[email removed] (I think) writes:
>>The new background severely cripples the technology that I have
>>become accustomed to.
[email removed] (Matt Johnston) writes:
>The solution here is then not to dwell on being Star Vikings from ye
>Olde Mudball worshipping a semi-sentient Air/raft but to dwell on
>being Regency marines...or High tech dudes.
[email removed] writes:
> I'm afraid that you've missed my central point. You see, I want
>the high technology to be *everywhere*. To be *consistent*. I want my
>environment to be without low-tech places. Back when I started playing
>Traveller (14 years ago--where's my cane?), I created my own region of
>space outside the Imperium where the absolute lowest tech level was 13,
>and ranged as high as an extrapolated 17. The average was right about
>15.
> My main gripe with the new setting is that the *average* tech level
>is far too low, and there are places that have no decent technology at
>all. It's not that there are too many low-tech worlds, it's that they
>exist at all. There should be *no* low technology at all.
I'm not sure I follow how having high technology everywhere is consistent. If we
look at the real world we live in, it certainly is not consistent. It is not
consistent even within a single nation.
While the "favourite" campaign universe of any referee is of course a matter of
preference, I don't think that having _consistently_ high tech levels for every
world really makes a lot of sense. The Imperium always struck me as permitting
a lot of variety within its borders, so technology would vary from world to
world, and possibly philosophies towards technology could vary as well.
If we look at our real world, some nations primary exports are fairly "low
tech", and they often get locked in a dependency relationship by trading the low
tech raw materials for higher tech finished industrial goods. I don't see why
similar situations could not arise in the imperium of old. It only seems
realistic.
One could really have fun playing with these types of economies, as players are
recruited by persons working for a mega-corporation sent to destabilize a world
government that was trying to impose restrictions on trade in an effort to
"industrialize" or "post industrialize" or whatever. Or they could be hired by
people from the other side to check out certain activities of mega-corporations.
In addition, the single tech level listing for a world or culture could be
misleading. Some cultures could specialize in certain areas, and be say tech
level 13 in terms of bio-engineering, while only tech level 8 in other areas.
Finally, the tech level on a world isn't the maximum tech level for that world.
It is just a general rating. There can be wealthy individuals, imperial
representatives, or whatnot who have all the high tech you want.
Of course, none of this addresses your concern of just having everything _high
tech_. I favour greater diversity as it seems to be more plausible given the
nature of the Imperium and known space.
Dane Johnson [email removed] writes:
>1) The New Era has added no real frontier to Traveller. Instead, it
>has reduced a well populated and civilized area to relative barbarism.
>The Imperium was spread over a few thousand star systems. There are
>*trillions* of stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Traveller's Known Space
>is pathetically small. All that was necessary to add new frontier was
>some 'beyond the Imperium' source ideas, as was already pointed out by
>someone else... There was no lack of frontier, just a lack of people
>generating their own sectors away from the main action.'
True. But I doubt there would be much new "life" going towards core, or if
there was, it would be very different from any life forms we know of. Although
not an astrophysicist, I've read many times that the stars and matter as you
move close to core generally have fewer of the heavier elements, and some of the
key building blocks for life as we know it. Still, if there was life there, it
would probably be very interesting. That still leaves room for going the other
way. However, the Imperium was pretty much hemmed in on all sides and wasn't
going anywhere, unless via some agreement with their neighbours.
While the referee was free to be as creative as they wished in creating a
"frontier", there wasn't really one presented. That I think is the difference.
TNE turned everything in known space into a lawless frontier except for a few
pockets, some large.
I must note that I do see one major problem with the TNE setting. There is a
huge danger of, as others have pointed out, of being turned into a "swords and
spaceships" type of affair, or Twilight 2000 or whatnot.
>2) The New Era has less diversity than CT/MT. Tech levels are more
>uniform (and lower). More worlds are balkanized. Most have lower law
>levels. Many are now unpopulated. In general, a subsector's worth of
>New Era planets offers less diversity than an equal volume of CT/MT
>worlds.
True. I would agree that in terms of "ratings" the planets are less diverse. I
do think though that they do present greater opportunities to surprise the
players. How would a planet change in the fall? Before, you could often
consult a compute library and get a good idea of what you were always heading
into. Now you can consult the records and find what it used to be like.
You are right though, there is less diversity when you look at the raw
statistics. However, as you mentioned in point 1, any referee is capable of
making things pretty diverse.
>3) The New Era or some other collapse-oriented scenario was hardly an
>inevitable outcome of the Rebellion. Did the US fall into a Dark Age
>after the Civil War or the Assasination of Kennedy? I, personally, was
>looking forward to a 'balkanized' Imperium, with Deneb, Antares, the
>Vilani, the Solomani, et al becoming small, soveriegn, human-dominated
>nations. Many other outcomes were possible, none inevitable.
The assasination of Kennedy was not the same type of event. I would say it was
more along the lines of the death of Tito in Yugoslavia or some other large
confederation/empire with very different ethnic/cultural groups being held
together by a strong leader/noble class. I'd say that events in Yugoslavia and
the Soviet Union may be a bit more analogous to what was happening in the
Imperium.
I do agree though that a collapse into barbarity was not inevitable. I
personally think it probably would have gone the way you suggested in part.
However, worlds on the battle lines would be destroyed and would effectively be
blasted into the dark ages. We would have Beruits, Stalingrads and Sarajevos
galore.
Who knows what effect the collapse in large scale trade could have had. I'm not
sure how self sufficient many of the systems in the imperium were. With trade
gone, they could possibly have faced very restless populations. I think the
results would have been a lot of instability, with a general falling back in
terms of overall "tech", although there would still be a few places that
remained high tech.
When I spoke of "inevitable", I refer to the realization that the Imperium can
never be again, at least not in the next several hundred years. When the
Rebellion started, I convinced myself that Margaret would likely succeed.
Eventually though, it became apparent that GDW had it out for her, and I didn't
see any other faction as having much of a chance. Then came hard times and the
collapse of many worlds. It looked like it was going to grind on for a long
time this way. I think the Virus was GDW's way "out" of this. With the virus,
they were able to clear off the table much more quickly to rebuild anew.
In many ways, I kind of wish they had gone with the fragmentation and general
lower level of the "dying back of technology", but I do like some of the
possibilities of the virus created vampires. I also like the possibility of
developing some very different cultures and worlds within the old territory of
the imperium.
Glenn Myers wrote:
>While I agree that the official campaign needed change, the rebellion
>certainly provided it. I think a very interesting history could have
>come out of the rebuilding and reforming of the various post-rebellion
>factions. There would be lots of political intrigue and conflict as
>the powers worked out their roles. The resulting map would be more
>interesting than either the Third Imperium or The New Era.
>It would have been much more believable although not as cataclysmic.
I would have to agree. The rebellion did provide change. It was starting to
get rather depressing watching things go so badly for humaniti. Perhaps they
could have just zoomed us ahead x number of years to after the worst of it.
But we do have the TNE setting, and it's too late to change that official
history. Although at first I was very skeptical, I can live with the TNE
setting. I actually like it, despite agreeing that it could possibly have been
better done otherwise.
Glenn Myers wrote:
>I just hope that Longbow will hasten cleaning up this virus mess so
>we can get back to good wholesome exploration and away from tomb
>robbing.
Amen. I hope that the game doesn't turn into a focus on snatch and grab
exclusively. With a good ref though, it doesn't have to.
Glenn Myers wrote:
>Why 70 years and not 150-300 years lost between MT and TNE?
>We still have to resolve Lucan and the black curtain. You can't leave a
>lead like that around and not follow up. Besides, he's the one that
>started this virus mess. Someone is ought to pay for this. And you
>have to let gamers bring their charcters over from MT if you want
>to capitalize on past sales.
Good point. I really want to know what the black curtain is and what happened
to all the players in the Rebellion.
Glenn Myers wrote:
>Personally, I wish they had moved the TNE setting to 250 years after
>the rebellion. By that time technology and culture would have changed
>enough that we wouldn't be making as many complaints about rules and
>equipment incompatabilities.
Perhaps GDW could be kind enough to support the TNE rules in all eras? I think
that a lot of the older fans might like that. Brilliant Lances did have some
pre TNE time period scenarios in it. With a timeline stretching over so many
years, it would be a shame to let all the older history and potential for
adventure to be unsupported.
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>I thought Grandfather was dumb too. In fact the whole idea of the Ancients
>was just too much of a gimmick for my tastes (like the Virus), but TNE
>hasn't elimiated Ancient technology, although I guess we don't know yet
>for certain how it has been affected by the Virus. I guess the point is
>there isn't anything about TNE that improves this situation (assuming you're
>like Ron and me and feel it had some room for improvement).
You are right. TNE does not change Grandfather, but at least it allows us to
have other more obvious mysteries to inspire adventure. Yes, any ref could come
up with his own "mystery", but now it has been returned within the official
setting that has been developed.
