CT Only: Throws

[Supplement Four]

In Classic Traveller, a "task" or "check" is usually referred to as a throw (page 16, TTB). This thread is dedicated to describing the types of throws you use in your game.

The idea here is to produce a thread for new CT Refs to peruse and get a handle on quickly and fairly creating throws for their CT games on the spot.

I'll begin. But, add your own to the thread!



18+, add ENTIRE STAT

This throw described on page 43 of TTB for a character actually throwing a dagger, blade, or bayonet at a target.

Your target number: 18

Modifiers: + full DEX; + Skill; - Target Evasion*

*And, it is probably a good idea to throw in any target armor mod, even though the book doesn't say to do that.

This throw is a good one to use when the task at hand is more about the character using his natural abilities with a little influence from his learned experience. Throw 18+, but add in FULL STAT plus Skill.

 

[Supplement Four]

2D STAT CHECK


Throw 2D, looking for STAT or less.

This is a great way to focus on throws that test only the character's natural ability or areas that are not covered by skills.

There are a lot of experience areas that do not have skills. For example, Balance isn't a skill (unless you create it). Therefore, a great way to test if a character keeps is balance is to roll 2D looking for DEX or less.

For really easy challenges, use 1D for Stat or less.

Harder challenges use 3D for Stat or less.

And, there's no reason not to call for a 4D (or more) check, if the situation calls for it.

For example, a character is trying to shove a boulder off balance, over the side of a cliff. He wants to block the passage below. But, the boulder, though precariously close to the cliff's edge, is damn heavy. The Ref calls for a 4D STR check. This means, roll STR or less on 4D.

 

[Supplement Four]

2D RANDOM TARGET



Sometimes, the Ref just needs a random target. Throw 2D, and use the result as the target. The player will need to roll that number or higher than, or that number or lower than, to succeed.

For example, there's a leak in the slow boat's grav coolant. Those graviton emitters get very hot, and if they burn out, then inertial dampening doesn't work. And, that means that the ship is limited to 1G burns while the crew either floats around or is strapped into seats.

To excite drama in the game, the Ref determines the time the Engineer has to repair the damaged system by throwing 2D. The Engineer gets one repair throw per minute. That last attempt, if no success is made, is 12+.

The Ref throws 2D and gets a 10.

This means that the Engineer gets three attempts to fix the system. The first minute of work is a 10+ throw. The second minute of work is a 11+ throw. And, the third minute of work is a 12+ throw. If none of those throws are a success, then the ship's grav plating is down until the ship can jump to a Starport and make repairs.

Remember, the Ref could have thrown a total of 2, giving the Engineer 11 tries to fix the system.

 

[Supplement Four]

SKILLS



Remember that, in CT, Skills can be used in a number of ways. You do not always have to have a skill provide a +1 DM per skill level. Experience applies to throws in different ways, depending on the situation.

Here are some examples.



Combat: Skills apply at +1 DM per skill level (page 37 TTB).



Low Berth: Medical-2 or better needed to gain the +1 DM (page 50 TTB). Here, a certain level of skill is needed to use the beneficial DM. A skill greater than the indicated level will not increase the DM.



Starship Broken: Typically, the ship's engineer attacks problems aboard the ship gaining a +2 DM per Engineering skill level. (page 23 TTB).



Zero-G: Working in Zero-G is not easy. We're used to the pull of gravity. If a character attempts any non-standard movement while in Zero-G (and non-standard movements are defined as running, jumping, hiding, jumping untethered from one ship to another, etc), then the character must roll 10+ to avoid a problem. Vacc Suit skill is applied at +4 DM per skill level (page 28 TTB).

 

[Supplement Four]

TWO DICE

 2D     N%    N- %    N+ %
---    ---   -----   ------
 2       3      3     100 
 3       6      8      97
 4       8     17      92
 5      11     28      83

 6      14     42      72
 7      17     58      58
 8      14     72      42

 9      11     83      28
 A       8     92      17
 B       6     97       8
 C       3    100       3

N% is the percentage chance the number is thrown exactly.

N- % is the percentage chance the number or less is thrown.

N+ % is the percentage chance the number or higher is thrown.





It is wise for CT Refs to become familiar with the chart above as it can help your game in a number of ways.

Understanding the value of a +1 DM: Notice the spread between the middle numbers and those at the ends. The difference in rolling a 3- and snake eyes is just 5 points. The spread between 4- and 3- is almost double that, at 9 points. And, the spread between 7- and 6- is triple, at 16 points!

What does this mean? The value of a +1 DM is variable. It can mean a 5% improvement, or it can be a 16% improvement (or something in the middle).

Consider that when you are handing out DMs. A +1 DM may not sound like a lot, but it could very well mean over a 15% improvement to the character's throw (in d20 terms, that's equivalent of a +3 DM!). If you allow a PC a +2 DM, you could be giving that character a 30% improvement (minimum improvement on +2 is 14%).

In other words: CT Refs should be stingy with DMs. Make the characters earn every point that they get. DMs in CT are quite powerful.





Picking 2D Target Numbers: Use the table to help you value the target numbers that you pick. Figure that 2D +0 mods is a base CT throw. If you want a 50% chance of success, then you should pick a target number of 7+ or 8+. If you want something tougher to throw--say something with a 25% chance of success--then pick a 9+ or 10+.

If you want to consider skill, then the process is the same. If the average experienced CT character is Stat-7, Skill-2, and you think the task at hand should be about a 50% probability of success for a professional, then pick the 50% probability on the table and move it up two points (the amount of the skill).

For example, 50% on the table is a throw of 7+ or 8+ (both are 8 points shy of 50). Let's go with 7+. This means a Skill-2 character will have about a 50% chance of success on a throw that requires a 9+ result. Pick the difficulty first, then add the skill level. This will give you your target number at the desired chance of success.

Here's another example (a little more elaborate). The ship's jump drive is out. One of the F-Coils blew and damaged the breaker box. The ship's engineer is trying to repair it.

The Ref recons that a competent engineer with Engineering-2 should have about a 75% chance of success. We look at the chart and see that a 75% chance of success is a target of 6+. As the skill description says, the Ref is going to give the PC Engineer a +2 DM per skill level. Thus, the target number is 10+. An Engineering-2 character will have about a 75% chance on a 10+ throw.

Now, the real PC engineer has Engineering-3, so this task is going to be easier for him. He's getting +2 per skill level (+6 DM), and his target is 10+. His minimum throw is 8. The PC Engineer is so good at his job that he's got a 92% chance to fix a problem that most competent (Skill-2 Engineers) only have a 72% chance to fix.

To pick a target number: Pick the number for the success chance desired on the chart, then adjust for skill, if any.

 

[Supplement Four]

USE NUMBERS IN THE GAME



Examples.



An roleplay encounter with a customs official goes south. Roll Law Level or greater to avoid a real problem (page 84 TTB).

What's the chance that the PCs were seen or noticed, landing their craft in the world's forest? Throw Population or less on 2D. (I just made that one up.)

What's the roll to find out if an NPC will give the group important information? Roll Reaction Number or less on 2D. (Often used throw in CT.)

 

[Marchand]

What's the chance that the PCs were seen or noticed, landing their craft in the world's forest? Throw Population or less on 2D. (I just made that one up.)

Minor aside: after TL6 (when radar comes in), make it Pop+TL on 2D.

 

[mike wightman]

All of this reminds me why I switched to a roll 8+ or roll 12+ task system for CT years ago

While I laud your efforts to make this stuff accessible it highlights the major failings of CT - too many different types of situational dice throw, too many different interpretations of what level 1 in a skill represents, exceptions, contradictions.

 

[Supplement Four]

Minor aside: after TL6 (when radar comes in), make it Pop+TL on 2D.

Wouldn't that be a 100% chance, every time?

(But, I understand your point. And, a different throw would probably be more appropriate.)

While I laud your efforts to make this stuff accessible it highlights the major failings of CT - too many different types of situational dice throw, too many different interpretations of what level 1 in a skill represents, exceptions, contradictions.

You should certainly use a structured task system.

For many, including myself. the CT method is a benefit, not a "major failing". It represents freedom from the constrictions of a structured task system. It allows on-the-spot customization.

There's nothing like playing in a CT game with a Ref that knows his throws. The game is so smooth. It rocks.

As much as I write about task systems, the CT method is my favorite.

 

[mike wightman]

Except by your own admission you have to make target numbers up on the spot, and unless you are going to keep copious notes of situations as they arise you will invariable run across problems - "hey last week you said I had to roll 14+ and my skill was worth +2 per level, now you are saying the target is 12..."

Then there is the issue highlighted above - roll population or population + TL - different refs will come up with different throws leading to problems (in the unlikely event someone plays in more than one game lol)

I'm just playing devil's advocate by the way - collecting all this together is long overdue.

 

[Supplement Four]

Except by your own admission you have to make target numbers up on the spot....

Well, yeah. That's kinda the point.

..., and unless you are going to keep copious notes of situations as they arise you will invariable run across problems - "hey last week you said I had to roll 14+ and my skill was worth +2 per level, now you are saying the target is 12..."

Not really. Your players have to understand that you are the Ref and what you say, goes. Old school strong GM.

Besides, do you keep copious notes on this task being Average, that one being Difficult....or, with your system, "Hey, last week you said it was an 8+ throw, and now it's a 12+ throw."

It's the same thing. No notes needed.

CT Refs who use the CT method do tend to have their "favorites", so that minimizes what you are talking about. For example, I use Rule 68A a lot, which people understand. It's just a method of picking target numbers. And, I use 2D for Stat or lower a lot, so players will often see the same types of rolls.

If I did get a player who said what you say above, then I'd consider if he was correct. And, if he was, I'd give him what he wants, the +2 per level with the 12+ target. But, I'd also consider the situation he's referring to...is it that different from the task at hand? Chances are, it is, and that's the defense of the throws. Last time, you were doing this. This time, you are doing that.

Even if its the same type of task, like a stuck hatch, maybe one is more stuck than the other. That's way a 3D for STR is needed this time, when a 2D for STR or less was needed last time.

Then there is the issue highlighted above - roll population or population + TL - different refs will come up with different throws leading to problems (in the unlikely event someone plays in more than one game lol)

First, there's nothing wrong with different Refs in different games making different throws. They're completely different universes.

Second, as I mentioned above, I would never make a 2D roll for POP + TL or less because the result, most likely, is 100%.

I'd stick with the Pop or less, then maybe modify the throw based on TL. -1 if TL 6+. -2 if TL 8+. -3 if TL A+. That sounds good.

I'm just playing devil's advocate by the way - collecting all this together is long overdue.

No problem. I'm fully aware that CT's free-form, Ref-call system isn't for everybody. People like the structure of task systems. And, that's fine. I like tasks systems, too.

But, I like CT in it's purest form, just as well.

 

[Marchand]

Wouldn't that be a 100% chance, every time?

(But, I understand your point. And, a different throw would probably be more appropriate.)

Nah, you're right. Maybe 3D. Just eyeballing Regina subsector, that would give a reasonable chance of pulling off an undetected landing on the likes of Whanga or Hefry, and a good chance on Knorbes. All a bit of a digression, anyway.

The broader debate about CT's approach to tasks reminds me a bit about being set right by an old teacher, after I'd said in a history class that the UK had an unwritten constitution. Not correct. The UK has all sorts of constitutional type laws written down about how long a parliament can be or who can vote. What it has is an uncodified constitution.

CT has a task system - an uncodified one.

 

[Supplement Four]

CT has a task system - an uncodified one.

I wonder if 1D AD&D gets similar heat for its throws. There's the combat system, sure, but anything other than that is just the Dungeon Master's call.

Then...non-weapon proficiencies were added tot he game, which gave those previously DM calls some structure. Then, in 3E, an actual task system was added.

 

[aramis]

I wonder if 1D AD&D gets similar heat for its throws. There's the combat system, sure, but anything other than that is just the Dungeon Master's call.

Then...non-weapon proficiencies were added tot he game, which gave those previously DM calls some structure. Then, in 3E, an actual task system was added.

Yes, but less so, because of the lack of universal skills.
And when the universal skill system was added (in UA), it was a single type of roll.

For those not familiar, in older D&D versions, Saves and Attacks were both 1d20 roll high vs a TN set by table lookup. Skills ("Non-Weapon Proficiencies") were 1d20 roll low, and thief skills were 1d100 roll low. Difficulty wasn't addressed directly until late in the AD&D rules, but the suggestion was made to make attribute throws on 1d20 or 1d100, as appropriate for the situation, in Moldvay basic.

It was confusing for many people, because a zillion house rules erupted from it.

 

[HG_B]

I wonder if 1D AD&D gets similar heat for its throws.

Why would it? It had tables for most everything. Saving throws, Thief skills, ranger's tracking. It goes on and on and on...

 

[Supplement Four]

Why would it? It had tables for most everything. Saving throws, Thief skills, ranger's tracking. It goes on and on and on...

Attribute rolls mainly. Look through old AD&D 1E adventures, and you'll find lots of different types of rolls. Roll 3D for DEX or less or fall off the bridge--stuff like that.

 

[HG_B]

Attribute rolls mainly. Look through old AD&D 1E adventures,

I'm referring to the RAW in the rule books. Most everything is defined. Thus, there wouldn't be such criticism leveled by one who was versed in the rules.

Otherwise, it would be akin to criticizing CT ship design rules because of the Annic Nova

 

[aramis]

Attribute rolls mainly. Look through old AD&D 1E adventures, and you'll find lots of different types of rolls. Roll 3D for DEX or less or fall off the bridge--stuff like that.

I don't recall EVER seeing anything other than d20 or d100 rolls against attributes in TSR's modules. And Most of the modules I have are AD&D 1E. (The rest are B or X series.)

Only one I can check easily is G1-3; no directions to check against attributes at all. Two "Save Versus" at penalties. Encounters and traps are "1-N on 1dX" type entries; no stat rolls.

I do recall seeing attribute tests on various dice in 3rd party modules...

Tom Moldvay includes this in his D&D basic set (1980 red box):

"There's always a chance." The DM may want to base a character's chance of doing something on his or her ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and so forth). To perform a difficult task (such as climbing up a rope or thinking of a forgotten clue), the player should roll the ability score or less on 1d20. The OM may give a bonus or penalty to the roll, depending on the difficulty of the action (-4 for a simple task to +4 for a difficult one). A roll of 1 should always succeed, and a roll of 20 should always fail.
(p. B60)​

Dr. J. Eric Holmes, in his D&D basic set (1977 blue box):

A final word to the Dungeon Master from the authors. These rules are intended as guidelines. No two Dungeon Masters run their dungeons quite the same way, as anyone who has learned the game with one group and then transferred to another can easily attest. You are sure to encounter situations not covered by these rules. Improvise. Agree on a probability that an event will occur and convert it into a die roll — roll the number and see what happens! The game is intended to be fun and the rules modified if the players desire. Do not hesitate to invent, create and experiment with new ideas. Imagination is the key to a good game. Enjoy!
(p 40)​

Most of the rules use "1-N on 1dX" type entries.

So, by 1980, TSR had decided d20±some_Mod was the way to handle it, at least for advice to novice DM's; the Survival Guides and OA also use the same mode, with explicit modifications for NWPs.

Gygax, for his part, states in AD&D

There will be times in which the rules do not cover a specific action that a player will attempt. In such situations, instead of being forced to make a decision, take the option to allow the dice to control the situation. This can be done by assigning reasonable probability to an event and then letting the player dice to see if he or she can make that percentage. You can weigh the dice in any way so as to give the advantage to either the player or the non-player character, whichever seems more correct and logical to you while being fair to bath sides.
(DMG, p 110)​

OE books 1-3 has no discussion of making up rolls for uncovered situations. The rules and examples show all rolls as being 1d6 for 1-N or 1d6 for X-Y; when two players throw their weight against a door, 2d are thrown, and only one needs to hit the range.

Dragon #1 has a convoluted "multiply the attribute by a random number to find the % chance of success."
Dragon 3 is the first time I see an attribute used for other than generating a modifier to some other chance; minimum beauty scores for a woman to seduce a man of a given race. No rolling against the attribute, just a minimum to be allowed to use a gender-specific ability.

In the first 12 issues of dragon, I don't find any attribute rolls. which covers the time between 0E and Dr. Holmes' Basic Set. (I'm too lazy to look further)


So, while I do not doubt you encountered people playing that way, I can't find evidence that it was standard advice. I didn't start until about the time Moldvay was released, but we took to heart the "derive a percentage and then roll against it like a thief skill" mode.

There was a lot of "innovation" of new mechanics in various older games. And a lot of hybridization, too. An idea in one game would often be ported over to a different game in play. By '77, there were over a dozen RPGs in print, many with what were then innovative mechanics. And individual campaigns cross-fertilized a lot.

As a fun aside: Dragon issue 5 has the article "Gandalf Was Only a 5th Level MU"...

 

[Supplement Four]

Well, I'm not going to dig through old modules to prove my point. And, who knows. Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly. It was a long time ago. But, in the early AD&D years, I do remember interesting uses of dice for things--obstacles in adventures. A roll to climb up a mountain (not using the Thieving skill, but for the whole party), or a roll to avoid a trap...or to make it across a rickety old bridge. Or, just a straight roll for things like, "roll 1d4, where a roll of 1 indicates that the character smells the....".

 

[aramis]

Well, I'm not going to dig through old modules to prove my point. And, who knows. Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly. It was a long time ago. But, in the early AD&D years, I do remember interesting uses of dice for things--obstacles in adventures. A roll to climb up a mountain (not using the Thieving skill, but for the whole party), or a roll to avoid a trap...or to make it across a rickety old bridge. Or, just a straight roll for things like, "roll 1d4, where a roll of 1 indicates that the character smells the....".

That last is extensively used in early D&D mechanics, at least pre-Moldvay. It's the same as is used for encounters.
I had some time, and some materials on the harddrive... and couldn't recall any stat-or-less rolls. Early D&D is a LOT less defined than, say, early Traveller.

Let's compare the 1977/78 editions of several games... and the 1974 D&D.
D&D-74: lots of 1d6 for 1-N, where N is a chance set by rules or the DM. Some rolls of 1-N on other dice. Saving throws in 5 categories, unmodified by stats, 1d20 roll high against a TN set by class and level. Combat rolls in the "alternative combat system" 1d20+statmod against TN set by table lookup of Class/level vs target Hit Dice or target Class/level; the "chainmail" combat system, officially "The" combat system, but far lesser used 2d6 roll high, modified by attribute. Attribute modifiers only +1 or -1; on 1dX vs 1-N, and only 4 attributes had explicit use that way: Dex, Con, Cha- Dex for missile to-hits, con for HP, and Cha for loyalty. No advice on devising other throws

D&D 77 (OE + Sups 1 & 2 & Dragon issues 1-10): percentile skills added (thieves, rangers, bards, assassins). Several of the rolls changed from 1d6 for 1-N to other types of die, almost always 1d8, 1d10, or 1d12. Drop the chainmail option for combat. Open Doors now a stat dependent range. Dex, Con, Int have percentile rolls derived from table lookups by attribute. Str now has explicit open doors range and adds to to-hits in melee, dex has wider to-hit mods. Thief, Monk, and Assassin have percentile roll skills. Advice on deriving percentiles from attribute by multiplication for difficulty in Dragon. Several additional classes with percentile abilities.

AD&D: Every attribute has some percentage roll, and some modifiers to other rolls. Reaction rolls modifiers added to Cha. Bards & rangers added, also with percentile "skills".

Traveller 77: all rolls on d6's. Mostly 2d6+mods for TN+, combat always TN 8+. Modifier value of a skill level not consistent; some are if skill n+ then+Y, others are +Level or +2x Level. A couple adventures use 2d6 for attribute or less, one uses 3d6.

RuneQuest: all skills percentile, attribute tests percentile vs 5x attribute. Difficulties as modifers to score.

Starships and Spacemen (78): all ability rolls 1d20 for Attribute or less, attribute modified for difficulty. Rolls to hit only for ranged weapons, and are modified attribute throws, doing rolled damage to St. Starship to hit numbers fixed by range, not ability. Close combat is 1d6+Strength, and compared to opposing roll of same, then looked up in what should have been a table (but is a paragraph). Ship combat to hit is determined by range, not abilities, but is modified for class.

Tunnels and Trolls (original is 74, but the crica 76-77 4th ed version is what I'm basing upon): two mechanics: weapon's dice+adds + mods from attributes (Str, Dex, Luck) for damage total; difference between sides damage to losing side, allocated among them. Saving rolls officially always Luck, and 2d6 doubles open end +Attribute; option to use saves on other attributes besides Luck. In the '79 5th ed (which remained the ed in print until 2003!), saves on other attributes standard, and functionally a task system. Attribute mods for combat are Att-12 for bonuses, or attribute-9 for penalties, thus 9-12 is no modifier.

Space Patrol: Attribute mods same as T&T for a number of rolls and situations (Movement, for example, is modified by Strength). To hit with ranged weapons is a table based upon dex and range, using 1d6+ mods, roll low; Table is memorizable, tho, as short range is dex/3 or less, rounded up, +1 at point blank, -1 at medium and -2 at long. Melee Combat (called "Contact Combat") is (weapon)d6's (unarmed is 1d6) + attribute modifers from Str & Dex vs 1d6 plus attribute modifers from target's strength and dex, difference being damage.

Boot Hill (1975): percentile abilities... except strength which gives an 8-20 based upon the percentile as well... but they aren't rolled directly. All the combat process is base chance modified by a table lookup. The reason for the percentile attributes is experience... Melee is a 2d6 throw; shooting is a percentile throw. Gambling is a special ability, and is rated with a percentage chance to be caught cheating if cheating; this chance is random.

We can see that there are a lot of different methods in use, but already several systems have prototypes for later task systems.