Re: TML nightly: Msgs 5182-5185 V51#16

 u>To refresh the reader, Sonthert is a world of 30 million inhabitants.
 u>They subsist with almost no atmosphere to speak of in a technological
 u>state equivalent to the pre-indistrial era on Earth, circa 1800.
 u>The questions are "why" and "how".

 u>Sonhert/Lanth 1918 X6266AB-3    Ni              R  314 Im

[email removed] (Chuck McKnight) writes:

>Let me offer an alternative for Sonthert.  Like many other worlds
>during the Long Night, Sonthert was cut off from the Imperium
>mainstream.  As an underground colony, isolated from the rest of the
>subsector it's inhabitants lost much of their knowledge regarding their
>technology. The atmosphere generators continued to provide the
>underground habitations with adequate oxygen, and the colonists also
>found several variety of fungi that produced small amounts of gases
>that were breathable and began using them to supplement the atmosphere
>generators. As time progressed, the society grew more structured along
>the lines of 19th century England (Earth). Although the starport at
>Sonthert has been reestablished, the general populace retain the
>societal views developed during the long night. Why colonize a planet
>with a difficult environment?  Why look for gold or oil in Alaska?
><grin>  Seriously, there might have been something of value there when
>the colony was set up or it might have been a strategic point to
>occupy.

JV>Okay. You're making one basic argument here: that Sonthert's
JV>situation can be explained... that with some imagination, it can be
JV>rationalized, and that in the process, we can come up with an
JV>interesting and distinctive history and culture for the planet and
JV>its inhabitants. That's fine. I agree with you.

JV>However, in the process of making this argument, you've completely
JV>ignored mine. My argument was this: the system for UWP generation is
JV>broken because it gives us unwelcome results with such alarming
JV>consistency that it confounds the imagination to have to keep coming
JV>up with new explanations and rationalizations on why such and such a
JV>planet shouldn't exist but does. I think that having this sort of
JV>world appear every once in a while is okay. But making it a standard
JV>outcome of the system is only indicative of a broken system.

JV>Take a second and think about it. True, we have lot of people working
JV>the oil and minerals up in Alaska, but the system doesn't say
JV>anything about oil and minerals. The unmodified/broken system says,
JV>if you take a dinky, icy world (which happens to be the mainworld of
JV>a star system), and you compare it against any other main world (even
JV>the terra-prime worlds out there), the chances of the ice ball having
JV>a higher population are 50%. In real life, if you take 1000 square
JV>miles of alaska (or antartica, or sibera, or the sahara desert... any
JV>place which is "inhospitable") and you compare it against 1000 square
JV>miles of any place which is hospitable, ask yourself, what are the
JV>odds that the yuchy-foo place is going to have a higher population
JV>than the garden paradise? My guess is that the odds are well below
JV>50%. Of course, that doesn't preclude it from ever happening. The
JV>scenario you describe is still possible. All I'm trying to do is make
JV>the system more reflective of what we'd expect on average.

Actually, I haven't ignored your argument about the UWP system being broken.
I approach the UWP generation system (hell, I approach most random generation
systems) as guidelines that I'm free to modify if it suits me.  I don't view
the UWP as a sacred cow that must not be fiddled with, but more of a starting
point.  If I get a result that doesn't match what I'm looking for, I change
it.  I will also mention that I don't mass generate sectors, preferring to
hand generate each system so I can be sure that I don't get anomalies.  But
that's my personal preference and I won't undertake to speak for anyone else.
I'm not denigrating your UWP mods, they're nift, they make sense, etc.  That's
your style of GMing and I support your efforts.  :-)

>I lean far more toward space opera than hard sci-fi when I'm running
>FRP/SFRPs. I look upon the current system as the engine that makes me
>use my imagination, to try to reason why an otherwise inhospitable
>world would be colonized.  However, that's my viewpoint and nobody
>else's. <grin>

JV>No, I'm sure that a lot of other people share your view, but if you
JV>prefer feeling like an extremist, why don't you just scratch the die
JV>modifiers altogether? Why make any attempt to get the UWP to conform
JV>with our expectations unless the attempt is a good and reasonable
JV>one? I think our difference here may simply be one of degree. You are
JV>happy enough with the unmodified system that the work needed to
JV>change it and make it better acts as a sort of inertia (which is
JV>probably the same reason I'm still playing AD&D, albeit largely
JV>modified). And please don't take this as a flame. It's not meant as
JV>such. And I do agree with you, that the softer the science in your
JV>game, the less desirable a reality-based system for UWP generation
JV>becomes.

Personally, I suspect that if it isn't published in a GDW/TSG publication most
people don't use it at all.  :-)  Like I think I mentioned, the generation
system is merely a beginning if I'm stuck for an idea.  Personally, I think a
game's 'reality' is the one imposed and painted by the referee, but I'm into
escapism in my gaming. :-)


>Nah, I'd say the little ice ball was the spiritual center of a culture
>and all the populace lives ship board packed around the little ice ball
>either in space stations or some other technological marvel that masks
>the true nature of the ice ball (it's actually a size A world with one
>hell of a spacial distortion <grin>).  :-)  Of course, if it's pesky
>and annoying to you, you always have the option of changing the UWP.
>After all, when was the last time the IISS came through here?

JV>Again, it is pesky and annoying, and the unmodified system generates
JV>too many of these pesky and annoying planets to modify by hand. A
JV>better system is called for (IMHO). Either that, or we can chuck this
JV>so-called hard-science/reality-based approach and start playing Star
JV>Trek.

Difference of approach, I think.  If I've got to flesh out a world that my
players will be playing on, I'll customize it to suit myself generation system
or no.  However, you're entitled to your opinion and I agree that there are
things that need changing if you're mass generating sectors to make results
more uniform.  Of course, I've never approached Traveller as a hard
science/reality based game.  ;-)

JV>Or maybe I should just look for another hole to bury myself in. :-)

Nah, ya gotta suffer with the rest of us.

Chuck McKnight

"""""
Etcetera, Etcetera  FidoNet/Internet Gateway Site
FidoNet : [email removed]; Internet : etcetc.fidonet.org