Where does it stop being Traveller?

[sideranautae]

The last layer that make Traveller unique is its in game setting tied in with the rules and giving gamers a ready made campaign setting while still allowing the game to be anything for anyone.

That isn't unique at all. AD&D did the same. The only "unique" thing about Traveller is that you must spend an inordinate amount of time & study in order to generate a PC. A MAJOR turn off for most would be new players.

 

[Reynard]

You must not make characters for Pathfinder.

Traveller made itself unique from the beginning by using a lifepath generation system and that was a selling point when I discovered it back in 79-80. I thought it was easier since, at that time, you weren't searching endless tables to make a character. Many other games use lifepath systems today. It also made Traveller fun to casually generate character especially NPCs just like generating worlds. Probably one of the most computer friendly chargens too.

 

[sideranautae]

Traveller made itself unique from the beginning by using a lifepath generation system and that was a selling point when I discovered it back in 79-80.

???????? You just ignored what you posted. You said that a campaign setting is what made it unique. (which as was pointed out, is incorrect).

 

[IanBruntlett]

That isn't unique at all. AD&D did the same. The only "unique" thing about Traveller is that you must spend an inordinate amount of time & study in order to generate a PC. A MAJOR turn off for most would be new players.

My experience as a Traveller GM helping casual gamers create their Player Characters contradicts that. Just as RPGs can be about "roll dice and blow things up", character generation could be described as "roll dice and build things up". And lots of people have found it to be fun.

 

[dragoner]

Mongoose chargen is one of its strongest points, that and the task system; the life-paths also get you away from mechanical character builds, which are boring.

Edit: with the caveat that the 40 something old adventurer ... yeah. 26-34 is more prime in my mind, like from Something Wicked This Way Comes with Jonathan Price and the book of years, "30's time for building empires".

 

[Reynard]

"That isn't unique at all. AD&D did the same. The only "unique" thing about Traveller is that you must spend an inordinate amount of time & study in order to generate a PC. A MAJOR turn off for most would be new players."

After rolling initial abilities AD&D was and is picking from Table a and Table and Table C and... That has nothing to do with Traveller. Many games in the Eighties followed AD&Ds suit. Life paths became popular much later.

"???????? You just ignored what you posted. You said that a campaign setting is what made it unique. (which as was pointed out, is incorrect)."

It is possible to have more than one unique quality, however, I should have worded the campaign reference more to reflect its setting is what makes Traveller what it is.

 

[Matt Wilson]

Mostly guys I was pondering one of my pet campaigns that removes starships and replaces them with Stargates, fixed Stargates as such the characters need to travel across a planets surface to get to the next gate. The main vehicles are Land Speeders but significant other sorts of vehicles exist as well, ahem-Cars with guns anyone.... Oh and all of this is after a large Apocalyptic war, such that the characters are wandering from world to world as each "adventure" dictates..

What would make the above Traveller-ish for me would be:

- a strong sense that one world is notably different from the next, a feeling that the characters really have traveled, as in the name of the game.

- settings and situations that are quirky while still seeming believable, and the feeling that this is the far future, with all the strange wonders that come along with it.

- characters who are often quite skilled but still mortal humans who get out of tricky situations using their wits and perhaps their moral ambiguity.

But ask ten other people on this board and you'll get ten different answers. That's probably the strength of the game right there.

 

[CosmicGamer]

CG, how would you define the core rules? The whole book?

To me they're the chargen and task system, not so much the combat (as that's where I house rule more than anywhere)

Yes, the whole book.

Deciding "we don't use psionics in our games" and throwing it out would not necessarily, to me, make a game not Traveller.

I probably could see someone coming up with their own alternate chargen system (the core rules itself has several I've used) as a plug and play option that fit's in the core rules and still call the game Traveller. An alternate plug and play combat system.

But start changing too much and I feel it takes things into the "My game based on Traveller" realm vs just being Traveller. Sorry, no clear line as to what or how many changes that is for me. Just a general personal impression based on how often I would need to alter my Travelling to adhere to someone elses rules vs the core rules.

 

[dragoner]

FTL communications, 3D maps, etc. make it not Traveller-ish.

 

[Anonymous]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

 

[sideranautae]

FTL communications, 3D maps, etc. make it not Traveller-ish.

I agree on FLT comm. 3D maps? More of a pain than not Traveller to me.

 

[simonh]

IMHO it stops being Traveller when you stop using the Traveller rulebooks as your primary reference.

Simple as that.

Simon Hibbs

 

[dragoner]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

They also increase difficulty exponentially by having to try to represent 3D in 2D, plus there being the time issue, where we see things now, is not where they are now, it is where they were. But we really know nothing of how the universe works, other than seeing the silhouette of planets moving against their primary.

I remember my girlfriend in college looking over my Physics 101 homework: 10 problems = 30 pages, 3 work book exercises = 10 pages, and a 10 page lab for a total of ~ 50 pages per week. Her opinion as an English major was that was "insane". That was just the beginning.

edit: Not that I don't like 3D maps, like I always have looked at atlas of the universe and tried to figure out how to use it; but it always comes out more trouble than it is worth.

 

[Reynard]

2300 did a good job introducing 3D mapping but the big problem is the non-analog nature of Jump as you puddle jump around the galaxy rather than float across as with stutterwarp. Jump routes are often less accessible with the nature of 3D distances. Alpha Centauri is actually 1.43 PC and would be inaccessible to Earth's first Jump ship.

You would need to create solar system clusters more tightly packed to insure Jump travel. All that said, one doesn't need an actual map other than game color, just a list with XYZ coordinates and a calculator or a spreadsheet as I did that you choose routes from in 1-6 PC increments. OR you use the Traveller alternate warp drive and 3d map travel is a breeze. It's a more work but doable as a viable Traveller alternate.

 

[Infojunky]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

Why?

 

[Anonymous]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

Why?

Because systems are not multiples of one parsec apart, because the universe is not 2 dimensional. It's a gross simplification which I get why but it's way too abstract.

 

[sideranautae]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

Why?

Because systems are not multiples of one parsec apart, because the universe is not 2 dimensional. It's a gross simplification which I get why but it's way too abstract.

If there were a good, simple 3D program where one could easily create and show the systems, I would use it. The players have tablets and could have the maps. But, finding good software is REALLY difficult. Finding crapware is easy.

 

[Infojunky]

3d maps might make it a little more complicated but they add a stack of believability to things.

Why?

Because systems are not multiples of one parsec apart, because the universe is not 2 dimensional. It's a gross simplification which I get why but it's way too abstract.

But if the simplest map to portray stars with planets is a flat subway map then isn't it the superior method to use?

In my professional opinion the next step up from the current subsector map is a system display of the individual bodies within a system. As that adds more to the utility of the map with the same level of added complexity that "3d" does.

 

[sideranautae]

In my professional opinion

Your a professional RPGer?

 

[Infojunky]

In my professional opinion

Your a professional RPGer?

Cartographer.... No, Geographer, which entails a whole more science than just generating maps, but maps are a huge part of our output too.....