Task system

[MT++]

I use a MegaTraveller system with one change.

If the roll of the dice is less than the attribute, you get a further +1, unless the roll is a 2. Thus a stat of 6 and 7 are different. Both give DM+1 for attribute/5, but the seven gives a further + 1 if the roll is 3-6 (before DMs), the six only on a 3-5
And for really high stats, if you beat it by ten you get another +1. So a PC with a stat of 15 gets an automatic +1 for rolling less, +3 for attribute/5 and if they roll a 3-5 they get another +1

It is a little counterintuitive at first but it makes slight variations in stats notable

[This message has been edited by MT++ (edited 15 June 2001).]

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MT++:
I use a MegaTraveller system with one chnage.
<snip description>
It is a little counterintuitive at first but it makes slight variations in stats notable<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This rule is making my brain hurt. One of the most common (if IMO somewhat spurious) complaints about the MT system is that it's hard for new players to figure out, and something like this certainly wouldn't help our case.

Actually, I'm not bothered by the graininess of the stat DM in MT tasks since, after all, stats are also used in various other areas, and providing task DMs is just one of their functions: strength 7 may not provide a bonus over strength 6 in tasks, but you get an extra 'hit point,' you can lift more, etc. etc.

Also, if we keep the 'stat/hit-points' system of damage (which I'm actually not particularly in favor of) where stat values will be constantly changing in-game as characters take and/or recover from damage, there's actually a disincentive to having tasks play a more gradiated role in task determination: having to re-figure all your task DMs every time you take a hit. With the current stat/5 system you can just make a mental "-1" note whenever a stat drops below 10 or 5 (which, I might add, ties in nicely with Light Wounds in AHL/Striker).

Edited to fix an error

[This message has been edited by T. Foster (edited 14 June 2001).]

 

[Gallowglass]

For MT tasks, I tend to (stat/5)-1:
1-4: DM -1
5-9: DM 0
10-14: DM +1
15-19: DM +2
etc

This allows stats to have an effect on normal tasks (but not much) and provides a progression that I can use if I end up pulling in the generic stats (Experience, Life Force, Determination).

As regards damage, although MT was too fiddly for me, the basic concept of a general system to track status during combat and then a more detailed assesment afterwards I always felt nicely captured the adrenalin thing. But I am also very much in favour of simple wounds status (Still one of the good things about the original Skyrealms of Jorune...)

How about: roll CT damage dice vs Life Force, each Stat block (always going lowest to highest) of LF you beat with the damage roll is a level of wounding. Increase wound level by one step on first shot/blow (First Blood rule). Note the dice rolls, but use them later...

Roll < lowest physical stat: Superficial wound.
Roll > lowest physicl stat but less than lowest TWO physical stats: Light Wound.
Roll > Lowest two stats but < all three: Serious wound
Roll > All three: Mortal Wound dead / dying (depending on how Gritty you want to be...)

[Edited for typo's]

[This message has been edited by Gallowglass (edited 15 June 2001).]

 

[MT++]

My reasoning for the above is twofold:

1. I want slight variations to make a difference, without increasing the spread (I hate rolling more than 2 dice for a task. Actually I hate it for players. People seem to have trouble adding numbers on multiple dice quickly*)

2. I want attributes to contribute more than a +1 or +2. At the same time I don't want the damn attributes to overwhelm the skill (ie. TNE and T4)

* and we won't even get into arguments about which die is the half.

 

[sebastian]

As we have just started playing Traveller again after many years doing other things, mainly wargaming. I started with T4 as the SOTA. Four games in we abandoned it and went back to MegaTraveller. Why?

Because of the task system. the MT task system is normalised, clean and simple. Stats and skills matter but so does the difficulty.

However we couldn't handle the roll for opportunity, roll to hit of melee combat so quickly dropped that as suggested in the rule book for a combined roll.

So practical experience in this part of the world says the MT task system is the one to go for.

------------------
The dogs of Sunday would be no ordinary dogs.

