Sane Starship combat rules for T20.

[BetterThanLife]

Has anyone come up with variations on T20 Starship combat that actually work for both small ships and big ones? Something where a big ship can actually survive past getting hit once? Something where you don't get to crit more often than hit? Or even worse use the PMOS with gunnery and auto crit by taking 10?

Rules where a Merchant or Scout's sensors are more than visual range. (I know it isn't quite that bad but it is certainly close.)

Has anyone converted Mayday to T20?

Has anyone converted Ad Astra's Starship combat game to T20?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Here is my temporary solution. Playtesting it currently and will be having players playing with at least part of it within the month.

Rule change 1. No ship weapons have a crit multiplier greater than x3.

Rule Change 2. Spinal mounts don't get a bonus to crit threat number.

Rule Change 3. Lose the Gunnery skill and replace it with BAB. ("Standard Naval Gunners" would lose the Feat "Skill Focus (Gunnery)" and add the Feat "Martial Training." (Doesn't quite make them equal to Marine gunners but not far behind.)

Rule Change 4. Throw out the flat 16 dice damage for all spinals and replace it with the factor number of dice the way the rest of the Starship weapons work. (Gives you a reason to actually pay for the bigger guns.)

Rule Change 5. Eliminate the "if you fly off the map, even if the guy shooting at you is one hex behind you, then you got away rule" and replace it with rolling mapsheets like Mayday. If you are more than 2 times the max range of your enemy's active sensors then you can decide to break off.

That is where I stand right now. Any suggestions?
Any ideas as to what this will do to Starship combat?

 

[RainOfSteel]

I've been using the T20 Spreadsheet (Falkayn's), and I've been very irritated at the limits to sensors and comms by computer model. I'm going to have to dig into the T20 Starship Design Sequence and see what I can come up with.

 

[Vanguard]

Rather than change ship gunnery to BAB, how about just saying that PMOS can't be taken with gunnery?

You'll still end up with higher gunnery scores than respective BABs. Maybe there needs to be a better way for other ships to improve their defense? A career gunner (lvl 10, 14 ranks gunner, maybe 18 total gunnery bonus) should be able to hit a ship flown by a rookie pretty easily, but a career pilot (lvl 10. 14 ranks pilot, maybe 18 total pilot bonus) should be able to dodge pretty well.

I guess I feel like switching to BAB is just a bandaid fix, and doesn't address the root of the problem. I also think that targeting starship weapons is much different than aiming a rifle, so they shouldn't be based on the same stat...then again, this is D20, where being good at firing a rifle also means you are a professional pistol shooter, knife-fighter, fencer, axe-man, and pikeman...so maybe starship gunner as well isn't much of a stretch.

To be honest, I havn't looked that closely at the starship combat rules for T20 (my last group never got into a fight, at any scale). I'll take a peek and see if I can't figure out what's breaking the gunnery skill.

 

[Vanguard]

Bhoins, are you using the rules from the playtest files or the T20 book? From first glance, looks like the "advanced combat" or whatever from the book, but I wanted to check.

 

[veltyen]

D20, where being good at firing a rifle also means you are a professional pistol shooter, knife-fighter, fencer, axe-man, and pikeman...so maybe starship gunner as well isn't much of a stretch.

You could go the other way and make each of the fighting techniques skill based. Skill (Marksman, swordsman, armsman, high energy) and so on. It means throwing away BAB as a meaningful term, but not a big loss as that is already academic for starship combat as noted.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Vanguard:
Bhoins, are you using the rules from the playtest files or the T20 book? From first glance, looks like the "advanced combat" or whatever from the book, but I wanted to check.

T20 book. And yes it is the advanced combat. I have never GMed a game, or played in one for that matter, where the players didn't want to see where they were in relationship to the enemy. The Basic Starship rules don't allow for that, however aside from putting it on a sheet of hexes there is little difference between the sets of rules. (Though the turn length difference might cause additional problems.) So far I have been messing within a strat hex. (Small scale.) I was planning on taking it outside to the strat hexes next.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Vanguard:
Rather than change ship gunnery to BAB, how about just saying that PMOS can't be taken with gunnery?

You'll still end up with higher gunnery scores than respective BABs. Maybe there needs to be a better way for other ships to improve their defense? A career gunner (lvl 10, 14 ranks gunner, maybe 18 total gunnery bonus) should be able to hit a ship flown by a rookie pretty easily, but a career pilot (lvl 10. 14 ranks pilot, maybe 18 total pilot bonus) should be able to dodge pretty well.

I guess I feel like switching to BAB is just a bandaid fix, and doesn't address the root of the problem. I also think that targeting starship weapons is much different than aiming a rifle, so they shouldn't be based on the same stat...then again, this is D20, where being good at firing a rifle also means you are a professional pistol shooter, knife-fighter, fencer, axe-man, and pikeman...so maybe starship gunner as well isn't much of a stretch.

To be honest, I havn't looked that closely at the starship combat rules for T20 (my last group never got into a fight, at any scale). I'll take a peek and see if I can't figure out what's breaking the gunnery skill.

Saying PMOS can't be taken with gunnery, when gunnery is the gunner's "Primary Military Occupational Speciality" seems a bit lame to me. There is no justification besides, "Because I say so!" Further BAB can be described as hand eye coordination, speed, reaction time, and kinesis (or however that is spelled.). That way it would work for Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Sword, Knife and Turret mounted Laser. You still have to see the target, recognize the target, aim at the target and fire. (All before the target disappears.) It doesn't really matter if the targeting information is what is seen with the mark-1 eyeball, a computer enhanced HUD on your cool mirror shades wired to your rifle, or the targeting information fed to you from the targeting computer on a starship, or anything in between. BAB isn't just over open sights. So why stop with personal weapons? Now you have to know how each weapon works, hence the feats for pistols, rifles, energy weapons, shipboard weapons, artillery, etc. (Which would be lessons in how the targeting information is presented and how to aim and fire the particular weapon at your disposal.

For example there is little difference in the principals of firing various weapons. Once you have a familiarity with the new weapon. For example, I generally qualified expert with an M-16 while I was in the Army. Once I was given a couple of hours to familiarize myself with an M-60 Machinegun, I had very little trouble qualifying expert with it. I also had no problems qualifying expert with an M203 Grenade launcher. These weapons share very little in common, but many of the basic principals apply. You have to figure out what a good sight picture is and follow proper proceedures for breathing and trigger squeeze. Make sure you have a steady firing position and engage the targets. I also qualified expert my first time out with the M-9 Pistol, and was extremely accurate with an M-72A2 LAW. (Not bad for a REMF!)

All combat is basically the same principal. Locate your target, aim at your target and engage your target. The differences are what your sight picture or how you aim at your target, how you release the force of your weapon, from swinging the Boarding Axe through trigger squeeze on a rifle, through depressing the paddles on a M2HB Maching Gun to firing a missile at an aircraft.

The basic principals are the same the difference is in the execution.

As for feeling like a bandaid, the whole thing feels like a bandaid. It is just a patch that preserves most of the intent of the rules without throwing them out. Which is why I am looking for a better more permament solution.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Like I said that is my temporary fix. Does anyone else have any suggestions?

 

[Vanguard]

After a quick look at the rules, it seems like gunners get their full skill for attacking, but pilots don't get their full skill for defense. This leads to a situation where ship combat is won in one of two ways:

- Cripple the other ship before he can take a shot.
- Have so much armor that you don't care about the other ship's constant hits.

It's possible that this was by design, and the game is intended to have that feel for ship combat. If you don't like it, fix it in one of two ways:

- Let pilots evade effectively - T20, P177 - Modify the "Evade" maneuver to apply at any range

- Make gunners roll the same way as pilots - Gunnery skill is rolled, and the result is referenced on T20 P160, "Evasive Maneuvers" table. A weapons hit is determined by: 1d20+result from table+size modifier+targeting bomus+range penalty (modification to attack action, P162)

Another thing you could do is allow full gunnery bonus at same ranges as the full pilot bonus applies. Use the table as above in all other ranges...this could cause some interesting changes in ship tactics since closing range makes such a huge difference.

