Talk:Traveller (role-playing game)/Archive 1

Archive 1

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Traveller (role-playing game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130606175103/http://www.travellerbibliography.org/cargonaut/force.html to http://www.travellerbibliography.org/cargonaut/force.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116170804/http://index.rpg.net/display-article.phtml?articleid=4148 to http://index.rpg.net/display-article.phtml?articleid=4148

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Vilani/Aslan

I fixed the references but I'm not entirely sure why these references go off page if the definitions are actually contained in page.

Virus

Should the link about Virus link to the wiki definition of a computer virus, since the aforementioned electronic superweapon spread via both hardware (the commando chips) and via software (via comm link, etc)?

In my opinion, no. While the TNE authors probably got the idea for Virus from computer viruses, its properties are so unlike that of a computer virus that it would be misleading to link the two. IMHO, if you must link it to anything, link it to Handwavium. Corvus

Well, I started the article on TNE's Virus and linked it - cyberia

Merging Classic Traveller into appropriate section

I've put a merge suggestion here and in the Classic Traveller article proposing that the CT article be merged in to the appropriate section of this main article. Comments welcome here or on the Talk:Classic Traveller page. Georgewilliamherbert 02:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. The Traveller (role-playing game) page has extensive info and an overview of all of the various game systems used to play in the Traveller universe. I think the Classic Traveller page needs to be expanded to show the difference between the Traveller as a whole and Classic Traveller. Seanr451 07:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Great job with the merge George. I just cleaned up the external links. Alphabetized them, and added a few more. Unfortunately I felt that I had to delete the link to the review of The Lord Weird Slough Feg's heavy metal album Traveller. The band's website is down, and the album appears to no longer be available. Seanr451 05:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Weapons and Anachronism

What often fascinated/frustrated me about Traveller was that in an age of jump drives and asteroid mining, so many of the combat skills in the game revolved around 19th and early 20th century weapons. Cutlasses, spears, leather armour, revolvers and SMGs. Typical sci-fi weapons like lasers were included, but almost masochistically limited in terms of their bulk and capability.

To be sure, Striker, Mercenary and so on redressed this, but I’d be interested in seeing others’ comments about the original game in this respect. Maybe this was just my take on things, so I wouldn’t want to amend the article without hearing from the rest of you. --Affentitten 03:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Classic Traveller was the original Generic System. Thanks to the rules that covered weapons from every tech level I (like many Traveller GM's before any of the Third Imperium stuff came out) ran Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica games with the Traveller rules. I've also run Old-West and Medieval era games. I've even run 50's pulp sci-fi type games (think Flash Gordon and The Shadow). You also have to remember that Traveller came out in 1977. So most of its ideas were from late 60's sci-fi. They stuck with that rather than update it. Also, it makes a whole different genre of gaming if instead of cutlasses and shotguns everyone has a 10 ounce auto-laser that never misses sitting on their shoulder. Tech has to have limits in a sci-fi game in order to have any kind of suspense or sense of adventure. Seanr451 17:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I think there were two threads there... One, a lot of planets were pretty primitive (TLs below earth-today as "high common"... and even on earth, there are places where people fight each other with bows and arrows or spears). Two, the original game was focused on civilian type activities, with an adventure flair. The sorts of guns and equipment that people carry as survival gear on expeditions in Alaska or the Canadian Arctic are not what military forces carry today, nor do you see criminals armed with M-16 automatic rifles and bulletproof vests and grenade launchers and light machineguns as anything approaching normal. At least, in most areas (some areas of the middle east and africa are exceptions... Law level 0? 1? 2?)

I agree with the universality comment as well. Georgewilliamherbert 19:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I ran a Classic Traveller campaign in the Thieves World setting once, where modern weapons were not available and the more roguish skills were paramount. Of course I agree that having everybody armed to the teeth makes for a different game. You need balance. But it always seemed to me that there was really an imbalance in the bias against modern weapons in Classic Traveller. When you did try, in context, to allow for more modern weaponry (even say, things that were of similar tech levels to existing weaponry, like grenades or assault rifles), they were difficult to implement because they were too powerful. I guess that’s realistic. If you get hit by a couple of rounds from an M16, you’re gone. But I like my universes to be consistent, and I could never see why in an age where lasers were available, my Navy guy would have been extensively trained in cutlass warfare. --Affentitten 21:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

It is also worth remembering that Traveller was influenced by the SF that Marc Miller had been reading. I don't know what that would be, really, but I'd say that H. Beam Piper influenced a lot of the initial set, and his universe doesn't have lasers at all. "Doc" Smith is also a posibility, and Lensman has a type of sheild that gets better the more energy you put into it, so boarding actions tend to be fought with hand weapons, as they can get through the personal energy shields, while guns and lasers bounce off.

Then again, it is apparent that MM has a few prejudices of his own. The first edition of Triplanetary apparently mentions that the ships are firing cannons/guns at each other as directed energy weapons "were found to be too impractical". That sort of thing explains why lasers had to be dragged into early Traveller kicking and screaming. --Rindis 17:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I remember reading [many years ago] that the reason for swords and bullets was 1) for shipboard action not to blow holes in ship hulls or cause collateral damage, 2) firing a piece of metal at high speed is very difficult to imporove on, for the price and ease of manufacture/maintainence.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Lasers were present from the first edition of Traveller. Neither kicking nor screaming was required. 12.172.207.3 (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

More novels?

Although 'Gateway to the Stars' claims to be the first Traveller novel, I've seen several others mentioned including 'The Death of Wisdom', 'To Dream of Chaos' and 'Diaspora Phoenix'. Does anyone know if these really exist?

