Skill Frequency

[Badenov]

The 2D6 roll in CharGen is for a typical Traveller (i.e. PC or special NPC), who are unusual. If you assume that 2D6 is the standard for the Population for Soc, then you end up with a "Social Diamond" instead of a "Social Pyramid" where the vast majority of people are Middle Class, with the number of Lower-Class people as small as (or smaller, if you take into account the effects of CharGen) the Upper Classes and Nobility.

Social Standing is an Imperial-level Scale, in relative terms. The type of people who are Travellers are an unusual bunch - very few who are Lower Class (though there are many members of this Class, most do not leave their homeworld, and if they do, only for a specific purpose); Upper Class people can travel relatively frequently, but there are relatively few of them as a whole in the overall population. The Imperial-scale "Middle Classes" are somewhere in the middle relative to these two factors.

The 2D6 roll works fine for the STR, DEX, END, and INT characteristics, as it is producing a standard distribution about a mean-value norm across a species. But if you want a random generation method for SOC in a Society as opposed to one that generates the SOC of the typical Traveller, then you need to come up with a different generation system that is skewed toward the lower values.

If I need the SOC for an average random encounter (vs. a Special NPC), I will use one of the following:

GENERATING SOCIAL STANDING FOR RANDOM NPCS AND IMPERIAL SUBJECTS

DEFINITION of TERMS (sourced from T5 and other RPGs):



METHOD #1 – SIMPLE/QUICK METHOD
===========================



METHOD #2 – GRANULAR METHOD
=========================

So, a realistic breakdown of social classes is probably beyond the scope of an RPG. If you feel the need badly enough, I guess you can go with the above system. I have a 4d6 Social system where the 4-16 results are mapped to values from 2-12 in rough proportion to the actual spread of society (according to a college sociology website I found).

That said, 2d6 is probably about right to create a range of 'interesting' encounters, and if you meet more kings than bums, bums aren't generally as interesting as kings. It's just worth being aware that you can't create a balanced spectrum of 'residents' with it. As was pointed out elsethread (I think), characters aren't just random citizens, they're the interesting citizens worthy of being brought to life by a player.

 

[whulorigan]

That said, 2d6 is probably about right to create a range of 'interesting' encounters, and if you meet more kings than bums, bums aren't generally as interesting as kings. It's just worth being aware that you can't create a balanced spectrum of 'residents' with it. As was pointed out elsethread (I think), characters aren't just random citizens, they're the interesting citizens worthy of being brought to life by a player.

Correct. The above table/chart that I have is for an "average random encounter" or some other use where I need an average person from a society IF I feel the need to generate the SOC of the person randomly.

For PCs and Important NPCs (= read: "Interesting Encounters") go with the standard 2D6 spread.

I have a 4d6 Social system where the 4-16 results are mapped to values from 2-12 in rough proportion to the actual spread of society (according to a college sociology website I found).

You wouldn't happen to have a document that details that 4D6 ==> 2D6 mapping, would you?

 

[Badenov]

Correct. The above table/chart that I have is for an "average random encounter" or some other use where I need an average person from a society IF I feel the need to generate the SOC of the person randomly.

For PCs and Important NPCs (= read: "Interesting Encounters") go with the standard 2D6 spread.


You wouldn't happen to have a document that details that 4D6 ==> 2D6 mapping, would you?

It's a bit rough, in a YMMV way

4d6 2d6
4-----2
5-----2
6-----3
7-----3
8-----4
9-----5 Lower Class (A bit under 10%)
--------------
10----6
11----6
12----7 Working Class (About 46%)
13----7
14----7
--------------
15----8
16----8
17----8 "Middle Class" (About 42%)
18----9
19----9
20----9
---------------
21----10 "Upper Class"/Bougeosie (About 2.5%)
22----10
23----11 Knights and such
24----11-12* Actual Nobility

On a 24, which is 1/1296, I roll another 2d6. On a 2-11, the final result is 11, on a 12, I'll give them a 12. This corresponds to about 21 nobles per million people, which seems about right.

 

[casquilho]

It's a bit rough, in a YMMV way

4d6 2d6
4-----2
5-----2
6-----3
7-----3
8-----4
9-----5 Lower Class (A bit under 10%)
--------------
10----6
11----6
12----7 Working Class (About 46%)
13----7
14----7
--------------
15----8
16----8
17----8 "Middle Class" (About 42%)
18----9
19----9
20----9
---------------
21----10 "Upper Class"/Bougeosie (About 2.5%)
22----10
23----11 Knights and such
24----11-12* Actual Nobility

On a 24, which is 1/1296, I roll another 2d6. On a 2-11, the final result is 11, on a 12, I'll give them a 12. This corresponds to about 21 nobles per million people, which seems about right.

Nice, I like it quite a bit. Might tweak it a bit to have more lower class (because of my personal setting). But I love that it makes being a noble much less common.

 

[whulorigan]

Nice, I like it quite a bit. Might tweak it a bit to have more lower class (because of my personal setting). But I love that it makes being a noble much less common.

Agreed. I would keep the "2's" as is but probably expand the prevalence of the "3's" thru "5's" and push the "6's" thru "10's" into the 15-22/23 range with decreasing frequency. For some worlds I might create a slightly higher frequency in the 5-8 range than what I just described.

But in general, I like the table a lot.

 

[whulorigan]

Another thing you could do is roll 3D6-3 (minimum "[1]", but if 1, then add a [1D3] or "[½D]" to the [1] to boost to [2-4] range) and generate a final range from 2-15 (average "7.5") for "Local Planetary SOC" (including Titles, if any, for values 11+). - This is similar to Soc 11-15 in CT: Book 1 (1977).

Roll [3d6-3]
------
[2-8] ==> Imperial SOC = 2-8
[9-10] ==> includes a minor local gentry title that maps to Imperial SOC =9
[11-12] ==> includes a local gentry title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
[13-14] * ==> includes a significant local gentry/noble title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 * (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
[15] ** ==> includes a major local gentry/noble title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 ** (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)


For anyone who scored 13+ on the 3D6-3 Roll, make an additional 2D6 Roll.

* [3d6-3] Roll = [13-14]:

• [2D6] Roll = [2-10] ==> The Imperial Social Standing remains at Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
• [2D6] Roll = [11-12] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =11 (including the appropriate Imperial Knighthood)

** [3d6-3] Roll = [15]:

• [2D6] Roll = [2-9] ==> The Imperial Social Standing remains at Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
• [2D6] Roll = [10-11] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =11 (including the appropriate Imperial Knighthood or Lordship).
• [2D6] Roll = [12] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =12 (including the appropriate Imperial Baronial Title).

 

[whulorigan]

Another thing you could do is roll 3D6-3 (minimum "[1]", but if 1, then add a [1D3] or "[½D]" to the [1] to boost to [2-4] range) and generate a final range from 2-15 (average "7") for "Local Planetary SOC" (including Titles, if any, for values 11+). - This is similar to Soc 11-15 in CT: Book 1 (1977).

Roll [3d6-3]
------
[2-8] ==> Imperial SOC = 2-8
[9-10] ==> includes a minor local gentry title that maps to Imperial SOC =9
[11-12] ==> includes a local gentry title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
[13-14] * ==> includes a significant local gentry/noble title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 * (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
[15] ** ==> includes a major local gentry/noble title that maps to Imperial SOC =10 ** (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)


For anyone who scored 13+ on the 3D6-3 Roll, make an additional 2D6 Roll.

* [3d6-3] Roll = [13-14]:

• [2D6] Roll = [2-10] ==> The Imperial Social Standing remains at Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
• [2D6] Roll = [11-12] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =11 (including the appropriate Imperial Knighthood)

** [3d6-3] Roll = [15]:

• [2D6] Roll = [2-9] ==> The Imperial Social Standing remains at Imperial SOC =10 (and includes the appropriate recognition as Imperial Esquire/Gentleman)
• [2D6] Roll = [10-11] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =11 (including the appropriate Imperial Knighthood or Lordship).
• [2D6] Roll = [12] ==> The Imperial Social Standing is adjusted to Imperial SOC =12 (including the appropriate Imperial Baronial Title).

ADDENDUM:
For CharGen: Also, if you want to use the above for characters and CharGen, what you can do is use the "Local" Soc value above as the default as you go thru CharGen (unless the particular situation would make the Imperial Value more appropriate) and treat increases in Soc thru CharGen to be increases in "Local Soc" (again, unless the particular reason for the "+1 Soc" would make the converted Imperial Value more appropriate, in which case then transition over to the Imperial Soc Values table - you've "made it" in Imperial Society). When CharGen is done, then convert the Local Soc value to Imperial SOC as necessary.

If one is using such a procedure for CharGen, then one may wish to consider using an initial Soc Roll of [2D6] instead of [3D6-3] for the Local Soc value as well and let the CharGen procedure "process" increases in CharGen as above (and then convert to Imperial SOC afterward as noted).

 

[aramis]

In grad school (for clinical psychology), I was sweating the idea that I might get a B in one of my classes and my advisor (coincidently the program head) told me exactly the same thing except it was phrased as "who gets all B's" - it definitely adjusted the level of sweat being produced.

D.

All of the grad schools I applied to had a B requirement to count towards your program.

 

[aramis]

I 100% prefer trav's play style over D&D's, I mean I still play D&D sometimes, sticking to like a Rogue; a caster? No way, too much work. Trav you make a character and then start playing.



One thing I try to avoid is the player that won't let their character leave the ship w/o their BD on, and that is usually by the unwritten agreement that I won't send BD opponents at them w/o warning. It's also easier as the combats are not as swingy.

meanwhile, I break them of that by use of SWAT teams.

 

[Dragoner]

meanwhile, I break them of that by use of SWAT teams.

True, I have done that also, though it doesn't make them happy.

 

[atpollard]

True, I have done that also, though it doesn't make them happy.

There is also the “Grendel’s Mother” approach … If all the players want to wear Battledress, then all the bad guys want to use FGMPs. It really sucks when they miss and a building collapses burying the group alive.

It reminds me of a short one-off campaign I did called “One Night in New Bangkok” that involved three factions that erupted into open war and the struggle to survive 24 hours until the Military could restore Law and Order.

 

[Dragoner]

There is also the “Grendel’s Mother” approach … If all the players want to wear Battledress, then all the bad guys want to use FGMPs. It really sucks when they miss and a building collapses burying the group alive.

It reminds me of a short one-off campaign I did called “One Night in New Bangkok” that involved three factions that erupted into open war and the struggle to survive 24 hours until the Military could restore Law and Order.

That's a weird song:

I've run Battledress games, using rules from the MgT1 CSC, even the old MgT1 Mercenary had some interesting BD rules, which I incorporated some of those in my Kosmic rules. Using stuff like that changes the tenor of the game though, and one needs extra buy in from the players. My standard group doesn't have enough people that want that type of game anymore. Easier to be just like guns, and knives vs cloth or whatever.

 

[Badenov]

There is also the “Grendel’s Mother” approach … If all the players want to wear Battledress, then all the bad guys want to use FGMPs. It really sucks when they miss and a building collapses burying the group alive.

It reminds me of a short one-off campaign I did called “One Night in New Bangkok” that involved three factions that erupted into open war and the struggle to survive 24 hours until the Military could restore Law and Order.

That almost sounds like One Night in Roanapur. Except that it's Every Night in Roanapur, apart from the restoration of law and order.

We never went around in Battle dress in our campaign. We never even owned Battle Dress, which now seems odd given that we were all prior Imperial Marines. Anything that would have required Battle Dress, we found alternate solutions for. When fighting did break out, though, we hit first, and hit hard enough that our target couldn't hit back. We did do some things with a rented bulldozer that made our GM have to completely shift gears, though ...

 

[aramis]

That's a weird song:

I've run Battledress games, using rules from the MgT1 CSC, even the old MgT1 Mercenary had some interesting BD rules, which I incorporated some of those in my Kosmic rules. Using stuff like that changes the tenor of the game though, and one needs extra buy in from the players. My standard group doesn't have enough people that want that type of game anymore. Easier to be just like guns, and knives vs cloth or whatever.

It was the first song I purchased digital. It's been on my iPods for decades, and my laptops, too. And now I have one, an iPad.
"The mates we choose will not excite you." So many innuendo.

 

[Dragoner]

It was the first song I purchased digital. It's been on my iPods for decades, and my laptops, too. And now I have one, an iPad.
"The mates we choose will not excite you." So many innuendo.

The whole song is filled with it. I really liked new wave of that era, and still listen to new retro wave stuff on youtube. Flock of Seagulls Wishing is totally science fiction; though of the era, Blondie Heart of Glass, and Soft Cell Tainted Love I particularly remember on the radio. Traveller seems a real natural thing for how immersed in sci-fi the late 70's, and early 80's was. A discussion of psi was "It's not Scanners, more like Escape from Witch Mountain."

 

[Badenov]

It was the first song I purchased digital. It's been on my iPods for decades, and my laptops, too. And now I have one, an iPad.
"The mates we choose will not excite you." So many innuendo.

I purchased the album on cassette tape, and just knowing that should tell you it was like 30 years ago. The album is a lot more about the geopolitical machinations going on that the chess tournament described in the song is a backdrop for. Though the one song that amuses me the most is the protagonist arguing with his mistress, and at the end spitefully telling her, 'You can even call my wife.''

 

[TamsinP]

That's a weird song:

It's from the musical "Chess" by Tim Rice, who collaborated with Benny and Bjorn from ABBA to write the songs (originally as a concept album).

 

[aramis]

The whole song is filled with it. I really liked new wave of that era, and still listen to new retro wave stuff on youtube. Flock of Seagulls Wishing is totally science fiction; though of the era, Blondie Heart of Glass, and Soft Cell Tainted Love I particularly remember on the radio. Traveller seems a real natural thing for how immersed in sci-fi the late 70's, and early 80's was. A discussion of psi was "It's not Scanners, more like Escape from Witch Mountain."

The Clash's Combat Rock was inspirational for so many CT and MT adventures I wrote.
Also, Thompson Twins' The Gap, and assorted Blondie songs.

Music can trigger creativity... but I find it ironic there's so little performance oriented skills in CT/MT/TNE. (I was a vocal performance {≅Opera} major for 4 years, then a History major to not lose all my credits.)

 

[Condottiere]

My first dungeon master liked heavy metal.

I tend to associate irony with the second British invasion.

 

[Dragoner]

The Clash's Combat Rock was inspirational for so many CT and MT adventures I wrote.
Also, Thompson Twins' The Gap, and assorted Blondie songs.

Music can trigger creativity... but I find it ironic there's so little performance oriented skills in CT/MT/TNE. (I was a vocal performance {≅Opera} major for 4 years, then a History major to not lose all my credits.)

Combat Rock was great. London Calling was the first album I bought of theirs, I remember thinking music that was five years old was "a long time ago" now that seems ridiculous. It is creative, you are right, I have used like Spanish Bombs and Fade Away and Radiate. I have added various performers and artist to chargen in my game. 171 out of 354 pages is for character generation, and I have some other careers I'd like to add.

It's from the musical "Chess" by Tim Rice, who collaborated with Benny and Bjorn from ABBA to write the songs (originally as a concept album).

I used to hang out a Mexican roller rink, it was all ABBA and Ranchera back then; roller skate and think what does this song have to with a Napoleonic battle? Frida had a big new wave hit too in I Know There's Something Going On. By 84 I was that weird kid with a shaved head and leather sitting in his truck listening to mix tapes of Bowie, Bauhaus, Germs, and Social D.