************
Topic 3 Thu Jun 01, 1989
J.FUGATE at 18:48 MDT
Sub: MegaTraveller - General Discussions
This topic is to be a catch-all topic for any discussion that doesn't fit in
any other topic.
************
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 406 Mon Nov 18, 1991
C.FAGO1 [Carl Fago] at 20:50 EST
Jay,
Maybe you could say a couple of words about what the "system" is with T2k or
D.C. that will be used for Star Viking. I have neither game and so I have
little idea what will be inherited.
The main skepticisms that have come through regarding S.V. is based upon the
past record of GDW regarding Traveller. For MT, this would be lack of
coherent ship design, lack of robot design rules, poor editing/proofreading,
poor internal consistency, etc.
These problems don't appear to have been solved in T2k or D.C. (neither, I
believe, would have ship design or robot design, editing/proofreading on these
I know nothing about.) I personally don't have a _big_ heartache with the
character generation rules (beyond lack of internal consistancy and
proofreading), nor am I all that upset about the task-method.
So, what _will_ S.V. attempt to improve?
I post his here vice the new topic because this is a generally negative post
(unfortunately.) Though I am _very_ interested in the answers.
*-=Carl=-*
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 407 Mon Nov 18, 1991
M.TURNAGE1 at 22:59 EST
Jay: Nothing wrong with playing Devil's Advocate..._someone_ should, and
you've got the industry experience to understand both sides.
I'm trying to adopt a wait-and-see attitude, but I still can't get over a
couple of problems I have with the revision:
For one, the compelte switch in the game system...while MegaTraveller was a
much needed revision, 90% of the old Traveller material (I don't count
background material...a settings is a setting, regardless of game system) was
still compatible. That which wasn't was usually superseeded by MT or didn't
really need much in the ways of rules (one of the blessings of the task
system). I see no way to avoid making a great, great amount of material
(especially by non-GDW publishers) obsolete.
For another, I have some real problems with the T2k 2nd ed./DC system (for
brevity's sake hereby referred to as the New System -- NS), at least as for
Traveller. The main one is that there is _no_ task system...the semi-task
based skill system in NS does not work all that well, and lessens the impact
of a characters skills. (BTW, I think this is the #1 problem with a 2300 - NS
conversion). I like the system, but I don't feel its appropriate for
Traveller.
I do like the idea that the starship combat rules are being completely
revised...the #1 problem with MT right now, IMHO. This would be a good idea
regardless of a revision of the rest of the system.
You asked Rob what he'd do...(putting in my .2 Cr). I think _I_ would go
ahead and do a 3rd edition/revision...but _with_ the same general system. Do
it as a single, large volume (though there'd be problem with costs, here).
Get good, good art (the biggest attention-grabbing device for a game is a good
visual hook...the gothicness of Cthulu, the Enterprise for SFB, the weirdness
for DC, or the robots of Battletech). Go for a _lot_ of exposure...novels are
the best way to me (Dark Conspiracy or Battletech would be nowhere near as
popular as they are right now without Mike Stackpole's novels, IMHO).
Put _everything_ in this one, like the old Traveller Book (Best thing that
happened to Traveller, IMHO). Basic character creation, task system & other
game mechanics (combat, healing, etc.), a streamlined system creation rules,
streamlined vehicular design/combat rules (Character level only...no need to
have rules to handle entire fleets), and, _maybe_ a small amount of
background. Put the more detailed version of rules in supplements...you want
the more detailed rules, get them there. If not, you've got enough already to
get by.
I'd do it as a campaign background volume (ie, Post-Rebellion Sourcebook),
system/world creation volume, fleet combat/large combat design volume, and
advanced character creation volume. I think DGP's idea for AI, with all the
needed basic rules in one set and more detailed rules later on, if wanted, is
the way to go.
Note, the method I was talking about seems awful similar to the way GDW did
Traveller over the years...that was intentional. I think that's the best way
to do it, only taking much less time.
I understand many of the reasons for a new edition, but I fear there's some
mistaken assumptions. I don't see the new players there...let's face it, the
vast majority of beginners are going to start on D&D in one of its various
incarnations (At least the ones that will buy games...the ones that count in
this case). In a year or so, once they feel more confident, they'll move on
to something that's more to their tastes. Many of them will _not_ be moving
on to SF games. The trick is to get the ones that do to lock on to Traveller
(in whichever incarnation).
