CT Experience System

[robject]

OK, I ran some very quick and dirty numbers through my "homebrew" experience machine, and came up with these depressingly small-looking probabilities:

p(Level 0 to 1) = 2.77%
p(Level 1 to 2) = 2.31%
p(Level 2 to 3) = 1.85%
p(Level 3 to 4) = 1.38%
p(Level 4 to 5) = 0.92%
p(Level 5 to 6) = 0.46%
p(Level 6 to 7) = 0%

This is per-success, or per-use if you prefer. And these are average chances, not guarantees. All in all I like it.

 

[robject]

OK, I ran some very quick and dirty numbers through my "homebrew" experience machine, and came up with these depressingly small-looking probabilities:

p(Level 0 to 1) = 2.77%
p(Level 1 to 2) = 2.31%
p(Level 2 to 3) = 1.85%
p(Level 3 to 4) = 1.38%
p(Level 4 to 5) = 0.92%
p(Level 5 to 6) = 0.46%
p(Level 6 to 7) = 0%

This is per-success, or per-use if you prefer. And these are average chances, not guarantees. All in all I like it.

 

[robject]

To comment on Lone Wolf's observations: the experience system doesn't affect char-gen; it does affect the PC's adventuring abilities.

In fact, the whole system looks like a cascade of checks and balances, and from the 10,000 foot view, the whole cycle is a struggle for achievement before dying. An epic cycle indeed!

[IMTU, improvement requires a significant time commitment, to force the player to balance the aging risk against skills or characteristics. I mean to allow slow, steady improvement over time, with as little bookkeeping as possible.]

But the whole adventuring process is also moderated; the wise referee seeks to set guidelines to limit PC's potential according to the characteristics of the campaign.

Has anyone been able to do this successfully?

 

[robject]

To comment on Lone Wolf's observations: the experience system doesn't affect char-gen; it does affect the PC's adventuring abilities.

In fact, the whole system looks like a cascade of checks and balances, and from the 10,000 foot view, the whole cycle is a struggle for achievement before dying. An epic cycle indeed!

[IMTU, improvement requires a significant time commitment, to force the player to balance the aging risk against skills or characteristics. I mean to allow slow, steady improvement over time, with as little bookkeeping as possible.]

But the whole adventuring process is also moderated; the wise referee seeks to set guidelines to limit PC's potential according to the characteristics of the campaign.

Has anyone been able to do this successfully?

 

[signless]

This topic is one that bothered me from the first time I sat down to play CT as a teenager (and that was a loooooong time ago...).
I eventually came up with not a set of cast-iron rules, but a method of GM-ing the game that allowed my players to advance according to their individual efforts in the game.
Using a primitive task system, I kept track of when each character attempted difficult tasks by calling on their existing skills. I would note the successes and failures, awarding each character a point or two towards advancing their skill level. Once a player had amassed ten points, they were able to either increase their skill level, or "purchase" a skill level of one in a closely-related area.
For example, a Pilot who has managed a series of very lucky atmospheric manuevers in his ship could over the course of time increase his Pilot skill...or "purchase" a Ship's Boat/Cutter/Pinnace skill of one after a two-week course in his target skill. Without constant re-inforcement in the new skill area (which I determined to be using the skill at least once every two weeks play time) the skill would drop to zero.
This gave me a great deal of leeway in rewarding the efforts of my characters, and allowed them a small bit of control over how they chose to improve themselves.
I know it's sloppy...but so is life...especially around Vargr...

 

[signless]

This topic is one that bothered me from the first time I sat down to play CT as a teenager (and that was a loooooong time ago...).
I eventually came up with not a set of cast-iron rules, but a method of GM-ing the game that allowed my players to advance according to their individual efforts in the game.
Using a primitive task system, I kept track of when each character attempted difficult tasks by calling on their existing skills. I would note the successes and failures, awarding each character a point or two towards advancing their skill level. Once a player had amassed ten points, they were able to either increase their skill level, or "purchase" a skill level of one in a closely-related area.
For example, a Pilot who has managed a series of very lucky atmospheric manuevers in his ship could over the course of time increase his Pilot skill...or "purchase" a Ship's Boat/Cutter/Pinnace skill of one after a two-week course in his target skill. Without constant re-inforcement in the new skill area (which I determined to be using the skill at least once every two weeks play time) the skill would drop to zero.
This gave me a great deal of leeway in rewarding the efforts of my characters, and allowed them a small bit of control over how they chose to improve themselves.
I know it's sloppy...but so is life...especially around Vargr...

 

[hirch duckfinder]

Originally posted by signless:
This topic is one that bothered me from the first time I sat down to play CT as a teenager (and that was a loooooong time ago...).
I eventually came up with not a set of cast-iron rules, but a method of GM-ing the game that allowed my players to advance according to their individual efforts in the game.
Using a primitive task system, I kept track of when each character attempted difficult tasks by calling on their existing skills. I would note the successes and failures, awarding each character a point or two towards advancing their skill level. Once a player had amassed ten points, they were able to either increase their skill level, or "purchase" a skill level of one in a closely-related area.
For example, a Pilot who has managed a series of very lucky atmospheric manuevers in his ship could over the course of time increase his Pilot skill...or "purchase" a Ship's Boat/Cutter/Pinnace skill of one after a two-week course in his target skill. Without constant re-inforcement in the new skill area (which I determined to be using the skill at least once every two weeks play time) the skill would drop to zero.
This gave me a great deal of leeway in rewarding the efforts of my characters, and allowed them a small bit of control over how they chose to improve themselves.
I know it's sloppy...but so is life...especially around Vargr...

----- i also use a similar idea ( see earlier in thread ) but i have a problem with only rewarding success , as i think you can learn just as much from failiure ( next time i'll know to go a bit further to the right.... ) . 1/10th of a skill point for every use under genuine pressure makes sense to me . whaddyathink?

 

[hirch duckfinder]

Originally posted by signless:
This topic is one that bothered me from the first time I sat down to play CT as a teenager (and that was a loooooong time ago...).
I eventually came up with not a set of cast-iron rules, but a method of GM-ing the game that allowed my players to advance according to their individual efforts in the game.
Using a primitive task system, I kept track of when each character attempted difficult tasks by calling on their existing skills. I would note the successes and failures, awarding each character a point or two towards advancing their skill level. Once a player had amassed ten points, they were able to either increase their skill level, or "purchase" a skill level of one in a closely-related area.
For example, a Pilot who has managed a series of very lucky atmospheric manuevers in his ship could over the course of time increase his Pilot skill...or "purchase" a Ship's Boat/Cutter/Pinnace skill of one after a two-week course in his target skill. Without constant re-inforcement in the new skill area (which I determined to be using the skill at least once every two weeks play time) the skill would drop to zero.
This gave me a great deal of leeway in rewarding the efforts of my characters, and allowed them a small bit of control over how they chose to improve themselves.
I know it's sloppy...but so is life...especially around Vargr...

----- i also use a similar idea ( see earlier in thread ) but i have a problem with only rewarding success , as i think you can learn just as much from failiure ( next time i'll know to go a bit further to the right.... ) . 1/10th of a skill point for every use under genuine pressure makes sense to me . whaddyathink?

 

[ACK!!]

I do not use everything out of Andy Slack's house rules but the Experience system is one I do.

Andy Slack's House Rules

It is simplistic but you reward the players 1 to 3 experience points per game and then when they get 8 points they can up a skill by one.

I know but it has worked for me.

 

[ACK!!]

I do not use everything out of Andy Slack's house rules but the Experience system is one I do.

Andy Slack's House Rules

It is simplistic but you reward the players 1 to 3 experience points per game and then when they get 8 points they can up a skill by one.

I know but it has worked for me.

 

[Straybow]

Heck, even the LBB says "The above is the only ordinary method of self-improvement available to characters" (emphasis added). In other words, any other methods would either not be ordinary or not be classified as self-improvement.

Mandatory training is not self-improvement. If a crewman is hired at Engr-1 and the chief (Engr-3) trains that crewman intensively as part of ship maintenance, it would go by different rules. Advancing to Engr-2 would take half the time (2 yrs temporary + 2 yrs permanent). For a technical skill only one apprentice can be trained on the job; a full-time instructor could handle many apprentices.

An Engr-2 could only train his assistant to the temporary level, it would take 4 yrs to make it permanent (self-study but with automatic discipline/motivation success). Anyone Level-2 in a skill should be able to train several students to Level-1, time dependent on how technical the skill is.

In an advanced society there should be subliminal/post-hypnotic means to accelerate certain kinds of training, perhaps requiring sophisticated VR gear and training modules. This would only work for less physically intensive skill types, such as Navigation, Electronics, Computer, etc.

I disagree with the idea that level 1 is easy to reach. If success in general is 8+, then a +1 is normally equal to a +16.7%, which is like a +3 on a d20 roll, which is no small deal. Level 1 is complete proficiency of all the basics, and executing the skill in real-life situations.

Level 2 (up to +30%) is mastery, Level 3 (up to +44%) is expert. For example, Medic-1 would be a licensed paramedic, Medic-2 RN or PA, Medic-3 is full Doctor. To go from Level-1 to Level-2 should take 4+4 years to advance a level by self-study.

CT uses a skill level of ½ to represent a more casual familiarity, and frequently imposes a negative DM to an attempt by a level 0 skill holder.

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).

No, the ability to learn is still education, not intelligence. There are some people who learn it early and intuitively, and the probability of that is intelligence. Someone from a primitive society would function at a lower level of Int than the raw score, until acclimated in the ways of the advanced society, but that is a different matter.

Then again, +1 Intel results are tossed around rather freely in both the Personal Development Table and Mustering Out, or even +2 Intel. (One of the things I changed IMTU: +N Intel on Muster Out becomes +N Equipment, pick anything but weapons or vehicles.)

Remember that Edu 9+ is equivalent to a BS degree, and above that graduate degrees. The scale is ~2 yrs formal, intensive schooling for each 1 point of Edu. (8 = Assoc. degree, 7 = High School grad, etc.)

Few could self-study at a college level. Only a genuine genius, which I would define as Intel 13+, can hope to self-study at a graduate level.

In addition, how about letting players choose a skill from the skill list whenever they roll Jack-o-T after the first time?

Only after the first? JoT has got to be the most abused thing in CT. In one game I got a JoT and asked the GM if I could instead choose a skill which wasn't available for my branch of service. He acted like he'd never thought of handling it that way, but IMTU that's the ONLY way. Maybe on the 3rd or 4th JoT roll I'd let a PC have a real JoT ability?it's been earned.

 

[Straybow]

Heck, even the LBB says "The above is the only ordinary method of self-improvement available to characters" (emphasis added). In other words, any other methods would either not be ordinary or not be classified as self-improvement.

Mandatory training is not self-improvement. If a crewman is hired at Engr-1 and the chief (Engr-3) trains that crewman intensively as part of ship maintenance, it would go by different rules. Advancing to Engr-2 would take half the time (2 yrs temporary + 2 yrs permanent). For a technical skill only one apprentice can be trained on the job; a full-time instructor could handle many apprentices.

An Engr-2 could only train his assistant to the temporary level, it would take 4 yrs to make it permanent (self-study but with automatic discipline/motivation success). Anyone Level-2 in a skill should be able to train several students to Level-1, time dependent on how technical the skill is.

In an advanced society there should be subliminal/post-hypnotic means to accelerate certain kinds of training, perhaps requiring sophisticated VR gear and training modules. This would only work for less physically intensive skill types, such as Navigation, Electronics, Computer, etc.

I disagree with the idea that level 1 is easy to reach. If success in general is 8+, then a +1 is normally equal to a +16.7%, which is like a +3 on a d20 roll, which is no small deal. Level 1 is complete proficiency of all the basics, and executing the skill in real-life situations.

Level 2 (up to +30%) is mastery, Level 3 (up to +44%) is expert. For example, Medic-1 would be a licensed paramedic, Medic-2 RN or PA, Medic-3 is full Doctor. To go from Level-1 to Level-2 should take 4+4 years to advance a level by self-study.

CT uses a skill level of ½ to represent a more casual familiarity, and frequently imposes a negative DM to an attempt by a level 0 skill holder.

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).

No, the ability to learn is still education, not intelligence. There are some people who learn it early and intuitively, and the probability of that is intelligence. Someone from a primitive society would function at a lower level of Int than the raw score, until acclimated in the ways of the advanced society, but that is a different matter.

Then again, +1 Intel results are tossed around rather freely in both the Personal Development Table and Mustering Out, or even +2 Intel. (One of the things I changed IMTU: +N Intel on Muster Out becomes +N Equipment, pick anything but weapons or vehicles.)

Remember that Edu 9+ is equivalent to a BS degree, and above that graduate degrees. The scale is ~2 yrs formal, intensive schooling for each 1 point of Edu. (8 = Assoc. degree, 7 = High School grad, etc.)

Few could self-study at a college level. Only a genuine genius, which I would define as Intel 13+, can hope to self-study at a graduate level.

In addition, how about letting players choose a skill from the skill list whenever they roll Jack-o-T after the first time?

Only after the first? JoT has got to be the most abused thing in CT. In one game I got a JoT and asked the GM if I could instead choose a skill which wasn't available for my branch of service. He acted like he'd never thought of handling it that way, but IMTU that's the ONLY way. Maybe on the 3rd or 4th JoT roll I'd let a PC have a real JoT ability?it's been earned.