Tech Levels - Different Enough?
- Thread starter Mithras
- Start date
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
aspqrz said:
Gosh, Phil you're right. The game doesn't accurately model economic theory, observation or professional prediction, especially to those who know lots and lots about the subject. Yup. Sure doesn't. Of course, I never expected it to, or felt that it should; and I haven't seen much yet to suggest that it'll play better if it is more accurate - for me anyway. But, yep. It aint accurate. It don't make no more than gaming sense.
Plays nice, though.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
DFW said:
It works fine for me, but then again, I know it will break if used as an unsupervised algorithm or as the basis of much above the player level.
Glad it helps, though !
Well, some people complain about the weapon descriptions and weaponcaptainjack23 said:
stats in Mercenary because their real world knowledge leads them to
see some of the information there as rather ridiculous, others complain
about the economic background and the trade system because their real
world knowledge makes that part of the game a pain in the neck, others
have some knowledge of astronomy and planetology and therefore se-
rious problems with Traveller's world building system - and so on (and
don't ask me about the low berths ... :roll: ).
I think such complaints are unavoidable, and as long as there is a chance
that those complaints cause discussions that lead to useful proposals for
modifications or house rules, like the formula you proposed, I really wel-
come them, as they help to improve those parts of the game that are less
well detailed or thought through - and if one does not have a problem
with such a field, one does not have to read the complaints and discus-
sions about it (I usually ignore weapon stuff ...).
rust said:
I think the specific point with Mongoose's Mercenary is that it quite ridiculous in parts. Ludicrous, in fact.
The original CT Mercenary was believable and seemed accurate enough based on real world values, and, indeed, except for the TL issues (advanced weapons at possibly to high a TL), still stands up well today, 35 years later.
MTrav's weapons, and TNE's weapons - even T4's weapons - were, likewise, believable.
MongTrav's basic weapons were fine.
MongMerc is the problem - because whomever wrote it and then whomever proof read it seems to have exactly zip knowledge of real world weapons and their operational deployment and use.
Quite a different kettle of fish from Trade and TL issues which weren't obviously broken in 3LBB but, as layer and layer of detail was added, have become more and more obviously broken over the years.
In a sense, it is not Traveller per se that is the problem, but the 3I background.
Using the 3LBB random world generation system for a completely new background with a random universe of mostly independent and/or recently discovered or settled worlds and the system doesn't seem so bad.
Its major problem is that the 3I background makes it ridiculous.
YMMV :wink:
Phil
aspqrz said:
I have to disagree here.... I feel its a Traveller rule problem.
In MT, tech level is stated to be both local tech base and commonly available tech in urban areas and near the starport hinting at imports. This is echoed in MT's Ref Companion. However, in DGP's World Builder Handbook, the tech is treated as local capability with 'novelty' tech being added to cover imports.
Hard Times indicates that tech is often from imports because tech level drops when interstellar trade drops to its self-sustaining level.
The UWP procedure rewards tiny populations ( pop5 or less ) with tech dm's as well as rewarding societies on worlds that require high tech just to survive. Combined with the total random placement of starport types, which give the biggest tech dm ( and providing another argument in favor of the tech_includes_trade_imports interpretation) gives possible tech assignments that I find to be ludicrous.;
Earth at D86797x gives a possible tech range of 3-8, whereas an airless rockball with a settlement of 15, at D00016x gets a range of 5-10 if in another system despite having too small a population to maintain a viable tech infrastructure, much less manufacturing base. It is worse assuming the dice award the airless rock with a type A starport despite the lack of trade volume or market base, bringing its tech level range of 11-16 according to CT Book 6, Scouts. I can only say such a world's tech level must include imports. It appears from the Traveller SRD that Mongoose Traveller shares the same UWP procedure too. thus looks to include imported technology into the overall tech level.
Striker, TCS and later Pocket Empires treat tech level as local manufacturing by using it as a modifier to worker output without mentioning imported tech.
So, you see that the rules, and not just the 3I setting alone, have the problem; they can't quite decide how to define tech levels. Yet, if you allow both to exist simultaneously then you have a situation where the local gov isn't allowing imports higher that its own manufacturing base, which is exactly what you've argued is the problem with an 1100 year old static system and water empires ( if I understood correctly ).
The only way to avoid this is to have an official hard definition, one way or the other, for what 'tech level' actually means. This is a problem because it would negate a bunch of rules, which, if applied to the OTU could cause serious changes to the setting.
AND to change the rules concerning UWP generation to distribute trade related stats into something sane. Again, this would wreck the OTU if retroactively applied
This is why I have written my own UWP method and treat tech levels only as local manufacturing/infrastructure tech and don't use the 3I very much.
you really can't discuss one without discussing the other; they are intertwined too tightly.atpollard said:
Ishmael said:
"Doesn't seem so bad" = not a ringing endorsement :wink: :wink: :wink:
I agree, it's not anywhere near perfect - unless you create a completely random sector that is newly discovered, and even then it has problems, they're just mostly not as obvious! :shock:
For creating an important Interstellar state player, well, it's a disaster - those should be hand created ... you might, barely possibly, use the random system as a base and then hand modify to make real world sense.
