QREBS - Burden

[Lapthorn]

As written, Burden from QREBS is added to an object's weight in kilos to determine felt or effective weight. The example given on p.192 of the BBB is an ACR-10 weighing 2.8kg with Burden-4; effective weight is zero.

I don't feel this is very realistic. It's a rifle; it should feel like some kind of encumbrance.

How about adding or subtracting 10% to effective weight per unit of Burden. At most, B+5 will add 50% to felt weight; at best, B-5 will make the object feel half the weight. Round to whatever level necessary.

The ACR-10 B=-4 would have an effective weight of 1.7kg under this system.

...This ends the Party Political Broadcast by the Pettifogging Detail Party. Normal programme will resume shortly...

 

[SanDragon]

I am assuming Burden-4 means Burden(minus)4...?

 

[Lapthorn]

I am assuming Burden-4 means Burden(minus)4...?

Sorry to be unclear. Yes, that's right.

 

[Supplement Four]

I actually don't have a problem with this rule at all.

Remember that Load and Burden are a measure of encumbrance, not just total weight. An object can be light, like a big cardboard box, but be encumbering. And, as with the ACR 10 in the example, an object can have weight but, due to its design and ease of use, not be encumbering at all.

With Burden -4, the ACR 10 (which would normally be burden 3 due its 2.8 kg weight), is really no harder to carry than it is to carry nothing.

Well, how the heck does it do that? The text on page 192 gives us a clue. Like a lot of things in Traveller (World codes, for example), its up to us to fill in the details.

I'm going to say that the ACR 10 is a short barrel weapon, made of light plastics and ceramics where possible, that comes complete with a shoulder sling assembly.

A character slips the sling on across both shoulders (to even out the weight on the torso), and the weapon clipped to the sling under the right arm (there are left handed slings available, too). The weapon attachment is a patented strap design where excess strap is rolled up into a cylinder that sits at the back of the shoulder, allowing the ACR 10 to be pulled out in front of the character when the weapon is used or simply allowed to retract into to its comfortable riding spot under the arm. The straps retract into the spool not unlike a measuring tape or the seatbelt in your car.

For long distance travel, there are two additional options. The barrel of the weapon can be secured to the belt on the character's hip, giving the weapon two secure points (handle and barrel). Or, with the pull of the master strap, the weapon will be pulled in place on the character's back.

Wearing this ergonomic strap design makes carrying the weapon unnoticeable.

 

[Lapthorn]

Another problem with Burden as written is that it makes no difference to very heavy objects. Burden for, say, a field gun is irrelevant.

My variant would make Burden relevant for all objects, using the kinds of rationalisation S4 brings up.

 

[robject]

Another problem with Burden as written is that it makes no difference to very heavy objects. Burden for, say, a field gun is irrelevant.

I have no problem with that, either. It may not be perfect, but -5 to +5 kg is a good-enough "perceived mass change" for the kind of gear players are likely to carry around.

To take it to extremes, I don't think an ergonomic design is going to make one howitzer feel much lighter than another howitzer.

 

[Supplement Four]

My variant would make Burden relevant for all objects, using the kinds of rationalisation S4 brings up.

I think Burden in T5 only applies to things that can be carried. By definition, the +5/-5 is applied to the weight of the weapon, in kg, before it is compared to a character's STR to calculate load.

Also, that really isn't my rationalization above. It's a little more detailed than what is in the book, but what I'm saying, and what the book says, are basically the same thing. See those last couple of paragraphs that offer reasons why Burden will be lighter or heavier.

 

[Reban]

I think Burden in T5 only applies to things that can be carried. By definition, the +5/-5 is applied to the weight of the weapon, in kg, before it is compared to a character's STR to calculate load.

Also, that really isn't my rationalization above. It's a little more detailed than what is in the book, but what I'm saying, and what the book says, are basically the same thing. See those last couple of paragraphs that offer reasons why Burden will be lighter or heavier.

Burden doesn't just deal with weight, it's also an expression of Bulk or in other words a measure of how unwieldy or how finely balanced an object is.

For example a heavy object fitted with handles or hand holds will be easier to lift (equivalent to a minus B) than a smooth round rock of the same weight is.


Getting back to the OPs question; is there anything to say B only deals with Kilos? The keyword in the description is that B affects perceived Load. How about if you are dealing with tons mass then B is expressed in tons mass?

Now the obvious flaw is that there's a difference between dealing with 1-10 tons and 10-100. i.e. a 5 ton object with B= -5 would be Load 0 while a 50 ton with B= -5 object would feel like Load 45ton.

To me that actually makes sense because I don't need a smooth progression when what we are dealing with is perceived mass not actual mass.

 

[Supplement Four]

Burden doesn't just deal with weight, it's also an expression of Bulk or in other words a measure of how unwieldy or how finely balanced an object is.

For example a heavy object fitted with handles or hand holds will be easier to lift (equivalent to a minus B) than a smooth round rock of the same weight is.

I believe I said the exact same thing above.

 

[pendragonman]

I have no problem with that, either. It may not be perfect, but -5 to +5 kg is a good-enough "perceived mass change" for the kind of gear players are likely to carry around.

To take it to extremes, I don't think an ergonomic design is going to make one howitzer feel much lighter than another howitzer.

Burden as an example of things that can't be carried.

Compare and contrast the 105 mm howitzer (M101A1) of WWII Vs the newer one (M102) The older one is 2.5 tons the newer one is 1.5...among other changes. The newer one is air-mobile in a way that the older one is more difficult to move.

Burden may have a primary usage for pc-carried stuff, but it isn't the only use.

 

[Lapthorn]

Burden as an example of things that can't be carried.

Compare and contrast the 105 mm howitzer (M101A1) of WWII Vs the newer one (M102) The older one is 2.5 tons the newer one is 1.5...among other changes. The newer one is air-mobile in a way that the older one is more difficult to move.

Burden may have a primary usage for pc-carried stuff, but it isn't the only use.

This was in the back of my mind. A B-5 jeep is easier for the grav carrier to airlift, etc.

 

[Ulsyus]

... as with the ACR 10 in the example, an object can have weight but, due to its design and ease of use, not be encumbering at all.

With Burden -4, the ACR 10 (which would normally be burden 3 due its 2.8 kg weight), is really no harder to carry than it is to carry nothing.

Well, how the heck does it do that? The text on page 192 gives us a clue. Like a lot of things in Traveller (World codes, for example), its up to us to fill in the details.

I'm going to say that the ACR 10 is a short barrel weapon, made of light plastics and ceramics where possible, that comes complete with a shoulder sling assembly.

A character slips the sling on across both shoulders (to even out the weight on the torso), and the weapon clipped to the sling under the right arm (there are left handed slings available, too). The weapon attachment is a patented strap design where excess strap is rolled up into a cylinder that sits at the back of the shoulder, allowing the ACR 10 to be pulled out in front of the character when the weapon is used or simply allowed to retract into to its comfortable riding spot under the arm. The straps retract into the spool not unlike a measuring tape or the seatbelt in your car.

For long distance travel, there are two additional options. The barrel of the weapon can be secured to the belt on the character's hip, giving the weapon two secure points (handle and barrel). Or, with the pull of the master strap, the weapon will be pulled in place on the character's back.

Wearing this ergonomic strap design makes carrying the weapon unnoticeable.

Just trying to picture this: a short barreled (even like today's carbines) bullpup weapon that fits under one's arm and has an attachment to clip to the hip or slip backwards onto the users back. Wouldn't it be easier to take the thing off when traveling long distance? Also, carrying an assault rifle under one's arm, hanging down, is restricting on one's posture and where the arm is held. It works as a means of freeing up the hands, but there's still a rifle dangling there (yes yes, until clipped onto the hip. The hip?) and that's an embuggerance.

I'm not trying to destroy your concept, just marry it up with how the damn things can actually be carried.

 

[Ackehece]

This was in the back of my mind. A B-5 jeep is easier for the grav carrier to airlift, etc.

maybe - but it appears that turrets (1 Dton) do not change mass but the charts give B mods to them - so maybe it is more a maintenance side (different from reliability and ease of use):CoW:o:

 

[Ackehece]

Just trying to picture this: a short barreled (even like today's carbines) bullpup weapon that fits under one's arm and has an attachment to clip to the hip or slip backwards onto the users back. Wouldn't it be easier to take the thing off when traveling long distance? Also, carrying an assault rifle under one's arm, hanging down, is restricting on one's posture and where the arm is held. It works as a means of freeing up the hands, but there's still a rifle dangling there (yes yes, until clipped onto the hip. The hip?) and that's an embuggerance.

I'm not trying to destroy your concept, just marry it up with how the damn things can actually be carried.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVGbYG2_u4I