The Vision for Traveller

[robject]

This post is off the cuff.

You may have heard about Greg Lee's passing on Easter Sunday. With his passing I reflect on the people who love Traveller, and who wish to see Marc's vision for it continue.

I've long thought about what it takes to be helpful, and I think the main thing is a loyalty and interest in Marc's vision of Traveller. This includes being "loyally opposed" to things in that vision. But I think that also means civil disagreement, plus a willingness to abide by decisions for the sake of getting on with the story. I note that even within decisions I don't like there is typically room for development in directions I do like. And I do believe that being able to subordinate your preferences is important for the ability to get along with everyone else.

To the degree that that is possible, then that is the degree of meaningful participation. For example, Joshua aligns with Marc over starchart data; he might or might not align over other aspects of Traveller, but his participation is typically self-limited to the Map, and in that matter he is a faithful and trustworthy steward of Marc's vision.

Anyone know what I mean? Am I making any sense?

Rob

 

[Whipsnade]

Anyone know what I mean? Am I making any sense?

Let me try: We can all agree to disagree, just as long as our actions concerning whatever tiny bits of Traveller which fall within our power help that vision. Sound right?

Here's the 64 dollar question: What IS Mr. Miller's vision or Traveller?

I've been play and playing with the game since 1977. In that time, I've read articles, forwards, dedications, and final thoughts across several versions and dozens of products along with posts by third parties "in the know". Despite that, if you held a gun to my head asking what Mr. Miller's "vision" is for the game, I'd be doing little more than guessing when I answered.

Over the last year or so, I've been handed more clues than I'd seen in the previous 39 years. There is a recorded Q&A session at some 'con, a report on another Q&A session at another 'con, and the rediscovery of an article in which Mr. Miller describes how he ran an encounter from CT's A:4 Leviathan, but those are damn few clues which have showed up pretty damn late.

Just what IS his vision? While I don't expect to agree with it fully, I can't even begin to guess what aspects I would agree with.

 

[kilemall]

And then there is the vision of the sandbox toolkit, vs. the vision of the OTU.

I am greatly interested in the former, the latter only as a resource for making informed gameplay design decisions in MTU.

 

[Timerover51]

This post is off the cuff.

You may have heard about Greg Lee's passing on Easter Sunday. With his passing I reflect on the people who love Traveller, and who wish to see Marc's vision for it continue.

I've long thought about what it takes to be helpful, and I think the main thing is a loyalty and interest in Marc's vision of Traveller. This includes being "loyally opposed" to things in that vision. But I think that also means civil disagreement, plus a willingness to abide by decisions for the sake of getting on with the story. I note that even within decisions I don't like there is typically room for development in directions I do like. And I do believe that being able to subordinate your preferences is important for the ability to get along with everyone else.

To the degree that that is possible, then that is the degree of meaningful participation. For example, Joshua aligns with Marc over starchart data; he might or might not align over other aspects of Traveller, but his participation is typically self-limited to the Map, and in that matter he is a faithful and trustworthy steward of Marc's vision.

Anyone know what I mean? Am I making any sense?

Rob

First, you are making sense. Second, my gut feeling is that the members of the forum are all in agreement with you with respect to supporting Marc's vision of Traveller, but sometimes do not do very good job at doing so. I will admit to being in that category, as there are times when I am a bit too blunt or a bit too formal, but at 65, I fear that I am not going to change too much.

I guess what I would most like to see is Marc's vision expanded beyond just is what is in the Official Universe or Traveller Map, to include a wider range of science fiction writing and imagination. I am somewhat trying to do that with my Piper Sector, blending a stronger strain of H. Beam Piper and Andre Norton with a spicing of A. Bertram Chandler with Traveller, mainly using the 1977 edition of the LLBs along with The Traveller Book.

Somehow, a focus on what is and what is not "canon" seems to me to get in the way of vision and imagination. Marc's vision has evolved over the years.
I would hazard to say that most players vision has evolved as well. I spoke several times with Gary Gygax, being not the far from Lake Geneva, and hitting the area conventions a while back on a regular basis, and he always reiterated the same thing, that rules for a RPG should be viewed as "guidelines", not commandments cast into stone. As in the long discussion on how to charge for cargo, the rules themselves are open to interpretation, and it is up to the Game Master as to how the charges work. He or she needs to use the rules in a way that they are most comfortable with, without bending them so far as to break them.

What my vision for Traveller would be is less "is it canonical", and more "is it solidly based on Traveller".

And now come the "slings and arrows of misfortune", along with the over-used coffee grounds, eggs, and tomatoes.

 

[Quint]

Let me try: We can all agree to disagree, just as long as our actions concerning whatever tiny bits of Traveller which fall within our power help that vision. Sound right?

Here's the 64 dollar question: What IS Mr. Miller's vision or Traveller?

I've been play and playing with the game since 1977. In that time, I've read articles, forwards, dedications, and final thoughts across several versions and dozens of products along with posts by third parties "in the know". Despite that, if you held a gun to my head asking what Mr. Miller's "vision" is for the game, I'd be doing little more than guessing when I answered.

Over the last year or so, I've been handed more clues than I'd seen in the previous 39 years. There is a recorded Q&A session at some 'con, a report on another Q&A session at another 'con, and the rediscovery of an article in which Mr. Miller describes how he ran an encounter from CT's A:4 Leviathan, but those are damn few clues which have showed up pretty damn late.

Just what IS his vision? While I don't expect to agree with it fully, I can't even begin to guess what aspects I would agree with.

Been playing since '79 or '80 and I identify with Whipsnade here - or at least I see a vision that I am less enamored with because I see a vision (T5) full of charts and subsystems and design sequences which is mired in roll-playing instead role-playing. Traveller (for me) is increasingly less a game system I can run and more a game engine to use as the skeleton for a host of house rules that actually create a coherent game.

That makes me sad because it make the likelihood of me actually running it decrease because of the work involved. I also don't have any particularly coherent sense of the OTU given the piles of contradictory information I have - which has pretty much killed my desire to ever try to run an OTU campaign ever again (maybe a one-off, but...)

Philosophically I like the idea of using the RAW to determine what the universe looks like, I also like the both the simplicity of the ProtoTraveller concept combined with the literary works it was emulating (compared to what CT evolved into) - and this comes from someone who was/is a DGP fan!

But I'm really lost when I try to sum up Traveller for a new player these days.

D.

 

[agorski]

You may have heard about Greg Lee's passing on Easter Sunday.

Wait...What? Can someone post info in the News section?

 

[McPerth]

Wait...What? Can someone post info in the News section?

Aramis has now: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=37551

 

[aramis]

Wait...What? Can someone post info in the News section?

Already done.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

“We're all stories, in the end. Just make it a good one, eh?"

Since Mr. Lee passed on brought you here, I suppose you are speaking about mortality, legacy and honoring a legacy. On Traveller vision, mortality and legacy, only Mr. Miller or his estate can truly answer. Yes, that sounds morbid but I am an unreformed goth. But at some time we will all pass.

What do I think that vision is? If my opinion matters at all, some level-less SF rule set(s) called Traveller and this OTU setting, in all its eras (even ATU ones)

In terms of actually helping, I have found my niche. I like cataloging and crunching numbers. I have done that for Don M., the Wiki and travellermap.
If another person rises up to Don's role some day, I hope I can be of service.

 

[sabredog]

I, like many others here, have played the game since it came out in '77. I have played it ever since more or less steadily now, and pretty much in exclusion to anything else out there. The only real exceptions being RQ and CoC...because Traveller is my thing.

What I believe Marc Miller's vision is, is what he wrote on the last page of the 2nd ed. of LBB 3, and I have always used as a guide for my games when I get stuck in some canon-or-not loop:

"A Final Word

Traveller is necessarily a framework describing the barest of essentials for an
infinite universe; obviously rules which could cover every aspect of every possible action would be far larger than these three booklets. A group involved in playing a scenario or campaign can make their adventures more elaborate, more detailed, more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination.

The greatest burden, of course, falls on the referee, who must create entire
worlds and societies through which the players will roam. One very interesting
source of assistance for this task is the existing science-fiction literature. Virtually anything mentioned in a story or article can be transferred to the Traveller environment. Orbital cities, nuclear war, alien societies, puzzles, enigmas, absolutely anything can occur, with imagination being the only limit.

The players themselves have a burden almost equal to that of the referee: they must move, act, travel in search of their own goals. The typical methods used in life by 20th century Terrans (thrift, dedication, and hard work) do not work in Traveller; instead, travellers must boldly plan and execute daring schemes for the acquisition of wealth and power. As for the referee, modern science-fiction tradition provides many ideas and concepts to be imitated.

