PoD - Oleb

[MasterGwydion]

Again: living off capital is insane economic planning, and selling assets is only a sustainable economic system if you are generating new assets as fast as you sell them.

And there’s a fundamental gap on the other element. Some people are relaxed about the fact that scouts are not gods, and in the context of the game they’re often unreliable narrators who make mistakes or even have the wool pulled over their eyes. This is the original philosophy of Traveller: it becomes our universe as soon as we start playing in it and even the 3i itself is just there as a starting point for us to play in. You find a UWP unhelpful? Change it: you’re supposed to.

Other people drive themselves mad in the belief that what the UWP says is and must remain the absolute and unchangeable, biblical truth (if you think I’m exaggerating then bear in mind that, in the last week, one of the posters in this thread went raging in all-caps at someone who suggested differently!) despite being the work of a retired scout jumping into a system a few decades ago (since when there might have been a devastating war, two revolutions and a global pandemic) and submitting a report on the basis of a few hours of observations and a misleading Potemkin tour by a local bureaucrat with an agenda.

Essentially it’s the difference between those of us who play like everything in the sourcebooks (not core rulebooks) is a description, in-universe, by in-universe sources and those who think it’s an external statement of Truth by MM or MWM or MJD or (far worse) Joe Fugate’s badly written and bugged non-random, random Number generator. If you’re doing that then you rely on every author having perfect knowledge of all canon, and good luck with that.

Perhaps you failed to read what someone else said above. If you have to Rule Zero everything, than why buy books or dice? UWP is an out-of-game mechanic, like Sig said, it has become used, by the writers and publishers, as an in-game piece of propaganda. When this happened, it was no longer able to be used as an out of game mechanic.

Apparently most people on this forum can't understand the difference between in-game and out-of-game anyhow, so I should not be surprised.

If everything in the sourcebook is a description from an in-game source? Who rolls the dice? Is your PC sitting down rolling dice in game before he shoots his laser pistol? Or is the player rolling the dice? Mechanics are not in-game. Why is that so hard for you guys to understand?

 

[MasterGwydion]

The UPP, or UWP as the kids of today call it, is a meta-game artifact that became described and used as an insetting tool also. The same can be said of the PC UPP, for the meta game it records your characteristics so that your character can interact with the setting you make up via the rules of the game.

As Mongoose Traveller 2e has drifted towards being The Third Imperium role playing game and away from the generic this distinction has been lost, conflated, confused, obfuscated and then we get to contradictory data... all without mentioning the fluff text.

In univeres the Third Imperium roleplaying game tells everything from the Imperial perceptive, we know that the IISS conducts 20 year missions to visit far off places 0 the last such jump 6 ten years out and ten years back could range for 1560 parsecs beyond Imperial borders. It just so happens the IISS UWP exactly matches the meta-game way of doing it.

Different cultures may well have different ways of tabulating system characteristics, but the meta-rule is for the UWP and the cultural varaince is left to the referee.

And Sig, if you would please. Explain what "metagame" means for those in the back... I don't think they quite understand the concept.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Sorry, I should have done so.

A simply as I can put it the meta-game are the rules and systems that you use to adjudicate the setting and influence the player in describing the actions and interactions of their character with the setting.

The longer answer is that game rule systems and the meta-game are related as the game mechanics adjudicate the setting, while the meta-game refers to player behaviors and strategies that occur outside the narrative but are shaped by their understanding of the game's systems and conventions - the meta-game.

How's that or am I misusing the term?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Sorry, I should have done so.

A simply as I can put it the meta-game are the rules and systems that you use to adjudicate the setting and influence the [layer in describing the actions and interactions of theri character with the setting.

A longer answer is that game rule systems and the meta-game are related as the game mechanics adjudicate the setting, while the meta-game refers to player behaviors and strategies that occur outside the narrative but are shaped by their understanding of the game's systems and conventions - the meta-game.

How's that or am I misusing the term?

Seems close enough to me, but basically, and correct Me if I am wrong, but "metagame" is what occurs outside of the gaming universe. It is the things that are not part of the in-game world, but are part of the out-of-game world.

 

[Endie]

Perhaps you failed to read what someone else said above. If you have to Rule Zero everything, than why buy books or dice? UWP is an out-of-game mechanic, like Sig said, it has become used, by the writers and publishers, as an in-game piece of propaganda. When this happened, it was no longer able to be used as an out of game mechanic.