 

[TCHarrison]

OK, before I begin my rant, let's get a few things clear:

1) I have never played any version of Traveller with a group. I have, however, played a few test runs on my own.
2) I do not own anything MegaTraveller, unless you count the BITS Task System print-out and the MT poster I got when I got the Supplements reprints.
3) I do not own any TNE books, but I do have the BITS Task System.
4) I have the T5 Playtest files, gotten from Downport.com
5) I have devised several RPG mechanics in the past.

Let's hope 1, 2, and 3 don't hurt too much and that 4 and 5 help a good bit in writing this.

My Evaluations of Task Systems:

Classic Traveller: What task system? There's a bit too much ad hoc for a novice ref. (I remember when I first looked at it. It intimidated me.

MegaTraveller: From what I've seen, it's A-OK. Very good, in fact. The intuitiveness and universalness of the system seems great. But A character with a stat of 5 does have the same chance as a character with a stat of 9...

Traveller: The New Era: 1d20's not a stranger to me. But then, I grew up playing AD&D. Anyway, as one fellow said, it's a game. Why be so picky about what kind of dice you use. At least you're not chunking around d30s... The system seems pretty good, although stat definately chokes skill right out of importance.

Marc Miller's Traveller: I like T4. It's got its bad spots and bruises, but it works. Having more skills/skills levels is satisfying. Being able to _improve_ those levels - it's mah-velous. The task system is good for me, even if skill gets choked out by stat. The IHTIT rule fixes some of this. What's so bad about half-dice (aka d3s)? I like 'em.

T5 Playtest: This is pretty good. There are some areas it needs work in (not to self: email Marc), such as Multiple Skills (my thoughts: take the lowest one) and "pure" skill checks (an artist with Art-6 shouldn't have just a 1% of painting a good picture; skill x3 sounds good here.), but with the IHTIT rule, it should do fine for T5, although seeing a new system would be neat.

d20 System: Hey, I grew up playing AD&D. This is pretty good system to me, and probably a good choice for reeling in new players. Although I might miss the days of the active TMLers pretty much _being_ Traveller (i.e. you see their names in the credits of major Traveller stuff).

GURPS Traveller: I almost forgot about this. GURPS has a fine system. 3d6 is very familiar for us D&Ders, although characters take a wee bit too much effort to create for some of us.

FUDGE Traveller: FUDGE is a good system, although contrary to what the author says, rolling 4d6 for 4dF is not that hard to convert once you get used to it. A few seconds, maybe. dF would probably only half that time - not worth the time and energy/money.

Risus Traveller: Let's not go here...

Oh, and let's not forget:

KB3: A good system if you're willing to spend the time and energy it takes to make a roll. But then that time might be enjoyable for some. I'm not sure... See Statement 1, above.

JJ0: My own little rules system, based on a popular boardgame. Anyone interested in it can check out my website in a few days. It will be under the name Base Rules. To convert from Traveller, divide stat by 3 and leave skill levels as-is or half if desired for T4. (not for GT or T20) Takes a lot a dice, but some might enjoy it. If you don't want to wait a few days for the universal rules, just modify the rules in The Host of Heaven, my currently web-published game.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

------------------
-J. Jensen

 

[lucasdigital]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TCHarrison:
OK, before I begin my rant, <SNIP>
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look to me like a sensible bunch of observations. To be a true rant though you should have used harsher language and more capitalised words...

Mk




------------------
Mark Lucas
Lucas-digital.com

 

[scout_harris]

I have just seen the Avery's proposed task system for T5. I must admit I am a little dissapointed, seeing as it is just the Task system from T4 with a little modification.

I don't buy Traveller for the background (well, I like the background, but mostly I tend to make that up my own background). So it is the mechanic that I am more interested in. The only two that I have really liked is the MT and the TNE. Both my players and I all thought the T4 task system was a dud.
Additionally, when I do use the background, I am not really interested in having source material for the past. I would prefer to see the 'Traveller' storyline advanced. If T5 was set a couple of hundred years after TNE I would be hungrily buying everything I could get my hands on.

Since it is going to be based in the past, with a task system my players and I don't like, I have decided that I will not be buying T5 (Like I presently don't buy Gurps...).

Sorry to be a bit negative guys... Still love traveller, still play it heaps. However, I would prefer to see a release of new material for CT, MT or TNE than an entirely new traveller game.


------------------
Scout since 1983!

 

[TCHarrison]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gallowglass:
For MT tasks, I tend to (stat/5)-1:
1-4: DM -1
5-9: DM 0
10-14: DM +1
15-19: DM +2
etc
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, to solve the problem of stat truncation (if I may call it so; I mean the dead spots of five consecutive integers that provide the exact same bonus), the basis behind Marc's staying with a T4-esque system, why not use (stat/3)-2, rounding down? Moving by +/-1 without effect isn't that bad, is it?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
This allows stats to have an effect on normal tasks (but not much) and provides a progression that I can use if I end up pulling in the generic stats (Experience, Life Force, Determination).

As regards damage, although MT was too fiddly for me, the basic concept of a general system to track status during combat and then a more detailed assesment afterwards I always felt nicely captured the adrenalin thing. But I am also very much in favour of simple wounds status (Still one of the good things about the original Skyrealms of Jorune...)

How about: roll CT damage dice vs Life Force, each Stat block (always going lowest to highest) of LF you beat with the damage roll is a level of wounding. Increase wound level by one step on first shot/blow (First Blood rule). Note the dice rolls, but use them later...

Roll < lowest physical stat: Superficial wound.
Roll > lowest physicl stat but less than lowest TWO physical stats: Light Wound.
Roll > Lowest two stats but < all three: Serious wound
Roll > All three: Mortal Wound dead / dying (depending on how Gritty you want to be...)

[Edited for typo's]

[This message has been edited by Gallowglass (edited 15 June 2001).][/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This sounds interesting. I may try this some day.

------------------
-J. Jensen

 

[christopher.boote]

Sorry to bubble this to the top, but is T5 still stuck on the awful T4 task system? Where stat is more important than skill, and using multiple-and-a-half dice?

A comment from someone (sorry, can't remember who) wanted to differentiate between different skill levels, so I've bashed about with this

2D6 only (appeals to most players, I believe)
Stat 7 is better than stat 6 (or 8 etc.)
Easy (I think)

Tasks are:-
Simple ....... 3+
Routine ...... 6+
Difficult .... 9+
Formidable .. 12+
Staggering .. 15+
Impossible .. 18+

Roll 2D + skill
If you roll < stat, +1 If you roll < {stat-10} +2

Doubles are special.
1,1 is automatic failure for all tasks
2,2 is automatic failure for Routine or harder tasks
3,3 is automatic failure for Difficult or harder tasks
4,4 is automatic failure for Formidable or harder tasks
5,5 is automatic failure for Impossible tasks

If you want to make it open ended, then you can have your 'sixes roll again and add' rule if you want. This would have no effect for Simple, and usually no effect for Routine tasks, but may have BIG distortions on the results of more difficult tasks for low- or un-skilled characters.

So, lets look at the odds for
Sid Superhero - Stat 15, Skill 6
Percy Professional - Stat 11, Skill 3
Ned Normal - Stat 7, skill 1
Frank Fumble - Stat 3, no skill
Attempting the six tasks

Task Difficulty . S ... P ... N ... F
Simple 3+ ...... 97% . 97% . 97% . 97%
Routine 6+ ..... 94% . 94% . 89% . 75%
Difficult 9+ ... 92% . 83% . 42% . 28%
Formidable 12+ . 69% . 39% .. 8% .. 3%
Staggering 15+ . 28% .. 3% .. - ... -
Impossible 18+ .. 3% .. - ... - ... -

Now, I find that easy to remember, and it compares fairly well with the spread from MT

Any thoughts?

