Ahhh, the slippery slope of licensing, also known as the Lucas Syndrome.  

Considering that T5 is likely the last chance MWM will have at a unifying "Traveller Vision", only time will tell if he decides to settle some of the longer term player debates over conflicts in rules and story amassed through 5-6 publishers.  It would be an interesting undertaking but I have a feeling that removing all doubt on some things would still give rise to bitching.

I'd like to read an article where he explains in detail what he sees as Traveller versus variants but he doesn't strike me as the type to have a problem letting other folks play in his sandbox.

As an aside does anyone know of examples where an RPG had tightly controlled canon yet still was successful?  Examples in books are easier to find since sole authorship is routine, where movies and television are less so.

It seems as though it would take a ton of foresight to structure a game/setting to allow for fans to create for it within guiding rules to preserve canon.  Such strict control seems like it would strangle the creativity that keeps games alive for more than a first edition.

Quote from: jgants;310299New Rule (Fan Service): If you argue vehemently over the tiniest change in the Traveller universe because it goes against "Marc Miller's Grand Vision", you must go ahead and offer to blow him.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;310303You say that like you think the fanboys don't want to do that, mate.

I certainly don't...

In the case of the Aslan changes, they invaldidated two whole clans, clans which have featured prominently in some of my prior campaigns. The two Aslan clans that openly endorse psionics!

Quote from: aramis;310373In the case of the Aslan changes, they invaldidated two whole clans

Nothing was invalidated. You just needed to ignore a couple of lines of text in some book, and explain to your players (if you have any who treat Mongoose releases as gospel truth) your decision.

I understand the desire to have a stack of books on your shelf, on which you can rest your eyes, and bask on the knowledge that together they contain a flawless font of  wisdom. Just like Edward Norton in Fight Club with his IKEA sofas, in the chaos of daily life you can at least relax in the knowledge that you have the OTU situation handled. It takes away from the feeling of security to have to add your own addenda, and possibly even justify your addenda to others.

But has not the time come to fuck things up, to scribble notes on scraps of paper, to succumb to the chaos of (gasp) your own Traveller universe? It is safer than buying a motorcycle and, according to most accounts, less blameworthy than adultery.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;310303You say that like you think the fanboys don't want to do that, mate.

I've met Miller at ORIGINS.

What you two suggest will never happen.

 I LOVE TRAVELLER - but my slightly modified version of it .

- Ed C.


Now If Captain Jack Harkness were real and not fiction, HIM I might blow.

Quote from: The_Shadow;310231Balbimus, Aramis and other believers in canon: have you soon the convolutions of fundamentalist bible scholars trying to reconcile the ramblings of semi-literate holy men separated by centuries, and by language and culture? It's a joke. But that's where the term canon comes from, and in terms of games, I can only see it as ironical.

Others may enjoy the game of trying to reconcile what  game designer A wrote at 3am in 1983 trying to meet his deadline while hopped up on mountain dew, with what game designer B wrote in 1997 after his hard drive crashed. They are welcome, while I continue to play the game.

The only issue here is making it clear to players what has changed in your campaign from what they are working from, especially when they have purchased a book. This is courtesy.

What the fuck?  All I said regarding belief was that I believe, factually speaking, that many games and licences have canon, ie that literally it does exist.  I would find the assertion that games and licences don't have canonical and non-canonical sources rather strange, and at odds with how those games and licences are commonly discussed (where for many fans, though not me, considerations of what is and is not canonical are very important).

I also said that you could ignore it, adapt it or use it as officially presented according to taste.  Generally I ignore it, occasionally I adapt it, I never use it as is because I see canon as merely one tool among many that I can use to put a particular campaign together.  Generally, for me, it's not a useful tool and I ignore it.  I tend to see canon as a bad thing, Aramis and I differ on that point, considerably, which is cool, I'm fine with people having different tastes to me.

I can't speak for Aramis, but I suspect he's aware that canon can be adapted for use at the table, he simply prefers and finds it more fun to use it as written - that preference obviously makes what is canonical much more important for him than it is for me.

But please don't patronisingly explain to me that canon isn't something one needs to adhere to, and imply that I'm stuck on it while you're getting on with playing.  It's annoying, it's sanctimonious and in my case it's totally bloody innacurate.

As for fundamentalist biblical scholarship, I couldn't give a flying fuck what those cretins are up to, firstly it's a US phenomenon and I'm not American, secondly even if I were it's a total fucking irrelevance to the discussion at hand and I don't think it's an accurate summary of where the term comes from.  It does come from religious discussion, certainly, but not from any strain of fundamentalism.  Given I'm not a Christian however, the whole issue is to me quite nuncupatory.

In the spirit of both the topic and the ideals of this particular web site, I just want to add: fucking fuckity fuck canon in the eye with a rake you soulfucking fuck fuckers.

Quote from: Halfjack;310478In the spirit of both the topic and the ideals of this particular web site, I just want to add: fucking fuckity fuck canon in the eye with a rake you soulfucking fuck fuckers.

In a different version of the spirit of the thread:

"Dude, that profanity was in the wrong dialect of Vargr (Gvekkh). Didn't you read the correction charts of the Judges Guild stuff?"


- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;310510In a different version of the spirit of the thread:

"Dude, that profanity was in the wrong dialect of Vargr (Gvekkh). Didn't you read the correction charts of the Judges Guild stuff?"


- Ed C.

Dude... JG was decanonized in 1984!

Balbinus: yup.

Even WWG decanonized a few bits over the years... like the Ritual of the Bitter Rose.... (Group Diablerie makes for massive munchkinism, and guarantees the value of kicking elder arse... othing worse for any sense of challenge than having 6 new diablerist 5th gen vampires replace the one raised to undeath as a 5th back in BC2000....)

Quote from: Balbinus;309735Abso-fucking-lutely.

Traveller is a generic sf game.  The Third Imperium is merely a published setting for it.

Not one I personally use.

Exactly.  There wasn't even a published Third Imperium setting when I started playing.  By the time one came out I'd already created MTU with a whole rolled up sector.  The closest thing I had to Aslan were Kzin, and my "Imperium" was closer to the Landsraad.  

I'll leave setting/canon wars to those who care.  But to the original post,  being professional and representing a company means to me not losing your cool or letting yourself be provoked.  You do what is in the comapies best interest not what makes you feel good.

I got to get over to CotI more....