Mongoose Core Rulebook - NPC Reactions

[nats]

I have added the following NPC reactions table to my core rulebook (its put on page 82 next to the Random opposition table in my book). I do not understand why this table is missing from the Mongoose Traveller considering NPC reactions were always so essential to Classic Traveller and to any game I play. I will also be adding this to the Mongoose Referee Shield I have as well in the spare bit of space at the bottom of the first leaf (pasted over the copyright text) I consider it so valuable:

Die Reaction
2 Violent - immediate attack
3 Hostile - attacks on 5+
4 Hostile - attacks on 8+
5 Hostile - may attack
6 Unreceptive
7 Non-committal
8 Interested
9 Intrigued
10 Responsive
11 Enthusiastic
12 Genuinely friendly

DMs: If character has served 5 or more terms in a service (Scouts, Army, Navy, Marines) career +1, if world population is 9 or more -1, effect of Streetwise, Persuade, Diplomat, Carouse or Advocate check rolls could also be used as a DM on this table depending on situation.

Referee needs to interpret the results of this table - attack my not be physical but could be in the form of insults, pushing away, sarcasm, etc depending on situation/law level.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Nice! Good catch.

 

[DonM]

Actually, it appears in the Alien Modules, at least in Aslan, Vargr and Zhodani...

 

[BytePro]

Yeah, this is missing, though I never used it - my NPC's not generally acting at random. In MgT, I would replace this with a task check - since it is implied that there is an interaction going on and Effect and Ref judgement would determine the nature and degree of reactions.

CT had a natural 2 automatically resulting in an immediate violent 'attack' or a 12 in automatic friendship, or such. I never liked such default mechanics that ignore DMs - gives precedence for rule mechanics overriding the Ref and for ignoring player actions - which is just plain bad form, IMO.

 

[nats]

Yeah, this is missing, though I never used it - my NPC's not generally acting at random. In MgT, I would replace this with a task check - since it is implied that there is an interaction going on and Effect and Ref judgement would determine the nature and degree of reactions.

CT had a natural 2 automatically resulting in an immediate violent 'attack' or a 12 in automatic friendship, or such. I never liked such default mechanics that ignore DMs - gives precedence for rule mechanics overriding the Ref and for ignoring player actions - which is just plain bad form, IMO.

Well I wouldnt really call it random if its affected by DMs especially if you use skill check DMs to affect the roll but I do feel it is realistic - you never can tell what other people are thinking for real especially in interviews for jobs!!

I always really liked this table. It gives the characters some really surprising twists to cater for. And if an NPC reacts really well they are never quite sure whether its a trick or not. Sometimes you just wouldnt think to have an NPC do that if purely controlling them yourself.

I think for major NPCs then obviously you need to role play them but for incidental NPCs especially random encounters and incidental ship encounters I think it can add some spice. And of course it can keep the ref on his feet trying to think of a reasoning for the result!

 

[BytePro]

I was referring to the original CT table - which had no DMs related to skills or actions.

Your suggestion is less random, but using the table with Effect as DM seems redundant and, worse, could counter the task roll -> ex: -2 Effect would be a normal failure, yet one could still roll a 12 and the result would then be Responsive?

As you stated, the terms have to be twisted to fit a situation as well - where 'violence' is replaced by a negative non-violent reaction.

I can see a table of potential negative/positive reactions being handy for some, but, as presented, this is a bit too limited, random, and subverting of task checks, IMHO. Perhaps I'm missing how this is applied?

 

[nats]

I was referring to the original CT table - which had no DMs related to skills or actions.

Your suggestion is less random, but using the table with Effect as DM seems redundant and, worse, could counter the task roll -> ex: -2 Effect would be a normal failure, yet one could still roll a 12 and the result would then be Responsive?

As you stated, the terms have to be twisted to fit a situation as well - where 'violence' is replaced by a negative non-violent reaction.

I can see a table of potential negative/positive reactions being handy for some, but, as presented, this is a bit too limited, random, and subverting of task checks, IMHO. Perhaps I'm missing how this is applied?

I know what you are saying and I agree with it actually now that I think about it.

In the original Traveller you had set rolls for tasks (that the referee had to make up but more often look up/remember) and this official table for randomised reactions which again had to be looked up/remembered. In Mongoose Traveller you have rolls for tasks (that the referee makes up using more easily remembered guidelines for difficulty) and they have done away with this table in the process, suggesting instead you also use task rolls for NPC reactions, in order to keep the game flowing (reducing rules look up).

Yes I see that you could easily do the same thing as this table by, for example, assigning a task such as: Impressing a crime underlord enough to give you a job 10+, with the effect determining his reaction. This would do the same thing as this table, I can see that.

So yes on reflection I agree there isnt any need for this table in Mongoose Traveller. Good point.

 

[BytePro]

Glad I could help!

Having only ever played CT, the elegance of the task system was immediately obvious, but the full implications took me a lot longer to grasp.