Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
How about you invite some of those people to this conversation so your statement can be relevant?Reynard said:
New Paizo SF RPG: Competitor with Traveller?
- Thread starter l_c_jackson
- Start date
ShawnDriscoll said:
Ah, now we get to the "Shawn's tries to distract everyone from his wildly inaccurate statements by making up conspiracies and throwing around baseless personal accusations!" stage. :lol:
You've flip-flopped around so much on this thread you don't even know what you're talking about anymore. Do stop wasting everyone's time.
There's a reason I seldom read anything Traveller related because of some of the types sci-fi RPGs tend to attract.
At its core (at least in the case of the most querulous here) Traveller "fails" because the computers are just too d@mn big and somebody seems to feel the need to be able to develop terrain in another dimension as they steer through hyperspace.
Seriously? Did I actually read this?
For the record, as I read these posts there are some folks who need to get out of the basement......but it's not ShawnDriscoll (at least in what I'm reading here).
If there are trolls here.....it ain't him. Just the opposite.
But, hey, enjoy the basement in your quest of measuring hyperdrive dimensional terrain and fuel burns....and overlarge computers.
Wish you the best.
At its core (at least in the case of the most querulous here) Traveller "fails" because the computers are just too d@mn big and somebody seems to feel the need to be able to develop terrain in another dimension as they steer through hyperspace.
Seriously? Did I actually read this?
For the record, as I read these posts there are some folks who need to get out of the basement......but it's not ShawnDriscoll (at least in what I'm reading here).
If there are trolls here.....it ain't him. Just the opposite.
But, hey, enjoy the basement in your quest of measuring hyperdrive dimensional terrain and fuel burns....and overlarge computers.
Wish you the best.
True, but it has seen very little support in the ten years since it was published, and one needs to convert material from GURPS 3rd edition to make it at least somewhat "universal". In my opinion the only parts of GURPS Space 4th that are better than their Traveller counterparts are the two chapters on world building, and even in their case one could argue that most referees and players simply do not need or want that amount of detail and prefer the more basic informations provided by Traveller's world building system.Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
rust2, that’s largely a matter of subjective opinion; the next step in that discussion is for me to whine about the lack of basis for what you’ve said, and then for you to either defend your argument with facts, or to troll like it doesn’t matter. It’s really something you shouldn’t have said in the first place, not without at least some genuine facts to back up what you’ve said. GURPS games are countable on Roll20; Roll20 regularly takes a “census” of its games. Traveller games are uncountably small. Surely, some of those GURPS games are sci fi, presumably “Transhuman Space” although how many is surely still open for debate. So based on facts available to me just now, your argument has no basis.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Lysander said:
It’s not just computers; it’s also the physical size and operational range of comms equipment, holodisplays failing to keep pace with modern uses of LCD and OLED displays, LCD display technology at indiscernably high resolutions becoming cheap as dirt, the advent of glass cockpits shrinking how large a cockpit actually needs to be, the removal of gunners from the guns they actually fire in modern warships, programmable electronics hardware (FPGAs), 3D printing replacing the need to carry most actual spare parts, and so on, and so on, and so on.
Basically, anywhere and everywhere technological and scientific progress has marched on, Traveller technology hasn’t. It categorically fails to achieve currency. In order to be a modern product that meets the modern expectations of a modern audience, it has to be modern.
Well, I hope you can avoid to whine, and I do not intend to troll ... :lol:Tenacious-Techhunter said:
The facts: GURPS Space 4th has neither a vehicle design system nor a robot design system, two systems I would expect a "universal" science fiction game to have. For
both purposes one has to use the relevant supplements of GURPS 3rd, and the technology concepts of these two older supplements are almost as outdated as those of
previous Traveller editions.
hivemindx said:Reynard said:
You could have said the same thing with regard to fantasy games when Pathfinder first came out. Personally I hope it does really well and I look forward to spending money on pre-painted Starfinder minis to use in my Traveller games.
When PF came out I didn't want to play it and thought it wouldn't last.
Now I played PF on a regular basis when I had a regular schedule and play it when I have a chance in my work schedule. I bought a now-ex GF a bunch of books, and still have a really battered copy of the core book. I also plan to buy the core rules of Starfinder when it comes out.
Does this mean I want to play Traveller any less? No. Hell no. But it'll give me a chance to (1.) find players to play any game with and (2.) an opportunity to advertise Traveller.
To cut the local convo a bit, and insert something on the general thread:
I don't think Paizo's new SF RPG will be a direct competitor for Traveller. Of course, my opinion is based on pure assumption without any input from Paizo, thus, when new info arises what I am typing here might dissolve into irrelevance.
