CT+, what would you do?

[Fritz_Brown]

Thanks, robject!

Um, Kafka, if somebody gets shot in the eyes, its usually going to give them DEX-0, STR-0, END-0! Even with a 22, the eyeball won't slow it down much before it goes bouncing around inside the brainpan!

 

[kafka47]

I was rather thinking of a flash burn from a laser. Not that from a slug thrower or fusion weapon. Sorry, I ought have clarified.

 

[robject]

I think if we discuss (calmly?) and compromise a bit (perhaps on the side of simplicity), we could actually get a consensus.

So Sigg, I'll change my vote to the T4 combat model, away from the MT pen/dmg dualism. For the moment. And I'll broaden some of the items a bit, here and there

 

[Berg]

I would love to see this come to fruition and released possilbly as a free community project.

We could vote for the project managers and all contribute

The beauty of CT was simplicity. We just need to make it steamlined, clean and eliminate the contradictions. I still love CT because the rules are smooth enough for online play.

Tom

 

[robject]

I'm sure the devil is in the details. However, agreeing on a general framework would be a great start and give some needed momentum.

Where we have two competing solutions, one side is going to have to back down.

I can agree to use Aramis' task system.

I count nine or ten people who so far have chipped in their two credits' worth. If we did a "design by committee", it seems to me that any option would have to at least get a majority of "votes" to be included.

Or there are a zillion different ways to do this. But I'd prefer a consensus, based on cooperation, consideration, and compromise.

 

[Berg]

I found the advanced Character Generation good, but unfair to the careers that lacked it. I found on Freelance Traveller a type of solution:
Generic Extended Character Generation System by James Jensen

I've been working on a VB prog for CT+ that would use this type of chargen to make advance chargen for all the careers.

Opinions

Tom

 

[robject]

That's pretty spiffy. I think his idea could combine with the wounded-during-career rules (no death during chargen in T5) in the T5 draft to produce a cool result.

 

[mike wightman]

I wouldn't bother with advanced character generation systems for CT+ at all.

By adding special duty to the character generation tables characters gain access to a few more skills.

Having two different character generation methods, one of which produces much more skilled characters, always seemed odd to me

 

[zakrol]

I'd agree - keep it simple by having the one style of chargen.

Personally I like the MT version pretty much as it stands so I'd also argue for the idea that getting 4 over a promotion/special duty roll gives an extra skill. This produces characters with skill levels close to those of the CT advanced methods. It all depends what sort of skill levels are regarded as 'correct' as this will have knock on effects for the task system.

It does need a bit of balancing between careers, though, as there are careers with difficult promotion that need lower special duty rolls to compensate.

 

[robject]

Perhaps, then, the special duty roll would be best, since re-balancing could be... difficult.

I also like giving characters more skills (with Sigg's duty-roll-rule, up to 7 per term) during career resolution than afterwards.

I have 3 reasons for this:

(1) early rewards are good
(2) younger characters can still be useful while still not being as skillful
(3) by around age 30, characters "should have" roughly one skill per year of age.

With Point #3, you get an ultra-fast point-based chargen for free.

 

[mike wightman]

One skill per year of age doesn't quite fit the CT/MT model, it works for TNE and T4/5 though - but in those latter games there was considerable skill inflation necessary due to the way assets and tasks were handled.

A CT/MT character after 3 terms with 30 points of skills? It's too many if we stick to a DGP derived task system IMHO. About one per year of service sounds closer to the mark.

 

[robject]

Well those are actually good points. I keep forgetting this is CT+

Consider my mind changed.

 

[zakrol]

Again agreed, Sigg

Although the special duty style can give upto 7 skills in a term (8 on the first) in MT, in practice it tends to be around 3 or 4 per term which matches the norm in the extended generation methods.

On the balancing between careers issue, pity the Noble who needs 11 to get promoted (assuming he's very intelligent) and 6 for special duty which means that he's going to average a little under 2 skills per term (after the first when he gets his near automatic position). Whereas a Scout with 2 skills per term base and 4+ special duty will average over 3.5.

I suppose it is more complex in that there is mustering out benefits and the chance of re-enlisting or being injured to take into account. Might be worth doing an analysis of it all to compare if it's deemed worth the bother...

On an aside, robject - are you aiming to come up with a model for CT+ here? I'd certainly be interested in such a thing if that is the aim.

 

[robject]

Actually, Zakrol, that's the aim of all the folks in this particular topic. I admit to steering the conversation, since it slacked off and needs a kick to get going again.

And though there are topics for very specific CT+ rules, there are still overarching concepts that need to be decided upon. And I suspect this will (at best) be design-by-committee, so we ought to get voting here so we can focus.


Here's the latest CT+ concepts list. I've taken horrible liberties, so make sure your opinion is represented correctly.


CT+ Probable Concepts

Separated from canon. CT+ implies the ruleset by which Traveller can be played, rather than the background. (Gruffty, robject)

LBB1 - Chargen

MT's basic CG. (Sigg, Aramis, Fralix, robject, Taylor (I think), Zakrol, Maladominus (I think))

Without the MT limit on the total number of skill levels (INT+EDU). (Fralix, robject)

About 50 skills, cleaned up and integrated with all careers. (See topic) (Sigg, robject, Maladominus?)

Homeworld skills (level-0 or level-1), some chosen, prior to enlistment. (Taylor, Fritz88, robject)

Use Life Pursuits as a mechanism for player choice and/or specialization. (Sigg, Fritz88, robject)

Alternately, use arbitary mix of random or chosen skills, as needed. (Zakrol, robject, Sigg, Taylor)

A special duty roll to gain more benefits per tem. (Sigg, robject, Zakrol)

Alternately, use a simple point-based system: 42 + [years in career] points to spend on characteristics and skills. (Sigg)

LBB1 - Task System

Target number scale of 4 8 12 16 20, and a DM of characteristic/3. (Aramis, Sigg, robject)

LBB1 - Equipment

Steal Peter Vernon's "Consolidated Equipment List": http://www.sff.net/people/kitsune/traveller/peter/vehicles.html
(Sigg, robject)

LBB2 - Starships

Starship construction based on T20/High Guard, with support for vehicles (perhaps based on The Oz's vehicle extension of LBB2). (Sigg, Fralix, Aramis, Brongrev, Zakrol, robject)

Include all the necessary deckplans of all typical player career ships (i.e. Types S, A, L, K, etc) in ONE section. (Maladominus, robject)

LBB2 computer rules, re-named Computer, Comms, Sensor/ECM Suite. (Sigg, robject)


LBB3 - Worlds and Adventures

LBB3 as is. (Sigg)


CT+ Unresolved Concepts

Chargen A - General

Add chargen from all CT alien supplements, including minor human races. (Maladominus)

T20 chargen without levels, with something like CT enlistments, XPs from survival, decorations, promotions, etc, (Fritz88)

Attribute increases available during Prior History creation. (Fritz88)


Chargen B - Skill Acquisition

Professional, Technical and Knowledge skills. (Fritz88)

Put Knowledge-type skills available in the "8+ Education only" skill list so some skills are not available to the truly education-challenged. (Taylor, Fritz88)

Have a combination of basic skills, choice, and randomly assigned skills depending on type of character. (Fralix)

Feats/Arcane Skills. (Fritz88, robject)

Use experience points to determine how many skills received per year/term. (Fritz88)

Allow skills from outside the service matrix at a higher cost. (Fritz88)


Chargen E - Extras

Benefits: Rolls on the money table are what you have managed to save during your terms of service. Assume that the character has acquired any basic equipment reasonable to their past history. Unusual or special (for example, military only) equipment must be purchased or acquired by some means up to the PC and referee. (Fralix, Zakrol)

Add level 7 & 8 to benefits tables and add an appriate means of reaching the DM to access those levels. All ship benefits would be on level 8 and add equalivalent benefits to those services that lack them. Make all multiple benefits meaningful. (Don't let additional TAS rolls become wasted rolls.) (Fralix)


Personal Combat

ACQ/T20/T4 system. (Sigg, Taylor, robject, Zakrol, kafka47)

MT-like pen/dmg system. (Oz, Aramis, Bromgrev, Zakrol)

Keep the same old combat system, because changing it would seriously alter the "Classic setting". (Maladominus)

It would be nice to have a close call kind of injury result: something that will leave you with noting more than a scar to brag about. (far-trader, robject)

Use something like the 2300AD system. (Fralix)

