DEAD AND MOVEDtypes of campaigns and system/trade generation

[captainjack23]

I moved this here out of the actual stats thread of EDG's, hopefully to expand the discussion without interrupting that thread.

I've had to move it again.
(third time is the charm, I hope)

I can't lock it, but I won't be reading it.

Campaign types and system type/generation changes III
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=33146&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=B2/viewtopic.php?t=33118&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=

 

[Deniable]

So if I'm reading this right, what you're looking for is a basic system that works well enough plus some options to flavor different regions. For example a maturity level for a (sub)sector to either raise or lower the local tech levels to make a region more interesting for the trader or explorer type players.

Some versions of Traveller have indirectly done this by modifying the starport up/down depending on the region's level of development. This then inflicted modifiers on the TL. Bringing TLs up shouldn't be a big problem, but lowering TLs [1] may make worlds non-viable. The issue is then to make them barren worlds or to enforce a floor on the TL.

[1] Kind of like TNE's collapse effects.

 

[EDG]

Sorry about the rant on the other thread, CJ.

think it was the statement that "the goal is to get a system that makes acceptable worlds, a few weird ones for hooks and a few mistakes" that got me. Because I really don't think that is OK at all, because it's basically settling for "second-best" when you can go further.

My goal is to get a system that makes sensible worlds in as simple a way as possible - any and all of which can be used by the imaginative and enterprising GM to run interesting adventures on - and not generate any "mistakes" at all. Because that's the most ideal option available, and that's the goal that any designer should be striving for - I really don't see any need for anything less than that.

And also, I detected an implication that "reasonably acceptable worlds" were somehow separate from "interesting oddities for adventure hooks". Every world is potentially an adventure hook, whether it's a "bland" high pop earthlike world or a small colony on a marginal world or a gonzo TL H asteroid belt. Interesting adventures primarily come from the GM and the players, not the UWPs - they're just a tool, and there's enough other tools in MGT (like the faction and law and culture rules) to help anyone to come up with interesting ideas for any world. And if they can't, then I firmly believe that it's because they're simply not putting in that little bit of extra effort required to come up with something themselves - it's not because of the UWPs.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Those odd, unique, and reality-defying worlds should not be produced by the system, IMHO. If a Ref wants 'em, he can just 'ave 'em, by GM Fiat.

A (mindless*) system should not be generating them.


*mindless in the way a computer program can crunch the numbers.


Some mods for the type of area (frontier, core, colonies) would be cool, but I can think of it being quite a complication right now - maybe something to leave for a future Scouts supplement.

 

[captainjack23]

Sorry about the rant on the other thread, CJ.

think it was the statement that "the goal is to get a system that makes acceptable worlds, a few weird ones for hooks and a few mistakes" that got me. Because I really don't think that is OK at all, because it's basically settling for "second-best" when you can go further.

My goal is to get a system that makes sensible worlds in as simple a way as possible - any and all of which can be used by the imaginative and enterprising GM to run interesting adventures on - and not generate any "mistakes" at all. Because that's the most ideal option available, and that's the goal that any designer should be striving for - I really don't see any need for anything less than that.

And also, I detected an implication that "reasonably acceptable worlds" were somehow separate from "interesting oddities for adventure hooks". Every world is potentially an adventure hook, whether it's a "bland" high pop earthlike world or a small colony on a marginal world or a gonzo TL H asteroid belt. Interesting adventures primarily come from the GM and the players, not the UWPs - they're just a tool, and there's enough other tools in MGT (like the faction and law and culture rules) to help anyone to come up with interesting ideas for any world. And if they can't, then I firmly believe that it's because they're simply not putting in that little bit of extra effort required to come up with something themselves - it's not because of the UWPs.

Look. I appreciate the apology, but we do have differences in our goals here; not to challenge or contradict yours, but I have heard them before, and am reasonably sure I understand them. Hell, I even agree with most of em. But enough, okay ? I'm sorry you found implications where I simply meant what I was saying...that I want to consider some other directions. So, give the advocacy a bit of rest here, please.

 

[DaltonCalford]

Well,

I would like to see other trade codes taken into consideration that are currently not handled by the rules but should be.

Subsector Capital - Such places should demand more luxery items and generate more mail than others.

Sector Capital - See Subsector Capital.

ShipYards - NI and Starport A, such a combination would requre large amounts of imports of equipment

Class A starports - they would need extra rare earths to produce the jump drive.

Young Colony - They would need more of everything

Amber zones - All shipping costs should go up due to the danger involved

X-Boat Route - All items cost/sell for less due to abundance of items

X-Boat Way Station Higher demand for certain types of goods

Navel depot lower demand for most goods as they are brought in by long term contracts supplied by the mega-corps.