Pathfinder, Paizo's greatest creation, is a specific game for a specific audience (although huge in size). Remember, their spike in popularity was when the Wizards announced DnD 4ed, and the audience attracted to 3.0/3.5 found refuge with Pathfinder. It wasn't the setting (currently, Paizo offer several settings) as it was the rules that attracted people so much.
So, that information leads me to the assumption that the Starfinder will keep the central theme of the Pathfinder rules - D20, classes, level based, feats + skills. Perhaps the closest another system I can recall is the Modern D20.
This core (assuming they keep it) makes it very different from Traveller.
Several years ago, by chance, I was browsing this - new to me at the time - site Drivethrurpg. I can't remember the exact details, perhaps I read it in a forum, or someone hinted me in skype, but I searched for Traveller, got interested and bought the Starter booklet (it had a few careers, some equipment, some skills and ground combat rules). We tried a few sessions, and we got hooked.
It was the first time I realized that rules actually can get in the way of the fun - the constant rule clarification, searching in the books, someone correcting another one of a particular rule interpretation - we were so used to that from DnD, that we didn't know any better. In Traveller, this was reduced to a minimum. If someone wanted to perform an action that the rules did not explicitly state, the way was simple, efficient and balanced (a simple skill check). The game also introduced this abstract, yet realistic deadliness of the encounters - bad thinking and bad dices can result in a death of a character. The game - so simple, yet not lacking. No levels, no feats, no magic items but no one seemed to miss those. For us, it was an invitation for the imagination to wake up after we've put it in the specific constraints of the rules-heavy games for too long.
What I want to say with this story is that Traveller has its charms and quirks, and it makes it a very different game from many others. If someone prefers Starfinder, or any other game, before Traveller, then it was never his game to begin with.
I don't think Paizo's new SF RPG will be a direct competitor for Traveller. Of course, my opinion is based on pure assumption without any input from Paizo, thus, when new info arises what I am typing here might dissolve into irrelevance.
Pathfinder, Paizo's greatest creation, is a specific game for a specific audience (although huge in size). Remember, their spike in popularity was when the Wizards announced DnD 4ed, and the audience attracted to 3.0/3.5 found refuge with Pathfinder. It wasn't the setting (currently, Paizo offer several settings) as it was the rules that attracted people so much.
So, that information leads me to the assumption that the Starfinder will keep the central theme of the Pathfinder rules - D20, classes, level based, feats + skills. Perhaps the closest another system I can recall is the Modern D20.
This core (assuming they keep it) makes it very different from Traveller.
Several years ago, by chance, I was browsing this - new to me at the time - site Drivethrurpg. I can't remember the exact details, perhaps I read it in a forum, or someone hinted me in skype, but I searched for Traveller, got interested and bought the Starter booklet (it had a few careers, some equipment, some skills and ground combat rules). We tried a few sessions, and we got hooked.
It was the first time I realized that rules actually can get in the way of the fun - the constant rule clarification, searching in the books, someone correcting another one of a particular rule interpretation - we were so used to that from DnD, that we didn't know any better. In Traveller, this was reduced to a minimum. If someone wanted to perform an action that the rules did not explicitly state, the way was simple, efficient and balanced (a simple skill check). The game also introduced this abstract, yet realistic deadliness of the encounters - bad thinking and bad dices can result in a death of a character. The game - so simple, yet not lacking. No levels, no feats, no magic items but no one seemed to miss those. For us, it was an invitation for the imagination to wake up after we've put it in the specific constraints of the rules-heavy games for too long.
What I want to say with this story is that Traveller has its charms and quirks, and it makes it a very different game from many others. If someone prefers Starfinder, or any other game, before Traveller, then it was never his game to begin with.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
rust2 said:
You are half wrong. The GURPS Basic Set has everything you need to design and play robot characters, npcs, allies, or “equipment” robots. Not really anything missing there.
The part you are right about is indeed glaring, but it’s both not as bad and worse than you suggest. While the “GURPS: Starships” book allows you to design starships in very simplistic terms (it works best for hard-science-fiction ships of “pods along a spaceframe”), the level of detail of “GURPS: Vehicles” is notably absent. The omission of a starship design process from “GURPS: Space” was branched out for the sake of selling another book; but it’s there, for what it’s worth. The complexity of the 3rd edition “GURPS: Vehicles” design process has been avoided at too high a cost; they haven’t even released a 4th edition “GURPS: Vehicles” book yet, though, presumably, they still intend to. However, the “GURPS: Traveller; Interstellar Wars” book has a Traveller compatible starship design process, so as a Traveller fan, I’m not really sure why you’re even complaining... aside from you having waited too long to buy a copy.
