My thougths on character generation

[ShawnDriscoll]

"Weak" characters do die off in CharGen. Culled.

 

[Major Tom]

Going to be keeping the 'roll in order' system, but I'll explain why...

That's a tremendously disappointing decision.

1. There are going to be alternatives (including point-build) in the Companion.

That's got to be the worst possible reason. You are saying to people, "want a modern character generation system? Give us more money."

2. It is very Traveller - you play the cards you are dealt.

You do in the 1970s and 1980s. Then games that let you design a character you wanted to play came along and that attitude fell out of favour quite dramatically.

3. Any experienced gamer is going to alter it to their tastes anyway.

I think that's another terrible reason. Experienced gamers should be the last people you are thinking about as your target audience. How the game looks and plays from the perspective of someone just branching out from D&D looking for their first SFRPG or completely new to the hobby is far more important. Traveller does not have a strong, recognisable IP like Star Wars, or Firefly to make it stand out alongside those games on the shelf. Making it less attractive to the browsing gamer cannot be a sensible way to go.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Major Tom,

Traveller is not about being a "Me, too." RPG. Never has. Anyway, you're here. So it's not like the game is closed off to the D&D mindset player who's looking for something better. Very few sci-fi RPGs that tried cloning D&D are still around, or even played.

 

[Major Tom]

Shawn,

If what you are getting from my post is, "Do D&D in space," then I'm not expressing myself properly. I'm well aware of Traveller's history and I'm a passionate advocate of the game. I started playing it in the 80s when Megatraveller became available in the UK and I've played in and run campaigns in pretty much every edition since. Traveller has been and probably always will be my go-to hard sci-fi game. What's frustrating for me is that Mongoose are apparently determined to put a big stumbling block in the way of engaging with and attracting new players. I get that hardcore 2D6 in order is classic. I am all for it's inclusion (preferably in the companion) but the core character generation system should be something that players who do not feel any nostalgia for the 80s can relate to. Like it or not the new edition of Traveller will have to compete with FFG's Star Wars games and Firefly on the shelves of LGSs (and the virtual shelves of DriveThru). It can't do so on brand recognition but it could do so with a really solid setting (the Third Imperium, or for my personal preference the Shattered Imperium) and a great system, which includes character generation. The 2d6 in order system just isn't that.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I get that hardcore 2D6 in order is classic. I am all for it's inclusion (preferably in the companion) but the core character generation system should be something that players who do not feel any nostalgia for the 80s can relate to. Like it or not the new edition of Traveller will have to compete with FFG's Star Wars games and Firefly on the shelves of LGSs (and the virtual shelves of DriveThru). It can't do so on brand recognition but it could do so with a really solid setting (the Third Imperium, or for my personal preference the Shattered Imperium) and a great system, which includes character generation. The 2d6 in order system just isn't that.

Matthew and I are role-players first. We both enjoy role-playing whatever characters we generate. Role-playing makes room for all characters in a game. For me, it's not any nostalgic feeling for the '80s that I prefer to role with my 2d6-in-order roll. I didn't play Traveller in the '80s. So maybe my nostalgia is a 2008s thing.

Competition is a healthy thing. I like seeing Mongoose Traveller on the same book shelf with Star Wars and Firefly. What Traveller doesn't have franchise-fame-wise, it makes up for rule-wise and player-wise (Mongoose Traveller already has a customer base, while FFG is still looking for custom dice customers, and Firefly is looking for Cortex+ customers).

One thing that sells Traveller is good referees that pass on good referee skills, and so on, and so on. Such referees agree with their players, before a game, on how characters will be generated. If chargen becomes a game-stopper for players, something has gone critical FAIL with the referee running the game.

 

[Major Tom]

Matthew and I are role-players first. We both enjoy role-playing whatever characters we generate. Role-playing makes room for all characters in a game. For me, it's not any nostalgic feeling for the '80s that I prefer to role with my 2d6-in-order roll. I didn't play Traveller in the '80s. So maybe my nostalgia is a 2008s thing.

I'm a role-player first myself. I simply dislike being prevented from designing a character that I want to play. I'm far from alone in that.

I do love life path, it's what got me invested in Traveller in the first place. Up to that point I'd mostly been playing MERP and Red Box D&D. Life path was wonderfully refreshing. Look at what Mutant Chronicles have done with it in their latest incarnation though, you get rolls but also a certain number of bennies to make picks or re-roll events. It's a great balance between random influence and developing the character you want to play.

Competition is a healthy thing. I like seeing Mongoose Traveller on the same book shelf with Star Wars and Firefly. What Traveller doesn't have franchise-fame-wise, it makes up for rule-wise and player-wise (Mongoose Traveller already has a customer base, while FFG is still looking for custom dice customers, and Firefly is looking for Cortex+ customers).

Traveller has an established base sure, but wouldn't it be great to expand that base? If the second edition only sells to people who brought first edition isn't that something of a failure? Both Firefly and the Star Wars games are excellent systems that really support role-playing over roll playing and provide players with choice in how their character is built. Both games are already much more popular than Traveller at my local games club (admittedly tiny sample, but Firefly and Stat Wars are always over subscribed while Traveller simply isn't played). Wouldn't it be good to change that? One of the ways to do that is to modernise things.

One thing that sells Traveller is good referees that pass on good referee skills, and so on, and so on. Such referees agree with their players, before a game, on how characters will be generated. If chargen becomes a game-stopper for players, something has gone critical FAIL with the referee running the game.

Sure, as an experienced GM I can enthuse players about the game and mod up the system to accommodate what my players want. What if the guy picking it up isn't a hugely experienced GM and doesn't mod the system? His players roll up a bunch of characters who've no positive DMs and so struggle to get into the careers they want their characters to follow and wash out on survival rolls. That's a seriously negative experience that will put them off Traveller. Likewise, weak characters dying off in generation creates negative experiences as the other players have to wait around, re-do connections and suchlike. Those negative experiences lead to Traveler sitting on the shelf while the competition picks up play time and sales. The system can fail just as easily as the GM.

I get the feeling that you and I are both passionate about Traveller how we would like to see it evolve. I hope we can continue to discuss things in a respectful manner, and if I have offended you with any of my previous comments I apologise. It was not my intention.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Matthew and I are role-players first. We both enjoy role-playing whatever characters we generate. Role-playing makes room for all characters in a game. For me, it's not any nostalgic feeling for the '80s that I prefer to role with my 2d6-in-order roll. I didn't play Traveller in the '80s. So maybe my nostalgia is a 2008s thing.

I'm a role-player first myself. I simply dislike being prevented from designing a character that I want to play. I'm far from alone in that.

Tell your referee that. Or fire them.

Competition is a healthy thing. I like seeing Mongoose Traveller on the same book shelf with Star Wars and Firefly. What Traveller doesn't have franchise-fame-wise, it makes up for rule-wise and player-wise (Mongoose Traveller already has a customer base, while FFG is still looking for custom dice customers, and Firefly is looking for Cortex+ customers).

Traveller has an established base sure, but wouldn't it be great to expand that base? If the second edition only sells to people who brought first edition isn't that something of a failure?

I'd be shocked if those were its only customers.

Both Firefly and the Star Wars games are excellent systems that really support role-playing over roll playing and provide players with choice in how their character is built.

Star Wars is just a boardgame without a board. Firefly is too much like FATE which is about cliche cartoonish one-trick characters players have to work with.

Both games are already much more popular than Traveller at my local games club (admittedly tiny sample, but Firefly and Stat Wars are always over subscribed while Traveller simply isn't played). Wouldn't it be good to change that? One of the ways to do that is to modernise things.

You don't play Traveller at your store? Do you let people know that you play Traveller when asked which sci-fi game is blah blah?

One thing that sells Traveller is good referees that pass on good referee skills, and so on, and so on. Such referees agree with their players, before a game, on how characters will be generated. If chargen becomes a game-stopper for players, something has gone critical FAIL with the referee running the game.

Sure, as an experienced GM I can enthuse players about the game and mod up the system to accommodate what my players want. What if the guy picking it up isn't a hugely experienced GM and doesn't mod the system? His players roll up a bunch of characters who've no positive DMs and so struggle to get into the careers they want their characters to follow and wash out on survival rolls. That's a seriously negative experience that will put them off Traveller.

So you think a sci-fi fan will just give up after that? Typically, they see the bigger picture and will immediately start on a new character again to see what happens next to that one. Players begin to see that their characters are not just coming from a vacuum. And that they have lives. They even have adventures before the game adventure starts for them.

Likewise, weak characters dying off in generation creates negative experiences as the other players have to wait around, re-do connections and suchlike. Those negative experiences lead to Traveler sitting on the shelf while the competition picks up play time and sales. The system can fail just as easily as the GM.

Waiting around is not fun. Bad GMs will make Star Wars and Firefly see less play also.

I get the feeling that you and I are both passionate about Traveller how we would like to see it evolve. I hope we can continue to discuss things in a respectful manner, and if I have offended you with any of my previous comments I apologise. It was not my intention.

Most sci-fi role-players (that are really into sci-fi) will buy all the games. I'm not a fan at all of those other games. But I often use Traveller for a Star Wars or Firefly game session for players that do want to play those kind of settings.

Anyway, you sound like a good guy. Take what I say or some or none. No biggy.

 

[-Daniel-]

Just to make a small point here. If this was a real strong thing for Mathew, why didn't they use the six and go rule in 1st edition? Clearly in first edition they understood the roll six and assign was a great compromise between total random generation and total character creation.

As for bringing in new players, I really do not remember a single one who bought the book(s) first than listened to me and joined in my game. Every single one listened to my spiel, rolled up a character with me, played, and then if they liked it bought the book(s). So I will use what I want to use when I "teach" them the game.

Just seems like a small thing to draw the line in the sand over when it isn't the system used in the previous Mongoose product.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Looks for his 1st edition book...

 

[-Daniel-]

Looks for his 1st edition book...

Let me help you. Page six.

To determine your character’s characteristics, roll 2d6 six times and
allocate them to the six basic characteristics in any order. Record
them on the character sheet. Strength, Dexterity and Endurance are
collectively referred to as ‘physical characteristics’. Intelligence and
Education are referred to as ‘mental characteristics’.

Bold added by me.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

If players (future or past) see that rule's (inclusion/removal) as a hurdle to playing the game, and that rule is near the beginning of the rulebook, I see them having hurdles throughout the entire set of corebooks. Just as well that there is a TRZ for second edition. Otherwise, roll for Sanity.

If I have my character rolled up after 35 minutes, and other players are still at the Characteristics part, I begin questioning if they are really role-players. That's actually a good test to find out what kind of player they are. For new players, I give out pre-gen characters. If they like the characters that were used for a game, they usually want to make their own character for next time. I should ask them what they think about the Characteristics part when I see them. Because I never gave it much thought.

 

[-Daniel-]

If players (future or past) see that rule's (inclusion/removal) as a hurdle to playing the game, and that rule is near the beginning of the rulebook, I see them having hurdles throughout the entire set of corebooks. Just as well that there is a TRZ for second edition. Otherwise, roll for Sanity.

If I have my character rolled up after 35 minutes, and other players are still at the Characteristics part, I begin questioning if they are really role-players.

While that is all interesting and I agree with most of it, it still is not a great reason for changing what was clearly acceptable in first ed and then holding the line when it is pointed out that at least adding an option could be worth doing.

And I still would like to know why it was OK in first ed to assign the rolls but now it is not. Maybe if I heard the thinking it might make more sense. I just found it interesting that none of Mathews reasons given addressed why it was changed, just why he liked it. But he must have liked the selection format back when first ed was written. What changed?

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

If players (future or past) see that rule's (inclusion/removal) as a hurdle to playing the game, and that rule is near the beginning of the rulebook, I see them having hurdles throughout the entire set of corebooks. Just as well that there is a TRZ for second edition. Otherwise, roll for Sanity.

If I have my character rolled up after 35 minutes, and other players are still at the Characteristics part, I begin questioning if they are really role-players.

While that is all interesting and I agree with most of it, it still is not a great reason for changing what was clearly acceptable in first ed and then holding the line when it is pointed out that at least adding an option could be worth doing.

New editions get new rulings. Gareth wrote 1st edition. Matthew is writing 2nd edition. So there are bound to be differences with the games.

And I still would like to know why it was OK in first ed to assign the rolls but now it is not.

Goes and looks for 2nd edition...

I don't see a rule that says it has to be done that way.

Maybe if I heard the thinking it might make more sense. I just found it interesting that none of Mathews reasons given addressed why it was changed, just why he liked it. But he must have liked the selection format back when first ed was written. What changed?

I liked 1st edition as a whole because it had the optional chargen stuff in it. I didn't use any of it. But I liked that it was in there anyway for players to see other ways of doing things. I just assumed chargen options would be in the Traveller Companion, such as the point-buy stuff which is kinda what characteristic-swapping is. If those rules won't be in the Companion book, and Traveler Rule Zero doesn't cut the mustard, and players feel they have to pay to play such optional rules if they buy the Companion book... I just don't see those players being satisfied no matter what Mongoose chooses to do.

Those referees should talk to their group players and find out what their players think (or not) about these things. It might be a non-issue with their players. Maybe their players will have a great answer to the problem, and report back here about it.

 

[anselyn]

Shawn:

(Mongoose Traveller already has a customer base, while FFG is still looking for custom dice customers, ....

Are you sure about that?

http://icv2.com/articles/markets/view/32097/top-5-roleplaying-games-spring-2015

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2732-The-Orr-Group-s-Q2-Usage-Data-Also-Puts-D-D-5E-In-The-Lead

Star Wars is just a boardgame without a board. Firefly is too much like FATE which is about cliche cartoonish one-trick characters players have to work with.

Yes, absolutely. I wouldn't want players who buy games like that to start buying Traveller. We want that classic niche with Runequest, Pendragon - perhaps even L5R. A place of taste, discernment and opinions as black/white as the LBBs.

 

[-Daniel-]

Gareth wrote 1st edition. Matthew is writing 2nd edition. So there are bound to be differences with the games.

Sorry, for some reason I had it in my mind Matthew wrote the first edition as well. Two authors, two ways of thought. See Shawn, a simple answer for a simple question. :wink:

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Gareth is busy doing Sindal. Maybe he is glad to be out of the loop for the most part during this playtest.

 

[TrippyHippy]

If you make 'roll in order' the sole system in the core rules, again, I guarantee you people will choose to not play it for that reason. You will lose sales.

I'm not even joking about that. I've seen new gamers or players moving on from other games, time and time again, who will simply take one look at the opening stage of chargen, decide 'too random' then put it back down again.

Your choice, but for the sake of including one sentence like 'Allocate scores as you wish or in order' it seems a bit belligerent.

Indeed if you want to include optional rules that 'feel Traveller', I'd suggest putting hard core random in the Companion, not the other way round.

 

[RajunCajun3025]

We played our first playtest session last Saturday and we ditched that character generation method pretty darned fast, general agreement at the table that it was a turn off. The event roll for each term seemed to be the thing everybody loved the most, kudos on that. And after seeing the production values on FFG's Star Wars line I would say despite any issues people may have with mechanics they are the one to beat, followed by Firefly which has the fan loyalty. As for Traveller I like the generic nature of the game but don't see how I could replicate either of those universes without more work than I want to do. Mental images are key. I could say a group of Thuldan Legionnaires and a War Lion walk into a room and have to explain that. I say a bunch of Stormtroopers and a Wookiee enter the room and no explanation necessary (unless you've lived under a rock all your life). That's a powerful aid to any GM. Despite many companies losing money on licensed product they keep after them because they know they are an easier sell than something invented in house. I think that hurdle is especially hard for scifi games. While generic fantasy games stick around most scifi games are long gone unless they have some strong visual imagery. Despite a really cool background I would bet that the total sales volume of Shadowrun, BattleTech and every other scifi property (even Star Trek) that FASA put out would be dwarfed in comparison to the sales numbers of all the Star Wars games put out.

Okay sorry about the rambling rant. Bottom line is Travellers needs simple clean mechanics that do not put off people or the sales will not be there. A smaller book than say the monsters FFG put out is a start but give people options and freedom not this is how you WILL generate a character. Yeah I can house rule that but back in the day I would not have thought of that. I would have stuck with the rules as written or more likely not bought the book in the first place. And probably not the next one either, which defeats the purpose of the Companion doesn't it?

Oh one last thing. Someone mentioned using Traveller rules to play a Firefly style game. Well sticking with the Scum and Villainy book with the SAGA version of Star Wars I am doing just that. Considering we are playing at the very beginning of the Dark Times I can definitely give the game a Firefly feel. No Jedi here....

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

If you make 'roll in order' the sole system in the core rules, again, I guarantee you people will choose to not play it for that reason. You will lose sales.

Do we have evidence of 1st edition rules gain sales because it was more flexible with roll order? A lot (a whole lot) of players have chose Classic Traveller still over Mongoose 1st edition.

I'm not even joking about that. I've seen new gamers or players moving on from other games, time and time again, who will simply take one look at the opening stage of chargen, decide 'too random' then put it back down again.

Just wait til they find out about the hit points and leveling up in Traveller. Those players just take more (what's the word) to get them to see outside the D&D box. If they still go back to D&D, then it just wasn't meant to be. There are plenty of other players to find that are willing to play Star Trek, Star Wars, Firefly, ALIEN, Prometheus, Chthonian Stars, Orbital, Forbidden Planet, Outpost Mars, Cowboys vs. Xenomorphs, etc. using Mongoose Traveller.

 

[TrippyHippy]

If you make 'roll in order' the sole system in the core rules, again, I guarantee you people will choose to not play it for that reason. You will lose sales.

Do we have evidence of 1st edition rules gain sales because it was more flexible with roll order? A lot (a whole lot) of players have chose Classic Traveller still over Mongoose 1st edition.

I'm not even joking about that. I've seen new gamers or players moving on from other games, time and time again, who will simply take one look at the opening stage of chargen, decide 'too random' then put it back down again.

Just wait til they find out about the hit points and leveling up in Traveller. Those players just take more (what's the word) to get them to see outside the D&D box. If they still go back to D&D, then it just wasn't meant to be. There are plenty of other players to find that are willing to play Star Trek, Star Wars, Firefly, ALIEN, Prometheus, Chthonian Stars, Orbital, Forbidden Planet, Outpost Mars, Cowboys vs. Xenomorphs, etc. using Mongoose Traveller.

1st edition *had* rules for points buy, allocated scores and other options. It was a very successful, popular edition of Traveller that sold well. Do you want to take the risk?