Steve Gibbons [email removed] writes:
> Role. (Here's where I really get on the soap-box.) What's _your_ role in
> making things better? Don't like a rule? Come up with an alternative, and
> _share_ it. Don't like the background? Come up with an alternative, and
> _share_ it. Notice a typu/misprint? Point it out. Don't like the structure/
> organization/printing/pricing of a product? Tell GDW. Hate the lack of
> scenarios/adventures that you can relate to? Write one. ...But don't _just_
> complain about how you don't like it (whatever "it" is,) direct your energy.
> Make "it" better. Use that imagination of yours, that you were probably trying
> to spark in the first place by playing an RPG.
Hear! Hear!
Steve has got an EXCELLENT point here! If it looks broken to you, well then
FIX it, or at least try!
[email removed] (Ron Dawson) writes:
> Although I agree with the opinion that the destruction of the Imperium
> by means of this virus was a bit lame, after recently reading through
> survival margin, I'm willing to give the new setting a chance.
This is probably a good place to mention the TML Pocket Empire discussion
group. It was formed a little less than a year ago, and the group's
charter is to create a new, different, and interesting campaign setting
using GDW's "Official" universe, while still remaining true to as much
of the established "Classic" background material as possible.
When the group was formed, periodic updates to TML were promised; I'm
afraid that I've not been carrying through on that commitment. However,
here is the current status of the project:
An outline for a campaign module has been written, and sent to Dave Nilsen
at GDW for comment. Nearly all of the major worlds have been detailed, and
write-ups are available for them. Adventure plotlines have been written,
UWP data has been prepared. Starmaps, deckplans, and other miscellania
have been done. Megabytes and Megabytes of conversations have passed
through our mailers. Discussion continues; the largest area of remaining
work is to take the adventure plot outlines and flesh them out into
real, publishable adventures.
> The view that the New Era reflects the pessimism of the 90s is an
> interesting point. It seems that most of GDWs games are going
> down that dark road.. dark conspiracy, twilight and now even traveller.
> Ah well.. maybe it's appropriate that the games people play reflect the
> trends in society.
This is true more in the gaming industry that elsewhere, although I have
noticed a similar trend in fantasy and science-fiction books and films.
This may be due in part that the "dark" is easier to write: it takes a
J.R.R. Tolkien, Robert Heinlien, Arthur Clark, Edward E. Smith, a Larry
Niven, a Gene Roddenberry or George Lucas (I could name more, but my point
is that these names are only a small fraction of those writing in their
genres) to make a "bright", upbeat future where unreasonable problems have
solutions, where might does not always make right, and set an interesting
story in it. On the other hand, there is considerable evidence that a
well-done "bright" story is even more compelling that a "dark" one: witness
the enduring popularity of these people's creations. Roddenberry credited
Star Trek's enduring popularity to his vision of a "bright" future - things
may look dark right now, but Humanity *can*, *should*, and *will* prevail.
Classic Traveller shows signs of that kind of longevity; on the other hand,
I haven't heard anybody say how they miss MegaTraveller, and I suspect that
Traveller: The New Era hasn't got it either. Sort of like the difference
between "Star Trek" and "Battlestar: Galactica" (if those of you younger
than 22 have no idea what "Battlestar: Galactica" was, then I rest my case).
> I'm curious what the rationale is for everyone (e.g. Zhos, hivers, etc)
> adopting the same transponder technology over such a relatively short
> period of time.
I believe the rationale is that the Imperium required prompt installation of
the "Deyo" transponders in order for foreign hulls to enter the Imperium. Of
couse, in order to gain the benefits of the "Deyo" and to avoid duplication
of registry systems, all of them (including polities still formally at war
with the Imperium) converted to the "Deyo" system (which required importing
sealed boxes of unknown contents from their enemy, the Imperium) right away.
Yea, sure ... that's the ticket ... ;-)
A more reasonable approach might be to have dual registry systems: ships which
enter the Imperium have "Deyo" transponders installed, while most of the
ships which trade only inside their own polity don't. Once the Virus got
loose, the transponders on the trade ships provided a convenient point of
entry. Once familliar with alien computers, the Virus was able to take over
non-Deyo equipped ships with relative ease.
Of course, if you have trouble swallowing the Virus at all, you can always
play the New Era without it. Simply up the date from 1201 to 2201, and state
that the wars and fragmentation of the Rebellion were sufficient to trigger
another Long Night, which the area of space around your campaign is
just recovering from (with the help of the Hivers). Play the rest of
the "Official" universe relatively unmodified (adjusting dates, and deleting
references to the Virus as appropriate). The largest changes will be to
remember to mention that the Regency has had a long succession of cloned
nobles running it ... ;-)
Seriously, though: the Virus isn't vital to a New Era, Reformation-Coalition
campaign. With a truly minor amount of work, you can remove all references
to it and play the same game. Some adventure scenarios will be invalidated
(for example, "Idol Dreams") but others could be played with minor changes.
Remember that some Imperial computer systems were nearly artifical
intelligences already - have them spend a millenia powered on with no
meaningful input and they'll be ready made artificial insanities (recall
Traveller Adventure 1 - The Kinunir).
[email removed] (Adrian Hurt) writes:
> The sad thing is the loss of diversity. The new background seems to offer
> no alternative except a hard, grim, "More Blood, Less Dialogue" setting.
> In the old background, if you wanted such an adventure, or even campaign,
> there were places for it.
Not exactly, but I can see where, with a little imagination and some minor
cutting and fitting, where the Reformation Colaition campaign could be
dropped right into the Classic Traveller universe; I haven't seen and haven't
heard discussed anything which the New Era makes possible that couldn't
have been done in the Classic Traveller universe simply by selecting a sector
off the edge of the "known space" map and setting the campaign there.
On the other hand, one of the reasons for preserving the Regency was as
a place to set many of the campaigns that aren't possible anywhere else
in the New Era.
> You aren't going to use the background, and you might not use the rules.
> What's the point of buying TNE, then? :-)
Exactly. As I said before, if you're happy with the little black books,
there a *lot* to be said for giving T:TNE a miss.
> > [email removed] (Goldman of Chaos -- postmaster CRI-US) writes:
> > Perhaps we could get someone to OEM
> > the Traveller Workstation! It would have to be black with red
> > lettering, portable with a very high resolution color screen.
>
> Better yet, let's have some Traveller software for pocket computers such
> as the HP95 and the Psion Series 3. Oh, I forgot, pocket computers are
> TL 10, so they don't exist yet. :-)
That's a good idea, but what *I* really want to see is Traveller: Pinball
Adventure in the Far Future (a Traveller pinball machine). Put your
quarter in, press start and get the sound effect "This is Free Trader
Beowulf! Mayday! Mayday!") ... I've already got most of the design
worked out in my head :-)
[email removed] (J Robertson) writes:
> I can't comment on Challenge's quality because my nearest store
> has stopped carrying it. If anyone would care to enlighten me, please do.
I can't comment on Challenge because I stopped buying it regularly about
two years ago, and haven't purchased an issue at all in about a year. It
just doesn't seem useful or relevant.
> Personally, I favor GURPS.
> (BTW, where's the GURPS 2300 book?)
You're not the first person I've heard of that prefers GURPS. I've talked
to several different people at the local game store who have told me that
they are now playing "GURPS Traveller", using the GURPS Space rules and
the Classic Traveller background. Many of these people left Traveller
rules when MegaTraveller came out, and all of them that I've talked to
consider GURPS better than either the MegaTraveller system or GDW's
T2k2 "house rules". I don't think their coming back for T:TNE.
[email removed] writes:
> I'm new to the list, so I don't know if there has been any discussion of
> Space:1889. This game had the hopeful themes of Edgar Rice Burroughs and
> Victorian Sci-Fi. I really like the game. It was, by all accounts, a
> financial disacter for GDW. A couple of industry people I spoke with
> thought that it had almost bankrupted GDW.
I like Space: 1889 a lot too, although I didn't buy it when it came out. You
can blame MegaTraveller for that. I had recently purchased MegaTraveller and
after realizing the profound lack of quality control in that game, I wanted
nothing to do with Space: 1889 until at least the second edition, lest I be
stuck with *another* $30 unplayable monstrosity.
Of course, a second edition never came out, and I eventually picked up some
of the materials second-hand (and still check out whatever is left-over at
the game stores for new Space: 1889 stuff).
By the way, does Frank Chadwick have a fetish for titles with colons in
them? Twilight: 2000, Traveller: 2300, Space: 1889, Traveller: The New
Era ... maybe he will change the company name to Game Designers: Workshop?
<grins> <ducks and runs> ;-)
> Dane said:
> >I dunno, maybe I'm not giving GDW enough credit. Loren has mentioned that
> >'many people' are extremely overjoyed with the new setting and direction.
> >However, I don't think I've seen or heard from *one person* who has this
> >opinion.
>
> Hmmmm... well, I guess I'm the one person. And this is hearsay, but the
> people in my gaming group are pretty excited about it [the new era] too.
Actually, this is good news. It would be very poor work indeed if it was
universally disliked.
> As to Jo's
> >*That* is my Traveller. I could not better put it. Endless
> >posibilities in a limitless world. The bright joy and wonder.
> >Shining spaceships, dubious traders, mysterious aliens.
> >But then, that was then.
>
> This sounds like a perfect description of Space:1889. I'm the only person
> I know who bought any of the stuff for this game, and I bought it all. I
> had a fun campaign. GDW almost went bankrupt. (Anybody know where I
> can get the unpublished Venus Sourcebook?)
Now you know someone else who liked Space: 1889. However, I never played a
campaign; I only know one other person who liked it (and like me, he *really*
liked it). Everyone else went "Vern who?" and went back to Twilight: 2000.
> I have a posting for an alternate anti-grav technology, but this list
> seems to be pretty serious...
Go ahead and post it! I'm still wondering if we'll get rules for Liftwood
and Ether Propellors in Fire, Fusion, and Steel (the T:TNE Technical
Architecture book).
> I also finally worked out the penetration system. Yuck! I'm working on
> a fix...
I'd say this is the biggest single problem with the T2k2 "House Rules" system
as presented in T:TNE. It looks like a basic small arms combat system that
was added onto by several suppliments, and without a lot of forethought. Since
different weapons have listings that are similar in format, but should be
nterpreted in completely different ways, it is *very* confusing to the new
player or referee.
[email removed]
- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Science-Fiction Adventure
In the New Era