Errata: Tech-World UWP and write up don't match - Aslan and Trojan Reaches both broke

[Vormaerin]

I think you're just adding to the argument that population needs a more clear definition (moving forward, as we can't change the past, only learn from it.) For example, It could explicitly be stated that the population code represents all sentient sophonts living and working on the planet, excluding tourists, visitors and non-sentient species.

You could add more restrictions to the rules, but I am not sure that gains anything. I do not believe that attempts to create a lot of derived characteristics off such broadly defined, non specific values is a good idea. Even if you could actually get agreement about a new, more explicit definition. All the characteristics in the UWP are extremely generic.

I mentioned in another thread, but Mercury, Ganymede, and Callisto are all 300 objects. C300468-E could easily describe all three of them if they were colonies of a few thousand people.

But Mercury is an extremely hot waterless world that is a science station and power generation facility that probably gets a quarterly supply ship from its government or corporate sponsors, but rarely would see any other traffic, having no public facilities. The population is about a thousand adult workers.

Ganymede is world with a magnetosphere, a proper iron core, and probably liquid water deep below the surface. It's population is a proper colony trying to become self sufficient with full civilian facilities and eight or nine thousand colonists, including children. It probably gets regular ships for supplies, additional colonists, and actual traders.

Callisto is a tectonically dead cold world with more ice and less rock and the population are all military personnel. It likely gets regular ships, but they are all military vessels. Civilian traffic is forbidden or, at least, highly restricted.

I don't feel that it any stats derived from the identical UWPs of these three very different worlds would actually add value. So I am not sure that we gain anything by adding more text about what is and isn't population.

 

[MasterGwydion]

It's no less of a relevant argument than saying "Oh, outdated star charts..." That's not an explanation, that's a workaround to resolve an existing discrepancy. It should not be used as a justification to continue to bastardize the rules as written in the book.

It feels like there's two arguments: One arguing why the codes should be rigid and strictly enforced, and one arguing why the rules aren't important at all. Neither addresses the issue of how and why this is now an issue.

I addressed how to fix the issues with minimum muss and fuss. Minor tweaks only and everyone jumped on Me about it and told that rules don't matter. They matter to Me! Respect that! If rules do not matter to you, then get the hell out of a rules discussion! It just makes it impossible for the rest of Us to enjoy Our passion for Traveller and helping to improve it.

Whoever wrote the Tech World fluff knew what the planet code was, and used the excuse of "Well, outdated star chart, I can do whatever I want" and used that as an out of universe creation rule. Same with Drinax. These are both canon, and run completely contradictory to the world generation rules. At some point in the past, there was a discrepancy between old world generation and new, so the in-game justification for this became 'old star charts" in an effort to support cross-compatibility and players that wanted to run old stuff with new stuff. It is NOT an objective rule for out of game generation. It's extremely suggestive and open to a wide range of interpretation. It's an excuse to circumvent the rules as written. In your own world, great. You're world, do what you want and come up with an in-game way to explain to your players why the world doesn't match the code. In what's supposed to be canon, I'm not sure using suggestive interpretation of the rules is good for the long-term health of the universe. Mongoose needs to try to limit how much "interpretation" happens in the OTU.

Exactly this! Thank you!

By and large, this doesn't really affect me as I prefer to create my own systems. I don't even acknowledge the Imperium as a thing for the most part. I don't think anyone is trying to suggest people can't do what they want in their own universes, they just want consistent rules. I'm struggling to see that as a bad thing.

Again. This. Exactly this.

 

[MasterGwydion]

You could add more restrictions to the rules, but I am not sure that gains anything. I do not believe that attempts to create a lot of derived characteristics off such broadly defined, non specific values is a good idea. Even if you could actually get agreement about a new, more explicit definition. All the characteristics in the UWP are extremely generic.

I mentioned in another thread, but Mercury, Ganymede, and Callisto are all 300 objects. C300468-E could easily describe all three of them if they were colonies of a few thousand people.

But Mercury is an extremely hot waterless world that is a science station and power generation facility that probably gets a quarterly supply ship from its government or corporate sponsors, but rarely would see any other traffic, having no public facilities. The population is about a thousand adult workers.

