I'm playing Traveller again!

[kaladorn]

I might actually have to steal that idea too Sig.

I find letting PCs have too many skills is rarely a problem (Int + Edu? Yah right...). Now, limiting how many level 2+ skills people have isn't a bad idea, but having piles of skill 1 or skill 0 abilities just opens up the role playing options.

 

[kaladorn]

I might actually have to steal that idea too Sig.

I find letting PCs have too many skills is rarely a problem (Int + Edu? Yah right...). Now, limiting how many level 2+ skills people have isn't a bad idea, but having piles of skill 1 or skill 0 abilities just opens up the role playing options.

 

[aramis]

Hmmm.... got me rethinking int+edu limit.

Say, Int+Edu level 0 skills max.
Higher of Int or Edu as max skills (not levels) possessed.
Use higher of the lower att or half the higher att. as max level posessed in any skill... (EG, xxxF3x has limit 7, xxx89 has level 8 limit, xxx5Cx has level 6, etc)

 

[aramis]

Hmmm.... got me rethinking int+edu limit.

Say, Int+Edu level 0 skills max.
Higher of Int or Edu as max skills (not levels) possessed.
Use higher of the lower att or half the higher att. as max level posessed in any skill... (EG, xxxF3x has limit 7, xxx89 has level 8 limit, xxx5Cx has level 6, etc)

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Robert, that's mostly how I use the MT system. I know what the difficulties are (3/7/11/15/19), what the appropriate skills and attributes are which apply, and it is usually obvious if the task is fateful or uncertain. With that, off you go! I usually run traveller with a starmap, some dice, maybe one or two combat charts, and that's about it. That's what I love about it.

If I understand you correctly, that's exactly how the MT task system says it should normally be used.

My goal is to emulate the style of the "task" rolls in the skill section of Book 1. The style that causes people to say that Book 1 lacks a task system & that the DGP/MT task system was a necessary innovation.

I don't know how close I'll come to my goal in actual practice, though. I wouldn't be too surprised if most rolls I call for will be close enough to a DGP/MT task roll to call them slightly non-standard DGP/MT tasks.

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Robert, that's mostly how I use the MT system. I know what the difficulties are (3/7/11/15/19), what the appropriate skills and attributes are which apply, and it is usually obvious if the task is fateful or uncertain. With that, off you go! I usually run traveller with a starmap, some dice, maybe one or two combat charts, and that's about it. That's what I love about it.

If I understand you correctly, that's exactly how the MT task system says it should normally be used.

My goal is to emulate the style of the "task" rolls in the skill section of Book 1. The style that causes people to say that Book 1 lacks a task system & that the DGP/MT task system was a necessary innovation.

I don't know how close I'll come to my goal in actual practice, though. I wouldn't be too surprised if most rolls I call for will be close enough to a DGP/MT task roll to call them slightly non-standard DGP/MT tasks.

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Two rules that I use that make the process still risky but less... vexing:

See, that's the thing. I think they were more vexed by me coming up with some on-the-fly rules in an attempt to make the process less vexing.

If I'd played it straight by the book, they may have had even more fun than they did.

1) MT's Brownie Points

Hmm. I'll have to re-read about those.

2) Non-death results of failed re-enlistment.

I've never played failed reënlistment as death! I'm guessing you meant failed survival?

In any case, I did give them the option of non-death on survival failure. I didn't allow them to try another career in that case. & I believe one of the final characters ended up being a failed survival survivor.

In the case of failed reënlistment, I let them try to enlist in another career. Likewise if they failed initial enlistment. (Though I also gave them the option of submitting to the draft.)

They just rolled really badly.

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
Two rules that I use that make the process still risky but less... vexing:

See, that's the thing. I think they were more vexed by me coming up with some on-the-fly rules in an attempt to make the process less vexing.

If I'd played it straight by the book, they may have had even more fun than they did.

1) MT's Brownie Points

Hmm. I'll have to re-read about those.

2) Non-death results of failed re-enlistment.

I've never played failed reënlistment as death! I'm guessing you meant failed survival?

In any case, I did give them the option of non-death on survival failure. I didn't allow them to try another career in that case. & I believe one of the final characters ended up being a failed survival survivor.

In the case of failed reënlistment, I let them try to enlist in another career. Likewise if they failed initial enlistment. (Though I also gave them the option of submitting to the draft.)

They just rolled really badly.

