Core Rules 5.09

[aramis]

Before spending the money to purchase it, is it: 1) Searchable using a PDF reader, and 2) is is possible to copy and paste from it, are is it simply readable with no possibility to pick and choose relevant pieces?

It's an OEF - Original Electronic Format - PDF. That means that it was distilled directly to PDF, and as used at DTRPG, that means the text is actually encoded as text.

That said, I've tested both functions in Acrobat - and yes, I can both search and copy.

The anti-piracy method is watermark with name and purchase number.

If you bought T5 from Marc (via kickstarter or post), you might have a PDF download coupon in your email.

 

[Supplement Four]

remember (and you know this...) spectacular failure also increases at the same rate.

OK...but it makes sense that a perfect failure gets more likely when the task gets harder.

It doesn't make sense that a perfect success gets more likely when a task gets harder.

I for one don't worry about this that much..

Just because that one little problem in the rules doesn't bother you doesn't mean that it's a good rule. It's a bad rule that you've accepted.

And, that's fine.

I'd like to have a solid game with good rules, though. Rules that make sense.

 

[Draconian]

That is welcome. I have not checked my latest e-mail in days, but will do so to get the download link.

I am grateful to all concerned.

 

[Timerover51]

Marc is still working to bring about a true 5.1. This is an interim effort.

That answers a question that I did not ask but should have regarding buying. I will wait a bit longer.

 

[aramis]

That answers a question that I did not ask but should have regarding buying. I will wait a bit longer.

Note that Marc is REALLY good about updating purchasers.

 

[Ackehece]

Note that Marc is REALLY good about updating purchasers.

That answers a question that I did not ask but should have regarding buying. I will wait a bit longer.

As aramis has said... buy it now... Marc will give you the update when it is available. He is VERY VERY good at that.

 

[David Johansen]

yep... I did bring that up Many times... but since they fixed a lot of other combat issues it is better.

It's easy enough to fix by giving the attacker a +7 to hit.

And I'm really pleased with this release, even if it's still a bit buggy it's been so very long in coming that I'm thrilled to see it.

 

[Supplement Four]

It's easy enough to fix by giving the attacker a +7 to hit.

Why do that? Why should the attacker get a whopping +7 modifier on his attack throw?

That doesn't make sense within the game--it's a mechanical fix only.

Melee attackers are +7 to hit because....

 

[Timerover51]

Note that Marc is REALLY good about updating purchasers.

When I spend money on a game, I do not depend on continuous updates to fix it. I have looked at Traveller 5 in the hard copy edition, and determined that I would wait a while before buying it. There is too much in there that I am not impressed with.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

OK...but it makes sense that a perfect failure gets more likely when the task gets harder.

It doesn't make sense that a perfect success gets more likely when a task gets harder.


Just because that one little problem in the rules doesn't bother you doesn't mean that it's a good rule. It's a bad rule that you've accepted.

And, that's fine.

I'd like to have a solid game with good rules, though. Rules that make sense.

Well, Supp4 perhaps it is meant to be a more cinematic rule and less a hard science rule in which case it does make sense.

You know a rule that allows player characters to be truly heroic, not just some shlubs. Not saying I am correct, but that is my impression.

 

[Spartan159]

Well, Supp4 perhaps it is meant to be a more cinematic rule and less a hard science rule in which case it does make sense.

You know a rule that allows player characters to be truly heroic, not just some shlubs. Not saying I am correct, but that is my impression.

Oh heavens forbid, heroic? Aren't you afraid of mobs with pitchforks?

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Of course heroic.

Oh heavens forbid, heroic? Aren't you afraid of mobs with pitchforks?

Yes, heroic. Why not?

And goodness no, mobs can be dealt with, you just need enough troops. :devil:

 

[Hal]

For what it is worth - when I got the book, I was seriously disappointed. Seeing the version 5.09 gives me some hope.

I'm currently running a Traveller campaign with my two players, and the reason I started that campaign was because of T5's debut. But, like Chivalry & Sorcery THE REBIRTH, it looked nice, but was unplayable as written.

This has the looks of perhaps being playable, so now I will start looking at it with an eye towards running it. As ever, when I don't like a rule as written, I tend to house rule it with something I like. So, even if there are a few minor glitches, if the basic system works and works reasonably well, I can find my own fixes to it and go from there.

I also picked up the Imperial Lines 6 and 7, and was thankful to see #7 with some information on Nobility.

Ah wellllllllllllll

 

[rancke]

Well, Supp4 perhaps it is meant to be a more cinematic rule and less a hard science rule in which case it does make sense.

You know a rule that allows player characters to be truly heroic, not just some shlubs. Not saying I am correct, but that is my impression.

That explanation might fly if the rules treated heroes (i.e. player characters) differently from non-heroes. But AFAIK they don't. Or do they? If NPCs don't get critical successes, that's different.

Still, I have to agree with S4 that a game mechanic that potentially have the players make their throws more difficult in order to achieve better results is... ahem, counter-intutitive.


Hans

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

A response.

That explanation might fly if the rules treated heroes (i.e. player characters) differently from non-heroes. But AFAIK they don't. Or do they? If NPCs don't get critical successes, that's different.

Still, I have to agree with S4 that a game mechanic that potentially have the players make their throws more difficult in order to achieve better results is... ahem, counter-intutitive.


Hans

Why does it make sense if only applied to PCs, but not NPCs? That makes no sense to me. I come from the school of if player characters can have it so can non-player characters. Fair is fair.

And I will punish the player who meta-games the Difficulty every time. If you're gonna cheat, be prepared for the concequences when you are caught. And make no mistake, what Supp4 (and you too, Hans if you follow his advice) is advocating is straight up cheating. :nonono:

Oh, and last bit, players don't set Difficulty, Referees do, so in play a player shouldn't be able to cheat the Difficulty. They can make suggestions, but in the end it is the Referee's job to set Target Numbers. So, if we are running our games properly there is no chance for cheating like Supp4 suggests since the players aren't doing more than making suggestions and rolling dice (mechanics wise, RP is expected by players too).

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

A response.

That explanation might fly if the rules treated heroes (i.e. player characters) differently from non-heroes. But AFAIK they don't. Or do they? If NPCs don't get critical successes, that's different.

Still, I have to agree with S4 that a game mechanic that potentially have the players make their throws more difficult in order to achieve better results is... ahem, counter-intutitive.


Hans

Why does it make sense if only applied to PCs, but not NPCs. That makes no sense to me. I come from the school of if player characters can have it so can non-player characters. Fair is fair.

And I will punish the player who meta-games the Difficulty every time. If you're gonna cheat, be prepared for the concequences when you are caught. And make no mistake, what Supp4 (and you too, Hans if you follow his advice) is advocating is straight up cheating. :nonono:

Oh, and last bit, players don't set Difficulty, Referees do, so in play a player shouldn't be able to cheat the Difficulty. They can make suggestions, but in the end it is the Referee's job to set Target Numbers. So, if we are running our games properly there is no chance for cheating like Supp4 suggests since the players aren't doing more than making suggestions and rolling dice (mechanics wise, RP is expected by players too).

 

[rancke]

Why does it make sense if only applied to PCs, but not NPCs. That makes no sense to me. I come from the school of if player characters can have it so can non-player characters. Fair is fair.

But then the justification that heroes do better goes out the window. If everybody does better than logic suggests they should, there's just plain something screwy going on.

And I will punish the player who meta-games the difficulty ever time. If you're gonna cheat, be prepared for the concequences when you are caught.

That's because you're such a good referee that you can backstop bad rules. But rules are supposed to help mediocre or even bad referees to do a good or at least decent job. It's the bad referees that really need rules, and they need the rules to be good.

And make no mistake, what Supp4 (and you too, Hans if you follow his advice) is advocating is straight up cheating. :nonono:

What you see as cheating another referee might see as legitimate manipulation of official rules. What's cheating about using the rules as they are written?

Oh, and last bit, players don't set Difficulty, Referees do, so in play a player shouldn't be able to cheat the Difficulty. They can make suggestions, but in the end it is the Referee's job to set Target Numbers.

"What's the difficulty? OK, what's the difficulty if I use my off hand? What if I shoot over my shoulder? Take a snap shot?"

So, if we are running our games properly there is no chance for cheating like Supp4 suggests since the players aren't doing more than making suggestions and rolling dice (mechanics wise, RP is expected by players too).

What's improper about running the game according to the rules as written? I've gamed with a ref who ran everything By The Book, and I can tell you, in such a case you want the rules to be tight, self-consistent, and realistic.

Though the other thing can be quite amusing.

Bottom line: The fact that a good referee can backstop a bad rule does not make the rule a good one.


Hans

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

More responses.

But then the justification that heroes do better goes out the window. If everybody does better than logic suggests they should, there's just plain something screwy going on.

What justification? What I said was villains are the equals of heroes, which they should be, if not a smidge more than equal otherwise where is the challenge for the PCs? And those extreme Difficulties are for extreme circumstances, not for every day adventure fare. Those are disarming nukes, steering the Dagger away from Efate, preventing the assination of the Emperor. Not trying to get cargo or shoot a mugger.

That's because you're such a good referee that you can backstop bad rules. But rules are supposed to help mediocre or even bad referees to do a good or at least decent job. It's the bad referees that really need rules, and they need the rules to be good.

No, I am not a good Referee, I am a mean Referee. And a crappy mathetician so I never noticed or cared about the "broken" probabilities.

What you see as cheating another referee might see as legitimate manipulation of official rules. What's cheating about using the rules as they are written?

"What's the difficulty? OK, what's the difficulty if I use my off hand? What if I shoot over my shoulder? Take a snap shot?"

The intent, sort of like the difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder.

"The same as it was before you thought to do trick shots. So, are you engaging in combat shooting or trick shooting? Choose one and then we'll see what the Difficulty is. Also, quit being a dick, player." Or even, "You don't know, since there are some Uncertain Dice that I will be rolling since all combat is Uncertain. You just roll nD6 and we'll see if your fancy trick shot hits, shall we?"

What's improper about running the game according to the rules as written? I've gamed with a ref who ran everything By The Book, and I can tell you, in such a case you want the rules to be tight, self-consistent, and realistic.

Though the other thing can be quite amusing.

Bottom line: The fact that a good referee can backstop a bad rule does not make the rule a good one.


Hans

Again, I am not a Maths guy so frankly, I am not really bothered by the rule and again I see it as a chance for the players to really shine, or get shined. So I don't think it is either broken or wrong.

Well, I have to be at bill paying job in like five hours so I may not respond again till later today, but rest assured, I'll be back if needed.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

And another thing...

Also, here is a suggestion. Remember that is a role-playing game and not a Math text. The primary objective is to have fun, not be mathematically correct to standard probabilities. And Crits are fun...mostly, like when they help you. In addition remember that it is balanced, you can just as hosed as you can be awesome. So again, not that big a problem to me.

As well, my dear Hans, I think you overrate consitency. Seriously, I look at the world we live in and I see tons of stuff that makes no damned sense, but then I remember that the real world is not a nice tidy rule book for a made up world. I like a bit of weirdness in my universes, a bit of inconsitenty, a lot of complexity and some down right confusion. To me that makes them far more realistic than excessive order or consistency.

But that may just be me.

 

[Orffen]

I took the plunge and picked this up and I have to say I'm impressed! After the bad reviews of the initial release I'm finding this one really readable. Really love the way the fluff section at the beginning is written.

A little disappointed about the ToC page number issues (and the missing PDF ToC) but minor quibbles in the grand scheme of things.

Thanks to Marc and everyone involved in getting this version out - looking forward to the 5.1 release!