Combat Rules....my thoughts after one read through....

[pendragonman]

Bottom line I see here is S4 is a "crunchy" GM-and prefers combat rounds like all previous versions of Traveller (thereby not happy at all with the abstracted combat that T5 presents) and Mags really likes abstracted combat because he prefers combat not be the focus of the adventure.

My position is that S4's premise that combat is broken is his opinion, which seems to offend him somehow. I think he is overlooking the obvious-Never attribute to Malice that which can be attributed to laziness or inattentiveness.

I think the examples in the book are made by a lack of attention to detail in the maker descriptions; not there to make combat not work on purpose, but because the maker descriptions were not thoroughly tested and abused by min/maxers to make sure it worked as advertised everywhere.

 

[cuTTer]

S4-those weapons on that list are "early" staged. I know, that is not true in real life, but try using the makers yourself and see what you get instead of that list.

<snippety snip snap>

Again, not all firearms do 1D6, to maintain otherwise is being disingenuous.

The weapons S4 quoted are not 'Early' staged. If they were, their TLs would all be one lower.

And, just to be clear, stage 'Early' has no effect on damage.

Not all firearms do 1D, but the basic revolver, pistol and carbine profiled on p.251 DO do 1D.

As every other revolver, pistol and carbine are born of these profiles, it's easy to see you can't apply any Burden that reduces damage unless you immediately 'standardise' it to get the D back. Clunky.

And another thing...I don't really get why stage 'standard' increases TL and D. Surely the seed profiles on p.251 should BE the standard, against which deviating designs are deemed lighter, heavier, earlier or more advanced?

 

[Supplement Four]

S4-those weapons on that list are "early" staged. I know, that is not true in real life, but try using the makers yourself and see what you get instead of that list. If you don't have the ruleset (can't remember) Rob has an excellent online program to do the work for you.

LOL.

I did use the GunMaker program in my reply to you above with the revolver. It produced a pistol doing Bullet-1 damage.

Just for grins, I used Rob's program to see what I'd get. I selected a Pistol and left everything else blank, to get a no frills, basic pistol.

I ended up with a GMP-6, TL 6 Gun Man Portable. It does 0 Damage!

That's right, no damage at all!

Code        Name                                         Damage and Hits              Mass  R Bu     Cost 
----------- -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- ----- - -- -------- 
GMP-6       Gun Man Portable-6                           (0)                          9     4 -1    5,000 
Code  : GMP-6
Name  : Gun Man Portable-6
Range : 4
Mass  : 9
Burden: -1
Damage: (0D) 
Cost  : 5,000

Code        Name                      Damage and Hits      Mass  R Bu     Cost 
----------- ------------------------- -------------------- ----- - -- -------- 
GMP-6       Gun Man Portable          (0)                  9     4 -1    5,000

If Rob's program is correct, this is just more evidence that another rule in T5 is broken.

Unless...you think a TL6 gun that does zero damage is a viable weapon.

Again, not all firearms do 1D6, to maintain otherwise is being disingenuous.

I never said that all firearm do 1D6 damage. Some do quite a bit more. But, some weapons in T5 do 1D6 damage.

And, those weapons cannot kill an NPC no matter how many times the NPC is shot!

That's broken!

So, the rules are broken because it may (depending on the weapon) take more than a single round of combat to kill a NPC.

No, the rule is broken because you can take that TL 5 Carbine that I showed you from the T5 list and fire at an NPC for 10 rounds, hitting the NPC every round, and never even damage the NPC, much less kill him.

Bottom line I see here is S4 is a "crunchy" GM-and prefers combat rounds like all previous versions of Traveller (thereby not happy at all with the abstracted combat that T5 presents) and Mags really likes abstracted combat because he prefers combat not be the focus of the adventure.

Actually, I like the abstracted combat rounds.

You didn't see me list that as one of the problems with T5 combat in my original post above.

My position is that S4's premise that combat is broken is his opinion, which seems to offend him somehow.

It doesn't offend me at all. There are things that I quite like about T5--some things that I've described as "brilliant".

But, as a whole, T5 is a mess, requiring the T5 Ref to constantly fix, tweak, and house rule.

 

[pendragonman]

S4, in at least two other threads you have argued for a more defined, more crunchy combat round. Not this thread. Instead, you are hijacking someone else's thread to further your agenda to spread your opinion that T5 is broken.

Gun refers to artillery things, not handhelds. But changing that didn't change the outcome. I still think it is more likely that someone didn't test the maker codes sufficiently or skipped the beta feedback on those things instead of deliberately making self contradictory rules.

Don't understand the "standard" extra die thing either, but perhaps it is evidence of the above?

Of course, it would help if Marc was more timely in responding to erratta questions but that is what it is.

On the CT body pistol 3D question: In the official errata p17 is correct and it does 2D not 3. Don has the official CT errata posted on his website.

 

[Supplement Four]

S4, in at least two other threads you have argued for a more defined, more crunchy combat round.

I suggested a Fix rule for those wanting a shorter round.

But, I also suggested a Fix rule for those using the abstract round who also wanted to be able to count ammo.

I've suggested several fixes for broken or ugly rules in T5. See my sig.

I don't dislike the abstract combat round at all. I dislike some of the problems associated with the abstract combat round, like no ammo tracking or no multi-targeting.

You need to read my posts more closely.

Contrary to what you suggest, I do like some things about T5. I think the Suppression Fire rule is brilliant. I like the Tactics rule. But, c'mon, let's call a grape a grape here. T5 has a lot of problems--so many problems that the T5 Ref will have to consider and fix himself.

Not this thread. Instead, you are hijacking someone else's thread to further your agenda to spread your opinion that T5 is broken.

It's not opinion that the game is broken with an average STR character cannot win a bar-fight with an average STR NPC.

It's not opinion that critical successes get easier the harder the task gets.

It's not opinion that a person cannot shoot at more than one target in a combat round that is considered about one minute long.

Gun refers to artillery things, not handhelds. But changing that didn't change the outcome. I still think it is more likely that someone didn't test the maker codes sufficiently or skipped the beta feedback on those things instead of deliberately making self contradictory rules.

And you may be correct. But, the problem still exists with the rule in the book.

In fact, you can say, "that someone didn't test," the game adequately before print, thus there are all these broken and ugly rules.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Once more into the breach.

Funny thing, if the combat is abstract so are things like counting ammo, meaning you don't keep track of it. No problem.

Actually, Supression fire lets you fire at multiple targets.

Combat is roughly, not exactly one minute long.

And last what is wrong with an average Str PC having a 50/50 chance at losing a fight with an average Str NPC? That they don't automatically win? Seriously, the PCs should get their butts handed to them on occasion, it is both real and a learning experience otherwise it is just monty haul, not adventuring.

 

[Supplement Four]

Funny thing, if the combat is abstract so are things like counting ammo, meaning you don't keep track of it. No problem.

Most people have a problem when it comes to figuring load. And, what about a situation where the PC doesn't have a weapon, then overpowers an NPC and takes his weapon.

Now, the PC has as much ammo as he needs, even if what he took is a six shot revovler.

Actually, Supression fire lets you fire at multiple targets.

Which just compounds the problem. Suppression fire allows you to attack every enemy that fires his weapon.

But, you crewmate, who has an automatic weapon set on full auto, can only fire at one target.

That's a problem.

Oh, and don't forget, the other crewmate, who is carrying a revolver, can fire only at one target if he doesn't also move that combat round.

So...let's sum this all up.

PC A, on suppression fire, gets to fire at every enemy that fires in the round.

PC B, with an full auto weapon, can only fire at one target during the round and can move this round.

PC C, with the revolver, cannot fire and move in the same combat round.



That doesn't seem wonky to you?

Combat is roughly, not exactly one minute long.

I said that.

And last what is wrong with an average Str PC having a 50/50 chance at losing a fight with an average Str NPC? That they don't automatically win?

A STR-7 PC fighting a STR-7 NPC, where both have the same skill, doesn't have a 50/50 of winning the fight. The PC has a 0% chance of winning the fight. The NPC has a 100% chance of winning the brawl.

That's a problem.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

I should be working...

Most people have a problem when it comes to figuring load. And, what about a situation where the PC doesn't have a weapon, then overpowers an NPC and takes his weapon.

Now, the PC has as much ammo as he needs, even if what he took is a six shot revovler.


Which just compounds the problem. Suppression fire allows you to attack every enemy that fires his weapon.

But, you crewmate, who has an automatic weapon set on full auto, can only fire at one target.

That's a problem.

Oh, and don't forget, the other crewmate, who is carrying a revolver, can fire only at one target if he doesn't also move that combat round.

So...let's sum this all up.

PC A, on suppression fire, gets to fire at every enemy that fires in the round.

PC B, with an full auto weapon, can only fire at one target during the round and can move this round.

PC C, with the revolver, cannot fire and move in the same combat round.

That doesn't seem wonky to you?

I said that.

A STR-7 PC fighting a STR-7 NPC, where both have the same skill, doesn't have a 50/50 of winning the fight. The PC has a 0% chance of winning the fight. The NPC has a 100% chance of winning the brawl.

That's a problem.

PC took the NPC's weapon, fight is over.

A is praying and spraying at anything that moves, B is trying to fill one target full of lead, and C is taking careful aim, so nope doesn't seem wonky at all. Then again, I know that most shots in a gunfight rarely hit the target.

And last, how does the NPC always win an opposed roll?

 

[David Johansen]

I swear there was a page that described the specifics of the damage types in one of the playtest versions but I can't find it in the book.

Still, cut strikes me as very odd as it causes continuing damage when bullets don't.

The one dice guns are there and I must confess that it would seem rational to have started at two dice instead. Still, it isn't a big issue unless those TL-5 guns play a major role in your campaigns. Advanced heavy pistols are the order of the day. I suppose that's almost a justification. What player ever wants a standard pistol?

I can't say combat's broken because I can't figure it out. Which has been the case with every version of combat, honestly. I know how I'd do it and I know what my own tastes are but I can't deny something is simply wrong with the combat system.

 

[cuTTer]

I swear there was a page that described the specifics of the damage types in one of the playtest versions but I can't find it in the book.

Still, cut strikes me as very odd as it causes continuing damage when bullets don't.

The one dice guns are there and I must confess that it would seem rational to have started at two dice instead. Still, it isn't a big issue unless those TL-5 guns play a major role in your campaigns. Advanced heavy pistols are the order of the day. I suppose that's almost a justification. What player ever wants a standard pistol?

I can't say combat's broken because I can't figure it out. Which has been the case with every version of combat, honestly. I know how I'd do it and I know what my own tastes are but I can't deny something is simply wrong with the combat system.

The original beta didn't have any more on damage types, maybe something in between the beta and the book?

Cuts didn't previously persist either, so some things DID change twixt beta and book .

2D would probably be a sensible compromise, I yearn for 3D simply as a traditionalist, and as someone who is comfortable with combat being as dangerous and 'last resort' as it ever was.

What player ever wants a standard pistol?

A mercenary captain. Those AHP-8s cost four times as much and I imagine it's ammunition would too (if it existed ) considering it does four times the damage of it's TL-5 grandfather.

Staging effects like advanced look good on paper and can be handwaved with energy weapons but don't really make sense with slugthrowers.

Colt 1911, designed and built in <gasp> 1911, technically TL4, and still being manufactured today in essentially the same form, four tech levels later.

Are there handguns in common use these days that do four times as much damage? Possibly, I genuinely don't know, but I suspect there aren't to many soldiers or policemen around the world that would be happy carrying a .50AE Desert Eagle as a matter of routine.

 

[Shonner]

For those that need there games like the classic D&D red box set, Traveller is not for them. It's a thinking RPG persons game. If putting depth into a character, creating starships, working out how to get around the mind bending idea of space travel on a massive scale isn't your thing, then simply put, Traveller is not for you. Having said that, there's no reason why anyone can not do anything at all they want with there game. Traveller allows for that and you just use as much or as little of the system as you like. No where does it say that you must do this, it's a guide.

Traveller, in general, is not for D20 players that want their character to start at Level 0 and be able to level up during a campaign. They may give T20 a try.

 

[pendragonman]

Colt 1911, designed and built in <gasp> 1911, technically TL4, and still being manufactured today in essentially the same form, four tech levels later.

Are there handguns in common use these days that do four times as much damage? Possibly, I genuinely don't know, but I suspect there aren't to many soldiers or policemen around the world that would be happy carrying a .50AE Desert Eagle as a matter of routine.

Actually, the 1911s manufactured today have much tighter tolerances than were available in early production. Tighter tolerances give it better accuracy, and the modern made ones are often used as match pistols.

There aren't many policemen walking about with a Desert Eagle because they are heavy, the clip holds only a few rounds, they take up alot of space on the hip and civilians seeing them attribute them to increased incidences of police excessive force, not because of an ammo issue.

Many cops I know own one, they just can't carry it for work. Same goes for the soldiers I know. It is not the individual trooper that doesn't want one, it is the supply guys as it is another caliber round they gotta get in. After all, a 9 mill won't always penetrate a wall to get the guy on the other side, a 50 cal will (the extra bonus is body armor won't save your target). Also, a 9 mil won't penetrate the side of most APCs, a 50 will. Even one tuned down for a pistol round.

Stage effects make some sense in that modern chemistry gives greater muzzle velocity even to the venerable 1911. Whether that is worth a full die or a partial die is a judgement call that the author made. See the various differences in 45 ACP ammo detailed Here. Since the author chose to do away with ammo tracking, stage effects will take care of the change in damage.

By the by, the Desert Eagle would likely be a heavy pistol, not a standard one.

 

[Supplement Four]

PC took the NPC's weapon, fight is over.

Did I have to say that he needed the weapon to fight other NPCs? Good grief!

A is praying and spraying at anything that moves, B is trying to fill one target full of lead, and C is taking careful aim, so nope doesn't seem wonky at all.

You do understand that C could be firing his weapon several times and reloading in the long, abstract combat round, eh?

And...we're still not letting him move. Ever. There's no method in T5 for him to fire his weapon once or several times and still move.

What if he doesn't take careful aim? What if he just fires his weapon six times blindly into one direction as he charges for cover?

T5 won't let the character with the revolver, semi-auto pistol, or single shot rifle do that, but T5 will let the burst fire weapon operate the trigger several times and then move.

As I said....wonky and problematic.

There's real rule issues there.

And last, how does the NPC always win an opposed roll?

Now, I know you haven't been reading my replies. This is the third time I've said it for you.

It doesn't matter how many times the NPC loses the opposed roll, when damage is rolled on the NPC, the NPC will resist it completely, 100%, because of the NPC damage rule.

The damage for "hands" is 1D. It takes 10+ points of damage to take out, or even damage, an NPC.

How are you going to roll 10 points of damage using only 1d6?

 

[pendragonman]

snip...

How are you going to roll 10 points of damage using only 1d6?

By taking a line out of West End Star Wars and go with cascading 6's

Wait a minute...hmmm

 

[cuTTer]

Actually, the 1911s manufactured today have much tighter tolerances than were available in early production. Tighter tolerances give it better accuracy, and the modern made ones are often used as match pistols.

Are you suggesting range should go up with TL?

There aren't many policemen walking about with a Desert Eagle because they are heavy, the clip holds only a few rounds, they take up alot of space on the hip and civilians seeing them attribute them to increased incidences of police excessive force, not because of an ammo issue.

Exactly, the 'standard' sidearm is preferable to an 'advanced heavy' one for many reasons.