Or if I'm totally out of the loop, and T5 already has a working Task system feel free to ignore this post

Ghunkugoe

 

[Ron]

Ghunkugoe,

T5's playtest rules use a system similar to the one found at T4, including the half dice. However, Marc Miller have posted in these boards that Hunter convinced him to drop the half dice.

 

[William]

Originally posted by Ron:
Ghunkugoe,

T5's playtest rules use a system similar to the one found at T4, including the half dice. However, Marc Miller have posted in these boards that Hunter convinced him to drop the half dice.

He has. I have the current version; I asked nicely and he obliged me.

With the half die gone and the "This is Hard!" rule (if the task requires more dice than the character has skill levels then the difficulty is increased another level - this makes skill as important as stats again) it's a fairly reasonable task system.

Perhaps Hunter could ask Marc if he would consent to having the current versions of the T5 materials posted on CotI for our (constructive? ) comment.

William

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by William:
Perhaps Hunter could ask Marc if he would consent to having the current versions of the T5 materials posted on CotI for our (constructive? ) comment.

I just shot him an email on this. Note he may be reluctant due to copyright considerations, but then again he may not have a problem with it. I'll let you know as soon as I get word.

Hunter

 

[womble]

If people are worried about stat overwhelming skill, let the stat modifier be capped by the skill applied - represents "Stat" being "native talent" and "potential for greatness" which requires a framework of training and experience to be fully realised.

 

[rian_matthews]

Just a suggestion, but why not simply remove attributes from the task system altogether (i think this idea was floated by someone else earlier). Instead, attributes could have some other benefit that may indirectly help tasks or skills. Examples of what attributes could do are;

1. Create derived stats, such as reaction, hit points (which i'd much prefer to that whole reduced attributes idea), combat pool or fatigue pool, hand to hand damage, etc.

2. They could lower the cost of purchasing/improving skills related to the attribute, or if the 'training to increase skills' idea is kept, they could make training easier;

3. Give levels is special skills, these special skills would then be used in tasks that are purely physical or mental etc (example special skils would be 'endurance' or 'feats of strength' etc). Unlike traditional skills, these skills would only improve because the linked attribute increased, ie you couldn't train to increase them.

4. If some sort of perks or flaws system was ever used, high attributes might make certain perks available.

5. Effect your chance or getting a critical success.

...the idea of attributes affecting the maximum a skill can be is also a great idea. I think in a game that had bionic or mutations (...hmmm, is it obivious i don't play in the OTU or what) it would a very interesting mechanic. It would mean that just becuase you had some super attributes, you wouldn't necessarily get any advantage, instead you'd have to train to learn how to use these new attributes...

...on a related note, i think aesthetically any mechanic for traveller should really stick to some sort of 2d6 mechanic... somehow anything else just doesn't feel traveller... The T20 game is a great game, and is one of the most well thought out and playable versions traveller i've seen... but because it uses d20s it just doesn't feel right...

 

[Calaem]

Skulls, et al.
I wrote Marc Miller a few months ago and he gratiously sent me a copy of his task system (in progress) for T5. It is indeed an upgraded version of the T4 system with those pesky 1/2 dice removed and a few other edits. He is apparently working quite hard with FFE and the T20 folks to get all the CT products out once again, so there is no telling when T5 will hit the shelves. (Or playtest, since thats why I contacted him in the first place.)

 

[Ron]

Calaem,

Does the current T5's task system relies as much as T4's in the characteristics. Not only I think that this is very unrealistic but also it's near the opposite of CT, in which training was everything.

 

[Calaem]

Yes, the T5 system is almost identical to T4. The changes aer mostly dropping of 1/2 dice, and possibly only having about 6 levels of difficulty with some modifiers instead of eerything changing the difficult. He keeps the concepts of hasty and deliberate, and the skill vs characteristic concepts are very interesting (if a bit bogged down).


I prefer the MT task system best, but CT was definitely the simplest and quickest to use.