Combat lethality?
- Thread starter SnowDog
- Start date
SnowDog said:Like I have said previously I have only experience with TNE and if you have any experience with that you would know that the combat in that system is ... less than lethal
In Re TNE:
I found that using D10's for damages above "-1", and 1d6 for "-1" damage moved it to being on-par with CT.
I think the MGT damages are a bit too low. Too hard to kill people even with adding margin; I think adding margin to each die would cure that...
AKAramis said:In Re TNE:
I found that using D10's for damages above "-1", and 1d6 for "-1" damage moved it to being on-par with CT.
I think the MGT damages are a bit too low. Too hard to kill people even with adding margin; I think adding margin to each die would cure that...
Hmm... I should have thought about that back when I was running TNE. Now the books are stored in boxes and I fix my eyes on MGT.
Adding margin to each die in MGT sounds harsh. I like that :twisted:
Thanks for the opinion about the subject. So far most of the people have been thinking about MGT combat pretty deadly so it is good to hear an opposite opinion, too.
Would you mind elaborating a bit? Is it that the combat is less deadly than in CT or all in all not deadly enough to get the "right" feel that you are in a middle of a fricking combat and you can get hurt, badly or even die very shortly? Or something else entirely?
Thanks!
SnowDog said:
It's about on par with CT, which means, to me, it's too weak. In CT, a rifle on a maximum shot does 36points of damage; not enugh to kill a peak human (FFFxxx, MT hits 6/10), but enough to kill a peak 18YO (CCCxxx MT Hits 5/8).
Now, MT, with it's multiplier system, is potentially FAR more deadly
Mgn DmgX
0 ____ 0.5
1 ____ 1
2 ____ 2
4 ____ 4
8 ____ 8
So that point blank aimed shot by Sammy Sniper is going to do 24 hits... enough to kill Peak Human unless he's armored, and do so outright
by 50% overkill. (even if armor is present but lower, poor shlub's still gonna take 12, and be out of action.
Further, MT hits convert to CT damage points at the rate of 1d6 points per hit; you can die (but it's unlikely) from the conversion, as well as damage outright.
Mongoose is less likely to kill outright than CT, TNE, or T4; MT is the most lethal, by far more powerful than MGT....
Traveller is a deadly game.
If you want it slightly less deadly you make two changes:
1) Two highest makes your "still standing" pool, lowest makes your "unconscious" pool.
2) Initial shock is a save against your highest.
I think some NPC in Andromeda put it quiet nicely:
"I've had all the adventure I want in my life. I just want to live my life on the world I was born and tend my nets. If I follow you it will be adventure, and at adventures people die."
If you want it slightly less deadly you make two changes:
1) Two highest makes your "still standing" pool, lowest makes your "unconscious" pool.
2) Initial shock is a save against your highest.
I think some NPC in Andromeda put it quiet nicely:
"I've had all the adventure I want in my life. I just want to live my life on the world I was born and tend my nets. If I follow you it will be adventure, and at adventures people die."
As I am yet to test the system I don't know whether the system is too deadly , not deadly enough or just the right for me. But if it end up being too deadly I will keep that suggestion in mind.
As I have (hopefully wrote) one shot kills are acceptable if they are not too common in "normal" combat situations with basic weapons. Something along the lines of Cyberpunk 2020 is about the level of lethality that I aim for (no pun intended).
As I have (hopefully wrote) one shot kills are acceptable if they are not too common in "normal" combat situations with basic weapons. Something along the lines of Cyberpunk 2020 is about the level of lethality that I aim for (no pun intended).
Well we use the endurance to 0 in single shot and you are unconcious. Seems to be working pretty well. Especially as they won't be firing weak pistols against heavily armoured targets so pistols are mainly used when you have weak armours. Let's see. Average pistol damage 7, 2 armour, 5. You only need effect 2 and average endurance guy drops unconcious instantly.
Oh and we use the drop so that if single attack causes endurance damage then that's out. Stops silly you get scratched by 1 and then you suffer 7 and you don't drop since it didn't go to 0 from single attack.
Makes low endurance characters fall unconcious pretty darned fast if they get hit and aren't wearing something like combat armour...
Oh and we use the drop so that if single attack causes endurance damage then that's out. Stops silly you get scratched by 1 and then you suffer 7 and you don't drop since it didn't go to 0 from single attack.
