Imperial Knights

[Vargr Merc]

Referee: "The Vargr have you tied to a stake they are ready to cook you and eat you, what do you do?" Player, "I try to negotiate some more."

On behalf of all the hard core Vargr players here, I'd like to officially protest this uncharacteristically invalid and biased portrayal of the Vargr race. While I may indeed threaten to eat my captives, in whole or in part, as a valid means to interrogate or intimidate a prisoner, I have never actually eaten a captive, and find the insinuation that we might eat other sentients libelously insulting!

I now return this thread to its regularly scheduled program, already in progress.

Six Actual, Out.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Tom Kalbfus:
<snip> Many pages are devoted to these combat rules, and yet your saying combat should be avoided?

<takes a deep breath>
Ok, if I'm in a bad firefight, instead of standing up and letting the bullets eat up excess HP (ala D&D), in T20 I'd better get the heck out or find a better position to shoot from.

I'm personally not saying combat should never happen in a T20 game, instead that it should be treated as the potentially dangerous matter it is. See below for more on my opinons on combat's place in a campaign.

And a goodly portion of the THB is devoted to such things as Vehicle and Ship design, Space Travel, World Design, Campaign suggestions, Character Generation...

The reason for the length of the combat section has to do with all the changes it makes to the d20 SRD. And as several discussions on rpg.net have hashed out, combat in almost *ANY* rpg (even diceless systems) takes up a lot of space in the rules due to the need for detail, regardless of whether or not combat is the main focus of the game.

I just wonder how one goes about negotiating with a group of Vargr who are shooting at you?<snip>

<sings> There's a time for combat, a time for negotiation, a time for swindling, a time for telling tall tales, a time for drinking...</sings>

And the three fine members of Team Vargr (at least one of whom posts on CotI) in the t20 pbem email game I'm in would be severaly dissapointed in your missrepresentation of Vargr. Especially the vegetarian scientist.

Any Vargr ethically-challenged merchant worth his salt wouldn't eat potentially valuable merchandise and could be negiotated with from a position of percieved Prestiage or strength. If you waltz into his base looking like a weakling and talk to the Vargr like an equal you will likely get shot at. Even then you'd be better off fleeing and trying another tactic than likely getting killed in a face to face shootout and gain nothing.

How exactly does one avoid combat if a bunch of NPCs are trying to kill your character? <snip>

You're not going to always be able to avoid combat, but it doesn't have to be the only part of your game.

Dude, if you think such jobs as Archeology (esp. in the Pulp 30's style or the actual early Archeologists), landing a mercenary ticket (yes there'll be combat but being a mercenary is FAR more than fighting), exploring the *UNIVERSE*, etc. are not exciting (in Real Life or in RolePlay), you need to watch oh any Star Trek series and the various Mummy movies, read Doc Savage and the real life stories of the Polar and Darkest Africa Explorers, early ambassadors to the Far East, traders to any newly "discovered" place, etc.

Yes you don't need to roleplay every boring detail but combat alone doesn't have to be and isn't the end all be all of roleplaying. For starters please reread the section in the THB on Traveller Campaigns.

Oh and among other things, my story-telling, raised as a horse-archer, ex-barbarian Cargomeister is currently flirting with two lovely ladies of the ship he is serving on and just finished a short fling with a Imperial Navy Commander. And it's been just as exciting as combat.

To sum things up, in Traveller (any version even BESM ) combat does not have to be the only thing or the main focus to make an enjoyable game.

Mr. Whipsnade: I'm starting to appreciate your valient efforts! My short answer unfortunately was not adequate, though I had hopes. As I said earlier, play what you will, how you will. : )

Slainte to you all! Liam, I'll dig up some references on later historical Knights asap, I've said my bit on t20 combat, etc. .
EDIT: trying to shorten things
Casey

 

[Liam Devlin]

why thank you Casey! (have ye caught yer breath yet? Here have a pint, sip and rest a while!)Liam looks outside the pub, makes sure coast is clear returns to find barmaids all over casey

"Must be the pretzels!"

