New Core Rulebook?

Probably not a fleet, but commerce raiders. Of course that depends on what's actually out there and possibly in the way.
I did sneak in my intentionally incomplete version of Foreven, but I don't think it should be officially developed. For everyone who wants certainty, someone else wants to do their own thing. (But if I was going to do my own thing, I'd probably just do my own universe and mess with the rules a bit).
Maybe I am missing the whole point of having a setting. It is My understanding that the point of a setting is to...well, have a setting. If you write nothing, there is no setting. Which is exactly what you get when you homebrew. Why buy a setting that then makes you have to homebrew?
 
Are you expecting that the Imperium is going to be launching deep penetration counteroffensives out of the Marches and into Foreven for some reason? That would certainly be a novel revision of past versions of the war.
Defense alone never won a war. It is also why there have been 5 Frontier Wars instead of just one. They are the same war, just spread across many, many years.
 
Maybe I am missing the whole point of having a setting. It is My understanding that the point of a setting is to...well, have a setting. If you write nothing, there is no setting. Which is exactly what you get when you homebrew. Why buy a setting that then makes you have to homebrew?
To have an overall thing. If you say 'we're playing in north america' that tells us something. If we say europe, or asia, that gives us soemthing quite different. The 3I is a continent. The sectors are countries within that continent (ok the analogy isn't super accurate, but it should get the point across).

We CAN say that every country, or state, or city, on the continent is defined. But it would also be completely reasonable to say 'that place between france and germany, has a country or more than one, but we aren't going to define what those countries are'.

But by defining france and germany, as well as the overall europe, well, we still have a whole lot of information about what those countries might be like. And most people could just set their game in france or germany. But if you want to be in europe, and you have a cool idea for a country, well, you have a spot that isn't defined - specifically so that players don't say 'but, the rulebook says the country is like this!'

Having an empty spot, avoids a lot of arguments for many tables, whether that's necessary for your table or not.
 
Probably not a fleet, but commerce raiders. Of course that depends on what's actually out there and possibly in the way.
I did sneak in my intentionally incomplete version of Foreven, but I don't think it should be officially developed. For everyone who wants certainty, someone else wants to do their own thing. (But if I was going to do my own thing, I'd probably just do my own universe and mess with the rules a bit).
Right, my point is just that there are lots of different types of people who are customers of Mongoose.

Some want to play in worlds with all the stuff worked out.
Some want to play in worlds they build themselves.
Some want to build their own stuff as part of an existing world.

There are definitely people who want Foreven officially developed. There are definitely people who are the reason that GDW and then FFE explicitly promised not to develop Foreven. Most likely, the majority of people don't care one way or another.

Personally, if I play in Charted Space, I do so for the pretty maps and I do all my own development by fleshing out all the star systems with secondary worlds, colonies, space stations, and other content. When I build an entire sector from scratch, I don't put it in Charted Space.

But I don't see any reason to think that means other people who do want to build in the region designated for that purpose should be denied the opportunity.
 
To have an overall thing. If you say 'we're playing in north america' that tells us something. If we say europe, or asia, that gives us soemthing quite different. The 3I is a continent. The sectors are countries within that continent (ok the analogy isn't super accurate, but it should get the point across).

We CAN say that every country, or state, or city, on the continent is defined. But it would also be completely reasonable to say 'that place between france and germany, has a country or more than one, but we aren't going to define what those countries are'.

But by defining france and germany, as well as the overall europe, well, we still have a whole lot of information about what those countries might be like. And most people could just set their game in france or germany. But if you want to be in europe, and you have a cool idea for a country, well, you have a spot that isn't defined - specifically so that players don't say 'but, the rulebook says the country is like this!'

Having an empty spot, avoids a lot of arguments for many tables, whether that's necessary for your table or not.
It also lets you have your campaign set in Transquixotania and still let your characters travel to Germany or France and do those German or French adventures that come with the setting.

It lets you have a cool idea for Transquixotania without having to have a cool idea for all of Europe.
 
Right, my point is just that there are lots of different types of people who are customers of Mongoose.

Some want to play in worlds with all the stuff worked out.
Some want to play in worlds they build themselves.
Some want to build their own stuff as part of an existing world.

There are definitely people who want Foreven officially developed. There are definitely people who are the reason that GDW and then FFE explicitly promised not to develop Foreven. Most likely, the majority of people don't care one way or another.

Personally, if I play in Charted Space, I do so for the pretty maps and I do all my own development by fleshing out all the star systems with secondary worlds, colonies, space stations, and other content. When I build an entire sector from scratch, I don't put it in Charted Space.

But I don't see any reason to think that means other people who do want to build in the region designated for that purpose should be denied the opportunity.
Denied the opportunity? Just pull out what is there and insert what you want there. Inform your players of the change or of the fact that changes exist to avoid preconceptions. Not defining it gives us nothing. Defining it does not prevent people from inserting what they wish in Foreven. I make changes to Charted Space all of the time. If nothing is defined though, the only people it prevents from doing as they wish, are the people who don't want to have to write a whole sector book of material to have a wonderful playground of "whatever cool stuff" is in Foreven.
 
Probably not a fleet, but commerce raiders. Of course that depends on what's actually out there and possibly in the way.
I did sneak in my intentionally incomplete version of Foreven, but I don't think it should be officially developed. For everyone who wants certainty, someone else wants to do their own thing. (But if I was going to do my own thing, I'd probably just do my own universe and mess with the rules a bit).
It’s really moot at this point all the UWPs are in the sector construction box set all it’s missing is trade codes and names. I think if you wan5 a GM playground put it somewhere out of the way
 
Last edited:
It’s really mute at this point all the UWPs are in the sector construction box set all it’s missing is trade codes and names. I think if you wan5 a GM playground put it somewhere out of the way
I think you probably mean moot rather than mute. xD, xD.
 
It’s really mute at this point all the UWPs are in the sector construction box set all it’s missing is trade codes and names. I think if you wan5 a GM playground put it somewhere out of the way
Once I buy the setting, everything is a GM playground.
 
It’s really mute at this point all the UWPs are in the sector construction box set all it’s missing is trade codes and names. I think if you wan5 a GM playground put it somewhere out of the way
Yes, it is moot, because those people who want someone else to make the Foreven content for them now have it. But it isn't "official" and it isn't going to be the basis for further material placed in Foreven, so Foreven remains open for development by those people who do not want to be saying "no, that map isn't right, use this one" and whatnot.

And, as I said in another thread, it is entirely intentional that the GM playground be adjacent to developed content. Because that's the point: to enable people to do both: homebrew their own sector AND be in a position to use published content as written.

That may not matter to you. But it absolutely matters to other customers. And Mongoose should do what meets the needs of multiple constituencies of customers. Not just what I want. Not just what you want.

You can say "they could just overwrite if it they want", but they can say "you can just play in Reaver's Deep or Gateway or some other published sector that doesn't abut Foreven." There's 4 sectors published that touch Foreven. There's 9 that are far enough away Foreven is irrelevant even if you don't include the Rim Expeditions sectors or the forthcoming Zhodani Core expeditions.
 
Yes, it is moot, because those people who want someone else to make the Foreven content for them now have it. But it isn't "official" and it isn't going to be the basis for further material placed in Foreven, so Foreven remains open for development by those people who do not want to be saying "no, that map isn't right, use this one" and whatnot.

And, as I said in another thread, it is entirely intentional that the GM playground be adjacent to developed content. Because that's the point: to enable people to do both: homebrew their own sector AND be in a position to use published content as written.

That may not matter to you. But it absolutely matters to other customers. And Mongoose should do what meets the needs of multiple constituencies of customers. Not just what I want. Not just what you want.
Again, you are ignoring My statement. If they write nothing it only supports the people that want nothing. The same people that want nothing are free to ignore the printed setting material. How are people supposed to ignore not having a setting to play in in Foreven? Your method only works for one side. Mine works for both. You are making a false equivalency.
You can say "they could just overwrite if it they want", but they can say "you can just play in Reaver's Deep or Gateway or some other published sector that doesn't abut Foreven." There's 4 sectors published that touch Foreven. There's 9 that are far enough away Foreven is irrelevant even if you don't include the Rim Expeditions sectors or the forthcoming Zhodani Core expeditions.
If you consider just a list of random UWP Code "having it", then you really need to learn the difference between a setting and some randomly rolled nonsense that has no stories in them. A setting is its stories. No stories, no setting.
 
Yours doesn't work for any table where players are allowed to disagree with the Gm. Anywhere the players can say 'we have this rulebook, and it says x'.

Sure you can say, don't allow that. That works for you. It doesn't work for everyone. For those tables, an empty space is Very Important.
 
Right. Not everyone plays the same way.

