Initiative...help me, please!

[jtfc]

OK, I give up. I need some help. Sorry if this isn't the right place.

We're getting sick of D&D, and we try to decide what to play next. One of
our players says "I have all the MegaTraveller books. Let's do
Traveller!" and the rest of us agreed. So, I get on the internet, and
I discover that you guys are making a new Traveller! Great, I say,
let's play that instead. Lots of things I like better in the new one.

So the guy who owns the MegaTraveller books takes a look at the PDF,
and says "look at these Initiative rules. Constant adjustments you
have to remember, constant worry about hasty actions, and so forth.
We play in a game where half the people are fairly new to roleplaying
games, one of our players is the 9 year old kid of another player, they
couldn't handle that". I pointed out that MegaTraveller is at least
as complicated, but he said that there, it's complicated for the GM.
For the players, it's easy. You act when the GM tells you to act,
say what you're going to do, roll two dice, and get told what happened.
No problem, even for a 9 year old.

So I can't get him to switch. And I have got to admit, he looks right
to me. I had to read the rules three times and simulate it before I got
a good feel of what it would even look like. What makes it worse is
that it's different...all RPGs I know play turns or segmented turns.
Nobody plays continuous, which this kinda sorta ends up being.

So what should I say to him? Is there a way to explain these rules
so that kids and people new to RPGs can actually play it? If not,
is there optional dumbed-down rules that we can use?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

One of the suggestions made early on and used successfully with my teenager (with only D20 experience) was to use a D6 for initiative for each character, when it reaches 6 you act and restart it at your new Initiative Die roll value for your next action.

It took about 3 combat rounds for us to get the hang of it, and now it is second nature.

One of the comments made in my group was that they LIKED the continuous flow of action over the artificial feeling round sequence.

Use the suggestion for not maxing out the Effect die and the adjusted weapons damage posted in other threads and see how it works. My group has been using it for a couple of months and it really is no big deal.

Now the 9-year-old might need extra help at first, but he/she should catch on pretty quick too.

It IS quirky though, so do some practice fights to get the feel of it.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Another alternative is to ignore the Timing/Effect rule.

Roll 2D to hit and 1D for initiative for the next round, add your DEX bonus and go highest to lowest, with tie rolls going to the higher dex character.

Damage is 1D+dex/str bonus and skill with damage per weapon type. Weapon damage is now listed as xY+Z where you multiply the Effect die (or damage die) by the Y value then add the Z value.

Works fast and gives you back that "round" feeling that they may be used to.

 

[jtfc]

It IS quirky though, so do some practice fights to get the feel of it.

The trick is to get them willing to do the first fight. I don't think the rules are all that complex, just written for somebody who understands RPGs really well, and it's too intimidating for them.

I'm not explaining what I need very well, I think. Let me start....

"You were looking around your comics shop for the latest Batman, and somebody asked if you wanted to play Traveller. You'd never played a 'role playing game' before, but heck, you'd try anything once. They handed you this sheet with some numbers on it, and told you that you were a grizzled marine with a checkered past and deeply in debt with a secret crush on the pilot, and that this was kinda like 'Star Wars' without Jedi. You were a bit hesitant but pretty soon you found it to be a lot of fun! You were getting into it and having a good time until some guy hit the pilot over the head with a beer bottle. Suddenly, everybody's pulling out dice. Welcome to combat.

The first thing you do is...."

I need something that I can use to explain the combat in such simple terms that the 9 year old and the person who's barely played RPGs will be willing to play. If that means skipping some of the more complicated stuff, that's fine. But I'm not looking for actual rules changes, except maybe a little streamlining if that's what it needs for people new to RPGs.

Thanks again!

 

[SableWyvern]

The trick is to get them willing to do the first fight. I don't think the rules are all that complex, just written for somebody who understands RPGs really well, and it's too intimidating for them.

At least part of that will probably because you're working from a playtest manuscript, not a finished product. I would assume part of the current finalising process includes fleshing out the descriptions and explanations.

Anyway, here's an attempt to help you out.

First up, drop the term Initiative. Call it Action Points. You get a certain number of APs every turn, and you spend them to take actions. You can save up unused action points to do something in a later turn. Attacking costs 6AP*, but you get some of those back, determined by the result of your Timing die.

That's it -- pretty much all there is to the initiative system, when you get down to it.

I would suggest that you drop the rules for hasty actions, which add complexity. I'd also drop the "moving as a combat action" rule, so all movment follows the same basic rules. Then, all you need is a list of common actions, and their AP costs, and you're good to go.

*Actually, since you have a minimimum Initiative of 1, it only costs 5 Action Points to attack. But it's probably more intuitive to allow AP to fall to zero, and call an attack action AP6.

Edit: I'm not sure if this will have unexpected ramifications and break the system, but you could also merge the movment and attack phases to really simplify the structure. Gain two AP at the start of the turn, then every body takes turns spending their AP in Dex order. If you've got 6AP, you can attack, if not, you can't. Possibly, start with that, then split the action and movment phases back out once they've got a handle on the baiscs.

 

[Settembrini]

Drop T/E.

 

[captainjack23]

Drop T/E.

Good one. Why didn't we think of that ?

 

[SableWyvern]

Drop T/E.

And how, exactly, does that help explain the initiative system?

 

[Deniable]

Drop T/E.

And then...

(Sorry, younger brother was watching "Dude, Where's My Car" recently.)

 

[jtfc]

Thanks Sable, that does help!

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Drop T/E.

T/E can be converted to a 'conventional' initiative system with no effort.

(Using uncapped Effect and a new success/fail scale) Keep Effect as normal, and use Timing as the next initiative roll, adding Dex bonus/penalty. Having Tactics as a minimum roll can still be used.

So...

Take initiative from Timing of last roll, min Tactics, + Dex.

Phase 1) Move or attack.

Phase 2) Attack or move.

'Full' attack will be things like autofire and current grapples, 'full' move will be things like charge and sprint.

or, just

Move or Attack/Action. Roll for any action.

We need better movement rules...

Instead of having Effect (of the Athletics, or just no skill roll) as the number of metres moved, have it add to a value dependent on race, depending on what the move type is.

Crawl/use cover/sneak. 10+Effect metres divided by 4
Walk. 10+Effect metres divided by 2.
Run. 10+Effect metres. -1 mod to task.
Sprint. 20+Effect metres. -2 mod to task.

To move and attack (charge) use the multiple task rules.

If you don't take an action roll a new initiative.

Easy.

 

[Settembrini]

That sounds okay.
That would warrant a longer round, no? In regards of time modelled.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

I don't actually see round length as fixed. Standard T/E rounds could last between 2 and 10 seconds, depending what happens, what's done.

For the simplified system, with a single move/action, maybe 3-5 seconds?

Basically a round takes as long as it needs to.

 

[Settembrini]

This is funny, as such a free floating thing is the opposite of what the MongoSystemsuggests!

Anyway, I think even you as a friend of T/E have raised some dire shortcomings in the recent incarnation.

For example I concur that many more actions must be defined and fitted into the T/E mold. It´s basically a floating action point mechanism, so the possible actions beg to be defined. This issue came up several times, for example regarding communication in combat etc.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

I agree there are shortcomings, dire is a bit too subjective for my take.

Any mechanic has shortcomings; some are good at modeling such a thing, others something else. Most come short in specific areas. In the end it is a matter of taste.

Granted the T/E device isn't wargamey; to me, it is roleplayery. Perhaps skirmish tactics are better placed in the Mercenary supplement, which I guess will have a more military feel. MGT has broken with tradition in that it's treated non-military careers and actions as more than just an afterthought. I think that's a good thing, in the long run. That it loses some of it's military simulationism is weighed against an increase in the potential* to do useful stuff that's more than just attacking.

That Mercenary should offer some alternate rulesets for different styles of combat is desirable. There's a distinct tradition of variant rules in Trav. It is easy to do because Traveller is actually a set of self-contained systems that share a common 1D or 2D range. It becomes simple slot in alternate methods without it effecting game balance. Compare that to the Burning Wheel (I know, quite an extreme example ), where if you change one part the whole edifice comes crashing down.

There's a mini interview with Gar in the latest Signs & Portents in which he briefly explains why he came up with T/E. It was so other characters than just the pilots and gunners could have something useful to do during spaceship combat.

*The corollary is that noncombatants (and I've played 1 or 2) can do their stuff in a more interesting way. Instead of passively cowering and running, they can now do it actively!

I regard T/E as an interesting concept that has needed to be violently beaten into shape, but that seems to be happening. I know feedback has been limited, but I can understand why.

If, as is my reading, that uncapped Effect also means a new success scale, maybe out of 10, then the basic probabilities are fine, IMHO.

As for Timing, it's a versatile iniative roll. It's less choosing to be careful over hasty, than it is weighing up effect against retaining the initiative. From playtesting it's my impression that it is mostly best to try for a high timing, so you can press your attack. It's worth taking weaker hits to act more often, in essence.

Also, the better the roll, the better the result. That's a nice simple thing to understand. No: "great roll, but lousy damage".

Does T/E need to be more thoroughly explained in the published text? Of course.

*Should the acts players can spend ticks on be more defined? Yes.

Should alternative variant systems be presented? In Mercenary most definitely, and probably should include one or two in the core book too.

Should T/E be ditched as a concept? No. It has features other kinds of mechanic don't easily provide, even though it perhaps loses others folk have got used to. Easily remedied with variant rules.

T/E has come in for a lot of hostile criticism, but in the end, that has been damned useful. How it works is much better understood, what it is and what it isn't.

I've been able to weigh facts, opinions, and analyses from several points of view, and yes, as a concept, it gets my vote. Now it's just a case of waiting and seeing what the final rules look like. Maybe I'll hate the final description in the end, but I do know I can easily fix that to my satisfaction and that it shouldn't affect any other part of the rules.

Phew, didn't mean to waffle on like that. Sorry, chaps.

 

[Monteblanco]

Mongoose Traveller initiative is just too complicated to casual gamers and, thus, not really a good choice for Traveller. I believe it would work fine as an optional rule, in the same way as T/E. However, making it a main rule it will only make it harder to new gamers.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Initiative a T/E were the same thing. Timing's gone; so we don't know what kind of initiative system it is.

 

[nezeray]

As a long time role-player, this thread has TOTALLY lost me. I guess it's time to read the playtest rules.

James / Nezeray
Favors T20 rules personally. (no need to flame me for liking D20, It's my cross to bare)

 

[atpollard]

When playing face to face, I prefer "Who wants to go first" as our initiative system (with Paper, Scizzors, Rock to break any ties).

Anything more complex just gets in the way of having fun.