Combat lethality?

[SnowDog]

Hi,

I am yet to try out the new Traveller rules (I am only really familiar with TNE). I am working out my scenario ideas and all my scifi-ideas need a pretty lethal/realistic system to create the correct atmosphere.

Now, I'd like to know based on your experience with the game rules how lethal the combat is?

Thanks in advance.

 

[GhostWolf69]

Traditionally I'd say that Traveller is a very lethal system.

I recall an old-timer I once new (and since I'm an old-timer my self now he must be ancient) who claimed that any rpg where it was impossible die from a knife wound was not worth his time.

All he ever played was Traveller.

That said, high tech equipment, top-notch gear and realy good skill use will keep people alive longer, but I still think that game is pretty ugly (i.e. dangerous) when it comes to combat situations.

My only objection so far with MGT on this matter is why a lot of older fire arms have a negative damage mod... I don't get it... and I will probably remove it.

/wolf

 

[Myrm]

Oh its lethal....some suggested that the damage might be a bit on the light side in another thread...I gave a reply to that indicating that I felt otherwise.

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=36626

Someone points a gun at you, you hide unless you are heavily armoured. Even then with the right (or perhaps the wrong) gun, you hide.

 

[SnowDog]

Okay, thanks for answers! After reading the thread behind the link it seems quite good balance. I don't necessarily want every single shot to kill (as that is totally unrealistic) but if an average gun can at least drop average guy then that will probably work for me.

I had to ask because although I otherwise liked TNE combat rules it felt stupid that you practically needed a heavy sniper rifle to be able to kill a normal NPC with one shot. Even that might not have worked on high statted PC.

So, now it seems that my scifi hired gun campaign has at least a possibility to see the light of the day using Mongoose Traveller rules.

Reading the rules and actually using them is after all two different beasts...

 

[Bygoneyrs]

Hey it is all scale and how the GM cares to run damage and how lethal one wishes to make it. I have always used a hit location system and that would give my players more hps that normal, but it also made taking a single hit much more descript. Plus reducing ones HPs or Structure Points to zero on their head means the player is DEAD regardless of how many HPs they might have.

Loads of fun for players and GM alike!

Penn

 

[SnowDog]

True, you can always house rule things but since I don't have previous experience with Traveller (apart from TNE) it's always kind of hard to tinker with the system without trying it out first with original rules. After getting familiar with the system it is usually quite easy to tinker it to suit personal tastes (I have done the same with Cyberpunk 2020 a lot).

Hit locations will probably be something that I will add later when I get more experience with the game engine. It's true that it helps to describe things but sometimes they give quite absurd results if generated purely with random rolls...

Anyway, thanks for input!

 

[Xoph]

Combat is very dangerous in Traveller.
My players have participated in a single combat in their 3 sessions and won initiative against the robbers in "The Rescue" used a stun grenade and took out the entire group in one skillfull throw.

 

[GamerDude]

Let me add an agreement that Traveller is very deadly.

In a recent demo I ran, one of the characters took two hits from an Autopistol fired full auto... Did enough damage through his flak vest to zero-out his END and drop his STR by at least two-thirds. And that was in ONE attack.

He spent the rest of the session in shock at how lethal Traveller is, repeatedly muttering "this is too damm deadly, give me back my Hit Points."

 

[SnowDog]

Sounds good. Although I have to admit that I am a bit suspicious about using stats as "hit points" but I am warming towards it. At least I will probably give it a shot.

Actually what I have read so far from this thread the lethality level sounds pretty much like what I want. It seems to be somewhere around the level of Cyberpunk 2020 that has been my go-to system so far in many games.

 

[Ishmael]

I think some people forget that many attacks are 'soft' kills that take the combatant out of action and leave him alive but bleeding to death or dying of shock, etc. over the next few combat rounds.

You need medics or yourself to dress wounds...
Most people to rpg combat by ignoring everything until the matter is settled and THEN worry about aid as if wounds don't bleed and don't hurt.

Besides, its very stressful to force a decision of " do you stay under cover?..or do you run out and see if your buddy, who is laying motionless in the street, can be saved... where the f**k is that sniper! "

instant death is usually a head shot or heart, the rest often leaves the victim laying on the ground ( alive ) but he WILL die if no help patches him up.

 

[SnowDog]

That's true. As far as I know most KIAs won't happen instantly but during a prolonged period of time. I don't know how well this aspect is supported by written rules in Traveller but if it is not handled that will be the first thing that I will house rule by adding a bleeding rule even from those wounds that only take out a portion of endurance (that will probably be okay to handle after combat bu any damage beyond that is more serious. On the other hand I don't know if it is necessary to apply first aid within seconds of wound or are we talking about scale of minutes (when combat can very well be over).

