Traveller Beta Playtest Rulebook

[phavoc]

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=130413&products_id=156017 has another review.

People from the "My glass is half empty" tribe are posting reviews of the playtest rules without spending the time to learn and play the game first. Desperate Lives of the First Complainers Club.

I find it very odd that you were so dismissive of the first review, and then you go and point out the positive review. So which point of view do you have? You are sending some mixed messages here.

It has been some time since I've put much stock in Megan's reviews of a product. I know she is a highly prolific reviewer, rarely gives anything less than 4 stars, and often 5 stars. After reading a review of hers and comparing it the product I found some factual errors to what she was saying. After that I pretty much discounted anything she says about a product.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I find it very odd that you were so dismissive of the first review, and then you go and point out the positive review. So which point of view do you have? You are sending some mixed messages here.

You thought this one was positive? That's interesting. I thought it was a simple "these are the chapters it has" overview, and not much of a review at all.

I'll be linking to any reviews I find, if that's what you were wondering.
http://www.shopyourway.com/articles/626327
http://www.stargazersworld.com/2015/09/07/some-thoughts-on-the-traveller-core-beta/
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=130592&products_id=156017
https://rockymountainnavy.wordpress.com/2015/09/13/first-impressions-mongoose-traveller-2nd-edition-public-beta/

 

[Jeff Hopper]

I find it very odd that you were so dismissive of the first review, and then you go and point out the positive review. So which point of view do you have? You are sending some mixed messages here.

You thought this one was positive? That's interesting. I thought it was a simple "these are the chapters it has" overview, and not much of a review at all.

I'll be linking to any reviews I find, if that's what you were wondering.
http://www.shopyourway.com/articles/626327
http://www.stargazersworld.com/2015/09/07/some-thoughts-on-the-traveller-core-beta/

OK, that first link is not even a review, it is an announcement. The second link makes me wonder if the reviewer has actually read the MgT2 Beta or is just parroting what he has seen in other reviews while singing the usual lament of "Traveller is sooooo outdated" (which has been proven wrong by Mongoose's own line of products for Traveller version 1.0).

 

[TrippyHippy]

It has been some time since I've put much stock in Megan's reviews of a product. I know she is a highly prolific reviewer, rarely gives anything less than 4 stars, and often 5 stars. After reading a review of hers and comparing it the product I found some factual errors to what she was saying. After that I pretty much discounted anything she says about product

The drivethru are 'weighted' in a sense that they can only be made by people who have purchased the product, while people who vote down a product with low scores are asked to write a few comments to explain why (other sites don't do this). It tends to cut out hostile reviews, anonymous voting and shilling. You'll note that a lot of the more negative comments in the associated forum tend to come from people who haven't purchased the product.

Indeed, you'll note that it sold to Gold standard in just a week, which does tend to contextualise the criticism a lot. It's sparked a fair amount of interest from positive to negative stances.

What were the factual errors?

 

[Anonymous]

The second link makes me wonder if the reviewer has actually read the MgT2 Beta or is just parroting what he has seen in other reviews while singing the usual lament of "Traveller is sooooo outdated" (which has been proven wrong by Mongoose's own line of products for Traveller version 1.0).

In all honesty, we haven't had a week since the beta was released, yet people have had enough time to assess the new to the point they could write a review? I wish I was a trustafarian and had time to game till me eyes bled...

In the real world, how many of us actually have the time (cos you know, real life sucks time amongst other things) to read and digest a 250 page rule book, roll characters and start up a session to see how the game actually plays?

I agree that you can read the rules and compare it to what we've been playing these last few years but to actually get a game going and try all the new stuff in the context of a breathing game?

2/3 of my group have bought the beta, we're looking at incorporating it into the current game but as the GM I would rather hold off till High Guard, the CSC, vehicle guide and Companion are released (in draft) so I get a better grip on the whole rather than just the core. I know there are those who'd say the core should be all you need and I see your point, I'd rather wait on the others to be better able to integrate the new rules into an ongoing campaign.

Hopefully tho, we will run a session or two and try things out. At that point I might actually post my thoughts but I won't be calling it a review.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I did introduce a couple of new elements in my bi-weekly Traveller campaign last night. The Boon/Bane thing works fine. The new skills training rule, I'm not so sure of.

Anyhoo, I can at least say I am honestly playtesting things - gradually at least.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I'm trying out the Bane and Boon right now. At first, I didn't know how to ask for such rolls. Finally, I blurted out, "Make a Bane roll for DEX." Not sure how that came across to others.

 

[Jak Nazryth]

I will be integrating some minor items at first, stream lined skills for instance, might use Bane dice as a simple play test to see how things go this upcoming game session.
Right now the group has miss-jumped and crash landed on a red-zone world that is a blend of Mad Max movies, Gamma World RPG, and Fall Out video game.
They need to find parts to temporarily fix the ship and find enough water for fuel.
Should be an interesting time.
Like others, I will pick and choose small items within the beta test to see how they go.
I hope to have time this weekend to read enough to issue my "official" remarks on the beta test.
Honestly though, because of my profession, I'm mostly drawn to the ship design game mechanics. I do use lots of miniatures in my games (including space combat on hex sheets).

