What was wrong with CT?

[manley_t]

Here we are, so many version of just one game -- and talking about yet another.

But I ask, what what wrong with CT? Really, just at the core of it, what was wrong?

Why not have T5 be the final version; the version that returns to it's roots with decades of experience under it's belt to create the BEST CT that could be done.

So, what were CT's weaknesses and what were some house-rules to overcome them?

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

In a word, Lord Tim, Nothing!

I myself have pondered the same questions you submit. he thing I always enjoyed about CT is that it supplied a solid, rational, framework, open enough to be interpreted in any way you wanted. Don't like the background? Fine. Then make a new one! All that was required was 2d6, paper, pencil, and of course copious amounts imagination.

I think in order to gain "new blood" into a game, companies have seen fit to endlessly revise things as rules get worked out. In my mind, when I picked up Megatraveller, I thought that they fixed something that wasn't broken. The best games always had a simple, elegant mechanic, and didn't need to rely on overcomplication to get the point across. I'm sure you could teach basic CT to a dolphin or a chimp easily. Refereeing is another matter. Later versions of Traveller I thought had improved presentation, but lacked in ease of play and logic of the background. People that I played with thought the Imperium was too static and needed to be more exciting... To that I say, It's as exciting as you make it, what?

 

[SGavorsky]

Part of it was the faddish-oriented nature of the hobby.

Task Resolution systems hot? We need one! GURPS Adaptations hot? We need one!

Personally, I always saw the later versions as primarily good for source material rather than their systems. However, I do like T20; as I've gotten older, for some reason I like the additional detail (particularly in the skill system) it provides. But that's more a personal choice, and it's not something that couldn't be built onto the CT base with a little effort.

I still use CT for one-shots; it's still one of the best, quick generic systems out there.

 

[Swordy]

Nothing wrong with CT, never was. For all of the fiddling around they did with other "versions" they could have done a great update and repackaging of CT when they did MT. CT already had a task system by that time and very little NEW info came in the MT box. The big change was the assassination gimmick, which turned me off of MT completely so that I stopped spending any money at all on GDW products

 

[DrSkull]

Come on, CT did have a few problems.

I can't say how many times this happened to me

Frank "I want to fire the ship's laser at those Gcarriers, what happens?"

GM "Uhhh, I don't know"

Frank "Okay, what about firing my PGMP at that ATV"

GM "Uhh, I don't know"

Frank "Okay what about having Joe shoot his gauss rifle at that dude in combat armor in the ditch way over there"

GM "Well that's easy, can't miss, he's dead"

 

[T. Foster]

There was nothing wrong with CT and to this day it is an entirely playable, very enjoyable game. However, it's so simple and basic that sooner or later most players want more -- more character types, more weapons and equipment, more skills, more realistic combat, more detailed ships and vehicles, more scientific world-gen, and least but not least more background and setting info! The CT books, supplements, games, etc. provided this, but in a very disorganized manner -- to get a complete 'advanced' system you needed about 2 dozen books, and some 'advanced' subsystems were incompatible with others (Striker and HG, for instance). MT tried to rectify this by putting all the 'best' advanced rules into a single package and making them consistent with each other, but then GDW blew it (just like TSR before them) by making this 'advanced' version the standard and discontinuing the original simple version (and then blew it again by trying to pass an entirely separate and incompatible game engine off as 'Traveller' in TNE but that's a different thread ).

Traveller's baseline should be no more complicated that CT Books 1-3, with MT-equivalent rules presented as options for those players that want more detail (at the cost of more complexity). The OTU setting should be kept separate from the rules, and presented in a manner to allow individual referees to set their campaigns wherever and whenever suits their fancy (so we'll hopefully never again have to hear folks complaining that GDW 'wrecked' their campaigns by introducing the FFW, or the Rebellion, or Virus, or the EW, or the Dominate, or whatever).

 

[William]

Originally posted by Big Tim:

So, what were CT's weaknesses and what were some house-rules to overcome them?

The task system. Plus this minus that - bletch. To have all those skills and no decent way to use them was extreamly aggrivating. While nowhere as bad as, say, DnD Non-Weapon Proficencies, it was still clunky.

Once you take DGP's one page task system and drop it into a copy of The Traveller Book you make an excellent game into a truely great game.

To me, a perfect T5 would be The Traveller Book with the DGP task system and the T20 update to the High Guard design system dropped in. Add maybe a total of 20 pages to the old book after subtracting the superceeded ones and you've got a system ready for the next 20 years.



William

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by T. Foster:
...

What he said.


Seriously, I run traveller using basically the CT Starter edition with bits bolted on from MT and T4. The DGP/MT task system is IMO essential, and whilst the idea of MT damage is neat, I find it too fiddly in play, so I tend to use the damage system from T4.

