Traveller-digest       Friday, June 20 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1449



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: We've Reached 50!!!!
(LONG!) Re: Task System Revision/Choices
Re: Spanish version of CT
Re: T4.1 Char gen system
Re: Hardware, firmware, software
...and now for something completely different...
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Re: Task System Revision
Shadis Offer [Commercial]
ROM tech level
Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1445
PE Software Wishlist
Re: Task System Revision
Re: Hardware, firmware, software
Re: Poll:  Task System Choices
Re: Re: We've Reached 50!!!!
Re: T4 Task Rationale

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:54:39 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: We've Reached 50!!!!

- -> Just figure someone should point out that reducing attributes would also
- -> work.
I am all for that! ;-)
- -> 
- -> What about simply dividing attributes by a fixed number (unless you like my
- -> suggestion for dividing by number of simultaneous tasks/distractions)? 
- -> Dividing by 5 gives you MegaTraveller.  This would be simple to do.  (So
- -> would another number.)  Dividing by 4 would also be easy.  Whatever you pick,
- -> adjust the number of dice to fit with this.
Dividing by three gives Carlos's Three system. 
But dividing by anything also reduces the number of dice!
So i take that as a vote by you for a MT Variant ??? ;-) 
- -> Very simple, minimal change.
Yup.
 
Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:59:06 +0000
From: "Martin F C Pickett" <ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk>
Subject: (LONG!) Re: Task System Revision/Choices

Right - this is far too long and consists mostly of my musings about 
the various task systems, so feel free to skip this unless you are 
*really* interested.  I would.

Marc asked for our votes on:

> 1. T4 is weighted too heavily against stats.  Skills have a minor
> part in a character's success at a task throw.  These should be
> equally weighted.

IMPORTANCE: 1

I have tried out the T4 task system, and **when coupled with the 
existing character gen system** attributes are worth too much.  As 
an old CT player, I never really got into the MT 'add stat/5' thing, 
so T4 came as a real shock to me.  I don't mind the stat having an 
effect, in fact I think it's a good idea.  But I don't like the idea 
of it having such a large effect - it just doesn't feel like 
Traveller to me.  

(All that aside, I think I should point out that I'm a big fan of
Chaosium's system from RQ and Stormbringer (et al), where stats add
a smallish modifier to the skill.  Not that it's particularly
important, but I thought I'd expose some of my biases, while I'm 
here.  Not suprisingly, I never really went for GURPS)

> 2. Spectacular Success and Spectacular Failure are hard to do at 
> easy and average, and easier at harder levels.
> ============================================================= 
> 3.  It should be harder to roll SS the harder a task becomes.
> ============================================================= 
> 4. Replace SS with SF in 3.
> ============================================================= 

IMPORTANCE: 3(ish)

As other people have said, this is really just one issue.  I have to 
say that I have found the original T4 SS/SF system to work OK.  It 
was one of the (few?) aspects of the T4 task system that didn't seem 
to be broken, so I see no real reason to fix it.

> 5. I don't like the half-die. Get rid of it.
> =============================================================

IMPORTANCE: 0

I'm easy.  My players found the whole 'different number of dice for 
different difficulties' idea quite exotic, and just accepted the D3 
as part of it (after an explanation of how to use it).  We use 4 
dice of the same colour and one different, which is used as a D3 if 
rolling a Difficult task or a D6 if rolling an Impossible task.

> Since you have voted for a change in the task system to fix it, rate
> each of these items in order of importance (1=most important) and
> don't be afraid to put a zero if you think it isn't important.

Linking this section with the next, it appears to me that there is 
another question lurking in the background here.  Several of the 
esteemed members of the list have posted variations on the MT task 
system, and they and others have called for a move back to the old 
2D6 way of life.  The question here seems to be:

"Why don't we just go back to the MegaTraveller system - we know it 
works, it's had years of playtesting by thousands of people.  Why do 
we need all these dice?"

Tough one.  As I've said, I'm a CT player at heart, so 2D6 certainly 
appeals to me.  But I think the idea behind the T4 task system was to 
present T4 as a *new game*, not just another printing of Traveller.  
And I've found that the multi-dice thing has grown on me, and it very 
much differentiates between T4 and CT/MT.  When I got MT, I ended up 
just pulling out the bits that looked OK and incorporating them in a 
half-arsed fashion into my CT game.  That hasn't happened with T4, 
I'm not sure why.  Perhaps it's because I took a long break during 
TNE?  No, actually that's wrong - I took FF&S and WTH and 
incorporated them in a half-arsed fashion into my CT game, just like 
MT.

Well, I dunno.  Let's skip on to the next section of voting, before I 
write anything else.

John Snead asked for our votes on:

> How about rating the 3 non-T4 Task systems we have available to us,
> and letting Marc and I know which one we like best. 
>
> 1) The old MegaTraveller Task system:  
>
> Roll 2D6, and add Stat/5+Skill
> Easy = 3+, Average = 7+, Difficult = 11+, Formidable = 15+, 
> Impossible = 18+
>

Your Rating of This System (1 = Best to 3 = Worst)

RATING: 3

Sorry.  I know it's 2D6, I know it's Traveller, I know.  But I never 
got into it with MT in the first place.  I always used 2D6, add skill 
and any other modifiers I felt like, 8+ is a success.  All these 
different targets left me cold.  Almost ironic really, considering 
I'm a fan of the multi-dice T4-style system now.  Oh well.

> 2) KB 1.1  
>
> Add Stat/2 + Skill *2 and roll below this number using differing 
> numbers of dice: 
>
> Easy = 1D6, Average = 2D6, Difficult = 2D6 + 1D3, Formidable = 3D6,
> Staggering = 4D6, and Impossible = 5D6
>

Your Rating of This System (1 = Best to 3 = Worst)

RATING: 1

Not that I think it's perfect, but it works the best for me out of 
the options so far.  The only real drawbacks are the stat division 
and the slightly out of place D3 for difficult tasks.

> 3) KB 2.0
>
> Add Stat + 3*Skill and roll below this number using differing 
> numbers of dice: 
>
> Easy = 2D6, Average = 3D6, Difficult = 4D6, Formidable = 5D6, 
> Staggering = 6D6, and Impossible = 7D6
>

Your Rating of This System (1 = Best to 3 = Worst)

RATING: 2

This fixes the problems with KBv1.1 very successfully, but introduces 
one that has kept me away so far - 5 dice is a lot to roll, but 
KBv1.1 only calls for that many for impossible tasks.  7 dice is 
*way* too many for my tastes.


SUMMARY:

I don't think that it is possible to make a system that uses the T4 
multi-dice approach, has skills that outway stats, and has no D3's 
without having lots of dice.  Not without changing the ranges of the 
stats and the skills in a major way, which would blow compatibilty 
with anything previously published totally out of the window.  So 
some compromises are needed.

Of the various features of the T4/KB systems, these are my thoughts:

Stat division: I can live with it, I guess, *if the character sheets 
and rules are set up to make it easy*.  After all, MT used it 
successfully (or did you all just fudge it a bit - be honest, I'm 
curious).

D3's: Well, I kind of like them, now that you mention it.  They're a 
little out of place being only used for difficult tasks, but they add 
a certain 'je ne sais quoi' to the game that sticks in people's 
minds.  Perhaps they should be propagated throughout the system?  
(Where did I leave my asbestos underwear?).

Multi-dice: Well, it's OK actually.  I don't mind having to roll 4 or 
5 dice (although 4 is better than 5).  6 or 7 is right out though, 
sorry Kenneth.

Right, I think that's me out of things to say and time to say them.  
Sorry I haven't come to any real conclusions, and thank you for 
listening to me ramble on for so long.  Now you know why I lurk, 
rather than participating. *shrug*

Going back to hide under my rock now.


Martin Pickett 
ceemfcp@cee.hw.ac.uk
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are alive, well and living on Sylea 

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:03:33 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: Spanish version of CT

- -> >Any lying arount in some stores, gathering dust, perchance???
- -> >Ad Astra,
- -> >V.A.G.
- -> 
- -> As a matter of fact, yes.  There's a Spanish CT boxed set still looking for 
- -> a home at my FLGS! :)
At what price? I probably wont buy it since overseas postage is 
usually a killer (you do live in America, don't you bill?) (i am still 
hoping for a store in Spain to have it...). Still, the price would 
indeed be of interest.
Thanks  




Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 22:52:51 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Char gen system

In mail you write:

> In a message dated 97-06-17 03:08:34 EDT, you write:
>
> << 
>  It does take up a lot of space, doesn't it? I think it could be done
>  better, perhaps with a description. Something like:
>  
>  1st digit: 1d6 - 1, reroll 5s and 6s.
>  2nd diget: 2d6 - 2
>  3rd diget: 2d6 - 2
>  
>  and then a brief example.
>  
>  
>   >>
> You're right. I originally had a brief example which said "randomly generate
> a birthdate" and some of the younger players couldn't reliably or accurately
> do that. So I made a table and they really liked it.

Here's one that's a bit more complex, but gives a *flatter* distribution:

roll dice 3 times:
1st 	(1d6-1) * 61	(0,61,122,183,244,305)
2nd	(1d6-1) * 10	(0,10,20,30,40,50)
3rd	2d6-1		(1-11) 

Add the results of the 3 rolls. If the total is 366 and it isn't a leap
year, change it to 365.

Simple, more even, fewer dice, and no re-rolls. It's also
"progressive". The first roll determines what part of the year, the
second determines where in that part, and the final roll gets the exact
day.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 08:15:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Hardware, firmware, software

>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 97 20:09:36 -0600
>From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
>Subject: Re: Hardware, firmware, software


The Commander is using a modifyed TL-8 Classification 1(2?) HomeComputer 
Unit.
(DEC 486-66 w/ 20Mb RAM and 1.2GB HD)
Installed with  Windows95.

>On 1997-06-19 17:01 thus spake Douglas E. Berry:
>>>If you *do* answer this, can we please be careful to avoid any OS wars.
>>
>>Macolytes are Evveeelll!!!  They must be made to embrace the Way of Bill!
>>Just send your paychecks to Redmond WA!!!!

>M$ Windoze sucks!!!! Bill Gates is the Antichrist!!!! Microsloth Orafice
>is the work of the devil!!!! Macs RULE!!!!!!

>:)

:-) <Comic Relief Mode on> (-:

"I am Bill Gatus of Borg....Resistance is futile....You will be 
assimilated!"

:-)</End Comic Relief Mode>(-:

Commander X

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:48:46 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: ...and now for something completely different...

	Does anybody have a clue as to the origins of the term "Munchkin"
as used to describe annoying roleplayers?  Does anyone know the name of the
person who first screamed "You [expletive deleted]...  [expletive
deleted]... umm... MUNCHKIN!!" and in what circumstances he did so?

	I was just sitting here moderately hung over (dinner last night at
a place called Sphagettata up on Laurier to celebrate my GF's promotion)
pondering the whole task system debate when I suddenly began to wonder
about this.  I'd love to know how the name went from Frank L. Baum wonder
and innocence to "... my 4th Generation Werewolf Brujah Mage takes his +7
Vorpal PGMP-18 and blasts the creature!  Using his 10 dots in Celerity to
blast it 10 times, using his Mind and Entropy Spheres at 5 and its
Ancient-level TL-20 Precognitive HUD to get SS's every time, doing a total
of 4,638 dice of damage to the 2 kg fluffy white long-eared grazer!"

	Think I'm gonna go pop some aspirin now :).

R.D. Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:00:17 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <Philk@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

I'll have to admit to being a long term lurker on this list, and more of
a collector than a player of Traveller. But *seven* digests were waiting
for me this morning, so something's excited interest.

If you want a vote on the task system issue, as much as I like KBv2.0,
I'll happily accept Marc's system and here's why:

The group I game with mostly does AD&D, so we have lots of character
generation each session:-) In this environment stats of 7-14 (on 3d6)
offer almost no benefit, so our stats dice rolls are modified to allow
player to get stats that give bonuses in what their character does
(ie high strength fighters, high dex thieves, etc).

I don't see any difference with Traveller.

If you want to be a research scientist, then the character generation
system forces you to have an education of B+, and this follows life -
the people who do research all seem to have pretty high EDU scores,
the skill just determines what they are good at.

Similarly, the armed forces want a decent physical specimen, even with
conscription - more so when you select less than a million marines from
over a billion people. So again I would expect the physical stats to be
in the range A+.

This means that when the characters met an NPC, that NPC would have a
stat (which AD&D calls a prime requisite) of about 9, A or B to support
their usual skill and 6, 7 or 8 in other areas (unless specially created)

This means that the target number for the professionals would vary 1 or 2
points due to stat and 2 or 3 points due to skill.
But experts would be stat B, skill 5 and amateurs stat 7 skill 1 and the
no contest result you expect would happen.

This would probably mean that I need to use more dice or more modifiers
on the task roll but I expected that.

Of course this only describes the average NPC. There are exceptions to any
system - in the case of roleplaying games, these are the players and
specifically detailled NPCs might have inappropriate stats and skills.
So what - I always felt that the players should not be your average
9-5 citizen worker. After all they do have a direct line to "god" and in
my case sit between me and the door of the house where we game:-)

I bet this has been said by someone else on the list but I can't read all
the messages whilst at work.
- --
  Philk@btinternet.com (don't blame BT for any of this, they only pay me:)
  Interested in a wargames show in Colchester, Essex UK?
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:05:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Task System Revision

Responding to the various posts about task system stuff:

From Marc Miller's Questionaire:
> 1. T4 is weighted too heavily against stats.  Skills have a minor part
>    in a character's success at a task throw.  These should be equally
>    weighted.

Priority One.  Skills and Stats should be equalized.  Dividing the stat by a 
nuber and adding it to the DM's seems to be the route most variants have 
taken.  Personaly, being a crazy ol' codger (Travametricly Speaking, been 
playing for Nearly 15 or so years<G>). I am very partial to the MT way. 
(2d6+Stat/5+Skill over fixed number)

> 5. I don't like the half-die.  Get rid of it.

Priority Two.  I had very little prob with 1/2 dice in T4.0(until the skill 
over stat issue arose in gameplay) where there was more instance, but now 
T4.1 where it is only used in 'Difficult'(2.5d) make it seem pointless. 
 Personaly I would like to see a return to 2d6, those multi dice are too 
much like SW.

> =============================================================
> 2. Spectacular Success and Spectacular Failure are hard to do at easy
>    and average, and easier at harder levels.
> =============================================================
> 3.  It should be harder to roll SS the harder a task becomes.
> =============================================================
> 4.  Replace SS with SF in 3.

I give these guy's equal priority. Zero.
I always believed that SS and SF were due to just plain dumb luck, again I 
will cite the 2d example, no matter how shoddy you are at a skill if you 
roll boxcars(12) you will luck out and pull through spectaculary.  Likewise, 
if it seems like there is no way you can fail with your +8 or so  DM's on 
that easy task, if you roll Snakeeyes(2) you fumble.  SS and SF are great 
role playing events.

