Mongoose Trav: Skill System Blogpost

Pierce Inverarity · October 19, 2007, 05:25:27 PM

http://blog.mongoosepublishing.co.uk/

So the general strategy is becoming clear: the core game will essentially be a cleaned-up CT for the grognards; plus add-ons for the n00bs/detractors. Point-buy in chargen a la GURPS, time/effect dice in task resolution a la ORE (sez rpg.net), or I guess more precisely a la some kind of OREification of MT.

This sounds a bit eclectic, and I'm not a fan of players' choosing which die is time and which is effect/success level, but whatever. So far, MongTrav riles me far far less than 4E.

Xanther · October 19, 2007, 05:37:00 PM

I like that time/effect idea a lot, but have never played such a system. How it will work on failures or combat, if at all, I'd like to see.

Ian Absentia · October 19, 2007, 05:55:01 PM

From the referenced blog...

QuoteOne of your characteristics will usually provide a Dice Modifier to the roll. Dexterity figures into most Gun Combat rolls, for example. DMs from characteristics range from -1 to +3. If you don't have any levels in a skill, you suffer an unskilled penalty.

Ah-hah! I thought J Arcane and I might be on to something. But the bottom of the scale at only -1? Looks like they're playing to the "heroic" crowd.

!i!

beeber · October 20, 2007, 06:20:52 AM

at least there is a negative modifier (from characteristics), yes? there's no such thing in MT.

Ian Absentia · October 20, 2007, 01:20:53 PM

At least in the the original Traveller, if you lacked required strength or dexterity for certain weapons, you'd incur as much as a -3 modifier. Now, maybe there's still such a rule in the forthcoming RTT, but why would one have both a characteristic modifer and a required/advantageous characterisitc modifer?

!i!

beeber · October 20, 2007, 06:19:52 PM

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaAt least in the the original Traveller, if you lacked required strength or dexterity for certain weapons, you'd incur as much as a -3 modifier. Now, maybe there's still such a rule in the forthcoming RTT, but why would one have both a characteristic modifer and a required/advantageous characterisitc modifer?

!i!

i just don't know, ian. them mongooses be weird critters. let's just leave 'em be until feb., 'n' see what crawls outta their burrows. . . . :keke:

dar · October 29, 2007, 01:04:25 AM

I don't think I like it. Someone at tbp posted an example of a low skilled character who would always have to roll two sixes to get a success. Which means that he'll fail and fail and fail until he succeeds in the most profound way. uh... no. It also means that all his successes will be spectacular... sure, rare... but he is supposed to be unskilled.

I'm sure I'm missing something critical about it. Least I hope so.

J Arcane · October 29, 2007, 03:35:32 AM

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaFrom the referenced blog...Ah-hah! I thought J Arcane and I might be on to something. But the bottom of the scale at only -1? Looks like they're playing to the "heroic" crowd.

!i!

Yay! I'm smart!

KenHR · October 29, 2007, 07:22:23 AM

Quote from: J ArcaneYay! I'm smart!

Bah.

Ian Absentia · October 29, 2007, 09:06:24 AM

Oops, sorry Ken. I didn't mean to forget you. One particular thing that we all had in common was that we didn't stop the negative mods at -1. :rolleyes:

!i!

KenHR · October 29, 2007, 09:11:58 AM

I was just funnin'. I throw ideas at the wall to see what sticks; you guys actually think them through.