Started a thread a while back about which edition of Traveller people would recommend. Thanks for all the suggestions. The thread has gotten bigger and broader since I posted . . . that's the way these things go sometimes.
Got Mongoose Traveller 2e a couple of weeks ago for $37 on Amazon because ~10 bookstores/comic stores didn't carry it and I wanted instant gratification. Looks good so far.
I want to start a campaign in a month or two. I like some of the ideas that they have at the back of the core rules when giving basics and possible plots on a few dozen worlds. Going to go with all humans in the known universe, but some animal, plant type life on other planets. Might have a first contact event within the campaign.
1) For character creation, they recommend 2d6 six times and place scores on attributes you would like. I am considering giving players an option of that or, point buy (more than 1 for 1 above 6 or 7 - haven't worked it out yet) or having set scores like 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10 or something . . . My concern is that it might mess a lot with the workability of character's career paths and how scores tend to change somewhat as a result - for example, characters that may have too many high or low scores. This isn't the end all be all, but I'm curious what others have tried and how that has worked. Note I want to keep the basis for the career path creation. The goal is to produce characters that are average to above average in skills and attributes . . . I realize that age and number of careers can influence that. I think they are going to go the explorer or trader route for the campaign style . . . maybe some troubleshooting in there too.
2) Combat seems pretty deadly human to human even without high tech. Is that people's experience?
More to come. Thanks.
1) The method that other versions of the game have used, and works surprisingly well, is to have each player roll 12 six sided dice at once, and then allocate two dice to each stats as the player wishes. It is still random, technically, but it does mean that you can stop the issue with rolling horribly low at times. Another little trick is to include PSI as a characteristic, that players can dump their worst scores into - it has little value in the game unless a player desperately wants to play a psychic. It's also worth noting that there are opportunities to boost characteristic scores during careers through personal development. And there are augmentations too - we had a player who's character was essentially a cripple, but rich enough to offset his physical weaknesses through technology.
Point buy can work based on the average of 12D6 - 42 points - but I've found it hard to do scores allocation method without inhibiting the chances of rolling more extreme scores (12s are difficult to balance). Yet, with the pure random method there is actually a pretty high chance of getting high or low scores - more so than in D&D (based on 3D6 rather than 2D6). Beyond this, the upcoming Traveller Companion is meant to detail some alternative character generation methods.
2) Combat is very deadly, but strategically works in a modern warfare type of way. Unlike D&D, there is not much sense in rushing into to melee unless absolutely necessary. The real trick is to win initiative and set up ambushes. The Tactics skill is useful for this reason. If you do want to get into hardcore combat though, then high tech power armour is the way to cope with high tech weapons.
Thanks. I'm going to play around with rolling 12 dice simultaneously. Seems like it could work. Not interested in a combat heavy game. However, combat is fun and does have its place.
Any other suggestions or observations out there?
Quote from: Vic99;9402542) Combat seems pretty deadly human to human even without high tech. Is that people's experience?
Yes. The three physical attribute values are the hit-points for your character.
Although because those are basically still hit points, it's pretty easy to tweak your game to be more forgiving to your players. In the one Mongoose Traveller game I ran (not in the Imperium), I basically quadrupled the hit points - basically if you took your physical attribute value in damage once, you were lightly wounded, twice moderately wounded, thrice, seriously wounded
Traveller: The New Era sort of did that, but also broke things up by hit location, so characters could absorb Mel Gibson level of bullets (as in the end of Lethal Weapon 2 where he's shot like 20 times)
Quote from: JeremyR;940485Although because those are basically still hit points, it's pretty easy to tweak your game to be more forgiving to your players. In the one Mongoose Traveller game I ran (not in the Imperium), I basically quadrupled the hit points - basically if you took your physical attribute value in damage once, you were lightly wounded, twice moderately wounded, thrice, seriously wounded
Traveller: The New Era sort of did that, but also broke things up by hit location, so characters could absorb Mel Gibson level of bullets (as in the end of Lethal Weapon 2 where he's shot like 20 times)
Well, no one ever said Mel Gibson wasn't committed to his craft. Most actors would have insisted on squibs and blood packs, but Mel... well... he insisted they actually shoot him.
That's why we love him, even when he's drunk and off the reservation...
Quote from: Vic99;9402542) Combat seems pretty deadly human to human even without high tech. Is that people's experience?
Yes, indeed! Especially when you remember to randomize which stat the damage comes from when first hit. Players learn to behave realistically/with self-preservation in mind quickly, or you go back to character creation often.
Quote from: darthfozzywig;940809Yes, indeed! Especially when you remember to randomize which stat the damage comes from when first hit. Players learn to behave realistically/with self-preservation in mind quickly, or you go back to character creation often.
In MgT 2e the damage isn't randomized. It's END -> STR or DEX (target's choice).
Quote from: Panzerkraken;940854In MgT 2e the damage isn't randomized. It's END -> STR or DEX (target's choice).
I remember seeing this. I think it will still give my group pause especially after the first fight when they see what could happen. That's not a bad thing. They enjoy combat, but we are not a combat-centric group.
Quote from: Panzerkraken;940854In MgT 2e the damage isn't randomized. It's END -> STR or DEX (target's choice).
Even when surprised? Pity if they changed that.
Quote from: darthfozzywig;940879Even when surprised? Pity if they changed that.
They did, indeed, change that.
One of the general trends of
Traveller through editions is to make combat "safer" for the Players with various options and bennies (depending on edition).
There are plenty of good reasons for doing this, of course. But there are plenty of valid reasons for keeping the blunt threat of death a vital part of the game. Each approach shifts the nature of gameplay to a different kind of game. The key is, what sort of game does one want.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;940883They did, indeed, change that.
One of the general trends of Traveller through editions is to make combat "safer" for the Players with various options and bennies (depending on edition).
There are plenty of good reasons for doing this, of course. But there are plenty of valid reasons for keeping the blunt threat of death a vital part of the game. Each approach shifts the nature of gameplay to a different kind of game. The key is, what sort of game does one want.
One in which combat is deadly and "Charge!" is not a reasonable tactical fallback option is the one that I prefer personally.
Quote from: jeff37923;940930One in which combat is deadly and "Charge!" is not a reasonable tactical fallback option is the one that I prefer personally.
Well, "charge" is always fallback option. If nothing else works, you might as well try to take as many of the bastards with you as you can:D!
And I don't think I've ever seen a non-deadly variant of Traveller, which is one of the things I like about the game;).
Quote from: Vic99Combat seems pretty deadly human to human even without high tech. Is that people's experience?
low tech combat is so deadly that it isn't deadly because you'd never be so foolish as to get into combat (except maybe when you totally have the drop on and and superior numbers to the other guy). Same is true as high TL unless you are talking about people in powered combat armor, in which case attack and defense are roughly equal and you might actually decide to enter combat if you had faith in your side or strategy.
As to the END > STR=DEX, I think it gives END more utility to be always the first. Not that I considered END to need boosting, I can see it (dex and str get so many active purposes, making End the main reactive one instead of just 1 of 3 makes sense). I doubt it will make combat less deadly.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;941221I doubt it will make combat less deadly.
Only in this regard: The player can work to boost his END, knowing it is the first Characteristic to get hit. With a random roll for First Blood (per the CT rules) you honestly don't know if the first time you take a blow if you're going down, as odds are one of the three might be weak.
***
In another matter, I just opened up the free Dominion Quickstart (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/203089/Dominion-Quickstart-For-Mindjammer-Traveller) for MgT Traveller Mindjammer. There are four regenerated PCs in the book, and all the characteristics for all four characters are 7+, with several of them 10+.
Is this an artifact of the MgT character generation rules? (Maybe there's a way of boosting characteristics more easily than in CT?)
I know it might be an artifact of the Mindjammer setting, but I was wondering if I had missed anything when I skimmed the MgT rules.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941230Only in this regard: The player can work to boost his END, knowing it is the first Characteristic to get hit. With a random roll for First Blood (per the CT rules) you honestly don't know if the first time you take a blow if you're going down, as odds are one of the three might be weak.
***
In another matter, I just opened up the free Dominion Quickstart (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/203089/Dominion-Quickstart-For-Mindjammer-Traveller) for MgT Traveller Mindjammer. There are four regenerated PCs in the book, and all the characteristics for all four characters are 7+, with several of them 10+.
Is this an artifact of the MgT character generation rules? (Maybe there's a way of boosting characteristics more easily than in CT?)
I know it might be an artifact of the Mindjammer setting, but I was wondering if I had missed anything when I skimmed the MgT rules.
The Mindjammer setting has more competent characters, due to the tech, who live longer too. The suggested started age is 150 years, but characters can potentially live for thousands of years.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;941244The Mindjammer setting has more competent characters, due to the tech, who live longer too. The suggested started age is 150 years, but characters can potentially live for thousands of years.
Absolutely. So I am correct in assuming the characteristic values reflect this, rather than these being typical values for MgT?
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941245Absolutely. So I am correct in assuming the characteristic values reflect this, rather than these being typical values for MgT?
I would say so, yes, although obviously I didn't generate them personally.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941245Absolutely. So I am correct in assuming the characteristic values reflect this, rather than these being typical values for MgT?
Probably, because I've generated a few PCs with MgT1e and MgT2e and I usually believe myself lucky if I have one high characteristic. The exception is if the PC is rich enough to pay for anagathics, in which case, you could get high characteristics.
Or it might as well be that Mindjammer PCs get point-buy that's higher than average, or roll 3d6 keep best 2 method.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941230Only in this regard: The player can work to boost his END, knowing it is the first Characteristic to get hit. With a random roll for First Blood (per the CT rules) you honestly don't know if the first time you take a blow if you're going down, as odds are one of the three might be weak.
Yes, we are in agreement about what happens mechanically. I was simply opining that that small change wouldn't turn combat into something you want to be regularly engaging in.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;941303Yes, we are in agreement about what happens mechanically. I was simply opining that that small change wouldn't turn combat into something you want to be regularly engaging in.
Cool. With that in mind, let me repeat and clarify that I never said
Traveller combat has become safe through various editions but "safer." There's a bloody randomness to the threat of system shock or death in CT that in different ways different editions try to
mitigate. Not remove, but mitigate. Usually by offering the Players just a little more mechanical manipulation. That's all.
True. Likewise, hasn't death-during-character-creation become setback-during-character-creation? Perhaps there's an overall trend going on?
Quote from: Willie the Duck;941330True. Likewise, hasn't death-during-character-creation become setback-during-character-creation? Perhaps there's an overall trend going on?
Honestly? I do not know of anyone personally who stuck with death-during-character-creation after having it happen a few times in actual play. Character knocked out of that career and start adventuring? Yes. Dead? No.
Quote from: jeff37923;941349Honestly? I do not know of anyone personally who stuck with death-during-character-creation after having it happen a few times in actual play. Character knocked out of that career and start adventuring? Yes. Dead? No.
Well... there are some of us who stick with it.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941359Well... there are some of us who stick with it.
Still stuck in '77.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;941361Still stuck in '77.
You mean sticking with the Classic
Traveller rules that are awesome?
Yes.
Yeah, I made a character for Classic Traveller once back in the eighties. He died in creation.
I STILL have never got to play the game with those rules. Damn GM was a stickler!
So now I play MongT, so I can just start a new career missing an arm or something.
Seriously? People are complaining about...what? Too easy character creation where you don't just start over, you get saddled with some drawbacks but get to keep going? Has ANYONE actually played a character that died in creation? Seriously? You spent every session just sitting there, not doing or saying anything, maybe brought a piece of raw meat to the game so eventually you'd smell like you were rotting?
Commitment!
What.the actual.Fuck.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;941361Still stuck in '77.
I would be amazed if you could ever possibly Unfuck Yourself.
Quote from: Spike;941372
Seriously? People are complaining about...what? Too easy character creation where you don't just start over, you get saddled with some drawbacks but get to keep going? Has ANYONE actually played a character that died in creation? Seriously? You spent every session just sitting there, not doing or saying anything, maybe brought a piece of raw meat to the game so eventually you'd smell like you were rotting?
Commitment!
LOL. That's funny. My wife and her sister like to just roll up characters for Traveller, like it is a game by itself. We've never played Traveller though.
Quote from: Tod13;941474LOL. That's funny. My wife and her sister like to just roll up characters for Traveller, like it is a game by itself. We've never played Traveller though.
It is a game by itself. I recently rolled a few for Cepheus and MgT2e:).
That's an additional reason I like lifepath systems;).
Quote from: Spike;941372Yeah, I made a character for Classic Traveller once back in the eighties. He died in creation.
I STILL have never got to play the game with those rules. Damn GM was a stickler!
So now I play MongT, so I can just start a new career missing an arm or something.
Seriously? People are complaining about...what? Too easy character creation where you don't just start over, you get saddled with some drawbacks but get to keep going? Has ANYONE actually played a character that died in creation? Seriously? You spent every session just sitting there, not doing or saying anything, maybe brought a piece of raw meat to the game so eventually you'd smell like you were rotting?
Commitment!
What.the actual.Fuck.
No. I don't think that's the intent. Dying in creation means you have to start over with a new character creation attempt. Thus going for another term in a risky career with a character you've already gotten close to what you'd like to end up with is a gamble. Playing a character who died in creation is in fact nonsensical, so no, I don't think anyone has done that.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;941555Dying in creation means you have to start over with a new character creation attempt.
I always took the dead-in-gen character to be part of the backstory of whatever PCs ended up making it through... a brother or friend who died in service. Possibly under circumstances that needed to be looked into... or as part of some situation that continues to affect the PCs. If he got a long ways and accumulated wealth/equipment maybe there's an inheritance to claim? Lots of ways to make use of those dead almost-PCs.
Quote from: Simlasa;941589I always took the dead-in-gen character to be part of the backstory of whatever PCs ended up making it through... a brother or friend who died in service. Possibly under circumstances that needed to be looked into... or as part of some situation that continues to affect the PCs. If he got a long ways and accumulated wealth/equipment maybe there's an inheritance to claim? Lots of ways to make use of those dead almost-PCs.
That would be my approach if a PC dies in chragen, indeed, though in practice, while possible, it's not likely in most lifepath systems:).
I don't understand what the big deal is about dying in character generation. The way your character gets powerful in Traveller is by having a ton of experience before the start of play. The only way to mitigate everyone gaming this to get maximum cool powerzzzz is to add an element of risk (you might die!), so you are encouraged to muster out at some moderate level of prior experience. So, when you remove this risk you've, by default, jacked up the average power level of your campaign. And if you don't like the waste of time, you should get a different hobby. It takes time to actually play table top roleplaying games.
This it, primarily:
Quote from: Larsdangly;941607The way your character gets powerful in Traveller is by having a ton of experience before the start of play. The only way to mitigate everyone gaming this to get maximum cool powerzzzz is to add an element of risk (you might die!), so you are encouraged to muster out at some moderate level of prior experience. So, when you remove this risk you've, by default, jacked up the average power level of your campaign.
The character creation system makes no sense to me without acknowledging this logic. (If it makes sense to
you, awesome. I'm a strange bird who doesn't get worked up about how other people use their hobby time.)
Moreover, I think the Classic
Traveller character creation system does a lot of other neat tricks that I discuss in this post (https://talestoastound.wordpress.com/2016/01/29/traveller-out-of-the-box-character-creation/). (It teaches the mechanics of the game (the 2D6 bell curve, DMs for rolls based on characteristics, the honest risk of death (which is how I play (https://talestoastound.wordpress.com/2016/01/20/death-is-on-the-table/)) in pursuit of what you want, the basics of suboptimal choices ("Do I call it quits after one term? Or risk death?") which in many ways is baked into the implied setting, working with the hand you are dealt (choosing the career based on potential characteristic DMs.)
And let us remember as well, it doesn't happen that often. Odds are good (especially with DMs) that characters will make it alive through terms. The
risk is there.
But for me, just as important, is that the roleplaying begins here. Is my guy the kind of guy who chose to leave after two terms? Got kicked out? Pushed his luck and went for a fourth or fifth term voluntarily? Wanted to get out but got drafted?
These questions, along with "Why did my guy never get promoted?" "What the hell happened during his service to make him so skilled in Blade combat?" and more, along the with answers the Player creates, add up to define character even before "play" begins. (My thesis is play begins the minute you pick up the blank character sheet, btw. Make of that what you want.)
But the biggest of these questions is the relationship the character had with a dangerous career. Why did he stay? For how long? Why? Why did he get out?
Given that all of the original
Traveller characters would be characters heading off onto worlds remote from the centralized government they once served, their relationship with risk, danger, and death is part and parcel to getting a hold on them.
For all the reasons listed above, I love the Classic
Traveller character system and its risk of death.
As always, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. Just sharing my thoughts. Please, please, go have fun with your hobby time as you see fit.
Quote from: Larsdangly;941607I don't understand what the big deal is about dying in character generation. The way your character gets powerful in Traveller is by having a ton of experience before the start of play. The only way to mitigate everyone gaming this to get maximum cool powerzzzz is to add an element of risk (you might die!), so you are encouraged to muster out at some moderate level of prior experience. So, when you remove this risk you've, by default, jacked up the average power level of your campaign. And if you don't like the waste of time, you should get a different hobby. It takes time to actually play table top roleplaying games.
That is nonsense logic. The 'Risk' of dying in character creation is only one possible way to avoid people staying in forever. Of course, Traveller has a pretty good alternate with the aging rules, which are deeply punitive in a system with four year 'terms'. But yes, anagathics... which swap one set of problems for other problems.
Of course, MongTrav still includes risk, not of death but of crippling injuries (and career derailment)... my issue isn't that the game prevents overpowered characters (in relation to...), its the occasionally derisive attitude that somehow playing with 'training wheels' or what have you by NOT dying in character creation is... soft?
Because?
Because some people don't want to go through three or four ideas... or three or four attempts at an idea... before succeeding... before the game even starts? The only REAL risk from dying in creation is... repeating creation. Honestly, the chance at being maimed seems a bit MORE punitive. Now you don't start over, you start crippled.
But to go back to your 'logic' that without 'death' people will just play overpowered characters, and probably shouldn't even play roleplaying games... anyone really interested in making that super-awesome octogenarian who spent every career knocking on deaths door an is now, officially, badass? Yeah, those players will simply go back to creation over and over and over again until they pass the right number of times. Just like the D&D players who re-roll their stats (satire'd in Knights of the Dinner Table, when one guy sets a phone app dice roller to roll endlessly until it gives him all 18's), until they are 'awesome'.
Again: How exactly does 'dying' in creation prevent this? It punishes the good along with the wicked, and does nothing to prevent the wicked from their blasphemous perfidy.
Which is why I mock it by suggesting that for it to 'work' the way the grogs like to say it does... its a 'real mans' creation, or it prevents munchkinism or whatever... you'd have to only be allowed that one attempt.
Its no Swift, but then you aren't England.
In a way, DCC is another game with death in PC generation... but there it is the zero level 'funnel'. Make a few potential PCs and see which, if any, survive. Players have some degree of control... they can favor one and play it safe while tossing the others into harm's way. No guarantee that'll work... but I haven't seen anyone bitch about the funnel the way I have Traveller's dead proto-PCs.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941625(My thesis is play begins the minute you pick up the blank character sheet, btw. Make of that what you want.)
I agree, but not all people approach it the same way (much to their detriment, might I humbly add:D!)
Quote from: Simlasa;941716In a way, DCC is another game with death in PC generation... but there it is the zero level 'funnel'. Make a few potential PCs and see which, if any, survive. Players have some degree of control... they can favor one and play it safe while tossing the others into harm's way. No guarantee that'll work... but I haven't seen anyone bitch about the funnel the way I have Traveller's dead proto-PCs.
Yeah, except in the DCC game I played, I lost all characters whose stats I liked better and got stuck playing the one that I expected to die first;).
Of course, the same game also proved that it's not the stats that make a memorable Warrior, because she sure was one before she even hit 2nd level!
Quote from: Larsdangly;941607I don't understand what the big deal is about dying in character generation.
Well, I didn't understand it either until I tried to just create a Belter. After having my character die fourteen different times during generation, I got fed up with what I considered to be a barrier to my fun. All I wanted was to roll up a Belter, but they kept on failing their survival roll and became corpses. So I changed how I used that rule.
Quote from: jeff37923;941741Well, I didn't understand it either until I tried to just create a Belter. After having my character die fourteen different times during generation, I got fed up with what I considered to be a barrier to my fun. All I wanted was to roll up a Belter, but they kept on failing their survival roll and became corpses. So I changed how I used that rule.
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for sharing the story. And I see your frustration.
(I'm about to type some things. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm not trying to say you're wrong. Just typing my take on this stuff.)
To be blunt, the CT character generation system really isn't set up for the Player who wants a specific kind of character type.
As I said, the CT system is designed more about the "play the cards your dealt" in which the Player rolls characteristics and then makes decisions about how much he's willing to risk to get an soldier from the Army (if that's what he wants) even though he's got characteristics that are better suited for the Merchant Marines. The notion of point-buys and more control over character creation would be a few years off.
I see the positive and negative aspects to each kind of play and wouldn't push one or the other on players who didn't like one or the other.
Moreover, Belters have the
worst odds of survival in all of the 18 careers spread across Book 1 and Supplement 4. The base chance of survival is Throw 9+ (28% chance of success), while 16 of the other careers range from a Throw of 3+ to 6+ (72% to 97% chance of success). The Scouts are the next worst compared with Belters, with a Survival Throw of 7+ (58% chance of success).
On top of that a Belter has no chance for an automatic DM +2 for the Survival roll based on a characteristic. (Every other career apart from the Noble has a DM +2 available for survival rolls based on a characteristic. This, of course, increases the odds of survival dramatically on a 2D6 bell curve.)
Instead the Belter gets a +1 DM for survival for every term served (including the first). This means that the first term of Survival is not a Throw 9+ but 8+ (42%). This is still lower odds than any other service with or without the Survival DM. (For the Book 1 careers a character with the Survival DM in play the odds are variously 97%, 92%, and 83%.)
This means that each time the Belter survives another term he gets a +1 to his survival roll. It will take him two terms of survival just to get him to the base level of a scout's survival Throw. And let's remember, the Scouts was where you sent your PC if you expected him to die!
If you can make it through the first two terms and get to the third you get a DM +3, which brings your Throw down at a 6+, and at least now you have a 72% chance of survival. Much better than than the 42% chance the character started with, but still
dangerous! And certainly much worse odds than other careers.
And then there is the Reenlistment Throw -- which requires a 7+ and is the worst odds of Reenlistment Throws. (Belters share this difficult Reenlistment Throw with Pirates and the Army.) This means even if your character survives a term, he's looking at only a 58% chance of getting back in. He survived, but might not have that many terms.
Without doubt making a Belter as a PC is
hard.
The only advantage is that a Belter (along with the Barbarian) begins at 14-years of age, which means if he can rack up more terms he won't suffer Aging Effects as badly.
So, several things:
The game wasn't designed for the Player to always get what he wants. You make your six characteristic rolls and then you decide where his best odds are in a system full of suboptimal choices. (A character might have better odds of survival in one career, but his odds of promotion will be lower; while his odds of promotion might be better in another career, but the odds of survival lower. The Player has to weight these DMs and odds, and then make a choice and see how it goes.)
Given that the Belter career is
especially crazy for creating a surviving PC, if a player really, really wanted a belter (or the campaign was built around Belters) I would skip the character creation process and let the Player randomly roll from the forty pre-generated Belters on pages 20 and 21 of Supplement 4 -- or even let the Players simply pick from the list.
The above choice is for people who really don't want to go through the mini-game.
Here is why I would, if I wanted or needed a Belter for the game, still roll the Belter up per the rules as written:
It's tough to be a Belter in Classic
Traveller. You start at the age of 14 and odds are good you'll be dead by the time you are 18 or 22. So,
if I'm into the role playing aspects of the character creation mini-game this is cool because now I'm involved in the lives of these miners. I'm seeing the life they're leading chew them up. If I'm watching them die or give up (failing Reenlistment) for poor health, fear, or lack of funds, or realize this job is going to kill them and get out to find a new path for survival (adventuring amid the stars), then I'm seeing those harsh lives up close. Even the dead characters are awesome because for those brief minutes (and lets be honest, it's minutes) that I'm investing in those PCs that die I'm seeing how hard it is to survive as a Belter.
Which means that
when (and its only a matter of time) one of the PCs makes it past the second term, or the third term, or even the fourth term, I know he's fucking awesome. He is a survivor, he is capable. I know how fucking competent he has to be to have made it this far. I
want to play that guy. He's Tom Hardy and Sean Connery rolled into one. And there's no way I would know him that way except that I know he was the rare one who made it when so many men and women he was mining alongside didn't make it.
Again -- I'm not asking anyone to go on my ride. If this isn't your cup of tea, I get it. And, again, notice that I'm really fine for someone rolling or picking a PC off the list of pre-generated characters from Supplement 4.
Why not? If someone really wants a Belter and doesn't want to deal with the frustration of dealing with all that death, why make them go through it?
But that's my take on it.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941776But that's my take on it.
That all makes me want to go and try to roll up a Belter, right now. Crazy bastards out there dancing with the rocks. I'd watch that movie.
Quote from: Simlasa;941777That all makes me want to go and try to roll up a Belter, right now. Crazy bastards out there dancing with the rocks. I'd watch that movie.
That's awesome.
Quote from: Simlasa;941777That all makes me want to go and try to roll up a Belter, right now. Crazy bastards out there dancing with the rocks. I'd watch that movie.
There is already a TV Series (http://www.syfy.com/theexpanse?__source=Vayner_The_Expanse_Season2&WT.srch=Search)
One part of death in character creation people miss is that it's how you get rid of a useless character. If I get 222222 then I'm going belter. If I get CCCCCC then I'm going merchant. Indeed, scouts with their 7+ survival roll has freed me from many a bad character. One of T4's faults is that with four skills per term, personal development could easily outstrip aging rolls. Another option people don't use enough is the one where the referee collects dead characters to use as adversaries.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941776Hi Jeff,
Thanks for sharing the story. And I see your frustration.
(I'm about to type some things. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm not trying to say you're wrong. Just typing my take on this stuff.)
To be blunt, the CT character generation system really isn't set up for the Player who wants a specific kind of character type.
As I said, the CT system is designed more about the "play the cards your dealt" in which the Player rolls characteristics and then makes decisions about how much he's willing to risk to get an soldier from the Army (if that's what he wants) even though he's got characteristics that are better suited for the Merchant Marines. The notion of point-buys and more control over character creation would be a few years off.
I see the positive and negative aspects to each kind of play and wouldn't push one or the other on players who didn't like one or the other.
Moreover, Belters have the worst odds of survival in all of the 18 careers spread across Book 1 and Supplement 4. The base chance of survival is Throw 9+ (28% chance of success), while 16 of the other careers range from a Throw of 3+ to 6+ (72% to 97% chance of success). The Scouts are the next worst compared with Belters, with a Survival Throw of 7+ (58% chance of success).
On top of that a Belter has no chance for an automatic DM +2 for the Survival roll based on a characteristic. (Every other career apart from the Noble has a DM +2 available for survival rolls based on a characteristic. This, of course, increases the odds of survival dramatically on a 2D6 bell curve.)
Instead the Belter gets a +1 DM for survival for every term served (including the first). This means that the first term of Survival is not a Throw 9+ but 8+ (42%). This is still lower odds than any other service with or without the Survival DM. (For the Book 1 careers a character with the Survival DM in play the odds are variously 97%, 92%, and 83%.)
This means that each time the Belter survives another term he gets a +1 to his survival roll. It will take him two terms of survival just to get him to the base level of a scout's survival Throw. And let's remember, the Scouts was where you sent your PC if you expected him to die!
If you can make it through the first two terms and get to the third you get a DM +3, which brings your Throw down at a 6+, and at least now you have a 72% chance of survival. Much better than than the 42% chance the character started with, but still dangerous! And certainly much worse odds than other careers.
And then there is the Reenlistment Throw -- which requires a 7+ and is the worst odds of Reenlistment Throws. (Belters share this difficult Reenlistment Throw with Pirates and the Army.) This means even if your character survives a term, he's looking at only a 58% chance of getting back in. He survived, but might not have that many terms.
Without doubt making a Belter as a PC is hard.
The only advantage is that a Belter (along with the Barbarian) begins at 14-years of age, which means if he can rack up more terms he won't suffer Aging Effects as badly.
So, several things:
The game wasn't designed for the Player to always get what he wants. You make your six characteristic rolls and then you decide where his best odds are in a system full of suboptimal choices. (A character might have better odds of survival in one career, but his odds of promotion will be lower; while his odds of promotion might be better in another career, but the odds of survival lower. The Player has to weight these DMs and odds, and then make a choice and see how it goes.)
Given that the Belter career is especially crazy for creating a surviving PC, if a player really, really wanted a belter (or the campaign was built around Belters) I would skip the character creation process and let the Player randomly roll from the forty pre-generated Belters on pages 20 and 21 of Supplement 4 -- or even let the Players simply pick from the list.
The above choice is for people who really don't want to go through the mini-game.
Here is why I would, if I wanted or needed a Belter for the game, still roll the Belter up per the rules as written:
It's tough to be a Belter in Classic Traveller. You start at the age of 14 and odds are good you'll be dead by the time you are 18 or 22. So, if I'm into the role playing aspects of the character creation mini-game this is cool because now I'm involved in the lives of these miners. I'm seeing the life they're leading chew them up. If I'm watching them die or give up (failing Reenlistment) for poor health, fear, or lack of funds, or realize this job is going to kill them and get out to find a new path for survival (adventuring amid the stars), then I'm seeing those harsh lives up close. Even the dead characters are awesome because for those brief minutes (and lets be honest, it's minutes) that I'm investing in those PCs that die I'm seeing how hard it is to survive as a Belter.
Which means that when (and its only a matter of time) one of the PCs makes it past the second term, or the third term, or even the fourth term, I know he's fucking awesome. He is a survivor, he is capable. I know how fucking competent he has to be to have made it this far. I want to play that guy. He's Tom Hardy and Sean Connery rolled into one. And there's no way I would know him that way except that I know he was the rare one who made it when so many men and women he was mining alongside didn't make it.
Again -- I'm not asking anyone to go on my ride. If this isn't your cup of tea, I get it. And, again, notice that I'm really fine for someone rolling or picking a PC off the list of pre-generated characters from Supplement 4. Why not? If someone really wants a Belter and doesn't want to deal with the frustration of dealing with all that death, why make them go through it?
But that's my take on it.
And now I want to go and roll up a CT Belter. I think I'm going to name him Rig, and give him free Unarmed Combat:p.
Or rather, that's what I'm going to do with the one that survives:D!
Quote from: David Johansen;941799One part of death in character creation people miss is that it's how you get rid of a useless character. If I get 222222 then I'm going belter. If I get CCCCCC then I'm going merchant. Indeed, scouts with their 7+ survival roll has freed me from many a bad character. One of T4's faults is that with four skills per term, personal development could easily outstrip aging rolls. Another option people don't use enough is the one where the referee collects dead characters to use as adversaries.
Again: why can't I, the player, just look at those shitty 222222 characters and chose not to waste my time trying to fail survival rolls, and just start over? This is just an inverse of the 'this is how we prevent awesome 80 year olds from breaking the game' arguement from yesterday.
Quote from: Spike;941822Again: why can't I, the player, just look at those shitty 222222 characters and chose not to waste my time trying to fail survival rolls, and just start over? This is just an inverse of the 'this is how we prevent awesome 80 year olds from breaking the game' arguement from yesterday.
You certainly can do that that.
You can also put him in a service, be surprised when he survives and musters out with some interesting skills, wonder "Who is this guy?", and then follow him into play to find out what will happen and how he'll conduct himself in order to survive while pursuing wealth and power on the fringes of society.
How he will conduct himself will, by definition, provide interesting roleplaying and memorable moments that can't be gained by simply plowing through circumstances with an average and powered up PC.
Note two things:
I'm not saying put such a character through a service to kill him. (If that's all your doing the crumple the numbers up and toss them.) I'm saying put him through the process
to find out what happens.
I'm saying the game was built to provide a range of kinds of characters, inspiring roleplay through both strengths and weaknesses. Again, CT is built on a "play the hand you are dealt philosophy." Your guy, until he dies, has characteristics of 222222. Okay, now what are you going to do with that?
The answer to that question is part of what Classic Traveller is about.
That's all well and good and reasonable, and though I may have taken issue with some of your comments I haven't actually argued against you, sir.
Note that I haven't actually said dying in creation is objectively bad. Its a mechanic, and while I am arguing that it is objectively good (it.is.a.mechanic.), I'm mostly pissy with people who sneeringly dismiss any version of Traveller that doesn't include as standard as somehow... wimpy.
Its probably one of the most pointless and pissant grog fights in all of RPG fandom, certainly it seems to have more legs than any others. Decending AC purists aren't this reliably obnoxious.
For what it's worth I don't think we're arguing and fighting. I assume we're simply exchanging ideas and points of view. (And I'm getting a chance to clarify my point of view to myself. Writing is how I clarify my thoughts!)
So, yeah -- no harm; no foul. Like I've said I completely see why some people would not want to use the rules as written. I'm just explaining why I find them so compelling and like them.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941831For what it's worth I don't think we're arguing and fighting. I assume we're simply exchanging ideas and points of view. (And I'm getting a chance to clarify my point of view to myself. Writing is how I clarify my thoughts!)
So, yeah -- no harm; no foul. Like I've said I completely see why some people would not want to use the rules as written. I'm just explaining why I find them so compelling and like them.
Yeah, I may disagree with ChristopherKubasik on death in Traveller chargen, but it is a polite disagreement. For me, at age 13, deciding that a rule in a game wasn't serving me and changing it was an important developmental moment in my RPG hobby timeline - that others did the same thing makes me think that it was the right choice.
He demonstrated his viewpoint in a detailed rational manner and was quite convincing. I just may not choose to adhere to Traveller RAW when I want a specific character profession in use.
Back about sixth grade, we had a joke about D&D that players who didn't like what they rolled would need to roll to kill themselves before being allowed to roll up another character, using the to-hit table and damage rolls, taking into account their presumably-low Dexterity. Yes, we were TFT point-buy snobs.
On the notion that a surviving belter must've been great, is there anything to back that up other than the skills they get for surviving each term? It seems odd that the stats and skills themselves wouldn't be taken into account in the survival and skill rolls, in an ideal system, of course. I don't really remember how CT makes use of character attributes - when I ran it briefly decades ago, I think I made success rolls roll-under relevant-stat-plus-skill, but that might've been a house rule coming from TFT.
Having noticed how asteroid mining and prospecting actually pay out in Traveller... I'd say that NOT allowing a Belter character to survive one term is due to the 13 Megacorporations of the IMperium actually assassinating all of them to prevent the rise of a fourteenth Mega.... then a fifthteenth and so on and so forth.
Not.One.Allowed.
QuoteAgain, CT is built on a "play the hand you are dealt philosophy." Your guy, until he dies, has characteristics of 222222. Okay, now what are you going to do with that?
I couldn't help myself. I started with characteristics of 222222 and rolled some dice.
I imagined a damaged orphan on the streets of a low gravity mega-city. The wealthy have technology and drugs to help their bodies stave off the affects of the low gravity. The poor have no such help.
He was the runt of his family, and the youngest, often beaten or forgotten. He ran away from home, living on the streets. The violence didn't stop and he spent most of his time trying to survive and dealing with the stress of the streets.
Malnourished, with weakened bones, muscles and cardiovascular from the low gravity, he was often ill and never grew past 5'5" (short for the elongated bodies of his world) but retained the bird-features common to those around him. The stress of his life stunted his intellectual growth and he never had any chance for education.
His one touchstone for survival was looking up at the stars at the edges of the city. In those glittering lights he saw all the possibilities of a life that was impossible to him here.
When a scout ship made a stop on the starport he smuggled himself on board. He is a natural survivor and years of sneaking about and trying to remain out of sight of the city's predators had made him quite capable of hiding himself and slipping into spots where food or money might be kept.
He was found by the scouts as they did an inventory check between systems. They took pity on the little guy (no one appreciates the pluck and grit like the scouts). But when they examined him at a recruiting office they decided he wouldn't make the grade and taking him on would be a death sentence. [He failed his Scout Enlistment roll]
But a war was breaking out on the planet and the Marines needed warm bodies that could hold a weapon and increase the odds until proper reinforcements arrived. [Drafted: Marines] He joined gratefully. While the Scouts were worried about his fate, he was not. Something different was what he wanted, even with a strong possibility of death.
His unit was overrun, but he stayed true during the battle, having nothing else to lose. His wary nature, worked up over years of survival on the streets, helped him lead a small group of men to safety. For his efforts he was awarded a rank of Lieutenant [Successful roll for Commission]. He began working on his skill with a revolver in order to compensate for his body's lack of coordination [Skill Table: Revolver-1]. Through the opportunity of better food, medicine, and training he began to improve his health as well. [Skills rolls STR +1 and END +1]
In his second term he shipped off world and once again served admirably, but he had no natural knack for leadership and did not move up the ranks. He did, however, reveal a focused knack for Electronics [Skill Table: Electronics-1] -- a quiet place where he could work methodically and solve problems with looking over his shoulder all the time.
He would have done anything to stay in the Marines. But his ill health was a concern and the hot war had gone cold. He was forced to leave. He was heartbroken. Nowhere had he ever felt so much a
part of something, nowhere did the loyalty he felt for his comrades in arms mean so much. But few men were as clearheaded about their limitations as he was about his, and he completely understood.
By the time he left the service his martial skills had increased through is diligent training and desire to improve himself. [Marines mustering out: Cutlass-1] [Marine Lt. mustering out: Revolver-1] Though his dexterity impaired his ability to handle a weapon as well as other soldier, his Revolver-2 removed that penalty. [DEX 2 penalty for Revolvers is a DM -2 to a Throw, but the Revolver-2 candles that out to a DM 0]
His time in the marines, as well as the structure, offered him a chance to start thinking more clearly and receive more education about the world. [Mustering out: INT +1, EDU +2] as well as a High Passage ticked to his next destination.
He began a course of study to improve his skills and now has an expertise of Electronics-2. [Normally if you choose to increase skills through the Experience System you get to pick two skills to improve. He only has one. I could have improved his physical stats by +1 each, but I saw him as seeing his Electronics skill as his ticket forward.]
He got a job at starport doing electronics repair. He's methodical and steady, never thinking out of the box and never handling the really complicated problems. But his work is solid.
His High Passage ticket burned a hole in his pocket. He could got to any world. But one jump would be only one of five destinations. And then what?
But as he watched the starship crews loading and unloading cargo and passengers he saw in some of them the same camaraderie and teamwork he'd seen in the marines. He knew what he wanted to do next.
He sold off his High Passage ticket [90% of face value] for Cr9000. Bought himself a revolver, ammunition, a cutlass, cloth armor, an electronic tool set of his own, and other supplies. He began introducing himself to the crews, having out in the starport bar. He wasn't a flashy man others who knew him from the starport spoke well of him and his work. By the age of 22 he was a man who never complained, did his work, and had the quality of a man wanting to find someone to be loyal to.
In time he signed on with a group of men who were heading out on a job to another world. His electronic skills, and his commitment to the group, would be an asset.
He has his Lieutenant's insignia, his most prized possion, in his jacket pocket. On the back of his thin neck is his unit's tattoo.
And now he is on his way....
(https://talestoastound.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/screen-shot-2017-01-21-at-10-45-14-pm.png)
A note about this one sentence:
QuoteHis wary nature, worked up over years of survival on the streets, helped him lead a small group of men to safety.
There is nothing mechanical there. I see this quality of his as being much like Tactics, but at a much smaller scale -- a small group of about six or so and no more. Moreover, he won't get the Surprise DM or Reaction Table DM that Tactics allows.
The reason introduced this is covered in this post where I talk about the bridge between
Braunstein and RPG play (https://talestoastound.wordpress.com/2017/01/06/traveller-out-of-the-box-an-approach-to-refereeing-and-throws-in-original-traveller-part-i/).
The idea is that Classic
Traveller (and I'm only talking about Classic
Traveller here) has a limited number of skills. That means that all the other qualities and opportunities for action can be, and should be, adjudicated in a looser many.
Thus, like
Braunstein, we look at the qualities of the character. Is the character a Noble? Very well. He will be able to do "noble" things even if he has no particular skill or mechanics rating for "Noble." Was the character a gambler? Very well. He might be able to do slight of hand. Was the character a street urchin? Very well, he might be able to pick pockets?
Note that the character above was a street urchin, but I don't see him as a pickpocket. I don't see that he would ever have approached someone to steal something. He would have done it all on his own, when it was quiet, and he was alone, and he could sneak about as he wished.
In other words, one looks at all the details of the character that have been generated (characteristics, skills, service, number of terms, and other details the Player creates that go beyond the numbers). You look at all of these elements holistically and you see what sort of character you come up with. Some elements of this character will be in the numbers. But other details will be in the "soft" spots between the numbers, where the Player, the Referee, the fictional details, and the roleplaying meet.
Cool, but... the marines are admitting people with Strength 3, Endurance 2 now?
Quote from: Skarg;941863Cool, but... the marines are admitting people with Strength 3, Endurance 2 now?
Are you asking about the United States Marines?
Or a fictional space Marines which conscripted a young man during a heated attack on a world?
Because I'm not saying anything about actual Marines. Are you?
Edited to add: When he was conscripted his characteristics were only 222222. So he was even more pathetic. The higher values were earned during his time in the Marines.
Quote from: Skarg;941836Back about sixth grade, we had a joke about D&D that players who didn't like what they rolled would need to roll to kill themselves before being allowed to roll up another character, using the to-hit table and damage rolls, taking into account their presumably-low Dexterity. Yes, we were TFT point-buy snobs.
On the notion that a surviving belter must've been great, is there anything to back that up other than the skills they get for surviving each term? It seems odd that the stats and skills themselves wouldn't be taken into account in the survival and skill rolls, in an ideal system, of course. I don't really remember how CT makes use of character attributes - when I ran it briefly decades ago, I think I made success rolls roll-under relevant-stat-plus-skill, but that might've been a house rule coming from TFT.
The rule you were using was a house rule. Which I'm not admonishing you about. Just stating a fact.
As to your question about Belters....
Following the change in rules for Scouts skill acquisition in the 1981 edition of the rules, I assume that any service without ranks hands out two skills per term. Thus, if a Belter last three terms, he gets six rolls on the skills table. If he survives four terms he gets eight.
Moreover, using post #58 as an example (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?35922-Traveller-edition-update&p=941851&viewfull=1#post941851), the "grit" I was referring to in my talking about Belters who survive is a quality the Player and the Referee get to create in play.
The specific quality of that grit cannot be discussed independent of the other qualities of the character (terms, skills acquired, age, and so on). But it is there, waiting to be sewn into play as the people at the table wish.
And, again, I'm not talking about skill-heavy, mechanically deterministic application of skills that came to dominate RPG design and play after the mid-70s. I'm speaking of a play style that, as far as I can tell, made perfect sense for OD&D, B/X D&D, and Classic
Traveller. It was left behind in the dust, so clearly a lot of people had no use for it. But I find it compelling.
Quote from: Spike;941830Note that I haven't actually said dying in creation is objectively bad. Its a mechanic, and while I am arguing that it is objectively good (it.is.a.mechanic.), I'm mostly pissy with people who sneeringly dismiss any version of Traveller that doesn't include as standard as somehow... wimpy.
There does tend to be a natural inclination in online discussions to try and cast one's own RP preferences as more 'hardcore,' un-'wimpy,' or the kind of thing that turns boys into men or some-such. For the most part, it's not true. This board has its' fair share of that kind of stuff, but not more than anywhere else (I knew a few people at Dragonsfoot that I swear thought they were the true God's gift to roleplayers and everyone else was literally whining, mewling pretenders). I've said it before and I'll say it again--we are talking about a (collection of) game(s) we play to have fun. There are no real badasses in it and very few true fools in it (outside of people just learning, children, etc.). We could all use an occasional ego check at the door.
That said, this thread has been pretty darn respectful from beginning to end. I don't think anyone is dismissing the other versions of Traveller. As has been mentioned, aging mechanics and injury mechanics allow their character creation to create different, but still effective, ways of limiting players from making uber-characters. They certainly aren't
'CT, just on easy mode,' or something.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941865Are you asking about the United States Marines?
Or a fictional space Marines which conscripted a young man during a heated attack on a world?
I'm fairly sure Skarg is referring to the minimum characteristic requirements (End 6+ in MgT1, I don't have Classic with me right now) to qualify for enlistment with the Marines.
Quote from: The Butcher;942165I'm fairly sure Skarg is referring to the minimum characteristic requirements (End 6+ in MgT1, I don't have Classic with me right now) to qualify for enlistment with the Marines.
Classic has no minimum requirements.
But neither does MgT. What you are referring to is the Qualifiction value. A roll of 6+ needs to be made, with the END characteristic modifier applied. (In this particular instance it would be DM -2. A roll of 8+ would allow a character of END 2 to enter the Marines in MgT.) The Qualification roll replaces the Enlistement Throw from CT.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941865Are you asking about the United States Marines?
Or a fictional space Marines which conscripted a young man during a heated attack on a world?
Because I'm not saying anything about actual Marines. Are you?
Edited to add: When he was conscripted his characteristics were only 222222. So he was even more pathetic. The higher values were earned during his time in the Marines.
No, not really - I was mainly joking. I get that Traveller marines are one or more agencies that aren't the USMC and may have very different requirements and that I wouldn't know as I've rarely looked beyond the original basic classic Traveller books, and also that the system is a generic starting place and if I actually wanted more detail in a real game I could/should add it myself as a GM. I just think it's funny sometimes to joke about what the rules lead to if taken to extremes and applying a higher standard than they were designed for. Really they might be happy to have whoever joins and slot them where they can use whoever it is. If he's really incompetent, he might be great for a role in Intelligence where no one would suspect he was an agent... with Intelligence 2, it might be best not to tell him he's an agent. ;-) And/or a decoy, and not tell him, as in the film _Spies Like Us_.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;941866The rule you were using was a house rule. Which I'm not admonishing you about. Just stating a fact.
As to your question about Belters....
Following the change in rules for Scouts skill acquisition in the 1981 edition of the rules, I assume that any service without ranks hands out two skills per term. Thus, if a Belter last three terms, he gets six rolls on the skills table. If he survives four terms he gets eight.
Moreover, using post #58 as an example (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?35922-Traveller-edition-update&p=941851&viewfull=1#post941851), the "grit" I was referring to in my talking about Belters who survive is a quality the Player and the Referee get to create in play.
The specific quality of that grit cannot be discussed independent of the other qualities of the character (terms, skills acquired, age, and so on). But it is there, waiting to be sewn into play as the people at the table wish.
And, again, I'm not talking about skill-heavy, mechanically deterministic application of skills that came to dominate RPG design and play after the mid-70s. I'm speaking of a play style that, as far as I can tell, made perfect sense for OD&D, B/X D&D, and Classic Traveller. It was left behind in the dust, so clearly a lot of people had no use for it. But I find it compelling.
That's cool. I get what you're talking about. I think in general it's an interesting concept, trying to interpret what it means or doesn't mean when a series of rolls leads to a remarkable unexpected success. On the one hand, it could mean that "the dice are telling you something" and it can be really fun to see someone survive against the odds and decide it means they have some sort of genius and then try to figure out how to play that. On the other hand, if you interpret it that way, you're sort of also implying that the rules used to see if someone succeeds aren't the accurate chances but include that sort of meaning in them (i.e. it's not the real odds for someone without a special ability - it includes the chance that they have an ability no one knew about till they do succeed like that). And just the general spectrum between wanting explicit detailed consistent rules for everything, and wanting to interpret (or possibly overrule) dice and rules, and use dice as a kind of divination seed for intuitive invention.
Quote from: Skarg;942178That's cool. I get what you're talking about. I think in general it's an interesting concept, trying to interpret what it means or doesn't mean when a series of rolls leads to a remarkable unexpected success.
As an aside, it's also a basic part of GMing without preparations;).
Are there any particularly interesting aliens or abhumans that are worth mentioning? I'm familiar with the Vargr, K'kree, Zhodani, and such, but not anything much deeper than ad copy.
I'm guessing that's a generic Traveller question?
I mean, you're missing the Aslan, 9 foot space lions and the Hivers...which are... um... land starfish with more starfish? But are like, super nice, and as for abhumans.... well, not in teh 40k sense, but there are plenty of 'alt-humans' floating around. LIke... its actually rare to claim to be a human from earth or something.
Honestly: Much of the aliens suffer from 'space animal' syndrome, though they have enough street cred to avoid too many 'furry' related charges. The politics and cultures of the alt-humans is where the good stuff is, even if it can be in some cases a bit derivative. You know; Sword Worlders are Space Vikings, with too much emphasis on the Vikings. Darrians are sort of vague space elves, if you squint. That sort of thing.
Quote from: Baron Opal;942886Are there any particularly interesting aliens or abhumans that are worth mentioning? I'm familiar with the Vargr, K'kree, Zhodani, and such, but not anything much deeper than ad copy.
K'kree and Hivers are my favorites... I've been playing a Hiver in our current game and it's always fun trying to twist my brain into that mode of thought. Communist manipulators with a strange reproductive cycle (they don't care for their young and will exterminate them if born outside of a Hiver enclave).
Quote from: Baron Opal;942886Are there any particularly interesting aliens or abhumans that are worth mentioning? I'm familiar with the Vargr, K'kree, Zhodani, and such, but not anything much deeper than ad copy.
All the major races have detailed background presented through multiple books with multiple viewpoints.
For aliens there are Aslan, K'Kree, Vargr, Droyne, Hivers, Virushi, Bwaps, Vegans.
Also there are the transplanted humans which include Vilani, Geonee, Zhodani, Suerrett, Answerin, Darrians, and others.
I would look at the Traveller Wiki and go from there.
http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Main_Page
Quote from: estar;942914All the major races have detailed background presented through multiple books with multiple viewpoints.
For aliens there are Aslan, K'Kree, Vargr, Droyne, Hivers, Virushi, Bwaps, Vegans.
Also there are the transplanted humans which include Vilani, Geonee, Zhodani, Suerrett, Answerin, Darrians, and others.
I would look at the Traveller Wiki and go from there.
http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Main_Page
I've always suspected that:D!