Empty Hex Jumps....again

[EDG]

It seems quite clear, in the original Traveller you could jump into empty hexes and it seems more than reasonable that the Mongoose version inherits that property. Case cased. Home in time for tea and medals.

If Mongoose sets all its OTU material in the 1100s era then sure. DSJs are possible in that era and there's nothing in GT:IW that contradicts that.

If Mongoose decided to set some material in the IW era though, I'd expect it to follow GT:IW and assume that DSJs are not possible in that era.

EDIT: Correction. I'd hope they followed GT:IW (being the only other authoritative source on the subject). But if you want to be "purist" about it, the options are to either follow by CT/MT/TNE canon (in which Marc has confirmed - by listing Imperium as official canon - that DSJs are not possible in the IW era, which leads us back to agreeing with GT:IW), or to ask for clarification from Marc on the subject, and whatever he says becomes the new CT/MT/TNE canon on the subject. Whatever he says will not, however, affect GT:IW's internal canon one bit.

 

[rust]

Case cased. Home in time for tea and medals.

Yep. :wink:

GT:IW is canon for GT:IW, MGT is canon for MGT - everything else would
defy logic. 8)

Tea and medals for me, too, please.

 

[captainjack23]

Those who feel that this is a dead topic could consider taking the polite and helpful route by ignoring it, and others like it, and just possibly , avoid derailing it, rather than feeling the need to threadcrap all over it.

Unless they are an admin of course, and are fully empowered to lock and move threads as desired, or,indeed, to tell various posters to stop crapping on others. But, until then we have to self regulate.

Besides. How many threads do we need on (say) MGT covers ? One man's dead horse is another man's....um. Horse that is still alive ?

So, right. Tea and bikkies on me....and even the good Doctor can have some !

 

[EDG]

Those who feel that this is a dead topic could consider taking the polite and helpful route by ignoring it, and others like it, and just possibly , avoid derailing it, rather than feeling the need to threadcrap all over it.

Well, I've not the one that mentioned "canonicity" here so don't blame me for that.

Though I am curious to know why you're so interested in empty hex jumps as to start four threads on the subject. Why is this so important to you? Are you writing a Traveller product that is set in the IW era? It doesn't seem that way, since you seem more interested in presenting your own non-canonical explanations for how to get around what you see as the "problem".

Besides. How many threads do we need on (say) MGT covers ?

Considering that there's only been one thread about the covers themselves, I don't know what you're complaining about. I started a separate thread for people to suggest ideas for new covers, but that's hardly "beating a dead horse".

 

[rust]

I apologize for calling the canonicity question a dead horse and take
that dead horse with me before it gets into the way even more ...

 

[captainjack23]

I apologize for calling the canonicity question a dead horse and take
that dead horse with me before it gets into the way even more ...

No apology needed - I quite understand that you were trying to point out that the thread wasn't about canon or canon beating. Thanks for trying.

 

[captainjack23]

To EDG, some specific answers and a few comments.

I decided to sleep on this, so as to have a more reasoned answer.

First, Matt has asked you and me to stop bickering. The specific suggestion was for us to simply ignore each other, and not respond, no matter how stupid the other person is being. He doesn't like how we were acting, and doesn't care about our grievances with each other. It's his house, and we are the ones running around pissing on each other; so I decided to give it a try. Yes, I'm breaking that rule here, but simply so you can know whats going on. If you want, you can now take lots of pot shots at me and my posts for free; or you can try and help the owner here keep his board the way he wants it. Frankly, I've enjoyed knowing that I don't have to participate in continuing a bad relationship, which is what we have. Give it a try.

Second, I moved the thread to another topic because you and Aramis had started your usual bickering about IW and Gurps being canon or not; which was absolutely not what the thread was about. So rather than try to separate you two from your argument, I stepped out. Possibly you don't like the frivolous way I expressed it ? That's my style. It wasn't aimed at you in specific, just the issue; I know you don't like, it, but, as you've exlained to others who dislike your style, you are free to ignore it.

Third, why the threads ? Because it interests me, and because I can. So until one of the admins says otherwise, your opinion of what I post is best served by ignoring it. Obviously I can't stop you if you want to do otherwise, but Matt has said he likes a board without sniping and arguing.

As to why the interest ? because it interests me... I created new threads as they wandered off, or were swamped by cross arguing. The original thread started lots of interest, including with you, who not only contributed and started more threads here, but also started multiple threads on other boards on the same topic. That you feel, as you announced, that you are done with the topic is irrelevant. If, as seems to be the case, the community here is also tired of it, they will vote with their feet and let it die. Beyond that, I have no plans to justify myself or what I want to post here to someone who has no more authority to stop me that I do to stop you.


So, finally, I know its likely that you'll have a response to this, and want to do a cut and comment job on half of it and ignore the rest -it's what we have all done here, myself included, all too much. The owner wants us to stop, and I'm letting my ideas of basic politeness and respect for my host rule my decision here - you may feel otherwise about your behavior, and where the source of the problem is, and you may be right. I am however going to eliminate my part of it, and I strongly suggest you consider doing the same. So I hope this is over and out.

 

[GamerDude]

And the sensible people said "AMEN".

Well put CJ. Some people just have to be right, just have to keep twisting something said they disagree with, just keep acting like something they disagree with wasn't actually said... etc.

And, for the record, I forwarded as an attachment Marc's email response to me on the "What is considered canon for the OTU". I did it as an attachment so there couldn't be any claim I edited the message to suit my viewpoint.

Why did I bend Marc's trust? Well I offered that I wouldn't post it in its entirety but Marc never asked for that. And second, now CJ and I KNOW the answer... definitively and that's that. The sad minority can try to argue and bait the two of us all they want, we can easily ignore them because we know exactly where anything GT stands (and it's NOT in the "canon" column).

***************************
We now return you to an earnest, mature, and polite discussion of jumping into empty hexes.
***************************

 

[far-trader]

Not trolling for a fight but I have to ask, just where are you coming from here...

And the sensible people said "AMEN".

...for the record, I forwarded as an attachment Marc's email response to me on the "What is considered canon for the OTU". I did it as an attachment so there couldn't be any claim I edited the message to suit my viewpoint.

Why did I bend Marc's trust? Well I offered that I wouldn't post it in its entirety but Marc never asked for that. And second, now CJ and I KNOW the answer... definitively and that's that. The sad minority can try to argue and bait the two of us all they want, we can easily ignore them because we know exactly where anything GT stands (and it's NOT in the "canon" column).

So you claim that Marc told you personally what is Canon (as far as GT goes?) when you asked him (and other people with presumed working relationships with the guy can't get him to answer reliably). And you shared it with CJ alone and now you're going to lord it over everybody else with this big privileged secret that only you two know? And the reason you didn't just put in the public record for the discussion and enlightenment of all is because you offered you wouldn't but Marc didn't actually require that? But then you feel free to intimate the answer in closing? And you think all of this will lead to mature polite discussion?

Really, I want to know your reasoning behind the above because from here it makes little sense and seems rather elitist and without any proof whatsoever. Am I calling you a liar? Not exactly. But the story does seem a bit contrived.

 

[EDG]

Marc's opinion on the subject doesn't matter, period. In practical terms, an author is only concerned about the edition that they're writing about, not any other one. And if you're not an author, then sticking to canon doesn't matter at all. (As far as I can see, there's five different self-contained branches of canon - T4/CT/MT/TNE, GT/GT:IW, 1248, T20, and MGT. What matters is that you stick within the one you're writing about).

If one is writing for GT:IW, then GT:IW is canon whether Marc says it is or not - he has no say in the matter whatsoever for GT. If Marc were to say "nope, GT in any era is no longer Traveller canon at all" then that ain't going to stop anyone from writing anything else for GT, and it's not going to prevent anything they write from still being canonical within it.

If one is writing for CT, MT, or TNE then and only then does Marc's opinion count. But since it's highly unlikely that anyone would be writing anything official set in or before the IW era for CT, MT, or TNE, it's also highly unlikely that this would even be an issue. And since Marc's already explicitly said that Imperium (with its mass-to-mass jumps) is canon for CT (in the front page of the CT Reprints), there's no conflict anyway.

That's why these canonicity arguments are so ridiculous. Though I think some people have such a hate-on for GT that they take the "it's an alternate universe' thing and twist it round to mean that anything it says is completely irrelevant and that there's no useful material in there at all.

 

[captainjack23]

Well, thanks for the support, but regardless of who is twisting what, the communication sucked, and needed to end.

As to the MWM letter, well, again, I appreciate the support, but I really, really want to get away from canon as law, and continue with "what are the implications of this thing in this set of parameters". In this context, it's pretty irrelevant if Marc or anyone else regards x,y,and z as canon when I ask something like, "if one looks at x and Y, how might one reconcile any contradictions between them regardless of canonicity ?" The goal is a creative exercise, not a catechism. Its clear that more than a few people regard it as a waste of time, which is fine. Like most entertainment, it is a waste of time, and I'm fine with that.


