Traveller-digest      Saturday, June 21 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1458



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

RE:Yet more task stuff
Re: Task System Revision
T4.1 Task Rationale
Re:T4.1 tasks
Re: A Plea to Marc Miller
Party time for munchkins
Re: Anomalies stuff
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Re: Tasks and Spec Succ
Re: Task System 4.1...
Re: Vargr Tech
Re: Yet more task stuff.
Re: [T97#1449] ...and now for something completely different...
Re: [T97#1444] Gushing about the new UWP
Re: Birthdays
Re: Tasks (again), a solution.
Task System:  Maybe *this* works

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 16:52:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: RE:Yet more task stuff

On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Simon Turner wrote:

> I couldn't agree more - my initial post was really just a reminder that its
> the *practical application* of whatever system that is used that counts. Its
> a bit like designing a sports car with all the trimmings when what you
> really needed was a reliable station wagon.

Yup. It's great to have that hot sports car that can do 220 MPH with its 
turbo charged engine...but if the speed limit is 60 MPH, and the car's 
constantly in the shop...what's the point?  :)

Similarly, if a task system can handle everything under the sun, and 
models the real world with 99% acccuracy, but one must wade through pages 
of charts and text to find the precise procedure to be followed for the 
task at hand...again, what's the point?  The purpose of the game becomes 
task resolution, rather than adventuring.


> I think we remember the old systems with such fondness because they were
> *FUN*. For me, I still get a kick from rolling a twenty or trying to follow
> the rules in 'The Mountain Enviroment'

You bet! :)  Stuffing a backpack full of 5-1/2 by 8-1/2 and 8-1/2 by 11 
books on every concievable subject, just to play four hours of 
Traveller...ahhh. :) 


> I must agree with this, my players always had a problem with this system.
> As a referee *I* liked it, they disliked it. However to be fair it was the
> first task based system we tried. 

That was our first as well.  It was a new idea to me - whaddaya mean 
there's not four hundred DM's spread over three dozen charts to look up 
every time someone wants to do something?!?  :)  OTOH, I found the rules 
exceptions confusing, and never could get them all in my head.


> I agree 4.1 is on the right track, although not Nirvana.
<snip>
> I will repeat again, I think the current system and its revisions are on the
> right path. Just a few steps away from enlightenment.

Have you any suggestions for how to move it closer to Nirvana?


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh  |  Game Designer for Marc Miller's Traveller
_________________|  Atari 1200XL and Apple IIGS User and Programmer

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:25:15 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Re: Task System Revision

Thanks for listening, Marc. Here's my 2 cents:

>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.

Give this a 1, this is the hardest part to swallow in the T4 system.

> =============================================================
> 2. Spectacular Success and Spectacular Failure are hard to do at easy and
>average, and easier at harder levels.

Give this a 3, I think it should be harder to roll SF and SS as the
difficulty goes up,
but I also like the current system's view that you just can't do anything
"spectacularly"
in a mundane task.

> =============================================================
> 3.  It should be harder to roll SS the harder a task becomes.

See the above. Give it a 3.

> =============================================================
> 4.  Replace SS with SF in 3.

Hmmm, if you mean SF should be harder to roll on harder tasks, I disagree.
Give 
this a 2.

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

5, it really is of little importance; I'd like to see it go, but can live
with it either way

> =============================================================
>
>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.

Still going to be rolling low, huh :)


**********************************************************
Paul Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
CEO and Chief Bottle Washer of ValuJump Lines
"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 22:26:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: T4.1 Task Rationale

On Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:51:05, CardSharks@aol.com wrote;

>> What most of us disagree about is how much weight to give to each.
>> In current T4, being one of the top 10% in natural ability
>> (attribute B+) with minimal training (skill 1) makes you *better*
>> than an average human (attribute 7) with many years of intensive
>> training (skill 4.)
> I also think some of this is a reflectionof inadequate task
> specification... to what extent do modifiers for tools, rehearsal,
> training, experience, qualifications, team support, and other
> variables make someone with years of training more likely to be
> successful than someone with Char-11 and Skill-1.
    Good point!  But... In a situation where those tools, team support and the
like are not available.  The Skill should outweigh the Stat!  It doesn't right
now and that's part of the problem.
    FoEx; You've just been trapped in the Wilderness with no hope for
evacuation for at least a day.  You have Appendicitis, you have an hour, maybe
two before it bursts and you Die.  Now you have to have an opperation RIGHT
NOW.  I don't care how skilled that Paramedic is, I want the Doctor with all
the medical SKILLS that can carry out the emergency operation with minimal if
any equipment.  The SKILL is the equalizer and enabler here.  Not the Stat.

