Traveller 5

[Wil Mireu]

If you are looking for a +1 sword, maybe one should look to another game ...

It's not about "looking for a +1 sword". It's about either using a complex system to figure out that a weapon gives you a +1 bonus (which is what QREBS would do), or just saying "it's a good weapon, it gives you a +1 to hit".

Maybe QREBS is good if you've got the time to figure out the stats for everything that players encounter, but most GMs won't have that time or the inclination to do that either. Meanwhile, just winging a bonus or penalty on the spur of the moment has worked well enough in other games (that's part of a GM's skill after all, whereas T5 just seems to want to put all of that out of the GM's head and into endless tables), and very often ends up being as internally consistent for most uses... so why bother with QREBS at all?

 

[dragoner]

so why bother with QREBS at all?

Then don't. Marc writes MOARN, or "Make Only As Really Necessary" and that goes for all of it; but QREBS does a little more than make a +1 sword.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Is it perfect ...NO. I do believe everyone can and does complain about every product that way, BUT I feel people should be a least a little more open to it.

I've complained that Mongoose Traveller is closer to perfection than Traveller 5 is.

 

[Wil Mireu]

I am sorry for trying to express my point of just wanting people to look for themselves at T5, and not base their feelings on what others have had to say.

Don't be. Nobody's complaining about that aspect of what you said.

I yield the point that this is a Mongoose Pub board and respect that most people here perfer to just use core Mongoose Pub rules. So that being said I am sorry for trying to express anything other than the Mongoose point of view. I will stop posting anything about T5, and anything not Mongoose Pub based.

And now you're being ridiculous. And you went over to CotI and not only quoted one of my posts from here directly and without context, but whined to everyone there about your "treatment" here and tried to set up a cross-board conflict. That's hardly "apologetic" behaviour.

As myself and others have pointed out, the problem is your attitude. You think that you have the right to patronise people just because of your supposed "experience"? We know nothing about your experience, and nobody CARES what your experience is. We don't care how many books you have collected either. It's just cock-waving, pure and simple, and it's immature and unnecessary.

Someone relatively new to the hobby can have interesting insights into the game as much as someone who's been in it for decades. And I know for a fact that there are people younger than you and with less "years in the hobby" under their belt who are accomplished and published writers (which is more than can be said for yourself) - are they less worthy than you to opine about Traveller? Do you honestly think that they don't have as much (if not more) understanding of the game as you?

Do you think that someone even needs to be an author to have enough experience of the setting to have that understanding? How many of your obsessively collected books have you read from cover to cover? Could you answer any question about Traveller that was thrown at you? I'm pretty sure you haven't read all of them, and I'm pretty sure that there are many other people who have posted here and elsewhere who have a better understanding of the setting than you do. So far you haven't even really demonstrated that you have any knowledge of the setting at all - so what's your "37+ years of experience" really worth? I'm sure you could run a decent game, possibly even a great game, but that doesn't really mean anything when talking about an RPG on a discussion board. THAT is the real problem here, but you keep insisting that your own experience is somehow more valid than anyone else's, when it really isn't.

And there isn't a conspiracy here to crowd out any other version of Traveller. Of course Mongoose Traveller is going to be the most popular here - what do you expect? - but as you can see from the poll thread Classic Traveller, GURPS Traveller, and TNE fans are pretty well represented too (the rest, not so much).

The thing with T5 is that some people seem to be INCREDIBLY hyper-defensive over it. Probably because they've been waiting a long time for it, and have sunk a lot of their hard-earned cash into it and waited even longer to get their book and trinkets, and don't want to hear about how crappy it is. But keep in mind, the negative reviews have come from people who own the book - these are people who ARE disappointed in what they got for their money and who HAVE read the book as much as anyone else who owns it has. You can't just sweep their opinions aside the way you have done everyone else's here.

Some people view T5 as a badly designed, over-written, over-complicated, disorganised mess that is too much effort to get anything out of and should have been a lot better given the development time and money sunk into it. Others acknowledge that (or try to deny or ignore it) but are more willing to spend their time and effort to wade through it and dig deeper to try to find a decent system or something they can use from T5. But these are the people who have already contributed to the kickstarter and/or the beta. People outside of the small hardcore of supporters who weren't as invested in the game simply aren't going to be interested in spending a lot of their time or effort in understanding or trying to use the game, and they're certainly not going to be willing to spend a lot of money on it to see what it's like either. That's what reviews are for. And so far I would say that the information that's slowly coming out about the game and its contents haven't got anyone outside of CotI all that excited about it - if anything it's successfully put people them OFF from looking further into T5.

 

[CosmicGamer]

I am sorry for trying to express my point of just wanting people to look for themselves at T5, and not base their feelings on what others have had to say.

With all due respect, whether it's a vacuum cleaner, a car, a movie, a book, or whatever, I check out the reviews. If the topic of the vacuum cleaner, car, or book comes up, why shouldn't I share with my friends what I've learned from the reviews? Consumer reports says this.. Car and driver says such and such.. "I'd never buy that car, it has a poor safety rating." "Why don't you drive it and crash it before you make a decision." :lol: Based on the reviews, that movie squeal is just a bunch of action with little plot - so I'll probably like it even though it only got poor reviews. Most of the reviews for T5 have complained about the index... Well, that may be a pain, but this alone wouldn't stop me from buying a book.

Maybe half way through the many years late "release" which, from what I hear, is still not filling any back orders or putting books on shelves and is still sending books to what I call the "good ol' boys" who did beta and kickstart, I decided the endeavor seamed amateurish (from the promises and producing results perspective - not content) and I wouldn't be supporting it with my money. Sorry Mark - by most accounts your a good guy but what I've seen is not my idea of good publishing. Even if the content is good, I will not buy into it because I don't want my dollars to "vote" for the process that produced it. Just my position. No need to argue it. I don't have anything bad to say about those who do support it. If I hadn't followed T5 and was just stumbling upon it today I would base my decision to buy on the reviews - because the price is beyond a just buy it to check it out deal.

If you want to loan me your copy I'll give you my address and check out your copy.
I'll try my best to put aside my preconceived notions and ignore the comments of others and just give you my honest opinion of the content and not the publishing process.

I will stop posting anything about T5.

No reason to go to those extremes. To me, it would seam out of place to have a thread in this forum devoted specifically to T5 only discussion, such as posting something designed with one of the cool maker tools if it is totally incompatible with Mongoose. However, I'd think discussing parts of T5 that would be compatible with Mongoose would be welcome. Even giving a heads up as to what things are different and how. "For those of you thinking of trying out T5, here are some of the things you'll find different..." and so on.

Take care and enjoy the game that you want and play the way you wish to play too.

You do the same. Stay 8)

 

[CosmicGamer]

If you want to loan me your copy I'll give you my address and check out your copy.

Based on the reports of it's size, it may take me a while to return it.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Most of the reviews for T5 have complained about the index... Well, that may be a pain, but this alone wouldn't stop me from buying a book.

I don't use indexes, so that isn't even a concern of mine about Traveller 5. What's between the front and back cover of the book is what concerns me.

However, I'd think discussing parts of T5 that would be compatible with Mongoose would be welcome.

The only thing of use (for me) from Traveller 5 which Mongose Traveller doesn't have are the world map forms. IS Map Form 9 from Classic Traveller is now the revised IS Map Form 8 in Traveller 5. So I'm using the form from Traveller 5.

 

[GypsyComet]

However, I'd think discussing parts of T5 that would be compatible with Mongoose would be welcome.

The only thing of use (for me) from Traveller 5 which Mongose Traveller doesn't have are the world map forms. IS Map Form 9 from Classic Traveller is now the revised IS Map Form 8 in Traveller 5. So I'm using the form from Traveller 5.

Mongoose's ship design numbers were informed by the T5 draft, so most Mongoose ships are already volume compatible with T5. T5's additional list of components, once given explanation, should fit into Mongoose ships just fine.

 

[F33D]

Mongoose's ship design numbers were informed by the T5 draft, so most Mongoose ships are already volume compatible with T5. T5's additional list of components, once given explanation, should fit into Mongoose ships just fine.

T5 uses 14 Kliters to the Dton?

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

However, I'd think discussing parts of T5 that would be compatible with Mongoose would be welcome.

The only thing of use (for me) from Traveller 5 which Mongose Traveller doesn't have are the world map forms. IS Map Form 9 from Classic Traveller is now the revised IS Map Form 8 in Traveller 5. So I'm using the form from Traveller 5.

Mongoose's ship design numbers were informed by the T5 draft, so most Mongoose ships are already volume compatible with T5. T5's additional list of components, once given explanation, should fit into Mongoose ships just fine.

IS Map Forms are not used for ships.

 

[GypsyComet]

Mongoose's ship design numbers were informed by the T5 draft, so most Mongoose ships are already volume compatible with T5. T5's additional list of components, once given explanation, should fit into Mongoose ships just fine.

T5 uses 14 Kliters to the Dton?

Dtons are dtons. Since neither game is using kliters for design purposes (for ships; Thingmaker is another matter), the difference between 13.5 and 14 m3 per dton is not important.

-
Obligatory use of "sophont".

 

[Oracle]

Hey I read my copy of Traveller 5, and it is ok. It has some rules that I might use, and others I need to think about for a while. I might go over to the Coti web sight and ask some questions to better understand how some rules actually work, so I understand those rules better.

I guess the real issue here is the cost for the book. My guess for the second printing they will have a soft cover copy and a .pdf file copy too...they should both be cheaper. So for me the book was worth buying and I am happy to have bought it.

 

[F33D]

Hey I read my copy of Traveller 5, and it is ok. It has some rules that I might use, and others I need to think about for a while. I might go over to the Coti web sight and ask some questions to better understand how some rules actually work, so I understand those rules better.

I guess the real issue here is the cost for the book. My guess for the second printing they will have a soft cover copy and a .pdf file copy too...they should both be cheaper. So for me the book was worth buying and I am happy to have bought it.

If the book ever gets properly edited and a $30 pdf comes out, I'm buying.

 

[IraShaine1972]

In my 30 years of playing and running more RPG systems than I care to remember. In all my open mindedness and enthusiasm for new games. In all my years of possibly misplaced determination to learn and run even "bad" games due to interest is concepts. In all my sentiment towards long lived systems that still take me back to those elementary school days of discovering RPGs and gaming in general (Call of Cthulhu, D&D, Traveller ect..). I can honestly say.....

I have never in all those years and game systems seen a more poorly written book. Ever. As a straight up game it looks more or less unplayable without investing ALOT of time. I will never get anywhere close to that as I found the book nearly unreadable. Pages of Dice probability tables? What? I have never seen a bigger mess. At least I got the custom dice. Those were very nice. Given that the book is worthless to me I now have a nice set of very expensive dice. Very, very expensive dice.

 

[Nerhesi]

I 100% completely agree with you, I've posted my very unfortunate let-down both on here and on the COTI forums.

I do not think editing will help T5. They need a a complete revamp of some core concepts. For example, any small craft that can boast a range 7 cannot be hit at all or even fired upon by large craft. Half the makers don't make things properly. Personal combat requires massive overhaul, and so on so forth.

I was really really looking forward to it. Thankfully, we have Mongoose which has proven that they have things right and have massive support in the form of many published books.

 

[The Dark Avenger]

When I got my copy of T5 I worked through it a few times. First because I was interested, and then for business reasons - I was considering the possibility of using T5 rules for published materials. My impression is that T5 needs what I said it needed a long, long time before it was published.

That is, it needs to be broken up into digestible chunks and presented in a clear and accessible manner, perhaps in what amounts to a series of Somewhat Larger Black Books (larger than LBBs, not larger than the T5 book because that may not be physically possible....)

Some elements of the core system need playtesting (in the sense of using the rules to actually play games!) and then revising or in some cases completely changing to make them simple and easy to use, and to make it all fit together.

Some concepts need bashing over the head with a rock. Ideas like 'every adventure starts and ends at the starport' seem like an attempt to codify and classify every object, concept and action in the universe. An idea like that might have made sense to me in my teens during the early 1980s, but there's simply no need for this sort of constraint. I'd be a lot more interested in a simple core mechanic and a loose framework for having fun adventures than an attempt to define and provide a rule for everything that the players might ever try to do.

I know; you can just ignore the bits you don't like. But a book should only be this huge if it needs to be this huge in order to contain what it needs to contain. Probability tables, edicts that you can't start an adventure anywhere but a starport and it's not ended until you go to the starport again... this isn't needed and it's contributing to an excessively oversized book.

You could probably remove the Makers, probabilty tables, alien creation and whatnot and present the rest (after cleaning up and fixing) in logical sections. Character Generation, Combat, Ships & Travel, Worldbuilding.... that sounds familiar.

That's what I was advocating some years ago, and having seen the results of not doing that way I feel vindicated. All those rules in the T5 tome should have been kept in the background as a framework and used to create digestible chunks of fun-enabling rules mechanics.

It could still happen. Maybe it is happening right now. We don't know because FFE isn't saying. This is my big question about T5 - is what came out this year 'it' or can we expect a playable-fixed-chunks version?

 

[The Dark Avenger]

A while ago I tried to gauge the level of interest in T5 with a view to maybe doing supplements and adventures to support it. Apart from a handful of people who took the attitude that 'you should do that because it will support Traveller and that's always good', the overall response was minimal.

What I was asking (and was criticised for asking) was 'who is playing games using T5?' - not building ships and making up subsectors but actually playing games. Apart from the tumbleweeds, the few responses I got were along the lines of 'that's not a fair question. It's far too early to ask who's playing games with it, it's not been out long enough'.

That seems odd. To me, a game is for playing and not just having; if I get a new game I play it as soon as I possibly can. If people who've been waiting eagerly - for years - aren't playing games with their new Traveller game within days then that suggests... accessibility issues, maybe.

Working on the not unreasonable assumption that these people wanted to play their new game, it seems to me that the presentation of T5 missed the mark. I suspect that the development focus was on creating T5 for its own sake rather than giving the fans the best version of Traveller yet. Focus was on the process rather than the result, maybe, and the result was a game that isn't really very accessible.

All is not lost, though. As I mentioned above, a broken-down and fixed version presented in a more accessible way could still work. I do think the clock is ticking on that one though; T5 discussion on COTI seems to be dropping off. FFE need to announce what they're doing sometime soon, or the opportunity could be lost.

 

[Sigtrygg]

T5 could have been brilliant.

Take all the best bits from every version of Traveller, fix stuff that needs fixing, release as 3 58 page LBBS in a box.

Some of the problems I have with T5:

The task system sucks, it is T4 all over again. DGP produced a far superior system they could include as a 2 page spread in each of their digest magazines which they improved further to produce the MT task system. The MgT task system is superior.

Personal combat is broken and still doesn't do what should now be standard - it doesn't scale between personal combat, vehicle combat and ship combat. How this came to pass when T4 ha a pretty good combat system is beyond me.

The makers are neat (when they are fixed ) but what players want are equipment lists.

Ship design is needlessly complicated.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

A while ago I tried to gauge the level of interest in T5 with a view to maybe doing supplements and adventures to support it. Apart from a handful of people who took the attitude that 'you should do that because it will support Traveller and that's always good', the overall response was minimal.

What I was asking (and was criticised for asking) was 'who is playing games using T5?' - not building ships and making up subsectors but actually playing games. Apart from the tumbleweeds, the few responses I got were along the lines of 'that's not a fair question. It's far too early to ask who's playing games with it, it's not been out long enough'.

That seems odd. To me, a game is for playing and not just having; if I get a new game I play it as soon as I possibly can. If people who've been waiting eagerly - for years - aren't playing games with their new Traveller game within days then that suggests... accessibility issues, maybe.

Working on the not unreasonable assumption that these people wanted to play their new game, it seems to me that the presentation of T5 missed the mark. I suspect that the development focus was on creating T5 for its own sake rather than giving the fans the best version of Traveller yet. Focus was on the process rather than the result, maybe, and the result was a game that isn't really very accessible.

Yet another vote for MgT from me, we may have tinkered with one or two things in the system (and re-written what we have always thought was the weakest part of MgT, the CSC), but fundamentally it would take a very impressive system for us to abandon MgT, and clearly T5 is not that.

So, instead of doing supplements and adventures for T5, how about writing some more for MgT?

Egil

 

[The Dark Avenger]

Avenger will continue to produce materials for Mongoose Traveller. Supporting T5 is clearly not viable at this time.

So right now we have the Kitbag series and other stuff, plus a forthcoming series set in Foreven sector, beginning with Research Station Chamax.