I am running a Regency TNE game at the moment and having read much of the
back story for the Imperium I can say it was probably time for it to fall
apart. Given the cyclic nature of human behavior any system human will
construct will eventually devolve. But a more scientific reasoning may be
found in the 2nd rule of thermodynamics, ordered system move towards
disorder or entropy theory.
But really I think it may have been possible for the imperium to fall into
warring client empires instead of a complete meltdown. While the Virus is
an interesting catalyst I feel that humans can be
incredibly ingenuousness when pushed into a corner.
A splintered state scenario gives several advantages.
1. GMs get the choice from several 'tones' where they want to set their
campaigns.
2. Several splinter states allows for epic space conflicts if that is what
a GM wants
3. Struggles for contested world resources is a perfect military setting
campaign where the GM can just pick the splinter states he wasn't involved
4. A splintered state scenario also allows for espionage setting campaigns
as empires trying to via for political, technological, or military
superiority over enemies AND allies.
5. Multi-sided conflicts lets profiteering abound, pirates, corsairs,
blackmarketeers, smugglers all have a chance to play a part in the setting
allowing a multitude of possible roleplaying opportunities for campaigns.
6. The 'Firefly' scenario is very viable also in a splintered state setting
where the player's are on the fringes of the empires trying to make a
living.
The major downside;
1. Content creation is a multi-headed hydra to wrangle.
2. It costs more for a company to do because of the added personnel
required to write and fact check content.
In short its more work and costs more to do but is the 'best' solution in
my opinion.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Evyn MacDude <> wrote:
> **
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> Here's something I've often wondered over the years.
>>
>> The argument has been made that one of the flaws of TNE is that it ruined
>> the Imperium. (A subset of that is that is was okay to ruin the Imperium,
>> but Virus was the wrong choice. We'll save that for a different
>> discussion.)
>>
>> What do you think, or what do you think other Traveller players in 1993
>> think we should have done instead?
>>
>
> Not a blessed thing..... Other than reference Hard Times a little more
> stridently, but to be honest if you read and played Hard Times the Imperium
> was Toast..... So really from the Big Picture, Not a thing...
>
> Short of the "shower scene" resolution, which we published in Challenge 59
>> 1/2, and which SJG appropriated for GT, what is another way that we could
>> have, or should have moved forward? Because to me, the editions of
>> Traveller which keep moving into the past don't make a whole lot of sense.
>> The historicity is all wrong. How can characters "change the world" in a
>> history that is already written?
>>
>
> Yep.
>
>
>> But that's my analysis, which I applied 20 years ago. What other good
>> options would you have liked to see, or do you think others would have
>> preferred?
>
>
> Preferred? I liked the setting, the whole creepy backwaters and monster
> ships, brought some bite to the Largely Vanilla Universe. It also allowed
> for lots of places for a industrious GM to carve out a campaign space all
> of his own. One of the huge problems with the online Traveller Fan-Base is
> that they don't play the game, just collect and read it. One of the things
> the edition change did was allow more modern SF to be played in the
> Traveller Universe, which is one of the huge weaknesses of the
> Mega-Traveller edition of the game.
> --
> Evyn
>
>
>
--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.