Worlds orbiting gas giants and jump distances
- Thread starter dayriff
- Start date
I,like dayriff, like the idea of GG moons being colonised, its a classic sci fi image. As for all the points made by other posters, they are all interesting, but, you know, traveller is a role playing game, a science fiction role playing game 
and to play such a roleplaying game, there has to be some suspension of disbelief. After all in this game we can travel FTL via the jump drive, yet there is no real world science for it. On these boards i see no real arguments against FTL, so why the problem with possibility of habitable planets that happen to be around a GG in a stars 'life zone'?
It seems that dayriff is not playing OTU (and i apoligize if i am incorrect in this assumption of mine ) so why not. We all play traveller differently, and sometimes i think the rule of cool should sometimes overrule 'reality'. Its a role playing game, and as much as some realism and real world science is needed to make the universe believable, it should not, IMO, get in the way of the game.
and to play such a roleplaying game, there has to be some suspension of disbelief. After all in this game we can travel FTL via the jump drive, yet there is no real world science for it. On these boards i see no real arguments against FTL, so why the problem with possibility of habitable planets that happen to be around a GG in a stars 'life zone'?It seems that dayriff is not playing OTU (and i apoligize if i am incorrect in this assumption of mine
) so why not. We all play traveller differently, and sometimes i think the rule of cool should sometimes overrule 'reality'. Its a role playing game, and as much as some realism and real world science is needed to make the universe believable, it should not, IMO, get in the way of the game.
AndrewW
Emperor Mongoose
Somebody said:
I'll agree on ships and vehicles. But the random generation of worlds is simply one optional way of doing things not a codified rules. There's nothing to say that their can't be a TL 16 world here because the random generation didn't provide one. Or that system over there has to have a gas giant.
dayriff said:
This brings up an interesting question about jumping that I don't think has been covered in any article or rule book. According to some of the things I've read, going too close to a sun or large gas giant while in jump space can pull you out of jump... though the 'pocket universe' of MGT might preclude this.
In any event, you would expect that systems, especially those that experience heavy traffic, are going to have posted jump lanes, where arriving ships are expected to come in, and others where they are expected to leave from.
Which leads to the idea that some systems are going to have stations and orbital complexes out on the the 100D limit, so that ships transitting to drop off cargo or passengers don't need to travel all the way in-system to drop off. Maybe rich systems are going to have a "north" and "south" station above and below the orbital plane? So a ship would be able to arrive much closer to a station, do its business, get new cargo and leave.
As it stands all the books and whatnot talk of highports and downports, but nobody really discusses the idea of putting them farther out. Having ships having to transit by a 100D port to clear customs and be inspected would also cut down on the risk of a enemy ship intentionally being used to drop bombs or drop itself down onto the planet. In that case I would suspect the 100D stations would be relatively cheap, since they may be exposed to enemy attacks and being far out they would have potentially no warning for enemy vessels to conduct a raid/attack. At least not like installations deep in a gravity well.
If I remember it right, GURPS Traveller at least touches upon this. For ex-phavoc said:
ample, the huge LASH Tenders remain at 100D while 800 dton lighters de-
liver their cargoes to the destination planet and other lighters bring cargo
and fuel from the planet to the tender. It would only be logical to expect
navigation beacons, warehousing and so on at the 100D point to make
this kind of operation easier.
Old timer said:It seems that dayriff is not playing OTU (and i apoligize if i am incorrect in this assumption of mine
It depends on what you consider the OTU. I use the 3I as a backdrop, but I prefer to generate my own subsectors rather than use prepublished material. When randomly generating worlds according to the published rules, there is nothing indicating whether they are orbiting gas giants or not (that is, if random generation has put gas giants in the system in the first place). It's as much a matter for GM discretion as the name of the world.
My post was really more oriented towards the idea of long travel times to get in and out of the 100-D distance than the plausibility of insterstellar colonization.
Couple of points:
In OTU, there is a simple reason to have some kind of settlement in most systems - the limits of Jump Drive and the timeframe. If your setting has the ability for ships to travel for dozens of parsecs without refuelling, and has only been colonising worlds for a century or two, then most marginal systems are probably going to get a quick survey and then be ignored. In 3I, the limit of jump distance (J-3 for most commercial concerns) and the fact that the areas in question have been settled for thousands of years (even the Spinward Marches, a frontier region has had settlement by Solomani and/or Imperials for over a millenium) means there are a lot of colonies on otherwise useless planets. Some of the "useless" ones will have useful resources, too, and would be settled under most settings.
In respect to "planets as rolled" without tweaking... well, that's just naive. Yes, you can use it as a kind of I-Ching and take the numbers as they fall, but in most cases Referees (including GDW and MGT in that role) will massage that raw data into coherent settings. If stuff makes no sense to you, you find an explanation or change it. I'm always puzzled by people who object to the handful of planets in the original Spinward Marches data that have system generation "errors", but are happy with the obviously handmade artifacts such as the Spinward Main and the Sword Worlds.
In OTU, there is a simple reason to have some kind of settlement in most systems - the limits of Jump Drive and the timeframe. If your setting has the ability for ships to travel for dozens of parsecs without refuelling, and has only been colonising worlds for a century or two, then most marginal systems are probably going to get a quick survey and then be ignored. In 3I, the limit of jump distance (J-3 for most commercial concerns) and the fact that the areas in question have been settled for thousands of years (even the Spinward Marches, a frontier region has had settlement by Solomani and/or Imperials for over a millenium) means there are a lot of colonies on otherwise useless planets. Some of the "useless" ones will have useful resources, too, and would be settled under most settings.
In respect to "planets as rolled" without tweaking... well, that's just naive. Yes, you can use it as a kind of I-Ching and take the numbers as they fall, but in most cases Referees (including GDW and MGT in that role) will massage that raw data into coherent settings. If stuff makes no sense to you, you find an explanation or change it. I'm always puzzled by people who object to the handful of planets in the original Spinward Marches data that have system generation "errors", but are happy with the obviously handmade artifacts such as the Spinward Main and the Sword Worlds.
Yeah, but what might have *started* as a refuelling depot of a few hundred people can easily turn into a thriving colony of millions over the course of centuries of time. That's my point about the timeframe of the 3I.
Australia was set up as a dumping ground for convicts and a base for British operations in the Pacific. Barely 200 years later we have a population of 20 million, which, frankly, is overpopulation for our agricultural resources (especially water). Yet there are stong political agendas in some quarters to increase our population greatly.
Political, religious, economic, strategic and happenstance factors can all determine why worlds aren't settled "logically". A wandering Solomani colony ship arriving in the Marches may turn up at the lovely G2 V star on its last legs, but be forced to settle the inhospitable mudball that turns out to be marginally better than the rest of the barren planets it finds. A religious cult fleeing persecution might choose a previously unappealing world precisely because it's the only one unoccupied. A corporation may occupy and stock a planet in order to have a sovereign authority it can use to operate outside the inconvenient laws that the "useful" planets in the area impose. A wealthy individual with a massive ego might colonise an unclaimed system just to do so. A "useless" rock might have natural beauty so breathtaking that millionaires line up to obtain a chance to live there, such is the demand.
Lastly, even a marginal planet is a *planet*. It will have resources, even if that's just sunlight, rock and the odd patch of ice. Look at Earth; anywhere people can live, they do. Even in some places they can't live (Antarctica, Low Earth Orbit), they do.
Australia was set up as a dumping ground for convicts and a base for British operations in the Pacific. Barely 200 years later we have a population of 20 million, which, frankly, is overpopulation for our agricultural resources (especially water). Yet there are stong political agendas in some quarters to increase our population greatly.
Political, religious, economic, strategic and happenstance factors can all determine why worlds aren't settled "logically". A wandering Solomani colony ship arriving in the Marches may turn up at the lovely G2 V star on its last legs, but be forced to settle the inhospitable mudball that turns out to be marginally better than the rest of the barren planets it finds. A religious cult fleeing persecution might choose a previously unappealing world precisely because it's the only one unoccupied. A corporation may occupy and stock a planet in order to have a sovereign authority it can use to operate outside the inconvenient laws that the "useful" planets in the area impose. A wealthy individual with a massive ego might colonise an unclaimed system just to do so. A "useless" rock might have natural beauty so breathtaking that millionaires line up to obtain a chance to live there, such is the demand.
Lastly, even a marginal planet is a *planet*. It will have resources, even if that's just sunlight, rock and the odd patch of ice. Look at Earth; anywhere people can live, they do. Even in some places they can't live (Antarctica, Low Earth Orbit), they do.
I think Thomas Malthus would disagree about the population pressure. It's not unique to here and now. Three or four generations back, most of my ancestors were raising double digit families (one on my wife's side raised 17 kids). Other areas of colonisation in the 19th century (such as the American west) are similar.
Unless deliberately kept in check, populations will rapidly expand to reach, then exceed the local resources. One planet or many, the same principle will apply. 3I has enough time (and technology) to support any amount of population increase required. The real question is not "why are all these planets settled?" but "what is it about the low population planets that has kept them low population?".
Unless deliberately kept in check, populations will rapidly expand to reach, then exceed the local resources. One planet or many, the same principle will apply. 3I has enough time (and technology) to support any amount of population increase required. The real question is not "why are all these planets settled?" but "what is it about the low population planets that has kept them low population?".
Captain Jonah
Mongoose
Hi guys, sorry to interupt your private chat 
Population presure is not just a matter of numbers. If you have such problems with the (religion/politics/culture etc) of the people around you you are under presure that has nothing to do with numbers. Remember a small group of pilgrims and a little country called America
If you decide to move and most of your money goes on transport you may have little left to buy colony rights to a decent world.
Worlds are found and surveyed by corportations or goverments who then have claim on those worlds. They have no intention to settle them but having found them they hold the rights to them and sell on those rights.
Worlds surveyed or held by the 3I or like interstellar goverment could be auctioned or asigned based on need or favours called. Privately owned ones are there for the cash.
Need colony rights on a new home world, nice garden world too expensive, grubby mudball with nasty smelling atmosphere going cheap.
Also over the life of a thousand year empire the reason for the origional colony may have gone. Was the world a staging pont for sectorwide expansion back when this was the frontier, did it once have rich resources now mined out. Was it once a thriving centre of excellence in some field drawing visitors from across the sector now livig on faded glory.
A ship could have broken down in an uninhabited system while refuelling from the planets ocean. They settle in for a wait and send out word via the next ship that comes past. A support ship is sent to repair them and in the mean time they meet and greet other ships that come to visit the place and someone realises this useless planet happens to be the only place for water to refuel in the system and as every ship going this way must come here so why not start a market here.
Basicly though if you don't like the way a planet comes out and cannot come up with a reason why it is or was occupied then tweek it a bit
Population presure is not just a matter of numbers. If you have such problems with the (religion/politics/culture etc) of the people around you you are under presure that has nothing to do with numbers. Remember a small group of pilgrims and a little country called America
If you decide to move and most of your money goes on transport you may have little left to buy colony rights to a decent world.
Worlds are found and surveyed by corportations or goverments who then have claim on those worlds. They have no intention to settle them but having found them they hold the rights to them and sell on those rights.
Worlds surveyed or held by the 3I or like interstellar goverment could be auctioned or asigned based on need or favours called. Privately owned ones are there for the cash.
Need colony rights on a new home world, nice garden world too expensive, grubby mudball with nasty smelling atmosphere going cheap.
Also over the life of a thousand year empire the reason for the origional colony may have gone. Was the world a staging pont for sectorwide expansion back when this was the frontier, did it once have rich resources now mined out. Was it once a thriving centre of excellence in some field drawing visitors from across the sector now livig on faded glory.
A ship could have broken down in an uninhabited system while refuelling from the planets ocean. They settle in for a wait and send out word via the next ship that comes past. A support ship is sent to repair them and in the mean time they meet and greet other ships that come to visit the place and someone realises this useless planet happens to be the only place for water to refuel in the system and as every ship going this way must come here so why not start a market here.
Basicly though if you don't like the way a planet comes out and cannot come up with a reason why it is or was occupied then tweek it a bit
There are currently quite a number of populations that do the opposite,rinku said:
they shrink far below the level their resources would allow them to sus-
tain - despite serious efforts of the societies in question to make the po-
pulations grow again.
Since this shrinking of populations is caused by individual decisions ba-
sed on individual circumstances, and happens contrary to the societies'
politics, I do not see that these populations are "deliberately kept in
check".
Captain Jonah
Mongoose
Somebody said:Captain Jonah said:Hi guys, sorry to interupt your private chat
Population presure is not just a matter of numbers. If you have such problems with the (religion/politics/culture etc) of the people around you you are under presure that has nothing to do with numbers. Remember a small group of pilgrims and a little country called America
If you decide to move and most of your money goes on transport you may have little left to buy colony rights to a decent world.
Worlds are found and surveyed by corportations or goverments who then have claim on those worlds. They have no intention to settle them but having found them they hold the rights to them and sell on those rights.
Worlds surveyed or held by the 3I or like interstellar goverment could be auctioned or asigned based on need or favours called. Privately owned ones are there for the cash.
Need colony rights on a new home world, nice garden world too expensive, grubby mudball with nasty smelling atmosphere going cheap.
Also over the life of a thousand year empire the reason for the origional colony may have gone. Was the world a staging pont for sectorwide expansion back when this was the frontier, did it once have rich resources now mined out. Was it once a thriving centre of excellence in some field drawing visitors from across the sector now livig on faded glory.
A ship could have broken down in an uninhabited system while refuelling from the planets ocean. They settle in for a wait and send out word via the next ship that comes past. A support ship is sent to repair them and in the mean time they meet and greet other ships that come to visit the place and someone realises this useless planet happens to be the only place for water to refuel in the system and as every ship going this way must come here so why not start a market here.
Basicly though if you don't like the way a planet comes out and cannot come up with a reason why it is or was occupied then tweek it a bit
That may all happen. Rarely and for special situations. But to take your above examples:
+ There may be some religious/cultural settlements. But they have a matching government code and are rare in OTU. And the Vilanie (that settle most of the 3I) are far more culturally homegenous than Earth is due to their early history. Dissenters in that culture didn't move "over the hill". They starved to death for lack of a "priest"
But a thousand years later the reasons for the move will have been long forgotten and the culture may have changed beyond all recognition. Also what if it was the priest who was the dissenter and his followers went with him.
Yet I seem to remember we do have cannon 3I worlds which are privately owned by Megacorps, nobles etc. Not some of the best worlds but still around from the clasic days. Someone with a better memory could perhaps name a few for me but I remember them being around. One was a privately owned holiday world I think, anoter was owned by one of the big manufacturing corps.
Yep have to agree with you there.
Somebody said:
So... you'd be wanting tables to roll up the names, political allegience, settlement history and racial makeup of the planets in your random subsector?
You appear to be a bit confused. DO you want to use pregenerated sectors, or do you not? If not, you have to be prepared to do a lot of legwork and MAKE decisions about these things. It's your choice to tweak the random planet generation rolls or not.
Lord High Munchkin
Mongoose
They had no choice, they'd already been deported several times and moved on from a couple of ports (they were a pretty unpleasant bunch in reality).Captain Jonah said:Population presure is not just a matter of numbers. If you have such problems with the (religion/politics/culture etc) of the people around you you are under presure that has nothing to do with numbers. Remember a small group of pilgrims and a little country called America
You are right though, pressure isn't just down to numbers. Sometimes populations just want to "get rid" of the disruptive extremist elements.
Cults would be a good choice for settling more "marginal" habitats.
With an orbital period in the order of a handful of days, there's no real impossibility relating to the gas giant 'blotting out' the sun for vast periods of time.
For that matter, if you'd prefer, go with ice water melted by vulcanism. You can then trot out the standard 'life near volcanic vents built up from chemosynthesis' that doesn't really need sunlight as an input to the food chain.
It also gives you the option of a 'local system' despite a relatively small area of space - several moons settled (at least to outpost level) makes for an interesting region of space, and quite a complex area - the high orbital speeds means travel between a gas giants moons is often as energy-intensive (if not as slow) as travel between planets.
For that matter, if you'd prefer, go with ice water melted by vulcanism. You can then trot out the standard 'life near volcanic vents built up from chemosynthesis' that doesn't really need sunlight as an input to the food chain.
It also gives you the option of a 'local system' despite a relatively small area of space - several moons settled (at least to outpost level) makes for an interesting region of space, and quite a complex area - the high orbital speeds means travel between a gas giants moons is often as energy-intensive (if not as slow) as travel between planets.
Somebody said:
Is there some virtue in following the random generation rules that I'm not seeing?
IMO, the primary virtue of random generation is speed. I can roll up a world quickly rather than have to spend the time to make a conscious decision on every little bit. It also helps keep me from falling into too much of a rut on types of worlds. What it does not do is make a game setting that is more playable/more fun than if no random generation at all were used.
For example, in many systems the rules for interstellar trade assume thedayriff said:
average kind of sector that is created by the random creation rules.
So, if you want the trade rules to work as intended, you should either use
the random creation or take care to design a sector that is very much like
an average sector that was randomly created - otherwise you could easily
end up with a region where trade is either economic suicide or a much too
easy and fast way to get incredibly rich.
In the end, you never have to use a random creation, but you should al-
ways take a close look at it in order to find out why the designers made
it produce these specific results. :wink:
