CT vs. MGT Character Gen

[mike wightman]

You misunderstand, I think. Yes Gruffty showed when it appeared in print. Though that may have little to do with when it was introduced. I beleive the idea may have been talked about in response to feedback on the rise in skills in advanced char gen. That's what I meant above.

Yep, it was probably the ridiculous number of skills that advanced character generation was giving that needed the nerf.

That it was not applied logically or equally is probably the result of (notorious imo) sloppy editing and/or consistency. Not some purposeful application designed to make only certain career gen adhere to it and not others.

It's a conspiracy I tell you...

As far as applying it equally to basic and advanced char gen, it's a moot point. I don't think I've ever had it an issue in basic char gen (well maybe once with some really low mental stats). But it has been an issue with more than a few advanced char gen characters even with average stats (and at least one with above average).

Again true enough - it is very rare for basic characters to come anywhere near the cap, until mustering out and then learning from experience...

And I will reiterate that the idea seems sound from a game rule point. It brings some balance to the stats...

...all except the classic dump stat of Soc of course

:rofl:

The rule is probably less necessary for MGT as it does use stat bonuses, as long as it treats the stats fairly* (not equally mind you, which is the way I suspect they went). I am curious if Soc is still a dump stat in MGT

* as in how many skills use each stat compared to the others? And how much do the physical stats count for beyond skills? And do the non-physical stats count for anything beyond skills. Fairly would see a balancing factor where a stat with few applicable skills would count for more, while a stat that counts for more than just skills would count less. Equally would just say "stat bonus = x for y" no matter which stat. But that's all probably less here than there.

In a sci-fi game Int and Edu become really important for lots of task roles - in MT an awful lot of tasks used Int or Edu as the controlling characteristic.
MgT also allows you to select skill and stat needed for the success role.

I use Int and Edu in combat too to determine brain damage as a result of blood loss etc.

 

[Supplement Four]

If you roll and keep characteristics it isn't unusual to end up with a low Int+Edu score. This should not stop someone from being able to pick up skills - the low stat should be enough of a handicap in play.

Not if you're talking about CT, where 80-90% of throws do not reference stat.

CT combat references some stat (not INT and EDU). There are a couple of other references, here and there (DEX for zero G operations, for example). But, most of the time, in CT, stat is not referenced.

So, the low numbers in stats--especially INT and EDU would not handicap play all that much.

The Experience Cap is needed.

Do you allow characters to swap new skills for old if they go above their cap during generation?

Sure. Player's choice. It's part of their input on their characters.

Don't forget that the CT rules allow for fairly easy increase of the EDU stat (but it cannot be raised higher than the INT stat).

Or downgrade a skill to a lower level so a new skill can be earned (this may actually work as a way to give level 0 skills "I was trained in it but it's so long since I used it...."

Skill never goes below Level-0. So, if you downgrade, you never lose all expertise in that skill.

For example, a character is very good at bicycle riding early on in life. He's Cycle-2. Then, as he gets older, he doesn't ride as often as he used to. As a new skill becomes available, the player decides to downgrade to Cycle-1. Later on, he does it again, to Cycle-0. But, his skill never drops below Cycle-0. He'll always retain some knowledge and expertise in that area.

Of course, this isn't a "game" example. I wanted to make the point. Substitute Rifle skill with Cycle above, and the same logic holds true. The character is a sharpshooter with Rifle-2 in his 20's. As he gets older, he doesn't go to the range anymore, and his skills fade. He degrades to Rifle-1 and then to Rifle-0. But, he'll never go below that.

The rule actually works quite well.



So many people think they know CT rather well, but I find that many people aren't as "up" on CT rules as they think.

CT skills are not meant to be stagnant. Just read Marc's words in the Experience section of LBB's 1-3. He explains how a sharpshooter is best at his skill when being a sharpshooter is his profession. That skill goes up and down.

The expereince rules reflect this motion, too.

At any one time, a player can be "training" a particular skill. During that training period, that skill is one level higher than normal. If the character keeps training that skill (and is successful on training throws), then the skill keeps the increase after 4 years.