Makes low endurance characters fall unconcious pretty darned fast if they get hit and aren't wearing something like combat armour...
SnowDog said:
Well it was basicly in rulebook except we simply made it to be "cause Endurance amount of damage in one go and character goes to unconcious" after realising that the rule as written would mean that it's basicly better to suffer 1 and 7 hit damages(assuming End7) than 7 and 1. We couldn't figure any logical reason for that so we simply made sure 7 point hit(assuming endurance 7) causes character to drop unconcious.
Last battle we had the less armoured PC's spent the battle on their bellies behind concrete wall rather than face the torrent of firepower that came their way. Lethal proposition to stand up!
As you can probably guess by now, I have not yet read the combat chapter all that well but if getting damage >= endurance then I don't see why it matters in which order the damage is taken (1+7 or 7+1 in this example). I have to skip other parts of the book for now and read the combat chapter when I get home.tneva82 said:
tneva82 said:
Seems like a very good idea to do in that kind of situation 
SnowDog said:
Rule(optional) as written is if endurance goes to zero from single attack you go unconcious. If you suffer 1 and 6 point damages your endurance 7 goes to 0 from two attacks. Not single.
Unless we misunderstood the rule completely but that's how we read it.
Yeah. Oh and they had pistols against targets 50+ meters away. Good luck hitting anything! Let the fellows with nice shiny combat armours and long range weapons deal with it
JohnLokiBeard
Mongoose
I've been interpretting it as current END in one hit: first hit does 1 damage which takes your END down to 6, so the subsequent hit for 6 damage takes your END to 0 in one hit.
So the majority of you are using the optional knockout blow rule on page 66? I have not run more than a single combat session yet and it was not very lethal. Mainly due to each side having at least 1/2 cover and then also crouching. It became hard for either side to score a hit (didn't help that hardly anyone in the PC party had gun combat skills). Eventually the merchant scored a hit with his stunner and that was very effective. Every time he scored a hit with that weapon an opponent dropped unconscious. The tide turned rapidly after he had taken down the two NPC's with Gun Combat. The remaining two surrendered afterwards.
Akaramis: I am not trying to irritate you, so bear with me
I really agree that TNE weapons were totally underpowered (same can be said for the Twilight:2000 2nd edition that uses the same basic rules). Without testing the rules, I guess that your house rule would have probably saved my campaign back then and also made it possible to run a Merc campaign using those Twilight:2000 rules.
But still, I am not entirely sure whether the MGT lethality issue is based on how lethal previous editions (apart TNE) were is MGT just purely and simply not deadly enough. Of course this is an opinion but that is exactly what I am looking for...
Otherwise: I had time to read the combat chapter yesterday and it looked pretty OK. I didn't see any mention that the knock out rule applies to current END so it must be a matter of interpretation and/or house rule.
Anyway, after thinking it through if you use a rule where you deliver the amount of damage equal (or exceed) of the current END causes the knock out then isn't it the same thing as having END as a sort of hit point that when reaching zero you are out? I mean, you can suffer minor wounds until you have only END 1 and then any hit that causes damage will get you out. That means that you don't need to get another physical stat to zero before unconsciousness.
Have I understood this correctly?
I really agree that TNE weapons were totally underpowered (same can be said for the Twilight:2000 2nd edition that uses the same basic rules). Without testing the rules, I guess that your house rule would have probably saved my campaign back then and also made it possible to run a Merc campaign using those Twilight:2000 rules.
But still, I am not entirely sure whether the MGT lethality issue is based on how lethal previous editions (apart TNE) were is MGT just purely and simply not deadly enough. Of course this is an opinion but that is exactly what I am looking for...
Otherwise: I had time to read the combat chapter yesterday and it looked pretty OK. I didn't see any mention that the knock out rule applies to current END so it must be a matter of interpretation and/or house rule.
Anyway, after thinking it through if you use a rule where you deliver the amount of damage equal (or exceed) of the current END causes the knock out then isn't it the same thing as having END as a sort of hit point that when reaching zero you are out? I mean, you can suffer minor wounds until you have only END 1 and then any hit that causes damage will get you out. That means that you don't need to get another physical stat to zero before unconsciousness.
Have I understood this correctly?
