Mongoose Traveller Stats Are Too Powerful

[captainjack23]

First of all, MGT is supposed to be based on CT.

Actually, no, it's supposed to be based upon T5.

And we're off to the Nicean council !

Proposition Catholic: The body of Traveller is descended from above, and the same substance as the creator.

Proposition Orthodox: The body of Traveller is of a similar substance to the creator, but transformed from man.

Proposition Aryan: The body of Traveller is of the earth, but inhabited by the creator.

Proposition Gnostic: All Traveller is spirit; that of the earth is inherently flawed.

Cue religous riot, exit stage left.

 

[Supplement Four]

First of all, MGT is supposed to be based on CT.

Actually, no, it's supposed to be based upon T5.

Again, you take the opposite view, and as usual, your response is not so correct.

From the Mongoose Press Release on their upcoming product, Traveller: "Traveller will be faithful to Classic Traveller, with an upgraded task and combat system. Traveller5 will be a superset of those rules, providing greater detail and more insight into resolving situations in Traveller."

 

[JimG]

Gar...another idea...SKILL RATIO

Ya know, another way to sold the stat bloat problem is to have the skill level value vary the way it did in CT.

From where I sit, that's one of the WORST things about CT, and about as backwards a design approach as can be found.

I really didn't want to get dragged into this argument, but I do have jump in here. I agree completely with Aramis here. As a referee or a player, you have to memorize how each skill works because they are totally inconsistant... and even then you get into arguments whenever (frequently in my old group) two people remember the same rule differently and end up wasting play time looking things up in the rule books. A nightmare...

 

[EDG]

Just because X is based on Y, doesn't mean that X needs to adopt everything that was in Y (or that anything done in Y was necessarily a good idea to start with).

As it is, from where I'm standing MongTrav bears little resemblance to T5. I believe Gar has at some point said that all that really matters is that you can take what MongTrav produces and use it in T5, not that there's any fundamental rules compatibility.

 

[Supplement Four]

As a referee or a player, you have to memorize how each skill works because they are totally inconsistant... and even then you get into arguments whenever (frequently in my old group) two people remember the same rule differently and end up wasting play time looking things up in the rule books. A nightmare...

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting different skills be used differently. The default would be Skill-1 equals +1 DM.

So, there will be no memorizing of how different skills work (with respect to this idea).

What I'm suggesting is that a notation be made with the task (or implemented by the GM).

So, if no notation is made, then assume Skill-1 equals +1 DM. If the task reads differently, then your instructions are right there in front of you in B&W.



EDIT: For example, if you see a task that allows bonus to EDU and Medical skill, then assume it's the normal task system as written. Thus EDU-12, Medical-1 would roll 2D +3.

If the task makes a notation that medical skill allows a DM of +2 per level of skill, that same character would roll: 2D +4.

 

[AKAramis]

First of all, MGT is supposed to be based on CT.

Actually, no, it's supposed to be based upon T5.

Again, you take the opposite view, and as usual, your response is not so correct.

From the Mongoose Press Release on their upcoming product, Traveller: "Traveller will be faithful to Classic Traveller, with an upgraded task and combat system. Traveller5 will be a superset of those rules, providing greater detail and more insight into resolving situations in Traveller."

T5 is releasing first. Take it up with Marc. Compatibility thus has to flow from T5 to MoTrav...

 

[Andrew Whincup]

I can see this being useful as a sidebar in the referee's section. Something along the lines of:

"Some tasks are more dependant than others on knowledge and training. The referee has the option of setting a minimum competence for attempting a task. He also has the option of giving training a greater weight so that each level of skill provides a +2 or even +3 DM. the default is that everyone can attempt a task and that skill levels provide a +1 DM. The frequency of deviation from the default is up to individual referee and groups."

Does that please people? It's an option you can use if you think the situation merits it, but much of the time it's a tool that lives in the shed.

Andy

 

[Tathlum]

First of all, MGT is supposed to be based on CT.

Actually, no, it's supposed to be based upon T5.

And we're off to the Nicean council !

Proposition Catholic: The body of Traveller is descended from above, and the same substance as the creator.

Proposition Orthodox: The body of Traveller is of a similar substance to the creator, but transformed from man.

Proposition Aryan: The body of Traveller is of the earth, but inhabited by the creator.

Proposition Gnostic: All Traveller is spirit; that of the earth is inherently flawed.

Cue religous riot, exit stage left.

Wow! A funny religious joke that isn't offensive.

Well done.

 

[SableWyvern]

I can see this being useful as a sidebar in the referee's section. Something along the lines of:

"Some tasks are more dependant than others on knowledge and training. The referee has the option of setting a minimum competence for attempting a task. He also has the option of giving training a greater weight so that each level of skill provides a +2 or even +3 DM. the default is that everyone can attempt a task and that skill levels provide a +1 DM. The frequency of deviation from the default is up to individual referee and groups."

Does that please people? It's an option you can use if you think the situation merits it, but much of the time it's a tool that lives in the shed.

Andy

I don't particularly like the rule (I think it would work, but would require a system designed from the ground up to support it), but I'm not going to complain if it's included as an option.

 

[Tathlum]

Would it though? Like the example he gave, I don't think its too much for a person with Vac suit-2 to automatically make a normal survival check in vacuum.

 

[SableWyvern]

Would it though? Like the example he gave, I don't think its too much for a person with Vac suit-2 to automatically make a normal survival check in vacuum.

Well, I wouldn't be asking for a check in the first place unless the character was unskilled or the circumstances were dire, so no, I don't think it's unreasonable. More to the point, the rules already imply as much, so I don't think we need to add anything new to make this the case.

It's the very ambiguous "skills may give +2 or +3 in unspecified conditions of your own determination" that seems like it needs a lot more depth to be useful and playable, IMO.

But, like I said, I have no problem with it in there as an optional rule for those who see things differently to me. As long as no one is arguing for this to just be bolted on to the current system as the default, I don't see much point in getting into a serious debate on the matter.

 

[Tathlum]

True, too much metagame thinking/generousity on the GMs part and doubling bonus' for level-1 players could devalue another players 2/3.

I'll bow, practically all of my traveller experience is with d20's.

 

[SableWyvern]

I'll bow, practically all of my traveller experience is with d20's.

Well, the bulk of my fairly limited Traveller experience is actually with SilTrav (Silhouette rules, Traveller setting), so please don't consider me any sort of Traveller expert. :wink:

 

[Andrew Whincup]

I think it works, but there wouldn't be many cases where I'd use either option. However, there' no reason not to have it as a tool the GM can use on occasion if the situation merits it.

While I might use it once a campaign, someone like Sup4 might use it every session. This way we can both be playing the same Traveller.

Andy

 

[AKAramis]

Wow! A funny religious joke that isn't offensive.

Well done.

I found it offensive. Not enough to lodge a complaint, but offensive none the less.

 

[Supplement Four]

It's a handy tool in situations where a trained person would be able to do a task very easily, but training is definitely necessary for the task. Untrained persons haven't a clue.

For example (going with the Vacc Suit example), let's say the players are on a world and find a bazaar. Here, among a lot of other things, Vacc Suits are being sold, and the price is right.

One of the players wants to know the "quality" of the suits. Are they buying the equivalent of real life third world knock-offs? Or, are the suits worthy? Will they hold up in an emergency when your life is on the line?

Hmm... The GM thinks about this for a moment. He decides that anyone with a competent Vacc Suit skill should be able to examine the suits and tell in a jiffy. To the layman, though, all Vacc Suits look alike (and the quality is assumed to be the same too).

To demonstrate this in a roll, the GM decides it's a Vacc Suit throw, governed by EDU. And, the DM is +3 per skill level.

He sets the difficulty fairly high, making so the unskilled will have a tough time telling the quality of the Vacc Suits. Let's set it at a 10+ needed to succeed (-2 DM on the MGT scale). But, the high DM per skill level will throw a lot of weight behind characters with experience, so that they'll be able to tell, easily, which Vacc Suit is of quality, and which is not.

So, Edmond, with EDU-12, Vacc Suit -0, he's throwing 2D +2 for 10+, or 2D for 8+.

But Riely, with EDU-8, Vacc Suit-2, he's throwing 2D +6 for 10+, or 2D for 4+, making it much easier for him to tell the Vacc Suits appart.

Somebody like Jason, EDU-9, Vacc Suit-3, wouldn't even have to throw. He'd be able to tell on sight.



See...this can be a good tool in the GM's bag of tricks if the GM knows how to use it. I've used it for years, but, then again, I'm a CT GM.

 

[Tathlum]

Wow! A funny religious joke that isn't offensive.

Well done.

I found it offensive. Not enough to lodge a complaint, but offensive none the less.

Oh. Right. Well done withdrawn.

 

[AKAramis]

It's a handy tool in situations where a trained person would be able to do a task very easily, but training is definitely necessary for the task. Untrained persons haven't a clue.

Yet again, you produce an example that only works if you buy Your (S4's) original premise that stats can't/mustn't outweigh skills, and that skills are the only valid measure of ability.

And I think a Average task is adequate... and Int (especially since it relates to perception) quite an appropriate attribute. One's inherent mental precision and perceptiveness is FAR more important in this case than knowledge of what to look for. With an Average Task, Mr. OneLevel has (assuming no bonus from stat) 7+ on the short timing; dropping to a 5+ by taking 10x as long.

Meanwhile, the unskilled folks need an 11+, dropping to a 9+... still about an order of magnitude less effective than even a level 0.

If anything, I think the issue is merely that unskilled is only a -3, and not a -4.

Real world: I have a friend who is an ASE certified mechanic, including the diagnostics endorsement. Lots of book knowledge. He hates troubleshooting, since he's not terribly perceptive, and thus sucks at it. Once he knows what's wrong, he's quick and efficient. But having him look over an engine is a waste of both people's times... (Having him fix it, however, is worthwhile, so long as he doesn't have to weld...) Meanwhile, another friend, also a mechanic, failed his ASE's, but is a quick and awesome diagnostician, and has been right every time I've asked him. The two of them should open a shop together....

 

[anselyn]

Hmm... The GM thinks about this for a moment.

Hold the thought that this should take a moment.

He decides that anyone with a competent Vacc Suit skill should be able to examine the suits and tell in a jiffy. To the layman, though, all Vacc Suits look alike (and the quality is assumed to be the same too).

To demonstrate this in a roll, the GM decides it's a Vacc Suit throw, governed by EDU. And, the DM is +3 per skill level.

He sets the difficulty fairly high, making so the unskilled will have a tough time telling the quality of the Vacc Suits. Let's set it at a 10+ needed to succeed (-2 DM on the MGT scale). But, the high DM per skill level will throw a lot of weight behind characters with experience, so that they'll be able to tell, easily, which Vacc Suit is of quality, and which is not.

So, Edmond, with EDU-12, Vacc Suit -0, he's throwing 2D +2 for 10+, or 2D for 8+.

But Riely, with EDU-8, Vacc Suit-2, he's throwing 2D +6 for 10+, or 2D for 4+, making it much easier for him to tell the Vacc Suits apart.

Somebody like Jason, EDU-9, Vacc Suit-3, wouldn't even have to throw. He'd be able to tell on sight.

Wouldn't it be easier to say anyone with Vacc Suit-2+ will know the quality?

Anyone with Vacc Suit 0/1 can roll vs EDU.

You also get into an area here where the skilled people should know the difference and know-they-know. (Would you make this an open or hidden role?)

See...this can be a good tool in the GM's bag of tricks if the GM knows how to use it.

There's the rub.

 

[captainjack23]

Wow! A funny religious joke that isn't offensive.

Well done.

I found it offensive. Not enough to lodge a complaint, but offensive none the less.

Well then, please accept my apologies. Offense was not my intent.