Mongoose Traveller NPCs

[opensent]

Is it just me, or do the NPCs that Mongoose Provides in various aventures and modules seem hyper optimized compared to the ash and trash PCs that character generation seems to produce?

About half the time I play, I'd actually perfer to take a NPC set of stats and skills than roll on some of these ill thought out skill and event tables. Not to mention endure the retarted 'the older and more skilled you get, the less employable you are' -1 DM from every career.

I've seen 5 term characters come out with stupid skill sets like: Zero-G-3, and no vacc suit skill.

I personally think Mongoose should eat it's own dog food and have every NPC be generated by random die and event rolls. If you look at the orignial CT books, that seems to be how it was done in the old days.

 

[BenTOGS]

I daresay that that is as it shoild be. The characters are designed, not randomised, afterall. One can 'Flesh' them out if the need is there. Lets face it most players need only the basic binary questions for NPCs such as 'Living/dead", ' threat/no threat?', Profit/loss?'

"eat it's own dog food"?

 

[opensent]

But they aren't 'designed' using any system. Even with point allocation, most NPCs break the rules.

Basically, it makes most PCs become subpar-sophonts adventuring in a universe of actually competent people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food

Basically, if they were to use the system they publish for PCs to create NPCs, it would lead to a better product.

 

[rust]

Not to mention endure the retarted 'the older and more skilled you get, the less employable you are' -1 DM from every career.

I think it is more a "the older and more skilled you get, the more difficult
it becomes for you to start a new career", and this seems to fit in well with
my real life experience - a highly skilled expert rarely decides to make a
new start as a beginner in another career, and employers hesitate to re-
train older experts from other fields.

I've seen 5 term characters come out with stupid skill sets like: Zero-G-3, and no vacc suit skill.

The skill packages for the various genres and the connection skills make
it comparatively easy to deal with this kind of problem.

Anyway, if you do not like the random character generation, you can al-
ways use the point buy system to generate characters you like better.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

Is it just me, or do the NPCs that Mongoose Provides in various aventures and modules seem hyper optimized compared to the ash and trash PCs that character generation seems to produce?

Yeah, I can see where you are coming from in this, the skills, and esp the physical characteristics are ofter pretty high. My answer has been to change a lot of the basic baddie AAB999 into 777777, and sometimes drop a few of the skill level 4 and 3s as well, but if you have, for some reason, got super powered PCs stick with the proposed NPC stats. The 1001 character NPCs are much more likely, so perhaps it all depends on who is writing which supplement.

Don't agree with the "ash and trash", we find that the character generation works well in most cases, but be prepared to see a few changes in direction. As has been pointed out, skills from connections and group packages can iron out oddities.

Egil

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Not to toot my own horn, but ALL of the NPCs created in Spica's Career Books 1&2 as well as the NPCs in ACER were created by rolling them up. The only NPCs that were "designed" were the "Redshirts" in ACER, and even they were created randomly.

 

[Matian]

Depending on the style of game, NPCs also represent their power to help or hurt the party. If the PCs bungle a vital check, an NPC with a high enough skill can get the party back on track in a relatively seamless fashion. Likewise, if the climax of an encounter is betrayal and a firefight, Red Shirts 1-5 are going to have average stats, but the Big Bad should be tough enough that it takes most or all of the party to take eax out; there's no sense of accomplishment if the BB goes down in two rounds or one player defeats eax single-handed.

Nthing what everyone else said about the connections and skill packages. In lieu of skill packages, I let all the players pick one level 1 skill and one level 0 to flesh out their characters a bit more. That works pretty well for evening out discrepancies.

 

[opensent]

Not to toot my own horn, but ALL of the NPCs created in Spica's Career Books 1&2 as well as the NPCs in ACER were created by rolling them up. The only NPCs that were "designed" were the "Redshirts" in ACER, and even they were created randomly.

Cool.. I just picked up ACER and it seems great. I really like all the SPICA stuff, so rock on!

 

[Vile]

And to blow my own horn, the three alternate crews for the Nemesis Pursuit Ship are all created according to the rules. There's a Space Patrol crew, a Bountyhunter crew, and an Enforcer crew.

I think that supplements owe it to the players and referees to stay true to the rules as much as possible. It's fine for referees to make up stuff off the cuff for their own games, but if it's a published book it's not a good thing if you don't know what follows the rules and what's broken. Look at all the trouble the broken deckplans and UWPs in CT caused over the years.

Oh, yes, the deckplans in Nemesis also follow the rules ... :wink:

 

[Bense]

If you are the evil crime boss, would you hire just the first four guys who randomly come in for your muscle, or would you hire the guys who were obviously tougher than average?
The NPCs are optimized because the bad guys hire the best. The guys with all 6s in their physical UPP don't get hired as muscle.

 

[simonh]

The NPCs are optimized because the bad guys hire the best. The guys with all 6s in their physical UPP don't get hired as muscle.

I as a real person got to make every single decision I was presented with throughout my entire life. Yet the Traveller game system gives me extremely few choices about the development of my character. I don't get any choice in which attributes I improved in personal development, or which skills I was interested in or trained in.

I suppose it's realistic that there's a chance you won't get into the career you want, that happens, but not having any say in what skills your character learns is incredibly annoying.

Simon Hibbs

 

[IanBruntlett]

I suppose it's realistic that there's a chance you won't get into the career you want, that happens, but not having any say in what skills your character learns is incredibly annoying.

I found that rigidly applying the standard Traveller character generation scheme can be unhelpful.

I already have protection vs bad characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 1 or 2 be rolled again.

As for career skills, well I figure that sometimes a marine will be ordered to learn skills they won't normally have volunteered for and other times will have the option of signing up to train for one out of a selection of skills. Basically I wing it for this aspect of character creation.

 

[hector]

I believe the idea of allowing you to choose which table to apply the die roll to after having rolled the dice was already mentioned in the Advancement thread, but I might as well repeat it here, which allows for a fair bit of versatility; chances are, if you can't increase a skill a skill you'd like, you'll still be able to increase a characteristic that suits.

Besides, if a skill is one you get as basic training, you only need to roll it once or twice for your character to be fairly good at it, which isn't that unlikely over three or four terms, and if you need a higher level, see about arranging connections with the other PCs (not to difficult once the terms have been worked out) and increasing your starting skills that way, as well as the group package at the end. As to generating NPCs, I'd use the point buy system for the important ones, and random rolls for the redshirts.

 

[far-trader]

I as a real person got to make every single decision I was presented with throughout my entire life. Yet the Traveller game system gives me extremely few choices about the development of my character. I don't get any choice in which attributes I improved in personal development, or which skills I was interested in or trained in.

The point being, I think anyway, that the random roll results are the choices your character made, not what you might choose. And then you role-play the character created. Rather than play yourself in the shoes of a person in the far-future.

It's your job as the player to look at the random results and figure out what the character is like from that. "Why did he choose to become so skilled at Zero-G with no Vacc-Suit skill?" (Answer: He spent a lot of time in a space habitat with a large zero-g area and participated in zero-g sports, but being a shirtsleeve environment he never needed vacc-suit skill.)

Or to put it another way for example... Would you want to play your physical stats in a game? Even if your health is less than average when that is important to your Imperial Marine? Would you want to substitute that Philosophy degree and associated education background for the tactical and weapons experience you want your Marine to have?

...but yeah, if role-playing a generated character is not your kind of fun, use point buy or some other created system. It's been my experience though that many players who want this fall into the habit of playing exactly the same personality and skill set over and over, with a different shell and a new name (sometimes not even the name changes)...

Player: "My character introduces himself as Bob... "

Ref: "Your last character was named Bob."

Player: "...and he's wearing BattleDress and carrying a Plasma Gun."

Ref: "But I thought you went through Merchant!?"

Player: "Well, yeah, but I bought it with my muster money."

Ref: "So, new Bob looks just like the old Bob who was a Marine?"

Player: "Yeah, and he has the same skills too, only he got a Free-Trader in mustering out and is looking to hire crew since he can't fly it. Or maybe I'll just sell it."

Ref: *headdesk*

 

[far-trader]

I found that rigidly applying the standard Traveller character generation scheme can be unhelpful.

I already have protection vs bad characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 1 or 2 be rolled again.

Do you also have protection vs uber characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 5 or 6 be rolled again?

Your "protection" idea, while no doubt well intentioned, is imo flawed. Whatever cranks your groups gears though, you're the only ones who know what is fun for you.

I'd personally suggest instead an averaging method that doesn't make them always tending to above average. Something like a stat total of less than average granting bonus points sufficient to reach average, with the player choosing where to apply them.

So sucky rolls don't create above average characters but you can bump them up to average, even padding a high score to make one stat remarkable if desired.

And lucky players who honestly roll better than average stats won't feel ripped off. I know I would if I rolled a couple 12s and the rest 7s, while the next player rolled a bunch of 4s and a couple 8s, then got to reroll and ended up with a couple 9s and 12s to add to his 8s.

Just don't let them then also choose where to assign the rolls, unless you have a well balanced game where every stat is equally important, or they'll find a dump stat and boost the rest. Tricksy playersses :x

And fwiw I've never rolled a totally useless character in all my time playing and creating npcs with pure random stats and careers. Some have looked bad at the start (poor initial stat rolls or the wrong stats for the concept) but gotten better with some career adds and skills. Give it a chance and you might be pleasantly surprised.

 

[simonh]

The point being, I think anyway, that the random roll results are the choices your character made, not what you might choose. And then you role-play the character created. Rather than play yourself in the shoes of a person in the far-future.

It's your job as the player to look at the random results and figure out what the character is like from that. ...

Sure, that's how Traveller is presented. It's a valid and interesting way to set up a game, but I'm not sure it's the best choice for the default character generation system for the default SF RPG.

Or to put it another way for example... Would you want to play your physical stats in a game?

Me as I am now, in an action game? Well, I'm a bit over the hill so my weapons and survival skills are a bit rusty. Me as I was in my late 20s? In a heartbeat! Maybe I'd do OK as a late-career Harrison Ford in his "ordinary middle aged guy thrown into the heart of the action" phase.

...but yeah, if role-playing a generated character is not your kind of fun, use point buy or some other created system. It's been my experience though that many players who want this fall into the habit of playing exactly the same personality and skill set over and over, with a different shell and a new name (sometimes not even the name changes)...

I don't see that as being a problem. It's their choice to make.

As referee you have the power to determine every detail of the entire game setting. All the players have is their character. That's it, nothing else. You have billions of characters and gajillions of credits to spend on props and gimmicks in the game. All they have is some stats, a handfull of skills and the few credits and snub pistol they mustered out with.

You're right, points buy is always a good option if no other compromise can be reached.

Simon Hibbs

 

[simonh]

Do you also have protection vs uber characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 5 or 6 be rolled again?

I don't think that's a fair comparrison. As I just wrote in a previous post, all the players have is their character. That is the only means they have for influencing or affecting the game world in any way. Better stats and skills means that all other things being equal they have a better chance of influencing the outcome of events. If they have an idea of how to resolve a problem, better skills and stats give a better chance they will be successful in executing their plan.

I think it's totaly reasonable for the players to prefer to have at least an 'average' character. Heck, I think it's perfectly understandable for them to want to want the best character they can possibly get. Why on earth wouldn't they?

It's pretty clear to me what benefits players get from having strong, healthy, competent characters. But what benefit would you get, as a GM, from imposing limits that average out the character's abilities? How might that make the experience of the game better for you, or anyone else?

I can see how you might enjoy the challenge of "overcoming the odds" despite handicaps such as mediocre stats or skills. That's great. I can see that being fun too. But I'd rather have some say in whether that's the kind of experience I want to go for in any particular game, especialy if I'm not familiar with the setting or the style of the GM. It's also not something I'd feel comfortable imposing on people regardless of their preferences.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

On character generation; if someone rolls up a very weak character (say 30 points or less overall), then I would be inclined to let them abandone that character and re-roll another from scratch. Also allow a certain amount of point swapping to bring up very low attribute scores by moving 1, 2 or 3 points from high attribute scores.

IMHO the careers system in the MgT does offer a good balance between choice and random rolls. The only significant modifications is we allow return to a previous career (starting at rank 0 again) if qualification roll passed, and though the first skill each term is randomly rolled on the appropriate table, any skill gained througn promotion can be chosen from relevant tables.

On NPCs, I tend a bit towards a game balance approach, and don't think that the baddies are always going to be the best/strongest/highest skilled folk around.

Egil

 

[IanBruntlett]

Do you also have protection vs uber characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 5 or 6 be rolled again?

Your "protection" idea, while no doubt well intentioned, is imo flawed. Whatever cranks your groups gears though, you're the only ones who know what is fun for you.

I agree it is flawed . When we were sorting out characters to run under the "Secrets of the Ancients" campaign, we just chose some characters from 1,001 characters. Next time we roll up characters, I may treat characteristic dice rolls of 2 or 3 as a 4.

 

[Bob.King]

Do you also have protection vs uber characteristic dice rolls by making rolls of 5 or 6 be rolled again?

I don't think that's a fair comparrison. As I just wrote in a previous post, all the players have is their character. That is the only means they have for influencing or affecting the game world in any way. Better stats and skills means that all other things being equal they have a better chance of influencing the outcome of events. If they have an idea of how to resolve a problem, better skills and stats give a better chance they will be successful in executing their plan.

I think it's totaly reasonable for the players to prefer to have at least an 'average' character. Heck, I think it's perfectly understandable for them to want to want the best character they can possibly get. Why on earth wouldn't they?

I'll go one step further along this line: I play an RPG to be the hero in a story. Granted, it can be VERY heroic to rise above mediocre stats and win the day, but if I wanted to play a guy with mediocre stat struggling to get by, I can just deal with my everyday life. I play RPG's to have some fun and get away from the everyday, so I would prefer a chance to play Commander Awesome or even Sergeant Competent.

Now, that does not have to be all about the stats or anything like that. I think the character generation rules can give you a good starting point since they give the character some interesting flavor. But the key factor is to play and enjoy the game.

If there is a potential issue like Zero-G 3 and no Vacc Suit, then let the player take Vacc Suit 1 instead of the third level of Zero-G. Does not change the character much, but makes it more reasonable for actually playing.

I can see how you might enjoy the challenge of "overcoming the odds" despite handicaps such as mediocre stats or skills. That's great. I can see that being fun too. But I'd rather have some say in whether that's the kind of experience I want to go for in any particular game, especialy if I'm not familiar with the setting or the style of the GM. It's also not something I'd feel comfortable imposing on people regardless of their preferences.

Well said! I am just getting back into Traveller after many years, and am putting together a campaign. I am considering granting a fixed number of rerolls during character generation. If someone wants to have a character with difficulties that must be overcome, then they are free to do it. Heck, they can reroll their good stats if they want more of a challenge. If they have any re-rolls left when mustering out they can always use them on the benefit rolls

I agree that that key NPCs should be reasonably competent. That is how they got to their position as key players, they rose above the competition. That also makes defeating them more satisfying. However, most red shirts should be a bit better than straight average in what matters to their job description (since they were picked based on *something* by their boss), but the red shirts should not be too competent or they would not be red shirts, they would be key players.