100-dTon TL 12 Prison Transport

[mike wightman]

I alluded to this in a previous post, now let us take a look at classic Traveller in all its glory, using two skills.

"Electronic expertise allows a character to use and operate electronic items; generally the skill is a DM applied to the throw to understand, repair, assemble, or operate. Complex items would also require a certain level of education or a very high intelligence; many devices may also require some degree of dexterity to disassemble, repair, and reassemble.

Referee: Specific throws for specific situations must be generated. Obviously, some throws will be harder than others, and many will be impossible without an accumulation of DMs based on expertise, education, dexterity, intelligence, and the availability of parts and tools. To generate a specific throw, the referee analyzes the specific circumstances and selects a number to be thrown (usually throw that number or greater to succeed). DMs allowed should be the level of electronics skill, +1 for intelligence above some level (say, 10), +1 for education above some level (say, 9), and appropriate values for lack of tools (perhaps -5) or poor conditions (maybe -3). The throw is then made, and success is determined by the result.
Such throws are restricted to one per specific time period, an hour, four hours, a day, or a week, as appropriate"

Why can't we just substitute the medical skill in place of electronic?

Medical expertise allows a character to perform medical related tasks; generally the skill is a DM applied to the throw to diagnose, provide treatment, and prescribe drugs. Complex trauma would also require a certain level of education or a very high intelligence; many surgeries may also require some degree of dexterity to disassemble, repair, and reassemble.

Referee: Specific throws for specific situations must be generated. Obviously, some throws will be harder than others, and many will be impossible without an accumulation of DMs based on expertise, education, dexterity, intelligence, and the availability of drugs and medical tools. To generate a specific throw, the referee analyzes the specific circumstances and selects a number to be thrown (usually throw that number or greater to succeed). DMs allowed should be the level of medical skill, +1 for intelligence above some level (say, 10), +1 for education above some level (say, 9), and appropriate values for lack of medical kit (perhaps -5) or poor conditions (maybe -3). The throw is then made, and success is determined by the result.
Such throws are restricted to one per specific time period, an hour, four hours, a day, or a week, as appropriate"

All I have done here is exactly what the rules as written in 77 edition tell me to do.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Why can't we just substitute the medical skill in place of electronic?

If you use the same "paradigm" of DMs for both (the basic structure of game mechanics and how to apply them) in order to sustain Intellectual Consistency across both/all cases ... except where explicitly instructed to do otherwise ... then the answer is that your SHOULD be able to apply the same "pattern of thinking" to other challenges. As a Referee, you use the same "template" in multiple ways for multiple circumstances.

Obviously, some throws will be harder than others, and many will be impossible without an accumulation of DMs based on expertise, education, dexterity, intelligence, and the availability of drugs and medical tools.

As an example of how I (as a Referee) would adjudicate this in relation to the topic of low berth transit survival would be like so:

• Medical skill/expertise applies a +DM
• INT and EDU attribute bonus DMs may apply depending on context of the circumstances (for example: unusual complications that apply -DMs to survival throw).
• Availability of drugs and/or medical tools, particularly if absent ... may apply a reduction/preclusion/prevention of +DMs enumerated above while also introducing -DMs into the mix (making success potentially "impossible" to achieve when it would otherwise be "automatic").

Best example of this type of IF-THEN approach to the complexities of possible scenarios can be summed up by Moriarity in Kelly's Heroes with regards to a mechanical breakdown of a Sherman tank.

If you don't have the right parts/tools to work with, sometimes technology is just ... dead ... no matter what your skill level or attributes (or positive thinking).



However, in circumstances where the "support needed" is readily available ... such as a starship's medical staff with low berths onboard ... only the most "off-nominal" circumstances would be so complex as to require "unusual support" (hospital, specialized tech/drug support, etc.) in order for the +DMs available of the staff to be "allowed" for low berth transit survival rolls.

You want a game mechanical system that is "flexible" enough to account for a wide variety of circumstances that Players can find themselves in. At the same time, you also want to be able to create "unusual conditions" (as a Referee) where specialized knowledge/tools/support may be necessary in some contexts in which "general" skills and/or techniques (by themselves) are NOT ENOUGH™ to resolve particular "off nominal" challenges.

 

[mike wightman]

It strikes me that you/we could re-write the skills section.

Remove all the examples baked in with the skill and all you are left with is a description of what the skill is for.

You/we could then use examples like I did with the electronic/medical skill to show the referee how to manage situational skill use.

This would likely save space in the book... and provide a bit more consistency. But then you/we are at risk of just reinventing some variant of the DGP task system.

What I like about the classic Traveller situation resolution is that it is open to referee interpretation and ruling on the fly

 

[kilemall]

It took me a while - decades in fact - but I finally realised that the skill examples in the skill descriptions are one off examples, they may be used that way, but as the text in 77 said the referee can and should make stuff up (paraphrasing).


It is explained in the Traveller Adventure - it is whatever the referee decides it is, The problem is is you are using a situation for which the actual game gives the procedure, which it does for low berth survival. So you have to use those rules as written as the basis, but you can change them to suit your game situation. Add +1 for an advance medical kit, add +1 for a low berth survival drug.

It only applies to combat skills and a few of the skills listed. There are many skills where the bonus is +2 per skill level, some even +4. Some give -1, -2 or -4, then there is the mechanical skill for which there is no skill DM... Take away the combat skills and you get a very different default assumption.

The End of the patient also matters, but that is not mentioned in the skill.

The rules explicitly state how you stack combat DMs, some get a bonus of +2 with no +1 threshold while others are limited to +1. If you have the characteristic you get the bonus, no more, no less.

What if you have a Dex of 15, do you get a +2 or +4? No.

That's not what the rules say though. The rules say you get skill, characteristic, sight, stock, etc...

No, it is a wild attempt to misquote and misuse the actual rules as written with your own views.

What difference to shooting a gun does Dex 15 make?

Yes, because Traveller pre task system was designed that way. As the referee I can decide what to allow as a DM to a situation throw. My decision is guided by the skill example, equipment descriptions etc.

You are not using the rules as written in those examples, you are just making stuff up.
Computer skill requires a complex interplay between computer skill and the skill required for the program you are trying to write
Forward Observer actually grants +4 per level of skill
Mechanical grants no DM per skill level...

I am in the strange superposition of almost agreeing and almost disagreeing with your arguments.

Schroedinger’s rules?

 

[Spinward Flow]

Schroedinger’s rules?

Who can say?

So if I may summarize ...

• RAW applies when it's convenient
• RAW doesn't apply when it's NOT convenient

Which in discussions like this only swings the door (WIDE!) open to the "RAW for me, but not for thee!" arguments being put forward by both sides. Needless to say, the two perspectives are fundamentally INCOMPATIBLE with each other.