Ganymede is world with a magnetosphere, a proper iron core, and probably liquid water deep below the surface. It's population is a proper colony trying to become self sufficient with full civilian facilities and eight or nine thousand colonists, including children. It probably gets regular ships for supplies, additional colonists, and actual traders.

Callisto is a tectonically dead cold world with more ice and less rock and the population are all military personnel. It likely gets regular ships, but they are all military vessels. Civilian traffic is forbidden or, at least, highly restricted.

I don't feel that it any stats derived from the identical UWPs of these three very different worlds would actually add value. So I am not sure that we gain anything by adding more text about what is and isn't population.

Because in reality, everything may be a snowflake, but in game worlds We need to general and categorize, otherwise We do not have a gaming system. You just have stories. For example, no two STR 8 characters are exactly the same strength. It is a generalization.

 

[Vormaerin]

Yes. That's why I said that if you want facts about the economics or other world building, you need a lot more than tweaks. Because formulas derived only from the UWP are going to give the exact same answers for all three of those worlds. Which I don't think serves a purpose. It makes everything the same.

If you want to go full World Builder's Handbook and create a lot of sub stats and extended UWP values and then use those to build further data, I can see that. "It's a science station, apply these modifiers." But the Ref is still going to be the one creating that differentiation by fiat and do it before you can calculate all those extended values.

 

[metlk]

You could add more restrictions to the rules, but I am not sure that gains anything. I do not believe that attempts to create a lot of derived characteristics off such broadly defined, non specific values is a good idea. Even if you could actually get agreement about a new, more explicit definition. All the characteristics in the UWP are extremely generic.

I do not disagree with you. Sometimes rules become too heavy and hinder creativity. The WBH is a good example of an "optional" rule source to hone in on a planet. It doesn't have to be used and the default UWP system gives players ample freedom to do as they wish. When I use the WBH, I do feel constrained to stay within the bounds of what it created, which does become restrictive at times. When that happens, I will simply redo it or if I want something specific, I will make it and do my best to make it feasible if it were to have been a random planet. I don't have to use any of the rules, but I don't write material for Mongoose either. If I did, I would hope they would expect my story to remain consistent within all of the rules of the OTU.

 

[Vormaerin]

I use the WBH moderately often, but I determine the outcome I want and then use the formulas to make that make sense

The core problem is that GURPS picked the two most problematics stats (Population and Tech Level) and made those the centerpiece of their entire edifice of trade rules. And that's pretty much lingered. And they are the two least clear cut stats possible.

 

[tytalan]

Metlk and MasterGwydion your real problem is not with the rules the rules for the UWP haven’t changed at all. What you’re complaining about is you want a setting that’s set in stone and never changes and since the beginning the Charted Space universe has been a dynamic universe with constant changes. Right now we are going thru a major one with FFW. Worlds UWPs may change alignments may change and you’ll both complain that the new UWP doesn’t match the old stated ones.

This is not about rules at all the Trojan Reach is not a Rule Sourcebook it’s a Setting Sourcebook and those change. You want all the UWPs to match up well that’s not possible because the setting is subject to change. Rather it’s because of in universe event or for an Adventure settings change. There is no rule changes here the UWP still means what it means but the setting is dynamic and sometimes the UWP is not going to match the setting and sometimes the current UWP isn’t going to match the old. Adventures/Campaigns change the setting that’s the truth in all TTRPGs

 

[MongooseMatt]

Travellermap states is the official map

Point of order: Travellermap is a magnificent piece of work and reflects much that is official, but it is not the official map...

 

[Sigtrygg]

Have you ever read Adventure 0?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Point of order: Travellermap is a magnificent piece of work and reflects much that is official, but it is not the official map...

Then where is the "official map?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Metlk and MasterGwydion your real problem is not with the rules the rules for the UWP haven’t changed at all. What you’re complaining about is you want a setting that’s set in stone and never changes and since the beginning the Charted Space universe has been a dynamic universe with constant changes. Right now we are going thru a major one with FFW. Worlds UWPs may change alignments may change and you’ll both complain that the new UWP doesn’t match the old stated ones.

This is not about rules at all the Trojan Reach is not a Rule Sourcebook it’s a Setting Sourcebook and those change. You want all the UWPs to match up well that’s not possible because the setting is subject to change. Rather it’s because of in universe event or for an Adventure settings change. There is no rule changes here the UWP still means what it means but the setting is dynamic and sometimes the UWP is not going to match the setting and sometimes the current UWP isn’t going to match the old. Adventures/Campaigns change the setting that’s the truth in all TTRPGs

You have no idea what you are talking about. Do not speak on My behalf.

I am done with this conversation. You are a troll. You and others have consistently, and on purpose, twisted My words to reflect something I did not say. I have stated multiple times that I am not looking to change the existing UWPs as printed on maps and such. I want to change the mechanic of how UWPs work. If you can not understand that, after I have explained it repeatedly and even Metik has explained it repeatedly, then you are beyond hope for being a positive contributor to this conversation.

If you do not want to have a rules discussion then GTFO! I am discussing rules and how rules effect setting. I know that is a little too nuanced for your brain to handle. Shut up. Leave Me alone and have a good day. Blocked!

 

[tytalan]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Do not speak on My behalf.

I am done with this conversation. You are a troll. You and others have consistently, and on purpose, twisted My words to reflect something I did not say. I have stated multiple times that I am not looking to change the existing UWPs as printed on maps and such. I want to change the mechanic of how UWPs work. If you can not understand that, after I have explained it repeatedly and even Metik has explained it repeatedly, then you are beyond hope for being a positive contributor to this conversation.

If you do not want to have a rules discussion then GTFO! I am discussing rules and how rules effect setting. I know that is a little too nuanced for your brain to handle. Shut up. Leave Me alone and have a good day. Blocked!

No ones trolling your just refusing to listen to reasonable counter arguments. There’s no need to change the UWP mechanics it works fine for what it’s supposed to do. You want absolutes for something that specifically is not meant to have such.

Also cut the abusive language there is no call for it.

 

[tytalan]

Then where is the "official map?

There is no “Official “ map because the setting is specifically meant to be variable. This was one of Marc’s intentions

 

[MongooseMatt]

There is no “Official “ map because the setting is specifically meant to be variable. This was one of Marc’s intentions

It is. If there is ever gong to be one official map, then it currently exists in pieces and is very much a work in progress. We are currently looking at it sector by sector.

 

[Vormaerin]

Then where is the "official map?

If you are not aware, Travellermap.com is a fan project by Joshua Bell under the Far Future Enterprises Fair Use policy. It is, of course, super amazing. But no one has any right to complain that that guy is not doing enough work towards keeping it accurate. From the site's Information page:

"Under the FFE Fair Use Policy, the Traveller Map presents an interactive view into the OTU, making use of official data approved and provided by FFE — as well as apocryphal and unofficial data."

Regarding Tech World specifically, yes, the UWP should be changed in the Mongoose sector book since the description text has changed from the original 30 scientists & 4000 robots to the current 4000 scientists and a million robots. But whether it should be changed to 3 or 6 will provoke this exact same argument. I know because its been had many times before.

 

[metlk]

Metlk and MasterGwydion your real problem is not with the rules the rules for the UWP haven’t changed at all. What you’re complaining about is you want a setting that’s set in stone and never changes and since the beginning the Charted Space universe has been a dynamic universe with constant changes. Right now we are going thru a major one with FFW. Worlds UWPs may change alignments may change and you’ll both complain that the new UWP doesn’t match the old stated ones.

This is not about rules at all the Trojan Reach is not a Rule Sourcebook it’s a Setting Sourcebook and those change. You want all the UWPs to match up well that’s not possible because the setting is subject to change. Rather it’s because of in universe event or for an Adventure settings change. There is no rule changes here the UWP still means what it means but the setting is dynamic and sometimes the UWP is not going to match the setting and sometimes the current UWP isn’t going to match the old. Adventures/Campaigns change the setting that’s the truth in all TTRPGs

Thank you for correcting me on what my real problem is. It is so kind of you to create your own argument and defend against that one instead of the one actually presented.

Nobody want's to "change the mechanics." We want the Mongoose published material to accurately reflect the mechanics. I don't care what the code for Solomoni is. What I care about is that the code for Solomoni in a setting for the year 500 matches the conditions of Solomoni in the year 500 should Mongoose create such a setting. If they create a setting in the year 3500, I would expect it to match the planet conditions for the year 3500, and not 1100 just using the excuse "Old maps, am I right?" When using older or 3rd party sources designed to work with various iterations of Traveller, that is a perfectly fine in-game explanation of why the code doesn't match. I don't give a damn about what Travellermap shows. It's not official, it's just a well-done piece of beauty that does it's best to accommodate for as many iterations of Traveller as possible. In any printed material Mongoose publishes, regardless of what "setting," the planets should match the codes. The codes aren't only there for the ref to use, but for players as well and they deserve to know what they are looking at is a reasonable approximation of what they will find when they land. That is the whole point of the codes. There can sometimes be a solid, story-driven reasons for it being inaccurate. Responding to a recent meteor impact which has decimated the population should use a different code so they have a reference of just how bad it is. What Mongoose should not do is be so lackluster with their consistency that players stopping by a water world for groceries only to be told the planet is actually a desert because, "Old maps, am I right?"

I tend to have to agree at this point that you are just trolling. Nobody can be that obtuse accidentally.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Thank you for correcting me on what my real problem is. It is so kind of you to create your own argument and defend against that one instead of the one actually presented.

Nobody want's to "change the mechanics." We want the Mongoose published material to accurately reflect the mechanics.

*raises hand sheepishly* I do. I want them to make sense. If a world has a Population Code of 3 but an actual population of 6. That can be corrected by simply stating that all "Social" UWP Codes (Pop, Gov, and LL) are economic ratings and not statistical ratings. Then you can make the statistical reality whatever you want. You are no longer hindered by how many people actually live there, because that is no longer what the Pop Code means. See? Problem fixed with almost nothing actually needing changed, but I got jumped on by trolls when I suggested this and got told RPGs don't need rules, only stories. People can play that way at their gaming table, but that does not help the rest of Us who want rules that actually mean something, as you so eloquently describe below.

I don't care what the code for Solomoni is. What I care about is that the code for Solomoni in a setting for the year 500 matches the conditions of Solomoni in the year 500 should Mongoose create such a setting. If they create a setting in the year 3500, I would expect it to match the planet conditions for the year 3500, and not 1100 just using the excuse "Old maps, am I right?" When using older or 3rd party sources designed to work with various iterations of Traveller, that is a perfectly fine in-game explanation of why the code doesn't match. I don't give a damn about what Travellermap shows. It's not official, it's just a well-done piece of beauty that does it's best to accommodate for as many iterations of Traveller as possible. In any printed material Mongoose publishes, regardless of what "setting," the planets should match the codes. The codes aren't only there for the ref to use, but for players as well and they deserve to know what they are looking at is a reasonable approximation of what they will find when they land. That is the whole point of the codes. There can sometimes be a solid, story-driven reasons for it being inaccurate. Responding to a recent meteor impact which has decimated the population should use a different code so they have a reference of just how bad it is. What Mongoose should not do is be so lackluster with their consistency that players stopping by a water world for groceries only to be told the planet is actually a desert because, "Old maps, am I right?"

I tend to have to agree at this point that you are just trolling. Nobody can be that obtuse accidentally.

 

[Sigtrygg]

So do you want population to represent actual population or economically active population?

 

[Vormaerin]

No one told you that they only need stories. That is a deliberate bad faith interpretation of what was said. People disagreed with what you think the rules should mean, when the designers have clearly stated that they are meant another way.

What you suggest is not different from the current understanding of the rules. "They are fuzzy and subject to interpretation". You just want to relabel them so they are fuzzy and subject to interpretation with terminology that sounds better to you. IMHO, that label change makes things less useful. Because 99% of the use cases fall in the numbers range as given and that's overall easier for most people to visualize when creating their own stuff. The few instances where that isn't the case in published material, it is clearly explained why the disparity exists.

Once in a while you have a case where a 3 got typed as an 8 or someone just misread a source (as I suspect happened with the Mongoose Aslan module where the new Tech World description arises, I believe).

Now, a separate issue is derivative stats. I'm fine with derivative stats. But I disagree that they can be based on the UWP directly. That's where "story" comes in. IMHO, you have to do the interpretation into a realized world before you can extrapolate from it. You can make a book about that, but it is not a simple change.

 

[MasterGwydion]

So do you want population to represent actual population or economically active population?

It makes more sense as a measurement of interstellar economic activity, but I would be fine with either, as long as We obey the rule.