High Guard: Expectations?

[EDG]

I went so far as to suggest that with T5 Marc should publically invalidate all prior canon.

Screw T5, I'd much prefer that Mongoose Traveller invalidated all prior canon.

You find it not worth discussing, so don't. Pack up and find a discussion that doesn't do you heartburn. Real simple. Not like anyone is holding a pistol to your temples forcing you to debate, EDG... Or are they?

I think that saying "you don't have to talk about it" is missing the point. It's not really that it's not worth discussing, it's more that any discussion is like building a house on quicksand, and you or me or anyone else trying to make some sense of it and figuring out what really should or shouldn't be there or what it means is fundamentally wasting their time. I guess that's why they call it "canon", because like religion it's entirely subject to belief and opinion with very vague "fact" to base it on from the "religious texts", and like religion there are different camps who believe very different things.

Either way, I think what it boils down to is that we really need all the future MGT books (including HG) to be internally consistent and coherent, because they are going to be what the new generation of Traveller fans (and those of us who are sick of the same old arguments) are going to base everything on - if the MGT books are done right then we should be able to completely ignore and bypass the ambiguities and inconsistencies of the old Traveller and get clear answers and a solid foundation from the MGT books.

The old guard will undoubtedly continue to fight about what their "holy texts" mean - if past history is anything to go by then most of them are going to ignore whatever MGT says anyway, and if they don't they'll probably make some well-meaning but ill-advised attempt to mash it together with the CT rules that'll muddy the waters further. But I think ultimately that's doomed to stagnation and/or failure.

So really I don't think it really matters what any of the CT books say about anything. What matters is what MGT's High Guard (and other books) will say - and as long as it's at least internally consistent (or at least updated/corrected in new editions) I don't really give a damn whether it agrees with old canon or not.

 

[rust]

I think that saying "you don't have to talk about it" is missing the point. It's not really that it's not worth discussing, it's more that any discussion is like building a house on quicksand, and you or me or anyone else trying to make some sense of it and figuring out what really should or shouldn't be there or what it means is fundamentally wasting their time ...

Yep, I really could not agree more - an excellent description of the si-
tuation, thank you !

 

[Infojunky]

So the real question is what does all this mean in terms of the game you are running/playing in?

One of the trends I have noticed the loudest/most fractious debates, arguments are driven by individuals who haven't been in or run a game in years.

Now what was this thread about again?

 

[captainjack23]

So the real question is what does all this mean in terms of the game you are running/playing in?

One of the trends I have noticed the loudest/most fractious debates, arguments are driven by individuals who haven't been in or run a game in years.

Now what was this thread about again?

Expectations for the new MGT edition of High Guard. Any thoughts ?

As regards your comment about what effect it has on the the game I'm running, I'm hoping that if they do have a new quick and easy resolution system, that they make sure it scales for player ships. But it isn't a deal breaker - the exisiting system works pretty well


The question always is though, given the setting, are the military ships and the civilian ships distinct enough ? I hope it'll address that, too. Are military ships just upscaled freighters (a valid model) or keelbuilt ships (another valid model) ?

Also, and somewhat contradicting myself, I suppose more customization options that aren't specifically military oriented would be good too. The probes, Avionics and repair drones were a good step in that direction. Survey or luxury oriented perhaps ? I guess it will depend on how Mavy specific they see the supplement as being.

 

[AKAramis]

As far as non-combat options, I'm hoping for science labs, sickbays, and mining related stuff.

 

[captainjack23]

As far as non-combat options, I'm hoping for science labs, sickbays, and mining related stuff.

That would be cool. I wonder if it makes any sense to scale them for size or cost by tech ?

 

[rust]

As far as non-combat options, I'm hoping for science labs, sickbays, and mining related stuff.

Yep, something like "GURPS Traveller - Starships" would be fine - it even
had Underwater Electronics and major Habitats for big colony ships and
space stations.

I used it for much of my setting, from starships to mining outposts on va-
cuum worlds and deep sea settlements, and something similar for MGT
would make it easier for me to "translate" the entire setting technology
from GURPS to MGT.

 

[Infojunky]

Expectations for the new MGT edition of High Guard. Any thoughts ?

Tons, but in general I will be happy with an expansion of character generation that doesn't overwhelm the fantastic system presented in the main book. Which IMHO is one of the best ever done for our grand old game. As for the rest something on the level of Book5 inline with what the main rule book does will be fine, though I hope the new weapons presented will be backwards compatible to what has already been done.

Or to put it another way I hope it is an expansion of the toolkit not a replacement.

As regards your comment about what effect it has on the the game I'm running, I'm hoping that if they do have a new quick and easy resolution system, that they make sure it scales for player ships. But it isn't a deal breaker - the exisiting system works pretty well

That is my take as well, needs a few tweaks, some errata, but all in all functional.

The question always is though, given the setting, are the military ships and the civilian ships distinct enough ? I hope it'll address that, too. Are military ships just upscaled freighters (a valid model) or keelbuilt ships (another valid model) ?

The funny thing is Book2 did a better job of this than did Book5, in that a military ship should have the highest letter code drive as possible for it required drive rating, as well as the maximum number of turrets available for its size class, couple that with the largest/most complex computer/electronics package and as many sub-craft as possible. While a civilian/commercial ship will have the bare minimums in all those categories.

While in Book5 you could do all of these things, but the core rules are far more granular so the differences disappear.

That brings up the one of the disappointing thing about the main rule book, they didn't see the reasoning behind the choices made in Book 2 and the letter code system in relation to the combat system.

, and somewhat contradicting myself, I suppose more customization options that aren't specifically military oriented would be good too. The probes, Avionics and repair drones were a good step in that direction. Survey or luxury oriented perhaps ? I guess it will depend on how Mavy specific they see the supplement as being.

In some respects I hope they look around at some of the other companies work on the subject matter. Both T4 and GT put out a book labeled Starships. the T4 one was horrible, the GT one is fantastic, in that it covers butt-loads of options both military and not.

 

[Infojunky]

I used it for much of my setting, from starships to mining outposts on vacuum worlds and deep sea settlements, and something similar for MGT would make it easier for me to "translate" the entire setting technology from GURPS to MGT.

For the most part for ships they will convert across as a space is a dTon, it is the equivalent price where the conversion takes some work.... Now i have to find where I packed that book..... This might be easier than I think it will be.

 

[captainjack23]

To which I would again add, if you think Traveller needs a new, consistent "U", and that the OTU is beyond repair, right now you've got a golden opportunity to write it and publish it.

Or, you can continue to pick nits with Myself and Aramis, and argue about what we are arguing about, how we should argue about it, and what we should be arguing about, with and for.... and in six months you'll have a stale thread to show for it, and possibly , heartburn.

Your call.

Part of exploring what we expect from HG is knowing what we have RIGHT NOW...

And what we have right now is
J1 Developed at TL9, Buildable at TL7*
J2 Developed at TL11, Buildable at TL7*
J3 Developed at TL12, Buildable at TL9
J4 Developed at TL13, Buildable at TL11
J5 Developed at TL14, Buildable at TL12
J2 Developed at TL15, Buildable at TL13

Those sevens are due to drives not being listed with TL's... So... if we knew the formulae, we should be able to build a J1 drive with 1980's tools...

The last entry is meant to be J6, correct ?


I suspect part of this would be due to backwards compatibility being far more important for production and development in the OTU than in modern day.

 

[EDG]

Well to codify my expectations: I want a design system that's internally consistent, and can add to (or completely replace) the system in the main rulebook, can design every ship from the smallest to capital ship size, and that provides a definitive answer to all the nagging questions and problems caused by CT books 2/5 inconsistencies.

In terms of ships, I would actually like a much bigger range. I don't want to see just one type of Scout/Courier, or Far Trader or whatever - there's got to be loads of different types of each class of ship out there.

In terms of characters... I'd actually prefer to see all the character generation stuff moved out of Mercenary, High Guard, Scouts etc and put in a separate expanded chargen book. I know when I got the original CT books, I thought half of them was wasted space because all I wanted to do was build ships or planets, not make characters. And I'm sure if all you wanted to do was build characters, then the ship building parts are wasted space too.