T5 vs Mongoose Traveler

[AKAramis]

Well then. Who could possibly wrap their brain around it?

From what I've read about previous versions of Traveller (some may be not entirely accurate, so long time traveller fans feel free to correct me), Marc Miller wanted a great deal of accuracy and realism in his games. He wants a game that would model realism greater then any current game (or version of Traveller) does. So doing things like having native life on a planet orbitting a white star is out.

Long time traveller fans, would you agree with that assessment?

Of Marc? No. Not at all. Marc seems to care not a whit about realism. Marc wants "Just realistic enough to keep the fan base." Marcs response to realism requests was bordering on snide.

By comparison to the other games of the late 1970's, traveller was the most realistic out there back then. But it never recovered.

It's a stylized Space Opera with Realistic Tendencies. How realistic varies. The editions by Marc (CT, T4) have been generally less realistic than those done outside his oversight (MT, TNE). Even then, for MT, not by much more (Combat, Ship Design. Space Combat, however, was badly broken from reality in MT...). TNE is the most realistic set of ship mechanics, but fails on the personal combat side... but is still somewhat more realistic than CT on that score.

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

Well then. Who could possibly wrap their brain around it?

From what I've read about previous versions of Traveller (some may be not entirely accurate, so long time traveller fans feel free to correct me), Marc Miller wanted a great deal of accuracy and realism in his games. He wants a game that would model realism greater then any current game (or version of Traveller) does. So doing things like having native life on a planet orbitting a white star is out.

Long time traveller fans, would you agree with that assessment?

Nope, absolutely, definitely, *NOT*. If you have access to them, look at the Universal World Profiles (UWPs) in the following Traveller books:

1. Classic Traveller Book 6 Scouts star system generation process;
2. Classic Traveller The Spinward Marches Campaign;
3. Classic Traveller Alien Module 6: Solomani;
4. Marc Miller's Traveller ("T4") Mileu 0 campaign book.

1.: Generates habitable worlds orbiting giant stars that can't exist for long enough to actually have habitable planets and habitable planets orbiting White Dwarf stars that would have vapourised planets in its Red Giant phase;

2. & 3.: Both have habitable planets orbiting Red Giants and White Dwarf stars;

4. As 2. & 3. *PLUS* the Law Level and Government codes for every single UWP in the book are the same (i.e. xxxxx00-x; xxxxx11-x; xxxxx22-x and so on).

Then there are the hundreds of tiny, rockball worlds with breathable atmospheres through out Charted Space; the no population/government/law level worlds with Tech Levels (MWM is getting round this anomaly in T5 with the "Die Back" Trade Classification - simply left over tech on an unpopulated world). Textbook example: the Hiver homeworld of Glea, which orbits a K1 V + D binary pair. Guaran orbits the binary pair at Orbit 2 (0.7 AU). Guaran wouldn't have survived the D when it was in its Red Giant phase; it would have been swallowed up by the Red Giant as it expanded, before it becomes a D. Consequently, no Hivers in the OTU. There a many, many worlds in the OTU in similiar circumstances.

Having had a lengthy email conversation with Marc about this exact issue (i.e. realistic stars and worlds for T5) I'm firmly of the opinion that T5 will still have habitable worlds orbiting D stars and Red Giants.

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

My personal view of this (star and worldgen in Traveller) is to "hand build" (i.e. not use dice) each system to be as realistic as is currently possible, then convert that information into UWPs.

 

[SableWyvern]

Of course, as is frequently mentioned, Traveller did predict hot jupiters, a truly prescient achievement. What other bad Traveller science is in fact brilliance scorned only for being before its time? Is Marc the Gallileo of the 21st Century? :wink:

Interestingly, a recent scientific simulation indicates Jupiter would remain entirely stable at distances as close as 0.16 AU from the sun.

 

[EDG]

Of course, as is frequently mentioned, Traveller did predict hot jupiters, a truly prescient achievement. What other bad Traveller science is in fact brilliance scorned only for being before its time? Is Marc the Gallileo of the 21st Century? :wink:

Interestingly, a recent scientific simulation indicates Jupiter would remain entirely stable at distances as close as 0.16 AU from the sun.

Traveller didn't predict "Hot Jupiters" at all, and I don't know why people keep mentioning thing. According to the (conflicting) GG placement rules, gas giants were supposed to be placed preferentially in the outer system, and then put in the inner system only if there wasn't room in the outer. Certainly there's nothing in Traveller to suggest that any planet can exist closer to a star than 0.2 AU, and all the Hot Jupiters are within that distance.

The closest Traveller got to "Hot Jupiters" was the almost-guaranteed presence of Close D companions - if you said they really were white dwarfs then pretty much every system in Traveller becomes uninhabitable, but if you were to replace those with Jovians then pretty much every system has a Hot Jupiter instead, which is a bit more reasonable. But that is by no means the official stance on the matter.

