MGT Only: Char creation - basic questions

[dr fre0n]

Hey everyone

ok so I invited one of my friend to create a new character for a potential upcoming 'Beltstrike' campaign. As a new referee, I created several characters without any problem using the core rulebook to get some hand-on experience. But my friend made a couple of choices that I didn't made or thought about and that I am unsure how to deal with. I was curious if any of you had an opinion on the following:

1. Native belters - are people born and raised in an asteroid-like environment. Normally rules suggest that a character roll for his homeworld and roll a couple of world specification which would define his background skills based on his EDU level - Say an Agricultural planet could provide a 0 skill in animal etc.

It is suggested in Beltstrike to define the asteroid homeworld type by throwing a couple of dices. There is 6 choices on the table. What I am supposed to do when rolled, say, 2 times the same thing (ex: High Tech - provides Computer 0) ? I asked for a reroll until I got something different, but it is the way to go ?

2. It is mentioned that belters can have several assignments available during any terms such as Miner, Prospector, Researcher - Worker

My friend choose to be a researcher for his first 3 term (of five) and then switch to Prospector for the fourth. In the ranking, I understood that he had an effective rank at level 0 as soon as he switched, then could roll for advancements etc. Am I right ? He argue (well he is about as green as I am regarding the understanding of the rules) that he should not be the new guy ranked at level 0 as he had already 3 terms as a belter, and should transfer to his new job at the same rank he was in his original job.

3. It is mentioned that belter born character should have a DM -1 modifier on END and STR and +2 to DEX, to reflect the conditions of living in zero-g (low-tech asteroid for instance). For average stats (7) does that mean that STR and END obtain a modifier of - 1 on any related roll or that we change the STR and END level from 7 to 6 ?

All thoughts are welcome, thanks.

 

[rancke]

2. It is mentioned that belters can have several assignments available during any terms such as Miner, Prospector, Researcher - Worker

My friend choose to be a researcher for his first 3 term (of five) and then switch to Prospector for the fourth. In the ranking, I understood that he had an effective rank at level 0 as soon as he switched, then could roll for advancements etc. Am I right ? He argue (well he is about as green as I am regarding the understanding of the rules) that he should not be the new guy ranked at level 0 as he had already 3 terms as a belter, and should transfer to his new job at the same rank he was in his original job.

'Belter' is used in two different ways: as someone who lives in a belt and as someone who makes a living prospecting for ore in a belt. While being a researcher your friend's character was the first kind of belter, but not the second kind. When he switched to being a prospector-type belter he is as green in his new profession as any 18-year old. So, yes, he starts as rank 1 and has to roll for advancement.

As a referee I would perhaps allow him to start at a higher rank if those of his skills that were relevant to prospecting life were high enough, but that would be a house rule.


Hans

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

Hey everyone

ok so I invited one of my friend to create a new character for a potential upcoming 'Beltstrike' campaign. As a new referee, I created several characters without any problem using the core rulebook to get some hand-on experience. But my friend made a couple of choices that I didn't made or thought about and that I am unsure how to deal with. I was curious if any of you had an opinion on the following:

1. Native belters - are people born and raised in an asteroid-like environment. Normally rules suggest that a character roll for his homeworld and roll a couple of world specification which would define his background skills based on his EDU level - Say an Agricultural planet could provide a 0 skill in animal etc.

It is suggested in Beltstrike to define the asteroid homeworld type by throwing a couple of dices. There is 6 choices on the table. What I am supposed to do when rolled, say, 2 times the same thing (ex: High Tech - provides Computer 0) ? I asked for a reroll until I got something different, but it is the way to go ?

2. It is mentioned that belters can have several assignments available during any terms such as Miner, Prospector, Researcher - Worker

My friend choose to be a researcher for his first 3 term (of five) and then switch to Prospector for the fourth. In the ranking, I understood that he had an effective rank at level 0 as soon as he switched, then could roll for advancements etc. Am I right ? He argue (well he is about as green as I am regarding the understanding of the rules) that he should not be the new guy ranked at level 0 as he had already 3 terms as a belter, and should transfer to his new job at the same rank he was in his original job.

3. It is mentioned that belter born character should have a DM -1 modifier on END and STR and +2 to DEX, to reflect the conditions of living in zero-g (low-tech asteroid for instance). For average stats (7) does that mean that STR and END obtain a modifier of - 1 on any related roll or that we change the STR and END level from 7 to 6 ?

All thoughts are welcome, thanks.

hello, and welcome to the wonderful world Behind the Screen!

For 1) and 2), I say that boils down to personnel judgement calls. as long as you are conisistant, it's not really a problem. But, for the record, I'd aggree with the re-roll on 1), and my call on 2) is that he keeps his rank, and any benefits he may get form it, but he can't claim any benefits form a lower rank (so, for example, if the carrer gave you a skill at ranks 2 and 3, and he transfered over at rank 3, he would get the rank 3 skill, but not the rank 2 skill).

for 3), i'd read that as saying you have a characteristic adjustment, so your rolled STR of 7 would become a 6.

does that help?

 

[dr fre0n]

Hey guys thank you for the great insight ! Definitely helped !

as you can see I am still getting used to the rules - not only MgT but Traveller as a whole

good points : I think the baseline is to be consistent, and to have fun.

after some thoughts I agree for 2) to arrange something for a character to keep his ranks (or some of it at least) when changing specialties, without gaining benefits from lower ranks. In a 'move forward approach'. But now knowing it's house rule help me get the mindset of the overall rules, so I will know better next time this kind of questions arise. In the end I counted the actual advancements when evaluating for mustering out so it balance. I'll go with that general approach

thanks for 3) I was just wanting to be sure -

ok I am going somewhere yess

 

[nats]

1. I tend to discount the second dice result if the same as a previous one, sometimes life is mean. Unless cumulative results are specifically allowed for, like when rolling on skills tables.

