far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Last edited:
Adventurer ! (fictional Book 9) feedback
- Thread starter far-trader
- Start date
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Not sure if this is where you'd like to see comments but here goes (I can always move it later)...
Question/Clarification: If a character defaults (drafted) to Noble are they not permitted a roll for position/promotion (per CT draft rule)?
"NORM!"
I had to go there. Minor brain typo I suspect crossed up Normal and Human.
(that is a full agreement endorsement btw)
Related: I'm also wondering about a Vehicle (cascade) to cover sailing and oared ships as well as wagons and chariots.
That's all at a quick glance. I want to do some char gen if I can steal some moments
Another couple quick questions.
In the Rank and Service skills table, what is the Default line about?
For "Other" upon Joining they get Crosstraining, but the description notes that Crosstraining is in the same table of any other career. Is this an exception where the Other can choose any other table from any other career? Even ignoring the Eldritch Education requirement?
Also, related to this, if a character get's Crosstraining in Eldritch Education (Other or Noble) thanks to requisite stat (Int or Edu 8+ respectively) do they ignore the requirement for the other careers with a different requisite stat?
EDIT: Not to promote skill bloat but I'm also wondering if Crosstraining should also include the Joining skill of the career on the first application in that career? To represent a background in it. Know what I mean? To avoid (say) a Other dabbling (Crosstraining) in Mage, earning Wizardry without first getting Cantrip? Or perhaps* instead of rolling the first time Crosstraining is gained it should simply be the Joining skill?
* hmm, fun, Noble gets Crosstraining, chooses Other, getting Crosstraining, chooses Fighter, getting Blade/Brawling (is that a Blade or Brawling choice?). Then later the Noble gets Crosstraining again, chooses Other again, gets to roll Other career Eldritch Edu
I was wondering how you were going to handle missed enlistment and draft. I like it, but not so much the above bit. I like the idea the draft bit put in my head of a default career term of Commoner or Noble but able to "specialize" beyond that. I think it would work to allow enlistment in any specialist career even if first enlisted (as opposed to "drafted") in the default. Even mixing throughout char gen. But that can be a house rule
Question/Clarification: If a character defaults (drafted) to Noble are they not permitted a roll for position/promotion (per CT draft rule)?
The door of the bar opens and a shout from the patrons rings out to greet the person entering...
"NORM!"
I had to go there. Minor brain typo I suspect crossed up Normal and Human.Preach it Brother Jack!
(that is a full agreement endorsement btw)Is that "Equestrian" from Book 6? Or something else?
Related: I'm also wondering about a Vehicle (cascade) to cover sailing and oared ships as well as wagons and chariots.
What is it?
That's all at a quick glance. I want to do some char gen if I can steal some moments
Another couple quick questions.
In the Rank and Service skills table, what is the Default line about?
For "Other" upon Joining they get Crosstraining, but the description notes that Crosstraining is in the same table of any other career. Is this an exception where the Other can choose any other table from any other career? Even ignoring the Eldritch Education requirement?
Also, related to this, if a character get's Crosstraining in Eldritch Education (Other or Noble) thanks to requisite stat (Int or Edu 8+ respectively) do they ignore the requirement for the other careers with a different requisite stat?
EDIT: Not to promote skill bloat but I'm also wondering if Crosstraining should also include the Joining skill of the career on the first application in that career? To represent a background in it. Know what I mean? To avoid (say) a Other dabbling (Crosstraining) in Mage, earning Wizardry without first getting Cantrip? Or perhaps* instead of rolling the first time Crosstraining is gained it should simply be the Joining skill?
* hmm, fun, Noble gets Crosstraining, chooses Other, getting Crosstraining, chooses Fighter, getting Blade/Brawling (is that a Blade or Brawling choice?). Then later the Noble gets Crosstraining again, chooses Other again, gets to roll Other career Eldritch Edu
Last edited:
captainjack
SOC-13
Excellent stuff, and thanks. Unfortunately, I only found it by semi accident, so maybe we should move back to the CT area; I'll set up a thread a little more clearly labeled for feedback.
captainjack
SOC-13
see previous post
No need; If I understand you, your assumption is the intent of the rule - and I obviously didn't make it clear.
What I want to present is this: If you fail enlistment, you spend a term as Commoner/noble resolved normally, including the reenlistment roll: if your reenlistment is failed, enter play. If if it succeeeds you get to roll for enlistment in any career. If enlistment fails, you do the whole thing again as needed until you fail a reenlistment roll , choose to enter play, or DIE.
If one is a noble and makes the position roll for the term, and thereafter successfuly enlists in another career, you do count as having made position and can roll for promotion that term. You do not get the position bonus skill again, however.
Finally, the bonus first term skill applies to only the actual first term -regardless of the above.
Nah, rather than draft it represents just continuing with your "normal" life before you run off to be a pirate or somthing.
The door of the bar opens and a shout from the patrons rings out to greet the person entering...
"NORM!"
No, again, what you wrote is correct. One becomes a regular at a local bar/tavern, and hilarity ensues. Eventually you get cancelled/eaten by orcs.
THANK YOU ! Testify, brother. The chuch of the foursquare failed survival roll death lives on !
Yes. Or possibly Citizens.
Good idea, dammit.
A new skill I have yet to quantify. The intent is that each level makes you either harder to hit, or reduces melee damage.
Cool ! Good luck stealing without a thief class ! :smirk:
captainjack
SOC-13
Should have been deleted. earlier idea that didn't pan out.
My intent was to allow the "other" character to pick any of the other bonus enlistment skills. I'll rewrite it.
For now, I'm gonna go with the rule as is: if they don't have the stat requirement, they can't pick from that table.
See above, but yes, I want to avoid that. I think limiting it to the enlistment bonus skill should do that. Good spot, BTW !
DM: "okay fine. You enter play. A safe labled ACME falls on you out of a clear blue sky. You die. "
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Suggestion:
I ran a couple quick gens, both short termers, darned failed reenlistment rolls. Then it hit me, you've got the characters starting young (except for Mages) but aging normally.
Given the harsh realities of medieval life expectancy (short) due to many issues (besides being eaten by orcs) I wonder if you shouldn't drastically shift the aging table. Maybe make the first aging checks begin at 26 years of age? At the very least I'd say begin at age 30 years to make it equal to Traveller.
I ran a couple quick gens, both short termers, darned failed reenlistment rolls. Then it hit me, you've got the characters starting young (except for Mages) but aging normally.
Given the harsh realities of medieval life expectancy (short) due to many issues (besides being eaten by orcs) I wonder if you shouldn't drastically shift the aging table. Maybe make the first aging checks begin at 26 years of age? At the very least I'd say begin at age 30 years to make it equal to Traveller.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Yes, more questions...
So, I try to enlist as a Barbarian, and fail. How old am I? Still 10 years old and a term of Commoner lies before me, then try to enlist Barbarian again at age 14? What if I try and succeed instead enlisting in Mage instead? Skip to age 18 from 14 as 18 is the starting age for Mages? Or skip to age 22 from 14, representing the extra time needed? Or start at age 14 since Barbarians start earlier? I'm making this too complicated aren't I
Perhaps, to simplify (and maybe there was such a statement or hint in what I read, vague recollection coming as I type this), you choose your career and if you fail to enlist the first time you can't try a different one. So the Barbarian in my example, who failed to enlist at age 10, ages 4 years in Commoner and can then try to enlist in Barbarian again, repeat as needed.
So, I try to enlist as a Barbarian, and fail. How old am I? Still 10 years old and a term of Commoner lies before me, then try to enlist Barbarian again at age 14? What if I try and succeed instead enlisting in Mage instead? Skip to age 18 from 14 as 18 is the starting age for Mages? Or skip to age 22 from 14, representing the extra time needed? Or start at age 14 since Barbarians start earlier? I'm making this too complicated aren't I
Perhaps, to simplify (and maybe there was such a statement or hint in what I read, vague recollection coming as I type this), you choose your career and if you fail to enlist the first time you can't try a different one. So the Barbarian in my example, who failed to enlist at age 10, ages 4 years in Commoner and can then try to enlist in Barbarian again, repeat as needed.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Suggestion:
Granted I haven't done many test gens, and my dice may be cursed, but I'm finding it hard to roll reenlistment and get more than 2 terms. Maybe the reenlist rolls need to be dropped a little. Maybe:
...where "A" is automatic. I don't see a need/reason to roll reenlistment for the default careers. They're life, you're in it till you die or run away and join the circus
Granted I haven't done many test gens, and my dice may be cursed, but I'm finding it hard to roll reenlistment and get more than 2 terms. Maybe the reenlist rolls need to be dropped a little. Maybe:
Code:
Fighter Barbarian Mage Priest Other Noble Commoner
Re-enlist 7+ 6+ 4+ 3+ 5+ A A...where "A" is automatic. I don't see a need/reason to roll reenlistment for the default careers. They're life, you're in it till you die or run away and join the circus
Last edited:
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
I know, but I can't recall ever having such a string of failed re-enlistments
It takes the other part of the "game within the game" out of the equation. There's no worry about failing survival or aging if all I get is one or two terms.
It's a fine balancing act and I think the numbers in the original Adventurer ! tables were just a tic too high (comparing CT's core careers). As for forcing one into play vs auto reenlistment, again the other parts, a threat of failed survival (death), and aging dropping stats will do that too.