 

[Poi]

Dunno 'bout the rest of you, but I want to play a game, not Astrophysics!

 

[SableWyvern]

Traveller didn't predict "Hot Jupiters" at all, and I don't know why people keep mentioning thing.

Probably because, like me, they thought hot jupiters were inner sphere jovians. I have now discovered that they are, as you point out, significantly closer than merely inner planets.

Edit: removed tongue in cheek comment that might have been taken the wrong way. No offense intended.

 

[hdrider67]

I can only say I hope someone gave Marc a heads up so he might defend himself. I don't know much about this controversy but it's not very cool to badmouth someone behind his back.

/Carry on...

 

[EDG]

I can only say I hope someone gave Marc a heads up so he might defend himself. I don't know much about this controversy but it's not very cool to badmouth someone behind his back.

Nobody's "badmouthing" Marc here, we're just saying what his attitude is to realism. Historically he's always completely ignored everybody's comments about his attitude and about Traveller anyway... which is largely why T5 is in the state it's in.

And given that a few other people have basically said the same thing I have (curiously without captainjack23 shrieking about it :roll: ) I know I'm not alone in my opinions.

 

[SableWyvern]

It's quite possibly hdrider was mainly referring to the comment I have edited out of the post immediately preceding his, which, while not intended as any sort of insult to Marc, could have been interpreted as a sarcastic snipe at him.

 

[EDG]

Probably because, like me, they thought hot jupiters were inner sphere jovians. I have now discovered that they are, as you point out, significantly closer than merely inner planets.

That would explain the confusion, considering that I've seen others make the same claim, as if Marc actually had enough knowledge about astronomy to be able to predict such things. He really doesn't - the fact that you can get inner system jovians is a side effect of the world placement system (and I'll point out again that the placement method is actually contradictory within the same book (6)), not deliberate intent.

We've always known that jovians can be stable at distances closer than the outer zone (they can hold onto their hydrogen and helium atmospheres up to quite high temperatures), but what wasn't obvious previously was how the jovians could actually get there in the first place since it was just assumed that they all form outside the snow line and stay there. Now we know that they can migrate inwards during formation so we have a way for them to be in the warmer parts of the system. But again, Traveller doesn't specifically "predict" this, it just falls out of the placement system that is used.

Edit: removed tongue in cheek comment that might have been taken the wrong way. No offense intended.

FWIW I got the tongue-in-cheekness of it

 

[SableWyvern]

I don't think I've ever come across anyone who actually believes inner sphere jovians exist in Traveller because of secret advanced scientific knowledge discovered from the Ancients or anything ... it's just one of those off-the-cuff comments, "Yeah, Traveller system gen looks unscientfic, but Hot Jovians!" :shock:

Then again, maybe I've just interpreted people who bring it up in a favourable light, assuming they don't actually attribute knowledge of the secrets of the Ancients to anyone on the Traveller design team.

 

[pasuuli]

Dunno 'bout the rest of you, but I want to play a game, not Astrophysics!

Yes, and my main concern is that T5 might not be playable.

 

[EDG]

Dunno 'bout the rest of you, but I want to play a game, not Astrophysics!

I find it funny that people can and often do excuse an unrealistic setting by saying "Science fiction is about fiction" while forgetting that the thing that actually makes it scifi as opposed to any other kind of fiction is the science that they're so eager to cast aside. I'm all for something playable too, but it's really not an "either-or" scenario here - it is quite possible to have a playable game with a reasonably realistic (heck, even just sensible and consistent) background that isn't overly complicated.

That said, people nowadays seem to run screaming at the mere mention of a square root in an RPG, but personally I'd like to assume that most roleplayers have more than just a primary school education...

 

[dmccoy1693]

Of Marc? No. Not at all. Marc seems to care not a whit about realism. Marc wants "Just realistic enough to keep the fan base." Marcs response to realism requests was bordering on snide.

Alrighty then. In that case, I got the wrong impression. My bad.

 

[Poi]

I have no problem with the science per se, but people on this forum seem to be obsessed with it.

When I run or play in a game, I do not want to have discussions about this planet being a scientific impossibility, or that gun having (or not having) recoil.

I want to focus on plot and background, not whether Vulcan could have a black population because of its star type.

 

[EDG]

I have no problem with the science per se, but people on this forum seem to be obsessed with it.

Realism (be it physical or economic/social) has been an issue in Traveller for some folks for quite some time. Speaking personally, my primary interest in Traveller is in fixing its worldbuilding, so I'm more into the science than anything else.

When I run or play in a game, I do not want to have discussions about this planet being a scientific impossibility, or that gun having (or not having) recoil.

And there's nothing wrong with that. That said, I'd say that it's generally better all round if your planet isn't a scientific impossibility, and your gun is designed so that it does have the recoil that one would expect. From your perspective as a player, you shouldn't be inconvenienced in any way if that's the case.

