The Universal Game Mechanic

[Fritz_Brown]

Originally posted by WJP:
a very easy way, that a Traveller gamer is not forced to draw that line.

Actually, you are drawing a line - its just that your line is the same place we draw the lines for precision on the stats. "My way" (not yet) is about half that precision.

Originally posted by WJP:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Since my thermometer only measures in whole degrees, it could be anywhere from 41.5 to 43.5. However, if I do the conversion, I will call it 43.

WHAT! YOU'RE KIDDIN' ME!

Screw that--use THIS thermometer instead. It will give you the correct temperature to one one-hundreth of a degree AND it's just as easy to look at as your normal themometer!

I call it: ThermoDeluxe.
</font>[/QUOTE] Heh! But I really don't need to know whether its 42.5 or 42.7 or 43 - I only need to know whether I should be wearing a jacket or not. Or, is it getting colder or warmer along my weekly commute (and my "new" car doesn't have a thermometer at all, so my granularity is down to less than FUDGE ).

I think your system is pretty good, and I did say slightly less intuitive.

THat comparison before DMs makes it seem (at first blush) as if you're rolling low. That's all.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Originally posted by WJP:
a very easy way, that a Traveller gamer is not forced to draw that line.

Actually, you are drawing a line - its just that your line is the same place we draw the lines for precision on the stats. "My way" (not yet) is about half that precision.

Originally posted by WJP:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Since my thermometer only measures in whole degrees, it could be anywhere from 41.5 to 43.5. However, if I do the conversion, I will call it 43.

WHAT! YOU'RE KIDDIN' ME!

Screw that--use THIS thermometer instead. It will give you the correct temperature to one one-hundreth of a degree AND it's just as easy to look at as your normal themometer!

I call it: ThermoDeluxe.
</font>[/QUOTE] Heh! But I really don't need to know whether its 42.5 or 42.7 or 43 - I only need to know whether I should be wearing a jacket or not. Or, is it getting colder or warmer along my weekly commute (and my "new" car doesn't have a thermometer at all, so my granularity is down to less than FUDGE ).

I think your system is pretty good, and I did say slightly less intuitive.

THat comparison before DMs makes it seem (at first blush) as if you're rolling low. That's all.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Did you get the chance to look at EABA WJP?

I just did, Sig...

Um, Sig...

Sig, my dear man, Sig...

Rock-Paper-Scissors?

I come up with a task system that is 2D +mods for 8+ --something that is so Traveller-esque that it's ridiculous--and some people still bitch.

Can you imagine what the replies would be like if I proposed a system that used Rock-Paper-Scissors for task resolution?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Did you get the chance to look at EABA WJP?

I just did, Sig...

Um, Sig...

Sig, my dear man, Sig...

Rock-Paper-Scissors?

I come up with a task system that is 2D +mods for 8+ --something that is so Traveller-esque that it's ridiculous--and some people still bitch.

Can you imagine what the replies would be like if I proposed a system that used Rock-Paper-Scissors for task resolution?

 

[mike wightman]

Oh yes, I can imagine

I like your UGM system, and, more importantly, my players for the last two sessions have liked your UGM.

Ok, so I use the benefit of years of MT experience to switch between an 8+ or a 12+ target number rather than figuring individual DMs (it is much easier to just raise the difficulty rather than figure everything out ), but they find it very easy to compare their roll to their characteristic and add DMs, and they like the way different characteristic values matter (sometimes ).

That's the skill system for CT sorted IMHO, now to find a way to make combat run more smoothly...

 

[mike wightman]

Oh yes, I can imagine

I like your UGM system, and, more importantly, my players for the last two sessions have liked your UGM.

Ok, so I use the benefit of years of MT experience to switch between an 8+ or a 12+ target number rather than figuring individual DMs (it is much easier to just raise the difficulty rather than figure everything out ), but they find it very easy to compare their roll to their characteristic and add DMs, and they like the way different characteristic values matter (sometimes ).

That's the skill system for CT sorted IMHO, now to find a way to make combat run more smoothly...

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Oh yes, I can imagine

Heck, there wouldn't be enough space on the forum's storage drive after Aramis wrote pages and pages of stuff against Rock-Paper-Scissors-Traveller!

I like your UGM system, and, more importantly, my players for the last two sessions have liked your UGM.

Sounds good.

I love feedback, good or bad.

If your players had any specifics, I'd like to hear it.

That's the skill system for CT sorted IMHO, now to find a way to make combat run more smoothly...

Thanks for that, Sig. I really appreciate it.

Just curious...what's the problem with CT combat?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Oh yes, I can imagine

Heck, there wouldn't be enough space on the forum's storage drive after Aramis wrote pages and pages of stuff against Rock-Paper-Scissors-Traveller!

I like your UGM system, and, more importantly, my players for the last two sessions have liked your UGM.

Sounds good.

I love feedback, good or bad.

If your players had any specifics, I'd like to hear it.

That's the skill system for CT sorted IMHO, now to find a way to make combat run more smoothly...

Thanks for that, Sig. I really appreciate it.

Just curious...what's the problem with CT combat?

 

[aramis]

WJP:

You looked at "EABA Anywhere", not EABA. Different mechanics.

{Shakes head disappointedly and disapprovingly}

EABA mechanics: Roll StatDice+SkillDice, keep best 3.

 

[aramis]

WJP:

You looked at "EABA Anywhere", not EABA. Different mechanics.

{Shakes head disappointedly and disapprovingly}

EABA mechanics: Roll StatDice+SkillDice, keep best 3.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
WJP:

You looked at "EABA Anywhere", not EABA. Different mechanics.

{Shakes head disappointedly and disapprovingly}

EABA mechanics: Roll StatDice+SkillDice, keep best 3.

Well, maybe I'll look at it again. I thought I'd look at the "lite" version thinking it would give me a better look into the system.

They should really get rid of that lite version of the game if it's so different from the full version. I can't be the only one who opened it up and said to himself, "A task system that uses rock-paper-scissors....yep, I'm done with this.".

I'll take another look if I can see something on the official system.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
WJP:

You looked at "EABA Anywhere", not EABA. Different mechanics.

{Shakes head disappointedly and disapprovingly}

EABA mechanics: Roll StatDice+SkillDice, keep best 3.

Well, maybe I'll look at it again. I thought I'd look at the "lite" version thinking it would give me a better look into the system.

They should really get rid of that lite version of the game if it's so different from the full version. I can't be the only one who opened it up and said to himself, "A task system that uses rock-paper-scissors....yep, I'm done with this.".

I'll take another look if I can see something on the official system.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Of course, finding the right balance is important; A max +1 is not enough, IMO, from stat, otherwise I'd not have switched to DM+Stat/3 (even though I use MT Diffs +1).

BTW, Wil, not to start re-hasing this again, but I never made a point I meant to in our discussions.

And that is that I went for a +1DM provided by Stat in UGM on purpose.

I'm firmly in the camp that skills should be heavily weighted in Traveller. Skills are precious and few (and broad) in Classic Trav, and a Skill-5 is something to brag about.

Adding too much by way of Stat to the task roll devalues Skill. (That's a huge issue with the T4/T4.1/T5 task system).

In your system, with Stat/3, you're saying that a guy with Stat-15 is as good as an ultimate professional.

Now, I know Stat-15 is the peak of human natural ability, so it should be rewarded. But to the tune of a Level-5 skill?

I can't see that.

Skill-3 is professional. Skill-5 is incredible (of course, this is the CT section of the forum, so I'm talking CT skills).

One of the best marksman you're ever likely to see in the CT world is a Skill-5 dude. I find it a problem in your system where a naturally gifted but untrained character can just pick up a weapon and shoot as well as a Skill-5 professional marksman.

One of the best doctors you're ever likely to see in a the CT world is a Medical-5 guy. I find it a problem that an EDU-15 guy can perform an operation....you get the idea.

There are a lot of examples.

To a lesser extent, I make the same argument about the DGP/MT system.

---------------------------------
---------------------------------

So, what I did in designing UGM was operate from a base of logic that says that natural ability--ANY natural ability--can give you, at most, equivalent proficiency as a Level-1 skill.

Then, to distinguish between the Attribute levels, I changed the frequency at which that bonus pops up. The higher the stat, the more likely the bonus will appear.

And, for the very high stat levels, I did venture into Skill-2 territory, but I made if a small faction of the time.

So, you see Wil, that +1DM I used with UGM has some logic thought behind it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Of course, finding the right balance is important; A max +1 is not enough, IMO, from stat, otherwise I'd not have switched to DM+Stat/3 (even though I use MT Diffs +1).

BTW, Wil, not to start re-hasing this again, but I never made a point I meant to in our discussions.

And that is that I went for a +1DM provided by Stat in UGM on purpose.

I'm firmly in the camp that skills should be heavily weighted in Traveller. Skills are precious and few (and broad) in Classic Trav, and a Skill-5 is something to brag about.

Adding too much by way of Stat to the task roll devalues Skill. (That's a huge issue with the T4/T4.1/T5 task system).

In your system, with Stat/3, you're saying that a guy with Stat-15 is as good as an ultimate professional.

Now, I know Stat-15 is the peak of human natural ability, so it should be rewarded. But to the tune of a Level-5 skill?

I can't see that.

Skill-3 is professional. Skill-5 is incredible (of course, this is the CT section of the forum, so I'm talking CT skills).

One of the best marksman you're ever likely to see in the CT world is a Skill-5 dude. I find it a problem in your system where a naturally gifted but untrained character can just pick up a weapon and shoot as well as a Skill-5 professional marksman.

One of the best doctors you're ever likely to see in a the CT world is a Medical-5 guy. I find it a problem that an EDU-15 guy can perform an operation....you get the idea.

There are a lot of examples.

To a lesser extent, I make the same argument about the DGP/MT system.

---------------------------------
---------------------------------

So, what I did in designing UGM was operate from a base of logic that says that natural ability--ANY natural ability--can give you, at most, equivalent proficiency as a Level-1 skill.

Then, to distinguish between the Attribute levels, I changed the frequency at which that bonus pops up. The higher the stat, the more likely the bonus will appear.

And, for the very high stat levels, I did venture into Skill-2 territory, but I made if a small faction of the time.

So, you see Wil, that +1DM I used with UGM has some logic thought behind it.

 

[aramis]

Having Reffed a bunch of Skill 5-7 MT characters, I find your assertions fundamentally flawed.

Having PLAYED 4 CT Characters with skills in the 6+ range, admittedly, all but one were advanced CG, again, I disagree.

I again find myself looking at your justification for the method, and finding the reasoning valid but based upon an invalid assumption.

I've known people who could shoot far better than myself on their first day, yet, I'd taken riflery as about 1/3rd of each HS school year. Likewise, I shoot better than some fourth year cadets on my fourth year. Moreso than a simple +1 would justify.

Similarly, I've known some who, on their first few hours of training with swords, develop a significiant ability; others who will never reach that ability level in 5+ years.

Further, In DGP-CT/MT, skill levels are only replaceable by attribute IF YOU ALREADY have skill.

Under stock; Fred Friday has FFFA87, Pistol 2, Investigation 2. He shoots with a total +5 on Pistol to hits (Pistol & Dex), and +4 on pistol maintenance (Pistol & Int). He shoots rifles, however, at a net -1 (+1 diff shift = -4 DM; -4 + 3 = -1). He handles book research at a net +2 (Investigation & Edu), but field clue-finding at +3 (investigation & int).

UGM lacks the balancing for a skill level unleashing raw talent. For me, it crit-fails the verisimilitude test: it can't replicate my own life experience about attributes within a reasonable degree of accuracy.

That, and the title is hyperbole... (see other thread)

 

[aramis]

Having Reffed a bunch of Skill 5-7 MT characters, I find your assertions fundamentally flawed.

Having PLAYED 4 CT Characters with skills in the 6+ range, admittedly, all but one were advanced CG, again, I disagree.

I again find myself looking at your justification for the method, and finding the reasoning valid but based upon an invalid assumption.

I've known people who could shoot far better than myself on their first day, yet, I'd taken riflery as about 1/3rd of each HS school year. Likewise, I shoot better than some fourth year cadets on my fourth year. Moreso than a simple +1 would justify.

Similarly, I've known some who, on their first few hours of training with swords, develop a significiant ability; others who will never reach that ability level in 5+ years.

Further, In DGP-CT/MT, skill levels are only replaceable by attribute IF YOU ALREADY have skill.

