M
Malenfant
Guest
So why not just say that you end up playing one of those who survive then?
Maybe so, but that's still not a particularly useful or practical way to make a character.
So, you've failed your survival roll...
- Thread starter RobertFisher
- Start date
M
Malenfant
Guest
So why not just say that you end up playing one of those who survive then?
Maybe so, but that's still not a particularly useful or practical way to make a character.
Border Reiver
SOC-14 1K
Yeah but you've got to admit that char gen was more fun than rolling 3D6 a half dozen times and seeing what you got and then fudging the rest if you didn't like it. Me, my crew would invent some hideous deformity or character fault related to the early departure from service for those that failed survival rolls. We came up with some beauties.
Border Reiver
SOC-14 1K
Yeah but you've got to admit that char gen was more fun than rolling 3D6 a half dozen times and seeing what you got and then fudging the rest if you didn't like it. Me, my crew would invent some hideous deformity or character fault related to the early departure from service for those that failed survival rolls. We came up with some beauties.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Nope, not really
It gives the player extremely little choice in the generation of his character. As such, IMO it utterly, utterly sucks as a practical chargen system.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Nope, not really
It gives the player extremely little choice in the generation of his character. As such, IMO it utterly, utterly sucks as a practical chargen system.
{Snide Mode}Mal, Why exactly are you hanging out here???{/Snide Mode}
Seriously, for many, CT CG was a game unto itself. A way to spend time between sessions.
Likewise, a common complaint about point-built and/or D&D style "Roll 6 times, then pick your class" is that players seldom push their own ability envelope...
In one GURPS game, which I was not participating in, but had been helping the GM with CG... One player I knew kept copies of all approved characters, with the name blanked out, as approved for starting characters in the game. So, when the character dies, he goes back to the same character as he had when he started that campaign. only with a different name. I've had similar things happen in Hero System. Most of the GURPS players I know build remakably similar characters time and time again.
Likewise, I know a player who, if it's D&D in any stripe, plays a dwarf fighter. Every time.
In CT, you have some choices. You have a lot of chances.
Survival, as it sits in CT, is officially "Dead", but there is an explicit optional rule in Bk 1 that it can be, with GM's permission, Injured out of service; not of need a crippling injury, just one that results in being no longer useful in your current role. (Like, say, 6 months of rehab...)
In MT, mind you, the default was injured out, and death is the optional rule.
If I want players to sculpt characters to some personal preconception, I'll run hero, EABA, CORPS, Vampire, or BESM.
If I want a game where players have to push thheir roleplaying a bit, then I run Traveller, complete with that game-within-a-game CG. If I'm running to conept characters, I may allow 1 skill per term to be picked, so as to define the concept.
It is far harder to take a point-based (or desire based) system and make it into a random-gen system than to allow desire-driven replacements for dicing in a random CG.
Seriously, for many, CT CG was a game unto itself. A way to spend time between sessions.
Likewise, a common complaint about point-built and/or D&D style "Roll 6 times, then pick your class" is that players seldom push their own ability envelope...
In one GURPS game, which I was not participating in, but had been helping the GM with CG... One player I knew kept copies of all approved characters, with the name blanked out, as approved for starting characters in the game. So, when the character dies, he goes back to the same character as he had when he started that campaign. only with a different name. I've had similar things happen in Hero System. Most of the GURPS players I know build remakably similar characters time and time again.
Likewise, I know a player who, if it's D&D in any stripe, plays a dwarf fighter. Every time.
In CT, you have some choices. You have a lot of chances.
Survival, as it sits in CT, is officially "Dead", but there is an explicit optional rule in Bk 1 that it can be, with GM's permission, Injured out of service; not of need a crippling injury, just one that results in being no longer useful in your current role. (Like, say, 6 months of rehab...)
In MT, mind you, the default was injured out, and death is the optional rule.
If I want players to sculpt characters to some personal preconception, I'll run hero, EABA, CORPS, Vampire, or BESM.
If I want a game where players have to push thheir roleplaying a bit, then I run Traveller, complete with that game-within-a-game CG. If I'm running to conept characters, I may allow 1 skill per term to be picked, so as to define the concept.
It is far harder to take a point-based (or desire based) system and make it into a random-gen system than to allow desire-driven replacements for dicing in a random CG.
{Snide Mode}Mal, Why exactly are you hanging out here???{/Snide Mode}
Seriously, for many, CT CG was a game unto itself. A way to spend time between sessions.
Likewise, a common complaint about point-built and/or D&D style "Roll 6 times, then pick your class" is that players seldom push their own ability envelope...
In one GURPS game, which I was not participating in, but had been helping the GM with CG... One player I knew kept copies of all approved characters, with the name blanked out, as approved for starting characters in the game. So, when the character dies, he goes back to the same character as he had when he started that campaign. only with a different name. I've had similar things happen in Hero System. Most of the GURPS players I know build remakably similar characters time and time again.
Likewise, I know a player who, if it's D&D in any stripe, plays a dwarf fighter. Every time.
In CT, you have some choices. You have a lot of chances.
Survival, as it sits in CT, is officially "Dead", but there is an explicit optional rule in Bk 1 that it can be, with GM's permission, Injured out of service; not of need a crippling injury, just one that results in being no longer useful in your current role. (Like, say, 6 months of rehab...)
In MT, mind you, the default was injured out, and death is the optional rule.
If I want players to sculpt characters to some personal preconception, I'll run hero, EABA, CORPS, Vampire, or BESM.
If I want a game where players have to push thheir roleplaying a bit, then I run Traveller, complete with that game-within-a-game CG. If I'm running to conept characters, I may allow 1 skill per term to be picked, so as to define the concept.
It is far harder to take a point-based (or desire based) system and make it into a random-gen system than to allow desire-driven replacements for dicing in a random CG.
Seriously, for many, CT CG was a game unto itself. A way to spend time between sessions.
Likewise, a common complaint about point-built and/or D&D style "Roll 6 times, then pick your class" is that players seldom push their own ability envelope...
In one GURPS game, which I was not participating in, but had been helping the GM with CG... One player I knew kept copies of all approved characters, with the name blanked out, as approved for starting characters in the game. So, when the character dies, he goes back to the same character as he had when he started that campaign. only with a different name. I've had similar things happen in Hero System. Most of the GURPS players I know build remakably similar characters time and time again.
Likewise, I know a player who, if it's D&D in any stripe, plays a dwarf fighter. Every time.
In CT, you have some choices. You have a lot of chances.
Survival, as it sits in CT, is officially "Dead", but there is an explicit optional rule in Bk 1 that it can be, with GM's permission, Injured out of service; not of need a crippling injury, just one that results in being no longer useful in your current role. (Like, say, 6 months of rehab...)
In MT, mind you, the default was injured out, and death is the optional rule.
If I want players to sculpt characters to some personal preconception, I'll run hero, EABA, CORPS, Vampire, or BESM.
If I want a game where players have to push thheir roleplaying a bit, then I run Traveller, complete with that game-within-a-game CG. If I'm running to conept characters, I may allow 1 skill per term to be picked, so as to define the concept.
It is far harder to take a point-based (or desire based) system and make it into a random-gen system than to allow desire-driven replacements for dicing in a random CG.
The trouble for me is that CT character gen (pre MT extra skills) is just too damn c@@p in skills to care about keeping a character, so if you have a Merchant with Admin 1, +1 Dex, Electronics and he's already pushing 30 you actually want him to accidently fall out of the air lock of a Oberlindes Line fat trader. That way at least his family get the insurance money...
Having said that, the often used house rule composite system of rolling skill points and assigning them to whatever skill the player chooses does allow CG to introduce a degree of pre role play role play into the game.
Having said that, the often used house rule composite system of rolling skill points and assigning them to whatever skill the player chooses does allow CG to introduce a degree of pre role play role play into the game.
The trouble for me is that CT character gen (pre MT extra skills) is just too damn c@@p in skills to care about keeping a character, so if you have a Merchant with Admin 1, +1 Dex, Electronics and he's already pushing 30 you actually want him to accidently fall out of the air lock of a Oberlindes Line fat trader. That way at least his family get the insurance money...
Having said that, the often used house rule composite system of rolling skill points and assigning them to whatever skill the player chooses does allow CG to introduce a degree of pre role play role play into the game.
Having said that, the often used house rule composite system of rolling skill points and assigning them to whatever skill the player chooses does allow CG to introduce a degree of pre role play role play into the game.
M
Malenfant
Guest
I wonder myself, sometimes
. So some people like playing the same sort of characters - since when is that a bad thing? Why is being lumbered with a character you don't necessarily want to play somehow "better" than having one you do want to play?
You have very few choices in CT. Pretty much everything is down to chance, and that is what I find intolerable about it as a chargen system.
M
Malenfant
Guest
I wonder myself, sometimes
. So some people like playing the same sort of characters - since when is that a bad thing? Why is being lumbered with a character you don't necessarily want to play somehow "better" than having one you do want to play?
You have very few choices in CT. Pretty much everything is down to chance, and that is what I find intolerable about it as a chargen system.
It's so common to generate the same type of character for different games that Robin's Rules calls it an Archetype, or something like that. Play enough games and people often will gravitate to one type of character.
This happens independent of game system. David Smart plays a Ronin. Jon Buller plays a Han Solo. Fred Vogel plays a Commando. And Val Dauterive plays a Combat Tech. Their personalities tend to be comfortable with roles like these, although they will break out of the role occasionally.
This happens independent of game system. David Smart plays a Ronin. Jon Buller plays a Han Solo. Fred Vogel plays a Commando. And Val Dauterive plays a Combat Tech. Their personalities tend to be comfortable with roles like these, although they will break out of the role occasionally.
It's so common to generate the same type of character for different games that Robin's Rules calls it an Archetype, or something like that. Play enough games and people often will gravitate to one type of character.
This happens independent of game system. David Smart plays a Ronin. Jon Buller plays a Han Solo. Fred Vogel plays a Commando. And Val Dauterive plays a Combat Tech. Their personalities tend to be comfortable with roles like these, although they will break out of the role occasionally.
This happens independent of game system. David Smart plays a Ronin. Jon Buller plays a Han Solo. Fred Vogel plays a Commando. And Val Dauterive plays a Combat Tech. Their personalities tend to be comfortable with roles like these, although they will break out of the role occasionally.
RobertFisher
SOC-12
OK, Malenfant. I get that you don't like CT chargen. I get why. There are times when I feel the same way & either choose a different chargen or a different game.
But please try to understand that there are some of us who really do like CT chargen.
Indeed, when creating D&D characters, I sometimes randomly roll race & class & other player decisions. When my group plays Marvel Superheroes, random chargen is preferred.
It can be lots of fun to be handed a character & be challenged to play it instead of creating an entirely customized one. Indeed, as robject says, I have a bit of a tendency to always create basically the same character if I'm using completely non-random chargen. (And in GURPS, for some reason, I have a tendency to create utterly boring characters.)
CT chargen is also nice in that it creates characters that--taken as a group--fit the implied setting. Common skills are common & rare skills are rare without the designer having to figure out how to price them perfectly (which is impossible) or the players having to understand the setting.
Besides the fact that some of us find chargen to be a fun game all by itself.
Is it perfect? No. Does it have advantages? Yes. Does it have disadvantages? Yes. Do I use it in every campaign? No. Do I use it in some campaigns? Yes!
Heck, in straight Book 1-3 CT a character with 777777 and no skills can be a viable PC. We're not talking something like GURPS where you have a A4 sheet full of stuff that actually makes a difference.
But please try to understand that there are some of us who really do like CT chargen.
Indeed, when creating D&D characters, I sometimes randomly roll race & class & other player decisions. When my group plays Marvel Superheroes, random chargen is preferred.
It can be lots of fun to be handed a character & be challenged to play it instead of creating an entirely customized one. Indeed, as robject says, I have a bit of a tendency to always create basically the same character if I'm using completely non-random chargen. (And in GURPS, for some reason, I have a tendency to create utterly boring characters.)
CT chargen is also nice in that it creates characters that--taken as a group--fit the implied setting. Common skills are common & rare skills are rare without the designer having to figure out how to price them perfectly (which is impossible) or the players having to understand the setting.
Besides the fact that some of us find chargen to be a fun game all by itself.
Is it perfect? No. Does it have advantages? Yes. Does it have disadvantages? Yes. Do I use it in every campaign? No. Do I use it in some campaigns? Yes!
Heck, in straight Book 1-3 CT a character with 777777 and no skills can be a viable PC. We're not talking something like GURPS where you have a A4 sheet full of stuff that actually makes a difference.
RobertFisher
SOC-12
OK, Malenfant. I get that you don't like CT chargen. I get why. There are times when I feel the same way & either choose a different chargen or a different game.
But please try to understand that there are some of us who really do like CT chargen.
Indeed, when creating D&D characters, I sometimes randomly roll race & class & other player decisions. When my group plays Marvel Superheroes, random chargen is preferred.
It can be lots of fun to be handed a character & be challenged to play it instead of creating an entirely customized one. Indeed, as robject says, I have a bit of a tendency to always create basically the same character if I'm using completely non-random chargen. (And in GURPS, for some reason, I have a tendency to create utterly boring characters.)
CT chargen is also nice in that it creates characters that--taken as a group--fit the implied setting. Common skills are common & rare skills are rare without the designer having to figure out how to price them perfectly (which is impossible) or the players having to understand the setting.
Besides the fact that some of us find chargen to be a fun game all by itself.
Is it perfect? No. Does it have advantages? Yes. Does it have disadvantages? Yes. Do I use it in every campaign? No. Do I use it in some campaigns? Yes!
Heck, in straight Book 1-3 CT a character with 777777 and no skills can be a viable PC. We're not talking something like GURPS where you have a A4 sheet full of stuff that actually makes a difference.
But please try to understand that there are some of us who really do like CT chargen.
Indeed, when creating D&D characters, I sometimes randomly roll race & class & other player decisions. When my group plays Marvel Superheroes, random chargen is preferred.
It can be lots of fun to be handed a character & be challenged to play it instead of creating an entirely customized one. Indeed, as robject says, I have a bit of a tendency to always create basically the same character if I'm using completely non-random chargen. (And in GURPS, for some reason, I have a tendency to create utterly boring characters.)
CT chargen is also nice in that it creates characters that--taken as a group--fit the implied setting. Common skills are common & rare skills are rare without the designer having to figure out how to price them perfectly (which is impossible) or the players having to understand the setting.
Besides the fact that some of us find chargen to be a fun game all by itself.
Is it perfect? No. Does it have advantages? Yes. Does it have disadvantages? Yes. Do I use it in every campaign? No. Do I use it in some campaigns? Yes!
Heck, in straight Book 1-3 CT a character with 777777 and no skills can be a viable PC. We're not talking something like GURPS where you have a A4 sheet full of stuff that actually makes a difference.
Originally posted by Malenfant:
[QB]I wonder myself, sometimes
Malenfant
You make good solid points. The original chargen system was something a ref could better do on their own time, for sure it was amusing to use to create NPC's.
For players, we ending up giving a pool of mods, or other cheats, but cheats they were.
Did you ever have a player who would rather roll characters than play? I mean, roll 7 or 8 a night, not "like" the way they turned out? Was not content unless he had a superman?
I would send him into the next room to bring back superman - the game had ways of dealing with such a player - they never learned how to keep a poor character alive, and so never really learned to keep a good one alive -
My argument in favor of the classic chargen is that, it's primary advantage is/was to get players to give a low stat/skill char a chance,thereby learning to play the game. (Tough characters produce weaker players? Not necessarily, I know)
The best players came up in that school of hard knocks, (I bet that you did!) - it is an accomplishment to have survived a few gaming sessions with the sharks I used to hang with - murderous rogues, all - I do miss all that.
Keep yo' powder dry, suh. (Alabamian drawl)
sojourner
Originally posted by Malenfant:
[QB]I wonder myself, sometimes
Malenfant
You make good solid points. The original chargen system was something a ref could better do on their own time, for sure it was amusing to use to create NPC's.
For players, we ending up giving a pool of mods, or other cheats, but cheats they were.
Did you ever have a player who would rather roll characters than play? I mean, roll 7 or 8 a night, not "like" the way they turned out? Was not content unless he had a superman?
I would send him into the next room to bring back superman - the game had ways of dealing with such a player - they never learned how to keep a poor character alive, and so never really learned to keep a good one alive -
My argument in favor of the classic chargen is that, it's primary advantage is/was to get players to give a low stat/skill char a chance,thereby learning to play the game. (Tough characters produce weaker players? Not necessarily, I know)
The best players came up in that school of hard knocks, (I bet that you did!) - it is an accomplishment to have survived a few gaming sessions with the sharks I used to hang with - murderous rogues, all - I do miss all that.
Keep yo' powder dry, suh. (Alabamian drawl)
sojourner
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
To be honest, I never used many cheats in chargen, just allowed picking skill lists, etc. after rolling, rather than before. I also usually allowed assigning rolls to stats, so the player doesn't get something they just can't stand.
I actually had a referee (in a FRPG) change my character's gender (size, attributes, etc.) through a really vicious piece of magic in the middle of the campaign. Actually became one of my favorite characters - eventually.
I actually had a referee (in a FRPG) change my character's gender (size, attributes, etc.) through a really vicious piece of magic in the middle of the campaign. Actually became one of my favorite characters - eventually.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
To be honest, I never used many cheats in chargen, just allowed picking skill lists, etc. after rolling, rather than before. I also usually allowed assigning rolls to stats, so the player doesn't get something they just can't stand.
I actually had a referee (in a FRPG) change my character's gender (size, attributes, etc.) through a really vicious piece of magic in the middle of the campaign. Actually became one of my favorite characters - eventually.
I actually had a referee (in a FRPG) change my character's gender (size, attributes, etc.) through a really vicious piece of magic in the middle of the campaign. Actually became one of my favorite characters - eventually.
