Core 2008 1e Clarification: Auto-Fire Attacks (NOTE: regarding Traveller Core Rulebook 2008 Edition "1e") Page 62)

[Vormaerin]

Why are your players wandering around in carapace or the like? As for soldiers, even a Combat Environment Suit is only 8. And your example assumes completely baseline ammo from an ACR, so no AP values and a minimum success to hit roll.

I just think its interesting that the game repeatedly has multiple shots at a single target being a bonus dmg per die (triple turrets for example), but in this one instance it's multiple separate shots. Obviously, GMs can play it however you want. Personally, I don't think Traveller needs any help in the lethality front, but then I don't have players running around in carapace and combat armor, so *shrug*.

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

I didn’t say they are?
It was an example, to show the difference between 3x 3d6 and 9d6.

To an unarmoured man, it won’t matter - but then again we are talking about half a clip from an assault rifle. Of course it’s gonna hurt.

And triple turrets in space combat add their damage together, just like multiple vehicle or battledress mounted weapons do, correct.

Autoattack mechanics exist there too though, even if it’s rather uncommon on spaceship weapons.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I just think its interesting that the game repeatedly has multiple shots at a single target being a bonus dmg per die (triple turrets for example), ...

Yes, in MgT2, but not in MgT1...

MgT1 has the lovely, and beloved, barrage table.

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

Why are your players wandering around in carapace or the like? As for soldiers, even a Combat Environment Suit is only 8. And your example assumes completely baseline ammo from an ACR, so no AP values and a minimum success to hit roll.

I just think its interesting that the game repeatedly has multiple shots at a single target being a bonus dmg per die (triple turrets for example), but in this one instance it's multiple separate shots. Obviously, GMs can play it however you want. Personally, I don't think Traveller needs any help in the lethality front, but then I don't have players running around in carapace and combat armor, so *shrug*.

umm....
Advanced Hostile Environment Vacc Suit = 9
Improved Boarding Vacc Suit = 12
Advanced Boarding Vacc Suit = 15 (one point below battle dress, perfect for the spacer expecting unwelcome guests on his ship)
and for the stylish; Tailored Vacc Suit = 8

Lots of civilian options to get good as or better than combat armor and that last one works much like regular clothing if you are expecting trouble. I didn't even get into all the combining you can do, which in the CSC book they give an example of how to get close to Combat Armor values with combining armor pieces like cloth and flak jackets.

You need to have the tech and to afford it, of course.

Full auto is meant to be deadly against unarmored targets. Just don't show up to the party under dressed and no, you don't need carapaces or combat armor to get by.

But note, not one other poster is agreeing with the "1 target means only burst" interpretation. You can do it, sure, but it's a "house rule" if you do and it's not a very good nor realistic one either at that, imho. Especially if you are just lumping all your damage dice from the successful attacks into one big smack on the armor (no wonder you feel it's imbalanced). You are playing something, but it's not Traveller 1e (or any species of Traveller). But hey, as long as it's fun for you go for it!

Seriously, it's the stun grenades and other stunners you really need to look out for anyway in 1e. (another story)

 

[Vormaerin]

I didn't actually argue about what the rule is. Perhaps you are confusing me with the poster who did. I made a comment to the effect that worrying about full autofiring on individual targets would be extremely deadly and I was just mildly annoyed by the counter example picking an unlikely to be in use armor to show that it didn't actually mean extremely deadly. Though that wasn't actually his main point.

There are plenty of armors that have enough armor to resist an ACR. But all of them are full body suits (carapace, specialist or military vacc suits, combat armor, etc). Maybe you play a game where they are always out in the wilds or space and looking like a storm trooper is perfectly normal. That's fine. Starwars style settings let the Mandalorian walk around like that.

My other comment is just that I thought it interesting that they toned down the damage of multi barrel weapons to something survivable, but not autofire. That wasn't an assertion of what the autofire rule said, but about gameplay implications.

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

Oops, you are right. sorry about that.

Anyhoo... it seems strange to you that in order to survive military grade weapons you might need military grade armor?

If characters are running around getting shot at by ACR's ie "Advanced Combat Rifles", I do think it is perfectly balanced and realistic to expect that they die when they do not have AP north of 8. Military armor should be as common as military weapons attacks, I would think.

Part of the game I am sure you will agree is knowing how to learn what is appropriate for the coming occasions and then dressing accordingly. The Ref's job is to make sure that is all played fair as no one enjoys an unjust TPK.

 

[Vormaerin]

Right. Just saying that it is important to realize that most games reduce the lethality of assault rifles to make them playable or increase the amount of concealable armor characters can have. Traveller does neither. So, if assault rifles are a thing you think gangs or whatever might have (or your players think they should have), just be aware that there isn't Cyberpunk style heavy armor windbreakers and such available.

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

There sort of is though?

CSC update has cloth jacket and coat, and one of the first six JTAS had an armoured hoodie iirc…

 

[Vormaerin]

Sure, there's some relatively inconspicuous armor out there. It's generally around +5 or +6, though the higher tech full cloth armor suit is apparently +8 and not obviously armor (despite the artwork). That's probably enough to keep you from being one-shotted as long as no armor piercing ammo is involved. I don't really consider that enough to make autofire combats survivable, but ymmv.

And it isn't really contrary to my point anyway. Many games that have automatic weapons available tend to lead to folks thinking that's what they should be using, because you want to be effective. Whereas I feel like Traveller has a lot of milspec gear because mercenary gameplay is one campaign style, but it probably shouldn't be the norm in the way it is in Cyberpunk games or some kinds of 'heroic action hero' games out there. At least, not without providing more high end concealable armor than exists.

But I'm not trying to dictate how anyone plays. Just pointing out something I thought might not be obvious.

 

[Nelphine]

And for gangs.. they can get 10 ACRs for the price of one suit of armour, that if you roll high, still wont save you from those ACRs. Unless you can afford battle suits, the cost efficiency is always going to heavily favor offense and lethal combat.

 

[Vormaerin]

Yup. My players view is "oh, there's automatic weapons involved? Right. So what's the scheme we are gonna use to avoid combat entirely?"

 

[Condottiere]

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

Try this one on, though. Using armor from CSC1e (remember this is a 1e thread):

Now the rule as I understand it for combined armor is this in 1e:

largest value torso: gets full value
other torso: gets half
appendages (head, leg, arms): gets quarter

You add each type before halving or quartering, then round down, then add to full value

Armor	Location	Full AP	value
Improved Flak Jacket	over ballistic vest	6​	full
Protect Suit	worn as clothing	4​	half
Ballistic Vest	over clothing/protect suit	5​	half
Diplo Vest	under clothing/protect suit	3​	half
Light Infantry Helmet	on head	5​	quarter
Heavy Leg Protectors	on legs	3​	quarter
Full	6
half: 4+5+3= 12	6
quarter: 8	2
total	14

So with all this lower armor combined, I get a total of 14. It's not too big a stretch that all that can be combined if you look at the locations and layering.

Would this not work?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I don't have CSC, but unless otherwise clearly stated I would certainly not allow four cumulative armours on the torso...

A piece of armour that can be worn over/under clothing cannot necessarily be worn with other armour.

The basic rule is:

Core, p87:
Armour
Unless otherwise noted, only one type of armour can be worn at a time.

I would say that unless the description explicitly says the armour can be worn with other armour, it can't.
If it can be worn over/under clothing doesn't count.


(If it is explicitly allowed, I would ban it with a house rule...)

 

[Alqualonde]

I've checked the descriptions of the armours in CSC1e.
- Diplo armor is a torso-only version of the protec suit.
- Ballistic Vest is a light version of the flak jacket.
I guess that 2 of the layers are duplicates of the others. It would be like wearing a business suit with a second business vest, a light bullet-proof armor (like the one used by police officers) and a heavy (military kind) bullet-proof armor. Along with arm & leg plates.
I would (house)rule, 1 non-rigid layer (like Cloth or Protec) and one rigid layer (like Flak Jacket or Carapace), or 2 layers of non-rigid armor (Cloth + Jack). From the descriptions, Ablat & Reflec can be considered as a non-rigid layer.
But don't put Ablat under a rigid armor : it is supposed to vaporise, so if trapped under a carapace, it might cook you alive (the heat generated won't have anywhere to dissipate harmlessly).

 

[Vormaerin]

Try this one on, though. Using armor from CSC1e (remember this is a 1e thread):

Now the rule as I understand it for combined armor is this in 1e:

largest value torso: gets full value
other torso: gets half
appendages (head, leg, arms): gets quarter

You add each type before halving or quartering, then round down, then add to full value

Armor	Location	Full AP	value
Improved Flak Jacket	over ballistic vest	6​	full
Protect Suit	worn as clothing	4​	half
Ballistic Vest	over clothing/protect suit	5​	half
Diplo Vest	under clothing/protect suit	3​	half
Light Infantry Helmet	on head	5​	quarter
Heavy Leg Protectors	on legs	3​	quarter
Full	6
half: 4+5+3= 12	6
quarter: 8	2
total	14

So with all this lower armor combined, I get a total of 14. It's not too big a stretch that all that can be combined if you look at the locations and layering.

Would this not work?

I'll leave the 1e rules to others, but I will say that if you walk around the streets in a ballistic vest, infantry helmet, and heavy leg protectors, you are not remotely inconspicuous. So you are back to 'does your setting accept people in blatant armor' being normal.

 

[Vormaerin]

Traveller's a toolkit. You are expected to add your own gear and elements to get the exact playstyle you want out of it. If you want Dune style personal energy shields, put them in. There's something similar in the 2e CSC. If you want a more cyberpunk/action hero type game with a lot of autofire, put in cyberpunk style armored clothes that can stand up to that.

That's the intention of the rules. The default is 'military shooting at you is bad!', but you don't have to play it that way.

 

[Saladman]

I always thought 1e armor made more sense if it didn't stack.* But that was partly an artifact of having started with the core book only, and I'm aware not all groups ran that way.

*At a meta-game level, not purely a simulationist one. There is this choice between simulationist logic and meta-game logic looking at rules, and I still don't think 1e is a simulationist ruleset to begin with, at least in core. I stand by that overall, separate from my position on autofire.