 

[RobertFisher]

I'd been thinking of letting each PC choose (almost) any skill at level zero as a hobby.

I like Sigg's rule too.

 

[RobertFisher]

I'd been thinking of letting each PC choose (almost) any skill at level zero as a hobby.

I like Sigg's rule too.

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by Ranger:
Just a thought...

Thanks for the thought! That might be just the backup plan I need.

 

[RobertFisher]

Originally posted by Ranger:
Just a thought...

Thanks for the thought! That might be just the backup plan I need.

 

[Flynn]

One of the rules I've seen in play is granting a number of 0-level skills equal to Education divided by three, rounded off. This related the "extra" skills directly to the character's statistic reflecting his success at learning. You could even extend this to (Int+Edu)/3, if you wanted to, and select the skills as per Sigg's suggestion.

Hope this helps,
Flynn

 

[Flynn]

One of the rules I've seen in play is granting a number of 0-level skills equal to Education divided by three, rounded off. This related the "extra" skills directly to the character's statistic reflecting his success at learning. You could even extend this to (Int+Edu)/3, if you wanted to, and select the skills as per Sigg's suggestion.

Hope this helps,
Flynn

 

[kaladorn]

Yes, I really did mean 'survival' roll failures, not re-enlistment. DOH! I know what I *meant* to say

My problem with tying skills to Edu is a lot of informally educated people (who could have a hard time saying they had a high Edu) have a lot of practical skills.

I realistically rated my gaming group one day. When I say realistically, I used roughly this paradigm:
level-4 in a skill is equivalent to an MD or a black belt
level-3 is equivalent to a brown/purple belt or an intern or someone graduated from college or university in a specialty
level-2 is 'some decent amount of knowledge' (we'll say about 2-3 years of university in a subject)
level-1 is 'a year of study' or knows how to do basic things competently
level-0 is 'a week long wonder course' or just basically familiar enough to avoid the usual penatlies for having no clue

With that rating system in mind, my average human player at the table (we're all in the 34-40 range, most have had former military service, some studied martial arts, most have 5-8 years of post-secondary education) had probably 35+ skill levels. Some had upwards towards 45. The highest skill levels present were 4 (very rare), the occaisional 3, and a lot of 0s, 1s and 2s. Note when I count 35-45 levels, 0s count as nothing. There were probably another big pile of them.

So, I've found that since the skill limits don't map to real life IMO well, and since the presence of a number of low level skills tends to make the PCs capable of getting into more neat adventures without making them easy, I really find no issue with ignoring that. I do watch for single skills of levels 3+ as these do have 'danger' flags.

My only comment about CT skills is that 8+ was nice, but there were too many per-skill-unique modifiers that you had to know or look up, which is why I prefer MT's system.

 

[kaladorn]

Yes, I really did mean 'survival' roll failures, not re-enlistment. DOH! I know what I *meant* to say

My problem with tying skills to Edu is a lot of informally educated people (who could have a hard time saying they had a high Edu) have a lot of practical skills.

I realistically rated my gaming group one day. When I say realistically, I used roughly this paradigm:
level-4 in a skill is equivalent to an MD or a black belt
level-3 is equivalent to a brown/purple belt or an intern or someone graduated from college or university in a specialty
level-2 is 'some decent amount of knowledge' (we'll say about 2-3 years of university in a subject)
level-1 is 'a year of study' or knows how to do basic things competently
level-0 is 'a week long wonder course' or just basically familiar enough to avoid the usual penatlies for having no clue

With that rating system in mind, my average human player at the table (we're all in the 34-40 range, most have had former military service, some studied martial arts, most have 5-8 years of post-secondary education) had probably 35+ skill levels. Some had upwards towards 45. The highest skill levels present were 4 (very rare), the occaisional 3, and a lot of 0s, 1s and 2s. Note when I count 35-45 levels, 0s count as nothing. There were probably another big pile of them.

So, I've found that since the skill limits don't map to real life IMO well, and since the presence of a number of low level skills tends to make the PCs capable of getting into more neat adventures without making them easy, I really find no issue with ignoring that. I do watch for single skills of levels 3+ as these do have 'danger' flags.

My only comment about CT skills is that 8+ was nice, but there were too many per-skill-unique modifiers that you had to know or look up, which is why I prefer MT's system.

 

[JWMcFarlin]

Huh. That's interesting. I wonder what the probability factor effects of DMs given by skills indicate about how much more "expert" a character at level 3 is than one at level 1?

For my part, I have always thought about it this way:

Think in terms of the default skills given, for example Rifle-1 for Army characters. With that you get a +1 modifier, and you avoid the severe negative modifier that no skill imposes. I would suggest that perhaps Rifle-2 indicates actually having used the weapon in combat. Rifle-3 might indicate virtuosity, years of experience in that specific skill, or highly specialized training, and Rifle-4 should indicate some sort of specialness about the character.

I tend to think of level 1 as being competent, and higher levels as being expert. Level 3, as you say Kaladorn, is the trigger line, because on one hand the character starts being able to do crazy things, and on the other, they tend to start being too specialized to be useful in a broader sense.

Roll up a hundred characters, and see where the skill levels fall, or better yet, just poll Citizens of the Imperium. My rough scan indicates that skill level one is pretty much the gold standard for an effective person. If we look at Medics, Medical-3 is the requirement for being termed a "Doctor." I'm not clear about whether the skills reflected in these NPCs are accurate--for example, there is an 8-term Diplomat with 6 skills.

As a side comment, note that Darth Vader is estimated as having Blade Cbt-5, Pilot-3, Jack-of all trades-4, and Leader-2. Anakin Skywalker was noted as being "the best pilot in the galaxy," of course we know that is part technical skill, and part Darth Vader's psionic strength of 13. Other fiction heroes don't necessarily have high skill levels, for example Jerry Pournelle's Sergeant Major Calvin, who sports Vehicle-2, Heavy Weapons-2, Vacc-1, and Instruction-1.

As for the Int+Edu barrier, I concur. It's rare to see it in effect. Even a character with Int3 Edu3 (a pretty rare set of rolls) could have six levels.

John

 

[JWMcFarlin]

Huh. That's interesting. I wonder what the probability factor effects of DMs given by skills indicate about how much more "expert" a character at level 3 is than one at level 1?

For my part, I have always thought about it this way:

Think in terms of the default skills given, for example Rifle-1 for Army characters. With that you get a +1 modifier, and you avoid the severe negative modifier that no skill imposes. I would suggest that perhaps Rifle-2 indicates actually having used the weapon in combat. Rifle-3 might indicate virtuosity, years of experience in that specific skill, or highly specialized training, and Rifle-4 should indicate some sort of specialness about the character.

I tend to think of level 1 as being competent, and higher levels as being expert. Level 3, as you say Kaladorn, is the trigger line, because on one hand the character starts being able to do crazy things, and on the other, they tend to start being too specialized to be useful in a broader sense.

Roll up a hundred characters, and see where the skill levels fall, or better yet, just poll Citizens of the Imperium. My rough scan indicates that skill level one is pretty much the gold standard for an effective person. If we look at Medics, Medical-3 is the requirement for being termed a "Doctor." I'm not clear about whether the skills reflected in these NPCs are accurate--for example, there is an 8-term Diplomat with 6 skills.

As a side comment, note that Darth Vader is estimated as having Blade Cbt-5, Pilot-3, Jack-of all trades-4, and Leader-2. Anakin Skywalker was noted as being "the best pilot in the galaxy," of course we know that is part technical skill, and part Darth Vader's psionic strength of 13. Other fiction heroes don't necessarily have high skill levels, for example Jerry Pournelle's Sergeant Major Calvin, who sports Vehicle-2, Heavy Weapons-2, Vacc-1, and Instruction-1.

As for the Int+Edu barrier, I concur. It's rare to see it in effect. Even a character with Int3 Edu3 (a pretty rare set of rolls) could have six levels.

John

 

[robject]

T5 also has the idea of "life pursuits": basically the player chooses a skill to pursue as a hobby. Each year (that would be 'each term' for CT) the player may choose to improve one level in that skill instead of getting a career skill. The player may also choose to stop pursuing that skill in favor of another. That gives players some control over their characters, while still keeping the random chargen in one piece. It also gives players a new avenue of post-career self-improvement.

 

[robject]

T5 also has the idea of "life pursuits": basically the player chooses a skill to pursue as a hobby. Each year (that would be 'each term' for CT) the player may choose to improve one level in that skill instead of getting a career skill. The player may also choose to stop pursuing that skill in favor of another. That gives players some control over their characters, while still keeping the random chargen in one piece. It also gives players a new avenue of post-career self-improvement.