A Time of War suggestions if my opinions mattered:
1. Establish point buy as the "main" form of creating a character.
2. Divorce the idea of X amount of years equals Y amount of extra points past a certain age.
3. Though I like the idea of major academies being a part of Life Modules, I don't see them really needed in the grand scheme of things. Still if they are added in, just lines in the write up that player gets extra XP for a set of skills might work for me.
4. Remove Well Equipped trait.
5. Make Wealth not a starting amount but the Wealth check rule from Companion and allow people to use it for some things upon character creation.
6. Combat-wise make sure all the charts remind the players to do the 1/4 math to their STR for melee damage.
7. Cap the age on initial character creation. I don't care by how much, I'm just sick of consulting the Aging chart and hoping I don't have to muddle around with things even further.
8. Give out scenarios or adventure seeds which utilize the normal combat rules or the various "Hero Mode" tweaks. List it out so people can see why those modes are helpful, plus gives them ideas to run and gun or play things more "gritty".
Everything else I want is in the Companion so just throw that book into the next companion. They always have a companion, let's not say this wouldn't either. ;)
A good compromise on the modules might be reasonably generic for the main book but in companion/alternate era sources maybe add more specific stuff there. I think that would be a good way to go.Basically yeah, each of the Field Manuals and Handbooks at one time from Merc to Marik and all in between had stuff for a certain version of the RPG that was current.
My vote is going back to a 2D10 system. But I might be biased, lol.2d10 is a bad fit for battletech, if you aren't going to use 2d6 some multiple of D6 such as 2D12 would be better
2d10 is a bad fit for battletech, if you aren't going to use 2d6 some multiple of D6 such as 2D12 would be better
4d6 total # occurring
4 1
5 4
6 10
7 20
8 35
9 56
10 80
11 104
12 125
13 140
14 146
15 140
16 125
17 104
18 80
19 56
20 35
21 20
22 10
23 4
24 1
And people complain about page count now... ::)
Character creation is still a bear and is likely a barrier to entry to new players. The rules are very math heavy, I think most roleplaying game systems avoid division in damage calculations.
What the system did right was that it added tactical abilities to use in the board game.
If it's going to remain as complicated as it is, then it should work on being a better addition to the board game so that more people utilize it for that.
That being said, they introduced a rules light version so maybe this is working fine.
2d10 is a bad fit for battletech, if you aren't going to use 2d6 some multiple of D6 such as 2D12 would be better
Actually, 2d10 BattleTech works extremely well. My group has been playing 2D10 BattleTech for over 10 years now and would never go back. We started with MW3rd/CBT:RPG 2D10 character rules and the 2D10 vehicle combat rules from MechWarrior's Guide: Solaris VII in our RPG game. But are now using AToW converted back to 2D10. We do company on company fights with a company of PCs vs a GM with NPCs.
There are some big names in gaming that do have damage division/multiplication but yeah I tend to agree there is a fair bit of math that seems to be for the sake of math that could be eliminated for faster character creation and game play.
- I am also not in favor of the Life Module chargen system as it is. From the stifling fixture of options to the baffling point values in the face of point optimization, I can't see myself ever using it while point buy exists. In fact, even if it didn't, I'd be tempted to just build a character in MW2 and convert them over rather than deal with life modules.
- Skills that are split into subskills in baffling fashion. Small Arms covers light slug-throwers, needlers, sonic stunners, lasers, and potentially plasma or a theoretical PPC pistol, but somehow you need to have knife-throwing and stone-throwing be two different skills?
- Faction-specific subskills. It seems like that would be better handled by specialties.
- Social/mass influence mechanics are sorely needed. Administrative know-how, cutting journalism, and incisive barbs toward rivals in court - all staples of BT that could keep it from being PeaceTech even when there's no fighting going on, but the system is very light on that sort of thing.
- I'm not in favor of using Edge arbitrarily as a value in certain instances. If you're rolling to see if an armored suit is breached, why not use its armor rating instead of Edge? It just seems a very bizarre place to cut in with randomness when randomness is already factored in with the roll.
- Don't list the cost of a vehicle and then say that the real cost is two points higher, and that the point cost quoted is the "just assigned" cost. That's irritating.
- Some more guidelines on the effects of high or low gravity on trait costs could be in order.
The next to last item about Vehicle is a tough one to be sure. I get the premise behind charging a character if they actually own it or the unit they are assigned to does, especially in certain eras. For Solaris Stables and Merc Units it does have a heavy impact on what kind of dynamic there is between the PC and the unit/stable in question. This becomes more pronounced in 3025 by adding House Formations to the list. Especially for mechs where being Dispossessed was a pretty big deal.
But if the stable/unit is entirely PC owned/operated or the GM really just doesn't want to deal with that kind of minutia, which to be fair I would never blame any group for making such a decision, all of that can pretty much be tossed straight out the window for the sake of not getting bogged down in details.
So yeah I see both sides of the argument and both have merit. I'll have to think on it a lot.
I'm not in favor of using Edge arbitrarily as a value in certain instances. If you're rolling to see if an armored suit is breached, why not use its armor rating instead of Edge? It just seems a very bizarre place to cut in with randomness when randomness is already factored in with the roll.Every other one listed I can follow but this confused me.
Every other one listed I can follow but this confused me.
Was there some sort of Edge rule in a book I forgot to look over?
I know that edge manipulates die rolls and there's the Edge Save optional from companion book, but checking for a breach?
"Vacuum", page 238.Ah thank you! I didn't play around in very extreme atmospheres. Thus explaining my brain fart on recalling this tidbit.
I liked the life modules, but felt that the whole issue was the math involved. I would love something like a Hero Lab character generator, just so I am not having to do the math on each PC when doing GM character approvals. Especially with players who do not use the worksheet.
The purpose of the "partial" experience values is to suggest those skills/traits/attributes. If you accrue enough suggestions, you gain the level. Otherwise, you can choose to take it or not. The choice is the point. If something never occurs to you (e.g., under point buy), there's no choice. If you're exposed to a skill or whatever in the optimization process, you may consider it again. Optimization almost always makes me reconsider things when I'm building characters. As evidence, I refer you to the two characters I've made so far for Cannonshop in his most recent fan fiction story. Mike Hogarth in particular has a lot more "under the hood" than I expected. I'm quite serious when I say the Life Module system adds more depth to characters than you'd expect. The process is the point.
Except that you almost never get enough suggestions to get over the threshold of a lot of them, so it's always a choice. Meanwhile, in point buy, I can just look at the list of traits and skills, review the character concept, and move on accordingly. Whatever quirks and hooks occur to me and look doable get in, and it doesn't take a 5+ step process with a narrow range of possible "get into trouble" options to do it.
The variation is a feature, not a bug I think. And you can take as many Civilian Job modules as you want without penalty.
The variation is a feature, not a bug I think. And you can take as many Civilian Job modules as you want without penalty.
That's... the point? ???
A "normal" life only involves adding skills over time. Only extraordinary risk yields extraordinary rewards. I walked past a mortar crater (that wasn't there on my way home the previous night) on my way to work one day. That round could have very easily hit my CHU instead. And the night those SOBs shelled the base twice instead of the usual (up until then) once? I had to tell my then five-year old daughter "I have to go... tell your mother I love her."
Those are experiences you really only learn from once. I don't fault TPTB for that decision. Does it complicate character building? Sure, a bit. But not that much, really. Building a person SHOULD be complicated. People are complicated. Plots for a tabletop game's war machines? Maybe not so much. But if you want characters that are engaging in a personal way, it should be a little harder. The optimization process increases the number of decisions that have to be made in a way that I think increases engagement. It seems you disagree, and that's totally valid. It comes down to a disagreement over ends, rather than means.
While I'm at it.
Another issues I have is with the Phenotype modifiers in all versions of the game (except 1st since it doesn't have them). While I am fine with the idea that they get a boost to the Attribute due to the enhanced genes, the concept that they can push the Attribute over human maximums seems wrong. While genetic manipulation could foreseeably allow for a higher % of olympic grade athletes, you are not going to create super soldiers with greater strength, reflexes, etc. then is possible at human maximums. while I can see an Elemental looking like a body builder
this is still an achievable level for a normal human and not some special thing only Elemental can achieve. If you are trying to tell me that Elemental are bugger then this, I fine that hard to believe as.
You don't need Toughness to buy off Glass Jaw last I checked.
I'll admit that is a particularly obnoxious part of the optional optimization rules and I know I'd never enforce that extra step and be fine with just paying the 50 XP and being done with the Glass Jaw.
I'll admit that is a particularly obnoxious part of the optional optimization rules and I know I'd never enforce that extra step and be fine with just paying the 50 XP and being done with the Glass Jaw.
You only have to take next level on an achieved negative trait. In book words:
However, this
form of optimization is limited to attaining only the nearest
“activated” level of the Trait (the point where its negative XPs
round off the Trait to its next lowest level of game play eff ect)
So , you can pay 50 XP an dismiss - 50 Glass Jaw
Glass jaw only has one level (-300)But you have not activated any level.
But you have not activated any level.Maybe it is covered elsewhere, but under Optimization Negative traits.
Turning her attention to Traits next, Lisa notes that the
100 XPs in Natural Aptitude/Strategy are effectively useless
to her character now, as she no longer has the Strategy
Skill and 100 XPs are far from enough to activate the
Trait. The same can be said of the 40 XPs in her character’s
Connections Trait and the 15 XPs in Fit. She shaves away
those XPs as well. She also notices that the character’s
–50 XP Compulsion Trait is too high to activate. Wiping it
out, however, would cost 50 XPs, so she instead decides
to subtract another 50 from the Trait, activating the
Compulsion at –1 TP
gonna be honest here... I'd tear the entire system down and start anew, especially char gen. char gen is too confusing, I've played a lot of RPGs many of which manage to get the same level of depth and options as ATOW without being nearly as convoluted.
I like CharGen for Destiny, but would like a little bit more specificity, and, honestly, I felt one of the biggest issues of ATOW is shared by Destiny: not enough variety in positive and negative(especially negative) traits.I always felt that the traits especially negative ones represent a much wider set of traits because they are generic.
gonna be honest here... I'd tear the entire system down and start anew, especially char gen. char gen is too confusing, I've played a lot of RPGs many of which manage to get the same level of depth and options as ATOW without being nearly as convoluted.Please name a few, because I can't think of any.