Stephen

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 22:26:00 GMT 
From: s.johnson107@genie.com
Subject: Re:T4.1 tasks

On Sat, 21 Jun 1997 00:32:24, CardSharks@aol.com Wrote;

    BTW Marc, please do not take all the heat that's being generated
personally.  These issues and subjects wouldn't be generating the passionate
debate they are if we all didn't care deeply about Traveller. ;) That said...

>> I agree with Kenneth and the other posters - I am increasingly uneasy
>> about the dominance of attributes in the task roll. Try running a
>> marine with a dex <6 and you'll see what I mean! Skills should be a
>> way to counteract natural inabilities in an area.
> Try running a Marine with Dex less than 6 and you have a clumsy Marine.
    True enough, however the military will take in that clumsy person,
especially in times of war, and count on training IN SPECIFIC SKILLS to counter
the clumsiness.  Problem is the current Task System doesn't really account for
this.  It does make a mockery of the idea that any specific level in a skill
has any meaning though.
    FoEx; I've been through marksmanship training and I'm not a terribly
dexterious person.  I watched guys on the firing range pick up their weapons
and perform miracles of marksmanship that made the sargeants smile (a
particularly grim sight for a struggling recruit.)  They didn't need to
practice, I did, and I practiced every sunday.  In the end I met the Expert
standard, because I increased my Skill through Practice!
    The Skill indicates a specific level of ability in a specific range of
tasks.  Yes natural aptitude should have an effect.  But it's been proven time
and again that Sheer Dogged Persistance, Perseverance and Practice WILL level
the field.  And that's Skill.

> This is the problem I find with the discussion about dominance of
> attributes over skills. When I look at a characteristic as an
> "aptitude" or "talent" or "potential" which can usually only be
> actualized through skill, then the higher the characteristic, the
> higher the potential.
    Fine, what in heaven's name does that have to do with actual use and
knowledge of the skill?

> If we have a low Dex football player, he doesn't make the cut. On the
> other hand, if he has a higher Int or Edu, maybe he becomes a coach.
    ::chuckle:: You OBVIOUSLY have never played ball at a third string school!
I've had experiences where the Coach and Team are happy to get whomever
volunteers!  Is it a great team?  A good team??  OC not... In the begining.
But over time as they practice they get better.  It not unknown for such teams
to get so good they take regional, state and occassionally National
Championships.
    They must definately do not have the Attributes, they DO have the skills.

> The value of the Traveller T4 system is that it links skills with
> more than one characteristic (as in Dex or Int above).
    Uhm... I would expect nothing less Marc.  This is rather like stating that
the value of the sun is that it shines during the day. ;)

> And, skills are a way to counteract natural inabilities in an area...
> Dex 3 and Skill-5 is the same as Dex 5 and Skill-3. But it takes a while
> to build to skill-5; the trade off is time versus natural ability.
    Yes, quite correct, however...  Traveller skills quite often state that at
_this or that level_ the possessor of the skill now possess specific ranges of
ability to do things.  The Medical-3 springs to mind as a perfect example here.
A Doctor requires a decade or so of training and can do a rather marvelous
range of things.  Yet the Traveller system can easily devalue that if the
Doctor has a low Attribute and some Medical-1 has a High Attribute.

> Now I know I am not going to change everyones' minds to one of the
> several possible systems, but I am looking very deeply into this
> matter (which all of your votes have encouraged me to do).
    ::chuckle::  You certain you haven't developed Diplomacy 5+ lately?! <grin>
Perhaps you should look at the idea of decoupling specific abilities from
specific skill levels and make it available at certain Stat + Skill scores.
    FoEx; Being a Doctor ceases to be Medical-3, but Int + Med = 10.  (ie.
Intelligence average is 7 plus the now traditional Medical 3)

Stephen

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:06:11 -0600 (MDT)
From: "P. ENGEBOS" <pengebos@NMSU.Edu>
Subject: Re: A Plea to Marc Miller

On Sat, 21 Jun 1997 CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> It should be clear that I am CONSIDERING everyting and anything,including
> abandoning tasks altogether, reverting to MT, using KB, using the posted
> system, using a hybrid, and just throwing up my hands in frustration.
> 
Well one of the things I like about task systems like that in MT or TNE
(where you make the same die role regardless of difficulty) is that hyou
can have players make a roll and tell you the difficulty that they
made,without having to reveal the difficulty necessary - thus preserving
some secrecy from the players.

Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<tsarith@io.com>
		http://web.nmsu.edu/~pengebos/

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:34:58 -0800
From: Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
Subject: Party time for munchkins

>At this point, why bother with more than skill level 1 with anything? Why
>not just send your PC to college, get an Edu of B and then roll on the
>Physical Development table until you have an 11 Dex and not worry about
>having any Edu or Dex skills over 1?

You don't have much experience with munchkins, do you? A true munchkin
would only roll on the physical and mental development tables until they
get a UPP of FFFFF7 (munchkins don't care about social standing). When they
start playing, they probe the referee to see what the adventure will be
about (assuming the ref designed the adventure; if it's a published
adventure he buys the book). Then, supposing the adventure will require
medical and gun skill, our hero takes a St. John's correspondence course to
get Medic-1 and gets an FAC certificate at a gun club. Our brave traveller
now faces the world with a target number of 16 in every important skill.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 12:12:27 +1100
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Anomalies stuff

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:

> Steve Miller writes: 
> >I agree, to a point. The Ramshackle Empire as a whole probably did not move
> >too far beyond the tech level of the Ziru Sirka, but I think progress could
> >have been made in certain pockets... a series of systems with extra resources
> >and dedicated scientists might have come up with all kinds of innovations.
> >(How did the systems come by these extra resources/innovations? They didn't
> >share them with anyone else except their closest allies.)

The problem, to me anyway, is that the Referee's Companion talks about
the TLs achieved by the various empires, which implies (again, to me)
that it's talking about pretty much the highest TL reached. Besides I
don't buy the notion of military tech 2 levels over the RoM's standard
max not being used by the RoM's Navy.
 
> The problem comes from a table in a Megatraveller book (_Referee's Companion_
> IIRC) where the times the various empires reached what TL was set out. RoM
> never got beyond 12, Sylea reached (re-reached) 12 in -150 and don't get to
> 13 until 300.
> 
> I've earlier proposed a way to explain some of this away: To define the TL
> of a planet as the highest TL a large part of the population routinely used,
> but to define the TL of an interstellar realm as its space TL. That way RoM
> _may_ have had some TL 14 stuff (though I also agree that it would be best
> to keep TL 14 relics severely curtailed), but it did _not_, repeat _not_,
> ever, ever build any TL 13 ships. And neither does Sylea until Year 300.

That's another problem - if the Syleans are finding TL14 relics, even 
in only small quantities why did it take them until 300 to get to 
TL13 and 700 to get to TL14? That's at least as long as the RoM existed, 
and the Syleans have these relics to help them.

However the biggest hurdle is that the new 3rd Imperium is expanding 
into old Vilani space, and I can't see how any of their worlds 
would've been able to provide the climate for innovation and TL 
advancement. The high TL worlds (and thus the relics) will be in the 
areas the Terrans settled, and mostly around Earth.

Mind you, I think that the canon history has Vilani culture embrace 
TL progress far too readily, and badly under estimates the value of 
espionage and reverse engineering in keeping up with your neighbours 
- - in 1100 both the Solomani and the Zhodani somehow stay 1TL behind 
the Imperium, even though there are millions of TL15 Traders and 
Scout ships that can be purchased or stolen and disassembled.


R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 20:50:33 -0400
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

> From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
> Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale
> 
> If you take someone who can't even eat a meal without knocking
> a glass over, he is _never_ going to be able to safely get into
> demolisions and will alway be a danger, no matter how much he
> pratices. (Every field for which safety is an issue has stories
> about guys that have been there for _years_ and have always been
> a hazard to those around them.)  Conversely, the oldtime of
> mediocre ability resenting the young talent that is displacing
> him is a staple of literature because it reflects reality.

Hm, well, I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that "staples of
literature reflect reality". "Fear the unknown, especially people
from outside your social group" is a staple of literature, but 
I wouldn't say it's a good way to live your life. That's neither
her nor there though.

Anyways, I think what you're trying to say here is not that
stats dominate, so much as that without a high stat, you'll 
never attain high skill. That's how I look at it anyways.
Someone with Dex-6 will never, ever attain Archery-10. It
just doesn't happen. Now, someone with Dex-14 could attain
Archery-10, sure. But don't expect them to do as well at 
basketball as they do at archery.

If I had to pick a house rule, I'd say that no skill can 
ever be higher than half or two-thirds (or something) of
the skill's controlling stat. ie. Someone with Edu-6 could
get a maximum of Law-3. I mean, you could be less educated 
than average and still be a professional lawyer. To be
a real crack lawyer, you'd need a higher EDU. So, someone
who had been to college, Edu-A or B, could, if they
studied law a lot, have Law-5.

Anyways, that's my take on reality.

> > No way...Age and Skill will beat Youth
> > and Talent any time.
> 
> And others are just as clear that it's the opposite....

Hm, well, I dunno about age or youth, but I think it's
unfair that having a high stat like DEX improves your 
chances at performing 26 different skills, while
having a high skill level improves your chances at
doing only one. Weenie min-maxers will throw for or
pick stat increases over skills every time, which
makes for unintersting characters.

Ethan

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:48:34 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Tasks and Spec Succ

At 01:03 PM 6/21/97 -0400, Marc wrote:

>The T41 task system I posted called for SS if the dice came out all 1's and
>SF if the dice came out all 6's.
>
>That was criticized, and I changed to to SS if 3 1's and SF if 3 3's. Its
>going to be one or the other. Frankly, 3 1's makes the game more exciting,
>with about a 1% chance at 2.5D and 0.5% at 3D 4D and 5D.

I like the three ones/sixes idea.. makes it immediately apparent whether
you shine or sink immediately.

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|    "Traveller assumes a remote centralized     |
|   government (referred to in this volume as    |
|    the Imperium)...                            |
|       -Introduction, Book 4: Mercenary (1978)  |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:43:13 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Task System 4.1...

At 12:34 PM 6/21/97 -0400, Marc wrote:

>I agree a Dex 7 Med-4 Doctor should beat a Dex-11 Med-1 EMT. But at what?
>Suturing?... must doctors use the Med-1's or so to do that anyway. Open Heart
>Surgery?... aside from the legal ramifications, what difference is there
>between using the Dex-11 guy for the very steady work (which is why doctors
>tried out a robot something or other a few years ago... to get that Dex-11
>they didn't personally have).(or why there is a team in the operating room).

I would like to point out at this juncture that from my real world
experience, most doctors aren't surgeons, and most surgeons don't do
anything but surgery.

In my case, my oncologist has a high INT and EDU, and about Medical-6.  His
ability is in diagnosing and prescribing the treatment of cancers.. when I
had my laparotomy, my surgeon was a specialist in abdominal surgery.

The proverbial DEX-11, Med-1 field medic may not know what to do when
presented with a patient who is suffering from painful seizures, an
enlarged spleen, and bizarre blood counts, if his EDU is only 5 or 6.  If
he has a high EDU, he may indeed know what is going on, tell a doctor, and
save the day!


>Dex 7 gives the Doctor 4% chance of success; Med-1 gives the doctor +39%
>chance of success, and the total of Med-1 through 4 gives him +78% chance of
>success. (If Char/3, the chances are 1%, +3%, and +28%).

If the surgeon spends extra time, has prepared, has the support of the
surgical team, is using good tools, etc..  the chances of sucess go way up.
 Dr. Gregg told me about the time he had to perform appendectomy on the
golf course; he said he never worked so hard in his life, or missed the
operating room quote so much.

>What if the Characteristic for the task is Int? Then you have the classic
>conflict that we see in ER every week... Int-7 Med-4 Doctor argues with
>Int-11 Med-1 EMT. The doctor knows he's right because he's a doctor... the
>EMT just knows the answer. Make than an opposed task and they can argue about
>which treatment to give the patient.

I'd use EDU myself.. I know plenty of nurses with a command of medical
knowledge that rivals (or eceeds) that of the doctors on staff.
- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|    "Traveller assumes a remote centralized     |
|   government (referred to in this volume as    |
|    the Imperium)...                            |
|       -Introduction, Book 4: Mercenary (1978)  |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:51:59 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Vargr Tech

At 11:17 AM 6/21/97 +0100, Simon wrote:

>Just a quick question until the Aliens Hardbound appears. Im just begining a
>M0 campaign in the Antares/Lishun sectors, <Boy, I love the Jag-II-Jagd> and
>need a few Vargr corsairs to spice up proceedings. What tech level have the
>Vargr achieved? Have the Vargr also suffered the effects of the long night? 
>Apart from not having fusion+ do some Vargr have the technological edge?

In a an adventure I'm working on, the Vargr are TL 9/10.  Their ships are
mostly fusion rockets armed with HE missles and weak (by Imperial
standards) lasers.

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
| Gearhead & Planetologist, Traveller since 1977 |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|    "Traveller assumes a remote centralized     |
|   government (referred to in this volume as    |
|    the Imperium)...                            |
|       -Introduction, Book 4: Mercenary (1978)  |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 01:38:52 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Yet more task stuff.

> The big leap that we all need to make, IMO, is keeping in mind that we're a 
> tiny, tiny minority of the current Traveller players, and an even more 
> miniscule minority of the universe of players Traveller must reach if it 
> is to be the success it deserves to be. 

Yes, but we are the most dedicated Traveller players in the world.  
If you are a Traveller fanatic, and you have a computer, chances are 
you are here on the TML.

I think that if we are pleased, then the chances are that most of the 
occasional Traveller players out there will be pleased as well.

We have a great amount of 
> knowledge, and a great capacity for accepting hairy, complex systems. 

> The customers that must be reached do not share that knowledge 
> or capacity.  I don't think we will find the right system unless we keep 
> that in mind.

Nonsense.  KBv2.0 is completely simple.  It's a little more complex 
than T4.1 as is, but I'd rank it in the same category with the MT 
task system, and that was pretty simple.

Besides, if you play RPGs, you'd expect some complexity.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 22:24:00 -0500
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN)
Subject: Re: [T97#1449] ...and now for something completely different...

Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca> writes...

T::> 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?

 Ummmm, I don't think so.  More likely, it was from the way such
 characters can "munch" their way through a dungeon for lunch.
 Somebody undoubtedly went from there - "what's an insulting
 word for 'a character that munches his way through dungeons'?
 Hmmm....  <evil grin> MUNCHKIN!"

 After all, would you think it complementary if your Mutant
 Ninja Wereturtle Mage with the +googol Silver Toothpick of
 Vorpal Bunny Slaying were referred to with the same word as
 cute little half-height people with squeaky voices that stand
 in awe of a perfectly normal 14-year-old girl, and then tell
 her (six times in two minutes) to follow a certain road, like
 she won't remember?

==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
  OLXWin 1.00b  Member: International Brotherhood of Tagline Thieves!

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 22:24:00 -0500
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN)
Subject: Re: [T97#1444] Gushing about the new UWP

Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu> writes...

T::>FWIW, I am finishing up a Python script that will generate such for the
 ::>empire as a whole.  I decided last night to break with published data, and
 ::>generate my own physical data, with the locations the same.  My logic was
 ::>that I found it a bit strange, though certainly not unreasonable, that the
 ::>average atmosphere was thin, rather than standard.  (I figured that if the
 ::>Ancients had spread humanity over so many worlds, the least they could do
 ::>is terraform them a bit.)

 (A) What's Python?

 (B) If it's comprehensible, please e-mail me a copy of the
 script.  I may want to port it to other languages.

T::>I am using a two pass system for this, which is really only appropriate at
 ::>the end of the long night, and if a computer is doing the scutwork.  All
 ::>worlds of pop 8, 9, and A will be placed first on congenial planets, then I
 ::>will have each spread some colonies out.  In addition, I am going to place
 ::>a few bizarre worlds here and there at random, though both colonies and
 ::>random worlds should likely be near a main.  I expect to have a roughly
 ::>similar distribution to that in the books, but with far fewer pop 6 or less
 ::>worlds that are not explicit colonies of some bigger world.

 I _definitely_ want to see the computer program that does
 this...

T::>(I owe this fit of fiddling to Jeff Zeitlin and his alternative world
 ::>generation page.)

 ????  What alternative world generation page?  Freelance
 Traveller has Commander X's take-the-Classic-data-and-backfit-
 -it-for-year-0 page, and my A-Starport-is-more-than-a-gas-
 -station-and-garage page, but no "alternative world generation"
 page that I'm aware of.  And it better not have any pages that
 I'm _not_ aware of!

==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
  OLXWin 1.00b  Kennedy Compound -KEEP OUT- trespassers will be VIOLATED!

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 21:19:35 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Birthdays

On 06/21/97 at 12:49 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>In a message dated 97-06-21 10:59:04 EDT, you write:

><< > Can I ask an impertinent question?
> > 
> > Why? <g>
>  >>

>For most (or many, or some) of you on the list, you know how to do
>birthdays, and do them or don't as you feel at the moment. The Birthday
>table is for the 12-16 year olds new to the game who don't know what to
>do. It's my job as game designer to give some direction to the new
>players. For a while my draft said "pick a birthday" and they floundered
>about how to do it, or they just didn't.

Fair enough.  It just doesn't strike me as all that difficult to come up
with a number between 1 and 366.  Of course, it's been a few years since I
was 12-16 years old. ;->

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 21:17:06 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Tasks (again), a solution.

On 06/21/97 at 04:41 PM,  "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
said:

>> Put the T4.1 system in the rulebook. But put KBv2 in too as a sidebar,
>> keeping the descriptions of task difficulty the same (eg 'average), as an
>> official alternative system that isn't stats dominated.

>That may very well be the best solution that is possible under the 
>circumstances.  Not all problems have neat solutions.  And there is long 
>precedent in the wargaming and RPG industries for "beginner" and 
>"advanced" rules.  Heck, CT itself was rife with them.

>Are we ready to call off the search for the perfect solution to this 
>problem?

>Are we ready to agree that this is the best solution that can be found?

No, Joe. Not yet. I know there are good economic reasons for wanting to
stay as close to T4/T41 as possible, but there are a couple more ideas I
have perculating, and I'd like to present them before we give up. ;->

Eris

- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 97 22:03:09 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Task System:  Maybe *this* works

On 06/21/97 at 12:34 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>Dex 11 gives the EMT an 18% chance of success (Difficult Task Default
>Skill); Med-1 adds 73% to his chance of success. (If Char/3, the chances
>are 4% and +5%)

>Dex 7 gives the Doctor 4% chance of success; Med-1 gives the doctor +39%
>chance of success, and the total of Med-1 through 4 gives him +78% chance
>of success. (If Char/3, the chances are 1%, +3%, and +28%).

I worked up some spreadsheets this afternoon illustrating what you are
talking about.  The STAT forms a base of, let's say 18%, that contributes
to any Target Number.  The Skill climbs the curve (the curve is important
here) contibuting what ends up being the bulk of the total for a Target
Number.  I'm a lot happier about the straight STAT+Skill method now.

There is still a problem when the Stat gets into double digits.  Then the
base for Target Numbers starts too high.  That's the DEX 11 and EDU 12
problem we've been complaining about.  All I can say is an effort should be
made to keep 11+ Characteristics *very* rare!  

