Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="trancejeremy" data-source="post: 584539" data-attributes="member: 924">Well, while in Classic Traveller the rule was that you died, there was an optional rule that if you failed the roll, you were just hurt and had to cut your career short. So, it was only a big deal if you wanted to make it a big deal.Anyway, I personally like T20 except for two rather large things.  The rather convulted design systems which aren't great and takes up most the book, and the new character classes, most of which are a joke, and don't even fit the feel of Classic Traveller.The latter became apparent when I tried to update some NPCs from CT adventures - it couldn't really be done). The Sky Raiders trilogy from FASA, to be exact.It's got several NPCs as scientists. While I'm sure they weren't rolled that way (the skills were presumably picked), all of them are legal characters as far as I can tell, and they have gun combat skills about on par with the sample PCs (a little worse, but not much).  Now compare that to T20 scientists, who are completely worthless. I mean, Commoners from regular d20 would beat the snot out of T20 scientists.  As there is really no way in T20 to give Scientists some combat skills other than multi classing into a military class, and that wouldn't be apropriate. So as far asAnyway, besides that, from reading the official T20 message boards, it seems apparent that many, many people are confused by the character generation rules (as am I). That said, I do think most of it is good, it just needed a better layout, and they need to revise the classes so they are somewhat balanced.I really like their damage system. I know some don't like it, but from what I've seen, it's quite a clever compromise and it works fairly well.</blockquote>

Verification