2. I wouldn't have kept the characters rank after changing speciality, which is in effect changing to a new career. For changing specialisation I would perform mustering out of the old career and require another re-enlistment roll for the new specialisation/career. And the general rule is you cant immediately return to a previous career so you would have to pick another one. So if you left the Belter career you would have to try your hand at another career entirely for four years before trying to return for another Belter specialisation. And notice that you would suffer a -1 DM for each previous career as well on the re-enlistment attempt.

The above wouldnt affect your mustering out benefits too much because you get benefits for all the ranks you acheive no matter where they were achieved, but the above does tend to make characters try to stay in the chosen career or think very carefully before leaving it. You do get slightly better mustering out benefits for acheiving higher ranks though, so you get more benefits from staying in the same career - which I think is right.

Having said all of that I dont think you could lose a service commission and be demoted to an NCO after having previously been an officer, upon re-entering another armed service. But I dont know about the services in real life to say if this is correct or not. If you are an officer in the navy and you transfered to the army would you still be an officer? Dont know if that is even possible in real life.

 

[SpaceBadger]

Having said all of that I dont think you could lose a service commission and be demoted to an NCO after having previously been an officer, upon re-entering another armed service. But I dont know about the services in real life to say if this is correct or not. If you are an officer in the navy and you transfered to the army would you still be an officer? Dont know if that is even possible in real life.

At least in US forces, No. Or at least, not automatically. Say you were an officer in the US Navy, mustered out, worked civilian awhile, then joined the US Army. You'd start from scratch as a recruit in basic training, then a Private. You could apply for Officer Candidate School, and if successfully completed become a 2nd Lieutenant, but otherwise you remain enlisted.

It is also possible that you could make a deal on enlistment into the Army that you would go straight to OCS out of Basic, based on your prior Navy service, but you'd still have to complete both Basic and OCS in the Army.

 

[aramis]

At least in US forces, No. Or at least, not automatically. Say you were an officer in the US Navy, mustered out, worked civilian awhile, then joined the US Army. You'd start from scratch as a recruit in basic training, then a Private. You could apply for Officer Candidate School, and if successfully completed become a 2nd Lieutenant, but otherwise you remain enlisted.

It is also possible that you could make a deal on enlistment into the Army that you would go straight to OCS out of Basic, based on your prior Navy service, but you'd still have to complete both Basic and OCS in the Army.

Actually, not correct.

10 USC 12206:

Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, a person who is a former commissioned officer may, if otherwise qualified, be appointed as a reserve officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps. A person so appointed—
(1) may be placed on the reserve active-status list of that armed force in the grade equivalent to the permanent regular or reserve grade, and in the same competitive category, in which the person previously served satisfactorily on active duty or in an active status; and
(2) may be credited for the purpose of determining date of rank under section 741 (d) of this title with service in grade equal to that held by that person when discharged or separated.​

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12206

Everything I have heard indicates that, unless the former officer specifically requests return to enlisted status or didn't receive an honorable discharge, they will be returned to officer status immediately. (Then again, almost all dishonorable discharges also strip officers of their commission prior to the discharge.)

 

[SpaceBadger]

*shrug* I haven't looked it up, just going by actual recent example. My son was in Army Basic with a guy who had previously been a Navy officer. That guy was slated to go directly from Basic to OCS.

Now there may have been some nuances that I missed or that were misreported to me. I don't know how long he had been out of the Navy before joining the Army. Does the Navy have warrant officers? If so, my son may have misreported that. I don't think it was a bad conduct thing, as this guy's civilian job in between Navy and Army was as a sheriff's deputy, and in fact he was going to be a National Guard MP after OCS.

I don't know which, or any, of these things may have made a difference. I do know that I talked with the guy at graduation and he confirmed that he was going directly to OCS and then would be a National Guard officer with an MP unit.

 

[aramis]

*shrug* I haven't looked it up, just going by actual recent example. My son was in Army Basic with a guy who had previously been a Navy officer. That guy was slated to go directly from Basic to OCS.

Now there may have been some nuances that I missed or that were misreported to me. I don't know how long he had been out of the Navy before joining the Army. Does the Navy have warrant officers? If so, my son may have misreported that. I don't think it was a bad conduct thing, as this guy's civilian job in between Navy and Army was as a sheriff's deputy, and in fact he was going to be a National Guard MP after OCS.

I don't know which, or any, of these things may have made a difference. I do know that I talked with the guy at graduation and he confirmed that he was going directly to OCS and then would be a National Guard officer with an MP unit.

Yes. Of the current military services, only the USAF lacks warrant officers, and only W1's are not commissioned. (And no service is currently making W1's. They're all entering service as CW2's. I know there are one or two left - I saw one last summer.)

Note that field commissioned blokes don't actually hold a commission, and I've known one who is now an E6 SSGT in the Army (and was a marine Acting O1 2LT - it was on his DD214, along with peak permanent grade E5 Sgt) - he wasn't "otherwise qualified" for that officer grade - no college degree.

You don't have to do initial entry training if you've been out less than 5 years last I heard.

Former officers have the right to request return to enlisted ranks without prejudice. (also in 10 USC.)

Transfers between services amongst officers retain rank; transfers between services for enlisted lose a grade unless there's a compelling need for their already trained specialty. A buddy who was an E5 Sgt in the Army joined the USCG as an E4. He opted to go through basic - and while he wore E1 SR through basic, was paid E4. He's now a CWO2.