Lots of Dice and a little Cepheus Engine, too

[fusor]

Of course not. I’m saying it should throw out all the things holding it back, and be rebuilt as the best possible version, without any of its formerly necessary limitations.

Then it stops being Traveller. I'm sure whatever it would be instead would be great, but you're basically saying the equivalent of "this old galleon is crap. Strip out the sails and wood and everything else that makes it what it is and replace it with modern construction techniques" and you end up with a spiffy modern megayacht. But a lot of people like that old galleon the way it was and don't see a reason to change. If people want a modern megayacht, they can go find one where the megayachts are.

And frankly, it's easier to make a new RPG from scratch than it is to strip out bits you don't like from an existing one and then claim it's the same thing. Then you get a new fanbase, and don't have the baggage of one that's going to be complaining about all the changes.

 

[-Daniel-]

Of course not. I’m saying it should throw out all the things holding it back, and be rebuilt as the best possible version, without any of its formerly necessary limitations.

Then it stops being Traveller. I'm sure whatever it would be instead would be great, .....

I am not sure saying change the rules is the same as saying the game could not be Traveller. Traveller has had how many different rule sets? Traveller D20, GURPS Traveller, or Mega-Traveller just to name a few. Where they all "not Traveller" because they used different rules to run the setting? I am not saying I want to toss out all the rules, I happen to like some of what I have now. But I also don't think what Tenacious-Techhunter is seeking means we are abandoning the setting or the core elements that make Traveller what it is.

 

[fusor]

I am not sure saying change the rules is the same as saying the game could not be Traveller. Traveller has had how many different rule sets? Traveller D20, GURPS Traveller, or Mega-Traveller just to name a few. Where they all "not Traveller" because they used different rules to run the setting? I am not saying I want to toss out all the rules, I happen to like some of what I have now. But I also don't think what Tenacious-Techhunter is seeking means we are abandoning the setting or the core elements that make Traveller what it is.

Well if he wants to take out the dice and system, and the unrealistic setting and technology, and anything that's anachronistic or out-dated then that pretty much is taking out everything that makes the game what it is. It really sounds to me like he wants to be playing another game that's more to his tastes and not wasting his time on Traveller.

Personally I'd rather just add more modern/realistic bits to Traveller and have them there as options for people to use. I don't really see a need for yet another system for it because of some misdirected crusade over dice, and I don't really see a need to throw everything that's there out - just have it all as options that people can pick and choose from. So the Third Imperium setting is just one set of options, 2300AD is another, something transhumanist would be another set, and so on.

 

[theodis]

Yes, which has 1/3 the players that Savage Worlds has, which, by comparison, is clearly an upstart.

Hardly. Savage Worlds exists since 2004 - 12 years straight. When Traveller was 12, it already was squarely in it's MT incarnation. Everything CT was said and done by then. So no, Savage Worlds is clearly not an upstart.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

Well, it’s certainly an upstart in comparison to Traveller. But yes, I suppose I wasn’t aware that it was that old.

Regardless, my point about dice choice remains valid; dice used in Savage Worlds are determined by stats, and not by some inherent mechanic, and it seems to do pretty well, in spite of having been incompatible with everything else.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

I am not sure saying change the rules is the same as saying the game could not be Traveller. Traveller has had how many different rule sets? Traveller D20, GURPS Traveller, or Mega-Traveller just to name a few. Where they all "not Traveller" because they used different rules to run the setting? I am not saying I want to toss out all the rules, I happen to like some of what I have now. But I also don't think what Tenacious-Techhunter is seeking means we are abandoning the setting or the core elements that make Traveller what it is.

While I specifically am saying to ditch the specific details of the setting on the grounds that current planet hunting techniques are making it demonstrably false, and that we have a much better understanding of spaceflight now than we did when much of Traveller was written, that doesn’t mean there aren’t things that are valuable to preserve once the whole thing has been modernized. Better to focus on what makes Traveller Traveller, and make it the best possible version that it can be without resigning ourselves to it hopelessly dating itself.

 

[fusor]

I think this record's scratched. :twisted:

 

[theodis]

Well, it’s certainly an upstart in comparison to Traveller. But yes, I suppose I wasn’t aware that it was that old.

Regardless, my point about dice choice remains valid; dice used in Savage Worlds are determined by stats, and not by some inherent mechanic, and it seems to do pretty well, in spite of having been incompatible with everything else.

Yes, because it was designed from scratch with both a very specific goal and target audience in mind. Fun fact: It started out as a 2d6 system...
Actually, Shane Hensley did pretty much what you advocate for Traveller, but he had no historical baggage nor an audience that is actively opposed to drastic changes. He could start with a blank slate - well, mostly. He cited himself, actually.

For reference:
http://www.peginc.com/freebies/SWcore/MakingofSW.pdf

If you're interested, you may want to check out "The Last Parsec". It comes pretty close to what you are implying Traveller should be like. But you might don't like what you'll see.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

No, that’s just a Savage Worlds setting; not what I’m going for at all. I used Savage Worlds as an example of the viability of an RPG that wasn’t the top-tier being successful using other polyhedron dice, to prove the point that it’s not all D&D clones, and that we are no longer manufacturability and availability limited, like some would have us believe. That doesn’t mean I like it.

 

[middenface]

Now there is a character sheet

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/188939/Cepheus-Engine-Character-Sheet

 

[Prime_Evil]

Now there is a character sheet

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/188939/Cepheus-Engine-Character-Sheet

Nice. Are any other publishers planning to support the Cepheus Engine? Or is TAS getting all of the love?

