Multi-profession characters in Classic Traveller

[hans_koch]

I'm in the exciting process of getting back involved in Traveller after an almost 15-year absence. One thing I remembered liking most was the character generation process, of course. I love the idea of playing characters that already have skills and backgrounds, rather than the old "experience level" way of roleplaying.

I remember when I used to play my friends and I would always allow a character to be in more than one profession if the player desired. Thus, if you failed to re-enlist after two terms in the navy you could head off and join the scouts. Re-reading the classic traveller rules that seems to be a no-no. In many ways I like this restriction, as it reduces instances of over-powerful characters. On the other hand, multiple careers allows you to create more of a narrative for your character's background... ("kicked out of the navy after two years, Moogi decides to join the scout service where, alone in his ship, he can brood about the dishonourable discharge he should have avoided...")

Do most Classic Traveller GMs follow the one-profession rule to the letter?

Hans Koch

 

[GBoyett]

Originally posted by hans_koch:
I'm in the exciting process of getting back involved in Traveller after an almost 15-year absence. One thing I remembered liking most was the character generation process, of course. I love the idea of playing characters that already have skills and backgrounds, rather than the old "experience level" way of roleplaying.

I remember when I used to play my friends and I would always allow a character to be in more than one profession if the player desired. Thus, if you failed to re-enlist after two terms in the navy you could head off and join the scouts. Re-reading the classic traveller rules that seems to be a no-no. In many ways I like this restriction, as it reduces instances of over-powerful characters. On the other hand, multiple careers allows you to create more of a narrative for your character's background... ("kicked out of the navy after two years, Moogi decides to join the scout service where, alone in his ship, he can brood about the dishonourable discharge he should have avoided...")

Do most Classic Traveller GMs follow the one-profession rule to the letter?

Hans Koch

I pretty much did. The only exception any careers that started at 14, like belter and barbarian in Citizens of the Imperium. I allowed a character to switch careers at 18.

 

[lightsenshi]

I haven't seen a player character change professions (i.e. classes) more than once. And it's usually from a service class to a core class. There are exceptions, of course.

 

[rambler]

While most of my players' characters have had only one or two careers (i.e. a service and a non-service profession) I have at least one who has pursued three. If memory serves, he's an Army/Rogue/Professional. His background makes perfect sense for the classes, and I don't see any reason to restrict unduly, excepting of course that VERY few people will leave one military service to join another.

 

[manley_t]

I would allow it. But I was also a stickler for aging so folks wouldn't want to make too many aging roles. I was also a stickler for 2d6 for each ability and no moving the numbers around (like in other games). So they were stuck what they were born with....

 

[Uncle Bob]

Originally posted by Big Tim:
I would allow it. But I was also a stickler for aging so folks wouldn't want to make too many aging roles. I was also a stickler for 2d6 for each ability and no moving the numbers around (like in other games). So they were stuck what they were born with....

Well, if the UPP averaged less than 6 I let them abort the character. To enlist in a service you got a -1 DM for every term already served, unless you had useful skills from prior service. And a -1 for every service you try to join and fail.

 

[hans_koch]

Originally posted by Big Tim:
I would allow it. But I was also a stickler for aging so folks wouldn't want to make too many aging roles. I was also a stickler for 2d6 for each ability and no moving the numbers around (like in other games). So they were stuck what they were born with....

Recently I've always dissed the "dice rolling" method of character creation, preferring the "assign points" method. I always thought it was unfair to stick the player with a type of character they didn't want just because of a certain die roll (e.g. "I wanted to play a strong tough guy and instead I'm a geek with EDU 12 and STR 5...").

Having said that, since I'm much more interested in actual roleplaying then powergaming, forcing the players to play the characters as rolled can make for some interesting situations. It makes them think more about their character's backgrounds and history. When GMing, I appreciate players who put some thought into their characters, and try to use both their strengths and weaknesses to enhance the storyline.

However, I still allow them to shift their rolls around from attribute to attribute...

(And Big Tim, you're right that the aging table rolls are a HUGE incentive to stop a character's career after 4 terms or so. I was making a book 1 character recently, and realized that there was no point in staying in an extra term, rolling on the professional development table to maybe get a +1 to a physical attribute, and then losing up to three physical attribute points in the aging role! Unless I was expecting some awsome mustering out benefits, or badly needed another skill, I was just going backwards...)

Hans Koch

 

[Stormraven]

(And Big Tim, you're right that the aging table rolls are a HUGE incentive to stop a character's career after 4 terms or so. I was making a book 1 character recently, and realized that there was no point in staying in an extra term, rolling on the professional development table to maybe get a +1 to a physical attribute, and then losing up to three physical attribute points in the aging role! Unless I was expecting some awsome mustering out benefits, or badly needed another skill, I was just going backwards...)

Hans Koch[/QB]

While I understand the genesis of the aging tables - specifically, that it does prevent players from running characters through a massive number of terms and giving them uber-skills - I have always disliked them. They just seemed to fly in the face of almost all the science fiction I'd ever read - most of which postulated advances in medical science sufficient to allow a fit and active lifestyle well into the 50's, even without life-prolonging drugs.

On Topic, I have never - and would never - limit people to just one profession, whatever the rules happened to say about it. Real life, as well as Fantasy and Science Fiction, has too many examples of people who have done multiple professions in their life to do so.

 

[Cleon the Mad]

Originally posted by Stormraven:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />(And Big Tim, you're right that the aging table rolls are a HUGE incentive to stop a character's career after 4 terms or so. I was making a book 1 character recently, and realized that there was no point in staying in an extra term, rolling on the professional development table to maybe get a +1 to a physical attribute, and then losing up to three physical attribute points in the aging role! Unless I was expecting some awsome mustering out benefits, or badly needed another skill, I was just going backwards...)

Hans Koch

While I understand the genesis of the aging tables - specifically, that it does prevent players from running characters through a massive number of terms and giving them uber-skills - I have always disliked them. They just seemed to fly in the face of almost all the science fiction I'd ever read - most of which postulated advances in medical science sufficient to allow a fit and active lifestyle well into the 50's, even without life-prolonging drugs.

On Topic, I have never - and would never - limit people to just one profession, whatever the rules happened to say about it. Real life, as well as Fantasy and Science Fiction, has too many examples of people who have done multiple professions in their life to do so.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]And to give one, earlier this month in our local paper, as part of a series of articles honoring veterans who had served during the attack on Pearl Harbor, there was a man who had enlisted in the Navy shortly before the attack, left it when the war was over, and then enlisted in the Air Force during the Korean War. So right there is an example of someone with a term in the (wet) Navy and a term in COACC, with a term inbetween in some civilan career, to roughly put it into CT/MT terms, and I suppose even T20 if T20 had classes for the Wet Navy and COACC.

 

[manley_t]

Originally posted by Stormraven:
....postulated advances in medical science sufficient to allow a fit and active lifestyle well into the 50's, even without life-prolonging drugs.

Well, if you look at the average human lifespan, we still live no more than 4 score. Even in the time of Ancient Greece, men would live that long (not common at all mind you). Generally, the wealthy and aristocratic tended to be much more longevous than the working classes. The *big* change in prolonging life is that the strata has changed from the realm of the wealthy and noble to the middile class. This means that folks are still vibrant in their 50s instead of becoming old -- but really only the peasants and working class were considered old. I mean, heck, how old was the Marquis Du Sade when he was scthooping the young nurse in his mental hospital?

But with smart prosthetics and gene-based drugs and therapy some research doctors actually think that human life can be expanded beyond what we have been stuck with to this point in time -- the 4 score wall (some exceed it, but not many) -- and even some speculate that it may be possible to turn off the aging gene.

But, IMO, the human being has not aged well in the past few hundred years. And, having more wealth and leisure time have created other ills that poorer nations do have; in spite of the wonderous advances in medical science we've had just to our paltry tech 7/8 place...

How is all that handled in game? Well, in most cases, I think ignored as we are dealing with fiction -- and as fiction we tend to like the best of the best and to play heroes.

But, as to dealing with straight dice rolls. How many here believe they got to choose what body they ended up being born with? In my opnion you're dealt your genetic hand and how you play it is up to you. Same in the games I run. You may be a hero -- but you're dealt the hand you started with and what makes a character a hero is the fact that they're one in spite of what holds them back instead of what accellerates them.

anyway....verbose mode off

 

[Stormraven]

Originally posted by Big Tim:
Well, if you look at the average human lifespan, we still live no more than 4 score. Even in the time of Ancient Greece, men would live that long (not common at all mind you). Generally, the wealthy and aristocratic tended to be much more longevous than the working classes. The *big* change in prolonging life is that the strata has changed from the realm of the wealthy and noble to the middile class. This means that folks are still vibrant in their 50s instead of becoming old -- but really only the peasants and working class were considered old. I mean, heck, how old was the Marquis Du Sade when he was scthooping the young nurse in his mental hospital?

But with smart prosthetics and gene-based drugs and therapy some research doctors actually think that human life can be expanded beyond what we have been stuck with to this point in time -- the 4 score wall (some exceed it, but not many) -- and even some speculate that it may be possible to turn off the aging gene.

But, IMO, the human being has not aged well in the past few hundred years. And, having more wealth and leisure time have created other ills that poorer nations do have; in spite of the wonderous advances in medical science we've had just to our paltry tech 7/8 place...

My issue and my point wasn't with the maximum age. It was with the concept that a character will necessarily start to fail physically and/or mentally as they age. In CT and such, this wasn't a major complaint, as there was the possibility of aging degradation not occurring. In T20, it's now automatic.

And this disallows someone like Jack LaLane. 80+ years old, with no physical degradation compared to a 35-40 year old. Heck, he's stronger than most 35-40 year olds.

An extreme example? Yes. Very few people have the time or motivation to do what he does to keep in shape. But not - by far - an isolated example.

The question of whether or not we'll break the 4 score barrier regularly (since we already do it more than occasionally) is moot here. The issue is that - with decent medical care and a modicum of motivation and training - people can stave off the overt physical degradation of aging which would manifest itself as minuses to Physical Characteristics.

IMTU - were I to run sometime - I can say that I would probably toss aging mods entirely for middle age, or at least mitigate them somewhat for active professions. I would likely still utilise the maximum number of terms, solely on a social level. Even today, vibrant, healthy, productive and useful people get cashiered or are not hired because they're older than 'the norm'.

 

[Uncle Bob]

Originally posted by Stormraven:
My issue and my point wasn't with the maximum age. It was with the concept that a character will necessarily start to fail physically and/or mentally as they age. In CT and such, this wasn't a major complaint, as there was the possibility of aging degradation not occurring. In T20, it's now automatic.

When T20 was proposed it was always explained that this wasn't ging to be "real" Traveller, just a way to get D20 gamers into a more interesting game.

I never bought that, and I am seeing more and more posts here from people like Stormraven who (relunctantly) seem to accept that T20 is the new mainstream. Or some who don't even know that T20 rules are different from "real" Traveller.

*sigh* This is why I call D20 "the system that ate rollplaying."

 

[Stormraven]

Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
When T20 was proposed it was always explained that this wasn't ging to be "real" Traveller, just a way to get D20 gamers into a more interesting game.

I never bought that, and I am seeing more and more posts here from people like Stormraven who (relunctantly) seem to accept that T20 is the new mainstream. Or some who don't even know that T20 rules are different from "real" Traveller.

*sigh* This is why I call D20 "the system that ate rollplaying."

I'm not looking at T20 as 'Real' Traveller. I have T4, TNE and - I believe - MT, and I know how to get CT.

