Trade Code Errata

[Garnfellow]

Is there any errata for the trade codes from the main book?

I pulled all the UWP info from MGT's Spinward Marches book in a database, and then calculated the trade codes using the main book rules. I then compared the results against the listed trade codes.

I ended up with quite a few differences between the two datasets, and it looks like in many cases some additional parameters may have been used in the Spinward Marches.

For example, I'm showing 70+ additional systems qualifying for the Garden World code, out of 400. Which makes me suspect that the authors of the Spinward Marches used an additional parameter on the Ga code, but I can't derive a rule from the data.

 

[drnuncheon]

For example, I'm showing 70+ additional systems qualifying for the Garden World code, out of 400. Which makes me suspect that the authors of the Spinward Marches used an additional parameter on the Ga code, but I can't derive a rule from the data.

If those worlds are not Garden worlds in CT's version of the Marches, then that is probably your answer - the trade codes may have been assigned based on the CT UWPs.

 

[Garnfellow]

The Garden World designation is not, I believe, in CT. But in any case, the trade codes in the CT Spinward Marches do not match closely with the trade codes in the MGT Spinward Marches, which do not match closely with the trade codes calculated using the MGT worldbuilding rules.

Since the MGT trade data does not closely match the CT data (while other things, such as base UWPs, do), it doesn't appear that MGT trade data is a straight grab from CT.

Which makes me wonder if the MGT trade code designations have been tweaked between the core rules and the Spinward Marches. The differences do not appear to be errors but the result of slight changes to the rules.

For example, the core rules assign a Vacuum code (Va) to any world with an Atmosphere of 0. Using that rule alone, there are 34 worlds from the MGT Spinward data that should have a Va code but don't:

Arba C200200-C Ht Lo NI
Attica C400546-8 NI
Binges A800231-A Lo NI
Bowman D000300-9 As Lo
Bronze E201000-0 Ba
Caliburn E000514-A As
Choleosti C200100-9 Lo NI
Edinina E400220-5 Lo NI Lt
Farreach A200400-B NI
Frenzie A200436-A NI
Gandr E000347-8 As Lo
Garoo A2008CB-A NA
Gitosy B000676-9 As
Glisten A000986-F Hi Ht As
Grote A400404-B NI
Hefry C200423-7 NI
Inthe C100598-B NI
Jinx D100133-7 Lo NI
Kwai Ching C503758-A IC
Macene B000453-E Ht NI As
Maitz A201511-B NI
Nirton X600000-0 Ba NI
Patinir C000632-9 As
Pimane E500343-4 Lo NI Lt
Pixie A100103-D Ht Lo NI
Quare B200545-9 NI
Rhise C100576-A NI
Robin C00059C-C Ht As
Ruby B400445-B NI
Sansibar B200310-A Lo NI
Shionthy X000742-8 As
Somem C301340-B Lo NI
Squanine A300550-B NI
Zaibon B000544-B As

Now, if you add a rule like "World Size must be 1+," then the 10 asteroid worlds drop out. And so on.

 

[AndrewW]

Which makes me wonder if the MGT trade code designations have been tweaked between the core rules and the Spinward Marches. The differences do not appear to be errors but the result of slight changes to the rules.

We might have to wait for World Builders Handbook and see what that might have.

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

The Garden World designation is not, I believe, in CT

You're correct - Garden World is not a CT trade code.

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

In CT Asteroid belts do not qualify for the Vacuum Trade Code (TC) - the assumption is that all asteroid belts have no atmosphere and are thus automatically have vacuums for atmospheres.

Although it is not explicitly stated in CT, "solid" worlds (i.e. worlds that are Size 1 or bigger) do get the Vacuum TC for having Atmosphere code 0.

Thus asteroid belts that are mainworlds do not get the Va TC, whilst worlds of Size 1+ that are mainworlds and have Atmosphere code 0 do get the Va TC.

HTH

 

[Garnfellow]

After taking another look at the data, the two most common differences between the listed and the "calculated" MGT Spinward trade codes occur with the Non-Industrial and Garden codes.

Using just the parameters in the core rules, the listed data often has NI where it shouldn't and doesn't have Ga where it should. So it appears the dataset was generated using a more restrictive set of rules for determining Ga than what's in the core rules, and a less restrictive set for determining NI.

I believe that in CT, any world with a population of 0-6 qualified for NI, while MGT restricts this to just populations of 4-6. If you calculated the trade codes using the CT rule for NI, suddenly 73 discrepancies disappear. For example, there are six instances in the MGT Spinward data of worlds with an "impossible" combination of the Ba (pop 0) and NI (pop 4-6) trade codes:

Tavonni 710 E567000-0 Ba NI
Huderu 704 X575000-0 Ba NI
Nirton 502 X600000-0 Ba NI
Zeta 2 109 X6B0000-0 Ba NI
Djinni 501 E459000-0 Ba NI
Gerome 408 X573000-0 Ba NI

This pairing is, of course, "possible" using CT rules for designating the NI code.

(Why am I concerned about this? Well, part of me is just curious, but I also have something like 35 sectors worth of world data in my database. I would like to generate a set of MGT trade codes for *all* of these systems, but I really want to make sure I understand the latest and greatest rules before I try to apply them to nearly 14,000 records!)

 

[drnuncheon]

In CT Asteroid belts do not qualify for the Vacuum Trade Code (TC) - the assumption is that all asteroid belts have no atmosphere and are thus automatically have vacuums for astmospheres.

While true, that seems a little bit off-kilter to me - being that they are vacuums, there have to be some similarities in the markets between them and planets with no atmospheres, which is I thought what trade codes were supposed to represent.

Of course, looking at the (MonT) trade system I don't see that Va has any effect whatsoever. As does, though.

 

[Garnfellow]

Of course, looking at the (MonT) trade system I don't see that Va has any effect whatsoever. As does, though.

The other place where trade codes come into play is character generation. An "As" homeworld gives you the Zero G skill, while "Va" gives Vacc Suit."

 

[Gruffty the Hiver]

In CT Asteroid belts do not qualify for the Vacuum Trade Code (TC) - the assumption is that all asteroid belts have no atmosphere and are thus automatically have vacuums for astmospheres.

While true, that seems a little bit off-kilter to me - being that they are vacuums, there have to be some similarities in the markets between them and planets with no atmospheres, which is I thought what trade codes were supposed to represent.

Of course, looking at the (MonT) trade system I don't see that Va has any effect whatsoever. As does, though.

Yeah unfortunately some of these things are misnamed - only some of the "trade codes" are actually "trade codes"; the others are more like world descriptors, whilst others do double duty as descriptors and TCs.

 

[Kilgs]

The Garden World designation is not, I believe, in CT

You're correct - Garden World is not a CT trade code.

In Universe, I've noticed that MGT Garden planets are often depicted as "Terran." The Garden coding for Universe is definitely different.

 

[Garnfellow]

I can't figure out what's going on with the Ga code in the Spinward Marches. I'm showing 67 systems in the 400+ of the Spinward Marches that should have the Ga code, but don't.

And I can't derive a new rule from the data that would cover these 67 exceptions.

 

[Garnfellow]

Here's my spreadsheet of systems that may be "missing" a Ga code. Maybe someone else can figure out what's going on here:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pWCTyyT3CHmaTS1KmwE9zNw

 

[Infojunky]

Which makes me wonder if the MGT trade code designations have been tweaked between the core rules and the Spinward Marches. The differences do not appear to be errors but the result of slight changes to the rules.

We might have to wait for World Builders Handbook and see what that might have.

Actually The World Builder's Handbook is out of play, as Marc doesn't have direct control of the DGP properties. Thus no use of the title/direct reprint of the material.

Now it someone wanted to write a similar set of books, they could.

 

[EDG]

Actually The World Builder's Handbook is out of play, as Marc doesn't have direct control of the DGP properties. Thus no use of the title/direct reprint of the material.

Someone had better tell MOngoose that, because they seem to think that their world-building book is going to be call that.

 

[Infojunky]

Actually The World Builder's Handbook is out of play, as Marc doesn't have direct control of the DGP properties. Thus no use of the title/direct reprint of the material.

Someone had better tell MOngoose that, because they seem to think that their world-building book is going to be call that.

Well, maybe not.... All I remember is comments on the DGP material from Marc in the past.

Hey, things change, I try to be fairly sanguine about it....

 

[drnuncheon]

The other place where trade codes come into play is character generation. An "As" homeworld gives you the Zero G skill, while "Va" gives Vacc Suit."

I would hope that anyone who grew up in a belt would have Vacc Suit-0 as well as Zero-G!

 

[brionl]

Actually The World Builder's Handbook is out of play, as Marc doesn't have direct control of the DGP properties. Thus no use of the title/direct reprint of the material.

Someone had better tell MOngoose that, because they seem to think that their world-building book is going to be call that.

It's a good thing you can't copyright book titles then.

 

[Infojunky]

Actually The World Builder's Handbook is out of play, as Marc doesn't have direct control of the DGP properties. Thus no use of the title/direct reprint of the material.

Someone had better tell MOngoose that, because they seem to think that their world-building book is going to be call that.

It's a good thing you can't copyright book titles then.

That is necessarily true. But I'm not going to argue it because it is Mongoose's, Marc's and Sangor's problem not mine.