I never liked the GDW House System from T:TNE and whilst there are good bits in T4, the core dice mechanic isn't one of them (it's a product of its time IMO). I could see using the 2300AD system for Traveller, but the linearity of 1d10 as opposed to the bell curve of 2d6 is a significant change.

To me Traveller (as a rule system) is simple, elegant, scalable, 2d6 driven. Which is probably why T:TNE never really felt like Traveller to me, and with T4 I squint and can see CT...

 

[Takei]

Originally posted by William:
Once you take DGP's one page task system and drop it into a copy of The Traveller Book you make an excellent game into a truely great game.

To me, a perfect T5 would be The Traveller Book with the DGP task system and the T20 update to the High Guard design system dropped in. Add maybe a total of 20 pages to the old book after subtracting the superceeded ones and you've got a system ready for the next 20 years.



William

I'd prefer to use something like CODA to the DGP task system, but otherwise would agree with William's comments here.

I'd even go so far as to say that you could produce a good, usable set of T5 rules (based off of CT) in a 64 page booklet. Take a look at "The Book of Knights", which is a kind of Pendragon Lite and see how much was covered in 64 pages.

 

[Gallowglass]

I rather like Andy Slack's "micro Traveller" summary at: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andyslack/pdf/ctul.pdf

And might I venture that a good yardstick for any RPG (Hard SF or otherwise) is that it should be possible to cover the essentials in something like T20 lite or The Book of Knights? Far too many games, especially in the hey day of White Wolf, seemed to suffer from truly amazing levels of pointless padding and irrelevant waffle...

 

[Vargas]

I think Andy Slack has been underecognized for his contributions to Traveller! I like the CT Lite writeup a great deal.

CT is good for those folks who aren't afraid to get out there and think for themselves instead of insisting that everything imaginable must be in the rules if a game is to be played. I think early RPGs demended creativity from the players and referees, something which many games today do less well.

When in doubt, make it up!

 

[kafka47]

CT is a great game. But, its rules are scattered over 30+ volumes or 10 or so reprints.

Therefore, let T20 be the new CT, and go forth and multiply. (create new and exciting games)

Quit moaning what was and get on with producing a brand new Traveller Universe that complements and builds upon the rich heritage of all that you know. T20 is blank slate waiting for the future to be written.

So get off your hindsides and game! Damn it, Jim just game.

 

[Ron]

Classic Traveller is a fine game. It is a very simple game and I think that this is one of its main strengths. I thought that Megatraveller was good but got a little too much crunchy in some areas. TNE was just awfull, T4 poorly edited, and I cannot resume how low GURPS and d20 systems stands in my view.

However, it would be naive not to recognise that there is room for a lot of improvement in CT.
</font>

• Unified Task System: CT's skill system looks like a list of exception as there is no unified concept underlying the skills</font>
• Combat: CT combat relies in a table, which is a poor design, MT and T4 relies in a superior prenetration rules, inspired by Striker. I think T4 is the better system, as it is simplier.</font>
• Starship combat: Completely unrelated to the personal combat system. Unification would be nice, also eliminating the combat tables.</font>

As you can see, much of it was addressed by the DGP task system and Striker combat rules, both available to CT. Also, they were incorporated in Megatraveller. The problem with Megatraveller rules is that they go too detailed in many aspects. Combat relies in several stats (penetration, armor, damage) and could be simplier, as in T4, whereas starship design became very complicated and not compatible with Book 2 and High Guard designs.

I'm currently not very excited about the upcomming T5. Previous editions were not exactly my cup of tea as Mr. Millers and other designers that worked with Traveller have followed different paths from what I would follow. Considering this, I would rather make my own house rules over CT and keep with my own gaming.

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

How ironic it is that a man named Kafka tells us to "quit moaning" what?

But he is correct. Pining for the old days is a moot venture at best, what?

T20 seems like It could with a little polish and temper, "fill the shoes" of CT. In my mind the two shall often meet. (raises Glass) To Progress!

It is most definitely the most violent version of traveller rules to date (if you exclude things like stiker , what?) which i suppose has its own merits. Sort of gives one the impression that just about everyone in the galaxy is "packing heat" to coin of Phrase...

 

[Takei]

Originally posted by Gallowglass:
I rather like Andy Slack's "micro Traveller" summary at: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andyslack/pdf/ctul.pdf

And might I venture that a good yardstick for any RPG (Hard SF or otherwise) is that it should be possible to cover the essentials in something like T20 lite or The Book of Knights? Far too many games, especially in the hey day of White Wolf, seemed to suffer from truly amazing levels of pointless padding and irrelevant waffle...

Bloody Hell he's made it even shorter! Last time I looked at Andy's CT Ultra-Lite it was 2.5 pages. Giving my age away here, but I remember reading Andy's articles in White Dwarf and his writing has always been good.

