Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Probably the one that was deleted.
Alright, I will.
-S4
-S4
bryan gibson
Absent Friend
Personally, I can't say why thet thread was deleted- it wasn't me, and if it was I'd say why. or at least PM you.
However, that crack about censorship I consider completely unjustified. I won't say I agree with many of your comments on various subjects - I don't - but thats neither here nor there. Say anything thing you like, and so long as your are civil about it, or within the rules of the forum, I'll defend that right ( and have) to allow that freedom.
But, if enforcing the forum rules can be considered "censorship" then guilty as charged.
I won't derail this thread further, but if you have any questions you are of course welcome to PM me.
However, that crack about censorship I consider completely unjustified. I won't say I agree with many of your comments on various subjects - I don't - but thats neither here nor there. Say anything thing you like, and so long as your are civil about it, or within the rules of the forum, I'll defend that right ( and have) to allow that freedom.
But, if enforcing the forum rules can be considered "censorship" then guilty as charged.
I won't derail this thread further, but if you have any questions you are of course welcome to PM me.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I will.
Are you admitting anything with your suggesting above?
Actually, it's fact that the ACT task system overweights stats at the expense of skills in a not dissimilar fashion than the T4 task system. I can show you that mathmatically. Unless, of course, some massive changes were made to the ACT system after I left the Avenger/Comstar forum--which I don't think is the case.On ACT vs. UGM, S4, please don't forget to add "In my opinion.."
I did read Shaman's comments...
I would argue that the "bad behavior" label was applied rather rashly to him compared to some other CotI posters who haven't been banned.
No, I wasn't there at the end, but I'd guess that the task system was not fixed because no apparent effort was going to be made fixing it when I left.
If they fixed it, then I'm glad for them.
I am. Really.
Not you, but another CotI policeman did...and shouldn't have.
I always try to remain civil. No use in yelling at anybody.
Well, I think I'd lose this debate because you've got a bigger stick than I have. Sun Tzu. But, I didn't see a lot of "bad behavior" coming out of Shaman...just someone with a strong opinion (not uncommon at all on these boards...or any boards).
Maybe a warning private mail would have been a better approach?
I really have no interest in that. There's no money in rpgs, or I would have written for them long ago. All you really get is your name in print, and that doesn't particularly appeal to my ego.
I wrote the UGM for my Traveller gaming group. I post it here because I know it's a good system--it should be with all the work I put into it. Anyone who sees it and likes it is welcome to use it in their games. I'm not really looking to sell it to anyone. I'm happy knowing other Classic Traveller players out there are finding it a good tool to use in their games.
You too.
-S4
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
In my and others' opinion, it was an abuse of policing power. If there was an offending post, then the post should have been deleted--not the entire thread.
Other threads here have been "locked", but still read-able. But, don't you find it suspicious that the UGM thread was deleted?
I do. So do others I've spoken to. And, the word outside the forum is that I'm not the only victim.
I feel the same about you...but, I'm willing to bury the hatchet if you are.
Good to hear.
Thanks. I really don't have anything further, though.
-S4
Liam Devlin
SOC-14 5K
S4:
I admit all I have already said, or suggested is "as is, at face value"--no hidden meanings.
Interpret as you will, as usual. PM me for clarification if this is unclear, by all means.
Thank you for being civil, we all (Mods & fellow posters) do appreciate that.
As for Shaman's banishment..I disagree, and you missed my point in front of you. I restate for the record sir:
"accepting a fan's bad behavior as acceptable because you agree with him, doesn't make it acceptable to the rules nor the Mods of this board..
+ Multiple infractions of Troll-baiting/ flaming
+ Multiple counts of excessive profanity/ unacceptable language
+ Multiple counts of refusal to accept Moderation/ Mods advice.
+ Multiple counts of personal attacks.
Those cost him and the other person there seat at the chat forum sir. Rashly applied?
Again I strongly disagree. The cases were made, all his posts were accounted for, and Hunter dropped the hammer with the proof his own posts hanged condemned himself with.
case closed.
(St P's day): Yes, we're going out to eat this evening as a family, thank you!
Sincerely,
I admit all I have already said, or suggested is "as is, at face value"--no hidden meanings.
Interpret as you will, as usual. PM me for clarification if this is unclear, by all means.
Thank you for being civil, we all (Mods & fellow posters) do appreciate that.
As for Shaman's banishment..I disagree, and you missed my point in front of you. I restate for the record sir:
"accepting a fan's bad behavior as acceptable because you agree with him, doesn't make it acceptable to the rules nor the Mods of this board..
+ Multiple infractions of Troll-baiting/ flaming
+ Multiple counts of excessive profanity/ unacceptable language
+ Multiple counts of refusal to accept Moderation/ Mods advice.
+ Multiple counts of personal attacks.
Those cost him and the other person there seat at the chat forum sir. Rashly applied?
Again I strongly disagree. The cases were made, all his posts were accounted for, and Hunter dropped the hammer with the proof his own posts hanged condemned himself with.
case closed.
(St P's day): Yes, we're going out to eat this evening as a family, thank you!
Sincerely,
attempting to steer this back to T5 ...
I have a personal observation about the history of the development of Traveller and its future development, that I would be interested in hearing other opinions on. I suspect that I may be very much in the minority on this issue.
I think that Traveller suffers from a form of skill inflation. Irrespective of the system, the number of possible skills has steadily grown and the number of skills which a character gains per term has also increased. In the days of LBB 1-3, a skill was a big deal. Characters gained only 1-2 skills per 4 years. Medic-3 made you a licensed doctor (or a surgeon with a high Dexterity). In my opinion, even the LBB 4-7 added too many unnecessary skills. It seemed to me that each skill felt more like a mini-career than the ability to perform a specific task. That ‘Old School’ feel set Traveller apart from every other game. I miss that.
Why do we have Battledress, zero-G environment, zero-G combat and Vaccsuit as distinct skills? Once upon a time, a character with Vaccsuit-1 received basic training with vaccsuits in the military and spent 4 years developing that skill with full-time hands-on practical experience. Any poor slob could wear a vaccsuit, Vaccsuit-1 represented a trained and experienced professional (like an experienced orbital construction worker) who could attempt anything with a vaccsuit.
Other games have “prestige classes” and “skill packages” and, once upon a time, each Traveller Skill was a “prestige class” or “skill package” all by itself. Traveller needs fewer skills and not more. Traveller needs Bigger Skills.
Am I completely alone in my opinion, or merely in the minority?
I have a personal observation about the history of the development of Traveller and its future development, that I would be interested in hearing other opinions on. I suspect that I may be very much in the minority on this issue.
I think that Traveller suffers from a form of skill inflation. Irrespective of the system, the number of possible skills has steadily grown and the number of skills which a character gains per term has also increased. In the days of LBB 1-3, a skill was a big deal. Characters gained only 1-2 skills per 4 years. Medic-3 made you a licensed doctor (or a surgeon with a high Dexterity). In my opinion, even the LBB 4-7 added too many unnecessary skills. It seemed to me that each skill felt more like a mini-career than the ability to perform a specific task. That ‘Old School’ feel set Traveller apart from every other game. I miss that.
Why do we have Battledress, zero-G environment, zero-G combat and Vaccsuit as distinct skills? Once upon a time, a character with Vaccsuit-1 received basic training with vaccsuits in the military and spent 4 years developing that skill with full-time hands-on practical experience. Any poor slob could wear a vaccsuit, Vaccsuit-1 represented a trained and experienced professional (like an experienced orbital construction worker) who could attempt anything with a vaccsuit.
Other games have “prestige classes” and “skill packages” and, once upon a time, each Traveller Skill was a “prestige class” or “skill package” all by itself. Traveller needs fewer skills and not more. Traveller needs Bigger Skills.
Am I completely alone in my opinion, or merely in the minority?
bryan gibson
Absent Friend
I would be inclined to agree, I really liked tyhe simplicity of that. Thats my gameplay style, of course, but it also made for a very simple chargen.
On this one, I can answer easily, if a bit flip ( not intended that way, just don't know how to avoid it)
You have seperate skills ( vacc suit, battledress) becasue, well, they aren't same things at all. A vacc suit isn't power armor by a long shot.
On the other hand, even by the rules decriptions, I see very little if any difference between zero g environment and zero G combat.Apparently one entails shooting at things and fighting, but if you have a gun skill and zero G enviro, why would yopu need a combat skill?
This typical of D20 and its ilk. In fact, anytime I run CT, I always restrict players to CoTI ( the 12 classes ) and the basics in the first books.
Its rather cliche but true- the hallmark of the mediocre/munchkin/power gamer is to insist on genning a septegenarian scout, maxed term short of aging rolls, scouts to get the plum JOT and potential ship bennie, and demanding book 6 ( or whatever ot was, just like high guard and merchant prince and mercenary) so as to get the page long list of skills, while others playing book three were lucky to get a half dozen in some cases.
Skill inflation has happened because players have demanded it, and it relieves GMs and players the burden of imagination. Something, you'll note more and more modern systems tend to lean toward, while games that are more abstract ( CT, Tristat and others ) tend to languish.
Of course, this is all likely quite moot, as Marc has made it apparent he has no interest in using any other systems out there ( be it ACT, UGM, both good sustems IMO having tried em both and being a CT fan - or one of several other equally handy SF systems )but rather aims to create/use his own. As to whether it will be any good, who can say? I havent seen much of what was out there and can't hazard a guess.
But given recent trends, it will likely lean to inflation, as you point out, rather than streamline, which is a shame.
I agree, simpler IS better
Rhialto the Marvelous
SOC-13
This is a very good point. I've run into this also in a rather different universe--the world of Basic / Expert D&D (Moldvay edition).
It's the same deal, or even more extreme. Hardly any skills outside of the Thief's percentages. Does this mean the PCs can't do anything? No. It means the opposite. They're heroes--they can ride horses, tie knots, swim, whatever... all of which tempered by common sense and situational modifiers. This is how Gygax himself explained it.
The thing is... in order for this to work (and to a lesser degree this is true for CotI PCs), you need to have players and GMs who *get* it. The fewer rules, the more weight GM fiat carries.
Most of us here do get it. But (and this is not wrong per se), at some point game designers decided that it wasn't going to be the GM but the rules that should provide the benchmark. And so they added more rules--more finely grained skill systems, etc.
On one hand, that's good. The game becomes more objective and more predictable. On the other hand, it becomes more open to abuse by powergamers, as Bryan says. The more system there is, the more you can work that system... against its spirit.
Intuitively, I'm definitely with you, atpollard. Calling a CT skill a prestige class is actually brilliant. Very, very cool. If you think about it this way, CT PCs don't feel incomplete any longer--on the contrary. Robert Fisher argued something very similar on his Basic D&D website, so you're not alone at all.
It's the same deal, or even more extreme. Hardly any skills outside of the Thief's percentages. Does this mean the PCs can't do anything? No. It means the opposite. They're heroes--they can ride horses, tie knots, swim, whatever... all of which tempered by common sense and situational modifiers. This is how Gygax himself explained it.
The thing is... in order for this to work (and to a lesser degree this is true for CotI PCs), you need to have players and GMs who *get* it. The fewer rules, the more weight GM fiat carries.
Most of us here do get it. But (and this is not wrong per se), at some point game designers decided that it wasn't going to be the GM but the rules that should provide the benchmark. And so they added more rules--more finely grained skill systems, etc.
On one hand, that's good. The game becomes more objective and more predictable. On the other hand, it becomes more open to abuse by powergamers, as Bryan says. The more system there is, the more you can work that system... against its spirit.
Intuitively, I'm definitely with you, atpollard. Calling a CT skill a prestige class is actually brilliant. Very, very cool. If you think about it this way, CT PCs don't feel incomplete any longer--on the contrary. Robert Fisher argued something very similar on his Basic D&D website, so you're not alone at all.
Couple of things:
1. ACT task system actually got altered. It's not the same as the so-called 'broken' version now, and in any case data on it came from a closed playtest. I'm not immensely happy about people posting comments on a system that is both incomplete and also privileged information.
2. S4 got into trouble not for dissing ACT but for posting details of it on an open board when it was still a closed playtest.
3. Nobody got into trouble for dissing Avenger materials. Sinbad Sam badly offended me, yes, by screaming that Avenger SUCKS! and then flying off the handle when asked why he thought that. So *I* walked away from that thread. Sinbad Sam then had a fight with other people who are not part of Avenger Enterprises and broke the rules of the COTI forum. He was then banned.
I object to the suggestion that some kind of censorship is in place here. At best this is an ill-informed opinion put forward by someone who should know better. Both of the people who have been moderated after making anti Avenger statements were modded for their behaviour, AND NOT FOR DISLIKING AVENGER.
Please refrain from making accusations of this sort unless there is actually some kind of basis for them.
1. ACT task system actually got altered. It's not the same as the so-called 'broken' version now, and in any case data on it came from a closed playtest. I'm not immensely happy about people posting comments on a system that is both incomplete and also privileged information.
2. S4 got into trouble not for dissing ACT but for posting details of it on an open board when it was still a closed playtest.
3. Nobody got into trouble for dissing Avenger materials. Sinbad Sam badly offended me, yes, by screaming that Avenger SUCKS! and then flying off the handle when asked why he thought that. So *I* walked away from that thread. Sinbad Sam then had a fight with other people who are not part of Avenger Enterprises and broke the rules of the COTI forum. He was then banned.
I object to the suggestion that some kind of censorship is in place here. At best this is an ill-informed opinion put forward by someone who should know better. Both of the people who have been moderated after making anti Avenger statements were modded for their behaviour, AND NOT FOR DISLIKING AVENGER.
Please refrain from making accusations of this sort unless there is actually some kind of basis for them.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
MJD, I'd respond to you, because you've got a couple things wrong as well. But, I'm dropping this.
I don't see any good in debating it.
-S4
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Robject,
I don't know why, but that news is hitting me much more positively than anything else I've heard about T5.
It actually sounds "good".
I'm glad to hear it.
-S4
Correction Sir, I was "asked" to refrain from responding/posting to threads in which caused or would cause emotions/tempers to run high, for "One Week".
But then in one of my post I suggested a similar sentence to those in that thread. The Moderator took me up on my suggestion, and "asked" me "to put my money where my mouth is". that is my words for it not the Moderator's, his was worded much more politely.
I served my "One Week" and did post to some threads, that had no flame potential(s) during that week.
So no I was not banned. Basically put into "Time Out"
bryan gibson
Absent Friend
Guys, this is a T5 thread, lets keep things on topic here since its digressing.
Of course, if the posters concerned want to discuss other issues, theres no reason not to open another thread elsewhere - but this is rightfully about T5, lets keep it on that subject.
Of course, if the posters concerned want to discuss other issues, theres no reason not to open another thread elsewhere - but this is rightfully about T5, lets keep it on that subject.
Jeff M. Hopper
SOC-14 1K
This is very important and good news, since the skills and task system has been the source of most negative comments on T5.
Robject,
I don't know why, but that news is hitting me much more positively than anything else I've heard about T5.
It actually sounds "good".
I'm glad to hear it.
-S4 </font>[/QUOTE]Depending on how it's implemented, it could be good or bad. And, it will strike people differently along that continuum. Also, a good thing can be done for the wrong reasons. But I think it's a good thing (fewer, broader skills), and I think it's done for the right reason (playability). I could be wrong.
Jeff M. Hopper
SOC-14 1K
I think I'll choose to be hopeful.
I'm with you Arthur and Bryan. I like a simple flexible system in which the GM uses his imagination to fill in the gaps. Some of the best RPGing I've done has been entirely freeform, often without dice or paper. I don't have the time or inclination to absorb vast quantities of information before I can start playing and don't like gameplay interrupted by the constant referring to rules and tables - it hurts the narrative flow.
I think that there are a few reasons which explain the departure from a simple system:
1. I believe that many players give more value to an object or characteristic which appears in print than one which has been made up by the GM. If it's in print it somehow has more legitimacy.
2. From an economic point of view, the requirement for more detail can only be good news for the publisher. The books get bigger and they can justify charging more for them.
3. Players demanded more detailed Chargen rules because it meant that they could customise their characters to ever greater extents and feel that there was legitimacy (point 1 above) in the final product.
It will be interesting to see whether T5 veers towards the simple or the complex. T20 is definitely too complex for me.
Ravs
Ravs
I think that there are a few reasons which explain the departure from a simple system:
1. I believe that many players give more value to an object or characteristic which appears in print than one which has been made up by the GM. If it's in print it somehow has more legitimacy.
2. From an economic point of view, the requirement for more detail can only be good news for the publisher. The books get bigger and they can justify charging more for them.
3. Players demanded more detailed Chargen rules because it meant that they could customise their characters to ever greater extents and feel that there was legitimacy (point 1 above) in the final product.
It will be interesting to see whether T5 veers towards the simple or the complex. T20 is definitely too complex for me.
Ravs
Ravs
Similar threads
