CT Experience System

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by hirch duckfinder:
. This should work for increasing ability scores, as well (except Social Standing).

my two-pence worth :--


---- i forgot to say . i think ability scores are very difficult to change . this requires exceptional circumstances . even education is hard to gain - the character would have to take months / years out to improve . strength can change a little with a LOT of work , dex can never really change ( you can improve its specific application -- i.e. a skill that uses dex e.g. shooting a gun ) . intelligence cant change ( unless by organic change - e.g. brain disease ) . endurance is like strength . social standing can change , but usually not by much . generally speaking characters are too busy to achieve any of this . i'm not much into reff-ing gym programmes .

basically i think abilitiy scores are genetic dispositions - you can tinker a little but fundementally they stay the same .

Strength can definately change (though not necessarily with *that* much work). Education can *definately* change with some continued learning programs. Also, the more you learn, the better able you are to learn, so Intelligence could increase, IMO (albeit very slowly, perhaps). Endurance and Dexterity could increase with enough training, IMO (albeit much more slowly than strength).

On character generation:

The problem with using the char-gen sequence as it is is that the skills that one can get (and the levels that one can get them in) are very limited, unless you use Books 4-7, which leave the other thirteen prior career services at a significant disadvantage (except with Mercenary, where it seems that you roll Garrison, which yields no chance of skills, too often).

Now, you *could* fix this by allowing the T4 char gen tables to be used, but then you would have to use some task system, and the game would essentially be T4, not Classic Traveller.

New Idea: It would perhaps be much better to give 2.6 experience points per term *in addition* to the normal skills per term, and let the players spend those on whatever they wish.

 

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by hirch duckfinder:
. This should work for increasing ability scores, as well (except Social Standing).

my two-pence worth :--


---- i forgot to say . i think ability scores are very difficult to change . this requires exceptional circumstances . even education is hard to gain - the character would have to take months / years out to improve . strength can change a little with a LOT of work , dex can never really change ( you can improve its specific application -- i.e. a skill that uses dex e.g. shooting a gun ) . intelligence cant change ( unless by organic change - e.g. brain disease ) . endurance is like strength . social standing can change , but usually not by much . generally speaking characters are too busy to achieve any of this . i'm not much into reff-ing gym programmes .

basically i think abilitiy scores are genetic dispositions - you can tinker a little but fundementally they stay the same .

Strength can definately change (though not necessarily with *that* much work). Education can *definately* change with some continued learning programs. Also, the more you learn, the better able you are to learn, so Intelligence could increase, IMO (albeit very slowly, perhaps). Endurance and Dexterity could increase with enough training, IMO (albeit much more slowly than strength).

On character generation:

The problem with using the char-gen sequence as it is is that the skills that one can get (and the levels that one can get them in) are very limited, unless you use Books 4-7, which leave the other thirteen prior career services at a significant disadvantage (except with Mercenary, where it seems that you roll Garrison, which yields no chance of skills, too often).

Now, you *could* fix this by allowing the T4 char gen tables to be used, but then you would have to use some task system, and the game would essentially be T4, not Classic Traveller.

New Idea: It would perhaps be much better to give 2.6 experience points per term *in addition* to the normal skills per term, and let the players spend those on whatever they wish.

 

[daryen]

I find that if you want to keep using Bk1/Sup4 for character generation, but want the skill numbers to increase, that the best compromise is just to give the character two skills whenever one is earned. Just double the skills. Then, have the "normal" skill rolled, and let the player pick whatever he wants for the "extra" skill. (Or make them roll both, if that's your style.)

This will NOT generate skills as quickly as Bk 4-7, but will come close enough to be playable. Plus, its simple. (Besides, I always thought that the extended character generation gave the characters too many skills.)

 

[daryen]

I find that if you want to keep using Bk1/Sup4 for character generation, but want the skill numbers to increase, that the best compromise is just to give the character two skills whenever one is earned. Just double the skills. Then, have the "normal" skill rolled, and let the player pick whatever he wants for the "extra" skill. (Or make them roll both, if that's your style.)

This will NOT generate skills as quickly as Bk 4-7, but will come close enough to be playable. Plus, its simple. (Besides, I always thought that the extended character generation gave the characters too many skills.)

