Military ships and crew

[Sigtrygg]

So when some question the rules the reply is "those are the rules now, shut up and accept it" but when others find oddities it is a case of "this is how it works in the real world" and "this is how it works in previous editions"...

Either accept the rules as written or accept older versions are still usable and MgT is flawed. Or just house rule.

 

[MarcusIII]

Or just house rule.

When I run into an illogic in the rules I carefully ponder it and turn it over in my mind until sure, then I house rule. The original Mongoose rules seemed, for the most part solid. 2nd edition is less well fitted together is th only term I can think of.

 

[swordtart]

So when some question the rules the reply is "those are the rules now, shut up and accept it" but when others find oddities it is a case of "this is how it works in the real world" and "this is how it works in previous editions"...

Either accept the rules as written or accept older versions are still usable and MgT is flawed. Or just house rule.

To be honest I often find myself flip flopping.

I prefer to use rules RAW as that requires the least effort and negotiation with players. Once you start house ruling then players also expect to renegotiate rules as you go along, this can be good in moderation but it can also lead to rules discussions instead of playing sessions.

Sometimes the RAW is inconsistent with other rules or commonly accepted canon. Then I have to eyeball it and make a decision. Hopefully my players won't even question it (nine times out of ten it is a background issue and they don't have access to the spreadsheet for that particular robot or ship so won't notice it is Cr500 more than it should be). Not everything should be fully investigable by players or their characters. Sometimes a garage overcharges you or does unnecessary work and you don't find out as life isn't 100% deterministic. Such is life.

Sometimes I will even find myself arguing against a point I made in another argument. This is not me just being contrary (though I have a hat in that size too), it is likely I have just noticed an inconsistency I didn't before or have had a consequence pointed out that I hadn't previously considered. The discussion is more important than the consensus (though sometimes it's nice to have your interpretation validated by others). Changing your mind in light of new evidence is an appropriate response in a science fiction game. It is fiction, but scientific method should be at the heart of it including rule validation.

Where it all comes unstuck is where people have opinions that are setting specific. It is important to their setting that the rule is accepted, but if you are not using that setting then it is just a discussion point. Many components are in the game for example that break the TI setting, or disagree with previous canon. That can create challenges if a player bases some important decision on their understanding of the setting and the referee has a different take on it.

Sometimes I regret underpinning my game with MGT2 vs other versions of Traveller. But then I did that with every other version of Traveller I tried as well. CT is too simplistic, MegaTraveller too complex, Traveller 5 isn't even a game etc. They are games and people are paid to create content (and are not necessarily omniscient wrt canon). If it is all just the same as last time you might as well just buy the old stuff.

 

[Condottiere]

Crewing has a great deal more latitude, since since there are options such as automation, and drones.

Understaffing works within a specific time window, until deterioration, in whatever, occurs.

Overstaffing works as well, as long as life support is sufficient.

 

[tytalan]

So when some question the rules the reply is "those are the rules now, shut up and accept it" but when others find oddities it is a case of "this is how it works in the real world" and "this is how it works in previous editions"...

Either accept the rules as written or accept older versions are still usable and MgT is flawed. Or just house rule.

Except in cases like this where the rules counter dictates themselves than you make a decision but it’s also good to let mongoose know so they can fix it.

The problem with RAW is that sometimes they counter dictate themselves, they don’t cover something, or your players break them. There has got to be a point where we accept that all rules systems are flawed and common sense must be applied. Just repeating that the rules say this is showing a lack of understanding this concept.

 

[phavoc]

So when some question the rules the reply is "those are the rules now, shut up and accept it" but when others find oddities it is a case of "this is how it works in the real world" and "this is how it works in previous editions"...

Either accept the rules as written or accept older versions are still usable and MgT is flawed. Or just house rule.

"Either accept the rules as written or accept older versions are still usable and MgT is flawed. Or just house rule." All reasonable options.

However, the point of purchasing rules from a publisher is so you don't have to create your own house rules for things. Same goes for settings and adventures - people buy these things so they don't have to create it all their self.

When their is discordance in the rules it should be pointed out. When there are errors in the rules, or typo's or wrong table of contents in the manuals, it should be pointed out. If we are all here to clap with one hand at how wonderful things are it would be a very useless message board. And the publisher would receive on useful feedback on what their customers like/dislike/are upset by except when their sales drop and they go out of business.

Feedback is great. USEFUL feedback is priceless.

 

[Sigtrygg]

There are no problems with the rules with this regard. The rules say ship's troops and marines are not crew. Accept the rule and move on. Or house rule.
But the rule book will not change until the next revised updated revision with new cover, and I will lay money on the table that something will be introduced that changes things unexpectedly (looking at you change to core rule book bridge table that isn't applied to the ship designs in the same book...)