But, a character can drop one skill and then pick up another.

For example, a character with Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-1 can train his Rifle skill, making him: Rifle-3 and Vacc Suit-1 during training.

If he changes focus during that training, he can decide to work on his Vacc Suit skill, making him: Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-2.

Or, he can fail his determination roll, slack off, and revert to his original: Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-1.

The point is to highlight how the skill levels fluctuate in CT.

Playing a game with Book 1 characters with e.g. three skills at 1 or 2, or playing one with Book 4-6 characters with six to ten skills at 1 to 5, is almost like playing with two different skill systems.

Again, if you enforce the Survival Rule, the two game systems will work together. You will get characters with about the same number of skills. The Survival Rule is key to make that happen, though. Basic and Advanced chargen characters do not work together if you allow the Optional Surival Rule.

Remember that, with Basic Chargen, Survival is throw but once per 4 years. With Advanced Chargen, Survival can be thrown up to once per year.

With the risk of death occuring more often, more skills are placed on an Advanced Chargen character.

What typically happens is that Advanced Chargen characters are younger, less terms, vs. their Basic Chargen counterparts. Both tend to have about the same amount of skills, though.

Compare 1001 Characters and Veterans if you don't believe me.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

S4, I agree. My hunch is the skill cap was introduced in order to preserve the Book 1 approach to skills after publication Books of 4-6. But the djinni was out of the bottle, and in a sense MT was the logical next step.

 

[Supplement Four]

S4, I agree. My hunch is the skill cap was introduced in order to preserve the Book 1 approach to skills after publication Books of 4-6. But the djinni was out of the bottle, and in a sense MT was the logical next step.

MT uses the Experience Rule (skill cap), as I'm sure you know.

And, you might be right about its introduction to equate Book 1 Basic Chargen characters with Books 4+ Advanced Chargen characters.

A couple of other limitations are hidden in the rules as well. For example, there's the Term Limit (unless box cars are thrown on Re-enlistment).

As I stated above, EDU can be fairly easily improved, but INT can only be improved through chargen. So, once chargen is completed, INT is what it is--and what it will forever be, until the character dies (or it is lowered due to age or some other factor). So, once EDU reaches INT (or if EDU is already higher than INT straight from chargen), that becomes the characters hard-line Experience Limit.

Let's not forget, though, in CT, having no skill is not that much of a penalty in many instances. The penalty, typically, is that the character recieves no bonus.

For example, a CT character could very well come out of chargen with just two skills: Rifle-1 and Vacc Suit-1. Nothing else.

This is a very playable character. He gets +1 with Rifle and a bonus to Vacc Suit throws, but for most everything else and most other throws, he's just throwing straight dice.

That happens a lot in CT. I think people forget that.

 

[far-trader]

...

Let's not forget, though, in CT, having no skill is not that much of a penalty in many instances. The penalty, typically, is that the character receives no bonus.

For example, a CT character could very well come out of chargen with just two skills: Rifle-1 and Vacc Suit-1. Nothing else.

This is a very playable character. He gets +1 with Rifle and a bonus to Vacc Suit throws, but for most everything else and most other throws, he's just throwing straight dice.

That happens a lot in CT. I think people forget that.

I don't think so...

For most cases where the character doesn't have the skill they can't do the thing. Period.

Without the (oft abused) Jack-o-Trades they are hooped unless the ref decides to allow it as a default skill. And in Book 1 that is a pretty limited skill set.

If it was applicable to every skill (i.e. every character has every skill at level 0 if needed) then what's the point of Jack-o-Trades? What's the need to hire that Engineer, Medic and/or Steward for the Free-Trader you mustered out with that you plan to Pilot and none of your friends have the needed skill(s)?

I don't even like (really really dislike to be honest) the "all characters in Book 1 have zero level skill with all weapons in Book 1". I mean come on, a little realism please.

 

[aramis]

Not every GM interpreted Gun-Combat 0 to be all weapons... many CT Ref's I've met made you pick. About half, in fact.

