mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Moppy
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 684
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby Moppy » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:51 pm

Is there some reason the particle spinal range is shorter range than the barbettes and bays?
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3722
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:44 pm

I have no idea, but I allow spinals to use regular tech advantages, e.g. Long Range.
Old School
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:41 pm
Location: Florida

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby Old School » Tue Jul 09, 2019 1:39 pm

I consider it errata, but have never tried to confirm.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 901
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby baithammer » Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:00 am

Kinda like the Fusion Bays don't have the radiation trait, yet the barbette version does.
Old School
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:41 pm
Location: Florida

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby Old School » Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:52 am

fusion bay radiation is listed as unofficial errata. Should we add the spinal mount range to the document?
Moppy
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 684
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby Moppy » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:40 pm

Old School wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:52 am
fusion bay radiation is listed as unofficial errata. Should we add the spinal mount range to the document?
Either that, or reduce particle bays and barbettes (baybettes?) to long.

Is the meson beam range OK?
phavoc
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4716
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:13 pm

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby phavoc » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:08 pm

Moppy wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:51 pm
Is there some reason the particle spinal range is shorter range than the barbettes and bays?
I could see the effective range of a spinal being shorter because you have to aim the ship itself. Barbettes and bays would have an easier time of aiming at a target.

Thought this reasoning isn't as strong when you are targetting a large relatively immovable object such as a space station or asteroid.
Old School
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 691
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:41 pm
Location: Florida

Re: mongoose 2 rules Q spinal mount ranges

Postby Old School » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:19 pm

phavoc wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:08 pm
I could see the effective range of a spinal being shorter because you have to aim the ship itself. Barbettes and bays would have an easier time of aiming at a target.

Thought this reasoning isn't as strong when you are targetting a large relatively immovable object such as a space station or asteroid.
That’s already covered adequately in the severe accuracy penalty assigned to spinal mounts. And I also note that the range of spinal railguns increases rather than decreases vs. the bay version.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: M J Dougherty, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 12 guests