Add in a combat hit location chart. (kafka47)


Vehicle Combat

Starship combat based on Mayday/LBB2 hybrid plus sensor tasks from MT. (Sigg, robject)

Use MT's damage rules. (Aramis)


Trade

Trade based on T20's tables, but with a per parsec revenue base. (Sigg, Zakrol)

LBB-based (perhaps revised) rules. (robject)


Etc

Use TNE Initiative and Contacts rules. (Aramis)

A weapons design system compatible with the vehicle design system. (Bromgrev, robject)

Finally, add some polish or extra minor delicious goodness. For example, does anyone have a clue what the Logo/Banner of the Two Thousand Worlds is? I dont think it exists!! I've never seen what the symbol of the K'Kree people. Certainly this is something that would be nice as "brand new never-seen material" to add polish to any proposed product. (Maladominus)

 

[jappel]

I've followed a bit of this conversation and will be happy to chip in. More thoughtful and complete comments will have to wait a bit, but for now I'll just say that I'm in the "clean & elegant" system camp and offer a few quick observations. Like Sigg I feel that MT overall is probably the best implementation of the rules, but I'd be perfectly happy to cherry-pick the good stuff from MT and clean up CT proper.

One thing I'd urge is a separation of rules and setting, e.g. I'd like to avoid things like the "DM +2 if member of Imperial Navy" in the advanced chargen in MT, and if memory serves High Guard.

If it hasn't been mentioned already, some sort of point-based chargen, even if optional, is really required to meet the sensibilities of today's gamers IMHO, or at least some mechanism to grant a bit of control over skill selection. I ran some MT sessions this past weekend and while folks found the random chargen entertaining, there was some frustration. One player went 6 terms in the scouts (basic MT chargen) without picking up any gun combat skills. (Naturally, he rolled "Weapon" as a benefit 5 times and wound up with a laser pistol and Laser Weapons-4, but it was a definite issue while he was in-service.) Another had one of those bad runs that sometimes occur; we tried three times to come up with something viable and wound up using a pregenerated character.

RE the reference to Aramis' task system - could someone point me to that please? Is it in the older portion of this thread or in another?

Gotta scoot, more to follow later.

- John

 

[mike wightman]

Aramis' 2d task system is similar to the DGP/MT one except the target numbers are increased by 1 to become 4 8 12 16 20, while the DM for attributes becomes characteristic/3.

It just so happens to be the way I used to do it too, but Aramis posted it first...

 

[mike wightman]

Oh, and a simple points based system could be 42 + [years in career] points to spend on characteristics and skills.
I wouldn't allow any skill to go higher than 4 though.

 

[Ranger]

Just to add my thoughts, two things I would add to CT/MT basic CG:

Ranks for Enlisted, which would allow for rolling for promotion without a position (possible one more skill per term without position).

Schools as a possible result of Special Duty. This would result in as many as 4 skills from a successful special duty roll.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by robject:

Chargen A - General
CT chargen plus extended chargen from LBBs 4, 5, 7, Citizens. (I suspect this is going to be very similar to MT, but I'll leave it separate for now -robject) (Maladominus)

Add chargen from all CT alien supplements, including minor human races. (Maladominus)

Yes, that the easiest way to do so - but consolidate it first (that is, fix minor incompatability errors, inconsestencies and so on, and let all services a chance to go to college, flight school etc). Also, extended chargen for the Citizens careers would be advisable (I have extended Belter generation complete on paper, but I still need to type it, btw). Alien careers, though, are not 100% nescery for the core rulebook. My take on such consolidation could be seen in this thread.

2d6 for stats. (Fritz88, robject)
CT attributes. (Fritz88, robject)

I agree - though I suggest that the rolling mechanism would be to throw 2d6 seven times, discard the lowest pair and assign the remaining six as desired.

Derive your XPs from survival, decorations, promotions, type of duty for that year, etc. (Fritz88)

You mean post-chargen XP? I like that idea! would you like to elaborate?

Have attribute increases available during Prior History creation. (Fritz88)
NO Levels! (Fritz88, robject)

I AGREE! On both.

Specializations or Life Pursuits as a substitute for Citizens career resolution (but Citizens stuff is okay to have also). (robject)

I prefer the Citizens careers, that is an expanded (LBBs 4-7 style) version of them; they give much desired variety for the player to choose from, and we should keep the Life Pursuits mechanic for T5.

Chargen B - Skill Acquisition

Clean up/integrate the list to blend with the careers. (Maladominus)

On the acquired skills table: "pick from, or roll dice on, the following tables", with the caveat that if you choose, no more than two levels in a particular skill can be gained per term of service. (Sigg)

I agree on both; the second one is a good, and probably balanced, idea; the first should mainly be done through cascade skills.

No limit on number of skill levels. (Fralix)

I agree - the "no more than INT+EDU" mechanic is redundant; if you want a really small number of skill levels, use Basic Chargen.

Feats/Arcane Skills. (Fritz88, robject)

What do you mean by that? I know what D20 Feats are, but most of these are abot out of the CT sphere; and what are Arcane Skills? Magic in CT?

Use experience points to determine how many skills received per year/term. (Fritz88)

Once again, I'd like to see the detailed XP rules.

Allow skills from outside the service matrix at a higher cost. (Fritz88)

Outside of service, I presume? I think that once you choose a service, you accept some limits on your skill types; cascade skills will probably add enough inter-service variety anyway.

Chargen D - Default/Homeworld Skills

Homeworld skills (level-0 or level-1), some chosen, prior to enlistment. (Taylor, Fritz88, robject)

Once again, my ideas on homeworld and default skills could be found here.

Chargen E - Extras

Benefits: Rolls on the money table are what you have managed to save during your terms of service. Assume that the character has acquired any basic equipment reasonable to their past history. Unusual or special (for example, military only) equipment must be purchased or acquired by some means up to the PC and referee. (Fralix)

That's an excellent idea - a character would probably have various personal effects collected over the years of service. Not guns and (heavy?) armor, which you'll need to roll/buy, but simple stuff such as clothes, a backpack, an electric torch, maybe a breather etc. A proposed list will be VERY interesting.

Task System
I suggest the use of a modified and highly expanded version of Paul Elliott's task system; my version of it exists here.

Equipment

Add weapons and armour from Mercenary. (Sigg)
Integrate the newer gear and weaponry all in one place. (Maladominus)

I agree - we need a consolidated CT weapon/armor/gear table. It'll make everyone's life easier.

Personal Combat

Weapons should have pen and damage values. (Amazingly great for scalability, closer to MT) (Oz, Aramis, Bromgrev)

I prefer to give them Penetration only - it will also affect their damage (in a striker-type system) and a one- or two-roll system is preferable to one with more rolls.

My modified Striker/MT/CT combat system exists here.

Add in a combat hit location chart. (kafka47)

As a part of basic combat or as an option? It'd be a nice option for special occasions (called shots?) but it will complicate the damage system by much.

Vehicle Design

My take on it is to create a modular (LBB2-style) system to design vehicles (based on Striker?) and improve the LBB2 system for ship design. I have a 8-page article on the next Stellar Reaches (hopefully) which deals with expanding the LBB2 system. For more gearheading, use Striker for vehicles and a modified HG for ships. Just make sure that all systems yeald comparable designs that are usable on the same combat systems.

Vehicle Combat

Starship combat based on Mayday/LBB2 hybrid plus sensor tasks from MT. (Sigg, robject)

I agree! Just add a vector-calculating software to the books to make gameplay easy and fun (especially for mathematically-challanged players). For vehicles, use the (simplified) Striker-style system used for personnell combat.

Etc

A weapons design system compatible with the vehicle design system. (Bromgrev, robject)

A good idea, and I think that such system could be derived from Striker.

Include all the necessary deckplans of all typical player career ships (i.e. Types S, A, L, K, etc) in ONE section. (Maladominus, robject)

Absolutely! I don't know why this wasn't done to date in any Traveller edition I know...

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Ranger:
Just to add my thoughts, two things I would add to CT/MT basic CG:

Ranks for Enlisted, which would allow for rolling for promotion without a position (possible one more skill per term without position).

Schools as a possible result of Special Duty. This would result in as many as 4 skills from a successful special duty roll.

Or enlisted promotion could be linked to making the special duty roll.

Also an enlisted man who is promoted through the enlisted ranks who achieves a commission should gain an officer rank equal to enlisted rank/3 round down.