Traveller Beta Playtest Rulebook

[Condottiere]

Aesthetically, it's up to the Dungeon Master to determine the ambiance of the games he runs, including how much he restricts or allows stuff like psionics.

Commercially, it's up to Mongoose to determine if there is a market for their products emphasizing those aspects for their Traveller range, or just place it as an option that is compatible with the Traveller game system.

 

[-Daniel-]

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.

No, the real problem is that each of us old grognards have a different vision of what Traveller is. You have yours and I have mine. We all started from the same black box with the same 3 LBBs. But we all do not agree on what Traveller is. So others could look at you and ask the same question; "Why do you want to make Traveller something it isn't?"

Even Marc Miller, the one person who is the most qualified to say what Traveller is, has changed his mind and adjusted his vision over time. There is really no one "right way" that Traveller should be. We all have different shades of it.

 

[-Daniel-]

... you will probably find like myself that actually Classic Traveller is still a brilliant game.

I agree, CT is a brilliant game with lots of room to encompass so many different types of Sci Fi RPGing. Merchant focused games, Military focused games, Crime, Political intrigue, so many different possibilities. That is why I think it just keeps going. It allows the fans to find what they need in their game. 8)

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

If nats posted a Traveller game session on YouTube, it would be different than what most people think Traveller is for their group.

 

[nats]

No, the real problem is that each of us old grognards have a different vision of what Traveller is. You have yours and I have mine. We all started from the same black box with the same 3 LBBs. But we all do not agree on what Traveller is. So others could look at you and ask the same question; "Why do you want to make Traveller something it isn't?"

Even Marc Miller, the one person who is the most qualified to say what Traveller is, has changed his mind and adjusted his vision over time. There is really no one "right way" that Traveller should be. We all have different shades of it.

With respect Marc Miller wasn't the only person involved in creating classic Traveller and his recent forays into a new Traveller have proved he was not the greater creative force way back then either or if he was he has lost his touch.

No we have to look at what makes Traveller 'Traveller'. Is it the ships? Is it the character creation and careers? Is it the lasers vs swords premise or the comms delay? Is it the setting? Is it the technology? Is it all of these things?

When we look at the original over the new Mongoose and T5 versions - what is left? The ships are barely recognisable, and similar for the careers. The setting has been altered to hell with new aliens introduced everywhere under the sun. Technology has vastly increased to include far more high tech stuff. And the premise of the game is no longer sacred with the introduction of cyber worlds and psionics all over the place not to mention new ship weapons and a massive amount of new rules.

So is it just the name then? No even that has changed and looks different lol!

There is surely only one answer - I T I S N O T T R A V E L L E R

 

[nats]

If nats posted a Traveller game session on YouTube, it would be different than what I think Traveller is for my group.

Changed that for you. Polls on COTI suggest its half and half between CT and MgT.

 

[-Daniel-]

With respect Marc Miller wasn't the only person involved in creating classic Traveller and his recent forays into a new Traveller have proved he was not the greater creative force way back then either or if he was he has lost his touch.

We will agree here. What Marc has tried to do with 5th is very different from the original three black books. Whether he has lost his touch, well I will leave that to others to argue out either way.

No we have to look at what makes Traveller 'Traveller'. Is it the ships? Is it the character creation and careers? Is it the lasers vs swords premise or the comms delay? Is it the setting? Is it the technology? Is it all of these things?

I will continue to contend it is different things to different people. We all took something from those original rules. Look at how you even lumped some items in your list of "bad add-ons" that are in the original three books. Your view of what makes Traveller is based on what it is *for you*.

There is surely only one answer - I T I S N O T T R A V E L L E R

I will not argue, if the rule set no longer fits your view of what makes Traveller, Traveller then you are right. For you it is not Traveller anymore. I would also then agree, you should not waste your money buying it and instead just use the materials that fit your vision and enjoy your games.

But we will just have to agree to disagree that your way is the "one and only true vision" and anything else is just not Traveller. I can't agree with you on that final point.

I wish you the best with your games.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I think, to be blunt, anybody who tries to assert their own views as to I T S N O T T R A V E L L E R ! ! ! has lost me as a sympathetic audience already.

Traveller is, and in fact was originally, a generic science fiction roleplaying game. Anything else anybody wishes to add to that is their own perception and that alone.

 

[nats]

I think, to be blunt, anybody who tries to assert their own views as to I T S N O T T R A V E L L E R ! ! ! has lost me as a sympathetic audience already.

Traveller is, and in fact was originally, a generic science fiction roleplaying game. Anything else anybody wishes to add to that is their own perception and that alone.

As in D&D is a 'generic fantasy game' is it? No you are quite wrong there. Gurps is a generic game. Traveller had a very specific design all along which got firmed up a lot more when the 3I setting came along. Its certainly never meant to be a generic game. Well not until Mongoose started changing it into a generic game.

And if MgT is still 'Traveller' I would like you to point out what specifically makes it 'Traveller'. Because I am damned if I can find anything - other than it has the same name. That is all that remains of the original game.

I am not saying that development of an idea is necessarily a bad thing. But when that development ends in a product that simply bears no relation to the original then is it really worth of the same name?

I would contend that what really made Traveller Traveller was its rules set - its chargen, its combat rules, its ship combat, etc. None of that remains now.

 

[Anonymous]

I had a lengthy post started late last night in response for you Nats, but I just don't see the point, you have your mind made up and I'm failing to understand why you're posting here.

All that's left to say is said in a light hearted vein, I hope you see it that way.

You're in Yorkshire right? A Yorkshireman?

What was it that your esteemed leader was caught on mic saying a few days ago?

"We just thought people in Yorkshire hated Mongoose, we didn't realise they hated everything else called Traveller so much."

 

[hdan]

And if MgT is still 'Traveller' I would like you to point out what specifically makes it 'Traveller'. Because I am damned if I can find anything - other than it has the same name. That is all that remains of the original game.

"Nothing" you say?

At a fundamental level, almost EVERYTHING that was in CT is in MgT:
* The stats (STR, DEX, END, INT, EDU, SOC) are generated by a 2D throw
* Players generate characters through a guided random process that gives them skill levels, mustering out benefits, etc. That process is nearly identical to the original LBB version, though with a few extras added.
* Starships travel with jump drives. Ship design in the core rules is almost identical, though again some numbers have been changed (notably in computer size)
* Hex-based, 2D subsector maps
* UPPs and UWPs (the later being exactly compatible with CT UWPs, though the generation process is somewhat updated.)
* Many if not all of the same device trappings (sandcasters, meson weaponry, battledress, gauss rifles, laser weapons that need dorky backpacks, etc.)

The core rules did neglect to include a reaction table, and the abundance of level-0 skills informs a different play style (character-sheet-as-playlist vs character-sheet-as-resume).

Now, I'll grant you that CT's presentation implies a game that's almost a board game in many respects - the Referee is there to administer the rules, randomly generate opportunities and setbacks, and administer the "role playing" parts of the game, though always with the freedom to introduce a more detailed scenario. That's certainly different from the modern style of RPG's, but at least with my group, we played CT as a story-driven game even back in the early 80's.

 

[nats]

You're in Yorkshire right? A Yorkshireman?
What was it that your esteemed leader was caught on mic saying a few days ago?

"We just thought people in Yorkshire hated Mongoose, we didn't realise they hated everything else called Traveller so much."

Quite wrong:

For one thing he is not my leader I didnt vote for him.

And secondly I am not a yorkshireman I am a geordie.

And thirdly I dont have anything against this new Mongoose Traveller version (as a completely separate Traveller-styled game) or against Mongoose as a whole. In fact quite the opposite I am considering possibly purchasing the new version. I just like to discuss these things in a critical manner as opposed to being a fanboy. Coming after the terrible T5 and the failed Liftoff its just starting to all get a bit rubbish really for Traveller lately.

I am not a great fan of the old Mongoose Traveller stuff it has to be said due to the errors, bad grammar and dodgy illustrations mainly. I mean one of the books was actually incoherent - Spinward Encounters I think it was - terrible book, it was as if it had been written by a monkey. So I've actually sold the bulk of my MgT stuff and I dont miss it.

I can however appreciate that the Mongoose Traveller is a good game in its own right for around the table play if you forget the errors, bad grammar and dodgy illustrations. It does annoy me greatly though that the only interior illustration I have seen in the Version 2 book is as bad as the worst of Version 1. It just seems that they have not learned a thing. I just hope the text and playability is better than the illustrations.

I am though trying to keep my mind open with reference to the new version. Whether I will actually buy it and whether I will ever play it ... well... we will see.

 

[alex_greene]

Gentlemen, please let's all just keep the discussion (1) civil; (2) on topic; and (3) civil.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I would contend that what really made Traveller Traveller was its rules set - its chargen, its combat rules, its ship combat, etc. None of that remains now.

The same goes for any RPG rules. Or books. Or movies. Anything. Re-boots are everywhere. Thus, the "Classic" label is used on the originals.

 

[TrippyHippy]

As in D&D is a 'generic fantasy game' is it? No you are quite wrong there. Gurps is a generic game. Traveller had a very specific design all along which got firmed up a lot more when the 3I setting came along. Its certainly never meant to be a generic game. Well not until Mongoose started changing it into a generic game.

Yes D&D is a generic game - as in it draws from a range of sources and is not tied specifically to one setting. If your definition of 'generic' is wrong, then it's no surprise if you end up leading to wrong conclusions. The original Traveller RPG was a generic game in intent and referenced a very diverse range of sources, but with a default setting that grew in supplements and was implied in the rules presented.

Moreover, there is no productive point in arguing with T H E W O R D O F G O D which you seem to be assuming at the moment, so I'm moving on to a debate that is more worthwhile.

 

[simonh]

I am not saying that development of an idea is necessarily a bad thing. But when that development ends in a product that simply bears no relation to the original then is it really worth of the same name?

Is a modern Ford Transit not a Transit because it's not made to the same specs as the first model in 1965?

It seems from your other comments that what you're saying is that later editions are not the same game because they don't have the exact same rules mechanics as classic Traveller. No they don't, but what would be the point of coming out with a new edition that had the exact same rules? The original CT material is still available from FFE, and was even reprinted in collected editions a while back. If you still have them on your bookshelf, nobody will raid your house and take them away because Mongoose are publishing a new edition. Republishing it in other formats would not be adding any value to anything.

OK, for you what makes something Traveller is that is has the exact same rules. That you have to look up the to hit modifier for a Gauss Pistol versus Jack Armor on a table, and it still gives the same modifier that Book 5 did all those years ago. For many of us, that sort of thing is really not something we care about and so for us Traveller is something different.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Reynard]

"Yes D&D is a generic game - as in it draws from a range of sources and is not tied specifically to one setting."

D&D has essentially the same spells and magic items, the same races and the same monsters. It uses the same modes of transportation for the most part and pretty much the same structures. The gods affect clerics' abilities the same. Everything is based on the same base of mechanics. D&D then slaps a new coat of paint over the landscape and sprinkles the basics with the same or slightly different names and EVERYONE rejoices at this all new campaign world! And yet the owlbears still attacks the carriage carrying the mage, fighter and rogue just like every other campaign world.

That makes D&D and Traveller equally generic for all sorts of different campaigns.

 

[brazouck]

Hello,

Are character from last edition MgTraveller compatible and portable to this one ? I Have the frenh one, and I don't want asking my players to reroll their characters.

Thanks

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Hello,

Are character from last edition MgTraveller compatible and portable to this one ? I Have the frenh one, and I don't want asking my players to reroll their characters.

Thanks

Yes.

 

[allanimal]

Hello,

Are character from last edition MgTraveller compatible and portable to this one ? I Have the frenh one, and I don't want asking my players to reroll their characters.

Thanks

Yes.

You will need to do minor tweaks, because skill specialization changed slightly, but it is straightforward and simple.