The CT solution was simple... no changing careers.
CT was:
Enter: 1 attempt.
If not in career, draft.
Proceed in that career until reenlistment failed.
The best solution is to have a failed reenlist end CGen. If one wants to change, one must be elligible to reenlist, and not manditorily reenlisted.
Or to have a specific number of enlistment attempts per character. I often set it for 3; draft counts as one. As in, succeed or fail, each counts, and after two fails, either risk play of a character with only HW/hometown level 0's, or submit to the draft.
CT was:
Enter: 1 attempt.
If not in career, draft.
Proceed in that career until reenlistment failed.
The best solution is to have a failed reenlist end CGen. If one wants to change, one must be elligible to reenlist, and not manditorily reenlisted.
Or to have a specific number of enlistment attempts per character. I often set it for 3; draft counts as one. As in, succeed or fail, each counts, and after two fails, either risk play of a character with only HW/hometown level 0's, or submit to the draft.
captainjack
SOC-13
The age thing is now solved....everyone will start at 14. It was a clunky attempt to make sure we had young barbarians and older mages. Not worth the hassle that has been illustrated.
A failed reenlist should and does end chargen. I don't like the whole skipping around to get extra terms.
I agree that Draft is more elegant -but its just too much of an anachronism for me to wrap my head around.
I have more to say about the terms and reenlistment issue when its not so late. I will say this: before I posted this I ran lots of numbers (being a math geek) and simply increasing the reenlistment roll can often just result in more dead characters, esp in careers with a difficult survival roll. My goal was to have about 2-3 terms, which if you run thru CT chargen (those reenlist numbers were a basline) , is about what you get. Really, 3-7 skills is what I see a starting character getting in an "old school" style game.
I'm attaching a table illustrating the results of a 1001 character run for each of the careers -note, some of the rolls it is based on may be from a slightly altered earlier version, but it should be good enough for now.
You may be right though, they could be a bit too high for one or two of them. The overall average for that bunch was 2.1.
I'll think on it (ie sleep)
What kind of skills and mustering benefits did you get out of the two term wonders ? I'd be interested in you assessing how fun playing them would be.
A failed reenlist should and does end chargen. I don't like the whole skipping around to get extra terms.
I agree that Draft is more elegant -but its just too much of an anachronism for me to wrap my head around.
I have more to say about the terms and reenlistment issue when its not so late. I will say this: before I posted this I ran lots of numbers (being a math geek) and simply increasing the reenlistment roll can often just result in more dead characters, esp in careers with a difficult survival roll. My goal was to have about 2-3 terms, which if you run thru CT chargen (those reenlist numbers were a basline) , is about what you get. Really, 3-7 skills is what I see a starting character getting in an "old school" style game.
I'm attaching a table illustrating the results of a 1001 character run for each of the careers -note, some of the rolls it is based on may be from a slightly altered earlier version, but it should be good enough for now.
You may be right though, they could be a bit too high for one or two of them. The overall average for that bunch was 2.1.
I'll think on it (ie sleep)
What kind of skills and mustering benefits did you get out of the two term wonders ? I'd be interested in you assessing how fun playing them would be.
Last edited:
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Don't take my mutterings as proof of a problem
I was just trouble shooting some worst case issues. I like the idea of the differences. Maybe a different implementation? Like ignore age entirely until career gen is complete then assign an age based on career and terms? Then apply aging rolls if needed? I still think you need to shift the aging table though.I think the idea of multiple careers was just my poorly worded thoughts. The way it seemed to me was there is only one career allowed. And Noble and Commoner were simply fill-ins for not yet entered your career, though they could (by default or choice) become your career as well.
I'd say you achieved your goal of 2-3 terms so my complaint there missed the mark. I simply wasn't aware it was a design feature (more on that below*) until I looked after getting a string of (to me) unusually short termers. Then I looked at the numbers more closely and they seemed just a tic high overall. So maybe a couple could be lowered by 1. I'm used to CT's (apparent anyway, haven't run numbers) average of 3-5 terms with 6+ not at all unheard of.
The thing with short terms and few skills is the game is going to have to (imo anyway) have some better experience rules than CT. The few skills creates a need for characters to gain more skills in play. Something more akin to D&D's leveling up and better to hit, and more spells and other skills.
I see now where the extra (to my mind) skills are not as big an issue given the shorter career before adventuring. You should still come out close to the CT baseline.
Interesting ones
Overall playable characters (though I'm not sure what my gold will buy yet). But then CT was built on even 1 term characters being playable, even with 1 skill. Partly because skills were broadly defined and everyone had some zero level skills. Partly because weapon skills weren't really the focus (at least not in most of our games). In a Sword and Sorcery game (and the odd Merc game in CT) weapon skills will be more the focus.
