TheRPGSite

Over on COTI, one of the Mongoose staffers posted this in a thread pointing out that they directly contract prior canon, and are making several small but siginifcant changes:

Quote from: MongooseFordy on TravellerRPG.comThe psionics rule for Aslan stays, no matter how ravenous your sense of entitlement over our products. If anything, the criticism on this thread has given us all the more reason not to change it, and possibly to veer even further from established canon.

Now, back to those Vagr... mmm, bigger antlers I think.

(for those not familiar, the Vargr are, canonically, uplifted Wolves...)
(Also note: Fordy wrote one of the supplements, not the one in question, but totally mangled canon in it.)

So what do you think:
Bad for business or not to intentionally tick off the fans.


(posted over here because on COTI, I can't ask this question.)

I think there trying to tweak canon so its less muddled and in some cases they feel they are better off throwing a huge chunk of it out.

I think the "fans" on CotI brought it on themselves, to be honest.  The histrionics in just about every Mongoose-related thread or any other traditional Traveller hotbutton topic are ridiculous, and the Aslan thread is only one of the latest (but one of the best) examples.  I'm actually kind of glad Mongoose responded the way they did.

First, I'd have to imagine he's kidding. Second, if he's not, then he's an idiot. That is, if he wants to actually sell product.

It used to be that I felt that the internet audience made up a small, not-terribly-accurate representation of the audience for a given product. That's become less true as the internet has made inroads into more and more households. Sure, a lot of internet posters are still asshats. But that doesn't mean that companies interested in selling products should categorically ignore anything they see as common complaints on the internet.

It's one thing to have a vision of something and stick to it; it's another to solicit opinions from one's audience - such as having forums on your company's website where you actually interact with your fans and customers - and then dismiss whatever people are calling for. That kind of shit isn't gonna work as a viable business model anymore. Thin-skinned company reps getting their panties in a twist and blasting detractors might have caused negligible damage in the past, but nowadays, with everything from email to Twitter sitting at the ready, such stuff is quickly disseminated. Like him or not, Gary Vaynerchuk has it right, I believe - the internet is now a tool that companies need to use to interact with their customer base so they can adapt to and fulfill the wants and the needs of their clientele. Refusing to interact with, or openly battling with, one's fan base online seems unwise at best, corporate suicide at worst.

I personally found the antlers thing pretty funny.

Seriously though Traveller has got to be the most house-ruled game around with having so many editions, so I really don't see what the uproar is all about.  If it bothers someone so much that they will only feel better if Mongoose "sanctions" psion Aslans then perhaps a fan-submitted Signs and Portents article detailing the reclusive pison Aslans is in order.

In the same vein I wish Mongoose would be the first to actually update the jump map to reflect modern understanding of habitable planets and ditch the hex based map system all together.  Switch it out for a node system map, like some of those on Nyrath's 3D mapping website, since nodes are EXACTLY what a jump network operates on rather than some map that tries to fit things in hexes like you are going to travel in the empty hexes along the way.

If you are going to do nothing but stick to the existing conventions slavishly why bother publishing the new system?  As for ticking off fans, I think many people dismiss how many fans really dislike the grognard attitudes on COTI when defending some 30 year old rule or design choice.

Quote from: ColonelHardisson;308763First, I'd have to imagine he's kidding. Second, if he's not, then he's an idiot. That is, if he wants to actually sell product.

It used to be that I felt that the internet audience made up a small, not-terribly-accurate representation of the audience for a given product. That's become less true as the internet has made inroads into more and more households. Sure, a lot of internet posters are still asshats. But that doesn't mean that companies interested in selling products should categorically ignore anything they see as common complaints on the internet.

It's one thing to have a vision of something and stick to it; it's another to solicit opinions from one's audience - such as having forums on your company's website where you actually interact with your fans and customers - and then dismiss whatever people are calling for. That kind of shit isn't gonna work as a viable business model anymore. Thin-skinned company reps getting their panties in a twist and blasting detractors might have caused negligible damage in the past, but nowadays, with everything from email to Twitter sitting at the ready, such stuff is quickly disseminated. Like him or not, Gary Vaynerchuk has it right, I believe - the internet is now a tool that companies need to use to interact with their customer base so they can adapt to and fulfill the wants and the needs of their clientele. Refusing to interact with, or openly battling with, one's fan base online seems unwise at best, corporate suicide at worst.

Opinions weren't solicited on Mongoose's website.  CotI is not Mongoose.  CotI is full of very...dedicated...Traveller fans who are quite...demanding (entitled-feeling?)...when it comes to canon issues.

Read the Aslan thread on their Mongoose Traveller board.  Conspiracy theories, people ragging on Mongoose or Marc Miller or his helpers.  I think the rep's reaction is understandable.

Seriously, I wouldn't take fans seriously either. They let real issues slide by and devote copious amounts of time to inane bullshit that doesn't matter. The Traveller fanbase is not an exception to this rule.

Quote from: aramis;308710So what do you think:
Bad for business or not to intentionally tick off the fans.

I'm divided on this issue.

On the one hand, I think it is bad for a business to intentionally tick off its fans. On the other hand, when canon minutia becomes the reason why fans will or will not purchase a product and generate 288 posts about it (at current count) then those particular fans are making a mountain out of a molehill.

The real answer here is if its OK with Marc for Mongoose to make canon changes then whats the problem ?

Aramis you know me from CotI and the other Traveller forums and its well known that you have made comments about everything Mongoose do or dont do, so why is it that your not making these questions on Coti ?, you are a mod on CotI and its never stopped you before now.

Quote from: aramis;308710Bad for business or not to intentionally tick off the fans.

You're confusing "fans" with "a few guys arguing on the Traveller Mailing List who haven't played for twenty years but Still Must Be Heard."

Actual game groups don't care about "canon" of this edition or any other. They only care if the game is fun and interesting. Rules are changed, setting elements are changed, etc. If you don't want psionic Aslan with antlers, voila, they don't exist in your game world. If you want psionic monkeys with antlers, voila, they do exist in your game world. As Moochava said, I am the GM, I run the game, not three hundred pages of recycled paper and third-rate art, I am the GM, I wear the Viking Hat! Fuck canon, new or old!

Quote from: KenHRCotI is full of very...dedicated...Traveller fans who are quite...demanding (entitled-feeling?)...when it comes to canon issues.

You mean it's full of dickheads who don't play, who buy everything with the "Traveller" name on it regardless of their wailing, but still think their opinion matters. Mongoose Matt was kind to them. I would have threatened to introduce a new expansion where Emperor Strephon is assassinated by a Virus wielded by... a kaffir.

Fans are the worst thing that can happen.

Quote from: Roger Calver;308937The real answer here is if its OK with Marc for Mongoose to make canon changes then whats the problem ?

Aramis you know me from CotI and the other Traveller forums and its well known that you have made comments about everything Mongoose do or dont do, so why is it that your not making these questions on Coti ?, you are a mod on CotI and its never stopped you before now.

Because I don't want the COTI opinion, and you don't kno how many times I write a post, and then don't click send, because it would be inappropriate.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;308942You're confusing "fans" with "a few guys arguing on the Traveller Mailing List who haven't played for twenty years but Still Must Be Heard."

Actual game groups don't care about "canon" of this edition or any other. They only care if the game is fun and interesting. Rules are changed, setting elements are changed, etc. If you don't want psionic Aslan with antlers, voila, they don't exist in your game world. If you want psionic monkeys with antlers, voila, they do exist in your game world. As Moochava said, I am the GM, I run the game, not three hundred pages of recycled paper and third-rate art, I am the GM, I wear the Viking Hat! Fuck canon, new or old!

Wrong, Kyle. I've had numerous players complain when I screwed up bits of canon in Traveller, L5R, Buffy, and even D&D games.

And I walked from a BTVS game over rules and canon; the canon issue alone was almost enough. The rules issue (adding a d10 to monster combat values, above and beyond the inherent stat+skill+6) tipped the balance.

I quit running Vampire when I couldn't afford to keep up with canon, and my players were upset by my lack of adherence to it.

It's been an issue in many a trek game, too.

Oh well, you and your players are dickheads, then.

Roleplaying games are not about quibbling over obscure details. That's what we have Advanced Squad Leader for. Roleplaying games are about adventure, about playing different characters in different situations, abotu challenge.

"But on page 223, section IV, subsection D, it says -"
"Shut the fuck up and roll the dice!"

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;308945Oh well, you and your players are dickheads, then.

Roleplaying games are not about quibbling over obscure details. That's what we have Advanced Squad Leader for. Roleplaying games are about adventure, about playing different characters in different situations, abotu challenge.

"But on page 223, section IV, subsection D, it says -"
"Shut the fuck up and roll the dice!"

Most of my players would consider your "ignore canon and roll" mode to be the dickheaded move. We play in milieus with canon because we like the consistency and the setting hooks that that canon provides. We WANT to play in that 'verse.

That's also, to a great deal, why we generally avoid generic systems.

Of course, we also tend to be college graduates in research-heavy fields, too, and most of us enjoy the research side as much as the play.

I don't pretend that it's the right shtick for everyone, but it is right for us.

But following canon is impossible, because canon - as anyone who knows the original meaning of the world - is mutable. If Marc Miller GMed you in Traveller, Joss Whedon in Buffy, and N Robin Crossby in Harn, you still wouldn't get your particular version of "canon" since they themselves changed it over the course of their productions.

I'd pay money to see that, actually, all the canon-heads arguing with the creators that they don't know their production. Awesome. It'd be almost as good as seeing James M go back in time to be GMed by Gygax and be thoroughly disillusioned.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;308952But following canon is impossible, because canon - as anyone who knows the original meaning of the world - is mutable. If Marc Miller GMed you in Traveller, Joss Whedon in Buffy, and N Robin Crossby in Harn, you still wouldn't get your particular version of "canon" since they themselves changed it over the course of their productions.

I'd pay money to see that, actually, all the canon-heads arguing with the creators that they don't know their production. Awesome. It'd be almost as good as seeing James M go back in time to be GMed by Gygax and be thoroughly disillusioned.

QFT

No work of fiction remains "true" to canon.  I have yet to see a single one of any length that didn't start to completely contradict itself later on.  Not a single one.  All creators change their minds over time - they constantly adjust things to suit their mood at the time.

The idea of "Traveller Canon" is even more absurd than most considering it has had so many rule systems over the years, many of them simultaneously developing next to each other like parallel alternative universes.

Traveller fans can be dicks about canon.  That's not news.  What's news here is MongooseFordy's unprofessional reaction to that fact.  Was Mongoose not aware of Trav fanaticism when they entered the field?  Anybody who was paying attention to the Trav scene could have anticipated canon brouhahas based upon the reception of GURPS Traveller.  Or did Mongoose just fail to explain that to the douchebag quoted in the first post?

Quote from: jgants;308962QFT

No work of fiction remains "true" to canon.  I have yet to see a single one of any length that didn't start to completely contradict itself later on.  Not a single one.  All creators change their minds over time - they constantly adjust things to suit their mood at the time.

The idea of "Traveller Canon" is even more absurd than most considering it has had so many rule systems over the years, many of them simultaneously developing next to each other like parallel alternative universes.

Thing is, big changes with no explanation just feel sloppy and like the writer's are doing a big cash-in.

I don't know how serious the example higher in the thread was, as I don't know squat about Traveller, but there was a comment about a race that is evolved wolves having antlers or something.  EEK.

I had a big issue with this in D&D3./5 when they dropped Infravision for Darkvision, specifically in Forgotten Realms, because they had explained large swaths of how the basic functions of Underdark society functioned with, and because of, Infravision (they told time by the use of magical heat moving up a pillar!) and didn't bother with any kinda rationale for the change other than "We like Darkvision better".

I'm okay with changes, but big changes for changes sake with no internal consistency is not only annoying, but lazy.

When Forgotten Realms moved to AD&D2E and now had new magic level limits, they came up with the whole big magical hubbub that led to the caps on magic, rather than one day you could do THIS and now you can only do THIS.

As for creators and canon, changes with no explanation are still very annoying, but way more forgivable coming from the source materials' creator.

For instance:  George Lucas introducing midichlorians in the Prequels...really rather hokey, but fine.  If WOTC had just decided one day to add midichlorians to the whole Jedi thing?  Asinine.

Just my opinion on it all.

ah, selective quoting....

Read the thread, people.  Context.  The post quoted in the OP was a joke, a barbed one, true, but the frustration is understandable based on the vitriol.  Seriously, one poster (who, I must add, is probably the most reasonable and enjoyable to read of the Traveller grogs) brushed aside the fact that earlier editions of Traveller from GDW invalidated entire swaths of old canon ship designs because he seemed to feel that psionic Aslan were more important.

Also pointed out: the change was approved by Marc Miller.  This just made people rag on MM.

The Traveller universe had more than its share of MAJOR contradictory canon in the GDW days (look at how the capital of 3I itself was described in Library Data entries for Capital in the early modules compared to what the 3I eventually looked like, for instance), and that situation, AFAICT, never got any better.  That folks would get so bent out of shape by a single sentence about Aslan psionics is kind of amazing, really.

And now there is a thread insisting that Mongoose use CotI posters for playtesting, another demanding to know if there is a 3I bible....

As a Mongoose Traveller playtester I know how things work unlike certain posters on CotI.
Avenger has always worked with Marc and still do Mongoose do the very same, in the end Marc says yes or no.

Canon needs large chunks of it made rational and/or just explained better, Mongoose is doing this with Marc, also if any of you have seen T5 you would know that things have changed in that as well.

Rog.

Quote from: jgants;308962The idea of "Traveller Canon" is even more absurd than most considering it has had so many rule systems over the years, many of them simultaneously developing next to each other like parallel alternative universes.

Are you saying it was Travgendered?  :)

Quote from: StormBringer;308977Are you saying it was Travgendered?  :)

:heh:

This isn't the first time, "jokingly" or not, that Mongoose has basically told the grognards to get stuffed. Considering that the grognards are the ones who made this a worthwhile license in the first place, it does seem to be rather dickish.

Gamers like me are going to play older editions because that's what we prefer, but how does it in any way benefit Mongoose to be rude to us?

Quote from: aramis;308951Most of my players would consider your "ignore canon and roll" mode to be the dickheaded move. We play in milieus with canon because we like the consistency and the setting hooks that that canon provides. We WANT to play in that 'verse.
/QUOTE]

This has been my experience. It is not entirely a straight jacket. There are things that are considered acceptable to muck around with in any given canon for a mileau.

As for traveller there are two things going on. First you can run traveller as a sci-fi game with your own universe. Or you can run the Third Imperium using a variety of editions of the Traveller rules.

I don't know why Mongoose decided to muck around Aslan psionics. Frankly the core of Traveller Canon is not very large compared to others.

What most people get intimated by is the size of the dataset describing the sectors of the Third Imperium. But the actual setting information is fairly compact. If all you read was Supplement 8 and 11 of classic Traveller you know about 80% of what you need to know about the 3rd Imperium.

The main problem is that because there been so many editions of Traveller a lot of restating the same thing happens again and again.

Quote from: The Shaman;308979This isn't the first time, "jokingly" or not, that Mongoose has basically told the grognards to get stuffed. Considering that the grognards are the ones who made this a worthwhile license in the first place, it does seem to be rather dickish.

Now its you who are joking.
If it was only the grog's who brought MGT then you would be correct BUT the sales of MGT have gone way, way beyond just grog's sales.
IMHO canon needs a good kick up the butt as its just a mess, I remember well when Martin started work on the MGT Spinward Marches book someone went out of their way to tell Marc that he/Avenger were trying to change canon (he/we wasnt even thinking of it).
A shit storm later and nothing could be changed/updated even with all of the glaring mistakes and errors - canon ruled the day, strange and stupid that later on Marc asked for suggestions to fix things but this wouldnt effect MGT Spinward Marches.

Rog.

Great just great, now Ive had my holding account banned on Coti for no reason what so ever.
Aramis care to explain as I cant ask you or any of the mods direct, please PM me.

Thanks,

Rog.

Roger:
Fordy, joking or not, has been pissy since day one toward anyone who loves the 3I setting.

Also, several of the changes were NOT approved by, but merely missed by, Marc Miller, and by Robject and DonM. That came out yesterday. Changes to the minimum size for bay weapons.

The original Traveller rules had no specific setting, so the idea of a Traveller canon is non-canon.

Quote from: aramis;309000Roger:
Fordy, joking or not, has been pissy since day one toward anyone who loves the 3I setting.

Also, several of the changes were NOT approved by, but merely missed by, Marc Miller, and by Robject and DonM. That came out yesterday. Changes to the minimum size for bay weapons.

That part about bay sizes was brought up in the playtest by me and others IIRC, all data and questions go direct to Marc and the canon team so the fault is with them and not Mongoose.

Quote from: Roger Calver;309004That part about bay sizes was brought up in the playtest by me and others IIRC, all data and questions go direct to Marc and the canon team so the fault is with them and not Mongoose.

Uhm, no. Don and Robject both noted that MWM had said "no" prior, and then it slipped through in the rush.

Fordy's snarkiness has pissed off a number of people. It's past the point of ticking off even several mongoose supporters.

Quote from: Roger Calver;308997If it was only the grog's who brought MGT then you would be correct BUT the sales of MGT have gone way, way beyond just grog's sales.

So it's okay then to insult them? "I've got mine, so sod off, you gits" - is that really supposed to make me want to buy Mongoose products?

The final version has to be approved by Marc and so the buck ends with him (or the team), even if it got lost in the rush why if it was such a killer problem why hasnt he asked for a errata ?
There are worse ones like the Merc plasma balls that dint work for the OTU based setting IIRC.

Fordy, is it mainly on CotI that people have been making comments ?

Quote from: The Shaman;309006So it's okay then to insult them? "I've got mine, so sod off, you gits" - is that really supposed to make me want to buy Mongoose products?

I dont really know the answer to this question.
Some have been insulted but not all, and I bet that even those who have fely insulted have still gone out and brought the products.

Here's what I see as the core problem: The Internet is forever. Deserved or not, if you respond to your customers and potential customers this way, people can read your comments years later. You may not feel the same years later.

It's always best to try ignore whatever you can.

Seanchai

Quote from: aramis;309000Also, several of the changes were NOT approved by, but merely missed by, Marc Miller, and by Robject and DonM. That came out yesterday. Changes to the minimum size for bay weapons.

:eek:

"Changes to the minimum size for bay weapons?"

:jaw-dropping:

"Made without Marc Miller's permission?!"

:rant:

Serious fucking business indeed.

Quote from: Age of Fable;309001The original Traveller rules had no specific setting, so the idea of a Traveller canon is non-canon.

:thanx:

You are most excellent, sir. We must meet for bevvies some time. It helps if you reply to your emails!

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;309043:thanx:

You are most excellent, sir. We must meet for bevvies some time. It helps if you reply to your emails!

Actually, they implied a lot about the setting, by virtue of elements of character generation, system generation, and trade rules.

And by 79, a nascent setting was emerging in the expansions.

Quote from: KenHR;308759I think the "fans" on CotI brought it on themselves, to be honest.

Keep in mind that there's more than just one flavor of fan over at CotI. There's some people over there who just want to talk about and enjoy the game.

But they can expect S4 and Whipsnade to regularly come in and shit on their fun.

But regarding the topic, that's no reason to shit on your fans. I've been a pretty firm advocate of MGT to date. MongooseFordy really has me wondering if I should quit buying MGT products immediately.

Quote from: aramis;309049Actually, they implied a lot about the setting, by virtue of elements of character generation, system generation, and trade rules.

And by 79, a nascent setting was emerging in the expansions.

Same with D&D, and Greyhawk. But no sane person speaks of "D&D gameworld canon".

Face it, bitch: having canon in Traveller is uncanonical.

Quote from: Roger CalverSome have been insulted but not all, and I bet that even those who have fely insulted have still gone out and brought the products.

Exactly. "Fans" render themselves irrelevant by their fanaticism. Marc Miller could publish a book of photocopies of his arse and the TML loons would still buy it. And then complain about it, and argue whether the picture on page 23 was "canon" or not.

Quote from: aramis;309049Actually, they implied a lot about the setting, by virtue of elements of character generation, system generation, and trade rules.

And by 79, a nascent setting was emerging in the expansions.

Yes, but I do agree with the original statement. It is to me a tragedy that when you say "Traveller", its assumed that you will play in the Imperium, when really it was a game that lent itself so easily to creating your own settings without the strictures of "canon".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;309071Yes, but I do agree with the original statement. It is to me a tragedy that when you say "Traveller", its assumed that you will play in the Imperium, when really it was a game that lent itself so easily to creating your own settings without the strictures of "canon".

RPGPundit

Since 1981, Traveller has been mostly about the OTU.

That's CT 2nd edition, MegaTraveller, TNE, T4, T20, and GT.

I don't mind them going "generic" in the rules; I do mind them f*ing up stuff that a read of a product they have on CD would have shown, for no other reason than "We feel it's more fun this way."

Quote from: aramis;309083for no other reason than "We feel it's more fun this way."

If "we feel it's more fun this way" was not a legitimate reason to make changes to a game, we'd be stuck with OD&D as Gary typed it out in 1973.

Be that as it may, I suggest you clarify with your players whether you will be going with Mongoose's take on Aslan psionics or not, as well as reassuring them they need not fear any invention or surprises on your part.

Quote from: The_Shadow;309089Be that as it may, I suggest you clarify with your players whether you will be going with Mongoose's take on Aslan psionics or not, as well as reassuring them they need not fear any invention or surprises on your part.

Indeed. We don't want GMs presenting the players with anything inventive or surprising. We want them to have a game universe they can know all about just by reading some books. Everyone loves that.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;309097Indeed. We don't want GMs presenting the players with anything inventive or surprising. We want them to have a game universe they can know all about just by reading some books. Everyone loves that.

Comments like that only prove that you just don't get it.

Everyone sharing the same baseline by having read the setting isn't a limitation for those who enjoy that style of game.

Quote from: aramis;309098Comments like that only prove that you just don't get it.

Everyone sharing the same baseline by having read the setting isn't a limitation for those who enjoy that style of game.

VERY TRUE.


My players were able to 'research' the setting somewhat when I ran GURPS:TRAVELLER but I was pretty good at surprising them and being creative within the setting's framework.

For example : I took the planet Tarsus in District 268 and developed that place big time into the players default 'homeport'.  It helped that I found the out of print box module for TARSUS at Origins in 2004.

Instead of becoming an Imperium member (as was suggested in there) My players indirectly steered that government into being even more independent. They defeated pirate operations, met and flirted with courtesans, got invited to ball hosted by the Duchess at Glisten/Glisten.....


- Ed C.

The GURPS Trav is one of those Aramis would wail about being non-"canon", Koltar.

What the fuck happened to bring you here to whine, Aramis? Did Supplement4, Whipsnade and the other bitter non-gamers get themselves banned from CotI or something and you were worried you were next?

Start a thread telling us about your campaign and all the fun shit everyone's done in it. I'm sick of hearing what fans hate, I want to hear what they love. Otherwise, go blow another fifty bucks for the privilege of editing Marc Miller's work and stop bothering us with this nonsense.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;309113The GURPS Trav is one of those Aramis would wail about being non-"canon", Koltar.

What the fuck happened to bring you here to whine, Aramis? Did Supplement4, Whipsnade and the other bitter non-gamers get themselves banned from CotI or something and you were worried you were next?

Start a thread telling us about your campaign and all the fun shit everyone's done in it. I'm sick of hearing what fans hate, I want to hear what they love. Otherwise, go blow another fifty bucks for the privilege of editing Marc Miller's work and stop bothering us with this nonsense.

Who the hell are you? The thread police? You didn't have read this thread.

Quote from: aramis;309049Actually, they implied a lot about the setting, by virtue of elements of character generation, system generation, and trade rules.

And by 79, a nascent setting was emerging in the expansions.

True. I meant "no setting beyond that implied by the rules".

Quote from: The_Shadow;309089If "we feel it's more fun this way" was not a legitimate reason to make changes to a game, we'd be stuck with OD&D as Gary typed it out in 1973.

Stuck? STUCK? I seem to hear a rumbling in the earth, as of a hundred men running to their keyboards at once...

But yeah, 'making it more fun' is surely the only reason to change a game, although the problem is that it's very subjective.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;309043:thanx:

You are most excellent, sir. We must meet for bevvies some time. It helps if you reply to your emails!

Sorry about that! I can't find one from Kyle Aaron in any of my folders. Maybe send me a PM instead?

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;309123Who the hell are you? The thread police? You didn't have read this thread.

Police stop things from happening, they don't make them happen.

Much more than I want Aramis to stop producing bullshit, I want him to start producing something good and useful - like telling us about his awesome campaigns, canonical or not.

I do have to read the thread if there aren't many others posted, and I want to read about rpgs. Plus, you don't know it's bullshit until you've read it, do you? Well, unless you're a psychic TML inhabitant... :p

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;309051Keep in mind that there's more than just one flavor of fan over at CotI. There's some people over there who just want to talk about and enjoy the game.

But they can expect S4 and Whipsnade to regularly come in and shit on their fun.

But regarding the topic, that's no reason to shit on your fans. I've been a pretty firm advocate of MGT to date. MongooseFordy really has me wondering if I should quit buying MGT products immediately.

It's pretty hard to read that post in context and not see it as a joke.  A bad one, but a joke, nonetheless.

ETA: Oh, no humor over there: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=19747

Tangentially, post #4 in this thread shows how much service the grogs have done spreading the word of Traveller: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=19753

I just looked over there and wish I hadn't.

Over the past eight years I've been on CotI, I've conversed with just about every participant in that dust-up and the behavior I'm seeing is beneath the dignity of every single one of them. I like these people, but I don't like the way they are acting right now.

It makes me embarrassed to say that I enjoy Traveller if that kind of behavior is what is being associated with fans of the game. We're better than that.

EDIT: Why am I telling you guys, I should be telling them.

EDIT2: Done. (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?p=321653#post321653)

Kyle: You ant to know what I've done? Open a copy of T20, EABA, EABA Stuff, or the MGT core book... you'll find me on the credits page of each. But that's immaterial to the question asked. Now, if Pundit feels I'm way out of line asking the question here, fine, I'm certain he'll tell me when I cross the line.

Kyle, there´s a German saying and it goes like this:

"If you don´t have a clue, simply keep your face shut."

Honestly, way brighter people than you and I have discussed the merits of Imperium canon vs. generic sci fi.

If there´s civilizatory advance in RPGs then it´s always in the settings. Rules are relative, but an enlightened continous update of a setting via a vetted process is worth so much, you´ll never understand it, I fear.

ADD: Half of this goes for Pundit, too.

I just want to know which canon is canon.

Is it the one where the emperor was assassinated, or the one where he wasn't?  The one where the virus happened, or the one where it didn't?  The one where earth circa 2300 and its fight with the kafer is branded as pre-history to the empire, or the one where it isn't?

Is it just the LBBs?  Megatraveller?  T:TNE?  T2300?  G:T?  T4?  T20?  MGT?  T5?  How is one to know where canon begins and where it ends?  Is the MGT's change to the Aslan really that big of a deal compared to all those other editions?

This is like people complaining that the new Star Trek movie butchered canon while ignoring that Enterprise, Voyager, DS9, TNG, the movies, the cartoon, the comics, the games, and the 8 million books already butchered canon 100 times over.

Whist I dont agree with Aramis and hes comments I dont have any problem with him asking them Kyle.

As said before by others the Traveller IS the OTU its the point of can/should canon be changed or altered that a sticking point in this discussion.

See Aramis we can agree on some things ;)

Rog.

Quote from: jgants;309241I just want to know which canon is canon.

Is it the one where the emperor was assassinated, or the one where he wasn't?  The one where the virus happened, or the one where it didn't?  The one where earth circa 2300 and its fight with the kafer is branded as pre-history to the empire, or the one where it isn't?

Is it just the LBBs?  Megatraveller?  T:TNE?  T2300?  G:T?  T4?  T20?  MGT?  T5?  How is one to know where canon begins and where it ends?  Is the MGT's change to the Aslan really that big of a deal compared to all those other editions?

To be correct your confusing two different game lines here, those being Traveller (in all its forms) & 2300AD (Originally called by a sort of mistake Traveller:2300) both made by GDW.

Canon in the Traveller line is a mix match that has been alteretd and in some cases rewritten by new versions and Marc's calls, point in case the old Judges Guild's Sector supplements were once canon and then removed form canon when T20 started.

In the end if Marc OK's a canon change then thats the final call and take it from someone who knows you have to make a good argument for him to OK changes.

Quote from: aramis;309216Kyle: You ant to know what I've done? Open a copy of T20, EABA, EABA Stuff, or the MGT core book... you'll find me on the credits page of each.

Mazeltov on your writing credits.

But I didn't ask you about what you'd written, I asked you about what you had played or GMed. Let's turn it around on me.

Kyle: "This new edition of D&D suxxorz!"
Aramis: "Tell us about the games you played and ran with other editions of D&D."
Kyle: "I wrote d4-d4."

So what? That didn't answer the question.

Tell us about your campaigns. That's much more interesting.

Quote from: aramis;309083Since 1981, Traveller has been mostly about the OTU.

That's CT 2nd edition, MegaTraveller, TNE, T4, T20, and GT.

Yes, I know. I'm just saying that's a shame.

QuoteI don't mind them going "generic" in the rules; I do mind them f*ing up stuff that a read of a product they have on CD would have shown, for no other reason than "We feel it's more fun this way."

Well, I wonder if it was really "we feel its more fun" and not "we fucked up and now we're trying to make ridiculous claims to cover it up". I've seen that a lot in RPG setting-design, though mainly in RPG - writers who use bad latin or really stupid alternate history.
First they try to claim they're right, then after they are proven wrong they say "well its just fun so who cares"?

RPGPundit

There's a similar thread over at ENWorld, in which some writer apologizes to Whizbros for his 'intemperate' comments over changes to the Realms; now he's writing for 'goose Trav, and is seeing how people react when he's the one messing with canon.

In that thread, I commented that in my opinion, one of the ways to approach canon revisions is to go with the grain, rather than across it or against it. If you want to make a change, then make the change with the flow of the setting, rather than ham-handedly retconning it. Want to make the Church of Stellar Divinity the force behind the throne? Build up to it through several works, make it a new facet of what's already known about both the Imperial power structure and the CSD - don't just up and announce, "The Emperor is really a CSD sockpuppet.

(As an aside, my comment on ENWorld was deleted by a mod, apparently because I used the word "dickish" in replying to someone who referred to gamers who object to canon changes as "dicks." They amended the original comment to read "jerks" instead of "dicks," but deleted mine outright. Given my reply to the moderator in question, I'm probably banned by now.)

Quote from: KenHR;309134It's pretty hard to read that post in context and not see it as a joke.  A bad one, but a joke, nonetheless.

Yeah, I went back and found the original post, and he was tweaking S4 and Whipsnade's nose. What a surprise.

Nonetheless, I have seen industry folks pull just this kind of hissy fit for real over a minority of whiners online. See: early Paizo, before they canned Johny whathisbucket.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;309313Yeah, I went back and found the original post, and he was tweaking S4 and Whipsnade's nose. What a surprise.

Nonetheless, I have seen industry folks pull just this kind of hissy fit for real over a minority of whiners online. See: early Paizo, before they canned Johny whathisbucket.

Yes it was a joke but one that in hindsight Matt should have seen that certain members of CotI would get upset about.
I actually agree with Hunters post when Matt made a followup post after Hunter locked at thread - his board his rules, no problems from an admin POV.

Quote from: Roger Calver;309315Yes it was a joke but one that in hindsight Matt should have seen that certain members of CotI would get upset about.
I actually agree with Hunters post when Matt made a followup post after Hunter locked at thread - his board his rules, no problems from an admin POV.

Yes, Matt did himself no favors by posting that.  Though again, if S4 had been able to see the Vargr post as the obvious (and funny) joke it was....

But in the end, Matt didn't have to do what he did.

I agree he should have reported S4 to the admin/mod team, IMHO S4 should have been banned for his "lie" thread.

Banning the Bitter Non-Gamers on CotI is like banning BNGs on rpg.net. They can do it, but it takes a fucking long time and dozens of others tired of fruitless and frustrating interactions with them will have been banned from or abandoned the forum in the meantime.

Quote from: Roger Calver;309324I agree he should have reported S4 to the admin/mod team, IMHO S4 should have been banned for his "lie" thread.

That was discussed... and ultimately rejected.

Quote from: aramis;309354That was discussed... and ultimately rejected.

Hmmm, no comment :banghead:

The Traveller OTU and approved cannon are pretty much a mish mash of illogical crap anyway, so  changing it really will not matter (and would probably improve it a great deal), and those over at COTI complaining about it don't even play MGT (they are still arguing over errors made 30 years ago in the first printing of the LBBs) so they can be safely ignored. MGT brought some needed improvements to the system (mostly cleanup, organization and clarifications) and they really need to take a sledgehammer and blow torch to the OTU or scrap it completly and use their own universe.

Well said!
:emot-flame:

Quote from: RockViper;309426The Traveller OTU and approved cannon are pretty much a mish mash of illogical crap anyway, so  changing it really will not matter (and would probably improve it a great deal), and those over at COTI complaining about it don't even play MGT (they are still arguing over errors made 30 years ago in the first printing of the LBBs) so they can be safely ignored. MGT brought some needed improvements to the system (mostly cleanup, organization and clarifications) and they really need to take a sledgehammer and blow torch to the OTU or scrap it completly and use their own universe.

This post is composed of steel-jacketed depleted bollocks.

Really, you would be hard pressed to add anything to this that would make me think it wasn't typed up by a room full of monkeys on meth.

Um really, isn't the official version of Traveller basically "Traveller: the New Era"? That's the original setting, before (in rebellion to how much it sucked) people retconned most of the events associated with it and created other versions of the setting.

So really, anyone who isn't defending TNE is actually violating Canon anyways. And anyone who is defending TNE is an idiot. Either way, I'd say Traveller is the LAST game for which people should issue complaints about "violation of Canon".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;309441Um really, isn't the official version of Traveller basically "Traveller: the New Era"? That's the original setting, before (in rebellion to how much it sucked) people retconned most of the events associated with it and created other versions of the setting.

So really, anyone who isn't defending TNE is actually violating Canon anyways. And anyone who is defending TNE is an idiot. Either way, I'd say Traveller is the LAST game for which people should issue complaints about "violation of Canon".

That's the hilarity for me.  

Here you have a bunch of people whining and moaning about one of the tiniest changes I've ever seen to canon, while they themselves have to ignore entire versions of the game that were played for years in order to have their version of canon.  A canon which is basically defined as "whatever Marc thinks is canon this week, assuming he doesn't change his mind later, though we pretend the guy doesn't contradict himself all the time and that Oceania has always been at war with East Asia anyways".  

It's patently absurd and deliciously ironic.

Quote from: The Shaman;309439This post is composed of steel-jacketed depleted bollocks.

Really, you would be hard pressed to add anything to this that would make me think it wasn't typed up by a room full of monkeys on meth.

I rest my case

Quote from: RockViper;309503I rest my case

Gald you had fun with that.

On a more serious note, something I've noticed is that critics of Traveller can say anything they like, however they like, but if someone defends that canon, they are immediately set-upon as exemplfying everything that is terrible about the game and its fans.

So thanks for making that point for me.

Now, on to the real question. Why do you think the setting is so bad? What would you change, and why?

Quote from: The Shaman;309651On a more serious note, something I've noticed is that critics of Traveller can say anything they like, however they like, but if someone defends that canon, they are immediately set-upon as exemplfying everything that is terrible about the game and its fans.

I don't think that people are being attacked for defending aspects of the "canon"; debates over ship computer size or battle armour or whatever can proceed according to their  merits.

Rather, attacks are made on folks who zealously defend the idea that there is, and must be, an Official Canon for Traveller itself. Once you admit the idea of Canon for a GAME LINE, not for an individual campaign (where an outline of which sources and approaches are being used is often appropriate and necessary) you ham-string the group's creativity and give the win to the most coke-bottle-spectacled individuals who are prepared to fork out for the most books.

Sure, this might be a minority opinion. But some of us still see any and all published material as a resource to use in our games rather than words from on high. From that point of view, you just look at a new supplement, say "no Aslan psionics now? Interesting, but I prefer the old way" and proceed. Not that hard really.

Thing is, a consistent canon for the line makes it easier to share home brew add-ons, since all are working from a common point.

My biggest complaint about Vampire:The Masquerade was that the various splat-books all were providing only subjective views of the setting; nowhere in the first edition run did an "objective" This-is-how-it-is presentation of which parts were true and which weren't in the setting ever appear.

It meant that the basic "truths" of the setting were so different that pick any 6 GM's, and if you're lucky, two will take the same approach on a given clan.... because no objective "default truth" was presented.

Whereas, in systems with a strong sense of objective canon, Like Ars Magica, L5R, or Traveller, the baseline facts can be referenced by each GM, and in 6, probably 4-5 will take the same approach to a given bit. Neither defined all that much in detail, but the overall was consistent and presented as a line-wide objective truth. Things like who that L5R Dragon Clan head really is... (Hoshi-sama is Hoshi-kami until after the 2nd edition RPG's timeframe). It also points out that the characters would not know this unless they are Ise Zumi or Family Daimyo...

It means that players are easier to find, and less likely to argue with the GM about the defined materials. It also means that one doesn't have to build the pile of setting truths; one trades a requirement for development for a requirement for study; I've always found the study side more fun than the development side.

I find the contradictory fluff as in Vampire to be a serious flaw... not because it limits, but because, instead of a consistent "Default Truths," one has to go through and pick what is true in one's own game, and a lot of GM's don't do it before hand, and don't think about the interactions until they get brought up in play. If I have to do the work myself, I'd rather the author didn't bother with inconsistent materials at all.

Heck, when I last ran VTM, I literally told my players they could use any powers found in clan books they were willing to give me... but that none of the non-rules text was even to be bothered with, since it contradicted from book to book so badly.

It also means that third party works are easier to judge against the baseline when that baseline is consistent.

I think that canon gives the large percentage of people who love Traveller/Whatever: the Bollocking/L5R but aren't actually playing it something to argue about on the internet. And a weapon with which to bludgeon potential new players.

Quote from: aramis;309687Thing is, a consistent canon for the line makes it easier to share home brew add-ons, since all are working from a common point.

Okay, let's suppose this "canon" actually exists, rather than being what true canon is, which is mutable and subject to interpretation (there's a reason that even the Pope employs an office of dozens to rule on various obscure things).

As soon as you have even one homebrew add-on, that's a deviation from "canon". So you can, by your argument, no longer share ideas - you've moved from your common point.

It reminds me of the GURPS GM I know who insists on using GURPS "so there's consistency between campaigns."
"But mate, you don't know the GURPS rules."
"I don't need to, I have players like you and A to tell me."
"..."

It's nonsensical. Only themes can ever be common between different campaigns.

GURPS is just about the opposite of Canon....

The whole point is that a consistent canon isn't essential for a PLAYER. It's a tool for GMs. It's especially a tool for authors writing supplements to a setting. It's a nicety for players, in that more GM's are likely to have similar approaches.

The moment one starts a game, one is diverging from the canon; that doesn't matter. The consistency of the game materials, however, should always be more than is expected of others' addons.

My take on Wypoc, for example... it's not canon, but it makes use of canon to make it useful to other GM's. They know where the world is, because Wypoc and it's basic stats are canon, and thus if they choose to use my take on it, they know that certain ground rules about it apply... so I don't need to restate those, and my material is a usable "quick and dirty" plug-n-play add-on.

Now, if I'd ignored the GT canon bit about a testing station, or directly contradicted it, it would mean that GT players had to pick which is true in order to use my add-on. (I didn't... so it has an Imperial Marine Insidious Environment Testing station on-world...)

Quote from: Halfjack;309690I think that canon gives the large percentage of people who love Traveller/Whatever: the Bollocking/L5R but aren't actually playing it something to argue about on the internet.

I'm not one of the big bitcher, but I did figuratively roll my eyes.

And my main concern with canon is being able to use old material or new with minimal pain on my part. Every deviation some new author who thinks he "imagined it better" makes his book more difficult to fit into my game.

The Mongoose guy probably cost them some sales, though possibly not actually given how many bitch but then buy, and it was probably dumb of him to post that.

But I'll still buy him a beer if I ever meet him, because it really is a kickass post.

Quote from: Age of Fable;309001The original Traveller rules had no specific setting, so the idea of a Traveller canon is non-canon.

Abso-fucking-lutely.

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

Not one I personally use.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;309042:eek:

"Changes to the minimum size for bay weapons?"

:jaw-dropping:

"Made without Marc Miller's permission?!"

:rant:

Serious fucking business indeed.

Come Kyle, surely it's obvious how that could impact actual play?

I'm very tired right now, so specific examples evade me, but the actual play impact would I suspect be dramatic.

I for one refuse to play in any game with innacurate bay weapon stats.

When I bought the Traveller box set, around about 1982, I thought it was incredibly cool.

Still do actually, the whole thing just reeked of adventure.

We played the hell out of it, great game, after we'd played the hell out of it for some months we discovered there was a published setting for it too.  Sometimes we bought supplements and nicked bits out of them for our game, and eventually some folk got into canon, but mostly we just ran our own game using that marvellous generic sf toolkit I'd bought in box set form.

Traveller is a generic sf rpg, just as D&D is a generic fantasy rpg.  Now nothing's truly generic, there's always some implicit setting stuff because the rules need to say something, but it remains true that for all some may claim otherwise the 3I and Traveller are not coterminous.

But hey, I just play the fucking game, I haven't memorised 30 years of setting development and collected every supplement put out for it.  

I've no problem with those who enjoy canon as a tool to help their actual play, Koltar for example likes canon but he uses it in play.  That's cool, I'd play Star Trek under him (though I'd be happier with ToS) and I might even research some canon because that would make the game overall more fun.

But canon for its own sake is empty.  Canon is a tool, like anything else in gaming.  You use it or abuse it as best suits your game.  It has no higher moral value in itself.

Quote from: RPGPundit;309441Um really, isn't the official version of Traveller basically "Traveller: the New Era"? That's the original setting, before (in rebellion to how much it sucked) people retconned most of the events associated with it and created other versions of the setting.

So really, anyone who isn't defending TNE is actually violating Canon anyways. And anyone who is defending TNE is an idiot. Either way, I'd say Traveller is the LAST game for which people should issue complaints about "violation of Canon".

I admit I'm a little confused by this. The only "people" who retconned the setting for publication, at least pre-'goose Trav, were Steve Jackson Games, by creating an alternate, no-Rebellion timeline.

On the other hand, if you're referrring to gamers who pick a starting point somewhere along the multi-millenia history of the Imperium and allow their game to move forward from there, changing in response to the events of the around the table, then how is that different from playing a historical game set in our own past and doing the same thing? Should historical games never diverge from the actual timelines?

There's no such thing as "canon" in role-playing games.
Just what happens at my game table.

Quote from: The Shaman;309972I admit I'm a little confused by this. The only "people" who retconned the setting for publication, at least pre-'goose Trav, were Steve Jackson Games, by creating an alternate, no-Rebellion timeline.

On the other hand, if you're referrring to gamers who pick a starting point somewhere along the multi-millenia history of the Imperium and allow their game to move forward from there, changing in response to the events of the around the table, then how is that different from playing a historical game set in our own past and doing the same thing? Should historical games never diverge from the actual timelines?

Well, my point is that if we were anal about "canon", everyone into Traveller should be playing, and the current books and sourcebooks should be detailing, the New Era setting. THAT is the direction the "Official Canon Setting" went.
Everything else is either prehistory or diversion.

Yet, most of the same Imperium-fanboys who are going apeshit about laser guns or whatever the fuck it is, were also the ones who so resoundingly denounced this New Era "Canon" to the point that the creators of the game had to turn away from it.

RPGpundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;310009Well, my point is that if we were anal about "canon", everyone into Traveller should be playing, and the current books and sourcebooks should be detailing, the New Era setting. THAT is the direction the "Official Canon Setting" went.

I see.

I approach it differently: anything from the Interstellar Wars to post-Virus Charted Space is still canon, and you're no more obligated to play in 1248 than you would be obligated to play in Rome AD 2009 as opposed to Rome AD 29.

YMMV, et cetera ad nauseum.

TNE was developed by different authors from the prior editions...
CT and MT had plenty of MWM inputs, and a lot of it was written by LKW. (MT was written, however, by Digest Group, a 3PP, and then printed by GDW under the GDW logo and copyright.)

TNE was (essentially) turned over to Dave Nilsen, and the Rules were Frank Chadwick. The TNE basic approach didn't need the prior OTU to work, and mechanically was several generations removed. (2300 was derived from the concepts of traveller mechanics; T2K2E was mechanically derived from 2300AD, then tweaked in 2.2, and TNE was tweaked away from T2K2.2. It was almost unrecognizeable to CT/MT players as being derived from the Traveller mechanics. So it wasn't JUST "Trashing the setting" but also that it altered the fundamental nature of spaceflight, travel, and ship deisgn, as well as the base competencies of PC's. It changed WAY too much at once to be accepted by the extant fanbase to any great degree. In short, it ran into the established fanbase idea that the Traveller setting was the 3rd Imperium, and it lacked the 3I.

T4 was Marc Miller doing a new chunk of time and a new chunk of setting area... and it was closer in feel to CT/MT as far as setting tropes. It was also mechanically closer to CT and MT. It also suffered for massive errors.

GT was done by one of the GDW staffers, LKW, but was, in part, SJ's decision to not do the rebellion... MWM didn't make them do that; SJG, SJ and LKW made that decision, and MWM permitted it.

T20 likewise was not done by MWM. It was done by Hunter Gordon, and while it was all approved by MWM, it wasn't done in the TNE timeline because Hunter likes the Classic era, and hunter wanted to backtrack a century to put it in a postbellum section of the 3I... and didn't want to compete with GT settingwise.

GTIW was done by fanboys; fanboys working for SJG. MWM again approves product, but isn't done at MWM's insistence.

Mongoose chose the Classic setting because that's where the one MG staffer who expressed any love of the game prior to the license liked. MWM approved it.

And the TNE setting IS supported... Avenger/Comstar have a license via Mongoose, and HAVE advanced the timeline from the TNE basepoint. TNE, however, wasn't the setting chunk that one awards as literature (Hugos and Nebulas); those awards were given for CT line, and are the reason those awards now have a games category.

The various editions and their timeframe and location:
T2300/2300AD: -2300, but in a totally different universe
GTIW: -1000
T4: -10 — 100, Core (Domain of Sylea)
T20: 990-1050, Gateway domain
CT: 1100-1110, Spinward Marches and Solomani Rim (opposite ends of the Imperium)
MGT: 1105. Spinward Marches.
MT: 1115-1135, Domain of Deneb (includes the Spinward marches), plus some stuff set elsewhere. Covers the Rebellion
GT: 1115-1135, Domain of Deneb (includes the Spinward marches), plus some stuff set elsewhere. But the rebellion never happens.
TNE:1200-1235, Old Expanses
Comstar 1248: 1235-1260 Old expanses.
Publication order: CT, T2300, MT, 2300AD, TNE, GT, T4, T20, GTIW, 1248, MGT

Essentially, the later editions ignored TNE because it was a nearly isolated fanbase all its own.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;309727I'm not one of the big bitcher, but I did figuratively roll my eyes.

