Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:11 pm

Yes, I know that the Traveller Clean up has started, and I have already submitted all this to Don, but I expect it will be a while before the official erratta come out, and I am interested in other peoples views on the following....

Ranges
On a general point there is a need to add an intermediate range for some slug throwers, i.e. submachine guns and some TL5+ carbines, between pistols and assault weapons. I get around this by increasing the penalty to hit for a “one handed” pistol at long range to -8 (practically impossible), but allow a “two handed” SMG to use the pistol table as CRB. Energy pistols fire as use the current ranges without amendment.

Specific issues;

Page Item(s) and "Issue"
37 Bayonet
Why does a fixed bayonet do 3d6 dam when spears (p34) do 2d6? Suggest 3d6 for both.
45 Bows
Ranges for many are quite excessive, e.g. the long bow (TL2 bent stick) uses the same ranges as a rifle, making it fairly accurate to 500m, and usable beyond.
52, 53 Sighting aids
Prices and weights all over the place, e.g electronic sights 2000cr, x-ray sight 300cr, bio mass sights 750cr. Nor do the prices make any sense compared to the sensor prices in the CRB. I suggest telescopic sights (TL4) 250Cr, electronic sights (TL6) 500Cr, electronic telescopic sights (TL7) 1500Cr, and the rest adjusted in proportion with more capable sights costing more
HUD
The +2 to hit is excessive. Personally, I am not convinced that a HuD helps you shoot any better, what it does do is help you shoot quicker, +1 or +2 initiative instead?
59 Cap and ball revolvers
Do these really have the range of a shotgun?
70 SMGs
Some SMGs have the range of assault rifles, which is excessive for a low velocity pistol round.
Assault Grenade Launcher
Hardly a submachine gun, in fact there was a whole thread in the Mongoose forums trying to work out what this is, or is supposed to be.
76, 77 Rifles
A lot of problems here. First, some weapons, unaccountably, have extra damage, e.g. the auto rifle (needs removing). 2nd, “assault rifle” have the same range as rifle (needs replacing with assault weapon ranges), rather than assault weapons.3rd, the ACRs have much more ammunition capacity than in the CRB, suggest that it goes back to 40 rounds for “light” ACR, and perhaps 20 for “heavy” ACR, the round might be electro-thermal, but they are not gauss needle thin.
80 Zero-G weapons
This is a mess, e.g. snub revolvers having the same range as shotguns and some pretty eccentric damage figures through. Suggest that the snub pistol and accelerator rifle stats from CRB are used, and other variants built around that.
82 Gauss pistols
A query, really, why would gauss pistol, with a shorter barrel so less opportunity to accelerate the needle, so that the slug will leave at a lower velocity (and is probably smaller than that from a gauss rifle), have the AP penetration rating? Surely should be none or SAP at most.
Gauss Rifles
CSC increases magazine capacity to 100 needles, in CRB it is 80. Again, CRB makes more sense (the increase was probably a way of keeping the G’ Rifle’s superiority over the ACR when CSC increased their magazine capacity, or perhaps a simple mistake?)
84 Laser weapons
Why does the power pack for a TL9 pistol costs 750CR, that for the more capable TL11 pistol costs 350CR? More generally, how about a bit of logical progression here, e.g. power packs cost, e.g., half the cost of the laser weapon, and why should the carbine be limited to 50 shots per power pack, while the pistol and the rifle have 100?
89 Laser weapons
Ok, not really errata, I am just not a fan of the multiplicity of funny designs, and don’t understand why a “cartridge” laser weapon can fire auto, while a power pack one cannot.
95 High energy weapons
CRB states quite clearly that these weapons use built-in micro fusion generators, in CSC they have, quite limited, magazines (however, the idea of limiting the number of times lower tech PGMPs and FGMPs can fire makes sense).Also, the PGMP-15 and -16 are clearly supposed to be FGMPs
105 LMG
Reload rules for a belt, 18 seconds, is ridiculous, suggest 1 or 2 minor actions.
LMG RF No idea what weapon this is supposed to copy, the rule and stats seems to be nonsense.
107 Advanced Light Autocannon
This weapon seems unaccountably cheap!
114 Grenades
Seem very expensive here, and in CRB. Suggest 30Cr for a standard frag grenade, and adjust the rest accordingly.
119 Launchers
Launched missiles (i.e rpgs and their variants) are almost the only place where I think CSC has understood weapons better than the CRB. Even so, medium reusable and improved heavy reusable launcher have picked up extra +4 or +5 damage for no apparent reason. Don't see why any of the rocket launchers, as opposed to the grenade launchers, should have a “magazine”,I assume another misprint. The damage for the Wrist mounted warhead launcher, and the range, seems far too great for what the description makes clear must be a micro weapon.
121-123 Direct fire artillery weapons
There is no recognition that AP effects reduce with distance for weapons that rely on kinetic force to achieve penetration and damage.
132 Encumbrance and Armour
The rules here suggest that amour magically becomes weightless when worn, which is, of course, non-sense. There is a problem with some types of armour being unnecessarily heavy, e.g. TL11 combat armour, at 18kg, is too heavy to be useful to anyone with a STR + END of less than 20 (you still need some spare for weapons ...). In MTU got around this by simply reducing the weight of some armours, e.g. TL11 combat armour reduced to 10kg. Also allow cheaper and lighter versions that cannot operate as a vacc suit, but will provide NBC protection and a respirator/filter mask, for use on planets with an earth or near earth atmosphere.
134 Personal protection
Very different prices for the carapace when compared to Mercenary.
142 Boarding vacc suits
Prices Very different stats from Mercenary
Combat Armour
CRB errata required a vacc suit skill to use combat armour. This should be added to CSC.
143-145 Assault battledress
Some description given of this, but no stats. Prices are probably following Traveller canon, but the expense of some forms of protection, especially combat armour and battledress seem far too high in relation to other products. In MTU reduced these by a factor of 10, to no ill effect as access to armour is still controlled by the need to the appropriate permits.
182 Subsistence and living expenses table
Very different from that in the CRB

To be honest I don’t like the some of the “Star wars” type weapons, e.g. “grav maces” or the “War Hammer 40K” type, e.g. chain swords, but that is my problem (these weapons don't tend to feature in MTU) and will undoubtedly suit some campaigns.

And that it.

Egil

Edited once for grammar.
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:09 pm

Outstanding work but 132 is incorrect. The armor does become magically weightless through the concept of area spacing. Medieval armor weighed 45lb mounted, more for infantry yet they moved quite easily in it. So properly balanced and fitted armor is not an issue, fatigue and heat is though when wearing them. Of course the user has to wear them awhile and would build up muscle (no rule for that) but once a certain point reached it becomes nearly un-noticable.

Single spot armor is heavy, helmets, breastplate shield ala WW1 all brutal, but fully weight distributed armor i.e. Roman, Medieval could be worn for hours w/o effect. Ultra modern polymers should be just fine if fitted.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Mon Feb 13, 2012 9:33 am

Thanks, Easterner

Even a man trained and experienced in wearing heavy armour is "encumbered" by it to some extent, though less so than someone who has put it on for the first time. Which is why I suggest reducing the encumberance figures significantly (basically halfing them) for combat armour makes makes more sense than just removing them wholesale.

Bizarrely, after removing enc effects for all sorts of body armour, the CSC then says that such effects do apply for vacc suits, another inconsistency, are not astronauts trained to wear such suits?

Just some figures to think about, a Private Smith with STR + END of 16 (not unreasonable scores)wearing TL11 combat armour of mass 18 is already overloaded, even before he picks up his ACR (3kg), a blade (0.5Kg) and 4 grenades (2kg total), = 23.5kg total (I give weight to ammo as well, but that is a MTU thing). If combat amour is reduced to mass 10, then the overall becomes a more manageable 15.5kg, no problems until he is called upon to pick up an injured comrade, at which point the encumberance rules start to apply.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:12 am

Had a chance to look up grenade prices CT was Cr200 for case of 20. Smoke 20% lower.

I don't disagree encumbrance rules are wrong. Just pointing out a 30Kg suit is distributed over body so that it does not have the effect of 30kg back pack.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:12 pm

Easterner wrote:Had a chance to look up grenade prices CT was Cr200 for case of 20. Smoke 20% lower.
Makes a lot more sense.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:33 am

Grenade Cr.200.00 case of 20 grenades
Grenade, Aerosol Cr.200.00 case of 20 grenades
Grenade, Flechette/Fragmentation Cr.200.00 case of 20 grenades
Grenade, HEAP Cr.240.00 case of 20 grenades
Grenade, Smoke Cr.160.00 case of 20 grenades
Grenade, Tranquilizer Cr.400.00 case of 20 grenades


http://www.sff.net/people/kitsune/trave ... d%2072.pdf
Which includes source.
apoc527
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 738
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:55 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby apoc527 » Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm

Good stuff, but I disagree on the autorifle. I think the assault rifle and autorifle are two different weapons, basically corresponding to a 5.56mm assault weapon and a 7.62mm battle rifle in today's terms. The increased damage of the autorifle is balanced by the higher Recoil and lower magazine capacity.

I agree that the assault rifle should have Assault Weapon range, however.
-Apoc527
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:58 am

The Auto rifle error is that it does +3 more damage than SLR rifle. Since they use same cartridge the damage should be identical.
apoc527
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 738
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:55 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby apoc527 » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:17 am

Actually, I think that's backwards. The automatic rifle is correct, it's the self-loading rifle that is wrong and needs its damage upped to 3d6+3 SAP.

That said, there are clearly issues with all damages. There really ought to be several tiers of rifle ammo damage, and there are, but they relate to each other illogically at this point. See Big Game Rifle and Full Bore Rifle for examples of what I mean.
-Apoc527
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:44 pm

I didn't state which was right, just that they were different. Such a bullet 7.62 is quite lethal and 3d6+3 just barely kills an average man 777 stats with a max roll. Most damages are too light all around.

CSC needs to have all the words between 'INTRODUCTION and cost' re-written, not just the damages with which I fully agree with you.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:56 pm

apoc527 wrote:I think the assault rifle and autorifle are two different weapons, basically corresponding to a 5.56mm assault weapon and a 7.62mm battle rifle in today's terms.
Thanks apoc527

Yes, the great "7.62 vs 5.56" debate, I seem to have been debating that, in various contexts and company, for the last 20+ years.

I did think a lot about this, along the lines you suggest, but have decided that it seems to be one step of detail too far. For game purposes I have gone along with the idea that the higher muzzle velocity of the 5.56 enables it to be as lethal as the slower, but heavier, 7.62. I am (very, very) fully aware that there are other points of view, and would suggest that unless we model reducing damage and armour penetration by range (with different ranges for different calibre rounds), which is a level of detail that I (IMHO) think is too much for a rpg, I am happy to assume that both rounds, and the weapons which fire them, inflict equivelent damage.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
apoc527
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 738
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:55 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby apoc527 » Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:42 pm

An interesting point of view on the level of detail, but you are talking to someone who is playing GURPS at the moment and enjoying every nitty, gritty detail...

For me, the CSC was the product that got me interested in Traveller. If it were to become oversimplified by ignoring the fundamental differences between these two very different rounds, I'd personally begin to lose interest in it.

A 7.62x54mm NATO round has roughly twice the muzzle energy of a 5.56x45mm NATO. There are definite tradeoffs and I think ignoring them is like ignoring the differences between either of these guns and a gauss rifle. By the time you start limiting detail, you might as well go with "Gun, Stick, Sword."

I exaggerate the "parade of horribles" of course, but nonetheless, I think that preserving this level of detail in a supplement like CSC is incredibly important. For the Core Book, I completely agree with you, and that's where you find the rifles simply doing 3d6.
-Apoc527
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:53 pm

For me GURPS is too much detail, we just aren't going to agree on the "best" level of detail...

Egil

PS It is a shame that neither Mercenary nor CSC didn't attempt to develop an alternative, more detailed, set of combat rules, including revisiting ranges and penetration values, for personal weapons, support weapons and artillery, but that is more missed opportunity rather than erratta.

PS added as an edit
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
JRoss
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby JRoss » Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:46 am

I second the armor thing. I was a firefighter, and our turnouts weighed forty pounds. It was so widely-distributed and well-fitted that it felt like nothing. My old turnout is still the most comfortable thing that I ever wore.
Freelance S&P Traveller contributor
Squirrel - Your Best Friend
Fox - Beware of Lies

Do you really want to spend your entire lives praying for longevity? We were born in order to die!
Thunderegg Productions
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:12 am

JRoss wrote:I second the armor thing. I was a firefighter, and our turnouts weighed forty pounds. It was so widely-distributed and well-fitted that it felt like nothing. My old turnout is still the most comfortable thing that I ever wore.
Not sure if you are seconding the csc or my suggestion. Certainly the figures given in the core book are excessive, I was suggesting reducing the mass of combat armour when worn, but not completely removing its effects, which is what csc suggested.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:32 am

And there's more!

p56, archaic firearms, csc suggest that you need to make a skill roll to reload the weapon, agreed, but then make a further roll to successfully fire it, needing a 8+skill. Black powder weapons do have problems, but that can be covered by one roll, perhaps with DMs if the conditions are particularly bad (i.e. damp).

p74, rifle automatic, a SAP weapon, hits "ignoring up to 2 points of armour", probably a typo, should be "1".

p111, fragmentation and high explosive warhead effects. CSC suggests that these are ST weapons. Certainly agree with that in the secondary radius, but closer in the the primary this seems to underrate the power of these weapons, so perhaps "normal armour applies in the primary burst radius, in the secondary radius armour benefit is doubled".

p114 and p109, grenades. Not just the excessive prices, some grenades have primary/seconday/tertiary blast zones, some, e.g. the "plasma", don't. Page 109 gives different rules for grenades and groups them with other explosive warhead. To be honest either rules would work fine, the csc should just have picked one interpretation and gone with it.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Easterner
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:03 am

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Easterner » Fri Mar 02, 2012 1:59 am

Here's one you missed you can add.

Pg 133
The highest-value armour worn on the torso (or a whole-body
suit of Cloth or Mesh, for example) counts at full value.
• Additional torso protection counts at half value.

The the MgT example:

Example: A character serving as a mercenary wants to outfi t himself
with good armour but cannot aff ord combat armour. He starts with a
suit of TL 10 Improved Cloth Armour (5 armour points) and straps a TL
10 torso protector over it (normally worth 8 points but halved to 4). He
is now wearing 9 points of armour.

The highest armour is 1/2 in the example
77thPatron
Shrew
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 5:22 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby 77thPatron » Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:45 am

Pg 68 and 71 - Boarding SMG - the 20mm Grenades for the boarding SMG need stats for damage, weight, costs, etc. The text references these being cut-down 20mm LAG rounds, but LAG (pg.108) has no entry for HEAP or multiple projectile.
nats
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:34 pm
Location: Pocklington, East Riding of Yorkshire

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby nats » Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:15 am

My issue with CSC was with the skills generally. For example flamethrowers have a skill on their own which isnt possible to get in a career and I dont think anyone in their right mind would choose flamethrower or whip skills on their own when they could choose a multiweapon skill instead. I put this into Citizens of the Imperium to sort of synchronise the Core Rules Book with the CSC/Merc skills and its still relevant - some of the weapons skills in the books are far too speciality-based to make a sensible option:

Change energy rifle and energy pistol to one category called laser weapons and alter the CSC to just use the one category instead of the three different laser categories. Heavy Weapons needs to include flamethrowers, autocannon and energy weapons as sub-specialities. Melee needs to include Large Blade, Spear and Axe sub-specialities and the Blade speciality should be changed to Small Blade. Athletics should have Archery and Thrown sub-specialities added. All to accord with CSC and Merc.

The above assumes changing the Melee(Whip) skill mentioned in CSC for stun whips or whatever it is to Melee (Bludgeon) or something similar as otherwise it will be the only weapon requiring that particular skill specialility (cant find any other whips). Also Ive assumed that all the different types of bow/sling specialities mentioned in CSC are all changed to just an all encompasing Athletics (Archery) skill requirement to avoid unnecessary confusion. Also Ive assumed that instead of laser carbines, laser rifles and laser pistols you just use just one sub-specialism called laser weapons for them all. But you could keep them all separate if required (far too fiddly for me).
6A6AB9, Citizen(Corporate), 8th Term, Rank 3, Cr Enough
Trade(Architecture)3, Art(3d Illustration)2, Computers2, Admin2, Leader1, Drive(Wheeled)1, Advocate1, Art(Painting)1, Flyer0
Comm(TL7), Computer(TL8), Binoculars(TL6), Tent(TL7), Ground Car(TL7)
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Suggested (Unoffical) CSC Erratta and Amendments

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:38 am

Easterner wrote:Here's one you missed you can add.

Pg 133
The highest-value armour worn on the torso (or a whole-body
suit of Cloth or Mesh, for example) counts at full value.
• Additional torso protection counts at half value.

The the MgT example:

Example: A character serving as a mercenary wants to outfi t himself
with good armour but cannot aff ord combat armour. He starts with a
suit of TL 10 Improved Cloth Armour (5 armour points) and straps a TL
10 torso protector over it (normally worth 8 points but halved to 4). He
is now wearing 9 points of armour.

The highest armour is 1/2 in the example
Sometimes feel that I cannot open CSC without finding a new problem, bet there are others I have missed as well, keep looking!

To be honest, I have never allowed this stacking rule anyway, so in this example you either wear cloth or torso protector, not both.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests