Traveller 5E
- Thread starter Sigtrygg
- Start date
Hard to say, since the art they've been using for the Backerkit is basically old Mongoose stuff. But even if it does have felinoid aliens and canid aliens (or uplifts) it doesn't follow that they're Aslan or Vargr.
All the miniatures seem human, though there may be variant subspecies in there (some are a bit stocky and I swear one has pointy ears...)
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Getting back to my comment yesterday... since it has a sizable "Gear and Robots" book, 5E players may not be prime customers for Robot Handbook or CSC. The Worlds and Vehicles also sounds like it covers those areas pretty well (85+ illustrated vehicles plus design rules, 45+ illustrated animals plus design rules), so the planetside parts of WBH, and the Vehicle Handbook are also probably covered.
All the miniatures seem human, though there may be variant subspecies in there (some are a bit stocky and I swear one has pointy ears...)
I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Getting back to my comment yesterday... since it has a sizable "Gear and Robots" book, 5E players may not be prime customers for Robot Handbook or CSC. The Worlds and Vehicles also sounds like it covers those areas pretty well (85+ illustrated vehicles plus design rules, 45+ illustrated animals plus design rules), so the planetside parts of WBH, and the Vehicle Handbook are also probably covered.
Last edited:
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
It has happened canonically.
Prior to the invention of jump drive the Earth's nations sent out STL colony ships, one such journey resulted in the Islands Cluster as originally detailed in TCS.
"Early in the space-faring history of Terra, a long-range program of interstellar colonization was begun, only to be abandoned with the discovery of the jump drive. Before that abandonment, however, several large colony expeditions were launched."
We are also told that the Vilani and Zhodani explored and set up colonies using STL.
"4,882 BC Vilani sublight interstellar colonization
4,717 BC Vilani discover Jump Drive
1,482 BC First Zhodani sublight interstellar flights
1305 BC Zhodani Consulate established
897 BC Zhodani discover Jump drive."
Many would welcome this, Charted Space and its galaxy are not how everyone runs Traveller...
Last edited:
It's interesting to me the difference in time between the Vilani and Zho between sublight expeditions and Discovering Jump Drive (165y vs 585y).
We know the Vilani are extremely cautious and methodical, so it scans that they wouldn't have even contemplated interstellar travel until they were overprepared for it. While the Zho seem to have spent quite a bit of time in sublight exploration mode. Luck probably played a part in it, but the Zho do appear to be a lot more adventurous as a culture.
We know the Vilani are extremely cautious and methodical, so it scans that they wouldn't have even contemplated interstellar travel until they were overprepared for it. While the Zho seem to have spent quite a bit of time in sublight exploration mode. Luck probably played a part in it, but the Zho do appear to be a lot more adventurous as a culture.
mavikfelna
Emperor Mongoose
I was really disappointed to hear they aren't mapping EDU to INT and INT to WIS, because that's where they belong. I've long disliked SOC as a stat and agree with their changing it to a trait or title.
Other than, it at least sounds like they are trying to keep a viable life path system.
CordwainerFish
Emperor Mongoose
Oh, if the Vilani had discovered the Toliak they would have sent everyone who knew about it off to live on an island somewhere.
(A real island. They're not Solomani, for Grandfather's sake.)
SOC as a stat worked in CT because stats didn't have fixed bonuses. You had situations where SOC 12 was a bonus and situations where it was a penalty. But in later editions (like Mongoose) where SOC is applied as a bonus or penalty to social rolls period, it breaks down badly. Traveller could use a way to have a socially inept Lordling and a charismatic guttersnipe, both of which are popular archetypes. But there is no mechanism in the base rules for doing that.
It sounds like this 5e game is going what I do with a house rule in my campaign, which is disassociate titles from the SOC stat.
mavikfelna
Emperor Mongoose
You're right, I had forgotten that. I much prefer using something like Vargr CHA and letting social standing be a situational modifier like CT.
I mean, it's a fair point... but at least in Mongoose 2e the characteristic used is contextual (including the possibility of not using any). And while there is a case to be argued for Social Standing's relationship to wealth and confidence affecting social situations, INT or EDU (or even physical characteristics in some cases) may be more appropriate for a particular skill check. Carousing (END), Carousing (INT) or Carousing (SOC) are all often seen, in different contexts (example given on CRB2e22, p59).
SOC gets used as the stat modifier when it is the most appropriate characteristic to use, or where it's one of several that could apply. A smart but poorly educated and low social character just does personal interactions a bit different to a thick Aristocrat. It doesn't mean they have a better or worse chance of talking a planetary official into granting them a permit.
And... if high SOC is a detriment to a situation for some reason, a Bane may be an appropriate way to game that, perhaps with a Boon for being scum? Same as if background matters?
Ultimately, it's a rating of social power, same as INT is a rating of brain power and STR is a rating of muscle power. When social power matters, it's the stat you go with.
SOC gets used as the stat modifier when it is the most appropriate characteristic to use, or where it's one of several that could apply. A smart but poorly educated and low social character just does personal interactions a bit different to a thick Aristocrat. It doesn't mean they have a better or worse chance of talking a planetary official into granting them a permit.
And... if high SOC is a detriment to a situation for some reason, a Bane may be an appropriate way to game that, perhaps with a Boon for being scum? Same as if background matters?
Ultimately, it's a rating of social power, same as INT is a rating of brain power and STR is a rating of muscle power. When social power matters, it's the stat you go with.
Last edited:
A couple problems with that.
Being Lord Whatshisname from Somewhere is not intrinsically "social power" in that many situations. What "Social Power" does the Baron of Faraway have amongst a bunch of belters? Or on a corporate world? If he does have influence, it'll probably be because he's wealthy or he knows people who do actually have power in that situation.
Also, examples in the rules don't really follow that consistently.
Gathering Rumors is something Dukes are better at than other people? (it's listed as a Carousing (SOC) roll in the Core rules).
Lord Popinjay the dilettante is intrinsically better at rallying troops than other people? (Rallying Troops is Leadership (SOC) in the Core rules).
Haggling in the market is also listed as a SOC thing.
More importantly, it leaves no mechanic in the game for reflecting strength of personality or charisma or whatever you want to call it. So, either you are potentially making social skills more difficult than typical skill checks (since they would generally be straight skill with no stat bonus, as suggested on pg 59 for "just carousing in general". Or you are going to be seeing players trying to shoehorn Int into it's place, because they are being clever in their socializing.
That is a thing you could do. Everyone is equally good at socializing. Those especially charismatic people are really just folks with high Skill Ranks. But why is that only for social skills? Wouldn't it make sense to make that the standard for all skills?
Being Lord Whatshisname from Somewhere is not intrinsically "social power" in that many situations. What "Social Power" does the Baron of Faraway have amongst a bunch of belters? Or on a corporate world? If he does have influence, it'll probably be because he's wealthy or he knows people who do actually have power in that situation.
Also, examples in the rules don't really follow that consistently.
Gathering Rumors is something Dukes are better at than other people? (it's listed as a Carousing (SOC) roll in the Core rules).
Lord Popinjay the dilettante is intrinsically better at rallying troops than other people? (Rallying Troops is Leadership (SOC) in the Core rules).
Haggling in the market is also listed as a SOC thing.
More importantly, it leaves no mechanic in the game for reflecting strength of personality or charisma or whatever you want to call it. So, either you are potentially making social skills more difficult than typical skill checks (since they would generally be straight skill with no stat bonus, as suggested on pg 59 for "just carousing in general". Or you are going to be seeing players trying to shoehorn Int into it's place, because they are being clever in their socializing.
That is a thing you could do. Everyone is equally good at socializing. Those especially charismatic people are really just folks with high Skill Ranks. But why is that only for social skills? Wouldn't it make sense to make that the standard for all skills?