Apparently most people on this forum can't understand the difference between in-game and out-of-game anyhow, so I should not be surprised.

If everything in the sourcebook is a description from an in-game source? Who rolls the dice? Is your PC sitting down rolling dice in game before he shoots his laser pistol? Or is the player rolling the dice? Mechanics are not in-game. Why is that so hard for you guys to understand?

You are entirely wrong here. The UPP and UWP strings have always been used diegetically. Which, since you’re unaware, means that they exist both within the game world and outside of it.

In other words, they are visible to both the players (non-diegetic) and their characters (diegetic). The strong use of diegetic design elements has, since the beginning of the game, been a consistent and inventive element of Traveller as a system.

Other games worked the way that you seem to believe: the hit points of a paladin are not a number known to him. But the UWP, for instance, is absolutely an in-game value known to the scout service. And sometimes they get it wrong.

I hope that’s simple enough but do ask if you need it broken down further or in easier words.

 

[MasterGwydion]

You are entirely wrong here. The UPP and UWP strings have always been used diegetically. Which, since you’re unaware, means that they exist both within the game world and outside of it.

Are you sure? The old gronards seem to think that the UPP/UWP system was developed before Charted Space, so therefore, they seem to think that UPP/UWP system was setting agnostic. Traveller rules are setting agnostic. So, if I make a Traveller game with no IISS, does that mean that I can no longer use the UWP codes since the people that create them no longer exist? See how ridiculous that is?

In other words, they are visible to both the players (non-diegetic) and their characters (diegetic). The strong use of diegetic design elements has, since the beginning of the game, been a consistent and inventive element of Traveller as a system.

Other games worked the way that you seem to believe: the hit points of a paladin are not a number known to him. But the UWP, for instance, is absolutely an in-game value known to the scout service. And sometimes they get it wrong.

I hope that’s simple enough but do ask if you need it broken down further or in easier words.

This is the part I need further explanation on.

Explain to me how they are supposed to work and be accurate (non-diegetically) if they are inaccurate (diegetically)? I cannot plug inaccurate numbers in to the formulas in the World Builders' Handbook and expect to get accurate information back.

 

[Condottiere]

Use it, if it looks like it makes sense.

Adjust it, if it doesn't.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Use it, if it looks like it makes sense.

Adjust it, if it doesn't.

So, your point of view is that We, as buyers of Traveller materiel, should have to rewrite every single book We buy just to fix the problems that the publishers created?

 

[Endie]

This is the part I need further explanation on.

Explain to me how they are supposed to work and be accurate (non-diegetically) if they are inaccurate (diegetically)? I cannot plug inaccurate numbers in to the formulas in the World Builders' Handbook and expect to get accurate information back.

I know from your comments recently that this makes you angry, but it’s up to you: that’s always been the heart of Traveller.

Maybe you say the figures are right, that Drinax really does have a class A starport. Or maybe you say that the situation is what the PoD books describe: that the starport is class B at best, more like class C, and that the survey is out of date.

That’s a consistent approach and is a sane approach in a game world with almost fifty years of conflicting sources across ten or more different versions of the game.

The other approach is to throw up your hands in despair that nobody is telling you exactly what every detail is with absolute accuracy, but that seems like a lot of stress to put oneself under over a game that’s actually very fun and playable with a modicum of initiative.

Edit: you edited your post quietly to add in the bit about UWP preceding the 3i. Absolutely it 100% did. And MWM then used the UWP as the output of the scout service survey when he invented that. Not in any way the gotcha you think it is. Traveller has never been the fixed, immutable and pure system of a single truth you crave so badly. It has always been in flux. Argue with MWM if you really want to rage about that.

 

[Endie]

So, your point of view is that We, as buyers of Traveller materiel, should have to rewrite every single book We buy just to fix the problems that the publishers created?

He’s right. And you’re strawmanning wildly, which is not very good faith. Obviously he doesn’t say “rewrite every book” he says “be a normal person and make the odd judgement call.”

 

[Condottiere]

Well, I'm having a go at a little narrating.

I'm far from familiar with the region I decided to base it on, so I look at the written statistics, which may or may not be canon, and see if I can work it in, or work with it.