One final thing you could try is reducing the range increments for starship weapons by quite a bit, so that it gets much tougher to hit at range.

I hope that's helpful! If you use that, or come up with something else, let us know how it works out!

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
Here is my temporary solution. Playtesting it currently and will be having players playing with at least part of it within the month.

Rule change 1. No ship weapons have a crit multiplier greater than x3.

Rule Change 2. Spinal mounts don't get a bonus to crit threat number.

Rule Change 3. Lose the Gunnery skill and replace it with BAB. ("Standard Naval Gunners" would lose the Feat "Skill Focus (Gunnery)" and add the Feat "Martial Training." (Doesn't quite make them equal to Marine gunners but not far behind.)

Rule Change 4. Throw out the flat 16 dice damage for all spinals and replace it with the factor number of dice the way the rest of the Starship weapons work. (Gives you a reason to actually pay for the bigger guns.)

Rule Change 5. Eliminate the "if you fly off the map, even if the guy shooting at you is one hex behind you, then you got away rule" and replace it with rolling mapsheets like Mayday. If you are more than 2 times the max range of your enemy's active sensors then you can decide to break off.

That is where I stand right now. Any suggestions?
Any ideas as to what this will do to Starship combat?

Bhoins,

Most of that sounds good to me. I'd still give spinal mounts x4 Crit Mod . . . they are what they are, but I'd give them a big penalty to-hit (at least -4), as they should be inherently difficult to bring on-target.

But, as the standard rules go for small ships, your average Fat Trader, with mod 1 computer and max mod 1 sensors, is only going to have a sensor range of 1 strategic hex, 15,000 klicks, then it isn't even going to be able to aim out to the end of the first range increment for lasers, pulse lasers, and missles. Some 400 dTon Corsair comes flying along, and the Fat Trader is going to get it's rear-end blown off before it even knows the Corsair is there.

Or am I reading it wrong? (I'm having trouble making sense of the rules.)

 

[BetterThanLife]

RainofSteel,
The reason for the X3 Crit limit is the way the starship weapons are currently set up. Most starship weapons are x1 Crit multiplier. Pulse Lasers, Nukes and Plasma Weapons are the only x2 Crit multipliers. Fusion Guns are x5 and Meson are x10. The Meson and Fusion weapons already do the most damage of the weapons on the chart and coincidentally have the lowest Crit threshold. Taking them down to x3 doesn't hurt them all that much.

You are reading the Sensor rules correctly. The Fat Trader will come in Fat, Dumb and Happy until or unless it is hit or swept by active sensors, or it almost runs into something. However the Standard Corsair, Model 2 computer, will not know if a Patrol Corvette (Model 3 Computer), (Sorry I refuse to call a 400T ship a Cruiser.

) Gazelle, Firey, Ramada, Lucifer, Valor, Broadsword, etc (Model 5 computer), SDB, Model 5-9 computer, Cruiser (Model 5-9 Computer) is out there watching the traffic patterns. And if there is a Cruiser out there the Pirate will likely find out only when the Spinal Meson obliterates his Corsair.

In my variation of the rules a Spinal will still gut a ship that is less than 1Kton with one shot and in the official rules a Spinal Meson can gut a 7.5 million ton ship with one crit (52.5%/100% of the time!(With/without PMOS Gunnery)) and vaporize a 450 thousand ton ship with one Crit. Both of those require average rolls and ignore Radiation damage.

Now given how effective Point defense is and that it does work against Lasers and that the sensors don't have a reach worth talking about means that a Merchant can arm his ship with Lasers and Sand and these weapons are defensive in nature. It is only when the ships sensors are upgraded that the ship has any real offensive punch. So the Navy may look closer at ships with better sensors than required.

It also means that a Subsidized Liner will see a Corsair before the Corsair sees the Liner. And I would never, under the T20 rules, classify a ship a Scout without at least Model 4 sensors. It would take a Scout with Model 1 sensors several months to a year just to figure out the orbits of the major heavenly bodies in a system. (Forget about doing an actual system survey.

)

 

[BetterThanLife]

Append to Rule Change 5. If you have divergent vectors, and have greater accelleration then you can choose to disengage if you are out of enemy weapon range. Or if you have a larger base vector and greater accelleration you can choose to disengage once you are out of enemy weapon range, provided your vectors are not convergent.

Add Rule Change 6. By mutual consent both sides can decide to disengage. (Actual consent not just saying so.

)

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Vanguard:
After a quick look at the rules, it seems like gunners get their full skill for attacking, but pilots don't get their full skill for defense. This leads to a situation where ship combat is won in one of two ways:

- Cripple the other ship before he can take a shot.
- Have so much armor that you don't care about the other ship's constant hits.

It's possible that this was by design, and the game is intended to have that feel for ship combat. If you don't like it, fix it in one of two ways:

- Let pilots evade effectively - T20, P177 - Modify the "Evade" maneuver to apply at any range

- Make gunners roll the same way as pilots - Gunnery skill is rolled, and the result is referenced on T20 P160, "Evasive Maneuvers" table. A weapons hit is determined by: 1d20+result from table+size modifier+targeting bomus+range penalty (modification to attack action, P162)

Another thing you could do is allow full gunnery bonus at same ranges as the full pilot bonus applies. Use the table as above in all other ranges...this could cause some interesting changes in ship tactics since closing range makes such a huge difference.

One final thing you could try is reducing the range increments for starship weapons by quite a bit, so that it gets much tougher to hit at range.

I hope that's helpful! If you use that, or come up with something else, let us know how it works out!

You can't have that much armor. Even a factor 3 Pulse Laser can score damage against factor 12 armor. And even Factor 15 armor won't help against meson weapons or crits, which ignore armor.

CT Personal combat has always gone to the first person to score a hit.(Rolling 3 + dice against a random 2D stat has nasty habit or reducing that stat to 0 and rendering a person unconscious.)

Under your system a hit will still disbale or destroy a craft especially when dealing with large ship combat. (And Mesons.) There are lots more modifiers available than simply Gunnery vs. Pilot. Further a Pilot's skill has a limiting factor of the actual agility of the ship he is piloting. The best pilot in the world is going to have a rather difficult time dodging canon rounds from an F-16 if he is piloting a 747. (Forget about missiles.)

On the other hand a great gunner isn't as constrained. Though trying to track an F-16 with the 16" guns of the New Jersey might pose some interesting problems.

 

[Vanguard]

Yes, I know armor isn't good enough for that kind of strategy, but black globes, meson screens, etc, can cause a similar effect.

It's true, there are other modifiers on both sides, but they balance out for the most part

The awkwardness of the large ship is in part represented by the size modifier to the ship. Gunners can still be constrained by sluggish ships if they're on bay or spinal weapons, or if the batteries they're aiming are not on the correct side of the ship for a particular target.

That being said, I do agree that the pilot's defense should be based somehow on the ship's agility. Do the ship combat rules take agility into account anywhere else? If not, we should come up with a forumla that adds a pilot skill check to AC, which is somehow modified by ship agility.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
RainofSteel,
The reason for the X3 Crit limit is the way the starship weapons are currently set up.

Oh! I see. I’m too used to looking at d20 D&D, where the standard value on the on the crit. column is x2. I see now that x1 is additional. Ok, that means my x4 is T20’s x3. I’m right on, even though I’m way off.

Originally posted by Bhoins:
You are reading the Sensor rules correctly.

<frown />

I was afraid of that.

<teeth gnashing />

 

[veltyen]

You can't have that much armor. Even a factor 3 Pulse Laser can score damage against factor 12 armor. And even Factor 15 armor won't help against meson weapons or crits, which ignore armor.

Crits don't ignore armor. They ignore armor for damage resolution, you still need to roll a hit to confirm the critical, a high armor rating makes that much harder.

An AC32 fighter (15 AR, 6 Ag, 1 size, 10 base) is surprisingly hard to crit. Add a couple of range increments and evasion and the fighter is hard to hit, let alone critical.

A USP3 pulse laser turret, with a M9 computer and a skill 10 Gunner is looking at a 10+ to hit at point blank range without the fighter evading.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
The best pilot in the world is going to have a rather difficult time dodging canon rounds from an F-16 if he is piloting a 747. (Forget about missiles.)

What? You didn't see Airport '77?

Ok, it wasn't a 747, but it wasn't a fighter, either.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by veltyen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />You can't have that much armor. Even a factor 3 Pulse Laser can score damage against factor 12 armor. And even Factor 15 armor won't help against meson weapons or crits, which ignore armor.

Crits don't ignore armor. They ignore armor for damage resolution, you still need to roll a hit to confirm the critical, a high armor rating makes that much harder.

An AC32 fighter (15 AR, 6 Ag, 1 size, 10 base) is surprisingly hard to crit. Add a couple of range increments and evasion and the fighter is hard to hit, let alone critical.

A USP3 pulse laser turret, with a M9 computer and a skill 10 Gunner is looking at a 10+ to hit at point blank range without the fighter evading. </font>[/QUOTE]An AC32 Fighter is the maximum AC a Space Craft can have. That is a very specialized, expensive craft for its capability. But OK.

An "Average Naval Gunner" (see pg. 423 THB) has a skill mod of 11 and the first two range bands count as short range. Sensor enhance that gunnery, (+9) Have the vessel commander actually command, which means the commander should have leadership skill, however according to 76 gunmen there is nobody with any leadership skill on a Naval vessel. (Yeah right.) Give the commander a Leader skill of 10. (The HG Line Officer equivalent.) You get 1/3rd of that. Or +3. Fire a battery, which, unless it is a Corvette is at least two turrets. (+5) Now our to hit number is 4+ (Take away the command ability it is 7+.). BTW generally if you have a Mod 9 computer you are at least a Destroyer Escort.

But for the sake of argument lets just use a TL-15 200T SDB from Supp-9. It needs a 5+ to hit, that AC32 Fighter, or an 80% chance of a hit or of confirming a crit. Fire a bay or ten laser turrets and it hits on a 2+ (without even trying).

Take a Spinal Meson, say level J (18). Have 10 skill levels in gunnery, gunnery specialization, heavy metal and PMOS Gunnery, a Model 8 computer, competent commander, and see what it takes to avoid a hit when the gunner takes 10 to hit. Now since a Spinal Meson Crits on a 10 and taking 10 the roll is a 10.... And is confirmed on another take 10. What size ship do you need to survive an average damage roll from the hit? (Under the standard rules.)

For the first question, the roll without sensors, computer aid, or a commander, with just the gunner is +29. (Plus 10 for taking 10.) The Max AC a Spaceship can have is 32. The Max AC a spaceship can have against a Meson weapon is a less than 100 Ton Fighter with a dispersed structure, a Factor 9 Meson Screen and Agility 6 (Like that combination is even possible.) is still AC32. So in that case the roll to hit is a 3, over open sights. Crit threat on a 10+ Critical hit on an additional roll of 3+ (Or 50% of the time you get a crit. Against any other target it is on a 2+ and your crit is 52.5% of the time and Take 10 your Crit is 100% of the time.)

To answer the second question you can do the math or look it up on this board. (It is discussed a few times. )

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
You are reading the Sensor rules correctly.

<frown />

I was afraid of that.

<teeth gnashing /> </font>[/QUOTE]On a brighter side it means taking a Merchant Vessel and going Pirate is much tougher, so those GMs that don't want their campaign to head in that direction can breath easier when a Merchant ship gets a couple of Laser turrets, they really are for self defense.