Re: New Traveller

Scott Kellogg writes:

> Problem:  How do we get them to listen to us?  The only way I can think of
> is a psy-ops campaign.  If we just yell and flame at them, they will NOT
> listen.  So, I think we have to calm down our tone a bit.  If we come across
> as REASONABLE people I think we have a shot at it.  I mean if we have
> complaints about the revisions, I think we had better be able to come up
> with alternative ideas rather than saying, 'I don't like this'

You're right.  Unfortunately, many of us also have time constraints.
I, for instance, have a great deal of catching up to do at work
(having just returned from vacation).

If we really want to provide REASONABLE and CONSISTENT alternatives,
then someone will have to take some time to compile people's ideas.

	[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[	TMLer Joe Heck has already offered to do this	  ]]
	[[	as I announced a few days ago.  Please make sure  ]]
	[[	to send your comments to the TML and/or to Joe	  ]]
	[[	directly at [email removed]. He	  ]]
	[[	Will summarize the responses and post the digest  ]]
	[[	to the TML, where it can be passed on to GEnie.	  ]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[					-- James	  ]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

I think that many of us have similar, or at least compatible, ideas
about what to do with Traveller.  If someone would be willing to
look at my ideas and incorporate them into a "proposal" of sorts,
I'd be willing to put my name on it.  Then, we could present it to
GDW and say "The following x people talked about it and would like
collectively to see these things: ..."

So, would you like to do such a thing?

To get you started, I'll name a few of my preferences:

o PROOF-READ it and have a few dozen non-gamers try to learn the rules
  by reading it!!!!!!

o The name "Traveller", or "Traveller, 3rd edition".  No fancy prefixes
  or suffixes or whatever.

o A good task system.  The MegaTraveller system is good (although not
  quite so perfect as some have been claiming recently).  I haven't
  seen the T2k2 rules, so can't comment on them.

o The Traveller background.  Don't totally ditch everything that is
  out there now.  Moving the timeline forwards is OK by me, though.

o A STABLE background.  We don't need galactic revolutions taking
  place.  It's nice to be able to create campaigns in the official
  universe without having to take such things into account.  It's
  OK to have a section of the galaxy in turmoil, but not all of it.
  A Long Night is also OK, since it is at least stable.  It could
  even be preferable, since it allows GMs freedom when designing
  their campaigns.

o Realistic and CONSISTENT science.  This virus thing seems to be
  REALLY stretching it, even if it's got abilities such as Iasic of
  the PBEM.  I've got to see it to believe it.  Also, stick to
  conservation of energy.  Even with the OLD Traveller rules, any
  player with a small spaceship could single-handedly decimate a
  world.  Jump drives and grav drives are OK as long as you explain
  them and don't get a free ride w.r.t. energy consumption.  Grav
  drives must use as much energy as the difference in gravitational
  potential energy.  Jump drives cannot jump to a higher point of
  potential energy without a commensurate cost.  By the way, this
  is a very good reason why jumps can never be into open space,
  but only into a star system, and wouldn't crash you into a star
  or planet.

o Rules for construction of vehicles/spaceships/robots/guns/whatever.
  They don't need to be in one place, but this is one aspect of
  Traveller which many people seem to like.  They also MUST be easy
  enough to do without a computer and in a reasonable amount of time.
  This is rather important -- there are many GMs and players who love
  to spend time designing things.  It's a form of solo play.

o Keep detailed character generation.  It really adds to the flavor
  of the game.  It's also good to have some randomness, although
  this may be optional.  From my experience, random generation of
  characters and character backgrounds leads to better role-playing
  and less munchkinism, even with experienced gamers.

o Don't make any one character type or character generation method
  vastly superior to any others (if there are different methods).
  The original Traveller fell into that trap starting with Book 4.

o Don't make Traveller or MegaTraveller stuff obsolete.  Provide for
  conversions to the new system.  Where things are changed in the
  new system, don't make them so different that you can't simply
  "fake it" with old characters/designs/etc.

o Does anyone else out there like the 6-sided dice?  I always
  identified Traveller with 6-siders and the 2d6 bell curves used
  for everything.  I'm really sorry to see this go.  I mean it.
  The whole feel is different.  Somehow, the fact that you don't
  need any special dice or equipment gave Traveller a FEEL unlike
  any other RPG.  It sounds strange, but I think that this really
  makes a difference.

Could someone (please) offer to compile a list of these and other
similar ideas and send them to GDW?  Barring that, I hope someone
will at least forward this to GEnie.  (I really wish they'd hook
into the Internet.  They should realize that they would actually
be gaining customers, not giving away their services.  Once people
on their net started getting into more and more mailing lists and
such, GE would have more business than they could handle.  And
people would still use GEnie.  The business they gain would vastly
outweigh the few they lose who have both free access and pay for
GEnie.  I doubt they'd even lose those people.  OK, enough ranting
for now 8-).

Jerry Williams ([email removed])