CT+ task system

[zakrol]

Originally posted by Takei:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Zakrol:
Also - do we want to poach a couple of d20 concepts, namely the idea of 'take 7' to reflect a calm unpressured task attempt and 'take 12' to reflect unlimited attempts?

Something else mentioned a few months back, and another thing I quite like. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes - I remembered it from somewhere. I must have read that thread...

 

[Fritz_Brown]

What about (attribute/2)-4? I know it actually entails a bit of math, but it can also be done in "table" form as:
1-2 -3
3-4 -2
5-6 -1
7-9 0
A-B +1
C-D +2
E-F +3

It uses the entire range 1-15, and it gives an even distribution, with negative DMs for klutzes and weaklings. (Anybody ... anybody....)

*Like Except for the attribute bonus, I will add my consensus to those above: Sigg's/Aramis' "By 4s" system.

What would the "takes" be? "Take 8" and "Take 12"?

 

[erisred]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
What about (attribute/2)-4? I know it actually entails a bit of math, but it can also be done in "table" form as:
1-2 -3
3-4 -2
5-6 -1
7-9 0
A-B +1
C-D +2
E-F +3

It uses the entire range 1-15, and it gives an even distribution, with negative DMs for klutzes and weaklings. (Anybody ... anybody....)

*Like Except for the attribute bonus, I will add my consensus to those above: Sigg's/Aramis' "By 4s" system.

What would the "takes" be? "Take 8" and "Take 12"?

The only problem I have with systems like you proposed is that the math isn't done *once* and recorded. Everytime a Characteristic goes down from injury, the math has to be done over, and over, and over...

...and then it becomes way too much trouble to keep track of.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

And, what method proposed here is different from that?

 

[robject]

I think the concept is less math, or less common lookups, or something.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Well, robject, I'm just wondering what has been proposed that entails lots of lookups, or complicated math? Mine is complicated by some standards because it involves division AND subtraction. But, seriously, if you can't do math, you probably want to play D&D, and there's a Traveller version for that - it's called T20.

(I know, that was uncalled for. But it was in jest, so chill.....)

 

[Takei]

I don't think any of the systems proposed involve too much lookup as players will tend to remember the numbers involved. I've played a fair amount of d20 and don't have to look up stat mods as they change as I know that a change of 2 to the stat means a change of 1 to the modifier.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

One thing not addressed yet (in the consensus [?] system) is opposed tasks. How do you handle, say a vehicle chase, or a sub-hunt with this system?

[Stepping out of the blast radius....]

 

[Takei]

Opposed tasks is something d20 handles very well. Actually, any roll-high system can handle them in the same way.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

And....

 

[robject]

Good point Fritz. At this time we've just got the barebones, don't we? Thank you for bringing that up.

 

[clementk]

Roll off, whoever succeeds after modifications (or rolls higher/highest margin of success if both succeed) wins the opposed roll?

(edited to hopefully actually make more sense )

 

[clementk]

For me a simple task system uses either modifiers only in steps of +1 or levels of difficulty, which may be one and the same and preferably just levels of difficulty. Anything else isn't simple enough for me to call it simple.

I admit I like BITS task chart thingee and wouldn't mind seeing that termingology used. Or at the least so CT+ can fit on the chart.

Oh and in game the fewer charts needed the better IMO.

 

[Berg]

Oh and in game the fewer charts needed the better IMO.

Agreed.

Tom

 

[Takei]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
And....

My bad, assuming it was obvious

Casey is correct, both parties roll and whoever gets highest wins. Sneaking past a guard is the easiest example: the guard rolls their Listen and that is the number the thief has to beat. One aspect of this is that the 4,8,12,16 levels can be ignored in some cases. The thief in the above example won't fail by rolling a 7 if the guard rolls a 6. In a speeder race through a canyon you need to succeed at a certain grav vehicle check not to crash, and if you also beat the guy in front then you gain on him.
Hope that's a bit clearer.

 

[Takei]

Something's just ocurred to me about using stat/4 as a task mod - you're never at a penalty for having a low stat. Not saying it's a bad thing, just one of the effects of stat/4.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

That's why I suggest truncate((attribute/2)-4). It gives penalties for low attributes, really good bonuses if you get a monster (above 12), can be figured without a table (go back to my post on page 3 of this thread) if you want, and keeps bonuses within the realm of CT skill levels.

 

[mike wightman]

Not having a bonus is enough of a penalty with the target numbers as they are

 

[Fritz_Brown]

But, attribute/4 still gives a bonus. And, it gives a +2 for an average stat (8).

 

[flykiller]

still advocate:
(2) (-2)
(3-4) (-1)
(A-B) (+1)
(C) (+2)