If you have a veteran Traveller group and you want to run in Charted Space with some custom stuff, you could rewrite existing locales. But that's problematic. Even if your players are cool with that, you create a lot of extra cognitive dissonance. Now the players not only need to learn your world (which is a normal thing to expect) but they also need to UNLEARN the way things are in the material they are already familiar with. It is a worse situation than just playing in a total free form world, because now the players have bad information instead of no information.

On the other hand, if you get to build your new stuff in the designated "undefined but adjacent to the published stuff" area, then your new stuff is just new stuff and all the existing info is fine. You don't have to worry about published adventures not matching because you changed The Five Sisters or whatever. Instead, you are just across the border and your players can visit the 5 Sisters for the new 5FW adventure... or not.

This is an important playstyle for a lot of people.
 
Yes, it is moot, because those people who want someone else to make the Foreven content for them now have it. But it isn't "official" and it isn't going to be the basis for further material placed in Foreven, so Foreven remains open for development by those people who do not want to be saying "no, that map isn't right, use this one" and whatnot.
On what grounds do you say it’s not official? I don’t see Mongoose saying that.
 
That may not matter to you. But it absolutely matters to other customers. And Mongoose should do what meets the needs of multiple constituencies of customers. Not just what I want. Not just what you want.
Mongoose should do what the greatest number of customers want. Trying to please everyone doesn’t work it just upsets everyone that’s been a business fact forever.
 
And you think you know what that is? In this conversation, there's an equal number of posters on both sides of the issue, though basically a negligible number either way. The reality is that most people probably don't care at all. Some number of people on both sides care quite a bit.

But the onus on the people who want change to long standing policy to establish there's an overwhelming constituency to make things different. Because there was a very vocal constituency that got GDW to establish this in Imperiallines #1, to keep it that way when Marc did the big map standardization, and to keep this free policy posted on the FFE website to this day.

FFE no longer owns Traveller, so sure, Mongoose can junk their policies if they want. But given that they are now selling CT stuff and talking about opening up TAS licensing to Classic Traveller and generally advertise to the wider traveller community, including the folks at FFE's forum, I doubt they are super keen on just flipping all those folks off for no particular reason.
 
Right. Not everyone plays the same way.

If you have a veteran Traveller group and you want to run in Charted Space with some custom stuff, you could rewrite existing locales. But that's problematic. Even if your players are cool with that, you create a lot of extra cognitive dissonance. Now the players not only need to learn your world (which is a normal thing to expect) but they also need to UNLEARN the way things are in the material they are already familiar with. It is a worse situation than just playing in a total free form world, because now the players have bad information instead of no information.
It is no more cognitive dissonance, than doing what you say, because everyone currently is used to the being nothing there. So as soon as you put stuff there, by your own logic, you have to unlearn that "there is nothing there" and learn whatever the Referee puts there. It is the same.
On the other hand, if you get to build your new stuff in the designated "undefined but adjacent to the published stuff" area, then your new stuff is just new stuff and all the existing info is fine. You don't have to worry about published adventures not matching because you changed The Five Sisters or whatever. Instead, you are just across the border and your players can visit the 5 Sisters for the new 5FW adventure... or not.

This is an important playstyle for a lot of people.
Okay, you guys win. Not having a setting is better than having a setting. Once you buy the material, it is all open to be changed.
 
On what grounds do you say it’s not official? I don’t see Mongoose saying that.
It's not posted to Travellermap. It's not included in any Mongoose content except the Sector guide. And the Sector Guide author wrote this:

"I did sneak in my intentionally incomplete version of Foreven, but I don't think it should be officially developed. For everyone who wants certainty, someone else wants to do their own thing."
 
Yours doesn't work for any table where players are allowed to disagree with the Gm. Anywhere the players can say 'we have this rulebook, and it says x'.

Sure you can say, don't allow that. That works for you. It doesn't work for everyone. For those tables, an empty space is Very Important.
Empty space is empty space if the Referee says it is. Anyone can disagree with the Referee, but the Referee's rulings are final. This has always been how it has worked. If players are saying the rulebook says this, and as a Referee, you have not made the changes clear to them before the campaign started, that is just poor Refereeing.

Edit: There is not one single benefit to not defining it and everyone writing their own, as opposed to writing the setting and then allowing Referees and players to make the changes that they wish. If they want to scrap the whole sector and write their own, they can do that, but people who do not, your only response is, "Well, go play somewhere else!" Poor response.
 
You claiming that another tables playstyle is poor refereeing does not stop it from being a valid playstyle, whether you like it or not.

You claiming that something that helps your playstyle won't hinder that playstyle doesn't make it true whether you like it or not.
 
Back
Top