What happened to Traveller/MegaTraveller?
CS
But it seems at lot has changed. Now Imperium Games (I believe that's how they're called) produces the game and it is again called Traveller (without the Mega-). And then GURPS has a Traveller line (which is cool because GURPS is a great RPG system).
So I guess I really need somebody to fill me in here. What happened to MegaTraveller? And what about all those old supplements? Are they still produced, reprinted or updated? What about the new material? Is it any good? Can somebody recommend good Traveller web sites?
Yep, so many questions. Sorry, folks, but I gotta know ;-) Anyway, I appreciate any information you can give. Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Chris
Jeremy Reaban
was replaced by Marc Miller's Traveller (called T4) when GDW went out of
business. However, the company that made T4, is no longer making it.
For about a 100 Traveller web sites, try
http://www.webring.org/cgi-bin/webring?ring=traveller;list
CS <uzs...@uni-bonn.de> wrote in article
<73rqm8$q...@news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>...
Until about six years ago I used to play MegaTraveller (you know, the
follow-up to the original Traveller). Then I couldn't find the time anymore
and stopped with RPGs. Well, recently I was thinking about taking it up
again and wondered if MegaTraveller still exists (I still got lots of
Traveller and MegaTraveller stuff :-).
But it seems at lot has changed. Now Imperium Games (I believe that's how
they're called) produces the game and it is again called Traveller (without
the Mega-). And then GURPS has a Traveller line (which is cool because
GURPS is a great RPG system).
<snip>
Michael T. Richter
Twilight:2000 mechanics and a really horrid disintegration of the setting --
worse than the Rebellion did to the original. GDW went out of business and
Traveller was re-issued as Marc Miller's Traveller from Imperium Games.
This stank completely. I'm not sure if Imperium Games is out of business or
not; I think it is, but if it isn't it should be. Steve Jackson made a
GURPS:Traveller thing as you've noticed. This hasn't died yet. There's
also supposed to be a fifth edition of Traveller coming from Marc Miller as
well, but given the complete piece of crap he produced in the fourth
edition, I don't expect to see anything good out of it.
--
Michael T. Richter <m...@ottawa.com> http://www.igs.net/~mtr/
PGP Key: http://www.igs.net/~mtr/pgp-key.html
PGP Fingerprint: 40D1 33E0 F70B 6BB5 8353 4669 B4CC DD09 04ED 4FE8
William Barnett-Lewis
In article <M1y82.608$P66.6...@198.235.216.4>, "Michael T. Richter"
Doug Berry
"Michael T. Richter" <m...@igs.net> is alleged to have said:
>MegaTraveller died adn was reborn as Traveller: The New Era using
>Twilight:2000 mechanics and a really horrid disintegration of the setting --
>worse than the Rebellion did to the original. GDW went out of business and
>Traveller was re-issued as Marc Miller's Traveller from Imperium Games.
>This stank completely. I'm not sure if Imperium Games is out of business or
>not; I think it is, but if it isn't it should be.
They are. They also owe loads of money to various creditors.
>Steve Jackson made a GURPS:Traveller thing as you've noticed. This hasn't
>died yet.
*sigh*
Michael, GURPS: Traveller is selling well, and has just released
the third book in the series. Why do you have this utter
contempt for all things Traveller? Were you traumitized by a
Traveller group as a child?
G:T is a good place for new players to enter the Traveller
universe, or for us old fogies to get all the information
collected in one place.
>There's also supposed to be a fifth edition of Traveller coming from Marc
>Miller as well, but given the complete piece of crap he produced in the >fourth edition, I don't expect to see anything good out of it.
Of course not.. that would require you to admit a mistake. T5
is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
written. several major changes have been made already based on
input from the TML. All of these were designed to make the game
accessable to new players.
But don't bother reading it, since it could be the uber-game and
you'd hate it because it was Traveller.
--
+-------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry dbe...@hooked.net |
| http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/ |
|-------------------------------------------|
| "Hear the voices in my head, swear to God |
| it sounds like they're snoring." |
| -Harvey Danger, "Flagpole Sitta" |
+-------------------------------------------+
Ross Smith
>
> T5
> is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
> written. several major changes have been made already based on
> input from the TML. All of these were designed to make the game
> accessable to new players.
All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
done differently this time?
--
Ross Smith ....................................... Auckland, New Zealand
<mailto:r-s...@ihug.co.nz> ........ <http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~r-smith/>
"Oh boy! Violence! Can't wait! Hey, sex is everywhere, but good
violence is hard to find!" -- Michael Thompson
Doug Berry
Smith <r-s...@ihug.co.nz> is alleged to have said:
>Doug Berry wrote:
>>
>> T5
>> is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
>> written. several major changes have been made already based on
>> input from the TML. All of these were designed to make the game
>> accessable to new players.
>
>All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
>done differently this time?
The difference this time is that the game isn't being shoved out
the door to meet an artificial release date. Each section is
being closely looked at by both long-time players and some
newbies. T4 wasn't really given any sort of playtest, just some
quick comments from those who had a chance to see the rules.
T4 was heralded as "Traveller with 20 years of experience", but
was never given enough time to be closely checked. Did'ya know
that the wrong draft of the rules was printed? That kind of
thing. T5 isn't going to be released until it is ready and able
to stand on it's merits.
Bertil Jonell
Doug Berry <dbe...@hooked.net> wrote:
>According to Ken Starr, on Tue, 01 Dec 1998 20:04:04 +1200, Ross
>Smith <r-s...@ihug.co.nz> is alleged to have said:
>>All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
>>done differently this time?
>
>The difference this time is that the game isn't being shoved out
>the door to meet an artificial release date.
What about Whitman, is he involved in T5 too?
>| Douglas E. Berry dbe...@hooked.net |
-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."
Ty Beard
>T4 was heralded as "Traveller with 20 years of experience", but
>was never given enough time to be closely checked. Did'ya know
>that the wrong draft of the rules was printed? That kind of
>thing. T5 isn't going to be released until it is ready and able
>to stand on it's merits.
The past record of GDW and Imperium Games on simple things like proofreading
gives me little hope that they can salvage it.
BUT, as a Traveller nut (don't really know why), I hope that Marc Miller can
get it right this time. It seems to me that IG's biggest mistake was the
decision to set the game in year 0.
Firstly, I think a lot of us Traveller fans would have liked the system to
be set in the good old Imperium, circa 1105. No Rebellion. No Virus. None of
that crap. This is based entirely upon my personal experience, but I don't
know very many Traveller fans who liked the Rebellion, Hard Times, the New
Error (gack, what a horrid system), or Milieu 0. Steve Jackson apparently
understood it, though. Remember the rejoicing when he announced GURPS
Traveller?
Secondly, the Imperium has a fantastic amount of background material already
available that could have mined, re-edited and re-released. Why did IG
ignore such a gold mine. And I don't think that they had the resources to
simultaneously support two different era.
Why they chose to ignore the wishes of the faithful, I don't know. Violates
the most sacred law of Capitalism: The Customer is Right.
And if IG owes a lot of creditors, how will Miller get the financial backing
to release T5? I hope he does, though.
Is there a website with drafts of the new T5?
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Bryan J. Maloney
<tbe...@e-tex.com> wrote:
> Firstly, I think a lot of us Traveller fans would have liked the system to
> be set in the good old Imperium, circa 1105. No Rebellion. No Virus. None of
> that crap. This is based entirely upon my personal experience, but I don't
YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES!
Throw out all that worthless TNE and post-TNE garbage. It never
happened. It will never happen. Never mention it again.
--
What you say may very well be true, but it may also very well be irrelevant.
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/bjm10/
Doug Berry
d9be...@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) is alleged to have
said:
> What about Whitman, is he involved in T5 too?
No.
Nyet.
Over Michael Richter's dead body will Whitman ever be allowed
near Traveller again.
Doug Berry
Beard" <tbe...@e-tex.com> is alleged to have said:
>The past record of GDW and Imperium Games on simple things like proofreading
>gives me little hope that they can salvage it.
GDW and IG are both dead. Marc is looking for a new publisher.
>BUT, as a Traveller nut (don't really know why), I hope that Marc Miller can
>get it right this time. It seems to me that IG's biggest mistake was the
>decision to set the game in year 0.
A lot of people thought the same way.. Milieu: 0 was Marc's idea.
The idea was always to release several different settings in the
Imperial timeline. The current list for T5 includes the
Earth-Vilani Interstellar Wars, the Civil War era, the "classic"
era.. even an idea for a "children of the Ancients" setting.
<snip>
>Secondly, the Imperium has a fantastic amount of background material already
>available that could have mined, re-edited and re-released. Why did IG
>ignore such a gold mine. And I don't think that they had the resources to
>simultaneously support two different era.
Copyright problems. Much of the really good stuff wasn't
avalible.
Sword Worlder
take the world by storm there was a panic that resulted in The New Error.
Kind of a "let's spice things up a bit", but without much thought to
anything but a rules tweak and some artwork.
T4 (aka Errata Traveller) had pretty books. A few were even good. If
anything Marc Miller had too little involvement. He still complains of
ideas of his that were ignored. Marc is getting a real earful on the TML
and I feel that he is taking it to heart. I think that T5 will be a simple,
playable system like Traveller was. I lobby for that regularly with Marc.
=======================
Visit the Subsidized Merchant - http://surf.to/traveller-trader
John P. Raynor
: A lot of people thought the same way.. Milieu: 0 was Marc's idea.
: The idea was always to release several different settings in the
: Imperial timeline. The current list for T5 includes the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now *that* would be an interesting period for a "Traveller" campaign.
- J. Raynor
Alan D Kohler
<swordw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Originally an excellent system. Unfortunately, when Mega didn't immediately
>take the world by storm
Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
immensely popular.
The New Error killed that trend dead. The attocious and illogical
evolution of the Traveller setting aside, I think GDW assumed that it
was the system that sold the at-the-time-popular T2000. Nay nay, it
was the military hardware fanatics and the system had little to do
with it. TNE went down in flames.
> there was a panic that resulted in The New Error.
>Kind of a "let's spice things up a bit", but without much thought to
>anything but a rules tweak and some artwork.
>
>T4 (aka Errata Traveller) had pretty books. A few were even good. If
>anything Marc Miller had too little involvement. He still complains of
>ideas of his that were ignored. Marc is getting a real earful on the TML
>and I feel that he is taking it to heart. I think that T5 will be a simple,
>playable system like Traveller was. I lobby for that regularly with Marc.
I think a system with a robust task system like MT and simple
construction system like CT would be optimal.
Alan D. Kohler
(hawkwind@SPAMMERS_MUST_DIE.olg.com)
This space reserved for later use.
"Ding, dong, the witch is dead" -The Wizard of Oz
Jeff Zeitlin
>Until about six years ago I used to play MegaTraveller (you know,
>the follow-up to the original Traveller). Then I couldn't find
>the time anymore and stopped with RPGs. Well, recently I was
>thinking about taking it up again and wondered if MegaTraveller
>still exists (I still got lots of Traveller and MegaTraveller
>stuff :-).
Nope. There was a rewrite (more like a massacre) called
Traveller: The New Era, and then GDW went under. Then came
Imperium Games with "Marc Miller's Traveller". But see below...
>But it seems at lot has changed. Now Imperium Games (I believe
>that's how they're called) produces the game and it is again
>called Traveller (without the Mega-). And then GURPS has a
>Traveller line (which is cool because GURPS is a great RPG
>system).
IG no longer produces the game; Marc Miller yanked their license,
likely because of business practices and the way they were
butchering many of the sourcebooks. GURPS Traveller is a
reality, though.
>So I guess I really need somebody to fill me in here. What
>happened to MegaTraveller? And what about all those old
>supplements? Are they still produced, reprinted or updated? What
>about the new material? Is it any good? Can somebody recommend
>good Traveller web sites?
Well, MegaTraveller isn't produced any more, but there's a large
Traveller community that uses those rules and background. You
can reach them on the Traveller Mailing List (TML). GURPS
Traveller is being produced, and the TML has had discussions
about converting material between versions, so that your prior
investment in any and all versions is still good. As far as a
good web site, you can start with Freelance Traveller
(http://come.to/FreelanceTraveller), look at what I have there,
and then move on to the sites I have on the links pages
(Information Center - Traveller On The Internet) or follow the
Traveller WebRing. Information for subscribing to the TML and
other Traveller-related mailing lists is also on those pages.
>Yep, so many questions. Sorry, folks, but I gotta know ;-)
>Anyway, I appreciate any information you can give. Thanks in
>advance.
If you don't ask, you won't find out.
--
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller - The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Resource
free...@hotmail.com
free...@my-dejanews.com
David P. Summers
bj...@cornell.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) wrote:
> In article <8TQ82.774$2n5.25...@news.randori.com>, "Ty Beard"
> <tbe...@e-tex.com> wrote:
>
> > Firstly, I think a lot of us Traveller fans would have liked the system to
> > be set in the good old Imperium, circa 1105. No Rebellion. No Virus. None of
> > that crap. This is based entirely upon my personal experience, but I don't
>
>
> YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES!
>
> Throw out all that worthless TNE and post-TNE garbage. It never
> happened. It will never happen. Never mention it again.
Well, this is the background that GURPS Traveller is supporting
(the timeline was advanced to 1120, but otherwise it is just
as described with no rebellion or Virus).
Cambias
<swordw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Originally an excellent system. Unfortunately, when Mega didn't immediately
> take the world by storm there was a panic that resulted in The New Error.
> Kind of a "let's spice things up a bit", but without much thought to
> anything but a rules tweak and some artwork.
>
Hardy "immediately" -- MT came out in 1987, TNE in 1993. Six years is a
reasonable cycle time between editions. And it wasn't just a rules tweak,
either. TNE attempted to shift Traveller over to the mechanics devised
for Twilight:2000. The reason was fairly simple -- most of the GDW staff
at that point (Lester Smith, Dave Nilsen, etc.) were more familiar with
T2K and the "house system" than with Traveller. They thought it would be
useful if all GDW games used the same system. They were utterly wrong, of
course, but there was some thought behind the decision.
Similarly, the New Era setting did have a definite goal: by knocking
society back to the stone age, it meant that player-characters could be
important people. The feeling was that mere individuals (even individuals
with an 800-ton mercenary cruiser) were too insignificant on the scale of
the Imperium. Unfortunately, throwing out the bathwater of the massive
scale required tossing the baby of an interesting and diverse universe.
The world of TNE quickly became an endless series of stone age worlds
ruled by tyrants with gauss guns, or else stone age worlds ruled by
tyrannical Virus computers. There wasn't anyone to trade with, there
wasn't anyone to spy on. All you could do was kill people.
> T4 (aka Errata Traveller) had pretty books. A few were even good. If
> anything Marc Miller had too little involvement. He still complains of
> ideas of his that were ignored. Marc is getting a real earful on the TML
> and I feel that he is taking it to heart. I think that T5 will be a simple,
> playable system like Traveller was. I lobby for that regularly with Marc.
>
I don't think it's fair to blame Mr. Miller for problems which were mostly
due to poor management at Imperium Games. I don't know the details of
financing or anything, but a delay of a year might have made T4 a superb
system, but once the company got into the cycle of "rushing out crappy
products to pay for printing the last batch of crappy products" it was
doomed.
Interestingly, one aspect of Traveller which has been completely neglected
is its usefuless as a "generic" sf rpg. I never really used the Imperium
setting at all (though I did lift things and even entire planets from
published material). I for one would be perfectly happy to see an edition
of Traveller with nothing but the basic rules, world creation, technology
creation and character generation. Then all the setting-specific stuff
could be supplements. That also would mean the supplements could be
rules-light and thus adaptable to GURPS Traveller, old Traveller,
homebrew, etc.
Just my UK 1p.
Cambias
and if it was published in a Little Black Book gamers everywhere would
weep with joy
Thomas Biskup
> In article <3663d11...@news.wenet.net>,
> Doug Berry <dbe...@hooked.net> wrote:
>>According to Ken Starr, on Tue, 01 Dec 1998 20:04:04 +1200, Ross
>>Smith <r-s...@ihug.co.nz> is alleged to have said:
>>>All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
>>>done differently this time?
>>The difference this time is that the game isn't being shoved out
>>the door to meet an artificial release date.
Actually Ken Whitman departed pretty soon from Imperium Games and
T4... and it didn't help the game a bit. The layout got worse, the
supplements didn't improve. Thus I guess it really wasn't Ken
Whitman's fault.
Having seen his recent ZERO RPG, the Groo cardgame and having hurt
good things about the recent DC rerelease I start to believe that Ken
Whitman can't be that bad a designer or publisher... despite his
inability to post to Usenet without getting folks to yell at him for
obvious blunders.
--
Thomas Biskup ...... Town Crier for the Loyal Order of Chivalry & Sorcery
EMail: bis...@saranxis.ruhr.de
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code."
Thomas Biskup
> According to Ken Starr, on Tue, 01 Dec 1998 20:04:04 +1200, Ross
> Smith <r-s...@ihug.co.nz> is alleged to have said:
>>All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
>>done differently this time?
> The difference this time is that the game isn't being shoved out
> being closely looked at by both long-time players and some
> newbies. T4 wasn't really given any sort of playtest, just some
> quick comments from those who had a chance to see the rules.
Is there already some publisher available with an interest to actually
print this thing? Or will it again be done by such professionals as
those engaged in T4?
> T4 was heralded as "Traveller with 20 years of experience", but
> was never given enough time to be closely checked.
Yeah, it was heralded as such by Marc Miller himself and many of the
TML folks probably fiddling with T5 right now... and all those folks
still blurted about how great T4 is, when almost everyone besides the
people on the TML had noticed, how bad a game it actually was.
> Did'ya know that the wrong draft of the rules was printed? That
> kind of thing.
When did this get out? Not during the one year (or so) of T4 time I
wasted on the TML. Who suddenly thought of that funny explanation?
And what does it tell you about Marc Miller's influence on and
interest in the game. I for sure wouldn't have my name on a book I
never even cared to check before mass-printing.
> T5 isn't going to be released until it is ready and
> able to stand on it's merits.
Oh, you mean "in ten years"... or never?
Thomas Biskup
>>There's also supposed to be a fifth edition of Traveller coming from Marc
>>Miller as well, but given the complete piece of crap he produced in
>>the fourth edition, I don't expect to see anything good out of it.
> is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
> written.
Yes, there also was a lot of debate about T4 and T4 was a very bad
system with many very expensive and very bad supplements... and gladly
it died quickly.
> several major changes have been made already based on
> input from the TML.
The TML (at least the very vocal gearheads) had a lot of input on the
technical parts of T4, including lots of "advice" to make the game
more playable. The result was a very convoluted and buggy system that
was much too complicated for the rest of the T4 system and simply
didn't fit it. Considering this (and the absolutely crappy load of
other sourcebooks that was released for T4) I highly doubt that Marc
Miller is able to write a good game these days... he's remained behind
on a level appropriate for the audience 20 years ago... and the many
fanboys on the TML who all want to have a word in the game don't help
either.
> All of these were designed to make the game accessable to new
> players.
Care to elaborate on that? In what ways will T5 be different from T4?
What changes are planned? Are the production schedules? Will the
mechanics be similar to T4? CT? MT? TNE? How will starship
construction be handled? By another gearhead heaven (and
serious-player-hell?).
Some answers would be highly appreciated to get an idea whether
there's anything but hot air and foul promises behind T5.
> But don't bother reading it, since it could be the uber-game and
> you'd hate it because it was Traveller.
Oh yes, highly likely that it will be a great game, considering that
most of the glorious past of Traveller consists of oldtimers dreaming
about how everything started. D&D was great, too, in the seventies,
you know. Today it's a bit behind the times (although still fun).
Alan D Kohler
This may be a minority view, but I hate the virus (sorry, too dumb for
SOD purposes), but LIKE the rebellion. It added spice to the setting,
and more importantly, added tons of adventure potential.
Alan D Kohler
D Kohler) wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Dec 1998 16:47:34 -0500, "Sword Worlder"
><swordw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Originally an excellent system. Unfortunately, when Mega didn't immediately
>>take the world by storm
>
>Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
>the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
>immensely popular.
Er, I meant to say "the definitive SF RPG." Carry on.
Alan D. Kohler
(hawkwind@SPAMMERS_MUST_DIE.olg.com)
"The best bluffers are those who don't think they are bluffing"
Mikko V.I. Parviainen
>According to Ken Starr, on Tue, 1 Dec 1998 05:56:08 -0600, "Ty
>>BUT, as a Traveller nut (don't really know why), I hope that Marc Miller can
>>get it right this time. It seems to me that IG's biggest mistake was the
>>decision to set the game in year 0.
In my opinion, the two worst campaigns in Traveller are Milieu:0 and
Reformation Coalition. Both are "bring civilization to ignorant
and violent natives who do not understand what is best for them" -type
campaigns. With bigger guns and better tech.
Kind of reminds me of the conquest of some huge tracts of land beyond
an ocean.
Star Viking especially make me puke in their righteousness.
Classic and MT campaigns were not so imperialistic (pun not intended),
there was not always a holy war for better civilization.
Rebellion was war, but it was not as one-sided as RC or Milieu:0.
>The idea was always to release several different settings in the
>Imperial timeline. The current list for T5 includes the
>Earth-Vilani Interstellar Wars, the Civil War era, the "classic"
>era.. even an idea for a "children of the Ancients" setting.
These would have been a very good addition to existing Traveller
material. Shame companies like IG can do business (and ruin some of it).
--
--
Mikko Parviainen
IMTU tc+ tm++ tn+ ru+ ge++ 3i+ jt-- jd++ pi au st- ls kk hi++ dr++ as+
va+ so- zh+ da++
Eamon Patrick Watters
> In article <8TQ82.774$2n5.25...@news.randori.com>, "Ty Beard"
> <tbe...@e-tex.com> wrote:
>
> > Firstly, I think a lot of us Traveller fans would have liked the system to
> > be set in the good old Imperium, circa 1105. No Rebellion. No Virus. None of
> > that crap. This is based entirely upon my personal experience, but I don't
> YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES!
>
> Throw out all that worthless TNE and post-TNE garbage. It never
> happened. It will never happen. Never mention it again.
What a happy family the Traveller Family is! My own experience is that
there are a lot of Traveller players that prefer TNE. I'm not going to
'shit' on any other versions of Traveller, as they all have some good
points (though T4's is thin on the ground).
Eamon Watters
Ty Beard
>... The current list for T5 includes the
>Earth-Vilani Interstellar Wars, the Civil War era, the "classic"
>era.. even an idea for a "children of the Ancients" setting.
The classic era, Doug. Tell him to do the classic era first. Please. That's
what the fans want. Give the customers what they want. If he does any other
era, I predict that T5 will fail. And I don't think that he'll have the
resources to effectively support multiple eras.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Michael T. Richter
>>MegaTraveller died adn was reborn as Traveller: The New Era using
>>Twilight:2000 mechanics and a really horrid disintegration of the
setting --
>>worse than the Rebellion did to the original. GDW went out of business
and
>>Traveller was re-issued as Marc Miller's Traveller from Imperium Games.
>>This stank completely. I'm not sure if Imperium Games is out of business
or
>>not; I think it is, but if it isn't it should be.
>They are. They also owe loads of money to various creditors.
Good. They got what they deserved.
>>Steve Jackson made a GURPS:Traveller thing as you've noticed. This hasn't
>>died yet.
>*sigh*
>Michael, GURPS: Traveller is selling well, and has just released
>the third book in the series.
Like I said previously: we'll see where it stands two years from now. Don't
forget that T4 was selling well too in its opening days and months....
>Why do you have this utter
>contempt for all things Traveller? Were you traumitized by a
>Traveller group as a child?
No. I was traumatized by T4 and the total crap that Marc Miller produced.
Not to mention the rabid fan reaction -- yours being a big one -- when I
dared suggest that T4 was less than perfect.
>>There's also supposed to be a fifth edition of Traveller coming from Marc
>>Miller as well, but given the complete piece of crap he produced in the
>fourth edition, I don't expect to see anything good out of it.
>Of course not.. that would require you to admit a mistake.
Which mistake? Or did it turn out that T4 didn't suck after all and I slept
through that bit?
>T5
>is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
>written.
Similar claims were made for T4. I remain unconvinced.
>But don't bother reading it, since it could be the uber-game and
>you'd hate it because it was Traveller.
And again Doug forgets that I'm a 13-year veteran of Traveller's
travails....
Michael T. Richter
>> T5
>> is being extensively debated and playtested as each section gets
>> input from the TML. All of these were designed to make the game
>> accessable to new players.
>All of the above was said of T4 before its release too. What's being
>done differently this time?
Note to both Beard and Berry: I'm not the only one saying this....
Ty Beard
>And again Doug forgets that I'm a 13-year veteran of Traveller's
>travails....
No, he just forgets that you are a walking "did not" machine masquerading as
a sentient being. You're wasting your time, Doug. Richter is a fool.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Ty Beard
>What a happy family the Traveller Family is! My own experience is that
>there are a lot of Traveller players that prefer TNE. I'm not going to
>'shit' on any other versions of Traveller, as they all have some good
>points (though T4's is thin on the ground).
Glad to hear it. All I meant to suggest is that the majority of Traveller
fans preferred the classic setting. Not giving it to them was a marketing
mistake, in my opinion.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Ty Beard
Noted. I thought you killfiled me...
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Brett Slocum
>According to Ken Starr, on Tue, 1 Dec 1998 05:56:08 -0600, "Ty
>Beard" <tbe...@e-tex.com> is alleged to have said:
>>BUT, as a Traveller nut (don't really know why), I hope that Marc Miller can
>>get it right this time. It seems to me that IG's biggest mistake was the
>>decision to set the game in year 0.
>
>A lot of people thought the same way.. Milieu: 0 was Marc's idea.
>The idea was always to release several different settings in the
>Imperial timeline. The current list for T5 includes the
>Earth-Vilani Interstellar Wars, the Civil War era, the "classic"
>era.. even an idea for a "children of the Ancients" setting.
I think that Milieu 0 was a good idea. An incredibly viable adventure setting.
The problem was the First Survey book, which is a fatal return to randomly
generated star charts. Buying a book full of computer-generated lists of planets
for $20 is not a good business plan. The original Spinward Marches book at least
had nice starcharts and was only $4.95 or whatever the price back then was.
---
Brett Slocum <slo...@io.com> | ICQ 13032903 | MiB #0666 (Twin Cities CL)
* Illuminated Site of the Week: http://www.sjgames.com/ill/illsotw/
* GURPS site: http://www.io.com/~slocum/gurps.html
* Tekumel Web Ring Admin: http://www.io.com/~slocum/webring/
"Ah'm yer pa, Luke." -- if James Earl Ray was the voice of Darth Vader
Brett Slocum
>Until about six years ago I used to play MegaTraveller (you know, the =
>follow-up to the original Traveller). Then I couldn't find the time =
>anymore and stopped with RPGs. Well, recently I was thinking about =
>taking it up again and wondered if MegaTraveller still exists (I still =
>got lots of Traveller and MegaTraveller stuff :-).
>But it seems at lot has changed. Now Imperium Games (I believe that's =
>how they're called) produces the game and it is again called Traveller =
>(without the Mega-). And then GURPS has a Traveller line (which is cool =
>because GURPS is a great RPG system).
Just as a heads up, the GURPS Traveller books currently out are:
GURPS Traveller
Behind the Claw: The Spinward Marches Sourcebook
Traveller Aliens 1: Zhodani, Vargr, and some minor aliens
Coming soon:
Traveller StarMercs.
Doug Berry
Beard" <tbe...@e-tex.com> is alleged to have said:
>Doug Berry wrote in message <3667551f...@news.wenet.net>...
>>... The current list for T5 includes the
>>Earth-Vilani Interstellar Wars, the Civil War era, the "classic"
>>era.. even an idea for a "children of the Ancients" setting.
>The classic era, Doug. Tell him to do the classic era first. Please. That's
>what the fans want. Give the customers what they want. If he does any other
>era, I predict that T5 will fail. And I don't think that he'll have the
>resources to effectively support multiple eras.
Trust me, the sentiment has been repeated many times on the TML.
Thr reason for the change in setting was a percieved lack of
frontiers in the classic era. There was no-place in the Third
Imperium that really had a frontier setting. Even the Spinward
Marches were hemmed in by the Zhodani, the Vargr and the Aslan.
The current proposal for a first setting is Antares around 200
Imperial. This is the era of the Julian War. You still have
lots of empty space to explore, and grand military campigns if
that's what you want. It also bvrings the K'kree into a play, a
race that has been sadly underutilized over the years.
For classic era gamers, might I suggest "Behind The Claw" for
GURPS: Traveller? Great write-ups for every world in the
Spinward Marches, along with a complete history of the Marches
from the Ancients to 1120. No Rebellion.
So far SJG has done an incredible job with their Traveller
license.. I picked up the first Alien races book yesterday,
(Zhodani and Vargr, plus three minor races) and it measured up to
the great DGP Alien books.
James Nicoll
Michael T. Richter <m...@ottawa.com> wrote:
>
>Like I said previously: we'll see where it stands two years from now. Don't
>forget that T4 was selling well too in its opening days and months....
>
it came out, sales dropped off nicely. If Starships had come out on time,
sales would have died that much sooner. If T4 and Starships had been
simultaneous releases, that baby would died in delivery instead of
in the crib.
--
"*GOTHS*. Pshaw. Those women there, for example. They're just so...so...so...
*dark* and *sullen* and *angst-filled* and...and..."
"Gorgeous?"
"It's *so* unfair." [Dork Tower 2]
Jefferson Krogh
> Just as a heads up, the GURPS Traveller books currently out are:
>
> GURPS Traveller
> Behind the Claw: The Spinward Marches Sourcebook
> Traveller Aliens 1: Zhodani, Vargr, and some minor aliens
>
> Coming soon:
> Traveller StarMercs.
Just out of curiosity, is anyone in this NG playing GURPS Traveller? If not,
are you using the new 1120 setting with one of the other Traveller rules
sets?
--
Jefferson Krogh
http://www.skaldheim.com
Tried to believe, but you know it's no good
This is something that just can't be understood... "Afterimage," Rush
ed
of Wed, 02 Dec 1998 01:37:38 GMT:
>>Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
>>the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
>>immensely popular.
>
>Er, I meant to say "the definitive SF RPG." Carry on.
Not whilst Space Opera is in print, which, technically, it is.
ed
--
edh...@equus.demon.co.uk | Dragons Rescued | _////
http://www.equus.demon.co.uk/ | Maidens Slain | o_/o ///
For devilbunnies, Diplomacy, RPGs, | Quests P.O.A. | __\ ///__
Science-Fiction and other stuff | | <*>
Alan D Kohler
>The noble hawk...@REMOVE2REPLY.olg.com (Alan D Kohler) spake on the day
>of Wed, 02 Dec 1998 01:37:38 GMT:
>
>
>>>Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
>>>the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
>>>immensely popular.
>>
>>Er, I meant to say "the definitive SF RPG." Carry on.
>
>Not whilst Space Opera is in print, which, technically, it is.
Excuse me, but:
yeah, right.
Mark Cook
> >>Originally an excellent system. Unfortunately, when Mega didn't
> >>immediately take the world by storm
> >
> >Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
> >the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
> >immensely popular.
>
> Er, I meant to say "the definitive SF RPG." Carry on.
Jeez, Alan. Most *dogs* can't roll over that fast! :^) :^) :^)
- Mark C.
Instructor, Willamette Small Arms Academy
EOD, U.S.M.C. 1st MarDiv (Camp Pendleton), Class of '75
Full-Auto Director, Albany Rifle & Pistol Club, Albany, OR
NRA (Life), SAF (Life), CCRKBA (Life)
Front Sight First Family member #1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mark f. cook * mark cook consulting * shoestring graphics & printing
2055 s.w. whiteside dr. * corvallis, or, 97333-1406 * ma...@ssgfx.com
Phone: 541-753-2732 Fax: 541-753-2738 http://www.ssgfx.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I believe that "decimation" originated with the Roman legions.
Of course it originated with the Romans! Who else would _need_
a word that means "kill every tenth person"? - Loren Wiseman
Brett Slocum
>Just out of curiosity, is anyone in this NG playing GURPS Traveller? If not,
>are you using the new 1120 setting with one of the other Traveller rules
>sets?
I'm running a G:Traveller campaign. We have our third session on Sunday. A rich
son of a Marquis just picked up his Lady of Shallot yacht and a crew picked by
his father. They left Strouden on a shakedown cruise.
I'm using the 1120 setting.
Ty Beard
make the classic Imperium the background, then we'll be having this same
discussion in about 18 months about T6. Richter, at least, will be happy.
Marc needs to decide if he's a vanity press or a business. If the former,
then he can choose any background he wants. If the latter, he'd better give
the customer what the customer wants. In my humble opinion, of course.
A suggestion -- alter the classic background a bit to allow for a Frontier.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Doug Berry wrote in message <36677e1e...@news.wenet.net>...
ed
>On Wed, 02 Dec 1998 20:23:49 GMT, edh...@equus.demon.co.uk (ed) wrote:
>
>>The noble hawk...@REMOVE2REPLY.olg.com (Alan D Kohler) spake on the day
>>of Wed, 02 Dec 1998 01:37:38 GMT:
>>
>>
>>>>Really? Back in my home town (where I no longer live, natch) MT was
>>>>the inheritor of Traveller's mantle as the definitive RPG and was
>>>>immensely popular.
>>>
>>>Er, I meant to say "the definitive SF RPG." Carry on.
>>
>>Not whilst Space Opera is in print, which, technically, it is.
>
>Excuse me, but:
>yeah, right.
Which is "yeah right" aimed at. Unfortunately it is still in print but
in such a restrictive way that it might a swell not be.
As to definitive. Absolutely. Despite Traveller's calm to emulate any SF
background, with later stats for Jim DiGriz and Darth Vader amongst
others, really it isn't suitable for any SF system
The original background is good, though I was never fond of it as a
place to play, but I loved SO's approach to allow gaming with rules
Catering to backgrounds ranging from Star Trek to Darkover.
Except in the Starship rules which were as one mode as Traveller.
I for one would welcome a 2nd ed Space Opera
David P. Summers
> The Illuminated Masters let Jefferson Krogh <jeff...@skaldheim.com> write:
>
> >Just out of curiosity, is anyone in this NG playing GURPS Traveller? If not,
> >are you using the new 1120 setting with one of the other Traveller rules
> >sets?
>
> I'm running a G:Traveller campaign. We have our third session on Sunday.
A rich
> son of a Marquis just picked up his Lady of Shallot yacht and a crew picked by
> his father. They left Strouden on a shakedown cruise.
>
> I'm using the 1120 setting.
My campaign is still at 1109. One of these days I'll get around
to advancing the timeline. But I want to get through the Traveller
Adventure first. :-)
Jeff Zeitlin
>According to Ken Starr, on 1 Dec 1998 11:50:20 GMT,
>d9be...@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) is alleged to have
>said:
>
>> What about Whitman, is he involved in T5 too?
>
>No.
>
>Nyet.
>
>Over Michael Richter's dead body will Whitman ever be allowed
>near Traveller again.
Don't say it that way, Doug - there are several _critics_ of
Traveller who think MTR overdoes it, and would be pleased to see
his dead body.
As far as _I_ am concerned, Whitman should not be permitted
anywhere near a Traveller product in any capacity - including
player - unless Moshiach says so, and even then, I'd argue with
him pretty hard.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Jeff Zeitlin
>On Tue, 01 Dec 1998 17:05:51 -0800, sum...@alum.mit.edu (David P.
>Summers) wrote:
>>In article <bjm10-01129...@potato.cit.cornell.edu>,
>>bj...@cornell.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) wrote:
>>> In article <8TQ82.774$2n5.25...@news.randori.com>, "Ty Beard"
>>> <tbe...@e-tex.com> wrote:
>>> > Firstly, I think a lot of us Traveller fans would have liked the system to
>>> > be set in the good old Imperium, circa 1105. No Rebellion. No Virus. None of
>>> > that crap. This is based entirely upon my personal experience, but I don't
>>> YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES!
>>> Throw out all that worthless TNE and post-TNE garbage. It never
>>> happened. It will never happen. Never mention it again.
>>Well, this is the background that GURPS Traveller is supporting
>>(the timeline was advanced to 1120, but otherwise it is just
>>as described with no rebellion or Virus).
>This may be a minority view, but I hate the virus (sorry, too dumb for
>SOD purposes), but LIKE the rebellion. It added spice to the setting,
>and more importantly, added tons of adventure potential.
That scenario is called "MegaTraveller", not "Traveller: The New
Era". I liked it too, for those same reasons.
HOWEVER: Another way to get the same kind of adventure potential
would have been to develop the other Major Powers of the region -
the Vargr Extents, the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Hivers, the
K'kree, the Solomani. Or, set more development in the
"unincorporated" areas, like the region between the Hivers,
K'kree, Imperium, and Lesser Rift, or between the Aslan,
Imperium, Zhodani, and Greater Rift. Much as I enjoyed the
adventure potential of the Rebellion (a.k.a. the Second Civil
War), I think I would have enjoyed _this_ a lot more.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Jeff Zeitlin
>Interestingly, one aspect of Traveller which has been completely neglected
>is its usefuless as a "generic" sf rpg. I never really used the Imperium
>setting at all (though I did lift things and even entire planets from
>published material). I for one would be perfectly happy to see an edition
>of Traveller with nothing but the basic rules, world creation, technology
>creation and character generation. Then all the setting-specific stuff
>could be supplements. That also would mean the supplements could be
>rules-light and thus adaptable to GURPS Traveller, old Traveller,
>homebrew, etc.
This is an interesting idea, and one which is actually 180° away
from what I usually see - a lot of people see Traveller as a
_setting_ more than a system, and use a system that they like.
One favorite was to run a "homebrew" GURPS Traveller - years
before SJG was a serious candidate to publish Traveller material.
But yes, I can see where the CT/MT rules could be conveniently
used against almost any sort of setting...
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Buzz
>As to definitive. Absolutely. Despite Traveller's calm to emulate any SF
>background, with later stats for Jim DiGriz and Darth Vader amongst
>others, really it isn't suitable for any SF system
I don't think that Traveller _ever_ claimed to be able to emulate
_any_ SF background. You could use it as such, but there are a lot of
Imperium-specific facets of the game, as well as a very specific
"worldview" in place. I don't know where exactly you got this idea.
>The original background is good, though I was never fond of it as a
>place to play, but I loved SO's approach to allow gaming with rules
>Catering to backgrounds ranging from Star Trek to Darkover.
I found SO to be a bit scatterbrained, overcomplicated, and that it
borrowed a bit from Traveller (e.g., chargen). I loved that it had
more high-tech than Trav (lightsabers, plasma pistols, more aliens,
etc.). I was never really able to run it effectively, though.
>I for one would welcome a 2nd ed Space Opera
For my few complaints, I'd be happy to see this happen, too. I'm not
going to deny that the game had potential, I just wouldn't call it
"definitive."
buzz[at]enteract[dot]com
Ty Beard
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Buzz wrote in message <36671b48....@news.enteract.com>...
James Nicoll
Jeff Zeitlin <jzei...@cyburban.com> wrote:
>
>HOWEVER: Another way to get the same kind of adventure potential
>would have been to develop the other Major Powers of the region -
>the Vargr Extents, the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Hivers, the
>K'kree, the Solomani. Or, set more development in the
>"unincorporated" areas, like the region between the Hivers,
>K'kree, Imperium, and Lesser Rift, or between the Aslan,
>Imperium, Zhodani, and Greater Rift. Much as I enjoyed the
>adventure potential of the Rebellion (a.k.a. the Second Civil
>War), I think I would have enjoyed _this_ a lot more.
Say, did anyone ever set up a Casablanca scenario or
a Geneva in 1938 style scenario for Traveller? Pick a planet
that is between several powers but independent as a base for
transfering information and goods between contenting states.
Ken Walton
Brett Slocum wrote in message <3666c889....@news.io.com>...
>The Illuminated Masters let Jefferson Krogh <jeff...@skaldheim.com>
write:
>
>>Just out of curiosity, is anyone in this NG playing GURPS Traveller?
If not,
>>are you using the new 1120 setting with one of the other Traveller
rules
>>sets?
>
>I'm running a G:Traveller campaign. We have our third session on
Sunday. A rich
>son of a Marquis just picked up his Lady of Shallot yacht and a crew
picked by
>his father. They left Strouden on a shakedown cruise.
>
>I'm using the 1120 setting.
I'm five weeks into a G:T campaign, set in the Spinward Marches in
1120. I found the GURPS system encouraged the players to come up with
much more interesting characters than would probably have happened
with standard Traveller rules.
The PCs are crew on a small freighter, owned by a family. The parents
were killed, the cargo stolen and the ship damaged by pirates just
prior to the start of the campaign. The children (in their early 20s)
survived the raid, and have been forced to "grow up" rather suddenly.
These children consist of the female pilot and her twin brother the
engineer, plus their autistic brother with latent psi powers, who
they've got to look after. As extra crew they've taken on a very dodgy
merchant with a bounty hunter after him, and a very strange female
navigator who was brought up by Hivers. And they're being used as
pawns in a complicated political situation involving the Imperium, the
Zhodani, the Vargr and the Federation of Arden. I'm trying to base it
on the "feel" of C.J.Cherryh's _Merchanter's Luck_ - ordinarly folk
caught up in extraordinary circumstances.
--
Ken Walton mailto: k...@sacnoth.freeserve.co.uk
"He whose laugh lasts laughs longest."
David L. Pulver
What T5 should really do is toss those canon elements that don't really
work but keep those that *do* work. In particular:
-- Redraw the bloody map of the Imperium so that the Imperium has a
frontier, even if it means knocking a corridor through someone's space.
It could be done without doing too much violence to the elements of the
universe that most people care about.
-- Create some Glorantha style "blank land" areas that will have NO
background at all and are in astrographically interesting regions and say
nothing about them, period, except "these are for GMs to develop."
-- Playtest man to man combat...
Mark Kinney
: Say, did anyone ever set up a Casablanca scenario or
: a Geneva in 1938 style scenario for Traveller? Pick a planet
: that is between several powers but independent as a base for
: transfering information and goods between contenting states.
Something B5-ish.... I've been considering something like this, as I like
the B5 concept, but am sick of using the B5 universe, which my players
know every-damned-thing about.
Which reminds me, which classic Traveller books did the secrets of the
Ancients show up in (or the other "secrets" listed in the GURPS books, for
that matter? Email me on this one, whoever...)
--
albe...@iglou.com | Mark Kinney | http://www.iglou.com/nations
AKA Mirumoto Maaku, Annoying Bushi Clan Magistrate
"I think it might have been that there was a Stonehenge monument on the
stage that was in danger of being *crushed* by a *dwarf*."
-- David St. Hubbins, "This Is Spinal Tap"
Alan D Kohler
wrote:
>cambias@heliograph."spahmtrap".com (Cambias) wrote:
>
>>Interestingly, one aspect of Traveller which has been completely neglected
>>is its usefuless as a "generic" sf rpg.
We mainly used the Imperium setting, but I have know several refs who
used the rules with variant settings... some of them sort of cool.
Alan D Kohler
>On Thu, 03 Dec 1998 21:11:52 GMT, edh...@equus.demon.co.uk (ed) wrote:
>
>>As to definitive. Absolutely. Despite Traveller's calm to emulate any SF
>>background, with later stats for Jim DiGriz and Darth Vader amongst
>>others, really it isn't suitable for any SF system
>
>I don't think that Traveller _ever_ claimed to be able to emulate
>_any_ SF background. You could use it as such, but there are a lot of
>Imperium-specific facets of the game, as well as a very specific
>"worldview" in place. I don't know where exactly you got this idea.
I don't know. It might not have made that claim (but in fact, I'm sure
some Traveller author made it somewhere), the fact that the Traveller
setting incorporated elements familiar to broad swaths of SF
litererature almost set it up for that role. C'mon the Vargr were
borrowed, the Aslan resemble cherryh's chanur with a little kzin threw
in, there are rules for rossettes and ringworlds in some of the
classic era books, Zhodani society borrows heavily from Bester's "the
demolished man". There are many more example, but my point is that it
was made to appeal to the gamut of SF literary fandom.
Now we only on occasion ran it with other than the published setting.
But the mere fact that it had such broad appeal as an SF game made it
the definitive SF game AFAIAC.
>
>>The original background is good, though I was never fond of it as a
>>place to play, but I loved SO's approach to allow gaming with rules
>>Catering to backgrounds ranging from Star Trek to Darkover.
>
>I found SO to be a bit scatterbrained, overcomplicated, and that it
>borrowed a bit from Traveller (e.g., chargen).
Triple ditto.
ed
23:19:32 GMT:
>On Thu, 03 Dec 1998 21:11:52 GMT, edh...@equus.demon.co.uk (ed) wrote:
>
>>As to definitive. Absolutely. Despite Traveller's calm to emulate any SF
>>background, with later stats for Jim DiGriz and Darth Vader amongst
>>others, really it isn't suitable for any SF system
>
>I don't think that Traveller _ever_ claimed to be able to emulate
>_any_ SF background. You could use it as such, but there are a lot of
>Imperium-specific facets of the game, as well as a very specific
>"worldview" in place. I don't know where exactly you got this idea.
Long, long ago it did. Showing my age here.
>>The original background is good, though I was never fond of it as a
>>place to play, but I loved SO's approach to allow gaming with rules
>>Catering to backgrounds ranging from Star Trek to Darkover.
>
>I found SO to be a bit scatterbrained, overcomplicated, and that it
>borrowed a bit from Traveller (e.g., chargen). I loved that it had
>more high-tech than Trav (lightsabers, plasma pistols, more aliens,
>etc.). I was never really able to run it effectively, though.
Also the StarSystems and animals owed a bit to Traveller IMHO. I was
able to run it effectively. It actually did work, some idiocies but
generally a sound, if over complex, system.
>>I for one would welcome a 2nd ed Space Opera
>
>For my few complaints, I'd be happy to see this happen, too. I'm not
>going to deny that the game had potential, I just wouldn't call it
>"definitive."
It could cater from Space Opera to the Harder edge of Space Opera.
To date, it's as definitive as it gets. IMHO.
Alan D Kohler
wrote:
>In article <366b1364...@news.cyburban.com>,
>Jeff Zeitlin <jzei...@cyburban.com> wrote:
>>
>>HOWEVER: Another way to get the same kind of adventure potential
>>would have been to develop the other Major Powers of the region -
>>the Vargr Extents, the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Hivers, the
>>K'kree, the Solomani. Or, set more development in the
>>"unincorporated" areas, like the region between the Hivers,
>>K'kree, Imperium, and Lesser Rift, or between the Aslan,
>>Imperium, Zhodani, and Greater Rift. Much as I enjoyed the
>>adventure potential of the Rebellion (a.k.a. the Second Civil
>>War), I think I would have enjoyed _this_ a lot more.
>
> Say, did anyone ever set up a Casablanca scenario or
>a Geneva in 1938 style scenario for Traveller? Pick a planet
>that is between several powers but independent as a base for
>transfering information and goods between contenting states.
I had my own version of the Reavers Deep, which was the major nexus
where I ran my campaign. In case you don't remember, the Reaver's deep
is on the frontiers between the Imperium, Aslan, and Solomani states.
Plus there are a number of client states in the intervening neutral
zone. It proved such a fun place to run adventures, when I discovered
that FASA (IIRC) had already published "official" setting material on
the reaver's deep, I totally blew it off.
It was great. Memories of many excellent campaigns run in this sector
is the number one reason that I thumb my nose at the occasional
Traveller-basher.
Allen Shock
<Pine.GSO.4.04.9812032104520.3325-100000@mercury>...
>
> What T5 should really do is toss those canon elements that don't really
> work but keep those that *do* work. In particular:
What, change the almighty CANON?? half the TML would drop dead at the very
thought!!
Actually, it has long been my opinion that major elements of the "canon"
should be changed or thrown out completely. But, Marc will do what he will
do. Such is life.
> -- Redraw the bloody map of the Imperium so that the Imperium has a
> frontier, even if it means knocking a corridor through someone's space.
> It could be done without doing too much violence to the elements of the
> universe that most people care about.
One thing that has been talked about for T5 is an official "blank sector"
that could be developed by refs. I agree with you though; give it a
frontier. (Actually, the sectors spinward of the Spinward Marches, starting
with Foreven, could be a frontier area.)
> -- Playtest man to man combat...
Lots of aspects of Traveller combat from CT all the way to T4 bug me.
That's one reason that I enjoy GURPS Traveller so much. I like GURPS
combat, I know it well, and it works for me.
Allen
Phil & Morgana Keast
<dlpu...@kos.net> wrote:
>
>What T5 should really do is toss those canon elements that don't really
>work but keep those that *do* work. In particular:
>
>-- Redraw the bloody map of the Imperium so that the Imperium has a
>frontier, even if it means knocking a corridor through someone's space.
>It could be done without doing too much violence to the elements of the
>universe that most people care about.
>
>-- Create some Glorantha style "blank land" areas that will have NO
>background at all and are in astrographically interesting regions and say
>nothing about them, period, except "these are for GMs to develop."
Actually, theImperium in CT does have friontiers. Many frontiers. the
problem lies with discrpencies of scale. If you look at any map which
shows the Imperium as a whole, it appears that it is surrounded on all
sides by other Empires/Realms such as the Solomani, Hivers, Zhodani,
Vargr, etc., etc.; yet if the scale of the map is increased, it comes
to light that there are often (ussually) stretches 2 or 4 sectors deep
which are aligned with neither bordering superpower. Even in areas
where the inter-border frontier is shallow, there are entire
subsectors which are aligned with neither side. These unaligned or
neautral regions consist of everything from totally unexplored
systems, through lost civilizations, independant worlds trying to
maintain the sovereignty, to client states of the spuer powers. In
short, a healthy frontier.
Given that the average subsector takes a month or more to cross by CT
jumpships, and a full sector can take a year or more to cross,
depending on stellar density and the jump capacity of the ship, these
are large frontiers. The frontier is only non-existent or small when
compared to the vast size of the Imperium. In reality, their is a
relatively narrow band of frontier, from a month to a couple of years
travel time thick, around the entire Imperium.
Take for example a well known sector such as Spinward Marches. A third
of the subsectors are nominally Imperium, and of that thrid, maybe
half of the systems within those subsectors are actually part of the
Imperium. Similarly, a few stellar systems are aligned with the
Zhodani, but not a particularly large block. The remained of the
Sector is independant, and varies from totally unexplored worlds who
have never heard of the Imperium to minor interstellar societies who
have had minor contact.
Take care out there ;)
Phil K. (Melbourne, Australia)
[ke...@melb.alexia.net.au]
Sword Worlder
>
>Now we only on occasion ran it with other than the published setting.
>But the mere fact that it had such broad appeal as an SF game made it
>the definitive SF game AFAIAC.
>
Poor chap. I had a good three years without the setting. My universe was
very firmly in place by the time the Imperium et al was fleshed out. I ran
DeGriz, Space Vikings, Naked Sun, Ringworld Engineers, Gateway, Reefs of
Space and many other borrowed backgrounds using just the three little black
books plus Mercenary. I eventually gave in and ran scenarios during the
Fifth Frontier War setting, but I did so because the setting was so
enticing.
Eric Tolle
Ty Beard wrote:
> A suggestion -- alter the classic background a bit to allow for a Frontier.
That's easily enough done- simply have the scouts go straight up or down. ;')
--
Eric
Tolle
sch...@silcom.com
"I have a vision of some galactic museum of the distant future in which diet
Coke
cans will share with mail coats a single small vitrine marked "Planet Earth,
1000-2000, Christian Era."- Felipe Fernandez-Armesto: Preface to "Millennium".
Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes
Eric Tolle <sch...@silcom.com> spake:
>Ty Beard wrote:
>> A suggestion -- alter the classic background a bit to allow for a Frontier.
>That's easily enough done- simply have the scouts go straight up or down. ;')
Heh. Been there, done that:
<flashback src="dejanews">
Author: Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes
Email: kami...@kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu
Date: 1997/01/12
Forums: rec.games.frp.misc
Jeremy Reaban <j...@xxxxinlink.com> spake:
> And finally, the thing about Traveller's background that I
> personally
>hate, and why I stopped playing CT a long time ago, is that there are
>no frontiers (if you are a human). The entire Imperium is hemmed in by
>aliens.
Whaddaya mean? They've got nothing BUT frontier - they just have to
go up or down a parsec, and they're on a whole new map!
<ahem>
Will T4 stick with the 2D sector maps forever, or will it be going to
a 3D map at some point? Even Space Opera and Universe had those - the
"20 years of gaming experience" doesn't seem to be showing through that
clearly.
</flashback>
[We now resume December 1998, already in progress...]
Nothing changes in Trav. New versions from new publishers, different
game system every time, but for some reason failing every time.
For what it's worth, I love the classic Trav setting, other than the
idiotic starmaps and the political borders... I'd pretty much dump the
existing maps and start over, but that's me.
-- <a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
Christian Hanisch
> Just out of curiosity, is anyone in this NG playing GURPS Traveller? If not,
> are you using the new 1120 setting with one of the other Traveller rules
> sets?
We are playing GURPS: Traveller. 8 or 10 times since its selling day, 6
or 8 times before then. (I always loved Traveller and GURPS is my famous
System - a connection of both was 'natural'). The last 6 Sessions play
in the 1120s with Classic Traveller Adventures (those in district 268)
and some own ones.
Christian
Carl Perkins
}David L. Pulver <dlpu...@kos.net> wrote in article
}> -- Redraw the bloody map of the Imperium so that the Imperium has a
}> frontier, even if it means knocking a corridor through someone's space.
}> It could be done without doing too much violence to the elements of the
}> universe that most people care about.
}
}that could be developed by refs. I agree with you though; give it a
}frontier. (Actually, the sectors spinward of the Spinward Marches, starting
}with Foreven, could be a frontier area.)
}
You can add a bit of "frontier" fairly easily without changing any of
the existing areas.
There's this class M star. Not very bright, just your typical little class M.
It's very near the edge of a big dust cloud. Not very interesting, except
that it is moving by at a fairly high speed and is just emerging from the
cloud. It was just noticed by somone at one of the stars on a route across
(or along the edge of) a rift (who, like everybody else, wasn't really
looking - everything cartographic has been known for centuries, or even
millenia, after all, hasn't it?). It just recentley entered Jump 5 distance
from that place and is moving past at about a parsec per century along a
path that will not quite ever bring it into Jump 4 range. Assuming that
Jump X is good to get from distances between X-1 to X, this means that the
new star will be in range for Jump 5 for nearly another 600 years, and then
in Jump 6 range for about 140 years after that.
Once you jump to it, you discover that there is a whole set of stars on the
other side of it that are now reachable. You could easily squeeze in several
subsectors worth of stuff.
Instant frontier - you just need to get past the initial long jump or jumps
to get to it. No telling what kind of beings already live there, if any, or
what their tech levels will be. Could be anything from no intelligent life
to "park the Navy over here - there's a TL19 Empire we don't want to let
expand into our space."
(Actually, in a place as big as the Imperium you should get shifts in jump
distances rather frequently.)
--- Carl
Buzz
'Kamikaze' Hughes) wrote:
> Will T4 stick with the 2D sector maps forever, or will it be going to
>a 3D map at some point? Even Space Opera and Universe had those - the
>"20 years of gaming experience" doesn't seem to be showing through that
>clearly.
></flashback>
Pardon my ignorance (my copy of SO disappeared long ago), but how does
one do 3-D starmaps that are, effectively, any differnt from the way
Traveller does theirs? I blieve the SO maps were just as flat, but
with "altitiude" co-ordinates for each star system. The effect was the
same.
I suppose you could do it with software. That'd be a new one: "This
game requires paper, pencils, dice, and at least 32MB of RAM." :)
Ty Beard
starship construction and combat? I always liked it (and it was pretty fun
with Trillion Credit Squadron) and thought it had the right balance of
detail and ease of use.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Alan D Kohler
Well, you can make some okay maps with just a piece of graph paper by
writing Z axis number on the paper. It's still less convenient than
Traveller's 2D map where all you have to do is count hexes to
determine distance; on a 3D starmap, you have to remember your old
pythagreon(sp?) theorom to figure out distances. So at the very least
you need a calculator, or a piece of scratch paper and a little time.
If you're lucky, your clever enough to make your own distance cross
reference chart, or the publisher has been kind enough to make one for
you (like the GURPS Space Atlas books do...) Or, you can assume that
in your universe that travel time with star drives is not directly
dependant on distance and just make up travel times and ignore
distances.
If your handy with a spreadsheet, you can make your own cross
reference list between stars of your own making.
However, the best solution by far, if you have a computer is a program
called ChView. It is a basic program that doesn't use too many memory
resources. It can display stars and allows the user to rotate the view
by dragging with a mouse. It is made to print an overlay on the map
that shows "links" between near stars, also showing distances between
them. The links have a user customizable color code depending on how
long it is. Finally, the program comes with a bunch of database files
that have fairly accurate compilations of nearby stars taken from the
Gliese and Hipparcos catalogs, so if you are a hard SF buff who want
to know about our future instead that of a galaxy far away (like me),
then this is the ticket.
It's available on the internet at:
http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~jaymin/chview/chv0.htm
And I wouldn't run a SFRPG with a realistic starmap without it!
Sword Worlder
Ask him. farf...@aol.com
=======================
Visit the Subsidized Merchant - http://surf.to/traveller-trader
Sword Worlder
>Is there already some publisher available with an interest to actually
>print this thing? Or will it again be done by such professionals as
>those engaged in T4?
Is that an offer?
[snip]
> I for sure wouldn't have my name on a book I
>never even cared to check before mass-printing.
agreed
>> T5 isn't going to be released until it is ready and
>> able to stand on it's merits.
>
>Oh, you mean "in ten years"... or never?
>
However long it takes. If it can't be done well, never is a better option.
=======================
Sword Worlder's Traveller Pages
http://come.to/traveller
Sword Worlder
>Care to elaborate on that? In what ways will T5 be different from T4?
>What changes are planned? Are the production schedules? Will the
>mechanics be similar to T4? CT? MT? TNE? How will starship
>construction be handled? By another gearhead heaven (and
>serious-player-hell?).
>Some answers would be highly appreciated to get an idea whether
>there's anything but hot air and foul promises behind T5.
Actually, Marc would be more than happy to send you a complete copy of the
CharGen rules if you e-mail him and ask for them. He genuinely wants your
feedback. Unfortunately, most of the vocal detractors turn mute when
constructive criticism is requested.
>Oh yes, highly likely that it will be a great game, considering that
>most of the glorious past of Traveller consists of oldtimers dreaming
>about how everything started. D&D was great, too, in the seventies,
>you know. Today it's a bit behind the times (although still fun).
T4 was a rushed and bastardized attempt, I agree, but hardly the fault of
Marc Miller, who was not running the day-to-day operation. He has had the
failure of T4 and the seeming success of G:T to learn from, now, and with
help and comment from more of us "non-gearhead" types, there may be hope.
I'm certainly willing to try.
Ty Beard
>.... The result was a very convoluted and buggy system that
>was much too complicated for the rest of the T4 system and simply
>didn't fit it.
What systems are you referring to?
>Considering this (and the absolutely crappy load of
>other sourcebooks that was released for T4) I highly doubt that Marc
>Miller is able to write a good game these days
Why?
>... he's remained behind
>on a level appropriate for the audience 20 years ago...
In what way?
?and the many
>fanboys on the TML who all want to have a word in the game don't help
>either.
Gee, I thought it was good to get input from your customers?
>Care to elaborate on that?
Please follow your own advice. I'm assuming that you really do have
something useful to say, so please give us something besides a bunch of
bald, conclusory assertions. You've been hanging out with Richter too long.
Please give us some examples and evidence of what you're talking about.
Thanks.
--Ty Beard, Esq.
Doug Berry
jzei...@cyburban.com (Jeff Zeitlin) is alleged to have said:
>HOWEVER: Another way to get the same kind of adventure potential
>would have been to develop the other Major Powers of the region -
>the Vargr Extents, the Zhodani, the Aslan, the Hivers, the
>K'kree, the Solomani. Or, set more development in the
>"unincorporated" areas, like the region between the Hivers,
>K'kree, Imperium, and Lesser Rift, or between the Aslan,
>Imperium, Zhodani, and Greater Rift. Much as I enjoyed the
>adventure potential of the Rebellion (a.k.a. the Second Civil
>War), I think I would have enjoyed _this_ a lot more.
The MegaTraveller Journal #4 was given over to "Lords of Thunder"
by William Keith (of the infamous Keith Brothers). The entire
Gateway sector, placed squarely between the Imperium and the Two
Thousand Worlds.
Numerous small states, K'kree ships all over the place, and an
ancient mystery. I've always wanted to run that setting. I'll
admit it, I like the K'kree.
Challenge tried to support the hinterworlds, but I've never found
anybody who really liked that sector.
--
+-------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry dbe...@hooked.net |
| http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/ |
|-------------------------------------------|
| "Hear the voices in my head, swear to God |
| it sounds like they're snoring." |
| -Harvey Danger, "Flagpole Sitta" |
+-------------------------------------------+
Doug Berry
jam...@ece.uwaterloo.ca (James Nicoll) is alleged to have said:
> Say, did anyone ever set up a Casablanca scenario or
>a Geneva in 1938 style scenario for Traveller? Pick a planet
>that is between several powers but independent as a base for
>transfering information and goods between contenting states.
In the Classic Era, Esalin/Jewell (co-owned by the Zhos and
Imperium) and the Federation of Arden are good for that kind of
setting.
Graham Spearing
ed wrote in message <3667f87...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>Except in the Starship rules which were as one mode as Traveller.
>
>I for one would welcome a 2nd ed Space Opera
I would second that emotion! Space Opera was overly complex and lacked
a unified task system but knocked the socks off MT (as far as I am
concerned). Star Wars sort of did what Space Opera was doing but in a
more restricted part of the genre. I've run Space Opera using James
Bond mechanics, which with worked very well and Star Wars in the Space
Opera setting.
Of course my dream is for Dream Pod 9 to produce a Space Opera style
game using silhouette. Hmm, perhaps I'd better write it :)!
Pip pip
Graham
Doug Berry
Biskup <bis...@saranxis.ruhr.de> is alleged to have said:
>Doug Berry <dbe...@hooked.net> wrote:
>Is there already some publisher available with an interest to actually
>print this thing? Or will it again be done by such professionals as
>those engaged in T4?
Not yet. Marc is still shopping around.
>> Did'ya know that the wrong draft of the rules was printed? That
>> kind of thing.
>
>When did this get out? Not during the one year (or so) of T4 time I
>wasted on the TML. Who suddenly thought of that funny explanation?
Marc Miller. It came out after the death of IG.
>And what does it tell you about Marc Miller's influence on and
>interest in the game. I for sure wouldn't have my name on a book I
>never even cared to check before mass-printing.
One of the biggest complaints Marc (and everybody else involved)
had with IG was the shoddy proof-reading and lack of opputunity
to review materials.
>
>> T5 isn't going to be released until it is ready and
>> able to stand on it's merits.
>
>Oh, you mean "in ten years"... or never?
I'd say a year, year and a half.
Doug Berry
Biskup <bis...@saranxis.ruhr.de> is alleged to have said:
>Doug Berry <dbe...@hooked.net> wrote:
>> several major changes have been made already based on
>> input from the TML.
>
>The TML (at least the very vocal gearheads) had a lot of input on the
>technical parts of T4, including lots of "advice" to make the game
>more playable. The result was a very convoluted and buggy system that
>was much too complicated for the rest of the T4 system and simply
>didn't fit it. Considering this (and the absolutely crappy load of
>other sourcebooks that was released for T4) I highly doubt that Marc
>Miller is able to write a good game these days... he's remained behind
>on a level appropriate for the audience 20 years ago... and the many
>fanboys on the TML who all want to have a word in the game don't help
>either.
que? We saw very little of T4 before it was released. The
people writing FFS2 got ever-changing requirements.
Gearhead bashing. How quaint. Did you ever notice that from the
beginning T4 had a simple, modular ship design system? FFS2 was
the advanced system, for those who enjoy designing ships and
weapons. The Quick Ship Design System (QSDS) was based on FFS2
and made to allow non-gearheads to quickly put together ships for
their games with much hassle.
>> All of these were designed to make the game accessable to new
>> players.
>
>Care to elaborate on that? In what ways will T5 be different from T4?
>What changes are planned? Are the production schedules? Will the
>mechanics be similar to T4? CT? MT? TNE? How will starship
>construction be handled? By another gearhead heaven (and
>serious-player-hell?).
First off, T5 will be playtested. Sections of the rules are
already under scruntiny. Character generation will now have the
option of the player simply choosing how long he stays in
service, and simply allocating a certain number of skill points,
rather than traditional Traveller character genration.
Characters will *not* die during generation.
Mechanics are similar to T4, but streamlined. All actions are
task-based, like MT. The rules for tasks take up about three
pages. Once you get that down, you know the game. The system is
simple (and not finished, so don't flame me!) As it stands right
now, Characteristic + Skill gives a target number. You roll
under that target number on a number of dice based on the task
difficulty. An Easy task might be 1d6, a Staggering task 4d6.
Since there isn't a publisher yet, I can't speak about production
schedules.
There will be a new version of FFS. Probably renamed. This will
be the gearhead book. With the basic rules there will be the
"Lego" ship building rules. This will be a simple
module-connecting system. Minimal math required. For example,
if you want a 200-dt ship with Jump-3, you look up that hull on a
table and it tells you how much that hull costs, and how much
space you have left after fuel, drives, airlocks, etc. have
already been figured in. Power plants will be handled in the
same way. You total up the power equirements, and pick a plant
of the chart that meets or exceeds the power requiremnts. This
will include a year's fuel for the plant. IIRC, the Basic Ship
Design System will only go up to about 1000-dt.
>Some answers would be highly appreciated to get an idea whether
>there's anything but hot air and foul promises behind T5.
Having read the sections Marc has released, I'd say that
traveller is still alive. GURPS:Traveller has been a shot in the
arm for the game; and I think that when the new system is
released (which won't be for a whil;e yet), it will have some
success.
Doug Berry
albe...@iglou.com (Mark Kinney) is alleged to have said:
>Which reminds me, which classic Traveller books did the secrets of the
>Ancients show up in (or the other "secrets" listed in the GURPS books, for
>that matter? Email me on this one, whoever...)
Adventure 12: Secret of the Ancients
Doug Berry
<ash...@gte.net> is alleged to have said:
>One thing that has been talked about for T5 is an official "blank sector"
>that could be developed by refs.
One thing T4 got right was reserving two sectors (Fornast and one
other) for referee development.
Doug Berry
kami...@kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu (Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes) is alleged
to have said:
> Nothing changes in Trav. New versions from new publishers, different
>game system every time, but for some reason failing every time.
Two versions being Origins Award winners, original game and the
designer in the hall of Fame, one version or another in print and
played for twenty years..
Interesting definition of failure.
NUELOW
<< T4 was a rushed and bastardized attempt, I agree, but hardly the fault of
Marc Miller, who was not running the day-to-day operation. >>
I keep hearing this... yet when I wrote my sections for "Anomalies," I was told
that Marc Miller had to review and approve everything.
Something's in conflict here... is there a bit of historical revisionism going
on?
Steve Miller
"Sometimes a dog grows so big that you just have to call it a horse!"
--Caramon Majere, "The Bestiary"
Carl Perkins
}On 4 Dec 1998 09:53:17 GMT, kami...@kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu (Mark
}'Kamikaze' Hughes) wrote:
}> Will T4 stick with the 2D sector maps forever, or will it be going to
}>a 3D map at some point? Even Space Opera and Universe had those - the
}>"20 years of gaming experience" doesn't seem to be showing through that
}>clearly.
}></flashback>
}
}Pardon my ignorance (my copy of SO disappeared long ago), but how does
}one do 3-D starmaps that are, effectively, any differnt from the way
}Traveller does theirs? I blieve the SO maps were just as flat, but
}with "altitiude" co-ordinates for each star system. The effect was the
}same.
}
}I suppose you could do it with software. That'd be a new one: "This
}game requires paper, pencils, dice, and at least 32MB of RAM." :)
}
For Traveller's purposes it is easier than that - you only have to indicate
distances between systems that you can get to via Jump 6, since there is no
Jump 7 (at tech levels you can find in the Imperium anyway - I'm not sure
if 6 is supposed to be the absolute upper limit or not). if you make the
subsectors have a Z extent the same as the narrower of the other two
directions the map would not be too cluttered if you indicated all possible
jumps (as long as you used some more shades of colors than the old maps did),
although you might have to limit it to lower than J6, J3 should not be too
messy and J2 would be usefull since most of the ships PCs initially have
access to can't do better than J2. Longer jumps could just be put on a list
(or indicated on a second map, and/or third, map).
--- Carl
Jeff Zeitlin
>Sword Worlder wrote:
><< T4 was a rushed and bastardized attempt, I agree, but hardly the fault of
>Marc Miller, who was not running the day-to-day operation. >>
>I keep hearing this... yet when I wrote my sections for "Anomalies," I was told
>that Marc Miller had to review and approve everything.
>Something's in conflict here... is there a bit of historical revisionism going
>on?
No conflict - Anomalies was one of the later items, coming after
Marc put his foot down and insisted on creative control/review.
Marc was never running day-to-day operations.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Pinochet
Buzz wrote in message <36685dc3...@news.enteract.com>...
>> Will T4 stick with the 2D sector maps forever, or will it be going to
>>a 3D map at some point? Even Space Opera and Universe had those >>-
the "20 years of gaming experience" doesn't seem to be showing >>through
that clearly. </flashback>
>Pardon my ignorance (my copy of SO disappeared long ago), but how >does
one do 3-D starmaps that are, effectively, any differnt from the way
>Traveller does theirs? I believe the SO maps were just as flat, but
>with "altitiude" co-ordinates for each star system. The effect was the
>same.
Except the increase in math required to compute distances. Not much of
a bother, but still one. Can be dealt with in various ways(such as a
list of distances...but that would be IMO, space that could be better
used for something else)...yet there isn't much of a *true* need to do
so, not
when you can dictate how FTL travel works and come up with a workable
explanation for 2D maps..
>I suppose you could do it with software. That'd be a new one: "This
>game requires paper, pencils, dice, and at least 32MB of RAM." :)
Wouldn't mind seeing such a thing, as there are plenty of such 3D
displays available that could be adapted. I'd prefer a hologram, but..
mercu...@hotmail.com
19981205154353.05510.00000540@ng-
ch1.aol.com>,
nue...@aol.comDEL (NUELOW)
wrote:
> Sword Worlder wrote:
>
> << T4 was a rushed and bastardized attempt, I agree, but hardly the fault of
> Marc Miller, who was not running the day-to-day operation. >>
>
> I keep hearing this... yet when I wrote my sections for "Anomalies," I was told
> that Marc Miller had to review and approve everything.
>
> Something's in conflict here... is there a bit of historical revisionism going
> on?
>
Naaaaah. Not in the GAME
INDUSTRY, Steve. That kind of
stuff just doesn't go on HERE...
;D
Heh.
S'a pity about T4, too. I was
REALLY looking forward to it, but
was horribly disappointed when I
picked it up the GenCon it debuted.
GURPS Traveller seems to be
picking up the slack (at least,
among the die-hard Traveller
fans). It'd be interesting to see the
T4 stuff bellyflop while a licensee
cranks out a succesful product.
THAT's just weird...
--
Eric S. Trautmann
Freelancer/Magician/Wage Slave
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Sword Worlder
>S'a pity about T4, too. I was
>REALLY looking forward to it, but
>was horribly disappointed when I
>picked it up the GenCon it debuted.
>
>GURPS Traveller seems to be
>picking up the slack (at least,
>among the die-hard Traveller
>fans). It'd be interesting to see the
>T4 stuff bellyflop while a licensee
>cranks out a succesful product.
>THAT's just weird...
Actually, GT has more oversight than T4 had. Loren Wiseman is in house and
MM has learned from past mistakes. Add to that the fact that SJG has nearly
twenty years publishing experience, and I'd expect it to be a passable.
Thomas Vickers
>GURPS:Traveller thing as you've noticed. This hasn't died yet. There's
>also supposed to be a fifth edition of Traveller coming from Marc Miller as
>well, but given the complete piece of crap he produced in the fourth
>edition, I don't expect to see anything good out of it.
Gurps Traveller looks great.
Gives us a lot of Classic Traveller material that has been missing since the
little black books.
As far as Traveller 5th Edition, it looks good, so far.
Marc Miller is taking his time and making sure the errors that accompanied
T:4 do not occur. From what I know, it was more the fault of Imperium Games
(who is out of business) not Marc's.
It is expected to be finished mid to late 1999.
TV
Andy Staples
>According to Ken Starr, on 3 Dec 1998 23:39:11 -0500,
>albe...@iglou.com (Mark Kinney) is alleged to have said:
>
>>Which reminds me, which classic Traveller books did the secrets of the
>>Ancients show up in (or the other "secrets" listed in the GURPS books, for
>>that matter? Email me on this one, whoever...)
>
>Adventure 12: Secret of the Ancients
Also Adv 3: Twilight's Peak, the Droyne alien module, a couple of JOTAS
or Challenge articles and a Traveller's Digest scenario. I've probably
forgotten a couple of sources as well.
I never managed to get hold of Secret of the Ancients, but I'm pretty
clear on what the secret is from other sources - especially the Droyne
module and the Challenge article discussing what Grandfather keeps in
his pockets...
--
Andy Staples
And when he came to the place where the wild things are, they roared their
terrible roars and gnashed their terrible teeth and rolled their terrible eyes
and showed their terrible claws, till Max said "BE STILL!", and tamed them with
the magic trick of staring into all their yellow eyes without blinking once.
- Maurice Sendak, "Where the Wild Things Are".
Andy Staples
>My campaign is still at 1109. One of these days I'll get around
>to advancing the timeline. But I want to get through the Traveller
>Adventure first. :-)
Thank God I'm not the only one! I take it you've got all tangled up with
the Fifth Frontier War as well...
Actually, for G:T I was going to crank the campaign calendar back even
earlier, to take in Twilight's Peak, run through FFW/Traveller
Adventure, then on to post-FFW stuff like Tarsus. Mind you, with plenty
of original digressions from that plot, it would probably take ten
years.
Then there's the naval and mercenary campaigns to consider. And all the
covert operations on the Rim...the wild and rough Reaver's Deep, the
Aslan colonies coreward of the Rift. And all of that without switching
your timeline to Mileu 0 or the Interstellar Wars between Terra and
Vland.
Problem with Traveller's background is one is spoilt for choice.
One aspect of the background I wouldn't change is the 2-D starmaps. Yes,
they're unrealistic, and for any other background I prefer 3-D maps. Had
Traveller been published originally with 3-D maps I'd've probably liked
it more, but they are too much an essential part of the background now.
The political and military history of the Imperium hangs on those maps.
What you have to do is rationalise *why* they're 2-D. It's obviously
tied in with the performance characteristics of the jump drive in some
way. My view is that the maps represent available routes through
jumpspace, rather than the physical location of star systems within
Einsteinian space - a bit like the symbolic representation of the London
underground on maps, which shows a nice, clean, orderly system of lines
and stations instead of the complicated twists, turns and gradients of
the real thing.
Invent your own Trek-style pseudoscience or scientibabble to justify it.
Yes, it's a fix, no, it's not hard SF, but it's the best way of handling
the problem I can think of.
Traveller isn't particularly hard SF anyway, though it has its moments.
For hard, I go 2300. If ever a game deserved republishing...
Raymond Speer
published? Am I the only one to see trouble up ahead?
If Traveller-5 is a success, won't Marc Miller let the license for
GURPS:Traveller lapse or actually take active measures to bring the
Traveller license of SJG to an abrupt close?
If GURPS: Traveller is a success, what sort of market is left over for
Traveller-5? I mean, Marc Miller should get real. Not even grognards buy
games nowadays just for a rules set, and I think it is very unlikely
that any "roll under ( attribute + skill ) with variable number of dice"
system is going to impress the gaming community.
If Traveller has a strength (and that is debateable), it is the future
history of the Imperiums. Sharing that asset with another publisher
cheapens the value.
Frank Wallen
<andy.s...@REMOVEminarsas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>David P. Summers <sum...@alum.mit.edu> writes
>
>>My campaign is still at 1109. One of these days I'll get around
>>to advancing the timeline. But I want to get through the Traveller
>>Adventure first. :-)
>
>Thank God I'm not the only one! I take it you've got all tangled up with
>the Fifth Frontier War as well...
>
>Actually, for G:T I was going to crank the campaign calendar back even
>earlier, to take in Twilight's Peak, run through FFW/Traveller
>Adventure, then on to post-FFW stuff like Tarsus. Mind you, with plenty
>of original digressions from that plot, it would probably take ten
>years.
>
>Then there's the naval and mercenary campaigns to consider. And all the
>covert operations on the Rim...the wild and rough Reaver's Deep, the
>Aslan colonies coreward of the Rift. And all of that without switching
>your timeline to Mileu 0 or the Interstellar Wars between Terra and
>Vland.
>
>Problem with Traveller's background is one is spoilt for choice.
Definately. There's a lot of directions a ref can take a campaign.
Pick a place along the timeline and much can be done with very little
thought.
>One aspect of the background I wouldn't change is the 2-D starmaps. Yes,
>they're unrealistic, and for any other background I prefer 3-D maps. Had
>Traveller been published originally with 3-D maps I'd've probably liked
>it more, but they are too much an essential part of the background now.
>The political and military history of the Imperium hangs on those maps.
>
>What you have to do is rationalise *why* they're 2-D. It's obviously
>tied in with the performance characteristics of the jump drive in some
>way. My view is that the maps represent available routes through
>jumpspace, rather than the physical location of star systems within
>Einsteinian space - a bit like the symbolic representation of the London
>underground on maps, which shows a nice, clean, orderly system of lines
>and stations instead of the complicated twists, turns and gradients of
>the real thing.
