Just got old traveller.

[RainOfSteel]

and books 4-7 CGen painfully slow

I was trying it again today and it was pretty slow, but it has been a long, long, long time since I have done it.

I did manage to start off with with a Mercenary who went directly to OCS in the first assignment. Then I rolled Intelligence school for the second assignment and rolled below 4 for all skills, getting nothing. Ugh.

I have the Mongoose rulebook. I may try it later.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Is the issiue people want a super character who is and expert in 3 or more fields? Or are they looking for a character who can hold his own in may fields?

Let's say I want to be a starship engineer. My idea is:

Engineering-3
Mechanical-2
Electronics-2
Computer-2
Gravitics-2

Let's say I want to be a space marine:

FGMP-15-3
Battledress-2
Zero-G Cbt-2
Brawling-2
Tactics-2

Both sets only involved 11 skill points. What are my chances of getting these combinations? Zero.

 

[nats]

@ROS in re air raft... it's pretty explicit the roll is for non-routine conditions. At least in later printings.

Ive actually removed Air-raft skill entirely as there is only one use of it in a table in all 7 books, Vehicle skill (if amended to include grav vehicles/ATVs etc as it is in later books) replaces it in most situations so I changed it to that in the one instance in Book 1 where it is referred to (the Army career service skills table).

Also likewise I have removed the ATV skill entirely as there is actually no use of that skill at all in any of the books - pretty daft IMO, unless it was in an early printing of Book 1 and dropped in the later ones (cant say as I got rid of my 1977 printings). Again Vehicle skill replaces it in later books so I just use that one.

There are quite a few instances like that in the books which are not covered in the CT errata - takes a while to amend CT into a wholly workable syatem but it works well when you have done so.

 

[nats]

Let's say I want to be a starship engineer. My idea is:

Engineering-3
Mechanical-2
Electronics-2
Computer-2
Gravitics-2

Let's say I want to be a space marine:

FGMP-15-3
Battledress-2
Zero-G Cbt-2
Brawling-2
Tactics-2

Both sets only involved 11 skill points. What are my chances of getting these combinations? Zero.

Thats the whole thing about Traveller that you seem to be missing entirely - you dont know what character you will end up with and you cant force the issue. Although nothings stopping you from trying a few times till you get a decent character and use the rest for possible NPCs.

If you particularly want to play an engineer with certain skills then you need to use a point system like Mongoose Traveller, but for me thats cheating and I dont see any fun in doing that at all - where is the fun in playing a super-perfect character?

But if you really, absolutely must do that then just alot the exact skills and be done with it - but IMO you want to be playing a different game if thats what you want to do!! I may on the very odd occassion do that for an NPC if he absolutely needs a particular skill, but never for a player character. If I ever feel like playing someone with a certain skill set (such as a pilot) I must admit that I will keep rolling characters until I get one that fits. Maybe I'm a bit daft in the head that way.

 

[iron warrior]

I think that classic traveller was written from the military perspective, in that contrary to all those old "Be all that you can be!" ads if you go into the military you end up being trained for what the military wants you to be, not what you wanted to be.

Some might like that, I still prefer making the character I'm expected to roleplay as a character I want to roleplay.

 

[skyth]

If you particularly want to play an engineer with certain skills then you need to use a point system like Mongoose Traveller, but for me thats cheating and I dont see any fun in doing that at all - where is the fun in playing a super-perfect character?

Your fun and someone else's fun are likely very different.

The characters that were quoted are not super-perfect, they are just specialists in a field. The engineer isn't very useful in a gun fight or if they need someone to pilot a shuttle or negotiate for something, etc.

Part of the fun of roleplaying for me is that it's an escape and I can, for a bit, be someone that is better than I am. While I love the backstory of Traveller, I've learned that the rules as written are not for me. I'd rather use another system (Spacemaster comes to mind) in the Traveller universe. YMMV of course.

 

[aramis]

Ive actually removed Air-raft skill entirely as there is only one use of it in a table in all 7 books, Vehicle skill (if amended to include grav vehicles/ATVs etc as it is in later books) replaces it in most situations so I changed it to that in the one instance in Book 1 where it is referred to (the Army career service skills table).

