New Edition and Canon

The Shaman · June 17, 2009, 01:09:11 PM

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?

Roger Calver · June 17, 2009, 01:10:59 PM

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 ?

Roger Calver · June 17, 2009, 01:13:47 PM

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.

Seanchai · June 17, 2009, 02:30:52 PM

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

Kyle Aaron · June 17, 2009, 07:20:35 PM

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.

Kyle Aaron · June 17, 2009, 07:24:02 PM

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!

aramis · June 17, 2009, 07:54:43 PM

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.

Caesar Slaad · June 17, 2009, 07:59:09 PM

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.

Kyle Aaron · June 17, 2009, 08:35:43 PM

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.

RPGPundit · June 17, 2009, 11:33:53 PM

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

aramis · June 18, 2009, 12:20:18 AM

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."

TheShadow · June 18, 2009, 12:54:47 AM

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.

Kyle Aaron · June 18, 2009, 03:14:05 AM

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.

aramis · June 18, 2009, 03:31:25 AM

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.

Koltar · June 18, 2009, 04:00:26 AM

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.