Levels of Canon

I get annoyed at ths attempts by people other than Marc Miller to determine what is or isn't "canon" (a term I personally loathe) for Traveller. ONLY Marc has that right in connection with published materials. This usually involves the canonista then looking down his/her/its nose at anything that that does not fit with what they want Traveller to be.

It is errant nonsense.

Allen
 
AKAramis said:
brionl said:
Anybody who tries to bring up "canon" in a discussion should be shot out of one. Into the nearest star.

Seriously, I grew sick of canon debates during the Star Trek nerd-wars back in the 70s. Game balance is much more important than canon.

Anyone who thinks universal game balance is achievable in a Roleplaying game hasn't played with my player groups, and might possibly be delusional.

Not only is it not really achievable (along with that other unattainable goal, 'realism') but it isn't even desirable, and most of the games I have seen that try too hard to achieve it aren't even fun.

Allen
 
TBH I've become sick of these endless discussions about what is or isn't canon. IMO the only thing that matters in practical terms is what people decide is 'truth' for their own games. It's one thing to want other peoples' opinions on the effect of a change in the published rules, but I really can't believe that anyone's games can actually be crippled, hamstrung, straitjacketed or otherwise limited by what is said in published rules.

If there's a problem because of a published rule (or a contradiction tehrein), then just make a decision (maybe based on other peoples' input, maybe not) and work around it - that's part of what GMing is. Just figure something out and go with it, and be consistent about it in your own games - it doesn't affect anyone outside your games (and if players can't adapt to it, then that's a problem with them, not the GM).

Unless you're writing an official Traveller product (in which case, gods help you), canon really doesn't matter at all.
 
So many of these discussions can be dealt with by the simple addition of an "IMTU".

The original arguers society of Traveller, the TML, gave up on "what is Canon" discussions over a decade ago for precisely the reasons we've been seeing here: increasingly heated and annoying (to observers) "discussions" over what is "real" and what isn't, to the point of lost friendships, community fragmentation, and loss of all the productive members of that list.

An edition-specific board like this one should not have this issue, but we've managed anyway.

We as a Mongoose board community need to:
-Generally stick to Mongoose Traveller products
-ALWAYS consider using an IMTU (or IRL) disclaimer on bold "it works like this" statements unless the workings of a Rule are being discussed.
-Not fish for "absolute" justification of each individual game's way of doing things.
-Get over the fact that other Traveller games are different. Your game is right, and so is everyone else's.

In addition, a few community building guidelines:
-Think about why you are posting. Posting to contribute is good. Posting to argue is usually counter-productive.
-Treat questions about "why" as actual questions, not as the steps to a soapbox.
-Learn to use conditional statements instead of absolute statements unless you are citing directly from a published source. Once you head off into opinion, label it as such.
-Recognize that emotion, including snarkiness and attempts at humor, does not translate easily to a purely written media like this one. Those smileys are provided for a reason, so don't be afraid to use them.
 
Looking at the latest posts on the 'cannon' debate, I've noticed a shift in opinions...

Basically it boils down to defining what you are talking about:

OTU - Official "Marc Miller" Traveller Cannon (from which everything is derrived)
ATU - Alternate Traveller Universe. Basically anything not in Mark Miller's list of Cannon.
T20TU - An ATU by QLI Cannon for their version AKA "Traveller d20" or "T20"
GTU - The ATU for "GURPS Traveller" by SJ Games.
MTU - The ATU we each play in... what each person would call "My" Traveller Universe
MGTU - Mongoose's Traveller Universe. Is this an ATU or the new source for OTU material?

Now, the big "debate" has been about what is in the OTU... is GT:IW in it, what happened to the game Imperium, my stick is bigger than your stick, etc...

As many people have now started to point out... knowing the "what's and how's" of the OTU lets someone know the baseline and decide where they want to deviate for their MTU. It also provides a way to figure out what books/materials are part of the core of Traveller (for background info).

So when someone starts asking about how the Borg fit into the OTU, and there is nothing clear in the OTU materials, then quoting from one of the ATUs is a nice way to look at how it was handled by someone else. But using something from an ATU as a way to hammer people into saying your opinion is the 'correct' one is wrong and that's what we need to stop here on these forums...

Y'all can go back to your MTUs... I'm off to read more MGP and GDW/FFE Traveller stuff for ideas.
 
I think what it really boils down to is that there's "whatever is published (or said) by anyone else" and "whatever people decide in their own games". An outsider is still an outsider - it doesn't matter if they're Marc, Loren, Matt, or anyone else on these boards - the only person who ultimately decides what applies to their own Traveller games is the person running them. No label of "officialness" is going to change that. Published material just provides a base to build on, but individuals can do whatever they like with it.
 
EDG said:
An outsider is still an outsider - it doesn't matter if they're Marc, Loren, Matt, or anyone else on these boards - the only person who ultimately decides what applies to their own Traveller games is the person running them. No label of "officialness" is going to change that.
True indeed. :)

I never even thought about whether a source was official, non-official or
maybe extraterrestrial when I decided to introduce something into our
campaign, to change something to better fit our campaign, or to delete
something from our campaign.

