Think of it this way.  I believe that the game is clean and clear but admit freely that the writing and editing is not.  It's not always easy for a designer who's always seen and played a system to realize why people can't follow what they've written.

During the beta we went through about three iterations of combat where nobody could figure out if the points of damage that went through the armor translated into dice of damage to stats.  Were that true then 1d pistols would be plenty deadly and scary.  Dice of dice we called it.  Play tested that version, all the PCs died.

But eventually they cleared that up.  It would have still meant that a lot of the armor is too tough.

I think some of the weirdness is narrative intent.  That the damages on low tech guns are deliberately low so pcs can feel awesome.  I think if Marc explained himself that would be his reasoning.  But I can't read his mind.

Quote from: jeff37923;669054This is only because you are busy taking pieces of the game out of context, but don't let any imparting of knowledge interfere with your misconceptions!

What context? I'm relying on you guys to supply context. It was like pulling teeth to even get anything, taking CKrueger and I getting frustrated with you all for a lack of concrete details.

Supply more concrete details to explain things then. We've been asking for them all this time.


edit: Thanks David for explaining this more. Your concrete detail and your challenges to give definitive commentary on it helps parse this thread. Sounds like design decisions are more interpreting and less explicit.

Quote from: Opaopajr;669171What context? I'm relying on you guys to supply context. It was like pulling teeth to even get anything, taking CKrueger and I getting frustrated with you all for a lack of concrete details.

Supply more concrete details to explain things then. We've been asking for them all this time.

I am sorry that I have not quit my job and suspended my other life activities in order to dedicate all my time to this endeavor of telling people about Traveller5.

Quote from: jeff37923;669307I am sorry that I have not quit my job and suspended my other life activities in order to dedicate all my time to this endeavor of telling people about Traveller5.

:boohoo:

And you call yourself a gamer.

Quote from: KenHR;669309:boohoo:

And you call yourself a gamer.

I know.

I'll have to make amends by suicide. I'll just drop the Traveller5 book on my head.

Quote from: jeff37923;669307I am sorry that I have not quit my job and suspended my other life activities in order to dedicate all my time to this endeavor of telling people about Traveller5.

I am seriously not being snarky here Jeff, but just honest when I say that while time-consuming, a better understanding of T5 from one of the site's most vocal Traveller proponents would be a better use of time for promoting Traveller then some of the more...vociferous rebuttals you get yourself involved in that I think can actually be counter-productive as has been pointed out before.

i just wanted to say that the abbreviation "mongtraveller" amuses me. i also like fart jokes.

Quote from: ICFTI;669348i just wanted to say that the abbreviation "mongtraveller" amuses me.

If its any comfort, I have the same sophomoric reaction.

A few years back, I remember being confused by the term RTT (Ricki-Ticki-Traveller) used on a specific forum.

What the hell? Oh....

Quote from: K Peterson;669571A few years back, I remember being confused by the term RTT (Ricki-Ticki-Traveller) used on a specific forum.

What the hell? Oh....

That's a good one, actually.

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;669641That's a good one, actually.

JG

yeah. it might even be considered flattering in that it is drawing a comparison to a beloved creature of classic literature.