Where T5 is Going

[aramis]

Games like Star Wars and WFRP have slightly different markets. People like me choose Traveller, because of it’s hard science feel.

I've not seen a hard science feel in Traveller except for the ship rules in TNE - it's pretty squarely in space opera territory in late CT, and in MT, T4, T20, and MGT as well.

A hard science feel would imply to me no gravitics, no magic thrusters, delta-V calculations, no meson guns, no psionics.

 

[Supplement Four]

Wrong game - you're talking WEG's Star Wars, long OOP, and that's second ed only - I'm talking FFG's Star Wars. Which explicitly has non-linear range bands, and range band movement. No Movement units.

As an aside, it looks like you're skimming then replaying, rather than reading for content and replying, because I explicitly stated FFG Star Wars.

Yes, I missed "FFG".

 

[Supplement Four]

I've not seen a hard science feel in Traveller except for the ship rules in TNE - it's pretty squarely in space opera territory in late CT, and in MT, T4, T20, and MGT as well.

A hard science feel would imply to me no gravitics, no magic thrusters, delta-V calculations, no meson guns, no psionics.

I think the "hard science" feel that Echo is referring to is, for instance, CT's method of creating starships (where volume is considered, and only certain components of certain TL can be placed within a limited space). In other games, like Star Wars, detail like that is not considered. Just make up something cool and go with it.

I remember I had a neat idea for a Zhodani grav bot that would be used to patrol forests and such. I started to design my idea using Robots Book 8, and I found that my thought was not quite possible given the engineering allowed with the rules. I had to change my bot into a drone, controlled from a station not far away. And, the weapons I imagined on the drone were cut down due to lack of space.

In many other games, I would have just gone with the picture in my head and given it some game stats, but the Traveller rules force me to put a little rhyme to my reason.

Rule like this (I agree with Echo) do give Traveller a hard science feel, especially when I'm using Scouts to design a solar system or considering the amount of thrust a ship is using in G's. Most other scifi games do not go into that type of detail.

True, Classic Traveller does have its space opera aspects as well, but I think the space opera is tempered with hard science bits.

 

[rancke]

Traveller has a hard SF shell with a delicious soft gooey center.


Hans

 

[Supplement Four]

Traveller has a hard SF shell with a delicious soft gooey center.

It is the Oreo of science fiction games. :rofl:

 

[savage]

No dates (those of you who have been here with me from the beginning know I never give dates), but Marc is working to catch up on the errata, and on a revision of the combat rules for review.
...
So what happens next? That is actually up to you. We'll have the first of two threads. In the first thread, I'm going to post MY thoughts on priorities for fixing t5 by topic (not specific problem, but chapter topic). I encourage all of you to suggest other priorities. My assumption is that all of us will hash that out for a few days, and at the end of the week I'll put up a poll and folks can vote on upcoming priorities.

This is all good news. The priority tracking is the best approach to progress.

 

[DonM]

The FIVE do have a lot from Marc to process.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I hate to comment here; but based on all the brew-ha-ha that I've seen elsewhere on the COTI BBS, I decided to give the personal combat rules a good read.

Call me naive, but they seem well thought out and written, and correct the old hit verse overcome defenses challenge that MT tried to address.

I like T5. I like how a Ton is defined visually as well as written in the introduction section.

I guess you could say I think T5 is A-okay.

My only beef with my CD and rules are the starship top down sketches on pages 654 and 655. I'd like to see some detailed CGI there when possible.

Beyond that...well, I look forward to an improved version of what I think is a decent rule set.

I still have most of my LBBs, my big black Traveller book (Bill Keith's dust jacket has long since vanished), and my MT books. I like the game. I'm glad T5 has come about, and ... I hope I can write for it some more.

... hmm ...

Shameless plug; check out Gypsy Knight Games Dawn Colony Adventures!

 

[Spaceresearcher]

THANK YOU

Many thanks DonM,
I for one appreciate the hard work you guys are embarking upon to ensure T5 does become the ultimate edition of Traveller.

My main issues where in fact the Character generation system. Mostly fixed with the errata, agreed but for someone taking that book and reading it for the first time, a bit of a scare off.

There was so much goodness in the (look can I just call it DRAFT T5)book, that it would have been a shame to see fellow Travellers leaving it as dead in the water.

Here's to a new edition that will be the ultimate edition of Traveller. Personally what I seek is an official rules set I can use without looking back at any old rules and that can finally be a rules set that's mostly agreed upon for use in a game(I say mostly because sadly most Travellers all have a firm view of what they believe the rules should be and perhaps you can't teach an old dog new tricks etc. But this player wants a rules set to use as the law and remove silly rules arguments if that's possible).

So thank you. There's way too much great material and ideas to let this tomb become a door stop. TRAVEL ON!!!!

 

[Supplement Four]

Call me naive, but they seem well thought out and written, and correct the old hit verse overcome defenses challenge that MT tried to address.

I agree, on the surface, for a first read through, they seem OK. It's only after you drive it off the lot that you find the problems.

Try to answer these questions:

In what circumstance would you use SnapFire rather than AutoFire?

How would you resolve a fist fight in a bar between three PCs and three NPCs?

You've got three PCs with six shot revolvers that do 1D damage. They're in a good defensive position. But, 22 native NPCs, without weapons, will rush them. Can you tell me how the NPCs will win this fight without taking a single hit to any one of them?

If a weapon is capable of burst fire, then why would a PC ever use the single fire option?

Can a PC using a standard pump action shotgun fire and move in the same combat round? Can a PC with an M-16 move and fire in the same round?

What's more deadly? A gunshot wound from a revolver or a single stab from a dagger?

What does the damage type PEN mean?

If an NPC wears standard Cloth armor, what type of weapon will it take to have a chance of inflicting even 1 point of damage?



Start answering those questions, and you will get a better idea of what T5 combat has under the hood. o:

 

[Blue Ghost]

S4, well, okay. I'll give some of the rules a more in depth read tonight.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

Now I understand there are no dates as of yet for this incredible revision version of T5, but is there an approximate ETA. Eg, a year? 2 years? 10 years?

 

[Supplement Four]

Now I understand there are no dates as of yet for this incredible revision version of T5, but is there an approximate ETA. Eg, a year? 2 years? 10 years?

It's a huge book. It needs a total re-write, imo. Or, at least a hard, detailed looked at each chapter. That's going to take time, and there's only so much manpower to go around.

Remember that Marc is writing the game. That's one man. The rest of us are just evaluating and giving feedback on what he wrote. We're not creating new rules or changing what Marc writes. We're just making suggestions. In the end, it is really Marc that is re-writing the book, with a little outside help in the form of opinions.

Big Book + One Man = Long Time.

 

[DonM]

Now I understand there are no dates as of yet for this incredible revision version of T5, but is there an approximate ETA. Eg, a year? 2 years? 10 years?

No dates means no dates. I won that argument a while back.

Now Marc reserves the right to announce dates, and he'll probably send out an e-mail when he's ready, but what he's said is:

a) he's going to fix T5
b) he's going to make sure everyone who already bought it gets treated fairly
c) those folks who bought it will be involved where possible in reviews and corrections
d) T5 remains Marc's vision, not Don's, Rob's, or anyone else's
e) while he fixes things, there will be other things going on

So I am waiting along with the rest of you on the when, but I have some idea of those other things, and I think they will be pretty exciting.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I agree, on the surface, for a first read through, they seem OK. It's only after you drive it off the lot that you find the problems.

Try to answer these questions:

In what circumstance would you use SnapFire rather than AutoFire?

How would you resolve a fist fight in a bar between three PCs and three NPCs?

You've got three PCs with six shot revolvers that do 1D damage. They're in a good defensive position. But, 22 native NPCs, without weapons, will rush them. Can you tell me how the NPCs will win this fight without taking a single hit to any one of them?

If a weapon is capable of burst fire, then why would a PC ever use the single fire option?

Can a PC using a standard pump action shotgun fire and move in the same combat round? Can a PC with an M-16 move and fire in the same round?

What's more deadly? A gunshot wound from a revolver or a single stab from a dagger?

What does the damage type PEN mean?

If an NPC wears standard Cloth armor, what type of weapon will it take to have a chance of inflicting even 1 point of damage?



Start answering those questions, and you will get a better idea of what T5 combat has under the hood. o:

I think the implication for Snap Shots is that the attacker gets a better defensive bonus, as opposed to leveling an aimed attack which makes the attacker more vulnerable. Although it does not appear to be codified as such.

I'm not sure I understand your point regarding the fist fight, though.

The 3 v 22 scenario; I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this. It depends on the terrain and situation, which is addressed in the STAMP system. Are the defendings in a canyon or gulch, and the attackers hurling rocks from above? Are they in a forest? Desert? I think page 230 addresses terrain.

Burst verse Single Shot; I think it's implied that single shot is aimed, verse rattleing off a burst which will add deflection to each subsequent round, and increased inaccuracy, but a higher chance to hit by virtue of the fact that more rounds are in the air. I don't see a problem here.

If I understand the run-n-gun question, it appears that the Attack! and Fighting Action can be both performed in the same round by the same character. It's the old one action then a half move, or two actions, or a full move from the old Snapshot rules. I don't see a conflict here. Again STAMP; Attack-Move. Maybe you're concerned that someone can rattle off a full mag, then reload in one combat round? Or is it the rate of movement?

Sidearm verse blade; depends on tech level and penetration derived therefrom. A light saber will probably do more damage than a wheel lock pistol, or an old double shot Derringer. Combine that with your "Damage type PEN"; a gas attack is different from a bullet, which is different from an EMP weapon that fries your fancy schmancy electric sights on your LASER rifle, which itself needs to overcome T5's equivalent of reflec and ablative.

Bullet verse kevlar; I think it depends on the tech level of the weapon, or whatever the Gun Maker con conjure as effects verse armor. Maybe you come up with a 44 Magnum or Colt 45 that uses Ancient Super alloys, and can cut through 1980-ish kevlar vests like a hot knife through butter. That verse your grandpappy's blackpowder Colt Dragoon which, though impressive in firing, can't make a scratch against that TL15 simulated Leather Jacket you bought, which is really made of an incredible synthetic akin to spider silk.

That's how I read the rules. Defenses are defined, but the actual values are defined by "The Maker" sections of the rules, or in whatever module or adventure you buy that has equipment listed.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

I'll add that I feel like I'm being tested on my knowledge of this game, and its evolution thereof. I've played Traveller since it was first published, and then got a copy of Starter in around 80 or 81. Any questions?

 

[Spaceresearcher]

Don't take anything personally Blueghost there's stacks of quibblers on COTI proclaiming the right of Traveller authority. Just let them have there feelings of superiority if it makes there lives better and keep on enjoying Traveller.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

No dates means no dates. I won that argument a while back.

Now Marc reserves the right to announce dates, and he'll probably send out an e-mail when he's ready, but what he's said is:

a) he's going to fix T5
b) he's going to make sure everyone who already bought it gets treated fairly
c) those folks who bought it will be involved where possible in reviews and corrections
d) T5 remains Marc's vision, not Don's, Rob's, or anyone else's
e) while he fixes things, there will be other things going on

So I am waiting along with the rest of you on the when, but I have some idea of those other things, and I think they will be pretty exciting.

So T5 is going towards a revision and ultimately a new book, I'll just have to leave it at that for now. I've got friends who would love to know as there seriously cheesed off with the current book and feel ripped off is all. I'll just have to find a way to pacify where possible.

One more thing(and moving forward) if I may? Was there any word on 'The Players Book' which was promised or is that subject to 'on-hold' till the revised T5 rule book edition?

Thanks for the updates DonM.

 

[rancke]

Don't take anything personally Blueghost there's stacks of quibblers on COTI proclaiming the right of Traveller authority.

No, just the right to point out when people make fallacious statements.


Hans

 

[McPerth]

Not knwong T5, I'll try to answer you questions (at least some of them) form my point of vierw (so, what would I expect from a game whose game mechanics I don't really know).

In what circumstance would you use SnapFire rather than AutoFire?

When your weapon has no auto fire capability :devil:?

Now seriously, AFAIK snap fire is unplanned or unaimed fire (e.g to an opportunity target), wile auto fire is area fire. As I understand them from other games (e.g. AHL) auto fire is when you want to cover a zone with fire, so either hitting more than one target or trying to raise your hit chances by firing several rounds, while snap fire is firing would be firing without first aiming, either because you just saw the target or because you did anything else than aiming (e.g. moving).

In any case, I don't see them as mutually exclusive (e.g. moving while hip firing a SMG would be both cases).

How would you resolve a fist fight in a bar between three PCs and three NPCs?

I agree with BG in not being sure to understand the question. In any case, this would be too game mechanics dependent to answer in my situation.

You've got three PCs with six shot revolvers that do 1D damage. They're in a good defensive position. But, 22 native NPCs, without weapons, will rush them. Can you tell me how the NPCs will win this fight without taking a single hit to any one of them?

With 18 bullets (wihtout reloading) against 22 targets?

I see several possibilities:

• Being far enough as to have time to reload
• Using suppresive fire to pinn the enemy
• Breacking natives morale due to casualties

And of course, missing few shoots...

If a weapon is capable of burst fire, then why would a PC ever use the single fire option?

Ammo saving or recoil interfering with aiming.

Can a PC using a standard pump action shotgun fire and move in the same combat round? Can a PC with an M-16 move and fire in the same round?

He should (IMHO) with a DM penalty (snap fire again, I guess).

What's more deadly? A gunshot wound from a revolver or a single stab from a dagger?

Both can be. I guess deadlyness is more dependent on the zone hit tan the weapon itself, in this comparison.

Both can be quite light wounding if hitting the arm, and quite deadly if hitting the neck or chest...

What does the damage type PEN mean?

Again too game mechanics dependent for me to answer.

If an NPC wears standard Cloth armor, what type of weapon will it take to have a chance of inflicting even 1 point of damage?

Again several possibilities:

• Any weapon that can hit an uncovered zone
• Any weapon doing kinetic damage, even if the damage will be blunt instead of penetratin
• Any weapon capable to pierce through the cloth (though it will probably be in the case above, blunt damage, even if it does not penetrate)
• Any weapon whose damage cannot be stooped by the cloth (Sonic damage, gases, heat, concusion form explosions, etc...)

Remember that cloth (as most ballistic clothing) only avoids cuts and penentrations, but does not reduce blunt trauma too much. An axe hit against a chainmail, even if it does not penetrate, can do similar damage to a mace hit when the kinetic energy it carries is suddenly stopped.

Start answering those questions, and you will get a better idea of what T5 combat has under the hood. o:

I hope this would help you all to see an answer not "contamined" by T5 mechanics. OTOH some answers may be quite absurd with T5 mechanics. If so, please forgive me and just throw them to trash.

 

[Blue Ghost]

What I should have said was this; "The Maker" aspects of the rules address most of everything. The only thing that I didn't see specifically addressed was how a "snapshot" effects the attacker.

*EDIT*
I'm beginning to wonder how many people actually read the rules.

The way the rules are setup is that the device gives you basic stats, and you then refer to the STAMP system. The formula is a bit more involved than your basic 8+ on 2d6, and I think there's a risk of the formula being almost overly involved, but the chart defines the factors for DMs, while the thing-"Maker" (gun, spear, wrench, motorcycle) defines the weapon's basic characteristics.

So, I'm wondering what the problem is.