Also likewise I have removed the ATV skill entirely as there is actually no use of that skill at all in any of the books - pretty daft IMO, unless it was in an early printing of Book 1 and dropped in the later ones (cant say as I got rid of my 1977 printings). Again Vehicle skill replaces it in later books so I just use that one.

There are quite a few instances like that in the books which are not covered in the CT errata - takes a while to amend CT into a wholly workable syatem but it works well when you have done so.

That just shows that you've avoided the adventures... ATV and Air/Raft are both used in several.

 

[far-trader]

Just my opinion of course but both your desired characters appear to me to be outstanding specialists in their fields. They'd be very mature, very much in demand, and not at all likely to be adventuring. I see them as high ranking officers, instructors, retired, or something. Something very much not about adventuring

All you really need for them as Adventurers is (LBB1 only, ignoring the enhanced gen):

Starship engineer:

Engineering-1 (Add 1 level if you want to be the rare talented one who hires out to adventure)
Jack-o-T-1 (to cover all the rest of the skills you listed)

...bam, 2 skill levels, even possible in 1 term, without commission or promotion. Anything else is gravy and colour. Like a level of a weapon skill making them dangerous and a level of vehicle skill for getting around dirtside.

Space marine:

Gun Combat-1 (you pick)
Cutlass-1 (free)
VaccSuit-1 (allows BD and ZeroG, with competence)


bam, 2 skill levels (not counting the freebie), and again possible in 1 term without commission or promotion. Easily employable as a Merc, in high demand in fact with the VaccSuit skill (that will be the tough one to snag). In LBB1 everyone has brawling at equal skill, because there is no actual brawling skill And again, any extra skills are your character's "interesting" background.

What are my chances of getting these combinations? Fair to decent, especially if I go another term or two, and I don't end up a geriatric (in your words iirc) going for the full skill suite you want

But you know, as you already have a set idea of what you want, and no fear in changing the rules, just make it up. Then the chances of you getting exactly those characters, with idealized characteristics to boot, are exactly automatic. About the same odds in fact (in my experience) that you will play exactly the same character (possibly with a different skill set) every time. Not saying that's wrong, I just think you're cheating yourself and your group of a lot of fun in stretching your role playing talents

Be aware though, if the ref allows you such, and your character is not some super-star but just a run of the mill scrub like all the rest, then all the other PCs will be just as special-average, as will most NPCs you meet. In other words, in a universe full of Skill-3 multi-talented adventurers, you won't be special, and the challenges you face will be exactly the same (after adjusting for skill) as the ones my character examples above face. And you're going to be wanting Skill-5 now, and about 6 more skills to boot

 

[rancke]

Thats the whole thing about Traveller that you seem to be missing entirely - you dont know what character you will end up with and you cant force the issue.

Thats the whole thing about this particular objection to the CT rules that you seem to be missing entirely - you dont know what character you will end up with and you can't force the issue. And some people think that's a flaw. Retorting that it isn't a flaw doesn't address that at all.

Although nothings stopping you from trying a few times till you get a decent character and use the rest for possible NPCs.

Actually, following the rules to the letter stops you from doing that. You don't get to roll a new character unless the old one is dead or retired. That's right, there's a procedure for retiring a character if it becomes to old or some of its characteristics reach 1, leaving the player free to roll up a new one.

If you particularly want to play an engineer with certain skills then you need to use a point system like Mongoose Traveller, but for me thats cheating and I dont see any fun in doing that at all - where is the fun in playing a super-perfect character?

That's a false dichotomy. You can have greater control over how your character turns out than the CT rules allow without getting super-perfect characters.

But if you really, absolutely must do that then just alot the exact skills and be done with it - but IMO you want to be playing a different game if that's what you want to do!!

Why? Surely the game is the same no matter how the character is generated?

I may on the very odd occassion do that for an NPC if he absolutely needs a particular skill, but never for a player character. If I ever feel like playing someone with a certain skill set (such as a pilot) I must admit that I will keep rolling characters until I get one that fits. Maybe I'm a bit daft in the head that way.

You're not following the Rules As Written if you do. And I really don't see much difference between that approach and one that allows a greater control of character generation in other ways.


Hans

 

[far-trader]

Why? Surely the game is the same no matter how the character is generated?

