What is Traveller?

[aramis]

See, the thing is, Jason, they ARE NOT distinct; the rules are the superset containing both the prose and the mechanics; given the way that Traveller editions are written, there is no distinction other than tables vs text made within the rules themselves, and generally, the text has been correct more often than the tables when it comes to eratta.

At least, in comparison to boardgame standards, they are absolutely comingled.

Many games these days go to great pains to separate mechanics text from setting text; Traveller NEVER made such efforts in core rules, not even Gareth's writing does so. (If he tried, he failed miserably; I'd much prefer to think that he didn't bother trying, since the ruleset is otherwise decent work, but is clearly linked to the Traveller Feel, even as it clearly isn't aimed at the OTU due to the rampant changes in pricing.)



The OTU isn't the source of the Traveller feel; the Rules themselves (text and tables alike) is the source of the feel. The OTU simply happens to be the best expression of that feel.

 

[rust]

I haven't made any argument about whether B5 or Hammer's Slammers are Traveller or not. In fact I think I haven't mentioned either one at all.

No, you did not mention them.

However, people sometimes tend to forget that we are discussing a game
where adults sit around a table and pretend to be starfarers or aliens, and
seriously begin to argue about the right way to pretend to be a starfarer
or alien, and they usually cause some "collateral damage" when doing so. :devil:

 

[captainjack]

Ah, Captain, I politely disagree.

To use a real world example, VLF/ELF radio frequencies are used to send mes-
sages to submerged submarines, but the necessary transceivers are so big
that a submarine can only have a receiver on board, never send messages
itself.

So, depending on the size, power requirement, etc., of FTL communicators,
their absence in the combat rules does not prove whether they exist or not,
it only shows that the technology is not useful for space combat.

Sir, an excellent point ! A huge transmitter, or one perhaps requiring a strong gravitic field would certainly work as you describe. While I cannot agree with the possibility that such was the default, your idea is within the bounds of my observation, and addresses my main argument. Still, I feel that there would have been some statement about why FTL coms were not available in combat had there been an assumption of FTL communications in general. But that's my opinion about how GDW wrote rules, so not everyone would see it as such.

 

[Ishmael]

I can see both sides of the argument here.

While the game assumes no FTL communications for good reasons, the rules makes no specific mention outside of comments that in the postulated Traveller universe, communications are limited to the speed of travel. The rule mechanics make no mention at all beyond the absence of named FTL equipment.

I looked into the rule mechanics themselves in MT ( player manual and ref's manual ). I assumed that the matter would have no impact on cg, animals, interpersonal tasks, non-space combat, etc. The only places FTL comms would have any effect would be on world building ( tech, government and law ), interstellar trade, and space combat.

In space combat, the total lag at the start of extreme range is less than a 1 sec given MT ranges. With game turns lasting 20 minutes and the rest of the combat rules being so abstracted, I don't feel that amount of lag is significant and there doesn't seem to be any rules or DM's that take such a lag time into account. Such small differences at standard ship combat ranges could just as easily be caused by data processing lags anyways. Any lag effects for greater ranges that might begin to be significant are left to the ref to handle on their own in the absence of any specific rules.

In world-building, the lag incurred by limiting comms to speed of travel is usually one week. Removing that with instant communications would still not be significant enough in my opinion to affect how the rules determine government types, law levels or tech levels. any differences that might arise could be explained away in the same manner that breathable atmospheres on 1000km chunks of rock can be explained ( which the rule mechanics force one to do anyways )

In economics, the trade rules do not simulate any serious economies anyways and exist merely to generate cargo availability for free traders. They provide gross affects of how costs can vary between worlds in a mostly random fashion. Any trends postulated would be the same after a week lag as they would be given instant knowledge. The rule mechanics do not take such a lag time into account.

I see no evidence that FTL, or the lack of it, has any significant effect concerning the rule mechanics even though it is definitely a base assumption in any postulated Traveller universe. Any effects caused by the lack of FTL comms are left to the ref to handle.

Thats what it looks like to me, anyways.
( but it is a base assumption that is mentioned directly for Trav )

 

[Whipsnade]

Bill deleted a very good, but obviously triggered by frustration, post on that very topic.

