T5 Task System Observations

[daltoncalford]

I know Don M. has spoken to Marc about this a couple of times, and Marc, flat-out, doesn't see anything wrong with the SS mechanic.

Then all is lost, as the core mechanic is what all other assumptions are built upon and you can not fix anything else until the foundation is corrected.

Character creation, combat, interpersonal interactions, everything is based upon how the core mechanics work.

If the core is broken, everything is, regardless of any other mechanics that are built upon it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Then all is lost, as the core mechanic is what all other assumptions are built upon and you can not fix anything else until the foundation is corrected.

Character creation, combat, interpersonal interactions, everything is based upon how the core mechanics work.

If the core is broken, everything is, regardless of any other mechanics that are built upon it.

Well, the core mechanic isn't broken, just the SS aspect of it.

You can take SS out of the game completely and not worry about it. The rest of the T5 task system will work fine.

 

[daltoncalford]

You can take SS out of the game completely and not worry about it. The rest of the T5 task system will work fine.

Not true.

SS is just the most obvious problem with it.

There are many issues with it.

Even after you did the statistical analysis, if I came up with an attribute/skill and difficulty, would you instinctively know how likely it would be to succeed without pulling out a spreadsheet? How about after a series of situational modifiers are applied? Can you do this on the fly as a player?

Most of the results also seem to be unbalanced - you are either highly likely to succeed or highly likely to fail, with only a few situations where you have a 50% chance of success. (most of the result sets you show have jumps of 40% or more of probability between the difficulty levels)

How good is an attribute? How valuable is a skill? What benefit does a knowledge represent? How does that work with the probabilities of a moving bell curve due to changing dice?

So, from a basic point of view, 1 point of skill = 1 point of attribute
In detail, the reality is something like this

+7 if no attribute is defined in Task
+3 if no skill is defined in Task
+Attribute(s) Level Listed in Task
+Skill(s) Level Listed in Task
+Applicable Knowledge(s) level (listed or not in task)
+Applicable Talent(s) modifier(s)
+Modifiers due to character action
+Modifiers due to common modifiers* see applicable pages in book
​

And

Number of dice rolled is determined by

Difficulty of Task
Modified by TIH rule
Modified by how hasty
Modified by JOT if skill is required
​

Now picture a typical new player who is trying to understand the system.

The system does not give the new player any feeling other than helplessness when trying to guess if what they are doing is likely or unlikely. There are far too many variables to balance out in ones head. Thus they don't know the risk reward ratios and so feel powerless. This is not fun.

As a referee, you can flub the numbers, house rule the systems etc., but, then you are playing your own game and not T5.

You can't even have a task where the player does not know how difficult it is in advance. So, when you do want to keep the odds hidden from the player, you can't.

Obfuscating odds when you don't want to, while making it impossible to truly hide the odds takes away options from the referee and player.

Everyone thinks about roll high vs roll low, but thats not it. It is about how easy it is to learn and use the game. It is the ratio of worrying about how things work vs using your imagination and enjoying the game.

All math/ratios should be simple, fast, intuitive. Values of skills should be obvious, as should attributes and knowledges.

The current system is complex. The current system is non-intuitive. The current system does not allow for hidden difficulty levels.

Forget the fact that SF, SS and Interesting results are by their nature, totally broken.

Find a 10 year old and explain the current system - watch their eyes glaze over. I was 10 when I started CT.

I have seen teenagers pick up and play MGT without any guidance.
Can you say the same with T5? I have yet to see a playtester pick up the rules and use them without guidance on these forums.

 

[Supplement Four]

Even after you did the statistical analysis, if I came up with an attribute/skill and difficulty, would you instinctively know how likely it would be to succeed without pulling out a spreadsheet? How about after a series of situational modifiers are applied? Can you do this on the fly as a player?

No, but personally I think that's a good thing.

Most of the results also seem to be unbalanced - you are either highly likely to succeed or highly likely to fail, with only a few situations where you have a 50% chance of success. (most of the result sets you show have jumps of 40% or more of probability between the difficulty levels)

I'd have to do some comparison, but I think the results of T5 chances are about the same as that for the UTP, and MT's task system as been accepted and used by Traveller players for decades.

How good is an attribute? How valuable is a skill?

I touched on this in the analysis. See the note I made about the Rule of Thumb.

A player can easily tell what types of tasks he is likely to succeed with and not succeed with by comparing his skill level with the difficulty of the task.

The system does not give the new player any feeling other than helplessness when trying to guess if what they are doing is likely or unlikely. There are far too many variables to balance out in ones head. Thus they don't know the risk reward ratios and so feel powerless. This is not fun.

I never said that I liked the system. I don't. But, I believe the system is sound, except for SS/SF, and quite useable in a game.

As a referee, you can flub the numbers, house rule the systems etc., but, then you are playing your own game and not T5.

There are ways to flub, a bit, with T5, using Uncertain Tasks. But, yeah, this is another aspect that I don't like about T5.

You can't even have a task where the player does not know how difficult it is in advance. So, when you do want to keep the odds hidden from the player, you can't.

I've stated several times that I dislike this aspect of T5, though T5 does have the Uncertain Task rule (which I think is clunky and not fun to use).

Still, this doesn't mean that the T5 system isn't statistically sound.

All math/ratios should be simple, fast, intuitive. Values of skills should be obvious, as should attributes and knowledges.

There are many throws in CT, for example, that aren't easy to figure the exact chance of success.

Quick, what's your chance to throw a weapon, needing 18+, using Entire DEX score as a mod along with your weapon skill, adding all that to a roll of 2D6?

Not easy to figure.

The current system is complex. The current system is non-intuitive. The current system does not allow for hidden difficulty levels.

I think you are confusing your dislike of the system with the fact that the T5 system does work well for those who have embraced it. The main T5 task system is not broken.

I agree, wholeheartedly, that the system should be replaced. But, facts is facts and they shouldn't be confused with opinion.

 

[aramis]

This is funny, I put together a roll high system over lunch (actually not mine, I was going to do a exploding 2d6 system ala T&T instead of 3d6) but, overall everyone is posting their own instead of defending the current system.

So, from what I can see, don't we have enough to try to get someone who is far more elegant with words than myself to speak to Marc and perhaps get this changed for the players guide?

I've been trying for over a decade. Since about 1997. Since I first got Marc's email, back in the days of T4.

 

[lspitz]

I've been trying for over a decade. Since about 1997. Since I first got Marc's email, back in the days of T4.

Yeah, I'm thinking that the official T5 task resolution system is not going to change. In my (admittedly limited) experience with him, Marc is not easily persuaded to consider other approaches. This is such a core mechanic (and a done deal, since it's already been published), I would not even try to influence his opinion on the subject at this point.

So, players will either tinker with the system at home until they get it adjusted to their liking, or swap in some other task resolution system that works for them. As it has always been in RPG gaming, and ever shall be.

 

[Licheking]

Even after you did the statistical analysis, if I came up with an attribute/skill and difficulty, would you instinctively know how likely it would be to succeed without pulling out a spreadsheet? How about after a series of situational modifiers are applied? Can you do this on the fly as a player?

So your saying that you don't know that if you were rolling 3D against a total of 15 you don't instinctively know your chances of success! Or 2D against a TN of 12! or 10D against a target of 20. Good chance of success in the first instance, automatic in the second and slim in the 3rd, why do you need spreadsheets to tell you these things i don't see the point. Thats why i can't understand the inclusion of all the probability tables, they should have been dropped and replaced with more and better examples.

As for the combat system it works quite well, or at least my interpretation of it does and uses all the rules as presented but that discussion is elsewhere.

 

[Supplement Four]

So, players will either tinker with the system at home until they get it adjusted to their liking, or swap in some other task resolution system that works for them. As it has always been in RPG gaming, and ever shall be.

IMO, I don't think players will buy T5. There's too many other versions of Traveller that may better suit a player's taste.

Sure, the Kickstarter was a huge success, but there was a lot of hope then. Now that we've seen the final product, I personally don't think any T5 product will be as successful.

Hopefully, I'm wrong. But, those are my thoughts.

Maybe Marc will put out a Players Guide (he's said that he's working on one) that will offer us an alternative task system, fix combat, and blow us all away. And, that leads to a second edition of T5, incorporating the new rule changes.

Who knows.

 

[robject]

Even after you did the statistical analysis, if I came up with an attribute/skill and difficulty, would you instinctively know how likely it would be to succeed without pulling out a spreadsheet? How about after a series of situational modifiers are applied? Can you do this on the fly as a player?

Believe it or not, this is also an argument against using 2D6. A longtime friend, who has played in our gaming group for 15+ years now, dislikes task mechanics using 6-sided dice -- even two of them -- because it's not obvious what the probabilities are. And he is no dummy; he just wants it plainly obvious, to the point of not wanting to memorize what is essentially an 11-entry table. He is firmly in the percentile crowd.

