Revisions, Part 18

Friends,

     I don't know how much longer I'm going to do this.  I need to speak to
Carl, but I think that full back/forth transfer from GEnie will be phased
out by Christmas or by whenever my next GEnie bill comes, whichever is first.

     Since no GDW rep has had anything to say (Trust us, you'll like it) for
a number of days, I'm not sure if they are reading any of this.  I wouldn't
say that they are exactly receiving overwhelming support.

     You know, I just fully realized this evening (as I was reading my Classic
Traveller Book 3) that by the time that GDW changes the rules system and
the background, there is no reason left for them to use the name Traveller
except to capitalize on whatever good will they have left.  (And since I think
that we old Traveller grognards _are_ what good will is left, I don't think
it will work.)

     By the reasoning that they are using at GDW, 2300AD was really the same
game as Twilight:2000 (1st edition)--they had about as much in common as
our Traveller is going to have with New Traveller.  Scary, isn't it...or
maybe just sad.

Rob Dean

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------


 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 97        Wed Dec 04, 1991
V.UJCIK [Duke James]         at 22:32 EST

     Okay, I've been reading along here, trying to form my opinion about
what's going on. First, let me give a little background about me.
     I've been playing Traveller since 1980 with no breaks. I own just about
everything published by GDW, DGP, Judge's Guild (well, it was official at the
time!), and Seeker. Aside from an occasional round playing AD&D, Traveller is
the only game I play. It's also the only RPG I own.
     I am trying to keep an open mind about what is going on. I am personally
adopting more of a wait and see attitude. I'll try to organize my thoughts
around the themes that have been circulating here on GEnie and in HIWG, with a
little of the TML concerns in here also (I have only read what TML stuff has
been u/l here recently).

TRUSTING GDW
     Unfortunately, I can't honestly say that I do. My personal dealings with
GDW have been _very_ negative. I find it hard to believe that GDW is really
willing to listen (as opposed to pretending and doing what they want anyway)
when they refuse to answer inquiries concerning published articles. It took
six months to get payment for an article I wrote. My three snail mail letters
were ignored! (It took a lot of GEnie email to get this straightened out --
I shudder to think about what would have happened if I weren't on GEnie. I
never have figured out what happened and GDW didn't send any letter of
explanation or apology, just a check in an envelope five months late.) Now
they expect me to trust them??? And we all agree that recent Traveller
publications leave a lot to be desired.
     I was very disappointed with the Rebellion setting, particularly
disliking all of the unknowns that this introduced. It just got to be too much
to handle. The Rebellion has shown us that there really isn't anybody left in
the hierarchy of the Imperium that can be trusted. Intrigue and excitement are
what the game needed; darkness, conspiracy, and political stupidity are what
GDW delivered.

NEW PLAYERS
     GDW believes that they need a new influx of players to Traveller in order
to continue supporting the game. I can't comment on this because I have no
real feel for how many people play Traveller, or any other game, to compare it
to. I'll grant them the fact that attracting new players means more money and
I don't begrudge them trying to make a credit or two.
     I, too, would like to see new players. I'd be interested to know how much
Traveller picked up when GDW changed the name. However, I'm not sure how loyal
the classic Traveller fans will be to this new game. GDW is going to have to
gamble that they pick up enough new players to offset the classic players that
won't buy the new game. Which leads me to my next point....

