Scouts Book from Mongoose ?

[spinwardpirate]

Scouts were always my favorite. I sometimes wonder if I choose my real life career path because it was somewhat Scout-like. (I'm a nautical cartographer for the National Ocean Service, Office of Coast Survey.)

Heh. Your not the only one, looking at my brand new BS in Geography.

I went back to school to figure out the science behind Traveller.

Funny. Let's meet at a starport bar and buy each other drinks!

 

[Infojunky]

Just ran a census on the TML, just as a mixer and get to know you.

It helps in putting games together, you never know who is local and jonesing for game.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

If a system as complex and involved as Traveller's isn't using realism as a baseline then I'm not really sure what it's good for.

Luckily the variant rules in MGT take out the worst of the nonsense.

But if you're not concerned about realism, a simple 2d6 table will provide most of your options.

 

[Infojunky]

If a system as complex and involved as Traveller's isn't using realism as a baseline then I'm not really sure what it's good for.

Define Realism please.

Luckily the variant rules in MGT take out the worst of the nonsense.

Yes, but Traveller has always been a toolkit/tinker's system. It is one of the joys of it. Heck a good chunk of early Cannon is from out side of GDW.

But if you're not concerned about realism, a simple 2d6 table will provide most of your options.

Yep ain't it grand!

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Define Realism please.

What I mean is a system that does not routinely produce obviously none-realistic worlds.

Yes, but Traveller has always been a toolkit/tinker's system. It is one of the joys of it. Heck a good chunk of early Cannon is from out side of GDW.

That's fine for those of us that have lived with Traveller for years, but a newby needs a system that works and gives useful results "out of the box".

Yep ain't it grand!

I don't mean roll 2d6 several times and apply lots of modifiers. I mean roll 2d6 once and get one from 11 world templates. You get roughly the same kind of variety just with that.

As it stands the UWP leaves out most of the information useful to roleplaying. (indigenous race or alien, length of settlement, type of biosphere, renowned resources, etc, etc)

 

[Infojunky]

Define Realism please.

What I mean is a system that does not routinely produce obviously none-realistic worlds.

As compared to?

Yes, but Traveller has always been a toolkit/tinker's system. It is one of the joys of it. Heck a good chunk of early Cannon is from out side of GDW.

That's fine for those of us that have lived with Traveller for years, but a newby needs a system that works and gives useful results "out of the box".

Ok, the base system does that, what's the problem?

Yep ain't it grand!

I don't mean roll 2d6 several times and apply lots of modifiers. I mean roll 2d6 once and get one from 11 world templates. You get roughly the same kind of variety just with that.

As it stands the UWP leaves out most of the information useful to roleplaying. (indigenous race or alien, length of settlement, type of biosphere, renowned resources, etc, etc)

Ah? you want tables with details... Well, now that might be a lengthy tome. Did ya' take a gander at the system I posted? it adds 3 codes to the basic stat line that go quite a ways towards what I think your asking.

If I am reading you right you want a new version of Grand Census/Worldbuilders. Then yes I could go for that.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

As compared to?

I mean rocks smaller than the moon with breathable atmospheres, or dirt poor vac worlds with hi pop lo tech inhabitants and a rubbish starport. That kind of world.

Ok, the base system does that, what's the problem?

It does, with the variant caveats.

Ah? you want tables with details... Well, now that might be a lengthy tome. Did ya' take a gander at the system I posted? it adds 3 codes to the basic stat line that go quite a ways towards what I think your asking.

If I am reading you right you want a new version of Grand Census/Worldbuilders. Then yes I could go for that.

I had a quick gander, but all those systems are way too involved to get the bare results you do get. And it is better described in words, rather than numbers you have to look up.

Extra factors do need to be recorded, but the number string notation is unwieldy with just 6 or so, let alone 10 or 12.

 

[Infojunky]

I had a quick gander, but all those systems are way too involved to get the bare results you do get. And it is better described in words, rather than numbers you have to look up.

