• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

T5 Poll part II: What system do you want in T5?

T5 Poll part II: What system do you want in T5

  • I don't want any system at all in T5

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


This is a refocussing of the first question in my "What Do You Want From T5" Poll, focussing specifically on the system you want to see in the game. This time though I've split the 'refined system' part of it into specific systems.

Feel free to elaborate on any details of the system you want to see, if you have any specific vision for it.
I'd just like a good presentation with easy to understand tables. That and Dietrich's art is a must.
OK, I've edited the explanatory text here a bit so that it's clear that we're talking about what rulesets people want to see, not the presentation or art or the look of the thing. I'm just asking solely about system, nothing else.
I voted for CT no task because the MT task system (IIRC) included DM's for atributes based on something like atribute/5 or such. I don't like that and think the DM's for tasks should be based upon skill levels and conditional modifiers (range, equipment, etc.). If the task system doesn't incorporate that then I would have voted for CT/MT hybrid but with the cavets of a HG style design sequences for ships and vehicles and some more realistic system generation rules.
My $0.02
What I want is anything that brings in lots of new Traveller players, revitalises the market and ensures plenty more Traveller material gets published. ;)

I'll keep using GURPS rules, but I'll buy anything with interesting setting material.
Originally posted by RogerCalver:
Calling a Mod we have a double poster here ;)
That's why he said, "Again, <sigh> No T5, No thank you."
I don't see why a characters statistics would not figure in to how good they were at a task. If I'm shooting a bow, having a high dexterity or a low dexterity should definitely play into my ability to hit with it. I just don't get that part of Randy's argument in favour of CT vs. MT system.

But I also think whatever system they come out with, including a BITS-like translation between it and prior systems would be worth a few pages.

Also, if it was *just* an implementation with a ruleset (no setting), then it would sort of have to be one that was spiffy (like MTs) or I wouldn't be fished into buying it. In that case, a translation section would be absolutely VITAL.

If it includes setting stuff, I'd probably buy it in any event to mine for ideas or to use for some future campaign. If it was only setting with no ruleset, this also applies.
I've always felt most games horribly over rate stats when it comes to skills. Ranged combat especially. I've taught marksmanship and slow clumcy chubby kids can become as good as any gymnist with the same effort.

I've taught hand to hand combat. Athletic types might be able to stay at it longer but not always better. I know a number of larger people who are pick it up faster then some quicker people.

I know at least one person whom I always thought to be an idiot. A shared opinion I might add but he took to computers like a duck to water. Programming, networking, and got a masters in software design with an idea of speicalizing in artificial intellegence. He almost didn't get through calc and even geometry was a challenge.

Stats might be an influence but not as much as many game systems imply.
Kaladorn, it comes down to the limited range for generated stats of 2-12 on 2d6. That's not a very good probability curve (3d6 is better). So in CT having a stat of 12 in something puts one in the top 2.5% of the population. If you made the stat DM of +1 for people with a stat of 11-12 then that becomes the top 7.5% of people. If the new CT/MT hybrid was to have stat modifiers for those stat ranges that would be acceptable since people with stats like that would be exceptional but to have a +1DM to a task because you intelligence or dex is 5 (which is below the 'average-median' stat of 7) I dislike and disagree with.
*bump* need more votes here - let's get it over 50 votes and then I can say what the results are.
More like 50/200 or 300 actually. There may be 7,000 people registered here, but only 200 or 300 actually contribute to the board at all, and to be honest I think it's more like 100 people who actually contribute all the time.

And as I said elsewhere, even if you call it 50/10000, that's still 50 more data points than we had before.

I mean, what else could you do to gather this sort of data? Any responses to polls are purely voluntary, and fact is most people don't vote on them. But it's better than nothing, surely.
It's not a lot better than nothing, though. The verbose people are often not particularly representative.
Well if you've got any ideas on how to make it more representative, I'm all ears...

I know it's far from ideal, but it's all we have for this sort of information.
It's more representative than a political poll. And even .5% is higher than market research polls. Doesn't make it any more accurate, or less so, it is simply the best information available given the resources
Hmmm, no time to go into statistics. I'll try to be Zen.

Small sample space = increased chance of error
Biased sample space = even more chance of error

It comes down to this; do you think the number of people registered on these forums, let alone who post actively, let alone actually bother with voting in a poll is a representative sampling of the Traveller "fan base"?

Or put another way, one wants to search through all parameter space to find the 'global optima', but this small sampling represents a heuristic search which is well known to get stuck on local optima. This CAN (not ncessarily will) be completely misleading.

As for market research polls, they do a lot more in the background, like control questions, random sampling, etc. to bolster their statistics.