The Injury Table

[Brandon C]

To be blunt, I don't like it and don't plan to use it.

In character creation, it's just a way to siphon money away from the character, on top of losing a benefit roll.

In a campaign, for effects after combat, wound severity has no bearing on the Wound Table roll -- a character who took only one point damage is just as likely to permanently lose 10 points of characteristics as is a character who has End and Dex reduced to zero and Str to 1. Or, with an equal chance, they suffer no permanent effect.

I just don't see a reason to keep the table.

 

[CosmicGamer]

You can do what you want but since you posted, must be you're looking for some input?

First, it doesn't seam realistic that characters go through their often quite dangerous career without any chance of injury.

In character creation, it's just a way to siphon money away from the character, on top of losing a benefit roll.

The lost benefit occurs when you fail a survival roll and happens no matter what the mishap is and is not associated with an injury.

Most injury rolls cost 10,000cr or less and some, or even all of the medical costs may be covered by the employer. You could also decide to not undergo treatment.

If starting cash is such an issue, I'd be more concerned with poor rolling on the cash table. With 3 rolls on the Merchants table you could have as low as 3,000cr or as high as 120,000cr.

In a campaign, for effects after combat

I think the injury table is only used during chargen. Please provide a reference to it's use during game play.

wound severity has no bearing on the Wound Table roll

What page is the Wound Table on?

I just don't see a reason to keep the table.

As always, it is a game and feel free to tweak it to your liking. I'd suggest thinking about keeping the table for added character background but if the expense is your main concern you could say the employer always pays the medical expenses or the character has insurance which covered it.

 

[Brandon C]

First, it doesn't seam realistic that characters go through their often quite dangerous career without any chance of injury.

Being injured isn't the problem -- it's the debt or lowered characteristics that are the issue.

The lost benefit occurs when you fail a survival roll and happens no matter what the mishap is and is not associated with an injury.

Correct, but with an injury it just compounds the potential financial loss.

Most injury rolls cost 10,000cr or less and some, or even all of the medical costs may be covered by the employer. You could also decide to not undergo treatment.

I doubt very, very few characters will take a lowered characteristic if they can avoid it.

I think the injury table is only used during chargen. Please provide a reference to it's use during game play.

Quote, yeah, only for character gen. My bad. Not sure why I first read the paragraph under 'Injuries' on p.37 the way I did.

What page is the Wound Table on?

p.37.

As always, it is a game and feel free to tweak it to your liking. I'd suggest thinking about keeping the table for added character background but if the expense is your main concern you could say the employer always pays the medical expenses or the character has insurance which covered it.

I'm not sure it adds any value to play.

 

[BytePro]

MgT does have a rather add 'insult to injury' in this area...

Medical debt should leave a minimum - like 1,000 Cr.

Injury Crisis (and Aging) pay 1d6x10,000 or die is rather silly as chargen doesn't provide credits till mustering-out.

Injuries (and events) could have used more balance that involved more choices - i.e. loose a limb, resulting in a lower physical stat and either a higher mental stat or monies (from disability or legal compensation).

The Cr stuff from chargen creates way too much disparity between PCs, esp. in games where the accumulation of wealth is an ingame motivator.

MgT extends CT chargen into a bit more of a simulation... they probably should have a salary (saved) during each term based on career, rank, and soc, instead of mustering out rolls like CT.

Stat benefits in muster make no sense, and the ship shares accounting is just silliness.

Overall, I found MgT has too many skills and rules which tend to encourage too much emphasis on rolling and mechanics vs roleplay, but the chargen is fun, even if it could use some improvements.

 

[CosmicGamer]

First, it doesn't seam realistic that characters go through their often quite dangerous career without any chance of injury.

Being injured isn't the problem -- it's the debt or lowered characteristics that are the issue.

I understood that was your issue and was just pointing out that totally disregarding injuries in chargen didn't appear to me to be a realistic solution.

What page is the Wound Table on?

p.37.

I have an old edition and only the Injury Table is on p. 37. You'll have to describe this Wound Table, or is it the same table just renamed in a different edition?

I doubt very, very few characters will take a lowered characteristic if they can avoid it.

Character or player?

With the many mongoose characters I've created over the years I only recall 2 that had money issues due to injury. For one, I did decide that they didn't want to go in debt. Raising funds to get medical treatment was part of the role playing once the game started. They were also very bitter toward the service which not only refused to pay for his medical care but kicked him out.

The other character used all but a few hundred credits to pay for medical care. From the start I was role playing the consequences of his finances due to injury. How he handled hand outs from the other characters since he didn't have the credits for initial equipment, willingness to take any job just to be able to afford a meal, and so on. As the group earned money I got to role play how the character dealt with having spare credits to throw around.

The Cr stuff from chargen creates way too much disparity between PCs, esp. in games where the accumulation of wealth is an ingame motivator.

I pointed out earlier that the majority of this is from the randomness of mustering out cash benefits. I believe the only way to accumulate any credits in CT and MgT is via the mustering out cash?

I'm not sure it adds any value to play.

Not to roll play mechanics but I think it does for role play.

the accumulation of wealth is an ingame motivator.

Overall, I found MgT has too many skills and rules which tend to encourage too much emphasis on rolling and mechanics vs roleplay, but the chargen is fun, even if it could use some improvements.

How injuries work in chargen to help create a background for character role play and to possibly diminish funds or even put a character into debt seams to be a plus then.

And last, were talking about a game that used to kill the character off if they failed the survival roll so, to me, any misfortune via injury in standard MgT chargen seams trivial in comparison. (MgT still has an iron man option)

 

[Ishmael]

I feel that it does enhance roll playing as well.
With each term, the player must decide whether to keep what he has, or else risk it to gain a little more. With each term, the player must weigh the possible benefits against the possible losses.

 

[Brandon C]

MgT does have a rather add 'insult to injury' in this area...

It reminds me very slightly of a table in (old) Fantasy Warhammer Roleplaying that a character had to roll on if they took a serious injury -- FWR characters tended to have to retire after a few rolls on that table ...

MgT extends CT chargen into a bit more of a simulation... they probably should have a salary (saved) during each term based on career, rank, and soc, instead of mustering out rolls like CT.

That sounds possible.

Stat benefits in muster make no sense, and the ship shares accounting is just silliness.

The increased stats (Edu and Soc anyway, Int is a bit more iffy) seem fine to me. My main issue with ship shares is how they work, not that they're on the tables.

Overall, I found MgT has too many skills and rules which tend to encourage too much emphasis on rolling and mechanics vs roleplay, but the chargen is fun, even if it could use some improvements.

MgT gives me impression that it's more tables/charts than text, compared to CT. This is probably unfair, as the CT rules I have is the starter set, where the text is in one booklet and the charts/tables in another.

 

[Brandon C]

I feel that it does enhance roll playing as well.
With each term, the player must decide whether to keep what he has, or else risk it to gain a little more. With each term, the player must weigh the possible benefits against the possible losses.

From my experience with CT, a character with less than three terms wasn't skilled enough to be worth player. I doubt a one term MgT character would be that much fun to play (although the wonky rules on learning skills* in play would favor him).

* Wonky, as compared to 'useless' for CT.

 

[Brandon C]

I understood that was your issue and was just pointing out that totally disregarding injuries in chargen didn't appear to me to be a realistic solution.

I'm not totally disregarding them, I'm just not rolling on the Injury Table. A roll of '2' on the mishap table still means you were hurt and forcd out -- I just don't randomly lower characteristics or cash.

I have an old edition and only the Injury Table is on p. 37. You'll have to describe this Wound Table, or is it the same table just renamed in a different edition?Character or player?

Sorry, if I said Wound Table I meant Injury Table.

With the many mongoose characters I've created over the years I only recall 2 that had money issues due to injury. For one, I did decide that they didn't want to go in debt. Raising funds to get medical treatment was part of the role playing once the game started. They were also very bitter toward the service which not only refused to pay for his medical care but kicked him out.

Yeah, but if I wanted that I'd be running GURPS Traveller instead of Mongoose Traveller (I picked MgT because it's still in print). I'm actually not that fond of random character creation.

Not to roll play mechanics but I think it does for role play.How injuries work in chargen to help create a background for character role play and to possibly diminish funds or even put a character into debt seams to be a plus then.

Not to me. I like characters bigger than life. Random roles that diminish characters go against that.

And last, were talking about a game that used to kill the character off if they failed the survival roll so, to me, any misfortune via injury in standard MgT chargen seams trivial in comparison. (MgT still has an iron man option)

That was the standard rule in the first printings of CT, with the optional rule of just being wounded and forced out. Later printings made wounding standard and death optional. In neither case were the effects of the career-ending wound randomly determined.

 

[BytePro]

...I pointed out earlier that the majority of this is from the randomness of mustering out cash benefits. I believe the only way to accumulate any credits in CT and MgT is via the mustering out cash?
...
How injuries work in chargen to help create a background for character role play and to possibly diminish funds or even put a character into debt seams to be a plus then. ...

I agree.

Think 'fixing' the downsides is doable by the simple 'should have a salary (saved) during each term based on career, rank, and soc, instead of mustering out rolls like CT.' and debt should not take all credits...

For the most part, I like the idea of Injury and Aging in chargen - it provides more to build 'character' around. But, the 'balance' could be tweaked. Re: credits - even in CT I never liked the over simplified random muster cash nor, for that matter, the fixed prices for items, the trade rules, nor, conversely, the count every single credit starship construction costs.

[Of course, I house rule all the things I dislike... just referring to the RAW.]

 

[DangerousThing]

Yeah, but if I wanted that I'd be running GURPS Traveller instead of Mongoose Traveller (I picked MgT because it's still in print). I'm actually not that fond of random character creation.

If you want a point based chargen system, you could look at Traveller Plus, an extension to CT. And it's free.

http://crucible.cc/traveller/tplus.htm

I'm working on my own for T5, but I think you could make T+ work for you with some changes in points to deal with MgT's increase in the number of skills.

 

[aramis]

If you want a point based chargen system, you could look at Traveller Plus, an extension to CT. And it's free.

http://crucible.cc/traveller/tplus.htm

I'm working on my own for T5, but I think you could make T+ work for you with some changes in points to deal with MgT's increase in the number of skills.

There's a point build mechanic in the MgT SRD.

 

[Brandon C]

There's a point build mechanic in the MgT SRD.

Factually correct, but some costs are a bit wonky and it feels tacked-on at the last minute. Aditionally, point-buy has no provisions for psionics and creates very average (arguably below average) characters.

 

[Brandon C]

If you want a point based chargen system, you could look at Traveller Plus, an extension to CT. And it's free.

If I were going to use different mechanics, I'd use GURPS or possibly Fudge.

 

[aramis]

Factually correct, but some costs are a bit wonky and it feels tacked-on at the last minute. Aditionally, point-buy has no provisions for psionics and creates very average (arguably below average) characters.

Psionics are just skills and an extra stat for its purposes.

 

[Brandon C]

Psionics are just skills and an extra stat for its purposes.

I could have sworn, when first reading the book, A short paragraph saying you csn't take psionics eith point but, but I haven't able to find it since.

 

[PFVA63]

Factually correct, but some costs are a bit wonky and it feels tacked-on at the last minute. Aditionally, point-buy has no provisions for psionics and creates very average (arguably below average) characters.

Hi, I think I understand what you are getting at here, but wouldn't it be a bad thing if a point buy system didn't give you average (or near average) characters.

If a point buy system allowed you to buy better than average characters it'd seem to me that there would likely then be no reason for any character to ever be average (or below average) - in comparison to the rest of the likely population., which would seem kind of flawed to me.

 

[BytePro]

If you haven't checked out Traveller Plus - highly recommended... its point buy system addresses above average Joes and it has quite a bit of psionics coverage (not my thing, but I noted it).

It predated MgT (from 2003 the earliest I found), and I'm lucky I didn't see it before Mongoose - as I like its mechanics more (overall), but would have missed a few choice morsels from MgT (successful effects). Notably, in T+, skill checks don't use stat DMs, and the stat check uses the full range of the stats. The DMs are a little more streamlined, with simpler difficulties and timing; and, the collaborative DM works better.

Ironically, I found T+ after coming up with my own rules - as they matched up quite a bit and it would have saved me some time.

Two changes I'd recommend. One being, treat unskilled as characteristic check with target of 20+. Means below average Joes won't succeed without modifiers (timing/collaboration) and normal 12 max stat is only as good as skill-0. The other, is to use some simplistic wound DMs.

 

[Brandon C]

If you haven't checked out Traveller Plus - highly recommended... its point buy system addresses above average Joes and it has quite a bit of psionics coverage (not my thing, but I noted it).

A new FLGS opened and the owner is not sure what rpgs to stock -- he has Rifts and Pathfinder out and asked for suggestions for more games.

As the only games I run are either out of print or older editions of in-print games, and I wanted to help by demo-ing a current game.

I ended up deciding to go with Traveller and the Mongoose version is the current in-print edition (T5 is not out yet and it's distribution method is uncertain, GURPS Traveller: Interstellar Wars is probably technically in print, but it's stand alone and I don't run 4e).

While I have no problem making relatively minor house rule changes, I'm not going to make sweeping ones.

 

[BytePro]

Well .. that's a goose of a different color.

I just don't see a reason to keep the table.

Because you are demo-ing the game - and dropping the table is more than just a minor 'house rule' - it would deprive folks of something that they may actually want in their games...

First, the odds are low - IIRC, one has to roll a 2 to even get to the mishaps, then only one or two entries on the mishaps link to the table - so at most less than 1% chance per term (2.78%/3). IIRC, my three players created 14 PCs that never had an injuries (so I never used my own house rules) - and I've played at least half a dozen myself that only suffered from aging.

While you may not think much of the idea of 'siphon(ing) money away from the character' - I've played with more than one player who actually enjoyed playing a broke/in-debt PC. And two who enjoyed playing 'handi-capped' PCs with a little money left.

Also, the injury during chargen had at least one co-player fielding an augmented PC - which they otherwise probably wouldn't have.

The injuries and the lack of funds/debt always got woven into the backstory - linking the party together more - and were useful in the Ref's game as well. Consider that handicaps and deformities (like burns) can lead to roleplaying of prejudice, sympathy, and fear - things both the Ref and the Player can take advantage of. Also, these PCs can have special needs - giving more for a Medic player to do.

You would be doing your testers a disservice to eliminate this aspect of MgT. I'd presume you would let them know that they can discuss anything they don't care for about chargen - so don't really see the point of removing something they may like.