How to "fix" your T4 game...

[Supplement Four]

If you're a T4 player, I'm sure you're aware that the game's task system is broken, a bit, in its evaluation of a character's skills in relation to his stats (his trained experience vs. his natural ability).

For example, take Piter the paramedic, EDU-9 Medical-1. He throws 10- on tasks when he attempts them.

Now, compare Piter to Fromme, the licensed M.D. Fromme's got Edu-6 Medical-3. But Fromme, a full M.D., only throws 9- when he makes medical task attempts.

Clear problem there, huh?

Well, fret not. There are two very popular "fixes" that are available to you--simple tweaks that will enable you to fix this n your T4 game with little to no fuss and keep on gaming.

===================
OPTION #1: KBv2.0
===================

This is a very poplular T4 "fix" that introduces the concept of a character's "Experience".

Basically, what it does, is inflate the value of a character's skill by a factor of 3.

On the character's sheet, you list the character's Experience score right there next to his Skill.

The character's Experience is his Skill x 3.

(Alternatively, you can just remember to multiply the character's skill by 3 when figuring the character's target number.)

Under T4 as written, Piter (the Edu-9 Medical-1 paramedic) throws 10- for tasks. Under KBv2.0, this character would throw 12- for tasks.

Compare this to Fromme (the Edu-6 Medical-3 doctor), who throws 9- under T4 as written. Under KBv2.0, this person throws 18-.

Thus, a character's experience makes much more of a difference in the tasks he attempts.

It's pretty simple. There are some other changes and optional rules, but that's the gist of it.

WHERE CAN YOU GET KBv2.0?

You can get it here:

http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/task/kb20.html


===================
OPTION #2: T4.1
===================

Another great tweak that you can use for T4 is a system tweaked by none other than Marc Miller himself. This is the T4.1 task system (and currently what Marc's thinking of using for T5...or some version of it).

T4.1 is basically the same system as T4, with the exception of the "It's-Harder-Than-I-Thought" rule.

This rule will increase a character's difficulty by one level if his skill level is not equal to or higher than the number of dice thrown on the task.

An Average task under T4.1 is to roll your Skill + Stat target number, or less, on 2D.

Piter, the paramedic (above), would have to actually roll 10- or 3D when making this task.

But, Frohen, the doctor (above) would roll 9- on 2D when making this roll.

WHERE CAN YOU GET T4.1?

You can get it here:

http://www.traveller5.com/


NOTE - BOTH SYSTEMS DO NOT USE THE HATED HALF-DIE FROM T4!!!!!

 

[far-trader]

But both fixes ignore the real problem I see, and that is that the system gives too much weight to stats as compared to skills.

In your examples I can see a good reason for wanting treatment by the highly educated paramedic instead of the "Doctor" who barely graduated high school.

If you really want a system that reflects skill over stat then just make it so. Drop the stat from the skill check (maybe there's a reason it is a "skill" check) or at least reduce the impact of the stat by either making it a division add or some breakpoint add (same thing really).

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by far-trader:
In your examples I can see a good reason for wanting treatment by the highly educated paramedic instead of the "Doctor" who barely graduated high school.

You're be-boppin' down the street. You feel like you've got heart burn. Then, suddenly, you clutch your chest, fall to your knees, and shriek out in pain. You're having a heart attack.

Nearby, there are two people with medical experience.

One is a paramedic, who's got a couple of degrees, but never praticed medicine: EDU-13 Medical-1

The other is a licensed doctor: EDU-10 Medical-4.

You're trying to tell me, in real life, you'd go with the paramedic?

T4 gives BOTH the same chance of success--which is ludicrous.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by far-trader:
But both fixes ignore the real problem I see, and that is that the system gives too much weight to stats as compared to skills.

On the contrary, both systems are specifically designed to increase the importance of expertise (skill) with regards to a character's task roll.

The real problem IS that T4 gives too much weight to stats as compared to skills--exactly as you say.

KBv2.0 addresses this by increasing the weight of skill by three-fold.

T4.1 addresses this by invoking the IHTIT rule, which greatly decreases a character's chance of success if his skill level does not equal or succeed the number of difficulty dice being thrown.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by far-trader:
If you really want a system that reflects skill over stat then just make it so. Drop the stat from the skill check (maybe there's a reason it is a "skill" check) or at least reduce the impact of the stat by either making it a division add or some breakpoint add (same thing really).

What?

This thread is about fixing official T4...minimal tweaks that will keep a T4 game up and running without the problems in official T4.

So, you're suggesting to drop the stat from the skill check.

You've got to make a 3D check. You've got Pilot-3 EDU-7. You're suggesting that the player should roll 3- on 3D to succeed?

You might want to re-think that.

Also, just because a character's stats in T4 ARE over stated as officially written doesn't mean that a stat is worthless.

A person's naturalability should absolutely be considered in a task roll.

If you've got two doctors in a room. Both are Medical-5 guys, but one is EDU-9 and one is EDU-13...

Wouldn't you agree that the EDU-13 doctor should have a better chance at success than the EDU-9 doctor?

You see, both KBv2.0 and T4.1 address these issues, and they do it with a minimal fuss. If you're playing T4, you can use either KBv2.0 or T4.1, and you won't have to re-write the entire official rule book. You just slip either system into your game, and all other rules stay as written.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by WJP:
You're be-boppin' down the street. You feel like you've got heart burn. Then, suddenly, you clutch your chest, fall to your knees, and shriek out in pain. You're having a heart attack.

Nearby, there are two people with medical experience.

One is a paramedic, who's got a couple of degrees, but never praticed medicine: EDU-13 Medical-1

The other is a licensed doctor: EDU-10 Medical-4.

You're trying to tell me, in real life, you'd go with the paramedic?

T4 gives BOTH the same chance of success--which is ludicrous.

Ah, but you've changed the numbers here

And as I said in your examples above, due to the way the "reality" (i.e. the rules) work, yes I'd want the green paramedic with the knowledge over the seasoned doctor with less knowledge.

In this latest example, again in that "reality", it wouldn't matter as you point out. So who ever gets to me first is fine.

Real life has nothing to do with the choice under the rules.

And I do agree, it's silly. Hence the need by some to fix the rules.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by WJP:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by far-trader:
But both fixes ignore the real problem I see, and that is that the system gives too much weight to stats as compared to skills.

On the contrary, both systems are specifically designed to increase the importance of expertise (skill) with regards to a character's task roll.

The real problem IS that T4 gives too much weight to stats as compared to skills--exactly as you say.

KBv2.0 addresses this by increasing the weight of skill by three-fold.

T4.1 addresses this by invoking the IHTIT rule, which greatly decreases a character's chance of success if his skill level does not equal or succeed the number of difficulty dice being thrown. </font>[/QUOTE]Right, I do see that, they just strike me as inelegant solutions. They compensate for the deficiency by grafting on more rules and calculations. That's the only point I was trying to make.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by WJP:
If you've got two doctors in a room. Both are Medical-5 guys... wouldn't you agree that the EDU-13 doctor should have a better chance at success than the EDU-9 doctor?

In most cases, in real life, nope. As long as each met the minimum educational standards each is likely to have the same probability of success. Skill, experience, whatever you call the "talent" measurment is the great equalizer.

Originally posted by WJP:
You see, both KBv2.0 and T4.1 address these issues, and they do it with a minimal fuss. If you're playing T4, you can use either KBv2.0 or T4.1, and you won't have to re-write the entire official rule book. You just slip either system into your game, and all other rules stay as written.

I'll defer, having not cracked T4 in ages, and having only a vague recall of the system's problems. I find it telling that "that" is my biggest memory of it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by far-trader:
[QB]

Ah, but you've changed the numbers here

And as I said in your examples above, due to the way the "reality" (i.e. the rules) work, yes I'd want the green paramedic with the knowledge over the seasoned doctor with less knowledge.

In this latest example, again in that "reality", it wouldn't matter as you point out. So who ever gets to me first is fine.

Game mechanics--good game mechanics, that is--model real life. They represent real characteristics of people in real life.

So, what you're saying is: If you have a heart attack, and a paramedic (EDU-9 Medical-1) and a fully licensed doctor (EDU-6 Medical-3) were standing around, ready to help you--you'd want the paramedic to work on you.

But, if the paramedic was EDU-13 Medical-1, and the doctor was EDU-10 Medical-4, you wouldn't care who would work on you...

OK...whatever.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by far-trader:
Right, I do see that, they just strike me as inelegant solutions. They compensate for the deficiency by grafting on more rules and calculations. That's the only point I was trying to make.

Now, that makes sense. That's a matter of taste and esthetics, of course.

But, the T4 system is broken, and the only way to fix it, if you're a T4 player, is to change a couple of things--tack on more rules, as you say.

I like both systems. I especially like the IHTIT rule (which wasn't Marc's idea originally, BTW). I think either system is a pretty elegant fix to the problem that T4 presents.

 

[Darium]

I don't think good game mechanics model real life, they help tell a story. Roleplaying games are about larger than life heroes doing encredible things in amazing worlds. I like T4 as is (although WJP's fixes are a good addition). IMTU the hotshot pilot is as good as the steady veteran in the cockpit. If you think there is a diference between then there is. You don't need rules to tell you. Once upon a time the GM was a Judge. Making decisions during the game not merely consulting rules.

I am taking another look at T4. The release of the rules 10 years ago go me back into Traveller.
Seeing the direction T5 is going it should be an easy transition when the new books hit the shelves.

 

[aramis]

Ken:

Good game mechanics do model something, just not always real life.

Take D&D 3E: The mechanics are good, as they do model something... but that something, while believable, Ain't Real Life.

CT obviously ain't real life. Nor is MT, but it's closer.

 

[Ursus Latex]

Just a question about tweaking expierence as handled in T4:
In various games (e.g. MechWarrior) the rules connected roling dice to raising skills and expirience. T4 does exactly the same and I must say, I distaste it. It leads only to a lot of roling dice, so everyone can test as much skills as possible. Then you test the skill for improving.

Since skills range from 1 to 10 (usually) and rarely go beyond, I tried to figure out a new way to improve skills. I usually used XP like they are used in other systems of similar skill range (WoD, L5R etc.) Does anyone have an opinion on that or expiriences with it?

Do you allow to improve attributes?

Do you limit skills? For example "skill may not be higher as aligned attribute"?

UL

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ursus Latex:
Just a question about tweaking expierence as handled in T4:

I assume you're talking about character improvement and not the Experience score used in KBv2.0?

Since skills range from 1 to 10 (usually) and rarely go beyond, I tried to figure out a new way to improve skills.

In T4, skill range from 0-6 or so. There is no limit, but I rarely see a T4 character with a Level 7+ skill. It can happen, but it just doesn't happen very often at all.

Unless you're using some chargen tweak from standard T4.

I usually used XP like they are used in other systems of similar skill range (WoD, L5R etc.) Does anyone have an opinion on that or expiriences with it?

I like dice rolling for stats, but I didn't use the official T4 rules when I played T4.

I usually use a system where, at the end of the night, points are awarded for "good ideas during the game" and "good roleplaying".

Then, I have pre-requisite number of points needed to attempt to go up.

When the character accumulates the points, he can try to go up--and going up is not automatic. It's a dice roll.

In this way, players are rewarded for good role playing and thinking creatively during a game--the more points they get, the more often they can attempt to go up.

I typically always use some flavor of that--right now, I'm a CT player, and I'm going to use a similar system.

Do you allow to improve attributes?

Absolutely. But, in my game, using a system like I've outlined above, it's so hard to do (and time-consuming in game--could take the character months or years) that players typically don't do it.

There's a big sacrifice in all those skills that could have gone up but didn't because the player was holding out to attempt to upgrade a stat.

I make it possible in my games, but I also make it very, very hard. I want a player to really want it and ask himself if it's worth the sacrifice to get his stat improved.

Do you limit skills? For example "skill may not be higher as aligned attribute"?

I don't. But, I could see an argument to do it.

I find that CT, MT, and T4 typically do a decent enough job in keeping skill levels low that I don't think it's necessary to limit skills.

