The Universal Game Mechanic

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
WJP, I'll read the thread more closely but if not there would you be willing to throw up some statistical numbers comparing CTI and UGM.

I don't have to throw up a bunch of stats to show you where UGM fails--I can do it with one set of figures.

If you're a rare case and got Skill-6 (rare, but it does happen occassionally).

Your chance of success using UGM is--

100% Very Easy
100% Easy
100% Average
100% Difficult
92% Formidable
72% Staggering
42% Impossible

I know Skill-6 is damn good and all, but sheeeesssshhhhh, the dude's not even challenged until the task is Impossible, and even then he's almost got a 50/50 chance of pulling it off.

What this would translate into a game is, "Oh, you've got Skill-6? Shit, don't even roll. You made it."

Skill-5 isn't that much better.

Trust me--CTI is the way you want to go. Those numbers drop off nicely once at the higher difficulty categories AND a character's stat is easily (simple game mechanic) influences the roll.

Stats mean something (vs nothing in official CT). Skills mean something. And CT-ish rolls (of, say 8+, in combat) are performed easily.

If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
WJP, I'll read the thread more closely but if not there would you be willing to throw up some statistical numbers comparing CTI and UGM.

I don't have to throw up a bunch of stats to show you where UGM fails--I can do it with one set of figures.

If you're a rare case and got Skill-6 (rare, but it does happen occassionally).

Your chance of success using UGM is--

100% Very Easy
100% Easy
100% Average
100% Difficult
92% Formidable
72% Staggering
42% Impossible

I know Skill-6 is damn good and all, but sheeeesssshhhhh, the dude's not even challenged until the task is Impossible, and even then he's almost got a 50/50 chance of pulling it off.

What this would translate into a game is, "Oh, you've got Skill-6? Shit, don't even roll. You made it."

Skill-5 isn't that much better.

Trust me--CTI is the way you want to go. Those numbers drop off nicely once at the higher difficulty categories AND a character's stat is easily (simple game mechanic) influences the roll.

Stats mean something (vs nothing in official CT). Skills mean something. And CT-ish rolls (of, say 8+, in combat) are performed easily.

If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

 

[aramis]

If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

I still prefer MT, sorry... CTI just doesn't hold a candle to my beloved MT..

 

[aramis]

If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

I still prefer MT, sorry... CTI just doesn't hold a candle to my beloved MT..

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

I still prefer MT, sorry...</font>[/QUOTE]As always, you gotta pick what's best for your game.

And, I agree, the MT task system is a brilliant piece of work. I wouldn't even try to fix it if it held more distinction between stats.

Now, I know you use a Stat/3 MT tweak, but still...CTI provides distinction between every stat. There's a difference between INT-6 and INT-5 and INT-4, whereas your MT tweak doesn't provide that distinction.

If that's not important to you--well, it's just not important to you.

Me, I'd rather my INT-6 guys be just a little bit better than my INT-4 guys.

Or, may STR-12 guys be just a little bit better than my STR-10 guys.

Which is why I'm using CTI.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If you want a good task system for Classic Trav, CTI is what you want.

I still prefer MT, sorry...</font>[/QUOTE]As always, you gotta pick what's best for your game.

And, I agree, the MT task system is a brilliant piece of work. I wouldn't even try to fix it if it held more distinction between stats.

Now, I know you use a Stat/3 MT tweak, but still...CTI provides distinction between every stat. There's a difference between INT-6 and INT-5 and INT-4, whereas your MT tweak doesn't provide that distinction.

If that's not important to you--well, it's just not important to you.

Me, I'd rather my INT-6 guys be just a little bit better than my INT-4 guys.

Or, may STR-12 guys be just a little bit better than my STR-10 guys.

Which is why I'm using CTI.

 

[Gruffty]

Originally posted by WJP:
(An example of the UGM)
Piter has INT-7 Electronics-2, and he's trying to figure a reroute of power for the damaged M-Drive. The GM has determined this to be an Average task.

To succeed on this task, Piter must roll 8+ on 2D.

Procedure--
1. Player rolls 2D.
2. If the 2D roll results in a 7-, a +1DM is used.
3. +2DM for Average difficulty is added. +2DM for Skill is added.
4. Task succeeds if total is 8+.

WJP: where did the +1 DM come from in step 2? I understand the rest of the system, but the +1 DM has me confused.

<EDIT> Found the answer in the text of the UGM.

 

[Gruffty]

Originally posted by WJP:
(An example of the UGM)
Piter has INT-7 Electronics-2, and he's trying to figure a reroute of power for the damaged M-Drive. The GM has determined this to be an Average task.

To succeed on this task, Piter must roll 8+ on 2D.

Procedure--
1. Player rolls 2D.
2. If the 2D roll results in a 7-, a +1DM is used.
3. +2DM for Average difficulty is added. +2DM for Skill is added.
4. Task succeeds if total is 8+.

WJP: where did the +1 DM come from in step 2? I understand the rest of the system, but the +1 DM has me confused.

<EDIT> Found the answer in the text of the UGM.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Gruffty:
Found the answer in the text of the UGM.

Hey, Gruff,

I admit, the UGM is an appealing idea. But, it just doesn't work well. Highly skilled characters are gods using this system.

It would be nice to figure a way to make the thing work--be worthwhile. But, I'm at a loss. A system's got to produce good probability numbers, and UGM just doesn't do that.

Try CTI instead. That's a good system.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Gruffty:
Found the answer in the text of the UGM.

Hey, Gruff,

I admit, the UGM is an appealing idea. But, it just doesn't work well. Highly skilled characters are gods using this system.

It would be nice to figure a way to make the thing work--be worthwhile. But, I'm at a loss. A system's got to produce good probability numbers, and UGM just doesn't do that.

Try CTI instead. That's a good system.

 

[Berg]

Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

 

[Berg]

Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Berg:
Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

I have tried moving the numbers around. The problem is that if you make it where the highly skilled characters are challenged, then the not-so skilled characters (most skills in CT) are severely handicapped.

It's the high skill levels.

I wanted to keep either Average or Difficult at 8+, because that's a damn good fit with Classic Trav.

I want the base to be 2D +mods for 8+.

Difficulties would either be a positive or negative mod (as you already know).

I could look into making less difficulty levels, and making them bigger jumps.

I looked some at this, but then I looked at CTI, and it's already got everything we're trying to achieve with UGM.

CTI is just a better system--so I kinda gave up work on UGM.

But, one thought is to go with bigger, steeper difficulty levels. Something like...

+4DM Easy or Average or something like that, depending on DMs from stat.
+0DM Difficult or Average
-4DM Hard/Formidable/Staggering
-8DM Impossible.

I looked at this before a bit--it didn't turn me on.

I also looked at doing something like this...

+6DM
+3DM
+0DM
-3DM
-6DM

Maybe I'll play around with it some more.

The thing is, I started wondering why I was trying to make this work when CTI works so good already--CTI already accomplishes what I want to achieve with UGM.

The only thing I like better about UGM is the "presentation" of 2D +mods for 8+ on every task.

I really, really like that idea. It's very Classic Trav.

But, let's say I got it to work OK, not great, but OK. Yet, CTI works great.

Do I really want a system that is inferior to another just because I like the way is "feels" better?

I mean, CTI feels pretty good. UGM, admittedly, feels "better--more like Classic Trav". But, CTI is no slouch in this area either--CTI is 2D, read 'em, for a target number or better.

Heck, if I was OK with an inferior system, then I'd be one of these guys sticking with MT or some version of it just because it "feels good". I mean, the MT system is a pretty good system, but it definitley has it's short commings--and so many people stick with it just because it's what they know and are comfortable with--never giving a better idea a try.

I'll play around some more with UGM, though, and see if I can brainstorm a different idea.

Even if I get the difficulties to work out OK, though, there's still the problem of what to do with the stats.

CTI references the stats brilliantly. UGM...not so much.

I'll look at it though.

(This post is kinda rambling, but I'm writing stream-of-consciousness and I'm ready for bed.)

I'll get back with you on what I find.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Berg:
Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

I have tried moving the numbers around. The problem is that if you make it where the highly skilled characters are challenged, then the not-so skilled characters (most skills in CT) are severely handicapped.

It's the high skill levels.

I wanted to keep either Average or Difficult at 8+, because that's a damn good fit with Classic Trav.

I want the base to be 2D +mods for 8+.

Difficulties would either be a positive or negative mod (as you already know).

I could look into making less difficulty levels, and making them bigger jumps.

I looked some at this, but then I looked at CTI, and it's already got everything we're trying to achieve with UGM.

CTI is just a better system--so I kinda gave up work on UGM.

But, one thought is to go with bigger, steeper difficulty levels. Something like...

+4DM Easy or Average or something like that, depending on DMs from stat.
+0DM Difficult or Average
-4DM Hard/Formidable/Staggering
-8DM Impossible.

I looked at this before a bit--it didn't turn me on.

I also looked at doing something like this...

+6DM
+3DM
+0DM
-3DM
-6DM

Maybe I'll play around with it some more.

The thing is, I started wondering why I was trying to make this work when CTI works so good already--CTI already accomplishes what I want to achieve with UGM.

The only thing I like better about UGM is the "presentation" of 2D +mods for 8+ on every task.

I really, really like that idea. It's very Classic Trav.

But, let's say I got it to work OK, not great, but OK. Yet, CTI works great.

Do I really want a system that is inferior to another just because I like the way is "feels" better?

I mean, CTI feels pretty good. UGM, admittedly, feels "better--more like Classic Trav". But, CTI is no slouch in this area either--CTI is 2D, read 'em, for a target number or better.

Heck, if I was OK with an inferior system, then I'd be one of these guys sticking with MT or some version of it just because it "feels good". I mean, the MT system is a pretty good system, but it definitley has it's short commings--and so many people stick with it just because it's what they know and are comfortable with--never giving a better idea a try.

I'll play around some more with UGM, though, and see if I can brainstorm a different idea.

Even if I get the difficulties to work out OK, though, there's still the problem of what to do with the stats.

CTI references the stats brilliantly. UGM...not so much.

I'll look at it though.

(This post is kinda rambling, but I'm writing stream-of-consciousness and I'm ready for bed.)

I'll get back with you on what I find.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Berg:
Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

BTW, if you've got any ideas on how to make UGM work better, then hit me with 'em. Let's discuss it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Berg:
Have you tried changing the DM's for the difficulty levels or other tweaks?
Just a thought...
I do like CTI, and UGM looks good...

BTW, if you've got any ideas on how to make UGM work better, then hit me with 'em. Let's discuss it.

 

[Pickles]

This may be completely off, as I haven't looked at CTI or UGM in detail, but what about introducing a 'cap' on skill levels at, say, 5? This seems to work in percentile systems (100%+ is very rare in BRP).

Just a thought (and probably not enough of one).

 

[Pickles]

This may be completely off, as I haven't looked at CTI or UGM in detail, but what about introducing a 'cap' on skill levels at, say, 5? This seems to work in percentile systems (100%+ is very rare in BRP).

Just a thought (and probably not enough of one).

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by WJP:
.

Now, I know you use a Stat/3 MT tweak, but still...CTI provides distinction between every stat. There's a difference between INT-6 and INT-5 and INT-4, whereas your MT tweak doesn't provide that distinction.

If that's not important to you--well, it's just not important to you.

I hate it when people unintentionally lie lie a cheap rug.

Which you did. I don't think you realized it.

There is a differentiation bewtween stats in MT, just not in tasks.

STR is a direct measure of carrying capacity. A 5 is quantifiably better than a 4.

End is hours of function before penalties.

Int and Edu both contribute to skill limit 1:1.

Soc is directly measurable in terms of life costs...

STR, DEX, and CON further still (under MT) are used to soak damage. MT merely delays that step until the character is down. (Just cause your hits stat is zeroed doesn't mean you are dead, but dead is more likely than not.) The method is, aside from the delay, the same process as CT. It neatly replicates the effects of adrenaline and shock.

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by WJP:
.

Now, I know you use a Stat/3 MT tweak, but still...CTI provides distinction between every stat. There's a difference between INT-6 and INT-5 and INT-4, whereas your MT tweak doesn't provide that distinction.

If that's not important to you--well, it's just not important to you.

I hate it when people unintentionally lie lie a cheap rug.

Which you did. I don't think you realized it.

There is a differentiation bewtween stats in MT, just not in tasks.

STR is a direct measure of carrying capacity. A 5 is quantifiably better than a 4.

End is hours of function before penalties.

Int and Edu both contribute to skill limit 1:1.

Soc is directly measurable in terms of life costs...

STR, DEX, and CON further still (under MT) are used to soak damage. MT merely delays that step until the character is down. (Just cause your hits stat is zeroed doesn't mean you are dead, but dead is more likely than not.) The method is, aside from the delay, the same process as CT. It neatly replicates the effects of adrenaline and shock.