Traveller-digest       Tuesday, June 24 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1468



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Deckplan Question?
Re: Party time for munchkins
Re: Task System: Four Simple Proposals
Re: Skills, task systems and all that
The *Ultimate* Munchkin Character [satire]
Re: Eris Task System Suggestion
Re: Party time for munchkins
Re: Roll for Skills
Putting Traveller on an upward trend
Re: Minimum TL for...(long, babbling)
Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Stats and Skills
Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)
Re: Minimum TL for...
Re: Anders FUDGES a Task System
Re: Editions and Mechanics comments
Re: Yet more task stuff
Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:55:51 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Deckplan Question?

On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Simon Early wrote:

> Two squares = 13.5 m3, based on a deck-to-deck height of 3 m.
> 
> Two squares = 1.5 x 3 x 3 = 1.5 x 9 = 13.5 m3
> 
> Thus a 100 T vessel has 200 squares on its deck plan.

So what do you do with the 50 extra m^3 your ship has? A displacement ton
is 14 m^3 _not_ 13.5 m^3. Your ship has almost 4 more deck squares worth
of space not accounted for...a tiny number perhaps, but LOTS of smugglers
have gotten by with less ;-)

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:04:44 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Party time for munchkins

Anders Backman writes: 

>Yes but under T4 a FFFFF7 guy with level 1 in important skills nothing is
>hard unless the ref invents an adventure revolving around knitting
>competitions, japanese tea ceremonials or such stuff that the character
>doesnt have skills in but an FFFFF7 guy would still have an asset of 8 in
>any and all tasks (characteristic/2 for lack of skill right?)

   Actually I would round down rather than up (7).  Again, to me it's a
matter of referee control.  I generally don't allow people to generate
characters without my supervision (Nick, you're one of the few
exceptions).  Anyone claiming to have randomly generated a character
with stats of FFFFF7 would be laughed out of the room.  Anyone spending
too much time on building up their stats while ignoring skill
development would be told to stop spending so much time on their
hobbies. But then I encourage (cajoule, threaten, abuse, verbally lash)
my players to develop their characters to match a concept, rather than
trying to develop a character to beat the system.

   You do raise an interesting point though.  The way things are handled
in TNE, this problem simply doesn't crop up.  Opportunities for stat
development are much fewer and farther between, which may be another
reason that the skill level = attribute point system works so much
better in TNE than it does in T4 (use of D20 rather variable D6 being
the other).  Marc will certainly want to address this in T4.1.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:19:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Larry Hadley <lhadley@peterboro.net>
Subject: Re: Task System: Four Simple Proposals

On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Merrick Burkhardt wrote:
> 
[snippage]
> Our bright guy with a little explosives skill has  to roll a 12 or
> less on 5d6.  And Average explosives expert (Int 7, Demo-4) has to
> roll a 7 or less on 2d6.
> 
> I think KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) is extremely important.  I
> think the idea of doing to much (any, actually) math on the skills
> attributes is too complicated (whay make a Char Gen system that produces
> skill levels that you end up converting to something else and necer
> useing?).

   I like your suggestions a lot, Merrick, they parrallel some thinking
I've been quietly doing on the subject myself.

   One thing I'd like to point out here, is that we also need to satisfy
KISS in the area of not only _doing_ damage, and applying the effects to
stats, but at least somewhat satisfying gearheads with some realism.

   This leads to the point I want to make: The Babylon Project (recently
released RPG based on B5) has a very interesting and somewhat novel way of
handling combat damage. Combat does damage to characters in two steps:
"immediate" and "final". Immediate damage is abstract, and is applied
immediately - the only two results are "wounded" and "dead", with
"wounded" characters receiving appropriate penalties to their combat
skills until "final" damage is assessed after combat. After combat, final
damage is assessed and applied (eg, broken bones, organ damage, etc) which
may result in much more severe penalties (limited mobility, need for later
surgery, negative modifiers to skills, etc). 

   I think such a system could be created for traveller with little
effort, and could enhance gameplay dramatically.

- -- DLH                                 lhadley@peterboro.net

http://text.peterboro.net/~lhadley/Profile.html

  "Fight to fly, fly to fight, fight to win." - TOPGUN motto.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:47:15 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Skills, task systems and all that

>> To plan the proper surgical procedure;
>> (EDU+Medical..Admin/2 may substitute)  < Difficult, 120min.
>
>   Admin?  Perhaps Biology instead?

Reminds me of the latest "photocopier poster" (what do y'all call
those things?) that has made the rounds at my hospital and is in all
of the doctors' and nurses' lounges.

Has a Victorian-style engraving of a woman swooning on stage, w/
a man catching her w/ one arm and imploring the audience w/ the
other, and in big letters:

"When someone gets hurt, no one ever yells 'Is there a hospital
administrator in the house?!' "

Paul Darius Owensby
pauld@athens.net
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:01:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: fcain@st6000.sct.edu (Franklin W. Cain)
Subject: The *Ultimate* Munchkin Character [satire]

UPP: FFFFF1
Age: 26 (2 terms)
Career: Ex-Scout
Skills: Jack of All Trades-10






('nuf said! ;-)

Franklin

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:00:13 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Eris Task System Suggestion

William F. Hostman writes:

>Here I'd disagree... not enough variety for my tastes (but then, I wanted
>to see 24+ carreers in the base rules!).

   I agree, but then we appear to be outnumbered on the issue.  :-(

>>One of the things I like about T4 is that skills have the same value as in
>>CT and MT, so that you don't have to convert all the old scenarios and
>>sourcebooks.  Doubling the number of skills PC's receive would eliminate
>>this advantage and make T4.1 a horrible mess.
>
>Again, here I agree whole heartedly. T4's saving grace is Marc's decision
>early on to try and keep it compatable with CT/MT. 

   In converting from previous versions of Traveller to TNE, converting
old scenarios and sourcebooks rated at the bottom of the list in terms
of complexity (as in it wasn't complex at all).  As for CT/MT
compatibility with T4 (well sort of), that's wonderful for CT/MT users,
but not so wonderful for users of TNE.  Another reason perhaps that the
TNE folks have felt basically abandoned.

>Eris and the "TNE Heretics" never were on par with CT/MT, and to them it may 
>not be important... but to those who kept the flame for over a decade, changing
>the value of skill level x is going to be annoying.

   Speaking as a "TNE Heretic", surprise!  I agree that doubling of the
skill number is not the way to go.  But then if we are looking for
"elegant solutions", varying dice with difficulty level isn't either. 
The Star Wars RPG solution, varying dice with *skill level* (the more
skill you have, the more dice you roll) does work.  Classic Traveller's
2D6 works.  MT's task resolution system works.  TNE's D20 system works. 
Enough said.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 02:17:40 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Party time for munchkins

On Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:04:44 -0400, Harold Hale wrote:

> Anders Backman writes: 
> 
> >Yes but under T4 a FFFFF7 guy with level 1 in important skills nothing is
> >hard unless the ref invents an adventure revolving around knitting
> >competitions, japanese tea ceremonials or such stuff that the character
> >doesnt have skills in but an FFFFF7 guy would still have an asset of 8 in
> >any and all tasks (characteristic/2 for lack of skill right?)
> 
>    Actually I would round down rather than up (7).  Again, to me it's a
> matter of referee control.  I generally don't allow people to generate
> characters without my supervision (Nick, you're one of the few
> exceptions).  Anyone claiming to have randomly generated a character
> with stats of FFFFF7 would be laughed out of the room.  Anyone spending
> too much time on building up their stats while ignoring skill
> development would be told to stop spending so much time on their
> hobbies. But then I encourage (cajoule, threaten, abuse, verbally lash)
> my players to develop their characters to match a concept, rather than
> trying to develop a character to beat the system.

As a house rule, I used to put severe penalties towards re-enlisting
if a character didn't possess certain skills by the end of each term.
This often prevented players from serving another term for the sole
purpose of trying to gain additional stat points.

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:25:33 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Roll for Skills

Marc Miller writes:

>The problem is, as much as people may like TNE or Mega or CT, those systems
>don't exist any more. There are no new publications for them, and comparisons
>to them don't work. The objective standard in T4 is that characters get about
>1 skill per year. And skill levels then reflect that idea.

   A game system continues to exist so long as there is a group of
people playing it.  As for new publications, all of the above systems
have people creating new scenarios, new settings, new equipment, even
new rules for them on a daily basis.  Many of these new items get
distributed through the Internet, some through fanzines, or other
periodicals.  Outside the land of RPGs, Star Trek continued to exist for
years after the original television series went off the air thanks to
fan support--eventually that loyalty was rewarded with a revival.  Some
would even say that CT fans were rewarded for all their loyalty over the
years (hanging on through two changes in the game system) with a revival
of sorts in the form of T4.

   Anyone can pick up a copy of any version of Traveller and compare it
to any other.  That's how many of us arrived at the version of Traveller
we're playing now: we looked over new items before purchasing them and
made a decision as to whether or not we would convert our campaigns (or
start new ones) based on the new rules system contained in the new
books.  Will the comparison be a fair, unbiased one?  Probably not, but
then most of us have things like cost, time, and peer pressure to think
about.

   As for the "one skill level per year" concept, I really don't see a
problem with it.  As a referee, you have to decide at what point you
want your players to stop the character generation process and get going
with the campaign.  Ideally, everyone agrees on a max age or number of
terms.  This serves to limit the number of skill levels any one
character can have, without having to resort to radical changes in the
character generation process.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 19:55:21 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Putting Traveller on an upward trend

Joseph E. Walsh (ransom@connect.iconnect.net) posts:

>There's not a whole lot a tiny company like Imperium Games can do to
>reverse the downward trend in the RPG industry.  But three of the things
>they /can/ do are: have splashy covers (like T4 already has), keep the
>core rules simple enough for beginners to teach themselves how to play,
>and make the game fun enough that they'll want to continue playing.

I feel for you, Joe. My FLGS went out of business a year ago. All the local
stores have converted to comics/card game shops. I have to travel to
another city to get Traveller stuff. The kids in high school these days are
all playing video games or card games.

However, I do a few suggestions:

Create a boxed "Traveller Science Fiction Adventure Game". The box should
contain a ship deck plan, a planetary or subsector map, counters or cards
for a group of vehicles, ships, and characters, a rules book and an
adventure book. The rules book introduces all the basic game mechanics in a
simplified, step by step method. The adventure book is a fixed sequence of
encounters which introduce the player to standard Traveller situations. For
example, meeting a noble patron, arranging passage at a starport,
travelling to another system, getting hassled by megacorp security,
investigating a strange or alternate technology, speculating on
interstellar trade goods, getting involved in a space battle with pirates,
conducting computer or engineering modifications, resolving the mission and
getting rewarded.

Each encounter should be simple and able to complete in an afternoon. It
should be cross-referenced to the rules book whenever a new game mechanic
is introduced, and each encounter should only use mechanics already
introduced. All characters, ships, equipment, and locations should be
pre-generated and described on reference cards or counters. It should be
playable solitaire.

The game should be visually attractive with an index, good layout, and
artwork showing the characters and situations.

The game should assume no previous knowledge of Traveller or role-playing.
It should be possible for some 14-year old kids to unwrap the game, turn to
page 1 of the adventure book, and finish the first encounter that afternoon.

IG was once dreaming about a Traveller movie to ignite customer interest.
Personally, I think a video game would be a better choice. The target
market has greater overlap, science fiction has greater penetration into
the video game market, and the startup costs are lower (though, admittedly,
probably still orders of magniture above IG's budget).

Perhaps a better idea is sponsoring a contest for high-school science or
computing students. From my experience this is the #1 breeding ground for
future Traveller players. Products like the adventure game would be prizes.

I don't claim all these ideas are original. In fact, the boxed introductory
game is a direct steal from I.C.E.'s Lord of the Rings Adventure Game. West
End also has an introductory boxed set for the Star Wars RPG. They are good
ideas.