Extra factors do need to be recorded, but the number string notation is unwieldy with just 6 or so, let alone 10 or 12.

Ah! I see the UWP is just short hand, and there lies your problem.....

As for physical characteristics, any and all might be reasonable once you get out side of our system, and as such fix the ones that seem wrong in your game, me I'll find and explanation that amuses me and run with it. After all it is just a game.

As for describing things with words instead of codes, Go for it, there is a long tradition of people detailing systems. Google Traveller Landgrab. Most all of the classic adventures detail a specific world to some level of detail.

As I said earlier in this post and in other places UWP is only a rough descriptor of what a world/system is about, what it means is up to you and your group.

 

[FallingPhoenix]

I mean rocks smaller than the moon with breathable atmospheres, or dirt poor vac worlds with hi pop lo tech inhabitants and a rubbish starport. That kind of world.

Hmmmm....that first one sounds like a good mystery to me...maybe there's an ancient site hidden on-world that produces the atmosphere? Maybe there was, but now it's self-sustaining?

As for the second one, what if there was a catastrophe of some kind that caused a quarantine? People maybe didn't die, but were altered or left in enough pain that no one else wanted it? Maybe the vacuum world is underground, but the sun went crazy enough that regular starships can't get to the world without getting fried, and the people had to make do without outside help. Somewhere along the way, the maintenance of the tech they needed to survive became religious, or maybe they just keep fixing what they've got because they don't have the local ability to produce new stuff to replace it?

Or maybe it's a pop placed by the Ancients? (Okay, I admit, that one's already getting a little overused)...

 

[tneva82]

or dirt poor vac worlds with hi pop lo tech inhabitants

Atleast that doesn't happen with MongT thanks to minimum tech level compared to atmosphere.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Hmmmm....that first one sounds like a good mystery to me...maybe there's an ancient site hidden on-world that produces the atmosphere? Maybe there was, but now it's self-sustaining?

That would be OK if it was just the odd world here and there. Statistically, it amounts to 25-40% of them (in old versions mind; MGT strips out the worst quite simply). They are almost the norm, not an anomaly.

My 'beef' with UWP is that it is convoluted and complicated, takes ages to get a little bit of info. In fact, you do not get enough info to work with - you have to make up the rest of it yourself before it has any value; as such, it is less an aid to the ref rather than a hindrance.

To illustrate, I was looking for a specific scenario in QLI's Gateway Domain, tho nothing unusual. I wanted an NI, mid-tech, v low Law level world with a breathable atmo within a few parsecs of a highish pop highish tech world. That should not be hard. Only a single example in 4 sectors!

I found the Spinward Marches unusable until I got Behind the Claw (luckily MJD is doing MGTs version, so my SM should be compatible with theirs). 3 lines of text say far, far more than any un-user-friendly multiple number string.

Yes a ref is free to change anything, but the more he does that the more difficulty he has using published material. And the UWP garantees no ones OTU will resemble anyone elses whatsoever.

It also has to be said that no published OTU sector relates at all to the world gen system (so far, at least). It seems the designers felt they couldn't rely on the system to produce useful results anyway.

I'll tell you this; it's 10 times quicker just making up the numbers yourself than using any Trav worldgen system, and then you have all the other info in your head that players need to be able to play.

 

[Infojunky]

My 'beef' with UWP is that it is convoluted and complicated, takes ages to get a little bit of info. In fact, you do not get enough info to work with - you have to make up the rest of it yourself before it has any value; as such, it is less an aid to the ref rather than a hindrance.

I wouldn't say that.

The 1st code is the port class, it tells us what sorts of services are available.

The next 3 give us size, atmosphere and amount of water.

Which thumbnail gravity (as a side note the higher the water percentage the higher the base average density of said planet and thus the gravity), what sorts of environmental gear generally required outdoors on the surface.

The last three in the core block give us a gross population estimate, a general form of government, and what kind of pain in the ass it is to deal with.

Then we have the general tech level/rating. Which gives us a idea of what kind of infrastructure is generally available.

In all a thumbnail picture, better than what y'all get on a roadmap.

To illustrate, I was looking for a specific scenario in QLI's Gateway Domain, tho nothing unusual. I wanted an NI, mid-tech, v low Law level world with a breathable atmo within a few parsecs of a highish pop highish tech world. That should not be hard. Only a single example in 4 sectors!

Yes I agree this is a pain when you are limited to manual searches, and the lack of a good mapper/database program is felt when one gets much beyond the sub-sector level. Though Galactic 2.4 goes a long way towards filling that gap.

I found the Spinward Marches unusable until I got Behind the Claw (luckily MJD is doing MGTs version, so my SM should be compatible with theirs). 3 lines of text say far, far more than any un-user-friendly multiple number string.

Well, we can ask him, I would bet that UWP will be a more central feature in MGT than Gurps:Traveller being that they have been put together with two different design philosophies.

Yes a ref is free to change anything, but the more he does that the more difficulty he has using published material. And the UWP garantees no ones OTU will resemble anyone elses whatsoever.

Ok, playing the Devil's Advocate here: Why should it?

Even if I adhered to published/cannon sectors they would change as time progressed. They have to, as the characters move and interact with a dynamic universe changes happen. The clock isn't static.

It also has to be said that no published OTU sector relates at all to the world gen system (so far, at least). It seems the designers felt they couldn't rely on the system to produce useful results anyway.

Most of the published sectors where roughly generated by what ever system was current, then gone over to modify things they felt needed change. That has been SOP for every sector I have ever seen, no matter what system was used. UWP is the one little piece of the toolkit.

Back to "published" or Cannon sectors, there are a bunch that where done by computer by DGP, from these the Dot-maps were generated, the raw files for these are highly suspect as they haven't had the human touch.

I'll tell you this; it's 10 times quicker just making up the numbers yourself than using any Trav worldgen system, and then you have all the other info in your head that players need to be able to play.

Yes, that is a viable system also, it's not random, but it will fit you traveller universe.

IMTU = In My Traveller Universe was coined years ago to describe one own personal expression of what they feel Traveller is.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

But let's look at what the UWP doesn't give us. (I'm talking traditional, here, as MGT addresses this somewhat).

Proper differentiation between non-breathable atmos.
Age of settlement.
Who settled it? What species live there?
Level of biosphere. Bacteria or dinosaurs?
Temperature.
Unusual tilt, tidelocked?
Tectonic activity, weather, EM field.
No. of satellites.
Is it itself a satellite of a GG?
Main economic activity (tho partially described in the trade codes).
Military level.
Wealth. (ergo, Japan is Poor when you look at natural resources, but rich in economic terms).

Most of this is more important than knowing whether a planet has 70% water coverage or 80%.

Yes, you can infer local gravity from Size, but at-a-glance it is less than helpful.

A UWP style number code is useful for putting as much data on one sheet as possible, but if that data is incomplete and you have to unpick it too then that's just frustrating.

A comparison could be: the UWP is the .zip file, and a useful description the uncompressed document. Except you have to do all the decompression in your head.

Why is it a problem if MTU diverges from the OTU? Well that's fine if I want it too. But say I've been running a game on Regina for years, then pick up an adventure set there, and the published Regina is utterly different.

For instance, it is a matter of canon that Regina has an indigenous intelligent race. Except no one knew that from the UWP, and it came as a surprise when something is published that said that. MWM has stated that there are dozens of nonhuman races in every sector. The OTU does not reflect that.

This happened when I acquired the Tarsus boxed set on eBay. It was so different than the one I had 'made' out of the UWP that the UWP might as well have been totally different.

And yes, by choosing my UWP myself it is not random, but then in order to make a UWP playable you have to do just that. They're not really random either.

It's just such a waste of effort that could be better spent on 'cool things' to number crunch UWPs, especially when you have to discard a third of the results for being silly and then generate most of the necessary info from your imagination anyway.

