Sorting things out: 2300AD is not Traveller

[Pentapod earplug]

Now when there is actually a game, is it not time that 2300ad got its own section? At the moment information about this setting is drowning in Travellerstuff, which while fine stuff I am sure, I am not at all interested in.

 

[Old timer]

Actually it is traveller, as that is the rule system used, but it is not the 3I. When it was first released it was always traveller: 2300AD.

 

[Colin]

It uses the Traveller ruleset; however, it is definitely not set in the Traveller Universe. While I wouldn't mind seeing it get it's own section, there are opportunities for cross-fertilization of ideas by keeping them in the same section.

 

[FreeTrav]

It uses the Traveller ruleset; however, it is definitely not set in the Traveller Universe. While I wouldn't mind seeing it get it's own section, there are opportunities for cross-fertilization of ideas by keeping them in the same section.

Freelance Traveller agrees with this, and will be supporting 2300AD once Mongoose releases the 2300AD recore book, along with all of the other Traveller out there.

Dammit, this version SHOULD be called Traveller: 2300!

 

[GamerDude]

Now when there is actually a game, is it not time that 2300ad got its own section? At the moment information about this setting is drowning in Travellerstuff, which while fine stuff I am sure, I am not at all interested in.

Well, 2300AD is an old GDW campaign setting, be republished by Mongoose Publishing, and using the current MGT rules system.

Just as Mongoose has published other settings under the MGT rules:
Hammer's Slammers
Judge Dread
Strontium Dogs

So, MGP 2300AD would warrent its own section if A) was a different SYSTEM or B) as a setting it got so much traffic and attention Matt&Co decided to make a 2300AD forum section.

 

[Pentapod earplug]

Sounds fair. Lets hope it gets "enough attention" then!

Subjected to only limited exposure of Trav classic, I often find the various attempts at reconciling the universes confusing and rather pointless, but thats me. As a side note, I am one of those weird ones who go for setting first, sets of game rules second, or wait, not at all mostly. Having loads of old 2300AD GM-hours under the belt way back, I feel that if I was ever to attempt 2300AD as GM again, I would just swap the rules for something else if they do not work for me. Anyway, I suppose the venerable traveller system is a minute stumble in the right direction compared to d20. Time, like up to when I get my eagerly anticipated copy, will tell.

 

[PFVA63]

Sounds fair. Lets hope it gets "enough attention" then!

Subjected to only limited exposure of Trav classic, I often find the various attempts at reconciling the universes confusing and rather pointless, but thats me. As a side note, I am one of those weird ones who go for setting first, sets of game rules second, or wait, not at all mostly. Having loads of old 2300AD GM-hours under the belt way back, I feel that if I was ever to attempt 2300AD as GM again, I would just swap the rules for something else if they do not work for me. Anyway, I suppose the venerable traveller system is a minute stumble in the right direction compared to d20. Time, like up to when I get my eagerly anticipated copy, will tell.

Hi,

I think I also tend to settings first and worry about what rules are used second. Though, one of the things that I kind of liked about the original 2300AD was that it wasn't using "Traveller" type rules. Although Traveller had been my first RPG and I kind of liked it, I was very interested at the time in seeing what else was out there and what other types of approaches were available for trying to do things. As such, I definitely plan to buy the new MGT 2300AD stuff, but I'm not sure if I'll ever end up using it with the MGT Traveller rules.

Pat