The Friday night Poker game is about to start...

Bob: "All right boys the game is 5 Card Stud, nothing wild..." <deals cards>

Jay: "I'll bet 20 quatloons."

Mac: "I''ll see your 20 and bump you 10."

Sam: "You got a 7... um, Bob?"

Bob: "Go fish."

Sam: "DARN! I pass."

Bob: "OK, roll 8+ to succeed in passing Sam."

Sam: "Do I add for my Bluff skill?"

Bob: "Bluff skill? What the heck do you think we're playing Sam? There's no Bluff skill roll in 5 Card Stud!"

... :smirk:

 

[rancke]

Dan, take a look at this character:

Ex-Merchant First Officer, 79BA86, Age 38, 5 terms, Cr2000; Navigation-3, Computer-2, Engineering-1, Vacc-1, Carbine-1, J-o-T-1, Pilot-1.​

Now tell me, did I roll that one up strictly according to the rules with no cheating, fudge a few rolls here and there, pick it out of a list of pre-generated characters, or pick out the exact skills I wanted?

What difference would the answer make to you if you had to run an adventure with that character as one of the PCs? What would you do different in one case and another?


Hans

 

[far-trader]

Dan, take a look at this character:

Ex-Merchant First Officer, 79BA86, Age 38, 5 terms, Cr2000; Navigation-3, Computer-2, Engineering-1, Vacc-1, Carbine-1, J-o-T-1, Pilot-1.​

Now tell me, did I roll that one up strictly according to the rules with no cheating, fudge a few rolls here and there, pick it out of a list of pre-generated characters, or pick out the exact skills I wanted?

It's a moot question of course

...but my money (just at a glance without looking at the tables and such, trusting my memory) would be on a pre-gen from the book, with a second guess of made up entirely from whole cloth. It looks entirely legal for CT LBB1, possible even though not very probable except after many attempts. So you might well have done any of the above.

What difference would the answer make to you if you had to run an adventure with that character as one of the PCs? What would you do different in one case and another?

Which is the real question of course. Without knowing more details of the circumstances the answers to the questions are as numberless as the situations themselves.

My answers would range from...

No difference at all if all the PCs were created the same way, whichever way that was you created it, as long as I was prepared to accept such a method.

To...

You can't play that character because it wasn't done the way I instructed characters for my game were to be created. It would be unfair to the rest of the players who did all create their characters properly.

Surely you can see the unfairness of me arranging a foot race for a group of friends which includes yourself, and the rest show up ready to run and you...

...introduce the Olympic gold medal winner who will be your proxy for the race, expecting us to accept it. Even if we did allow it in the interest of having the race since we're all there already. I don't think you'd be surprised at the animosity when you "win" and that you wouldn't be invited to the next race

Let me ask you since we're playing this game

Take a look at this LBB1 character:

Ex-Navy, 424A96, Age 22, 1 term, Cr10,000; Medical-1, Computer-1​

Was it rolled strictly according to the rules with no cheating, were a few rolls fudged, was it picked it out of a list of pre-generated characters, or did I chose the characteristics and skills I wanted?

Again it's a moot question. The real question is what does anyone find unplayable about this character, and much more telling, why?

 

[skyth]

Well, I have no interest in playing a character with a 2 dex. I am really only interested in playing characters with a high dexterity as an escape from being me

Not to mention, the friend I'm playing with has a character that has better stats, computer-2, medical-3, and Jack-o-T-1 making my character have to be second fiddle.

 

[rancke]

...but my money (just at a glance without looking at the tables and such, trusting my memory) would be on a pre-gen from the book, with a second guess of made up entirely from whole cloth. It looks entirely legal for CT LBB1, possible even though not very probable except after many attempts. So you might well have done any of the above.

Or none of the above. It's one of the pre-generated characters from Leviathan with the Navigation upped from 2 to 3 and the Engineering reduced from 2 to 1.

My point was that no matter how he was generated, he was perfectly suitable for playing Traveller using the CT rules.

Surely you can see the unfairness of me arranging a foot race for a group of friends which includes yourself, and the rest show up ready to run and you...

