Check it out. Then scroll down and get involved in the discussion.
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7638.html
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7638.html
T20 Review on RPG.net
- Thread starter Reginald
- Start date
Skylinkdave
SOC-8
One of several reviews I read that convinced me to buy it
Dave
An update:
Another T20 review on RPG.net. Brace yourselves, this one is not favorable.
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7722.html
Glad to see that Hunter Gordon is defending the product on the discussion on the bottom of the review page.
Another T20 review on RPG.net. Brace yourselves, this one is not favorable.
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7722.html
Glad to see that Hunter Gordon is defending the product on the discussion on the bottom of the review page.
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
Lots of rather odd bias showing in that review, considering he claimed to have run CT:Originally posted by Reginald:
Another T20 review on RPG.net. Brace yourselves, this one is not favorable.
He seems to have issues with characters not being balanced within a group.
He seems to think every class should have more combat ability.
And he seems boggled by the fact that every page has actual game content...
trancejeremy
SOC-6
I wrote the second review on RPG.net. (After my last review garnered lots of attacks by crazed wiccans, I've stopped reading comments there.)
I've played a lot of CT. I've written a CT character generator for windows. I know a lot about CT characters.
Anyway, my point is, even characters without any combat skills in CT generally get a weapon-0 skill. You can easily end up with military service characters with only a 1 or 2 in a given combat skill. That's maybe a 25% chance or so great to hit in combat (hard to figure out on a 2d6)
That's not a huge difference. OTOH, in T20, you can get a guy with a +5 BAB, and another guy with +20/+15/+10/+5. That's a huge difference - not only a 75% greater chance to hit, they get 4 times the amount of attacks
How is this balanced? How is this like classic traveller*?
You basically have to use troupe play, with everyone having one character for combat, and one for other things. (This also makes 90% of the classes in T20 unusable in other d20 games).
Also, just about every profession in CT could at least pick up the gun combat skill. I think only the Doctor doesn't have it. Yet, all non-military (and even the Navy) are essentially screwed over when it comes to combat skills.
So again, how is this like classic traveller?
Do you really need to know the design specs for every vehicle? Especially given there weren't that many? Couldn't that space have been better used for more vehicles and equipment, like in past travellers? Or background, again, like in past travellers?
Anyway, I did give it a 4 for substance. I just thought it was really really ugly (which it is - probably the worst artwork I've seen in any Traveller rulebook, and that's saying a lot. ) and poorly laid out and very confusingly written in the character generation section. I'm not alone, if you read the T20 forums here. So it did really deserve a 1 for style.
* I came across this glaringly while converting the Sky Raiders trilogy from original Traveller to T20.
In the last module in the trilogy, there are several scientists. Every single one of them has a gun combat skill of 1 (except the Doctor). All of this is according to the rules (if you look at the Citizens of the Imperium supplement, all but doctor do have gun combat as a skill).
Looking at the 8 pre-rolled PCs, 3 of them have combat skills greater than 1 (and all 3 are rated at only 2 in that skill). 4 have ratings of 1 in their gun combat skill, and 1 (an ex-Rogue) has a zero.
So, it's not like I'm just making this up, though I do admite in the later books dedicated to one career (Scouts, Mercenary, etc), they did end up with a lot higher. But those books really broke the system, IMHO.
I've played a lot of CT. I've written a CT character generator for windows. I know a lot about CT characters.
Anyway, my point is, even characters without any combat skills in CT generally get a weapon-0 skill. You can easily end up with military service characters with only a 1 or 2 in a given combat skill. That's maybe a 25% chance or so great to hit in combat (hard to figure out on a 2d6)
That's not a huge difference. OTOH, in T20, you can get a guy with a +5 BAB, and another guy with +20/+15/+10/+5. That's a huge difference - not only a 75% greater chance to hit, they get 4 times the amount of attacks
How is this balanced? How is this like classic traveller*?
You basically have to use troupe play, with everyone having one character for combat, and one for other things. (This also makes 90% of the classes in T20 unusable in other d20 games).
Also, just about every profession in CT could at least pick up the gun combat skill. I think only the Doctor doesn't have it. Yet, all non-military (and even the Navy) are essentially screwed over when it comes to combat skills.
So again, how is this like classic traveller?
Do you really need to know the design specs for every vehicle? Especially given there weren't that many? Couldn't that space have been better used for more vehicles and equipment, like in past travellers? Or background, again, like in past travellers?
Anyway, I did give it a 4 for substance. I just thought it was really really ugly (which it is - probably the worst artwork I've seen in any Traveller rulebook, and that's saying a lot. ) and poorly laid out and very confusingly written in the character generation section. I'm not alone, if you read the T20 forums here. So it did really deserve a 1 for style.
* I came across this glaringly while converting the Sky Raiders trilogy from original Traveller to T20.
In the last module in the trilogy, there are several scientists. Every single one of them has a gun combat skill of 1 (except the Doctor). All of this is according to the rules (if you look at the Citizens of the Imperium supplement, all but doctor do have gun combat as a skill).
Looking at the 8 pre-rolled PCs, 3 of them have combat skills greater than 1 (and all 3 are rated at only 2 in that skill). 4 have ratings of 1 in their gun combat skill, and 1 (an ex-Rogue) has a zero.
So, it's not like I'm just making this up, though I do admite in the later books dedicated to one career (Scouts, Mercenary, etc), they did end up with a lot higher. But those books really broke the system, IMHO.
Ah, crazed wiccan reporting for duty ...
Nobody said that CT was perfect and should be ported across to d20 as is ... IMHO that would be particularly dumb. In many ways the T20 system reminds me more of MegaTraveller's detailed task system.
The d20 system gives a great amount of detail to combat and this allows the game designer to spend prolific amounts of time tweaking it to get combat just right for their particular needs, it doesn't mean that most people need to be combat grunts.
IF you want to be a combat grunt, and be able to stand in the line of battle with the professional merc, or ex-marine, then prepare your character for that role:
- Put good stats in DEX and CON.
- Spend a term serving in the armed forces.
- Get the Martial Training feat (p.106).
- Spend your non-class feats buying combat feats.
- Buy good armour and a big gun (at the end of the day this can outweigh the disadvantage of a low BAB - heck buy Battledress and an FGMP-15).
The beauty of T20 is that unlike CT you can have a character with as checkered a past as most players of Traveller have.
Most people playing Criminal or Merc campaigns will not be playing the very low BAB characters, and those that are in your opinion disadvantaged (Navy, Army etc.) will more than make up for it when they get behind the controls of a vehicle, starship or artillery piece, or take command of the situation with their Leadership and Tactics I feats.
In temrs of your ranking of 1 for style, that was malicious. The THB does lack something in style, but it certainly is not so poor as to require a 1, in comparison to the many other products that are out there a 3 would have been more appropriate.
I am sorry if you don't like the feedback on your review, but that's part of being a reviewer!
What people seem to fail to realize about ANY rules set. IF you don't like a certain rule, change it.
People have been maing up "house" rules for game systems since the first game came out. Heck, where do you think the critical rules came from for 1st edition D&D? They were HOUSE rules. That's just one example. I mean Hackmaster(TM) is nothing but 1st Editon D&D with all the house rules people made up.
IF you want your NAvy guys to be combat grunts, give them a better BAB. If you want your Merchants to be better, give them one too. HEck, give everyone the highest BAB progessions you can! Problme solved! Yes?
OH, but hold on, if you did that then everyone would play merchants or Academics causet hey get more skill points!
There are some FINE examples of that already on this board. Keep up the good work! MAke the game how you want it. That's the most important thing.
I could digress more, but i won't.
Just bringing things to the height of absurdity.
Honestly, a review is just a review, it is an opinion. EVERYONE has a right to that. AND everyone has the option of tweaking the rules anyway they want.
A side note on the art, art is VERY subjective. What one person thinks is ART is another man's trash. I know personally, some of the art in many of the books published these days is cr4p. But see, that is just my opinion.
So, some people don't like the T20 system or this or that. You can't please everyone. That is the way of the world.
This is in NO way an official statement by Quiklink, it is my OPINION.
Bruce
The Man Behind the Curtain
People have been maing up "house" rules for game systems since the first game came out. Heck, where do you think the critical rules came from for 1st edition D&D? They were HOUSE rules. That's just one example. I mean Hackmaster(TM) is nothing but 1st Editon D&D with all the house rules people made up.
IF you want your NAvy guys to be combat grunts, give them a better BAB. If you want your Merchants to be better, give them one too. HEck, give everyone the highest BAB progessions you can! Problme solved! Yes?
OH, but hold on, if you did that then everyone would play merchants or Academics causet hey get more skill points!
There are some FINE examples of that already on this board. Keep up the good work! MAke the game how you want it. That's the most important thing.
I could digress more, but i won't.
Just bringing things to the height of absurdity.
Honestly, a review is just a review, it is an opinion. EVERYONE has a right to that. AND everyone has the option of tweaking the rules anyway they want.
A side note on the art, art is VERY subjective. What one person thinks is ART is another man's trash. I know personally, some of the art in many of the books published these days is cr4p. But see, that is just my opinion.
So, some people don't like the T20 system or this or that. You can't please everyone. That is the way of the world.
This is in NO way an official statement by Quiklink, it is my OPINION.
Bruce
The Man Behind the Curtain
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
Two very seperate questions, there. CT wasn't balanced except perhaps at a sheer statistical level, and the '1001 Characters' book did a pretty good job of debunking even that...
As for your style rating being based on the layout and art being "the worst", you obviously missed the Judges Guild and Group One products. Which of the editions of Traveller (or failing that, some other well known RPG products) would you consider at the top of the Style ranking?
Cleon the Mad
SOC-12
I won't get into a long debate with TranceJeremy, I respect his opinion, and he's also indicated that he's not going to read any critique of his review on RPG.NET, so I see no need to do so. Having said that, I notice one of his major gripes, possibly his largest one is the low BAB for many of the classes. He seems to forget that it's very easy to multiclass in Traveller T20. Simply put, one can start in a low BAB high skill point class, then switch to a high BAB low skill point class, if one wishes to do so, and have the best of both worlds, prior history allows for such. Or do the opposite, if one wishes more levels granted toward combat ability then skills, since one's first term generally speaking will grant the lion's share of levels. Otherwise, despite it stating right in the rules that people are encouraged to multiclass, TranceJeremy seems to forget that one can do so, if one wishes to be let's say an Academic or Professional, but does not wish to be stuck with a low BAB.
Similar threads
