Zhodani Psionics

[Jet_Black]

They should because *you* can ignore that for yourself, but it establishes a baseline for what is and isn't expected.

If no one knows whether or not every piece of machinery is a robot or arc field weapons are commonplace, then you have no consistency in the products.

Take ion weapons. They exist primarily to disable ships without seriously damaging them. Yet quite a few adventures published comment that it is difficult to actually disable ships. Most recently, I think there was something to that effect in Hellworld Heists. But if ion weapons are commonplace, that's just not true. The fact is, Charted Space is designed assuming such weapons are for other settings.

Can you put them in your game? Of course. But you shouldn't expect that any published 3I ships have them.

Funnily enough, this is a bad example because The Glorious Empire sourcebook does feature two ships equipped with ion weapons - the Eagle of Nom, a custom Drinaxi Harrier, and the Aslan Su'ikh-class interceptor!

I know some of you people love ranting about this very topic, and maybe I'm just weird, but I never saw the point of having restricting canon like that in an rpg. Any canon flies out the window as soon as it comes in contact with gamemasters and their players...

 

[Sigtrygg]

Mongoose can state every weapon and bit of equipment in HG, CSC etc exists in charted space, but in so doing they ignore previous canon and the setting as such is no longer fit for purpose...

it makes a complete mockery of "ensuring consistency of lore", which I am still laughing at two days later....

 

[Jet_Black]

Mongoose can state every weapon and bit of equipment in HG, CSC etc exists in charted space, but in so doing they ignore previous canon and the setting as such is no longer fit for purpose...

it makes a complete mockery of "ensuring consistency of lore", which I am still laughing at two days later....

As I said, I don't get it - why do you need canon in an rpg? What is the added value for me in Mongoose telling me what tech I can or can't use in my games? Charted Space is malleable enough to survive the inclusion or removal of all kinds of technical gadgets.

 

[Vormaerin]

Funnily enough, this is a bad example because The Glorious Empire sourcebook does feature two ships equipped with ion weapons - the Eagle of Nom, a custom Drinaxi Harrier, and the Aslan Su'ikh-class interceptor!

I know some of you people love ranting about this very topic, and maybe I'm just weird, but I never saw the point of having restricting canon like that in an rpg. Any canon flies out the window as soon as it comes in contact with gamemasters and their players...

The purpose is to have consistency of expectations. Why does 2300 have different technology than Charted Space? Why does Mindjammer? Why does Pioneer? They are all Traveller, after all.

Why does the core rules say that a significant portion of Army veterans have cybernetics, but that's not reflected in any of the NPCs in the setting? Why doesn't Omicron have personal energy shields?

If I'm going to bother playing in a published setting, I want to know what the setting designers expect about it and what I can expect to be in the materials they publish. I want to know that I have to rewrite everything to suit the fact that all my PCs ended up cyborgs and are using a bunch of gear in the CSC that none of the game materials are gonna incorporate.

Yes, the GM can change things to suit them. But there should be a baseline they are changing from. Why is it okay to say that Charted Space using Jump Drives, not Warp Drives, but not okay to say it uses lasers but not ion weapons? Yes, I can put pentapods in Charted Space if I want. Or replace the Kafer with Aslan. But that should be with malice aforethought, not because there's no actual setting to the setting.

 

[Enkelas]

Why does 2300 have different technology than Charted Space? Why does Mindjammer? Why does Pioneer? They are all Traveller, after all.

Different universes. 2300, charted space and pioneer are not set in the same universe. think about them as multiverses, so i do.
the thing is as i said someetimes( and i think mongoose too) choose in your table whatever you like play as you want.

they give you settings with guidelines. they dont give you settings with laws and if you break them, police will go to your house to arrest you.

pick up whatever you and your players are comfortable and have fun with it.

 

[mavikfelna]

The purpose is to have consistency of expectations. Why does 2300 have different technology than Charted Space? Why does Mindjammer? Why does Pioneer? They are all Traveller, after all.

Why does the core rules say that a significant portion of Army veterans have cybernetics, but that's not reflected in any of the NPCs in the setting? Why doesn't Omicron have personal energy shields?

If I'm going to bother playing in a published setting, I want to know what the setting designers expect about it and what I can expect to be in the materials they publish. I want to know that I have to rewrite everything to suit the fact that all my PCs ended up cyborgs and are using a bunch of gear in the CSC that none of the game materials are gonna incorporate.

Yes, the GM can change things to suit them. But there should be a baseline they are changing from. Why is it okay to say that Charted Space using Jump Drives, not Warp Drives, but not okay to say it uses lasers but not ion weapons? Yes, I can put pentapods in Charted Space if I want. Or replace the Kafer with Aslan. But that should be with malice aforethought, not because there's no actual setting to the setting.

This is why I have a problem with Mongoose not having a proper rules master document and baselines for the setting. You shouldn't be adding rules in non-rulebook books, especially adventures, unless it's to address a specific issue in that specific case. If it's a broader issue, it needs to be in a rulebook so it can be applied to the setting properly and everyone has access to the rules. There needs to be living errata and updates that people can access between rulebook publications so we can know what the official interpretation is. We can decide for our group how we want to implement it if we don't like a particular rule, but if someone goes to a different group or there is ever an official live play campaign we need those base rules in place so there isn't confusion and disruption.
The same goes for the setting. Canon should be solid and consistent so everyone knows what to expect as a baseline. If something changes in the past canon for some reason, the reason needs to be made clear and just have it snuck in in a random sourcebook and not explained why it changed. As a specifice example, the Armies of the Fifth Frontier War book totally changes the organization and tech level of the Imperial army without a conving explanation and upends all prior canon. The implications of this change are profound and vastly reduce the ability of the Imperial army to resist the Zhodani invaders, who are still shown as consistently being TL 14, two full TL above the new Imperial units. And for no good reason I can find, replaced the standard Gauss rifles of the troopers with ACRs, that cannot penetrate Zhodani armor. This upends all traditional canon and makes no logical sense in the setting itself so it is a big deal and affects how players interact with setting and the game overall. And causes needless confusion when someone joins a new group who might be using old canon.
Mongoose owns the IP and setting for Traveller, and they have every right to change what they want. But then authors consistently produce works that are supposed to be in the canon setting but contradict the established canon and other contemporary authors work it creates confusion and I feel drives away people that might otherwise be interested in the setting.

 

[Vormaerin]

Different universes. 2300, charted space and pioneer are not set in the same universe. think about them as multiverses, so i do.
the thing is as i said someetimes( and i think mongoose too) choose in your table whatever you like play as you want.

they give you settings with guidelines. they dont give you settings with laws and if you break them, police will go to your house to arrest you.

pick up whatever you and your players are comfortable and have fun with it.

I was responding to the previous post about why have setting parameters on technology at all. The point was exactly that, that different tech choices are important to the feel of the setting.

The fact that GMs can choose to change them does not mean that the setting shouldn't have them.

 

[WHULorigan]

As I said, I don't get it - why do you need canon in an rpg? What is the added value for me in Mongoose telling me what tech I can or can't use in my games? Charted Space is malleable enough to survive the inclusion or removal of all kinds of technical gadgets.

You don't need canon in an RPG. You need canon in a Setting.
Charted Space is a Setting.

Middle Earth is a setting. I do not want a Game Publishing company who has publication rights to the Middle Earth Legendarium for their RPG Game to introduce Dwarves with Springfield Rifles and Kzinti in "Eastern" or "Far Southern Middle Earth" simply because they can use the excuse that we have never really seen what is there. Nor do I want Phasers and Photon Torpedoes being introduced to a Star Wars game universe. It ruins the flavor of the setting and opens the bag of unintended consequences.

It is an issue of respect for the setting. Charted Space is a setting, just as Middle Earth is a setting, or Herbert's Dune Imperium, or the Star Trek Federation, or any world/universe created/imagined by your favorite fantasy/sci-fi author.

Furthermore, as the above-mentioned settings, Charted Space was an existing setting with a long history and flavor and feel inherited from someone else. It should not be abused. If new items/ideas can be introduced that have been thought through in terms of overall setting-consequences that fit with the feel and/or do not alter the flavor, that is great. Let the setting grow appropriately.

But if items are promoted, modified, detailed or introduced that do not fit with the feel of the Charted Space setting (or 2300AD, or any other setting that they support for that matter) - or are at least questionable - , then they should be noted as such in the description or in a header, or be listed in a section of alternative ideas or technologies (relative to Charted Space, et al, that is) or otherwise be clearly marked as such for the sake of clarity (and for those who are less familiar overall with the setting, especially content writers and newer players who wish to use the historic published setting).

I have no problem with all kinds of things being made available for individual GMs to use and/or introduce in their campaigns. Individual players and GMs can do whatever they want in their own campaigns with their own gaming groups, but they should at least be provided with a clear representation of what a given setting was intended to be like (whether Charted Space or something else), and what was intended to be in it, and what was not. Then they can decide what they want to do with it - use it as originally portrayed, tweak it, alter it, or radically deviate from it as they choose.

 

[mavikfelna]

You don't need canon in an RPG. You need canon in a Setting.
Charted Space is a Setting.

Middle Earth is a setting. I do not want a Game Publishing company who has publication rights to the Middle Earth Legendarium for their RPG Game to introduce Dwarves with Springfield Rifles and Kzinti in "Eastern" or "Far Southern Middle Earth" simply because they can use the excuse that we have never really seen what is there. Nor do I want Phasers and Photon Torpedoes being introduced to a Star Wars game universe. It ruins the flavor of the setting and opens the bag of unintended consequences.

It is an issue of respect for the setting. Charted Space is a setting, just as Middle Earth is a setting, or Herbert's Dune Imperium, or the Star Trek Federation, or any world/universe created/imagined by your favorite fantasy/sci-fi author.

Furthermore, as the above-mentioned settings, Charted Space was an existing setting with a long history and flavor and feel inherited from someone else. It should not be abused. If new items/ideas can be introduced that have been thought through in terms of overall setting-consequences that fit with the feel and/or do not alter the flavor, that is great. Let the setting grow appropriately.

But if items are promoted, modified, detailed or introduced that do not fit with the feel of the Charted Space setting (or 2300AD, or any other setting that they support for that matter) - or are at least questionable - , then they should be noted as such in the description or in a header, or be listed in a section of alternative ideas or technologies (relative to Charted Space, et al, that is) or otherwise be clearly marked as such for the sake of clarity (and for those who are less familiar overall with the setting, especially content writers and newer players who wish to use the historic published setting).

I have no problem with all kinds of things being made available for individual GMs to use and/or introduce in their campaigns. Individual players and GMs can do whatever they want in their own campaigns with their own gaming groups, but they should at least be provided with a clear representation of what a given setting was intended to be like (whether Charted Space or something else), and what was intended to be in it, and what was not. Then they can decide what they want to do with it - use it as originally portrayed, tweak it, alter it, or radically deviate from it as they choose.

Yes, exactly this. I don't want Phasers in Charted Space, they don't fit with the setting and its history. But if Mongoose wants to put in Traveller, that's fine, no problem there. But they need to lable it in some was as to what of their settings it's appropriate for.
Here's something different, the Annic Nova was introduced long ago as a one off bit of strangeness. Mongoose decided to put jump collectors from it in the rules in 2e, not sure if they were in 1e as a rulebook available tech, at TL14. I was once told there is another official MgT design for a Darrian scout that uses them but I don't where it's from as I can't find it. But the powers that be really need to explain why, if these things are readily available in Charted Space, they aren't on everything built at TL14 and over besides fast packets and couriers. There isn't any rule saying you can't have conventional fuel tanks and collectors, so every jump capable warship should have these rather than using drop tanks in addition to their normal fuel tankage. Now, you can prepare for an invasion for a week, jump into the target system with full fuel tanks and be ready to jump out if things aren't favorable immediately. Any merchant that can save 89% of the space he currently spends on fuel to use for cargo or passengers for the simple cost of staying in place for a week while they unload and load is probably going take those savings, especially on a ship without a fuel purifier like the subsidized liner. The collector would pay for itself in a year or two of work at most. And ships that need to make a jump followed by another jump, like crossing a rift, use fuel/cargo containers for those time and it's easy to make the crossing fast.
So, where are the collectors? Well, for some reason they are virtual non-existent, but there's no explanation as to why, despite them being in the setting. I've designed ships with these things and they are pretty game breaking for the Charted Space setting. As a one off left in an adventure, not a problem. In the rule book but listed as not available in the setting, that's ok too. But having the rule in the rulebook and not knowing it's not allowed, or exceedingly rare even, in the setting and so having someone writing canon material for the setting that includes them that then makes it common totally changes the setting and has some pretty extreme repercussions to the setting. And then new people see all the confusion this causes and decide the game isn't worth is since they can't figure out then own setting and no respect for the rules.

I don't know if I'm making myself clear here. But I have seen too many games fall apart because the authors didn't consider unintended consequences for big changes that failed to take into account the setting they were supporting.

 

[WHULorigan]

Here's something different, the Annic Nova was introduced long ago as a one off bit of strangeness. Mongoose decided to put jump collectors from it in the rules in 2e, not sure if they were in 1e as a rulebook available tech, at TL14. I was once told there is another official MgT design for a Darrian scout that uses them but I don't where it's from as I can't find it. But the powers that be really need to explain why, if these things are readily available in Charted Space, they aren't on everything built at TL14 and over besides fast packets and couriers. . . .

Just as a side note:

Collectors were probably introduced at TL14 in MgT2 because they first become available under the T5 ruleset at TL14/Standard. But in T5, they need to be matched to the Jump-level attempted and scale up with TL like Jump-Drives. Collector-1 powers jump-1 at TL14; Collector-2 Powers Jump-2 at TL-15, etc.

And the Canopy begins to degrade and become less efficient (i.e. longer recharge time) the more you use it after a certain point, going from an initial 10-day charge-time for a number of uses, eventually starting to degrade downward to 100s of days per recharge-time, and needing to ultimately be replaced (for a Megacredit price tag).

And I believe the argument is also that though the Collector-1 can be built Standard at TL-14, it is not necessarily an obvious breakthrough that everyone makes - the Imperium and most races in Charted Space didn't discover it (though they could duplicate it were they shown its principle).

 

[Sigtrygg]

The original Annic Nova collector could only be used within a star system and took 1d weeks to charge depending on luminosity, distance and the like.

For some unfathomable reason the collectors in T5 and MgT can function in the empty space between stars...

as people with evs are discovering, there are advantages to being able to fill up your fuel tank quickly and getting on with the journey...

 

[mavikfelna]

Those limitations would make collectors much more niche and a better fit in Charted Space. Alas, that is not RAW

 

[WHULorigan]

. . . as people with evs are discovering, there are advantages to being able to fill up your fuel tank quickly and getting on with the journey...

Funny that you mention that. I was going to note (and then didn't) that people with EVs also think they are so great and maintenance free and no "price at the pump". . . Until it comes time to replace the batteries at about 80,000 to 100,000 miles (130,000 to 160,000 km) . . .

 

[WHULorigan]

The original Annic Nova collector could only be used within a star system and took 1d weeks to charge depending on luminosity, distance and the like.

For some unfathomable reason the collectors in T5 and MgT can function in the empty space between stars...

as people with evs are discovering, there are advantages to being able to fill up your fuel tank quickly and getting on with the journey...

I was just thinking about this. Presuming the original Collector was NOT simply a sophisticated Photoelectric Cell / Stellar Particle Radiation Collector (which I am sure was the original intent), and was based on the collection of "Exotic Particles" or the Induction of Excitation States in the Ground State Jump Field . . .

I had always naturally assumed that the 1d6 weeks roll was associated with low values (1 week) being close to a lumimous/bluish star and high values (6 weeks) being distant from a dim/reddish star.

But it could just as well be the other way around; the text is not specific:

Perhaps 1 week is associated primarily with being distant from a dim red star and 6 weeks if one is close to luminous bluish star. Then the issue might be that it is more difficult to collect particles/induce Excitation States when deeper within a significant gravity well, and is easier when distant from a low mass source (1 week). This would tie the original CT Collector's functioning vaguely with the diameter-limit jump-cutoff. It would also tie in with the T5 Collector note that it will take damage under acceleration (perhaps more than simple fragility), as gravity well stresses and/or tidal forces affect Collector functioning.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I think it likely that the 1d6 weeks was an abstraction rather than have to have a formula or look up chart for luminosity and distance from star.

They were simpler times, the star type etc wouldn't be a thing until LBB:6 in 1983, four years after the Annic Nova was first described.

"Fuel, Refuel, or Power. The canopy collects radiated stellar power and stores it in the accumulators on the drive deck.

Sufficient energy may be accumulated to power each of the jump drives once, as well as to maintain internal life support in ordinary circumstances. Note that a jump drive can be used for any jump distance up to its full rating, but that each jump takes approximately one week
Duration of internal power: 60 days under ordinary load.
Required recharge time: 1 to 6 weeks (1D), depending on the distance from and spectral type of the star serving as radiation source."

So for a random system you roll 1D, but if you want the hassle then you could work out the luminosity and distance chart for every star in charted space and the wider galaxy and replace the 1D roll...

 

[Condottiere]

If a game mechanic can be exploited, it will be.

To make Collectors a morally challenging issue, make jump initiation require a human sacrifice, each time, per hundred tonnes volume, per parsec.

 

[Anstett]

Funny that you mention that. I was going to note (and then didn't) that people with EVs also think they are so great and maintenance free and no "price at the pump". . . Until it comes time to replace the batteries at about 80,000 to 100,000 miles (130,000 to 160,000 km) . . .

Totally off topic of this thread and the forums overall..... But...

Who are these people? Who is ever replacing a battery at 100,000 miles?

I have driven an EV since 2014. 3rd one now, each about 50,000 miles. I have never had a battery deplete past 85%, (an original Leaf) which is a reduction in range of... about 2-4%. Nissan takes the batteries out of the Leaf at 80% and moves them into a factory for charging mobile robots, where they last another few years. (I cannot find data on IF they have ever retired a battery that way either, but it likely happens).

Newer battery configurations last even longer. My previous Chevy Bolt was 60,000 miles and zero battery degradation. My current Bolt is just under 50,000 and has better range now than two years ago.

The cost of a new/replacement battery is just not a thing to ever worry about.

 

[WHULorigan]

I think it likely that the 1d6 weeks was an abstraction rather than have to have a formula or look up chart for luminosity and distance from star.

They were simpler times, the start type etc wouldn't be a thing until LBB:6 in 1983, four years after the Annic Nova was first described.

"Fuel, Refuel, or Power. The canopy collects radiated stellar power and stores it in the accumulators on the drive deck.

Sufficient energy may be accumulated to power each of the jump drives once, as well as to maintain internal life support in ordinary circumstances. Note that a jump drive can be used for any jump distance up to its full rating, but that each jump takes approximately one week
Duration of internal power: 60 days under ordinary load.
Required recharge time: 1 to 6 weeks (1D), depending on the distance from and spectral type of the star serving as radiation source."

So for a random system you roll 1D, but if you want the hassle then you could work out the luminosity and distance chart for every star in charted space and the wider galaxy and replace the 1D roll...

Agreed. Especially since CT: Book 6 had not yet been published and there was no canonical info for systems' primaries, it would have meant the referee would have had to generate the stellar and orbital data for each system the ship jumped to (ordinary starships already had L-Hyd info from starport, gas giant, and hydrographic info for each system in hand from the Subsector map and UWP).

But the alternate interpretation of the 1d6 roll above makes a segue to T5 a bit more plausible, if the star/gravity well is inducing the generation of the "exotic radiation", but that it can only be harvested easily by the mechanism in unstressed spacetime.

 

[WHULorigan]

Totally off topic of this thread and the forums overall..... But...

Who are these people? Who is ever replacing a battery at 100,000 miles?

I have driven an EV since 2014. 3rd one now, each about 50,000 miles. I have never had a battery deplete past 85%, (an original Leaf) which is a reduction in range of... about 2-4%. Nissan takes the batteries out of the Leaf at 80% and moves them into a factory for charging mobile robots, where they last another few years. (I cannot find data on IF they have ever retired a battery that way either, but it likely happens).

Newer battery configurations last even longer. My previous Chevy Bolt was 60,000 miles and zero battery degradation. My current Bolt is just under 50,000 and has better range now than two years ago.

The cost of a new/replacement battery is just not a thing to ever worry about.

I have never owned an EV, so I have no personal experience. But I have always heard that the battery eventually needs (expensive) replacement. Maybe the mileage is better now than I had heard previously.

 

[Anstett]

I have never owned an EV, so I have no personal experience. But I have always heard that the battery eventually needs (expensive) replacement. Maybe the mileage is better now than I had heard previously.

The batteries are much better now. It is true that a new battery pack can be expensive still. But not more expensive at the 150,000 mark than a a gas car at that point is when totally repairs, upkeep, gas, etc. Total cost is still in favor of the EV.