Chargen from the Mongoose Blog
- Thread starter Vargas
- Start date
Plankowner
SOC-13
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.
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
SOC-14 10K
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.
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
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.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
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.
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.
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.
Gruffty
SOC-14 1K
....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 
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?
I always enforce it. Character generation is a mini-game within Traveller and I am more than satisfied on playing it. Without death, there is not much reason why a player shouldn't seek as many terms as he can, as far as his physical stats would allow. Death is there to make the bet for more skills riskier.
Plankowner
SOC-13
Actually, the game plan was to have the characters start a Spacebucks Coffee franchise empire and challenge Ling Standard Products, but without that essential skill, they became mercanaries and destroyed Capital/Core!
And being able to convert a Mr. Coffee into a Cappuccino machine takes Coffeemaker-2 or higher.
Babylon, Rome, the Maya, Portugal, the Dutch East India Company... and now the Imperium. Thus another empire is brought down solely and entirely due to the lack of upward-mobility in the brewed beverage industry...
Plankowner
SOC-13
Yes, you see this trend throughout human history. A sad but true fact.
Plankowner
SOC-13
October 19 Blog about RTT
The blog info on RTT about Character Generation mentions a max characteristic bonus of +3.
That would seem to indicate that skills will be more important that characteristics, but without knowing how high the skills will get, it is still a bit fuzzy. It sounds like characters will have several low level skills (ala CT) and then a larger number of Level 0 Skills that at least keep you from getting the negative penalty for being unskilled.
He mentions that there are about 40 Skills right now, but he expects to whittle that down a bit. To me, that seems a small enough number that they will be pretty broad, so that a young character with only a couple of skill levels will still be useful.
Also, he mentioned the idea of using the two dice (roll 8+ to succeed) to determine EFFECT and TIME (1 dice representing each).
In his example, the player rolls a 6 and a 1 (with skill 1, he succeeds).
Now, if you want for ROLEplaying, you can take the 6 as effect and the 1 as time (fixed it REALLY well, but it took a long time to do) OR you can take the 1 as effect and the 6 as time (fixed it enough to make it work but did it really quick). Obviously the higher you roll, the better your results in both categories.
Most of the time, you wouldn't even want to use that Effect/Time option, but in non-combat situations, it could be handy. I also thought it might be interesting if you used 2 different colored dice and had to pick which was which BEFORE you rolled.
The idea of Effect/Time seems kinda cool to me. I can see where it might be nice to have a quick way to decide some additional flavor to a success roll.
The blog info on RTT about Character Generation mentions a max characteristic bonus of +3.
That would seem to indicate that skills will be more important that characteristics, but without knowing how high the skills will get, it is still a bit fuzzy. It sounds like characters will have several low level skills (ala CT) and then a larger number of Level 0 Skills that at least keep you from getting the negative penalty for being unskilled.
He mentions that there are about 40 Skills right now, but he expects to whittle that down a bit. To me, that seems a small enough number that they will be pretty broad, so that a young character with only a couple of skill levels will still be useful.
Also, he mentioned the idea of using the two dice (roll 8+ to succeed) to determine EFFECT and TIME (1 dice representing each).
In his example, the player rolls a 6 and a 1 (with skill 1, he succeeds).
Now, if you want for ROLEplaying, you can take the 6 as effect and the 1 as time (fixed it REALLY well, but it took a long time to do) OR you can take the 1 as effect and the 6 as time (fixed it enough to make it work but did it really quick). Obviously the higher you roll, the better your results in both categories.
Most of the time, you wouldn't even want to use that Effect/Time option, but in non-combat situations, it could be handy. I also thought it might be interesting if you used 2 different colored dice and had to pick which was which BEFORE you rolled.
The idea of Effect/Time seems kinda cool to me. I can see where it might be nice to have a quick way to decide some additional flavor to a success roll.
Gruffty
SOC-14 1K
Here's how the proposed system looks (to 2 decimal places):
Presumably there'll be some rounding of decimals (these are my numbers, btw, not Mongoose's - decimals of .5 or less round down, .51 or higher round up):
.......looks familiar somehow
Code:
1 -2.00
2 -1.67
3 -1.33
4 -1.00
5 -0.67
6 -0.33
7 0.00
8 0.33
9 0.67
10 1.00
11 1.33
12 1.67
13 2.00
14 2.33
15 2.67
Code:
1 -2.00
2 -2.00
3 -1.00
4 -1.00
5 -1.00
6 0.00
7 0.00
8 0.00
9 1.00
10 1.00
11 1.00
12 2.00
13 2.00
14 2.00
15 3.00Could be:
Characteristic scores 4 or less = -1
Characteristic scores 9 or more = +1
Characteristic scores 12 or more = +2
Characteristic scores 15 or more = +3
...in layman's terms.
So, as a set of rules:
Characteristic scores half or less than target number 8 = -1
Characteristic scores more than target number 8 = +1
+ 1 for each multiple of 3 over target number.
Characteristic scores 4 or less = -1
Characteristic scores 9 or more = +1
Characteristic scores 12 or more = +2
Characteristic scores 15 or more = +3
...in layman's terms.
So, as a set of rules:
Characteristic scores half or less than target number 8 = -1
Characteristic scores more than target number 8 = +1
+ 1 for each multiple of 3 over target number.