 

[MasterGwydion]

He’s right. And you’re strawmanning wildly, which is not very good faith. Obviously he doesn’t say “rewrite every book” he says “be a normal person and make the odd judgement call.”

The odd judgement call? Have you not played Traveller? They can't even write ships in their new books that follow the rules that they established. At what point should people quit demanding higher quality products? I can show you problems in every single MgT2 book. So, who is not operating in good faith here? Me? You? Mongoose publishing?

I know from your comments recently that this makes you angry, but it’s up to you: that’s always been the heart of Traveller.

It does make Me angry when I spend money for a Traveller book, that doesn't work with the material that this same publisher has published. If I buy a book with a game system in it, I expect the game system to function. I do not enjoy buying a book and then having to "fix" it. Ask @Terry Mixon how he feels having to fix every single ship that Mongoose publishes because it doesn't match the rules as written by Mongoose. I also have to rewrite just about every ship in the game because it doesn't follow the rules, along with most of the planetary systems. Why? Because Mongoose isn't following their own rules. The rules flat out state things and then Mongoose ignores them and people like you make up excuses for them doing as bad job, for 40+ years! Why encourage mediocrity? Traveller is a brilliant game and a brilliant idea, but the execution leaves something to be desired.

Maybe you say the figures are right, that Drinax really does have a class A starport. Or maybe you say that the situation is what the PoD books describe: that the starport is class B at best, more like class C, and that the survey is out of date.

That’s a consistent approach and is a sane approach in a game world with almost fifty years of conflicting sources across ten or more different versions of the game.

The other approach is to throw up your hands in despair that nobody is telling you exactly what every detail is with absolute accuracy, but that seems like a lot of stress to put oneself under over a game that’s actually very fun and playable with a modicum of initiative.

What is the point of putting out a setting if what you are putting out doesn't obey the rules of the setting that you created? As a player there is no stress, because I am responsible for nothing. As a Referee, there is tons of stress. How do you run a sandbox campaign where you have to rewrite most worlds because their descriptive text doesn't fit the UWP? How do I determine the BTN between 2 worlds if I don't have their accurate population numbers? Traveller doesn't give Us all of the information, but it does give Us enough information and formulas that We can calculate the rest of the information... Except, We can't if the information they give isn't accurate. Inaccurate information is for players, not Referees and publishers.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Well, I'm having a go at a little narrating.

I'm far from familiar with the region I decided to base it on, so I look at the written statistics, which may or may not be canon, and see if I can work it in, or work with it.

So, basically, you rewrite everything to make sure it fits. So, why buy the books?

 

[Endie]

You say Mongoose makes you angry. You’ve complained endlessly about them and their output with the same, identical point again and again across thread after thread for day after endless day. You say that buying their products is pointless and a waste of money.

Why do you bother? If it makes you so unhappy that you waste the only life you’ll ever have making furious, sometimes all-caps posts on an internet forum to strangers, why not just leave us all alone to enjoy the game we like and take up a hobby that doesn’t make you constantly bitter?

This is not a troll. It’s a serious question. You seem so unhappy all the time about something you spend so much time on. Is it because you hope to persuade us all to boycott the game?

Edit: “As a Referee, there is tons of stress”. I’m sorry you experience that. I felt that way with D&D 5e so I just stopped DMing it and the problem was instantly gone. I’ve never felt that way with Traveller. If I did I’d stop.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Ask @Terry Mixon how he feels having to fix every single ship that Mongoose publishes because it doesn't match the rules as written by Mongoose.

It annoys the heck out of me. They have rules and they don’t even have someone verify the builds are legal. They could use @Arkathan’s spreadsheet and see they have problems. The output isn’t copyrighted, so that is 100% legal. Why can’t they do that?

 

[MasterGwydion]

You say Mongoose makes you angry. You’ve complained endlessly about them and their output with the same, identical point again and again across thread after thread for day after endless day. You say that buying their products is pointless and a waste of money.

Why do you bother? If it makes you so unhappy that you waste the only life you’ll ever have making furious, sometimes all-caps posts on an internet forum to strangers, why not just leave us all alone to enjoy the game we like and take up a hobby that doesn’t make you constantly bitter?

This is not a troll. It’s a serious question. You seem so unhappy all the time about something you spend so much time on. Is it because you hope to persuade us all to boycott the game?