I don't think simpler rules are the answer (Its never taken me more than
twenty minutes to explain the system to _anyone_). COMPLETENESS and
INTEGRATION are the answers! I want everything I need to run the system
there, and I want the rules to be internally consistent.
Oh well, I've rambled long enough.
Respectfully,
Mark
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 408 Mon Nov 18, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean] at 23:09 EST
3-398 Loren Wiseman says:
> Let me point out one thing that seems to be generating some mis- >
understanding here: we will not be changing over to the Twilight: 2000 >
background history, just a variant of the rule mechanics. We want to re- >
instill the original excitement the game engendered, cleaning up rules >
problems and smoothing out hassles.
Actually, I understood that. As you'll see below, that's not really the part
that is worrying me.
3-404: Jay Adan says
> So what would you want if it were all up to you? No, really. You don't sound
> too happy with the current game as it stands so do you think that GDW should
> just call it quits and just be happy things lasted this long?
Since you started the topic for positive comments and suggestions, I'll post
most of my answer to this up there. Do _I_ think GDW should drop the idea and
let Traveller die quietly? H*** no. Do I have confidence in their recent
track record? Not really. That's why I'm nervous. I happen to be a fan of
Space:1889...
> Have any of you taken a good look at 2nd Ed. Twilight:2000 or Dark >
Conspiracy? They may not be your roleplaying cup of tea, but they are a >
remarkable improvement over Megatraveller and even 2300AD.
As it happens, I've got T:2000/2. Dark Conspiracy doesn't intrigue me in the
slightest so I haven't bought it. I've got 2300AD, and I've got
Traveller:2300. I'd go so far as to say that 2300AD is a substantial improve-
ment over Traveller:2300. So much so that I can't figure why GDW released the
latter in the form they did. There are only a few things that bother me
about the T:2000 system, and most of those have to do with how well 2000/2
fits my view of that game's reality versus how well 2000/1 fit it. I can
elaborate if you like--my main problem is that I don't think the 2000/2
characters are capable enough, compared to the old characters, which wouldn't
be a problem in a Trav adaptation. What does bother me is the potential
problem of converting a substantial investment in old work into the new
system, again, and that characters may not be compatible. I still haven't
finished converting my High Guard fleets into MT...
> It seems like Megatraveller has been one long attempt to fill the gaps and
> correct the mistakes. Don't you think it will be nice to wipe the slate >
clean and start again and maybe, just maybe, get it closer to right on the >
first try?
I might, if I had any confidence that it would work on the first try. I felt
like I was burned by the 'two versions of 2300' mess, the original edition of
MT, and the collapse of Space:1889. I didn't like the way the background time
clock was reset back to July, 2000 on the second edition of T:2000. Would I
be willing to do something constructive about it. You bet! I would be happy
to be a playtester for any version of the thing, just because I love the game.
I'm also reasonably confident that many of the members of the Internet Travel-
ler Mailing List would also be willing to provide commentary on game systems
during testing in any level of detail that you might care for.
The wiping the slate clean part is what worries me the most. Look at the
situation now. We still do not have, after almost five years, as much back-
ground information as was available in 1985. The Shattered Imperium is a
potentially interesting setting, but a referee doesn't have enough _Traveller
unique_ information available to him/her to make it real or interesting to a
player. We don't know much about any of the factions beyond the capsule
writeups in the Rebellion Sourcebook. There isn't an introductory adventure
as good as THE TRAVELLER ADVENTURE or even TARSUS or BELTSTRIKE available for
use by referees who aren't old timers. If all the resources are put into
working on the rules, who's going to do the modules, supplements and advne-
tures that a role playing game seems to need in the current market to attract
new players?
3-405 Joe Fugate says:
> As the person mostly responsible for the MegaTraveller revision and the >
revised craft design system, perhaps I can shed some light on things? > ...My
biggest problem was I knew the game well, and wrote the revision for > a gamer
who was a familiar with the game as me. BIG mistake.
Oddly enough, I happen to like the revised craft design system. It's one of
the few things that I would preserve in large parts if I was doing the revi-
sion. Now the craft combat system(s), those are a problem!
More comments in the new topic...
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 3 Mon Nov 18, 1991
C.FAGO1 [Carl Fago] at 20:50 EST
First, a summary of what is already planned for the Traveller revision is in
order so that we don't tread over old ground.
Also, and I mentioned this in Email to GDW, what is the main objective of the
revision? What is the target audience? And what is already set in stone or
reasonably so?
*-=Carl=-*
------------
Category 11, Topic 29
Message 4 Mon Nov 18, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean] at 23:13 EST
Jay asks what we'd like to see in a new Traveller. A leading question if I
ever heard one. I'll try to keep this upbeat, and differentiate in some cases
between things that are a matter of taste, things that I think are a matter
of sheer commercial necessity and things that I think the game would be lost
(as a game) without.
Let me start by commenting that I'm at least partially what one might think of
as a 'reality purist'. That is, I think that a game which states that ships
travel at 1-G constant acceleration should be take notice of the fact that
this means that travel times between planets will be measured in days, and
travel times to jump points and so forth, in hours. Combat rules for space-
ships should reflect the view of reality of the rest of the game. I can
handle something being abstracted (ala High Guard or Imperium's near/far
rules). I can handle something as complex <?> as Mayday. What I have a hard
time with is compromises like the MT space combat rules. Since Traveller is a
game of science fiction, I feel that it is acceptable to ask that the game
pick a set of 'rules of reality' and then stick to them. Good sf books do
this.
I would hope that the new rules would cover creation of characters from a wide
variety of worlds and backgrounds. The rules should cover personal combat,
but not in such excessive detail as to make the use of guns the first recourse
in problem solving...in fact, I'll go so far as to say that I see no particu-
lar reason why the rules for combat should be any more detailed than the rules
for resolving any other skill use (heresy!!). Especially since this aspect
should be covered by the miniatures rules, which I understand are already in
preparation. One of the great attractions of the game has always been the
character's potential ownership of a starship, allowing for that broad, free-
wheeling, multi-world, "This isn't Kansas anymore" flavor to the game. Thus,
ships should be covered in at least as much detail as they are now, if not a
bit more. A ship combat system should be provided that focuses on the prob-
lems of the typical player type ship--a scout or a free trader (or, as I
suppose will be the case in Star Viking, an 800 ton cruiser). Leave the fleet
actions for a supplement. As it stands now (in MT), a typical player vs. bad
guys space combat leads you to combat table with three possible results for a
hit: Weapon-1, Fuel-1, and Maneuver-1. Not terribly exciting. Since travel
to different worlds is such a large part of the game, rules should be in place
to help the referee detail and distinguish the worlds. I think that the
World Builder's Handbook does a pretty good job of this in the current
system...if that's too much detail for the basic rules, then it should
certainly be one of the early supplements. Even in what I visualize as the
Star Viking setting, trade will be a strong motivation for travel. Thus I'd
like to see a fairly extensive set of trade rules, which should be based on
trading actual objects rather than Industrial Goods, TL15, Va, Hi...more like
the old 'thirty tons of silver' system. Some version of a vehicle design
system should be included--the present one, despite its shortcomings is
pretty good about allowing a referee to work up a few exotic pieces of
equipment to add to the flavor of an unusual plant. I'd hate to see all
planets using M-1A1 tank clones, just because we were now compatible with
Twilight:2000. In keeping with the science fiction theme, robots ought to be
part of the main rules, as equipment even if not covered by design rules.
Again, maybe reality demands a compromise: Put an equipment list or simple
design system in the basic game, and sell a detailed but still compatible
system as a supplement. Background information and equipment lists: as much
as will fit, without an undue empha- sis on military hardware. Enough
information about all the major races to allow the use of them as NPCs at
least.
How to package all of this: Well, I'd like to see the following:
Core rules Miniatures rules with interface (I know this is in the plans
already). Miniatures for the rules! (Why don't I play Striker?) Miniatures
for typical characters Fleet/system battles boardgame Boardgame compatible
with the miniatures rules, but at a higher level of
abstraction (I'd hate to try to loot a planet while trying to keep track
of individual vehicles.) Alien supplements Detailed planet supplements Add-
on vehicle supplement Predesigned vehicles/robots supplements Introductory
adventure(s)
In terms of what's out there now, what I'd like to see is rules that include
the World Builder's Handbook and selected sections of the Starship Operator's
Manual, a supplement equal to 101 Vehicles, 101 Robots and 101 Starships all
in one, the completed series of DGP Aliens modules, a Traveller Adventure, and
a Tarsus or a Beltstrike, the awaited Seeker Equipment guide, and some of the
wargaming stuff.
This post is going to be long enough. Anyone else?
Rob Dean
------------