Citizens of the Imperium

Citizens of the Imperium (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/index.php)
-   Mongoose Traveller (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/forumdisplay.php?f=122)
-   -   Chargen from the Mongoose Blog (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=14201)

Vargas October 12th, 2007 10:06 AM

Chargen from the Mongoose Blog
 
A few notes on character generation can be found at:

http://blog.mongoosepublishing.co.uk/

Plankowner October 12th, 2007 12:17 PM

I posted my comments over on Mongoose (I'm Rikki Tikki Traveller).

Overall, I am encouraged by what I read. It still has most of the elements of basic CT which I loved, but with some of the expanded stuff from LBB4+.

I find the idea of Skill Packages interesting. There was nothing worse than having to redo your entire campaign idea because no one in the group had "Coffeemaker-1" skills.

I remain cautiously optimistic.

far-trader October 12th, 2007 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plankowner (Post 238650)
I posted my comments over on Mongoose (I'm Rikki Tikki Traveller).

And I'll reply here as I've lost patience and faith with Mongoose setting up a Traveller forum heading :nonono:

...oh, very well, there is a handy link at the bottom of the blog post, I'll copy there too for what it's worth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plankowner (Post 238650)
I remain cautiously optimistic.

And my own cautious optimism wanes daily :(

But on to the blog response...

The Connections bit is interesting, as is the Skill Package idea. I think they need some solid work and playtest though, I can see abuse written all over both ideas.

I also noted that they appear to have Broker as a player skill :rolleyes: I think my thoughts on this are well known.

The "Iron Man" skill incentive idea is also interesting but I wonder at it's functionality. Seems a waste of time to me. Players/Refs who aren't going to play Death in Chargen will just co-op any "Iron Man" special skill(s) into regular chargen. Why bother? Just concede that this idea is a lost cause on most gamers and drop it. Move on. Unless it's a requirement for the license from Marc.

Echo October 12th, 2007 05:37 PM

It's not a lost cause for me, and as the choice is provided, I can't see the beef you have with it.

far-trader October 12th, 2007 05:55 PM

It's not a beef, in fact I think the original rule is still the best and makes the most sense. BUT I'm in a decided minority on that. Maybe you're of a like mind on that so you don't see it as a lost cause, but it is if RTT is to attract new players. The biggest crank most non-Traveller players pick on is "death in chargen" because they don't understand the gamesmanship of it.

If the option to ignore death in chargen is there, then what is the point of having death in chargen at all? Who is going to use it? And if you award some bonus for playing with the death in chargen rule do you really think most if not all groups aren't going to ignore the death in chargen rule and use the bonus it allows anyway?

It is a pointless rule. The only reason I can see for including it is to satisfy a license requirement. Unless it's just some nostalgia trip. Maybe I do have a beef with it after all if you count it appearing to be pointless a beef.

When I first saw it I think I posted that it was cool and explained why the rule was important. And still most didn't get it, or didn't accept it, and continued to harp on how silly a rule it is. It's not a silly rule though, the softening of it to "not death" was silly. It changed the dynamic of the game in a way that really didn't help.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter what my opinion is, it will be done the way it will be done and the gamers will play it how they want.

Echo October 13th, 2007 08:59 AM

As I have said, I'd probably use that system. So there's one person at least. The key thing is the choice is there. What you seem to be saying is that gamers shouldn't have that choice.

atpollard October 13th, 2007 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plankowner (Post 238650)
... no one in the group had "Coffeemaker-1" skills.

Would "Coffeemaker-1" involve being knowledgeable in the operation and maintenance of "designer” coffee - like converting a “Mr. Coffee” to a cappuccino machine using spare parts from the engineering locker? I was just curious.

Spinward Scout October 13th, 2007 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpollard (Post 238744)
Would "Coffeemaker-1" involve being knowledgeable in the operation and maintenance of "designer” coffee - like converting a “Mr. Coffee” to a cappuccino machine using spare parts from the engineering locker? I was just curious.

No rolling of dice for that one - I want to see you roleplay it out.

:rofl:

Gruffty October 14th, 2007 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atpollard (Post 238744)
Would "Coffeemaker-1" involve being knowledgeable in the operation and maintenance of "designer” coffee - like converting a “Mr. Coffee” to a cappuccino machine using spare parts from the engineering locker? I was just curious.

....prolly, just don't buy a Mr Coffee from a Vargr or, worse still, Trader Jim............. ;) I'd give ya a +1 DM on the throw just for the laugh :)

robject October 14th, 2007 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by far-trader (Post 238688)
It's not a beef, in fact I think the original rule is still the best and makes the most sense. BUT I'm in a decided minority on that.

[...]

It is a pointless rule. The only reason I can see for including it is to satisfy a license requirement. Unless it's just some nostalgia trip.

You're old-school. So am I. Young punks nowadays don't want to die. They want point-buy. I'm just happy Mongoose isn't just abandoning the old system. My group can play it the same way I play CT, in fact. That in my mind is a plus. And the Young Punks can play it their way. Who could ask for anything more?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.