In a related issue, I suspect that the ancients were simply a way to help
justify humaniti and other human type creatures being all over known space.
There are also a lot of people who like science fiction that deals with ancient
mysterious civilizations.
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>There could have been *Imperial* Core Expeditions (possibly in cooperation
>with the Zhos? Or maybe a `core race'?), as well as Spin, Trail and Rim
>Expeditions.
In cooperation with the Zhos? Not officially for sure! Maybe some competition
from vargyr/Imperial types who want to get to whatever it is the Zhos are moving
towards.
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>This isn't `whining for the old days'. The point I'm trying to make is that,
>so far, *all* of the advantages claimed for TNE *from a background point of
>view* could have been accomplished in the Imperium campaign. Given this
>fact(?), why should anyone buy TNE except that it's the only `game' in town?
>If the only car available was a Yugo would everyone not only rush out to buy
>one but also be clamoring about how great it was? (Again, this ignores
>issues related to the rules system.)
Ummm.. the only car in town still remains a good argument. The only car in town
may be a yugo, but in many ways it is better than the old imperial chevy which
has been stuck on blocks and was slowly rusting from within.
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>Black curtain? Do tell!
Heh. That's one of the biggest mysteries in the TNE. Pick up a copy of TNE or
Survival Margin and look at the maps. In the most recent map is a big area
around where core is which is a big black splotch through which no information
passes. There are also the rumours of vampire fleets around the edge of this
curtain. What is behind the curtain? Lucan? A virus-based AI empire? A huge
vampire fleet that thinks it is Lucan? The books are rather vague about it so
far.
>> We don't
>> know what happened to the Solomani.
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
> Maybe they're now the United Federation of Planets? :-)
Heh. Maybe! What scares me though is that I was always under the impression
that the Solomani had more advanced computer technology than the imperium. I
wonder what would have happened to all their smart systems. Maybe Captain Kirk
virus strains breaking the prime directive. :)
[email removed] (David Johnson) writes:
>Okay, after two rounds, here's the score as I see it. Not much to recommend
>TNE over previous eras except that you don't have to venture outside the
>core of the Old Imperium (which allows you to `rediscover' worlds you were
>familar with 70+ years ago) and the possibility of new `wonder gadgets'
>derived from positive viral mutations.
I would say that TNE is a bit less stagnant than CT. MT wasn't stagnant by any
means, but things were slowly going downhill as imperial civilization slowly
devoured itself. Eventually, the fighting would break down, as it was starting
to, and you would have had large areas of collapsed economies and worlds along
the battle lines, and different things happening in the worlds behind the lines
which still may be stable. This could have been the setting for TNE. One of
many possibilities. I would have guessed that the Solomani would have been the
biggest winners overall, their expansion stopping only because of difficulty in
absorbing hostile worlds.
On the plus side, I would say TNE offers:
(1) Less certainty for the players because old imperial space is less stable
(2) The chance to develop very different societies as a result of distrust of
technology
(3) The chance for the players to engage in empire building/civilization at a
much more personal level. Their actions can have more of an effect because of
the smaller scale of the situations they are likely to be in
(4) Greater freedom within imperial space to develop worlds, cultures, empires.
(5) The chance to do some fun things with the virus gimmick as others have said
On the downside:
(1) Trade outside of the spinward marches is a very different animal. I was
always a big fan of the old long trade oriented far trader campaigns. Although
the current setup could still see trade, but it would be on a barter type of
system, and one would have to be very careful of losing ones ship to the
"natives"
(2) The virus has a lot of problems, both in terms of planning and plausibility.
(3) There is a danger of creating a D&D dungeon-crawl type of setting with the
Star Vikings as they plunder technology in their snatch 'n grabs.
(4) TNE is an attempt at a darker setting. GDW is jumping on the darker setting
trend in games. It remains to be seen if the supplements offer something for
those who prefer a more stable and optimistic future.
Lots more pros and cons, I'm sure. I'm just two tired to think of any right
now, and this letter is already too long.
Overall, I think that the TNE does offer greater alternatives to the referee
than it destroyed. The regency still does exist for those who want greater
stability. The wilds exist for those who like that type of campaign. Within
the pocket empires, hiver's sphere, regency, etc the referee is of course the
final determinant as to what their campaign will be like.
I used to really dislike the whole virus idea, and the new setting. I still
like the old setting, but if I were to run a campaign now, I would definitely
opt for the New era, or maybe a combination of MT/New Era to work _sleeper_
players into the post-virus era. I personally find it fascinating to think of
how societies would rebuild from this disaster.
- - Ron Dawson
[email removed]