A Time of War Examples

[Kitsune413]

This is great and really helps me understand the combat rules a bit more.

@ Monbvol

Will you be doing something like this for chargen?

If you want it I can try to work on it. I like ATOW a lot.

Do you have any examples of things you usually struggle with?

[monbvol]

My intent is to eventually cover what I consider the "basics": which to me are combat and character generation.  But since Maelwys does have threads on chargen already(see here for one such thread) I'm placing that as my last priority.  In the mean time because I don't want to claim any absolute ownership of this project others are free to take a stab at it if they so desire.

[beachhead1985]

If you want it I can try to work on it. I like ATOW a lot.

Do you have any examples of things you usually struggle with?

Well, I have a hard time with chargen, but lots of other people seem to have no problem with it, so I assume I am doing something wrong.

[Kitsune413]

Well, I have a hard time with chargen, but lots of other people seem to have no problem with it, so I assume I am doing something wrong.

I'll try to work through a character and explain how I do it.

Battletech is a simulator and so it can be really complicated. I don't think it is you. I've been playing Battletech for the last twenty five years, which is the majority of my life and I've played every Mechwarrior edition except the first (though I own that book)

I've also played the semi sister game shadow run that shares a lot of traits.

So I've built those pathways in my brain. But I think anyone coming from a different role playing system could find it particularly daunting.

[Kitsune413]

I also ran a few year long Mechwarrior 3 campaigns without any Mechwarriors. With several characters dieing and several additional or alternate characters rolled. So I've just done it alot.

[Atlas3060]

I'm compiling a short adventure scenario describing from chargen to mission examples that can be used as well.
Basically I'm taking inspiration (copying just admit it) from the recent posts here and putting my own in some narrative.
Maybe that will help others where flat examples might not do it.
So if we keep this up, maybe players can look at all of our examples and it clicks for them somehow.  O0

[VictorMorson]

If you want it I can try to work on it. I like ATOW a lot.

Do you have any examples of things you usually struggle with?

How if your characters get high level the game effectively breaks and you either need to shoot basic TNs to the moon or the game rapidly turns into "I say what I want to do and I win unless I snake eye.  If I do I'll spend a point of edge."

[monbvol]

It doesn't matter how much XP someone has if the GM is creative enough to devise evil and nefarious ways of handling the PCs.

[VictorMorson]

It doesn't matter how much XP someone has if the GM is creative enough to devise evil and nefarious ways of handling the PCs.

The problems begin when they start rolling +8 to +9; the only way to make things not an auto-success are to begin raising TNs to 16-17 at that point.  That's where it seems to really hit a nasty break point, even by high level character standards.

[monbvol]

Is that in every skill or just particular ones?  Like a Small Arms of +8 doesn't help them keep their transport from being temporarily press-ganged by a government without some serious consequences.  Or Negotiations +10 doesn't help if the only supplier on planet is down to their last gyro that the PCs need to bring one of their mechs back on-line if they are outbid by someone with much deeper pockets.

[Kitsune413]

Battle techs major characters have +8 to +10. Alaric Ward is a +10. You may want to stop rewarding experience so quickly. Or talk to characters about the way they are building their characters if they are getting that high that quickly.

Kind of like saying in dungeons and dragons your level 20 characters kill level 1 orcs real fast and the only way to fix it is by throwing in level 21 orcs.

Kai Allard Liao isn't supposed to Miss... and at +10 neither are your players.

[Kitsune413]

How if your characters get high level the game effectively breaks and you either need to shoot basic TNs to the moon or the game rapidly turns into "I say what I want to do and I win unless I snake eye.  If I do I'll spend a point of edge."

I think it's a matter of perspective.

At skill level 3 your players are the battle tech equivalent of green. Gunnery 5.
At skill level 4 they are regular pilots. Gunnery 4.
At skill level 5 they are veteran pilots. Gunnery 3.
At skill level 6 they are elite pilots. Gunnery 2.
At skill level 7 there isn't even a rank for them. They are better than elite forces. Gunnery 1.
At skill level 8 they are legends. Gunnery 0. The bounty hunter. Khans of the clans.
At skill level 9 they are better than most Khans. -1 gunnery.
At skill level 10 they are Alaric Wolf. Maybe. Because... -2 gunnery.
Skill level 10 plus a bonus link attribute of 7 or more. -3 gunnery.
Skill level 10 plus two bonus link attributes. -4 gunnery. Most likely where Kai Allard Liao is.
With exceptional attribute. -5
With two exceptional attributes. -6 only clan warriors with two exceptional attributes could get here.

That's not including special abilities.

But by rank 9 you are already the guy they call to make a shot against a moving aerospace fighter... from the hull of a moving dropship. While re-entering the atmosphere.... while inverted.

[monbvol]

Well page 40 does talk about how one is not supposed to include attribute bonuses or go below 0/0 for Gunnery/Piloting.

[PurpleDragon]

I may be confusing my editions, but doesn't the ruling attributes limit how high you can take your skill levels? 

[monbvol]

I know I've talked about that as a house rule but I'm not familiar with that as a rule from any edition of the RPG.

[PurpleDragon]

I know I found something in 3rd ed that was like that.  It might have been an option from the companion.  But I know I have read it somewhere. 

[Kitsune413]

Nah. 10 is the max but it's your job as a GM to talk to your players if you aren't planning on running and Uber elite players campaign. It is like running a street level campaign in shadowrun.

If you give out the 400 xp that they need to take their skills from 5 to 10 and they never put them in anything but gunnery... etc...  and you don't stop them from leveling the same thing every weeks... or make them need other skills...

The average xp atow is probably 10 to 15...  so if you figure you give them 10 xp a game it would take 40 games to get the xp to become level 10 at gunnery if they started at level 5.

If you played once a week it would take them half a year to get to level 10. If they never bought a strategic skill or leveled anything else at all.

[Kitsune413]

Well page 40 does talk about how one is not supposed to include attribute bonuses or go below 0/0 for Gunnery/Piloting.

Unless your GM wants to allow these "Super Human" abilities. Past skill level 8 You are Super Man.

[beachhead1985]

XP is something else I wondered about.

Did I miss a table somewhere for that? I could never figure what anything was supposed to be worth. Is it a fixed rate, or some sliding Challenge-Rating formula?

So, like if I kill a Mech is that 500XP and a random mook is 5?

[Kitsune413]

There is a table in the GM section. I'll have to check the page later.

You give experience for completing the mission on a sliding scale for failure, success, great success. Then for advancing the campaign. Then for character development and roleplaying.

It isn't based on what you kill but the challenge of the mission/adventure/Roleplaying.

[monbvol]

I have come up with a plan finally for how to structure future examples but since I have a couple days of work ahead of me I'll probably not implement it until Wednesday.

My basic idea is to go ahead and re-name this thread to indicate it as a discussion/question/beta thread but create a second thread that has an index post to start with and one example per post with any questions or feedback directed to this thread.  I would like something a bit cleaner to stand as the actual example thread but also wish the discussions to continue, especially once I start delving into more philosophical elements where certain elements of AToW are more open to interpretation and there is no wrong answer per se when dealing with them.

[guardiandashi]

its on pg 332 in my copy most awards range from 0-9 with overall campaign completed awards being up to 20xp

[beachhead1985]

There is a table in the GM section. I'll have to check the page later.

You give experience for completing the mission on a sliding scale for failure, success, great success. Then for advancing the campaign. Then for character development and roleplaying.

It isn't based on what you kill but the challenge of the mission/adventure/Roleplaying.

Huh, that is a change from the normal tabletop 4/5 kills to a skill advance.

[Atlas3060]

Huh, that is a change from the normal tabletop 4/5 kills to a skill advance.

Well to be fair I think the earlier RPG editions had a similar situation.

[beachhead1985]

Well to be fair I think the earlier RPG editions had a similar situation.

Well, I just expected that wit all the emphasis in trying to maintain a mechanical connection (2d6) to the tabletop game that something like that would have been a natural transfer. Confused me that it wasn't.

[Kitsune413]

Roleplaying games are kind of about a believable and organic increase in power. If you d&d character went from level 1 to level 20 in one session you would probably call foul on your gm.

So in a more natural or organic system just shooting down mechs doesn't make you better. If you are an elite pilot in a real world example you could kill Green pilots all day and your skill would probably actually be going down rather than getting better.

In a tabletop campaign its a lot less important that these guys seem that authentic. You're looking for other means of progression.

[Maelwys]

I hope to make a character in the next week or so to demonstrate how its done, utilizing some of the more oddities available in the ATOW universe. Just have to get a few other things out of the way first :)

[Daryk]

With regard to pilots with elite abilities, we found years ago (under MW1e) it doesn't matter how negative your gunnery is... your 'mech only has so much armor.

[ZombieAcePilot]

This is why the heavier mechs are given to better pilots. You want your big hitter able to stay in the game longer. It's also a good reason for leveling other skills such as tactics. Being a better shot doesn't matter if you get outflanked or ambushed. Similarly, if you want to use that good shooting skill you will seek ways to reduce the number and effectiveness of attacks against you. This means fighting smart or getting your enemy to agree to fighting stupid (duel anyone?).

[Maelwys]

On the other hand, you can justify giving light 'Mechs to your better pilots. They can get better use out of the movement, and the higher gunnery skills means they can hit targets from further away, making it harder for them to be hit in return.

Giving heavier 'Mechs to greener pilots can be a problem, but it also gives them a better chance to survive a mistake.