Now, most of the above codes are created by the referee and not the generation system, but, the trade and commerce rules should take them into account.

Just my 2c worth

best regards

Dalton

 

[EDG]

Look. I appreciate the apology, but we do have differences in our goals here; not to challenge or contradict yours, but I have heard them before, and am reasonably sure I understand them. Hell, I even agree with most of em. But enough, okay ? I'm sorry you found implications where I simply meant what I was saying...that I want to consider some other directions.

Why should anyone consider any other directions if they're just "adequate" though? I know the system I've come up with (that I'm literally about to post) comes up with "reasonable" worlds that make sense, as well as "interesting" worlds that make sense too, and it doesn't churn out "mistakes" (i.e. broken systems). There's no reason to aim for anything less than that.

So, give the advocacy a bit of rest here, please.

I'll freely admit that I am pushing hard for a change here, and I'm not going to apologise for that or hold back from doing so - if that gets under people's skins then sorry, but that's not my problem. My sole aim here is to come up with a worldgen system for Traveller to make 100% sense, doesn't produce errors, and produces interesting worlds (people may disagree about details of the social aspects, but they'll still at least have some logical consistency to them rather than the head-scratching bafflement that the CT UWPs often result in).

But this playtest is the last chance that anyone is going to have to effect some long overdue changes in the Traveller system, and nobody should have to back down from pointing out the flaws in the system and the fixes to repair them. I'm going to let the numbers speak for themselves - I've already pointed out the flaws in the CT (and MGT) systems as they stand, and I'm literally about to post the fixes and the results of my "EDG worldgen".

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

So if I'm reading this right, what you're looking for is a basic system that works well enough plus some options to flavor different regions. For example a maturity level for a (sub)sector to either raise or lower the local tech levels to make a region more interesting for the trader or explorer type players.

Some versions of Traveller have indirectly done this by modifying the starport up/down depending on the region's level of development. This then inflicted modifiers on the TL. Bringing TLs up shouldn't be a big problem, but lowering TLs [1] may make worlds non-viable. The issue is then to make them barren worlds or to enforce a floor on the TL.

[1] Kind of like TNE's collapse effects.

I have handled this with a GM Fiat DM to the POP roll (for younger sub-sectors), a DM -2 eliminates Hi Pop and In worlds and creates more Ba (uninhabited) worlds that haven't been settled yet. A similar DM on the Starport table eliminates (or makes VERY rare) the Class A starports.

One that I find useful in settled regions is 1d3+3 for the TL dice. It gives you from 4-6 instead of 1-6 which brings up the lower TLs a bit.

 

[captainjack23]

Look. I appreciate the apology, but we do have differences in our goals here; not to challenge or contradict yours, but I have heard them before, and am reasonably sure I understand them. Hell, I even agree with most of em. But enough, okay ? I'm sorry you found implications where I simply meant what I was saying...that I want to consider some other directions.

Why should anyone consider any other directions if they're just "adequate" though? I know the system I've come up with (that I'm literally about to post) comes up with "reasonable" worlds that make sense, as well as "interesting" worlds that make sense too, and it doesn't churn out "mistakes" (i.e. broken systems). There's no reason to aim for anything less than that.

So, give the advocacy a bit of rest here, please.

I'll freely admit that I am pushing hard for a change here, and I'm not going to apologise for that or hold back from doing so - if that gets under people's skins then sorry, but that's not my problem. My sole aim here is to come up with a worldgen system for Traveller to make 100% sense, doesn't produce errors, and produces interesting worlds (people may disagree about details of the social aspects, but they'll still at least have some logical consistency to them rather than the head-scratching bafflement that the CT UWPs often result in).

But this playtest is the last chance that anyone is going to have to effect some long overdue changes in the Traveller system, and nobody should have to back down from pointing out the flaws in the system and the fixes to repair them. I'm going to let the numbers speak for themselves - I've already pointed out the flaws in the CT (and MGT) systems as they stand, and I'm literally about to post the fixes and the results of my "EDG worldgen".

Then shut up, do it, and stop wasting time over here.

 

[EDG]

Then shut up, do it, and stop wasting time over here.

I have posted the stats, uwps and rules. I've just got to post the discussion and then it's done. I'm not "wasting time" here, I've been trying to get the damn stats right for the past couple of days and making sure there's no bugs.

 

[captainjack23]

Then shut up, do it, and stop wasting time over here.

I have posted the stats, uwps and rules. I've just got to post the discussion and then it's done. I'm not "wasting time" here, I've been trying to get the damn stats right for the past couple of days and making sure there's no bugs.

post it in the thread you started for it, as well as your statements of intent and justification for it, PLEASE.

 

[captainjack23]

Moved and removed by author

 

[captainjack23]

Moved and removed by author

 

[captainjack23]

Moved and removed by author