Who actually wears combat armour?

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby F33D » Sun Jul 14, 2013 3:10 pm

rust wrote:
CosmicGamer wrote: What skill should they lose? Pilot, Comms, Sensors, something else?
In my view Communications and Sensors use basically the
same technology (especially when it comes to radio and ra-
dar) and therefore require basically the same technological
knowledge and related skill, so I use only one of these two
skills in my settings. This opens career table slots for some
other skills, which I choose depending on the specific cam-
paign and the player's character concept for this campaign.
I dumped Comm a while ago. Same reasons you cite. Sensors is a skill but Pilots, Astrogators & Gunners get it for free at one less than their Skill level. So, unless we're talking the Large ship arena, no one is holding a Sensors only Bridge position.
dragoner
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1716
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:37 pm
Location: Indiana, US

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby dragoner » Sun Jul 14, 2013 4:47 pm

rust wrote: In my view Communications and Sensors use basically the
same technology ...
Afaik this was the assumption in CT, where one only had comm as a skill, and I would rather it be together as well. But if one wanted to be realistic, the only skill for piloting a spacecraft would be computer, as it would be the spacecraft that would have to fly itself.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby F33D » Sun Jul 14, 2013 5:11 pm

dragoner wrote:
rust wrote: In my view Communications and Sensors use basically the
same technology ...
Afaik this was the assumption in CT, where one only had comm as a skill, and I would rather it be together as well. But if one wanted to be realistic, the only skill for piloting a spacecraft would be computer, as it would be the spacecraft that would have to fly itself.
Not really. 1st, with computers at that TL it wouldn't take any programming skill, 2nd, deciding what you want the computer to do would require knowledge not gleened from understanding computers. But true, an AI pilot pgm could handle most of it.
dragoner
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1716
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:37 pm
Location: Indiana, US

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby dragoner » Sun Jul 14, 2013 6:43 pm

F33D wrote:
Not really.

Yes really, because in reality, just a takeoff and landing have hundreds of people involved, so something is doing that process, logically it would be the computer.
User avatar
Sturn
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:37 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Sturn » Sun Jul 14, 2013 6:49 pm

Egil Skallagrimsson wrote: And 20th century scouts were tasked to sing around campfires, your point is based on a irrelevant analogy (I don't recall that Indian scouts were able to handle the naval artillery of the 19th century either). Traveller scouts are not the Kit Carson's of the wild frontier, most are part of a scientific and exploratory organisation, which also runs the galactic post office and assists navigation....<snip>...
Yes I of course wasn't arguing that Old West Scouts should have the scientific skills of Traveller Scouts. The analogy still holds in my opinion for the argument suggested above - Scouts don't need weaponry skills.
CosmicGamer wrote:
Sturn wrote:Scouts should be able to learn Gunnery without jumping through hoops.
What skill should they lose? Pilot, Comms, Sensors, something else? The main issue is that the game has mechanics and the mechanic is that there are 6 skills per table. Logically, realistically, or in theory (since this is a fictional futuristic career), there are a lots more skills than six that someone could learn during a career.
Gun Combat? Isn't the argument against including Gunnery that Scouts aren't supposed to get into fights? They can receive Gun Combat training/experience, why can't they receive Gunnery training/experience for the turret on their most common Scout ship?

I agree there is not room for all of the essential skills, you have to prioritize them. The disagreement is in the individual prioritization. No one is really wrong here.

Why limit it to the Service Skills table? Referring to Core Scouts only, I have no problem not having Gunnery available to Couriers (Xboats aren't armed) or Survey (specialty skill lists suggests a contact sort of Scout). But I wouldn't have an issue replacing Stealth or Recon with Gunnery under Exploration. I suppose it's your personal definition of each of the specialties that could mold what you think each specialty should have. Exploration = space exploration versus Exploration = Surface exploration, leads to a big difference of what should be on the specialties' list. All Scout "explorers" go regulary exploring in a ship through space. Not all of them drop down on a planet surface sneaking about regularly.

An easy fix (for me) would be simply combining the Pilot results under Exploration into one entry of Pilot (small or space). Then you open a spot for Gunnery or Flyer (Grav) if that is more important for you.
Egil Skallagrimsson wrote:More interesting, not including flyer or drive skill in the scout career table seems to be more of a limitation. The inclusion of gun combat skill is interesting, it is included, but most scouts will not have more than a level 0. I can see an argument for replacing it with, say, flyer (grav), but have rationalised it as a basic scout requirement, a "just in case".
I agree.

On a related note, is the following question I've had issues with before answered somewhere yet?: Can Pilot (small craft) be used to pilot an Air/Raft from orbit to surface? By definitions in Core it seems Flyer (Grav) should be used to pilot an Air/Raft once it enters atmosphere, but Pilot (small craft) should be used once orbit is obtained (a.i. docking with the Scout ship). The definition of Flyer (grav) specifies it's used for "air/rafts" and such, while also stating, "Flyers only work in an atmosphere; vehicles that can leave the atmosphere and enter orbit generally use the Pilot skill." Enclosed Air/Rafts can can enter orbit and dock with their Scout ship, at least that is the way I've always used them. They just can't leave orbit.
-Sturn
"I don't need a medal, God knows what I did" -

SGT William Hisle, US Army, WW2.
Terran Dawn Campaign Guide
Sturn's Shipyard!
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby F33D » Sun Jul 14, 2013 7:35 pm

Sturn wrote:The definition of Flyer (grav) specifies it's used for "air/rafts" and such, while also stating, "Flyers only work in an atmosphere; vehicles that can leave the atmosphere and enter orbit generally use the Pilot skill." Enclosed Air/Rafts can can enter orbit and dock with their Scout ship, at least that is the way I've always used them. They just can't leave orbit.

I changed that. "Flyer" in all other types is an aeronautic skill using lift control surfaces. Air Rafts don't use that type of mechanics at all.

I changed it to: Pilot (Grav vehicle), (Small craft), (Space craft) & (Capital Ship) as they all use some type of Grav drive for motive power and control.
AndrewW
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4392
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:57 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby AndrewW » Sun Jul 14, 2013 10:06 pm

Sturn wrote:The definition of Flyer (grav) specifies it's used for "air/rafts" and such, while also stating, "Flyers only work in an atmosphere; vehicles that can leave the atmosphere and enter orbit generally use the Pilot skill." Enclosed Air/Rafts can can enter orbit and dock with their Scout ship, at least that is the way I've always used them. They just can't leave orbit.
An Air/Raft doesn't have to be enclosed to leave atmospher. Vacc suits could be used.
User avatar
Sturn
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:37 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Sturn » Sun Jul 14, 2013 10:24 pm

F33D wrote: I changed that. "Flyer" in all other types is an aeronautic skill using lift control surfaces. Air Rafts don't use that type of mechanics at all.

I changed it to: Pilot (Grav vehicle), (Small craft), (Space craft) & (Capital Ship) as they all use some type of Grav drive for motive power and control.
Thanks. This makes lots of sense. It removes the issues of two different skills for flying the same craft in different environments. Leave that for boats that can morph into airplanes and such.
AndrewW wrote: An Air/Raft doesn't have to be enclosed to leave atmospher. Vacc suits could be used.
You're right of course. I saw my mistake should have editted, was lazy.
-Sturn
"I don't need a medal, God knows what I did" -

SGT William Hisle, US Army, WW2.
Terran Dawn Campaign Guide
Sturn's Shipyard!
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Jul 15, 2013 2:34 am

Sturn wrote:Why limit it to the Service Skills table?
Not aware of anyone saying you should. Tweak away.
Sturn wrote:I suppose it's your personal definition of each of the specialties that could mold what you think each specialty should have. Exploration = space exploration versus Exploration = Surface exploration, leads to a big difference of what should be on the specialties' list.
Perhaps create an additional specialty table. One for system/space exploration and one for Planet exploration. But:
Sturn wrote:Survey (specialty skill lists suggests a contact sort of Scout)
I think you might recalibrate survey to be the the specialty for planetary missions like first contact and surface exploration. Exploration specialists could be tuned for system exploration skills, including planet, but limited to what is found from the ship or survey vehicle and no landing.

I took a look at someones scout pdf and it supports this. The Scout Exploration career has two assignments (specialties).
• Analysis: Analysis teams specialise in the deep analysis of
systems, worlds and stellar anomalies. Science skills figure highly
in their work.
• Pathfinder: Pathfinders specialised in planning, testing
and verifying space lane routes. The role includes a certain
amount of analysis but is focused more on Astrogation and
Navigation.
The Scout Special Operations career has three specialties that would all be planet side.

The Scout survey career has three specialties.
World Analysis: You spend your time either planetside or on an orbital platform/space station, monitoring what is happening on the planet itself.
Stellar Analysis, and Cultural Analysis.

There are the three specialties for the Scout Contact career.

Interestingly, of all the careers, only the courier career advanced education table has Gunnery.

The different scout stations in the book did not have weapons.

Out of the six or so ships, only one, The type FS Survey Scout ‘Far Reach’, listed gunners as part of the crew.
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:00 pm

Yes, the "Scout" supplement career tables are much more nuanced, some specialisms do not get gun combat as a basic skill (though some have the opportunity to become quite skilled combatants, but at the penalty of losing other skill more usually associated with scouts), and most do not get the gunner skill.