Aramis,

That post deserved to be deleted. There may have been good points in it, but it was more a product of my terminal insomnia than anything else and it would added nothing of worth to this thread.

After posting it, I re-read it and was horrified. (I normally re-read my posts for spelling and grammar errors that I somehow cannot pick up during composition.) I would have immediately deleted the post if a thunderstorm had not knocked me off line.

I'm not happy that I wrote the post in question, nor am I happy that I realized I needed to delete it. Relieved is a better description.


Regards,
Bill

 

[dmccoy1693]

However, people sometimes tend to forget that we are discussing a game where adults sit around a table and pretend to be starfarers or aliens, and seriously begin to argue about the right way to pretend to be a starfarer or alien, and they usually cause some "collateral damage" when doing so. :devil:

I do believe you have won the thread, sir.

 

[Whipsnade]

Jason,

Why did I come up with the odd idea? It's because you've failed to answer the question "Why?" that has been posed to you by several posters in this thread. Ty's version is the best and most recent version:

Then perhaps you can tell us *why* this argument that you're flogging with such enthusiasm matters... For some reason, you're stretching awfully hard to press an argument that most of us do not find convincing (and that requires a very dubious downgrading of plain statements in the first paragraph of the Traveller rules). Why?

You're deconstructing Traveller's rules in the best tradition of literary deconstructionism and to ultimately the same result: reductio ad absurdum.

You've reduced and parsed the text to a point where it essentially becomes meaningless. Literary deconstructionists do this so they can then insert into the text whatever sociological or political idea they happen to be flogging at the time. Because you were deconstructing the text, I naturally was curious if you were using deconstruction for the same reason literary types use it and were attempting to insert non-Traveller settings in the Traveller rule set. Then a phrase you used in another post - basic game mechanics - clued me to what the disconnect between your questions and our explanations has been all along.

You've confused rules with basic game mechanics.

"Roll 2D6" is a basic game mechanic. You can find that mechanic in Traveller, Yaquinto's Ironclads, Craps, and thousands of other games. It's only when a basic game mechanic is placed in the context of a game that it becomes a rule.

"Roll 2D6" becomes the Traveller rule "Roll 8+ on 2D6 with these DMs to hit an opponent with an ACR." when the context is applied. The same basic game mechanic becomes the Ironclads rule when that game's context produces "Roll 8+ on 2D6 when firing an 11-inch dahlgren at this range to hit an opponent" and becomes the Craps rule when that game's context produces "Roll your number on 2D6 before rolling a seven".

The fact that Traveller, Ironclads, and Craps all use the same basic game mechanic in no way means that those games are in any way similar or that the rules for one can be used for another. Your belief that a basic game mechanic equates compatibility is predicated on the mistaken assumption that basic game mechanics equate rules. The two are very different things; one is context free and the other context dependent.

It is this difference that is at work when we say B5 or Slammers are not Traveller settings. They can very well be "powered by Traveller", that is use game mechanics from Traveller in different contexts. They are not Traveller in the slightest however because both are outside the context stated for Traveller in the first paragraph on the first page of the first book of the first rules set:

"The major problem, however, will be that communication, be it political, diplomatic, commercial, or private, will be reduced to the level of the 18th century, reduced to the speed of transportation."

That quote is part of the context that was used to form Traveller's rules from a mass of basic game mechanics. The text describing that context is just as important as the rules themselves because the text makes the rules what they are.

I hope this clears up any questions you may have and explains my musings about the possible reasons you may have had for asking those questions in the first place.


Regards,
Bill

 

[CosmicGamer]

the absence of named FTL equipment

Using statements like this to support a position doesn't make sense to me.
1) FTL communication may require huge transmition and recieving devices, cooling towers, huge power stations or other devices that take up vast amounts of space. I don't believe 'installations' and buildings are typicaly equipment and I've never seen things like the hoover dam or an office building in an equipment list. How many equipment lists include non FTL communication satelites for communication with other planets in the same system?