 

[lspitz]

Believe it or not, this is also an argument against using 2D6. A longtime friend, who has played in our gaming group for 15+ years now, dislikes task mechanics using 6-sided dice -- even two of them -- because it's not obvious what the probabilities are. And he is no dummy; he just wants it plainly obvious, to the point of not wanting to memorize what is essentially an 11-entry table. He is firmly in the percentile crowd.

Bell curves model some real-world phenomena better than linear scales, and vice-versa. And there are some things that neither one models well. You have to make some kind of choice when designing a gaming system (a balance between playability and overly-baroque realism, hopefully).

I'm hard put to say which I prefer for a core task mechanic, linear or bell curve. Linear scales certainly do make it a lot easier to calculate the probabilities in your head. Personally I don't find 2d6 or 3d6 bell curves intimidating or non-intuitive, but I like doing probability and statistics.

 

[Licheking]

Your gaming style must be very different my own. I don't think i have ever heard a player say ooh, whats the probability i can do this? They are told to roll the dice and they either succeed or fail, or they tell me what they are doing then they roll and either succeed or fail.

I don't get this methodology of knowing your probability of success making any difference to what your character is going to do. If you trapped on a burning ship and need to make a Zero-G roll to get out, then you roll you don't have a choice you don't sit and work out the probability of success you just do. Even with thinking time most people don't calculate the odds of accomplishing something they just get on and do it, and that's how your characters should be acting surely. This is a roleplaying game after all, not statistical analysis.

 

[aramis]

Your gaming style must be very different my own. I don't think i have ever heard a player say ooh, whats the probability i can do this? They are told to roll the dice and they either succeed or fail, or they tell me what they are doing then they roll and either succeed or fail.

I don't get this methodology of knowing your probability of success making any difference to what your character is going to do. If you trapped on a burning ship and need to make a Zero-G roll to get out, then you roll you don't have a choice you don't sit and work out the probability of success you just do. Even with thinking time most people don't calculate the odds of accomplishing something they just get on and do it, and that's how your characters should be acting surely. This is a roleplaying game after all, not statistical analysis.

I hear it a lot. Not in exact terms, but "Do I have a chance? Am I likely to fail? To Fumble?"

It factors in. I offered a player a choice in my Age of Rebellion game today... and despite not knowing the specifics, they choose their actions carefully based upon what they know of the difficulties. And I don't hide difficulties for known things.

One of my players knows the odds pretty damned well mathematically. In Age of Rebellion, they realize that doing something that adds both a blue and a black die increases the overall odds in their favor, despite being semantically "opposite" rolling dice. (They aren't actually mirrors of each other, tho').

 

[Licheking]

This is what surprises me, i have never heard a player in all my time as GM and player (30 years) ever ask what their chances of doing something is. They just tell me what they want to do and then they roll for it. I love the fact that our hobby allows for all these different styles of play.

 

[whulorigan]

I hear it a lot. Not in exact terms, but "Do I have a chance? Am I likely to fail? To Fumble?"

It factors in.

This is what surprises me, i have never heard a player in all my time as GM and player (30 years) ever ask what their chances of doing something is. They just tell me what they want to do and then they roll for it. I love the fact that our hobby allows for all these different styles of play.

I think players in general like to have a ball-park idea of what they believe their chances are for a given task. I have mentioned before that I am a big BRP/RuneQuest fan - but sometimes knowing that you have exactly a 73% chance of success for a given task (apart from unknown modifiers) is a little unrealistic.

On the other hand, unless there are significant variables that I do not know about, I should have some idea (in general terms) whether I am likely to succeed or not (e.g. - This sounds like a difficult task based on my skill-level, or this sounds like something I should be able to pull off based on my training, etc.).

Part of skill and training should grant some type of ability to assess the general likelihood of success or failure based on the variables that my character is aware of.

 

[Supplement Four]

After you play with a system for a bit--any system--you get a feel for your chances. You may not know exact percentages, but you have a clue when you're likely to fail and likely to succeed.

 

[Licheking]

After you play with a system for a bit--any system--you get a feel for your chances. You may not know exact percentages, but you have a clue when you're likely to fail and likely to succeed.

Yeah exactly, whether its a roll high or low system once you know what the numbers mean on your character sheet you should have a good idea of your chances of success and what you character is good at. In T5, high skill levels and high stats mean good chances of success, low or no skill slim chances on complex tasks but alright on easy ones.

 

[aramis]

This is what surprises me, i have never heard a player in all my time as GM and player (30 years) ever ask what their chances of doing something is. They just tell me what they want to do and then they roll for it. I love the fact that our hobby allows for all these different styles of play.

