Tech Level....errata ? Design error ?

[captainjack23]

Not sure if this has been brought up, or if its even eratta so apologies if this is redundant....

The Tech Level generation in the wordbuilding section has one roll a base 1d6 and then apply modifiers based on UWP and Starport.... ...shouldn't this be 2d6 or possibly 2d6-2 ?

As it is, the average imperial world (Sepimissus* C555555) is generally going to have a tech of 7-8 .....roll 3 or 4, (+4 total from Starport, GT & Pop: Seriously prestellar - (earth, currently, in fact). The max tech of 10 ?

Getting a tech 12 (stellar average, IIRC) requires a roll of six AND a type A starport (boxcars or eleven) - for about a 2% liklihood (2 sixes, one five or six, three d6).

To get a tech 15 world with an average roll (3 or 4), one has to have a UWP of like, A000555 as a minimum, or have insanely high Pop (A ,+2)and balkanization (GT 7=+2) AND a type A starport and at least +1 from other mods.


That can't be right, can it ?

[Edit.] Be damned. That's the CT version. The ports are generated differently, though... one is twice as likely to get a type A in CT, and more likely to get B and C in CT - the extra "D" in MGT slid everything down.

Okay, nevermind.......I guess. [end edit]



* Latinoid for "Maximum seven", (I think ) , being the average for 2d6 which gives you fives on 2d6-2)

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Welcome to Traveller!

The Tech Level table has always been 1D.

The table in MGT is almost identical to the tables in previous additions (Population is different I think).

YES, it is very difficult to get a TL 15 world that is not a Class A starport with Hi population. Average TL comes out to be at or just above current Earth.

 

[Deniable]

A quick eyeball check says that the new TL mods are almost the same as the TNE version. They've changed the pop and mods for it at the high end, added a +1 for 0 hydro and added a +2 for government 7. That may be because we top out at TL 7 otherwise.

 

[EDG]

That's right. Well, "right" for Traveller.

You'll also note that a mid-population habitable world (e.g. D86889A_) has a maximum TL of 6. The only way to increase that is via the starport type. And if they have no starport at all, then that same world has a maximum TL of 2!

So I'd say this is a design flaw (held over from CT), because there's really no good reason why you can't have a high tech (A+) agricultural world.

 

[simonh]

That's right. Well, "right" for Traveller.

You'll also note that a mid-population habitable world (e.g. D86889A_) has a maximum TL of 6. The only way to increase that is via the starport type. And if they have no starport at all, then that same world has a maximum TL of 2!

So I'd say this is a design flaw (held over from CT), because there's really no good reason why you can't have a high tech (A+) agricultural world.

I suppose the assumption is, why else would such a world not have a starport in the Traveller universe? You need to have some coupling between starport type and TL otherwise you might end up with Starport type A on a low tech planet that couldn't sustain it.

What I'd like to see in Scout is an extension of the basic system that has more dials and switches for customizing the kind of output you get, as well as a bit more detail on the system.

Simon Hibbs

 

[EDG]

I suppose the assumption is, why else would such a world not have a starport in the Traveller universe? You need to have some coupling between starport type and TL otherwise you might end up with Starport type A on a low tech planet that couldn't sustain it.

...which is exactly what I suggested during the playtest . While some of my suggestions appear to have influenced the world design, I guess that one didn't make it. But yes, I think it would make a lot more sense to have tech limits for starports.

 

[Infojunky]

The Tech Level generation in the wordbuilding section has one roll a base 1d6 and then apply modifiers based on UWP and Starport.... ...shouldn't this be 2d6 or possibly 2d6-2 ?

Naw 1d6. that's right.

As it is, the average imperial world (Sepimissus* C555555) is generally going to have a tech of 7-8 .....roll 3 or 4, (+4 total from Starport, GT & Pop: Seriously prestellar - (earth, currently, in fact). The max tech of 10 ?

Sounds about right. As for earth the UWP is closer to D868974-8ish

Getting a tech 12 (stellar average, IIRC) requires a roll of six AND a type A starport (boxcars or eleven) - for about a 2% liklihood (2 sixes, one five or six, three d6).

To get a tech 15 world with an average roll (3 or 4), one has to have a UWP of like, A000555 as a minimum, or have insanely high Pop (A ,+2)and balkanization (GT 7=+2) AND a type A starport and at least +1 from other mods.

That can't be right, can it ?

The seriously "High Tech" planets are few and far between, is there a problem with this?

The other part of this equation is how one reads the meaning of the few descriptor codes we are given in the UWP. The main point where they are lacking is in the first and last. Starports are way too granular, in that they describe both the amount of trade moving through the port as well as the general services available. Ideally we should have a trade volume stat as well as a services stat. The other end is the traditional bug-a-boo of Tech Level, which describes both the level of technical prowess in manufacturing as well as the general state/efficiency of the infrastructure system.

The other thing lacking in the base stat line is the overall richness of a systems resources, and maybe a rating of the level of life on the main-world.

I could go father with the method of settlement of systems throughout the history of a region of space, but the detail gets to be a bit much.

 

[captainjack23]

Yes, I noted that the 1d6 was correct with regards to traveller CT - its in the edit at the bottom.

As I pointed out, the difference is in the starprort table: MGT makes the high starports (A,B) about half as likely - when i reran the cumulative probs (well, actually looked at my old notes from the playtest) the CT version gives you most subsectors with one good high tech type A, a few moderate tech, and the rest as noted.

The MGT change makes subsectors with no major hub possible, but doesn't mess around with the lesser hubs to any great degree(2-3/sector down from 3-5) So one can argue that more variation in the structure of subsectors as a whole is good for adventuring.

On the whole, I'm glad it came up - it reminded me of the point that the focus of Traveller seems to be the subsector, not just the planet. Any one planet can be a bit wonky, but the subsector generally seems to work.


As to the tech and starport coupling, it's worth noting that there were good arguments as to why the low planet high port model can work....hopefully we don't need to rehash them here.

In final analysis, that really seems to be one of the fundamental axioms that traveller was built on: contrast can generate adventure.

Arguments that it needs to be different for the sake of external logic is rather like arguing that the Lord of the rings shouldn't have needed to create hobbits or elves just for fluff -the exact same story could be told with just normal, if rather parochial or over-civilized humans. Different races don't make as much logical sense, and the story would have much more versimilitude without them.

The point is, that's the place the author started from, and that, while open to criticism, really isn't open to revision; any such would essentially be creating a whole new and differently oriented creative work. In this case, contrast = adventure, and is one of the main elements of traveller. Other games do it differently, obviously.

 

[EDG]

In final analysis, that really seems to be one of the fundamental axioms that traveller was built on: contrast can generate adventure.

Funny, I've never seen that axiom anywhere in Traveller. I've seen people claiming plenty of times that the random gibberish that the UWP generation process often creates is somehow inspirational for adventure, so I guess maybe you could interpret that as "contrast generating adventure" because a lot of the time you end up with a bunch of extremes mashed together that you then have to think of something to do with... but I don't think it can really be described as a "fundamental axiom".

It might be more accurate to say that it's just how the standard unsupervised UWP generation process works but to say it's an "axiom" implies that Marc Miller deliberately intended it to produce nonsensical results when he came up with the system - personally I'm not convinced he thought that far ahead. In fact I'm more inclined to think that he came up with the system and then noticed it created some weird results and then made the claim that it was a good thing because people would have weird anomalies to figure out and supposedly lead to interesting gaming. So, I don't think it's so much an "axiom" as "a dubious side-effect that he got opportunistic with and claimed was a good thing".

Arguments that it needs to be different for the sake of external logic is rather like arguing that the Lord of the rings shouldn't have needed to create hobbits or elves just for fluff -the exact same story could be told with just normal, if rather parochial or over-civilized humans. Different races don't make as much logical sense, and the story would have much more versimilitude without them.

That seems like a strawman to me - I don't think it's similar to saying that at all, or even related to the point being discussed here. LotR with all humans would work just as well and make just as much sense as LotR with a mixture of races. Whereas we're talking about situations where you are often forced to contrive a really bizarre set of conditions to explain why a UWP works when you want to flesh it out.

The point is, that's the place the author started from, and that, while open to criticism, really isn't open to revision; any such would essentially be creating a whole new and differently oriented creative work. In this case, contrast = adventure, and is one of the main elements of traveller. Other games do it differently, obviously.

Well, by that logic there's no reason to try to correct anything in Traveller because "that's where the author started from". But it's patently obvious that the author has either started from some really weird assumptions, or that he didn't actually think the implications of the system through properly (given what I've seen of the CT UWP system I'm pretty convinced it's the latter). Heck, in Book 3 CT there isn't even any attempt to tally TL with atmospheres, so you could have people suffocating in unbreathable atmospheres (that did get added a lot later though... but the original design was definitely flawed until that got fixed) - is that because the author intended that to happen, or because he didn't think it all through properly? And do you honestly think that sort of thing shouldn't be open to revision?

But as I said, I don't think "contrast = adventure" is a deliberate feature of Traveller at all. It's certainly something that people can interpret as being part of it, but it's not an integral, deliberately designed part of it IMO.

 

[captainjack23]

In final analysis, that really seems to be one of the fundamental axioms that traveller was built on: contrast can generate adventure.

Funny, I've never seen that axiom anywhere in Traveller. <snipped for brevity, see above post>

Some notes before this degenerates.

The "axiom" is my own opinion made up by my own massive intellect. So, you have an opinion, I have an opinion. It pretty much ends there.

I'm not going to try and second guess or mindread Marc Millers intent in creating the system except to note that he obviously doesn't care about some issues that upset you. Again, you have an opinion, I have an opinion, and in this case, so does Marc. It pretty much ends there.

It's not a "strawman" argument, look the term up. It's an example illustrating my opinion.My "strawman" argument is an attempt to illustrate my point that there may be things in a authors product that cannot be changed without creating something new that is fundamentally no longer his product. Extending that to claim that it applies to any change isn't the intent at all; which is why I didn't say that.

As regards contrast = adventure, I'm pretty sure you're wrong; it may not have been originally intended, but it seems to show up all over the place in traveller; but (all together) , you have an opinion, I have an opinion. It pretty much ends there.

I think putting some thought into what makes traveller what it is, and what works about it is at least as useful as critical deconstruction. Marc's original intent is neither here nor there - what was produced may well have aspects that he never intended, and judging by its longevity and at least mild popularity, is worth looking at. Obviously, you don't like much about CT or Marc Miller, so I doubt that this is of much interest to you.

I would note that you may do better to actually produce the revisions you want rather than attempting to convince everyone the system is "flawed" "broken" or "weird"; or to argue against suggestions that various systems are fine as they are. Given the availablity of an SRD, OGL and your contacts among two major traveller publishers, I'd suggest that this is your golden opportunity to make your point. You mentioned that you turned down the opportunity to write the MGP worldgen system...and then ended up putting tons of effort to correct a system that really didn't seem to please you, and spent lots of pages arguing about it, and eventually gave up.

So, this time, why not produce the version of traveller that you want and would want to play ? I probably could have written a short novel with the time I've spent arguing online about stuff -how bout you ?

 

[AKAramis]

"Contrast can generate adventure."

While not explicit in CT, it's an obvious interpolation from the various adventure seeds in CT sources.

It is strongly implied in MT's Hard Times. Especially in the collapse procedure.

It is strongly implied in TNE's core rules, too. The Survivors versus the Bombed Out Shells...

It does seem axiomatic to the Traveller experience.

 

[tneva82]

Heck, in Book 3 CT there isn't even any attempt to tally TL with atmospheres, so you could have people suffocating in unbreathable atmospheres

Or you could figure simple answer to that: They live in highter TL safe areas but have no ability to reproduce said technology. Just for extreme example remove current Earth from present day humans, populate it from people from say 1000BC and concider what the tech level would be. I would say pretty low despite them living middle of current era technology...

 

[captainjack23]

"Contrast can generate adventure."

While not explicit in CT, it's an obvious interpolation from the various adventure seeds in CT sources.

It is strongly implied in MT's Hard Times. Especially in the collapse procedure.

It is strongly implied in TNE's core rules, too. The Survivors versus the Bombed Out Shells...

It does seem axiomatic to the Traveller experience.

Thank you !

 

[rust]

I also have some problems with the way TL is handled in Traveller.

However, for me the "official" Traveller material is just a starting point
for my setting, a proposal by the author, and not some kind of law I
have to obey.
What I do not like, or what does not fit my intended setting, I replace
with something that suits me better.
And I am well aware that other people will prefer other approaches and
solutions, because they prefer other settings and other styles of playing
Traveller.

Therefore I see no need at all to rewrite the official material in order to
create an (impossible) "perfect" version of it, or to try to convince others
to accept my idea of "Traveller as it should be" - others will have their
own and much different ideas of what their Traveller should look like.

So, if you do not like the way Traveller deals with TL, well, change it for
your setting. This is no big deal, and hardly worth much debate.

 

[simonh]

I would note that you may do better to actually produce the revisions you want rather than attempting to convince everyone the system is "flawed" "broken" or "weird"; or to argue against suggestions that various systems are fine as they are. Given the availablity of an SRD, OGL and your contacts among two major traveller publishers, I'd suggest that this is your golden opportunity to make your point.