By the way, what kind of medical aid is applied to wounds caused by energy weapons? Yes, I know that it won't much matter mechanically but it is pretty nice to know when describing the actions. Any ideas?

 

[Anonymous]

This is my one objection to MT, a set of rules I am otherwise very happy with.
Combat is a lot less deadly than in all previous incarnations of traveller.

An average guy will need to take 20 odd hits before he falls over, a pistol does 3d6-3 - an average of 7 ish. If a guy is wearing armour it takes 5 points off for an average of 2 and often no damage at all, even at point blank range.

For me, combat needs to VERY deadly to maintain the traveller feel. It becomes a last resort (of course adventurers often have to *ahem* resort to the last resort - that is what makes them adventurerers).

My group had its first major combat last session and it went on much longer than it would have before, involving many more shots and some silliness which was always absent from traveller.

I love the rules but think I may stick to CT combat.

 

[Golan2072]

hirch_duckfinder, one trick you could use to increase combat speed and lethality is to allow "critical hits", that is, allowing any hit with an Effect of 6 or more to ignore armor (it has struck a weak point in the armor).

If you want to make such hits even more common, allow a character in a "sniping position" to ignore armor if he hits with an Effect of 4 or more. A sniping position usually requires a clear line of sight to the target, a good way to brace the weapon, no distractions, time to aim, and a good view of the character (that is, either Medium or shorter range or through sights/optics).

 

[Vile]

Of course, if you're running a percentage game, you won't have to house-rule critical hits or hit locations ... :twisted:

 

[AKAramis]

This is my one objection to MT, a set of rules I am otherwise very happy with.
Combat is a lot less deadly than in all previous incarnations of traveller.

then you do not understand MT combat rules.

Joe average can take 3/5 hits.. that is 3 to unconsciousness and 5 more to death.

Average weapon does 3, before armor and to hit mods. Make the to hit roll by 0, and damage is halved. by 1, it's normal. By 2, it's double.

So making your to-hit by 2 against even Billy Buff 5/9, he's down... presuming no armor.

 

[JimG]

This is my one objection to MT, a set of rules I am otherwise very happy with.
Combat is a lot less deadly than in all previous incarnations of traveller.

then you do not understand MT combat rules.

Joe average can take 3/5 hits.. that is 3 to unconsciousness and 5 more to death.

Average weapon does 3, before armor and to hit mods. Make the to hit roll by 0, and damage is halved. by 1, it's normal. By 2, it's double.

So making your to-hit by 2 against even Billy Buff 5/9, he's down... presuming no armor.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that hirch_duckfinder is using MT to refer Mongoose Traveller and Aramis is referring to MegaTraveller.

 

[AKAramis]

This is my one objection to MT, a set of rules I am otherwise very happy with.
Combat is a lot less deadly than in all previous incarnations of traveller.

then you do not understand MT combat rules.

Joe average can take 3/5 hits.. that is 3 to unconsciousness and 5 more to death.

Average weapon does 3, before armor and to hit mods. Make the to hit roll by 0, and damage is halved. by 1, it's normal. By 2, it's double.

So making your to-hit by 2 against even Billy Buff 5/9, he's down... presuming no armor.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that hirch_duckfinder is using MT to refer Mongoose Traveller and Aramis is referring to MegaTraveller.

MT is the standard abbreviation for MegaTraveller...

 

[pyrrhic victory]

hirch_duckfinder -

Did you find that the effect roll had much impact on combat lethality?

 

[AKAmra]

This is my one objection to MT, a set of rules I am otherwise very happy with.
Combat is a lot less deadly than in all previous incarnations of traveller.

An average guy will need to take 20 odd hits before he falls over, a pistol does 3d6-3 - an average of 7 ish. If a guy is wearing armour it takes 5 points off for an average of 2 and often no damage at all, even at point blank range.

For me, combat needs to VERY deadly to maintain the traveller feel. It becomes a last resort (of course adventurers often have to *ahem* resort to the last resort - that is what makes them adventurerers).

My group had its first major combat last session and it went on much longer than it would have before, involving many more shots and some silliness which was always absent from traveller.

I love the rules but think I may stick to CT combat.

Are you remembering that Effect adds to damage in MGT? With MGT's low armor points and Effect adding to damage, I'm surprised your finding combat less than deadly. Also, what kind of armor are your characters wearing? Generally, heavy armor should only be reasonably worn in heavy combat situations and your opponents won't be using pistols - they'll be using heavier weaponry (don't bring a pistol to an assault rife fight - remember the LA bank robbery?).

Edit - pyrrhic victory - you beat me to the Effect question while I was typing. It seems odd some people find combat too "wimpy" when other posters have created rules beefing-up armor.

 

[pyrrhic victory]

Aramis-

Agreed that opinions on lethality are all over the place. I'm waffling on whether to keep it as is, or transplant something else (MT or ACQ are the likely candidates).