>
>Invent your own Trek-style pseudoscience or scientibabble to justify it.
>Yes, it's a fix, no, it's not hard SF, but it's the best way of handling
>the problem I can think of.
>
>Traveller isn't particularly hard SF anyway, though it has its moments.
>For hard, I go 2300. If ever a game deserved republishing...
I've always treated the maps as abstract representations. My take is
this: the universe is obviously 3D, but the maps really just show the
Jump distance between points, not actual positions. I realize that the
position of stars and planets is more complex than the maps show, but
in my campaigns what's important is what goes _in the universe_, not
what happens _on the map_. It's too easy for me to get involved in
number-crunching and authentically astrographical representations, so
I'd rather avoid those aspects and stick to the players, their
characters, and the storyline as my focus.
***************************************
Frank Wallen (mailto:mr...@excell.net)
Reft Sector Islands at:
http://www.excell.net/mrdim/index.htm
***************************************
'Space isn’t remote at all. It’s only an
hour’s drive away if your car could go
straight upwards.'- Fred Hoyle
Doug Berry
nue...@aol.comDEL (NUELOW) is alleged to have said:
>Sword Worlder wrote:
>
><< T4 was a rushed and bastardized attempt, I agree, but hardly the fault of
>Marc Miller, who was not running the day-to-day operation. >>
>
>I keep hearing this... yet when I wrote my sections for "Anomalies," I was >told that Marc Miller had to review and approve everything.
Marc was *supposed* to review everything, but what happened was
usually items would be held to the last moment, and under
ridiculous deadlines, so that they ran out of time. Marc would
get his copies the same day the stuff went to the printer.
hawkw...@my-dejanews.com
dbe...@hooked.net (Doug Berry) wrote:
> According to Ken Starr, on 4 Dec 1998 05:28:14 GMT, "Allen Shock"
> <ash...@gte.net> is alleged to have said:
>
> >One thing that has been talked about for T5 is an official "blank sector"
> >that could be developed by refs.
>
> One thing T4 got right was reserving two sectors (Fornast and one
> other) for referee development.
Gee, at one time that was the statement of Classic/MT: that ALL areas that
weren't already defined were free for development. When they printed the
"atlas of the imperium", only the details of major worlds were shown on the
map, leaving it to the referee to fill in the details. Late in the MT era,
that got screwed over by semi-official maps of everything and its brother.
The Whole TNE fiasco did do one thing good, though. It taught me that you are
FAR better off totally ignoring official developments in a background than
vainly hanging on to a setting that you liked at one time trying to hang on to
changes in the setting. I ran a highly successful MT campaign well after TNE's
advent and demise on this principle.
-Alan
hawkw...@my-dejanews.com
ray...@webtv.net (Raymond Speer) wrote:
> Why make Traveller-5 while GURPS: Traveller is simultaneously being
> published?
I've got the short answer for that one: Because some traveller afficianadoes
like myself really do not like GURPS. Even some who DO like GURPS think that
the flavor of Traveller is inherently inconsistant with GURPS, especially Re:
the chargen system.
> Am I the only one to see trouble up ahead?
>
No. I fully expect it to fail, but hope it will succeed.
> If Traveller-5 is a success, won't Marc Miller let the license for
> GURPS:Traveller lapse or actually take active measures to bring the
> Traveller license of SJG to an abrupt close?
>
Yes, that would be both likely and nice, IMO. But I don't think that "if" will
happen.
> If GURPS: Traveller is a success, what sort of market is left over for
> Traveller-5? I mean, Marc Miller should get real. Not even grognards buy
> games nowadays just for a rules set, and I think it is very unlikely
> that any "roll under ( attribute + skill ) with variable number of dice"
> system is going to impress the gaming community.
>
Gee, the same type of system is being appreciated by a huge fraction of the
gaming community now. I think they should shed the variable dice pool think;
that was a farce. But it's not like several other game companies didn't
succeed with variations therof.
> If Traveller has a strength (and that is debateable), it is the future
> history of the Imperiums. Sharing that asset with another publisher
> cheapens the value.
Pretty much. But it's nice to hope.
Jeff Zeitlin
>GURPS Traveller seems to be
>picking up the slack (at least,
>among the die-hard Traveller
>fans). It'd be interesting to see the
>T4 stuff bellyflop while a licensee
>cranks out a succesful product.
>THAT's just weird...
Well, considering that Marc pulled IG's license, and there is no
more T4, I'd say that this is exactly what happened. To be
honest, I can't truly say I'm disappointed.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Jeff Zeitlin
>Problem with Traveller's background is one is spoilt for choice.
This is a _problem_? The more background and opportunities there
are, the better I like it, provided that it's all well-developed.
That way, you never get bored.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
Jeff Zeitlin
>Why make Traveller-5 while GURPS: Traveller is simultaneously being
>published? Am I the only one to see trouble up ahead?
>If Traveller-5 is a success, won't Marc Miller let the license for
>GURPS:Traveller lapse or actually take active measures to bring the
>Traveller license of SJG to an abrupt close?
Why should he? Traveller is both system and background; there
are people who do like Traveller-background, don't like
Traveller-system, and do like GURPS; GURPS Traveller gives them
GURPS-system with Traveller-background, and no need to try to
fudge up conversions yourself.
Moreover, GURPS Traveller pursues a timeline that the "official"
Traveller material does not - i.e., in GURPS Traveller, the
events that established the background of MegaTraveller (the
Rebellion) and Traveller: The New Era (Virus and Collapse) do not
happen - thus giving the people who like Traveller-system but
didn't like the Assassination, Rebellion, Virus, and Collapse
some new material to use for their campaigns. It's not a
question of GURPS Traveller competing head-to-head with
Anybody-else's Traveller; they're filling different (but possibly
overlapping) niches, and doing it in a non-competitive way.
>If GURPS: Traveller is a success, what sort of market is left over for
>Traveller-5? I mean, Marc Miller should get real. Not even grognards buy
>games nowadays just for a rules set, and I think it is very unlikely
>that any "roll under ( attribute + skill ) with variable number of dice"
>system is going to impress the gaming community.
Marc's stuff will be covering eras that GURPS Traveller does not.
GURPS Traveller will essentially be the continuation of the
Classic Era; T5 is intended to cover _other_ eras, potentially
ranging from the Ancients' visit to Earth to obtain specimens,
all the way to the heat-death of the universe. (obviously, those
represent extremes (although they've been mentioned in TML
discussion); but it's not unreasonable to expect to see
Interstellar Wars (Earth meets the Vilani), the Civil
Wars/Barracks Emperors, Milieu Zero, the Pacification Campaigns,
the Alien Missions, the Aslan Border Wars, and so on as time and
resources allow. None of these are slated for GURPS Traveller -
but they'll still be of interest to GURPS Traveller players,
because _now_we_have_the_official_method_to_convert_to_GURPS_.
And the stuff that SJG publishes will be useful to the T1/2/3/4/5
players, because they can run the conversion rules backwards, and
have access to the Traveller universe that they know and love,
only without that *(&%^(*& VIRUS and star vikings.
>If Traveller has a strength (and that is debateable), it is the future
>history of the Imperiums. Sharing that asset with another publisher
>cheapens the value.
Not necessarily - sometimes, letting other writers into your
universe makes it better. Consider, for example, the Thieves'
World collections. Would the overall story have been better if
only one author had been involved? I don't think so. And I
don't think it will hurt Traveller, either. And yes, you said
_publishers_, but I got sidetracked. Even there, I don't think
anything harmful will come of it, because a publisher can only
have so many works-in-progress at once. By authorizing a second
publisher, that increases the possible output. Alternatively, it
allows both publishers to concentrate more on quality, and
perhaps take a little more time than otherwise to get the
material out. Really, the only conditions under which this _can_
hurt are (1) the two product lines are in direct head-to-head
competition - which T5 and GURPS are not, or (2) the universe is
"closed" - if there is only so much that can be written before
the subject is totally exhausted. That's clearly not the case in
Traveller, and I question whether it can be the case in _any_ of
the more notable RPG systems/backgrounds.
--
Jeff Zeitlin
jzei...@cyburban.com
David P. Summers
<andy.s...@REMOVEminarsas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> David P. Summers <sum...@alum.mit.edu> writes
>
> >My campaign is still at 1109. One of these days I'll get around
> >to advancing the timeline. But I want to get through the Traveller
> >Adventure first. :-)
>
> Thank God I'm not the only one! I take it you've got all tangled up with
> the Fifth Frontier War as well...
Heck, I'm only just about to start it!
I started playing GURPS Traveller come years ago, but there
is so much CT stuff out there (and we play on and off) that
I'm only just getting up to the FFW (and even then I skipped
some stuff).
> Actually, for G:T I was going to crank the campaign calendar back even
> earlier, to take in Twilight's Peak, run through FFW/Traveller
> Adventure, then on to post-FFW stuff like Tarsus. Mind you, with plenty
> of original digressions from that plot, it would probably take ten
> years.
>
Sounds good. I would say that Twilight's Peak is the one pre-FFW
thing you really have to run.
David P. Summers
ray...@webtv.net (Raymond Speer) wrote:
> Why make Traveller-5 while GURPS: Traveller is simultaneously being
> published? Am I the only one to see trouble up ahead?
>
> If Traveller-5 is a success, won't Marc Miller let the license for
> GURPS:Traveller lapse or actually take active measures to bring the
> Traveller license of SJG to an abrupt close?
The currently liscence was negotiated (finished) before T4 went
under. Marc clearly doesn't have a problem with such a version
being out the same time as GURPS Traveller.
Thomas Biskup
> Marc Miller is taking his time and making sure the errors that
> accompanied T:4 do not occur. From what I know, it was more the
> fault of Imperium Games (who is out of business) not Marc's.
Marc's name was on the cover, they advertised a game profitting from
"20 years of experience" and so on. If he allowed them to put all
that stuff out without ever looking at what they produced he either is
an idiot, he doesn't care about the game or he has lost touch with
modern gaming. My guess is on the latter... he probably still didn't
quite notice that rpgs have come out of the backyards as far as
quality and professionalism go...
--
Thomas Biskup ...... Town Crier for the Loyal Order of Chivalry & Sorcery
EMail: bis...@saranxis.ruhr.de
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code."
Thomas Biskup
> GURPS Traveller seems to be picking up the slack (at least, among
> the die-hard Traveller fans). It'd be interesting to see the T4
> stuff bellyflop while a licensee cranks out a succesful product.
> THAT's just weird...
Wasn't GURPS Vampire: the Masquerade (Werewolf:tA, ...) making more
money than the original line and wasn't that the reason for White Wolf
yanking the license from SJG or is that just a nasty rumor I heard
somewhere? SJG just have the talent to do many things right
(especially as far as supplements for the core rules go). Thus I'm
not very surprised about the success of GURPS Traveller. Steve
Jackson knows what gamers want and he's kept up with the evolution of
rpgs.
Thomas Biskup
> No conflict - Anomalies was one of the later items, coming after
> Marc put his foot down and insisted on creative control/review.
> Marc was never running day-to-day operations.
Am I right in assuming that the "Milieu 0 / First survey" combined
hardcover edition came out after Anomalies? At least it showed up in
german shops long after Anomalies was out... and it had *all* the
problems plagueing the original releases (especially the broken tables
in First Survey).
That tells you something about how competent and involved his creative
control was :-(