Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi

Ophidian wrote:
> news.TakeThisOut@celticbear.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Someone else also commented about d20. I have come to hate d20 myself
> > as it's just a table-top minis combat system.
>
> Weird reason to hate it when there are so many better reasons.
> I like having it, but it's trivial to drop the mini's aspect.
> I hope you aren't a GURPS fan either then.
> It's entire origin is as a 'mini's game'.

Well, I guess other reasons would be I dislike the magic system and,
and any system in which players who play the game literally every week
of every month must STILL refer to the book for various things like "so
does he enter the square on a charge or not, and does that provoke and
attack of opportunity, and..." means something's out of whack.

I don't hate it because it's like a minis battle system now, but
because it's become that way. I started with D&D back with red box
basic set in 1983. And until circa 2001 we almost never used minis or
were concerned about range and such minutiae that requires 1" grids and
minis to resolve combats in more than an hour per combat. =/
Whatever happened to role-play, you know?

>
> > But are you connecting
> > that with Serenity?
> > Serenity is so non-d20 it requires that you use all other polys EXCEPT
> > d20. =) I think it's vaguely based on the Drangonlance game system. In
> > any case, it's an add attributes+skills multiple dice to reach a
> > target number that changes situationally, type system.
>
> Doesn't sound at all like DL.
> Does sound like Storyteller...
> (Except for using more than just d10, maybe it's like Deadlands?)
>
Sorry. All I know is that it's the same publisher. Wasn't certain if it
was based on it or not.
It's kind of like AEG's roll and keep, except, you keep all you roll.
=)

> > But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
> > setting.
> > As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
> > Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
> > anyone has any feedback on that?
>
> RIFTS rule wise is basically D+D before D20 came along.
> The large amount of sourcebooks is nice, but the rule systems can be
> clunky and unbalanced.
> It is also very low on the "realism" scale that the Traveller Universe
> and systems have always been "high" on.

Ah! Well, realism is something I really want to have!
So I'm certainly going to check out GURPS.
Thanks!
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

<news.TakeThisOut@celticbear.com> wrote in message
news:1141764366.978912.9710@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> I'm really wanting to run a sci-fi RPG with my group, and could use
> some advice on which system to look into.
> I'm looking for hard sci-fi, with a focus on exploration and adventure,
> and a certain amount of realism.
>
> Traveller came to mind first. But while I actually have The New Era
> deluxe box set I've never actually read it. =/
> Is the GURPS Traveller the latest version, and how much different is it
> from TNE?


It's a lot different. Mechanically they have nothing in common at all.
Setting wise they have a little in common- GT is set in the Imperium at its
height, TNE is set centuries after the Imperium has fallen. Officially TNE
is not the future of GT, to the trivial extent that that matters.

In that TNE is a reasonably good system, and you already own it, I'd say
stick with that.




> I also got TSR's Alternity years ago, and I really liked the ease of
> learning the rules and how it's much more versitile and realistic than
> their cartoonish attempt at Star Frontiers in the 80's. Any opinions of
> comparisons?


It's OK, but it's less realistic than either GT or TNE.



> Serinity is a good system. Real easy, focus on storytelling and
> realism/believability. But, perhaps not quite hard sci-fi and as
> expansive as I'd like.
>
> Any suggestions or feedback?


No d20 game can be recommended for realism- the system just doesn't allow
that.

For a reasonably realistic system I'd recommend GURPS. It is grounded in
reality as much as possible and everything is cross compatible with
everything else. And there's a ton of 3rd edition worldbooks that need only
trivial modification to be compatible with 4th edition and are available
cheap.

I don't think the Traveller universe is quite what you want, since the
Imperium doesn't actually have any unexplored frontiers, but you can take
everything from Traveller and tack it onto your own universe.

In short-

Use TNE since you already have it.

If spending money isn't an issue get GURPS Traveller.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

Ophidian wrote:
> news.DeleteThis@celticbear.com wrote:
>
> > Ophidian wrote:
> >
[..]
> >>Doesn't sound at all like DL.
> >>Does sound like Storyteller...
> >>(Except for using more than just d10, maybe it's like Deadlands?)
> >
> > Sorry. All I know is that it's the same publisher.
>
> The publisher of Dragonlance was bought out by Wizards of the Coast.
> Who publishes Serenity?
>
Margaret Weis Productions
Her company I guess was the one bought by Wizards.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

Shawn Wilson wrote:
> <news DeleteThis @celticbear.com> wrote in message
> news:1141769197.899790.241550@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
[..]
> > I'm not against spending a little money to get a new system if it's
> > good. But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
> > setting.
> > As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
> > Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
> > anyone has any feedback on that?
>
>
> GURPS is generic and point based. Rifts is specific and level and class
> based. If you don't like d20 for its lack of realism, you won't like Rifts
> any better.
>
> And just now taking a look at the most recent incarnation of Rifts, it's
> even less flexible than D&D is. In D&D you can change your class, not in
> Rifts. Rifts is purely for munchkins.

