Originally posted by WJP:
Dalton, again, you are wrong. The UTP was introduced in an early Traveller's Digest. It never saw print in the Journal. And, it appeared years before Challenge absorbed the Journal.
Travellers digest was a DGP production, not a GDW production and if it hit canada, it stayed in the major cities.
Also I have the UTP in a copy of the Journal - from my traveller journal reprints. When MT was being introduced and the rebellion was being shown in the TAS news entries. I can get you issue and page once I get home.
Originally posted by WJP:
What do you call the task system described on pg. 28-29 of The Traveller Adventure then?
A shorter version of this appears page 2 of Adventure 1 The Kinunir.
This is exactly the wording from adventure 1 the Kinunir
DIE-ROLLING CONVENTIONS
The same die-rolling conventions used in other books for Traveller are in force
when playing the Kinunir adventure. To briefly recapitulate:
Throw: That dice roll required to achieve a stated effect. If only the number is
stated, it must be rolled exactly; often the statement will include exactly in
parentheses. A number followed by a plus (for example, 8+) indicates that the
number or greater must be rolled, while a number followed by a minus (for
example, 3-) indicates that that number or less must be thrown.
Number of Dice: Usually, a dice throw involves two dice. Throws requiring more
dice (or fewer dice) are always clearly stated. All dice throws involve six-sided dice.
Die Roll Modifiers: Die modifiers (abbreviated DM) are always preceded by
either a plus or minus (in contrast to the statement of throws, which are followed
by the sign). Thus, the notation DM +3 indicates that 3 is added to the die roll
before it is compared to the required throw.
Generating Throws: In situations where no specific throw is stated, the referee
must usually create the throw himself. Often such a throw may be determined by
referring to the characteristics of the player-characters involved. Such
characteristics may be used either raw, or subject to DMs based on personal skills.
For example, a character may be faced with a very unusual navigational problem
hitherto unencountered. The referee can easily create the required throw to solve
the problem by using the character's intelligence (or less), thus, in effect, stating
that anyone with that level of intelligence has that probability of solving the
problem (per day, per hour, or whatever). Each level of navigation skill would then
be used as a DM of +1. Also, a requirement should be imposed that some navigation
skill is a prerequisite.
As you can see, it is NOT a universal mechanic. It is an addhoc mechanic to deal with actions not specifically dealt with in the main rules.
I do not have the Traveller Adventure with me so I can not specifically refute your posting but if you use the kinunir as an example, you must be reading a different set of rules than I am.
Originally posted by WJP:
Just because it didn't have the words "TASK SYSTEM" flashing in bright neon, these are Classic Traveller rules designed to handle (to quote from TTA) "a wide variety of circumstances and situations", and they are "efficient methods of dealing with unexpected situations."
In other words, these are rules for tasks.
Obvisoulsy, these are official CT rules. Obviously, this is CT's attempt at a task system.
Classic Traveller had a lot of rules that showed up in Adventures and other supplements (not unlike D&D and most other RPGs).
That statement alone proves my point. Traveller had different rules depending upon what you do. The combat mechanic was different from the trade and commerce mechanic, which was different from the teaching rule mechanic which was different from the diagnosis and repair mechanic. With most mechanics left to the referee's discretion.
You could not be a rule lawyer with CT because there where not many rules for alot of situations.
The use of die modifiers calculated from attributes was not a CT thing. CT stated quite clearly "IF an attribute equals X or greater, add this, otherwise add nothing". It was not "ADD 1 to the die roll for every point attribute is above X" nor was it "Add your skill to your attribute and roll under" it was always roll 8+ plus skill plus possible bonus's (see related charts) and in some rare circomstances, add 1 or 2 points due to attribute if the description calls for it.
The CT system produced VERY different result ratios from the MT system.
Originally posted by WJP:
Well, the MT task system was designed for CT. And, it was used, without being changed at all, in the official MT set.
So, if the MT task system is not inter-compatible with both CT and MT, then there are a lot of Traveller gamers out there (using the most popular Traveller task system) using an incompatible system.
I'd put my money on all of those gamers being correct and you being incorrect in your opinion that CT and MT are not inter-compatible using the MT task sytem.
Don't forget to lump the MT designers into the group that believes the MT task system is inter-compatible with CT.
Alot of people use thier DVD writers to burn backup copies of thier material.
Under canadian law, this is allowed.
Under current american law, this is not allowed.
Depending upon who you are, where you are, and what is available to you, you may use one system of the other.
I am not saying the CT is any better or worse than MT. I am just saying that the rules created and published by GDW are different than the rules created by DGP. If they where not different, DGP would not have had to create them.
I am also saying that the CT rules as published had different odds of success and failure than MT.
This is a fact. If you never played with the CT rules and only used MT rules, you would never realize this. If you came late to the CT era, you would have only used the DGP based rule set. That is fine.
Many D&D players out there think that the original D&D set was the 'BASIC D&D' set which is patently false as it was the third set of rules published for D&D and it changed alot of the fundimental rules of the game.
What you play is your choice. What system you use is your choice. I am a programmer. I have to deal with standards bodies, code standards, UML standards and the one rule is, DO NOT CALL SOMETHING BY SOME OTHER NAME. As the CT rules did not have the UTP in it, regardless of whether or not the rules where designed for CT, they are NOT the CT rules. If the traveller book was published with UTP, that would have been a different set of rules than the CT rules. The traveller book was published without the UTP mechanics, even thought the UTP system was already created for CT.
This is not a argument of which is better. It is an argument over comparing apples to oranges and selling old south orange juice as the latest champain because 'THEY ARE FUNDEMENTALLY THE SAME, AT LEAST THAT IS HOW WE DID IT' which is a spurious argument at best and an insult to yourself at worst.
This comes down to an old post aramis made on one of these threads (he is much more elegant in his writing than I am) comparing the different systems and he fully recognized the fundemental differences between them.
Look for it, it is a good read. (But it may be in the private playtest area)
best regards
Dalton
