Ive been toying with a run at MGT2 as I was a big fan of CT way back. With a perception tainted by more modern and innovative mechanics however I see the characters in Traveller as somewhat dry. Im wondering if there is room for a Special Ability house rule addition. Special traits or whatever that give characters small roleplaying or functional advantages/disadvantages in specific circumstances. (ie. Intimidating - Your character has a look in his eye or perhaps a scar or something that gives people the chills. He gains a +1 when attempting to intimidate or threaten someone.)

Does that sort of thing have any place in Traveller or should I just leave it alone?

Just based on the resolution mechanic (MGT2 is a 2D6 mechanic like most of the others, right?), I tend to stay away from frequent little +1s and -1s. That's really better for a GURPS or better yet a percentile system only because of size of effect.

That said, mere skill modifiers? Sure, I suppose. If the system can handle psionics, it can handle that. Maybe even make it a + and - (+1 on intimidating, but -1 on persuasion-type effects when the other party is clearly in the position of power or the like).

That said, what does it add?

First I agree that a +1 in the game is pretty substantial. (Yes, its still a 2d6 + Attribute and Skill over target number) Its one of the reasons Im a little hesitant. I considered limiting these abilities to a certain number of times a session or even attach them to some sort of (cringe) metagaming resourse like fate points or something where you must spend one to gain the benefit.

What I believe something like this adds is more depth and variation to characters. Your character and mine may both have a Dexterity of +1 and a Pistol skill of +2 but I have the "Quick on the Trigger" ability which allows me to get an extra shot in if I spend a Fate Point or whatever. Just a couple of these at the bottom of your skill sheet can really help your character stand out and help make them seem more special, you know?

Of course, there is GURPS Traveller where there are vast lists of possible traits for characters. You could either use that system, or raid it trait ideas & mechanics.

If you wanted to just tack something onto classic Traveller,  you could just add a trait table or two for chances of pre-career and/or during-career traits (such as interesting scarring/lasting injuries like the one you mentioned). The tables could be generic (gain a trait that gives you a +1 one something and/or a -1 on something else) and then have the player suggest and/or the GM dictate what the actual description and effects are.

As Willie illustrates, different players like different things, including level of detail. Perhaps people who choose to play classic Traveller may tend to be in it for the minimalism? Personally I found Traveller too minimal for my tastes when I tried running it in the 1980s.

This could be a fine and non-intrusive house rule for this system, but risks the 'grade inflation' that usually comes with these sorts of things. I'd recommend any rule that effectively gives players bonuses at things they want to do with some sort of penalty that maintains overall power balance and success probabilities in the game. If you can't figure out a way to do that, the players are always free to imagine whatever scars, etc. go along with their usual set of abilities!

Quote from: Skarg;1038988As Willie illustrates, different players like different things, including level of detail. Perhaps people who choose to play classic Traveller may tend to be in it for the minimalism? Personally I found Traveller too minimal for my tastes when I tried running it in the 1980s.

Well, it's more level of impact that really concerns me (as rgrove indicates, he's aware of how big an impact +1 has on 2d6). Traveller, as a whole, can handle huge differences in level of detail (with classic Traveller and Mongoose Taveller v.1 being relatively light on the character delineation, while GURPS Traveller and T5.09 (or whatever it is now) being much more detailed.

My larger point (and this is opinion/personal perspective and plainly labeled as such) if I felt the need to add a widget to flesh out a character, I wouldn't use a skill bump. Using GURPS as an example since you are here, I would create a character with a 13-14 in a skill to indicate that they are fairly competent in that skill. If I wanted to give them something that made them less dry, I'd pick an advantage like double jointed or disadvantage(honesty) or playing off rgrove's "Quick on the Trigger" idea, maybe even the quickdraw skill or the like.

As far as "is there room", in my home brew, I basically say to make sure the GM and players are all on the same page with how broad or powerful the special abilities we allow are. If everyone is OK with the how it works, then run with it. If people not involved with the game don't like it, that isn't an issue.

Our homebrew allows one "non-combat" (meaning it can't be an attack, but can be used during combat) skill, that the player and GM agree on, that is ranks at the absolute best skill possible. One player took climbing, another took "fetch" (she's a werewolf and can 'fetch' something up to 2x movement in a turn), while another took working with poisons.

But for fleshing out a character, our favorite is using something like the DWD Studios' Moral Code. You pick Somewhat, Very, or Totally for each Aspect and one option for each Aspect: Kind or Cruel, Focused or Unfocused, Selfless or Selfish, Honorable or Deceitful, Brave or Cowardly. Your character also has one or two Descriptors. When the descriptors come out in game play, the character gets an XP bonus. (My players used "likes needlessly complicate plans" and "loves water and swims any chance they can" in their first adventure.)