Not possible. The Traveller license explicitly bars anyone from producing a world generation system or variations on one under the license. You could produce one as a generic RPG aid of course, but can't put the word Traveller anywhere near it.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Golan2072]

Not possible. The Traveller license explicitly bars anyone from producing a world generation system or variations on one under the license. You could produce one as a generic RPG aid of course, but can't put the word Traveller anywhere near it.

However, as fan material you would probably be OK (though I'd like to hear from a Mongoose official about this area in particular) with producing this - the Traveller Logo License is for 3rd-party products, not house-rules. For example, you could easily write a Stellar Reaches article or publish a fan-site with OTU material (as long as you don't post unreasonably large parts of published OTU products, of course), but you cannot publish this under the TLL (this was confirmed by Mongoose some time ago).

 

[EDG]

I would note that you may do better to actually produce the revisions you want rather than attempting to convince everyone the system is "flawed" "broken" or "weird"; or to argue against suggestions that various systems are fine as they are. Given the availablity of an SRD, OGL and your contacts among two major traveller publishers, I'd suggest that this is your golden opportunity to make your point. You mentioned that you turned down the opportunity to write the MGP worldgen system...and then ended up putting tons of effort to correct a system that really didn't seem to please you, and spent lots of pages arguing about it, and eventually gave up.

So, this time, why not produce the version of traveller that you want and would want to play ? I probably could have written a short novel with the time I've spent arguing online about stuff -how bout you ?

I've done all of that. And some of the changes I suggested in the playtest do appear to have made it into the final MGT book.

Also, why do you think I'm impatient for the SRD to be released?

 

[captainjack23]

I would note that you may do better to actually produce the revisions you want rather than attempting to convince everyone the system is "flawed" "broken" or "weird"; or to argue against suggestions that various systems are fine as they are. Given the availablity of an SRD, OGL and your contacts among two major traveller publishers, I'd suggest that this is your golden opportunity to make your point. You mentioned that you turned down the opportunity to write the MGP worldgen system...and then ended up putting tons of effort to correct a system that really didn't seem to please you, and spent lots of pages arguing about it, and eventually gave up.

So, this time, why not produce the version of traveller that you want and would want to play ? I probably could have written a short novel with the time I've spent arguing online about stuff -how bout you ?

I've done all of that. And some of the changes I suggested in the playtest do appear to have made it into the final MGT book.

Also, why do you think I'm impatient for the SRD to be released?

Yeah, me too. And now I have another reason to be impatient !

And thanks for not insisting on arguing opinion vs opinion.

 

[captainjack23]

Not possible. The Traveller license explicitly bars anyone from producing a world generation system or variations on one under the license. You could produce one as a generic RPG aid of course, but can't put the word Traveller anywhere near it.

The devil is, as ever, in the details, and requires consideration of the authors exact plans alongside an actual reading of the legal docs, before one declares a thought impossible. Yes, the OGL has strict limits, but I also noted he has options and contacts with at least two OTU licenced traveller companies; and fan stuff works too, as Golan points out.

The point is there is more and more widespread interest in traveller than there has been for QUITE some time. Whatever route taken, its a good time to try to make a ones mark as regards traveller, and via other means than just online forum/mailinglist distribution.

 

[AKAramis]

Not possible. The Traveller license explicitly bars anyone from producing a world generation system or variations on one under the license. You could produce one as a generic RPG aid of course, but can't put the word Traveller anywhere near it.

The devil is, as ever, in the details, and requires consideration of the authors exact plans alongside an actual reading of the legal docs, before one declares a thought impossible. Yes, the OGL has strict limits, but I also noted he has options and contacts with at least two OTU licenced traveller companies; and fan stuff works too, as Golan points out.

The point is there is more and more widespread interest in traveller than there has been for QUITE some time. Whatever route taken, its a good time to try to make a ones mark as regards traveller, and via other means than just online forum/mailinglist distribution.

ANd the devil's details include two levels of license.

OGL products will likely find a trademark for Traveller derivatives, much like someone registered the OGL20, OGL3.0 and OGL3.5 marks. I suspect OGLT will happen. With the OGL, you can use a tweaked world gen, etc, but can't touch the OTU (unless you're SJG, Avenger, HeroGames or QLI).

TSRD products have a raft of restrictions (No world gen tweaks, etc), but you get to use the Traveller License Logo.

One SRD, two different levels of use.