Your Traveller Character Generation

[zanwot]

Within some vague future, I intend to start a campaign, and am thinking over how to adapt character generation. The thing being that rolling the characteristics completely at random seems too harsh to me (and a little too old school). And taking away too much randomness would take away the fun I feel (I do want to keep character generation as a mini game in itself). I am tempted to introduce many special rules, but am afraid I would make it too complex. I want players to have the ultimate control over their characters, but still keep that mini-game atmosphere.


So what do you use as a house rule for character generation? What is your opinion and if possible your experience with this issue?


My present idea of a solution is based on two steps:
* The players roll each of the 6 characteristics, individually (no choosing what characteristic gets which dice roll, at least not yet), then an extra 2 reserve characteristics. If the sum of the modifiers from the 6 characteristics is negative the player can reroll. Then each player can move around up to 4 characteristics, including the reserve ones (so either swap around 4 characteristics; or trade 2 characteristics with the 2 reserve ones, etc). [I am afraid if I just let them assign rolls to characteristics freely they will not be pushed into any original character choices which make Traveller characters fun, such as Marines with low Dexterity or Strength, etc]
* During the careers (no use of "Iron man rules"), when a D6 roll is made to get a skill, the player can decide before the roll that one specific result will be replaced with another one. This basically means to exclude one of the 6 skills/modifiers and double the chances of another (not applicable for Jack of all Trades). [appart from very slightly reducing randomness one can garantee not to get those silly Vacc-Suit 5 characters]

Any comments on these possible solutions would be welcome.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Well, notwithstanding that there is a perfectly serviceable points-spend chargen system in the corebook, you could do what they did in T4:

Roll 12 dice all at once and have players designate where each dice go, in pairs, to make up the 6 characteristics as they wish.

 

[Stormraven]

Well, I know that it's basically heresy, but I prefer that players be able to at least get within range of what they have in mind for their characters, not to mention having an actual chance to be truly extraordinary at the beginning.

So something I've toyed with - haven't done it yet, but I've been looking at it - is having the players roll for stats in order, then roll 2d6 for a pool of points they can use to modify their stats, within certain guidelines.

The modifications take two forms:
1) Outright stat increases, which cannot be greater than two points higher than the starting characteristic (thus giving, at maximum, a 14) or

2) Protection against aging, for one or more stats. Up to 2 points per stat can be set aside as protection against aging loss. These points do no affect stat levels, they just protect against loss due to aging. As a corollary to this, when aging losses occur, the stat affected is rolled randomly, as opposed to the PC choosing.

 

[Alexander Cecil]

I found that the strong level of randomness in character generation was something that my PCs really latched onto once they wrapped their heads around it. Here are the two small variants that I made:

• If you are unhappy with your stat roll, then you may choose to reroll, but you must keep the second set of stats, even if they are worse. Only 2 out of 7 PCs exercised this option.

• If at the end of character generation you end up with a character you absolutely cannot enjoy playing, then you may choose to roll up a new character. I made sure to encourage the PCs away from this option unless the player was truly, deeply unhappy. Only one player out of seven exercised this option, and to be honest, I couldn't blame him. He had almost no skills, never passed an advancement roll, and ended with no mustering out rolls. The skills made no sense, and every attempt at salvaging the character was an exercise in futility.

All of my players really enjoyed how character generation told a story, and they especially enjoyed hoe the characters changed, matured, and grew before their eyes. A couple had a hard time of it as they did not get what they wanted, but within a week they had come around and really cared about their non-ideal PC.

 

[zanwot]

All of my players really enjoyed how character generation told a story, and they especially enjoyed hoe the characters changed, matured, and grew before their eyes. A couple had a hard time of it as they did not get what they wanted, but within a week they had come around and really cared about their non-ideal PC

Exactly what I want to keep, but still giving a little more control to players. (try to get the best of both worlds)

If you are unhappy with your stat roll, then you may choose to reroll, but you must keep the second set of stats, even if they are worse.[/b] Only 2 out of 7 PCs exercised this option.

Where the stats pre-allocated to each characteristic, or where the players able to choose which attribute got which stat?

Protection against aging, for one or more stats

Well you probably expect this comment, but to me that is a dangerous path, as aging is one of the things that limits the amount of careers in a game where the players have too easily a tendency to take a large number of careeers in order to min-max. I understand where you are going, but why don't you just give them an extra skill per term if you want them more skilled?

 

[Alexander Cecil]

Where the stats pre-allocated to each characteristic, or where the players able to choose which attribute got which stat?

I let them choose which attribute got which stat. Still, 2d6 has a fairly strong level of variance, and the sheer number of 2's and 3's rolled by a couple players made for horrific stats.

I know that usual arguments in favor of keeping lousy stats, but I also want my players to be happy. They are happier playing average-or-better humans, not quadriplegic social misfits with severe learning disabilities.

 

[Delerium]

We generally roll 2 sets of stats, as if you were going to generate 2 characters.

Then pick 1 set.

Nobody likes a weak set of stats and devious players will simple find a way to suicide weak characters to get a replacement that might be better.
Better to give them a fighting chance then.

As for skills, I think the current system gives an excellent amount of unpredictability. But at the very end you can also get to choose 1 key skill from the list based on your campaign style. That way, you are ensured there is also a pilot ,etc. And also the 2 "bonus" skills for Connections I think there is no need to make any other skill system.

I think the system is excellent and doesn't need amending

 

[hogscape]

Yup, it's heresy!

Keep what you roll and join the Scouts if you don't like 'em.

*oops being a bit old skool*

 

[dmccoy1693]

I feel players should be heroic. I had my players roll in 3 groups of 6. Then they got to choose the group of 6 they wanted and place them whereever they wanted.

 

[Jame Rowe]

My CG heresy: roll for skills and life events per year. Each year, they automatically get a skill, but don't get another unless they get a promotion or a successful roll on a life event. Once per term, they may roll for advancement; once per term they may roll for commission.

Any character, should he choose and roll such, may use options like "+1 Str" to improve any other attribute that is under 8, but may only increase that stat to 8 (the only way to improve it further is to gain an increase through mustering out).

 

[Drifter]

I use seven rolls, keep six, with the understanding that if a character is sub par without being interesting, you can reroll.

 

[Stormraven]

Protection against aging, for one or more stats

Well you probably expect this comment, but to me that is a dangerous path, as aging is one of the things that limits the amount of careers in a game where the players have too easily a tendency to take a large number of careeers in order to min-max. I understand where you are going, but why don't you just give them an extra skill per term if you want them more skilled?

Well, it's not actually about skills. It's just something I added to the 'pool' system to help ensure that players would have to make choices - either increase multiple stats, or protect certain of them from aging loss.

Well, that and it makes a statement about their character, that he/she is so gifted in that arena that even aging isn't an issue for them.

Basically, look at Jean Valjean. Rolled a 12, added 2, then added another 2 to protect against aging loss. So that even at 50, he was astoundingly strong.

Now, I'm well aware that, with Mongoose's RAW, that protection isn't needed. Even with a small pool of additional points, the players can choose which stats are affected by aging loss. I just like having a mechanic that tells me, as GM 'This is that important to my character.'

Most likely, I won't use it - but it's something I've considered.

 

[Duroon]

I have my players add together their DM's (negative and positive) if the resulting number is positive they keep the character they have rolled. If all the DM's together end up as a negative they can re roll.

 

[zanwot]

Please all be specific on if the stats the players roll up are specific to each characteristic (dexterity, intelligence, etc) without the player being able to choose, or if the players can choose which result of the rolls go on which characteristics. I get the feeling many take for granted that the rolls can be used on any characteristic, at the player's choice.


And also please do give your comments, or especially experience, on which might work best / or not.


Anyway, all interesting.

I just like having a mechanic that tells me, as GM 'This is that important to my character.'

Ok now I see. Much like "legendary trait" in Seventh Sea. Even though I am a big fan of 7th sea I did not see Traveller like that, but it is an interesting idea.

As for skills, I think the current system gives an excellent amount of unpredictability. (...) I think the system is excellent and doesn't need amending

When I mention a character getting Vacc suit 5, I really did get a character like that making tests. Of course if a player of mine got that I would let him trade a couple of those levels for other skills, but it would be nice to prevent those (of course the vacc suit case is really the bad luck one, just about any other skill can have a use at level 5).

 

[Xoph]

When we rolled up the characters for the game I'm currently running, I used a combination of the rules with the goal to have everyone making up a character they really want to play:

Stats: Roll 10 times take any 6
Skills: Pick unless the chart has a stat increase or Jack of All Trades in it, then the player would have to roll.
Survival: I used the marginal success rule for skill rolls here; the Navy Pilot in our group had recently been promoted to Officer and then failed his survival roll by 1. I told him he could survive if he gave up his commission.

It was everyone's first time playing Traveller and first time rolling up MGT characters. I tried to run character creation almost like a board game to make it more fun, which took a long time (6 hours) with seven players. I was mostly successful until the 5th hour. It took about an hour per term.

The characters might be a little more powerful then some made the strict rules, but it seems to just compensate for inexperience.

 

[pasuuli]

We generally roll 2 sets of stats, as if you were going to generate 2 characters.

Then pick 1 set.

I think that's the best solution I've ever heard. Thanks!

 

[mlooney]

We generally roll 2 sets of stats, as if you were going to generate 2 characters.

Then pick 1 set.

I think that's the best solution I've ever heard. Thanks!

I'm going to use a modified version of the system I use in d20. (i.e. roll 3d6, use highest 2.) Past that, you can roll as many sets of stats as you like. You have to use the last one you rolled.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

When rolling for skills, I let them roll the dice then choose which table to pick from.

That gives them a choice between (often) 3 skills, sometimes 4 or 5, if high Edu or an officer. It depends on the career; sometimes there's only 1 skill to take, on 3 tables.

Keeps everything random, but allows the player to guide the direction somewhat more than as standard.

 

[Scorpion]

Brand new Traveller player here.

After some thought and generating some characters, I am going to allow players to roll 2d6 7 times. 6 of the rolls go into the standard 6 stats. The 7th roll gets divided between Psi, and a new stat called Luck.

Luck will work pretty much like it did in the old Cyberpunk game: you can spend Luck each game session to improve a roll. Luck regenerates between game sessions.

You can also, in character creation, permanently spend 1 Luck to re-roll 1 stat, Skill and Training Table result, Events Table Result, or Mishap Table Result. So it's a tradeoff: permanently lose 1 Luck to avoid a crippling injury or lame Skill selection, at the cost of being better able to accomplish awesome things later?

Psionic characters will also thus rely on their powers, and not on their inner strength and good fortune. Another point of difference between the Imperium and the Zhodani?

"Minor" NPCs will have no Luck stat, but "major" NPCs like the campaign's main villain probably will.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Why not simply make the Psi stat useable as a luck stat? A bit like the Force in Star Wars - a chararcter may not be trained, but a strong Force would simply manifest in 'lucky' outcomes (eg. shooting a laser-bolt into a 2 metre hole, to be able to blow up the Death Star).