Big Explosion Damage

[Eisenmann]

Hey, all.

I'm looking at how to model an IED using the system.

I just ran a test scenario where where an AFV ran over the IED (10D6). The damage roll resulted in 18 (36 total - 18 armor). This resulted in the weapon system being destroyed and a point of armor loss. Even with a multiplier it seems as if it would take a long time to chip away at an AFV.

Maybe I should just use a damage multiplier? I dunno. Even at that it doesn't seem very "realistic" if I dare to use the term.

What's your take? Add an Armor Piercing stat to weapons? I'm not sure if I want to go that route but I might be convinced to do so.

 

[zozotroll]

Go with 30D6 or so. An IED that can bust a bradley or Striker will zaporize a person. 10D6 will kill somebody, but with just a flak jacket, not by a lot.

The amount of damage needed to kill a tank is several orders of magnitude above what it takes to kill a person. Trying to use one system for both doesnt usually work very well.

 

[Eisenmann]

I kept experimenting and went with 4D6x5. It tore through the hull and took out the power plant, destroyed the weapon systems, damaged sensors, and killed an occupant.

I'm still not "convinced" it's the most elegant approach but it'll work for tomorrow night at least.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Hey, all.

I'm looking at how to model an IED using the system.

I just ran a test scenario where where an AFV ran over the IED (10D6). The damage roll resulted in 18 (36 total - 18 armor). This resulted in the weapon system being destroyed and a point of armor loss. Even with a multiplier it seems as if it would take a long time to chip away at an AFV.

Maybe I should just use a damage multiplier? I dunno. Even at that it doesn't seem very "realistic" if I dare to use the term.

What's your take? Add an Armor Piercing stat to weapons? I'm not sure if I want to go that route but I might be convinced to do so.

Grrr. I thought there was something in the core rulebook about IEDs but I can't find it. Is it really there? If so, please give a page #.

Not knowing the details of the IED, my first question would be what tech level is it? You are trying to take out a TL 12 heavily armored vehicle with a pipe bomb? I hope it will take some time to chip away at it. Losing the vehicles triple laser turret is a very nice chip. It would be 2 pts of armor loss not 1, no?

Yes, you should use a damage multiplier as stated in the rules. Explosives multiply their damage by their effect (page 102 and page 54) so a well made IED triggered at just the right time can do a good amount of damage. An effect of 2 would make it 72 damage - 18 armor = 54. That would be 2 triple hits, 3 double hits and a single hit. Not too shabby for your IED. Imagine what an effect of 4 could do.

Explosives also have an area of effect. Any nearby personnel, vehicles, or other items may also take hits (if it was a movie there would be a nearby fuel barrel to explode and add in its damage).

Not every IED will cause lots of damage. Some may not even go off. That is realistic.

 

[Eisenmann]

If there's something about IEDs in the book then I've missed it. If so, awesome! I'll poke through the book again to see if I can find it.

And, nope. I'm not trying to model a pipe bomb. I've seen real IEDs go off. HUGE. That's what I'm going after. Something to make the players quake in their boots.

Thanks for the pointers to pages 102 and 54. Much appreciated. How did I miss that? I've read the book through 3 or 4 times now. lol

 

[EDG]

I'd imagine that even if the bomb doesn't tear the vehicle apart (even a TL12 APC will have a "soft" underbelly) it's going to flip it over/send it flying and shake up the occupants (and then you have unsecured bits flying around inside the vehicle).

Hm. You could just treat it as a collision (see p66 of the corebook - as if it's suddenly gone from its current speed to 0 km/h) with extra explosive damage maybe?

This also brings an interesting tangential question to mind - can a grav tank set off a pressure-sensitive mine? I'm sure it's been argued about before, but if grav does 'push' on the ground somewhat then maybe it would. Of course, a remotely activated landmine would seriously bugger up a low-flying grav tank (especially if they're flying fast - the undercarriage not only gets shredded, but then the vehicle plows into the ground at a few hundred km/h...)

 

[Eisenmann]

Excellent point. Lifting and rolling the vehicle is something that I was playing with but didn't transpose onto the forum.

Great idea to use collision to help model the phenomenon.

I know one thing. I wouldn't want to be in a grav tank that sets off an IED.

I'd imagine that even if the bomb doesn't tear the vehicle apart (even a TL12 APC will have a "soft" underbelly) it's going to flip it over/send it flying and shake up the occupants (and then you have unsecured bits flying around inside the vehicle).

Hm. You could just treat it as a collision (see p66 of the corebook - as if it's suddenly gone from its current speed to 0 km/h) with extra explosive damage maybe?

This also brings an interesting tangential question to mind - can a grav tank set off a pressure-sensitive mine? I'm sure it's been argued about before, but if grav does 'push' on the ground somewhat then maybe it would. Of course, a remotely activated landmine would seriously bugger up a low-flying grav tank (especially if they're flying fast - the undercarriage not only gets shredded, but then the vehicle plows into the ground at a few hundred km/h...)

 

[EDG]

It seemed to make sense . Collisions also have handy-dandy rules for sending people flying too.

Though flicking through the rules there (I've not really read the book enough to be familiar with all the systems)... what do vehicles do for armour? For people the armour rating absorbs the damage, do Vehicles have that too?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Isn't there a damage scale up between vehicles and personal scale?

So 10D6 vehicle damage is a LOT more personal damage. I don't remember what the damage scaling factor is though. I know past editions of Traveller had it, but not sure about this one.

 

[GhostWolf69]

I would just like to add that I personally think rolling 10+ d6's are completely out of the question.

30d6 ... why? It's fun to roll lots of dice I know but come on!

I would strongly recommend rolling something like 5d6+80 or something like that instead. Saves me the time and effort of counting all those dots...

Statistically I'll just end up around roughly the same sum anyway.

Sure you loose the freak-occurence factor that the Gods of Fortune turned their back for a second and you rolled a total of 34 or something on those dice... but honestly... a) do you want that to happen? b) have you ever seen it happen?

My take at least... not really the subject that was intended in thsi thread but I felt like sharing just the same.

Edit: Multipliers are also evil...they really screw with the Standard deviation curve since you still suffer the same freak-chace but the results are then... well multiplied... and all you do is end up with a greater risk that soemthing will go horribly "sideways".

/wolf

 

[Myrm]

I
30d6 ... why? It's fun to roll lots of dice I know but come on!

I would strongly recommend rolling something like 5d6+80 or something like that instead. Saves me the time and effort of counting all those dots...

Statistically I'll just end up around roughly the same sum anyway.

No it won't be similar statisitically - the means will be similar enough, but the range and variances will be very different.

 

[GhostWolf69]

No it won't be similar statisitically - the means will be similar enough, but the range and variances will be very different.

I know, I know. But my point was that I can't be bothered counting 30 dice and add them up.

Rolling 7d6+80 will give you about the same Arithmetic Mean.
Variance would be somewhere between 1/3rd and 1/4th of 30d6 and the Standard Deviation is more or less halved in any given sample.

So yeah you have a completely different shape.

But how often... in an RPG session... will you ever notice the difference? Do I care?

/wolf

 

[Myrm]

No it won't be similar statisitically - the means will be similar enough, but the range and variances will be very different.

I know, I know. But my point was that I can't be bothered counting 30 dice and add them up.

OK, but ease of use is a good enough reason in and of itself in a game you play with friends...so just pop that in as the reason rather than trying to justify it more objectively with the maths. These games are as often subjective as objective.

So yeah you have a completely different shape.

But how often... in an RPG session... will you ever notice the difference?

Often enough - with a minimum damage of 80 odd player may feel cheated that there is no chance to stay alive, whereas if they get to roll X number of dice and possibly, even if its vanishingly small in probability, survive then they are far far likelier in my experience to live with it. That range is important and so yes the difference will get noted.

 

[GhostWolf69]

We have different opinions that's all.

I DO think statistics back up my way of doing it, because the chance of a guy surviving is ridiculously small it might just as well be impossible, to save time. That is how I feel. I would almost get mad if I DIDN't die, because it seems absurd to be able to take a hit like that and walk away.

My thinking is; if you get hit by 30d6 of damage you probably did something wrong way before that, hoping for a divine intervention givving you only 34 points of damage... is not gonna save you.

See what I mean?

/wolf

 

[Myrm]

We have different opinions that's all.

Actually, I havent given an opinion on the best way to do it - I think your method could be as valid as any other if it fits what you need to do with it - I just wanted to point out that saying that 30D6 and 5D6+N were statistically similar wasn't true and could be noticed....and I'll stand by that statement.

What's 'best' in random number generation is going to vary dramatically based on the decisions and wants of the individual group.

I DO think statistics back up my way of doing it, because the chance of a guy surviving is ridiculously small it might just as well be impossible, to save time. That is how I feel. I would almost get mad if I DIDN't die, because it seems absurd to be able to take a hit like that and walk away.

My thinking is; if you get hit by 30d6 of damage you probably did something wrong way before that, hoping for a divine intervention givving you only 34 points of damage... is not gonna save you.

See what I mean?

Yes - it means the differences in the statistics do not worry you enough to prevent you using a simpler, quicker, deadlier method for that explosion.

My point was limited to disagreeing with the statement that the methods were statistically similar, not disagreeing with your choices based on the magnitude and type of those differences.

Its not similarities in statistics that back up your decision really - its how well the different statistical models fit into your gameplay requirements that is backing up your choices, a subtle difference in perspective I realise...