Quote from: KenHRThe thing that's astounded me since I've started designing my campaign (space pirates!) is how beholden people are to the official Third Imperium universe.  I figured the world creation rules were there for a reason and launched right into designing my own setting, using the OTU as an idea mine (there are enough assumptions hard-coded into the rules that would probably make any homebrew bear a strong resemblance to the 3I).  But then, I really dislike using official settings; there's always some smartass out there who will quote canon just to tick a GM off, and I had my fill of that after an abortive Greyhawk campaign years back.

I like to spin my own settings as well. But the 3I is one of two settings that really clicks with me, because it gives me a nice combination of supporting material and ideas, and freedom to create. I rolled up my own version of reavers' deep, and had a rollicking campaign there.

For T20, I bought and use the Gateway to Destiny setting, which proved a fun basis for a short campaign and some gameday and gencon games.

I did toy with the idea of making a T20 setting based on Masters of Orion, and I have seen other Traveller players roll their own settings.

That said, planet gen seems dated to me, as do 2D starmaps. Yeah, I've heard all the handwaves -- even made up my own. At the end of the day, I think I have come to prefer realistic 3d starmaps set in our local region of space for a space setting. I have yet to see a game do a really good job of this.

I still wait for a better, more modern successor to Traveller.

Quote from: jrientsA lot of fans take the setting deadly seriously.  Me, I'm working on sort of a hybrid that's part official setting and part gee-whiz pulpy space opera with exploding planets and giant space amoeba.

Yeah, some of the discussions I've seen on my short time on the TML show how dedicated people are to the 3I.  God bless 'em, but I find the entire setting too large and unwieldy.  The original three books seem (in my limited experience with the system so far) to fit best with a cozier "small ships" setting: 2-3 subsectors (a full sector at most).  High Guard (blech) and its ilk seem to have sprung up along with the 11K+ world Imperium.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadThat said, planet gen seems dated to me, as do 2D starmaps. Yeah, I've heard all the handwaves -- even made up my own. At the end of the day, I think I have come to prefer realistic 3d starmaps set in our local region of space for a space setting. I have yet to see a game do a really good job of this.

Just curious, but why do you feel that a 3d starmap would be better suited or more meaningful that the 2d maps Traveller generates/uses?  Your comment just got me thinking about which one I would prefer.  After giving it some thought, I decided I would probably want a 2d one.  After all, I would be using it to get from point A to point B mostly, or to look at trading routes, or something else.  The third dimension wouldn't really add any additional information.  Sort of like today's road map.  I guess they could make it three dimensional, but why?

I love Traveller from way, way back. I have a ton of the CT black books. I had some of the Megatraveller books, but never thought much of them. I was really jazzed to see SJG revive Traveller with GURPS, even though I'm not much of a GURPS fan. I like T20, but I feel the game might be better served with a d20 Modern/Future upgrade.

The Imperium itself is OK. I don't like the royal family storylines in general, the ones that get sent out in the SJG Traveller news emails. They just seem pointless to me.

The main beef I have with the Imperium is that it's way too big. Actually, I don't have a problem with the size of the Imperium, really, just the travel time involved to get from one end to the other. While I understand that this helps make for a more wide-open setting, which makes for a good campaign area, the logic of it begins to fall apart after a while. It takes literally years to travel from one side of the Imperium to the other. Some might see that as a strength, and I can dig that, but I prefer to have the travel time be in months rather than years. Jump times are, what, a week each, regardless of distance. I think I'll make that a day, if I ever get a chance to run the game again.

Quote from: rcsampleJust curious, but why do you feel that a 3d starmap would be better suited or more meaningful that the 2d maps Traveller generates/uses?

Let's just say it's the simulationist/immesionist in my. Operating in 3 dimensions is a significant detail, and cutting it out buggers with my suspension of disbeleif.

QuoteThe third dimension wouldn't really add any additional information.  Sort of like today's road map.  I guess they could make it three dimensional, but why?

A third dimension is rarely significant in roadmaps, since roads are entities in which most movement is confined to a 2d surface. Not so in 3d space.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadI like to spin my own settings as well. But the 3I is one of two settings that really clicks with me, because it gives me a nice combination of supporting material and ideas, and freedom to create. I rolled up my own version of reavers' deep, and had a rollicking campaign there.

3I does have that wide-open feel that the best older RPG supplements (e.g. Wilderlands of High Fantasy, World of Greyhawk) had.  The sheer number of planets, etc. means you'll always have room to play.  My experiences with "canonistas" in various other RPG settings have colored my outlook somewhat, though (and that's totally my problem, I realize).

Quote from: Caesar SlaadThat said, planet gen seems dated to me, as do 2D starmaps. Yeah, I've heard all the handwaves -- even made up my own. At the end of the day, I think I have come to prefer realistic 3d starmaps set in our local region of space for a space setting. I have yet to see a game do a really good job of this.

I still wait for a better, more modern successor to Traveller.

The planet gen is dated, true, and I'm realizing this more and more as I do my own research to prep my game (damn, everything I learned in school about stars and planets is ALL WRONG...and it wasn't that long ago...well, now that I think about it was sort of a long time ago...).  But it does convey the feel of '70s era literary sci-fi quite well.

I totally understand the desire for 3-d starmaps, but am willing to settle with the simple and pragmatic 2-d solution.

As far as modern successors go, I've heard good things about Hard Nova II and Cold Space by Flying Mice.  Still have yet to check them out, however.

2d starmaps is Traveller's equivalent of 'Elf is a class' in Basic D&D.  It's nice and simple but it drives some people nuts.

Quote from: KenHRAs far as modern successors go, I've heard good things about Hard Nova II and Cold Space by Flying Mice.  Still have yet to check them out, however.

I can heartily recommend both.

Quote from: jrients2d starmaps is Traveller's equivalent of 'Elf is a class' in Basic D&D.  It's nice and simple but it drives some people nuts.

QFT.

Quote from: KenHRThe planet gen is dated, true  But it does convey the feel of '70s era literary sci-fi quite well.

In addition, replace "planet gen" with "starship computers/programming system"...

Quote from: rcsampleIn addition, replace "planet gen" with "starship computers/programming system"...

My solution to any conflicts between Traveller and realworld science or technology is to approach Traveller as a retro vision of the future.  The setting isn't Life in The Year 5627, it's Life in The Year 5627 as Imagined in 1977.  This one mental gymnastic saves a lot of heartache over things like nanotechnology and internets and allows me to concentrate on what really concerns me: punching space pirates in the face.

Quote from: jrientsMy solution to any conflicts between Traveller and realworld science or technology is to approach Traveller as a retro vision of the future.  The setting isn't Life in The Year 5627, it's Life in The Year 5627 as Imagined in 1977.  This one mental gymnastic saves a lot of heartache over things like nanotechnology and internets and allows me to concentrate on what really concerns me: punching space pirates in the face.

I've never had a particular problem with computer tech in traveller.

First, patching into different world's net's has been a standard activities in games dating back to at least MT by my recollection. Some of the fuzzier aspects of this activity got sorted out as the internet matured.

Second, I build systems that go on naval ships for a living. Despite the forward rush of technology, various sensors and specialized systems exist that don't cotton to moore's law, and moore's law becomes more about adding capabilities than reducing size. So I swat aside complaints about "mainframes on starships" with casual ease.

There is only One Traveller, and the LBBs the Gospel.

I started playing RPGs with D&D, about 1979. It was fun.

Then I discovered Traveller about 1981 - it was transformative.

I've far preferred Sci-Fi (gaming and literature) ever since, and I blame CT for that. Its still my all-time favorite game, for such a simple but open-ended ability to do anything you want... from trading across the galaxy to punching Pirates in the face. But hey, why not both?

And I still love the random character generation, including death. I spent HOURS rolling up character after character that never saw the light of day. Same with systems, subsectors, and sectors. It was kind of like exploring whole new worlds for hours at a stretch, even if you were all by yourself.

Hell, I may break out the reprints and make a subsector just for old-time's sake.

As to the setting - meh. We played it before "The Imperium" became the ossified grognard's playground it is today (this coming from a guy with more than a few Traveller writing credits under his belt). If I run anything using Traveller again, it'll be in a home-made subsector or two.

Quote from: jrientsMy solution to any conflicts between Traveller and realworld science or technology is to approach Traveller as a retro vision of the future.  The setting isn't Life in The Year 5627, it's Life in The Year 5627 as Imagined in 1977.  This one mental gymnastic saves a lot of heartache over things like nanotechnology and internets and allows me to concentrate on what really concerns me: punching space pirates in the face.

That's a good way to look at it, but...there was science fiction of the time that posited advanced computer technology. My favorite example comes from James Hogan's "Giants" novels. The Ganymedans used a computer system which was quite a bit like what has been envisioned for our own future. Matter of fact, in some ways it bore a strong resemblance to the computer tech used in the Matrix flicks (though benign in temperament), complete with virtual reality. My point being that Traveller at the time it was first published had examples to draw from for futuristic computer tech in scifi literature. It could simply be a matter of Marc Miller not reading particular scifi books.

Quote from: jrientsThe setting isn't Life in The Year 5627, it's Life in The Year 5627 as Imagined in 1977.  

That's why I left in the last part of KenHR's comment about "convey the feel of '70s era literary sci-fi quite well."....

Quote from: Caesar SlaadSo I swat aside complaints about "mainframes on starships" with casual ease.

None of these are really complaints...just personal bug-a-boo's, immersion benders, if you will... I was bothered more by the small amount of programs computers of the future (according to Traveller) could hold in their "RAM" or "hard drive" than the size of the computer. This may bother me due to my profession (a software engineer) more than it may bother others.