Inventors, Engineers, Technicians, Makers, Fixers and Operators

[kilemall]

In other versions of Traveller there are mechanics for differentiating between people who can repair a technology, operate a technology, and develop/create a technology.

This usually involves more differentiated skills possibly with cascades to define these capabilities.

As recent readers of CT forums know, I am not big on 'skill bloat' and like building in differences in characters with minimal generation/paperwork/cues.

So herewith, a proposal for who can do what using basic skills/stats as is in CT.

The basic idea is that INT is the problem-solving do something new stat, and EDU is the know prior accumulated knowledge stat, so levels of capability should derive from the combination of DMs of these stats and skills.

Each level of capability can do specific things-

INVENTOR- Create new capability, device and/or major TL advancement.
ENGINEER- Design new system/device with possibly an incremental advanced capability and organize it's production.
TECHNICIAN- Assist Inventors and Engineers in developing and producing new devices/technology including new subsystems with improvements in production and performance.
MAKERS- Translate the specs and designs into production templates, oversee and operate the Makers that produce the new devices.
FIXERS- Repair the devices/technology. The most typical use of skills.
OPERATORS-All of the above can operate the above at reduced capability.

Two ways to cut this cake-

#1 is various stats hard define capability- have them and you can do that level of work with the skill/tech.

Inventors- INT A+, EDU 6+, Skill-3
Engineers- INT 8+, EDU A+, Skill-3
Technicians-INT 8+, EDU 8+, Skill-2
Makers- INT 6+, EDU 7+, Skill-2
Fixers-Skill-0
Operators- Skill-0 min, average DM (Skill-#)-2

#2 would be DMs applied from the various charstats to help with the roll- or maybe skill roll, charstat roll with having to roll stat or below.

Either way, obviously the difficulty level should be appropriate to the task.

 

[rhialto]

In other versions of Traveller there are mechanics for differentiating between people who can repair a technology, operate a technology, and develop/create a technology.

This usually involves more differentiated skills possibly with cascades to define these capabilities.

As recent readers of CT forums know, I am not big on 'skill bloat' and like building in differences in characters with minimal generation/paperwork/cues.

So herewith, a proposal for who can do what using basic skills/stats as is in CT.

The basic idea is that INT is the problem-solving do something new stat, and EDU is the know prior accumulated knowledge stat, so levels of capability should derive from the combination of DMs of these stats and skills.

Each level of capability can do specific things-

INVENTOR- Create new capability, device and/or major TL advancement.
ENGINEER- Design new system/device with possibly an incremental advanced capability and organize it's production.
TECHNICIAN- Assist Inventors and Engineers in developing and producing new devices/technology including new subsystems with improvements in production and performance.
MAKERS- Translate the specs and designs into production templates, oversee and operate the Makers that produce the new devices.
FIXERS- Repair the devices/technology. The most typical use of skills.
OPERATORS-All of the above can operate the above at reduced capability.

Two ways to cut this cake-

#1 is various stats hard define capability- have them and you can do that level of work with the skill/tech.

Inventors- INT A+, EDU 6+, Skill-3
Engineers- INT 8+, EDU A+, Skill-3
Technicians-INT 8+, EDU 8+, Skill-2
Makers- INT 6+, EDU 7+, Skill-2
Fixers-Skill-0
Operators- Skill-0 min, average DM (Skill-#)-2

#2 would be DMs applied from the various charstats to help with the roll- or maybe skill roll, charstat roll with having to roll stat or below.

Either way, obviously the difficulty level should be appropriate to the task.

In my game I'd choose option #2-bold: easily done on the fly, since I like the concept of the UGM (?) "if the 2D task throw is <= Stat add 1 to the roll". Less is more, but I like the divide between INT being more for inventing and EDU for engineering.

 

[flykiller]

#1 is various stats hard define capability- have them and you can do that level of work with the skill/tech.

Inventors- INT A+, EDU 6+, Skill-3
Engineers- INT 8+, EDU A+, Skill-3
Technicians-INT 8+, EDU 8+, Skill-2
Makers- INT 6+, EDU 7+, Skill-2
Fixers-Skill-0
Operators- Skill-0 min, average DM (Skill-#)-2

#2 would be DMs applied from the various charstats to help with the roll- or maybe skill roll, charstat roll with having to roll stat or below.

seems like you're trading skill "bloat" for task system bloat.

 

[kilemall]

seems like you're trading skill "bloat" for task system bloat.

Not really, just note what the character can do or not do over and above fixer/operator.

If you are doing inventing or engineering, gonna be a whole big campaign focus and a custom throw or series of throws anyway. Don't feel the need to recreate that whole complex invention/design system found in later versions.

 

[infojunky]

It's not a bad idea.

I was pondering how to make Scientists from Supplement 4 work the other day, and was thinking along the same lines. Note I was looking at the Program writing rules as a reference.

 

[kilemall]

It's not a bad idea.

I was pondering how to make Scientists from Supplement 4 work the other day, and was thinking along the same lines. Note I was looking at the Program writing rules as a reference.

Well the program writing rules make it clear the programmer doesn't have to have the specific expertise, just has to have access to such a person during the program writing.

So perhaps a cross-discipline approach will work that way.

 

[RandyB]

It's not a bad idea.

I was pondering how to make Scientists from Supplement 4 work the other day, and was thinking along the same lines. Note I was looking at the Program writing rules as a reference.

I always saw the Supplement 4 Scientist as more of a Benton Quest type - the rough-and-tumble adventuring scientist, with game play emphasis on the "rough-and-tumble adventuring" part.