What do you want from T5?

[Malenfant]

Somewhat bafflingly, nobody seems to have asked this question as a poll here:

What do you want from T5?

So you can think on it, the questions are:
1) What game engine do you want in T5?
2) What setting do you want in T5? (multiple answers)
3) How would you use T5?
4) How/Why would you buy T5?
5) Do you think the Traveller market needs another version?

You can only see the results once you've voted - let's try to keep any discussion civil and on topic.

 

[Anthony]

For the 'game engine' question, you might want to change it to:
Refined CT/MT
Refined TNE
Refined T4
Refined T20 (likely not possible)
Brand New (as existing poll)

 

[Merxiless]

I'd say those poll questions were exactly on the mark. Good job.

 

[Liam Devlin]

Well done Malenfant.nods to author

 

[Golan2072]

For me, the "perfect" T5 would be T4 with the following changes:
1) All errata fixed.
2) The UGM (or MT) task system instead of the T4 one.
3) Far less complicated ship design rules; an HG-style system should be included in the basic book.
4) Better and clearer vehicle rules, incluing a simple (HG-style) vehicle design system included in the main book.

 

[mbrinkhues]

1) A version of an existing engine, preferably TNE since
</font>

• That is the third most used engine for me anyway (GURPS and Interlock/Fuzion beat it currently)</font>
• Is easy to tweak with few well known problems(1)</font>

I did not vote "No system" since general material+conversion notes always was "too much work" for me

2) All the ones I like:

</font>

• Classic OTU including MT</font>
• Prä-OTU settings (Gateway/SolRim, Barracks Emperor, Start of 3I)</font>
• TNE / 1248</font>

3) Difficult to answer, depends on the rules system and setting

4)Only after I have browsed through the rules and settings and liked them

5)Not really

 

[Liam Devlin]

No thanks, not for me, every time.

finis

 

[Roger Calver]

Interesting results so far.

 

[Jame]

1: Refined version of Traveller.

2: I would like anything listed, including no setting at all but excluding a variety of settings.

3: I would read T5 and add it to my collection, and if I liked it after I read it I would mine it.

4: I would buy it because it's another version of Traveller.

5: Yes we do need another, simply because you left open the implication that we don't.

 

[robject]

I know people (who like Traveller) who, in good conscience, don't believe a new version is needed (neither T5, T20, nor ACT, etc).

I'm looking forward to T5, and it is a new version of the rules, but it's not needed to play Traveller. CT+ works fine.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Jame:
5: Yes we do need another, simply because you left open the implication that we don't. [/QB]

Huh? The question was "do you think the Traveller fanbase really needs another version of Traveller? (Y/N)". How is there any implication in there that we don't need one, it's a yes/no question!

Anthony - I could have got more detailed with the systems, but it seems that the big split is between those who want any refined system (usually it a CT/MT hybrid or a refined T4) or a new one. So I just lumped all the "refined existing system" ones together.

So far the results are interesting. Please vote even if you're not interested in T5, this is going to give Marc some useful information.

 

[Supplement Four]

Question 3 is hard to answer. It depends on how "good" the T5 rules set is, doesn't it?

And, on Question 5, whether Traveller needs another rules set (probably not) depends on whether Marc makes one rules set "official", and all licensees are made to use it with their supplements.

I believe the market for Traveller is fractured, and I think that is killing the game.

We need a single rules set that all publishers of Traveller use.

The problems is: If that rules set is not based on CT/MT, I'm likely not to embrace it. There are others out there who feel the same about their TNE based games.

-S4

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Supplement Four:
[QB] Question 3 is hard to answer. It depends on how "good" the T5 rules set is, doesn't it?

It does, but some people have made it clear that they don't actually care how good it is, they'd just use it anyway (and have voted as such). Which is an... interesting viewpoint.

 

[flykiller]

so far, only about .10 say they want another version of traveller, but .50 say the "fan base" needs another version of traveller.

 

[Malenfant]

Odd interpretation of the results, flykiller...

There's currently a 50/50 split on the last question, but about 10% of the voters so far have said would NOT buy T5 at all, and about 10% have said that they want a new system compatible with the old editions. So far nobody has said they wanted a new system that was incompatible with older versions.

A clear majority of voters so far want a revised version of an existing system as the engine though.

 

[Vargas]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Supplement Four:
[QB] Question 3 is hard to answer. It depends on how "good" the T5 rules set is, doesn't it?

It does, but some people have made it clear that they don't actually care how good it is, they'd just use it anyway (and have voted as such). Which is an... interesting viewpoint. </font>[/QUOTE]I had the same problem with the question so I answered that I'd drop what I got and use it. The real answer is if it's good enough, I'd adopt it entirely.

 

[flykiller]

.70 of the respondents say they would, at best, look for ideas from T5 to incorporate into their existing games. yet .50 say the "traveller fanbase" needs a new version.

perhaps they are including new players in the phrase "traveller fanbase".

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Vargas:
]I had the same problem with the question so I answered that I'd drop what I got and use it. The real answer is if it's good enough, I'd adopt it entirely. [/QB]

I's suggest that for those cases a more accurate answer would be "Maybe, I'll read some reviews first" (if that's the right question I'm thinking of). It's really to separate those who would just embrace it immediately from those who'd wait and see (and those who wouldn't buy it at all). If you're saying "it depends if it's good enough" then it seems to me you're in the 'maybe' camp.

 

[Anthony]

The reason I suggested splitting the 'revised system' question is that the currently proposed 'new system' is 'revised T4'. There is a considerable split between 'revised CT/MT' and 'revised T4'.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I'm a CT/MT fan myself. I'm hopeful that I'll get to run a couple of good rounds of Trav this year or the next, and use a good refinement of MT with some CT sprinkled in.

Snapshot for personal combat married with MTs penetration/attenuation system, and the task system for everything non-combat related.

Beyond that I'm pretty flexible.