Smart Guns and the Expert Program

[opensent]

If Expert Programs only work with INT/EDU skills, why would you create a smart gun, since Gun Combat is a DEX skill?

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Tools and weapons are special cases, with the rules governing them at the bottom of the box text on p93. The user needs the skill (whereas an expert program can substitute for it) and whether a bonus occurs depends on the difficulty.

Admittedly, the text is a little fuzzy, but that seems the intent.

 

[opensent]

Ah.. Ok. Smart Tools... I like that.

 

[Tathlum]

Your character might not.
Remember how helpfull and calming clippy was? :lol:

 

[Golan2072]

I recall an example in the weapon section about a weapon "firing itself" with an Expert program, which is problematic.

My house rule is that weapons with the right equipment (i.e. Smart modification and tripod/harness with servomotors) could do so, just like the Smartgun in Aliens.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I don't know that I would go that far in an OTU setting.

I would think that it is much like the modern AED (Automatic External Defibrillators). They can diagnose and recommend a shock, but a person still has to push the button to get a shock. It also has the failsafes so that if you press the button when a shock is not recommended, it won't shock.

So, I figure a smart gun can do everything to help you right up to actually pulling the trigger, which still has to be done by a person.

 

[Paladin]

How do automated turrets ID threats? Could the Friend/Foe recognition be tricked?

 

[aspqrz]

How do automated turrets ID threats? Could the Friend/Foe recognition be tricked?

IFF can always be tricked. The "problem" is that the Sensor "rules" (TMB, page #63, 96) are ... frankly ... a joke :shock:

All Sensors do is allow you to detect things that would otherwise not be detectable (fine so far), but no actual rules for ESM/ECM (countermeasures) are provided which makes a mockery of what the present battlefield is like and what we can reasonably assume the future battlefield will be like.

That's my take, anyway :?

Canonistas MMV. :roll:

Phil

 

[Delerium]

I think the ECM/Sensor/Expert program rules are a perfect match with the rest of the rules.

i.e. vague and open to intepretation and misintepretation.


Let's be honest. Even the die-hard traveller fans can't seriously sit there and deny this. Just look at the forums, endless debates about meanings and it's bound to continue.

Don't get me wrong,I like the game, but rose-tinted spectacles I don't wear.

 

[collins355]

I think the sensor rules are fine for a core rulebook that is essentially introductory in nature. But I would support Phil and Delerium's comments when applied to the two key military rulebooks Mongoose has/is putting out (i.e. Mercenary and High Guard). It is not excusable for those books to ignore/handwave proper sensor rules.

 

[Lane Shutt]

My house rule is that weapons with the right equipment (i.e. Smart modification and tripod/harness with servomotors) could do so, just like the Smartgun in Aliens.

It is almost impossible to hold a weapon steady unless it is supported/braced in some way. Since many on this forum do not have access to weapons try sticking a laser pointer on a broom handle and aiming at something at least 30' away. Most likely the dot will move in a figure eight over the target point.

A Smart Weapon Mod does what an experienced shooter does, predicts the motion and fires for the person aiming. For longer ranged shots it may also account for wind, gravity, target motion etc.

Place it on a table pointed at a door and it could fire at a person entering. First shot would be fairly accurate due to being 'aimed' by the owner. After firing it may have moved so it would have heavy negatives due to no dex.