Well, that pretty much settles it! GURPS! =)
Or, well, maybe Alternity.... need to see how they compare.
But definitely not RIFTS!
Thanks. =)
Liam
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

<news.DeleteThis@celticbear.com> wrote in message
news:1141769197.899790.241550@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...


>> In short-
>>
>> Use TNE since you already have it.
>>
>> If spending money isn't an issue get GURPS Traveller.
>
> It's good to know that a version of the system that came out more than
> 10 years ago is still viable.


There's no reason for a game to stop being viable. If it was fun then it
will be fun now.




> I'm not against spending a little money to get a new system if it's
> good. But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
> setting.
> As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
> Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
> anyone has any feedback on that?


GURPS is generic and point based. Rifts is specific and level and class
based. If you don't like d20 for its lack of realism, you won't like Rifts
any better.

And just now taking a look at the most recent incarnation of Rifts, it's
even less flexible than D&D is. In D&D you can change your class, not in
Rifts. Rifts is purely for munchkins.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

news.RemoveThis@celticbear.com wrote:

>
> Someone else also commented about d20. I have come to hate d20 myself
> as it's just a table-top minis combat system.

Weird reason to hate it when there are so many better reasons.
I like having it, but it's trivial to drop the mini's aspect.
I hope you aren't a GURPS fan either then.
It's entire origin is as a 'mini's game'.

> But are you connecting
> that with Serenity?
> Serenity is so non-d20 it requires that you use all other polys EXCEPT
> d20. =) I think it's vaguely based on the Drangonlance game system. In
> any case, it's an add attributes+skills multiple dice to reach a
> target number that changes situationally, type system.

Doesn't sound at all like DL.
Does sound like Storyteller...
(Except for using more than just d10, maybe it's like Deadlands?)

> But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
> setting.
> As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
> Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
> anyone has any feedback on that?

RIFTS rule wise is basically D+D before D20 came along.
The large amount of sourcebooks is nice, but the rule systems can be
clunky and unbalanced.
It is also very low on the "realism" scale that the Traveller Universe
and systems have always been "high" on.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

"Liam" <news.RemoveThis@celticbear.com> wrote in message
news:1141776607.523815.176970@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...

>> GURPS is generic and point based. Rifts is specific and level and class
>> based. If you don't like d20 for its lack of realism, you won't like
>> Rifts
>> any better.
>>
>> And just now taking a look at the most recent incarnation of Rifts, it's
>> even less flexible than D&D is. In D&D you can change your class, not in
>> Rifts. Rifts is purely for munchkins.
>
> Well, that pretty much settles it! GURPS! =)
> Or, well, maybe Alternity.... need to see how they compare.
> But definitely not RIFTS!


Thinking more about it I was going to go for strongly recommending GURPS
over TNE. TNE is a dead system, and only covers one setting. GURPS is
still very much alive and covers a huge number of settings. There is just
infinitely more flexibility there if you want to do something else.

Also the GURPS basic system is very simple and is available free (GURPS
Lite).

While GURPS 3rd edition is officially obsolete, the mechanics haven't
changed with the new one. There are some differences in character
generation and skills, but nothing that affects published information except
for point totals of published characters (which doesn't affect anything).
The good news is that SJ Games is selling off their 3rd edition stuff for
$10 each.

Their other SF setting is Transhuman Space, which I never got into. It
doesn't have star travel


The basic GURPS Traveller Books that you might want to look at are-

G Traveller (covers the basic setting)

GT First In (covers the whole 'exploring new worlds' bit)

If you want to get deep into designing Starships there's-

GT Starships (boring, but has those crunchy details)




Non setting specific books that you might be interest in are-

Ultra Tech (high tech SF toys)

Ultra Tech II (more of the same, but SJG doesn't have it in stock)

Space (generic supplement for Space adventures covering all the bases)

*Note- there is a new edition of Space coming out soon for 4th edition.


And there's a whole universe of GURPS stuff, some cool and interesting,
others trite and boring.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

news.RemoveThis@celticbear.com wrote:

> Ophidian wrote:
>
>>news@celticbear.com wrote:
>>
>>>Someone else also commented about d20. I have come to hate d20 myself
>>>as it's just a table-top minis combat system.
>>
>>Weird reason to hate it when there are so many better reasons.
>>I like having it, but it's trivial to drop the mini's aspect.
>>I hope you aren't a GURPS fan either then.
>>It's entire origin is as a 'mini's game'.
>
> Well, I guess other reasons would be I dislike the magic system and,
> and any system in which players who play the game literally every week
> of every month must STILL refer to the book for various things like "so
> does he enter the square on a charge or not, and does that provoke and
> attack of opportunity, and..." means something's out of whack.

Hm, I see that as handwavable.
Most groups I've played in check rules frequently in any system.
But some will play in rather complex systems, but just let the GM decide
rulings in seconds without book reference to keep the "story" moving.
Some is this depends on how important the tactical aspect is to you.
I enjoy it, but don't require it.
I suppose people who are rather anal about staying to the rules _are_
drawn to systems like D20, GURPS, and Hero, as opposed to, say, Amber.

>>>But are you connecting
>>>that with Serenity?
>>>Serenity is so non-d20 it requires that you use all other polys EXCEPT
>>>d20. =) I think it's vaguely based on the Drangonlance game system. In
>>>any case, it's an add attributes+skills multiple dice to reach a
>>>target number that changes situationally, type system.
>>
>>Doesn't sound at all like DL.
>>Does sound like Storyteller...
>>(Except for using more than just d10, maybe it's like Deadlands?)
>
> Sorry. All I know is that it's the same publisher.

The publisher of Dragonlance was bought out by Wizards of the Coast.
Who publishes Serenity?

>>>But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
>>>setting.
>>>As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
>>>Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
>>>anyone has any feedback on that?
>>
>>RIFTS rule wise is basically D+D before D20 came along.
>>The large amount of sourcebooks is nice, but the rule systems can be
>>clunky and unbalanced.
>>It is also very low on the "realism" scale that the Traveller Universe
>>and systems have always been "high" on.
>
> Ah! Well, realism is something I really want to have!
> So I'm certainly going to check out GURPS.
> Thanks!

I'm not a fan of GURPS because it handles extremes poorly.
But conversely, it handles non-extremes rather well, so it very well may
be what you're looking for.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

Liam wrote:

> Ophidian wrote:
>
>>news@celticbear.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ophidian wrote:
>>>
>>The publisher of Dragonlance was bought out by Wizards of the Coast.
>>Who publishes Serenity?
>
> Margaret Weis Productions
> Her company I guess was the one bought by Wizards.

Hm, now I'm confused.
TSR released the original DL modules for D+D, and the SAGA system
version of Dragonlance.
TSR was bought by WotC.
I had heard Weiss had regained some DL rights, but don't know the details.
I have the DL Campaign setting for D20/D+D which was published by WotC
and written mainly by Weiss and Don Perrin.
I know there were supplements to it published by another company, but I
thought that was under licensee from WotC.
Has there been a non-D20 DL other than SAGA?
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

On 7 Mar 2006 14:06:37 -0800, news DeleteThis @celticbear.com wrote:


>I'm not against spending a little money to get a new system if it's
>good. But someone else recommended RIFTS and its space campaign
>setting.
>As I understand, RIFTS, like GURPS, is an all millieu system.
>Traveller aside, what are the general differences between them, if
>anyone has any feedback on that?
>
>Thanks!
>Liam


spare yourself the pain of dealing with rifts. it's not what you'd
call a "reasonable" system.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

news.RemoveThis@celticbear.com wrote:
> Ophidian wrote:
>> news.RemoveThis@celticbear.com wrote:
>>
>>> Someone else also commented about d20. I have come to hate d20 myself
>>> as it's just a table-top minis combat system.
>>
>> Weird reason to hate it when there are so many better reasons.
>> I like having it, but it's trivial to drop the mini's aspect.
>> I hope you aren't a GURPS fan either then.
>> It's entire origin is as a 'mini's game'.
>
> Well, I guess other reasons would be I dislike the magic system and,
> and any system in which players who play the game literally every week
> of every month must STILL refer to the book for various things like "so
> does he enter the square on a charge or not, and does that provoke and
> attack of opportunity, and..." means something's out of whack.

<shrug> If you're attacking or getting ready to attack, there's no
AoO, otherwise there is. It's been that way since 2nd edition ADnD at
least (though back then a lot of stuff was arbitrarily banned in melee
range rather than discouraged via AoOs).
OK, there's about five exceptions, but they're pretty obvious.

> I don't hate it because it's like a minis battle system now, but
> because it's become that way. I started with D&D back with red box
> basic set in 1983.

Best edition EVAR. 8]

> And until circa 2001 we almost never used minis or were concerned
> about range and such minutiae that requires 1" grids and minis to
> resolve combats in more than an hour per combat. =/

So throw out the mini's and battlemat and go back to approximate
marks on the sketch map like the old days. Assume everyone who's not
cornered or surrounded is avoiding AoO's with their retreats, and you're
all set for quick combats (assuming the spellcasters know their spells).
If it's still slow, just implement speed-up rules. Players must
announce their action in 6 seconds or go into delay mode, arbitrate
immediately on rules questions and only crack the books on breaks
(players may also check stuff while waiting for their turn to come up).
DC 15 if in doubt, +2 bonus for each unique favourable circumstance.

And I must warn you, if you think d20's got slow, fiddly combats,
you're /not/ going to like GURPS.

> Whatever happened to role-play, you know?

Mine's fine, I don't know what happened to yours.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:11:21 -0500, Ophidian <ophidian23 DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote:

>news@celticbear.com wrote:
>
>> Ophidian wrote:
>>
>>>news@celticbear.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Someone else also commented about d20. I have come to hate d20 myself
>>>>as it's just a table-top minis combat system.
>>>
>>>Weird reason to hate it when there are so many better reasons.
>>>I like having it, but it's trivial to drop the mini's aspect.
>>>I hope you aren't a GURPS fan either then.
>>>It's entire origin is as a 'mini's game'.
>>
>> Well, I guess other reasons would be I dislike the magic system and,
>> and any system in which players who play the game literally every week
>> of every month must STILL refer to the book for various things like "so
>> does he enter the square on a charge or not, and does that provoke and
>> attack of opportunity, and..." means something's out of whack.
>
>Hm, I see that as handwavable.
>Most groups I've played in check rules frequently in any system.
>But some will play in rather complex systems, but just let the GM decide
>rulings in seconds without book reference to keep the "story" moving.
>Some is this depends on how important the tactical aspect is to you.
>I enjoy it, but don't require it.
>I suppose people who are rather anal about staying to the rules _are_
>drawn to systems like D20, GURPS, and Hero, as opposed to, say, Amber.

I've gone back-to-back sessions GMing GURPS games without even
*touching* the rulebooks, repeatedly. Nowadays, I only bring them along
in case the players want to look something up, which isn't often.

Gamemastering style (and playing style) has little to do with choice of
game systems.

(And GURPS works quite well without minis or maps, too. Maybe better
than with them...)


<snip>

>> Ah! Well, realism is something I really want to have!
>> So I'm certainly going to check out GURPS.
>> Thanks!
>
>I'm not a fan of GURPS because it handles extremes poorly.

The rules have been cleaned up substantially in the fourth edition;
extremes are handled much better than they were in the third edition.
(Much of the cruft has been trimmed away, too.)

>But conversely, it handles non-extremes rather well, so it very well may
>be what you're looking for.

--
Rob Kelk Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- tznvy -qbg- pbz
"As far as Doug is concerned, "dignity" is just a tragic disease that
other people suffer from."
- Bob Schroeck, talking about his V&V character, 15 March 2005
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi 

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 16:28:01 +1300, tussock <scrub.RemoveThis@clear.net.nz> wrote:

>news@celticbear.com wrote:

<snip>

>> And until circa 2001 we almost never used minis or were concerned
>> about range and such minutiae that requires 1" grids and minis to
>> resolve combats in more than an hour per combat. =/
>
> So throw out the mini's and battlemat and go back to approximate
>marks on the sketch map like the old days.

Or trust the GM to not be out to hose you, and go with descriptive
combat (no maps at all).

<snip>

> And I must warn you, if you think d20's got slow, fiddly combats,
>you're /not/ going to like GURPS.

I can run a combat in GURPS in half the time it would take in xD&D. The
"contests of skill" mechanic in GURPS cuts the number-crunching time
down substantially.

<snip>

--
Rob Kelk Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- tznvy -qbg- pbz
"As far as Doug is concerned, "dignity" is just a tragic disease that
other people suffer from."
- Bob Schroeck, talking about his V&V character, 15 March 2005
 >> Stay informed about: Traveller comparisons to self and Alternity and other sci-fi