Mongoose's New IP: Traveller is BACK

[Twowolves]

AFAICT, you were quoting a number I'd given in the post to which you were responding but applying it to the wrong ruleset. That would be a less impressive feat of memory.

No, I was pretty much right, but feel free to stick your fingers in your ears and cry "nuh-uh!"

Classic Traveller had rolld 2d7, beat a 7, maybe add 1 or 2 to the roll. That's it exactly. Getting a +2 in any skill in CT was pure luck, and pretty rare.

MegaTraveller was roll 2d6 and beat a 4, 7, 11 or 15, and maybe add 3 or 4 to the roll. I might have been off a bit, but I was more right than I was wrong, despite your attempts at picking nits.

Death during character generation was an optional rule. Skill acquisition was, as I noted in the message you responded to, a mix of choice and random bits, so no they were not randomly rolled.

Optional in MT, maybe, but it sure set up the rules to have death as a result on the term of service tables. And skill aquisition STILL had a random factor as to which list/skill you got to choose from. Maybe not 100% random like in CT (where, I believe, it WAS 100% random), but still a far cry from spending your character generation points wherever you darn well please. Or was it not you who said this:

Up to +4 was the Classic range - skill awards were truly random, you had to be a bit lucky to get two skills per term on average, and so it was pretty unusual to see anything higher.

Just for you, I calculated it out: 39 skills at 1 or higher among the five characters, and the average score is 2.3.

This is a bit more helpful. In your MegaTraveller game, the average skill was a bit over +2. So unless stats were routinely over 10, characters averaged a +3 to skill checks. Now one could figure in exact odds of success at typical tasks in that game. If I were so inclined to run those numbers, that is. I don't have to do so, because I already know that I don't like bell curve task resolution when it's 3d6 (Hero/GURPS) and the odds are even more exaggerated with only 2d6.

Actually, that's not always true. In a bell curve distribution such as 2d6, how much a skill helps depends where you are on the curve. In the Traveller case, your scenario is correct for a target number of 7, incorrect for the other three target numbers of 3, 11, and 15. In general, higher skill levels help more with harder tasks, on easier tasks the extra skill doesn't matter as much.

You are correct. I thought about the actual numbers after I posted, while I was out running errands. I have done a more in-depth asessment for 3d6 < 10 systems long ago and was drawing from my memory of those numbers. But my basic point is the same, in that a +1 to a skill check is worth as little as 1 in 18 chance of success to as much as 1 in 6, depending upon where your target numbers are falling on the bell curve. That is granular in my book.

I think they were supposed to read the "Referee's Guide to Tasks", which takes up four whole pages of the Referee's Manual, and apply those guidelines as necessary. That's what I did, and it pretty much came together for me.

Four pages of guidelines. Well, I guess that completely negates any complaint about the sharply delineated task summaries being scattered through multiple rulebooks, sourcebooks and adventures.

I remember reading those rules, pretty thoroughly, and wondering how they came up with those target numbers and time factors, and in the end the answer was "just make it up yourself" in many cases. No thanks. If I had that level of comfort running that system, I wouldn't have needed any "guidelines" in the first place.

No trouble. And thanks for giving a stellar display of why it's a good idea not to make definitive statements about the rules or gameplay of systems one has never played.

I can give pretty definative statements about several games I've never played. In fact, I don't see where I was so horribly wrong in this instance. The only thing I see I got 100% wrong was matching the TN still being a success. Everything else I was still right on the money, even if off by a digit or two. I have pretty good reading comprehension skills, and I have played or seen being played dozens of games over 20+ years of gaming. I don't have to eat a crap sandwich to know I won't like it. But you feel free to take a bite and confirm it for the rest of us ignorant peons.

 

[SWBaxter]

Classic Traveller had rolld 2d7, beat a 7, maybe add 1 or 2 to the roll. That's it exactly.

No, it's not. If you want to try again, you can refer to the earlier post where I told you what CT had.

MegaTraveller was roll 2d6 and beat a 4, 7, 11 or 15, and maybe add 3 or 4 to the roll. I might have been off a bit, but I was more right than I was wrong, despite your attempts at picking nits.

Your earlier claim was that MT was beating a 7 with only a +2 at most, so if by "more right than wrong" you mean missing most of the system and by "picking nits" you mean adding all the stuff you were unaware of, your assessment is accurate.

Optional in MT, maybe, but it sure set up the rules to have death as a result on the term of service tables.

No, it didn't. I would tell you what actually happens in MT, but why bother? You've made it clear that accuracy isn't a factor in your desire to comment on a game's rules.

I can give pretty definative statements about several games I've never played.

It's possible you can, but so far in this thread you haven't and that's the only evidence I have to go on. Based on this and my experience with other posters pontificating on games they've never actually played, I stand by my belief that it's generally not very valuable to do so. It is good for a laugh, though, so thanks for that and have a good day.

 

[Twowolves]

No, it's not. If you want to try again, you can refer to the earlier post where I told you what CT had.

Ok big boy, why don't you pull your CT book out and tell me exactly where I'm wrong. Tell me where task resolution in CT was NOT "roll 2d6 + 1/5 stat + skill >= 7".

Your earlier claim was that MT was beating a 7 with only a +2 at most, so if by "more right than wrong" you mean missing most of the system and by "picking nits" you mean adding all the stuff you were unaware of, your assessment is accurate.

Now who's reading comprehension is in question? I said this:

As I recall CT/MT task resolution consisted of rolling 2d6 and trying to beat a 7, and most skills/stats never added more than +2 to that roll.

I did NOT say you never add more than +2 to the roll. I said most skills don't add more than +2. Again, it's been years since I read the material, but every NPC I read in the CT books and the adventures had less than a half dozen skills, and maybe 1 of those was at +2.

Glad to see I'm still right, from something I read ages ago, and you had to go look it up to try to say I was wrong, because I said "+2" and you say "+3".

No, it didn't. I would tell you what actually happens in MT, but why bother? You've made it clear that accuracy isn't a factor in your desire to comment on a game's rules.

Why don't you look it up? CT had death as a real end to a character generation path. MT did too. Whether it said "optional rule: you die here" or it said "you die here: optional rule: you don't" doesn't change things one tiny bit. Skill selection in CT and MT was RANDOMLY ROLLED (either the actual skill, or a short list of skills you could pick from AFTER the random roll) and death was possible from RANDOM ROLLS, optional rules or not. You said so yourself,no trying to back out of it now. TNE specifically stated that instead of death, you can muster out and don't finish the term, but again, that death option was still in there. You can try to sugar-coat it, but you can't deny it.

But in any case, I'm glad to see my memory is good enough that you have to pull out your books, look up rules, all so you can say "nuh-uh, it's +3 not +2!!!11!!". /roll

 

[QLI/RPGRealms]

*sniff*

Smells like Traveller fandom...

 

[T. Foster]

The Universal Task Profile (UTP) system in MegaTraveller is brilliant, IMO the best such system ever devised for an rpg. A few points that don't become apparent until you've played around with it for awhile:

Having 7 and 11 be the target numbers for the two most commonly rolled difficulty classes makes them easy to remember -- anyone who's ever played craps will be able to remember that you want 7 or 11.

The stat adjustment being stat/5 dropping fractions corresponds perfectly to the 2D distribution for character stats: 2-4 = +0, 5-9 = +1, 10-12 = +2; +1 is the standard (2/3 of the distribution), with the bottom 1/6 of the distribution being 1 worse than standard (i.e. 0) and the top 1/6 of the distribution being 1 better (i.e. +2). Bell-curve-tastic!

Traveller canonically defines skill-3 as "professional" level (see Doctors); with the standard stat adjustment (and "basic familiarity" with a skill) being +1, a character performing a task at a professional level is likely to have a combined DM (skill+stat or skill+skill) of +4, which is exactly one level of difficulty -- i.e. a professional performing a routine task is effectively simple, a professional performing a difficult task is effectively routine, and so forth. Furthermore, the max DM cap of +8 means that the "best person in the world" has an effective bonus of two levels of difficulty -- the difficult is simple, the formidable routine, and even the near impossible is merely difficult.

Because of the interchangeability of stat and skill adjustments in the system, tasks don't always have to be defined as stat+skill and can just as easily be skill+skill or stat+stat (or even statx2 or skillx2 if the referee so desires), which enormously expands the referee's options in defining tasks, and makes the system vastly more versatile.

Cautious attempts doubling the duration but making the task one difficulty level easier, and Hasty attempts halving the duration but making the task difficulty one level harder, is brilliant in its logic and simplicity -- if faced with a difficult task, do it carefully and it will effectively become routine; likewise you can hurry through a rotuine task but that makes it difficult.

Likewise with Retries and Determination -- if you just barely fail at a task (miss the target by 1) you can try the task again, and even if you failed badly (missed the target by 2+) you can still try again but you have to make an effort to stay Determined or the task will becomes harder (+1 difficulty level) unless you step away from it for awhile (10x the duration of the failed task) to regroup mentally.

The UTP is an entire game-system in 3 pages; everything else is just examples and background color. I'm so attached to the UTP system that I honestly have zero interest in any new edition of Traveller that doesn't use it (or at least something very close to it).

 

[T. Foster]

Ok big boy, why don't you pull your CT book out and tell me exactly where I'm wrong. Tell me where task resolution in CT was NOT "roll 2d6 + 1/5 stat + skill >= 7".