Gateway to the Stars wasn't the first novel. The Death of Wisdom was published before. "Death of Wisdom" and "To Dream of Chaos" were the first two parts of a trilogy set in the New Era. "Disapora Phoenix" is the first part in a series written by Martin J Dougherty and was published last year. Ben W Bell talk 11:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Time to Give a Few Game Details?

While I agree with a later writer that Wikipedia is not the place to give all the details of the game mechanics, it also seems very odd to see such a long article on the game setting with no mention of the game mechanics whatsoever. It seems that a section on the mechanics would be in order, specifically mentioning what's unique about it--The intricate career-based character creation system, the equally detailed ship combat system, and a mention of the skill/ability score system. If there are no serious objections, I will add this at some point. Gilbertine goldmark (talk) 21:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

(I moved your comment to the bottom of the talk page as this is the usual way to add new messages.)

I suppose this would be okay to some extent as long as it's not overly detailed. More importantly, as with anything on Wikipedia, if you can find third party references that talk about these aspects of the game (i.e. what's unique about them, what makes Traveller "trend-setting" or different from other games, if this game was the first that did this-that-or-the other) this would be even better. In particular, it shouldn't really be *you* that's "deciding" what's unique about the game as that would be classified as original research. Hope this helps. --Craw-daddy | T | 21:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Considering that many other RPG pages on Wikipedia have notes about game mechanics, I vote to have something about them shown here.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 16:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Current Versions of Traveller

First and foremost, there are no details on what I assume is the current mainstream version of the game, namely "MGT" or Mongoose Traveller.

Still a good point. I'll edit the main text. Washi (talk) 20:12, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Second, please explain the differences, if any, between Traveller5 and Mongoose Traveller.

Third, I see no mention of Comstar Games, and its line of Next Era products (including a line of TNE 1248 supplements, taking place 150 years after the original TNE edition).

Thanks CapnZapp (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Considering the GURPS conversion has already been out for a few years before Mongoose, and GURPS is probably more well known than Mongoose, I'd say that's more of a "current mainstream" version.

193.243.227.1 (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

GURPS, more mainstream than Mongoose's edition.

That's laughable.

Also, is the music album by sloughfeg mentioned on this page? 75.173.78.208 (talk) 05:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

GURPS is not in any way shape or form mainstream, get your facts straight.

Additionally, Mongoose Traveller, aside from being a cleaned up version of Classic, also posesses all of the standard careers in the default book, as well as having more detailed character creation that doesn't leave a grizzled veteran of three conflicts posessing only four points in Bureaucracy, a computer he doesn't know how to use, and three hundred thousand credits of debt. 75.173.78.26 (talk) 20:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Just a reminder to keep things civil and assume good faith here. Washi (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

possible merges

Deletions of some of the more specific articles on aspects of the game were proposed--I changed these to suggested merges, so some of the information can be used and redirects kept. This should get approval here before being actually done. DGG (talk) 03:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Since it's been almost a year since you proposed this merger, I am going to merge these articles within a few days. Or you certainly can if you'd like. Seanr451 (talk) 12:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

If you could do that Sean, that would be awesome. Traveller needs some love. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 16:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Eurisko's 1981 & 1982 national championship wins

If anyone has any information on Eurisko's 1981 & 1982 national championship wins, please add (with references) to the Eurisko article. Our current references are conflicting with each other as to the fleet composition used. Josh Parris 04:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Shorten alien descriptions?

Do we need that much text describing aliens? Wouldn't a line or two be sufficient for each? The content just gets so verbose I wonder if the purpose of this article is to capture as much detail as possible, versus conveying a concise but broad overview... I know it's hard to decide where the line is, but I'm thinking the alien writeups, while well done, seem long. Washi (talk) 17:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I just recently added some detail to some of the alien entries that for the longest time didn't say much, or anything at all. I came across some old Traveller game books that had write ups of those aliens and figured I fill in some blanks, but if you think they're too long then shorten them. It's not gonna bother me. Cyberia23 (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

And it's all good -- just a bit long. I've shortened the entries somewhat, trying to remove some of the material beyond just enough to get a basic sense of the alien. Re-expand if you feel I've gone too far. Washi (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Missing version?

When I was in college in the late 80s/early 90s, we played a version of the game that came as a large format hardback book, titled The Traveller Book. I believe there was a sequel or expansion, also a large hardback, titled something like The Traveller Adventure, that we did not have. We were aware of the "full" game consisting of a large number of the little black books, but as were were all heavily invested in several other games floating around at the time, we didn't want to be throwing our limited funds at yet another expansive system; The Traveller Book was the best way to get in cheaply, as it was stand-alone, did not require any of the little black pamphlets, and it was an easy system to modify if we found the rules lacking. This article does not mention this iteration at all. I was hypothesizing that it was an early/later/alternate name for the version the article calls T4 or Mark Miller's Traveller, but neither is the actual name of the book, the publication year given here (1996) is far too late, and I'm pretty sure it was published under the GDW logo (I no longer have the book). Is this the same as one of the versions mentioned here, or something that was left out of the article? 12.233.146.130 (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Traveller Book was simply an amalgamation of the main LBB rulebooks and two scenarios (Shadows from Double Adventure 1, and Exit Visa which was later reworked and inserted into T4.) It was not a separate edition and was published by GDW in 1982. Basically an all in one rulebook for easy entry to the game. Canterbury Tail talk 00:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

So shouldn't it at least be mentioned in this article? 12.233.146.130 (talk) 23:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I see no particular reason for it to be mentioned. It's not a different ruleset or anything. I suppose it could have a 1 line entry under the original Traveller section. Canterbury Tail talk 23:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

1 line mention added under Classic Traveller Washi (talk) 17:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)