...introduce the Olympic gold medal winner who will be your proxy for the race, expecting us to accept it. Even if we did allow it in the interest of having the race since we're all there already. I don't think you'd be surprised at the animosity when you "win" and that you wouldn't be invited to the next race

Surely you can see the unfairness of requiring someone to play a character that is about one quarter as effective as an average Traveller character, just because he rolled low on his first re-enlistment roll instead of on his fifth? Or to play a callow unskilled ex-Navy rating with minimum competence when he wanted to play a bona fide Action/Adventure hero.

Take a look at this LBB1 character:

Ex-Navy, 424A96, Age 22, 1 term, Cr10,000; Medical-1, Computer-1​

[...]

The real question is what does anyone find unplayable about this character, and much more telling, why?

Obviously that would depend to some extent on the other player characters. If they were all just as incompetent, you might be able to come up with adventures that would challenge and amuse all the players equally. As a referee, I wouldn't want to try myself, but I'm sure there are referees who could do it. Maybe some sort of Five Stooges campaign.

But if the other player characters all had a dozen skill levels, among them at least one Medical-2+ and one Computer-2+, I'd be ashamed to stand on the letter of the rules and require any player of mine to play that character until he could get him killed off.


Hans


PS. I wouldn't mind a player who actually wanted to play such a character. As long as the player would be OK with the other players dumping him for being a useless drag.

 

[aramis]

Why? Surely the game is the same no matter how the character is generated?
Hans

Actually, Hans, no, it isn't. Having run MGT with random gen and with point gen, the feel of the game is QUITE different.

Random gen, the party generally had a character who had their basic role goal skills at 1+ (due to the high numbers of choices in events), but most had a number of other skills, and their role goal skills were a strange mix, with higher levels being in odd places. "Picked because you were available and can do the job" kind of feel for the in-service game. Further, terms for the party ran 4-6 terms. No one had skills above 3. Everyone had 1-2 skills off-goal skills.

Meanwhile in the point gen, everyone was level 3 in their primary role goal, level 2+ in the others, and some had skills into the 5 range; all the PC's were 4th term. They also had very few off-goal skills as a group.

This makes a HUGE difference in a 2d skill system. Pistol 5 is MUCH better than Pistol 3, and that's much better than Pistol 1... and the best pistol skill in the random game was a 2, while the best in the point build was a 5.

So, yes, the feel is different in point build because players will tend to focus the characters into narrow, specialist characters, and devalue the meaning of a level 1 skill as a skilled and experienced person.

And then there's the issue of the implied narrative from the CGen process itself... which is also lacking in point build.

 

[Mithras]

I don't get it? To me the 22 year old Medic-1 Computer -1 character is a viable and probably typical young Traveller PC. Not all are in their 30s and 40s, and the LBB system doesn't give you many skills.

But I play (and interpret) Traveller as a system that rarely requires a skill to attempt an action. Characters are generally competant at level 1, so this guy is a computer tech and a paramedic, at level 1 both good skills and useful.

I'd play this guy.

If they were all just as incompetent, you might be able to come up with adventures that would challenge and amuse all the players equally. As a referee, I wouldn't want to try myself, but I'm sure there are referees who could do it. Maybe some sort of Five Stooges campaign.

 

[Icosahedron]

Surely you can see the unfairness of requiring someone to play a character that is about one quarter as effective as an average Traveller character, just because he rolled low on his first re-enlistment roll instead of on his fifth? Or to play a callow unskilled ex-Navy rating with minimum competence when he wanted to play a bona fide Action/Adventure hero.

I agree with Hans on this. There are greater 'unfairnesses' built into the system than you will get with sensitive rule/system tweaking. What matters is what your players want. If they want to play a bunch of butt-kicking heroes, what's the GM gonna do, pick up his rule books and pout "Shan't play then, cos a bunch of folks thirty years ago on another continent made a decision that says you can't." Or will he say "Ok guys, let's use point buy this time."