But in all of those cases, none of my potential players has access to those books. None.

So - call T20 'Available' Traveller, and you'll be more accurate. When and if T5 comes out, I'll buy it, and try to convince my potential players to do the same, but I won't hold out hope.

The other main option for me is to convert Traveller into HERO.

 

[Zinzan]

All in TNE:

Personally I use the roll and asign for attributes, char start a career at 16 and I allow as many changes in career as the player likes. However I tend to roleplay the char gen phase of the game and introduce various rolls to succeed based on background (char & world) - I also run a survival roll and auto reenlist to make things interesting. Several of my players ended up in careers their Char didn't choose or spent time in jail for various "accidents".

OTOH I also add in extra aging rolls for the affects of serious wounds, being captured by a TED and so on.

My reasoning for allowing a variety of careers is based on the real world (for ex my career runs along the following lines : Student, Courier, Naval Officer, Student, Administrator, Driver. Now I like my PC's and NPC's to have had a smiliarly varied life.

 

[Aokhir]

I haven't seen a player character change professions (i.e. classes) more than once. And it's usually from a service class to a core class. There are exceptions, of course.

In CT there shouldn't be any profession changes, but there are indeed a couple of exceptions...
1) Vargr can change professions at will.
2) Irklan Sect can be an added second profession.
3) White Dwarf ISS can be a second profession (after one of the four main ones).
4) Dragon magazine Rogue can have pirate as a follow on career (or else finish with a single additional term in a non-military profession).
(Have I missed any?)

 

[aramis]

In CT there shouldn't be any profession changes, but there are indeed a couple of exceptions...

(Have I missed any?)

Several... in the advanced careers
Technically, Navy can switch navies up/down level. (CT Bk5: HG) Merchants likewise can switch lines.(CT Bk7:M)
Field Scouts can move to the Scout administration (CT Bk6:S)
All advanced gen characters can go from college to advanced career. (CT Bks 4,5,6,7); some Refs allow to basic careers.
The Poltroonery rules (JTAS 10, p31) allows for jail, but no skills are gained in jail...

All officers can attempt to transition to the Imperial Academy of Science and Medicine, and it explicitly allows post-military and mid-military enlistment. (JTAS 22, p18)
Dolphins in military can freely swap, term by term, between military and civilian; civilian dolphins cannot. (JTAS 7, p30)

 

[Spinward Flow]

In CT there shouldn't be any profession changes, but there are indeed a couple of exceptions...

And here I was contemplating the notional idea of starting as a Barbarian for 1 term (18-22) before switching to a different career (any) at 22+ as a sort of "college/not college for low tech level" worlds before being able to achieve that "reach for the stars" moment leading out into wider Charted Space. Just one of those possible interesting twists on a backstory kind of thing that might be fun to play with ... the low tech savage gone high tech when that once in a lifetime chance presented itself.

 

[mike wightman]

Barbarians and Belters start at age14...

As an exception, belter and barbarian characters begin their careers earlier, at
age 14.

Which leads to the interesting possibility of serving one term and then trying to enter a typical career at age 18 or submitting to the draft.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Ah, somehow I missed that notation (LLB S4 p2).

So ... for extra bonus points (of the "you have GOT to be kidding me!" variety) ... Zhodani space Barbarian (age 14) with Psionics (because, Z culture), then at age 18 switches to a different career path (potentially even emigrating to Imperial space, possibly even involuntarily due to a "disaster" of some kind).

Alternatively, there's the Barbarian (or Belter) at 14-18 ... College from 18-22 ... then enlist or be drafted into another career from 22-26 option, if you really want to play up the Noble Savage combined with the Fish Out Of Water stereotypes.

 

[kilemall]

Pffft.

If you want to do it, just have a negative DM for terms past 18, so if they want to jump careers they have to do it quick, aging tables will catch anyone trying to max out their skills, retirement pension only counts for 5 terms same career, we're done here.