CT Only: Number of Terms, Distribution & Averages

[creativehum]

Did anyone here post an analysis of the number of terms PC tend to go through during character creation? Obviously this would change depending on service.

I looked around, but couldn't find anything.

But it seems like this kind of thing someone would have done by now!

 

[kilemall]

I'd say that's a very individual sort of criteria.


Big part is, do you go whole hog and apply the chardeath result and do you force/encourage players to play up whatever gets rolled?


A player may have rolled top stats or promotions and be partial to a character and not risk death pretty early. Conversely a low stat character may be run through as much as possible just to intentionally kill it off before play.



Skill choice vs. random results will also increase attachment, but possibly also disposability since it's known they can get the character they want more readily.


Bottom line, many refs are going to alter those chargen dynamics whether from personal taste to genning characters within what adventure style the group or player preferences, and that would affect any choices and statistical results based on that choice style and agenda.



In general most people prefer to get a usable amount of skills so you are going to have a tendency to shoot for at least 3-4 terms. Bennies are nice especially when they involve ships, TAS, stat upgrades and/or serious money.

 

[infojunky]

Did anyone here post an analysis of the number of terms PC tend to go through during character creation? Obviously this would change depending on service.

I looked around, but couldn't find anything.

But it seems like this kind of thing someone would have done by now!

Hum at least a couple of articles where done in the early days. One in White Dwarf for sure, but I seem recall other magazines have similar articles as well.

 

[Quint]

Hum at least a couple of articles where done in the early days. One in White Dwarf for sure, but I seem recall other magazines have similar articles as well.

I'm pretty sure there was one in JTAS as well, CT era IIRC.

D.

 

[mike wightman]

All I can offer at the moment are the observations of the characters my players have made over the years.

Almost four decades ago it was typical for players to generate 3 term characters to avoid aging rolls, with the occasional 4 term character at the risk of one aging roll.

The only time they went for a full seven terms is if they had a promotion goal in mind or wanted to maximise their chances of a ship benefit (for a Merchant this goes hand in hand). A failed re-enlistment roll meant there were a few 4-6 term characters, and we have had a couple of eight term characters over the years.

As we aged ourselves it became more common to go for the full seven terms.

Career selection was primarily based on rolled characteristics. Some looked at a career where they would gain the DM to survive, some looked at careers where they stand a greater chance of commission or promotion, rarely was the choice based on the best DM for enlistment. The ideal was to qualify for DMs at every stage, so if someone got these or better they were happy:
Navy ***899
Marines 8*8879
Army *67*7*
Scouts 8*96**
Merchants 7**9**
Other ***9**

 

[willtron3030]

I'm pretty sure there was one in JTAS as well, CT era IIRC.

D.

For a similar query of mine, I was pointed to JTAS 23.

 

[willtron3030]

All I can offer at the moment...

:snip:

Is wisdom decades in the making. Thank you. I've clipped this for later contemplation, and wish this forum allowed "thumbs up", "like", "karma", etc.

 

[Gray Lensman]

My own experience is pretty much like Mike's. One thing I did notice that when we had big groups we tended to have mostly 3 term and with smaller groups typically going for more terms.

When I Dm'ed for smaller groups (3 or 4) It was always based on a far trader or something similar and I would just tell my players that 3 terms were really all they needed (I always ran a 7 term Merchant has a GM PC that was the boss).