Who PLAYED IT but doesn't like it. (Traveller: The New Era)

[CosmicGamer]

I'm curious. Who has PLAYED Traveller: The New Era, not people who have only read about it in forums, play tested it but never played the released version, not people who saw a friends copy, or got a copy someone was going to throw away and gave it a cursory glance, but who has PLAYED Traveller: The New Era with a group of people in person or on-line and what are the things you don't like?

Has the experience caused you to
A) stop playing Traveller all together
B) play a different version of Traveller you own
C) go out and buy a different version of Traveller
D) keep playing - possibly making house rules and not use things you don't like

 

[aramis]

B. went back to MT.

I liked some elements, but not enough to put up with the sucky task system, and the totally broken combat. (Guy survived a FGMP at 2m, and kicked the zhodani to death. Marines wind up doing more damage unarmed than with guns. Chopsocky BS the whole way.)

 

[mbrinkhues]

Aramis: How did the guy survive the hit? What did he wear?

As for the rest: Like the system but changed parts of starship construction (using the FFS supplied thrusters instead of Heplar) So the answer is a D.

 

[aramis]

Aramis: How did the guy survive the hit? What did he wear?

As for the rest: Like the system but changed parts of starship construction (using the FFS supplied thrusters instead of Heplar) So the answer is a D.

He was in cloth. The damage system really is that broken. I'd already UPPED the damage levels by using d10's instead of d6's for weapon damage, and still a kick was a more lethal weapon. (I had a couple of PC's with STR12+ and UC10+, which means 12d6 unarmed damage...)

 

[Supplement Four]

Bought it. Started a brand new campaign with it. Played about three, maybe five game sessions.

Everybody in my group, to a person, hated the rules set.

We ditched it and went back to using (at that time) MT.

 

[mbrinkhues]

He was in cloth. The damage system really is that broken. I'd already UPPED the damage levels by using d10's instead of d6's for weapon damage, and still a kick was a more lethal weapon. (I had a couple of PC's with STR12+ and UC10+, which means 12d6 unarmed damage...)

Okay, extremly high attributes and skill levels. 10 points in Unarmed is IIRC a basic to-hit role of 22 for a difficult task (Attrib + Assett) Never seen someone that extreme in my games.

 

[Gallowglacht]

Erm..thats 12 hits of unarmed combat damage not 12d6. Which is a slight wound to an average persons head or a scratch anywhere else. A kick raises it to 18 points. From someone built like a bodybuilder and trained like Bruce Lee.

I can neither remember nor find any reference to damage dice for unarmed combat. I even reread the sections on unarmed combat, wounds and derived stats. That should be points of damage, not dice.

I do agree that damage was a weak point of the rules and houseruled it myself. Other than that I think TNE is my favourite flavour of Traveller.


Edit; D) Played and ran more TNE campaigns than all others put together.

 

[aramis]

It gave a damage. Every other use of a damage was roll (damage)d6 for hits.

 

[Gallowglacht]

Agreed, every other example of damage does.
But unarmed is counted in hit points, not dice. It even gives an example where Reese with str7 and UMA8 will inflict 5 hit points per unarmed attack. Page 35. I doubted myself enough to check.

 

[epicenter00]

D.

I like the concept. I didn't really care for the rules, but we grit our teeth and played anyway since it wasn't CT or MT with their horrible (in our opinion) rules system. Eventually we kept the background and I moved the game over to my heavily-modified 2300 system.

As for unarmed combat ... I always found it was just the opposite. My major gripe with unarmed TNE combat was that you couldn't do a thing to someone, even if they were unarmored. I can't believe someone "kicking someone to death" - I think you'd fall over from exhaustion before you did that.

 

[mike wightman]

I like the setting but hate the rules.

Still run the odd TNE setting based game, but the rules are always my CT+ stuff.

 

[deniable]

As for unarmed combat ... I always found it was just the opposite. My major gripe with unarmed TNE combat was that you couldn't do a thing to someone, even if they were unarmored. I can't believe someone "kicking someone to death" - I think you'd fall over from exhaustion before you did that.

Same feeling here. 10 Strength and skill and you could almost do the average damage of an M16 (3d6) and you could only hit once but shoot multiple times in an action. Part of the problem was doubling the hits for NPCs from Twilight 2nd to TNE. It balanced the game by making everybody a superman.
My solution was generally to halve the hit capacities of both PCs and NPCs or just the NPCs and figure we were playing a 'cinematic' game.

 

[Colin]

TNE is my favorite rules set for Traveller and just about anything else. I've used it for 2300AD, and threw in bits from Twilight Nightmares, Dark Conspiracy and other Twilight:2000 v2 products. I never really played with the TNE setting, though, save for a few one-off games with my long-departed 1st wife

 

[Supplement Four]

TNE is my favorite rules set for Traveller and just about anything else.

Wow.

We're so far apart on the continuum it ain't even funny. No wonder you've tagged the hell out of me in the past with CotI Warnings and what not.

 

[Colin]

Nah, I did that because you were wrong.

I prefer a rules system with lots of meat to it. TNE is very flexible, and can be used to cover a lot of ground. Like 2300AD, Twilight:2000, Dark Conspiracy, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs. Even Traveller.

 

[mike wightman]

Flexible yes.

Trouble is TNE's combat system is pants.

PCs that can ignore gunshot wounds and take a couple of plasma gun hits. Not my idea of Traveller.

 

[aramis]

The Initiative rules were good, I sometimes use MT to hit and damage with TNE initiative and CT morale. ANd the contact rules were a nice graft back into MT.

 

[wnourse1]

TNE remains my favorite version of the game as well! I've just returned to Traveller after a 15 year hiatus and am running a game with my group.

 

[Antony]

Just wondering which version of TNE people are talking about since there were differences between them. And as for the plamsa/fusion weapons these were massively upgraded but this is not shown in the core rule book.

For example the TL12 4.3cm plasma rifle listed in the core book with penetration rating 1-2-10 pentration value 9-9-5-1 now has a penetration rating of 1-2-10 and penetration value of 23-23-12-2 plus the normal blunt trauma damage so at short and medium range dont forget to add 23 damage points to what ever dice get through. Bear in mind also that TL14 Standard Battledress only has and armour value of 8. Plus there is also plasma splash so unarmoured targets may get his by this as well.

 

[Gallowglacht]

I thought the only differences were errata and "putting the heat back into plasma" although that last one is a biggie. Correct me where I'm wrong. All 4 copies our group has are from the same print run, so I honestly don't know the difference. (also have the errata booklet from Fire, Fushion and Steel)

I thought blunt trauma only worked on flexible armour so at short range tl14 BD takes 15d6 damage. Still much better than the original 1d6. But I was wrong, however it only adds when the dice is blocked so against that tl14BD adds 8hp, thats 23-98 points of damage. That 18 hp kick from earlier would cause 2 and the kicker would take 8 damage himself.

I saw an editorial somewhere saying TNE was designed to be realistic and providing figures from gunfights showing that it is quite hard to kill someone with a gun. There is the quick kill roll aswell which might help things along.

But like most people I found it felt wrong in play. You get a headshot and everyone pretty much expects the guy to go down, no matter how often you are presented with figures explaining non lethal head injuries. Gameplay is more important that realism, so like most people I houseruled it too. Well, I houseruled it because it didn't seem realistic to take so many bullets (unless you are Cathal Brugha). Later when I read the editorial I decided I prefered it houseruled anyway.

The Initiative rules were good, I sometimes use MT to hit and damage with TNE initiative and CT morale. And the contact rules were a nice graft back into MT.

Yeah I liked the initiative rules too. Pity that the generation of the stat was so random though.


EDIT; D'oh given the title of the thread that looks too much like a defence of TNE. Instead read it to be;
Dislike;
Damage. (bullet sponge)
Determining of Initiative. (one role may gimp the guy who wanted to play a stoic, capable Marine)

As these are two big parts of an RPG and combat an important part of the vast majority of RPG's, this is a flaw.
GDW were gun nuts, so maybe there is a lesson here; decisions that are good for realism and accuracy in a topic who have interest and knowledge of may impede your ability to do what you actually set out to do. ie make a good rpg system. Maybe?
Ultimate example of this is something like pheonix command. Plenty of detail on what a bullet does, agles of attack, injury, penertration. Each realistic on its own. Add them together and it is long, drawn out, over complicated, boring instead of exciting.