Above all, the players and the referees must work together. Care must be taken that the referee does not simply lay fortunes in the path of the players, but the situation is not primarily an adversary relationship. The referee simply administers the rules in situations where the players themselves have an incomplete understanding of the universe. The results should reflect a consistent reality.

Welcome to the universe of Traveller!"

This vision is of a shared imaginary space in which we can and do imagine everything and anything we want to without having to weld ourselves to any particular canon. Nobody should berate anyone else for "not playing it right" or for violating some holy writ - anything goes that you can hang on the framework of the supporting rules.

It is open ended by design to allow players to enjoy as they want to, and if they want to share what they have then we all celebrate it together as Traveller players. OTU, ATU, whatever,...it doesn't matter so long as it is a fun science fiction roleplaying game we can all sit around a table with and tell stories with. Because that is also the vision for Traveller: to tell awesome stories of high adventure among the stars...Traveller sets the stage, but we write the play, and I'm pretty sure that is what Marc envisioned for the game 40 years ago when it first came out.


***the excerpt off the .pdf is wonky, sorry, but I banged this out in a hurry.

 

[creativehum]

A Final Word

Traveller is necessarily a framework describing the barest of essentials for an
infinite universe; obviously rules which could cover every aspect of every possible action would be far larger than these three booklets. A group involved in playing a scenario or campaign can make their adventures more elaborate, more detailed, more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination.

The greatest burden, of course, falls on the referee, who must create entire worlds and societies through which the players will roam. One very interesting source of assistance for this task is the existing science-fiction literature. Virtually anything mentioned in a story or article can be transferred to the Traveller environment. Orbital cities, nuclear war, alien societies, puzzles, enigmas, absolutely anything can occur, with imagination being the only limit.

The players themselves have a burden almost equal to that of the referee: they must move, act, travel in search of their own goals. The typical methods used in life by 20th century Terrans (thrift, dedication, and hard work) do not work in Traveller; instead, travellers must boldly plan and execute daring schemes for the acquisition of wealth and power. As for the referee, modern science-fiction tradition provides many ideas and concepts to be imitated.

Above all, the players and the referees must work together. Care must be taken that the referee does not simply lay fortunes in the path of the players, but the situation is not primarily an adversary relationship. The referee simply administers the rules in situations where the players themselves have an incomplete understanding of the universe. The results should reflect a consistent reality.

Welcome to the universe of Traveller!

-- Book 3 (19&1)

I think Marc Miller has had many visions for Traveller over the years. And people are drawn to each of these different visions.

I was thinking earlier today about how I would express which of those I am drawn to. And then sabredog posted the quote from Book 3. That's the vision of Traveller I care about.

Which means the vision of Traveller articulated (clearly) by Miller that I care about was written about 40 years ago. I don't think it's Miller's vision of Traveller anymore. But it's still mine.

 

[Fovean]

"A Final Word

Traveller is necessarily a framework describing the barest of essentials for an
infinite universe~"

This. This is what has always made the game great, difficult, amazing, confusing, enlightening - all at the same time. The freedom of the system is in some ways a prison. Which I suspect is why more and more official background as well as crunchy gearheaded-ness grew in with each publication of the rules. The consuming public needed or wanted a direction to work in because truly, you can do pretty much anything you want with Traveller, even the rule sets that are very setting-specific, like M0 or TNE.

I discovered Traveller in 1984, in elementary school. About a year after I discovered D&D. So I'm younger than most of you guys it seems. But I delved in to all the available versions - CT LLBs when I could find them, TTB (my first and favorite) and Starter. It's very amazing to have so much of it on my iPad now, when I was so protective my hard-won, allowance-based copies of the books back then...

I've supported both MgT as well as T5. MgT has breathed a lot of new life into the Marches and the Reach. T5 has given us all those fun Makers as well as the Galaxiad to look forward to.

For me there's no question of supporting Mark's vision of the game, which to me is obviously T5 and wherever that is heading. But I can't play T5 with my friends. It's just too dense. They don't care enough about the rules of T5 when we can get basically the same effect from MgT which to them feels simple, old school renaissance flavorful. Having said that, even when I disagree with the Traveller PTB, it is with respect - and thankfulness for all the years of play this simple yet overwhelming game has given me.

FWIW we play in MTU, not the 3I, and I take all the best bits from all the rules I like and that works just fine.