- --
Richard Hough
rdhough@orca.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 23:46:47 -0400
From: Tom Trelenberg <tomt@scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Minimum TL for...(long, babbling)

>    Question for the engineers on the list.  What's the absolute
minimum level
>of technology required to get airships able to carry a crew and some
cargo into
>the air?  I'm thinking of putting together an adventure on a world
where below
>a certain altitude the oxygen toxicity kills you.  This would restrict
the
>population to the mountain tops and I want to make the tech level as
low as
>possible.
>    So what's required to get an airship off the ground and keep it
moving
>through the air?  Thoughts, comments, suggestions and References all
welcome!
>
>Stephen

Hey Stephen...I have some ideas for your airship for you to condider:

1)    This is a suggestion that seems to fall (as far as TL) between the
NC (navigate currents) method mentioned and the IC (internal combustion)
ideas that were posted....though you were looking for lowest tech, I'll
throw this in just for thought.  The idea is for there to be a
cable/good stout rope extending between any two of your mountain-top
towns.  Wait a minute...this isn't as stupid as it sounds at first.  The
cable would lay on the ground between the two towns (imagine the cables
that were laid down across the Atlantic for communications before the
age of satellites....these lay on the ocean bottom).  Such cables/ropes
would be lay there by workers/slaves using something along the lines of
a diving bell.   An airship would wait for the currents to move it in
the proper direction.  It would then lower some anchors.  Workers with
large cumbersome helmets on would be lowered into the "soup" below.
Others workers on board the airship would be working to turn air pumps
that would send the breathable air down into the helmets.  (The pump
would be the highest TL item of this scheme--I beleive it would come
before IC--I don't have my rule books to see where it would fall out)
Like deep sea divers they would attach the beginning of a new rope
segment to the end of the existing segment (I guess this could even be
done while on the ship--but IMO the "air divers" make a better story).
They are then hauled up and the ship awaits for the currents which will
push them in the direction they wish to go.  At which point they lift
anchor and move to the next position.  (I got it...in order to keep the
"build ship" from straying to far from coarse in the unpredicable air
currents--"divers" are periodically sent down to anchor the cable to the
valley floor--so even if blown of coarse the ship could "pull" itself
back to its last anchored position.)  Once the other town is reached the
build ship returns along the cable and removes the anchors.  The system
is now ready for general use.  A ship is equipped with closable rings
which can be clasped over the cable.  Workers/slaves then pull on the
rope for propusion.  Enough slack exists in the rope that it rises from
the ground to meet the airship at a safe altitude and then sags back
down to the ground once it is past.  This idea is highly labor intesive
and would probably require a slave or worker caste in society inhabiting
your planet.
Anyway, its just another idea.

Also, for the NC idea:  have certain natives be blessed with "the
gift".  "The gift" would be a psi talent that the natives don't even
recognize they have (Much like chirpers from Research Station Gamma).
Certain members of the community are born with the gift and become
airship navigators.  The psi ability gives the user a "feeling" of the
environment around him.  He knows when to drift with the currents to
take them in the right direction and when to lay anchor to ride out
contrary winds.  Just another idea.  The "mysterious natives" theme has
worked well in several of my own campaigns.

Lots of luck!!!

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:24:36 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@Rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)

 
> Me thinks this task system needs a bit more work (or am I missing
> something :)

Aside from the fact that it could use a little tweaking, the example
you posted isn't really fair.

Somebody with skill-6 (I have to admit I'm more comfy with CT skills
number wise---I'd consider a 6 to be a very famous expert.  Anyway,
The table posted wasn't mine.  I say that there is no fixed
relationship between skill and task level, just good guidelines.  I
would say that if the task is "extremely hard" (I used
Staggering/Impossible to fit with T4) for a professional (skill-3),
then it would be 3 levels easier for a professional of skill 6.  For
a task that is routine for a skill-1 person, the skill 6 guy should
have automatic success, IMO.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:32:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@Rt66.com>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

 
> >Just one point I wanted to comment on. Dex 7 is *average* for humans -
> >hardly a clutz. PC's are likely to have a higher Dex level (depending on
> >how you let them generate their stats of course).
> 
> Well, a Dex 7 is that average rolled, before any additional
> character advancement.  That means that  a stat of 7 is
> below average.  I would say that someone on the clutzy
> side of average is not doctor material..

You haven't met the number of medicine people I have, obviously :-)

Most medical stuff would be Int dominant, for one.  Ortho guys might
throw in Strength :-)  It's been my observation that a lot of the
medical people I know are about average (average for people who
attend university, not the general public).  I guess I'd say that
I'd expect higher Int (I know the exceptions, too), and Dex wouldn't
be as much of an issue---I have trouble imagining how different a
dex 7 person is from a dex 10 person, actually.

- -Merrick

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 13:56:05
From: 2drapers <2drapers@infowest.com>
Subject: Stats and Skills

I have not had e-mail for a while and apologize if this idea has already
been discussed.

Anyway, I have been thinking about reality lately (a little) and have come
to a few conclusions.  First, someone with skill-4 is going to be able to
do something better than someone with skill-1 almost every time, regardless
of stats.  Second, I have been thinking about people I know who are really
good at something, and invariably they have not only high skill level but
their relevant stat is also high.

As an example, any person with reasonable intelligence can go to tech
school and get medic-1.  No matter how clever they are, they are not going
to be able to do something as well as someone with a medical degree or an
EMT with a a few years experience.  If you were to look around for the
really excellent doctors, you would find a high degree of intelligence and
skill.  The best are not going to be bright kids right out of medical
school or old hacks who have been around forever but have limited
intelligence. Without exception, the best doctors (or attorneys, managers,
riflemen, mechanics, etc.) are all going to have high stats and skills.

As far as a game mechanic, how about limiting skill level by stats?  For
example, you can only attain a particular skill level equal to one-half of
the relevant attribute.  So if you have Intelligence of 8, you can achieve
Medic-4.  Perhaps players could be allowed to proceed above this skill
ceiling if each additional skill level "cost" twice as much.

Although this may be jumping off the deep end of skill v. stat debate, you
could eliminate stats from the task roll (except for things directly
related to stats like breaking down the door, etc.), as they are indirectly
figured in.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:49:13 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)

>> Roll 2D6 <= attribute.
>> +1D6 for each difficulty level above skill
>> -1D6 for each skill level below attribute
>> If the number of dice is 0 or less success as well as SS is automatic.
>
>The SS idea is a great addition.
>
>> If dieroll <= attribute/2 (round up) then SF
>
>Aren't we trying to beat Attribute?  This looks like a good roll is
>SF to me.

Whoops, it should read:
If dieroll >= 2*attribute then SF
If dieroll <= attribute/2 then SS

Or for those of you who doesn't like to multiply and divide during combat etc

If successful: Reroll lowest die and if it still is successful a SS occurred
If failure: Reroll highest die and if still failure a SF occurred.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:54:36 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Minimum TL for...

>Steam engines + high O2 + close proximity to a bag full of Hydrogen
>
>I can see it now: a flaming airship, falling rapidly into the depths of
>the atmosphere, burning faster and harder as it goes...by the time it gets
>to the ground, even the normally inflammable stuff should be lit up! You
>could probably get _iron_ to burn readily in that atmosphere, once it's
>heated up enough.
>
>Air battles on that planet must be horrific!
>
>Bruce Johnson

Yes they are. My players convinced a local ruler to use burning arrows on
the enemy ships. The NPC did a spectacular failure in preparing the arrows
and boy what a sight!


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:08:24 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Anders FUDGES a Task System

>This system works nicely and can be adapted to Traveller in many
>different ways, but it is *so* different, I wouldn't dream of suggesting
>Marc use something like this in T41.  ;->
>
>Eris

About the names of tasks/skills I think it is important to keep the names
of skills and equivalent tasklevels similar ie:
Extremely inexperienced  Extremely easy
Very Inexperienced       Very easy etc

My biggest gripe about FUDGE is that there is no tasklevel that is about
50%. I've tried a tasksystem that gave Joe Average 6+ on 2D6 on Normal
tasks and we played an entire boarding action with that and later refought
it with 7+ instead. The differance in feel was quite large and both my
players and me agreed on 7+ being superior.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 01:59:11 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Editions and Mechanics comments

GypsyComet writes:

> TNE:
>  Stat and skill are numerically weighted the same, but have slightly
>different ranges. This imbalance is reduced by the multiplier system in
>TNE, where the really difficult tasks are rolled on a fraction of the
>stat+skill total. The imbalance is further controlled by the fact that
>stats (the factor with the wider range) are randomly generated while
>skills are numerous and chosen.

   Your assumption is that "imbalance" is a bad thing, which is just a
matter of opinion.  The High Guard, Merc, Scout, and Merchant Prince
characters I generated routinely had skill levels as high as 6 and stats
as high 12 (characters with low Int and/or low Edu were routinely tossed
out before generation began because of the totally artifical Int+Edu
stat limit)--that doesn't sound all that "balanced" to me.

>  In TNE it is possible to blow out the balance due to two things. First,
>skills are all tied to a single stat for task resolution.

   As in T4, done that way for sake of simplicity.  As I have indicated
elsewhere, I would have had no problem with some tasks being based on an
average of two stats.

>  Second, as noted here by others, the EDU stat is tied to a near majority 
>of the skills as well as being the easiest stat to raise by great amounts 
>during character generation. This means that it is fairly easy to blow out
>a large number of skills with a fairly simple and legal set of character
>generation steps. 

   Sorry, but the actual breakdown is as follows:

Cluster      /   # of skills
Strength     /      14
Agility      /      21
Constitution /      12
Intelligence /      20
Education    /      26
Charisma     /      14

   While Education has the most skills under its cluster, the total
hardly qualifies as a "near majority".  Typically in a TNE gaming
session, characters with high EDU (12+) are eggheads (characters that
are useful up until the moment of combat, when they are best left back
on the ship), or engineers (in which case they are back on the ship
making sure the drives are warmed up for a quick get away).

   Increases in EDU are only possible by attending college or a Hiver
Technical Academy (assuming you can get access to one).  Increases in
EDU amount to a massive +1 (one) per term (+2 for the HTA, and that is a
one time benefit).  Referees have the option to allow a character to
increase their EDU level +1 as their secondary activity each term
(assuming the character is eligible).

>  In combat, injury has grown a set of rules regarding threshold levels
>and penalties, and now involves hit locations. This has caused two new
>"stats" to join the Traveller list: Hit capacities by location, and
>Initiative.

   This isn't explained all that well.  Initative determines who goes
first in a five second combat round, with high initiative characters
(those with 6+) being able to act twice in a turn.

   As for hit capacity, it is a more detailed way of keeping track of
damage.  I prefer it.  Someone such as yourself who has a bias toward a
simplistic system of determining damage does not.  

>Very much a part of the second wave of RPGs, BTW, but not
>really very elegant. The combat and injury system in TNE is made worse
>by a nearly impenetrable editing job and a really horrid choice of
>typeface.

   All of course in your humble opinion.  I had no trouble with it
(unlike the MT system which I found very confusing), nor has anyone else
I've spoken with who plays the game on a regular basis.  As for the
typeface, some people don't like it, and some people do.  Not really a
relevant comment.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:10:05 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Yet more task stuff

>Actually, as more casual observer, I must say that this list has
>certain biases that are not shared in gaming generally.
>
>>Besides, if you play RPGs, you'd expect some complexity.
>
>The lable "complexity" is a real bubaboo in gaming these
>days.  I you are marketting a game you don't want it seen
>as "complex".

Well several on this list complained about FF&S being too simplistic!


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 08:15:14 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Merrick Burkhardt's Task system (longish)

>> Roll 2D6 <= attribute.
>> +1D6 for each difficulty level above skill
>> -1D6 for each skill level below attribute
>> If the number of dice is 0 or less success as well as SS is automatic.
>
>Hmmm... so a DEX=7 character, with skill-6, performing an Extremely
>hard (EH) task, would *automatically* succeed.  The two dice he would
>normally roll would not be increased since the difficulty level does
>not exceed his skill level.  They would, in fact, be reduced to only
>one die, due to the fact that the skill level of 6 is one less than
>the character's DEX of 7.  Therefore, he'd be rolling only 1d6, trying
>to roll less than or equal to his DEX rating of 7... automatic
>success.
>
>> If dieroll <= attribute/2 (round up) then SF
>
>This doesn't sound right, since the above example would translate into
>wanting to roll as low as possible, without rolling too low.  This
>might be confusing since each die roll would have to be judged whether
>or not it was inside this variable window between success and SF.

Sorry for my brainfart.
I should have read it more carefully before posting:
Roll 2D6 <= attribute.
+1D6 for each difficulty level above skill
- -1D6 for each skill level below skill
If dieroll > 2*attribute then SF
If dieroll <= attribute/2 then SS


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1468
***********************************
