Classic Traveller Target Number for rolls

[jaz0nj4ckal]

Folks:

I just got a digital copy of Classic Traveller from RPG Drivethu, since i heard good things about the system. Being into retro systems and games I thought I would take a look at it, which I missed the first time around during the 80s.



However, I have a question that the Traveller players out there could help me with. I understand 8+ is the standard roll; however, what are target numbers for generic default difficulties? For example: if something is hard would I assign a target roll of 11+? Just trying to understand how a GM would set difficulties. Another example: a roll of x+ is needed to pick a good quality electronic lock.

Thanks!!!

 

[halfjack]

There are none in CT. The ref was expected to make up difficulty modifiers on the fly. So any given check was 8+ but the ref might assign a difficulty of -3 or whatever she felt was appropriate.

 

[sjmiller]

In order to make something harder, you add modifiers. If someone does not have the proper tools, give the standard roll (8+) a modifier of +2, making it a 10+ to succeed. Most everything is up to the Referee, but general guidelines are to add a minor modifier +2 for harder tasks, an additional +2 if it is very hard, and keep adding more +2s to make it harder and harder. Remember, most skills do not have more than a 2 or 3 rating, sometimes as high as a 4, so anything more than a +4 modifier will make the roll very difficult indeed.

 

[jaz0nj4ckal]

I played the heck out of AD&E 1E/2E, which used a flat %, which made it easy to say oh...a -2=10%; however, I noticed that is not the case with CT, yet I was hoping for some generic Target Number.

Due to the latter, and what Sjmiller posted - it looks like multipules of 2s are used.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

I played the heck out of AD&E 1E/2E, which used a flat %, which made it easy to say oh...a -2=10%; however, I noticed that is not the case with CT, yet I was hoping for some generic Target Number.

Due to the latter, and what Sjmiller posted - it looks like multipules of 2s are used.

Pretty much, but be carefull. As was pointed out, it doesn't take many +2s to make the target number impossible to roll. (Can't remember off hand what 8+ on 2D6 is percentage wise, but its way higher than 50% already.)

 

[Treebore]

You can actually make it easier too, such as making it as low as 3, and only if failing the roll would have game significance. Otherwise, as in any game, just assume success. Plus it does not have to be in increments of 2, and it can go + or -. You make the modifier what you feel it needs to be. Your just basing everything around 8. So if you think it is something easier than 8, and failing the roll will have meaningful impact on the game, give them modifiers to allow them succeed with a roll of 3 or better. If its really hard, modify it to where they need a total of 14, 16, whatever.

 

[jaz0nj4ckal]

You can actually make it easier too, such as making it as low as 3, and only if failing the roll would have game significance. Otherwise, as in any game, just assume success. Plus it does not have to be in increments of 2, and it can go + or -. You make the modifier what you feel it needs to be. Your just basing everything around 8. So if you think it is something easier than 8, and failing the roll will have meaningful impact on the game, give them modifiers to allow them succeed with a roll of 3 or better. If its really hard, modify it to where they need a total of 14, 16, whatever.

Ok that makes sense, but when handing out target numbers for actions/skill checks do I account for the player’s ranks/levels or just base percentages off the default 8+?

For example:
8+ is roughly 41% chance for success

So if I add +2 penalty then it becomes 10+ (16%).

But I am having a hard time understanding if I assign +6 penalties, which becomes a 14+. Only way a default personal with no skills is 12+ (2.77%); however, the ranks/skill would play a large part in this.

I understand I need to break my AD&D 1/2E way of thinking, but it is hard after so many years of playing that one system. I never upgraded to D20, but it does sound exciting, but it lost the retro feel for me with all the colored drawings…I know I am stuck in the late 80s and early 90s.

Thanks for the help.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Ok that makes sense, but when handing out target numbers for actions/skill checks do I account for the player’s ranks/levels or just base percentages off the default 8+?

For example:
8+ is roughly 41% chance for success

So if I add +2 penalty then it becomes 10+ (16%).

But I am having a hard time understanding if I assign +6 penalties, which becomes a 14+. Only way a default personal with no skills is 12+ (2.77%); however, the ranks/skill would play a large part in this.

I understand I need to break my AD&D 1/2E way of thinking, but it is hard after so many years of playing that one system. I never upgraded to D20, but it does sound exciting, but it lost the retro feel for me with all the colored drawings…I know I am stuck in the late 80s and early 90s.

Thanks for the help.

Yes, you should be basing everything around the roll of 8+. The difficulty of the task should (theoretically) not have anything to do with how good the characters are. Especially as they rarely get any better once they've mustered out. If something is slightly easier or harder you can give a +1/-1 modifier. Slightly moreso, and go to +/-2, etc. What you give modifiers for can vary greatly. I believe, although I no longer have my original books, that the tech level of equipment could give some mods. (But higher TL wasn't always better. Your super-duper electronic lockpicking gizmo wouldn't help worth beans against a simple physical key lock! )

Also of note, which I'm no longer sure was in the original, is the rule in the Mongoose version that someone with no skill can still try at a -3 penalty. That may not sound like much, but on a 2D6 roll it is. And be aware that a competently skilled person has a mod of 0. So small increments to mods, not used too often, is the way to go. A +/-4 modifier is actually pretty huge.

 

[Treebore]

Yeah, just look at the action to be taken itself, and make your determinations based off that. The only reason I look at what ranks the characters have is to make sure I am giving them a chance, even if it is only if they roll double 6's. Unless it is truly impossible, then I set it at 18, so in order to even have a chance, they better have a skill rank of 4 and a attribute modifier of +2, and have to roll double 6's, or forget it, it simply cannot be done, just like so many things in real life.

 

[jaz0nj4ckal]

Yes, you should be basing everything around the roll of 8+. The difficulty of the task should (theoretically) not have anything to do with how good the characters are. Especially as they rarely get any better once they've mustered out. If something is slightly easier or harder you can give a +1/-1 modifier. Slightly moreso, and go to +/-2, etc. What you give modifiers for can vary greatly. I believe, although I no longer have my original books, that the tech level of equipment could give some mods. (But higher TL wasn't always better. Your super-duper electronic lockpicking gizmo wouldn't help worth beans against a simple physical key lock! )

Also of note, which I'm no longer sure was in the original, is the rule in the Mongoose version that someone with no skill can still try at a -3 penalty. That may not sound like much, but on a 2D6 roll it is. And be aware that a competently skilled person has a mod of 0. So small increments to mods, not used too often, is the way to go. A +/-4 modifier is actually pretty huge.

Thanks so much for clearing that up - I was very unsure if I based the modifiers on the default roll of 8+ or factor other items into the mix.