A lot of the descriptions done from UWPs defy the UWP in some way too - the designer has an idea for a planet but then has to shoehorn it into the already published UWP. Check out the Starfall Cluster, Starfall in particular. A great planet to adventure on, full of juicy bits, but on closer inspection the Pop score is just too low to make it credible; in which case (IMTU), the Pop score goes and the description stays, cuz words is better than a number.

As a hook to build a planet out of, the UWP is just too complicated. A term like 'Marginal Terrestrial, small mining colony, TL11', or 'Terrestrial, industrial homeworld, TL12' are much more helpful, and consistent.

And while I will concede that planetary descriptions, such as in the forthcoming SM, should have a UWP, for the canonistas and compatibility, it should be built from the capsule, not vice versa. In the SM's case, the numbers are established, but MJD did a good job of rationalising them last time round.

IMO, the UWP is a shibboleth. Pity it can't be ditched or totally reformed....

 

[Infojunky]

But let's look at what the UWP doesn't give us. (I'm talking traditional, here, as MGT addresses this somewhat).

Proper differentiation between non-breathable atmos.
Age of settlement.
Who settled it? What species live there?
Level of biosphere. Bacteria or dinosaurs?
Temperature.
Unusual tilt, tidelocked?
Tectonic activity, weather, EM field.
No. of satellites.
Is it itself a satellite of a GG?
Main economic activity (tho partially described in the trade codes).
Military level.
Wealth. (ergo, Japan is Poor when you look at natural resources, but rich in economic terms).

All of this sort of detail I include in library data, not sector listings.

A UWP style number code is useful for putting as much data on one sheet as possible, but if that data is incomplete and you have to unpick it too then that's just frustrating.

Ah, Try line instead of Sheet. The UWP is what is in the charts, as I said before it is only a rough thumbnail of the system. i.e. The point on the map. The information you are looking for would be in the library data. The gazetteer for the sub-sector. Etc...

It become very obvious that you are confusing map data with the facts of the place, they are two different things. No worries.

A comparison could be: the UWP is the .zip file, and a useful description the uncompressed document. Except you have to do all the decompression in your head.

Yep, what's so bad about that? From the provided data I can infer reams of socioeconomic data, that tells me kinda what to expect as a casual traveller passing through the port. what it doesn't give me is detailed analysis of the place. And that is what I believe you are asking for.

Which is ok, I understand the need/want. One of the real questions is "How much are you willing to pay for it?"

What do you want out of a sector book? How much detail? How much time are you willing to put into providing that level of detail in your game?

Why is it a problem if MTU diverges from the OTU? Well that's fine if I want it too. But say I've been running a game on Regina for years, then pick up an adventure set there, and the published Regina is utterly different.

For instance, it is a matter of canon that Regina has an indigenous intelligent race. Except no one knew that from the UWP, and it came as a surprise when something is published that said that. MWM has stated that there are dozens of nonhuman races in every sector. The OTU does not reflect that.

Ok, now comes it comes to the decision point everybody makes when using preprinted/modules within their campaign, do you change the data in your game to reflect the module or change the module to reflect your game. Either is fine, but the weight is on your shoulders.

As a hook to build a planet out of, the UWP is just too complicated. A term like 'Marginal Terrestrial, small mining colony, TL11', or 'Terrestrial, industrial homeworld, TL12' are much more helpful, and consistent.

And while I will concede that planetary descriptions, such as in the forthcoming SM, should have a UWP, for the canonistas and compatibility, it should be built from the capsule, not vice versa. In the SM's case, the numbers are established, but MJD did a good job of rationalising them last time round.

I think we require different things out of our sector maps, you want more provided detail. Sometimes that is nice, having it all laid out for you, frequently i find that to be a straightjacket. YMMV. If I need the data you list at the beginning of this post I generate it on a as needed basis. As even listed UWPs are out of date for the Era my game is set in.

Though if this helps there is site on the web where the author has listed every world that ever been used in an adventure.

 

[captainjack23]

That would be OK if it was just the odd world here and there. Statistically, it amounts to 25-40% of them (in old versions mind; MGT strips out the worst quite simply). They are almost the norm, not an anomaly.

