Most people aren't adventurers.
We are talking about a science fiction roleplaying game, aren't we?
Okay another question
- Thread starter khanjohn
- Start date
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
When I say "most" people, I should say people who are at least 22 years old having spent 4 years in either the Navy, Marines, Army, Scouts Merchants, or Other careers. (Unless using the optional Survival rule, then minimum character age is 20 with 2 years in one of those careers.)
I don't think that's unreasonable at all. Remember, in Supplement 4, there are some different default skill applications for some of those careers.
Again, we're talking about a 22 year old, at least, and the DEX modifier still applies to CT combat.
Skill-0 is basic experience in that particular discipline.
But, you seem to be coming at this from a very "non-CT" perspective. Remember, the meaning of Skill-1 if variable in CT.
Medical-1 means nothing if trying to bring a person out of low berth. It's the same as having no skill at all.
Medical-5 is the same as Medical-2 for that same reason. Both only give a +1 DM on the throw.
Vacc Suit-1 gives the character a +4 per skill level on some throws.
Engineering-1 will give a +2 per skill level on some throws.
AutoPistol-1 will give only a +1 DM per skill level on gun combat throws.
In CT, the value of a skill level depends on its application. By the same token, the penalty of not having a skill level is also dependent on the situation at hand.
The Referee, and common sense, win out over rules as written (or missing rules).
Now, I'm betting that you like the more standardized situation where one skill level is equal to a +1 DM no matter the task or situation (or skill being used).
CT just uses a different approach.
It does take some getting used to, though.
As I said in the other posts, some situations with some skills are defined to have penalties. For example, no Vacc Suit skill means a -4 DM on the 10+ throw needed to avoid critical situations while doing zero G work.
In other words, a character with no Vacc Suit skill can suit up and go outside and do ordinary maneuvers with no problem. He's a beginner, though, and there is a 100% chance that he will have a problem if he tries to do something like jump to the other docked ship.
Battledress and Combat Armor are an improved armored version of the typical vacc suit and require Vacc Suit-1 skill in order to be worn at all.
So, yes, there are penalties for no expertise in some areas.
Why would you say that. I bet this character is a lot more playable, by the CT rules, than you think.
For some situations, penalties are appropriate. It's just not within the CT rules to put a blanket penalty for having no skill or Skill-0 for many types of actions.
It depends on the action.
Just like the value of a skill level being varied, depending on the situation, so too are the penalties. Some are light. Sometimes, there is no penalty. And, sometimes the penalty (as with the Vacc Suit above) is severe.
Why not? You're the Ref. If it makes sense, do it.
Riding is not a skill in CT, so you'd have to do one of four things:
1: One, you can ignore it and just allow the characters to ride. Why make a throw anyway? I wouldn't, unless there's a real need--like in a chase, with a character on horseback, avoiding obstacles.
2: You can create a new skill (but I wouldn't advise doing that unless Riding is going to be something that happens a lot in your game--skill points are precious in CT). You could put in penalties for animal orneriness.
3: You can make it a Stat-dependent (or some other version of a throw) throw--something simple, like, "Throw 2D for DEX or less to jump the horse over the downed tree log."
4: You can just make it a 2D (or some other version of a generic throw) and run with it. A great example in The Traveller Adventure has Marc Miller talking about different types of throws and how to use them. In one, Marc suggests just throwing 2D6 and using whatever the result as the target number. Then, allow the player to throw 2D and try to beat that number. Add in a modifier if you like (+1D if DEX 9+, or something like that).
This is a great way to randomly determine (if logic or backstory fails) to determine how gifted a character is at riding a horse. If the 2D difficulty is low, make a note that the character has horse riding in his back ground (no skill--the note is fine, in case this ever come up again). If the 2D throw is 12, then obviously the character cannot make the throw unless the Ref allows some modifiers--and a 12 would mean that the character has never been on the back of an animal in his entire life.
I think that's fun stuff. Discovery during the game.
I'll agree that I think you'd like a much more black & white system--less customizable, more one-size-fits-all.
I think both styles are fun.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
@Hans
I used to do this type of thing in CT a lot. Remember old TAS Form 2? The original CT character sheet? In one of those boxes, I'd record a note about whatever it is like this--
Riding 4
Cooking 8
That tells me that, somewhere in the past gaming, Riding and Cooking came up and needed a throw for some reason. To see how well a character was at these things, I just threw 2D. The result gave me a target number. I see here that, with a 4, the character will be OK at riding animals, but he's not that great a cook as he's got to beat an 8.
I don't pre-think any of these. Just, in a game situation, if some subject comes up that needs a throw but is not covered by the regular Traveller skills (or is not something like forcing open a stuck hatch, where I'd rely on the STR stat), then I'd just do what I said above. It gives me an idea of the character's background, and I know how hard to make a throw should that situation ever come up again.
Sure, I'll create new skills if needed. In one game, set on a water world, I created a Swimming skill. But, when skills are created in CT, they need to be skills that are used a lot---otherwise, they're a waste of a character's precious skill points (and the system I speak of above works great for little things that fall through the cracks, like riding animals).
In many cases, I'll use the above system for swimming.
I'll also not roll randomly on the number if a character's background or logic tells me that the character would know how to do whatever it is we're tallking about. For example, a character from a water world (providing the character could get in the water--temperature and so forth) I'll probably give them a note saying Swimming 3 or something like that...because they're probably good swimmers.
I used to do this type of thing in CT a lot. Remember old TAS Form 2? The original CT character sheet? In one of those boxes, I'd record a note about whatever it is like this--
Riding 4
Cooking 8
That tells me that, somewhere in the past gaming, Riding and Cooking came up and needed a throw for some reason. To see how well a character was at these things, I just threw 2D. The result gave me a target number. I see here that, with a 4, the character will be OK at riding animals, but he's not that great a cook as he's got to beat an 8.
I don't pre-think any of these. Just, in a game situation, if some subject comes up that needs a throw but is not covered by the regular Traveller skills (or is not something like forcing open a stuck hatch, where I'd rely on the STR stat), then I'd just do what I said above. It gives me an idea of the character's background, and I know how hard to make a throw should that situation ever come up again.
Sure, I'll create new skills if needed. In one game, set on a water world, I created a Swimming skill. But, when skills are created in CT, they need to be skills that are used a lot---otherwise, they're a waste of a character's precious skill points (and the system I speak of above works great for little things that fall through the cracks, like riding animals).
In many cases, I'll use the above system for swimming.
I'll also not roll randomly on the number if a character's background or logic tells me that the character would know how to do whatever it is we're tallking about. For example, a character from a water world (providing the character could get in the water--temperature and so forth) I'll probably give them a note saying Swimming 3 or something like that...because they're probably good swimmers.
Still doesn't make them plausible as superjacks-of-all-trades.
Exactly. Including scores and hundreds of skills that your 22-year old have never as much as read a teach-yourself book about.
Mainly I'm coming at it from the perspective that you've presented in your previous posts. Supplemented by some vague and evidently erroneous memories of playing Traveller forty years ago.
Oh, please! Not that old chestnut again! The fact that a good referee can backstop bad rules doesn't improve bad rules one little bit.
And that's just the problem. If CT took a plausible approach, I wouldn't consider it implausible, now would I?
No, I think you've convinced me that it is playable as a sort of boardgamish game piece. If you don't mind overlooking the implausibility of its unbelievable versatility. The problem is, I do mind. Which is why I said that.
Substitute an appropriate CT skill then. The point I was trying to make has very little to do with riding except as a skill the example character wouldn't have had the opportunity to acquire even perfunctory knowledge of.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Sorry about that. As far as I can see, it's CT that's the less customizable system. Much less. The system I switched to is far, far more versatile. Unless by 'customizable' you mean "with little or no rules to help or hinder the referee".
Hans
Most adventurers (that I've read about) don't have 95% overlapping skills sets.
What's your point?
Hans
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Example of Non-Important Skill System
-- EXAMPLE --
I just remember a real game example where I used this system I mention above. It was one of the short adventures from GDW module 8, Alien Realms.
The PCs had crash landed on this planet. The adventure was about survival after crash landing into the forests of a foreign world and contact with the native indigs there, who were very low tech, living in tribes.
The PCs were camped near a stream, and they needed food. So, of course, they wanted to fish.
Now, "fishing" isn't a skill I could see enforcing upon the players. So, I just relied on my old system. Every player threw 2D for his character and notated "Fishing #" with the number they threw. That number is their general target number when it comes to fishing.
IIRC, I allowed a +1 DM for INT A+ and another +1 DM for EDU A+.
After creating that, it was easy to come up with a quick throw for the characters to fish. They used worms for bait. Made some poles and line from the crashed gear. Some threw some raw bacon on their lines from what little supplies they had left. And, the characters fished!
I ran it like this: You roll 2D for your personal Fishing number or better, success meaning that you've caught enough for one meal. Every 2 points that you roll over, you catch enough for a second meal.
For time, I think I rolled a simple 1D6 hours per attempt.
We diced it, had fun, and moved on.
And...it added a little background to the characters who could fish...and those who could not.
-- EXAMPLE --
I just remember a real game example where I used this system I mention above. It was one of the short adventures from GDW module 8, Alien Realms.
The PCs had crash landed on this planet. The adventure was about survival after crash landing into the forests of a foreign world and contact with the native indigs there, who were very low tech, living in tribes.
The PCs were camped near a stream, and they needed food. So, of course, they wanted to fish.
Now, "fishing" isn't a skill I could see enforcing upon the players. So, I just relied on my old system. Every player threw 2D for his character and notated "Fishing #" with the number they threw. That number is their general target number when it comes to fishing.
IIRC, I allowed a +1 DM for INT A+ and another +1 DM for EDU A+.
After creating that, it was easy to come up with a quick throw for the characters to fish. They used worms for bait. Made some poles and line from the crashed gear. Some threw some raw bacon on their lines from what little supplies they had left. And, the characters fished!
I ran it like this: You roll 2D for your personal Fishing number or better, success meaning that you've caught enough for one meal. Every 2 points that you roll over, you catch enough for a second meal.
For time, I think I rolled a simple 1D6 hours per attempt.
We diced it, had fun, and moved on.
And...it added a little background to the characters who could fish...and those who could not.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I definitely agree with you there. I just don't agree that CT mechanics handle things badly!
CT is definitely not for you, but I am curious. Can you give me an example showing how implausible it is?
Which would you use for Riding horses, then?
Poor choice of words on my part. I wasn't trying to challenge you.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
The long and the short of it is that experience in Traveller is whatever you decide to do.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Well, there is an written out experience system in CT, but it plainly states that it is not the only way to do things.
If making up your own system, my advice is to first understand how the written experience system works, and then be very, very stingy in handing out skill levels. As the experience system does, a good CT XP system should mirror character generation and only award skill levels once per two or four years (I'd say about a 50% chance to earn a skill once per two years should do it, nicely).
Or, a 25% chance per game year. That should do it, too. If you want the players to check or roll for it more often and get excited on that average one-in-four times that they gain a skill. And, some characters will get lucky and get 1 skill per year, but that won't happen often. A skill ever two years will not be unheard of.
Garyius2003
SOC-13
I think we are describing the weakness of the CT system before books 4, 5, and so on made it better.
An average current US Marine will leave service with (assuming, say, something non-combat arms like avionics tech)
Rifle-1
Pistol-0
Crew served weapons-0
Swim-0
Electronics-2
Wheeled Vehicle-1
That's just for non-combat jobs. Infantry will have a lot higher and more combat skills. Therefore we can assume a 3I Marine will have skills on discharge...
Rifle-1
Pistol-0
Crew served-0
Grav Veh-1
Vacc-1
and some tech skill (Gunnery-1 or Ship's boat-1 or Electronics-2)
The fact the system was not making characters like that is a big issue, one that was over solved with the book 4 and up.
An average current US Marine will leave service with (assuming, say, something non-combat arms like avionics tech)
Rifle-1
Pistol-0
Crew served weapons-0
Swim-0
Electronics-2
Wheeled Vehicle-1
That's just for non-combat jobs. Infantry will have a lot higher and more combat skills. Therefore we can assume a 3I Marine will have skills on discharge...
Rifle-1
Pistol-0
Crew served-0
Grav Veh-1
Vacc-1
and some tech skill (Gunnery-1 or Ship's boat-1 or Electronics-2)
The fact the system was not making characters like that is a big issue, one that was over solved with the book 4 and up.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I disagree that CT Basic Chargen is inferior. I think it's highly playable, and new careers after Book 4 was published went on to use the 4-year method (so I would argue that the people at GDW didn't think the Advanced chargen system fixed anything, but only offered an alternative for a few careers).
Regarding skills in CT.
One (1) skill point is a profession. Enough to hold a job and make a living. The average non-adventurer, non-military and non-criminal civilian probably has one or two skills at 1 and probably a few at 0. For example, a professional mechanic would have Mechanic-1 and very likely also Ground Vehicle-0 (he has a driver's license) and possibly Steward-0 (if he knows how to cook and is a good host). On a vacuum world he'll also have Vacc Suit-0. Skills above 1 denote specialization; for example, a paramedic would have Medic-1, a nurse Medic-2 and a full doctor Medic-3. Colonists on dangerous frontier worlds will probably have a few weapon skills at 0 as well, but not too many - say, Carbine-0 or Shotgun-0.
557AF7
Computer-1, Gunner-1, Vacc-1
This is a multi-skilled professional. He can work as a programmer; work as a gunner; and work as vacc suit technician or EVA specialist. He has THREE full, money-earning professions. He is also HIGHLY educated and very smart. If he were an adventurer, he'd also have all Book 1 (but not Book 4) weapons at 0, and probably also a vehicle skill at 0. He can hack, he can shoot all common guns (though he isn't a marksman), he can fire big guns with professional skill, he can work very well in zero-G/vacuum, and probably can drive/pilot a vehicle as well. He can even wear Combat Armour with no penalty! Very playable.
Look at it from the old-school D&D angle. Your Fighting-Man has, essentially, skill-0 in all weapons at level 1; later on he gains a higher skill (in CT that would be in specific weapons). old-school D&D Fighting-Men do not have any other skills on their character sheet. Yet they're perfectly playable.
Another way to look at it - in D&D 3.xE/D20, CT skills are much more akin to feats than to 3.xE/D20 skills. A weapon skill is like a Weapon Specialization feat in that weapon. Medic is essentially a "Medic I" feat (allows you to be a Medic on a starship and treat wounds where one characteristic has been reduced to zero with no roll needed) and its advanced/"Greater" feats, "Medic II" (gives you a bonus to revive low-berth passengers) and "Medic III" (allows you to treat all wounds - including serious ones - with no roll needed). Vacc Suit is like an "Armour Proficiency" feat.
One (1) skill point is a profession. Enough to hold a job and make a living. The average non-adventurer, non-military and non-criminal civilian probably has one or two skills at 1 and probably a few at 0. For example, a professional mechanic would have Mechanic-1 and very likely also Ground Vehicle-0 (he has a driver's license) and possibly Steward-0 (if he knows how to cook and is a good host). On a vacuum world he'll also have Vacc Suit-0. Skills above 1 denote specialization; for example, a paramedic would have Medic-1, a nurse Medic-2 and a full doctor Medic-3. Colonists on dangerous frontier worlds will probably have a few weapon skills at 0 as well, but not too many - say, Carbine-0 or Shotgun-0.
557AF7
Computer-1, Gunner-1, Vacc-1
This is a multi-skilled professional. He can work as a programmer; work as a gunner; and work as vacc suit technician or EVA specialist. He has THREE full, money-earning professions. He is also HIGHLY educated and very smart. If he were an adventurer, he'd also have all Book 1 (but not Book 4) weapons at 0, and probably also a vehicle skill at 0. He can hack, he can shoot all common guns (though he isn't a marksman), he can fire big guns with professional skill, he can work very well in zero-G/vacuum, and probably can drive/pilot a vehicle as well. He can even wear Combat Armour with no penalty! Very playable.
Look at it from the old-school D&D angle. Your Fighting-Man has, essentially, skill-0 in all weapons at level 1; later on he gains a higher skill (in CT that would be in specific weapons). old-school D&D Fighting-Men do not have any other skills on their character sheet. Yet they're perfectly playable.
Another way to look at it - in D&D 3.xE/D20, CT skills are much more akin to feats than to 3.xE/D20 skills. A weapon skill is like a Weapon Specialization feat in that weapon. Medic is essentially a "Medic I" feat (allows you to be a Medic on a starship and treat wounds where one characteristic has been reduced to zero with no roll needed) and its advanced/"Greater" feats, "Medic II" (gives you a bonus to revive low-berth passengers) and "Medic III" (allows you to treat all wounds - including serious ones - with no roll needed). Vacc Suit is like an "Armour Proficiency" feat.