I don't know what else to say about it except that it is interesting, but, if Marc didn't want it passed around, it doesn't seem fair to regard it as definitive. Canon decisions only exist in the context of a public statement, really, and it may simply be that he was more tossing around concepts off the record than making a statement; or possibly he doesn;t want to be qoted out of context, or possibly he doesn't want to deal with the online shitstorm that happens anytime he changes his mind about how a planet is spelled. All valid reasons to put it "off the record". But regardless, since as far as I can tell, I can't discuss it in any detail, I'd rather not.....and think that might be a good idea in general.

 

[rust]

My entire setting developed through a series of "what if ?" thought ex-
periments towards what it is now.
For me, the interesting and fascinating property of Traveller is exactly
that the system lends itself to such creative thought experiments with-
out being broken by them, and I also think that this kind of creativity,
this "what if ?", is the basic spirit of science fiction:
To think about what people, worlds, the universe and all that would be
like if some parameters would be twisted somewhat.
Therefore I am less interested in the "what is" of any specific game
universe, except as a base to start from, and much more in what it
could become with some twists here and there.

Just some thoughts ...

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

In my ATU, I have 2 races that are just coming into contact with each other. One, a lost Human colony group HAS the ability to jump through empty hexes (not just barren stars, but actual empty space). The aliens do NOT have that ability. As I have been laying out the Pocket Empires at the time of play, I have had to come up with a way to create Barren Stars (stars or Brown Dwarfs without planets) and true empty hexes with no known mass that can be jumped to (by the aliens at least).

Since both groups are at TL 10-11 and I am using the Hard Science world creation rules, the ability to make empty hex jumps is a HUGE advantage for the humans, but how long can it last? The human government is trying to restrict the distribution of the ability to make these Empty Jumps.

I track the ability of a ship to make Empty Space Jumps by a Computer Program, separate from the Jump Control Program, which I have cleverly called Empty Space Jump Control (ESJC).

Here are the stats that I came up with:

Empty Space Jump Control Program:
TL: 11
Rating: 5
Cost (MCr): 0.5 (Restricted to Military/Government use)
Effect: This program when run with a normal Jump Control program allows a ship to jump into and out of empty space, ie no planets or stars nearby.

This program is integrated into the Standard Jump Control/3 and higher programs automatically.

For the Barren stars, I came up with the following general rule:

After (or before it doesn't matter) roll for planet locations, roll the same change (standard, dense, scattered, whatever) for the presence of a Barren Star. Then roll for the presence of Planetary systems.

NOTE: It is possible for the same hex to have both a barren and a planetary system. When this occurs, only the planetary system is mapped, but it should be noted that a Barren star also exists in that hex. I use an Asterisk (*) for that symbol.

Barren Stars can be star systems with no planets or usable planetary belts (often multi star systems or white dwarfs or red dwarfs), Brown Dwarfs or Rogue Planets (VERY rarely).

So my map consists of circles for planetary systems and "*" for Barren Stars and if you don't have the ESJC program you HAVE to use the Barren Stars for transit.

I have also had to tweek Jump Fuel requirements since decent systems are so far apart, but that is not part of this topic.

 

[far-trader]

...I really, really want to get away from canon as law, and continue with "what are the implications of this thing in this set of parameters". In this context, it's pretty irrelevant if Marc or anyone else regards x,y,and z as canon when I ask something like, "if one looks at x and Y, how might one reconcile any contradictions between them regardless of canonicity ?" The goal is a creative exercise, not a catechism.

That's cool but I suggest you phrase such ideas in that spirit then, rather than leading off with:

Okay, jump points again. How to cross empty hexes.

According to Gurps interstellar wars, one needed a mass at each end of a jump; so assuming that Gurps interstellar wars is canonical...

Just avoid saying canon when talking about it, even specifically say at the outset that you're not interested in canon takes on it and that this is entirely YTU speculation. That should avoid all the useless arguments and allow focus on the ideas.

Just a thought.

 

[EDG]

That's cool but I suggest you phrase such ideas in that spirit then

Yeah. By referencing the canon in his threads, the implication is that he's trying to fit his ideas into canon, which leaves him open to criticism when they don't fit (I'm pretty sure I mentioned before to him that it'd be a better idea to explicitly say if a thread isn't about canon when he starts too).

The issue I have with the multiple threads on the subject is more that it just seems disorganised. I think it's better to just formulate all of one's ideas about something like this beforehand (including the problem itself, the proposed solution, and any possible issues) and post them in one big initial post instead? Obviously I can't stop him from giving us a "shotgun blast" of multiple threads on the same subject, but if nothing else it makes it a lot harder for people to keep track of the topic.

 

[captainjack23]

...I really, really want to get away from canon as law, and continue with "what are the implications of this thing in this set of parameters". In this context, it's pretty irrelevant if Marc or anyone else regards x,y,and z as canon when I ask something like, "if one looks at x and Y, how might one reconcile any contradictions between them regardless of canonicity ?" The goal is a creative exercise, not a catechism.

That's cool but I suggest you phrase such ideas in that spirit then, rather than leading off with:

Okay, jump points again. How to cross empty hexes.

According to Gurps interstellar wars, one needed a mass at each end of a jump; so assuming that Gurps interstellar wars is canonical...

Just avoid saying canon when talking about it, even specifically say at the outset that you're not interested in canon takes on it and that this is entirely YTU speculation. That should avoid all the useless arguments and allow focus on the ideas.

Just a thought.

Good Idea, and good advice. Which is why I moved it and prefaced it with this:

Keep in mind this is canon neutral. My point isn't an attempt to decide canon status one way or another. Okay ?

Still, when I have tried that in the past, I've been chided for "shutting down discussion", and other times, had it ignored entirely - or missed; "reading the last post and responding" is something I'm guilty of, too.

I think this kind of problem is unavoidable given the nature of thread style discussion; perhaps the whole thought experiment thing is poorly served by this kind of a setting where derailing and defocusing are so easy to do without trying....and TLR is common.

However, your point is good: at least saying so at the onset does focus my own thoughts on the matter - and the framing line about "assuming canon" would likely have been written more clearly...which, it seems, came to dominate the thread. Oh well. At least it got semi sorted out in my head as to why it all works. Anyone else who is interested can find it.

 

[AKAramis]

...I really, really want to get away from canon as law, and continue with "what are the implications of this thing in this set of parameters". In this context, it's pretty irrelevant if Marc or anyone else regards x,y,and z as canon when I ask something like, "if one looks at x and Y, how might one reconcile any contradictions between them regardless of canonicity ?" The goal is a creative exercise, not a catechism.

That's cool but I suggest you phrase such ideas in that spirit then, rather than leading off with:

Okay, jump points again. How to cross empty hexes.

According to Gurps interstellar wars, one needed a mass at each end of a jump; so assuming that Gurps interstellar wars is canonical...

Just avoid saying canon when talking about it, even specifically say at the outset that you're not interested in canon takes on it and that this is entirely YTU speculation. That should avoid all the useless arguments and allow focus on the ideas.

Just a thought.

Good Idea, and good advice. Which is why I moved it and prefaced it with this:

Keep in mind this is canon neutral. My point isn't an attempt to decide canon status one way or another. Okay ?

Still, when I have tried that in the past, I've been chided for "shutting down discussion", and other times, had it ignored entirely - or missed; "reading the last post and responding" is something I'm guilty of, too.

I think this kind of problem is unavoidable given the nature of thread style discussion; perhaps the whole thought experiment thing is poorly served by this kind of a setting where derailing and defocusing are so easy to do without trying....and TLR is common.

However, your point is good: at least saying so at the onset does focus my own thoughts on the matter - and the framing line about "assuming canon" would likely have been written more clearly...which, it seems, came to dominate the thread. Oh well. At least it got semi sorted out in my head as to why it all works. Anyone else who is interested can find it.

Consider also: EHJ's have been a flame war topic for more than 10 years.

Actually, since I got on the internet in 92 (college), it's been a hot-button topic.

 

[rust]

Actually, since I got on the internet in 92 (college), it's been a hot-button topic.

People have been discussing this for sixteen years ? :shock: :shock: :shock:

And I thought playing roleplaying games might be an odd hobby ... :roll:

 

[collins355]

I'm confused by the references to Imperium as indicating that EHJ are impossible. Doesn't Imperium state on page 6 of the 'History of the Imperium' that the Terrans placed intermediate refuelling supplies in order to use Jump-1 to get to Barnard's Star to meet the Vilani?

 

[captainjack23]

I'm confused by the references to Imperium as indicating that EHJ are impossible. Doesn't Imperium state on page 6 of the 'History of the Imperium' that the Terrans placed intermediate refuelling supplies in order to use Jump-1 to get to Barnard's Star to meet the Vilani?

Does it ? In the background section of the boardgame rules ? I honestly haven't been able to dig it out, but now I must. Heh. I'd kiss you if its true, but why punish you for good work ?