I've never played in another Ref's CT or MT game without the Experience limit. I've run a couple without it... but never again under CT/MT.

Jack was a "roll-for-it" skill in most GM's games.

The purported lack of stat references S4 cites is pretty much only in the core; the adventures have a variety of different task approaches, including 3d vs stat, +3 x to stat if skill y+.... While S4's 68A is derived from CT, it's not the CT task system, but A CT skill resolution system (which isn't quite the same thing), and its one of several approaches in the core rules. A couple refs I've met used a 2d vs stat if skill adequate, 3d if present but insufficient, or 4d if skill not present; most of them also played TFT, and had Bk0, which does have a discussion on aproaches to resolving actions. Several others used a modified combat mechanics: 2d for 8+, DM+1 if stat X+, DM -1 if stat Y-, DM+Skill; they used this approach (usually Stats 10+ and 5-, but not always).

The lack of an explicit singular mechanic provided room for a variety of approaches. I've seen at least 6 approaches used in play by myself and other Refs.
Method 1: 2d for 8+ with DM's, usually including a DM+1 or +2 for high stat, and a DM-1 or -2 for low.
Method 2: Dice by difficulty for ≤stat, DM +X if skill Y+
Method 3: if skill high enough, succeed, if not, fail
Method 4: Roll 3+Skill dice, keep 3, for ≤ stat.
Method 5: Roll and total dice equal to skill.
Method 6: Roll 2d if skill enough, 3d if present but not sufficient, 4d if skill missing; -1d if easy, +1d if hard; trying for stat or less.

Methods 1,2, and 3 are from various skill sections in the core rules. Method 4 was used by a guy I met, who said it was based upon the AD&D DMG methods of rolling stats. Method 5 was used by me a couple times, based upon my having had my ref require it in 1985... Method 6 was used by a group in anchorage who also played TFT; we discussed it at a school function.

The one thing that can be reliably said is that CT as it was played seldom was CT as written, and even when it was, many other actions were resolved in a variety of ways based upon the lack of consistent method.

Most games of the era had at least 2 resolution systems: Usually one for combat and a different one for non-combat. T&T: Saving Rolls for non-combat, attack dice totals for combat, both for ranged combat. TFT 3d vs adj stat for combat, Xd by difficulty vs stat for non-combat.

 

[mike wightman]

Not if you're talking about CT, where 80-90% of throws do not reference stat.

Do any of them in the basic game?

CT is a skills based system first, to play by the boook you need the book in front of you to read how to handle each skill.

CT combat references some stat (not INT and EDU). There are a couple of other references, here and there (DEX for zero G operations, for example). But, most of the time, in CT, stat is not referenced.

So, the low numbers in stats--especially INT and EDU would not handicap play all that much.

very true.

The Experience Cap is needed.

I still don't see why.

A character rolls a 5 for INt and 6 for Edu, what's the chance of them ever getting 11 skill lvls in basic character generation?
And if a character gets a 2 in each the player just joins the scouts

[delete]Skill never goes below Level-0. So, if you downgrade, you never lose all expertise in that skill.

For example, a character is very good at bicycle riding early on in life. He's Cycle-2. Then, as he gets older, he doesn't ride as often as he used to. As a new skill becomes available, the player decides to downgrade to Cycle-1. Later on, he does it again, to Cycle-0. But, his skill never drops below Cycle-0. He'll always retain some knowledge and expertise in that area.

Of course, this isn't a "game" example. I wanted to make the point. Substitute Rifle skill with Cycle above, and the same logic holds true. The character is a sharpshooter with Rifle-2 in his 20's. As he gets older, he doesn't go to the range anymore, and his skills fade. He degrades to Rifle-1 and then to Rifle-0. But, he'll never go below that.

The rule actually works quite well.[/quote]
But it's not a game rule is it? And yes I do like it.

So many people think they know CT rather well, but I find that many people aren't as "up" on CT rules as they think.

Hidden meaning?

CT skills are not meant to be stagnant. Just read Marc's words in the Experience section of LBB's 1-3. He explains how a sharpshooter is best at his skill when being a sharpshooter is his profession. That skill goes up and down.