So I actually agree with you, more or less :wink:
Phil
Ishmael said:
Which is Looney Tunes as a TL 5 settlement couldn't support human life there. TL 9 would be about the minimum for a sustainable outpost. AND, your point being correct about pop and manufacturing base.
Yes, the system gen tables are batty. But, I haven't used them since my 2nd game GMing CT in '78.
This is pretty much what I use, although this is an older version from many many years ago. I didn't type in the relevant tables from World Builder's Handbook or Pocket Empires though ( the Social Outlook tables ), because I didn't want to risk running afoul of an IP that I don't own and all those tables seemed a bit more than is legally allowed.
https://sites.google.com/site/moukotiger/files/worldmods.txt?attredirects=0&d=1
Basicly, I use dm's from atm and hyd to get more people on shirtsleeve worlds and less people on rockballs.
Sorry about the pop dm's being in the form of a spreadsheet formula :wink:
I roll up the complete social outlook as per World Builder's, then use dm's based on those results and 'pop-6' as a dm for tech level.
Then I use the resulting 'tech level - 1d6' to determine starport type.
Its still not perfect, but it makes a heck of a lot more sense than the standard version and uses information that I'd be rolling up anyways.
I may go back someday and use the 'social outlook' info to generate government type and military spending......
https://sites.google.com/site/moukotiger/files/worldmods.txt?attredirects=0&d=1
Basicly, I use dm's from atm and hyd to get more people on shirtsleeve worlds and less people on rockballs.
Sorry about the pop dm's being in the form of a spreadsheet formula :wink:
I roll up the complete social outlook as per World Builder's, then use dm's based on those results and 'pop-6' as a dm for tech level.
Then I use the resulting 'tech level - 1d6' to determine starport type.
Its still not perfect, but it makes a heck of a lot more sense than the standard version and uses information that I'd be rolling up anyways.
I may go back someday and use the 'social outlook' info to generate government type and military spending......
Rikki Tikki Traveller
Cosmic Mongoose
It states quite clearly in CT's LBB3 that the random UWP generator is there to creat a VARIETY of worlds for playing in.
It was NEVER meant to be the one and only method by which UWPs should be created. Unfortunately, GDW and everyone that followed them FORGOT that and started using the Random method everywhere. THAT created the problems.
There should probably be three or four methods for generating UWPs depending on the settlement pattern for that region of space.
At a minimum, you need methods for creating UWPs in the following Setting Situations:
Core (long civilized)
Developed (hundreds of years of settlements)
Explored (newish colonies)
Surveyed (very little actual colonization, but some locals)
Recovering (post Long Night, perhaps this is your "random")
Tech Level should be set by the Referee for the setting and then MODIFIED by the UWP created above.
As Examples:
The Imperial Core regions and the Solomani Rim woudl be CORE regions.
The Spinward Marches would be DEVELOPED
2300AD would be EXPLORED
It was NEVER meant to be the one and only method by which UWPs should be created. Unfortunately, GDW and everyone that followed them FORGOT that and started using the Random method everywhere. THAT created the problems.
There should probably be three or four methods for generating UWPs depending on the settlement pattern for that region of space.
At a minimum, you need methods for creating UWPs in the following Setting Situations:
Core (long civilized)
Developed (hundreds of years of settlements)
Explored (newish colonies)
Surveyed (very little actual colonization, but some locals)
Recovering (post Long Night, perhaps this is your "random")
Tech Level should be set by the Referee for the setting and then MODIFIED by the UWP created above.
As Examples:
The Imperial Core regions and the Solomani Rim woudl be CORE regions.
The Spinward Marches would be DEVELOPED
2300AD would be EXPLORED
Unfortunately, because it was used to create the OTU, the OTU will suffer for not having reasonable tech/trade distributions.
And because of the apparent fear of changing anything worthwhile in the OTU and, probably the rules that are the foundation for the OTU, Traveller's tech and trade will forever be broken except as an ATU that touches nothing of the OTU.
a pity, really
And because of the apparent fear of changing anything worthwhile in the OTU and, probably the rules that are the foundation for the OTU, Traveller's tech and trade will forever be broken except as an ATU that touches nothing of the OTU.
a pity, really
After reading through 8 pages it seems that this topic has gone, well, nowhere.
"Simplicity is the ultimate form of sophistication." - Leonardo da Vinci
"No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated." - Crabtree's Bludgeon
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" - Aristotle
jolt
"Simplicity is the ultimate form of sophistication." - Leonardo da Vinci
"No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated." - Crabtree's Bludgeon
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" - Aristotle
jolt
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
Ishmael said:
Your example must be using somthing non-mongoosian for rules. First, tech 5 is TL 5: (Industrial) TL 5 brings widespread electrification, tele-communications and internal combustion. and quite sufficient for maintaining vaccuume gear and shelter. second, assuming that the 5 digit UWP you provide is omitting Law Level,the modifier for D00016x is +5 , giving a minimum tech of 6 and a max of 11. Are you using MT ?