Since the last game ended with the party's ship (without any power) surrounded by typical Mad Max battle buggies. The party does have a couple of operable grav vehicles if they can make mechanic rolls to open the cargo/grav bay doors... so they can put up vehicle-to-vehicle fight. I'll be able to test the new vehicle combat rules very soon... as I emailed my group earlier... prepare to roll initiative!

 

[ErinPalette]

I'll definitely be giving the Bane/Boon mechanic a try tomorrow, when I run my online Trav game. I want to see for myself how it plays out.

I'm giving the Psi section more study, because I have 2 Droyne in my party. I still think that 0 psi points for Teleportation is just broken, and I hope that was a typographical error.

My dilemma with the new ship system is this: I can't test it. My PC group is using an upgunned, uparmored, 3rd-party published ship. Without any idea of how to convert it to 2e, without knowing how much power the PP puts out vs. what each weapon system drains*, I cannot make use of it unless I arbitrarily kick my PCs out of their ship. And even if I do that, I'm restricted to using the sample ships in the chapter, so if I want to pit my PC group against a Vargr corsair, or a Zhodani patrol ship, I'm out of luck.

* Yes, I see the chart on p.144. There's nothing there for bay weapons or plasma guns.

One thing I'm unlikely to use is the new missile damage. FOUR DICE? Ye gods, a nuke in 1e only did half that! Now we have 2e missiles (which might be nuclear, or might not be, no explanation is given) doing as much damage as 1e torpedoes!

Don't get me wrong: missiles have needed an upgrade to make up for the fact that they take many turns to hit their targets and they can be shot down on approach vs. the immediate damage of an energy weapon. But I am worried this is an over-correction.

 

[hdan]

Don't get me wrong: missiles have needed an upgrade to make up for the fact that they take many turns to hit their targets and they can be shot down on approach vs. the immediate damage of an energy weapon. But I am worried this is an over-correction.

Also, it costs money to fire a missile. So a trader (or really any captain with a budget, which I guess is all captains) has to be very sure it's worth the loss in profits to fire a missile, and with v1 damage, it really wasn't.

By Mongoose standards, they've improved, but by Classic Traveller standards (which appears to have been Mongoose's benchmark when making the first edition) they were woefully under-powered. Missiles in the Classic rules were capable of up to 6x damage of a laser.

Tactically and Dramatically, having a missile launched at your ship was a cause for great alarm, and led to some nice, tense moments.

I like that element coming back into the game. There has to be SOME reason to bother shooting a 20kCr per shot weapon.

 

[ErinPalette]

These are all good points. I look forward to seeing how it works out in playtest.

And here I thought I was being edgy when I bumped nukes up to 3d damage!

 

[MongooseMatt]

I'm giving the Psi section more study, because I have 2 Droyne in my party. I still think that 0 psi points for Teleportation is just broken, and I hope that was a typographical error.

It was. Currently set to a base 2 points.

My dilemma with the new ship system is this: I can't test it. My PC group is using an upgunned, uparmored, 3rd-party published ship. Without any idea of how to convert it to 2e, without knowing how much power the PP puts out vs. what each weapon system drains*, I cannot make use of it unless I arbitrarily kick my PCs out of their ship. And even if I do that, I'm restricted to using the sample ships in the chapter, so if I want to pit my PC group against a Vargr corsair, or a Zhodani patrol ship, I'm out of luck.

The High Guard play test will be coming very soon - just want people to bed down with the Core Rulebook first.

Don't get me wrong: missiles have needed an upgrade to make up for the fact that they take many turns to hit their targets and they can be shot down on approach vs. the immediate damage of an energy weapon. But I am worried this is an over-correction.

Open to comments and suggestions on this!

 

[ErinPalette]

Open to comments and suggestions on this!

Thank you! Before I can comment I need two questions answered:

1)) Are the missiles which do 4D damage supposed to be nukes, or are they regular missiles with nukes doing even more damage?

2) Why did you revert to the old thrust table for missiles? They're slow enough to hit, even using the 1e High Guard chart. With the old table you've effectively made fighters impossible to hit with them.

 

[dirklancer]

Any word on a blank character sheet?

 

[-Daniel-]

I'm giving the Psi section more study, because I have 2 Droyne in my party. I still think that 0 psi points for Teleportation is just broken, and I hope that was a typographical error.

It was. Currently set to a base 2 points.

This is great news for me, not for one of my players who was asking about adding psionics to his character. LOL

Thanks

 

[nats]

I think the main issue I have with the Mongoose products is they are slowly but surely eroding the original Traveller concepts of swordfighting on spaceships, of psi-training being banned, of simple rules with flexibility, of a romantic era of space travel where communication was slow, where spaceships were small and weak. I guess it all started going wrong for me with Mercenary and High Guard. Maybe that is the fault of MM not Mongoose for losing his own way and spoiling his own fascinating creation. But once you start getting into the realms of high science and mega technology I think the interesting setting of the original game is completely lost. Its a shame I feel that Mongoose haven't taken the opportunity presented by this rewrite to try to reclaim some of the romanticism of the original rules.

 

[Anonymous]

Nats, this isn't personal, please don't take it that way.

Classic Traveller still exists and is still playable and played by many. CT's rules and setting can be all those things you like. Why should Mongoose retread those steps even if they're using the name? It seems more than likely that MWM knows what Mongoose is doing tho I really don't know what say he has in how or what they do exactly.

I applaud Mongoose for trying to move on from what CT, MT, T4, and TNE brought us. There's plenty of material out there for Traveller's TI setting and plenty of people expanding on that from what's written in their own versions of the Third Imperium.

Let's have something new from Mongoose!

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I think the main issue I have with the Mongoose products is they are slowly but surely eroding the original Traveller concepts of swordfighting on spaceships, of psi-training being banned, of simple rules with flexibility, of a romantic era of space travel where communication was slow, where spaceships were small and weak. I guess it all started going wrong for me with Mercenary and High Guard. Maybe that is the fault of MM not Mongoose for losing his own way and spoiling his own fascinating creation. But once you start getting into the realms of high science and mega technology I think the interesting setting of the original game is completely lost. Its a shame I feel that Mongoose haven't taken the opportunity presented by this rewrite to try to reclaim some of the romanticism of the original rules.

Most games are played like Spaceballs. Just be glad Mongoose text and art is not going in that direction like Marc Miller let happen in a lot of the '80s and '90s books. I would love to see an early '60s sci-fi style Traveller universe. Nobles and space knights with their sabers and black globes. And women are treated like queens, etc. But we live in a post-Blade Runner era with PKD sprinkled on top. I like that Traveller universe also sometimes.

 

[nats]

Nats, this isn't personal, please don't take it that way.

Classic Traveller still exists and is still playable and played by many. CT's rules and setting can be all those things you like. Why should Mongoose retread those steps even if they're using the name? It seems more than likely that MWM knows what Mongoose is doing tho I really don't know what say he has in how or what they do exactly.

I applaud Mongoose for trying to move on from what CT, MT, T4, and TNE brought us. There's plenty of material out there for Traveller's TI setting and plenty of people expanding on that from what's written in their own versions of the Third Imperium.

Let's have something new from Mongoose!

Of course I play CT myself with my family. I find it far easier to play than Mongoose's millions of contradictory rules. It seems that everyone who writes a book for them seems to feel the need to add in some new rules of their own that havent been playtested of merged with earlier ones. Sometimes though less is more. And this is the case with CT. You get the basics and the referee does the rest. Dont need millions of rules.

I think CT was spot on actually as written in the LBB and everything that came since has detracted from that simplicity. I think Mongoose are trying to crete a new game - great. But its not Traveller. Its something else. It might have the Traveller name on the top of the books (for marketing reasons) but its not Traveller to me. Never will be. Taken me a while to figure that out but now I have I am in a better place.

And you just have to look at the polls in COTI to realise that at least half the whole current Traveller playbase agree with me. Mongoose has done well to capture half of the market but I see their share now will start to shrink with the dilution of their version and the lack of any substantial changes or improvements.

If you take that away and everything that goes with that and erase all the terrible new ideas that were thought up to just to try to encourage people to re-buy the same stuff over and over (just like Mongoose are doing now) , you will probably find like myself that actually Classic Traveller is still a brilliant game. It might be a little clunky in places and require a little bit of house ruling to some areas (like vehicle combat) but it still works really well generally. Its certainly the most entertaining version and the it's still the easiest to pick up and play.

 

[nats]

Most games are played like Spaceballs. Just be glad Mongoose text and art is not going in that direction like Marc Miller let happen in a lot of the '80s and '90s books. I would love to see an early '60s sci-fi style Traveller universe. Nobles and space knights with their sabers and black globes. And women are treated like queens, etc. But we live in a post-Blade Runner era with PKD sprinkled on top. I like that Traveller universe also sometimes.

Blade Runner is another setting entirely. How come you are confusing that somehow with Traveller? When you look at the original Traveller universe it is actually quite real, grimy and seedy already. I would say Traveller has always been more like Firefly that Bladerunner anyday. Bl;aderunner is more cyberpunk than anything else - and thats not Traveller.

I think that the problem. People wanting games like Bladerunner. If you want that sort of thing you have GURPS Cyberworld or whatever.

Why do some people want to change Traveller into something its not? This is the whole problem. Mongoose have their view of what Traveller should be and its not Traveller its something else entirely.