"Official" in our setting and campaign is the material the players and I
developed and agreed to treat as "official", and nothing else. :wink:
 
Canon is important to me as a GM because it represents work I don't have to do. This is more true with regards to things like NPCs, World's and organizations.

I've noticed that those are the things in canon that no one really argues about unless there is a clear discrepency, mainly because there so many holes to fill with our own material. Out of the 11,000 systems in the 3rd Imperium, how many are defined in canon material by more than a name and UWP? a couple hundred? How many of them have a world map or their entire solar system defined? Less than half of that?

It makes Traveller both challenging and enticing at the same time. Challenging because there is so much work to do for a GM, which makes the canon materials valuable as a resource - need the name of an interstellar shipping conglomorate? it's there in canon. Need to know the name of the duke of Regina? It's there.

Enticing because despite the detail given, there is still room for so much more. So what if there are a dozen Mega-corporations defined by canon. There is room for hundreds more slightly smaller (yet still huge by today's standards) mega-corps you can personalize to your campaign. Need an airless rock somewhere - not only can you find tons within the given UWP, but you can stick one within any of the numerous systems that has a defined mainworld, but no defined system layout.

When you think about it, there is a lot that is canon that hasn't been argued over - have there ever been any arguments over the world map of Fulacin or Vanejen?
 
kristof65 said:
When you think about it, there is a lot that is canon that hasn't been argued over - have there ever been any arguments over the world map of Fulacin or Vanejen?

I don't know about the world maps, but Hans and I discussed whether the pre-Maghiz Darrians ever made significant contact with Vanejen. Does that count?
 
kristof65 said:
When you think about it, there is a lot that is canon that hasn't been argued over - have there ever been any arguments over the world map of Fulacin or Vanejen?

As a working Geologist, I stopped worrying about game world maps done by others a long time ago unless I'm specifically asked by the creator. My blood pressure thanks me.

The long and short of world mapping is that you either understand plate tectonics, the effects of erosion and gravity, and the placement of civilized societies, or you don't.
 
kristof65 said:
It makes Traveller both challenging and enticing at the same time. Challenging because there is so much work to do for a GM, which makes the canon materials valuable as a resource - need the name of an interstellar shipping conglomorate? it's there in canon. Need to know the name of the duke of Regina? It's there.

But it's still basically someone else's opinions that you're drawing from. You as a GM can and should decide whether or not you're going to use that stuff or not. If you want the Duke of Regina to be called Ramshackle Bob, go right ahead. If you want to pick a name of a shipping conglomerate off the top of your head, go right ahead. Canon in no way should restrict anyone from doing whatever the heck they want in their games - it's just one possible option that potentially saves you a bit of effort is all.
 
I have both the old judges guild Ley sector maps and the QLI Ley sector maps. Both officialy licensed Traveller products and both mostly unique to themselves. In Game I can explain the massive changes to the Ley sector and work in the Deadspace zones at the same time but it involves a current plot so more on that later.

The point is that cannon material in traveller is rather limited. It has been said by at least one person that claims a relationship with Marc, that even some of his own stuff (Annic Nova) isn't cannon.

I love the Traveller Universe, but for consistancy rather than cannon I perfer to stick to only a very limited amount (or at least sources) of source material even when running a truely epic saga that spans large sections of the Imperium.
 
GypsyComet said:
As a working Geologist, I stopped worrying about game world maps done by others a long time ago unless I'm specifically asked by the creator. My blood pressure thanks me.
Mental note to myself: Never show GipsyComet the maps of my settings
and ask for his opinion - answer could ruin the campaign. :lol:
 
EDG said:
But it's still basically someone else's opinions that you're drawing from. You as a GM can and should decide whether or not you're going to use that stuff or not. If you want the Duke of Regina to be called Ramshackle Bob, go right ahead. If you want to pick a name of a shipping conglomerate off the top of your head, go right ahead. Canon in no way should restrict anyone from doing whatever the heck they want in their games - it's just one possible option that potentially saves you a bit of effort is all.
Agreed. That's why I said it's valuable as a resource.

@gypsycomet - I'm not a geologist, but I understand your frustration - a pet peeve of mine is rivers on fantasy maps. I mean, come on, understanding that water runs downhill and takes the path of least resistance doesn't require a degree in geology...
 
kristof65 said:
@gypsycomet - I'm not a geologist, but I understand your frustration - a pet peeve of mine is rivers on fantasy maps. I mean, come on, understanding that water runs downhill and takes the path of least resistance doesn't require a degree in geology...

Funnily enough I just discovered this too, looking on one of the cartography forums :). A lot of the physical rules for that make sense, I'd just never really thought about it before (then again I'd never really made maps that involved rivers either, so it never really came up before for me either).

Then again, rivers and outflows are more the realm of hydrology than actual geology anyway...
 
Back
Top