Traveller Developer's Pack

[alex_greene]

I hope we'll get to see some of Psion make the updated SRDs.

Hear hear.
The Mental Trauma rules from Psion, the Stress rules from Scouts, the Reactions table from Prison Planet, the Trust rating and cover identities rules from Agent, the condensed heist mechanic from Scoundrel ... they can all be so useful to a Referee.

 

[Bobson]

Hi guys,

We'll be doing a round up of the SRD in the New Year, adding all sorts of new bits and pieces.

Well, it's a new year again. Any word on whether we're going to see this fulfilled this year?

My taveller game is long since over, and the odds of me finding another to join are low, but I'd still like to finish and share the projects I started, if the SRD will let me without the hassle of rewriting one planet-based one.

 

[Vile]

Bumpety-bump bump.

 

[Vile]

Er ... :?:

 

[MongooseMatt]

Hi guys,

This is still on the cards but, I regret to say, it is of absolute low priority at the moment. We are pouring a lot of free support into Traveller, with the Secrets and Living campaigns, and we also need to do some paid work!

 

[Vile]

Thanks for the update, Matt.

Perhaps you could ask the third-party crowd to contribute? After all, they are the main beneficiaries, other than Mongoose. Mongoose of course gains because 3rd party books will have disclaimers extended to "requires the use of Mongoose Traveller Cybernetics, Robots, Civilian Vehicles, etc. etc. etc.

Ask for volunteers, tell them to give you an SRD draft for a book of their choice (they buy their own original to work from, of course), and all you guys have to do is give it the once-over to make sure that all the not-essential-for-SRD stuff has been taken out.

Heck, I'd do it. :wink:

 

[mlooney]

So, how is that SRD update coming along?

 

[DFW]

If a rule, that exits in one of the SRD's, has been errata'ed(corrected), can it be considered to be changed in the SRD too?

 

[dmccoy1693]

If a rule, that exits in one of the SRD's, has been errata'ed(corrected), can it be considered to be changed in the SRD too?

No!

If its not in the SRD, it is not OGL.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

However, you could take the original OGL rule and modify it as you like. While you cannot duplicate the revised rule exactly, you could make your rule SIMILAR to it, maybe even make it better.

The OGL is a starting point, not an endpoint.

 

[DFW]

If a rule, that exits in one of the SRD's, has been errata'ed(corrected), can it be considered to be changed in the SRD too?

No!

If its not in the SRD, it is not OGL.

It was a Q for MGT staff. I know about OGL. It was more about updating the SRD to match any rule changes.

 

[dmccoy1693]

It was a Q for MGT staff. I know about OGL.

You might know about the OGL, but you obviously don't know the OGL. OGL is black and white. Cut and dry. No if's, and's, or but's about it. If its not declared open content, it is not open content. The OGL is a legal document. There is no fudging it. No "well its not open content, but you can use it anyways" about it. What is open content is open content. And what not open content is not open content.

And RTT is correct, you can come up with your own similar rule. But you CANNOT come up with the exact same rule. The wording MUST be different. If mongoose wanted whatever rule you're considered in to be open content, they would update the SRD.

 

[DFW]

It was a Q for MGT staff. I know about OGL.

You might know about the OGL, but you obviously don't know the OGL.

Yes, I do understand. Your condescending attitude an inability to read & understand my reply isn't welcome.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Yes, I do understand. Your condescending attitude an inability to read & understand my reply isn't welcome.

If my attitude is condescending, it is only because:

1) you want to hear the same thing from Mongoose and won't accept the same answer from anyone who understands the OGL better than you. You want to know if you can get around the OGL by Mongoose saying, sure, yea its fine. Mongoose has already released material via the OGL/SRD. They have an avenue open to them for saying use this. But you want something besides that. If mongoose was going to do something, all they have to do is update the SRD and then there is no question.

2) The question you are asking has been answered on this exact thread many, many times over the past few years. "Can I use this non-OGL material?" The answer is the same every time. No. The core book even explicitly states, "This book contains no open content material," right on the credits page.

3) There is a wealth of open content material out there already. Not all of it is traveller and there is no reason why you can't adapt it to traveller. Heck, T20's rules were open content. You can use them and adapt them as needed to the rules system you want.

4) I remember the days when fans got cease and desist letters from game companies (T$R in particular) for putting fan-made material on the web. So now we have the OGL which allows anyone to make their own material for free with no possibility of getting sued. And a company chooses to support it by giving away material for free. I don't think it is to much to ask to honor their generosity by sticking with what you already have and then writing your own material from there.

The vehicle creation system is a common one that is asked for. Vehicles are in the SRD. So you can make all the vehicles you want. However, you cannot copy the vehicle creation rules system word for word. You can make a vehicle with all the stats of core book. You change a number here and there, a number is changed. However, if that changed number happens to be balanced against the vehicle creation rules and reflected in the price, then there is no problem, because you are sticking to open content material and merely changing a number to produce what you are looking for. You don't need vehicle creation rules to be open content for that. The only thing that making the vehicle creation rules open content would give you is the ability to copy and paste the rules into a product of your own. I don't think honoring Mongoose choice to not make some rules open content (and thereby copy and paste-able) is to much to ask.

The same with the rest of the non-open content material. A lack of open content should not stop you from making your own product. It should merely require a bit more creativity on your part on how you can make the product you want with the tools you have to work with.

 

[barnest2]

I'm writing a piece of work that may be self-published, and most of the events have taken place in the spinward marches. Is this allowed under the SRD?
If not, would it be okay to have them occur in Foreven?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

If you are going to use ANY of the IP from the OTU (names, corporations, planets, anything) then it HAS to be Foreven. The SRD/OGL specifically says you cannot use it for OTU products.

Don also brings up a good point, one I have used several times. You can use the design sequence in one of the non-OGL books and publish the results. That is fine, as long as the stats you use at the end are in the SRD. As he said, vehicles are in the SRD, so you can make vehicles, using the Vehicles book, and publish them, BUT, the stats have to be the stats from the SRD or real life. You just can't publish the design sequence (not SRD).

I hope that helps clear things up.

 

[barnest2]

Buggeration. As far as I can tell there is no 3I presence in the Foreven sector... I'll do something.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Well, there are FORMER 3I worlds in Massila (subsector D) and of course there are Client States.

Also, for your Foreven, you can put 3I worlds there if you want.

2 options:

1) Extend the cluster of worlds from 5-Sisters into Urnian adding a few 3I worlds. This is the easy way, you could probably give the 3I half the subsector without too much trouble.

2) Have a Pocket Empire within Foreven that is an Imperial Client State and runs itself exactly like the Imperium (Maybe ruled by a Duke) could be a group that got stranded after the 1st Frontier War and founded their own Imperium since they were cut off. Allied with the 3I, they could get all the cool stuff that you want to design for your game.

The nice thing about Foreven is you can do what you want WITHIN it.

 

[Prime_Evil]

Changing the topic slightly, it's a pity that Mongoose isn't using the same model for SRD updates for Traveller that they are adopting for Legend - declaring some of the material in the rulebooks as product identity and allowing third-party publishers to use the rest as open game content.

I understand that there are certain parts of the Traveller rules that Mongoose doesn't want to open up for third-party use, and that's cool with me. I also understand that all intellectual property related to the OTU will remain closed product identity due to the licensing greement with Far Future Enterprises, and that's also cool.

But it would be great if third-party publishers could provide ongoing support for the stuff that Mongoose has already put out - such as PDFs of new robot designs or cybernetic devices. These are niche products that might be best served by small-press PDF publishers.

The current system of SRD updates is very slow due to the fact that Mongoose is a small company whose staff have many other demands on its time....such as producing the books that we want to buy

I wonder if a better approach might be to have a web page that specifies which sourcebooks third-party publishers are permitted to reference and which sections of those books are to be considered as OGC.

As an example of how this might work, take a look at the way that Paizo handles this. Most of their products contain a legal statement such as:

Product Identity: All trademarks,registered trademarks, proper names (characters, deities, etc.), dialogue, plots, storylines, locations, characters, artwork, and trade dress. (Elements that have previously been designated as Open Game Content or are in the public domain are not included in this declaration.)

Open Game Content: Open Content: Except for material designated as Product Identity (see above), the game mechanics of this Paizo Publishing game product are Open Game Content, as defined in the Open Gaming License version 1.0a Section 1(d). No portion of this work other than the material designated as Open Game Content may be reproduced in any form without written permission.

Note that in addition to this declaration, if you wish to publish material with the Pathfinder compatible logo you must also comply with the Compatibility License. This license requires publishers to register their details and limits the list of products that can be referenced. Even though products directly tied to the Golarion setting contain some OGC, third-party publishers aren't allowed to reference them without a separate licensing agreement. Would it be desirable or possible for Mongoose to do something similar with Traveller?

I understand the desire of Mongoose to protect their intellectual property and to nurture a successful product line, but I wonder whether there might be a better way to encourage better third-party support for Traveller. It seems to me that the SRD model adopted by Mongoose Traveller was based upon the approach developed by WoTC for D&D 3.5 and shares many of the same strengths and weaknesses - including the fact that SRD updates will be infrequent and will always remain a low priority for the company because they don't generate revenue. Paizo has updated this approach to make it easier for them to administer and it looks like Mongoose is adopting something similar with Legend. This may be wishful thinking, but I wonder whether it might be logical to do the same with Traveller too.

 

[DFW]

If my attitude is condescending, it is only because:

You can't understand my 2nd post where I clarified what I meant.

English IS your friend.