First Impressions from MGT

[Jamus]

And, just like that, boom, boom, the stat bloat issue is gone. Simple fix. No change to the existing MGT task system. Everybody's happy.:rofl:

And, yes, this was ignored on the Mongoose forum.

I don't mean to be tootin' my own horn, but, c'mon, this is a damn elegant way to fix a problem I see (in my opinion) with the MGT task system.

To be honest, I'm still scratching my head as to why this wasn't adopted.

Maybe because the issue of stat bloat is just the opinion of a few people. I dont see any problem with current skill lvls or the way attributes effect them. For me there is no problem to fix.

To address your example both medical persons have basically the same training. one has raw talent while the other has years of experience. seems pretty fair and to a point realistic.

 

[Ishmael]

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days now and think that there is no such thing as stat bloat.

If we can accept that skill is the combination of natural ability and experience, then given that stats represent natural ability, then 'skill levels' represent experience. This make perfect sense considering how one gains or increases 'skill'.. that is, by training, aka, learning by doing. This is true whether gaining the 'skill' in careers or for personnal improvement.

Looking at s4's example that way, different conclusions can be reached.
The edu-12, med-0 might very well be an intern who had graduated near the top of his class from Harvard Medical School, yet has little field experience, whereas the edu-8, med-2 guy might by a high school grad navy corpsman who learned his trade by sewing his buddies up after firefights and by treating the sick and injured during goodwill peace-keeping missions or friendly police actions. Both have the same real skill ( actual dm used for the task ).

The same would apply to gun skills.
The young dex-12 kid, with steady hands and an eagle eye who knows gun safety and gun care might be a better shot than the grizzled old veteran who is a master gunsmith and does custom loads for professional sharpshooters, yet has coke-bottle glasses and the shakes ( low dex ). Yet which one would be listed as having greater gun combat skill?

As a real world example....
Back when I used to fence, I was in a club where I fenced against my freind Gabe (his last name escapes me now ). He was the Hungarian Olympic gold medalist in sabre in 1960. I had greater 'stats' aka, natural abilities, due to my youth and his age. I could nearly keep up with him because of that, yet he would always eventually win. His experience was such that there was nothing I could throw at him that he hadn't already seen a thousand times in international competition, yet my 'stats' let me be almost as good as his huge skill.

no...there is no stat bloat, just poor terminology.
SKILL = ability (stats ) + experience ( skill level )

no need for a fix, as its not broken

 

[Ishmael]

Thinking about medical skills reminded me of something I think I read in the old T5 playtest .pdf's which would apply to any task where something is broken ( machine or body ) and has to be repaired....and a way to differentiate been abilities in performing such tasks.

skill+int for troubleshooting/diagnosing the problem
skill+edu for determining the best method of repair
skill+dex for actually performing the repair

maybe the edu-12, med-0 doctor has a high dex making him a better candidate to perform surgery than the edu-8, med-2 corpsman with a much lower dex.

Same for engineering type tasks..
maybe one guy is a whiz at figuring out whats wrong with a machine, but is a clutz at turning the wrench...

With this sort of thinking, I'm looking forward to see what else is in T5!

 

[Sturn]

S4 I missed this when you posted it at Mongoose, but like your idea. I was originally considering house-ruling a different stat ruling to make skills mean more, but I think this is what I will be using now.

I've actually retyped three chapters of MGT (I type fast) in order to add errata and house rules. This isn't a remark on MGT (I like MGT so far). I always make changes to any system I get, just hate having pencil notes throughout a book, would rather print something out will all the changes. Crossing-fingers that the pdf version is coming soon, less typing, more pasting.

 

[Supplement Four]

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days now and think that there is no such thing as stat bloat.

No such thing as stat bloat, eh?

So, a dude spends a lot of time in school and gets PhD in English Literature. EDU-12. He becomes a professor at the university. And, he's never been exposed to any type of electronics or demolitions more complicated than connecting the positive and negative cables to his car battery.

Then, the school gets a bomb threat. The professor notices something under his desk. It's the bomb!

The police are called. The Bomb Disposal unit shows up. The Bomb Disposal guy has EDU-8 and Demolitions-2. He's a professional, trained at diffusing bombs.

If there is no stat bloat, as you say, then the professor should have as good of a chance at diffusing the bomb as the demolitions expert.

And, if there is no stat bloat, this situation in this example would be true because they both throw 2D +2 to diffuse the bomb.



But, that's ridiculous, right? Someone needs to be trained in order to have a good chance of diffusing a bomb, correct?

That's right. And, that's where Skill comes into play.

Skill represents acutal training and experience. Stat represents broad based natural ability.

This is why, when new recruits join the Marine Corps, they are taught to shoot. They become rifle experts (every Marine an expert shot, and all that). They earn the Rifle skill.

There has got to be real people who join the Marine Corps who are very dextrous but can't shoot the broad side of a barn because they've never picked up a weapon before. High Dexterity does not automatically make people who pick up firearms for the first time expert shots. It's Skill, gained through training and experience, that make them expert shots. High DEX only makes it likely that, once trained, the shooters will be excellent shots.

If stat bloat didn't exist, then what I just said would be false.

But, stat bloat does exists.

In fact, the Mongoose Rules even acknowledge that stat bloat exists. Because, if you don't have at least Skill-0 for the task, then you suffer the -3 DM penalty. This is a measure to curb stat bloat.

What that mechanic is "saying" is that characters are penalized (with the -3 DM) unless the character has a minimum level of training and experience in the Skill. Stat alone won't do it for you. You've got to have at least Skill-0 to avoid the penalty.

It is my opinion that the stat-bloat-curbing in MGT should go one step further with the simple idea I proposed.

S4 I missed this when you posted it at Mongoose, but like your idea. I was originally considering house-ruling a different stat ruling to make skills mean more, but I think this is what I will be using now.

I wouldn't have posted it here (as it was already posted at the MGT forums), but I was asked, so I brought the idea back out of the closet.

But, I'm glad you find it useful.

 

[rust]

So, a dude spends a lot of time in school and gets PhD in English Literature. EDU-12. He becomes a professor at the university. And, he's never been exposed to any type of electronics or demolitions more complicated than connecting the positive and negative cables to his car battery.

To me, EDU-12 seems a rather high level of general knowledge, which should
include more than the basics of technical knowledge. So, in my opinion your
professor has a very good chance to know quite a lot about electronics, and
perhaps even something about demolitions.

Remember, the high EDU value can not be the result of his knowledge in Eng-
lish Literature alone, because that knowledge would be represented by a
skill "English Literature".

 

[Ishmael]

No such thing as stat bloat, eh?

So, a dude spends a lot of time in school and gets PhD in English Literature. EDU-12. He becomes a professor at the university. And, he's never been exposed to any type of electronics or demolitions more complicated than connecting the positive and negative cables to his car battery.

Then, the school gets a bomb threat. The professor notices something under his desk. It's the bomb!

The police are called. The Bomb Disposal unit shows up. The Bomb Disposal guy has EDU-8 and Demolitions-2. He's a professional, trained at diffusing bombs.

If there is no stat bloat, as you say, then the professor should have as good of a chance at diffusing the bomb as the demolitions expert.

And, if there is no stat bloat, this situation in this example would be true because they both throw 2D +2 to diffuse the bomb.

the english professor has no skill related to bomb disposal, therefore he gets an automatic dm -4 ( at least in rules I use, MT. MGT seems to have a similar rule ). Therefore, by your numbers, the professor would have to roll 2d-1 ( dm-3 in MGT, iirc). By MT rules that I prefer, he'd have to roll against an increase in difficulty (effectively a DM-4). The REF might very well take it upon himself to increase the difficulty further to drive home the point that the professor has no clue. The professor might think he knows how to defuse the bomb from some learning he's had, but isn't sure...sounds like a great uncertain task to me. If he tries despite knowing he doesn't have the skill, let him, or what if he also notices its ready to blow ( all time bombs have a LED countdown timer, right? ), and he can't wait for the bomb squad guy, who knows, he might get lucky.

out of curiousity, why use Edu as a dm for defusing a bomb? It seems very odd considering that it does allow the absurd example you give. INT, maybe, if any stat DM at all, but EDU?

But, that's ridiculous, right? Someone needs to be trained in order to have a good chance of diffusing a bomb, correct?

That's right. And, that's where Skill comes into play.

Skill represents acutal training and experience. Stat represents broad based natural ability.

This is why, when new recruits join the Marine Corps, they are taught to shoot. They become rifle experts (every Marine an expert shot, and all that). They earn the Rifle skill.

There has got to be real people who join the Marine Corps who are very dextrous but can't shoot the broad side of a barn because they've never picked up a weapon before. High Dexterity does not automatically make people who pick up firearms for the first time expert shots. It's Skill, gained through training and experience, that make them expert shots. High DEX only makes it likely that, once trained, the shooters will be excellent shots.

yes, 'skill' plays a role, which is why MGT as well as MT penalizes attempts at tasks without having the required skill.
But I still say that 'skill' merely represents EXPERIENCE.
Marines are trained and gain their 'skill' by firing hundreds if not thousands of rounds on the firing line. Marines learn to care for and clean their guns by DOING it, not simply having an instructor tell them how. It is Experience gained that allows them to become expert riflemen, not just being told how to do it. That's why "practice makes perfect."
High dexterity does not make someone an instant expert marksman, but it sure gives them a strong head start. Once they get some experience with the gun under their belt, they WILL be better than a lower dex person with equal experience.

And I strongly disagree with you.
Actual useful-for-DM's 'skill' is the sum of ability ( stat ), and experience ( the rule's 'skill' level )
It is up to the REF to make reasonable choices as to which stat, if any, to allow as a DM source. Poor choices in this lead to absurd situations.

the Mongoose Rules even acknowledge that stat bloat exists.[/B] Because, if you don't have at least Skill-0 for the task, then you suffer the -3 DM penalty. This is a measure to curb stat bloat.

What that mechanic is "saying" is that characters are penalized (with the -3 DM) unless the character has a minimum level of training and experience in the Skill. Stat alone won't do it for you. You've got to have at least Skill-0 to avoid the penalty.

unskilled penalty is nothing new...its been part of MT since the beginning in the form of increasing difficulty level for not having at least level-0 ( that's the same as a DM-4 ). Its not to curb stat bloat, so much as its to make bookish english professors think twice before attempting to disarm bombs.....
( EDU is still a weird dm stat to use in such a situation, imo )

We interpret the rules in different fashion. We won't change each other's minds, so lets just leave it lay. We've each stated our positions and our reasons already.








I wouldn't have posted it here (as it was already posted at the MGT forums), but I was asked, so I brought the idea back out of the closet.

But, I'm glad you find it useful.[/QUOTE]

 

[Supplement Four]

To me, EDU-12 seems a rather high level of general knowledge, which should
include more than the basics of technical knowledge.

But, that's what stats are. They're a measure of a character's broad based natural ability. They speak to no specific area of expertise. That's the skill's job.

A character gets his general ability from his stat. He gets his specific training from his skill.

So, in my opinion your
professor has a very good chance to know quite a lot about electronics, and
perhaps even something about demolitions.

So, (the exact same example expressed in a different way) the DEX-12 recruit who joins the Marine Corps is automatically equivalent to an expert Rifle shot because he's got high dexterity?

There can be no characters with high dexterity that really know nothing of shooting? As you say with the professor above, the character with the DEX-12 must have had some experience firing a weapon before just because his Dex is high?

 

[tbeard1999]

I dunno about stat-bloat, but I'm already concerned about skills-bloat. I noticed that the MGT version of Jamison has 17 skill levels, plus 4 skills at level-0 (statistically, a level-0 skill is worth about 0.7 skill levels), This is the equivalent of 20(!) skill levels for a 42 year old character.

Seems rather high to me, assuming that Jamison is a typical character.

I should note that Jamison has one skill at level 3, two at level 2, ten at level 1 and four at level 0. Valuing zero-level skills at 0.7 skill levels, this is ~20 skill levels.

By contrast, a comparable CT merchant character would have 12 skill levels.

Oh, and on an unrelated note, my criticisms of the unduly high survival rolls for "exciting" careers failed to take into account the fact that such careers have a higher chance of advancement, which means characters would average more skills. This should address my complaint, so consider it withdrawn.

Gotta say that I like the random character generation system, though I am concerned that it generates too many skills. If I were gonna use random character generation in my campaign, I'd probably use the MGT system (I'd limit skills to about 2/3 of the MGT total, though). I prefer my own points based character generation system to the MGT system, however.

 

[Klaus]

So, (the exact same example expressed in a different way) the DEX-12 recruit who joins the Marine Corps is automatically equivalent to an expert Rifle shot because he's got high dexterity?

There can be no characters with high dexterity that really know nothing of shooting? As you say with the professor above, the character with the DEX-12 must have had some experience firing a weapon before just because his Dex is high?

He isn't until he gets basic training (level-0), then he and his drill instructer discover he's a natural. And anyway, marines train hard for weeks to improve their stamina and reactions (represented by personal development). Attribute isn't just natural ability.

But that is important too. Some people are just better at some stuff than others. I see it daily at college. Some students are creative, some are well organised, some are very bright, some put the effort in; some are all of these, and they get the best marks (ability+skill).

A medical student with very high intelligence could cruise through his training, while his duller colleague has to put in the effort to pass. Probably end up with a higher medic skill (2 to the bright one's 1), but the whizz kid still outperforms him, even though he might be winging it a lot of the time.

Relying on a high stat is not, well, reliable. The two doctors above have average Dex. When called on to perform surgery, the bright one just ain't as good as Dr. Average. I know where the internship is going to go.

Skills could be said to be time spent training (which is exactly how advancement works in MGT). How well you perform with the training is up to your abilities.

People tend to gravitate to what they're good at, and train more in skills they have ability in. Natural talent is key to becoming good at your job.

The MGT system might not be a perfect model of the tension between nature and nurture, but it's certainly good'nuff to to be enjoyably playable.

 

[rust]

They're a measure of a character's broad based natural ability. ...

A "natural ability" of Education does not seem to make much sense. To me,
Education is obviously the general knowledge aquired over time through cul-
ture (schools etc.), not any inborn "natural ability". And the higher the EDU
value, the more non-specific, general knowledge the character has.

As for the Marine, a person with a high Dexterity (which is most probably in-
deed a "natural ability") doubtless has a much higher chance to learn to use
a rifle than a person with a low DEX.
Here the system indeed seems to have a problem, but only for the first (or
first few) use(s) of a skill, and it is quite easy to handle this by introducing
a modifier for such cases.

 

[aramis]

The problem here is that certain posters can't accept that their narrow views of what stats and skills should mean do not jive with
(a) the rest of the community
and
(b) the design team.

They also (erroneously) claim that this results in much higher attributes in general (which said, is not congruent with the majority experience, but may have been their experience with their players).

CT was the best SF game of the late 1970's, and even into the early 1980's... but games theory has evolved and certain elements are no longer seen as strengths by the majority of players:
(1) Stats not affecting task rolls
(2) multiple task resolution systems in one engine
(3) a successful roll to hit not being an actual hit
(4) death in character generation
(5) no control over character development

Industry wide, this has been major movement. Like it or not, this is the way the industry as a whole has been moving, and is likely to continue.

 

[Klaus]

I dunno about stat-bloat, but I'm already concerned about skills-bloat. I noticed that the MGT version of Jamison has 17 skill levels, plus 4 skills at level-0 (statistically, a level-0 skill is worth about 0.7 skill levels), This is the equivalent of 20(!) skill levels for a 42 year old character.

Seems rather high to me, assuming that Jamison is a typical character.

I should note that Jamison has one skill at level 3, two at level 2, ten at level 1 and four at level 0. Valuing zero-level skills at 0.7 skill levels, this is ~20 skill levels.

By contrast, a comparable CT merchant character would have 12 skill levels.

There are more skill levels than CT, but given that the MGT skills list is pretty comprehensive (covering areas that CT hardly touched, skills wise), I think it's probably reasonable.

Jamison may be a little atypical, though I've not picked apart the example. 0-level skills aside for now, he'd have only got as many skill rolls as he would have in CT (so 12 assuming it had been promotion every term). The extra levels would come from rank and events. These are usually level 1 only, so if you already have a level in that skill then it doesn't count. And only a few events carry a chance at a skill 1. Jamison might have been lucky.

The final levels are from connections, and the skills package. Connections is a nice way of binding the party together, and it allows for either a bit of sensible specialisation or acquisition of a skill that nicely rounds the character out. The skills package is probably the real culprit for any bloat. A character could easily get 2, 3, or even 4 skills from this. The Solo Play rules are maybe a more restrained method, netting only 1 level or 3x0-levels.

I think it's worth making a distinction between leveled skills and 0-level skills on the character sheet. Skills with levels give you your professionalism. 0-level is a tertiary thing, hobbies, basic certificates, and the like. It removes the clutter (and looks a bit more like a resume).

It's worth noting that any skills acquired are going to be tightly focused on the career. A soldier will have combat skills but few spacer or science skills. A scholar could have loads of fields of expertise but no fighting ability at all. MGT characters don't produce the often quite random skill distribution of LBB4+ characters anywhere near as often. I've also noted a few higher skill levels with MGT characters I've made than with CT ones (tho I did once roll a High Guard character with level 6 gun combat!). MGT characters seem more specialised, whereas I felt CT ones tended to be a bit all over the place.

 

[tbeard1999]

I think it's worth making a distinction between leveled skills and 0-level skills on the character sheet. Skills with levels give you your professionalism. 0-level is a tertiary thing, hobbies, basic certificates, and the like. It removes the clutter (and looks a bit more like a resume).

Well, statistically speaking, a level-0 skill is worth about 70% of a level-1 skill (i.e., comparing success chances). So I don't think that the distinction is defensible. In effect, 4 level-0 skills are roughly comparable to 3 level-1 skills, so they are a significant benefit.

It's worth noting that any skills acquired are going to be tightly focused on the career.

This is true of most Traveller random character generation systems, seems to me. And the fact that MGT makes it easy to change careers means that characters can have rather broad arrays of skills. Jamison, for instance, has seventeen different skills, so it's kinda hard for me to agree with you that he's tightly specialized.

MGT characters seem more specialised, whereas I felt CT ones tended to be a bit all over the place.

I disagree completely if we're discussing LBB1 and Supp 4 characters. As noted, Jamison would have 12 skill levels in CT -- 60% of the total in MGT.

And I don't think that Books 4+ characters are "all over the place". They seem to me to be more tightly specialized (lots more skills at level-3+; fewer total skills; comparable skill levels). But I think that Book 4+ characters can break the system, so I'm not taking the position that they are better than MGT.

 

[Supplement Four]

I should note that Jamison has one skill at level 3, two at level 2, ten at level 1 and four at level 0. Valuing zero-level skills at 0.7 skill levels, this is ~20 skill levels.

By contrast, a comparable CT merchant character would have 12 skill levels.

The actual Jamison character is in CT. He's the example character. And, he only has 10 skills after five terms as a Merchant: One at level 3, one at level 2, and five at level 1.

It is a good distribution, and, since the playtest, I've suspected that MGT might have too many skills through character generation.

The MGT system might not be a perfect model of the tension between nature and nurture, but it's certainly good'nuff to to be enjoyably playable.

Do you think my fix for the stat bloat will make the game less enjoyable?

Do you think my fix for the stat bloat will make the MGT task system take a little step toward perfect?

Do you think my fix for the stat bloat should be ignored or implemented officially?

Here the system indeed seems to have a problem, but only for the first (or
first few) use(s) of a skill, and it is quite easy to handle this by introducing
a modifier for such cases.

Thank you for admitting that there is a problem.

Now, in order to fix the problem, does my non-invasive fix feel like a good thing to you or something that should be over looked?

They also (erroneously) claim that this results in much higher attributes in general (which said, is not congruent with the majority experience, but may have been their experience with their players).

Higher attributes? Who said that? I haven't seen anybody mention it.

CT was the best SF game of the late 1970's, and even into the early 1980's... but games theory has evolved and certain elements are no longer seen as strengths by the majority of players:
(1) Stats not affecting task rolls

It isn't that games have "evolved". They really haven't. There isn't a whole lot of difference in most games today and the early games in the industry.

And, CT has plenty of examles were Stats affect task rolls. Take combat for example. DEX plays a part in gun combat, and STR and END play a part in brawling combat.

There are many other examples, too. Some of the Zero-G throws referece DEX.

The thing with CT is that stats do not affect each and every task roll. It's not necessary, and it doesn't happen.

 

[aramis]

My experiences with bk4 characters are different, Ty. I've only had to invoke the Int+Edu limit on bk4-7 characters under CT, and only rarely on MT basic (but the vilani with 13 terms DID get hit, even tho he was a marine...) HE had stat bloat; after he hit the desired skill levels (replacing one undesired skill with the desired level), he continued to pump stats... 2-3 rolls per term on the pers dev table will do that, and given vilani aging and a +4 Bloodline purity longevity bonus (Saves were thus 3/4/3), he was FFFCFF upon retirement...

It varies quite a bit by player style. I know one chap who every player he had was unwilling to play anything less than 7 terms... then again, everyone in the group was 6+ terms IRL...

I' ve had groups where every one chose to be under 4 terms.

I've had players who played 1/2termers.

as for level 0 skills outside combat: they have been with us since CT, formalized in Mega. They did not appear in TNE nor T4, but those (due to different skill granularity) put employable at level 2, and background/trainee/hobby level at 1.

 

[aramis]

Higher attributes? Who said that? I haven't seen anybody mention it.

You have, tho' not in the current thread.

It also is the logical implication of the term "stat bloat."

 

[Supplement Four]

You have, tho' not in the current thread.

It also is the logical implication of the term "stat bloat."

You must be mis-reading me, then.

If you've followed my posts and examples, then it should be clear that I'm referring to stats overpowering skills when it comes to influencing MGT task throws.

 

[aramis]

If they did, it would inevitably lead to people seeking more stat gains over more skill levels.

 

[Supplement Four]

If they did, it would inevitably lead to people seeking more stat gains over more skill levels.

THAT'S exactly RIGHT!

Think about it.

Let's say you have this character:

Yoe with DEX-8
Pilot-0
Vacc Suit-0
AutoRifle-0
Shotgun-0
AutoPistol-0
ATV-0

And I, as your GM, tell you that you can add 4 points to your stat, or you can add 4 skill levels to any of your skills (all on one skill, or raise 4 of them to level 1, or any combination).

Which are you going to pick?

If you're trying to make the most effective character, then you'll want to raise your stat to DEX-12 to take advantage of the stat bloat, and leave all of the skills at level 0.

You'll be better off with zero level skills and high stats under the MGT system.

Why? Because your Stat-12 will give you a +2 DM in each and every skill you have! All of those skills typically use DEX, so by raising your DEX three points, the stat bloat makes you an effective Skill-2 in each skill!

Stat bloat!

If you put your points into skills, the best you can do is put all four points into one skill. You'll be +4 on one skill and +0 on the other five.

If you put your points into your DEX, then you are +2 with each skill!

Stat bloat!