Then your experience sounds particularly limited - most of the more than 100 players I've gamed with want to know (1) what a skill/stat rating means in terms of success, and (2) how likely success is in some cases.

If a character is skilled, they should have a clue as to difficulties in field.

 

[flykiller]

you don't think, to use your own words from above, that multipling a skill then turning right around and subtracting it is unnecessarily conditional and convoluted?

gee, tough crowd ....

subtracting 1 hardly seems convoluted. do it three or four times and it just flows naturally.

Somebody with Skill-3 will throw a total of 7 automatically. That will automatically get him success on Routine and Unusual tasks.

On an average throw (7), he'll throw 12. That means that Skill-3 characters will typically beat all tasks on your system except Extraordinary.

well, yes. that was my intent. in my chargen system - task systems should be paired with chargen - a skill level of 3 is a big deal and level 3 should be expected to succeed at routine and unusual tasks and have some expectation of success even at very difficult tasks. surely this is not a problem ....

A pilot flying a speeder in a dog fight, with DEX-15 is just as good as his enemy, who has DEX-3, if both have Speeder-2 skill?

no. perhaps my abbreviated description was not clear. it is 2d6-based. dex15 would not exist (except perhaps by some deliberate bionic modification). someone with dex3 would have a -1 modifier. someone with dex12 would have a +2 modifier - if and when the referee felt it was appropriate.

with this system I especially like the way it makes skill capability evaluations possible. in ct engineering1 means - well, engineering1. he may or may not succeed at any given task as it happens, who knows. but in my system you can judge job suitability by the skill level. engineering1 - can handle basic ship operations, we can fly. engineering2 - can handle all typical ship operations, good for long-term operations in long-term conditions. engineering3 - can handle just about anything, good for wilderness operations in hostile conditions. etc.

'nyway, thought I'd mention it.

 

[lspitz]

Your gaming style must be very different my own. I don't think i have ever heard a player say ooh, whats the probability i can do this? They are told to roll the dice and they either succeed or fail, or they tell me what they are doing then they roll and either succeed or fail.

I don't get this methodology of knowing your probability of success making any difference to what your character is going to do. If you trapped on a burning ship and need to make a Zero-G roll to get out, then you roll you don't have a choice you don't sit and work out the probability of success you just do. Even with thinking time most people don't calculate the odds of accomplishing something they just get on and do it, and that's how your characters should be acting surely. This is a roleplaying game after all, not statistical analysis.

True, when your hand is forced, you take whatever action is available to you. But when you have the luxury of considering which action to perform (or not perform) out of a range of possibilities, it's nice to have a feel for the odds. E.g., I'm really low on ammo but not in immediate danger; it would be nice to take that guy out but is the shot likely to be wasted at this range? I may need that bullet later. Under those conditions I'll probably chance it if the odds of hitting are 60% or better; I'm definitely not going to waste the ammo if they're under 40%. If it's a shoot-or-die situation, then I'll shoot no matter what the odds.

I know a couple of other players who are good with probability and statistics and use it tactically to make gaming decisions like this. Most gamers I know don't bother; they're perfectly comfortable with a fuzzier "easy/middling/hard" understanding of the odds.

 

[Licheking]

Then your experience sounds particularly limited - most of the more than 100 players I've gamed with want to know (1) what a skill/stat rating means in terms of success, and (2) how likely success is in some cases.

I run 4 games currently throughout the week comprising of 12 separate players, some of which appear in 2 or more of the games. Over 30 years of gaming i have GM'd too and played with over 200 players and i still hold that none of them ever asked me or tried to query what the chances of success were on a roll. I put this down to play style, which in my case is all about the story and roleplaying not number crunching. I still enforce the rules, and use them mostly as written but they don't halt the game. Yes my players know roughly how good they are within the system we are using as i explain roughly how the task/skill systems work when they do their characters. And i have still not heard any of them say whats the chance of picking this lock, i have heard who has lock picking and then someone steps forward and does it, or at least tries. I have heard someone say i only have Fighter-0 but give me a gun and i will give you covering fire, that was last Saturday when the ship got boarded by pirates.

I have even discussed this with my players to see if knowing the probabilities would make any difference, and they said not, as long as they know what the scale of skills and attributes are within the system they could get on with the game. Now to be fair, i do have a couple of players who at character generation love to Min/Max their characters so they can be the best at whatever role they have taken, but even they said knowing the odds made no difference to them during the game, they knew what they could do and that was that.

So in conclusion i haven't had a limited experience but i suspect we have a completely different play style.