Mustering out was interesting. Especially when I first rolled Panoply and had a look at it. At once both generous and nice. I was torn between thinking it was too generous and liking it muchly. Reminded me of the tables I did for quick party outfitting in D&D ages ago (for starting a group at something other than 1st level).Though I wondered what my Fighter would have done if I hadn't lucked out and gotten Riding for the position roll? I figured a reasonable ref would allow Riding-0 in that case.
I actually like the muster tables a lot. Many fun ideas there.
I was averaging about 2.6 skills per term so that seems pretty typical. Again it was just the unexpectedly short terms that threw me because I was anticipating more CT term runs of 3 plus. I didn't have a chance to sweat about survival rolls or aging. I usually don't start calculating/gambling the risk/reward until 3rd term is done in CT. If I die on the first or second term I've usually not invested much time or interest in the character and won't mind starting again. Unless my dice have been exceedingly kind in UPP and early career rolls
I think all the characters generated would be fun to play. But there would need to be some character growth beyond the CT experience rules to maintain an interest in them (for me anyway). At least a little more than the CT rules. I don't think the game would play as quickly (game time) as CT with it's week in jump typically happening a few times in a session to make the years fly by.
That said... I did roll a 1 term Fighter that had a lot going for that 4 years of service. Six skills (a nice mix), Panoply kit, and 20 gold. Just enough coin to not be desperate, not enough that he could simply rest easy. Yeah, that one would be very fun to play
Again, all of them had interesting "history" though... that's the beauty of CT career gen to me. It gives just enough information to seed the imagination, but not so much that it's fenced in. Any of them would be fun to play imo.
Last edited:
I was actually going to suggest that as an optional rule. My question is about how you determine the number of spells a mage or priest has.
captainjack
SOC-13
Well, hey, here we go !
Update posted in file section !
magic rules ! All is revealed !
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=22059
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=22060
__________________
Damnit, I liked being locked in ignorance and darkness. The light is too bright. Revelation is too blinding.
All hail Bridget, or Natasha Kerensky. Whoever gets there second.
On-Topic Alert! Warning! Warning! This following section will actually be relevant to the topic at hand!
I looked at your magic rules and available spells briefly. While I'm not sure if I understand what you meant by the differences between Cantrips/Dweomer/Etc., I need to read the rules more; however, you did get me hooked, and I should say that it has a very D&D feel to it. Well done!
Last edited:
captainjack
SOC-13
Glad to hear & Thanks. 25 years of wasted time can't all have been wasted, at least when it comes to wasting more time....I guess.... :rofl:
As to the differences in spells, conceptually, they are just cool gygaxy names for "level 1, level 2 etc". The discussion of "Vancian Ammunition" type spellcasting is mainly establishing fluff that I suspect would have been part of any GDW type RPG-and might have helped in the original.
The main play releveant differences between all the spell skills is that the standard four (cantrip, dweomer,sorcery,wizardry) are grouped by complexity/strength (rather than effect or function,) and are only accessable from the Magic users career, whereas the Mysteries (Summoning, mysteries,necromancy,Alchemy) are grouped by function such as "deals with life and death" and are (or will be) accessable to both cleric/priests and Magic Users.
I appreciate any and all feedback, even "it sucks"*. Looking at it last night, I'm aware that some more copyediting is needed, especially in the spellcraft sections.
That said, Natasha K ? Isn't that Battletech ?
*although I do reserve the right to respond to such with somthing equally helpful along the lines of : "yo' Momma"...
:smirk:captainjack
SOC-13
Posted update on skills and spells to chargen document.
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=21822
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=21822
Yes, Natasha K is Battletech. She is one of the reasons I started looking at the BT game (that and one of the guys I play with worked on MechWarrior for FASA).
And I had a whole lot more response but the BBS program restricts you to 4 smilies.
So in brief: I think I understand what you were going for with magic but will have to reread it to make sure if I understand.
And as for whether it sucks or not...
IT SUCKS!!! ... wait a second ... NO IT DOESN'T!!!
What was that about my mom? I couldn't HEAR you, Captain! :devil:
And I had a whole lot more response but the BBS program restricts you to 4 smilies.
So in brief: I think I understand what you were going for with magic but will have to reread it to make sure if I understand.
And as for whether it sucks or not...
IT SUCKS!!! ... wait a second ... NO IT DOESN'T!!!
What was that about my mom? I couldn't HEAR you, Captain! :devil:
captainjack
SOC-13
What was that about my mom? I couldn't HEAR you, Captain! :devil:
YOUR MOMMA, Sergeant; WEARS COMBAT BOOTS SERGEANT !
...and very attractive ones they are, tooo.