However, there are loads of really useful non-combat skills available in these careers.

I think some of the discussion above is influenced by how the Scout service is viewed in YTU, is it an auxillary military service or a civilian service. I go very much for the latter view, yes, I know scouts can be mobilised in the event of a war (but then just about anybody else useful may be as well, merchant crews, medical staff, citizens for local defence, etc etc), and some may end up attached to military expeditions, or in quite dangerous situations, but fundamentally they are civilians.

Of course, both the Solomani and Zhodani have removed any doubt about the status of the scout service.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby F33D » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:59 pm

Egil Skallagrimsson wrote:I go very much for the latter view, yes, I know scouts can be mobilised in the event of a war (but then just about anybody else useful may be as well, merchant crews, medical staff, citizens for local defence, etc etc), and some may end up attached to military expeditions, or in quite dangerous situations, but fundamentally they are civilians.
You are "conveniently" leaving out the GLARING fact that those others you just mentioned aren't Gov employees running around in government owned ships that are armed and only carrying out gov missions. :roll: :lol:
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:20 pm

F33D wrote:You are "conveniently" leaving out the GLARING fact that those others you just mentioned aren't Gov employees running around in government owned ships that are armed and only carrying out gov missions. :roll: :lol:
And you are leaving out that although armed, the crew listing on most scout ships does not list a gunner.

I doubt the gov missions for scouts includes using said guns such as "Go to system x and go destroy". That's left to the military types who actually are trained and drill for exactly such.

It is not hard to conceive that it would be a special event and not a general skill for the scouts - for some people in some traveller universe. Off the top of my head: A vessel approaches intending to attack your scout ship. You may either roll Gunner and gain a level of skill if successful in deterring the combatant or roll Diplomacy and gain a level of skill if you successfully negotiate a cease fire. If you fail, your vessel was severely damaged and you may not roll for advancement this term.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby F33D » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:28 pm

CosmicGamer wrote:And you are leaving out that although armed, the crew listing on most scout ships does not list a gunner.
Nope. For instance, a Type S often has only one person. There isn't a listing for JD Engineer. However, someone with that skill is onboard. If even the single crew member.

And, I'm sure the Scout Mission don't say, take you Laser Rifles here and blow away the inhabitants either. Learn some logic. :lol:

Try again until you get it right. I'll stand by. ;)
rust
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5941
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:17 pm
Location: Sonthofen / Germany

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby rust » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:16 pm

Scouts and Gunnery skill ... I would hesitate to look for a setting
explanation for the missing skill and therefore see this as purely
a matter of Mongoose Traveller's game mechanics, mostly becau-
se the Scout characters of the same Third Imperium setting did
have access to the Gunnery skill in previous versions of Traveller,
for example in MegaTraveller, Traveller TNE and GURPS Travel-
ler.
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby CosmicGamer » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:19 pm

F33D wrote:Try again until you get it right. I'll stand by. ;)
No thanks. If you don't get my logic and want me to explain it differently you should be nicer about it.

If you don't agree just say so and explain why. Don't know why you have to get so snarky.

Sorry, hope I didn't hurt your feelings. Your right. I'm wrong. IYTU only. So sorry for having an opinion.

I'll try not to respond to your posts if it upsets you so much.
User avatar
Sturn
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:37 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Sturn » Tue Jul 16, 2013 1:46 am

F33D wrote:You are "conveniently" leaving out the GLARING fact that those others you just mentioned aren't Gov employees running around in government owned ships that are armed and only carrying out gov missions. :roll: :lol:
I would also add that the civilian career of Merchant actually does allow you to learn Gunnery. It's a civilian career. None of the basic core merchant ships come with guns as default. The paramilitary (government if you prefer) Scout ships have guns. The career of Scout, which is at least more "military" then civilian Merchants alas does not have Gunnery as even an option. That's why we take issue with it.
rust wrote:Scouts and Gunnery skill ... I would hesitate to look for a setting explanation for the missing skill and therefore see this as purely a matter of Mongoose Traveller's game mechanics, mostly because the Scout characters of the same Third Imperium setting did
have access to the Gunnery skill in previous versions of Traveller, for example in MegaTraveller, Traveller TNE and GURPS Traveller.
....and CT, and T4, and T5. MGT is the only Traveller system out of 7 that takes away the Gunnery skill from Scouts. So, please at least understand our issue with it missing in MGT. Either you believe MGT got it wrong or you have to believe all of the other 6 systems did and MGT finally got it right?
-Sturn
"I don't need a medal, God knows what I did" -

SGT William Hisle, US Army, WW2.
Terran Dawn Campaign Guide
Sturn's Shipyard!
CosmicGamer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:45 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby CosmicGamer » Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:52 am

Sturn wrote:That's why we take issue with it.
Sturn wrote:So, please at least understand our issue with it missing in MGT.
I can see the points. Not sure why you feel the need to convince people to see things your way.
Sturn wrote:Either you believe MGT got it wrong or you have to believe all of the other 6 systems did and MGT finally got it right?
Sorry, I believe neither of those two options. Different versions can and always do some things differently. I don't have a problem with that and expect it.

What's the point of trying to convince others that MgT got it wrong.
Lets say we all agree. Ok now what. We just sit around and bitch and moan.

I'd rather discuss and spend time and energy either discussing
- why it works ok as is (for some people in some TUs)
or
- what doesn't work optimally and creating fixes (for some people in some TUs)
I actually can be objective and do both. Point out reasons that help explain why it can work as is (for some people in some TUs) and also point out possible changes (for some people in some TUs).

I also can tell you how I do things but if it is different from someone elses that does not mean I think they are wrong. I take some offense if they tell me, or imply my opinions are not valid and I'm wrong.

Peoples favorite baseball team is different, peoples favorite ice cream flavor is different. Is one right and one wrong?

And, by the way, although pilot was a default skill for scouts in CT, I believe during their career they were more likely to get gunner than pilot!? Hardly what I'd think typical for a scout.

Sorry, I don't own and can't comment on the career in other versions.
F33D wrote:Sorry, doing mental gymnastics to justify gaping holes in the rule set doesn't cut. Keep trying though.
Personally I prefer a post with mental gymnastics over one completely void of mental activity at all. Keep trying though.
User avatar
Sturn
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:37 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Sturn » Tue Jul 16, 2013 3:21 pm

CosmicGamer wrote:
Sturn wrote:That's why we take issue with it.
Sturn wrote:So, please at least understand our issue with it missing in MGT.
I can see the points. Not sure why you feel the need to convince people to see things your way.
Sturn wrote:Either you believe MGT got it wrong or you have to believe all of the other 6 systems did and MGT finally got it right?
Sorry, I believe neither of those two options. Different versions can and always do some things differently. I don't have a problem with that and expect it.
I did suggest some solutions, like you did:
Sturn wrote:But I wouldn't have an issue replacing Stealth or Recon with Gunnery under Exploration. I suppose it's your personal definition of each of the specialties that could mold what you think each specialty should have.

An easy fix (for me) would be simply combining the Pilot results under Exploration into one entry of Pilot (small or space). Then you open a spot for Gunnery or Flyer (Grav) if that is more important for you.
I completely agree each person can do whatever he wants with his own game. That's obvious. You seemed to take issue with our version of things, so I pointed out it isn't just our version, it's 6 out of 7 official Traveller versions. I was never trying to convince you to put Gunnery in your personal MGT Scout tables, just understand why some of us have an issue with it not being in the official tables and discount the, "Scouts aren't the Navy so they shouldn't be able to train in Gunnery", argument.
Sturn wrote:I agree there is not room for all of the essential skills, you have to prioritize them. The disagreement is in the individual prioritization. No one is really wrong here.
-Sturn
"I don't need a medal, God knows what I did" -

SGT William Hisle, US Army, WW2.
Terran Dawn Campaign Guide
Sturn's Shipyard!
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Tue Jul 16, 2013 3:27 pm

F33D wrote:
Egil Skallagrimsson wrote:I go very much for the latter view, yes, I know scouts can be mobilised in the event of a war (but then just about anybody else useful may be as well, merchant crews, medical staff, citizens for local defence, etc etc), and some may end up attached to military expeditions, or in quite dangerous situations, but fundamentally they are civilians.
You are "conveniently" leaving out the GLARING fact that those others you just mentioned aren't Gov employees running around in government owned ships that are armed and only carrying out gov missions. :roll: :lol:
By that logic everybody who works for the government should have the gunner skill, every crew member on a government liner, every doctor in a state run hospital, every pen pusher and street sweeper, all should have gunner (turret) 1, just in case they are mobilised in a hurry. Bizarre.

IMHO, IMTU, Scouts are government employees, but not military auxiliaries, in fact, many of there members are adventurous types who can't abide military "bull".

Can't see how I can make this any clearer

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: Who actually wears combat armour?

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Tue Jul 16, 2013 3:39 pm

CosmicGamer wrote:
F33D wrote:Sorry, doing mental gymnastics to justify gaping holes in the rule set doesn't cut. Keep trying though.
Personally I prefer a post with mental gymnastics over one completely void of mental activity at all. Keep trying though.
:lol: :lol: Exactly, another vote for mental gymnastics.

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 13 guests