ottarrus
Emperor Mongoose
SMG's are bullet-spitters... 'autofire'. So yeah they count as military light assault.
Starting equipment for TL9-12
- Thread starter mavikfelna
- Start date
I agree, but the law level classifications never have. Submachine guns have always been one law level more available than "military weapons". Mongoose are just continuing 1977 onwards here; the classic text for law level 3 prohibitions is explicit:
"Weapons of a strict military nature (such as machine guns or automatic rifles, though not submachine guns) are prohibited."
Law level 4:
"Light assault weapons (such as submachine guns) are prohibited."
The same or similar text is carried throughout the various Traveller editions.
By all means redefine them in YTU or on a particular world. I guess SMGs were seen as appropriate to police forces and other paramilitary ones.
ottarrus
Emperor Mongoose
Yeah, that logic is ridiculous, especially when you consider that under older rules Rifles and SMGs did the same amount of damage, 3D
If you're weapon can fire bursts, it's illegal at LL 3.
Weapon restrictions don't always make sense in the real world using gamer logic. Shotguns are generally more allowable than rifles and pistols not because they do less damage, but because they have more general utility for hunting small game. Some countries put a limit on the ammunition so that you cannot use slugs for example, but buckshot will still kill quite effectively. Pistols are often heavily restricted for their concealability, the US has wildly varying rules about concealed carry and open carry from neighbouring states. Bolt action hunting rifles might be perfectly legal by default (e.g. Germany) but any sort of semi-automatic loading might be illegal (e.g. UK). There are often exemptions that might make sense locally but no sense to an outsider.
In the UK our gun laws have evolved over the last century or so often in response to isolated incidents for political and public opinion reasons completely unconnected with any credible effectiveness of the legislation. Shotgun ownership is still reasonably common as it is a required tool for farmers. Not all shotguns are legally classed as shotguns though e.g. semi-automatic guns capable of holding more than 3 shots, short barrelled guns etc. You can own certain types of pistol if you are a member of a gun club, others are banned outright. You cannot own a self-loading rifle unless it is a "smallbore" (.22 rimfire for example). Using a "full bore" rifle of any kind requires a special license unless you only intend to fire blanks (in the UK the license also covers the purchase of a certain quantity of ammunition), so owning the weapon itself might not require such a restrictive FAC. You can own antique weapons designed for "obsolete ammunition" with no restriction even if you actually own some ammunition, except that some have been specifically restricted because they have been commonly converted to modern ammunition. You can own a smooth-bore muzzle-loader of up to 2" bore on a shotgun license (which is easier to obtain than a firearms certificate - FAC). Whilst you cannot buy ready made slug shells for a regular shotgun without a FAC, there is no such restriction on owning loose ball, powder etc. Some forces have asserted that loading a muzzleloader with loose powder and balls turn it into a firearm requiring a FAC, but the law does not appear to support this assertion, but good luck arguing that at the point of arrest. Recently certain brands of smokeless powder were reclassified as requiring a special license to own, but the orginal formulation does not.
We have laws covering specific prohibited melee weapons and these are almost exclusively a result of some highly publicised incident by idiots. Whilst the intent is clearer, sometimes the implementation is almost random. Under a strict interpretation of the law I can own a sharp full-sized rapier, but not certain types of cheese knife. Most of these are mitigated by the "reasonable" defence. I cannot carry any knife larger than a non-locking penknife "just because". I can carry even a large knife or sword if I have a good reason. The reasonableness will be tested in court so again it won't necessarily stop you being arrested (though if you can convince the police officer that you have good reason it may not get that far). A muster out weapon might come with a built in good reason "this was a personal gift from the sector baron - I am required to wear it as part of my uniform"
It should also be remembered that not all officers of the law actually know the law or they may be operating on "local" interpretations or might be bringing other baggage to their judgements. A pragmatic officer that is about to go off shift might be keen to avoid the paperwork, but an overly zealous officer, in the midst of a messy divorce and who also really doesn't like off-worlders, especially the mouthy type he is currently dealing with, might be looking for a scalp.
Real legal complications are not neat distinctions and LL is pretty clear cut because it is a game. Personally I like the randomness to keep players on their toes. Visitors to a new world should always be wary about tripping over some local regulation that they either did not understand or even know about. It is the referee to make that interesting rather than irritating. When you get hassled outside the starport, the actual LL might be less important than the characters attitude, which ensures the player has agency and the disposition of the authority you are dealing with, which ensures the referee retains fine control. If for plot reasons you want to take that high tech laser weapon out of the game temporarily then a slavish adherence to Law Level should not prevent you. As long as the player isn't permanently denied their cherished "Best Gun", you are not required to allow players to dictate the terms of the adventure.
The story is in that specific interaction with the law enforcement officer, not in the technical difference between a self-loading pistol and a repeating pistol. That will come out in the court case and that probably isn't the adventure you or they want to be having.
In the UK our gun laws have evolved over the last century or so often in response to isolated incidents for political and public opinion reasons completely unconnected with any credible effectiveness of the legislation. Shotgun ownership is still reasonably common as it is a required tool for farmers. