I think I'll just start my characters out at 6th level instead of going through the prior careers routine, it is much faster if I just pick skills and feats as I would for D&D, start them out at age 26 with two terms under their belt and use my authorial skills to make up a background for them. What do you think?
I'll start my characters out at 6th level
- Thread starter Werner
- Start date
Proneutron
SOC-13
Very good idea.
I'm designing my game without levels but with terms instead. So the GM can say make a PC with 4 terms in any service. Based on your choice of Service and career path (E.G. Scouts, Engineering path) you have skill sets some mandatory, some elective you can choose from.
So it's not going to be d20 Modern because that has levels. So are you going to have Feats and skills? In D20 there is a feat called toughness which allows a character to add hit points and the feat toughness can be taken multiple times. I think skill level with a weapon can substitute for the Basic Attack Bonus, so a character can get very good with hitting with various sorts of weapons. and a d20 would still be rolled against Armor class to hit. Is that the direction your going in?
Proneutron
SOC-13
I AM going to us a D20 with 3D6 stats & skill levels. A PC has two primary attributes which get +6 to rolls when making skill checks associated with that attribute. Each "profession" will have a primary attribute associated with it (Str, Int, Edu, etc.) and the player chooses the second one.
E.g. Astrogation EDU related. The profession of Scientist has EDU as the set Primary attribute. So a scientist would get an set +6 bonus to his roll on top of the Skill level when making Astrogation checks.
If that makes sense.
I imagine only Barbarian would have strength as his primary attribute, mercenary, army, and marine would use dexterity, as modern combat is not usually melee combat, though low tech army might have strength if its pregunpowder. Noble would have Soc.
Proneutron
SOC-13
Yes, Strength is not assigned to any other. USMC Infantry & Arty MOS might not be Dex but End. Maybe some other MOS's would be Dex though. I don't have Noble nor Soc but that IS what I would assign if I did. Scouts are Int, Fleet (Space Navy) is EDU. Rogue is Personality (as in FORCE of personality)
Usually I think of Rogues as a Dex character, thought the example in the T20 had a lousy DeX score. I guess thieves of the future don't pick pockets, move silently or back stab, what do you think. I think the most commonly thought of Rogue in Traveller is a pirate.
Don't forget about Skill Emphasis and Weapon Group Proficiencies. T20 should have those Feats since it's d20 compatible.
Proneutron
SOC-13
You are thinking of a 2nd story man or a gutter snipe that picks pockets. A Rogue (in a high tech setting) works by conning people, working confidence tricks, pretending to be someone (maybe very upper class) they aren't, smuggling, etc. Think of Paul Newman's character in the The Sting
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
It would look like that a thread is needed for "My Own Traveller T20 Universe".
What about burglars, I guess the Traveller Universe is full of clumsy oafish thieves that make a lot of noise when they break into someone's home.
Proneutron
SOC-13
Remember, you get TWO Primary stats. One dictated by class. The other that the player picks. So, your Primaries would be Dex & Pers.
Another reason I have Pers as the class designated Primary for a Rogue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBrnBmUmVzI
An example of an underworld figure: Al Capone, would he be a rogue?
Proneutron
SOC-13
Yes, I think so. BTW I got the Primary attribute idea from this game. http://www.trolllord.com/indexnew.html
Last edited:
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Insane monster would be more accurate.
Proneutron
SOC-13
You know in all honesty, I like levels and hit points, I know they are we not realistic, but they substitute for plot armor. In a book the main character has plot armor, the author does roll the dice to see if the main character of his novel lives or dies everything he whites a new page, and an action novel a certain amount of luck is needed to get the character through the story, you need a certain amount of danger to generate suspense, but you also need to get your character through the story and have some sort of resolution to the story arc. If a character is just an average Joe, then some minor cannon fodder bad guy gets lucky and your main character gets killed, the author of a books doesn't rely on luck but on plot armor.
Now when war veterans recount their stories on how they survived, they are they lucky ones, you don't get to hear the stories of those who were killed on the first moments of battle because they are dead!
Now when war veterans recount their stories on how they survived, they are they lucky ones, you don't get to hear the stories of those who were killed on the first moments of battle because they are dead!
Proneutron
SOC-13
I don't tell stories. I ref Role Playing Games. PCs live or die by actions taken and a certain amount of randomity . There are no guarantees in life
Well do you like rolling up new characters very often? T20 characters take a long time to roll up.
Well I suppose an AI program could create characters on the fly as you need them to replace casualties. Maybe it can generate 10 characters for each player, and make them all average Joe cannon fodder types and we can see who survives just like on real life battlefields, who survives and has a story to tell is as often a matter of luck as it is one of survival skill and experience. With leveled characters, you rely on luck on your first few adventures and afterwards after you increase in levels, your ever mounting hit points keep you alive. So if you start with 100 characters and 5 are left over after multiple combat encounters, those five are the heros, everybody else is just cannon fodder, that is what modern battles are about.
Are you familiar with George Armstrong Custer? He fought in the American Civil War, and throughout that war, he was both fearless and lucky, those two qualities made him a hero, he was so lucky, that at times he felt himself invincible as people to the left and right of him, got blown up, maimed killed and shot, he continued to charge into battle, and because of that, he was one of the heroes of the Civil War, his Valor and courage serve as inspiration for many soldiers up to this day, and then at the battle of the little big horn, his luck ran out, I think Custer was more of a statistical fluke rather than being a better soldier than those who were just as brave and fearless as he was but got killed or maimed early on.
Last edited:
Similar threads