 

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by T. Foster:
I like this system a lot because it allows for gradual improvement over time at a pace approximately equal to that of char-gen (~1 skill point per year) without falling into the trap of "I discovered the secret of the Ancients so now I'm a better navigator"

I would think that this would depend on how long it took the character to find the secret of the Ancients. If they found it in a matter of minutes, no, they probably wouldn't be better. If it took several days of looking through star chart after star chart, they would probably get better just from the knowledge gained from looking at all of those charts and from trying to hunt through them quickly.

 

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by T. Foster:
I like this system a lot because it allows for gradual improvement over time at a pace approximately equal to that of char-gen (~1 skill point per year) without falling into the trap of "I discovered the secret of the Ancients so now I'm a better navigator"

I would think that this would depend on how long it took the character to find the secret of the Ancients. If they found it in a matter of minutes, no, they probably wouldn't be better. If it took several days of looking through star chart after star chart, they would probably get better just from the knowledge gained from looking at all of those charts and from trying to hunt through them quickly.

 

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by daryen:
I find that if you want to keep using Bk1/Sup4 for character generation, but want the skill numbers to increase, that the best compromise is just to give the character two skills whenever one is earned. Just double the skills. Then, have the "normal" skill rolled, and let the player pick whatever he wants for the "extra" skill. (Or make them roll both, if that's your style.)

This will NOT generate skills as quickly as Bk 4-7, but will come close enough to be playable. Plus, its simple. (Besides, I always thought that the extended character generation gave the characters too many skills.)

That wouldn't really work the way I would like. I'm looking to broaden the number of skills that a character has, so that a Merchant can have Liaison and Carousing without using Book 7, so that a Scout can be a skilled diplomat ("Who's in charge here? I'd like to speak with them about matters of pressing importance.") and so on.

If I simply allowed an extra skill to be *chosen*, then the learning curve for any skill becomes a straight line. The normal Classic Traveller Experience system has this sort of "curve", but it takes so long to get better, who cares? If advancement is going to be quick, it needs to be on a curve, with each advancement getting harder and harder to achieve.

Allowing 2.6 to 4.2 extra experience points per term would do this (you'd may want whole numbers, though, now that I think of it). You could even award a base 4.0 or 4.2 before careers for skills earned as background skills.

 

[cheeb2002]

Originally posted by daryen:
I find that if you want to keep using Bk1/Sup4 for character generation, but want the skill numbers to increase, that the best compromise is just to give the character two skills whenever one is earned. Just double the skills. Then, have the "normal" skill rolled, and let the player pick whatever he wants for the "extra" skill. (Or make them roll both, if that's your style.)

This will NOT generate skills as quickly as Bk 4-7, but will come close enough to be playable. Plus, its simple. (Besides, I always thought that the extended character generation gave the characters too many skills.)

That wouldn't really work the way I would like. I'm looking to broaden the number of skills that a character has, so that a Merchant can have Liaison and Carousing without using Book 7, so that a Scout can be a skilled diplomat ("Who's in charge here? I'd like to speak with them about matters of pressing importance.") and so on.

If I simply allowed an extra skill to be *chosen*, then the learning curve for any skill becomes a straight line. The normal Classic Traveller Experience system has this sort of "curve", but it takes so long to get better, who cares? If advancement is going to be quick, it needs to be on a curve, with each advancement getting harder and harder to achieve.

Allowing 2.6 to 4.2 extra experience points per term would do this (you'd may want whole numbers, though, now that I think of it). You could even award a base 4.0 or 4.2 before careers for skills earned as background skills.

 

[Ranger]

I had a nice long post writen up earlier today, and my computer crashed befor I could add it, so this is the Readers Digest Condenced version.

To answer the question you asked at the top of the thread about why skills are they way they are in CT, I would say that it revolves around the nature of CT as a game. Without character classes the system needs some way to assign roles to characters. Skills became the way to do this. A group (ship's crew, merc group, exploration team, etc.) needs certain skill sets. The skills generated in the CG process put charactors in their roles. The thing with skills are, once players have them, they want to use them somehow.

So, before deciding on how many skills you want a typical characer to have, you need to decide what kind of game you really want to run. Is the game going to be 'task driven' or 'narative driven'? Do you want the players applying their characters' skills to overcome challenges, or do you want them to come up with cleaver ways to overcome them? If it's going to be 'task driven' then you need a good task resolution system and characters need a good skill set. If not, then the skills are just meant to fit the characters into their roles (pilot, navigator, engineer, medic, what ever) and the rest is up to the players to come up with.

Based on what you've said so far, you may want to try and track down the MT players manual and look at the CG system ther. It is basically CT+. It was designed to give 'basic' characters the same amount of skills as the advanced system. It also has the 'inborn' cascade skill (which I personally don't like) that will give your players some more diverse skill options.

I've thougth about a lot of the same problems and have been jinning up my own CG system based on CT that gives more skills and allows players some flexability to choose skills along the way (before I got a copy of MT and realized most of the work I was doing was already done). If you'd like to take a look at it I'd be happy to pass it along.

One more thought. Most of the really big jump in skills learned in advanced CG comes from schools (flight, medical, buisnes, commando, etc), which give the chance to pick up up to 4 skills in one shot (if you roll well). I have played with the idea of working those schools into the MT basic CG system (which has the chance for special duty in a term). That would give basic characters a chance for a lot more skills.

just my thoughts,

Rob

 

[Ranger]

I had a nice long post writen up earlier today, and my computer crashed befor I could add it, so this is the Readers Digest Condenced version.

To answer the question you asked at the top of the thread about why skills are they way they are in CT, I would say that it revolves around the nature of CT as a game. Without character classes the system needs some way to assign roles to characters. Skills became the way to do this. A group (ship's crew, merc group, exploration team, etc.) needs certain skill sets. The skills generated in the CG process put charactors in their roles. The thing with skills are, once players have them, they want to use them somehow.

So, before deciding on how many skills you want a typical characer to have, you need to decide what kind of game you really want to run. Is the game going to be 'task driven' or 'narative driven'? Do you want the players applying their characters' skills to overcome challenges, or do you want them to come up with cleaver ways to overcome them? If it's going to be 'task driven' then you need a good task resolution system and characters need a good skill set. If not, then the skills are just meant to fit the characters into their roles (pilot, navigator, engineer, medic, what ever) and the rest is up to the players to come up with.

Based on what you've said so far, you may want to try and track down the MT players manual and look at the CG system ther. It is basically CT+. It was designed to give 'basic' characters the same amount of skills as the advanced system. It also has the 'inborn' cascade skill (which I personally don't like) that will give your players some more diverse skill options.

I've thougth about a lot of the same problems and have been jinning up my own CG system based on CT that gives more skills and allows players some flexability to choose skills along the way (before I got a copy of MT and realized most of the work I was doing was already done). If you'd like to take a look at it I'd be happy to pass it along.

One more thought. Most of the really big jump in skills learned in advanced CG comes from schools (flight, medical, buisnes, commando, etc), which give the chance to pick up up to 4 skills in one shot (if you roll well). I have played with the idea of working those schools into the MT basic CG system (which has the chance for special duty in a term). That would give basic characters a chance for a lot more skills.

just my thoughts,

Rob

 

[Sophiathegreen]

There will never be than ideal experience or skill system in role-playing games at all. Traveller can use than hobboy skills for character generation. May-be the merchant capt has than hobboy of woodworking on the side and once than while he gernerate extra money sell finsh work.

 

[Sophiathegreen]

There will never be than ideal experience or skill system in role-playing games at all. Traveller can use than hobboy skills for character generation. May-be the merchant capt has than hobboy of woodworking on the side and once than while he gernerate extra money sell finsh work.

 

[Uncle Bob]

"Hobboy" threw me at first, hobo, hoboken...
I think this is what you meant.

From The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

hob·by n. pl. hob·bies
An activity or interest pursued outside one's regular occupation and engaged in primarily for pleasure.

 

[Uncle Bob]

"Hobboy" threw me at first, hobo, hoboken...
I think this is what you meant.

From The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

hob·by n. pl. hob·bies
An activity or interest pursued outside one's regular occupation and engaged in primarily for pleasure.

 

[roygbiv]

All of this is IMTU, so adjust your salt doseage accordingly.

The skill level 0 or 1 don't represent a significant accomplishment. IMTU, they indicate some proficiency but that's about it.

Take the CT medical skill. In the CT model, someone with Med-3 has the skills of a full-fleged doctor, whether or not they've earned that designation.

Med-0 is probably 58th century first aid: a combination of wound stabilization and the operation of contemporary medical and trauma aids. Med-1 would probably be the level of a battlefield medic or corpsman. Remember that CT uses 2D6 >= 8 as a measure for success, which gives an unmodified 40% success rate. This if you don't use a task system such as BITS or T4, so once you reach Med-3, you only need 5+ on 2D6 in order to succeed at a task. You've had a significant jump in probable success.

Remember that in a 2D6 system like CT, you don't need bodaceous skill levels to strongly affect your success rate and thus skew the game. Do you really want PCs with Pilot-6 or AutoPistol-6, who can succeed on a roll of 2+?

I use a ramped rule for skill improvement. Any skill level 0 can be acquired with 3 months of tutelage and practice. Gun Combat-0 means you can load a weapon, point it downrange and manage to not shoot your own eye out. GunCbt-1 means that you meet minimum military standards (such and such a group at so many meters...), plus you can field strip and clean the weapon and perform battlefield-level repairs. Someone with GunCbt-2 is heading towards the "marksman" level and would need significant practice to attain that level.

As several gun bunnies on the TML have stated, attaining match-level competency (GunCbt 3+) requires constant training and thorough familiarization with a weapon. Guys like Doug Barry and John Kwon have claimed that they notice a difference in their shooting if their training slacks off at all. Thus I would make regular practice a requirement for attaining and maintaining any skill level above 3. As I mentioned, in the CT system, a skill level of three starts to skew the probably of success significantly in favour of the PC.

When you add a task system, such as BITS, you can compensate by modifying the difficulty level for every two levels of skill. A difficult shot for someone with GunCbt-0 might be an average task for someone with GunCbt-2.

Extrapolation of this to other skills is trivial. Yes, your Pilot character is constantly piloting, but that doesn't mean he or she is necessarily improving his or her skills. Ask someone who used to fly for the Navy and now flies for American Airlines if they're better pilots after 6 years of trundling winged buses through the sky. My guess is that their piloting skill has decreased because they only practice a narrow subset of "flying" from a naval aviator's point of view. If your 200T free trader only really follows established flight plans, with the occasional combat action, your pilot character probably isn't being stressed enough to experience continual improvement.

Same thing with Engineering: if you're determined to acquire a solid foundational knowledge of engineering processes and you not only study but apply that learning on a continual basis, then your character should be rewarded with additional skill levels. If he or she simply lurks at the ChEng station and occasionally twists a dial or reads a gauge, then I can't see any justification for advancement.

 

[roygbiv]

All of this is IMTU, so adjust your salt doseage accordingly.

The skill level 0 or 1 don't represent a significant accomplishment. IMTU, they indicate some proficiency but that's about it.

Take the CT medical skill. In the CT model, someone with Med-3 has the skills of a full-fleged doctor, whether or not they've earned that designation.

Med-0 is probably 58th century first aid: a combination of wound stabilization and the operation of contemporary medical and trauma aids. Med-1 would probably be the level of a battlefield medic or corpsman. Remember that CT uses 2D6 >= 8 as a measure for success, which gives an unmodified 40% success rate. This if you don't use a task system such as BITS or T4, so once you reach Med-3, you only need 5+ on 2D6 in order to succeed at a task. You've had a significant jump in probable success.

Remember that in a 2D6 system like CT, you don't need bodaceous skill levels to strongly affect your success rate and thus skew the game. Do you really want PCs with Pilot-6 or AutoPistol-6, who can succeed on a roll of 2+?

I use a ramped rule for skill improvement. Any skill level 0 can be acquired with 3 months of tutelage and practice. Gun Combat-0 means you can load a weapon, point it downrange and manage to not shoot your own eye out. GunCbt-1 means that you meet minimum military standards (such and such a group at so many meters...), plus you can field strip and clean the weapon and perform battlefield-level repairs. Someone with GunCbt-2 is heading towards the "marksman" level and would need significant practice to attain that level.

As several gun bunnies on the TML have stated, attaining match-level competency (GunCbt 3+) requires constant training and thorough familiarization with a weapon. Guys like Doug Barry and John Kwon have claimed that they notice a difference in their shooting if their training slacks off at all. Thus I would make regular practice a requirement for attaining and maintaining any skill level above 3. As I mentioned, in the CT system, a skill level of three starts to skew the probably of success significantly in favour of the PC.