A minor quibble on terminology, Mr. Golan...
Skill 1 is an employable level, but not a professional level.
Professional has, in English of the US and UK varieties, a connotation of a legal licensure to perform in a field, and a denotation of specialized skill.
So, a skill 1 medic may or may not be a professional (and if he/she is, they're an EMT or LPN); a skill 1 carouser is not a professional, even tho' they have an employable skill at entertaining. A skill 1 in Legal probably isn't a professional, since Lawyers are Skill 2+ per one of the articles on the IMOJ; still, it's employable.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/profession
Skill 1 is an employable level, but not a professional level.
Professional has, in English of the US and UK varieties, a connotation of a legal licensure to perform in a field, and a denotation of specialized skill.
So, a skill 1 medic may or may not be a professional (and if he/she is, they're an EMT or LPN); a skill 1 carouser is not a professional, even tho' they have an employable skill at entertaining. A skill 1 in Legal probably isn't a professional, since Lawyers are Skill 2+ per one of the articles on the IMOJ; still, it's employable.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/profession
LeperColony
Traveller Card Game Dev Team
It's always possible to just be bad at your job...
But you still get hired and paid up to Cr4,000 a month!
Well, IME (in my experience) 2D6 is too coarse a result space (or whatever the correct statistical term is) for my gaming needs. That's why one of the first changes I introduced was to go from 8+ on 2D to 12+ on 3D. Followed by increasing the number of skill levels a character got. Still, I'm not saying that CT doesn't work mechanically. I couldn't even if I wanted to1 because evidently I've never used the rules correctly. I'm saying it doesn't work verisimilitudinously. For me, anyway. Based on the sole example in the original rules (Medic, Nurse, Doctor), I always assumed that you needed a skill level of three to be a professional. Now you tell me that a skill of 1 is enough. Well, I want, for roleplaying and setting-building purposes, to be able to distinguish, at the very least, between 'apprentice', 'journeyman' and 'master' skill.I definitely agree with you there. I just don't agree that CT mechanics handle things badly!
1 Don't want any infractions, do I? :devil:
Is this a trick question? How about the example that I objected to above? Adventurers being at least marginally competent in most skills?
How is this relevant?
Oh, I didn't take it as a challenge. How could it be when I can't back up my claim of superiority of my rules by letting you have a look at them (They're in Danish)? It's just that I see the claim that a set of rules that doesn't address a subject or addresses it perfuntorily somehow is the better for that because they don't stifle initiative and creativity as woefully fallacious. Now, if CT had guidelines for creating your own additional skills and how to introduce them into the mix in a way that balanced them with the predefined skills, then I'd say they were versatile and customizable.
My own system is a point buy system and you pay for how useful a skill is (for campaign purposes). That way the GM can simply guesstimate how useful a new, never before described skill will be and read the point cost on a table. I find that pretty versatile.
Hans
Well, in anything related to starships, Book 2 hints at the fact that Skill 1 is enough for a license - commercial pilot's license (Pilot-1), ship medic license (EMT?) (Medic-1), and ship's engineer license (Engineering-1). You need Skill 1 to fill these positions, and I'm sure that the Imperium requires a license for each. Maybe even for Stewards and Gunners.
Yes, these are lower-level professions like EMTs and LPN, but professions nonetheless. Higher skill denotes greater specialization.
And Ground Vehicle 1 would probably be enough for a commercial driver's license.
Of course, things might be different in Core worlds or on high-end commercial liners where you have an actual ship's surgeon (Medic-3, DEX 8+). On the high frontier, however, I'd bet that many "doctors" might be Medic 1, a bit like wild-west docs...
You still have 'apprentice', 'journeyman' and 'master' skills - skill level 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Three different levels of professionalism. But you already have a trade - a skill enough to hold a job - with one.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
See, you lose me right there. I've played some point buy and enjoyed them. The James Bond RPG comes to mind. I really enjoy that game.
But generally, I tend to shy away from point buy. I much prefer random roll.
But not, I trust, because of any inherent greater versatility of random roll systems.
One of the options I can offer my players is to roll up a character randomly and use it as a template, then use point buy to add final details. Best of both worlds, seems to me.
EDIT: By the way, if down near the bottom of my post is where I lost you, does that mean that you agree with everything I had written up to then? :devil:
Hans
Last edited:
