Traveller Question - Core Rules

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Nathan Brazil
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Contact:

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby Nathan Brazil » Sun Apr 21, 2013 6:13 pm

Which brings you back then to Rules as written is divide/multiply damage dice by 50 (round down). I find the rule appropriate. As a science sort of thing it makes sense. As a player, I would not like like it if I wanted to damage a starship for some reason. As a GM, meh, depends on the situation.
So how to fix this and still have fun? First to all of the people favoring damage and not damage dice: I need to point out if you are doing damage and not dice you should be multiplying/dividing by 175 (50 dice x 3.5 average points per die) to simulate the 50 dice thing. I personally favor the damage thing because it allows those few extra damage points due to a character's Effect to make a difference.

For your games, simply find a multiply/divide factor that you are comfortable with. And have fun!

Since we all want glittery fun space combat we have to have starship weapons and space combat. And many people think that if Stormtroopers from the movies can fire at starships, it must be so.

As F33D pointed out, starships as designed in Traveller have to endure that constant 1G acceleration, survive against micrometeroites when your speeding along at vectors with that kind of thrust. For space combat, weapons have to strong enough to pump out that energy across thousands of miles. They are not the flimsy things we hurl off into space right now. I bring up this stuff because it is a perception of what you want in a game vs that thing called "reality". Not that the two have to be the same, but this is a science fiction game, so some more "reality" is desired.
0401 X55A670-A S he+ hi++ as va ith-- vr+ ne- so+ 733
IMTU tc+ tm tn++ t4+ tg t20++ ru ge++ 3i+ c+ jt-- au- ls pi+ ta he+ hi++ as va ith-- vr+ ne- so+
Nathan Brazil
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Contact:

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby Nathan Brazil » Sun Apr 21, 2013 6:25 pm

I am fine with the idea that small arms and other "lesser weapons" cannot affect starships. I can live with current weapons as designed in game cannot damage them either. My only gripes with the game is that the vehicle design supplement does not have in its design sequences to allow starship grade weapons on vehicles. Then again if you could if could fly, right? Cause of that power plant, right? What makes it different from a starship then? And so on...
0401 X55A670-A S he+ hi++ as va ith-- vr+ ne- so+ 733
IMTU tc+ tm tn++ t4+ tg t20++ ru ge++ 3i+ c+ jt-- au- ls pi+ ta he+ hi++ as va ith-- vr+ ne- so+
User avatar
Lord High Munchkin
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:12 am
Location: Vancouver, where the rainbow ends/Oxford, occasionally, in an ivory tower

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby Lord High Munchkin » Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:16 pm

Well one could always design a "very large" vehicle capable of carrying a starship power plant, some fuel, and weapon system and off you go!
The desire for a "definitive, ultimate answer" is, in fact, classified by modern psychiatric medicine as a mental illness.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:26 pm

rgrove0172 wrote:On page 151 the insert at the bottom states that starship weapons do 50X damage to regular vehicles. Even a lowly pulse laser with 1d6 can therefore vaporize a main battle tank (hull 35/Structure 35) in a single blast, yet its effect on other ships is marginal at best.

How then do vehicle weapons function against starships. Do we devide by 50? If so, then a 75mm main gun off a tank (8d6 damage) cant hope to even scratch the thing, even if its unarmored.

How do you handle the situation where a vehicle opens up on your ship while its trying to take off?
Traveller starships are, basically, very tough.
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: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:33 pm

hdan wrote:so I've also reduced the "man portable artillery" damage by 1/2, which I believe is more reasonable in balance against BattleDress. At 1/2 damage, an average hit will wound but not necessarily kill a man in Battle Dress, though it will fry anyone in lesser armor. It also makes the rocket launcher ("poor man's PGMP") seem less like a "desperate man's poor excuse for a PGMP".

(Look at all other man-scale weapons in the game - cutting PGMP and FGMP damage in half makes them fit nicely with between plasma rifles, rocket launchers, BattleDress armor, etc. I suspect the 16d6 FGMP-15 has only be retained because of inertia. An 8d6 FGMP-15 fits the game better IMHO.)
This reduces high tech super weapons, man portable artillery, to just a bit better than a low tech rocket launcher, which seems too weak. I like the way that PGMPs and FGMPs are so powerful, these are true heavy weapons, not just beefed up small arms.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
hdan
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 2:11 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby hdan » Sun Apr 21, 2013 10:48 pm

Jeraa wrote:Only multiplying or dividing by 10 also has another problem.

A pulse laser (or a beam laser, if you use the changes from High Guard) does 1d6 damage to a starship. Thats either a Single Hit (if 1-4 is rolled), or 2 Single Hits (if 5 or 6 is rolled).

A rifle does 3d6 damage, which is an average of 10.5. When attacking a starship, that would get divided by 10, for a single point of damage. That is still enough for a Single Hit. It doesn't seem right that a rifle, and a starship-grade laser capable of hitting something thousands of kilometers away can cause the same damage on a target (both causing a Single Hit on average on an unarmored target). Though even a single point of armor protects from the rifle, while 6 points would be required to protect from the laser.
True.

But since MgT adds "Self Sealing" as a TL-9 hull option, and the encounter table stipulates 2D6 damage from micrometeorites, clearly, MgT hulls are not immune to micrometeors.

I suppose a further correction could be to give standard hulls 1 point of armor, though it's beginning to look like more trouble than it's worth.

I still stand behind ?GMP weapons being "overspec-ed" though.
/hdan
User avatar
rgrove0172
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: USA

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby rgrove0172 » Sun Apr 21, 2013 11:14 pm

Ill probably go with a lesser multiplier and leave it at thats. Possibly 20.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby F33D » Mon Apr 22, 2013 2:02 am

mr31337 wrote: The assumption made by RAW is that starships are inherently tougher than say ground vehicles, due to their size. To me that's just nonsense.
It would be nonsense. However, that isn't the reason given...

"Starships are shielded from the void of space and layered in armour designed to withstand raw star
radiation and absolute zero temperatures"
User avatar
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3163
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Traveller Question - Core Rules

Postby locarno24 » Mon Apr 22, 2013 7:12 am

Also note the (previously mentioned but often overlooked) ability to combine damage from multiple attacks.

So an aerospace defence laser won't hurt a ship when dividing by 50.
A battery of several dozen will.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests