Retclone critical situation throw

[BytePro]

...The core of CT is a series of procedural rules. Marc was, like both Frank and Loren, a Wargames designer. Rules as procedures. Simulation via rules. A significant subset of players, however, treated it as a rules-lite set of exemplars. And others who saw it as a framework to expand upon with new procedures.

...Throws are being used in CT rules in a non-critical situation just as much as a critical one. The GM is allowed to ignore them, but the rules are presented as a series of if-thens, and a proceduralist approach is that they are prescriptive and schematic: you can add more at any time, but the ones given are typical (and often mundane) uses.

Please pardon my interruption gentlemen, just wanted to say Thanks aramis for those excellently succinct descriptions!

 

[flykiller]

To that end there is no task system, rather there should be a referee's guide ... The referee should decide on the target number

so the referee is a facilitator of game progress rather than a rules administrator? he influences, or decides, whether or not the player succeeds or fails?

 

[mike wightman]

Perhaps it would help if I explained my reasoning behind calling it a critical situation throw - there are after all many words I could have chosen and may still choose to replace the word critical.

And before I continue these suggestions are for resolving player character actions in situations that the referee and players end up placing the characters in; the referee still has all their usual procedural tools and rolls (wait 'til you see how to use the reaction table ).

To my mind if the sum total of character skill, experience (prior history), attribute and tools are taken into account then many tasks that later rules suggest are simply a waste of time picking up the dice and are more likely to result in eventual failure than success.

If a player and referee can agree that the way the player describes the character's actions plus the above factors allow their character to achieve routine stuff then do not bother rolling.

Hence it follows that it is only situations beyond the routine that require the dice to be consulted. I chose the words 'critical situation' because the outcome of the situation should have an impact for good or ill.
I could have chosen 'stressful', 'difficult', 'challenging', 'important' 'portentious' and may well swap to one of those, but the fact remains the dice are there to resolve key situations in the game.

If there is uncertainty about the outcome then you roll the dice.

 

[creativehum]

so the referee is a facilitator of game progress rather than a rules administrator? he influences, or decides, whether or not the player succeeds or fails?

How on god's green earth did you jump from "decides target number" to "whether or not the player succeeds or fails?"

Let's leave aside the fact the rules in CT in many examples the Referee will have to do exactly this. And the fact that in some examples the Player Character won't even have a chance to succeed if he does not have the right skill or high enough skill.

Let's simply focus on: "Here are the odds" does ever mean "You will succeed" or "You will fail" no matter how high or low those odds are.

 

[mike wightman]

so the referee is a facilitator of game progress rather than a rules administrator? he influences, or decides, whether or not the player succeeds or fails?

Aren't they always both? Doesn't the referee always do this in a role playing game?

In a situation that requires a throw then the dice will decide, with the referee and player interpreting the results.

In MT or MgT or CE as written the referee chooses the difficulty of the task which generates a target number, I intend to go back the more freeform system of picking or randomly determining the target number and instead of having rigidly defined DMs based on attribute value and skill rating the player and referee can negotiate how important a skill, experience(prior history), attribute or tools are to providing DMs both positive and negative

 

[flykiller]

the dice are there to resolve key situations

yes. but the use of the dice is typically subject to rules to reflect the milieu's ideation. should the target number be determined by the rules or should it be subject to the referee's subjective feelings and by extension to the player's eloquence?

 

[creativehum]

yes. but the use of the dice is typically subject to rules to reflect the milieu's ideation. should the target number be determined by the rules or should it be subject to the referee's subjective feelings and by extension to the player's eloquence?

By definition of the rules found in Classic Traveller -- yes.
Unless you can point me toward these rules you are referring to in the description of, for example, Mecanical, Engineer, or Electrical in the CT rules.

The rules literally say the Referee must determine the Throw.

I understand you might find that rule horrible. It that simply means CT is not for you.

EDIT: And since Mike is whatever-cloning I assume he is going back to both the letter and spirit of the rules of CT. So I am referencing CT.

 

[aramis]

Let's simply focus on: "Here are the odds" does ever mean "You will succeed" or "You will fail" no matter how high or low those odds are.

Odds can be any valid fraction X/Y; given the recommendation for 2d6, the odds are any of the following
0/36, 1/36, 3/36, 6/36, 10/36, 15/36, 21/36, 26/36, 30/36, 33/36, 35/36, 36/36... Expressed as ratios 0:∞, 1:35, 3:33, 6:30, 10:26, 15:21, 21:15, 26:10, 30:6, 33:3, 35:1, and ∞:0.

 

[creativehum]

Yes. As I noted there are times when a PC won't even have a chance of success.

I had assumed, from flykiller's post, a Throw was still to be made with viable odds of success or failure. If the Referee were to acutaully spend a whole night of play declaring "you succeed" or "you have no chance" with no possibilities in-between... well, I suppose that would make my point moot. But if the odds range from 3-12 on 2D6 after DMs the character might succeed or fail not matter what the Throw value.

So what you typed is correct, and refutes my point in the most pedantic way. But it has no bearing on any evening of RPG play I have ever experienced.

Anyway, I keep referencing quotes from the rules from CT and you never address them. Could you?

 

[estar]

yes. but the use of the dice is typically subject to rules to reflect the milieu's ideation. should the target number be determined by the rules or should it be subject to the referee's subjective feelings and by extension to the player's eloquence?

As their characters the players will be dealing with a variety of situations in a tabletop roleplaying campaign. This is handled by players describing what they do as if they are there as their character. The referee job is to impartially adjudicate these actions. The mechanics of rules are one tool that can be used by the referee to do this job. But are not the only tools.

Having formal mechanics is useful because it provides consistency. Designed well, like many editions of Traveller including Classic Traveller, it becomes second nature to the campaign. However in the end it just a tool in service of a larger goal.

If for some reason if a rule can't be found that fits the action, or applying the rule results in nonsense. Then the referee will have to use his judgment and experience to come up with a ruling. Either a fiat statement of success or failure, or involving a series of dice rolls. Given what possible in a campaign, there no general rule of thumb that can be made.

Now you asked what is a target number. The short answer is "what seem right for the situation." or as you put the "referee's subjective feeling". But it doesn't need to operate without any reference to the chosen rule system. If I was playing Classic Traveller I would start off with the idea that 8 or better is the average difficultly of a task performed under stress, like combat, and work it out from there.

What left is to write it down if so you are consistent if it comes up again. If there turns out later there is an undesirable side effect of the ruling then before the next session explain to your players that the rule will be changed and we will be using the new mechanic from here on out.

 

[flykiller]

so the referee is a facilitator of game progress rather than a rules administrator? he influences, or decides, whether or not the player succeeds or fails?

Aren't they always both? Doesn't the referee always do this in a role playing game?

(sorry, failed to see your question earlier) yes, in response to the inevitable gaps in any ruleset and developing complexity in any game. but when you said "To that end there is no task system, rather there should be a referee's guide ... The referee should decide on the target number" and mention a "free form approach" it sounds as if any rules - that is, milieu structure and consistency - were to be deprecated out of relevance and replaced with free-form consensus-of-the-moment. so I thought some explication might be worthwhile.

 

[estar]

(sorry, failed to see your question earlier) yes, in response to the inevitable gaps in any ruleset and developing complexity in any game. but when you said "To that end there is no task system, rather there should be a referee's guide ... The referee should decide on the target number" and mention a "free form approach" it sounds as if any rules - that is, milieu structure and consistency - were to be deprecated out of relevance and replaced with free-form consensus-of-the-moment. so I thought some explication might be worthwhile.

As an alternative view, rules are just an expression of the reality of the setting of the campaign. In the absence of rules the referee has the setting on which to base his decision. For Traveller the setting assumes that the real world physics hold sway especially at the level of individual action. That people are still are still people. Both of these and other aspect of the setting can serve as solid foundation for adjudication as a set of game rules.