T5 Damage Application???

[Hemdian]

- How should a bar brawl be handled, where the seven PCs and NPCs of the player's ship engage a rival crew of nine NPCs?

Divide the mass brawl into multiple seperate brawls with the option (where appropriate) for individual characters to shift from one brawl to an adjacent one between rounds. I've seen this in other RPGs.

- How is one of those brawlers healed when his 9A8 stats are reduced to 123 during the brawl. That's would Severity 9. A 9D task to heal this dude!!!

Perhaps, although I would sum up all the Hits from one attack to determine injury severity, I would *not* do so for multiple attacks during a combat. Stats going from 9A8 to 123 would take 21 Hits over the combat as a whole but from multiple injuries of lesser severity.

Actually, can you point me at the section that says a severity 9 injury takes a 9D roll to heal. (Not doubting you, just didn't spot it.)

- How does a PC hurt an NPC when his pistol does Bullet-1 damage when any damage 9- on an NPC are ignored?

That is in the NPC damage rules that I see as an optional extra to make the Referee's life easier. It does appear broken to I've set it aside for now. To be honest I've never trusted NPC shortcut rules so I probably wouldn't have used this one anyway.

- How do you reslove penetration with weapons? Each type of damage singlely, or by adding them together? If you do them one by one, what order do you use? If you combine them, then how do you resolve wound severity (where cuts are Hits/3 and wounds are Hits/2)?

As I've said before, I resolve each seperately for penetration but combine by injury type for those that do penetrate, (This post-penetration combining may be wrong, we'll have to see when it is addressed in the eratta.) Order doesn't matter as effects (like armour destruction) are applied next round.

The Cuts to Hits question is interesting. It appears that one point of Cut does 1 Hit of damage per turn (when applying that damage to C1/C2/C3) but you don't combine Hit injuries with Cut injuries for the purpose of wound severity.

- Why would any character ever use SnapFire, when AutoFire has the same requirements and penalizes the character less and provides better bonus damage?

Because you can't use AutoFire while running.

- How can a character using a revolver move and fire in the same combat round?

I suggested Revolvers and Autopistols (but not other pistols) should be classified as having "Rapid" action ... which is technically single action but treated as burst.

- You're OK with some attack rolls getting easier if the character decides to use a Hasty attack and add dice to difficulty?

Are you talking about the effect of "Spectacular Success"? It would be a simple enough fix to say that Spectacular Success is any *successful* roll where there are three or more "1"s. Thus the chance of success is untouched, it's just that a greater proportion of successes are spectacular the harder the task.

- You're OK with a character using Suppression Fire attacking 15 targets in the same round (all the attackers that attack him), yet his buddy, who is using the same weapon, can only attack one target?

Yes.

I could keep going...but I think I've made the point that T5 Combat problems are much more than "a few wierd values" throwing the game off.

I disagree. Right now, the issues with GunMaker and ArmorMaker seem to be the most intractable. After that there is the ambiguity of handling the extra damage from SnapFire and AutoFire, the apparently broken optional NPC damage rule, and (maybe) medical healing post-combat ... I'll have to read up on that. Other than that it looks "good to go!"

 

[Supplement Four]

Divide the mass brawl into multiple seperate brawls with the option (where appropriate) for individual characters to shift from one brawl to an adjacent one between rounds. I've seen this in other RPGs.

And...what rules would you use?

Perhaps, although I would sum up all the Hits from one attack to determine injury severity, I would *not* do so for multiple attacks during a combat. Stats going from 9A8 to 123 would take 21 Hits over the combat as a whole but from multiple injuries of lesser severity.

But, now you're talking House Rules. I'm only speaking about T5 as written.

Actually, can you point me at the section that says a severity 9 injury takes a 9D roll to heal. (Not doubting you, just didn't spot it.)

It's under the Medic skill. This is all the healing rules I could find in the book. Severity gives you the difficulty of the healing throw, and Severity is Wounds divided by 2 (cuts divided by 3).

It's a wonderful idea that is poorly executed, like many ideas in T5.

That is in the NPC damage rules that I see as an optional extra to make the Referee's life easier. It does appear broken to I've set it aside for now. To be honest I've never trusted NPC shortcut rules so I probably wouldn't have used this one anyway.

Again, you're talking House Rules. What does T5 give us? Two damage systems, one for Player Characters and one for NPCs.

As I've said before, I resolve each seperately for penetration but combine by injury type for those that do penetrate, (This post-penetration combining may be wrong, we'll have to see when it is addressed in the eratta.) Order doesn't matter as effects (like armour destruction) are applied next round.

But, what is it supposed to be? T5 doesn't really tell us, and that's a problem.

The Cuts to Hits question is interesting. It appears that one point of Cut does 1 Hit of damage per turn (when applying that damage to C1/C2/C3) but you don't combine Hit injuries with Cut injuries for the purpose of wound severity.

Yes, another unclear problem with T5 combat.

Because you can't use AutoFire while running.

Really? Page 214 clearly states that a character using AutoFire or SnapFire can be Speed=0 or Speed=1 only. That's standing still or walking. No running. It's the same for SnapFire.

It's only the table on page 218 that indicates that characters using SnapFire can run at Speed=2.

Which is correct? Who knows? I would think that a passage written out would be more likely to be correct than a table, but the table makes more sense.

Again...another T5 problem.

I suggested Revolvers and Autopistols (but not other pistols) should be classified as having "Rapid" action ... which is technically single action but treated as burst.

House Ruling, again. We're only talking about the T5 rules as written.

Are you talking about the effect of "Spectacular Success"? It would be a simple enough fix to say that Spectacular Success is any *successful* roll where there are three or more "1"s. Thus the chance of success is untouched, it's just that a greater proportion of successes are spectacular the harder the task.

But...that "fix" is a House Rule. We're going by what T5 says...

I disagree.

Somehow, I feel as if I could show you 100 problems with T5, and you'd still disagree that there's anything wrong with it except a tweak here or there.

After that there is the ambiguity of handling the extra damage from SnapFire and AutoFire, the apparently broken optional NPC damage rule, and (maybe) medical healing post-combat ... I'll have to read up on that. Other than that it looks "good to go!"

That just flabbergasts me.

You've answered everything I pointed out above with a House Rule, and still say there's nothing wrong with the game.

 

[Hemdian]

Divide the mass brawl into multiple seperate brawls with the option (where appropriate) for individual characters to shift from one brawl to an adjacent one between rounds. I've seen this in other RPGs.

And...what rules would you use?

Ask the players what they want to do, decide what the NPCs want to do, apply an awareness of the situation in resolving who actually fights who. If necessary sketch out the area or use minis to illustrate (even if we're not using minis to resolve the actual combat itself). You know, standard behavior for a GM of any RPG.

Perhaps, although I would sum up all the Hits from one attack to determine injury severity, I would *not* do so for multiple attacks during a combat. Stats going from 9A8 to 123 would take 21 Hits over the combat as a whole but from multiple injuries of lesser severity.

But, now you're talking House Rules. I'm only speaking about T5 as written.

The rules are expressed ambiguously. I'm trying to make an educated guess as to what was intended. If I guessed correctly it's not a House Rule. So this might be correct, we'll have to wait on the eratta for confirmation.

That is in the NPC damage rules that I see as an optional extra to make the Referee's life easier. It does appear broken to I've set it aside for now. To be honest I've never trusted NPC shortcut rules so I probably wouldn't have used this one anyway.

Again, you're talking House Rules. What does T5 give us? Two damage systems, one for Player Characters and one for NPCs.

I'm not sure choosing not to use an optional rule consistutes a House Rule ... at least not in the sense you mean.

As I've said before, I resolve each seperately for penetration but combine by injury type for those that do penetrate, (This post-penetration combining may be wrong, we'll have to see when it is addressed in the eratta.) Order doesn't matter as effects (like armour destruction) are applied next round.

But, what is it supposed to be? T5 doesn't really tell us, and that's a problem.

Again I'm making an educated guess ... this one I'm fairly confident about.

The Cuts to Hits question is interesting. It appears that one point of Cut does 1 Hit of damage per turn (when applying that damage to C1/C2/C3) but you don't combine Hit injuries with Cut injuries for the purpose of wound severity.

Yes, another unclear problem with T5 combat.

It's a wrinkle I hadn't noticed. But now that I have it seems clear to me.

Because you can't use AutoFire while running.

Really? Page 214 clearly states that a character using AutoFire or SnapFire can be Speed=0 or Speed=1 only. That's standing still or walking. No running. It's the same for SnapFire.

It's only the table on page 218 that indicates that characters using SnapFire can run at Speed=2.

Which is correct? Who knows? I would think that a passage written out would be more likely to be correct than a table, but the table makes more sense.

Again...another T5 problem.

Either p214 or p218 has a typo. If p214 is correct then the rule doesn't make sense. If p218 is correct then the rule does make sense. Logically p214 is the typo and p218 is correct. QED.

I suggested Revolvers and Autopistols (but not other pistols) should be classified as having "Rapid" action ... which is technically single action but treated as burst.

House Ruling, again. We're only talking about the T5 rules as written.

Yes. There is a genuine flaw in the rules. I was suggesting this as a fix. A House Rule. You got me.

Are you talking about the effect of "Spectacular Success"? It would be a simple enough fix to say that Spectacular Success is any *successful* roll where there are three or more "1"s. Thus the chance of success is untouched, it's just that a greater proportion of successes are spectacular the harder the task.

But...that "fix" is a House Rule. We're going by what T5 says...

True, this is also a House Rule. I personally wasn't going to bother as I believe the probabilities are so low that they won't materially affect game-play. I was merely offering it as a suggestion for any mathematical uber-pedants who might read this.

I disagree.

Somehow, I feel as if I could show you 100 problems with T5, and you'd still disagree that there's anything wrong with it except a tweak here or there.

I'm trying to triage issues as typos, ambiguities, and actual flaws. In the first two categories I try to make reasonable guesses as to what the rules should say, and in the third category, I look for the smallest possible change to fix it. The aim is not to gleefully prove that the system is a completely unusable mess, but to end up with something usable while staying as close as possible to the R.A.W.

After that there is the ambiguity of handling the extra damage from SnapFire and AutoFire, the apparently broken optional NPC damage rule, and (maybe) medical healing post-combat ... I'll have to read up on that. Other than that it looks "good to go!"

That just flabbergasts me.

You've answered everything I pointed out above with a House Rule, and still say there's nothing wrong with the game.

You made 8 points, I offered 2 House Rules (one of which isn't really necessary) plus suggested ways of interpreting the rules in a manor that is consistant with what is written.

I guess I see the glass as half full and you seem to see it as highly toxic, possibly even radioactive, and think we should all run screaming from the room.

 

[Supplement Four]

I guess I see the glass as half full and you seem to see it as highly toxic, possibly even radioactive, and think we should all run screaming from the room.

Hey, I want to like T5. I really do.

 

[Licheking]

- How should a bar brawl be handled, where the seven PCs and NPCs of the player's ship engage a rival crew of nine NPCs?

Split the fight up into as many pairs as you can then resolve as per the rules in the skills section under fighter/brawler i think.

- How is one of those brawlers healed when his 9A8 stats are reduced to 123 during the brawl. That's would Severity 9. A 9D task to heal this dude!!!

The maximum injury a person can sustain is Severity 6 according to the injuries and wounds chapter and the table at the bottom.

- How does a PC hurt an NPC when his pistol does Bullet-1 damage when any damage 9- on an NPC are ignored?

They can't, so either live with it if you want to use the mook/NPC rules or use the regular combat system.

- How do you reslove penetration with weapons? Each type of damage singlely, or by adding them together? If you do them one by one, what order do you use? If you combine them, then how do you resolve wound severity (where cuts are Hits/3 and wounds are Hits/2)?

Each singly would be the logical interpretation or why would you have different effects in the first place. This would then imply multiple injuries with multiple severity and therefore healing rolls. This is why i ignore the one sentence talking about doing all the severity stuff at the end of combat and doing as part of the damage process.

- Why would any character ever use SnapFire, when AutoFire has the same requirements and penalizes the character less and provides better bonus damage?

Because they are descriptive and in the rather abstract nature of T5 combat as written they work as a descriptive rule, eg:- i'm firing from the hip, or i'm emptying my clip at that person.

- How can a character using a revolver move and fire in the same combat round?

They can't, again live with it. It doesn't make sense in a minute long combat round but does in a few seconds long one, the issue here is how do you justify it in the descriptive flavour of the round and its apparent length within the story.

- You're OK with some attack rolls getting easier if the character decides to use a Hasty attack and add dice to difficulty?

They don't get easier, you are rolling an extra dice, this makes it harder, you are quoting statistics which only have relevance over 100's of rolls and the issue is with the Spectacular Success/failure rule not the general skill system.

- You're OK with a character using Suppression Fire attacking 15 targets in the same round (all the attackers that attack him), yet his buddy, who is using the same weapon, can only attack one target?

Yes because again your assuming 15 people will attack the guy suppressing an area, but more likely no-one will pop there head up and therefore the buddy will actually be more successful than the guy suppressing an area. Again this is part of the abstract/descriptive flavour of T5 combat live with it as is or don't it is not a problem with the system, its YOUR problem with the system.

 

[thalassogen]

Ah, sorry, folks. People do have problems with the system, yes, and I would like to refrain from stating that it is "objectively flawed", but it is. That does not mean that it can't be liked, though! But every system must allow itself to be measured by the standards set by other systems. And there are abstract and descriptive systems that do a much better job at supporting combat with much less rules and much more clarity.

Does that mean T5 has to change? No.
Will T5 as written attract new gamers? Probably not.

T5 is a revival of nostalgic feelings. Yes, it is playable, at least to some degree, but the gamers I know won't even consider it.

And I guess that's the hurting point: At least I had been hoping for a great playable game that ported CT to the 21st century incorporating all lessons learned through the decades and editions past. But at least to me, T5 (the rules!) is not modern/appealing/fresh/accessible/fun/etc. I hadn't hoped for a specific system, but I had hoped for a modern revival of Traveller by the original mind behind it. I don't regret participating in the Kickstarter, but I regret the result into which I invested so much hope. Maybe too much for anybody to live up to.

 

[Supplement Four]

But at least to me, T5 (the rules!) is not modern/appealing/fresh/accessible/fun/etc.

Agreed, of course.

The minimum I expect from a game that I buy, especially one as expensive as T5, is that the game is understandable and playable rules as written, right out of the box.

I don't have to agree with those rules. I don't have to even like them. But, the game should be able to be played using just what is described in the text--without House Rules are tweaks.

On that basic, minimum level, T5 fails.

 

[Epee]

And there are abstract and descriptive systems that do a much better job at supporting combat with much less rules and much more clarity...

Thalassogen, I've been away from gaming for a while, what are the systems you're referring to and are there any tactical systems you particularly like?

PM me if the mention of non-Traveller games seems inappropriate.

 

[thalassogen]

PM me if the mention of non-Traveller games seems inappropriate.

I PMed you to keep this thread Traveller-oriented.

 

[Licheking]

But it is playable 'out of the box' as you call it. Yes there are some things that some people don't like, but i have yet to find a system that gets used without some changes because of group dynamics and gaming style differences. T5 works, there are some strange rules that don't when taken to the extreme like the NPC damage and bullet-1 but thats the way the system is written and it works within the context of the system. Spectacular Success/Failure works, you might not like how it works but it does work so you cannot go round saying that it has failed, its only failed in YOUR opinion.

 

[Hemdian]

- You're OK with a character using Suppression Fire attacking 15 targets in the same round (all the attackers that attack him), yet his buddy, who is using the same weapon, can only attack one target?

Okay, I never answered this one properly. When you conduct Suppression Fire you are not "attacking 15 targets", you are attacking one target (an area) that you resolve potentially multiple times. Look at it this way: I know T5 doesn't closely track ammo use but if it did then your suppression fire would use the same amount whether one guy steps into the line of fire, ten guys, fifteen guys or no one. And it's not "all the attackers that attack him" but anyone in the target area who exposes themselves, whether attacking or not (even friendlies).

One attack per round:
- Attack one person, resolve once.
- Attack one area, resolve for each exposed person within that area.

 

[Supplement Four]

Spectacular Success/Failure works, you might not like how it works but it does work so you cannot go round saying that it has failed, its only failed in YOUR opinion.

No, I'm speaking of the things that are actually broken in the game. SF is broken if chance of making it gets easier the harder the task becomes. That's true with T5. Broken.

The text gives no clue whether a character can run or not while using SnapShot. Examples of "yes" and "no" exist in the book. That's broken.

The text says that every character can attack and move during a combat round, then that is contradicted in the text for characters with single shot weapons. That's broken.

It is very easy to get to a 6D Hopeless medical task with the slightest of wounds. Many rpgers will agree that's broken.

NPCs cannot be damaged by PCs using pistols that do Bullet-1 damage, but NPCs using those same pistols can damage PCs. That's broken.

The text is unclear about how to apply weapons damage--as a whole for penetration, or separately by type. That's broken.

These things aren't my opinion. They're the truth of T5 combat.

 

[Hemdian]

These things aren't my opinion. They're the truth of T5 combat.

Half of what you've just listed is true, the other half is opinion. That's what make your posts so frustrating.

 

[Licheking]

No, I'm speaking of the things that are actually broken in the game. SF is broken if chance of making it gets easier the harder the task becomes. That's true with T5. Broken.

That is not broken, only a statistical anomaly, and i don't agree with it but it doesn't make the system broken, broken means doesn't work, but the task system does work you roll you get a result so what if it gets statistically easier we arn't playing the statistics we are trying to tell a story.

The text gives no clue whether a character can run or not while using SnapShot. Examples of "yes" and "no" exist in the book. That's broken.

That is not broken either, pick whichever one suits the purposes of your games it says both so you actually have more choice.

The text says that every character can attack and move during a combat round, then that is contradicted in the text for characters with single shot weapons. That's broken.

See statement above pick whichever suits your gaming needs, still not broken though.

It is very easy to get to a 6D Hopeless medical task with the slightest of wounds. Many rpgers will agree that's broken.

As you are quoting the rules and trying to stick to the letter of the rules, the first wound in any combat is applied to only 1 characteristic rolled randomly. A severity 6 injury is 12 points of damage that is any attribute reduced to 0 even if you rolled maximum in character gen and assuming you didn't get any bonuses throughout your career. Average Joe with 777777 is actually at -5 in one of their ph7ysical stats and unconscious. That to me warrants a 6D medical task, so again not broken.

NPCs cannot be damaged by PCs using pistols that do Bullet-1 damage, but NPCs using those same pistols can damage PCs. That's broken.

Live with it, if you insist on using 2 different combat systems you are going to get anomalies stick to one or the other, or live by the results. It is not broken just because you don't like it, you know its there and it doesn't stop the game.

The text is unclear about how to apply weapons damage--as a whole for penetration, or separately by type. That's broken.

Agreed its unclear, but it doesn't make the thing broken, and logic would indicate that you take each effect as a separate roll, otherwise why would you have them.

These things aren't my opinion. They're the truth of T5 combat.

You could easily play this game straight out of the book, the only reason i have changed things is because i hate abstract systems and i want a very detailed granular combat, i have got this while still keeping the majority of T5 intact, in my opinion.

 

[Supplement Four]

Honestly, Lichking, can you describe something that you would call broken in a game? If it's broken, it's really just a choice, huh? Or a statistical anomaly...

 

[rancke]

That is not broken, only a statistical anomaly, and i don't agree with it but it doesn't make the system broken, broken means doesn't work, but the task system does work you roll you get a result so what if it gets statistically easier we arn't playing the statistics we are trying to tell a story.

Let's call it flawed then. A combat system that gives believable results is better than a combat system where you have to consciously accept an counterintuitive result for the sake of getting on with the game.

That is not broken either, pick whichever one suits the purposes of your games it says both so you actually have more choice.

That's silly. Either you can or you can't. If the rules don't make it clear or, worse yet, present two different mutually exclusive answers, then it's flat out broken. Not flawed, broken. Any rules that allow players and referees to get into arguments where both sides can present official examples that back their point of view are a Bad Rules.

Agreed its unclear, but it doesn't make the thing broken, and logic would indicate that you take each effect as a separate roll, otherwise why would you have them.

Being unclear is a flaw in rules.


Hans

 

[Licheking]

Any rules that allow players and referees to get into arguments where both sides can present official examples that back their point of view are a Bad Rules.

This would never happen in my games, i do not allow the players to argue with my point of view about the rules. Its also why i don't like my players having a copy of the rules, i can't stand rules lawyers or anyone who would argue with the GM mid-game. I make sure that the players know what they need to know to play their characters and how the system works but once play starts my word is law.

 

[rancke]

This would never happen in my games, I do not allow the players to argue with my point of view about the rules. Its also why i don't like my players having a copy of the rules, i can't stand rules lawyers or anyone who would argue with the GM mid-game. I make sure that the players know what they need to know to play their characters and how the system works but once play starts my word is law.

What you do in your own private game sessions to overcome the shortcomings of the rules you use is not really relevant to the question of whether the rules have shortcomings.

Any argument that relies on not using the rules or not using them as written is completely nugatory when it comes to the question of how well the rules work.


Hans

 

[Licheking]

I think i'm going to quit the forums for a while, i'm finding them far too negative and frankly i don't need that.

Some people just seem to want T5 to fail and they are trying to tell the world that it is broken and that they are the only ones who can fix it, well i don't agree.

 

[Supplement Four]

I think i'm going to quit the forums for a while, i'm finding them far too negative and frankly i don't need that.

Don't do that. You're right. It's been quite negative. I know I've been negative on T5 because I am so disappointed in it (had high hopes for it), and, it seems, every time I turn around, I find something else about it that is broken or wonky. And, to be honest, that just frustrates the hell out of me because I really do wish the game was a good one.

I don't want you to quit the forum or stop posting. I'd feel bad if you did that.