What you THOUGHT you knew about CT???

[RandyT0001]

And, also don't forget that EDU cannot be raised higher than INT.

Yessir, I will. ...... Note, however, that a character's EDU score can never be raised higher than the character's INT score.

Ok, let me be more specific. I'm not talking about the INT+EDU limit (which, IIRC, is first mentioned in LBB7: Merchant Prince) but where does it plainly state that EDU cannot be raised higher than INT (Book and page please)?

I don't recall where it is (I don't have TTB btw).

 

[far-trader]

Ok, let me be more specific. I'm not talking about the INT+EDU limit (which, IIRC, is first mentioned in LBB7: Merchant Prince) but where does it plainly state that EDU cannot be raised higher than INT (Book and page please)?

I don't recall where it is (I don't have TTB btw).

Yep it's also in Book 2, pg 42, Experience - Self Improvement - Education

Note, the way I read this it applies only to EDU improvement through personal study.

During career gen EDU may be improved with no INT limiter, and so one might imagine there is a way to improve EDU beyond INT even after career gen. Like in a University setting. Or maybe they just forgot to make the note of an INT limiter in career gen

 

[Supplement Four]

Ok, let me be more specific. I'm not talking about the INT+EDU limit (which, IIRC, is first mentioned in LBB7: Merchant Prince) but where does it plainly state that EDU cannot be raised higher than INT (Book and page please)?

Oh, sorry. I guess I mis-read what you were asking.

As I said, I default to TTB, and it's on pg. 103, in the Experience chapter, under the Education program. First sentence reads: A character with education lower than intelligence may improve education....

Thus, if your EDU is not lower than INT, you cannot attempt to improve it.



Lemme check Book 2 for you...

Yep. Same thing. Check out Book 2, page 42. You'll see it there.


EDIT: Looks like Dan beat me to the punch. Plus...I'll note that the wording is a bit different in Book 2 and TTB. It says the same thing--just worded a bit differently.

 

[Supplement Four]

The same seems true for the Traveller experience rules, which many or most people never used and so can't quote chapter and verse.

(And I still think that's because they're impractical in gameplay. Realistic, sure, but impractical.)

Rhialto,

What is it that you don't like about the CT Experience Rules?

I view character creation in Traveller as a short hand way of playing, throwing meta-tasks. Instead of rolling for a gunshot or to shove open a hatch, the throws represent what happens to the charcter over years.

Don't you think that character growth during play should mirror the rate at which a character got skills during character generation?

Why do you think the rules are impractical? I've roleplayed 6 months of the game in just a few minutes--with jump taking a week and skipping, uneventfully, across several systems (in fact, I've used that technique to make the players feel a bit of the monotony of space flight--the grind, in this system, out that system, where the hell are we again...not unlike a what a rock band on tour must feel sometimes), game time can pass incredibly fast.

Thus, I do think the pace at which skills are awarded are quite practical.



Also note that a +1 DM on a 2D throw is a hell of a modifier. It's a real, measurable gain.

It's not like getting a +1 on a d100 and even less than a +1 on a d20. So, because the bonus is so big, the time that the characters receive that bonus needs to be spread out a bit over the character's lives.

Otherwise, they'll become uber characters that can't miss in no time.


And...if intense, quick training is what is required, then there's always the training rules provided in Book 4 (which can unbalance a game in a hurry unless the GM uses those rules as intended).


So...what is it you don't like about the Classic Traveller Experience System?

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

S4, because gut-wise, to my mind 4 years game time is a whole campaign, and a big one at that. Minimum. A whole year of *real* time, if you play weekly.

To have a PC do his daily 2 hours of blade combat practice throughout all of that... and then another 4 years game time to make the improvement stick for non-zero-level skills... just seems dull and inconvenient in so many ways...

Six months, fine (barely). Four to eight years, not so much.

 

[RandyT0001]

S4 (and Dan) I read that paragraph before posting the question but it didn't sink in. DUH! I was focusing on character generation and didn't remember it being there (in LBB1) and it's not as Dan says. I then read the experience part in LBB2 and read right over it without it registering. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.

 

[Supplement Four]

S4, because gut-wise, to my mind 4 years game time is a whole campaign, and a big one at that. Minimum. A whole year of *real* time, if you play weekly.

To have a PC do his daily 2 hours of blade combat practice throughout all of that... and then another 4 years game time to make the improvement stick for non-zero-level skills... just seems dull and inconvenient in so many ways...

Six months, fine (barely). Four to eight years, not so much.

Hmm..

Ok, well, can't you just adapt to the situation? Your character that is practicing 2 hours a day on blade combat--why not have him spar with another member of the crew...maybe someone who is also training that skill?

You could just say that the two spar, 2 hours a day, while on the ship. And, that's all that need be done. Play the game. Do the adventures. Wait for the time to pass in the game.

The Experience Rules allow for breaks in the training period. If the training character is stuck for a week on a planet while going through an adventure, no problem. Just pick the training back up when possible.

The breaks are expected, and there is no penalty as long as a single break isn't longer than 3 months!

In addition, you could work in the Book 4 training rules when appropriate. Let's say the crew is higher to jump into Vargr space and recover a vessel that was stolen from a patron. The patron might be an official on a planet, and the crew could take a crash course in XYZ, using planetary instructors, before they embark upon their mission.

Players are happy because their characters got new skills or improved skills!

GM is happy because the training period was story-oriented!



I mean, I understand your resistance to the CT Experience Rules. I used to feel the same way. But, now I think they're spot on--after studying them and understanding them.

Tell me: If you don't use CT Experience, then what is your house rule?

 

[atpollard]

But, boy-howdy! That's a hell of a discrepency, ain't it?

Actually, not as big as it might first appear. By TTB (My 'Real Traveller' because it was the first version that I bought), LBB4 was already available with the Combat Rifleman skill granting every weapon you would practically use - so who cares about your skill with a spear when the only real question was whether your automatic rifle was 'regular' or 'gauss'.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

Tell me: If you don't use CT Experience, then what is your house rule?

No experience.

Pathetic, I know.

But it beats keeping track of daily piano lessons for one whole year.

 

[Supplement Four]

Actually, not as big as it might first appear. By TTB (My 'Real Traveller' because it was the first version that I bought), LBB4 was already available with the Combat Rifleman skill granting every weapon you would practically use - so who cares about your skill with a spear when the only real question was whether your automatic rifle was 'regular' or 'gauss'.

That's a good point. Later books in the Traveller line "included" more and more skills. Combat Rifleman is a good example, but there are others. Pistol and Handgun skill come to mind (two different skills).

And, this makes upping tons of zero level weapon skills even less attractive. This should be a point on my earlier post about why most players won't be attracted to the option presented them with the TB Skill-0 Experience rule.

No experience.

Pathetic, I know.

But it beats keeping track of daily piano lessons for one whole year.

It's your game, of course! I just wondered at what you used instead.

It seems, since you're using no Experience rule, you might adopt the CT Experience system. I mean, I don't think it's a lot of bookkeeping. Hasn't been for me. A GM note, or a tick mark (or even parentheses) around an upped skill can suffice. On my character sheets, I have a note box next to each skill. I just write the date the skill will be improved there in that box and forget about it. When that date comes around, the skill is improved (or the player has changed his mind and some other skill has a note).

It doesn't need to be a problem.

Just my 2Cr, though.

 

[mike wightman]

A couple of points if I may.

The Int+Edu cap does not appear in any edition of LLB5 (who knows CT as well as they think ehh S4 ).

Next, the little "spat" between S4 and Dan over the experience rules highlights a problem - CT is not one game.
CT original
CT revised
CT TTB
CT Starter Edition

all contain slight - and sometimes huge - differences.

I have tried over the years to compile a list of all the changes between editions - unfortunately when my computer died last Christmas I lost the file

I may get around to doing it again.

So should this thread not be retitled to "So you think you know TTB edition of the game..."

 

[Supplement Four]

A couple of points if I may.

The Int+Edu cap does not appear in any edition of LLB5 (who knows CT as well as they think ehh S4 ).

Note that I said "think". I wasn't sure with Book 4+ book had it, but I knew it was in there. Might be Book 7...still unsure, but its in one of 'em.

I didn't mis-represent myself and knew I was unsure about which had it.

So should this thread not be retitled to "So you think you know TTB edition of the game..."

Well, the TTB is the most recent version of the rules. That should count for something (although I'd bet most people have Books 1-3 revised).

I don't refer to that rules set that often because it's missing too many things.

And, still, this thread is about misperceptions and rules that are not well-known about CT.

Feel free to list something that fits that topic. I never intended the thread to be a one-man show.

 

[aramis]

I may get around to doing it again.

You should. realizing that CT 1E had a number of minor editions is important

So should this thread not be retitled to "So you think you know TTB edition of the game..."

I'd say so. It happens to be my primary CT reference, tho, too.

And the contradictions inherent in it tend to lead Rosy-Glasses folks to overreach statements like those in the Air/Raft Entry (which is, IMNSHO, justification for the allowance of Level 0 skill, not permission to violate the restriction in the chapter on vehicles, and not one of those contradictions). S4's not the only one I've encountered to take that approach.

 

[Supplement Four]

And the contradictions inherent in it tend to lead Rosy-Glasses folks to overreach statements like those in the Air/Raft Entry (which is, IMNSHO, justification for the allowance of Level 0 skill, not permission to violate the restriction in the chapter on vehicles, and not one of those contradictions). S4's not the only one I've encountered to take that approach.

Let say, for the sake of argument, that I agree with you on the air/raft rule. (I don't, but I'm making a point here.)

Your position is that a minimum of Skill-0 is needed to make a task throw.

What I'm saying (without focussing on any one skill, like Air/Raft), is that the CT characters can make all kinds of task throws without having the skill. And, further, that most task throws a character makes does not require skill in order for the task to be made.

The argument is getting bogged down with the details of one particular skill. That was never my point. And, even if you did convince me that Air/Raft-0 or better skill is needed to pilot an air/raft, that still wouldn't change the fact that there are many, many more examples in the core rules where task throws come with no skill requirement (although they are likely to have a penalty).

The main point I've been making is not that no skill is needed pilot an air/raft. That just happens to be a task that doesn't have a skill requirement.

The main point is that skills are usually not required when CT task throws are made.

Let's try not to confuse the issue.

 

[mike wightman]

Note that I said "think". I wasn't sure with Book 4+ book had it, but I knew it was in there. Might be Book 7...still unsure, but its in one of 'em.

Nope - it's not in LBB4 either - infact one of the example characters breaks the Int+Edu cap, as do a few sample characters in Veterans.

I didn't mis-represent myself and knew I was unsure about which had it.

Just pulling your leg

Well, the TTB is the most recent version of the rules. That should count for something (although I'd bet most people have Books 1-3 revised).

Starter Edition was the last iteration - and it had rules that were missing from TTB.

I don't refer to that rules set that often because it's missing too many things.

It is missing stuff too - see Starter Edition comment.

And, still, this thread is about misperceptions and rules that are not well-known about CT.

Problem being you have to specify which version of the CT rules - always preferred first edition myself

Feel free to list something that fits that topic. I never intended the thread to be a one-man show.

KK

On the subject of experience, if a player musters out with 70,000 Cr the Experience section and a nice GM could allow them to go to college to pick up a skill lvl 2 in a technical skill

 

[Supplement Four]

....infact one of the example characters breaks the Int+Edu cap, as do a few sample characters in Veterans.

Casualties of retro-fitting the game with that rule, no doubt.

Starter Edition was the last iteration - and it had rules that were missing from TTB.

Starter Edition doesn't count...as it was intended as a "rules lite" version of the game. (Heck, even the Experience section is missing!)

Hasn't Marc said somewhere (I thought I'd read) that TTB is the ultimate version of the Traveller rules?

Problem being you have to specify which version of the CT rules - always preferred first edition myself

I think any edition of CT is appropriate for this thread. If there is something in first edition you want to highlight, then have at it.

On the subject of experience, if a player musters out with 70,000 Cr the Experience section and a nice GM could allow them to go to college to pick up a skill lvl 2 in a technical skill

Yessir, correct. The sabbatical costs Cr70,000, takes 4 years, and nets the character a Skill-2 in a non-weapon skill.

Yet another way to immediately improve your character straight out of chargen.



In fact, a player could combine your suggestion above with something I was describing earlier in the thread.

The character goes through chargen and musters out.

Immediately after chargen, the character takes the sabbatical, netting him a Skill-2 non-weapon skill.

The character is aged another 4 years.

And, then the character can attempt a Weapon experience program using two Skill-0 weapon skills as I suggested earlier.

The net result would be: The character gains +4 skill levels from 3 new skills, in addition to whatever he earned during character generation.


My guess is that not too many Traveller players use these rules--but they can be quite profitable for the character if all goes well (have the money for the sabbatical, make the determination throw for the experience program, GM plays along with you, etc.).

 

[mike wightman]

Starter Edition isn't rules lite - it leaves out a couple of bits (drugs spring to mind), but it does include the range band system for ship combat (IMHO the best rpg space combat system in Traveller, the rest are great games but not very useful for face to face gaming during a role playing session) and it includes the rules for pulse laser damage (which are not in any other edition of the game).

 

[Supplement Four]

Starter Edition isn't rules lite - it leaves out a couple of bits (drugs spring to mind), but it does include the range band system for ship combat (IMHO the best rpg space combat system in Traveller, the rest are great games but not very useful for face to face gaming during a role playing session) and it includes the rules for pulse laser damage (which are not in any other edition of the game).

Hey, I'm a fan of the Starter Edition. It was my first edition I ever purchased. But, it does omit large sections that are present in TTB. As I said earlier, the Experience section is missing.

I guess it's "rules lite" when compared to TTB, but not "rules lite" when compared to LBB1-3.

 

[mike wightman]

The ideal Traveller Book to me would have been a second edition of TTB with the rules additions from Starter (which had the incredibly useful charts and tables book), i.e. include the range band ship combat system as an option (keep the vector based one for us tabletop wargamers) and include that pulse laser damage rule.

Oh, and the careers from S4:CotI should be in there too.

CT heaven will look like this

 

[Supplement Four]

The ideal Traveller Book to me would have been a second edition of TTB with the rules additions from Starter (which had the incredibly useful charts and tables book), i.e. include the range band ship combat system as an option (keep the vector based one for us tabletop wargamers) and include that pulse laser damage rule.

Oh, and the careers from S4:CotI should be in there too.

CT heaven will look like this

I agree. Range Band movement is a must, and it's only included in Starter Traveller.

I'll pull back the DM for pulse lasers, as I always liked it.

Do the tweaks you suggest.

And...have a section dedicated to showing GMs how use the CT non-structured task system. I think too many GMs are afraid of it or just plain don't know how to use it correctly. I think a section showing examples would be welcomed.

I've often thought of publishing a CT supplement with extras in it like this. (One could discuss Sensors in CT; Creating Tasks; Highlight the different uses of skills as I did in one of these posts in this thread...etc).

I think a book like that would be highly useful and popular.