This bumps up against what you want to do with EDU, Marc.  If you don't
inflate EDU due to schooling...and in fact make raising *any*
characteristic rare and expensive I'll withdraw my objection to Stat+Skill
completely.  (Not my objection to the 1/2 die though. It should still go.
<g>)

Example of an Average Characteristic (7) and Skills ranging from 1 to 12. 
I know Skills aren't supposed to get that high, but it did it for
completeness, and liked what I was getting.

                Base    Part    Percent
2d6 Average     from    from      of
Stat    Skill   STAT    Skill   Success
7         1     58.3%   13.9%   72.2%
7         2     58.3%   25.0%   83.3%
7         3     58.3%   33.4%   91.7%
7         4     58.3%   38.9%   97.2%
7         5     58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         6     58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         7     58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         8     58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         9     58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         10    58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         11    58.3%   41.7%   100.0%
7         12    58.3%   41.7%   100.0%

                Base    Part    Percent 
3d6 Difficult   from    from      of    
Stat    Skill   STAT    Skill   Success 
7         1     16.2%   9.7%    25.9%
7         2     16.2%   21.3%   37.5%
7         3     16.2%   33.8%   50.0%
7         4     16.2%   46.3%   62.5%
7         5     16.2%   57.9%   74.1%
7         6     16.2%   67.6%   83.8%
7         7     16.2%   74.5%   90.7%
7         8     16.2%   79.2%   95.4%
7         9     16.2%   81.9%   98.1%
7         10    16.2%   83.3%   99.5%
7         11    16.2%   83.8%   100.0%
7         12    16.2%   83.8%   100.0%
 
                Base    Part    Percent 
4d6 Formidable  from    from      of    
Stat    Skill   STAT    Skill   Success 
7         1     2.7%     2.7%    5.4%
7         2     2.7%     7.0%    9.7%
7         3     2.7%    13.2%   15.9%
7         4     2.7%    21.2%   23.9%
7         5     2.7%    30.9%   33.6%
7         6     2.7%    41.7%   44.4%
7         7     2.7%    52.9%   55.6%
7         8     2.7%    63.7%   66.4%
7         9     2.7%    73.4%   76.1%
7        10     2.7%    81.4%   84.1%
7        11     2.7%    87.6%   90.3%
7        12     2.7%    91.9%   94.6%

                Base    Part    Percent 
5d6 Staggering  from    from      of   
Stat    Skill   STAT    Skill   Success
7         1     0.3%     0.4%    0.7%
7         2     0.3%     1.3%    1.6%
7         3     0.3%     2.9%    3.2%
7         4     0.3%     5.6%    5.9%
7         5     0.3%     9.5%    9.8%
7         6     0.3%    14.9%   15.2%
7         7     0.3%    21.8%   22.1%
7         8     0.3%    30.2%   30.5%
7         9     0.3%    39.7%   40.0%
7        10     0.3%    49.7%   50.0%
7        11     0.3%    59.7%   60.0%
7        12     0.3%    69.1%   69.4%

                Base    Part    Percent 
6d6 Hopeless    from    from      of    
Stat    Skill   STAT    Skill   Success 
7         1     0.0%     0.0%    0.1%
7         2     0.0%     0.2%    0.2%
7         3     0.0%     0.4%    0.5%
7         4     0.0%     1.0%    1.0%
7         5     0.0%     2.0%    2.0%
7         6     0.0%     3.6%    3.6%
7         7     0.0%     6.1%    6.1%
7         8     0.0%     9.6%    9.7%
7         9     0.0%    14.4%   14.5%
7        10     0.0%    20.6%   20.6%
7        11     0.0%    27.9%   27.9%
7        12     0.0%    36.3%   36.3%

You'll notice I dropped the 1/2 die.  <g> I like the numbers I'm getting
here, but maybe the *average* number of levels for a skill needs to go up a
little.  Rather than 1 to 4 with 2 being average, I think we might want to
go to 1 to 8 with 4 being average.  

How do you get the higher average skill numbers?  Either give out *lots*
more skills, or give 2 points/gain...I think I'd vote for lots more skills. 
Maybe as many as 8 per term, that would be 1 skill each 6 months..or in
educational terms 1 skill level per 2 semesters.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1458
***********************************
