CTI - Classic Traveller Improved

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by WJP:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dalton:
Hey WJP,
Did you ever try out or read the 'Traveller Home Edition' mechanics?

best regards

Dalton

Nope, never heard of it, Dalton. I'm always interested in seeing how other people handle Traveller mechanics, though. Where can I get a copy?

Thanks for posting. I'll learn something new. </font>[/QUOTE]It was on this forum but the history of it's development is over on the Traveller5 forums

http://www.traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=126

It was called highlowcompare, then chill (short for compare high low) then it became Traveller Home Edition - THE.

If you read the thread and like the concept, I can send you some pdf's with some formal layouts.

best regards

Dalton

 

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by WJP:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dalton:
Hey WJP,
Did you ever try out or read the 'Traveller Home Edition' mechanics?

best regards

Dalton

Nope, never heard of it, Dalton. I'm always interested in seeing how other people handle Traveller mechanics, though. Where can I get a copy?

Thanks for posting. I'll learn something new. </font>[/QUOTE]It was on this forum but the history of it's development is over on the Traveller5 forums

http://www.traveller5.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=126

It was called highlowcompare, then chill (short for compare high low) then it became Traveller Home Edition - THE.

If you read the thread and like the concept, I can send you some pdf's with some formal layouts.

best regards

Dalton

 

[Supplement Four]

If you read the thread and like the concept, I can send you some pdf's with some formal layouts.

best regards

Dalton [/QB]

Hey Dalton,

I checked out your system and perused that thread. Interesting work. Good work, too.

It's a bit too "different" from standard/official Classic Trav for my tastes, though. With CTI, I wanted to keep Classic Trav completely intact. Your system requires changing skill level values and what-not.

It looks like a good system, but it's not quite the CT -friendly task system I've been looking for (or created in CTI).

Thanks for the link, though. I enjoyed looking at it.

-WJP

PS - I've written a few other task systems for Traveller. The most popular of which is KB2.0, a system I created to fix the broken T4 mechanics. If you're interested, you can check it out on Freelance Traveller here:

http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/task/kb20.html

Another system I wrote, for Classic Traveller, is more akin to the type of thing you've done (although it's uses very different mechanics). That one is called System1123, and you can spy it also on Freelance Trav here:

http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/task/sys1123.html

Although I played an entire campaign with System1123, and my players liked it alot, I was never quite happy with it because, like your system, it strayed too much from the simplistic, but detailed, rules set that is Classic Traveller.

So, I set out to make a task system that would fit perfectly with the game--in fact, feel like it was written when CT was written--and CTI is the result.

Check out those other two systems if you're interested.

Best--K.

 

[Supplement Four]

If you read the thread and like the concept, I can send you some pdf's with some formal layouts.

best regards

Dalton [/QB]

Hey Dalton,

I checked out your system and perused that thread. Interesting work. Good work, too.

It's a bit too "different" from standard/official Classic Trav for my tastes, though. With CTI, I wanted to keep Classic Trav completely intact. Your system requires changing skill level values and what-not.

It looks like a good system, but it's not quite the CT -friendly task system I've been looking for (or created in CTI).

Thanks for the link, though. I enjoyed looking at it.

-WJP

PS - I've written a few other task systems for Traveller. The most popular of which is KB2.0, a system I created to fix the broken T4 mechanics. If you're interested, you can check it out on Freelance Traveller here:

http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/task/kb20.html

Another system I wrote, for Classic Traveller, is more akin to the type of thing you've done (although it's uses very different mechanics). That one is called System1123, and you can spy it also on Freelance Trav here:

http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/task/sys1123.html

Although I played an entire campaign with System1123, and my players liked it alot, I was never quite happy with it because, like your system, it strayed too much from the simplistic, but detailed, rules set that is Classic Traveller.

So, I set out to make a task system that would fit perfectly with the game--in fact, feel like it was written when CT was written--and CTI is the result.

Check out those other two systems if you're interested.

Best--K.

 

[mike wightman]

Classic Traveller did have a task system of sorts for unexpected situations - i.e. not covered by the individual skill descriptions.

Trouble is that it was hidden in Adventure 1.

Read the section on page 2 about Die-rolling conventions, especially the bit about generating throws.

I'd missed this for years until some kind soul on these boards pointed it out

 

[mike wightman]

Classic Traveller did have a task system of sorts for unexpected situations - i.e. not covered by the individual skill descriptions.

Trouble is that it was hidden in Adventure 1.

Read the section on page 2 about Die-rolling conventions, especially the bit about generating throws.

I'd missed this for years until some kind soul on these boards pointed it out

 

[Supplement Four]

Hey Sigg,

Yes, I knew about that in Adventure 1. There's a bit more on the same topic, expanded somewhat, in the Traveller Adventure.

I use these types of throws all the time--just check out my Expanded CT CharGen thread. You'll see SOC checks all over the place.

The problem with this, though, is that the Skill-2, Stat-10 guy will automatically succeed on every task he attempts (not to mention the structure in not having to keep track of the rolls you've made up to keep some uniformity in your campaign "Hey, the last time we had to jump over a four foot wall, you only made us roll DEX or less on 2D, Ref...now it's 3D?")

As I said, I still use that stuff mentioned in Adv 1 and the TA, but I also recognized a need for a structured task system in CT (and I wanted to improve on some of the MT/DGP's task system's short commings).

Best,

WJP

 

[Supplement Four]

Hey Sigg,

Yes, I knew about that in Adventure 1. There's a bit more on the same topic, expanded somewhat, in the Traveller Adventure.

I use these types of throws all the time--just check out my Expanded CT CharGen thread. You'll see SOC checks all over the place.

The problem with this, though, is that the Skill-2, Stat-10 guy will automatically succeed on every task he attempts (not to mention the structure in not having to keep track of the rolls you've made up to keep some uniformity in your campaign "Hey, the last time we had to jump over a four foot wall, you only made us roll DEX or less on 2D, Ref...now it's 3D?")

As I said, I still use that stuff mentioned in Adv 1 and the TA, but I also recognized a need for a structured task system in CT (and I wanted to improve on some of the MT/DGP's task system's short commings).

Best,

WJP

 

[mike wightman]

Hi WJP.

Classic Traveller was a skill based game, wth characteristics having little effect on most skills.

There are only a couple of skills where characteristics are mentioned as providing DMs.

The characteristic + skill check does indeed break down as you say.

This may have lead MWM to the idea that to make it more difficult you can increase the number of dice to roll

 

[mike wightman]

Hi WJP.

Classic Traveller was a skill based game, wth characteristics having little effect on most skills.

There are only a couple of skills where characteristics are mentioned as providing DMs.

The characteristic + skill check does indeed break down as you say.

This may have lead MWM to the idea that to make it more difficult you can increase the number of dice to roll

 

[mike wightman]

By the way, thanks for posting all this here

I never visit the TML, because I can't stand the format of that type of message board. The same reason for not posting to online JTAS discussions over at SJGs. I prefer their forum section.

 

[mike wightman]

By the way, thanks for posting all this here

I never visit the TML, because I can't stand the format of that type of message board. The same reason for not posting to online JTAS discussions over at SJGs. I prefer their forum section.

 

[mike wightman]

I like to use an armour as damage reduction system too. AHL and Striker both being heavy influences, but these days I use a version adapted from T4 and T20.

There was a JTAS article that helped a lot with integrating Striker with CT, I've still got all the index cards with all the weapons rated this way.

Over the years I've tried to simplify this too, so range band increases make to hit tasks more difficult etc.

This is one of my early attempts at unifying the combat matices etc.

to take another look at the required dex table, an average of dex 6 gives a DM of -2, while an average of dex 10 gives a DM of +2.

Adding all the weapons from LBB4 gives an average of dex 7 gives a DM of -2, while an average of dex 10 gives a DM of +1.

The average DM to hit no armour is +3.

Which is a long winded way to say that if characteristics are only to give positive DMs then the bonus should be +1 to +4 in order to preserve the 8+ required to hit.

The lowest dex to get a -DM is 4, the highest dex to get a bonus is 11
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Dex DM
1-4 +1
5-8 +2
9-10 +3
11+ +4</pre>

[/quote]

 

[mike wightman]

I like to use an armour as damage reduction system too. AHL and Striker both being heavy influences, but these days I use a version adapted from T4 and T20.

There was a JTAS article that helped a lot with integrating Striker with CT, I've still got all the index cards with all the weapons rated this way.

Over the years I've tried to simplify this too, so range band increases make to hit tasks more difficult etc.

This is one of my early attempts at unifying the combat matices etc.

to take another look at the required dex table, an average of dex 6 gives a DM of -2, while an average of dex 10 gives a DM of +2.

Adding all the weapons from LBB4 gives an average of dex 7 gives a DM of -2, while an average of dex 10 gives a DM of +1.

The average DM to hit no armour is +3.

Which is a long winded way to say that if characteristics are only to give positive DMs then the bonus should be +1 to +4 in order to preserve the 8+ required to hit.

The lowest dex to get a -DM is 4, the highest dex to get a bonus is 11
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Dex DM
1-4 +1
5-8 +2
9-10 +3
11+ +4</pre>

[/quote]

 

[mike wightman]

Have you seen this tsk system by Paul Elliott, it's one of my favourites:

http://www.geocities.com/zozergames/fbotr.html

 

[mike wightman]

Have you seen this tsk system by Paul Elliott, it's one of my favourites:

http://www.geocities.com/zozergames/fbotr.html

 

[Supplement Four]

The characteristic + skill check does indeed break down as you say.

This may have lead MWM to the idea that to make it more difficult you can increase the number of dice to roll [/QB]

Yeah, but using more dice drops the % chance of success exponentially.

If you roll 7- on 2D, you're talking 58% chance of success. On 3D, the 7- roll drops way down to a 16% chance of success. At 4D, it's only a 2.7% chance of success.

So, if you, as a GM, drop a 3D roll on that Skill-2; Stat-10 character I mentioned earlier in the thread, you'll keep him from always, 100% of the time, making the check, but you're greatly hurting your Stat-5; Skill-1 character.

Again (and I know I'm biased, but the damn thing works!), CTI allows you more flexibilty as a GM in that the changes in difficulty aren't so drastic.

 

[Supplement Four]

The characteristic + skill check does indeed break down as you say.

This may have lead MWM to the idea that to make it more difficult you can increase the number of dice to roll [/QB]

Yeah, but using more dice drops the % chance of success exponentially.

If you roll 7- on 2D, you're talking 58% chance of success. On 3D, the 7- roll drops way down to a 16% chance of success. At 4D, it's only a 2.7% chance of success.

So, if you, as a GM, drop a 3D roll on that Skill-2; Stat-10 character I mentioned earlier in the thread, you'll keep him from always, 100% of the time, making the check, but you're greatly hurting your Stat-5; Skill-1 character.

Again (and I know I'm biased, but the damn thing works!), CTI allows you more flexibilty as a GM in that the changes in difficulty aren't so drastic.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Have you seen this tsk system by Paul Elliott, it's one of my favourites:

http://www.geocities.com/zozergames/fbotr.html

I hadn't seen that one before. Thanks for pointing it out.

You're right. It is one of the better ones I've seen. Simple. Easy to implement. I do like it.

My argument against it would be about an area of the task system that was important to me to utilize in CTI--that being the use of the character's attribute.

To me, there should be a difference between a DEX-9; AutoPistol-2 guy and a DEX-5; AutoPistol-2 guy.

This is one of the main reasons I created CTI. MT, as I've already stated, provides the same to-hit roll for both of these characters.

And, potentially, the same thing would occur in that task system you just showed me. If the target number is 10, then both of these guys, under that other task system, would have the same chance of success.

Under CTI, different stats mean different average results.

And I think CTI is as simple (probably a bit simpler) than that other task system. I mean, CTI is roll 2D, look at the results, probably re-roll one of the die, then add 'em up. It's pretty quick--about as fast as MT's system.

Anyway, I've just been explaining the things I like about CTI.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Have you seen this tsk system by Paul Elliott, it's one of my favourites:

http://www.geocities.com/zozergames/fbotr.html

I hadn't seen that one before. Thanks for pointing it out.

You're right. It is one of the better ones I've seen. Simple. Easy to implement. I do like it.

My argument against it would be about an area of the task system that was important to me to utilize in CTI--that being the use of the character's attribute.

To me, there should be a difference between a DEX-9; AutoPistol-2 guy and a DEX-5; AutoPistol-2 guy.

This is one of the main reasons I created CTI. MT, as I've already stated, provides the same to-hit roll for both of these characters.

And, potentially, the same thing would occur in that task system you just showed me. If the target number is 10, then both of these guys, under that other task system, would have the same chance of success.

Under CTI, different stats mean different average results.

And I think CTI is as simple (probably a bit simpler) than that other task system. I mean, CTI is roll 2D, look at the results, probably re-roll one of the die, then add 'em up. It's pretty quick--about as fast as MT's system.

Anyway, I've just been explaining the things I like about CTI.