Out of curiosity, does the TAS agreement prevent you from dual-licensing works? Could you produce a Traveller 2.0 branded version under the TAS label AND ALSO an OGL version using the Cepheus Engine? Or do you need to choose one or the other (i.e. is there a grant of exclusivity)?

 

[middenface]

Nice. Are any other publishers planning to support the Cepheus Engine? Or is TAS getting all of the love?

A couple that I know about, or maybe just the one. But TAS really is not for third party publishers, even DTRPG admit this. It is more suitable for fans.
The system WOTC use is a far better licence. DMs Guild or OGL, I suspect WOTC have exclusivity to that deal..
http://support.dmsguild.com/hc/en-us/articles/217520927-Ownership-and-License-OGL-Questions

Out of curiosity, does the TAS agreement prevent you from dual-licensing works? Could you produce a Traveller 2.0 branded version under the TAS label AND ALSO an OGL version using the Cepheus Engine? Or do you need to choose one or the other (i.e. is there a grant of exclusivity)?

Hmm. Not sure. I think the answer is no. But check with DTPRPG
This is from the Text and Terms of TAS.
'4. Rights Granted to You.

(a) Subject to your compliance with the terms of this Agreement, OBS grants you the limited, nonexclusive, nontransferable, personal, worldwide and revocable right to use and otherwise incorporate Owner’s IP and Program IP into your Work(s) for distribution through the Program or other platforms and channels at the sole discretion of Owner.

(b) Except for short promotional excerpts used to promote your Work, you may not display, recreate, publish, distribute or sell your Work (or derivatives thereof) outside of the Program administered on OBS websites or through other platforms or channels authorized or offered by Owner.'

 

[Gypsy Knights Games]

Nice. Are any other publishers planning to support the Cepheus Engine? Or is TAS getting all of the love?

I'd say there is a very large chance that several other publishers will be using the Cepheus Engine in the near future.

As for love of TAS, I have absolutely none.

Out of curiosity, does the TAS agreement prevent you from dual-licensing works? Could you produce a Traveller 2.0 branded version under the TAS label AND ALSO an OGL version using the Cepheus Engine? Or do you need to choose one or the other (i.e. is there a grant of exclusivity)?

From my reading of the agreement, that would be a huge no.

 

[phavoc]

Out of curiosity, does the TAS agreement prevent you from dual-licensing works? Could you produce a Traveller 2.0 branded version under the TAS label AND ALSO an OGL version using the Cepheus Engine? Or do you need to choose one or the other (i.e. is there a grant of exclusivity)?

By the wording of the agreement, that's a definite no. They are pretty expensive in their restrictions. If I were a publisher that made a living off of Traveller I wouldn't touch TAS with a 1km long pole. But for the casual gamer or somebody who does this for fun, it's fine (just so long as you keep in mind they could, conceivably, litigate with you if you ever tried to publish something later on using the same basic ideas. Not that they might get very far once it got in front of a judge, but for some just the mere threat or litigation can wipe out a year's profits getting legal assistance to answer a suit).

 

[Prime_Evil]

It's a pity that the licensing used by TAS is so restrictive in comparison for what was available with MgT 1e.

Another question - are people planning to use the Cepheus engine simply as a vehicle to publish Traveller compatible material under the OGL in a way that protects their intellectual property rights, or are they interested in extending the system with new rules content (albeit at the risk that it may gradually drift further from MgT)?

I know that many publishers currently introduce their own universe-specific tweaks to the core rules for various reasons. Would publishers consider releasing some of the non-universe specific material as OGC to extend the basic rules? There was a lot of OGC released for MgT v1 and I'm wondering if people would be interested in consolidating and sharing some of that existing material for use with the Cepheus Engine (I'm already playing with a homebrew variant...so I'm curious. )

Finally, are their plans to release a Cepheus-system compatibility license? The term Cepheus Engine remains a trademark of Samardan Press and the OGL prohibits indicating compatibility. (For my own house variant, I'm calling it the Starfarer system to get around this issue).

 

[Gypsy Knights Games]

Another question - are people planning to use the Cepheus engine simply as a vehicle to publish Traveller compatible material under the OGL in a way that protects their intellectual property rights, or are they interested in extending the system with new rules content (albeit at the risk that it may gradually drift further from MgT)?

Well, I can tell you that we are interested in using these rules and expanding upon them. You'll see more on this from us later.

 

[JRoss]

Prime-Evil, Flynn put in notes about what to do. I'm planning on expanding the rules with a solo play variant.

 

[Prime_Evil]

Another question - are people planning to use the Cepheus engine simply as a vehicle to publish Traveller compatible material under the OGL in a way that protects their intellectual property rights, or are they interested in extending the system with new rules content (albeit at the risk that it may gradually drift further from MgT)?

Well, I can tell you that we are interested in using these rules and expanding upon them. You'll see more on this from us later.

Well...you could easily use Anderson & Felix Guide to Naval Architecture as a High Guard variant

 

[Gypsy Knights Games]

Well...you could easily use Anderson & Felix Guide to Naval Architecture as a High Guard variant

Indeed. I highly recommend doing so!

And you could easily use The Cepheus Engine as a new rules set for Clement Sector's second edition (which, BTW, is 25% off until July 28 so now is a great time to get your copy).

 

[madmike]

Another question - are people planning to use the Cepheus engine simply as a vehicle to publish Traveller compatible material under the OGL in a way that protects their intellectual property rights, or are they interested in extending the system with new rules content (albeit at the risk that it may gradually drift further from MgT)?

Well, I can tell you that we are interested in using these rules and expanding upon them. You'll see more on this from us later.

Well...you could easily use Anderson & Felix Guide to Naval Architecture as a High Guard variant

Oh yes, absolutely.