The Universal Game Mechanic

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:

(snipety a long, multi-post, back-and-forth discussion between me and Aramis.)

Alright, Will. Brass tacks time. No more diatribe by either of us.

I'm going to ask you a point-blank question.

The characters find a pyramid structure in the unexplored region of some forgotten planet. As they explore it, two character walk into an ancient stone room. One inadverntantly steps on the wrong stone. All of a sudden, the portal behind them slams shut, and the walls begin to move together, Star-Wars-Trash-Compactor-style.

As the two of them turn back to the way they came in, they notice an ancient looking gizmo lights up in the wall--it's probably the interface for an alien computer.

(I'd probably role play this situation in my game, but this is a task example I'm writing.) The GM decides that, to figure out how to use the computer interface and open the door, it's a Routine Computer task governed by INT.

Both characters have Computer-2, but one of the characters is INT-3 and the other is INT-5.

Now, intelligence measures a character's IQ. It represents his logic, reasoning, and problem solving ability.

Time is short. There's only enough time before the walls collide, giving each character 36 D6 damage, for one of the characters to attempt to open the door.

Which character should it be that attempts the task?

In your game, it doesn't matter.

Here's my point-blank question: Doesn't it make sense that the guy with INT-5, Computer-2 have just a teeny-weeny bit of a better opportunity to open the door?

Doesn't it make sense that he should (having almost twice the IQ) have some type of benefit, no matter how small, when he attempts the task over the dude with INT-3, Computer-2?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:

(snipety a long, multi-post, back-and-forth discussion between me and Aramis.)

Alright, Will. Brass tacks time. No more diatribe by either of us.

I'm going to ask you a point-blank question.

The characters find a pyramid structure in the unexplored region of some forgotten planet. As they explore it, two character walk into an ancient stone room. One inadverntantly steps on the wrong stone. All of a sudden, the portal behind them slams shut, and the walls begin to move together, Star-Wars-Trash-Compactor-style.

As the two of them turn back to the way they came in, they notice an ancient looking gizmo lights up in the wall--it's probably the interface for an alien computer.

(I'd probably role play this situation in my game, but this is a task example I'm writing.) The GM decides that, to figure out how to use the computer interface and open the door, it's a Routine Computer task governed by INT.

Both characters have Computer-2, but one of the characters is INT-3 and the other is INT-5.

Now, intelligence measures a character's IQ. It represents his logic, reasoning, and problem solving ability.

Time is short. There's only enough time before the walls collide, giving each character 36 D6 damage, for one of the characters to attempt to open the door.

Which character should it be that attempts the task?

In your game, it doesn't matter.

Here's my point-blank question: Doesn't it make sense that the guy with INT-5, Computer-2 have just a teeny-weeny bit of a better opportunity to open the door?

Doesn't it make sense that he should (having almost twice the IQ) have some type of benefit, no matter how small, when he attempts the task over the dude with INT-3, Computer-2?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
Personally, I prefer a 2:1 skill:attribute ratio. I like the idea that skill outweighs raw power (muscle or brain).

I'm completely on-board with skills outweighing natural ability. Completely.

That is one of my gripes about the T4/T4.1/T5 game system--skills are undervalued in the task system (although the IHTIT rule goes a long way in equalizing them.).

If you are talking a pure attribute-based task (as many of your examples are), then I would make the roll directly against the attribute.

I've purposefully tried to keep skill out of my examples--keeping everything else even (skill, difficulty, modifiers), I'm looking at the difference between two characters with different stats.

In my examples, it doesn't matter if they have Skill-0 or Skill-6, as long as both characters have the same.

I've defaulted to Skill-0 in my examples, but above, in my reply to Aramis, I used an example where both characters have Skill-2 (and I did that just for you, Fritz!).

If you make the roll against the attributes, then every attribute level matters.

Fritz, I'll pose to you the same direct question I asked Aramis above.

Look at that example.

Does it make sense that the INT-5, Computer-2 guy has the exact same chance of success as the the INT-3, Computer-2 guy?

Does not, all other factors being equal, his near-twice IQ net him any benefit over his lower IQ compatriot?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
Personally, I prefer a 2:1 skill:attribute ratio. I like the idea that skill outweighs raw power (muscle or brain).

I'm completely on-board with skills outweighing natural ability. Completely.

That is one of my gripes about the T4/T4.1/T5 game system--skills are undervalued in the task system (although the IHTIT rule goes a long way in equalizing them.).

If you are talking a pure attribute-based task (as many of your examples are), then I would make the roll directly against the attribute.

I've purposefully tried to keep skill out of my examples--keeping everything else even (skill, difficulty, modifiers), I'm looking at the difference between two characters with different stats.

In my examples, it doesn't matter if they have Skill-0 or Skill-6, as long as both characters have the same.

I've defaulted to Skill-0 in my examples, but above, in my reply to Aramis, I used an example where both characters have Skill-2 (and I did that just for you, Fritz!).

If you make the roll against the attributes, then every attribute level matters.

Fritz, I'll pose to you the same direct question I asked Aramis above.

Look at that example.

Does it make sense that the INT-5, Computer-2 guy has the exact same chance of success as the the INT-3, Computer-2 guy?

Does not, all other factors being equal, his near-twice IQ net him any benefit over his lower IQ compatriot?

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Well, WJP, I think there isn't quite the difference between them that you do - they're both on the slow side. Given their Computer-2 skills, I'd have to say they both work for Microsoft and code OS's in Visual Basic - they are both doomed to become smears. Unless they get really lucky with their rolls (except you made this the pyramid of the Sesame Street people and their are nice pictures with Elmo and Oscar showing how to open the door).

Ok. Now that I've got that out of my system.... I actually don't see much difference between the Int-3 and Int-5 characters. They both have sub-par Int, but have worked really hard to overcome that with a lot of book-learning. I will say that in this case (assuming they are unfamiliar with the particular alien race here) I would have their Int play a larger role - because of the amount of in/deduction involved. However, that would be an on-the-spot kind of thing.

Let's take Johnson: Int-6, Educ-7, Computer-2, Intrusion-1. He needs to hack a database to pull out lifesaving medical information the megacorp has hidden to save his buddy.

Or, he can leave it to his teammate Lars: Int-7, Educ-7, Computer-2, Intrusion-1.

Your system makes a distinction between the two (and that's fine by me), or Aramis' system makes no distinction. This is (I think) the main reason anybody is "arguing against" your system - most don't think this scenario needs a distinction between the two. Again, I'm not complaining, just pointing out the reasoning. (And, of course, I could be wrong, too.

)

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Well, WJP, I think there isn't quite the difference between them that you do - they're both on the slow side. Given their Computer-2 skills, I'd have to say they both work for Microsoft and code OS's in Visual Basic - they are both doomed to become smears. Unless they get really lucky with their rolls (except you made this the pyramid of the Sesame Street people and their are nice pictures with Elmo and Oscar showing how to open the door).

Ok. Now that I've got that out of my system.... I actually don't see much difference between the Int-3 and Int-5 characters. They both have sub-par Int, but have worked really hard to overcome that with a lot of book-learning. I will say that in this case (assuming they are unfamiliar with the particular alien race here) I would have their Int play a larger role - because of the amount of in/deduction involved. However, that would be an on-the-spot kind of thing.

Let's take Johnson: Int-6, Educ-7, Computer-2, Intrusion-1. He needs to hack a database to pull out lifesaving medical information the megacorp has hidden to save his buddy.

Or, he can leave it to his teammate Lars: Int-7, Educ-7, Computer-2, Intrusion-1.

Your system makes a distinction between the two (and that's fine by me), or Aramis' system makes no distinction. This is (I think) the main reason anybody is "arguing against" your system - most don't think this scenario needs a distinction between the two. Again, I'm not complaining, just pointing out the reasoning. (And, of course, I could be wrong, too.

)

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
Well, WJP, I think there isn't quite the difference between them that you do - they're both on the slow side.

(snip, snip, zoom, zoom)

I actually don't see much difference between the Int-3 and Int-5 characters.

No difference between INT-3 and INT-5 guys, huh?

OK, what about INT-3 and INT-2. Is there a difference there? Your answer above would steer me in the direction that you don't really see a difference between an INT-2 and INT-3 characters--they're both slow.

Yet...

Aramis' mechanics sure says there IS a difference between those to INT scores..

So, there IS a difference between INT-2 and INT-3...

...but there's NOT a difference between INT-3 and INT-5.

But, there IS a difference between INT-5 and INT-6...

...but there's NOT a difference between INT-6 and INT-8...

You're telling me that makes sense to you, Fritz?

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
Well, WJP, I think there isn't quite the difference between them that you do - they're both on the slow side.

(snip, snip, zoom, zoom)

I actually don't see much difference between the Int-3 and Int-5 characters.

No difference between INT-3 and INT-5 guys, huh?

OK, what about INT-3 and INT-2. Is there a difference there? Your answer above would steer me in the direction that you don't really see a difference between an INT-2 and INT-3 characters--they're both slow.

Yet...

Aramis' mechanics sure says there IS a difference between those to INT scores..

So, there IS a difference between INT-2 and INT-3...

...but there's NOT a difference between INT-3 and INT-5.

But, there IS a difference between INT-5 and INT-6...

...but there's NOT a difference between INT-6 and INT-8...

You're telling me that makes sense to you, Fritz?

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I'm saying there comes a spot where you draw the line. When dealing with most tasks, I don't think that line is as fine as you do. The difference between a lightweight and a middleweight punching you in the head isn't that great (trust me, I know this first hand ), though there is a difference. Its a matter of scale where skills are concerned - I think it ought to be a 2:1 ratio (skill:att) with less than "average" getting a penalty rather than a lesser bonus.

As far as att=2/att=3 v att=3/att=5, that is an artifact of a discrete measurement system. Just like converting F to C - 6C translates to 42.8F, or does it. 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.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just pointing out that some folks are comparing the systems against a broader line than you are aiming for. Your system paints a nice fine line for every attribute level. The trade-off is a slightly less intuitive system v added granularity. YMMV, IYTU, and all that.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I'm saying there comes a spot where you draw the line. When dealing with most tasks, I don't think that line is as fine as you do. The difference between a lightweight and a middleweight punching you in the head isn't that great (trust me, I know this first hand ), though there is a difference. Its a matter of scale where skills are concerned - I think it ought to be a 2:1 ratio (skill:att) with less than "average" getting a penalty rather than a lesser bonus.

As far as att=2/att=3 v att=3/att=5, that is an artifact of a discrete measurement system. Just like converting F to C - 6C translates to 42.8F, or does it. 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.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just pointing out that some folks are comparing the systems against a broader line than you are aiming for. Your system paints a nice fine line for every attribute level. The trade-off is a slightly less intuitive system v added granularity. YMMV, IYTU, and all that.

 

[aramis]

WJP: It only matters which if either or both are:
1) Fatigued
2) Injured
3) Otherwise impaired
4) Played by a Player whose rolls are skewed from standard (either by dice, fate, or psionics*)

It is an artifact of quantization of attribute.

It isn't an important difference, and it's an obscure and extraordinary situation. The difference is that, unlike you, I don't find the difference worth obsessing about; they're both slow.

The difference is that, if fatigued, the Int 5 guy still has a better chance.

Of course, there is a solution... grant the second plus on the roll of another die, but that's exactly the kind of thing I DISLIKE about UGM.

Quantization is useful in modeling. It's an acceptable level of loss, especially at att/3.

MOST games now use either 1-5 stats or 3-18 stats. A rare few use 2-12 (Including Traveller, but it allows for raises and losses, which many games do not).

Open: D6 was out of print for less than 2 years. WEG released the D6 generic core (a construction set, really) while SW-D6 was still in print and under license. It went out of print only briefly, during the buyout, and was the FIRST product rereleased. They then revised it, dropping many of the construction kit bits, into the three cores now in print.

Adds vs Subtracts: It shouldn't be, but do to the artificiality of the math teaching process, Subtraction is slower for most people than addition. Sad facts of life. (Heck, it's even reflected in the math goal guidelines for special education teachers in the Anchorage School District.) A 0based add is mathematically identical to and X based mod, where X is an offset to both TN and modifier of identical magnitude. It also puts attribute effects directly comparable to skills.

as a side comment, if both subjects in WJP's hypothetical were competing, I'd give a tie of 0 or 1 point above TN to the guy with the better stat...
--------------------------------------------
*since the only real world psionic effect with replicated results is slewing of the distribution of random number generators, and said deflection is 1σ; this means a significant effect... if one player is hot, it's probably a psionic effect or a dice effect. In WWG's engines, the range of human possibility is 1-5 centered on 2; so we're talking a pair of 1's...

 

[aramis]

WJP: It only matters which if either or both are:
1) Fatigued
2) Injured
3) Otherwise impaired
4) Played by a Player whose rolls are skewed from standard (either by dice, fate, or psionics*)

It is an artifact of quantization of attribute.

It isn't an important difference, and it's an obscure and extraordinary situation. The difference is that, unlike you, I don't find the difference worth obsessing about; they're both slow.

The difference is that, if fatigued, the Int 5 guy still has a better chance.

Of course, there is a solution... grant the second plus on the roll of another die, but that's exactly the kind of thing I DISLIKE about UGM.

Quantization is useful in modeling. It's an acceptable level of loss, especially at att/3.

MOST games now use either 1-5 stats or 3-18 stats. A rare few use 2-12 (Including Traveller, but it allows for raises and losses, which many games do not).

Open: D6 was out of print for less than 2 years. WEG released the D6 generic core (a construction set, really) while SW-D6 was still in print and under license. It went out of print only briefly, during the buyout, and was the FIRST product rereleased. They then revised it, dropping many of the construction kit bits, into the three cores now in print.

Adds vs Subtracts: It shouldn't be, but do to the artificiality of the math teaching process, Subtraction is slower for most people than addition. Sad facts of life. (Heck, it's even reflected in the math goal guidelines for special education teachers in the Anchorage School District.) A 0based add is mathematically identical to and X based mod, where X is an offset to both TN and modifier of identical magnitude. It also puts attribute effects directly comparable to skills.

as a side comment, if both subjects in WJP's hypothetical were competing, I'd give a tie of 0 or 1 point above TN to the guy with the better stat...
--------------------------------------------
*since the only real world psionic effect with replicated results is slewing of the distribution of random number generators, and said deflection is 1σ; this means a significant effect... if one player is hot, it's probably a psionic effect or a dice effect. In WWG's engines, the range of human possibility is 1-5 centered on 2; so we're talking a pair of 1's...

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
I'm saying there comes a spot where you draw the line.

Of course, but the whole point of this thread is that there is a way, a very easy way, that a Traveller gamer is not forced to draw that line.

Why draw it if you don't have to?

There's CTI or UGM. Both are easily used, and both don't require the line to be drawn.

So, why draw the line when there's something like UGM out there that is just as easy to use and Traveller intuitive as the MT system (I'd argue that it's even easier to use than MT because UGM doesn't require division) yet doesn't require that line to be drawn?


It's just what people are used to, I guess.

This is the old Beta tape vs. VHS tape thing again.

Its a matter of scale where skills are concerned - I think it ought to be a 2:1 ratio (skill:att) with less than "average" getting a penalty rather than a lesser bonus.

You and I see eye-to-eye on most things. If we don't, then I've certainly be able to nod my head towards your side of the discussion.

If stats had to be divided by anything, I'd be willing to accept a division by 2 over anything else I've seen (except a system--not necessarily CTI or UGM, could be another good system out there somewhere--that provides benefit from every stat).

And, I'm with you on those below average stats getting a penalty.

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.

(Hey, if one can't make light of himself, you shouldn't be tossing your ideas back and forth, heh?)

The trade-off is a slightly less intuitive system v added granularity.

I can see that applying to CTI. CTI is easy for me, and I like it a lot. But, it's not for everybody--too far away from typical 2D plus mods for a target number or higher (even though CTI is exactly 2D plus mods for a target number or higher--it's just that the 2D roll in CTI is "read" whereas a typical 2D throw is just a 2D throw.).

But..

C'mon. UGM? It's a friggin' 2D throw plus mods for 8+. You gotta compare your throw to your stat, exactly the way you do when you make a typical Classic Trav stat check (Stat or less on 2D).

There's no division like MT.

I mean, can you get more Classic Traveller intuitive than UGM?

It's 2D plus mods for 8+ for gawds sakes!

2D plus mods for 8+...AND you get the distinction for every stat level so you don't have to draw that line mentioned above.

It just seems like such a no-brainer to me.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
I'm saying there comes a spot where you draw the line.

Of course, but the whole point of this thread is that there is a way, a very easy way, that a Traveller gamer is not forced to draw that line.

Why draw it if you don't have to?

There's CTI or UGM. Both are easily used, and both don't require the line to be drawn.

So, why draw the line when there's something like UGM out there that is just as easy to use and Traveller intuitive as the MT system (I'd argue that it's even easier to use than MT because UGM doesn't require division) yet doesn't require that line to be drawn?


It's just what people are used to, I guess.

This is the old Beta tape vs. VHS tape thing again.

Its a matter of scale where skills are concerned - I think it ought to be a 2:1 ratio (skill:att) with less than "average" getting a penalty rather than a lesser bonus.

You and I see eye-to-eye on most things. If we don't, then I've certainly be able to nod my head towards your side of the discussion.

If stats had to be divided by anything, I'd be willing to accept a division by 2 over anything else I've seen (except a system--not necessarily CTI or UGM, could be another good system out there somewhere--that provides benefit from every stat).

And, I'm with you on those below average stats getting a penalty.

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.

(Hey, if one can't make light of himself, you shouldn't be tossing your ideas back and forth, heh?)

The trade-off is a slightly less intuitive system v added granularity.

I can see that applying to CTI. CTI is easy for me, and I like it a lot. But, it's not for everybody--too far away from typical 2D plus mods for a target number or higher (even though CTI is exactly 2D plus mods for a target number or higher--it's just that the 2D roll in CTI is "read" whereas a typical 2D throw is just a 2D throw.).

But..

C'mon. UGM? It's a friggin' 2D throw plus mods for 8+. You gotta compare your throw to your stat, exactly the way you do when you make a typical Classic Trav stat check (Stat or less on 2D).

There's no division like MT.

I mean, can you get more Classic Traveller intuitive than UGM?

It's 2D plus mods for 8+ for gawds sakes!

2D plus mods for 8+...AND you get the distinction for every stat level so you don't have to draw that line mentioned above.

It just seems like such a no-brainer to me.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
WJP: It only matters which if either or both are:
1) Fatigued
2) Injured
3) Otherwise impaired
4) Played by a Player whose rolls are skewed from standard (either by dice, fate, or psionics*)

Wil, you evaded my question with all that verbage.

You did say...

It isn't an important difference, and it's an obscure and extraordinary situation. The difference is that, unlike you, I don't find the difference worth obsessing about; they're both slow.

But, you know doggone well that I could just give you another example where they both weren't slow. I could use a Stat-12 and a Stat-11 character, wondering why one of these gets a bonus and the other doesn't, while the Stat-11 guy doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-10 or Stat-9 guy.

Look, we're not going to get anywhere with this.

I conceed the field.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
WJP: It only matters which if either or both are:
1) Fatigued
2) Injured
3) Otherwise impaired
4) Played by a Player whose rolls are skewed from standard (either by dice, fate, or psionics*)

Wil, you evaded my question with all that verbage.

You did say...

It isn't an important difference, and it's an obscure and extraordinary situation. The difference is that, unlike you, I don't find the difference worth obsessing about; they're both slow.

But, you know doggone well that I could just give you another example where they both weren't slow. I could use a Stat-12 and a Stat-11 character, wondering why one of these gets a bonus and the other doesn't, while the Stat-11 guy doesn't get a bonus over the Stat-10 or Stat-9 guy.

Look, we're not going to get anywhere with this.

I conceed the field.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Of course, there is a solution... grant the second plus on the roll of another die, but that's exactly the kind of thing I DISLIKE about UGM.

BTW, you do know that UGM uses only one dice roll, right?

It's not two dice rolls.


Stat-7, Skill-2 guy makes a UGM Routine task.

That's 2D +2 +2 for 8+.

All possible results for this character's task--

2D
2 +4 +1 = 7 (task fails)
3 +4 +1 = 8 (task succeeds)
4 +4 +1 = 9 (task succeeds)
5 +4 +1 = 10 (task succeeds)
6 +4 +1 = 11 (task succeeds)
7 +4 +1 = 12 (task succeeds)
8 +4 = 12 (task succeeds)
9 +4 = 13 (task succeeds)
10 +4 = 14 (task succeeds)
11 +4 = 15 (task succeeds)
12 +4 = 16 (task succeeds)


It's not clear from your statement, but it almost looks like you think UGM requires a second dice roll for the natural ability DM.

It's just one dice roll--one task roll--with a possible extra plus one after the dice are thrown.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Of course, there is a solution... grant the second plus on the roll of another die, but that's exactly the kind of thing I DISLIKE about UGM.

BTW, you do know that UGM uses only one dice roll, right?

It's not two dice rolls.


Stat-7, Skill-2 guy makes a UGM Routine task.

That's 2D +2 +2 for 8+.

All possible results for this character's task--

2D
2 +4 +1 = 7 (task fails)
3 +4 +1 = 8 (task succeeds)
4 +4 +1 = 9 (task succeeds)
5 +4 +1 = 10 (task succeeds)
6 +4 +1 = 11 (task succeeds)
7 +4 +1 = 12 (task succeeds)
8 +4 = 12 (task succeeds)
9 +4 = 13 (task succeeds)
10 +4 = 14 (task succeeds)
11 +4 = 15 (task succeeds)
12 +4 = 16 (task succeeds)


It's not clear from your statement, but it almost looks like you think UGM requires a second dice roll for the natural ability DM.

It's just one dice roll--one task roll--with a possible extra plus one after the dice are thrown.

 

[mike wightman]

Did you get the chance to look at EABA WJP?

 

[mike wightman]

Did you get the chance to look at EABA WJP?