When you add a task system, such as BITS, you can compensate by modifying the difficulty level for every two levels of skill. A difficult shot for someone with GunCbt-0 might be an average task for someone with GunCbt-2.

Extrapolation of this to other skills is trivial. Yes, your Pilot character is constantly piloting, but that doesn't mean he or she is necessarily improving his or her skills. Ask someone who used to fly for the Navy and now flies for American Airlines if they're better pilots after 6 years of trundling winged buses through the sky. My guess is that their piloting skill has decreased because they only practice a narrow subset of "flying" from a naval aviator's point of view. If your 200T free trader only really follows established flight plans, with the occasional combat action, your pilot character probably isn't being stressed enough to experience continual improvement.

Same thing with Engineering: if you're determined to acquire a solid foundational knowledge of engineering processes and you not only study but apply that learning on a continual basis, then your character should be rewarded with additional skill levels. If he or she simply lurks at the ChEng station and occasionally twists a dial or reads a gauge, then I can't see any justification for advancement.

 

[Lord Iron Wolf]

I think one thing is missed with all of this focus on the experience system--Traveller was several games within a game system. Character generation was one of them. When you were generating a character how long did you leave them in before stopping and collecting your money and material goods? The longer the better but if you stayed too long aging effects and survival rolls would increase the chances of death and returning you to scratch. With a good set of character stats, how much did you want to risk versus the rewards of taking the gamble of staying in for several terms?

I've heard a lot of complaining about the chance of death during character generation and the lack of an experience system--hell! the damn randomness of the character's skills--but this is to make the character generation into a game within itself.

Any experience system defeats the game of Character Generation by reducing the risks.

Any Comments?

Lord Iron Wolf

 

[Lord Iron Wolf]

I think one thing is missed with all of this focus on the experience system--Traveller was several games within a game system. Character generation was one of them. When you were generating a character how long did you leave them in before stopping and collecting your money and material goods? The longer the better but if you stayed too long aging effects and survival rolls would increase the chances of death and returning you to scratch. With a good set of character stats, how much did you want to risk versus the rewards of taking the gamble of staying in for several terms?

I've heard a lot of complaining about the chance of death during character generation and the lack of an experience system--hell! the damn randomness of the character's skills--but this is to make the character generation into a game within itself.

Any experience system defeats the game of Character Generation by reducing the risks.

Any Comments?

Lord Iron Wolf

 

[robject]

I agree with previous posts: MegaTraveller's chargen rules and experience rules are very Classic compatible, and nicely expanded. There are a staggering number of skills there, so be aware. I wonder if there are too many, but that's another thread.

I'm never satisfied with experience rules. My current homebrew is to fix a probability that skills will be learned/improved every time one is used, map that to your task rolls, and make it harder to specialize. Here's an example.

Astrogation. Let's say the average Astrogator performs on the order of 30-40 successful jumps between levels 1 and 2. That's over a year of working trade routes, by the way. OK, no problem. When the astrogator rolls to successfully jump a ship, see if she rolled boxcars (or snake eyes, whichever is best). If she does, have her roll a single d6: if the result is greater than her skill level, her skill level goes up by one. No bookkeeping necessary: the law of averages does all the work for you.

So, if you can assume most tasks have around 50% chance of improvement between levels 1 and 2 after 30 to 40 uses, then the above rule may work for you.

 

[robject]

I agree with previous posts: MegaTraveller's chargen rules and experience rules are very Classic compatible, and nicely expanded. There are a staggering number of skills there, so be aware. I wonder if there are too many, but that's another thread.

I'm never satisfied with experience rules. My current homebrew is to fix a probability that skills will be learned/improved every time one is used, map that to your task rolls, and make it harder to specialize. Here's an example.

Astrogation. Let's say the average Astrogator performs on the order of 30-40 successful jumps between levels 1 and 2. That's over a year of working trade routes, by the way. OK, no problem. When the astrogator rolls to successfully jump a ship, see if she rolled boxcars (or snake eyes, whichever is best). If she does, have her roll a single d6: if the result is greater than her skill level, her skill level goes up by one. No bookkeeping necessary: the law of averages does all the work for you.

So, if you can assume most tasks have around 50% chance of improvement between levels 1 and 2 after 30 to 40 uses, then the above rule may work for you.