Point of math. You're overstaing the liklihood by a great deal.

Assuming a planet < earths moon = 0,1 ,
And breathable ~= ATM 3 + :

The chance of a size 1 world with 3+ atm =110/1296 ~=8%
size 0 world with 3+ atm =36/1296 ~= 2%
or ~= 10% Max. There is thus a 40% chance of getting one of those worlds if you roll up six.

So, you'll have several (most likely 3-5) per subsector.

Probably, given how unlikely such a natural result is (impossible according to the actual planetologist) that is too many, if you want to put the effort into modding the final results on a sector level-or -if you care to do so.

However, the basic assumption that sees this as a problem in need of modification fails, really : The UWP generation process as given was never intended to be an unsupervised system (-ie requiring 0% ref input) to generate planets.

I mean, it might be nice if it was, but lots of discussion has convinced me that accounting for all the outlier results ramps up the complexity and time enormously - and seems to invariably add in another layer of errors/eratta. Your Tolerance May Vary. Plus, if you hate a result, change it -even if it is in the PTU canon....and if you don't notice it, it doesn't matter.

 

[captainjack23]

To illustrate, I was looking for a specific scenario in QLI's Gateway Domain, tho nothing unusual. I wanted an NI, mid-tech, v low Law level world with a breathable atmo within a few parsecs of a highish pop highish tech world. That should not be hard. Only a single example in 4 sectors!

WARNING More Prob math wankery !

well....I'd guess that the main culprit in that was the Hi-pop requirement - a pop 9/10 world adds a factor =`.09 to the liklihood of a world meeting your requirements....dropping the pop requirement to 8 would double the number of nearby candidates.

Rememeber....when combining probabilities, one multiplies them ; that can make an overall liklihood drop VERY quickly with multiple criterea.

Observe , an annoying probability trick !

The target planet, even if there was a 50% chance of generating each of its criterea would only have a liklihood of: 18 ^4/36^4 =104976/1679616 0r ~=.06 . (6%)

So, multiply that by the liklihood of the nearby planet (from above =.09), you get .054. OR, about 1/36 chance to find that specific combination of two planets per pair examined.....so you only have half as many chances per subsector) and that's not even noting that they cannot be more than (guessing what several means) 1-6 parcecs apart - which drops the overall liklihood even more.....

So, honestly, getting one per quadrant wasn't too surprising. As you said, much better to have added them yourselves.


Thanks to those who read this far ....feel much better, now...

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

WARNING More Prob math wankery !

In public??!! :shock: You have no shame, sir!

Thanks to those who read this far ....feel much better, now...

...e-ew...

 

[tneva82]

But let's look at what the UWP doesn't give us. (I'm talking traditional, here, as MGT addresses this somewhat).

Then again UWP isn't intended to be complete coverage but rather quick overview on certain aspects(especially where it's related to trade charts). You can more easily look for prospective trade partners from UWP's than with bunch of detailed describitions.

I haven't seen anywhere claim that UWP would be complete and include every detail so where's the problem?

 

[Klaus Kipling]

But let's look at what the UWP doesn't give us. (I'm talking traditional, here, as MGT addresses this somewhat).

Proper differentiation between non-breathable atmos.
Age of settlement.
Who settled it? What species live there?
Level of biosphere. Bacteria or dinosaurs?
Temperature.
Unusual tilt, tidelocked?
Tectonic activity, weather, EM field.
No. of satellites.
Is it itself a satellite of a GG?
Main economic activity (tho partially described in the trade codes).
Military level.
Wealth. (ergo, Japan is Poor when you look at natural resources, but rich in economic terms).

All of this sort of detail I include in library data, not sector listings.

Why? Any reason other than that's the way Traveller does it? It maybe what folk do, but it doesn't justify the UWP.

It become very obvious that you are confusing map data with the facts of the place, they are two different things. No worries.

Nope. In the vast majority of cases, the map data is all the facts we have.

A comparison could be: the UWP is the .zip file, and a useful description the uncompressed document. Except you have to do all the decompression in your head.

