Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2009 14:07:29 GMT -6
This is a bit off-topic, but we do have some sci-fi love on this board as well. Has anyone done a good retro-clone of Traveller similar to what's been done for D&D? I'm kind of shopping around for a system to use for a special project of mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimlotfp on Mar 11, 2009 15:01:21 GMT -6
This is a bit off-topic, but we do have some sci-fi love on this board as well. Has anyone done a good retro-clone of Traveller similar to what's been done for D&D? I'm kind of shopping around for a system to use for a special project of mine. Isn't Mongoose's Traveller REALLY close, and open? |
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Mar 11, 2009 15:24:41 GMT -6
Yup, there really no need for a retro-clone with the existence of Mongoose Traveller.
Also the original rulebooks are still in print from Far Future Enterprise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 11, 2009 18:41:40 GMT -6
Well, since there is a Traveller section and all.... :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by RandallS on Mar 11, 2009 21:19:07 GMT -6
If you want really lite rules, there's this over on Dragonsfoot: [GEN/Traveller] 2D6 Light Traveller rulesIf you want a full retroclone, Mongoose Traveller is very close to Classic and most of their changes really are improvements (but can easily be rolled back if you don't like them). The only real disadvantage is the price. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 12, 2009 18:13:26 GMT -6
If you want a full retroclone, Mongoose Traveller is very close to Classic and most of their changes really are improvements (but can easily be rolled back if you don't like them). The only real disadvantage is the price. I thought that Mongoose had a SRD that was a free download. If I can find a link, I'll post one..... |
|
|
|
Post by RandallS on Mar 12, 2009 20:19:15 GMT -6
I thought that Mongoose had a SRD that was a free download. If I can find a link, I'll post one..... They do and I think this is the link: www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/travdevpack.zipHowever, as I recall, it only has one service to create characters in. |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 15, 2010 3:50:59 GMT -6
We actually discussed this at some depth behind the scenes at Spica Publishing, but our conclusion was the same as that of other posters - MGT is so close to CT that a clone would not do much to expand the fan base, and with the original CT materials still being available in PDF from DTRPG and in print or CD-ROM format from Marc Miller himself it would be in poor taste to make a clone available. If you want value-for-money, you can't go wrong with the CD-ROMs. |
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Aug 15, 2010 6:51:42 GMT -6
and with the original CT materials still being available in PDF from DTRPG and in print or CD-ROM format from Marc Miller himself it would be in poor taste to make a clone available. That's more or less the attitude I have about all clones. If the original game is still available in some form, particularly if it's available from the original publisher and/or creator, there's less of a need for a clone and indeed one could reasonably argue that it's in poor taste to create one. |
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Aug 15, 2010 11:39:08 GMT -6
and with the original CT materials still being available in PDF from DTRPG and in print or CD-ROM format from Marc Miller himself it would be in poor taste to make a clone available. That's more or less the attitude I have about all clones. If the original game is still available in some form, particularly if it's available from the original publisher and/or creator, there's less of a need for a clone and indeed one could reasonably argue that it's in poor taste to create one. I don't think a retro-clone is needed for Traveller. We've got the original available...and MT and TNE and T4 and GT and RTT are still available, too. What we need is more people actually playing Traveller, plus more supplements, more adventures, and more settings. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 15, 2010 15:01:07 GMT -6
That's more or less the attitude I have about all clones. If the original game is still available in some form, particularly if it's available from the original publisher and/or creator, there's less of a need for a clone and indeed one could reasonably argue that it's in poor taste to create one. But OSRIC came about while the AD&D PDFs were still legally available. The entire point of retro-clones is to make it possible to legally sell support materials (modules, monster books, etc.) for the original game (without having to enter into an financially prohibitive agreement with the IP holder). |
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Aug 15, 2010 20:36:17 GMT -6
But OSRIC came about while the AD&D PDFs were still legally available. The entire point of retro-clones is to make it possible to legally sell support materials (modules, monster books, etc.) for the original game (without having to enter into an financially prohibitive agreement with the IP holder). (I don't want to derail this thread with OT chatter, so feel free to shunt this to a separate thread) I think that's a good thing, obviously, but, for me anyway, support materials are a distant second in importance to the rules themselves. I don't need supplements (though I do like them), whereas I can't play without the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Aug 15, 2010 22:47:23 GMT -6
I've also never really bought the need for a clone to just be able to publish support materials.
Ok, I sort of buy it for D&D because at one time TSR was very hostile to fan sites and such.
But, unless you want to set support material in the official setting (which a clone won't help you with), it seems to me that there's very little that can be done to prevent publication of support material as long as you find some way to reference the game it's intended for (such as "1st edition of the worlds most popular RPG").
And honestly, if your supplement is good enough, I'm going to find a way to use it in my game (and it will be obvious to me if it uses compatible mechanics if it's something of a more mechanical nature). Give me weapon stats that look like they fit with Traveller, and if they check out power level wise, I'll use 'em. Give me character generation for a career that looks Traveller like, and I'll use it (heck, far as I know, no one ever got sued for the Traveller careers in the various magazines at the time).
But then, I'm not a lawyer.
Frank
|
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Aug 16, 2010 20:44:21 GMT -6
But then, I'm not a lawyer. That alone is worth an exalt.  |
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Aug 16, 2010 22:38:12 GMT -6
I've also never really bought the need for a clone to just be able to publish support materials. ...unless you want to set support material in the official setting (which a clone won't help you with), it seems to me that there's very little that can be done to prevent publication of support material as long as you find some way to reference the game it's intended for (such as "1st edition of the worlds most popular RPG"). The problem is TSR spent a decade or so demonstrating a willingness to sue not only publishers, but threaten the little people with legal action too. The Mayfair Games affair proved it was quite legal to publish compatible adventures, but they were dragged through court to do so. Most old school publishers consist of one guy working from his desktop computer and without a lot of funds to fight a legal case in court. So though it is perfectly legal to publish compatible products, TSR did such a good job of creating an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty that has left many thinking, however unnecessarily, better safe than sorry. This fear was removed with the release of the OGL/SRD and the discovery that it could be used to legally reverse-engineer the original rules. I think one aspect of this that you're overlooking Frank is that while non-OGL modules can be released, that in itself won't grow the hobby and bring in fresh blood. All it will do is give our rapidly aging little niche more adventures to play with, which though a good thing, is ultimately a dead-end street. If people don't already own the original rules, they're hardly likely to buy the modules. And they are even less likely to fight collectors on Ebay trying to get hold of the original rules just so they can play these new modules. Free stuff on the net is great, but some people seem to think a game is more "real" if they can buy a product for it rather than just downloading a few free pdfs off the Net. The retro-clones are now being distributed into bricks and mortar gaming stores, reaching a new and fresh audience who are seeing not only the modules, but the rules to back them up. They are winning awards in the gaming industry. They are being talked about on non-old school forums and blogs. These people are filtering into the online old school community and it's encouraging and refreshing. While some hate the term OSR, there has certainly been an explosion of sorts online over the last few years. Gone are the days we old school types were limited to a small handful of incestuous forums, having to put up with loud-mouthed dicks just to be able to discuss our hobby with the like minded and share a bit of creativity. The scene is very different now, thank goodness. If you want to attract new people to the scene to keep the game fresh and alive - and grow bigger - the clones are doing it far better than the used-games market and a couple of combative forums were. And they're more effective than releasing compatible modules that will only be bought by those who already possess their battered old rulebooks and are on the slippery slope to middle age and beyond. |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Aug 16, 2010 22:47:37 GMT -6
Oh, I've got no problem with publishing clone rules to make the rules available.
My question is if we REALLY need clone rules to publish compatible material.
And I guess the answer there is "It depends." You're right, someone with big pockets can make life miserable for a small publisher.
I also see value to clone rules that are in some editable medium, because then I can edit up a copy with my house rules and publish a definitive rule book for my campaign that I can hand out to my players.
Frank
|
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Aug 16, 2010 23:12:09 GMT -6
My question is if we REALLY need clone rules to publish compatible material. And I guess the answer there is "It depends." Well after my previous long-winded reply, the short answer is no, clones aren't necessary to publish compatible material. They just make it easier to spread the game. |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 17, 2010 1:01:09 GMT -6
You could easily publish CT-compatible material under the Mongoose OGL, and you could even market it as Traveller-compatible with the "Traveller Logo License" if you can make the Mongoose Traveller stuff look like Classic Traveller. Easier with some things than others, for example adventures could be done without difficulty, ship designs may need tweaking but basically doable.
But, again, a CT-rules clone - no need.
|
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Aug 17, 2010 9:24:54 GMT -6
My question is if we REALLY need clone rules to publish compatible material. And I guess the answer there is "It depends." Well after my previous long-winded reply, the short answer is no, clones aren't necessary to publish compatible material. They just make it easier to spread the game. Speaking strictly of Traveller, though, there is a big gorilla standing in the corner folks...The Third Imperium, and the "standard Traveller timeline." The preferred, assumed, classic setting for Traveller is somewhere along that "Standard Traveller timeline" with the standard Traveller "races"/aliens...Aslan, Vargr, Zhodani, K'kree, Bwap, Vilani, etc. Any adventure that uses the STT with the non-OGL content is going to have to be licensed by the IP rights holder. Not-for-profit, you can get away with, I think, but if you're charging for your work then Marc (and Mongoose) are going to give you a call. Sure any of us could create a different universe, publish adventures there and all people to use Traveller rules to play there, but for some folks that isn't going to even *be* Traveller. I don't agree personally, but for some people Traveller *is* the setting, not the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Aug 17, 2010 10:57:52 GMT -6
Of course a clone doesn't help publishing in the Imperium...
The stock races can be worked around if necessary.
Frank
|
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 22, 2010 9:25:54 GMT -6
It is, however, perfectly possible to publish things compatible with the Third Imperium using the Foreven License. It limits you somewhat, but Foreven is right next to the Spinward Marches so all your usual suspects are available. But, for profit, you can only do it with the MGT rules. Now, if you use the MGT rules to make a CT retro-clone and then publish stuff in Foreven for your clone, it gets too complicated for me. And we're back to the poor taste thing. |
|
|
|
Post by danbuter on Aug 28, 2010 6:57:28 GMT -6
One thing I love about Mongoose, they are publishing multiple settings for Traveller. At least they don't listen to the whiny fatbeards who insist Traveller rules should conform to the Imperium. Especially when the Imperium didn't even exist for the first few years of Traveller.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Aug 28, 2010 16:13:58 GMT -6
Hasn't Mongoose released Traveller under the OGL? If so, there's no need for a retro clone...
|
|
