Rules Only: Has anyone used a different rules system for person-to-person combat?

[Spinward Scout]

I've been wondering if anyone has used different rules for Combat in Traveller.

Or even adding in different rules from other games.

I've had some people recommend different rules for realistic Combat.

Fully Automatic by LittleBlueShyGuy

A Modern Day Stealth Action Role Playing Game

littleblueshyguy.itch.io

OUTGUNNED – Cinematic Action RPG

Outgunned is a cinematic action RPG inspired by the classics of the action and heist genre, from Die Hard to True Lies, passing through James Bond, Lethal Weapon, Kingsman, Ocean’s Eleven, Hot Fuzz…

twolittlemice.net

DELTA GREEN

Dive into the world of Delta Green, a role-playing game where horror meets conspiracy. Uncover government secrets, battle cosmic horrors inspired by H.P. Lovecraft, and experience the ultimate struggle for sanity. Resources, adventures, and community for all Delta Green agents.

www.delta-green.com

DriveThruRPG

www.drivethrurpg.com

Hollowpoint by vsca

bad people killing bad people for bad reasons

vsca.itch.io

Has anyone tried any of these for Traveller? I'd love to throw more Combat into Traveller. I think it would be fun.

 

[spank]

I've though about it,
Atleast for melee.
I'd like to try melee as an opposed check, Attacker's {better initiative} roll minus Defender's {worse initiative} roll. Attacker has a TN of 8 and Defender of -8 {attacker gets an advantage}

 

[Spinward Scout]

Cool.

 

[spank]

Cool.

IDk how it'd work, but that's the rough idea. Melee would probably take alot longer, unless on person out classed the other by alot. But I think that's realistic.

 

[spank]

Thinking about it your TN would need to be alot lower, if Traveller melee succeeds on 8+ it will succeed 41% of the time.
With 2d6-2d6, once I actually looked at the numbers, you need 1+ to get 44% success, 2+ to get 33% and 3+ to get 24% success. So the attacker's TN would need to be somewhere between 1+ and 3+ to keep melee from becoming a quagmire. 2+ wouldn't be bad, a little slower than Trav style, but not terribly.
And the defenders TN would need to be lower than the attacker to give the attacker an advantage, so maybe -3. A TN of 2+ for the attacker and 3- for the defender would work out like this for evenly match combat with no additional mods.

Attacker hits	33.56%
No damage to either	42.56%
Defender hit	22.92%

I think that the melee would consume the defender's action, representing being interrupted and having to counter/defend the attack.

 

[Takei]

I've though about it,
Atleast for melee.
I'd like to try melee as an opposed check, Attacker's {better initiative} roll minus Defender's {worse initiative} roll. Attacker has a TN of 8 and Defender of -8 {attacker gets an advantage}

I've thought about something similar but just using straight opposed rolls, higher roll wins and inflicts damage (assuming both parties want to inflict damage on each other). I remember martial arts sparring many years back (both unarmed and armed) where I'd make an attack but leave myself open and get hit by my opponent. Game mechanic wise I made an attack but my opponent rolled higher.

Fire combat wise I'm hoping to try a game using Azhanti High Lightning/Striker where each light wound gives you a cumulative -1 DM, each serious wound knocks you out and you need to make a roll to regain consciousness.

 

[mike wightman]

I use Weakened blows to add a bit of melee shenanigans.

You can opt to make any blow or parry a weakened blow, it lowers your chance to hit/defence DM but does not use a point of temporary End.

So the trick is to weave in some weakened blows that your opponent has to defend against costing them a point of End, or they can ignore the attack and hope it misses. A trained fighter is also able to make make weakened parries.

Note that the defender does not know if it is a normal blow or a weakened blow coming their way.

As to alternative combat systems it would be faster to list the ones I haven't tied.

The ones that spring to mind - Snapshot, AHL, Striker, mash up of those, BRP, Cyberpunk, White Wolf, Aftermath, Twilight 2000 1e, YZE dicepool and step die...

These days - declare what you are doing, roll to hit, if you hit roll damage dice subtracting damage dice based on AV of the opponent, apply wounds, next round.

 

[spank]

I've thought about something similar but just using straight opposed rolls, higher roll wins and inflicts damage (assuming both parties want to inflict damage on each other). I remember martial arts sparring many years back (both unarmed and armed) where I'd make an attack but leave myself open and get hit by my opponent. Game mechanic wise I made an attack but my opponent rolled higher.

Fire combat wise I'm hoping to try a game using Azhanti High Lightning/Striker where each light wound gives you a cumulative -1 DM, each serious wound knocks you out and you need to make a roll to regain consciousness.

I like the system from Shadowrun where you had a different wound categories and levels of being wounded, and a separate stack for stun that overflowed into Physical.

 

[Takei]

I like the system from Shadowrun where you had a different wound categories and levels of being wounded, and a separate stack for stun that overflowed into Physical.
View attachment 6367

I've never played Shadowrun but the wound track kind of reminds me of Cyberpunk 2020 that I'm running at the moment. I do find just ticking of boxes to be an easy way of tracking things

IIRC Cortex uses something similar with Firefly, Serenity and BSG, only it uses a single coloumn with Stun and Physical damage coming from opposite ends - when they meet you fall unconscious.

 

[mike wightman]

One of the things I liked about Alternity and White Wolf games is how damage is handled.

Stun, wound mortal, or bashing, lethal and aggravated.

I prefer the WW system of noting damage
/ bash (stun)
X lethal (wound)
O aggravated (mortal)

 

[kilemall]

CT Striker but combination of pen roll and physical location tied to die damage. Gives me individual location armor effects, occasionally hit with no effect, lucky survives and unlucky wounds/death with small weapons, and less auto death with plasma/fusion guns.

 

[igycrctl]

Has anyone used Snapshot or Azhanti High Lightning?

 

[McPerth]

Has anyone used Snapshot or Azhanti High Lightning?

As I commented sometimes, I used to use a variant of AHL combat system.

AFAIK, Striker system was very close (if not outright the same but expanded)

 

[mike wightman]

Has anyone used Snapshot or Azhanti High Lightning?

Yes, both. And a mash up of their action point systems and phases.

 

[spank]

Yes, both. And a mash up of their action point systems and phases.

I would have liked to give AHL a try, but it's got two major issues. 1) it's a "large ship" game and I prefer "small ship" games. I'd much prefer a game that came with maps for Scouts, Traders, Lab ships, Safari ships, Merchants, Cruisers, Escort and Liners. and 2) It's quite pricey to find a good copy.

 

[mike wightman]

Get the Classic Traveller cd rom/USB drive/dropbox from Far Future Enterprises - you get every rule book, supplement, adventure and game GDW printed for CT, this includes the AHL supplement, ruolbook , and map set.

The combat system doesn't require big ships, it works pretty much as a replacement for Snapshot. The maps in AHL can be repurposed to warehouses, industrial manufacturing units, all sorts of things.

 

[infojunky]

Has anyone used Snapshot or Azhanti High Lightning?

Yes, both, either, generally something that mixes the two.

 

[infojunky]

Thinking about it your TN would need to be alot lower, if Traveller melee succeeds on 8+ it will succeed 41% of the time.
With 2d6-2d6, once I actually looked at the numbers, you need 1+ to get 44% success, 2+ to get 33% and 3+ to get 24% success. So the attacker's TN would need to be somewhere between 1+ and 3+ to keep melee from becoming a quagmire. 2+ wouldn't be bad, a little slower than Trav style, but not terribly.
And the defenders TN would need to be lower than the attacker to give the attacker an advantage, so maybe -3. A TN of 2+ for the attacker and 3- for the defender would work out like this for evenly match combat with no additional mods.

Attacker hits	33.56%
No damage to either	42.56%
Defender hit	22.92%

I think that the melee would consume the defender's action, representing being interrupted and having to counter/defend the attack.

I have been pondering along this line for a whiles now.

Though I probably would go with a single 2d6+all appropriate DMs roll. In general 8+ attacker hits, 6- Defender hits.

 

[Ildefonse]

I use two house rules in my CT combat: I enjoy the more abstract nature of CT combat, and so have not looked at anything more simulationist.

• Double Tap: similar in concept to Striker and MT with separate to-hit and penetration rolls, but using CT DM's
• PC's are unconscious at two characteristics = 0, not one (I run a more heroic style of game, at my group's request)

 

[spank]

I think maybe you could run a combined "hp bar" / stun bar.
Use END + 1/2 STR for wounds and DEX + 1/2 STR for stun.

I use two house rules in my CT combat: I enjoy the more abstract nature of CT combat, and so have not looked at anything more simulationist.

• Double Tap: similar in concept to Striker and MT with separate to-hit and penetration rolls, but using CT DM's
• PC's are unconscious at two characteristics = 0, not one (I run a more heroic style of game, at my group's request)

I've thought about something similar but just using straight opposed rolls, higher roll wins and inflicts damage (assuming both parties want to inflict damage on each other). I remember martial arts sparring many years back (both unarmed and armed) where I'd make an attack but leave myself open and get hit by my opponent. Game mechanic wise I made an attack but my opponent rolled higher.

Fire combat wise I'm hoping to try a game using Azhanti High Lightning/Striker where each light wound gives you a cumulative -1 DM, each serious wound knocks you out and you need to make a roll to regain consciousness.