Yep, what's so bad about that?

In your head? Fine for a computer to do it. The UWP is fine for a computer to 'get'; I prefer plain English.

From the provided data I can infer reams of socioeconomic data, that tells me kinda what to expect as a casual traveller passing through the port. what it doesn't give me is detailed analysis of the place. And that is what I believe you are asking for.

You can, or you can just make it up, since that's what you're doing anyway. 2 folk look at the same UWP can get totally different and contradictory socioeconomic data, and most of the time do. How is that helpful? If the inferences aren't even slightly consistent, then it's not really useful at all.

Which is ok, I understand the need/want. One of the real questions is "How much are you willing to pay for it?"

Enough. More than I'm willing to pay for pages of mostly useless number strings.

What do you want out of a sector book? How much detail? How much time are you willing to put into providing that level of detail in your game?

I want a playable sector. I don't want to fork out cash, and then have to do most of the work myself.

A decent amount of detail: some very detailed worlds, some less so, only a paragraph, some maybe just a line or two. The rest? No UWP, just a location - if I've got to fill in the rest at least give me carte blanche.

How much time? A lot.... Something I have actually done (in collaboration), and which you will be able to peruse sometime this year.... The UWPs were annoying and quite literally the least enjoyable part of the process, stifling creativity and boring me senseless. The rest of the endeavour has been a lot of fun. Though doing someone else's accounts is more fun than wrangling UWPs.

I think we require different things out of our sector maps, you want more provided detail. Sometimes that is nice, having it all laid out for you, frequently i find that to be a straightjacket. YMMV. If I need the data you list at the beginning of this post I generate it on a as needed basis. As even listed UWPs are out of date for the Era my game is set in.

Though if this helps there is site on the web where the author has listed every world that ever been used in an adventure.

When I purchase an rp product I expect to have bought something useful. Doing a star map is the easy bit. What could be easier than deciding which hexes to fill with planets and which not? I don't necessarily expect a whole sector to be detailed, but important worlds need to be mentioned and put into context, which are the local powers, who has the money. If I want to detail my own stuff, then leave a few systems blank, allowing me free reign.

The UWP is woefully inadequate as even a planetary sketch. Not enough data to be useful, too much to allow proper creativity.

When I buy a dvd, I expect to see a film, not half a script and a couple of pictures and an advisory to have fun filling in the rest with my imagination.

The UWP quite simply does not do the job it was intended to, ie: give a ref enough of the useful info he needs on a credible planet in the most concise form possible. It's concise, yes, but so does leaving out all the vowels mean you use less characters in a sentence. r lvng t ll th vwls mn y s lss chrctrs n sntnc.

That Traveller fans have made do is not the issue - of course you can come up with your own stuff, but if you look at most of the sector books or cluster books published recently you'll rarely find a bare UWP - a capsule of some kind is just the basic minimum I would expect to pay money for. (and some of the contortions to get round the straight jacket of a UWP are quite breathtaking in their creativity, but why should they feel the need to in the first place if the UWP was so good in itself?)

And if, to produce that capsule, you have to make up most of the info, then the UWP is not doing it's job.

 

[pasuuli]

The UWP does not produce 'playable' planets, in the sense of a World Builder's Handbook or a Subsector Sourcebook. It's not supposed to. Its job is to tell the referee (and some players) what players can expect in very broad terms. It's a basic and highly randomized role-playing aid.

It tells them what the Imperium thinks of the world (starport), and what kind of facilities exist for their ship, how difficult it might be to refuel, if they need to wear a vacc suit, or a respirator, how big the cities will probably get, and how the government might treat offworlders, what kind of gear and repairs are available, and what kind of weapons will get them thrown in jail.

"Everything" else (for some value of "everything") is color.

On the other hand, a sourcebook ought to write up worlds. The barest minimum is a paragraph of color text like GURPS: Behind the Claw, but what I pay for is a two to three page writeup for individual worlds, done like the LBB adventures wrote up worlds.