Sand Caster Question

Jak Nazryth

Mongoose
I'm a bit embarrassed to have to ask this question, but embarrassing myself has never been a problem in the past.. :lol:

In the core rules page 111 on Sand Casters it states in part.. "... small particles which counteract the strength of lasers and protect the ship. A sand caster reduces the damage from a beam weapon by 1d6"
(This is a word problem to me.. in making a declarative statement by singling out "lasers" in the first sentence, it suggests the exclusion of other types of weapons. But in the following sentence it adds "beam weapons". A particle gun is a beam weapon. If the paragraph would have simply stuck to "laser" or "beam weapon" in both sentences I wouldn't be asking.
Sorry for being deep in the weeds on this one guys. Just would like a mongoose interpretation on this.

Per the description, since a Particle beam is considered a beam weapon, does a sand caster reduce the damage from one just like it does from lasers? It's been so long since I played CT I simply cannot remember... My players have a particle gun on their ship, so I want to be sure.
They also have plasma guns on their ship (based on the plasma from Trillion Credit Squadron). One of my players mentioned that he remembers CT sand casters ALSO reduced damage from plasma.

Anyone know the Mongoose "final word" on this?
Thanks.
 
I believe sandcasters work against all beam weapons.

If you look on page 149, it mentions "Beam" again with no reference to lasers, so I'd say anything but Meson guns. I suspect the explicit reference to "lasers" is either a leftover from the text in an earlier version of Traveller or simply a mistake.

The rules also mention that you can use sand against boarding parties. For some reason, you cannot also use them against missiles. My suspicion is that missiles are considered to be too fast to be "blocked" by a cloud of sand. Sure, beams are "speed of light", but they have to have a certain amount of time on-target to burn through, which sand interrupts.
 
I tend to agree with you on the particle gun...
yep, you can load "pebble" canisters instead of sand to shoot at borders and missiles.
Since plasma came out so late (after core and high guard), just curious if a sand casters effected them as well.
 
Don't worry about what Classic Traveller said. Mongoose is its own game. You can't have both universes and eat them too. Sand affects light, such as laser beams. So damage is reduced. That's it. No other-thought needed.

Plasma melts sand.
 
ShawnDriscoll said:
Don't worry about what Classic Traveller said. Mongoose is its own game. You can't have both universes and eat them too.

Well, that one man's opinion.....

ShawnDriscoll said:
Plasma melts sand.

So does the Laser fire for all that is worth.....
 
Infojunky said:
ShawnDriscoll said:
Don't worry about what Classic Traveller said. Mongoose is its own game. You can't have both universes and eat them too.

Well, that one man's opinion...

Quite honestly it's the only sane one to have. Trying to reconcile differences between editions is a madman's game.
 
Ideally one should not "need" to look to previous versions of a game to get rules clarifications. Ideally the revamped MGT rules would have published rules without gaps in them that necessitate such questions.

Ideally.

Reality is different than the ideal. The question posed is a valid one, and referring to a previous rule set upon which most of the current rule set duplicates is also a valid. I do think it's obvious (and has been previously proven multiple times in the past) that the different rule books were developed by separate individuals, and not all of the rules were checked against each other. Failing to find official errata it's just as valid to look to a previous version as anything else.
 
phavoc said:
Reality is different than the ideal. The question posed is a valid one, and referring to a previous rule set upon which most of the current rule set duplicates is also a valid. I do think it's obvious (and has been previously proven multiple times in the past) that the different rule books were developed by separate individuals, and not all of the rules were checked against each other. Failing to find official errata it's just as valid to look to a previous version as anything else.

Not really, because the previous edition isn't relevant. People don't play a mix of different rule systems in a game, they use one system. And people don't always have previous editions to hand either.

If it's not defined in the current edition, I think it's far better - and quicker - to just make something up for your game. Then you don't need to negotiate the maze of contradictions and inconsistencies of previous editions to figure out what is going on. Treat each edition as an isolated, self-contained entity.
 
Wil Mireu said:
phavoc said:
Reality is different than the ideal. The question posed is a valid one, and referring to a previous rule set upon which most of the current rule set duplicates is also a valid. I do think it's obvious (and has been previously proven multiple times in the past) that the different rule books were developed by separate individuals, and not all of the rules were checked against each other. Failing to find official errata it's just as valid to look to a previous version as anything else.

Not really, because the previous edition isn't relevant. People don't play a mix of different rule systems in a game, they use one system. And people don't always have previous editions to hand either.

If it's not defined in the current edition, I think it's far better - and quicker - to just make something up for your game. Then you don't need to negotiate the maze of contradictions and inconsistencies of previous editions to figure out what is going on. Treat each edition as an isolated, self-contained entity.

But your talking Traveller which I believe in my humble opinion is best played with a mash of rules from multiple editions. I know not everyone will do that, but I do think a good number of fan players will. I mostly run a CT game but I use the MGT task system with attribute mods from MGT and everything, but my character generation and starships and all that are basically the first 3 LBB's with the Citizens book careers thrown in for more careers.
 
Wil Mireu said:
Not really, because the previous edition isn't relevant. People don't play a mix of different rule systems in a game, they use one system.

Hum, that isn't what I have experienced. Especially in Traveller games.


Wil Mireu said:
And people don't always have previous editions to hand either.

I will give that.

But here in this case it is a set of unclear rules, where access and experience with earlier editions can provide an answer were the rules as written are lacking.
 
Visible spectrum, I believe; not a physicist, but perhaps some added component diffuses some of the heat from the fusion bolt, much like a ceramic layer.
 
hdan said:
The rules also mention that you can use sand against boarding parties. For some reason, you cannot also use them against missiles.

High Guard also allows sandcasters to be used for point defence against missiles, as long as the missile was launched from beyond Medium Range.

Because apparently a defence system which can intercept laser fire can't cope with close-range missile shots.

Go figure.
 
This is actually clarified in Central Supply Catalog (I think?)

At TL 17 (or was it 16) it says "Sandcasters are now effective vs particle weapons".

So no, they are not effective normally against particle weapons.
 
High Guard pretty consistently says Lasers and Missile can be stopped by sand. I have wondered why the particle beams, plasma beams and fusion beams are not affected, but I am happy to accept the rules as written.

In previous versions. Megtrav refers to Sand interacting with beam weapons, while only defining Plasma, fusion and Lasers as a beam weapon.
T20 has them defending against Missile, Laser, Plasma and Fusion
Classic Traveller sandcasters are only effective against Missiles, Lasers plasma and fusion.

My other copies are not handy (stored somewhere in my basement, can't be bothered looking for them).

So, I reckon you could safely house rule extend sand to work against Fusion and Plasma, but if you are in the realm of house rules you could do whatever makes sense to you.
 
Back
Top