planet they wanted to visit. That extra time in normal space means extra chances for adventures.
The math is just there to prove the table to persnickety types. As a GM you needn't use it at all.
And remember, as a GM you needn't use jump masking at all.
Have fun,
Bill
I certainly did not expect the number of responses on the question I posted. From reading the posts, it seems that MWM is just publishing T-5 just to say that he is still in the game.
I believe MWM walked away from Travller sometime beforw MT was published, and focussed on his main love, wargames. This is unfortunately, because rpg's are like children,they will grow with out their parents as long as someone else cares for them. DGP ran with MT, until GDW decided to do TNE. MWM decided to return to rpg's with T-4. Not good. Now he is going to try again with T-5. And once again, it does not seem to work.
Some of the original game designers have stayed with their games and have guided them. Seimbeda over at Pallidium still controls all his products and knows where it is going, system and settings. MAR Barker, the creator of Tekumel: The Petal Throne, supposedly has been running games in Tekumel for the past 20+ years. The current printing setting reflects the changes that have happened with his gaming groups. He seems to have ignored the mechanics and focused on running a great game setting. Others have focused on game mechanics, Steve Jackson/GURPS,& Greg Porter/CORPS&EABA.
MWM, imho, should probably scrap the system for T-5, and focus on settings. Whether it is some version of the Traveller universe or a brand new setting all together. Why bother reinventing the Travller mechanics and also seeming to make it more complicated than it has to be? Alot of random dice rolls to create alien beings. That is so 1980's. A few game systems try to use logic to build alien races and fit them into their system.
Some of you may think I hate Traveller or dislike MWM. But I really want T-5 to succeed and grow, not because MWM wrote it, but because it is good and worth playing. I remember being excited about MT, getting a lot of the related products. I bought TNE, just on the strength of the cover and the excitement it promised. I ran MT for over a year, and unfortunately I had to move away after I got TNE, but I still own it waiting to run it in the future.
So I say in closing this post, MWM if you are reading this, do not receate the wheel if you do not have to, tell us a good story!!
I believe MWM walked away from Travller sometime beforw MT was published, and focussed on his main love, wargames. This is unfortunately, because rpg's are like children,they will grow with out their parents as long as someone else cares for them. DGP ran with MT, until GDW decided to do TNE. MWM decided to return to rpg's with T-4. Not good. Now he is going to try again with T-5. And once again, it does not seem to work.
Some of the original game designers have stayed with their games and have guided them. Seimbeda over at Pallidium still controls all his products and knows where it is going, system and settings. MAR Barker, the creator of Tekumel: The Petal Throne, supposedly has been running games in Tekumel for the past 20+ years. The current printing setting reflects the changes that have happened with his gaming groups. He seems to have ignored the mechanics and focused on running a great game setting. Others have focused on game mechanics, Steve Jackson/GURPS,& Greg Porter/CORPS&EABA.
MWM, imho, should probably scrap the system for T-5, and focus on settings. Whether it is some version of the Traveller universe or a brand new setting all together. Why bother reinventing the Travller mechanics and also seeming to make it more complicated than it has to be? Alot of random dice rolls to create alien beings. That is so 1980's. A few game systems try to use logic to build alien races and fit them into their system.
Some of you may think I hate Traveller or dislike MWM. But I really want T-5 to succeed and grow, not because MWM wrote it, but because it is good and worth playing. I remember being excited about MT, getting a lot of the related products. I bought TNE, just on the strength of the cover and the excitement it promised. I ran MT for over a year, and unfortunately I had to move away after I got TNE, but I still own it waiting to run it in the future.
So I say in closing this post, MWM if you are reading this, do not receate the wheel if you do not have to, tell us a good story!!
RobertFisher
SOC-12
Yeah, but the people who recommend the CT reprints without mentioning GT or T20 weren't going to mention GT or T20 if the CT reprints weren't available. They'd either stay silent or recommend ebay instead.
But, it's Marc's money, & he can do what he wants. We can give advice, but we can't make him follow it. If we think he's got it completely wrong & he ignores our advice, the only thing we can do is put up our own money & compete.
Agreed.
That's it. Thanks. Not that I really wish ill of GT or T20...at least I try not to.Originally posted by Bromgrev:
Schadenfreude
M
Malenfant
Guest
Well, ebay isn't really a practical option for a lot of people. Without the CT reprints, I'd imagine that getting all the individual LBBs that you'd need would be rather expensive. (and QLI is also partly involved here, for keeping books 1-3 in circulation).
My opinion is that CT can't remotely compete against GT or T20 as a system that people coming into the game TODAY would want to use. It uses a radically different design paradigm compared to today's games, it's not well explained or detailed, and is not presented in a way that would particularly impress the modern gamer.
Furthermore, if you want a generic scifi game to build your own background today then books like Star HERO, Lightspeed, GURPS Space, d6 Space, and d20 Future give you much better tools and much more options in which to do it than CT does. There is very little (if anything at all) to recommend CT over these other systems.
Plus, more to the point, CT is not supported - the reprints are just a pretense of support. The only people actually putting out new material for Traveller are SJG and QLI, and they're doing that for their own versions of the game.
If CT wasn't around today then people recommending the game would point others to GT and T20 - they'd be the only active options available. Pointing them to CT is like pointing someone who is asking for a recommendation for a new car to a clapped-out 1970s Ford Cortina instead of to a shiny new Mazda or Chrysler (and in this case, the old banger wouldn't cost much less than the new cars).
Well, we can't do that really. Since Marc holds the key to the licenses, he would just say "no, you can't do that".
We can choose not to spend money on something that he puts out that we don't want though. All the people who say "ooo, a product by Marc Miller! I must buy this even if it's crap!" are not doing anybody any favours. If T5 ends up being wildly different to what anyone in the community had in mind, then don't waste your money on it.
Also, I'm wondering where GT and T20 will be if T5 comes out. Will Marc want the competition to stay out there? With T5, he'd be able to make money directly from sales of that, instead of through licensing of GT and T20 and sales of the CT reprints. I doubt if he'd keep the reprints in circulation. SJG may not decide to renew its license for Traveller after this year if GT:Interstellar Wars doesn't sell well - or it might sell well (and I think it will) and they'd want to keep the license. And T20 would hopefully still be selling well by 2007.
We've already lost CT+ because of T5 (personally, I think Hunter should push ahead with it and let the market sort it out. I'm sure that CT+ would be much more popular than T5). Are we going to lose GT and T20 as well because of it? Because if we are, what we're getting in their place is nowhere near as good.
Bluntly, I think Marc should be put out to pasture - he should hand over the reins of Traveller to Loren, Hunter, and MJD and let them take the game where they want it to go. But as far as I can see, Marc is becoming a major road block in Traveller's future, a shadow over everyone that shouldn't be there.
Right now, we have two companies actively putting out good, well-produced material for their own editions of the game that are relevant to the modern gaming market. And that is under threat because Marc is too stubborn to admit that (a) there is no place for T5 in the market, (b) that he'd be undermining the people who ARE putting out good material for the game, and (c) that he can't design a game that would be relevant or interesting in today's market.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Oh, and can the jump-maskers please move their discussion to another thread?
Gurps Space is a great product for what it does. It may be derivative of classic Traveller, but it does not "do" what the classic LBB's did. If you don't understand this then there's no way that you can understand the need for T5.
(GURPS Space does not have a trade system. It has only an abstract space combat system. It has only one example starship. It doesn't have CT's super cool TAS forms. You are left to your own devices to determine how FTL works and what the terrain is like. CT's subsector is just an all around brilliant solution. CT has J-O-T 4, whereas GURPS emphasizes role playing to the exclusion of everything else. And so on...)
If the CT Reprints weren't available I'd probably have ended up putting my Traveller collection up for sale on ebay and telling people not to bother.
BTW, if GT shuts down it won't be because of T5.
...
And I liked the eighties. I'd like more options on the table than just GURPS & D20.
And if T5 is as big a disaster as you say it is, then GT and T20 will pick up and move on and not be affected by it after it tanks.
(GURPS Space does not have a trade system. It has only an abstract space combat system. It has only one example starship. It doesn't have CT's super cool TAS forms. You are left to your own devices to determine how FTL works and what the terrain is like. CT's subsector is just an all around brilliant solution. CT has J-O-T 4, whereas GURPS emphasizes role playing to the exclusion of everything else. And so on...)
If the CT Reprints weren't available I'd probably have ended up putting my Traveller collection up for sale on ebay and telling people not to bother.
BTW, if GT shuts down it won't be because of T5.
...
And I liked the eighties. I'd like more options on the table than just GURPS & D20.
And if T5 is as big a disaster as you say it is, then GT and T20 will pick up and move on and not be affected by it after it tanks.
Similar threads