Possibly, depending on the rules used.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
Ishmael said:
actually, as suggested here and with others, its a too many Traveller rules problem.
D00016x is pretty damn unusual a result.
How unusual ? Well, assuming that the 5 digit UWP you provide is omitting Law Level, the chances of getting a world with that size, that population and that starport (or worse) is 1/36*2/36*15/36 =30/46656, which converts to .064% note that that is a decimal, and a percent.
We expect one example of this extreme type per 1563 systems generated, or ~ every 40 sectors.
To add in the exact GT of 6, which is required to give it no TL mod, multiply this by 2/36., and get ~.004%. So,
So. we expect one example of this type for every 25000 systems generated, or 625 subsectors. How big is the empire ? Charted space ?
Has anyone here ever generated this (without using mass rolling code) , let alone more than one ?
Unusual enough by far to make it worth the effort to explain for an adventure seed, which is the point of the process, not creating an unsupervised planetary modeling algorithm. Which, I note you don't even use; good for you ! You either have the time or the flash creativity to have the luxury of rolling your own .
As I see it, and I think theres been enough comment from MWM and GDW alums to back it up) the use of plangen in the OTU isn't just stupidity or blindness or fear of change, but creating a sandbox that allows GMs who don't have the time to generate a variety of world to have a setting with lots of variety. The OTU is that, and that alone. So, if you don't aggree with how it was generated, or insist on applying expectation that are inconcistent with its intent, of course its not going to work for you- in which case, pointing out its flaws from that non-connected veiwpoint isnt just pointing out the low hanging rotten fruit, its bringing your own rotten apples to a fir tree.
What I see is that different editions of the same game have different interpretations, which suggests that each edition is trying to deal with the issue differntly than the others. Not a big surprise, and not exactly supportive of an unwilling ness to change the rules if not the OTU. And the OTU is a published product. Me, I like that it isn't being rewritten every time a new content editor comes on board or a new edition comes out - WartyK and the disappearing Dwarf races, anyone ?
Sure you can. If you don't play PC trade Traveller, you don't have to. The problem is that the arguments you (and others) present are too tightly intertwined.
far-trader
Mongoose
DFW said:
I honestly don't see how this, or any random generation of a UWP no matter how bizarre, shows the rules are broken. I think you are misreading the rules if you do.
You, the person with the brain, not the rules (no brain), not the dice (no brains) or whatever random generation method (no brain) take the result and apply thought.
I know, some find that a chore and a bizarre concept and feel the rules are to blame and that they should only produce absolutely flawless results 100% of the time. Never mind we all have different expectations of what those results should be. Not pointing fingers, it's just a general impression I've gotten from various threads this has come up on over the years.
So you take your randomly generated D200101-5 and go "hmmm, that's a puzzler..."
You think on it for a moment (or less if you're impatient, time pressed, or an ADD sufferer) and go:
i) "Aha! I've got it! This world is... (yada yada, provide a brief explanation that works for you)
ii) "Nope, I got nothing... (and reroll, repeat as needed)
iii) "Nope, that doesn't work, but if I change... (and change the random result to something you think fits better)
The RAW don't say anywhere, anything like "Thou shalt not ever discard or alter a randomly generated UWP! Thou shalt take it as decreed by the gods of chance and use it! Thou shalt strike down with vengeance in the name of RAW the character or characters of any player who questions the UWP!" Do they?
Maybe the rules need to be more explicitly written that the ref has to do some work on random results like UWPs though I seem to recall some versions do explain this. What does MgT have to say on it?
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
DFW said:
Really. Well isn't that a surprise coming on the heels of this discussion. You've got a TL +4, modifier, so at least its possible - if staggeringly unlikely to repeat given honest dice.
So, broken ? Where ? And why ? TL 5 can easily support life on a vacc rock, let alone Luna, and a prison colony or a hab station with a regressed dwindling population is solid Heinlein era SF. Frankly it would work just fine with my post on Re Dnailz in another thread, and even better in a random Sector. And since you'll probably never get two of them in the same subsector, let alone a campaign, that hardly qualifies as an "all the time" problem, nor an "all the time" solution.
Yes, there is a rules problem with Traveller, but it seems more to be that people misrepresent them. 8)
DFW said:
Oh, pish tosh and similar dismissive sounds. I have to agree with far trader on this: why is it that "don't like" or "don't agree with premise" equals "broken" ? I mean, if you were writing the rules, that would make sense, but otherwise ? I doubt that there is any expert or unassailable reason for that to be impossible. Improbable, yes -but odd worlds are a staple of adventure, both from the SF genre of the 70's and 80's (and again, currently I see) and RPGs in general.
