Announcing: The Open Playtest!

[far-trader]

Gauss weapons should have recoil though, pretty serious recoil in fact. At least comparable to pistol and rifle for the same type. Only lasers make sense as zero recoil, and then only if strictly an electrically powered laser, not if an explosively powered generator laser.

No. Gauss Rifles use a electromagnetic field to propel the round down the barrel. The process does not require compressed gas and the projectiles flight down the barrel is frictionless. So recoil would definitely be minimal to non-existent.

Nope, it's still a standard Action/Reaction system. The act of propelling the round (Action) down the barrel imparts recoil (Reaction) on the barrel and weapon. And while standard Gauss weapons do have very light rounds (other problems there but I'll ignore that) they are propelled at very very high velocity. Which works out pretty close to the same recoil as you find in typical chemical explosive propelled weapons of similar 'power' to do damage and cover range.

Recoil is definitely existent and significant.

...So recoil would definitely be minimal to non-existent, at least for single shot operation. I suppose a case could be made for some recoil due to the magazine feed mechanism for automatic fire, but certainly not excessive recoil.

There could actually be a case made for no recoil effect (effect to aiming that is) for the first few rounds down the barrel in any sufficiently high rof weapon, as well as the first round fired in any weapon of course. Even some automatic rifles today can offer that. Any weapon that imparts serious aiming effects from the cycling of the feed is poorly designed

 

[Mongoose Gar]

Cutlass is 4+Strength DM.
Lasers are currently around damage 10.

(Weapon/armour balancing is one of my current bugbears. Actually, it's probably worth listing the bits of the system that I've mentally tagged as 'structurally unsound right now':

* Abstract Wealth
* Point Buy
* Aiding others with skills
* Weapon/Armour Balancing
* Large Engagements.)

I'll polish up equipment and encounters as soon as possible.

 

[far-trader]

Cutlass is 4+Strength DM.
Lasers are currently around damage 10.

Cool. Thanks

 

[rkhigdon]

Nope, it's still a standard Action/Reaction system. The act of propelling the round (Action) down the barrel imparts recoil (Reaction) on the barrel and weapon. And while standard Gauss weapons do have very light rounds (other problems there but I'll ignore that) they are propelled at very very high velocity. Which works out pretty close to the same recoil as you find in typical chemical explosive propelled weapons of similar 'power' to do damage and cover range.

Recoil is definitely existent and significant.

Well you learn something new every day. I always assumed the 4mm, 4 gram needles in Traveller gauss rifles would have little recoil. However plugging them in and assuming 1,500 meters/second it does indeed seem that recoil would equal that of a standard weapon. Interesting stuff.

 

[far-trader]

Well you learn something new every day. I always assumed the 4mm, 4 gram needles in Traveller gauss rifles would have little recoil. However plugging them in and assuming 1,500 meters/second it does indeed seem that recoil would equal that of a standard weapon. Interesting stuff.

I'm happy to see you worked the math through. If only everyone were so easy to convince

 

[Takei]

Firstly, I'd be happier with a formula that filled the table, rather than just the table. Secondly, I agree, the unskilled penalty is -3 DM then a characteristic +3 DM should be the rarest of the rare

(Characteristic - 7)/3, rounded produces:

01 = -2
02 = -2
03 = -1
04 = -1
05 = -1
06 =  0
07 =  0
08 =  0
09 = +1
10 = +1
11 = +1
12 = +2
13 = +2
14 = +2
15 = +3

Personally, I think that looks pretty good, fills a table nicely, but lets us computer inclined folks program it into a game aid without having to embed a table.

Eris

I much prefer the table (and calculation method) Eris suggests.

One other suggestion I have is to make skill checks in steps of 3 rather than 2. Unskilled use is at -3 which would equate to making tasks one step harder. Still keep 8 as the base target number.

 

[Allensh]

This is just so freaking cool!

Guess what we're gonna be doing for a few weeks, gaming group?

Now to find a good planet based adventure to run...hmm...maybe Marooned?

Allen

 

[Eris]

Firstly, I'd be happier with a formula that filled the table, rather than just the table. Secondly, I agree, the unskilled penalty is -3 DM then a characteristic +3 DM should be the rarest of the rare

(Characteristic - 7)/3, rounded produces:

01 = -2
02 = -2
03 = -1
04 = -1
05 = -1
06 =  0
07 =  0
08 =  0
09 = +1
10 = +1
11 = +1
12 = +2
13 = +2
14 = +2
15 = +3

Personally, I think that looks pretty good, fills a table nicely, but lets us computer inclined folks program it into a game aid without having to embed a table.

Eris

I much prefer the table (and calculation method) Eris suggests.

One other suggestion I have is to make skill checks in steps of 3 rather than 2. Unskilled use is at -3 which would equate to making tasks one step harder. Still keep 8 as the base target number.

Hum...well, I think keeping the steps at 2 might be a good idea as that makes unskilled checks *more* than one step harder. I might even go with unskilled checks being a -4 to balance JOAT a bit more.

What I'd suggest is extending the task scale up a bit higher:

DM    Descriptor     Target
+6      Simple          2
+4      Easy            4
+2      Routine         6
 0      Average         8
-2      Difficult      10
-4      Very Difficult 12
-6      Formidable     14
-8      Staggering     16
-10     Hopeless       18
-12     Impossible     20

My thought here is that a really top level PC might have a +3 Characteristic, a +4 Skill and get a roll of 12 giving them a 19 and putting them right below being able to do the Impossible at their peak...without outside aid. Of course, my additional levels are just added to the end of Mongoose's table so it will be simple enough to just house rule it in.

Frankly, I'd probably refer to the Target number rather than 8 +4 or 8 -2, too, but that's me and I don't have a problem with how the difficulty levels are being expressed.

Eris

 

[Cowboy]

Just downloaded the document and I'm skimming through it, so here's my initial thoughts:

•Agree with others about the +3 modifier. Starting it at 15 both makes sense in terms of making that score of F (yeah, I'll still use hex even if the rules don't ) special and of making the bonuses progress in a mathematically consistent way making it easier to extrapolate values for crazy critters that might exist in other TU's and be outside the usual human range.
•The effect/timing mecahnic is a neat idea but if they remain, I suggest either making them "lower is better" or changing the resolution system to roll-under with the base target# set at 6. The extra step of adding the DM's to the effect die completely ruins the elegance of the system. Alternately, negative DM's could be ignored and positive DM's split by the player across timing and effect. As it is, someone with a +5 DM will always succeed spectacularly well or fail altogether. If he had to spread that +5 across Timing and Effect, there'd at least be a bit more variation.
•On p. 1 of combat, I've no idea what the following is meant to convey: " Take a free move of one tick, and move up to three ticks." OK, wait, I think I get it - a tick is both a unit of time and a unit of distance? This is guaranteed to cause confusion.
•The combat rules, by and large, look way, way, waaay more complex than I'm comfortable with. I'm already shuddering at the thought of tracking initiative for more than one or two NPCs. Not to mention the timing of movement. I predict a lot of arguments about who has to commit to movement first and micromanagement galore.
•I'm not crazy about the parrying rule. I'd prefer an active roll on the part of the defender.
•The wounding system is just plain poorer than in CT IMO. I can't see why points left after subtracting the End DM are automatically applied to Endurance rather than to all physical stats. It also makes high End characters incredibly tough and low End characters extremely fragile. It would make more sense to me to apply those points left over as dice of damage to be split among physical stats.
•I'd love to actually playtest it but I've no idea what kind of stats any weapons have as this information isn't actually in the document.

All in all, though, my feelings on how the whole thing looks beyond character creation (which looks good indeed), I think it suffers from too many Stupid Dice Tricks™ and too few clever ideas that actually are clever.

Cheers.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Nope, it's still a standard Action/Reaction system. The act of propelling the round (Action) down the barrel imparts recoil (Reaction) on the barrel and weapon. And while standard Gauss weapons do have very light rounds (other problems there but I'll ignore that) they are propelled at very very high velocity. Which works out pretty close to the same recoil as you find in typical chemical explosive propelled weapons of similar 'power' to do damage and cover range.

Recoil is definitely existent and significant.

Well you learn something new every day. I always assumed the 4mm, 4 gram needles in Traveller gauss rifles would have little recoil. However plugging them in and assuming 1,500 meters/second it does indeed seem that recoil would equal that of a standard weapon. Interesting stuff.

Yea for fun, back in college, I designed a battleship mounted gauss cannon complete with ammo. Problems: I would have required the ship's nuclear reactor would have to be full tilt and the recoil would have been enough to sink the ship. So yea, a gauss weapon with a recoil of 3ish is probably about right.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Here's my thought:

TL progression.

TL 0 (Primitive): Stone Age tech.
TL 1 (Primitive): Bronze age only tech. Permits construction of blades (and metal axes), but not swords.
TL 2 (Primitive): Iron Age only tech. Swords, chainmail.
TL 3 (Primitive): Middle Ages only.
TL 4 (Pre-Industrial) Renaissance tech. Early rifles, early revolvers (at late TL4).
TL 5 (Industrial): roughly 1845 to 1919. Given as standard in CT.
TL 6 (Industrial): roughly 1919 to 1955. Nuclear bombs.
TL 7 (Pre-Stellar): roughly 1955 to 1989.
TL 8 (Pre Stellar): 1990 to 2050.
TL 9 (Early Stellar): 2050 onwards.

The rest of the TL scale is fine by me.

 

[Cowboy]

Oh, and another further thought: I think the aliens should be left out of the core book entirely and reserved for the supplements. Giving them a bunch of stat modifiers and using the human character creation tables takes away their alienness. Save them for supplements, then do them properly.

 

[rkhigdon]

Oh, and another further thought: I think the aliens should be left out of the core book entirely and reserved for the supplements. Giving them a bunch of stat modifiers and using the human character creation tables takes away their alienness. Save them for supplements, then do them properly.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

 

[tneva82]

Humm humm. Just something I noticed while creating few dry-runs but the age modifiers for certain careers(marines and military specifically) seems to make advancing past rank 3 very, VERY hard.

Now while this is realistic it certainly makes it less appealing to try make long term career there. When, even with +2 modifier you get from ability), you need 11 or 12 to qualify and still have to face survival and advancement checks...Well going to other terms might just be more profitable option.

Howabout adding(atleast in those military careers) your rank as positive modifier? I would think military would be more interested in keeping high ranking officers on the career so this would IMO make sense.

Just a random thought.

Oh and weren't there supposed to be danger of death? Am I just missing it or is it there? Can't figure out how character could actually die during character creation.

 

[Allensh]

I wil dissent. I like having the mods in there and really, how much different would a Vargr corsair be than a human one in terms of skill set and such? I think non-Traveller customers might expect there to be at least some aliens in the book from the get-go.

Allen

 

[Allensh]

Humm humm. Just something I noticed while creating few dry-runs but the age modifiers for certain careers(marines and military specifically) seems to make advancing past rank 3 very, VERY hard.

Now while this is realistic it certainly makes it less appealing to try make long term career there. When, even with +2 modifier you get from ability), you need 11 or 12 to qualify and still have to face survival and advancement checks...Well going to other terms might just be more profitable option.

Howabout adding(atleast in those military careers) your rank as positive modifier? I would think military would be more interested in keeping high ranking officers on the career so this would IMO make sense.

Just a random thought.

Oh and weren't there supposed to be danger of death? Am I just missing it or is it there? Can't figure out how character could actually die during character creation.

I like the rank as postive DM idea.

The "dying while being rolled up" thing is listed under alternate character creation, "Iron Man". I think relegating it to an option is a good idea.

Allen

 

[Cowboy]

I wil dissent. I like having the mods in there and really, how much different would a Vargr corsair be than a human one in terms of skill set and such? I think non-Traveller customers might expect there to be at least some aliens in the book from the get-go.

Allen

I agree on your last point. I just see no reason for those aliens being the Traveller aliens rather than some more generic ones.

The Traveller aliens were always pretty alien as aliens go, even the human ones and a few stat modifiers don't really make that so. No previous version of Traveller (including the clearly non-generic ones like MT and TNE) included chargen rules for the aliens in the core book. It makes little sense for this generic version to do so.

 

[E.D.Quibell]

Putting the Aliens in the rule book links the rules to the Official Traveller Universe.

I'd suggest leaving them out for a settings book.

Best Regards

Ewan

 

[dmccoy1693]

I wil dissent. I like having the mods in there and really, how much different would a Vargr corsair be than a human one in terms of skill set and such? I think non-Traveller customers might expect there to be at least some aliens in the book from the get-go.

Allen

Not to mention that aliens not in the core book(s) will most likely mean that they won't be OGL. So instead of having Traveller, it'll be Serenity.

 

[Eris]

Putting the Aliens in the rule book links the rules to the Official Traveller Universe.

I'd suggest leaving them out for a settings book.

Best Regards

Ewan

Well, this is the *playtest* document, so it's okay to have them in there for that purpose...we might need a few when we...you know...playtest.