Rules Question: Space Combat

[Pentallion]

My friend and I just bought the Traveller Core Rules. We're unclear about damage allocation in space combat.

If we have a triple beam turret and score three hits on a Far Trader with Armor 4. We are unsure which of three possible things we should do. Do we:

A: roll 2d6 and subtract 4 for Armor for each hit and apply damage individually for each beam weapon (typically a Single Hit)?

B: Roll 2d6 and subtract 4 for Armor for each hit then apply the total damage that got through from all beam weapons (typically a Double Hit)?

C: Roll 6d6 because all three beams hit, subtract the 4 for Armor and apply that total to damage (typically 2 Single Hits and a Double Hit)?

Reason we're unsure is because the chart goes beyond 44 points damage yet the toughest weapon in the game is a Particle Beam and it does 6d6, so it's impossible to do that much damage unless the damage is all combined somehow.

We've also wondered if Effect has any impact on the amount of damage scored.

 

[Hopeless]

Okay from what i've read your triple beam laser turret if it hits rolls all 6d6 and subtracts the 4pts of armour because they all hit the same location.

The total damage that goes through is checked with the damage section in the core rules to indicate how many hits the ship took and you then roll on the hit location chart for the exterior until Hull drops to 0 then you apply any further rolls to the hit location chart for the interior of the ship and then when Structure drops to 0 then the ship is destroyed.

Hope that helps!

 

[tneva82]

Okay from what i've read your triple beam laser turret if it hits rolls all 6d6 and subtracts the 4pts of armour because they all hit the same location.

Actually pretty sure correct answer is A. Makes armour pretty damn strong defense.

 

[hdan]

I'm not just saying this to be contrary, but I'm pretty sure the answer is (B): roll damage for each weapon, subtract armor, add up all the damage that gets through, then read the table.

As to whether effect of the gunnery roll adds in, I've seen evidence both for and against, and AFAIK there has been no official ruling. Considering that many published ships have armor so thick that it's impossible to damage them without PA weapons, I tend to allow effect to add to damage, like it does with personal combat. It just makes those laser-armed fighters less useless.

[house rules follow]

There have been many proposals around (including a few of my own) to let you "link" all the similar weapons in a turret to combine their damage dice as in (C). I personally think that's completely reasonable (and even works out well enough in terms of equipment costs and such, if you take the HG errata's "particle beams take up a whole triple turret" ruling), and it's what I do. If the player wants to make a single attack roll, they can "gang" the weapons in the turret. If they want to fire separately, then they resolve damage separately.

It makes triple laser turrets very versatile weapons, since you can use them to either shoot at up to 3 incoming missiles or blast big holes in armored targets. Or have a better chance to hit less armored targets, though you'll do less damage.

 

[Rockymountainnavy]

The way I think of it is to not call the hits from the weapon "hits" but to think of them as "impact" that you convert to hits using the Damage Table on p.150.

It has always been my interpretation that each weapon in a turret is handled separately. This is based on p.147 under Firing Beam Weapons where it states "A gunner may fire any or all of his weapons in his turret or bay...."

 

[hdan]

Huh, I was going to refute Rockymountainnavy, but then after I checked my PDF copy of the v2 rulebook, I stand corrected. My v1 copy is at home; did they change the wording of the Damage section on p.150?

Either way, looks like (A) is the correct ruling.

I still plan to use my "linked weapons" house rule IMTU.

 

[BP]

That rule quote doesn't actually qualify the nature of the damage... it just speaks to how many weapons may be fired in the turret - i.e. a gunner may chose not to fire a missile or sand caster in the same turret. The full sentence ends with '...but each turret or bay may fire once per round.' Making that rule about the number of targets (only one) and the weapons the gunner chooses to use against it that round.

However, looking under 'Fire Sand' on pg 149, one reads 'If successful the damage of each beam in the incoming attack is reduced by 1d6. Resolve each beam separately.' Ignoring the poor editing (one has to for the entire combat section, after all ), that implies damage from each beam would be accounted for separately, but is still inconclusive.

So, we really are left with our own interpretations.

IMO, the nature of the weapon does not change - you are just sharing a hit roll as if there where more single turrets. So if the weapon is only capable of a single hit quality of damage, then that shouldn't change.

Thus, for me, the damage is rolled for each weapon separately (OP's A).

It might seems like hits should share locations, but the RAW only states '...roll on the Location table for each hit.', with hit referring to the Effect on the 'damage table'. Again, this makes double/triple turrets less likely to inflict more damage outside the nature of their weapons. I.e., two singles do not automatically become a Double against any single location, unless the rolls make them so.

 

[Pentallion]

Then why does the damage table go far beyond 36 damage if 6d6 is the most you can do? Are there ships in other books with larger weapons?

 

[renski]

Yes, for example there are torpedos that do 8d6 damage. Then you have spinal mounts and barrages of weapons which can cause massive amounts of damage, though these are only normally considered with capital ships. All of these things are discussed in the high guard book.

Also, as a DM you might decide that an unusual event might cause a large amount of damage. For example, crashing the ship.

Renski

 

[Hopeless]

I really should have stated as per your gamemaster's ruling in that reply!

Depending on their view it could be argued that for all three beam lasers' to hit the same location requires an additional -2 dm to their attack roll.

So instead of 6d6-4 it could be treated as 6d6-12 damage I suppose.

 

[Pentallion]

Thank you everyone. After some discussion we decided to go with A. We also decided that a hit with Effect 6+ caused an additional hit which was always internal. Sort of a house rule, but in keeping with the combat rules for PC's.

 

[BP]

Good rule.

The combat rules have a number of (sometimes obvious) editing shortcomings and areas that are not well covered. This can be a bit frustrating and might not be the best thing for everyone, but it makes you think and ultimately make the rules your own.

(P.S. - in keeping with the spirit of the Task Check style effect, marginal success could result in the location being the hull or structure...)

 

[renski]

Id rather take out the sensors! P151 Core Rule Book.

"Second hit: Sensors are disabled preventing the ship from making Sensors checks and on making attacks on targets beyond adjacent range"

Pretty nasty. Consequently everyone in my campaign has or is talking about installing several sets of sensors, players and NPCs, in order counter being blinded by a luckly double. Otherwise given that a third hit destroys the sensors, any ship of a reasonable size will keep fighting until it's sensors are taken out and then be defenceless.

 

[locarno24]

That's what's killed all the heavier ships in any game I've seen - losing sensor coverage.

The only real insurance is backup sensors and armoured bulkheads (an option added in High Guard which protects a system against the first hit it takes).

 

[rust]

The only real insurance is backup sensors and armoured bulkheads (an option added in High Guard which protects a system against the first hit it takes).

Sensor Drones, similar to the usual recon drones, with a
datalink to the ship's computer, small and therefore dif-
ficult to hit, and not overly expensive ...

 

[BP]

The sensor rule is the first one I changed when I used the Space Combat rules

Without sensors, I increase the Difficulty DM by range (i.e. incrementing -2 DM for each range beyond Adjacent).

 

[Pentallion]

The sensor rule is the first one I changed when I used the Space Combat rules

Without sensors, I increase the Difficulty DM by range (i.e. incrementing -2 DM for each range beyond Adjacent).

I like that rule too, thanks.