Slainte!

 

[Anton]

"Sláinte's" appearing everywhere? So Diaspora sector is named after the Irish Diaspora

Larsen: Please don't dismiss T20 quite so lightly. I agree totally with you that levels are the most unrealistic aspect of the D/T20 rules system ("Phew! If I hadn't delivered that course on Jumpspace physics last semester, there's no way I would have survived that fall!") but it is a valid game mechanic. Also, as I recall, the CT system actually didn't include any method for character progression/skill acquisition, except more wealth and better equipment (though it may have been covered in a supplement). Having said that, we don't all play Star Munchkin the RPG...

Different games favor different styles of play. None are better, but all are different.

Very, very true.

Tom said:

If you want to go on a series of XP harvesting dungeon crawls then you get a game like T20

No, you don't. You play Spelljammer, or BESM, or D20 Star Wars, or any one of a number of other games.

I think T20 should be an attempt to attract the kind of players who like to increase their character levels and decrease their vulnerablity while becoming better fighting machines, otherwise why do a d20 version of Traveller in the first place, if all it does is faithfully emulate Classic Traveller, there is no point.

IMHO, the reason to do a D20 version of Traveller is to use probably the most popular system to attract new players to an amazing setting - one that has stood the test of time and continues to grow in popularity.

The point is to tell a great story. If you listen to a world war II Vet tell his war stories, you are listening to the stories of a survivor, those that get cut down early in battle never get to tell their stories. When you play Traveller, you want some excitement and some danger, if the rules just cut you down like cannon fodder time and time again, and T20 characters take a long time to roll up, its not going to be fun. You need some built in survivability so your character can go on to meet greater and more dangerous foes, thats what T20 and the d20 game system is for.

</font>

• Yes, the point is to tell a story. Endless battle-story after battle-story soon gets boring though.</font>
• Combat survivors in a modern battle tend to a) lucky b) smarter c) better equipped d) have better tactics.</font>
• Excitement and danger can arise from far more than just combat. Read more books. Watch the news!</font>
• If you want built-in survivability, then why not use the prior-history rules. That's what they're FOR! (Well, also to give your character a more interesting background than "Yeah, after we all left school we found this abandoned ruin. We kicked in doors, killed the monsters, stole their treasure and bought this starship. Er, can you tell me how to fly it?").</font>

Tom, can I suggest something? Try T20 for a few sessions without the dungeons... give your players challenges like intrigue, betrayal, negotiations, natural obstacles or similar... you might be pleasantly surprised. Situations where roleplaying and non-combat skills are needed. The Linkworlds pdf adventure on this site is excellent and although combat plays a part, it isn't the be-all and end-all. You (and your players) might be pleasantly surprised. And if not, then you can always throw together a few dungeons...

Regards,

Anton

 

[TKalbfus]

Yes, the point is to tell a story. Endless battle-story after battle-story soon gets boring though.
Combat survivors in a modern battle tend to a) lucky b) smarter c) better equipped d) have better tactics.
Excitement and danger can arise from far more than just combat. Read more books. Watch the news!
If you want built-in survivability, then why not use the prior-history rules. That's what they're FOR! (Well, also to give your character a more interesting background than "Yeah, after we all left school we found this abandoned ruin. We kicked in doors, killed the monsters, stole their treasure and bought this starship. Er, can you tell me how to fly it?").

Tom, can I suggest something? Try T20 for a few sessions without the dungeons... give your players challenges like intrigue, betrayal, negotiations, natural obstacles or similar... you might be pleasantly surprised. Situations where roleplaying and non-combat skills are needed. The Linkworlds pdf adventure on this site is excellent and although combat plays a part, it isn't the be-all and end-all. You (and your players) might be pleasantly surprised. And if not, then you can always throw together a few dungeons...

Regards,

Anton

I guess I wouldn't be so persistent if Larsen would not imply that I was such a moron for not agreeing with him. I don't play Pokey Man. I have no interest in playing a Japanese cartoon with a big mouth and small eyes or vica versa. I know what D&D is, and its not all about combat either if played propery and there are other reasons to award experience points besides killing something. I was just hoping that Traveller T20 would be more versitile like D&D rather than a "you can only play it this way" sort of game. I was hoping that Traveller might become the D&D of science fiction. The main deficiency with Traveller is that you are in deep trouble if you leave civilization and you don't take a hospital with you. I've read the book and there are some treatments that will heal you fast, but you need to get to a hospital. Field medicine is quite limited. One solution to the problem I believe is linked characters. In the Dark Sun campaign 1 player can play multiple characters, but only one at a time. In the case of Traveller you can have 10 player characters for instance with 1 active and 9 in low berths. When one character gets injured or killed, you take him out of the dungeon and revive another character from his low berth to replace him. The other character coincidentally has the same number of xp as the previous character up to his point of injury. The frozen character is not used until something happens to the character he's replacing. All the frozen characters are advanced as the active character is advanced, not that they are Borged, it is a metagame solution, the other characters are assumed to be advanced by an unspecified amount until the something happens to the active character so one of the frozen characters are thawed, the experience point total of the thawed character is the same as the one taken out of action, he is a different character of course, his abilities are different, and he may even be of a different class. I believe this is also called a character Tree. The player keeps two character sheets current at all times, one for the character he's playing and one for his character's replacement. No healing potions and nothing unTraveller-like.

 

[Anton]

No healing potions and nothing unTraveller-like.

Well, actually, I disagree. It's West End Games' Paranoia, in Space, without the humour. It's not Traveller.

But whatever, it's your game, have fun.

Anton

 

[Whipsnade]

"Larsen: Please don't dismiss T20 quite so lightly."


Sir,

Please be assured, I am most certainly NOT dismissing T20 in any manner. I think it is a fine set of rules and the materials produced for it have been excellent. T20 is also a different set of rules than the d20 core set, just as M20 is different.

I also fully support the idea of a d20 version of Traveller as a way of introducing more players to the Traveller setting. SJGames does something similar with GURPS, so why shouldn't WOTC do it with d20? It is a great idea and one I hope WOTC extends to other settigns and mileaus.

However, people playing in different GURPS settings don't complain when the style of play necessarily changes between settings, it is expected because the setting is different. People playing d20 in different settings should have the same viewpoint, the setting changed so the style of play changed.

Mr. Kalbfus complained that a play mechanic used extensively in D&D d20; the XP harvesting dungeon crawl for low level PCs, was not feasible in Traveller d20. I tried, and failed, to explain that Traveller d20 was not the same thing as D&D d20 even though they use some of the same core rules. GURPS:Cyberpunk isn't the same thing as GURPS:Swashbucklers even though they share some core rules. No one squawks about that because they expect it.

I'm certain that, even before it was completely written, T20 was explained to the d20 hobby as something different, that it wouldn't simply be D&D d20 in space. The differences were explained, the differences were expected, and thus complaints should not be made about the differences.


Sincerely,
Larsen

 

[Whipsnade]

"I guess I wouldn't be so persistent if Larsen would not imply that I was such a moron for not agreeing with him."


Mr. Kalbfus,

I most certainly have not implied that you are a moron. If you care to re-read my posts, I have continually expressed my sorrow in my failure to explain a fundamental point to you; Traveller and D&D are two very different settings that just so happen to share a set of core rules. This is not about you being 'stupid' or being a 'moron', because you are patently neither, this is about my utter failure to get my point across.

"I don't play Pokey Man."

Oddly enough, I do. It's a nifty game and my nephews; 8 and 6, enjoy it tremendously. It teaches all sorts of gaming skills and ideas that they'll be able to use when they grow older and can handle d20, GURPS, Fudge, or whatnot. It's a nice little primer for RPGs, much like 'Go Fish' or 'Old Maid' is for card games and 'Chutes and Ladders' is for boardgames.

I wasn't mentioning Pokemon as a way to denegrate or slam D&D. I happen to think it is a nice little game and you'll notice every time I mention it I use it's real name and not the insulting "Pokey Man" knickname. I was using Pokemon as a form of shorthand, as a way to refer to a type of play mechanic. Rather than having to type "gathering XPs during various adventures so that your PC can move up levels and grow more powerful" every time I wanted to mention the play mechanic, I simply typed "Pokemon-like". Fewer keystrokes you see.

"I was hoping that Traveller might become the D&D of science fiction."

Score yourself a keyboard kill there, Mr. Kalbfus. Then go to the homepage of this site and look for Hunter Gordon's announcement about a certain vote that recently took place in the RPG hobby.

"The main deficiency with Traveller is that you are in deep trouble if you leave civilization and you don't take a hospital with you. I've read the book and there are some treatments that will heal you fast, but you need to get to a hospital. Field medicine is quite limited. One solution to the problem..."

Another solution to the problem is to avoid getting hurt in the first place; more brains and less boom-boom. This 'deficiency' you write about is what makes the Traveller setting more realistic than the various D&D settings and being more realistic is one of Traveller's drawing points.

Again:

- Traveller and D&D are different from each other.
- Neither Traveller or D&D are better than each other.
- Different settings require a different general style of play.

Just to reinforce my first point in this post; I do NOT think you are a moron, I do NOT think you are ignorant, I do NOT think you are even being willfully ignorant. I DO think I have failed to clearly and concisely explain myself to you.


Sincerely,
Larsen

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Anton:
"Sláinte's" appearing everywhere? So Diaspora sector is named after the Irish Diaspora

Heh, been using Sláinte since I first tasted Guinness and Bushmill's in Ireland. But that would'na surprise me.

I'm more Irish by way of ethically-challenged merchants

who decided Picts weren't that bad afterall but I don't let that stop me from enjoying a Guinness.

I agree totally with you that levels are the most unrealistic aspect of the D/T20 rules system but it is a valid game mechanic.

One thing I've been tempted to do is use the system from the Polyhedron mini-game Omega World and allow feats and skill point selections to be held back until after game sessions. That way you don't say learn how to drive a grav vehicle or increase your skill in trading until after you've taken the air/raft for a spin or negotiated your latest deal.

There's always d20/OGL games like Mutants & Masterminds or SAS/BESM d20 for ideas on point-buy/levelless or classes in T20.

Casey

 

[TKalbfus]

Mr. Kalbfus,

I most certainly have not implied that you are a moron. If you care to re-read my posts, I have continually expressed my sorrow in my failure to explain a fundamental point to you; Traveller and D&D are two very different settings that just so happen to share a set of core rules. This is not about you being 'stupid' or being a 'moron', because you are patently neither, this is about my utter failure to get my point across.

Well, maybe I did read between the lines too much. All I know about Pokemon is that it is about cartoon about a videogame where small creatures jump off the screen and fight it out. The reason I'm interested in dungeons is that they are great combat testers. You can put alot of creatures in one spot and try things out. Dungeons are neat and tidy, you put a creature entry and everthing else you need to run the combat in one room. The PCs can only go where their are rooms and they must also go through certain other rooms first, its a way of mapping out an adventure that is clear and concise. I was exploring expanding the concept to Traveller. Another idea I've had is the concept of a party of Starships. Each player rolls up a starship's crew and builds or selects ar starship and arms it. There is something like 4 starships in the party and a whole subsector filled with space pirates that they have to clear out. The starship's jump from system to system, and some of the systems have pirates in them. The pirates attack the starships and they have a space combat encounter. The PCs loot the pirates lair and go on to another star system. Eventually the party has enough loot to buy their own starships or build bigger and better starships. It may happen that in the process a PC's starship gets destroyed or damaged. Either the ship has an engineering crew to repair the damage or they can pull into a base. It would probably take well over a year to clear out an entire subsector filled with pirates, but you can play with compressed game time.