Take a look at this LBB1 character:

Ex-Navy, 424A96, Age 22, 1 term, Cr10,000; Medical-1, Computer-1
The real question is what does anyone find unplayable about this character, and much more telling, why?
​

Nothing necessarily unplayable about it, except that Traveller's random gen has created a character who shouldn't exist. Even by the age of 22, he will have realised long ago that he has certain deficits. A Dex-2 guy who is all thumbs simply won't make it as a computer programmer or a medic. He's in the wrong job. He would have realised that at school, and if not his trainers would have realised it at college. The chances of him getting qualified are slim.
Now if everyone wants to play a comic game about this guy finding his true vocation over the next decade, that's fine, but I wouldn't want to be in a ship for which he programmed and debugged the Jump tape, nor would I want him getting shrapnel out of my eye...
I suspect a game containing this character would degenerate into a circus.
And, as someone else said, chances are another character will outskill him in both fields and he'll have no real role to play - just another redshirt.

Let's say I want to be a starship engineer. My idea is:
Engineering-3
Mechanical-2
Electronics-2
Computer-2
Gravitics-2

This character is great in CT, but when the cascades come in, he gets Power-1, Maneuver-1, Jump-1 - which is much less useful!

Your fun and someone else's fun are likely very different.
Part of the fun of roleplaying for me is that it's an escape and I can, for a bit, be someone that is better than I am.

Hear hear!​

 

[RainOfSteel]

This character is great in CT, but when the cascades come in, he gets Power-1, Maneuver-1, Jump-1 - which is much less useful!

A cascade for Engineering? Which book does that come in on?

I was thinking that it would have been a good idea to dump Gravitics into Engineering.

 

[rancke]

Actually, Hans, no, it isn't. Having run MGT with random gen and with point gen, the feel of the game is QUITE different.

Since I haven't, I'm going to have to base my response on the CT rules. I do have the MGT core rules, but I haven't used them, so I don't know if their random character generation has amended some of the features of CT's random character generation.

Random gen, the party generally had a character who had their basic role goal skills at 1+ (due to the high numbers of choices in events), but most had a number of other skills, and their role goal skills were a strange mix, with higher levels being in odd places. "Picked because you were available and can do the job" kind of feel for the in-service game. Further, terms for the party ran 4-6 terms. No one had skills above 3. Everyone had 1-2 skills off-goal skills.

You say that like it's a good thing . Actually, it sounds pretty good. Especially the 4-6 terms bit. Does that mean that getting kicked out into the Cruel World after only 1-3 terms is somehow impossible with MGT? Because it's a very real possibility to get kicked out after just one term in CT, and that's one of the "features" that I've been voicing my displeasure with.

Meanwhile in the point gen, everyone was level 3 in their primary role goal, level 2+ in the others, and some had skills into the 5 range; all the PC's were 4th term. They also had very few off-goal skills as a group.

I wouldn't use a pure point buy system myself. I agree that tailor-made characters can have flaws of their own. Still, if that's what the player wants, maybe it's not a bad idea to let him have it?

This makes a HUGE difference in a 2d skill system. Pistol 5 is MUCH better than Pistol 3, and that's much better than Pistol 1... and the best pistol skill in the random game was a 2, while the best in the point build was a 5.

The 2D resolution system is another part of CT that I don't like, because of its low granularity. Long before I worked out and switched to my own house rules for playing Traveller, I had switched to 3D (12+ to hit).

So, yes, the feel is different in point build because players will tend to focus the characters into narrow, specialist characters, and devalue the meaning of a level 1 skill as a skilled and experienced person.

Of course the tone of the campaign will differ. Just as a campaign where all the PCs start with automatically enlisting in the Navy will differ from one where they start in the Merchant Service will differ from one with random enlistment. But there's no difference to the rules you'd use to adjudicate the game, is there?

EDIT: Oh, and I never got the idea that someone with a level-1 skill was a skilled and experienced person. Why, you need Medical-2 to be a medic and Medical-3 to be a doctor! :devil:

And then there's the issue of the implied narrative from the CGen process itself... which is also lacking in point build.

Yes, that's a nice feature. I always kept that no matter what else I changed.

My favorite way of generating characters was using the basic system with fudges to avoid the most egregious problems. I never said the basic system was all bad. Just deeply flawed.


Hans

 

[Andrew Boulton]

There is no right or wrong way; the rules aren't carved in stone. The idea is for everyone to have fun.

Personally, I prefer to steer my chargen towards a specific goal, and I like the depth of CT4+/MT. Others prefer to let the dice choose. As long as the characters are legal, balanced, and everyone is happy, it doesn't really matter how they were created.