Aslan Preview

[Gamerguy]

:shock:

The new Mongoose Aslan book looks and reads very well thank you.

After 12 happy years of playing GURPS Traveller - I'm converting to Mongoose Traveller.

Both players and people who run gaming conventions are demanding it.

I'm actually going to try to convert as much of it as I can straight over. My MTU is not going to change for example.

I'll still run GURPS, but not for Traveller.

All the Mongoose stuff reads very well and the quality is as good as the GURPS stuff.

This Aslan book is twice as big as my GURPS Aslan book.

Hardbound too.

8)

 

[lastbesthope]

You have one already! Lucky sod :lol:

LBH

 

[Kawaresksenjajok]

I hope its not just a rehash of things that came before... I find them lacking
.... being carnivores will make their agriculture and economy significantly different than human and make their land use different.
..... their 3:1 female/male will make their society and demographics different in ways earlier works never really touched upon.
..... females make up 75% of the population by older sources and control finance/economy and technology/innovation yet are barely described in older works.
..... males want land for 'instinctive' reasons lowering them to a bad stereotype of animal-behavior concerning territory.
..... males' obsession with 'honor' and their willingness to duel reduces them to bad stereotypes on samurai.

those bad stereotypes combined with effectively ignoring the greater part of the population ( who do the real work of maintaining the technological society ) make Aslan less interesting than they could be.

I hope this product will rise above that.
( the art means little to me as I'll imagine the visuals myself anyways )

Right with you about the stereotyping - it must be a tough game to (as I remember Traveller being proud in stating) claim you're aliens are complex, full of depth and aren't 'humans in rubber suits', but then go right on stereotyping them!
I have to give them credit over most other sci-fi games with all the effort that must go into the Alien Modules.

 

[EDG]

I hope its not just a rehash of things that came before... I find them lacking
.... being carnivores will make their agriculture and economy significantly different than human and make their land use different.
..... their 3:1 female/male will make their society and demographics different in ways earlier works never really touched upon.
..... females make up 75% of the population by older sources and control finance/economy and technology/innovation yet are barely described in older works.
..... males want land for 'instinctive' reasons lowering them to a bad stereotype of animal-behavior concerning territory.
..... males' obsession with 'honor' and their willingness to duel reduces them to bad stereotypes on samurai.

I do find it funny that some people berate me whenever I mention planetary realism in Traveller because it's supposedly "Space Opera", and yet nobody seems to bat an eyelid when people complain about this sort of thing (which is an equally valid concern).

Either way, we're complaining because something isn't realistic or sensible. If Traveller really is supposed to be "Space Opera" (as defined by the way people use the term which seems to imply anything from "not remotely realistic" through "not based on anything real" to "real but with unrealistic elements", even though that's not actually what it means anymore) then this racial stuff should matter as little as the planetary stuff. And yet, that doesn't seem to be the case. Curious that.

 

[captainjack23]

Planets are props, aliens are costars. I almost never need to worry about a planet's motivations; but then, possibly, I don't understand planetary psychology. :wink:

People care more about things that talk and potentially wave guns. [shrug] It is the way of things, grasshopper

 

[EDG]

People care more about things that talk and potentially wave guns. [shrug] It is the way of things, grasshopper

That's pretty inconsistent though. If anything, during games characters are usually interacting a lot more with their environment than with aliens.

Whether you're talking about how much gas a planet can hold on to, or why the sex ratios or carnivorousness of the aslan mean this or that for their culture and society, it's still the same sort of "niggling level of detail" that some people complain about isn't it? Just as one could argue that you don't need to get a planet completely realistic, one could equally argue that you don't need to get the sex ratios or whatever of Aslan completely realistic either.

It's not that "one is a prop and the other is a co-star". They're both equally important when it comes to verisimilitude, so caring about one and not the other seems somewhat arbitrary.

 

[captainjack23]

People care more about things that talk and potentially wave guns. [shrug] It is the way of things, grasshopper

That's pretty inconsistent though.

People are pretty inconsistent in most things, I agree. And thats a professional opinion..

Gaming is a social interaction. Talking to PC's is a social interaction. Interacting with a planet mostly consists of not dying. One is active, the other is passive. Observation suggest that people care more about the active social stuff than the passive survival stuff. Plus, people have more default experience with social stuff, and so think about it more. Again, that doesn't make it good or bad, it's just how things seem to be.

If only we had a good product on the market making all the planetary science stuff accessable for traveller. Even a free PDF would be great. Alas.......what we have is scattered posts and squabbles. A publication, see, would avoid all the squabbling, berating, old issues, interuptions, argument and derailing that the forums provide.


If only.......

 

[EDG]

If only we had a good product on the market making all the planetary science stuff accessable for traveller. Even a free PDF would be great. Alas.......what we have is scattered posts and squabbles. A publication, see, would avoid all the squabbling, berating, old issues, interuptions, argument and derailing that the forums provide.

Instead, people would just complain about the product once it's out there, and how it's ruining their game with realism... and Mongoose would probably cover that in their World Builders Handbook anyway.

There's stuff on my website and on others that people can use. Right now I sure as hell am too burned out on it to do anything about it. And half the time I wonder if it's even worth doing in the first place.

 

[kristof65]

There's stuff on my website and on others that people can use. Right now I sure as hell am too burned out on it to do anything about it. And half the time I wonder if it's even worth doing in the first place.

Well, it's worth doing if it works for you.

As for the arbitrariness - it seems to be inherent in RPGs, not just Traveller. I've seen a D&D GM who had detailed family trees for the all the nobility of a city, and yet couldn't even begin to explain the ecology of a dungeon we were in, where he simply selected the monsters he thought were "cool", despite the fact that it didn't make sense for some of them to be sharing a habitat, let alone being in a dungeon in the first place. It was still an enjoyable game, despite that "flaw". And I've seen more than one PC where the player can tell you the backstory on every scar the PC has, but still can't tell you the PCs mother's name.

As for why people might care more about Aslan psychology and physiology rather than the planet being the right distance from the star? Well, I chalk that up to interactivity. An Aslan PC/NPC is going to interact with the PCs on a more detailed level than most planets will. And look at the ways a GM can convey an NPC to a group of players, versus the way they can convey a world to them. NPCs can be conveyed with mannerisms, physical motion, facial expressions, voices as well as pictures, and verbal or written descriptions. Planets aren't as easy to convey - you're really left with pictures, plus verbal/written descriptions - unless you happen to be playing in a location where you can control the environment a little bit. FREX, as a GM, I can convey an NPC as being aggressive and ready to kill the PCs with nothing more than noises, hand motions and facial expressions. However, I can't, at this point, convey a planet having a cooler sun, polluted air, and 1.5Gs of gravity with anything other than words, maybe pictures.

 

[BP]

... convey a planet having a cooler sun, polluted air, and 1.5Gs of gravity with anything other than words, maybe pictures.

Dim the lighting, fart and put wrist weights on all your players


"I never drive faster than I can see, and besides... it's all in the reflexes." - Jack Burton

 

[EDG]

As for why people might care more about Aslan psychology and physiology rather than the planet being the right distance from the star? Well, I chalk that up to interactivity. An Aslan PC/NPC is going to interact with the PCs on a more detailed level than most planets will. And look at the ways a GM can convey an NPC to a group of players, versus the way they can convey a world to them. NPCs can be conveyed with mannerisms, physical motion, facial expressions, voices as well as pictures, and verbal or written descriptions.

Yeah, but what does that interaction have to do their what the skeletal structure of their hand is, or on how many livestock they need to be able to feed a community, or what the male:female ratio is? None of that would really come through in normal interaction with the species, any more than a planet's detailed physical evolution comes through when characters land on it. So arguably it's as irrelevant a detail fo revery day use as the planet stuff.

 

[captainjack23]

As for why people might care more about Aslan psychology and physiology rather than the planet being the right distance from the star? Well, I chalk that up to interactivity. An Aslan PC/NPC is going to interact with the PCs on a more detailed level than most planets will. And look at the ways a GM can convey an NPC to a group of players, versus the way they can convey a world to them. NPCs can be conveyed with mannerisms, physical motion, facial expressions, voices as well as pictures, and verbal or written descriptions.