Example: Joe Shigulii, is the best pilot in the Imperial Navy.  Dex=12(+2DM) 
and Pilot=6.  He wants to show off his skill to some babes.  He does some 
fancy flying at the formidiable level and succedes no sweat.  Now he comes 
in for a perfect military spit and polish landing.  Should be no prob, thats 
an average task, should be automatic, but he rolls a 2!  The silly pilot was 
so engrosed with impressing the gals that he forgot to engage the landing 
gear and grinds his fighter's ventral turret up on the tarmac!

"Doh! The Admiral's not gonna like this!"

Well thats my 0.02cr worth :)
Commander X
 

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:39:11 +0100
From: "Silburn, Luke (Exchange)" <SilburnL@logica.com>
Subject: Shadis Offer [Commercial]

I just heard this from the Ars Magica list and thought you might be
interested, apologies if its deemed off-topic here.

Shadis are giving away games to people who take out a subscription.
Their website [http://www.isomedia.com/homes/aeg/sub.html] gives the
full scoop, but T4 is on the list of possible freebies. A couple of guys
who's opinion I trust have confirmed the deal as appearing to be on the
level.

So if you want to encourage victi^H^H^H^H^Hplayers to join your
Traveller group, then persuading them to get T4 for 'free' might help.
Who knows, the number of requests for different games might be used by
Shadis to influence the mix of articles in future issues.

Me, I've already got T4. But Harnmaster 2nd Ed is on the list as
well....

Luke
SilburnL@logica.com
Suggestions for a witty .sig gratefully received....

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:55:30 +0100 (BST)
From: "mark.wilkin" <aa4mwi@zen.sunderland.ac.uk>
Subject: ROM tech level

Just a quick question but I'm sure I read something about the ROM 
wholesale cloning and gene-engineering people to work on different worlds.
And I remember from the information in the Lady Elise adventure in TNE 
the GM's screen that there are some dolphines, orcas and whales out 
there "uplifted" to intelligence in the pocket empire along the vampire 
highway.
What tech level was this defined as being? It seems 
pretty high to me, but I've never read the definition of the tech levels.

"Damm talking out loud again" The Maxx
Mark Wilkin

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 09:04:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1997 #1445

Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU> writes:
> Another thing that's astonishing me is the number of hitherto unheard from
> lurkers popping out to cast their votes on the issue...
> Where are you people the rest of the time?? Sometimes it feels like
> there's only about 30 people on this whole list...not bitching, just
> wondering...

Well, I can't speak for the others, but I'm not involved in a game at the
moment, and have not yet bought in to T4.  So, being stuck in the MT mode,
I haven't got a real desire to join in T4 or M:0 discussions.  Much of the
remainder seems to be generated by leftover TNE players, and I'm not really
interested in post-Virus either.  Someday I'll wake up and become active
again (though not like '90-'91)...

Rob Dean
(slumbering dinosaur of the TML)
robdean@access.digex.net

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:28:06 +0100
From: "Silburn, Luke (Exchange)" <SilburnL@logica.com>
Subject: PE Software Wishlist

John Wood:
<<If you *do* answer this, can we please be careful to avoid any OS
wars.>>

A mixture of Wintel stuff (3.11 and 95) with some Unix, it varies
depending upon what kind of role I'm in at work. Anything Traveller
related should be Wintel (preferably 16-bit for backwards
compatibility).

John:
<<My second question is more Traveller-related.  What would you want
Pocket Empires software to do?>>

*	Read in UWP data from a data file. MH
*	Create UWP data from scratch. SH
*	Allow the user to choose between methods for generating UWP from
scratch. NTH
*	Display PE data for systems in a clear, easily followed manner.
Having high level summaries that can be drilled down etc. SH
*	Allow options for year by year development from full auto (do it
all and report on changes) through to step-by-step (letting the player
override values by hand as they go). SH
*	Historical reporting (letting you graph growth of GWP against
time etc). SH
*	Comparitive reporting. SH
*	Extended-auto operation (allows a player to seed an area with
PEs, set them some goals and then crank time forwards a couple of
decades, or a couple of centuries, to see what happens). NTH
*	Big starfield display (for the epic sweep of clashing empires).
NTH
*	Core software to conform to PE as published. MH
*	Extensibility (I want population to factor into infrastructure
costs? Give the option to do this or hooks that allow me to build my
own). SH

MH 	= Must have
SH 	= Should have
NTH 	= Nice to have

Loads of other stuff probably. This is just what I came up with over my
sandwich at lunch. 

Luke
SilburnL@logica.com
Suggestions for a witty .sig gratefully received....

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 08:23:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: lee@uansv2.Vanderbilt.Edu (Mike Lee)
Subject: Re: Task System Revision

Since you have voted for a change in the task system to fix it, rate each of
these items inorder of importance (1=most important) and don't be afraid to
put a zero if you think it isn't important.

 1. T4 is weighted too heavily against stats.  Skills have a minor part in a
character's 
 success at a task throw.  These should be equally weighted.

(1)  Please give greater weight to skills.  As Merrick Burkhardt said, I
believe skills should be used to determine the difficulty of a particular
task, and attributes be considered the vehicle for achieving the task.
 =============================================================
 2. Spectacular Success and Spectacular Failure are hard to do at easy and
average, and easier at harder levels.

(3)  I agree with this, in the main.  Easy tasks are things like putting oil
in your car or riding a bike- it takes real effort to spectacularly fail, or
succeed (Oh, wow- you've just made the best toast the world has ever seen!).  
 =============================================================
 3.  It should be harder to roll SS the harder a task becomes.

(4) Succeeding at an impossible task in the first place should be
spectacular enough, in my opinion.
 =============================================================
 4.  Replace SS with SF in 3.

(5)
 =============================================================
 5. I don't like the half-die. Get rid of it.
 =============================================================
(2)  Toss the sucker.  Please.  Like Nick Munn said, I can live with the
half-die if necessary...but it's inelegant.  If it is absolutely necessary
from a statistical point of view, then I will grudgingly accept it.

        Thank you very much, Marc, for your willingness to take the die-hard
fans' feelings into account on this.  I have never, ever seen a more
passionate, intelligent, and committed group of RPG fans as those found here
on the TML, and I believe that they can provide a wealth of data, insight,
and experience to make T4.1 and future products the best in the industry.

Mike Lee

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:44:02 +0200 (MET_DST)
From: Ola Agren <corps@ts.umu.se>
Subject: Re: Hardware, firmware, software

On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, John Wood wrote:

> I was wondering what computers/operating systems people here use?  I've
> seen quite a few mentions of Macs and only a few Unix/Windows/Dos.

UNIX, if I have the choise. I sometimes use PCs, Macs and VAX/VMS, but
mostly UNIX (Sun OS4/5, SGI Irix, IBM AIX, Digital Ultrix/OSF-1, SCO
XENIX/UNIX/ODT or HP HP-UX).=20

/Ola
- --
Ola =C5gren * corps@ts.umu.se * ola@cs.umu.se

General Preprocessing Perceptron -
=09How to put an awful lot of "knowledge" in a weighted sum.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:47:58 +0200 (MET_DST)
From: Ola Agren <corps@ts.umu.se>
Subject: Re: Poll:  Task System Choices

On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, John R. Snead wrote:

> Well, most folks seem to want a task system which empahsizes skills over
> stats.=20
>=20
> How about rating the 3 non-T4 Task systems we have available to us, and
> lettting Marc and I know which one we like best.=20
>=20
> 1) The old MegaTraveller Task system: =20
>=20
> Roll 2D6, and add Stat/5+Skill
> Easy =3D 3+, Average =3D 7+, Difficult =3D 11+, Formidable =3D 15+,=20
> Impossible =3D 18+
>=20
> __  1
>=20
> 2) KB 1.1 =20
>=20
> Add Stat/2 + Skill *2 and roll below this number using differing numbers
> of dice:=20
>=20
> Easy =3D 1D6, Average =3D 2D6, Difficult =3D 2D6 + 1D3, Formidable =3D 3D=
6,
> Staggering =3D 4D6, and Impossible =3D 5D6
>=20
> __  3
>=20
> 3) KB 2.0
>=20
> Add Stat + 3*Skill and roll below this number using differing numbers of
> dice:=20
>=20
> Easy =3D 2D6, Average =3D 3D6, Difficult =3D 4D6, Formidable =3D 5D6,=20
> Staggering =3D 6D6, and Impossible =3D 7D6
>=20
> __  2

I rate megaTraveller as Best (1), KB2.0 as (2), and KB 1.1 as worst (3)
(But all are IMHO better than the current system).=20

/Ola
- --
Ola =C5gren * corps@ts.umu.se * ola@cs.umu.se

General Preprocessing Perceptron -
=09How to put an awful lot of "knowledge" in a weighted sum.

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

Date: 20 Jun 1997 13:49:04 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
Subject: Re: Re: We've Reached 50!!!!

>> Just figure someone should point out that reducing attributes would also
>> work.
>
>Not as well.  Attributes should be left alone to reduce math--because 
>attributes decrease when  character is wounded.
>
>The only thing we should do with an attribute is add it to something 
>else.
>
>Let's keep it simple.

Well, in MegaTraveller we had attributes (possibly reduced by wounds) being
divided by 5 and added to the task roll.  Worked OK.  I don't think a simple
division is too much math.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:03:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

On Thu, 19 Jun 1997 CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> 
> More Training. Three may decide that regardless of his aptitude, he wants to
> be a Demolitions Expert and he pursues nine years of study and practice and
> eventually reaches the same level of achievement as Eleven (since Dex 3+
> Demolitions-9 is the same as Dex 11 and Demolitions-9 when we consider
> Demolitions as a Dexterity based activity). If Eleven made no improvements in
> his skill, and Three made these major improvements, than Three would
> certainly be more of an expert, with more knowledge, theoretical experience,
> and even practical experience; but when it came to defusing bombs, the Eleven
> (with Demolitions-1) and Three (with Demolitions-9) would be about equal.
> They might make a good team: Three giving instructions and advice and Eleven
> doing the actual nimble finger work.

Hmmm...this is exactly the place where all the people who think that the
task system is broken point to, Marc.

There is no way on the Emperors green Sylea that someone with skill-9 in
something should be merely equal to someone with skill-1, I don't care
WHAT their aptitude is! Gaining skills is not just book learning and
taking tests, particularly for something as demanding as demolitions.
Getting that skill-9 involves three things: Practice, practice, practice.
Ok, maybe four things, we'll toss in a little practice. Three may be
really bad at basketball, can't juggle one ball at a time, and drop his
food in his lap all the time, but in the real world he's going to
outperform Eleven almost every time at demolitions related tasks, if not
every time.

To take up our tired Mikey example from the great task wars debate,
Michael Jordan CLEARLY has the aptitude to play basketball, he's one of
the best in the world at it, maybe one of the best of all time. But,
according to your example, when Mike was in high school, at about skill 1,
he'd be able to beat the majority of NBA players and almost all NCAA
players, because of his attributes. No way...Age and Skill will beat Youth
and Talent any time.

The problem with the T4 task systems, based as heavily as it is on the
underlying attribute is that it makes the assumption that the attribute is
unchanging. It isn't. Any dexterity related skill is going to be improved
by the muscle training that comes with gaining the skill...it's like
learning tennis, or golf, or flytying...you can read all about it, know
all about it intellectually, but if you're not _doing_ it, you're not
gaining the skill, and that's what the difference in skill levels are
supposed to represent: practice more than knowledge.

This is also where the old thing about gaining skills after chargen broke
down in that you had to find time to get a teacher, materials and time to
devote to practice, when the skills people were trrying to improve were
usually the skills their characters were using in their day to day gaming
lives.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1449
***********************************
