Scouts system generation

[captainjack23]

You don't actually have Scouts yet, right ?

No, I'm just asking what it's based on. I suppose that eventually I'll see the published version (this is one book I may be tempted to pick up, depending on how many glaring layout errors surface).

That is about it.

I'll have to see the results it generates before I can opinionate properly. But it sounds like it was developed based on something that "felt right" rather than by fully generating systems and simplifying things down to see how many planets on average fell in each zone or within the jump shadow.

No, it's based on the points I mentioned. I'm assuming that "felt right" is a polite way of saying "hogwash" ? 8)

If so, you'd be basically right; but here's the issue: generating the system and then defining the count (as you suggest) would have required that I generate stellar data that I would have to pull out of thin air, (or copy without permission) so I avoided that entirely, and tried to avoid anything that would tie MGT to more essentially made-up planetary and stellar data -which is what it would be if I did it. So, since I didn't have the time and motivation to get another doctora te (this one in planetary sciences), I didn't.

I do have to say that it's a system I sent to you for input during the playtest - and you were pretty definite that you weren't interested in my approach or my system, or the need for it. Fair enough, and no hard feelings, but the lack of technical input didn't go away; and so it probably isn't anything you like now.

It is an attempt to hit a greater level of narrative description than in the core book, without the detail intended for a specific book, with a minimum of handwavium. There is, however lots more in the book than this one page digression for the help of the GM.

 

[EDG]

No, it's based on the points I mentioned. I'm assuming that "felt right" is a polite way of saying "hogwash" ? 8)

No, it means that it's not based on anything scientific or particularly realistic beyond some very broad boundaries.

I do have to say that it's a system I sent to you for input during the playtest - and you were pretty definite that you weren't interested in my approach or my system, or the need for it.

I wasn't involved in the Scouts playtest at all, and never received anything from you while it was going on, so I don't know why you're claiming that I wasn't interested in your approach when I never even saw it.

It is an attempt to hit a greater level of narrative description than in the core book, without the detail intended for a specific book, with a minimum of handwavium. There is, however lots more in the book than this one page digression for the help of the GM.

I'm just wondering why they bothered having any kind of quantitative system there in the first place - there's already enough unrealistic worldgen in Traveller without adding another one.

 

[captainjack23]

No, it's based on the points I mentioned. I'm assuming that "felt right" is a polite way of saying "hogwash" ? 8)

No, it means that it's not based on anything scientific or particularly realistic beyond some very broad boundaries.

on the nose. Thanks for not calling hogwash, then.

I do have to say that it's a system I sent to you for input during the playtest - and you were pretty definite that you weren't interested in my approach or my system, or the need for it.

I wasn't involved in the Scouts playtest at all, and never received anything from you while it was going on, so I don't know why you're claiming that I wasn't interested in your approach when I never even saw it.

My bad. I meant the original playtest of the core rules. I think it was mostly pm, but may have had some discussion in the forums. I remember it because you were particulalry...eloquent...on the subject of not seeing a need for it.

I'm just wondering why they bothered having any kind of quantitative system there in the first place - there's already enough unrealistic worldgen in Traveller without adding another one.

People wanted it, including Loz and whoever is the overall editor. [shrug] Given our lack of technical savvy, I think that it's a pretty good job of not making up crap just to fill tables, while still addressing a need. Response here suggests that some people think it useful.

Perhaps further discussion should go offline ? I'm not sure I can fairly say much more about a system you don't have access to.

 

[captainjack23]

True about the available orbits; as I said, I was just going on an "off the cuff" estimate. That probably brings it down to about 4%, or a small amount lower.

Yes, I guess I was going off the cuff too - you're right, it is actually 26/36 * 2/36 or 4%. (I multiplied by the wrong half..oops: )

Good point about it not being an unsupervised system, and closely related to my own point. This is a quick-start, inspirational system to give the ref a starting position from which to work. It's not a be-all and end-all astrophysics simulation system, and (as explicitly stated in the text!) is not intended even to accurately model reality. Personally, I think it succeeds pretty well within this remit.

As for Mars falling outside the habitable zone, well, by your own "hot, cold, just right" definition, Mars is probably more habitable than Venus, and probably more easily terraformable. I'd rule that it qualified, in my opinion.

Thanks !

Enjoy. Hope the rest of the book is as useful and successful for y'all.

 

[BP]

Is the World generation specific already underway, or just planned for the future?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Geez, I go away for the weekend and look what you've done to my thread!

Seriously, the ONE PAGE in Scouts about this is a Q-A-D method to fill in the rest of the planetary system without rolling a lot of dice.

For what is was meant to do, it is very slick. It is scientifically accurate? Probably not, but it is vague enough that you can make it more or less accurate as you like. It fills a void and does it well, in my not so humble opinion.

Specifically, the 2D to determine the number of worlds in the habitable zone (or near it) is very quick and seems to produce a nice range of results that don't glaringly shout NONSENSE. It works.

I expect a LOT more from the World Builders book, but this was a nice QAD procedure.

Given that it is only 1 page in length (well 2 pages I guess), it can only do so much, but what it does it does well. KUDOS!

 

[captainjack23]

Geez, I go away for the weekend and look what you've done to my thread!

Seriously, the ONE PAGE in Scouts about this is a Q-A-D method to fill in the rest of the planetary system without rolling a lot of dice.

For what is was meant to do, it is very slick. It is scientifically accurate? Probably not, but it is vague enough that you can make it more or less accurate as you like. It fills a void and does it well, in my not so humble opinion.

Specifically, the 2D to determine the number of worlds in the habitable zone (or near it) is very quick and seems to produce a nice range of results that don't glaringly shout NONSENSE. It works.

I expect a LOT more from the World Builders book, but this was a nice QAD procedure.

Given that it is only 1 page in length (well 2 pages I guess), it can only do so much, but what it does it does well. KUDOS!

Thank you sir. You've divined my intent completely. QAD indeed.

But, it was also an opportunity to clarify some design decisions for those interested in "under the hood", so the discussion was fine.

But again, thanks. compliments aren't always as helpful as criticism, but they sure feel nice !

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Oh, you want criticism? I can do that too if you like! :twisted:

 

[captainjack23]

Oh, you want criticism? I can do that too if you like! :twisted:

Let me guess...I'm ugly and my mother dresses me funny ?

 

[Dave Chase]

Oh, you want criticism? I can do that too if you like! :twisted:

Let me guess...I'm ugly and my mother dresses me funny ?

Oh no. The first one is obvious and the second one, well all know that gamers dress them selves. They would look better if they mother did dress them

LOL

Dave Chase

 

[captainjack23]

Oh, you want criticism? I can do that too if you like! :twisted:

Let me guess...I'm ugly and my mother dresses me funny ?

Oh no. The first one is obvious and the second one, well all know that gamers dress them selves. They would look better if they mother did dress them

LOL

Dave Chase

You sir, have never met my mother......