Yeah, but what does that interaction have to do their what the skeletal structure of their hand is, or on how many livestock they need to be able to feed a community, or what the male:female ratio is? None of that would really come through in normal interaction with the species, any more than a planet's detailed physical evolution comes through when characters land on it. So arguably it's as irrelevant a detail fo revery day use as the planet stuff.

Well, I do think you are mixing up two things here: relevance of a question and interest (or motivation) in a question. Yes, in game terms, the skeleton of an aslan is probably no more relevant than the planet one is standing on; and by saying that , I'm not saying that they are both tirvial, but rather that they are huge, but, for whatever reason, people tend to pay more attention to the former.

Not sure what to do about it, except note that gaming is social, and so possibly the more closely an issue fits into in game social interaction, the more likely it'll get examined. Some info on exactly why planetary environments are important to social interaction is certainly more likely to interest people who are already predisposed to discuss it, I suspect.

I will say this, and this is entirely my own opinion about how I'd do it, and YMMV: since it's an issue of changing peoples motivations I don't think that just posting observations is the best way to motivate people to care. Certainly you have every right to do so, it's just a question of what you are trying to accomplish.

Its an interesting question, and one pretty neglected in gaming (and SF in general); but I'm not going to presume that I could point out the relevance of a planet on social interactions in a game, or learn what I have to de novo; I'm sure it is a big component, but it's a passive one, perhaps, and I honestly haven't looked at it all that much. It's your ball, I think.

[edited for good will]

 

[EDG]

I will say this, and this is entirely my own opinion about how I'd do it, and YMMV: since it's an issue of changing peoples motivations I don't think that just posting mildly annoyed observations in an environment you seem to feel is hostile to it is the best way to motivate people to care. Certainly you have every right to do so, it's just a question of what you are trying to accomplish.

I don't think making unfounded interpretations about my motivation for posting anything helps either - the quoted paragraph was completely unnecessary. More generally, posting anything about anybody's motivations for posting or saying something is neither helpful nor useful. Can we for once have a discussion without questioning people's (usually my own...) motives for posting?

EDIT: I note that you said something on CotI today that basically said that questioning peoples' motivations is a bad thing to do, so I'm curious as to why you think it's OK to do it to me here as often as you do - particularly since you even say that you apply it in arguments with me (which you're clearly not doing here):

How bout the short version: these problems seem to arise the minute one ventures to comment on a persons motivations, and not their behavior nor ideas. Motivations are inherently unknowable, and just fuel for the bonfire {...} This isn't the only reason this happens, not by a long shot - rudeness and vitriol are real probems too, but much less quantifiable: but I will suggest that anytime one is critically asserting something about anothers motivations, that one cannot possibly know, it is potentially over the line in an argument; and I maintain it is a quantifiable observation.

Truth is, I posted just to draw attention to the issue, not because I'm "mildly annoyed" by it. I'm not even particularly interested in "motivating people to care" either. I'm just saying "hey, isn't it weird that this happens" is all, and hoping some kind of useful discussion would come of it.

 

[rust]

In most of our settings the environment of the planet where the campaign
is located and the characters' interactions with this environment are as im-
portant as the social interactions between the characters and between the
characters and the nonplayer characters.

Whether it is a water world or a desert world (to name our current favouri-
tes), the planet itself is a "major player" of the campaign. Many of the ad-
ventures deal with the exploration of the planet and its ecology, with natu-
ral desasters, with projects to "tame" the planet, and so on.

To make this interesting, one needs quite a lot of varied details, and these
details should be plausible and "realistic" to avoid contradictions and to
support the suspension of disbelief of the players.

While this may be unusual, "my" planets are far more detailed than "my"
aliens, mainly because I know that the characters will spend a lot of time
and effort to learn more about the planet they are on, and much less so
to find out about the anatomy and physiology of any alien species.

 

[Ishmael]

gee... I brought those issues up because I was treated poorly for suggesting that events from the Sengoku period of Japan might make for neat background info for Aslan politics, history, etc... I was told to "think like an alien " in so many words....
so I got a hair up my a** and tried to think like an alien and I'm still working on it

Aliens think;
"I'm hungry...what can I eat?", which leads to thinking about food production.
"I'm horny...I want to mate" , which leads to thinking how they relate to reproduction and where their babies come from
"I don't want to get killed " , which leads to security/housing issues
"I'm lazy..anything that lets me do everything else easier or better is good", which leads to thinking about technology

That which makes a society, whether its alien or not, depends on the society's methods of dealing with those things.

Even though it will have only a passing effect on how an individual acts, I liken that to how a 'realistic' world's characteristics might cause a tree to grow or how the landscape looks. Thinking about how an alien society is put together leads to a better depiction of that society much like thinking about how a world can lead to a better depiction of what its like.
It's just making a 'set' for the story and can be as fancy/detailed as you like; from the cockpit of the airplane in "Plan 9 from Outer Space" to the bridge of the Nostromo from "Alien"
A matter of preference that only supports the story, not overwhelms it

at least, thats how I view it.

 

[kristof65]

While this may be unusual, "my" planets are far more detailed than "my"
aliens, mainly because I know that the characters will spend a lot of time
and effort to learn more about the planet they are on, and much less so
to find out about the anatomy and physiology of any alien species.

This doesn't surprise me at all, based on the glimpses of your campaigns you've given us here. In contrast, all of the Traveller campaigns I have personal experience with - including my own - are about hopping from one planet to another - planets play about the same role as hotel rooms do for for travelling rock bands on a world tour.

Each are valid approaches - honestly, while my campaigns never turn out like yours, I would be thrilled to play in one of yours.

EDGs original observation is a good one, but in the end what gets detailed and what doesn't I think it comes down to a) human quirkiness, and b) what any given group of players care about. Because, let's face it, it's still very, very difficult for any one person (or small group of people) to give an RPG setting (whether it's Traveller, D&D or any other game/genre) all the detail a setting deserves. Someday, perhaps...

 

[EDG]

planets play about the same role as hotel rooms do for for travelling rock bands on a world tour.

That's true with the OTU, because every planet is pretty much treated like that. There's just too many of the damn things in the setting, nobody could possibly give them any more detail than "standard vacuum-baked rockball A" and "humid rainy planet B". They may as well be the equivalent of villages in a fantasy setting.

Reduce the size of the setting though, and then you've got more time to make interesting worlds. Just look at Blue Planet or Tekumel or Jorune, for example - one planet, LOTS of detail.

You do see that with races too. There are five major races in the OTU, which is the sort of number that can be handled in a fair bit of detail. But most of the minor races get sketchy writeups, because there are so many of them.

It's almost like there's a finite amount of detail that one can put in a setting, and you can either spread it over a wide area and have little detail, or concentrate it in one smaller area and have a lot of detail.

 

[BP]

...
Aliens think;
"I'm hungry...what can I eat?", which leads to thinking about food production.
"I'm horny...I want to mate" , which leads to thinking how they relate to reproduction and where their babies come from
"I don't want to get killed " , which leads to security/housing issues
"I'm lazy..anything that lets me do everything else easier or better is good", which leads to thinking about technology
...

Hmmm... that doesn't sound to 'alien-ish' to me. Perhaps something more along the lines of -

Is it possible for creatures to live who are exposed to the light of their own sun?
Can organisms actually survive in an oxygen rich environment?
-or-
Wonder what sauce goes well with bipedal carbon-based creatures?

 

[kristof65]

...
Aliens think;
"I'm hungry...what can I eat?", which leads to thinking about food production.
"I'm horny...I want to mate" , which leads to thinking how they relate to reproduction and where their babies come from
"I don't want to get killed " , which leads to security/housing issues
"I'm lazy..anything that lets me do everything else easier or better is good", which leads to thinking about technology
...

Hmmm... that doesn't sound to 'alien-ish' to me.

The questions themselves aren't alien-ish, because they the very basic of motivations. What makes them alien-ish are the answers. Even here on Earth, a lion is going to have a different answer to "I'm hungry" than a cow, an octopus or a deep sea thermal vent organism.

A human's answer "A thick steak, medium rare, with a nice salad and baked potato" is different from an Aslan's answer of "A freshly killed animal, dripping with blood" and very different from a Xagoblotian's answer of "I need a warm rock to soak up this sunlight from".

 

[Ishmael]

they are 'life form'-ish questions, but the answers that the life form gives pretty much defines how the life form lives.

works for humans and giant squid and aliens and fruit flies and pretty much anything that's alive.
they're just a starting point