You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
broadsword damage to battledress
- Thread starter ColHut
- Start date
Assume max damage roll and max effect of 6. That's 30 points of damage. That has to represent sticking the sword into some vulnerable spot on the armour and hitting flesh, cutting a power cable, shorting the armour, frying the guy inside etc or similar and remember that to happen and get effect 6 thats got to come from a skilled and powerful combatant. Thats the thematic explanation.
ColHut said:Dear All
Just having a little trouble understanding how a stong man with a broadsword can cause serious damage to a person in battle dress. I thought it was powered, armoured, exoskeleton armour. I think broadsword does 4d6 and battle dress provides 16 to 18 armour.
cheers
Think of the averages said broad sword does 14 points of damage, battledress in MgT has a DR of 18 for net -4 damage on average. Now with a good to-hit (effect adds to damage) and/or a good damage roll overcomes this. Max damage from said broad sword is 24 sans DR it is 6 points plus effect.
So it isn't quite as bad as could be.....
A real world example that might help a little.
Knives are old fashioned but still penetrate bullet resistant armour surprisingly well. A less relevant example from SF is armour so optimised for protection against modern beam weapons it is useless against slug throwers.
It is a flaw with many RPGs and computer games for that matter and is a tricky thing to model well and playably. Also having weapons that just go 'pink' against some types of armour is not fun – and you always have to allow for the lucky hit that breaks all the rules.
Knives are old fashioned but still penetrate bullet resistant armour surprisingly well. A less relevant example from SF is armour so optimised for protection against modern beam weapons it is useless against slug throwers.
It is a flaw with many RPGs and computer games for that matter and is a tricky thing to model well and playably. Also having weapons that just go 'pink' against some types of armour is not fun – and you always have to allow for the lucky hit that breaks all the rules.
Emperor Herdan
Mongoose
Actually some large swords have more in common with crushing weapons then they do with slicing weapons. Ohh yes they can "cut" flesh and bone... but when used in combat against armour, they become quite dull quickly.
The force generated is still quite strong, and can break bones without breaking through any armour (transference). Likewise there are always weak points with any armour (trade-offs.. darn those trade-offs). The odds of actually killing someone in BD with a broadsword is remote, but being able to wound someone would be rare, but not impossible.
Having said that, I still miss the Micro-sledge of CT times...
Take care
E. Herdan
The force generated is still quite strong, and can break bones without breaking through any armour (transference). Likewise there are always weak points with any armour (trade-offs.. darn those trade-offs). The odds of actually killing someone in BD with a broadsword is remote, but being able to wound someone would be rare, but not impossible.
Having said that, I still miss the Micro-sledge of CT times...
Take care
E. Herdan
BenGunn said:Basically there should be no way that an unaugmented human wielding a sword can harm or hurt a person in Battledress.
Why? And why if it detracts from game play?
Now I you must understand that I consider Battledress to be the bottom end of the powered armor spectrum not the top.
Broadsword: 4d6 = 4-24 pts.
Battle Dress TL 14: Protection 18
With no other modifiers, must roll a 19 or better to do 1 pt or more of damage. Chances of rolling 19 or better: 10%.
Chances of doing 4 pts or more of damage (rolling a 22 or better) are 1%.
Chances of doing 6 points of damage (rolling a 24) are under 0.1%.
One thought is that it may be rare, but it should be possible to damage the battle armor. A well placed hit in a joint might bend something just enough to cause it to seize up or at least reduce mobility. Perhaps some of the damage should be to the armor and not the occupant.
Another thought is that an attack, especially a surprise attack from behind while you are preoccupied crushing townsfolk between the toes of your mighty battle dress (sorry for being a little silly there - wait, no, I'm not sorry!) anyways, a surprise attack from behind might throw you around (as the battle dress automatic gyros compensate to keep upright the force exerted on the armor is now transfered to the occupant. Luckily the armor is designed with cushioning that greatly reduces the forces actually caused to the occupant) 1) if you are not strapped in tight you slam into the inside of the battle dress or 2) if you are strapped in tight, the harness or whatever may cut into you or put strain on your joints. If you will, imagine a car slamming into another car where the occupant is either thrown around the interior, has bruises or worse from their seat belt, or has whiplash.
Battle Dress TL 14: Protection 18
With no other modifiers, must roll a 19 or better to do 1 pt or more of damage. Chances of rolling 19 or better: 10%.
Chances of doing 4 pts or more of damage (rolling a 22 or better) are 1%.
Chances of doing 6 points of damage (rolling a 24) are under 0.1%.
One thought is that it may be rare, but it should be possible to damage the battle armor. A well placed hit in a joint might bend something just enough to cause it to seize up or at least reduce mobility. Perhaps some of the damage should be to the armor and not the occupant.
Another thought is that an attack, especially a surprise attack from behind while you are preoccupied crushing townsfolk between the toes of your mighty battle dress (sorry for being a little silly there - wait, no, I'm not sorry!) anyways, a surprise attack from behind might throw you around (as the battle dress automatic gyros compensate to keep upright the force exerted on the armor is now transfered to the occupant. Luckily the armor is designed with cushioning that greatly reduces the forces actually caused to the occupant) 1) if you are not strapped in tight you slam into the inside of the battle dress or 2) if you are strapped in tight, the harness or whatever may cut into you or put strain on your joints. If you will, imagine a car slamming into another car where the occupant is either thrown around the interior, has bruises or worse from their seat belt, or has whiplash.
iainjcoleman
Banded Mongoose
Having conducted extrensive field trials in which skilled swordsmen attack volunteers in fully powered battledress, I conclude that the damage probabilities in Mongoose Traveller are a reasonable simulation of reality.
starbright
Mongoose
I imagine battledress to be more like a walking tank with a person inside than a suit of armour. You wouldn't expect to be able to take out a tank with a sword ... or would you?
drnuncheon
Mongoose
starbright said:I imagine battledress to be more like a walking tank with a person inside than a suit of armour. You wouldn't expect to be able to take out a tank with a sword ... or would you?
Well, battledress has certain factors that make it more vulnerable than a tank. The primary one is the joints - anywhere you want to have mobility you are going to be sacrificing protection, so places like the back of the knee, the elbow, and the armpit are all potential weaknesses. If the helmet is mobile then the neck is a possible weak point as well.
That said, MonT battledress is by no means tankish - a good hit with a rifle can penetrate (at least a little), so it's possible you are overestimating its protection.
If I got the swing right that I might stand a small chance to be able to detrack the tank and so disable it. Thats a fairly close analogy to injuring a guy in battledress.
Bluntly put, the chances of a swordwielder of low tech taking out a battledress wearer in practical terms is wildly wildly unlikely. They will have friends, you have to get close, then you have to pull off the rolls.
The statement that there is no way anyone should be able to hurt someone in Battledress is a player preference not an objective idea (objective statements like that cannot exist in a fictional equipment list beyond perhaps, that which we know as 'canon'). Its clearly not the view that the authors of the current edition have taken as they have left it possible for broadsword wielders to hurt people in battledress.
However, that being said, the flip side of the 'there is no objective view of BattleDress because its fictional' is that for the player that wants Battledress to be rock-solid-tank-like in their game, the change becomes important, even vital, for that player to be able to include and ideally easily explain to players familiar with the base rules. Therefore for that game needs a method of implementation. SO here are some ideas of how to implement this and give your BattleDress so upgrade lovin'
1) For me the quickest method of doing that would be by upping Battledress armour - say Tech Level x2 in Armour for BattleDress - this means that even modern small arms will start to have a serious problem and the armour becomes much more invulnerable personal tank like - its also very easy to figure for future similar bits of kit from future equipment releases. This is not unrealistic given a modern APC is the comparator given in this thread and modern APCs can bounce small arms.
2) Or if you wish to go more complex and make it TL related and nick an idea from Dark Heresy - assign a number of items a 'Primitive' tag if their tech level is below TL of choice and double APs of armour without the 'Primitive' tag to primitive weapons....this allows you to include fancy high grade alloys, or incredibly fine edged (monomolecular etc) to remove the primitive tag.
3) Go one step further and assume that the wearer has some input here. So that the basic plates provide some protection but more experienced and skilled users are more able to place the protective plates in the right angles to defend and ameliorate damage. In this model the APs given for the BattleDress are the base provided to a BattleDress-0 user and each level of BattleDress skill adds to it a certain amount....tune the amount to your chosen level of lethality/tankness and voila...
Bluntly put, the chances of a swordwielder of low tech taking out a battledress wearer in practical terms is wildly wildly unlikely. They will have friends, you have to get close, then you have to pull off the rolls.
The statement that there is no way anyone should be able to hurt someone in Battledress is a player preference not an objective idea (objective statements like that cannot exist in a fictional equipment list beyond perhaps, that which we know as 'canon'). Its clearly not the view that the authors of the current edition have taken as they have left it possible for broadsword wielders to hurt people in battledress.
However, that being said, the flip side of the 'there is no objective view of BattleDress because its fictional' is that for the player that wants Battledress to be rock-solid-tank-like in their game, the change becomes important, even vital, for that player to be able to include and ideally easily explain to players familiar with the base rules. Therefore for that game needs a method of implementation. SO here are some ideas of how to implement this and give your BattleDress so upgrade lovin'
1) For me the quickest method of doing that would be by upping Battledress armour - say Tech Level x2 in Armour for BattleDress - this means that even modern small arms will start to have a serious problem and the armour becomes much more invulnerable personal tank like - its also very easy to figure for future similar bits of kit from future equipment releases. This is not unrealistic given a modern APC is the comparator given in this thread and modern APCs can bounce small arms.
2) Or if you wish to go more complex and make it TL related and nick an idea from Dark Heresy - assign a number of items a 'Primitive' tag if their tech level is below TL of choice and double APs of armour without the 'Primitive' tag to primitive weapons....this allows you to include fancy high grade alloys, or incredibly fine edged (monomolecular etc) to remove the primitive tag.