Yeah I probably overstated my case; it's just that I spend some time on the TML which is almost entirely populated by people who don't play arguing canon minutae. Clearly for some people that IS the role-playing game.

Quote from: The Shaman;310030I see.

I approach it differently: anything from the Interstellar Wars to post-Virus Charted Space is still canon, and you're no more obligated to play in 1248 than you would be obligated to play in Rome AD 2009 as opposed to Rome AD 29.

YMMV, et cetera ad nauseum.

Nevertheless, do you or do you not recognize that Imperium fanboys went APESHIT over how TNE had "ruined" the setting, and for a great deal of them it SIMPLY NEVER HAPPENED? Ie. they refuse to even acknowledge it as canon, choosing to effectively IGNORE CANON at their whim?

In other words, they not only allowed, but FORCED a massive change (rollback, to be fair) in the setting Canon because they didn't like it?
And yet, in general, these are the same anal little fucking obsessives who are going apeshit now because the lasers are touching where they're not supposed to?

RPGPundit

There's no such thing as canon, only individual GMs' imagination.

So I say to you all what I said to my former players - my World of Darkness has Kender.

Quote from: Age of Fable;310144There's no such thing as canon, only individual GMs' imagination.

So I say to you all what I said to my former players - my World of Darkness has Kender.

Repeating that mantra won't make it true.

Quote from: RPGPundit;310143Nevertheless, do you or do you not recognize that Imperium fanboys went APESHIT over how TNE had "ruined" the setting, and for a great deal of them it SIMPLY NEVER HAPPENED? Ie. they refuse to even acknowledge it as canon, choosing to effectively IGNORE CANON at their whim?

If you mean they continued on with the Rebellion-era games they were already running, then as I noted upthread, they were still using the canon as their starting point.

Maybe I'm not understanding your point here: it sounds like you're saying that the only way to play Traveller per the OTU is to set it in the New Era. Is that what you're arguing?

Or to use a different example, is playing a game set in the pre-Time of Troubles Realms IGNORING CANON as well?

Quote from: RPGPunditIn other words, they not only allowed, but FORCED a massive change (rollback, to be fair) in the setting Canon because they didn't like it?

"FORCED" who to rollback what, exactly? GDW didn't suddenly throw their hands in the air and say, "Okay, just kidding - here's some more Golden Age stuff for you to use."

Quote from: RPGPundit;310143Nevertheless, do you or do you not recognize that Imperium fanboys went APESHIT over how TNE had "ruined" the setting, and for a great deal of them it SIMPLY NEVER HAPPENED? Ie. they refuse to even acknowledge it as canon, choosing to effectively IGNORE CANON.......

RPGPundit

I consider a mellower, modified version of that - to me everything the day before Emperor Strephon's assassination and onwards never happened. Thats about the point where I think GDW's quality control went downhill.

In my way of looking at things , the TRAVELLER universe is 80% of classic TRAV - thats the mostky LBB size book era and ALL of GURPS TRAVELLER is canon with me.


- Ed C.

Quote from: aramis;310155Repeating that mantra won't make it true.

Quite.

There is canon, it's a potentially useful tool.  Some people find canon inspiring, some find it restricting, most I suspect don't much care as long as it's broadly in line.

But it does exist.  At the boundaries it may get fuzzy, but that's true of most concepts so that's hardly surprising.

Balbimus, 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.

You know what - fuck Mark Millar.  Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.  Fuck Mark Millar in the fucking ass with a concrete dildo!

That fuckhead gave up the right to be the exclusive author of "canon" way the fuck back when.  

So yeah, not everything Millar decides is canon is canon.  Every fucking published set of rules and every fucking published supplement ever made for Traveller is canon.  Anyone who argues differently is just being dumb.

Quote from: The Shaman;310171If you mean they continued on with the Rebellion-era games they were already running, then as I noted upthread, they were still using the canon as their starting point.

Maybe I'm not understanding your point here: it sounds like you're saying that the only way to play Traveller per the OTU is to set it in the New Era. Is that what you're arguing?

No, I'm arguing that there are a ton of Traveller Fanboys who steadfastly despised TNE to the point of refusing to accept it as Canon, considering it an atrocity. Many of these are the same people who are demanding that "canon" be followed now.
This means the issue isn't really about canon as much as it is about the anal issues these people have about how they want the Traveller universe to be; they're trying to make an appeal to authority, but what they really want is for only stuff they like to be included.

QuoteOr to use a different example, is playing a game set in the pre-Time of Troubles Realms IGNORING CANON as well?

That's beside my point. However, you bring up an interesting scenario. What's going on here is like if the FR fanboys were now to protest about some particular thing an FR writer were to present because it was against "canon", when these same fanboys shat all over 4e FR.

I'm not saying 4e FR was good, or TNE was good either; I'm saying that these guys (the fanboys, of one game or the other) would be hypocrites to now try to appeal to "Canon".

Quote"FORCED" who to rollback what, exactly? GDW didn't suddenly throw their hands in the air and say, "Okay, just kidding - here's some more Golden Age stuff for you to use."

No, they just went out of business.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;310258No, I'm arguing that there are a ton of Traveller Fanboys who steadfastly despised TNE to the point of refusing to accept it as Canon, considering it an atrocity. Many of these are the same people who are demanding that "canon" be followed now.
This means the issue isn't really about canon as much as it is about the anal issues these people have about how they want the Traveller universe to be; they're trying to make an appeal to authority, but what they really want is for only stuff they like to be included.

Okay.

I don't mean to put you on the spot here, but can you link an example of someone saying this?

Quote from: RPGPunditThat's beside my point. However, you bring up an interesting scenario. What's going on here is like if the FR fanboys were now to protest about some particular thing an FR writer were to present because it was against "canon", when these same fanboys shat all over 4e FR.

Okay.

Quote from: RPGPunditI'm not saying 4e FR was good, or TNE was good either; I'm saying that these guys (the fanboys, of one game or the other) would be hypocrites to now try to appeal to "Canon".

Okay.

Quote from: RPGPunditNo, they just went out of business.

That they did.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your posts for me. Most appreciated.

GDW closed down while in the black. Marc Miller has said what is and is not canon, and the term canon literally means a list of what is approved. Frank Chadwick essentially retired. LKW went to work for SJG. Marc Miller immediately started doing what he had been forbidden to do under GDW: write for Traveller.

In Traveller terms, unless you're writing for Traveller, Traveller canon can be safely ignored by GM's who chose to. But that does not change the fact that Marc Miller, as the owner of the intellectual property, has chosen to say that not everything published is canon (to wit, the timeline of GT, certain rules in GTIW, the novels), nor that a large group of fans like to know what is approved by MWM.

New 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.

You say that like you think the fanboys don't want to do that, mate.

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

I distinctly remember one Traveller canon griefer who wouldn't. Then again, this same guy once spent 4 pages of a thread insulting MWM, then was bitching because MWM didn't want to talk to him.

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....