Reverse Expectations

[Votan]

Yeah per the chargen system you should only expect 1-3 skill points per 4 year period so you wouldn't expect alot in play. We basically never gave skill points but IIRC our games were more short duration.

Yeah, that was also my experience.

Still, the idea was that the focus was on the universe and not player power/design/advancement.

Very true. Something I didn't like in my youth but can now appreciate. It's kind of fun to have a system where it all doesn't just come down to who is better in combat. For one thing, it means it's not such a big deal to have a young PC with half the skills of an old PCs as long as he brings something different to the table. Very different concept than most leveling systems.

Young PCs were also very happy if they rolled high for psionic potential. It was a nice balancing factor.

Plus the advantage of skill ranks wasn't that amazing unless you got really, really lucky. It's hard to optimize a system based on random results.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Ok my reading comprehension may not be at its highest today but how is this:

If you're taking away the player's ability to choose the danger level of the challenges they're facing, then you're removing their meaningful choices. If you're removing their meaningful choices, you're railroading them. QED.

not a direct answer to this:

Because nowhere in the quoted text did I say anything about level scaling?

Go check out post #20. I actually said the exact opposite of what Dannager keeps claiming I said. I've pointed this out to him multiple times. He keeps posting what basically amount at this point to lies about what I said.

More generally, there's a very old ASCII text file out there called "The 28 Types of Game Master" by Scott Butler and J.D. Frazer. My copy is dated 4-25-89 and reads, in part:

23) Leading and Overbearing - "You pump the bartender for information
and he tells you about a red dragon's lair to the west."
"Too risky. We go to hear rumours somewhere else."
"A man offers to hire you to clean out a red dragon's lair for him."
"We say `no, thank you' and leave for the next village."
"On the way to the village you stumble onto a red dragon's lair . . ."

Several people on this thread apparently have much to learn from its wisdom.

 

[Mort]

Because nowhere in the quoted text did I say anything about level scaling?

Go check out post #20. I actually said the exact opposite of what Dannager keeps claiming I said. I've pointed this out to him multiple times. He keeps posting what basically amount at this point to lies about what I said

In post # 20 you said:

Scaling the power up doesn't. Forcing the PCs to face opponents of a given power level no matter what choice they make, however, DOES. By definition.

Forcing PCs to face oponents of a given power level (or even range of power levels) = level scaling - it's the definition.

The dispute is whether this in and of itself = railroading. You say yes it does (it's right there) - Danager (and others including myself) say no it does not. That is the argument.

More generally, there's a very old ASCII text file out there called "The 28 Types of Game Master" by Scott Butler and J.D. Frazer. My copy is dated 4-25-89 and reads, in part:

23) Leading and Overbearing - "You pump the bartender for information
and he tells you about a red dragon's lair to the west."
"Too risky. We go to hear rumours somewhere else."
"A man offers to hire you to clean out a red dragon's lair for him."
"We say `no, thank you' and leave for the next village."
"On the way to the village you stumble onto a red dragon's lair . . ."

Several people on this thread apparently have much to learn from its wisdom.

Yes this is a clear case of railroading - it also has nothing to do with level scaling which is more like:

You pump the bartender for information and he tells you about a red dragon's lair to the west." (DM knowledge a Party CR+4 challenge)
Player: "Too risky. anything else?"
Barkeep: "Well there are the trolls to the south, They're causing a lot of havoc and are rumored to have much treasure." (DM knowledge a party CR+2 challenge)
Player: "Nah, we're in the mood for something a bit less strenuous."
Barkeep: "Well there are the kobolds outside the city, they're pesky. But the rewards will likely be nowhere near as good!" (A party CR -3 challenge)

This is still an example of level scaling (The DM is artificially controling the CR of the monsters to something the party can handle) - but railroading? I don't think so.

I think the disconnect is forcing a specific challenge/situation which is railroading - level scaling does not imply that you are.

 

[Ariosto]

Even so, in the end it is pretty level-less. I don't recall too many post chargen level ups from my distant traveller days but I suppose that is a matter of style.

With 2d6, the difference between 41.67% (8+) and 100% (2+) is only 6 points. With 1d20, from 40% (13+) to 100% (1+) is 12 points.

That's twice as many "level ups" for a skill rating or other factor.

 

[Haltherrion]

With 2d6, the difference between 41.67% (8+) and 100% (2+) is only 6 points. With 1d20, from 40% (13+) to 100% (1+) is 12 points.

That's twice as many "level ups" for a skill rating or other factor.

Not really sure what you are getting it but it seems a stretch to consider Traveller a leveling system. After you define your character in the chargen process, it stays mostly the same as far as base skills and attributes as you adventure. The PC changes through roleplay, gear acquisition, wealth and such but that is a far cry from a system like D&D where the focus to a lesser or greater extent is usually on leveling.