Low Berth

[CosmicGamer]

This is initiated by posts in this thread:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=40351&start=15

In MGT, the only rules I found were in Signs & Portents 63 (I don't know if that makes them official or not). A medic with Medic-0 needs to roll 11+ for sleeper survival there (8% survival rate), with Medic-1 he needs 10+ (17% survival rate), with Medic-2 he needs 9+ (28% survival rate). With Medic-3 or more, survival is automatic (which makes me wonder what was the point of saying the survival roll was 8+, if nobody ever actually rolls that).

In the Core Rulebook, page 142, under Spacecraft Operations\Passage\Low Passage, it states:

a Medic check is required upon opening the capsule, applying the passenger's Endurance DM to the check. If failed, the passenger does not survive.

Survival Rate Comparison
Medic 0; Core rulebook: 8+, 42%; S&P 63: 11+, 5%
Medic 1; Core rulebook: 7+, 58%; S&P 63: 10+, 17%
Medic 2; Core rulebook: 6+, 72%; S&P 63: 9+, 28%
Medic 3; Core rulebook: 5+, 83%; S&P 63: Automatic, 100%

I do not like the implementation in S&P, sorry Alex, because:
1) The DM implementation seams strange to me. MGT tasks indicate timing and have a format something more like

A medic check must be made for each low berth occupant.
Low Berth Revival: Patient Endurance, 1-6 minutes, Difficult (-2), Automatic for Medic 3+

2) The very low rate of survival for Medic 0-2 is not to my liking.
3) There is no mention of unskilled. In theory, it would be the 8+ survival roll with a -3 DM. The exact same roll as for Medic 0.
4)The very significant jump from Medic 2 28% to Medic 3 100% chance for passenger revival is too much for my liking.

...the greater the skill of the medic and the better the health of the passenger, the greater the chance they will survive, but life can still be cruel and the healthiest person ever under the care or the greatest medic ever can still die when being revived from coldsleep.

A Medic 5 would need to roll a 3 or better to get an 8 (assuming average passenger with End 6-8 so no DM). This gives a 3% chance of failure. This would be approx one out of every 33 low berth passengers dying. A free trader can carry 20 passengers, so maybe every other run a passenger would still die.

At Medic 6, the roll would be automatic for average passengers. Perhaps incorporate a snake eyes always fails policy?

Side note: Perhaps an endurance enhancing drug is given before putting a passenger into low berth?

NOTE: I'm ok at math but there could be errors.

 

[rust]

As mentioned previously in another thread, I allow a Medic 3 an automa-
tic success, because otherwise my setting's colony ships would become
spacegoing coffins - a survival rate of 83 % means that 170 out of 1,000
colonists travelling in low berths arrive dead ... :shock:

Even the average mercenary unit would hesitate to accept a mission with
guaranteed losses of almost a fifth of the entire unit, and colonists are ci-
vilians, with some of the most urgently needed ones being well trained,
well paid specialists. They would hardly accept a risk that is the same as
that of Russian Roulette (16.67 %).

 

[CosmicGamer]

Rust, don't forget the MGT task rules regarding timing and situational modifiers. A pair of well equipped medics may take their time reviving key personnel. Key personnel (and mercenaries?) may be screened such that only those with above average endurance are used. +1 for timing, +1 for situation, +1 for Endurance, and Medic 3 for +3 makes a roll of 2 an 8; guaranteed success!

 

[rust]

A pair of well equipped medics may take their time reviving key personnel.

True, but for the average colonist this still means that he has to accept
either Russian Roulette or a very long wait before he can leave the low
berth.

With a colony ship of only 1,000 colonists, handling the low berths at an
average speed of 10 minutes per low berth would take about 167 man-
hours, or 21 days of 8 hour shifts for one medical team, which could "re-
vive" only 48 colonists per day.

In the end the colony would have a logistics problem with either a very
slow "arrival" of the colonists or a surplus of medical doctors who are
no longer needed in such numbers after the low berths were emptied.

Something like this might work in other settings, but it would break mine.

 

[Golan2072]

My low-berth house-rules:
The Low Berths are altered a bit from the vanilla Traveller version. The main difference is that my version is somewhat safer. Characters are rarely be killed by these berths, but injuries – including serious or even permanent ones - could still result from their use.

Under standard procedure, preparing a passenger for low passage takes 1-6 hours and requires the presence of a medic (but no task roll). Reviving a low passenger is a Medic, Endurance, 1-6 hours, Easy (+4) task using the passenger's Endurance DM. In both cases one medic could simultaneously work on up to 20 low berths, but the medic has to make a separate task roll for each passenger he or she attempts to revive. A failed revival roll results in 3d6 normal damage rather than instant death. Healthy low passengers frozen and revived using the standard procedure rarely die, but might need prompt medical attention in some cases; infirm, ill or wounded passengers are at greater risk.

In emergencies, however, it is possible to quickly freeze a character, taking only 10-60 seconds and not requiring any medic to be present. This emergency procedure is automatic and may even be initiated by the passenger himself by using an override switch inside the low berth. Reviving a passenger frozen in this manner is subject to a -2 DM.

It is also possible to quickly revive a low passenger using the emergency revival procedure, which is a Medic, Endurance, 1-6 minutes, Average (+0) task using the passenger's Endurance DM. This could either be done by a medic or by triggering an override failsafe mechanism of the low berth (which is treated as if it had Medic 0 for this purpose). A failed emergency revival task causes a roll on the Injury table (TMB p.37); damage is permanent unless treated in a hospital of TL10 or better (using the costs listed on TMB p.37).

 

[kristof65]

Somewhere around here in the forum are some house-rules someone posted last year for Low Berth that I found worked pretty well. They don't change the rolls needed, but instead use the effect of the task roll as a modifier on an injury/death chart. Most passengers who happen to fail just end up with various degrees of "freezer shock", which wears off after a variable amount of time.

It seriously increases the survivability of Low Berths, while preserving an unpleasant air about Low Passage that makes it less than desirable as a mode of travel.

 

[EDG]

Somewhere around here in the forum are some house-rules someone posted last year for Low Berth that I found worked pretty well. They don't change the rolls needed, but instead use the effect of the task roll as a modifier on an injury/death chart. Most passengers who happen to fail just end up with various degrees of "freezer shock", which wears off after a variable amount of time.

That's how I'd do it (I know I was suggesting that kind of approach last time this topic came up) - I don't do "random chance kills PCs" in RPGs, as far as I'm concerned that's a leftover from the Bad Old Days of RPGs (ditto for fatal misjumps - those will never happen to PCs if I was running a Traveller game).

 

[Golan2072]

Under my house rules, low-berth failure rates when using the standard procedure are around 8% for a skill-0 medic and an averagely healthy passenger (End DM +0); around 3% if the medic has skill-1 (as he should have) or if the passenger has an END DM of +1; and no chance of failure if the medic has skill-2.

Even if the berth fails, standard-procedure thawing is fatal only for people who are in bad physical shape (a total of all three physical characteristic 18 or less), and even then quite rarely. Quick freezing and/or thawing is far more likely to cause serious damage.

Anyhow, if you're averagely tough (or even slightly less than averagely) you'll survive the trip as long as you're using adequate equipment, even if your ship's medic isn't THAT skilled (skill-0). However, you do have a chance of freezing damage which could cause serious injuries and might even require immediate surgery in extreme cases.

Colony ships simply carry skilled doctors; also, most colonists are healthy so cryo-death is very rare unless the berth is damaged by combat, accident or sabotage.

 

[rust]

Colony ships simply carry skilled doctors; also, most colonists are healthy so cryo-death is very rare unless the berth is damaged by combat, accident or sabotage.

Yep, and the fact that a single medic can work on up to 20 low berths at
a time also allows for a reasonable time frame for "unloading" the colony
ship's low berths, which does not force the colonists to either buy thou-
sands of low berths or to charter a huge ship for months on end just to
get the colonists out of the low berths.

 

[GamerDude]

3) There is no mention of unskilled. In theory, it would be the 8+ survival roll with a -3 DM. The exact same roll as for Medic 0.

Well, the skill system is if you have 0 in a skill, there is no -3 DM so there is a difference between Medic 0 and untrained.

I also don't like the S&P article because it does what CT did: Change the Target Number to reflect difficulty, which MGT doesn't do. (something I really like).

At Medic 6, the roll would be automatic for average passengers. Perhaps incorporate a snake eyes always fails policy?

While that idea has some merit, I had to think of what it would take for someone to attain a Skill of 6 in anything. Damm they would be commanding a nice salary from the ship, and the captain can ensure more of his low-passage berths would be full each trip by advertising how high the revival rate is on his ship.

 

[Paladin]

I like your house rule suggestions Golan2072. Seems more on par with realistic technology. Tech with the current levels of success would be abandoned or have SERIOUS legal issues.

 

[Bygoneyrs]

I posted this in another thread as well too...but it fits here as well too!!!

Being a old timer Traveller player with many In House Rules, I have always liked slower travel between systems for my own game.

1st) Everyone travels via Cryo-Sleep (that includes crew too).

2nd) I use travel time 3 months for Jump-1, 5 mouths for Jump-2, 7 months for Jump-3, 9 months for Jump-4, 11 months for Jump-5, and 13 months for Jump-6. Now there are other Tech factors that can cut down
the jump times buy 1-2 months, but the fastest Jump will always take at least 1 month time.

3rd) Cryo-sleep berths have a pretty good survival with the base roll set at a 8, with modifiers for the passenger's End, and Medic skill level. Thus a End-6 is 0, End-7 is +1, End-8 is +2 and etc. The Medical skill bonus is Medic-0 is 0, Medic-1 is +1, and Medic-2 is +2 and so on. Thus it is very easy to have almost everyone survive. If someone does fail, then the Medical staff can try to save someone still.

I like to picture the tech level like that of Aliens II with a few other tech increases also thrown in. I guess it is all in just the flavor of your own campaign and mine has existed for over 20+ years and I have been playing and GMing Traveller now for 30+.

Penn

 

[CosmicGamer]

3) There is no mention of unskilled. In theory, it would be the 8+ survival roll with a -3 DM. The exact same roll as for Medic 0.

Well, the skill system is if you have 0 in a skill, there is no -3 DM so there is a difference between Medic 0 and untrained.

Yes, for the system in the book, however, the article states that Medic 0 has a -3 DM.

 

[CosmicGamer]

In the end the colony would have a logistics problem with either a very slow "arrival" of the colonists or a surplus of medical doctors who are no longer needed in such numbers after the low berths were emptied.
Something like this might work in other settings, but it would break mine.

In your setting, how long does it take for everything the colony needs to be set up?

How many doctors do you have for the 1000 colonists?

I would think the logistics of 1000 people quickly revived and needing food, shelter, and freshers would be a problem.

Perhaps this is off topic and should be in a separate colonization thread?

 

[rust]

In your setting, how long does it take for everything the colony needs to be set up?
How many doctors do you have for the 1000 colonists?

The colonists try to unload the ship and to set up temporary shelters
(e.g. tents) as fast as possible, because the ship is a chartered one
and they have to pay it by the week (or part of a week). Otherwise
they would have to buy the 1,000 low berths for 50 MCr instead of
"renting" them for the one voyage to their new homeworld.
The colonists should have at least one Medic-3 per 500 colonists, but
for security reasons they have three doctors.

 

[Golan2072]

I like your house rule suggestions Golan2072. Seems more on par with realistic technology.

Thanks

 

[Golan2072]

In your setting, how long does it take for everything the colony needs to be set up?
How many doctors do you have for the 1000 colonists?

The colonists try to unload the ship and to set up temporary shelters
(e.g. tents) as fast as possible, because the ship is a chartered one
and they have to pay it by the week (or part of a week). Otherwise
they would have to buy the 1,000 low berths for 50 MCr instead of
"renting" them for the one voyage to their new homeworld.
The colonists should have at least one Medic-3 per 500 colonists, but
for security reasons they have three doctors.

I'd assume around a week of unloading (either by shuttles from orbit or directly from a landed ship); this way you'll only need about 7-8 medics per 1,000 colonists assuming 6-hour workdays or 3-4 medics assuming 12-hour workdays.

Not all of these will have to be Medic-2's; most will typically be Medic-1's.

Colonization attempts with particularly low budgets (or convicts sent to a penal colony) will probably use the "quick-thaw" procedure, taking serious risks but greatly reducing the offloading time and the required number of medics.

 

[rust]

Yep, thank you.

Since the new colony will be established on a water world, which makes
the construction of even temporary shelters a bit complicated and time
consuming, I have calculated a maximum of 21 days for the entire ope-
ration to set up the colony well enough to enable the colony ship to lea-
ve.
It is good to know that your rules make it possible to have all colonists
"on the job" within a week, because this ensures that the colonists have
a good chance to meet their "deadline" and will not have to pay for a
prolongued charter time of the ship.

 

[GamerDude]

Yes, for the system in the book, however, the article states that Medic 0 has a -3 DM.

that's what I get for posting on the forums while still waking up from a power nap... I'd totally forgotten about that.

 

[Paladin]

I'd assume around a week of unloading (either by shuttles from orbit or directly from a landed ship); this way you'll only need about 7-8 medics per 1,000 colonists assuming 6-hour workdays or 3-4 medics assuming 12-hour workdays.

Not all of these will have to be Medic-2's; most will typically be Medic-1's.

Colonization attempts with particularly low budgets (or convicts sent to a penal colony) will probably use the "quick-thaw" procedure, taking serious risks but greatly reducing the offloading time and the required number of medics.

Depending on the length of the journey, some of the thawing process would start before they made it to the planet so they would already be ready to disembark.