In short, with GURPS: 4E, Steve Jackson Games pulled the same trick on you that Mongoose just did, only earlier; they split the “Starship” book out from the “Setting” book into a separate book of its own to increase sales. Business as usual. For your likely purposes, I would recommend the “Interstellar Wars” book over the “Starships” book, unless you are deliberately going for extra simple.
Thank you for the recommendation. I do have Interstellar Wars, but unfortunately the GURPS Traveller ships are incompatible with the ships of other Traveller versions, and GURPS has lost the Traveller license anyway, so this design system is more or less a dead end. As for the Spaceship supplements, I use them now and then for other games, but their design system really is ... basic. Since my favourite campaign is a planetary one, what I would need most is a vehicle design system, and here Mongoose is likely to deliver much earlier than GURPS (provided GURPS ever does, that is). As for a robot design system, the little information in GURPS Basic is really not my idea of a true design system, especially when compared to GURPS 3rd Robots (or even the Robot supplement of Classic Traveller).Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Oh, by the way, I do play or otherwise use Traveller now and then, but I am certainly not a "fan".
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
Well, you’ll have to forgive me for jumping to conclusions on this one. XDrust2 said:
With regards to “Interstellar Wars”, no one says you have to use that design process for a Traveller game...
I don’t see where you’re coming from with regards to the robots rules. Everything you need should be in there. You should probably PM me with some specific questions.
Well, let us take a look at the robot described on page 307 ff. of GURPS Basic Characters, the C31R07. This robot is built with Advantages and Skills, which tells me what the robot can do. However, this omits the technology enabling the robot to do that, there are no technical data (weight, volume, power requirement, etc.), and there are also no costs. So, while this kind of system would allow me to design a robot, I would have to handwave all the technical and financial informations asked for by the players (e.g. "Can I replace the radio with a sonar communicator of the same size ?", "How much do I have to pay for that new aquaculture robot ?"). In the end the system does very well what it was written for, but not really what I need in my setting.Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
rust2, I’m going to PM you a response, because that is the appropriate action here; regardless, your concerns are unjustified; they mostly amount to asking for setting information in a book that shouldn’t provide setting information.
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
You mean like a set of rules for designing your own sci-fi settings based on a few basic assumptions and filling in the gaps from your favourite novels, TV shows or movies?
Ah - you mean just like CT was designed to do...
and does well (as does its modern successor MgT).
GURPS 4 basic set no more has robot rules than CT LBB1-3 - if I want to generate a robot using CT I can just assign stats and skills and call it Robbie - the GURPS basic rules approach.
Ah - you mean just like CT was designed to do...
and does well (as does its modern successor MgT).
GURPS 4 basic set no more has robot rules than CT LBB1-3 - if I want to generate a robot using CT I can just assign stats and skills and call it Robbie - the GURPS basic rules approach.
Tenacious-Techhunter
Mongoose
The GURPS 4E Character Creation rules apply no less to Robots than to any other character; his main fuss is he’s asking for setting stuff when he shouldn’t.
The setting requirements and technobabble for a pulp sci-fi robot is going to be different from a hard sci-fi robot, which is going to be different from a space opera robot. These are setting rules, not system rules. It may be unusual that, in GURPS, one thing has nothing to do with the other, but that doesn’t mean “GURPS has no rules for Robots”. He’s asking the wrong question; he should be asking, “Well, which GURPS book has the setting rules I want to use?”.
The setting requirements and technobabble for a pulp sci-fi robot is going to be different from a hard sci-fi robot, which is going to be different from a space opera robot. These are setting rules, not system rules. It may be unusual that, in GURPS, one thing has nothing to do with the other, but that doesn’t mean “GURPS has no rules for Robots”. He’s asking the wrong question; he should be asking, “Well, which GURPS book has the setting rules I want to use?”.
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
Had a chance to look over a couple of the announcement pages. It is sounding a lot like Dragonstar. Some say Spelljammer but that was pure fantasy RPG with the ability to sail the ether between isolated planets using magic sailing ships. I very much believe it will have a fan base in the Pathfinder community and will get big play time at game shops using the same Pathfinder Society model. That said, I'll stick with Traveller for real science fiction when I'm at the game shop.
Now move along! No black dragons flying overhead. Move along!
Now move along! No black dragons flying overhead. Move along!
Similar threads