Thing is, all this discussion is very much "behind the scenes". When you're playing the game or making your planets or tech, the results should ideally be realistic and at least should be be sensible/consistent. When you're using the results of those design systems that realism is still there but it's transparent. Then you can honestly say "yes, that gun should have X recoil", or "yes, this planet can have a breathable atmosphere" because they're actually designed on realistic principles, and not have arguments about whether it is or isn't possible because the writers of the design systems didn't do their research properly.

 

[captainjack23]

Yeah, the extent that traveller does seem riven by this issue is somewhat unique...I'm not sure what it means or if its good or bad, but it does seem to cause more that its share of heat.

From what I've seen, SF games like Mechwarrior/Battletech, Star Wars, don't have huge issues over some basic implausabilites, and unlikely physical settings.

I think the issue may be confused by the fact that some of what traveller tries to model as a game does have points of comparison in the real world - which somehow seems to draw the flack, as opposed to the actually impossible or non-existent (anti-grav, reactionless thrusters, FTL). Perhaps this is why so few games have tried ? Or at least the attempt is seriously out of fashion these days.

Me, I admit I like a science veneer with traveller. Much of the fiction I base the flavor on is riddled with obsolete science-(green stars in Foundation ? ) and was known so at the time. But is still great story telling (in my unsophisticated opinion). For me, the issue is that an RPG is a story telling construct, not necc a teaching construct. Besides, I get enough science journal reading, arguing and critiquing in my professional life... ( pointed heated criticism being a major tool of science) -that a nice vacation is appreciated !

As to Marc "blowing off" science when people complain about it, well, its not like he has published a textbook, it's his game, and honestly, I imagine that if the comments about his work on the internet and HIWG and TML are anything to go by...why the heck should he care ? Its very possible that pestering emails by well meaning but abrasive amature science/gaming mavens are just not interesting or important to him. Or perhaps he's the same kind of person...or even *gasp* a poorly socialised gamer with stubborn opinions !! People just seem so offended when he doesn't take their criticisms to heart.

Which might be a shame, but hey, its his game we're still complaining lauding playing ostentatiously ignoring thirty frippin years later. I hope I can do something for gaming that lasts half as long...

Cap

 

[captainjack23]

When I run or play in a game, I do not want to have discussions about this planet being a scientific impossibility, or that gun having (or not having) recoil.

And there's nothing wrong with that. That said, I'd say that it's generally better all round if your planet isn't a scientific impossibility, and your gun is designed so that it does have the recoil that one would expect. From your perspective as a player, you shouldn't be inconvenienced in any way if that's the case.

why ?

Thing is, all this discussion is very much "behind the scenes". When you're playing the game or making your planets or tech, the results should ideally be realistic and at least should be be sensible/consistent. When you're using the results of those design systems that realism is still there but it's transparent. Then you can honestly say "yes, that gun should have X recoil", or "yes, this planet can have a breathable atmosphere" because they're actually designed on realistic principles, and not have arguments about whether it is or isn't possible because the writers of the design systems didn't do their research properly.

Again, why ?

Honestly, this would be a very valid issue for a dissertation - not doing research properly, or at least to the standards of the committee, but a game ? And honestly, I don't see that T5 or MongTrav have any differing approach to this issue - "make it real but very very playable."

I guess part of the issue is always going to be that if I want to stand on research, most of my players have areas of knowledge far in advance of mine in various areas- what then ?

"Okay, they fire a particle beam"

"In an atmosphere ?"

"Well, it's a charged PAW."

"Oh Christ, that old paper ?"

"Oh. Uh, well, its a magic disintegratorium wand, I guess."

"pshaw."

Me, I'm a professional and an expert. But not in High Energy Weaponry. One of my players is. Another is an Honest to God rocket scientist. Another helped invent the relational database concept. Ray guns, space flight and computing. Great.

Yeah, my Neuroscience and biology is spot on, but my lifetime is...well limited as far as getting several more PhDs for my game. So, there has to be a flow, a story to fall back on, to let them suspend disbelief...and let me tell you, handing out journal articles ain't gonna do it.

Cap

 

[captainjack23]

...Guaran wouldn't have survived the D when it was in its Red Giant phase; it would have been swallowed up by the Red Giant as it expanded, before it becomes a D. Consequently, no Hivers in the OTU.

Hmmmmm. An excellent argument for increasing versimilitude. An OTU with no Mopheads. mmmmmmmmmmmm.

I kid. I love you guys. I have to. Now give me back the films.

Cap.

"Just imagine no more mopheads/It's easy if you try/
Just imagine all the starfish, bugg-ing some-one elseeee/
Oh you may say that I'm no Traveller/ but I'm not the only one...."

Johnniiinnniiii Lennonimanu
Vilani epic poet