And they have a lot of fun with our system's Optional Disadvantages, which offer no "extra skills" or anything. They're just circumstances at which your character is horrible at something. One player picked disadvantage while underground, for a campaign using D&D modules with almost everything underground.

Quote from: rgrove0172;1038968Ive been toying with a run at MGT2 as I was a big fan of CT way back. With a perception tainted by more modern and innovative mechanics however I see the characters in Traveller as somewhat dry. Im wondering if there is room for a Special Ability house rule addition. Special traits or whatever that give characters small roleplaying or functional advantages/disadvantages in specific circumstances. (ie. Intimidating - Your character has a look in his eye or perhaps a scar or something that gives people the chills. He gains a +1 when attempting to intimidate or threaten someone.)

Does that sort of thing have any place in Traveller or should I just leave it alone?

OK, this shows to me a lack of understanding of the system. How does the lifepath character generation approach of MgT not give a player advantages in roleplaying in your opinion? You have the entire prior history of the character sketched out during creation. As far as giving a +/- to skill checks in specific circumstances, it is a 2d6 base system and a =/- of even 1 is significant for that low of a range of numbers and there already is an advantage/disadvantage system baked in to the game.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1038989This could be a fine and non-intrusive house rule for this system, but risks the 'grade inflation' that usually comes with these sorts of things. I'd recommend any rule that effectively gives players bonuses at things they want to do with some sort of penalty that maintains overall power balance and success probabilities in the game. If you can't figure out a way to do that, the players are always free to imagine whatever scars, etc. go along with their usual set of abilities!

Some sort of inherent balance is a great idea actually. Every ability would have a down side. (Perhaps you do get that extra shot but both it and your original shot are -1 to hit. OR You do intimidate people very well but also suffer a -1 general reaction modifier etc.) I actually like that idea a lot.

Quote from: jeff37923;1039002OK, this shows to me a lack of understanding of the system. How does the lifepath character generation approach of MgT not give a player advantages in roleplaying in your opinion? You have the entire prior history of the character sketched out during creation. As far as giving a +/- to skill checks in specific circumstances, it is a 2d6 base system and a =/- of even 1 is significant for that low of a range of numbers and there already is an advantage/disadvantage system baked in to the game.

What Advantage/Disadvantage baked system are you referring to. I only see Attributes, Skills and circumstancial modifier...oh and the new Boon/Bane thing or whatever which amounts to the same thing. Am I missing something?

I wouldn't shoehorn special abilities into Traveller, because FOR ME special abilities feel more cinematic than realistic and I prefer Traveller to lean toward "hard science".

However, I'd be interested if WotC did Star Frontiers 5e.

Quote from: rgrove0172;1039033What Advantage/Disadvantage baked system are you referring to. I only see Attributes, Skills and circumstancial modifier...oh and the new Boon/Bane thing or whatever which amounts to the same thing. Am I missing something?

No, I was referring to the Boon/Bane mechanic which is Advantage/Disadvantage.

Quote from: jeff37923;1039057No, I was referring to the Boon/Bane mechanic which is Advantage/Disadvantage.

Yeah, they took the Advantage/Disadvantage system from D&D 5e and spliced it into MGT2, but calling it a new name.

One one hand, the fact that old-school Traveller is so "Dry" is an odd part of it's appeal.

On the other, the system is so simple and flexible it almost begs to be house-ruled, tinkered with, and modded.

Maybe make each special ability totally unique... the first PC to get "Fastest gun in the Spinward Marches" or "Last of the Martian Trench-Fighters" is the only PC to get that special ability.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1038990Well, it's more level of impact that really concerns me (as rgrove indicates, he's aware of how big an impact +1 has on 2d6). Traveller, as a whole, can handle huge differences in level of detail (with classic Traveller and Mongoose Taveller v.1 being relatively light on the character delineation, while GURPS Traveller and T5.09 (or whatever it is now) being much more detailed.

My larger point (and this is opinion/personal perspective and plainly labeled as such) if I felt the need to add a widget to flesh out a character, I wouldn't use a skill bump. Using GURPS as an example since you are here, I would create a character with a 13-14 in a skill to indicate that they are fairly competent in that skill. If I wanted to give them something that made them less dry, I'd pick an advantage like double jointed or disadvantage(honesty) or playing off rgrove's "Quick on the Trigger" idea, maybe even the quickdraw skill or the like.

I see what you mean, yes. (Also remembering how big a deal each skill level is in classic Traveller.)