Modifications to Traveller (Part II)

Wiseman continues: 

The most common change will probably be in the available weapons. Any additions to the weapons should be especially well thought out and rationally based. Science fiction literature contains many more weapons than could be described in the basic rules. Many of these have only the flimsiest of scientific justifications, if they are justified at all. In television and movies, weapons are often created for the visual effect they have and are not usually very well thought.

A couple of points. First, we again see a reference to "science fiction literature" as the first source of inspiration for Traveller, which shouldn't be surprising. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of E.C. Tubb and H. Beam Piper – the two most influential authors on Traveller – can easily see where the game came from. That said, sci-fi TV and movies are mentioned, albeit unflatteringly. Second, it's very clear that Wiseman at least considered Traveller to be an attempt at a "serious" game grounded in real world science. He doesn't see it as a game of swashbuckling space opera. I'm OK with that, though I know plenty of people aren't.

In addition, all ramifications of the weapon must be considered. For example, any major change in lethality of hand-carried weapons is likely to have profound effects on military tactics, at least eventually (the military is sometimes a little slow to catch on).

This is a fair point. For the most part, Traveller's weapons – at least those readily available to player characters – are all on a fairly similar plane in terms of lethality. There are differences, obviously, but, aside from some of the stuff introduced in Mercenary, they're all of a piece. 

A few question to ask might be: is this weapon really required by my universe? What is the principle of its operation? (If the weapon is taken from literature, the principle of operation may be described or well-established.) Is the principle of operation a reasonable one? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this particular weapon, and why would it be used in place of more conventional weapon systems?

All reasonable questions, so I don't have much to add. I will note, however, that a common complaint about Traveller is that it includes too many "archaic" weapons among its firearms, like shotguns and submachine guns. This has never much bothered me, perhaps because of a comment in Book 1 of Traveller that seemingly addresses this point: "the surest way to injure or kill an adversary will be to subject him to a large dose of kinetic energy, and a simple way, easy way to administer that energy is by bullet impact."

Adaptations to the jump and maneuver drive systems and to our concept of jump space should be made only with care and consideration. The effects of modifications to these areas are wide-ranging and touch almost every rule in one form or another. In designing our interstellar drive system, we tried to come up with one which fitted in with the other aspects of our proposed mythos and which was reasonably close to the literature we drew it from. It was assumed, however, that some referees would not be satisfied, whatever system we devised. It was further assumed that any referee who felt strongly enough about the matter would change what displeased him.

This section might be one of the more controversial ones, because I know that many people both dislike Traveller's jump drive and believe that the game is perfectly playable without it. Wiseman acknowledges this above. For myself, I'm a big fan of the way jump drive works, because, when coupled with the lack of any form of FTL communications, it creates a setting that's somewhat akin to the Age of Sail, at least as far as the dissemination of information. That opens up a lot of possibilities for adventures both large and small. 

We do not recommend major revisions of the trade and commerce section without considerable thought. Minor deviations from the trade and speculation table, or reclassification of certain world types are acceptable; indeed, in most cases, some deviation from the letter of these rules is desirable, but the spirit (i.e. the general system) should be preserved.

As to how integral the speculative trade system is to Traveller, I'm not sure. I'll only say that I very much love the system, not because it's a good simulator of interstellar commerce – it's not – but because it provides a terrific campaign framework and a reason for characters to travel from world to world. I'll talk more about this in a future post.

Referees are cautioned against making psionic powers too common. Players will often urge that psionics become more widespread, but this is often only because they want to have every possible advantage without drawbacks. Powerful psionic abilities would soon dominate all aspects of play and most of the excitement of Traveller (the advanced technologies) will lapse into disuse, or at least be relegated to a secondary role. 

I can't really disagree with this section, but I've also never been a huge booster of psionics in Traveller (aside from when I've used the Zhodani), so my opinion is perspective is perhaps skewed.

The cautions which apply to major revisions apply to a lesser extent to expansions of existing rules. Many referees find certain rules do not go into enough detail to suit them. Examine the manner in which Book 4, Mercenary, expands upon the army and marines, or Book 5, High Guard, expands upon the navy for general guidelines on technique. You need not (and probably should not) duplicate the systems in these two books exactly, but they will prove a source of inspiration for your own efforts.

Even as someone with a decidedly mixed opinion about Traveller Books after 3, I agree with Wiseman here. Most of the later books do provide good models for those who wish to add more detail to their adventures and campaigns, even if I've rarely felt the need to do so myself. I prefer a simpler, less baroque version of Traveller, but I understand not everyone feels this way, especially in a game that's much more laser focused on a particular style of play.

Wiseman offers up a lot of food for thought in this section of Book 0. In future posts, I'll be returning to a few of them. Stay tuned.