T2K2 RULES
     I am vehemently opposed to this change for several reasons. First, no
conversion from classic to 'neo' Traveller can take into account the nuances
that the old system gave our characters. The two systems are different!
     Second, if I, as a Traveller player, had wanted to play with T2K rules,
then I would be a T2K player not a Traveller player. I don't agree that T2K
'is better.'  Yes, it's different, but both systems have their strong and weak
points and *I* like Traveller's system better than T2K.
     This has been a topic of discussion recently in my group. The consensus
reached was that we would probably end up converting 'neo Traveller' rules to
fit into classic Traveller. We probably aren't going to bother buying into the
new game rules. We will make independent judgements about the support material
that will presumably follow.
     Fortunately, the ability to take another system and make it fit Traveller
(and I mean the classic Traveller here) is part of what has made the game so
much fun over the years. Back in the spring of 1981, before there were any
'official' sectors published, I rolled up my own complete sector -- all the
worlds, starports, x- boat routes -- and have continued to fill in details
over eleven years. (In fact, my original sector was only 3x3 subsectors. I was
doing this on the fly and had no info to the contrary. Then GDW published
something, don't remember what, that said a sector was 4x4 subsectors. So I
rolled up another 7 subsectors to fit!) This is the sector that I use for my
solitaire playing. My group has used the 'official' stuff because then we all
have equal access to the information printed.
     GDW's talk about making their system generic to their product line will
only make all of their games look alike and play alike. One of the ideas of
having a game is the uniqueness that it has when playing it. Making similar
rules over fairly different games/backgrounds will take away much of the
flavor of different games. This idea is akin to a restaurant that serves only
one dish, but 'the spices are different.' It'll have a different flavor, but
will still be the same dish.
     GDW is fooling itself if they think people are buying 2300 and T2K
because of the character generation system. HA! Most people who buy the game
are getting it because of the background and/or basic premise of the game.
Since they come in a sealed box, how does a buyer (particularly a new gamer,
which is what GDW wants to attract) know what system is good and what isn't
before he/she spends several hours studying and playing with these new rules?
What sells the game is advertising and word of mouth, both of which have not
been very good for Traveller of late. With no advertising to speak of, and
poorly edited/written material, Traveller has suffered greatly. It's only the
die-hards like us that have kept the game alive and brought what few new
players there are into the game. For example, my local hobby shops have
posters of T2K and 2300, but none for Traveller. Why?

LOSING MARC AND JOE (et al)
     I'm very disappointed that Traveller has lost the two people who have
probably meant the most during the first fifteen years of its existence: Marc
Miller and Joe Fugate (and the rest of DGP). It's seems to opportune that Marc
leaves and Traveller is scheduled to be changed into T2K with another name.
Joe's comment says much of the same thing that I'm thinking, that the upheaval
caused by and/or around Marc's departure will mean lean times for Traveller
players. I also am skeptical of GDW's commitment to Traveller now that Marc is
gone as opposed to when he was there to champion the game himself.

TRAVELLER IN THE NEW ERA (Dave Nilsen's comments)
     Dave says, '...Traveller is back!' As far as I'm concerned it didn't go
anywhere (pun intended). That is, I'm still playing it as are many others, and
GDW didn't support us much during the last couple of years. Now, all of a
sudden, here they are telling us they are willing to listen to us as they
prepare another onslaught of new rules (instead of what we really want, which
is well written and edited _extended_ rules and more background/adventures).
On the other hand, they tell us that they've already decided to change the
game in the most major way you can change a game, i.e. the character system
and they won't except any inputs here. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather
they call their new game something else and leave Traveller well enough alone!
     I'd like to know how many letters GDW has received in the last couple of
years begging them to change Traveller to the T2K system. My bet is *zero*. I
haven't seen much to substantiate the rumor that the T2K system is _better_
than the Traveller system. They are different, and everyone has their likes
and dislikes, but I hate it when someone comes along and tells *me* that 'THIS
IS BETTER.' In my experience, this is usually the opening speech of someone
who doesn't know what they are talking about or is out for a cheap thrill.
Soon after the whole thing collapses like a black hole, never to be heard
about again.
     I think Dave is out in left field when he says "...will not require you
to buy time on the MIT mainframe to generate a fleet of starships." Maybe Dave
can't generate a ship without a computer, but I can. Rob Dean has generated
over 300!!!!! He also says that starship combat will be more fun and detailed.
This is also an opinion that has absolutely no substantiation behind it. Fun
is a relative term, like better!
     I also definitely get the feeling that Dave *is not* reading the same
GEnie and TML notes that I'm reading. Most of what I hear is against a major
change such as GDW proposes. I'd like more detail about how Dave thinks that
they are 'right on target.' It sounds to me like we may be looking at two very
different targets (both moving diametrically opposed in opposite directions!)


     Now that I've got that out of my system, I will say that I will consider
the new system if I think that it improves the game that I like to play. If it
doesn't, then I won't buy it. My decision will be based on the merits of the
system and the reviews that I read. I will definitely *not* buy it as soon as
it hits the shelves! After the last couple of years I'm much to gunshy for
that.
     It's also too bad that GDW thinks that they have to support the move to
the darker themes that seem prevalent in today's RPGs. I, for one, play
Traveller for precisely the opposite reason, i.e. the escape from the real
world into a world of fun and exploration, not one worse off than the one I
live in now.
     I think GDW is still shying away from the very thing that made D&D a hit
when it came out: playing aliens is fun. Every time we get close to having
enough info to really play aliens well, the system collapses and we have to
start all over. They seem to get close to where we, the players, want to go
and then say "Ooops, here's something BETTER FOR YOU! All you have to do is
buy all these new books, read all this new background."
     GDW, why don't you try learning from TSR. D&D (all versions) support
several different backgrounds in pretty much the same universe. The Traveller
universe is also big enough for all of us too. My suggestion is to move the
new Traveller somewhere else while maintaining support for classic Traveller
as well (like TSR). Otherwise I'm afraid that you will kill Traveller, or at
best make it into Twilight: 5700.
     Thanks for listening (reading) this diatribe. I feel much better now,
don't you?
     All together now, nice and loud.....


"WE WANT CLASSIC TRAVELLER, WE WANT CLASSIC TRAVELLER, WE WANT CLASSIC
TRAVELLER........"

               For now,
                    Duke James
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 98        Wed Dec 04, 1991
D.MATHESON1                  at 23:12 EST

<<<Faint rustling from the electronic bushes as a lurker moves into the
light>>>

  I've been following the discussion here for some time, both before and after
this big revision talk started, and I thought  I would join in and put in my

  First, a bit of background.  I've been playing Traveller/MegaTraveller since
1977, and I figure in that time I've averaged about one game a week.  My
current campaign has been in operation for over 25 years of  game time, and
that doesn't include various side adventures and campaigns. I have been
running tournaments at conventions for 8 years now.  In the real world, I am
an engineer designing control systems for an electrical utility.

  Having said that, how do I feel about MT v2.0?  First, what parts of the
MegaTraveller system would I like to keep?

   1)  The Skill/Task system.

  I could live without just about everything else.  I have never been fond of
the vehicle design system, the trade and speculation system is completely
worthless, and the only thing saving world generation is the DGP WBH.
  I am not even attached to the Imperium background.  When I started my
campaign in 1977, there was no Imperium.  I developed my own universe, and
never saw any real reason to switch to the *official* one.  For that reason, I
am really not concerned with how "logical" the Space Viking background is.
I'll probably ignore it anyway.

  What would I like to see in a new system.  A logical trade and speculation
system for one.  Has anyone besides me ever noticed that a ton of iron ore, a
ton of refined steel, a ton of steel machine parts, and a ton of completed
equipment ALL COST THE EXACT SAME THING!!!  Or that I can sit at a Starport
and buy and sell cargo and make a fortune ALL WITHOUT EVER MOVING MY SHIP!!!
(Sorry, got a little heated there.)  I designed my own system some time ago,
but would be interested in seeing an *official* one.
  I would also like to see a better ship design system.  Yes, I know some
people here really like designing ships, but I designed two or three then gave
up on the whole thing.  Starship combat also needs work.  (Right now, I use
Star Strike as my ship design/combat system.)  I would like to see a
simplified design sequence, perhaps using the component system someone
described earlier; something that would let me design/modify a ship during a
game session, as opposed to having to devote an entire evening to one design.
  A new and improved robot design system would be nice too.

  Someone asked if we were familiar with the T2K/DC system.  I have played T2K
v1.0 a few times, and have DC.  I like the character generation system in DC,
but that's about it.  I felt the task system was inferior to the one in MT,
and really didn't like the combat system.  (And while I'm at it,  can someone
*please* tell me why in DC gun combat is a Strength related skill?)

  That looks like about .02Cr...

<<rustling sound as a figure retreats into the bushes>>
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 99        Thu Dec 05, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.]       at 21:53 EST

James,
     The reason it took so long to straighten out was that the letters we sent
all (except the last one) kept coming back marked "Unknown at this Address."
     I remember sending you an apology via GEnie. I still have no explanation.
     Loren
 ------------