WHULorigan
Emperor Mongoose
Sounds like Classic Traveller . . .
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Influence.
Chain of command.
Financial clout.
Separate, but equal.
Chain of command.
Financial clout.
Separate, but equal.
Fluffy Bunny Feet
Emperor Mongoose
People pay more attention to celebrity than they would the same person who isn't. High social isn't just nobles or wealthy but fame. People will listen to a famous boxer (who may be dumb as a rock) more readily than the non famous guy next door with a sky high IQ and 6 degrees relevant to the discussion.
That being the case as a PC gains fame whether by gaining wealth or by deeds that get in the news their SOC should go up. Wealth that is kept hidden won't help SOC till it is revealed. Of course he may gain infamy instead for his evil deeds and for some purposes at least his SOC still goes up.
Captain Bob of the Free Trader Sunshine isn't likely to have high SOC or fame. But the same guy with the same ship but now calling himself Captain Blood of the commerce raider Ravager is more likely to be noticed and have his SOC go up, especially if he owns the ship and has famous battles or builds a raider fleet from his captured vessels. Also more likely to have a famous death as the other side hunts him down, but that is another issue.
That being the case as a PC gains fame whether by gaining wealth or by deeds that get in the news their SOC should go up. Wealth that is kept hidden won't help SOC till it is revealed. Of course he may gain infamy instead for his evil deeds and for some purposes at least his SOC still goes up.
Captain Bob of the Free Trader Sunshine isn't likely to have high SOC or fame. But the same guy with the same ship but now calling himself Captain Blood of the commerce raider Ravager is more likely to be noticed and have his SOC go up, especially if he owns the ship and has famous battles or builds a raider fleet from his captured vessels. Also more likely to have a famous death as the other side hunts him down, but that is another issue.
Yeah. I don't particularly like how every task check has some unique calculation for resolving it in CT, but overall I am a big fan of emphasizing the character's actual Skill ranks over smothering them in stat and gear bonuses.
Sure. And that's where the situation assesses if SOC IS the appropriate stat or not. The Referee is well within their rights to rule that a boorish and stupid noble trying to impress a bunch of belters uses their -1 INT DM for that interaction.
Titles are just gloss that characters MAY choose to use. In some situations they will matter, but in most others it's not being a Knight that matters, but having SOC 11 (which, it should be noted, has the same +1 DM as SOC 9 gets...).
In Mongoose Traveller*, the characteristic that is used for a skill test is never fixed and changes from situation to situation. There are numerous examples, and there are ones that are almost universally applied, or almost never applied (STR doesn't usually go with Comms...). But the three mental ones very often get used for the social skills.
And honestly? Yes, I'd expect that someone that's part of the ruling class probably does have the connections and social capital to be able to better source rumours and gossip... of an appropriate nature. WHAT rumours and gossip a particular character discovers very much depends on where and who they are sourcing them from. I would say that low social stuff may be Streetwise (INT); online research may be Investigation (EDU) and asking your follower base for help might be Persuade (SOC). All three are likely to deliver very different results regarding the same rumours and gossip, but that's how it goes.
I would reiterate: Social Standing is what it says it is, just as Endurance is what it says it is. It is NOT Charisma, Charm or Appearance. OFTEN, a character's Social Standing will be the most appropriate characteristic to use in a social situation... but not always, and often enough INT will be a fair alternate if it has a better mod, just as often you might be able to use the better of INT or EDU.
*(If you are coming from another edition such as GURPS or MegaTraveller this response does not apply).
Last edited:
I think everyone is aware of that and does not dispute that this is what the rules say. The comment that started this discussion was someone agreeing with the kickstarter removing SOC from the main stats, because it does not fit with the rest.
As a quibble, I will point out that your example about rumors is not the one I was referring to, which specifically was:
Gathering Rumours at a Party: Average (8+) Carouse check (1D hours, SOC).
Traveller has a strong tendency to just run on three stats: Dex, Int, Edu. The other three are pretty niche applications as written. I do not think that is a good design.
My basic problem with the idea of SOC as a stat is that it is not remotely fixed. The amount of status an Imperial Noble has on an advanced Imperial world is vastly different than the amount of status that they have on backwater world outside the Imperium. Also, it is extremely vague and unhelpful in describing your character in the 2-10 range. What kind of person has a 5 status in Imperial society? What kind of person has a 8? Why is this not affected by your actual career? Is the Imperium a caste system where you are born an Uncouth One and that's who you are no matter what kind of wealth or power you come into? What does a SOC 10 Barbarian represent? Or a SOC 3 Rank 6 Corporate CEO?
As a quibble, I will point out that your example about rumors is not the one I was referring to, which specifically was:
Gathering Rumours at a Party: Average (8+) Carouse check (1D hours, SOC).
Traveller has a strong tendency to just run on three stats: Dex, Int, Edu. The other three are pretty niche applications as written. I do not think that is a good design.
My basic problem with the idea of SOC as a stat is that it is not remotely fixed. The amount of status an Imperial Noble has on an advanced Imperial world is vastly different than the amount of status that they have on backwater world outside the Imperium. Also, it is extremely vague and unhelpful in describing your character in the 2-10 range. What kind of person has a 5 status in Imperial society? What kind of person has a 8? Why is this not affected by your actual career? Is the Imperium a caste system where you are born an Uncouth One and that's who you are no matter what kind of wealth or power you come into? What does a SOC 10 Barbarian represent? Or a SOC 3 Rank 6 Corporate CEO?
You could make the same criticism for Education. That is also contextualised by background; an Aslan Pilot will have a very different body of knowledge to draw from than a Zhodani social worker, even if they have the same EDU rating.
Yes. It is culturally dependant; SOC is the stat that changes based on culture and sometimes species. The default is "in the culture of the campaign setting", which is usually the 3I, but does not have to be. Humans are similar enough that human settings will usually still use some version of it. Aliens usually have another stat.
SOC 10 Barbarian? What's their story? If they were born into that or stayed on the homeworld, clearly they have experience of being part of a local elite, but might sometimes struggle to apply that offworld. If they started there but gained SOC in the Imperial Navy, they're part of the mainstream, with a fascinating background to leverage at parties...
SOC 3 CEO? They may have rank and wealth, but little real social power. Possibly their lower class origins are held against them by their peers. Maybe they're profoundly autistic or utterly obnoxious. Maybe that their rise to power was largely to show them all!
(I don't have any issue with a stat that works differently to the other ones.)
But as far as 5E goes... 5E DOES do things differently here, yes. It DOES have a Charisma stat that actually has no stat equivalent in Traveller, and never really did. Same as GURPS has no direct equivalent characteristic to EDU. So I am indeed cool with them doing it differently.
Yes. It is culturally dependant; SOC is the stat that changes based on culture and sometimes species. The default is "in the culture of the campaign setting", which is usually the 3I, but does not have to be. Humans are similar enough that human settings will usually still use some version of it. Aliens usually have another stat.
SOC 10 Barbarian? What's their story? If they were born into that or stayed on the homeworld, clearly they have experience of being part of a local elite, but might sometimes struggle to apply that offworld. If they started there but gained SOC in the Imperial Navy, they're part of the mainstream, with a fascinating background to leverage at parties...
SOC 3 CEO? They may have rank and wealth, but little real social power. Possibly their lower class origins are held against them by their peers. Maybe they're profoundly autistic or utterly obnoxious. Maybe that their rise to power was largely to show them all!
(I don't have any issue with a stat that works differently to the other ones.)
But as far as 5E goes... 5E DOES do things differently here, yes. It DOES have a Charisma stat that actually has no stat equivalent in Traveller, and never really did. Same as GURPS has no direct equivalent characteristic to EDU. So I am indeed cool with them doing it differently.
But then Traveller bases your cost of living on SOC... And the game mechanic for wielding that power they rose to is...the SOC stat they don't have.
And it's definitely not "being obnoxious or autistic" because that's exactly what SOC is NOT representing: which is social acumen.
The game mechanic does not reflect what the game says it does. They are not consistent in using it as status rather than acumen. They are not consistent about what it actually means because they conflate wealth and status in many places, but not in all places. Like the Corporate career only provides one possible boost to your SOC, which is a +1 from reaching Rank 6 and the Merchant career likewise, only by reaching Rank 5.
Traveller has from time to time introduced optional rules for just buying your way to high SOC. Or failing to pay to keep your SOC. But that's never been a normal function of game play.
The career tables suggest very strange things about the "place in society" of people in Traveller settings.
The vast majority of people have no social mobility whatsoever. Their SOC is 100% based on birth apparently, since there is no way to improve it as a worker, colonist, belter, or scavenger. And even merchants and corporate officials can only get a very minor boost to their birth status from reaching the pinnacle of their careers.
The most upwardly mobile are Entertainers and Scholars, the only two careers that can get +SOC in both Personal Development and Mustering Out (and they don't need to be Rank 5+ to get SOC on mustering out).
Interestingly, Nobles on active service can't actually improve their status. The only +SOC bonuses come from mustering out.
Scouts have an entire Knighthood specifically for them in sourcebooks, but nothing in their career makes that a thing that could happen.
The Navy is apparently the most prestigious career, because Rank 5 characters are automatically bumped to SOC 10 (or +1 if better) and their Rank 6 is SOC 12 automatically. The Marines get the Rank 5 boost to 10 but nothing for Rank 6. The Army doesn't get the SOC 10 until Rank 6. Rank 5/6 characters can also get SOC bonuses in Mustering Out, but there is no possible change in social standing if you don't reach those heights.
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
I long ago looked at what player character do in game, and looked at the characteristics and skills (and talents, the Aftermath rules version not the D&D power up version) that get the most use. The ones that were rarely or nerve used are thus redundant, why have them on the character sheet?
Thins PCs do - fight stuff, so stats like STR, DEX, END or AGL, CON or if you want all five of them...
think about stuff - INT, EDU*
resist stuff - DET**, END, CON, WILL
spot stuff happening - Intuition, PER
communicate with others - CHA, Charm, Influence, persuade, command
if something is rolled for regularly and is innate to the character then it should be a characteristic.
*EDU is complicated, do you use it as a general catch all for backgound learning, or does it provide skill points, or do you scrap it entirely and replace it with skill points.
**DET or determination happens a lot.
Skills - I prefer a short skill list of broad skills rather than the dozens of skills that clutter a BRP character sheet many of which will never be used
Should knowledge based skills be a thing or rolled into the EDU characteristic?
Notice SOC has not been mentioned as yet. To me SOC is like rank and thus is more of an additional characteristic that may be inherited, earned, raised and lowered due to circumstance and events.
Thins PCs do - fight stuff, so stats like STR, DEX, END or AGL, CON or if you want all five of them...
think about stuff - INT, EDU*
resist stuff - DET**, END, CON, WILL
spot stuff happening - Intuition, PER
communicate with others - CHA, Charm, Influence, persuade, command
if something is rolled for regularly and is innate to the character then it should be a characteristic.
*EDU is complicated, do you use it as a general catch all for backgound learning, or does it provide skill points, or do you scrap it entirely and replace it with skill points.
**DET or determination happens a lot.
Skills - I prefer a short skill list of broad skills rather than the dozens of skills that clutter a BRP character sheet many of which will never be used
Should knowledge based skills be a thing or rolled into the EDU characteristic?
Notice SOC has not been mentioned as yet. To me SOC is like rank and thus is more of an additional characteristic that may be inherited, earned, raised and lowered due to circumstance and events.
