Failing Survival

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by FlightCommanderSolitude:
I said whoa there, hombre, no-can-do, you're playing that poor bastard.

I don't know why I find this so funny, but I can't see for the tears in my eyes right now.

Talk about a game within a game! What seemed to be a perceived deficiency for the character, turned out to be a real boon to the players - we parleyed a dumb, decidedly unheroic scenario into an afternoon's enjoyment, and it really added to the character's story and the player's motivation to play him.

Gawd, those were the days. Some of the best gaming in my experience has been like this too.

See, I'd say you "grew" this player from an OK gamer into a roleplayer.

It's not about having stats at FFFFFF, Gauss Rifle-7 skill, BattleDress, and a FGMP-15 to boot.

It's about playing a character, whether that person has good stats and skills or bad. That's where the fun lies.

I remember a Traveller character not so long ago. He had physical stats of 555. I never thought it that bad, but the player thought it awful. He new he was always 10 points away from being Seriously wounded and, for practical purposes, taken out of the game (at least for a while). This dude would always, on every occasion, avoid combat. No matter what the rest of the players were doing. He was the guy who wouldn't get out of the car when the other gang was spotted tresspassing on the player's turf.

One time, a fight broke out in a house. This guy had a Laser Carbine. It was big and heavy--about the only equipment he had. And, the engineer had even rigged a grav-assist harness on to lighten the powerpack's weight.

Well, the fight broke out in one part of the house, and this guy, in one of the bedrooms, climbed up into the ceiling to hide!

I said, "What about your laser carbine you left on the bed,?" thinking he might get some spine and come down and fight with the rest of the party.

"Oh yeah," he said, "thanks." And he climbed back down out of the ceiling, grabbed the laser carbine, then crammed it up into the ceiling with him, carefully replacing the ceiling tile so that it didn't look like anyone was up there.

What a freakin' coward!

But...I realized something the player didn't. He was role playing. That was the character. The player, really, was just trying to protect his character from getting shot.

I harped on how he'd deterrmined this character's personality. Thy guy was a coward, through and through.

At first the player was resistant, but gradually it became funny...and accepted.

And, something happened that game to that player. He learned how to play a role--not just an equipped and capable character like one would in a computer first person shooter. He learned that, even if your stats are 222222, there's a character to be played there.

And, it can be fun.

That was about 15 years ago.

Would you believe that this same player is, today, one of the best role players I've ever played with?

He doesn't care about stats. Highly skilled or no, you can throw this guy the character, and the player will show you his character.

You've seen me mention the character in my current campaign--the one I've based the entire adventure around--the Marquis Terran Tukera, highest ranking noble in the Aramis subsector?

Yep. That's this player's character.

When we sat down to play, the first thing I do is roll SOC. It helps me determine which of the pre-created homeworlds the character will hail from.

This player, just before he rolled, said, "I really don't want to play a noble. I did that last time. I want a real gritty character."

The dice were thrown, and we were both looking at the double sixes.

And, we both started laughing.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by FlightCommanderSolitude:
I said whoa there, hombre, no-can-do, you're playing that poor bastard.

I don't know why I find this so funny, but I can't see for the tears in my eyes right now.

Talk about a game within a game! What seemed to be a perceived deficiency for the character, turned out to be a real boon to the players - we parleyed a dumb, decidedly unheroic scenario into an afternoon's enjoyment, and it really added to the character's story and the player's motivation to play him.

Gawd, those were the days. Some of the best gaming in my experience has been like this too.

See, I'd say you "grew" this player from an OK gamer into a roleplayer.

It's not about having stats at FFFFFF, Gauss Rifle-7 skill, BattleDress, and a FGMP-15 to boot.

It's about playing a character, whether that person has good stats and skills or bad. That's where the fun lies.

I remember a Traveller character not so long ago. He had physical stats of 555. I never thought it that bad, but the player thought it awful. He new he was always 10 points away from being Seriously wounded and, for practical purposes, taken out of the game (at least for a while). This dude would always, on every occasion, avoid combat. No matter what the rest of the players were doing. He was the guy who wouldn't get out of the car when the other gang was spotted tresspassing on the player's turf.

One time, a fight broke out in a house. This guy had a Laser Carbine. It was big and heavy--about the only equipment he had. And, the engineer had even rigged a grav-assist harness on to lighten the powerpack's weight.

Well, the fight broke out in one part of the house, and this guy, in one of the bedrooms, climbed up into the ceiling to hide!

I said, "What about your laser carbine you left on the bed,?" thinking he might get some spine and come down and fight with the rest of the party.

"Oh yeah," he said, "thanks." And he climbed back down out of the ceiling, grabbed the laser carbine, then crammed it up into the ceiling with him, carefully replacing the ceiling tile so that it didn't look like anyone was up there.

What a freakin' coward!

But...I realized something the player didn't. He was role playing. That was the character. The player, really, was just trying to protect his character from getting shot.

I harped on how he'd deterrmined this character's personality. Thy guy was a coward, through and through.

At first the player was resistant, but gradually it became funny...and accepted.

And, something happened that game to that player. He learned how to play a role--not just an equipped and capable character like one would in a computer first person shooter. He learned that, even if your stats are 222222, there's a character to be played there.

And, it can be fun.

That was about 15 years ago.

Would you believe that this same player is, today, one of the best role players I've ever played with?

He doesn't care about stats. Highly skilled or no, you can throw this guy the character, and the player will show you his character.

You've seen me mention the character in my current campaign--the one I've based the entire adventure around--the Marquis Terran Tukera, highest ranking noble in the Aramis subsector?

Yep. That's this player's character.

When we sat down to play, the first thing I do is roll SOC. It helps me determine which of the pre-created homeworlds the character will hail from.

This player, just before he rolled, said, "I really don't want to play a noble. I did that last time. I want a real gritty character."

The dice were thrown, and we were both looking at the double sixes.

And, we both started laughing.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Supplement Four:
You've seen me mention the character in my current campaign--the one I've based the entire adventure around--the Marquis Terran Tukera, highest ranking noble in the Aramis subsector?

Yep. That's this player's character.

As a side note, when we saw that this player would play a noble, I suggested, "Hey, let's go for broke. House Tukera pops up all over the place. They're always the bad guys. What if you played a Tukera. We could get into that grey area. Bad guys aren't all bad guys. They're not two-dimensional. And, from their point of view, they're not bad at all. They're just doing their thing."

He said, "I like it. His name... House Tukera is power--probably one of the most powerful and well known noble Houses in Traveller. Think of the kids of rock stars and movie stars. Demi Moore named her kid "Rumor". Gwenneth named hers "Apple". There's "Moonbeam" as well. And, it's not Judy Hilton, is it?

"The Marches were settled by the Solomani during the Rule of Man, right. So, let's call this dude "Terran". "Terran Tukera."

And, that's how the character got his name.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Supplement Four:
You've seen me mention the character in my current campaign--the one I've based the entire adventure around--the Marquis Terran Tukera, highest ranking noble in the Aramis subsector?

Yep. That's this player's character.

As a side note, when we saw that this player would play a noble, I suggested, "Hey, let's go for broke. House Tukera pops up all over the place. They're always the bad guys. What if you played a Tukera. We could get into that grey area. Bad guys aren't all bad guys. They're not two-dimensional. And, from their point of view, they're not bad at all. They're just doing their thing."

He said, "I like it. His name... House Tukera is power--probably one of the most powerful and well known noble Houses in Traveller. Think of the kids of rock stars and movie stars. Demi Moore named her kid "Rumor". Gwenneth named hers "Apple". There's "Moonbeam" as well. And, it's not Judy Hilton, is it?

"The Marches were settled by the Solomani during the Rule of Man, right. So, let's call this dude "Terran". "Terran Tukera."

And, that's how the character got his name.

 

[Supplement Four]

Considering Survival, the Experience Limit, and the difference between Advanced and Basic characters...

Another thought on this thread:

One of the great contributions MT made to Traveller was the rule balance that was put into play to equalize characters created through Advanced CharGen and those created through Basic CharGen.

MT's rule did two things: (1) It added a Special Duty roll for which a character could gain an additional skill each term; and (2) it stated that if a Commission, Promotion, or Special Duty roll was exceeded by 4+ points, then a another bonus skill was awarded the character.

Thus, a first term character, going through Basic CharGen, could gain 8 skills during that term if the dice fell right. That's 2 skills for the character's first term; 1 skill for Commission; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Commission; 1 skill for Promotion; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Promotion; 1 skill for Special Duty; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Special Duty. And, this does not include an automatic skills the character may receive.

This MT rule went a long way to balancing Traveller characters whether they were generated with either the Basic (4-Year) or Advanced (1-Year) methods.

But, I'm wondering now...is that MT rule really necessary?





The overbalance of skills provided in Advanced CharGen is another good reason to enforce the Survival rule (especially the optional Survival rule presented in Book 1 that allows a character to survive but forces the close of character generation). Advanced characters do receive more skills, on average, than a basic character, but advanced characters are also submitted to many, many more survival throws--up to four a term (albeit the throws are typically easier than that for basic characters). Still, the probability is that an advanced character will brick one of these rolls and have to enter play using the optional survival rule.

The survival rule, when looked at this way, is the great equalizer between Basic CharGen and Advanced CharGen characters. Some GMs may even decide the imported MT rule for Special Duty and 4+ rolling is un-necessary with enforcement of the Optional Survival Rule.

Advanced CharGen characters are kept compatible with Basic CharGen characters using two methods: Enforcement of the Survival Optional Rule and the Experience Limit Rule that states a character cannot have more total skill levels than the sum of his INT + EDU.

If a GM doesn't fudge on the survival rule or experience limit, characters created either way should be fairly compatible.

 

[Supplement Four]

Considering Survival, the Experience Limit, and the difference between Advanced and Basic characters...

Another thought on this thread:

One of the great contributions MT made to Traveller was the rule balance that was put into play to equalize characters created through Advanced CharGen and those created through Basic CharGen.

MT's rule did two things: (1) It added a Special Duty roll for which a character could gain an additional skill each term; and (2) it stated that if a Commission, Promotion, or Special Duty roll was exceeded by 4+ points, then a another bonus skill was awarded the character.

Thus, a first term character, going through Basic CharGen, could gain 8 skills during that term if the dice fell right. That's 2 skills for the character's first term; 1 skill for Commission; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Commission; 1 skill for Promotion; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Promotion; 1 skill for Special Duty; 1 skill for rolling 4+ over Special Duty. And, this does not include an automatic skills the character may receive.

This MT rule went a long way to balancing Traveller characters whether they were generated with either the Basic (4-Year) or Advanced (1-Year) methods.

But, I'm wondering now...is that MT rule really necessary?





The overbalance of skills provided in Advanced CharGen is another good reason to enforce the Survival rule (especially the optional Survival rule presented in Book 1 that allows a character to survive but forces the close of character generation). Advanced characters do receive more skills, on average, than a basic character, but advanced characters are also submitted to many, many more survival throws--up to four a term (albeit the throws are typically easier than that for basic characters). Still, the probability is that an advanced character will brick one of these rolls and have to enter play using the optional survival rule.

The survival rule, when looked at this way, is the great equalizer between Basic CharGen and Advanced CharGen characters. Some GMs may even decide the imported MT rule for Special Duty and 4+ rolling is un-necessary with enforcement of the Optional Survival Rule.

Advanced CharGen characters are kept compatible with Basic CharGen characters using two methods: Enforcement of the Survival Optional Rule and the Experience Limit Rule that states a character cannot have more total skill levels than the sum of his INT + EDU.

If a GM doesn't fudge on the survival rule or experience limit, characters created either way should be fairly compatible.

 

[Sifu Blackirish]

I always liked the 'game within a game' that CT chargen is...and I modified my old QBASIC program to show deceased characters.

I also modified it to show term skills received, so I could see what happened and fudge an event blurb for that term.

MT did, with the addition of special duty and the +4 rule, did a lot to even the playing field.

One thing I might do is bump up the CT skills received to 3/term for no prom chars and 1st term otherwise, 2/term afterwards. Paranoia Press 'Asassin' character generation does this fairly well.

That unfit for service table works, but do you want almost all of your characters mustering out for less than honorable reasons?

 

[Sifu Blackirish]

I always liked the 'game within a game' that CT chargen is...and I modified my old QBASIC program to show deceased characters.

I also modified it to show term skills received, so I could see what happened and fudge an event blurb for that term.

MT did, with the addition of special duty and the +4 rule, did a lot to even the playing field.

One thing I might do is bump up the CT skills received to 3/term for no prom chars and 1st term otherwise, 2/term afterwards. Paranoia Press 'Asassin' character generation does this fairly well.

That unfit for service table works, but do you want almost all of your characters mustering out for less than honorable reasons?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Dominion Loyalty Officer:
I always liked the 'game within a game' that CT chargen is...and I modified my old QBASIC program to show deceased characters.

I also modified it to show term skills received, so I could see what happened and fudge an event blurb for that term.

MT did, with the addition of special duty and the +4 rule, did a lot to even the playing field.

I'd be interested to see your results using your program of Basic CharGen without the MT Special Duty and +4 Rules compared to Advanced CharGen that enforces Survival.

I'm thinking that the greater likelyhood of failing survival in Advanced CharGen will even that system out with Basic CharGen.

I'm wondering if the MT rules are needed at all.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Dominion Loyalty Officer:
I always liked the 'game within a game' that CT chargen is...and I modified my old QBASIC program to show deceased characters.

I also modified it to show term skills received, so I could see what happened and fudge an event blurb for that term.

MT did, with the addition of special duty and the +4 rule, did a lot to even the playing field.

I'd be interested to see your results using your program of Basic CharGen without the MT Special Duty and +4 Rules compared to Advanced CharGen that enforces Survival.

I'm thinking that the greater likelyhood of failing survival in Advanced CharGen will even that system out with Basic CharGen.

I'm wondering if the MT rules are needed at all.

 

[BlackBat242]

In my 8 years in the USMC (1981-1989), including 6 months working in the reception/separations unit at MCAS El Toro, I would say that the non-end-of-enlistment discharges broke down like this:

~60%-70% General (other-than-honorable)/Bad Conduct/Dishonorable.

~20% General (honorable)[includes hardship]/Good of Service [usually due to civilian-related misconduct, to allow civilian authorities to deal with the person]/Convienience of Government [includes optional pregnancy discharges, and chronic overweight].

The rest were Medical [due to physical injuries causing disability, or for psychological problems].

 

[BlackBat242]

In my 8 years in the USMC (1981-1989), including 6 months working in the reception/separations unit at MCAS El Toro, I would say that the non-end-of-enlistment discharges broke down like this:

~60%-70% General (other-than-honorable)/Bad Conduct/Dishonorable.

~20% General (honorable)[includes hardship]/Good of Service [usually due to civilian-related misconduct, to allow civilian authorities to deal with the person]/Convienience of Government [includes optional pregnancy discharges, and chronic overweight].

The rest were Medical [due to physical injuries causing disability, or for psychological problems].

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by BlackBat242:
~60%-70% General (other-than-honorable)/Bad Conduct/Dishonorable.

Are you kidding me? 60-70% of the discharges from the USMC are less than honorable discharges?!

Wow. I would think the other way around.

Only 20% are honorable discharges?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by BlackBat242:
~60%-70% General (other-than-honorable)/Bad Conduct/Dishonorable.

Are you kidding me? 60-70% of the discharges from the USMC are less than honorable discharges?!

Wow. I would think the other way around.

Only 20% are honorable discharges?

 

[flykiller]

60-70% of the discharges from the USMC are less than honorable discharges?!

he means if their enlistments don't end normally. if a discharge occurs before normal end of service, there's a reason, and often it's not a good reason.

 

[flykiller]

60-70% of the discharges from the USMC are less than honorable discharges?!

he means if their enlistments don't end normally. if a discharge occurs before normal end of service, there's a reason, and often it's not a good reason.

 

[BlackBat242]

SIGH...

To quote from my post: "non-end-of-enlistment discharges"!

100% of end-of-enlistment discharges are "Honorable"!

 

[BlackBat242]

SIGH...

To quote from my post: "non-end-of-enlistment discharges"!

100% of end-of-enlistment discharges are "Honorable"!

 

[BlackBat242]

"End-of-enlistment discharge" means the same as "full term re-enlistment failure" or "refusal to re-enlist".

"Non-end-of-enlistment" discharge means the same as "failed survival roll" where the character is not killed.

 

[BlackBat242]

"End-of-enlistment discharge" means the same as "full term re-enlistment failure" or "refusal to re-enlist".

"Non-end-of-enlistment" discharge means the same as "failed survival roll" where the character is not killed.