Mongoose Traveller Stats Are Too Powerful

Core Rules are the minimum needed to run the game, not to run the official setting as developed.

Books 4-8 are clearly expansion material, and not "in the box" no matter how "essential" they may feel. Further, while required for some adventures and supplements, they are not required for all, nor even most.

The Core Rules for CT are Bk 1-3.

The Core for MT is Player's, Ref's and Imp. Encyc, plus errata

The Core for TNE is the TNE Book, though a good case can be made to include FF&S, simply because of the number of references to it within the main book.

The Core for T4 is the main book plus errata... Again, FF&S can be argued for "Core" status, but in this case, not so strongly.
 
AKAramis said:
Core Rules are the minimum needed to run the game, not to run the official setting as developed.

Books 4-8 are clearly expansion material, and not "in the box" no matter how "essential" they may feel. Further, while required for some adventures and supplements, they are not required for all, nor even most.

So it's an entirely arbitrary definition of "core". Gotcha.

Because really it's down to when you started playing CT. If you started at the beginning then you'd consider books 1-3 as "core" since that's all you had for a while. If you started at the end (as I did), then you'd consider books 1-8 as "core" because that's what was available in the mid-80s.

But there's no official statement of "these are the core books", it's just assumptions. And as I said, given that most of the later CT books ended up as core rules for the later editions, that tends to imply that the "core" of CT is larger than you imply.
 
EDG said:
AKAramis said:
Core Rules are the minimum needed to run the game, not to run the official setting as developed.

Books 4-8 are clearly expansion material, and not "in the box" no matter how "essential" they may feel. Further, while required for some adventures and supplements, they are not required for all, nor even most.

So it's an entirely arbitrary definition of "core". Gotcha.

Because really it's down to when you started playing CT. If you started at the beginning then you'd consider books 1-3 as "core" since that's all you had for a while. If you started at the end (as I did), then you'd consider books 1-8 as "core" because that's what was available in the mid-80s.

But there's no official statement of "these are the core books", it's just assumptions. And as I said, given that most of the later CT books ended up as core rules for the later editions, that tends to imply that the "core" of CT is larger than you imply.

Actually, the fact that Starter Traveller, which was released after book 5, included only materials from Books 1-3 really speaks to "core-ness", as did the fact that the boxed sets for CT all included only books 0-3...

And MT, likewise, included only the three I listed as core in the boxed sets as well.
 
AKAramis said:
And MT, likewise, included only the three I listed as core in the boxed sets as well.

Then I guess you'll have to explain to me why the MT Referee Manual had the Big Ship (book 5) design system that let you design very large ships (which book 2 didn't let you do), and the Extended World Generation (book 6) rules that let you design the other worlds in the system (book 3 only allowed you to generate the mainworld UWP on its own). And the complex trade tables that are pretty much straight out of Merchant Prince (book 7).

Megatraveller's core rules clearly encompassed the later CT books, and didn't just focus on books 1-3. So evidently there was a change of heart in the GDW camp, because they didn't appear to consider the other books as optional extras for MT.
 
EDG said:
AKAramis said:
Core Rules are the minimum needed to run the game, not to run the official setting as developed.

Books 4-8 are clearly expansion material, and not "in the box" no matter how "essential" they may feel. Further, while required for some adventures and supplements, they are not required for all, nor even most.

So it's an entirely arbitrary definition of "core". Gotcha.

Because really it's down to when you started playing CT. If you started at the beginning then you'd consider books 1-3 as "core" since that's all you had for a while. If you started at the end (as I did), then you'd consider books 1-8 as "core" because that's what was available in the mid-80s.

But there's no official statement of "these are the core books", it's just assumptions. And as I said, given that most of the later CT books ended up as core rules for the later editions, that tends to imply that the "core" of CT is larger than you imply.

Seeing that Mercenary, High Guard and Merchant Prince are all rules expansions in those particular areas, and weren't actually available for several years after the original core rules of the Traveller game were released, I think it's patently obvious that they are not the same thing as 'core rules'. This is just arguing for arguments sake.
 
EDG said:
AKAramis said:
And MT, likewise, included only the three I listed as core in the boxed sets as well.

Then I guess you'll have to explain to me why the MT Referee Manual had the Big Ship (book 5) design system that let you design very large ships (which book 2 didn't let you do), and the Extended World Generation (book 6) rules that let you design the other worlds in the system (book 3 only allowed you to generate the mainworld UWP on its own). And the complex trade tables that are pretty much straight out of Merchant Prince (book 7).

Megatraveller's core rules clearly encompassed the later CT books, and didn't just focus on books 1-3. So evidently there was a change of heart in the GDW camp, because they didn't appear to consider the other books as optional extras for MT.

Each edition's core stands alone, and yet stands with different stance once added to with expansions.

I have often said that MT's Ref's Companion should have been in the core box... it wasn't, and isn't... The game runs just fine without it, runs better with it.

And yes, MT included the Big Ships and Bk7 trade rules. It's core to MT that way, in a way that CT never had. No CT basic set (Traveller, Deluxe Traveller, The Traveller Book, Starter Traveller) ever shipped with HG design system built in, nor with Bk7 trade built in, except the reprint book.

MT also has Mainworld only and expanded gen... and all the "expanded" stuff is optional. There is no requirement to use advanced character generation, nor to use the extended system generation process...
MT RM p18 said:
EXTENDED SYSTEM GENERATION
Use the Extended System Generation when you wish to completely
detail a star system’s entire complement of planets and
satellites.

The basic mainworld gen doesn't include stars... and generates the same data as CT Bk 3. the above quote shows the detailed whole system process optional.
 
My point is that it's daft to dismiss books 4+ just because they don't fit some ill-defined definition of "core rules". They're there, and they're there to be used until such time as Marc 'decanonises' them.

Anyone would think that CT was just books 0-3, but it's not. But many Traveller fans have a habit of insisting that later material isn't relevant and that earlier material takes precedence over later material, so it's hardly surprising that this attitude to the CT books exists.
 
Supplement Four said:
I agree. The core rules for CT is the LBBs in their entirety.

But, really, who cares! Is this worthy of discussion?

Oh come now ! This argument is the very heart and soul of stats vs skills !

Nothing could be more relevant, or crucial to the new edition of Traveller. Nothing ! :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

-Cap
 
Supplement Four said:
I agree. The core rules for CT is the LBBs in their entirety.

But, really, who cares! Is this worthy of discussion?

Actually, it's quite relevant, since Marc seems to be rejecting some of Bk5's tropes in what Robject is posting in the T5 area on COTI.

It goes also to "what is a core ruleset"?

I do feel Bk4-8 are part of the OTU, and that those specific elements (like ranks) that were changed in later editions either are timeline based changes, or are changes to fit the "OTU"...

But the core rules, for any game, are the minimum set, based upon the releasing company's sales model, for playing the game. Books 4-8 are not "Not Classic Traveller", nor is playing without them "Not Classic Traveller". But, playing without Books 1-3 is clearly "Not Classic Traveller".

The relevance comes from certain assertions of "realism" or "attempted realism"... they just don't exist in those 1st 3 books... it is high-space-opera, with passing nods to realism (specifically, vector movement, firearms instead of zap-guns).

Adding Bk 4 changed little except adding an optional CGen, and added lots more weapons. It added an optional style of play, that of the merc unit commander, and a non-detailed resolution system to make that playable. Nothing essential about that.

Book 5 adds another optional CGen, and the most important rules addendum in the whole of CT: the new ship system and its combat system. it was only halfway backwards compatible; old ships could be used in the new combat system, but new ships can't be used in the old combat system. Now, this one is essential to running the OTU, but not to running a good traveller game; in fact, it's often rejected as being even less realistic than the core. (Bk5 Destroyers are the size of a Nimitz class CVA, with crews the size of a cutter...)

Book 6 adds yet another optional CGen, and adds an option to expand the process of detailing star systems beyond the mainworld.

Book 7 adds yet another optional CGen, and adds a different trade system with a whole different paradigm,

Book 8 adds robot rules, far more closely related to MegaTraveller's design system than anything CT. Do they work? Sure. Are they needed to run the game? not at all.

Supplement 4 added a bunch of 12 new careers, and primitive weapons. And it included a bunch of NPC's for each. Needed? No. Useful, yes.
Spinward Marches Campaign added the same 12 new careers. It didn't include the other stuff, and had almost no rules material besides this.

Supplements 1 & 2 were generic "GM Aids"... are they core? Not at all. Useful for running CT? Yes.

Supplement 3 is core to the setting: it's the first official setting booklet. So useful that about 75% of it wound up in the Deluxe Traveller box (The worlds list is in Adv 0, and the map on a poster... and in the Deluxe Box). Is it a core product? Arguable... I'd say it is as close as can be without being one. Mostly due to not being included in the later Starter Traveller.

So what is a core rule set?
Sufficient to run the game. The default "start here point". The "Common Point of Reference". The only parts of Books 1-3 invalidated by later books are starship combat (since B5 grandfathers Bk2 designs) and Trade and Commerce (replaced by Bk 7's system, which to many is inferior and/or simply annoying and thus never used).
 
AKAramis said:
But the core rules, for any game, are the minimum set, based upon the releasing company's sales model, for playing the game. Books 4-8 are not "Not Classic Traveller", nor is playing without them "Not Classic Traveller". But, playing without Books 1-3 is clearly "Not Classic Traveller".

OK, that makes your stance somewhat clearer. I just usually get the impression that books 4+ are ignored/dismissed by many CT fans just for the sake of sticking to older stuff.

That said, I know you're a big fan of the "proto-traveller' concept where you just stick to the original (early book) concepts of the game, but going the other way and using all the CT books while superseding/overriding older rules where conflicts arise turns Classic Traveller into a very different beast (and one that IMO is what it should rightfully be considered as).
 
EDG said:
OK, that makes your stance somewhat clearer. I just usually get the impression that books 4+ are ignored/dismissed by many CT fans just for the sake of sticking to older stuff.

That said, I know you're a big fan of the "proto-traveller' concept where you just stick to the original (early book) concepts of the game, but going the other way and using all the CT books while superseding/overriding older rules where conflicts arise turns Classic Traveller into a very different beast (and one that IMO is what it should rightfully be considered as).

My personal "vision" of prototraveller also uses HG design sequences (but with 5Td minimum bridge, not 20Td, and PPFuel is per year not per month...), MT combat and characters, and computer limits to hull sizes. ;)

I just don't mention that on the prototraveller threads. Mostly because Prototraveller is about the setting more than the rules. Actually, my draw to Prototraveller was more one of T20's playtest drawing me to figure out what I did and did not like in CT, MT, TNE, and T4, both rules and setting wise.

I like HG & T20 design sequences, except:
1) the max size being WAY too high. I can't see anything past about 10,000 Td. (Simple fix: alter the required computer by hull size so 10001+ requires TL17+ computers...)
2) the 20Td minimum bridge size (5 I could see...)
3) The sensors abstraction. (And that's tolerable in T20.)
4) The fuel rates (And that's a rather easy fix... make the PP Fuel per year instead of per month.)

Rules Simplicity is good. a Unified Mechanic is good. Combat where Joe Average might be killed by a .22LR or survive a Cal.50 is good. Someone making due with lots of raw talent, or shining with plenty of skill despite no aptitude is good. At the moment, MoTrav is quite close to this.
 
Gar...another idea...SKILL RATIO

Ya know, another way to sold the stat bloat problem is to have the skill level value vary the way it did in CT.

In CT, most times, Skill-1 meant a +1 DM. Since MT, this seems to have been "standardized". But, remember in CT, there were times when Skill-1 meant a +2 DM on the throw.

Take, for example, the Vacc Suit skill. A throw of 10+ is required to maintain control in a zero-G environment. A character was given a +4 DM per skill level. Thus, a character with Vacc Suit-1 needed a 6+ throw. A character with Vacc Suit-2 would automatically succeed.

That's one of the things I always liked about CT. It's versatility.

If we implement this kind of skill interpretation in MGT, then that clears up the stat bloat issue nicely.

