General Sidekicks in Traveller?

[Commander Truestar]

IMO, the only sidekicks that wouldn't be more trouble than its worth are 'droids.
You can buy one to spec, buy a training guide in re-assembly and repair and all it costs you is re-charging and repair parts.
If designed correctly, it fits into spare space when stowed and you're done.

Anything living (Clone, NPC, pet, etc) needs housing, food, air, "what happens if" consideration [no one ever considers what happens to the ship's cat when a combat hit voids compartments]

And, what happens when you get caught in an all hands shoot out and everyone takes cover except for the panicking side kick?

IMTU, even NPC's have to make morale roles in combat to see if they support the crew as expected or pull back in fear, etc....

 

[Nathan Brazil]

Do you give them a automatic bonus on the morale roll bc they are generally loyal, say +1 to +6 Effect without having said leader make a roll.

 

[Condottiere]

It lands on it's feet.

 

[Commander Truestar]

Do you give them a automatic bonus on the morale roll bc they are generally loyal, say +1 to +6 Effect without having said leader make a roll.

I might, based on their:
In-built training, programming or design
Based on the treatment they've received from their controller/leader

Add in other factors.

But, it is ultimately situational

 

[Vargr Breath]

It lands on it's feet.

Someone is going to get their shoes craped in later.

 

[bookwyrm]

Do you give them a automatic bonus on the morale roll bc they are generally loyal, say +1 to +6 Effect without having said leader make a roll.

Wouldn't it depend on the Sidekicks 'build'?

For the early Batman comics & television, Robin was loyal, smart, tough, highly trained, and high morale.

In the Scooby Doo cartoons, although Shaggy is one of the two main characters with Scooby, he's actually a sidekick who is loyal, afraid of his shadow & ghosts, always hungry, has a knack for finding clues by accident, and low morale.

Chewbacca from Star Wars is kind of in the middle. He sticks to Han because of a Life Debt (freed from slavery), but they end up best friends and Captain/Crew of a starship. Chewy is highly loyal with average morale. He hates getting into trouble but always has Hans back when the laser bolts start flying. A great warrior and really good with mechanical things, he uses intimidation and logic depending on the situation. He is not Hans yes Wookie, his disagreements with Han are usually geared towards how much trouble is on the way.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Consider that we don't get Chewbacca's perspective on this -- is he ever written in a first-person perspective, or his actual Wookie speech even subtitled into English?

Perhaps he's keeping Han around as a pet for whom he feels an obligation to provide care...

(Hey, it's no sillier than the Sith Lord J.J. Binks fan theory....)

 

[Condottiere]

 

[kilemall]

Consider that we don't get Chewbacca's perspective on this -- is he ever written in a first-person perspective, or his actual Wookie speech even subtitled into English?

Perhaps he's keeping Han around as a pet for whom he feels an obligation to provide care...

(Hey, it's no sillier than the Sith Lord J.J. Binks fan theory....)

I think the Christmas special had subtitles but I dare not stare into the abyss.

 

[Commander Truestar]

I think the Christmas special had subtitles but I dare not stare into the abyss.

Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first force to sit through a screening of the Star Wars Christmas Special

 

[kilemall]

Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first force to sit through a screening of the Star Wars Christmas Special

There is no greater pain then being a true believer, without even seeing Empire strikes Back yet, only having Splinter of the minds eye as supplemental what is Darth thinking, hog the family TV for the Christmas special, and within 45 minutes relinquishing said hogging because it was just that bad.

I’ve never seen it all the way through, which is why I’m only partially crazy.

 

[Commander Truestar]

Consider that we don't get Chewbacca's perspective on this -- is he ever written in a first-person perspective, or his actual Wookie speech even subtitled into English?

Perhaps he's keeping Han around as a pet for whom he feels an obligation to provide care...

(Hey, it's no sillier than the Sith Lord J.J. Binks fan theory....)

I disagree with this entirely.
We do get to see Chewbacca commenting and responding.
And nearly everything that "Character" said was defined in context by the responses to the "Character's" comments.

So, when it comes down to it, IMO:
1) Chewbacca is a Character, not an NPC
2) As defined (accepted or not) in the follow-on movie "Solo", they are not leader and sidekick but allies who have elected to stay together

Bringing this back to Sidekicks, those would have to be:
1) an NPC tied to a specific character, and who's actions would be tied directly to supporting the actions of their "lead character"
2) a character with specifically prescribed options where it comes to supporting or ignoring their "lead character"

In the end, that comes back to my comment earlier.
If the "sidekick" is not an android/robot, etc... You need to house and feed the sidekick as an NPC at the least

 

[bookwyrm]

Bringing this back to Sidekicks, those would have to be:
1) an NPC tied to a specific character, and who's actions would be tied directly to supporting the actions of their "lead character"
2) a character with specifically prescribed options where it comes to supporting or ignoring their "lead character"

Reading this made me wonder if anyone ever played a Sidekick character to another players Character.

On top of that, I feel like I've read a few stories told of the Main Character through the eyes of the Sidekick character. It's an interesting perspective for a story.

 

[Condottiere]

 

[casquilho]

So, when it comes down to it, IMO:
1) Chewbacca is a Character, not an NPC
2) As defined (accepted or not) in the follow-on movie "Solo", they are not leader and sidekick but allies who have elected to stay together

In my experience with several different rule sets and settings, this is always the common struggle. Is the 2nd sheet really an NPC sidekick, a 2nd PC, or an 2d excuse to give the character some more powers to call upon. Sidekick, follower, hireling, whatever name they are given, I think the path is not an easy one for either the GM or the player IMO.

 

[Commander Truestar]

The one item which plays large IMTU, are the "Shudusham Concords"
*If* you use the 3I, and *IF* you consider the Concords, and how you interpret them can be very important.

IMTU, no android or computer can actually be sentient

So, that does open the door for an android or robot with expert systems which "appear" sentient to outsiders, but are not.
Where you can assign that device "storage space", that comes the closest I've ever considered to a "Sidekick".

Properly programmed and kitted out, it can:
- Track and follow it's owner(s)
- react to orders from the owner(s) to carry out activities it is programmed for and has the installed tool kits for
- respond to such events as it can perceive (thanks to "in-game" programming) to take independent action

So, if it is programmed to evaluate technical situations and use tools, that does not mean it can make the intelligent and intuitive leap to grab a dropped weapon when its owner is threatened or wounded.

If told to hack into a system, it can't pull an R2D2 because it does not have the intuition to allow it to sense and evade or defeat the invaded computer system's security

If told to go from point A to point B, it will do it's best to manage the course, but will not recognize a person blocking its way as an enemy combatant. So, it won't evade fire or the attempt to pop a sticky bomb on it's frame as it politely passes around the trooper.

The list of "it can't do" goes on and has to be evaluated by the GM to decide if "understanding that"
- is programmable?
- Has been programmed by the players to evaluate that?
- is restricted in "understanding" a situation because it is not sentient?

That is, IMTU, how to include a robotic sidekick

 

[mike wightman]

What about an android with a biological brain?

 

[coliver988]

Reading this made me wonder if anyone ever played a Sidekick character to another players Character.

On top of that, I feel like I've read a few stories told of the Main Character through the eyes of the Sidekick character. It's an interesting perspective for a story.

Call me Ishmael.

 

[Commander Truestar]

What about an android with a biological brain?

The android would still have the ability to be an NPC or Character
It would also have to take in nutrients to feed the meat-brain, so you'd not have to provide it a stateroom, but what affect would that have on the psyche of the enclosed mind? If you do not provision it with privacy, a stateroom, etc, you are still trying to treat a sentient being like a device.

And you can't simply "turn it off".
So, you can only pretend it is not a PC or NPC.

 

[casquilho]

What about an android with a biological brain?

You have a full body prosthetic on a PD or NPC. Think GitS for example. 1 Step past Cyborg but still not an android or robot because they have a real person riding the frame.