And yes Kafka, we should just game. Being honest, I don't think T5 will see the light of day. However this is a discussion area and we all like bouncing ideas around

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by kafka47:
CT is a great game. But, its rules are scattered over 30+ volumes or 10 or so reprints.

Therefore, let T20 be the new CT, and go forth and multiply. (create new and exciting games)

Quit moaning what was and get on with producing a brand new Traveller Universe that complements and builds upon the rich heritage of all that you know. T20 is blank slate waiting for the future to be written.

So get off your hindsides and game! Damn it, Jim just game.

So those of us who believe that the full version of CT contains a game system that is _inherently_ better at capturing the feel of the OTU than T20 does for us should just shut-up and accept T20? Er, sorry, no I won't.

Even if T20 were a perfect rule system for me, I do not see this as a reason to preclude the utility or existence of other rules systems.

d20 is a great rule system in many ways, but after 18 months intensive use and numerous experiments with variants, the only setting(s) that I find it works for me in is D&D. So I'll stick with something else for my Traveller games thank you.

And what earthly relevance has rule systems debate got to do with the future of the OTU? The OTU is described in six "official" rule sytems as it is, so a bunch of us grumbling away about wanting a T5 (which from this thread at least seems largely to be CT/MT without the errors and more modular) is hardly causing a problem...

Sorry, I obviously took too many grumpy pills this morning!

On the subject of Andy Slack, I was delighted to discover many of his early WD articles on the net, my own original WD's from when I subscribed having alas long been sold. He remains a wonderfully perceptive and lucid writer. Some of the 2300 stuff is superb and whilst quite a lot of the CT stuff is technically out of date, it is all still worth reading IMO.

Now if I could only track down a copy of The Sable Rose Affair from WD17...

 

[Elliot]

I agree with the consensus that is emerging:

CT with DGP task resolution

The basic CT 8+ rule is just not convincing:

Player: Ref what do I need to hit that Zhodani tank with my RAM grenade from my bunker: Ref 8+ including +1 for your grenade launcher skill of 1, +1 for your resting position.

Player: Ok I've hit the tank, what do I need to do to save the Zho commander from dying from the piece of tank he has lodged in his head: Ref: That's brain surgery, lets see.... oh! 8+, plus +1 for your medical skill of 1, +1 for the fact that you have a medical computer and -3 for the fact that you are not in a hospital.

I'd rather have:
Ref: Its a rountine task to hit the tank but you can use you skill in Grenade launcher to assist.

Ref: Gee brain surgery in the field by a guy whose done a paramedic's course in the Scout's ten years ago: That's almost impossible (15+) and its going to be hazardous: if you fail he dies!. Still you have dexterity F so you may be able to do it on a 11 or 12 (After all trepanning saved Prince Rupert in the English Civil War!)

Apart from that I never bothered with the technical stuff in MT and just stuck to CT/Mayday for ship design and combat. As to Grand Survey: Its way too detailed for me to be any fun, rather like GURPS: Far Trader - but I understand people like both!

In my view any T5 should be CT+ its supplemental revisions (Task System, Striker combat, HG and Mayday ship combat etc)and no more.

 

[Reginald]

With the reprint of CT I must wonder ... why is Far Future doing a fifth edition?

BTW, is the 5th edition out already? I lost track.

As for T20 being the new CT, I sincerely doubt that, and that statement is coming from a d20/T20 gamer (i.e., me ). You can have as many rules incarnation of Traveller (from d20 to GURP to Storyteller or Hero rules systems). There is only one signature rules system for Traveller, and it is the CT version.

 

[Gallowglass]

From what Hunter has said, MWM is working on the T5 rules (drafts of some bits are up at Traveller Downport I believe) but he doesn't have a publisher lined up, and with a day job plus working pretty much solo on the CT/T2K/2300AD reprints, his time is limited... (Hunter or anyone in the know please correct any factual errors here!)

In fact, I think many of us ardent T5'ers are more enjoying the conversation for the sake of it than expecting a commercial product any time soon: none of us would want Traveller as a whole to suffer for the sake of T5 and it's hard to see a sound basis for _another_ rule system in print with CT, GT and T20 all current. Now, once the CT reprints are done, and if T5 is pretty compatible, it makes (more) sense to do T5 then. From hints dropped here I think that may be the longer term game plan but only MWM knows for sure.

 

[Vargas]

A general apology from me, I don't really intend to come off as a CT fanatic. CT has/had problems which I think DGP worked to overcome (not always effectively). As I've gotten older, I have come to prefer simpler systems. TNE, GT and T20 don't meet my personal sniff test but that doesn't mean I think their adherents are 'wrong'. However you do it, go out and enjoy Traveller!