 

[lightsenshi]

If "spontaneous" leveling bothers you, require that your players put their next level advancement (skills, feat, etc) in writing to you to represent "training" toward said advancement.

Personally, I don't think it's an issue. You already have to suspend belief to play, what's one more thing?

 

[Anton]

Celts in S P A C E!

Yep, IMTU, players are allowed hold skills/feats back. Not, I hasten to add, so that when they suddenly need someone able to fly an air/raft one of them can select that feat! Rather, it's more of an aide for us as we get more familiar with the system and setting and its requirements, and may well disappear over time.

Cheers,

Anton

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Tom Kalbfus:
I don't play Pokey Man. I have no interest in playing a Japanese cartoon with a big mouth and small eyes or vica versa.

Too bad, it's an easier to play version of Magic that's helped me introduce a cousin of mine to something other than video games. I suggest you watch Cowboy Bebop, Crest of the Stars, Outlaw Star, Ghost in the Shell, or the Animatrix shorts if you get the chance. There's some fine Anime out there.

I mentioned BESM (the RPG) as it is a very valid option for playing Traveller (using the conversion at JTAS) and is hardly all combat. And it's Big Eyes, Small Mouth, a stereotype that comes from Disney originally. ^_^

I was just hoping that Traveller T20 would be more versitile like D&D rather than a "you can only play it this way" sort of game.

Lol, I find this statement ironic since D&D3E struggles under the weight of the combat orientation of previous editions of D&D.

I do like your idea of having "backup" characters. This could also be useful if you have for example ship crew and ground crew. And a "cleaning up the pirate's campaign.

Baka Casey-chan (EDIT: added linkage)

 

[TKalbfus]

I think Traveller is more combat oriented once your characters get inside a starship. Starships aren't equal. Big starships have more SI than small ones. Starships also take a week to go from one system to the next. Starships can be repaired while in jump space. In the tradition of D&D, your can have a starship designed as a mobile repair shop, this ship carries spare parts and can restore some SI to a damaged starship, fulfilling the role of part cleric somewhat. The repair ship would probably be bigger than the other ships and would be staffed by an engineering team. Likewise one can have a hospital ship, a starship which is a mobile fully staffed hospital with professional doctors, nurses etc. The other ships in the Starship party would be fighting ships and one subsidized merchant converted to carry 8 fighters. One important treasure to collect from destroyed pirate ships are the debris of those destroyed ship. As you know Traveller ships are very pricy, if any starship parts can be found in working order it would be worth a lot of money. If the party collects enough parts from enemy starships, it can sell them and buy new starships, or it can make their own starships out of those parts.

 

[helvorn]

As a fairly hard core Vargr player and member of Team Vargr with Casey, I must also take exception to the man-eating Vargr story; "You forgot to add the BBQ sauce."

In some parts of the Vargr extants humans is good eat'n and in others we wouldn't sully our superiorly engineered bodies with human flesh

The main thing to remember is with Vargr is that it varies... it all varies.

Of course the problem with Team Vargr are the constant prestige battles. My character and one of the other Vargr have had a rather interesting time sorting out our relative prestige in the team. Lots of fun!

Matt

PS Bring on the scooby snacks! Rrooobbby rrroooby dooo!

 

[Father Fletch]

Lightsenshi;
I like what you proposed
If "spontaneous" leveling bothers you, require that your players put their next level advancement (skills, feat, etc) in writing to you to represent "training" toward said advancement.

Personally, I don't think it's an issue. You already have to suspend belief to play, what's one more thing?

I am thinking of adding a "Half Level" to the game. By the time a player is at enough XP to be between levels, they have to commit to what the next level is going to be. This means saying what class, skills, feats, etc they are working towards. Then I would allow them to list the skills and feats on their sheet, BUT, highlight or keep them in brackets until they actually level. Once comitted they also would not be allowed to switch. They also would need to come up with an in game rationale for the way they earned the skills. IISS correspondence courses, training at a Dojo dirtside, cross training with another crew member, etc.