The expereince rules reflect this motion, too.

At any one time, a player can be "training" a particular skill. During that training period, that skill is one level higher than normal. If the character keeps training that skill (and is successful on training throws), then the skill keeps the increase after 4 years.

But, a character can drop one skill and then pick up another.

For example, a character with Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-1 can train his Rifle skill, making him: Rifle-3 and Vacc Suit-1 during training.

If he changes focus during that training, he can decide to work on his Vacc Suit skill, making him: Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-2.

Or, he can fail his determination roll, slack off, and revert to his original: Rifle-2 and Vacc Suit-1.

The point is to highlight how the skill levels fluctuate in CT.

The point being the skill never drops to lower than it was during character generation - in play you may temporarilly or even permanently raise a skill but your base line is whatever you finished character generation with.

Again, if you enforce the Survival Rule, the two game systems will work together. You will get characters with about the same number of skills. The Survival Rule is key to make that happen, though. Basic and Advanced chargen characters do not work together if you allow the Optional Surival Rule.

Remember that, with Basic Chargen, Survival is throw but once per 4 years. With Advanced Chargen, Survival can be thrown up to once per year.

With the risk of death occuring more often, more skills are placed on an Advanced Chargen character.

What typically happens is that Advanced Chargen characters are younger, less terms, vs. their Basic Chargen counterparts. Both tend to have about the same amount of skills, though.

Compare 1001 Characters and Veterans if you don't believe me.

I have and do. I also note the characters in both books that break the Int+Edu cap....

 

[mike wightman]

A couple of other limitations are hidden in the rules as well. For example, there's the Term Limit (unless box cars are thrown on Re-enlistment).

How can a rule that's flat out stated be hidden?

As I stated above, EDU can be fairly easily improved, but INT can only be improved through chargen. So, once chargen is completed, INT is what it is--and what it will forever be, until the character dies (or it is lowered due to age or some other factor). So, once EDU reaches INT (or if EDU is already higher than INT straight from chargen), that becomes the characters hard-line Experience Limit.

Int can be raised by an RNA implant but the details are left to the referee - hidden in the Experience section

Let's not forget, though, in CT, having no skill is not that much of a penalty in many instances. The penalty, typically, is that the character recieves no bonus.

For example, a CT character could very well come out of chargen with just two skills: Rifle-1 and Vacc Suit-1. Nothing else.

This is a very playable character. He gets +1 with Rifle and a bonus to Vacc Suit throws, but for most everything else and most other throws, he's just throwing straight dice.

That happens a lot in CT. I think people forget that.

Read "Default skills" in the "Other Skills" section at the end of the skills description section.
Unless you have JoT skill you can not even attampt skills that you don't have lvl 0 or lvl 1 in (and the list of lvl 0 skills is there in the default section).

 

[atpollard]

To bring this somewhat back to CT vs MGT CharGen, I was quite impressed with the way MGT quantified ability modifiers to skills. It seemed to match fairly closely the range of modifiers found among the individual CT skill descriptions in a more "universal" manner. The basic 2-12 attribute range has most characters with +0, some with +/-1, and a very few with +/-2. IIRC, +/-3 required exceptional attributes. I am inclined to adopt it for use with CT and the 68A rule as a good simple guideline. (As a ref, I freely admit to putting more emphasis on 'fast' and 'fun' than on 'fair' when it comes to resolving tasks.)

I also like the fact that MGT quantified the zero level skills. In CT I have adopted a house rule that any time you fail a roll for a skill in Chargen, you get that skill at level-0 (you were exposed to it but never mastered it). This works well explaining how that character got that particular skill-0. So far it seems to work out ok.

MGT offers a point-buy option that seems an open invitation to create 'half-Elven Rangers' - (the classic combination for the old D&D min-max rules munchkins). It isn't an inherently bad idea, just one prone to abuse.

While some people have done analysis of the 'average' number of skills for CT Basic CharGen, CT Advanced CharGen and MGT CharGen, my personal experience is that these averages, while probably correct, are not indicative of the real results that I see in actual characters. CT Basic Chargen rarely produces more than 2 skills per term for even the luckiest set of rolls. CT Advanced CharGen on the other hand, could produce as many as 6 skills in 1 year by attending one of the schools and rolling well – with still more chances for skills for Commission, Promotion and other years in that term. In the end, a 1 term CT Advanced Chargen Marine could be overwhelmingly superior to a 4 term CT Basic Chargen Marine (both having made 4 survival rolls). From the analysis, MGT Chargen has averages comparable to CT Advanced Chargen, but the characters that I have seen suggest that in practice, MGT Chargen produces characters with both many more skills (including skill-0) and many more skill levels than CT Advanced Chargen and MegaTraveller Chargen. While the averages may be similar, the systems produce far different statistical ‘tails’, and players tend to save and play the ‘best’ character that they rolled, not the most ‘average’.

 

[Supplement Four]

I received several responses to my comments above. I'm going to have to respond one by one--but later today.

Here's one, though...

I don't think so...

For most cases where the character doesn't have the skill they can't do the thing. Period.

That's incorrect.

Look at the "Throws" section in The Traveller Adventure that discusses the creation of task throws. Also, look through the Traveller Book at all the suggested skill throws. For the most part, skill is not a requirement.

What happens when a Naval character fires a Rifle without Rifle skill? Nothing. He throws without a bonus for having Rifle skill--all other modifiers are the same. (All characters in Book 1 are considered to have Skill-0 in all weapons listed in that book.)

What happens when a Doctor fires a Rifle without a Rifle skill? A penalty is applied (-5 DM as Doctors are not considered to have Skill-0 in all weapons listed in Books 1-3). He still gets an attempt (and it the penalty may make it impossible to hit...and it may not, depending on other modifiers). The point being: He can still attempt, and sometimes make, the throw without skill.

What happens when a character without Vacc Suit skill attempts to jump, untethered, from one ship to another across a vacuum plain? Nothing. He still gets to roll. He just doesn't get the +4 per skill level bonus.

What happens when someone without Medical skill attempts to pull a passenger out of low berth? Nothing. He still gets the attempt. He just doesn't get the bonus for having Medical-2 or better (which is only +1).

As I stated before, many people think they know CT but really don't know the rules as well as they think they do. (No slight meant to Dan or Mike or anyone reading this thread....I'm just correcting some misperceptions.)

Now, there are some instances where having skill is absolutely necessary...the GM can make that requirement anytime he wishes. Also, there are some examples in the book when this requirement is in place.

But, for the most part, a CT character does not have to have the referenced skill in order to attempt a throw. Sometimes there are penalties to not having the skill, and sometimes there is. But, many, many throws allow the throw even if the character doesn't have the skill.

I don't even like (really really dislike to be honest) the "all characters in Book 1 have zero level skill with all weapons in Book 1". I mean come on, a little realism please.

I think it makes sense. Look at the careers. Navy. Scouts. Marines. Army. Merchants. Other. I can see all of those types of characters having zero level skill (knowing how to pick up a regular weapon and fire it with some competence) in regular weapons.

Note that this rule does not apply to all careers in CT. For example, Doctors, from Supplement 4, are not subject to the rule. If a Doctor doesn't have skill, he suffers the -5 penlaty to hit.

Which, again, makes sense.

 

[GypsyComet]

How can a rule that's flat out stated be hidden?

By being in a less than obvious location for the subject; being under a header that no one thinks applies to their situation, or being in a book that no one has really read in 25 years (Book 2 springs to mind for a lot of people).

How many people remember what END is used for (in CT) in combat aside from being a stat to take damage on? It's there in black and white, really.

A more extreme case can be applied to most of TNE, an edition that became a classic "baby thrown out with the bath water" case because two setting decisions annoyed people so much that they couldn't accept that there might be rules that answered the gripes they had with CT or MT.

Traveller is hardly unique in this respect, mind you.

 

[far-trader]

This first...

As I stated before, many people think they know CT but really don't know the rules as well as they think they do. (No slight meant to Dan or Mike or anyone reading this thread....I'm just correcting some misperceptions.)

No worries, goes ditto for me. And I freely admit I've no doubt forgotten some rules, never read others, and blended some to the point that I don't always recall the original.

And now with apologies for the ongoing (but related) sidetrack...

Look at the "Throws" section in The Traveller Adventure that discusses the creation of task throws. Also, look through the Traveller Book at all the suggested skill throws. For the most part, skill is not a requirement.

That's the second time you referenced TTA and while it's canon it's not what I think of when I talk about CT rules. To me CT rules are B1-3 and CT+ is B4-8 and optional. The rest of canon is even more optional imo. Anything beyond B1-3 is more akin to house rules and not everybody had or has access to (or even needs) any of it to play Traveller. Just defining my pov.

What happens when a Naval character fires a Rifle without Rifle skill? Nothing. He throws without a bonus for having Rifle skill--all other modifiers are the same. (All characters in Book 1 are considered to have Skill-0 in all weapons listed in that book.)

(bold above added by me)

Yes. So what happens when that Naval character (let's give him a background of TL15 for sniggers) grabs a Halberd without Halberd skill? According to the rules he gets to swing it with no penalty (presuming his Str is average). Yeah, that makes a lot of sense

That is my beef with that particular rule, but it's there so I can live with it but I'm more likely to house rule it away and say the IN officer hasn't a clue what to do with a Halberd without specific training with it.

I think it makes sense. Look at the careers. Navy. Scouts. Marines. Army. Merchants. Other. I can see all of those types of characters having zero level skill (knowing how to pick up a regular weapon and fire it with some competence) in regular weapons.

But it's not just "regular" weapons. It's all weapons. Even archaic polearms. Well a few anyway, the Halberd for one. But apparently not the Bill-guisarme and a host of others, by the letter of the rule.

Note that this rule does not apply to all careers in CT. For example, Doctors, from Supplement 4, are not subject to the rule. If a Doctor doesn't have skill, he suffers the -5 penalty to hit.

Which, again, makes sense.

But only with Guns, not with a Halberd or any other regular blade, by the letter of the rules, which (again part of the conspiracy of contradiction) refers to the Book 1 rule and suggests it means only guns when it says all weapons. Guns, Blades, and Brawling in Book 1. So that pacifist (the only reason I can see for that particular rule) Doctor who spends his whole life with high tech firearms but uses them with a -5 can pick up a Halberd from some ancient society he finds in a museum and use it with no penalty.

Does it still make sense?

What happens when a Doctor fires a Rifle without a Rifle skill? A penalty is applied (-5 DM as Doctors are not considered to have Skill-0 in all weapons listed in Books 1-3). He still gets an attempt (and it the penalty may make it impossible to hit...and it may not, depending on other modifiers). The point being: He can still attempt, and sometimes make, the throw without skill.

And what happens when the Marine created with Book 4 goes to use an accelerator rifle without Zero-G-Weapons skill? He may have Combat Rifleman-3 and Laser Weapons-2 but just because he didn't choose Zero-G-Weapons he fires at -5. Just as bad with it as that Doctor who's never used a gun at all.

Do you see the irrationality of the whole thing yet?

What happens when a character without Vacc Suit skill attempts to jump, untethered, from one ship to another across a vacuum plain? Nothing. He still gets to roll. He just doesn't get the +4 per skill level bonus.

Then what's the point of Vacc Suit being a default skill at level 0?

Read the default skills section again.

What happens when someone without Medical skill attempts to pull a passenger out of low berth? Nothing. He still gets the attempt. He just doesn't get the bonus for having Medical-2 or better (which is only +1).

Note that Medical is not listed as an appropriate default skill. That means no level 0. That means no attempt. Or at least that it won't succeed. A kind and generous ref might allow it but it's not part of the rules. It's one of the cases that Jack-O-Trades was made for.

Read J-O-T again. It specifically uses Medical as an example* and spells out what not having a skill means.

* without J-O-T to substitute for Medical skill the adventurer dies

As I stated before, many people think they know CT but really don't know the rules as well as they think they do.

True

But, for the most part, a CT character does not have to have the referenced skill in order to attempt a throw. Sometimes there are penalties to not having the skill, and sometimes there is. But, many, many throws allow the throw even if the character doesn't have the skill.

To quote you, That's incorrect.

 

[far-trader]

How many people remember what END is used for (in CT) in combat aside from being a stat to take damage on? It's there in black and white, really.

Me, me, me

Spoiler:

Well, one anyway, maybe there's more. From memory it's how long you can melee before taking a penalty.

Did I win?

 

[aramis]

Me, me, me

Spoiler:

Well, one anyway, maybe there's more. From memory it's how long you can melee before taking a penalty.

Did I win?

I believe so.

CT, to me, has always been TTB.

Some interesting notes are buried in that skill list. Like Leader 1 is REQUIRED to lead more than 6 hirelings or NPC's. Leader 3+ means no rolls needed to be obeyed.

Bribery is roll low. Air Raft is roll high. 1 in 6 programming attempts result in "fatal flaws"...

Level 0 skills are limited to weapons, ground vehicles, steward, vacc suit, and forward observer.

ANd the adventures in the TTB... page 133: "Throw 7+ for the vacc suit to be torn while being retrieved; DM + vacc suit skill." (errata item... there is a missing "not"...) Pretty much, everything in Shadows is roll high... but in this one, skill is BAD!

Then Exit Visa starts with Roll Low.. Just about every roll is roll low.

 

[Gruffty]

Me, me, me

Spoiler:

Well, one anyway, maybe there's more. From memory it's how long you can melee before taking a penalty.

Did I win?

Uhm - schwa? Where is this rule, pls 2 B telling?

 

[aramis]

Uhm - schwa? Where is this rule, pls 2 B telling?

TTB 36, Right Collumn, "The Effects of Characteristics", entry for Endurance.

 

[Supplement Four]

This first...



No worries, goes ditto for me. And I freely admit I've no doubt forgotten some rules, never read others, and blended some to the point that I don't always recall the original.

Good. Goes for me, too. It's too easy to hurt someone's feelings on these forums sometimes, and I think you know me well enough already, Dan, that I wasn't trying to get under your (or anybody else's) skin.

That's the second time you referenced TTA and while it's canon it's not what I think of when I talk about CT rules.

I reference it because Marc Miller wrote it and it's the best description in all of CT on how a GM should handle tasks in Traveller. There are shorter descriptions elsewhere (as in some adventures), but this is the most lengthy, clearest section on how the chief designer of the game intended throws to be carried through.

Yes. So what happens when that Naval character (let's give him a background of TL15 for sniggers) grabs a Halberd without Halberd skill? According to the rules he gets to swing it with no penalty (presuming his Str is average). Yeah, that makes a lot of sense

I'm OK with that. Basic Training in the Navy may have (probably had) training with melee weapons since those are important, sometimes, in a zero-G, airless envrionment. It is logical to assume Naval characters go through some basic training with similar weapons to withstand boarding actions.

So, yes, I think it makes sense.

Please remember that it is career based. The military-type careers use it. Many non-military type careers don't (from Supplement 4).

But it's not just "regular" weapons. It's all weapons. Even archaic polearms. Well a few anyway, the Halberd for one. But apparently not the Bill-guisarme and a host of others, by the letter of the rule.

For archaic weapons, it depends on which set of Traveller rules you are looking at, for they are missing from some editions.

As I stated above, I do think it appropriate that Skill-0 in Halberd be given to characters in the careers available from Book 1 for reasons (and like reasons--an Army character would train with his weapon and bayonnet) stated above.

But only with Guns, not with a Halberd or any other regular blade, by the letter of the rules, which (again part of the conspiracy of contradiction) refers to the Book 1 rule and suggests it means only guns when it says all weapons. Guns, Blades, and Brawling in Book 1. So that pacifist (the only reason I can see for that particular rule) Doctor who spends his whole life with high tech firearms but uses them with a -5 can pick up a Halberd from some ancient society he finds in a museum and use it with no penalty.

Does it still make sense?

Don't forget that the GM is encouraged in CT to alter the rules to fit his particular universe. CT brings the blanket rules to the table. It's up to the GM to customize them to his tastes.

So, it'd be quite welcome to take your situation above and apply only a -1 DM with like weapons.

Note that Medical is not listed as an appropriate default skill. That means no level 0. That means no attempt.

How skills are intended to be used in Classic Traveller are explained in example after example within the rules themselves.

As I stated before, most throws do not require that the character have the skill in order to make the throw (although the character is usually penalized in some fashion).

GM preferenence is given wide interpretation in CT, so the GM's tastes are expected to color the mechanics a group uses.

The Default Skills paragraph is intended to allow GMs to award Skill-0 to appropriate characters if the GM thinks it wise.

For example, The Administration skill is not listed as an appropriate default skill either, but if you look at that skill's description, it is certainly clear that a throw using that skill is appropriate for someone who does not have the skill.

(If no Admin skill is held, a -3 DM is applied.)

And this is why your comments about the JOT skill and Medical skill is not entirely correct.

 

[Supplement Four]

Not every GM interpreted Gun-Combat 0 to be all weapons... many CT Ref's I've met made you pick. About half, in fact.

Well, the actual rule reads (pg. 37 TTB): All player characters automatically have an expertise of zero (for example, carbine-0) in all weapons shown in this book.

I don't know how 50% of the GMs reading that rule could mis-interpret what it says. It's pretty danged clear. o:

I've never played in another Ref's CT or MT game without the Experience limit. I've run a couple without it... but never again under CT/MT.

The Experience Limit is definitely needed...from a mechanical point of view. It helps keep the 2D6 system from breaking with too many modifiers (which I fear happens in MGT).

The purported lack of stat references S4 cites is pretty much only in the core; the adventures have a variety of different task approaches, including 3d vs stat, +3 x to stat if skill y+....

There are a variety of task approaches, that is for sure.

But, the skill-only bias is evident throughout CT, even in adventures. It depends on the author.

As I said, 80-90% of the task rolls in CT are sans a stat reference. There are still several that do reference stat, but they're not the norm.

While S4's 68A is derived from CT, it's not the CT task system, but A CT skill resolution system (which isn't quite the same thing), and its one of several approaches in the core rules.

Actually, 68A is something I created to help GMs understand and implement CT tasks. It is heavily influenced by throws seen in CT, but nowhere is the 68A method defined the way I defined it. I wrote it to help those seeking structure in the structureless system that is CT.

The lack of an explicit singular mechanic provided room for a variety of approaches. I've seen at least 6 approaches used in play by myself and other Refs.

And, this is a GOOD thing. Read Marc's discussion of Throws in TTA.

"Anything goes" is good because it allows a good GM to customize throws appropriate to the situation. "One-size-fits-all" is out (a structured task system like the UGM, MGT's UGM variant, or MT's UTP), and "Customized-fit" is in (appropriate throw generated by the GM, from CT).

 

[far-trader]

Uhm - schwa? Where is this rule, pls 2 B telling?

Oh sure, make me look it up

Also in Book 1 page 35 under heading Endurance.

 

[MikeNGina]

Substitute Rifle skill with Cycle above, and the same logic holds true. The character is a sharpshooter with Rifle-2 in his 20's. As he gets older, he doesn't go to the range anymore, and his skills fade. He degrades to Rifle-1 and then to Rifle-0. But, he'll never go below that.

The rule actually works quite well.

If this is supposed to follow an example of real life, it doesn't work well. If just for a game mechanic ok. As for real life, I went to the range earlier this year. First time since 1992 and was hitting at 300 meters juat as well as i did back in the army. This track seems like it's perfect for more physical skills like stunt riding on a bike, but unless something like eyesight failing happends, I don't see how it can affect something like sharpshooting honestly. IMO anyway.