I can't think of a single instance in all of Classic Traveller where task resolution WAS "roll 2d6 + 1/5 stat + skill >= 7". Mostly because there was no "task resolution" system as such in Classic Traveller (at least until Digest Group Publications intorduced the prototypical UTP in their fanzine The Travellers' Digest in 1985), everything was completely ad hoc skill by skill and situation by situation. Even in combat the base roll to hit is "2D + skill >= 8" with additional situational adjustments for weapon v. armor, weapon v. range, required/advantageous stats (NOT stat/5 but rather determined ad hoc by weapon type -- for instance a Body Pistol requires Dex 8+ to avoid a -3 DM, and Dex 11+ provides a +1 DM), target movement/evasion, target's weapon skill (in melee only), and/or weakened blows (also in melee only). Other "task resolution" descriptions tended to look more like this:

[under Forgery skill] Forged or fake documents are discovered, if inspected on a basic roll of 6+.
DM: -2 per level of expertise.

or this

[under Forward Observer skill] If artillery of any form is available (including communication with the firing battery) the first shots fired will invariably miss the target. On each subsequent turn in which such fire is delivered, a basic throw of 11+ to hit is required.
DM: +4 per level of expertise, No expertise DM: -4. Per turn of adjustment (2 minute turns) +1.

or this

[under Ship's Boat skill] Bad weather (storms, wind, etc.) can convert an ordinary landing into an emergency landing. In such situations, throw 9+ to avoid emergency landing. DMs: +2 pe level of expertise above 1, -3 if extremely bad weather.

 

[Ranger REG]

Marc Miller owns the rights, and he's the one that is making the deal with Mongoose. Since he's doing it, they do indeed have the right to do so. Note that one of the most valuable things about Traveller is not the system, but the IP of the Official Traveller Universe (OTU), and I'm pretty sure Marc wouldn't give up his rights to that. That's where the money is. The system is just a set of mechanics for playing in that well-developed and well-loved background. If, however, he does allow you to publish works that build upon the OTU, then that would be a great accomplishment indeed.

With Marc Miller's sign-off, the system could be exactly CT, and it would be perfectly okay for it to go OGC.

At Least, This Is My Understanding,
Flynn

Well, d20 is a modified AD&D ruleset. So the same could apply to CT modified ruleset as well.

If that's alright with MARC (not Steve) Miller, then go for it.

 

[bolen]

In 30 years of rpg gaming, I have not played traveller (even though the original box version sits on my shelf). I am one that is not too pleased with this -- not for Traveller itself - If Mongoose can make the fans happy, then bully for them -- but rather for the fact that they have dropped support for the d20 Starship Troopers. They put out a number of books for this line, then dropped it like a sack of potatoes. The fans have been asking them forever and a day what's going to happen, and then we're told they didn't like the game in the first place as d20 and it was too much trouble to fix so we're just going to move systems. Well, thanks alot Mongoose!

Mongoose has almost always stood by their consumers, and maybe even listened to us once in a while. But this kinda screwed everyone who bought into Starship Troopers when it was released. The core rule book was a pathetically edited, poorly constructed book (my first copy fell apart after three days -- they were kind enough to replace it), yet I felt it was a great game with a lot of potential. So, I bought their modules, and their supplements. Now I have to stick with what I have, because ain't no more coming! a

Matt, if you are reading this -- at least give us what you had in d20 through signs and portents!!!!

I did not know Starship Troopers was a d20 game, Is this true? I thought it had its own system.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

GURPS Traveller won't be effected by this decision. That was mentioned

here

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=29611

Okay, that is good news. The advertisement for GURPS Traveller is still one of my favorites.
Free Trader Beowulf...
Come in Free Trader Beowulf...
Can you hear me?
Come in, Free Trader Beowulf...
Hang in there Beowulf...
Help is on the way.

I may need to pick up GURPS Traveller, even though I am not all that fond of GURPS*.

I am however rather fond of the slightly alternate GURPS Traveller setting - I did not like what was done, setting wise, with either Mega Traveller or Traveller: the New Era.

The Auld Grump

*Little to do with the game iself, a great deal to do with some of the local GURPS players.

 

[trancejeremy]

I am however rather fond of the slightly alternate GURPS Traveller setting - I did not like what was done, setting wise, with either Mega Traveller or Traveller: the New Era.

The Auld Grump

Yeah, that's the reason I can't get too excited about this (besides it being from Mongoose). The setting for Traveller was basically killed off. T4 tried to ignore this by being set in the past, but that wasn't a very satisfying solution.

I'm not sure there is one, other than the GT method - pretending MegaTraveller and TNE never happend. They could simply go forward a couple 100 years, the 4th Imperium. But I'm not sure that would be Traveller anymore. Although that would be better than being set in the past again.