Under stock; Fred Friday has FFFA87, Pistol 2, Investigation 2. He shoots with a total +5 on Pistol to hits (Pistol & Dex), and +4 on pistol maintenance (Pistol & Int). He shoots rifles, however, at a net -1 (+1 diff shift = -4 DM; -4 + 3 = -1). He handles book research at a net +2 (Investigation & Edu), but field clue-finding at +3 (investigation & int).

UGM lacks the balancing for a skill level unleashing raw talent. For me, it crit-fails the verisimilitude test: it can't replicate my own life experience about attributes within a reasonable degree of accuracy.

That, and the title is hyperbole... (see other thread)

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Having Reffed a bunch of Skill 5-7 MT characters, I find your assertions fundamentally flawed.

Having PLAYED 4 CT Characters with skills in the 6+ range, admittedly, all but one were advanced CG, again, I disagree.

I've rolled up hundreds of CT characters in 20+ years of gaming. I've seen exactly one character with a Level-8 skill, and exactly two characters with a Level-7 skills (using standard CT chargen).

But, let's say I'm wrong about that.

Let's say that characters with Skill-7 happens regularly in MT and CT (we both know it doesn't).

You're still giving a non-trained Skill-0 character with a Stat-15 the equivalent of Skill-5.

That's crazy.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Having Reffed a bunch of Skill 5-7 MT characters, I find your assertions fundamentally flawed.

Having PLAYED 4 CT Characters with skills in the 6+ range, admittedly, all but one were advanced CG, again, I disagree.

I've rolled up hundreds of CT characters in 20+ years of gaming. I've seen exactly one character with a Level-8 skill, and exactly two characters with a Level-7 skills (using standard CT chargen).

But, let's say I'm wrong about that.

Let's say that characters with Skill-7 happens regularly in MT and CT (we both know it doesn't).

You're still giving a non-trained Skill-0 character with a Stat-15 the equivalent of Skill-5.

That's crazy.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
UGM lacks the balancing for a skill level unleashing raw talent.

Let's review--

(1) Your system says that having Stat-15 is the same as having trained knowledge in a skill to the tune of a whopping Skill-5.

UGM doesn't.


(2) Your system rewards a sub-par, low stat, characters (a Stat-3 character with a +1DM on all of his task rolls).

UGM doesn't.

UGM provides a +1DM for this character a measely 8% of the time, but when he does get it, it will only help him on the easiest of task rolls. Since, without the bonus, he'll make this roll 92% of the time ANYWAY, that 8% of the time he gets that +1, it's not a big help at all--the net result being that Stat-3 characters under UGM pretty much don't get a bonus. Under UGM, a Stat-3 character won't get a +1 that will help him on an Impossible roll--but that will happen under your system.


(3) Your system uses division (Stat/3).

UGM doesn't.

UGM uses only addition and subtraction.


(4) Your system produces funky breaks in benefit...

...(i.e. why does a Stat-12 character get a bonus over a Stat-11 character, yet the Stat-11 character doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-10 character. And the Stat-10 character doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-9 character. But, the Stat-9 character does get a bonus over the Stat-8 character....)

UGM provides a different benefit for each and every stat level.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
UGM lacks the balancing for a skill level unleashing raw talent.

Let's review--

(1) Your system says that having Stat-15 is the same as having trained knowledge in a skill to the tune of a whopping Skill-5.

UGM doesn't.


(2) Your system rewards a sub-par, low stat, characters (a Stat-3 character with a +1DM on all of his task rolls).

UGM doesn't.

UGM provides a +1DM for this character a measely 8% of the time, but when he does get it, it will only help him on the easiest of task rolls. Since, without the bonus, he'll make this roll 92% of the time ANYWAY, that 8% of the time he gets that +1, it's not a big help at all--the net result being that Stat-3 characters under UGM pretty much don't get a bonus. Under UGM, a Stat-3 character won't get a +1 that will help him on an Impossible roll--but that will happen under your system.


(3) Your system uses division (Stat/3).

UGM doesn't.

UGM uses only addition and subtraction.


(4) Your system produces funky breaks in benefit...

...(i.e. why does a Stat-12 character get a bonus over a Stat-11 character, yet the Stat-11 character doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-10 character. And the Stat-10 character doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-9 character. But, the Stat-9 character does get a bonus over the Stat-8 character....)

UGM provides a different benefit for each and every stat level.