Will you buy Mongoose Traveller when released?

[Klaus Kipling]

The thing I like about the way CT chargen is put together (and MT, MGT, etc) is that it is so flexible.

Play it as written, and yes, the results can be pretty random, to the good, oe the bad. It is quite easy to end up with characters that just couldn't do the job they're intended to do.

However, it is simple just to read the rules differently and get a nice hybrid between surprise and player choice. When rolling for skills I tend to roll the die and then choose the skill from eligible tables: sometimes there's a lot of choice, sometimes there's very little, but it gives me more control of my character. I'll also let players use their term skill to increase an already trained skill, as long as it does not go over 3 and it is on a table the character is eligible to.

For me, 'Basic' CT doesn't have quite enough meat on the bones and 'Advanced' is just too damn fussy and inefficient. MGT strikes a nice balance between the two, with plenty of player choice figured in. (I'd also pick background skills after career skill allocation, just to fill in any discrepancies).

Essentially, for me the chargen system is the most important part of any rpg, followed by weapon and equipment rules. The task system itself is a somewhat lesser consideration. The beauty of any 2D based mechanic is that there's only so many alternatives, so it is the easiest part to fix, if there's anything wrong.

CT never quite got any of this right, even though there was enough there on display to keep us talking about it for 30 years. CT chargen was inconsistent (not just between basic and advanced: the fact that they broke they're own rules and gave Scouts 2 skills per term in 1001 Characters says it all, really), and using weapons was a real mess (all that cross referencing of tables, ugh!); using equipment was barely mentioned.

MT might have fixed some of this: I did get some of the pdfs but I found chargen to be a little clunky, still obsessed with the military, and I did not like that task system (steps of 4! on a 2D mechanic? Ludicrous!). The main thing that put me off, however, was the poor quality of the scans and the Rebellion setting.

Of all the versions out there right now, T20 is probably the most internally consistent, but it has all that D20 baggage, and it kinda proves D20 and Prior History aren't really compatible, despite the noble effort.

Given that I'm assuming Mongoose to be sensible enough to fix the power issue for spacecraft (funny how the power they require is identical to their displacement....), and that I hope worldgen ends up tasting like EDG worldgen, I pretty much like what I see.

So notwithstanding the above, and an unresolvable POV argument about the use of stats, it seems the main objections folk have is the T/E addendum to the core 8+ mechanic. Well, even if I did not think that either a) it will be fixed in the published version, or, b) easily fixable in itself, I'd still probably get MGT for everything else. Adapting it to any kind of 2D mechanic is easy as pie, with a caveat that it depends on how the final weapon damage system looks.

What I'm really interested in, after a properly integrated chargen system, is a fresh pair of eyes. I don't think I've spotted any familiar bits of text in the playtest documents. In most other versions of Traveller I've seen, it seems like 50% of the text is identical to the last version (I may be exaggerating here but that's what it feels like).

I've not pre-ordered it yet. I'd like to buy it from my local Forbidden Planet, as it's nice to see Traveller on the shelves.

 

[Supplement Four]

Spare me the persecution complex. :roll:

Tell ya what. I'll give you the last word, too.

Go ahead and post a quip to this one too.

 

[Supplement Four]

So notwithstanding the above, and an unresolvable POV argument about the use of stats, it seems the main objections folk have is the T/E addendum to the core 8+ mechanic.

Back on topic: I'm concerned at how T/E mechanic is so central to so many system in the game. Initiative. Combat. Tasks. Etc.

Now, I haven't played it, but I am an experienced gamer. In reading it, it looks to me as if it will stagger the flow of the game. A pause will occur as the player decides which will be better, the lower die as his effect or the lower die as his timing.

I'm also real concerned about the work that will be required of the GM in keeping track of initiative for NPCs, especially when multiple NPCs are concerned, with the initiative number changing all the time based on what the NPC does. I'm thinking that's going to be a nightmare.

Combine this with the T/E statistics problem, the issue that MGT really won't be that compatible with T5, and the stat-bloat issue (and I haven't even looked at the other areas of contention like world building and such)...and old MGT isn't looking so good from this side of the stands.

The negatives seem to keep piling up.

 

[tneva82]

Simple: YES! Infact I notified store I buy my stuff to get copies of those ASAP ;-)

I'm still in need of good sci-fi ruleset. B5 is close but no cigar. The horrible space ship damage/armour thing kills it for me(certain things can't even hurt others no matter how many times they hit it!). Traveler doesn't have that problem. It also isn't set in B5 universum which is great in that it gives more freedom(larger place to play with. Adding own sector where players can act without canonical background getting too much in a way shouldn't prove problem. Need war? No problem!).

Haven't had problems with traveler. Albeit planets have oddly low population and tech.levels but gives flavour and if need be those can be altered manually. Trade is also bit tricky but I don't concider it trading game. More of something extra they do in addition to adventures they will have so even if it's bloody hard to make big profit without big starting sum that's fine. I'm not interested in campaign where characters haul cargo back and forth ;-)

 

[TrippyHippy]

Yes. I'm happy with it, and am already involved with running acampaign using the playtest rules. If there are issues that I find with the published rules now, I will possibly houserule stuff, but the core of the game is perfectly serviceable for my group and I. Indeed, I would venture that the character generation system is the most fun in all rpgs, and I like the fact that the game is genuinely skill based (rather than power based), and utilises a simple 2d6 roll. The tactical stuff, we also like, and I'd like to see a minature range for this.

I'm as interested in seeing how some of the other settings, like Starship Troopers and 2000AD turn out, although I'm mainly using a Third Imperium campaign, currently. I have some hopes that we may see Cyberpunk, Blue Planet or maybe some settings from adapted sci-fi novels in the future (Dune? Well, I can hope!). That's part of the package for me.

 

[TrippyHippy]

That is entirely a matter of opinion.

It is entirely a matter of opinion, of course. However, some very prominent people in the roleplaying hobby have identified, and awarded the original Traveller game with a 'one of the best of all time' status.

That includes GAMA (Hall of Fame) and the recent Green Ronin publication that had it included amongst the best 100 hobbygames of all time, along with about 15-20 other rpgs. The person who nominated, and wrote an essay on it was Mike Pondsmith, most noteable as the creator of the Cyberpunk game.

Personally, I think some people forget just how much Traveller pioneered lots of hugely influential aspects of game design - like the idea of a skill based system, for example - whilst the updated version, hopefully, will remind people about just how much fun a randomised lifepath generation system can be.

Either way, I think most opinions on the matter, would accept that Traveller is a classic game by most criteria.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Back on topic: I'm concerned at how T/E mechanic is so central to so many system in the game. Initiative. Combat. Tasks. Etc.

Now, I haven't played it, but I am an experienced gamer. In reading it, it looks to me as if it will stagger the flow of the game. A pause will occur as the player decides which will be better, the lower die as his effect or the lower die as his timing.

I'm also real concerned about the work that will be required of the GM in keeping track of initiative for NPCs, especially when multiple NPCs are concerned, with the initiative number changing all the time based on what the NPC does. I'm thinking that's going to be a nightmare.

Combine this with the T/E statistics problem, the issue that MGT really won't be that compatible with T5, and the stat-bloat issue (and I haven't even looked at the other areas of contention like world building and such)...and old MGT isn't looking so good from this side of the stands.

The negatives seem to keep piling up.

If you want to consider it simplified, as my group and I have done on occasion, just think of it as player autonomy to manipulate their own initiative dice - by selecting to aim or rush their shots, and taking bonuses/penaties accordingly.

With the question of initiative for NPCs, we have taken the action-style of having all minor characters based upon the same initiative roll, and major characters (including the PCs) roll their own. The use of minatures and maps does help also.

The system is a bit different to D20 say, but there is a rythm to it, once you get into it, I think.

 

[EDG]

It is entirely a matter of opinion, of course. However, some very prominent people in the roleplaying hobby have identified, and awarded the original Traveller game with a 'one of the best of all time' status.

That's entirely their opinion too, of course... There's a lot of Oscar-winning films that aren't to my taste (and I'm sure that aren't up to yours either), and they're decided by "very prominent people" too.

Personally, I think some people forget just how much Traveller pioneered lots of hugely influential aspects of game design - like the idea of a skill based system, for example

Traveller wasn't the first game to have a skill system - Bunnies and Burrows came out in 1976 and had one, and Boot Hill (1975) apparently did too. (see http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/byyear/1977.html , and work back from there)

Either way, I think most opinions on the matter, would accept that Traveller is a classic game by most criteria.

The problem with "classic" is that its definition is also somewhat subjective (and varied). CT was certainly one of the earliest SF games (again, "Metamorphosis Alpha" and "Starfaring" pipped it at the post) and it is quite definitive, renowned and noteworthy, so I'd agree that it's "classic" in those senses. However, many people think it's classic as in "of the highest quality" and that's where it gets down to opinion again.

I'm not saying this to start arguments, I'm just pointing out that CT isn't as universally praised as some people think it is.

 

[tneva82]

whilst the updated version, hopefully, will remind people about just how much fun a randomised lifepath generation system can be.

Yeah. That's fun part of the rules I enjoy. It's quite interesting to roll up new character and figure out his background and character from the rolls. Much more fun than creating template and then creating stats to mix it(also less of min-max possibility there and instead you have rounded up characters instead of every single skill/feat directed to make him uber monster in his area of specialisation. IMO this makes characters feel more real).

 

[hdrider67]

I preordered the book, so I guess YES is my answer.

That said:

I'm trying to figure out way to yank T/E out of combat. I know, it's a matter of style but the T/E mechanic might work well for regular tasks but shoehorning that into combat just doesn't work for me.


I'm really hoping that EDG's worldgen stuff is taken into the system. That alone would make it worth the price.

Don't get me wrong. By and large, I like MGT. There are some things that didn't turn out how I would have liked (and I thought T/E looked good after the fix but changed my mind later). I can't get everything I want since I didn't design it and I don't have the skills to even try.

It's still acceptable to me. I'm not sure how popular it'll be, though. I hope MGT has listened to the T/E complaints because it'd be easier to fix it now and delay the release for a month or two than to have the system become a sales bomb.


In all honesty, I think the (I better find some cover) D6 system is flawed. There's just not enough room in two six sided dice for widely varying results. I know, EVERYONE has D6 laying around. I don't deny this is a positive but everyone also has access to Irony games and their dice rollers.

I seriously wish MT was based on the MRQ mechanic. The classlessness of both systems are complimentary and the MRQ mechanic has a pretty deep fan base.

T-20 was an almost great product. It was flawed only in a few places, mostly in the way lethality was unknown in D-20 and classes are an anathema in the CT system. The armor reduction rules were weird, too.

Hell, I'd be playing T-20 and only that system if I could have easily house ruled the combat system.


Still, I bought it and I'll find a way to make it work. The T/E system seems easier to pull out than the lifeblood/armor issues of my next favorite system.

If nothing else, It'll be an excellent sourcebook. and I DO appreciate the hard work from the Mongoose staff.

 

[Mac V]

I think you guys are hitting one of my biggest problems: T/E. It just seems clunky. I think it would be hard to track as well. It does, however, seem OK for skills. IF they change that OR give us a new combat system in Mercs, I'll buy.

 

[EDG]

Thanks to everyone voicing their support for the EDG worldgen, btw - I hope the Mongoose guys take note!

 

[tbeard1999]

Then, I saw TBeard1999's analysis of the T/E mechanic. It's clearly broken, and clearly, Mongoose is going to release the game with the broken mechanic.

Well, since TBeard's statistical objections do not apply once Effect is uncapped, as apparently it will in the release, clearly the mechanic is no longer broken after all.

Sorry Klaus, but this is incorrect. The statistical flaws in the systewm are independent of capping. But then, I think you already knew that.

 

[Traveller]

T-20 was an almost great product. It was flawed only in a few places, mostly in the way lethality was unknown in D-20 and classes are an anathema in the CT system. The armor reduction rules were weird, too.

If you find T20 non-lethal you haven't played it.

 

[Supplement Four]

In all honesty, I think the (I better find some cover) D6 system is flawed. There's just not enough room in two six sided dice for widely varying results. I know, EVERYONE has D6 laying around. I don't deny this is a positive but everyone also has access to Irony games and their dice rollers.

Personally, I wouldn't play Traveller any other way. To me, Traveller is a 2D6 mechanic, higher is better. d20 and d4's and d8's and percentiles are great for other games, but Traveller needs to be 2D6.

Just personal taste. But, it's a strong personal taste. The change in dice (plus a bunch of other things, including mechanics) in TNE was a huge factor in me never playing a single game of TNE even though I own much of the TNE material.

As for the Irony dice rollers....ya know, some of us still play in face-to-face games.

I can't imagine a web based game being as intimate or involving as when a couple of players and GM are head-to-head at a gaming table.

 

[hdrider67]

T-20 was an almost great product. It was flawed only in a few places, mostly in the way lethality was unknown in D-20 and classes are an anathema in the CT system. The armor reduction rules were weird, too.

If you find T20 non-lethal you haven't played it.

I may have worded that badly. I'm saying that in D-20 lethality is not a priority. I didn't care for the way T-20 had to accommodate D-20's historical non-lethality with the HP/LB workaround.

Like I said, T-20 was almost there. It was on the cusp of perfection (as defined by me).


Supplement Four Wrote:

Just personal taste. But, it's a strong personal taste.

I agree it is personal taste. It's also demonstrable that there are fewer results and a more narrow range when using 2D6 versus D20 or D%. One of the chief complaints at COTI is that damage is so predictable in MGT. Well, I agree. Part of this is the way the system used no more than two die. The MGT system only takes the core problem of CT (using a die that is common to all parts of the world in many games of chance) and compounding it by limiting the number of usable die.

I'm not saying I hate CT and I don't hate MGT. I don't have a dog in the previous flame wars between COTI folks and Mongoose players. What I *am* saying is that the Runequest system, both the mechanic AND the character flexibility is even more conducive to modification into a traveller system. Moreso than D-20, IMHO.

I'll still play some form of D6 traveller but that doesn't mean it (or MGT) are free of mechanic idiosyncrasies. Hell, I recently wanted CT on pdf. I bought LBB1-7 from Hunter's site a month or two ago.

As for the Irony dice rollers....ya know, some of us still play in face-to-face games.

I have a laptop and the downloaded dice roller. I always have my RPGNOW pdfs and dice roller handy. I've never done an online RPG in my life.

I hope neither of you guys took my comments personally. There's been altogether too much needless fighting in the recent threads. That's a big part of why I haven't *had* an opinion of late.

 

[tbeard1999]

Traveller wasn't the first game to have a skill system - Bunnies and Burrows came out in 1976 and had one, and Boot Hill (1975) apparently did too. (see http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/byyear/1977.html , and work back from there)

I have both the 1975 printing of Boot Hill and the 1976 printing of B&B and neither has a skills system.

The 1975 printing of Empire of the Petal Throne has skills, but they are very crude, essentially like background skills in AD&D, though more detailed.

My 1977 printing of Star Patrol has a skill list with sparse, but servicable, rules on how to use them.

So if Traveller wasn't the first RPG with a skills system, I'd submit it was one of the first and very likely the first well-known RPG with skills.

I'm not saying this to start arguments, I'm just pointing out that CT isn't as universally praised as some people think it is.

I'd submit that no RPG has ever packed as much in as few pages as CT (~72 letter sized pages in the 3 LBBs). In that small set of rules, you got a sophisticated and effective chargen system, a combat system that was state of the art in 1977, a complete system for generating worlds, animal encounters, psionics, starship economics, trading. a very engaging and effective starship design system, an elegant vector-based starship combat system, etc. Indeed, everything that was really required to run a game anywhere. Not bad at all. The equivalent of an athlete with 2% body fat. Unfortunately, the percentage of fat has skyrocketed with each succeeding version of Traveller, but them's the breaks.

Of course, not everything has stood the test of time. The combat system, although perfectly useable for CT battles, proved way too easy to break in Mercenary. The lack of aliens in a science fiction RPG was especially noticeable. Etc.

But I don't think any RPG has started out stronger.

 

[Supplement Four]

I hope neither of you guys took my comments personally.

Absolutely not. I hope I didn't come across as if I did.

 

[tbeard1999]

One of the chief complaints at COTI is that damage is so predictable in MGT. Well, I agree. Part of this is the way the system used no more than two die. The MGT system only takes the core problem of CT (using a die that is common to all parts of the world in many games of chance) and compounding it by limiting the number of usable die.

I'm no great fan of the 2d6 bell curve, but MGT combat is not predictable because of the 2d6 curve. It's predictable because the designers did not understand the statistical qualities of the T/E system. In the T/E system, the T or E die tends to strongly skew high on successful rolls (with an unmodified successful roll, each die is nine times more likely to come up 5+ than 2-). So, most of the time, the effect die will be 5 or 6 on a success. The result is a mindlessly predictable damage system. The fact that they're using d6s is incidental; the problem is caused by their bizarre obsession with forcing one die roll to resolve whether a hit occurs, damage, and how much time it takes.

 

[hdrider67]

I hope neither of you guys took my comments personally.

Absolutely not. I hope I didn't come across as if I did.

Just making sure my contributions don't add to the recent acrimony of this board.

Honestly, I wish Hunter'd been able to update T-20 with changes to the issues I mentioned. I'm not sure he *could* with the OGL and all (I don't understand how the legal stuff might have mandated HP).

I've toyed with building a MRQ version of a space opera but I'm working 60 hur weeks these days and I'm not as skilled as many of the denizens of this board so I can only hope someone else will come up with one. I'll still plat Traveller but I'd like to see MRQ in space as well.