Many cops I know own one, they just can't carry it for work. Same goes for the soldiers I know. It is not the individual trooper that doesn't want one, it is the supply guys as it is another caliber round they gotta get in. After all, a 9 mill won't always penetrate a wall to get the guy on the other side, a 50 cal will (the extra bonus is body armor won't save your target). Also, a 9 mil won't penetrate the side of most APCs, a 50 will. Even one tuned down for a pistol round.

Big guns are great. None of the cops of squaddies I know own a DE, but that's probably a law/culture thing. You say toe-MAY-toe, I say toe-MA-toe...

Stage effects make some sense in that modern chemistry gives greater muzzle velocity even to the venerable 1911. Whether that is worth a full die or a partial die is a judgement call that the author made.

Chemistry is great, but a 200% increase? (Do we have partial die in T5, is that a thing?)

See the various differences in 45 ACP ammo detailed Here. Since the author chose to do away with ammo tracking, stage effects will take care of the change in damage.

Not so much ammo tracking as ammunition as a concept. There is no ammunition in the T5 dojo.

By the by, the Desert Eagle would likely be a heavy pistol, not a standard one.

We were talking about P-5s vs AHP-8s. The 1911 was standing in for the P-5, the DE for the AHP-8. H is for Heavy .

 

[Murdoc]

Chemistry is great, but a 200% increase? (Do we have partial die in T5, is that a thing?)

Thankfully, no it doesn't. But if I were to do this, I'd probably do the D&D thing, and add Quality mod. That's right, it's a +1 Body Pistol! (Although I'd only have it affect damage and/or to-hit, not range; the range bands are too big in this game for that.) Or more T5: a +1,2,0,-4,0 Body Pistol-9.

 

[cuTTer]

Thankfully, no it doesn't. But if I were to do this, I'd probably do the D&D thing, and add Quality mod. That's right, it's a +1 Body Pistol! (Although I'd only have it affect damage and/or to-hit, not range; the range bands are too big in this game for that.) Or more T5: a +1,2,0,-4,0 Body Pistol-9.

You sir, are a genius.

I have no issue with a +4 Gauss Rifle of Dragonslaying.

Rather than add directly to Range you could add to the values that Range represents. A +1 pistol doesn't get bumped to R3, it's R2+1m. Or +1m per Range band.

Bookkeeping-tastic.

P-5 Range 2 Mass 1.1 qreBs 0 Bullet-1 Hits (v1) 1 Cr 150

+1 P-5 Range 2+1 Mass 1.1 qreBs 0 (but Qrebs +1) Bullet-1+1 Hits (v1) 1+1 Cr 150 + or x ?

Still a TL5 pistol, just a better one.

:-D

 

[mechascorpio]

What player ever wants a standard pistol?

Trader Captain Carl Hess and his 5-person crew (page 237), apparently

 

[Supplement Four]

And, let's not forget that many of the weapons we use today, at TL 8, are just as powerful as those used several TLs below.

To an unarmored target, getting shot by a modern-day, mostly polymer, semi-automatic .32 pistol is the same as getting shot by a heavy, TL 5, 1940 model .32 Browning semi-auto.

I doubt there would be much difference in damage.

Therefore, many of the T5 weapons with Bullet-1 damage are suspect.

 

[LiamKerrington]

Hi there,

this is a very interesting discussion you have here.
The only thing that makes me curious: why is a standard combat round roughly a minute long? This is something I know from early D&D or AD&D games. And there the reasoning behind this long term was that during a minute of (melee) combat the opponents rush at each other, make several blows and parry a lot, but eh one important attack is the one you have to roll for.

Now I imagine the guy in your examples with his standard pistol. Either he shoots during the combat round or he moves. That really does not "feel" right to me, because in ranged combat you don't have such things like attacking, blocking, moving, avoiding blows, testing the skills of your enemy etc.. Are there optional rules available changing the term of a combat round? Or other optinal rules which would allow you to modify the actions available during a combat round?

Or would the Referee or the gaming group be entitled to houserule things?

Best wishes!
Liam