Because Mongoose has the potential to be one of the best game companies that has yet existed, and I want them to be better. I point out both problems and solutions, not just problems. You are mad at Me for trying to clarify how rules work, and when it is shown that they don't, you and others try and use history to explain to me why we can't make the game better and the rules function cohesively.

I try and improve the game that we collective love and you accuse Me of hating the game. Yet, you can't explain to me what the point is for writing a rule and then violating all over the place. Why not just change the rule to make it work without modification? Then if people want to change it, they can, but they don't need to for the game to function according to its own rules. I try and look at rules and I ask Myself, what effects would this rule have on the other rules in the game as well as what effect this and other rules may have on the game setting. (such as the example given above with using computers and mining credits. The example someone else gave about how the fluff says that it is very hard to make money legally, so adventurers have to take risks, but then they designed a system where you can buy a few computers and bit of software and can live the high life, or at least a high SOC life.) Why write that fluff and then build a system that disproves that? What point did that serve? How did that improve this game which we all love? That is just one example of hundreds that I am sure exist.

Does that make sense?

 

[MasterGwydion]

It annoys the heck out of me. They have rules and they don’t even have someone verify the builds are legal. They could use @Arkathan’s spreadsheet and see they have problems. The output isn’t copyrighted, so that is 100% legal. Why can’t they do that?

@Arkathan has a great spreadsheet, but it isn't perfect. I will say that it is way better than any other shipbuilding tools I have ever seen though, and it is being improved all of the time to make sure that it includes all of the rules and doesn't violate any rules without you selecting to specifically ignore a rule or two.

 

[Endie]

Because Mongoose has the potential to be one of the best game companies that has yet existed, and I want them to be better. I point out both problems and solutions, not just problems. You are mad at Me for trying to clarify how rules work, and when it is shown that they don't, you and others try and use history to explain to me why we can't make the game better and the rules function cohesively.

I try and improve the game that we collective love and you accuse Me of hating the game. Yet, you can't explain to me what the point is for writing a rule and then violating all over the place. Why not just change the rule to make it work without modification? Then if people want to change it, they can, but they don't need to for the game to function according to its own rules. I try and look at rules and I ask Myself, what effects would this rule have on the other rules in the game as well as what effect this and other rules may have on the game setting. (such as the example given above with using computers and mining credits. The example someone else gave about how the fluff says that it is very hard to make money legally, so adventurers have to take risks, but then they designed a system where you can buy a few computers and bit of software and can live the high life, or at least a high SOC life.) Why write that fluff and then build a system that disproves that? What point did that serve? How did that improve this game which we all love? That is just one example of hundreds that I am sure exist.

Does that make sense?

Yeah I think I understand that you have very strong compulsions towards consistency, ones that make you very angry and uncomfortable and liable to both project your behaviour onto others and to lash out aggressively about anything that doesn’t fit those Platonic ideals of absolute consistency.

In a world where such consistency is literally impossible, and to the majority of Mongoose’s customers actively undesirably restrictive, that must be very frustrating and I think I understand a little better why you post the way you do.

Edit: “The example someone else gave about how the fluff says that it is very hard to make money legally, so adventurers have to take risks, but then they designed a system where you can buy a few computers and bit of software and can live the high life, or at least a high SOC life.)”

That was Joe and he openly said he was using one rule from 2016 for the exploit in question, and that rule was removed for the current version. Yeah: it’s possible to take rules from different versions of Traveller that don’t mesh well.

 

[Terry Mixon]

@Arkathan has a great spreadsheet, but it isn't perfect. I will say that it is way better than any other shipbuilding tools I have ever seen though, and it is being improved all of the time to make sure that it includes all of the rules and doesn't violate any rules without you selecting to specifically ignore a rule or two.

Perfect? No. Able to spot basic errors? Absolutely.

 

[Endie]

It annoys the heck out of me. They have rules and they don’t even have someone verify the builds are legal. They could use @Arkathan’s spreadsheet and see they have problems. The output isn’t copyrighted, so that is 100% legal. Why can’t they do that?

Did you watch the recent interview with Mongoose Matt where he explained quite clearly that yes, sometimes they’ll intentionally allow ship builds that don’t follow the law 100%?

Obviously I’m fine with that, and you’re not. But it’s not (always) due to mistakes. It’s an informed decision because they want to let groups have fun in unusual stories.