Another reason I don't limit skills is that I don't tie any one skill to a particular attribute as is done in MT and T4. I use skill with an appropriate stat governor--which may change depending on the task being attempted.

For example, a Pilot typically uses EDU when using his Pilot skill. But, if he's got to perform a tricky docking maneuver with a derelict spacecraft, dead, in space, rotating at a fast clip, then a steady hand on the manual joystick might be called for. In this second case, I'd use the Pilot skill with DEX instead of the usual EDU.

If you play skills this way, then which stat do you use to judge the limit of the skill with?

If a ship is damaged, and a pilot fighting the joystick as the ship is tossing about in an atmosphereic storm, then I might use Pilot skill governed by STR for the pilot to keep control of the stick.

It just depends on the situation.

 

[Border Reiver]

Game mechanics--good game mechanics, that is--model real life. They represent real characteristics of people in real life.

So, what you're saying is: If you have a heart attack, and a paramedic (EDU-9 Medical-1) and a fully licensed doctor (EDU-6 Medical-3) were standing around, ready to help you--you'd want the paramedic to work on you.

But, if the paramedic was EDU-13 Medical-1, and the doctor was EDU-10 Medical-4, you wouldn't care who would work on you...

OK...whatever.

Bad analogy, unless the doc was a cardiac or emergency medicince specialist I'd take a paramedic everytime. Game mechanics can never model real life, it's too complex. I also think that attributes should only affect how skills are gained not their use (unless a task specifically gave a modifier based on atts per MT). You carry on down this route and the game will become unplayable as you become bogged down in dice and calculations. Good game mechanics are fast, simple and do not interupt game flow. If you get caught in a damage mantra then the game is flawed (mumbles to himself THACO is 14 so I need a 12 plus 3 for the sword plus 2 att modifiers plus 3 for the amulet plus 1 for the ring..yes do thats 2D8 +2 dam plus 3 str mod plus 1D4 fire dam plus 2D4 for.............just leave him in a corner)

 

[Ursus Latex]

If you play skills this way, then which stat do you use to judge the limit of the skill with?

I absolutely agree on using skills with diffrent stats, and I don't think I would use a skill cap method in my game. The question was for brainstorming.
But if I would use it, I would either cap the skill at the default attributes (e.g. Pilot-EDU) rating, or I would go for "indefinite value but relative cap".
The first system would say: "Piloting is mainly a thing of your brain and education, hence your knowledge [read EDU] of flying caps your skill-abilities, even though you might be entitled for better performances. An example would be a beginners pilot. He has no imagination and knowledge of possible flight maneuvers, hence he does not consider flying an Immelmann turn...
THe second version seems more promising to me, as it relates your flying capabilites (in the example) to the "actually performable". In a way it is a "in-system" difficulty rating. Compared to the set difficulty of a task, which reflects the "objective propability" of a succesful application of a skill, this would be a "subjective propability". It relates to your own abilities.
However it dramatically emphasizes the aatributes, which might be not what you would want in the regular T4.

UL

 

[Prospero]

I'm all for the multiple attribute approach.

One other mechanic I've used is to define a skill level requirement for the task and then penalize characters who don't meet that requirement. For example, CPR might simply be a level one medical task. Fine. However, heart surgery would be a level 5 task (assuming one even had the equipment). Level 3 for being a doctor, +1 for surgery +1 for specialized surgery....Then the paramedic with medic-1 would receive at least a -4 do his die roll (for the level 5 task minus his skill of 1). That would be on top of any other change in the number of dice rolled. Or one might double the penalty to -8 or what ever. Or one could simply say that computer-3 was necessary to understand the code or what have you...that way skill level has a strong influence.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Prospero:
For example, CPR might simply be a level one medical task. Fine. However, heart surgery would be a level 5 task (assuming one even had the equipment). Level 3 for being a doctor, +1 for surgery +1 for specialized surgery....Then the paramedic with medic-1 would receive at least a -4 do his die roll (for the level 5 task minus his skill of 1).

I like it. Good stuff.

 

[Ursus Latex]

Yes, indeed. It's a good idea.

Urs

 

[Prospero]

Thanks...