2) The equipment detailed is finite and there is a huge variety and number of items that are not in any equipment list for Traveller but these items would still obviously exist. I do not have access to every traveller publication for every version, so I don't want to make a fool of myself by giving a bunch of examples only to have someone state it is in such and such. Out of curiosity though, has anyone ever seen a two inch #10 silicon bronze slotted flat head tapered shank screw in a Traveller equipment list?

 

[captainjack]

The fact that Traveller, Ironclads, and Craps all use the same basic game mechanic in no way means that those games are in any way similar or that the rules for one can be used for another.

You know, I always wondered where the assumption that the CSS Virginia had no FTL communications came from.......it really isn't stated explicitly in the Yaquinto version of the rules......

 

[Jason]

Why did I come up with the odd idea? It's because you've failed to answer the question "Why?" that has been posed to you by several posters in this thread. Ty's version is the best and most recent version:

Uh, yes I did answer that. See post #219.

You've reduced and parsed the text to a point where it essentially becomes meaningless.

No I haven't. I've simply pointed out that there is a difference between text and rules, and that while the Traveller text says there are no FTL communications in Traveller, there is nothing in the rules that would have to be drastically changed if they were added. Therefore the assumption that there is no FTL communication in Traveller is not as fundamental to the game as it might at first appear.

That quote is part of the context that was used to form Traveller's rules from a mass of basic game mechanics.

I agree that the quote is in the book and was part of Marc Miller's assumptions about the game when he created it. I disagree that this particular assumption had a fundamental effect on the game mechanics/rules as they appear in the same book.

I hope this clears up any questions you may have and explains my musings about the possible reasons you may have had for asking those questions in the first place.

Not really, but like I said, you can believe what you like.
Would it help clear up some misconceptions to let you know that I've never read any Hammer Slammer's stories and don't own the Mongoose book, and that I didn't watch a single episode of Babylon 5 when it aired and don't own any B5 books - game system or otherwise - either?
On the other hand, I do own several copies of the LBBs, The Traveller Book, The Traveller Adventure, and various CT Traveller books, all the reprints, all of GDW's MegaTraveller products and nearly all of DGP's MT products, nearly all of TNE and T4, all of the GURPS Traveller books, and now all of Mongoose Traveller's stuff? All in the original, dead tree versions, not on collection CDs.
I am a fan of the game and especially the OTU, and I wouldn't add FTJ communications to any game I ran of Traveller in the OTU.

 

[Murdoc]

Ok, maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't get how FTL/J comm doesn't affect trade. This is how I look at it:

I'm a trader. I'm looking at buying Cr1000 of widgets on planet A, hoping to sell them on some other planet in another star system. Now, with traditional Traveller no-FTJ comm, I don't know for what prices I could sell these widgets at on each of the other planets, aside from the normal modifiers for TL, trade codes, etc. I don't know if they're having a surplus or shortage right now. In order to find out, I have to buy the cargo, go to the system, and take my chances.

But now, with FTJ comm, I just check "online" what the current market rates are, pick the best one, and head on over. Ok, so there is still a week's lag, and price can change in the meantime, but at least I'm in the ballpark. How about I use that comm, contact the potential buyer, and make a deal at a certain price (I do this on eBay). There, my cargo is paid for, no risk. Heck, I could take it one step further and start a bidding war if widgets happen to be in a seller's market (also like eBay). Probably won't happen as I imagine there will be other sellers, or stock, or shippers to deal with, but it could. In fact, I'd see a lot less potential for free traders at all if the companies themselves can just comm over to the various buyers and set up a deal themselves. Then the best any tramp freighter can hope for is a little surplus freight shipping. (Most eBay seller's use something like UPS.)

To me this changes the game. Now what am I missing? (Go on, I'm prepared to be proven wrong.)

 

[Whipsnade]

I've simply pointed out that there is a difference between text and rules...

Jason,

Once again, you're deconstructing the game to a point of absurdity.

I can examine a cell and say there's a difference between the nucleus and the mitochondria, but, because I'm discussing a cell, I still need to keep my frame reference at the cellular level.

... and that while the Traveller text says there are no FTL communications in Traveller, there is nothing in the rules that would have to be drastically changed if they were added.

I'll point you once again to all the posts regarding the trade system, including Murdoc's recent one in which he explains how tramp traders would be shut out of the speculative market if shippers could contact buyers via FTJ comms. A similar situation happening in the real world as radios became cheaper and more widespread; the storied tramp traders of the south Pacific, southeast Asian archipelagos, and coastal Africa all vanished and were replaced by freight haulers filling radioed orders. FTJ comms would have the same effect on the game's trading system, ship operating costs, ship construction, and canonical ship designs among many other things. Those aspects of the game are specifically designed to force ship-owning players into speculative trading and other risky ventures so that they can pay their bills. Fiddle with the economic system, which you continue to claim has no bias against FTJ comms, and you remove the game's built-in adventure hook thus changing Traveller out of recognition.

Therefore the assumption that there is no FTL communication in Traveller is not as fundamental to the game as it might at first appear.

You are incorrect.

I disagree that this particular assumption had a fundamental effect on the game mechanics/rules as they appear in the same book.

The reason why you are incorrect is clearly stated in the sentence I quoted. You still do not comprehend the difference between mechanics and rules.

Quite frankly, I'm at a loss as how to explain that difference to you, a difference that everyone else in this thread seems to already understand.

Would it help clear up some misconceptions...

Not really. I re-read the post you directed me to and I still am uncertain as to why you're persisting in this line of reasoning. No one would do this simply for "fun".

I am a fan of the game and especially the OTU, and I wouldn't add FTJ communications to any game I ran of Traveller in the OTU.

What you do in your own games only concerns you. Nothing else matters, especially the opinions of others.


Regards,
Bill

 

[rust]

By the way: Naval operations and Third Imperium history.

True, I do not remember any detailed rules for naval operations except those
in Trillion Credit Squadron, which definitely would have to be rewritten if FTL
communication did exist in the Third Imperium (no "fog of war", no squadrons
in the wrong system at the wrong time, etc.).

However, while the known history of the Third Imperium is not exactly a part
of the rules, only "fluff text", I would expect such a description to reflect the
rules of the game, written and "unwritten" ones.
And many naval operations during the described history of the Third Imperium
would make no sense at all if FTL communication had been available to the
commanders of the fleets involved.

There would be similar problems with the Third Imperium's politics. Just imagi-
ne how different the situation after Strephon's "assassination" would have de-
veloped if FTL communication had existed, or how the spread of Virus would
have been influenced by advance warnings via FTL communication.

So, in the end the question whether the rules explicitly mention FTL communi-
cation or not may be interesting, but it is somewhat moot for the Third Impe-
rium setting - it obviously does not include FTL communication.

And as for other settings, well, we will have to wait and see what kind of ru-
les for FTL communication Mongoose intends to publish. As mentioned before,
while the Babylon 5 setting doubtless includes FTL communication, I did not
find any rules for it in the Babylon 5 supplement.

 

[dmccoy1693]

To me this changes the game. Now what am I missing? (Go on, I'm prepared to be proven wrong.)

Depends on how you define the game. If you define Traveller as being a game of speculative trading, then yes it does change the game. But if you define it as a game where you do "missions" and you transport cargo to generate a supplemental income (aka not really interested in the trading aspect), than it doesn't change things much.

 

[Space Hamster]

Jason,

Once again, you're deconstructing the game to a point of absurdity.

<snip>

Not really. I re-read the post you directed me to and I still am uncertain as to why you're persisting in this line of reasoning. No one would do this simply for "fun".

<snip>

Regards,
Bill

A troll would. Look at the create date of his account. I think he is baiting you guys.

 

[atpollard]

Ok, maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't get how FTL/J comm doesn't affect trade. This is how I look at it:

I'm a trader. I'm looking at buying Cr1000 of widgets on planet A, hoping to sell them on some other planet in another star system. Now, with traditional Traveller no-FTJ comm, I don't know for what prices I could sell these widgets at on each of the other planets, aside from the normal modifiers for TL, trade codes, etc. I don't know if they're having a surplus or shortage right now. In order to find out, I have to buy the cargo, go to the system, and take my chances.

But now, with FTJ comm, I just check "online" what the current market rates are, pick the best one, and head on over. Ok, so there is still a week's lag, and price can change in the meantime, but at least I'm in the ballpark. How about I use that comm, contact the potential buyer, and make a deal at a certain price (I do this on eBay). There, my cargo is paid for, no risk. Heck, I could take it one step further and start a bidding war if widgets happen to be in a seller's market (also like eBay). Probably won't happen as I imagine there will be other sellers, or stock, or shippers to deal with, but it could. In fact, I'd see a lot less potential for free traders at all if the companies themselves can just comm over to the various buyers and set up a deal themselves. Then the best any tramp freighter can hope for is a little surplus freight shipping. (Most eBay seller's use something like UPS.)

To me this changes the game. Now what am I missing? (Go on, I'm prepared to be proven wrong.)

If you loaded your Speclative Cargo of Widgets into a (water) ship and spent a week crossing the ocean to sell it in another country on another continent of the same balkanized world, you would (YMMV) use the exact same "sale price tables and modifiers" to sell the cargo as you would have used if jumping to another world. Communication lag does not appear to be responsible for the change in prices over time. (IMHO)

The underlined text indicates our area of agreement (the price will change over time - with or without FTL communications) and our potential area of difference (how much). I would argue that the one roll the new sale price with no change in the printed rules - that is how much the price changed with or without FTL communications. One might (and you probably would) argue that the price should change less with no communication lag and one should roll only 1of the D6 rather than 2D6 (in CT Trade) to determine the new sale price (across the ocean or across the parsec).

This is clearly an area where reasonable people can disagree.

 

[Murdoc]

If you loaded your Speclative Cargo of Widgets into a (water) ship and spent a week crossing the ocean to sell it in another country on another continent of the same balkanized world, you would (YMMV) use the exact same "sale price tables and modifiers" to sell the cargo as you would have used if jumping to another world. Communication lag does not appear to be responsible for the change in prices over time. (IMHO)

Unless, as I said, you use said instant communications to set a price and finalize the deal before shipping. In this case, the price is not going to change regardless of your shipping time (not after the sale mind you; the buyer may pay more for faster shipping of course). Yes, you could do it your way, and thus use those tables, but why would someone take such a risk when they don't have to?

 

[Whipsnade]

A troll would. Look at the create date of his account. I think he is baiting you guys.

Space Hamster,

I'm not willing to go that far yet.

I did look at Jason's account date and posting history, both are among the reasons why I assumed he was using MgT and was asking the questions he did.

If he is trolling - and I don't believe that to be the case - he's trolling more in the very subtle manner of Andy Kaufman or Sacha Baron Cohen and not in the slam-bam manner of the common internet variety.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Unless, as I said, you use said instant communications to set a price and finalize the deal before shipping. In this case, the price is not going to change regardless of your shipping time (not after the sale mind you; the buyer may pay more for faster shipping of course). Yes, you could do it your way, and thus use those tables, but why would someone take such a risk when they don't have to?

Murdoc,

Why take the risk indeed.

As I pointed out in my post, the tramp steamer crammed full of speculative goods which had linked various island and coastal backwaters with the bustling world found itself slowly losing business first as telegraph cables spread and finally out of business when radio aerials were erected in even the most remote locations.

When even the most remote location could now order what they needed and arrange for freighting, the floating emporiums and their canny pursers who understood their customers' minds better than their customers did were no longer needed.


Regards,
Bill

 

[rust]

When even the most remote location could now order what they needed and arrange for freighting, the floating emporiums and their canny pursers who understood their customers' minds better than their customers did were no longer needed.

I think the tramp traders would already begin to suffer seriously as soon as
a major trading company would establish a network of local factors (who ta-
ke orders and deliver the goods to the customers) and use a few fast courier
ships to connect the factors with a logistics centre (that buys goods in high
numbers and organizes the transport) - like the old "catalogue shops" (if they
were a known business model in the USA).
Well, and if those factors could easily communicate with each other and their
logistics centre by FTL communication ...