For example, on the medical examples we've been using in this thread, maybe each level of medical skill provides a +2 DM on the throw. That would certainly go a long way to making the Stat-8/Skill-3 character better than the Stat-12, Skill-0 character.

Stat-8/Skill-3 would roll 2D +6

Stat-12/Skill-1 would throw 2D +3

I GM can be selective about skill value. Most of the time it would default to a 1-1 ratio. But, on some tasks, a different ratio is used.
 
Without commenting on Supplment4's idea, another way to increase the importance of skill relative to talent is this: when checking for effect, add only the skill modifier - including the -3 if unskilled.

The effect is that talents helps you succeed, but skill gives you quality.

If you are using talent to overcome a total lack of skill, you may succeed, but the result is very likely to be a MacGiver/Bodgejob/bailing wire and gum sculpture.

It might be good to also including the difficulty mod, perhaps capped to the skill level : that way one doesn't always have skilled people producing excellent results no matter what the difficulty. (skill 2 would get the "exceptional result 50% of the time; seems a bit extreme, speaking as having at least one skill 2 IRL).

I suggest the cap as the difficulty scale is different from the skill scale, so it won't take much for all difficult tasks to produce shoddy results,( and thus punishing the attempt to challange oneself)

Comments ?

-Cap
 
Supplement Four said:
Gar...another idea...SKILL RATIO

Ya know, another way to sold the stat bloat problem is to have the skill level value vary the way it did in CT.

In CT, most times, Skill-1 meant a +1 DM. Since MT, this seems to have been "standardized". But, remember in CT, there were times when Skill-1 meant a +2 DM on the throw.

Take, for example, the Vacc Suit skill. A throw of 10+ is required to maintain control in a zero-G environment. A character was given a +4 DM per skill level. Thus, a character with Vacc Suit-1 needed a 6+ throw. A character with Vacc Suit-2 would automatically succeed.

That's one of the things I always liked about CT. It's versatility.

If we implement this kind of skill interpretation in MGT, then that clears up the stat bloat issue nicely.

For example, on the medical examples we've been using in this thread, maybe each level of medical skill provides a +2 DM on the throw. That would certainly go a long way to making the Stat-8/Skill-3 character better than the Stat-12, Skill-0 character.

Stat-8/Skill-3 would roll 2D +6

Stat-12/Skill-1 would throw 2D +3

I GM can be selective about skill value. Most of the time it would default to a 1-1 ratio. But, on some tasks, a different ratio is used.

Hmmm... I actually like that idea. It would suck if you had tons of skills to remember, with different effects for each, but with only having a few skills, this could well work. And I generally dont like d6 traveller systems...
 
Supplement Four said:
Gar...another idea...SKILL RATIO

Ya know, another way to sold the stat bloat problem is to have the skill level value vary the way it did in CT.

From where I sit, that's one of the WORST things about CT, and about as backwards a design approach as can be found.
 
AKAramis said:
From where I sit, that's one of the WORST things about CT, and about as backwards a design approach as can be found.

Doesn't surprise me that you'd feel that way. If I take a stance on something, chances are better than good that you'll post the opposite in disagreement.

But, actually, it does make a lot of sense, my idea of looking at CT that way. First of all, MGT is supposed to be based on CT. Second, using varying values like that goes a long way to tweaking the 1-5 Skill scale with the 1-15 Stat scale.

You wouldn't use it for everything. Your default would be Skill-1 = +1 DM. But, on some tasks, actual learned experience will be more important than natural ability.

Like in the operating room.

Like when someone is diffusing a bomb.

Like when a veteran engineer is scraping together parts to jury-rig the jump drive.

Makes a lot of sense.
 
While I understand the issue of skill bloat, I have to say that varying the value of a skill mod seems to me mainly a way to increase page count and argument. Lots of examples and situations and etc.


Orig traveller did have it, and one of the skills was engineering- giving a +2 per level. I think I've used it once in about thirty years - from lack of need, and from not remembering it.

Honestly, if a GM needs flexibility, the fact is, they'll take it; even extreme structure fans. I really don't see that mandating it by reducing (an already fairly minimal) structure is the way to go.

-Cap
 
Back
Top