3) Go one step further and assume that the wearer has some input here. So that the basic plates provide some protection but more experienced and skilled users are more able to place the protective plates in the right angles to defend and ameliorate damage. In this model the APs given for the BattleDress are the base provided to a BattleDress-0 user and each level of BattleDress skill adds to it a certain amount....tune the amount to your chosen level of lethality/tankness and voila...
Hmm, not sure that for that I'd be looking at armour issues, but more about how damage works after the armour, I mean 2 inches of high tech armour is 2 inches of high tech armour and its how the compnents inside take damage thats an issue....at that point BattleDress AP compared to incoming damage are not really the issue.
I'd personally be leery of making BattleDress function like a vehicle myself as it was one bit of T20 that I really didnt like and Im not sure right now of how to do it conceptually differently to the way T20 made that shift.
I'd personally be leery of making BattleDress function like a vehicle myself as it was one bit of T20 that I really didnt like and Im not sure right now of how to do it conceptually differently to the way T20 made that shift.
today a cheap as you like RPG handled by a barely trained militia can kill a modern MBT.
also the differance between a tank and any sort of personal armour is thickness, plus anything vulnerable in a tank is usualy not right behind that armour where as a person is literally right behind his armour.
also the differance between a tank and any sort of personal armour is thickness, plus anything vulnerable in a tank is usualy not right behind that armour where as a person is literally right behind his armour.
Pyromancer
Mongoose
BenGunn said:When an armor costing 6-digit numbers can be killed by simply firing enough rifles or sending enough Crusaders against it (Laws of chance) it becomes useless.
To quote Mr. Jughashvili: "Quantity has a quality all its own!"
Right off the bat I agree that Battledress is kinda funky, in that like the weapons there is no consistent scale.
The TMB version of battledress isn't quite the walking tank that some of y'all feel it should be. I mean it only give a +6 to effective Str. which isn't all that much.
What doe y'all think the level of protection of BD should be?
The TMB version of battledress isn't quite the walking tank that some of y'all feel it should be. I mean it only give a +6 to effective Str. which isn't all that much.
What doe y'all think the level of protection of BD should be?
BenGunn said:katadder said:today a cheap as you like RPG handled by a barely trained militia can kill a modern MBT.
Nope, it can not. It can kill an APC or an older tank (M60, AMX30 etc) but not a current generation MBT (Leopard II, Challenger-2 etc).
Huh? One Abrams taken out by RPGs
http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-1-04/rpg-threat.htm
Heck at least one Abrams has been penetrated by a 25mm Cannon (albeit with DU, but thats still cheap armament compared to the tank)
http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-2-04/fratricide-2.htm
Captain Jonah
Mongoose
Myrm said:Sorry to correct here but the Abrams reported taken out by an RPG was not. If you read the stories written by several men who were there the M1 took an rpg hit very low and at at upward angle that penetrated the lower armour on the engine compartment. This causes an oil leak.
The tank continued on mission having reported it was overheating.
It was decided to push on and it eventualy stopped. At this point it was abandoned and stripped of sensitive items.
At a higher level it was decided to bomb it to destroy it rather than risk recovering it. It was hit by an airstrike later.
Locals and poorly fact checked reporting by media resulted in it being called an RPG hit when in fact if the troops on the ground had been allowed to return in force by commanders it was a mobility kill and repairable.
After the air strike it was a mess and the pictures of happy RPG armed locals standing next to it went world wide.
The actual RPG hit caused an oil leak and had the op plan allowed for it, the tank could have withdrawn under escort and been repaired quickly.
That said however the ongoing attack/defence swing keeps swinging. Current addvances in tank defence focus on not getting hit rather than being immune to penetration. Mixed active and passive defences taking up the slack where heavy plate cannot be made tougher by current tech.
drnuncheon
Mongoose
BenGunn said:Modern Technology and even more so TL14 tech has some abilities and tricks that the old plate armorers did not have. Starting with simple ball bearings for the helmet and electrical operated "internal" locks. I.e the current space-suit is a two piece affair joined at the hips, thereby reducing gaps a lot.
Obviously I'm not talking about completely open gaps, since battle dress is vacuum sealed - I'm talking about places where rigid protection cannot be used, and thus the protection is weaker.
And looking at late renaissance full plate: There are few gaps in those and quite a few are there due to lack of modern bearings
What types of full plate specifically? A lot of the heaviest armor with the most covering was intended for jousting, where you don't need anywhere near the same amount of mobility as you do in a real battle.
Another thing to note is that hits do not need to penetrate to damage the wearer. If the neck of battledress has up-down mobility or can tilt side to side, a powerful head hit could cause whiplash without doing anywhere near enough to penetrate. Similarly, if the limbs have significant freedom of motion they could be strained or sprained without damaging the battle dress in the slightest.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 4K
