mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
If you haven't visited the T5 web site for a while it may be worth doing so now...
Worth a visit
- Thread starter mike wightman
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
And for those who can't take a bit of a hint, here's the other announcement 
Ditto.
Good news indeed
Good news indeed
M
Malenfant
Guest
I do wish people would drop the crap about T5 being "the next REAL version of Traveller". Frankly, it's no more "REAL" than T20 - it's the same universe, just with different rules. I can't imagine it would rock the RPG industry though.
I'll still believe it when I see it, either way.
I'll still believe it when I see it, either way.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
So, they announce it 27 some odd months ahead of time?
That's . . . interesting.
That's . . . interesting.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Quite... I really doubt that they'd be attracting anyone who isn't already interested in this - which is a very small number of people in the first place.
Fact is, T5 has very little to offer Traveller fans or the RPG community that isn't already out there. It would be interesting to see how many people would cheerfully drop whatever version of Traveller they've been using until the time T5 comes out in order to play this "REAL" version of it - I'm not convinced that a significant number of people would do that.
Heck; I'm pleased.
I don't game much anymore, but I'd still buy the new ruleset, if for no other reason than to see the rules cleaned up and presented in a crisp and clean format.
M
Malenfant
Guest
And how do you know if it'll be 'crisp and clean'?
daltoncalford
SOC-12
It gives me an incentive to create a auto-character generation program to see how the current playtest rules work.
Does anyone know if thier is a newer version of the playtest rules? If so, where can I get them?
The rules on Traveller5.com are all dated dec 24th 2004. Looks like a restore from backup type date and not a active file archive.
best regards
Dalton
Does anyone know if thier is a newer version of the playtest rules? If so, where can I get them?
The rules on Traveller5.com are all dated dec 24th 2004. Looks like a restore from backup type date and not a active file archive.
best regards
Dalton
You're right, T5 went down with the rest of Downport.
And no, there has been no new playtest material posted since those old, crusty originals. There have been changes since then, but they've not been propogated out. Looks like the playtest stuff is very alpha.
And no, there has been no new playtest material posted since those old, crusty originals. There have been changes since then, but they've not been propogated out. Looks like the playtest stuff is very alpha.
A little chirpir told meOriginally posted by Malenfant:
And how do you know if it'll be 'crisp and clean'?
M
Malenfant
Guest
A little chirpir told meOriginally posted by Blue Ghost:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Malenfant:
And how do you know if it'll be 'crisp and clean'?
If he really wants to bring Traveller to a bigger market (a rather pointless endeavour - T20 has already brought it to the biggest RPG market around: d20) then he's going to have to make it attractive to that market. And frankly, I can't see a way that he'll attract anyone to it at all.
Time will tell. I'm fairly optimistic about it. When I last did a serious purusal of the local game stores last year I saw a number of non-d20 systems on the shelves, all very professional looking, and all seemingly having a fairly good player base. But that's just my impression.
My only real beef with the original ruleset was some of the obscurity of a handful of references, this was despite the "Charts" booklet for Starter Traveller. Something that needs page flipping I think sits well with most players, but something that needs excessive, or "unique" page flipping (I need to find Rule-X on Page-Y because it isn't with the rest of the charts, kind of thing) steers some people away. I know I got somewhat frustrated every now and then with that kind of thing. But that's just me
We'll see. I'm looking forward to seeing them.
My only real beef with the original ruleset was some of the obscurity of a handful of references, this was despite the "Charts" booklet for Starter Traveller. Something that needs page flipping I think sits well with most players, but something that needs excessive, or "unique" page flipping (I need to find Rule-X on Page-Y because it isn't with the rest of the charts, kind of thing) steers some people away. I know I got somewhat frustrated every now and then with that kind of thing. But that's just me
We'll see. I'm looking forward to seeing them.
M
Malenfant
Guest
It's not that d20 can't sell (it won't sell as much as d20 does, but it can sell enough to keep the company above water - especially when it's an established line like GURPS or WoD or HERO). It's just that Traveller's already had no less than six very different versions over a long history. As it is the fanbase for the game is already fairly fractured - while the whole may be doing well, each new version is scrabbling for an ever more divided market.
Frankly, I don't think there can be that many people who haven't already found a system to play the game that they're satisfied enough with, and there can't be that many people who would be willing to learn yet another new system to do it in. Given that, can a seventh version really sell?
I've got to wonder why FFE and MWM still want to do a new version of Traveller. What can they offer in practical terms that all the other editions can't? Is it really that important to have "written by Marc Miller" on the front?
That's called hype. It's just an attempt to differentiate another version from a few recent ones. All of it, GT, T20, T5, whatever... it's just crap. Shards of paper, words, ideas... all crap. What do you care what someone calls it? Don't start taking this stuff seriously or you'll lose your grip and misjump to the planet wacko.
Swordy:
No, the universe portrayed IN PLAY i very different from version to version.
Rules help to define elements of a setting, in ways oft ignored by people who claim the ruleset doesn't matter.
For example: Point buy vs Random Roll: One says "All heros are created equal", and the other says all rise from where thhey are at to become something more.
HG vs Bk2 v MT vs FF&S: The nature of ships makes a huge difference in how one perceives the universe. HG created one clear set of expectations; a very different one from HG. MT and FF&S both create even more different assumptions, but also create a much tighter definition of the game universe by what is installed in small bits, much of which was ignored in HG and Bk 2.
Could you have radiator covered oblate spheroids in Bk 2? yup. Net effect? GM defined, if any, besides coolness.
In HG: some game effects for being a flattened sphere... but none for the radiator covered.
MT: Same as HG... although one could argue the radiators affect streamlining.
TNE/T4: those radiators are required to a point; If it's a mostly-PP ship, powering a huge weapon, they could be required to points well beyond what we normally think of.
Lots of the "Little Things" add up.
T20 is "Not Real Traveller" to some, not because of skill resolution, but because of the lack of Tech Architecture. To others, MT, TNE, and/or T4 aren't , because they redefined the tech architecture from CT (which had 2 ship design systems, semi compatible, and one vehicle design system in a subordinate product, striker)
GURPS Traveller is, by the original license announcement on the TML, non-authoritative; the GTU is not the OTU, just fairly close.
GT uses a totally different Tech Architecture, and a wholly different set of assumptions about CG, and the fundamental level of control over PC's.
To many, the OTU is what makes a Traveller Edition "Real"; hence the snarkiness about Traveller 2300 (Which, had I known the truth, I'd not have purchased originally, but ran some enjoyable games of) and its 2nd ed, 2300AD.
T5, if it brings the right level of both detail and playability, and maintains he right level of Player Control over Character Development, will grow well in the industry.
If it doesn't, however, find the right balance, it will be at best a flash in the pan.
And GT could very easily find its license non-renewed if T5 actually starts a draw. Likewise T20.
No, the universe portrayed IN PLAY i very different from version to version.
Rules help to define elements of a setting, in ways oft ignored by people who claim the ruleset doesn't matter.
For example: Point buy vs Random Roll: One says "All heros are created equal", and the other says all rise from where thhey are at to become something more.
HG vs Bk2 v MT vs FF&S: The nature of ships makes a huge difference in how one perceives the universe. HG created one clear set of expectations; a very different one from HG. MT and FF&S both create even more different assumptions, but also create a much tighter definition of the game universe by what is installed in small bits, much of which was ignored in HG and Bk 2.
Could you have radiator covered oblate spheroids in Bk 2? yup. Net effect? GM defined, if any, besides coolness.
In HG: some game effects for being a flattened sphere... but none for the radiator covered.
MT: Same as HG... although one could argue the radiators affect streamlining.
TNE/T4: those radiators are required to a point; If it's a mostly-PP ship, powering a huge weapon, they could be required to points well beyond what we normally think of.
Lots of the "Little Things" add up.
T20 is "Not Real Traveller" to some, not because of skill resolution, but because of the lack of Tech Architecture. To others, MT, TNE, and/or T4 aren't , because they redefined the tech architecture from CT (which had 2 ship design systems, semi compatible, and one vehicle design system in a subordinate product, striker)
GURPS Traveller is, by the original license announcement on the TML, non-authoritative; the GTU is not the OTU, just fairly close.
GT uses a totally different Tech Architecture, and a wholly different set of assumptions about CG, and the fundamental level of control over PC's.
To many, the OTU is what makes a Traveller Edition "Real"; hence the snarkiness about Traveller 2300 (Which, had I known the truth, I'd not have purchased originally, but ran some enjoyable games of) and its 2nd ed, 2300AD.
T5, if it brings the right level of both detail and playability, and maintains he right level of Player Control over Character Development, will grow well in the industry.
If it doesn't, however, find the right balance, it will be at best a flash in the pan.
And GT could very easily find its license non-renewed if T5 actually starts a draw. Likewise T20.
M
Malenfant
Guest
So basically, "Real Traveller" is defined by stodgy, reactionary fans who don't like anything that isn't CT?
Let's be clear about something - MT and TNE were valid evolutions of CT - the timeline just moves forward from the default setting. As such, they qualify as being "real Traveller" - that there's a vocal, whiny portion of the fanbase who doesn't like the directions they went in doesn't change that fact. Even T4 is too.
Frankly, if MWM approved it, it qualifies as "real Traveller". To say anything else is to unecessarily obfuscate and complicate the issue.
And yet GT (and T20) are the closest to CT in the feel of the setting - in fact the events that take place in the GT timeline are indistinguishable from what would have happened if CT had just continued as is. I know you don't like GT, but it's rather unfair to brush that aside just because it uses different rules for things. And it really, really doesn't matter in practical gaming purposes what the tech is in GT - it's not like you're going to be hopping between CT and GT all the time in the game - it's all internally consistent within each version.
If that's the case, the rules and tech used don't matter - the setting is what's important.
How have previous versions of Traveller failed in both detail and playability? And how is the "right level of player control over character development" defined? Pandering to people who want the complicated random lifepaths of CT that no big players in the RPG industry use anymore? Or going with a more controllable, possibly point-based system, of the sort that dominates the modern RPG market?
Either way, I certainly don't see GT or T20 as being "unplayable" at all.
If it really will come out in 2007, then GT's license would probably be up by then anyway. The last time it was renewed was two years ago, and SJG have pretty much said it'll only be renewed again this year if Interstellar Wars makes it worthwhile.
Similar threads
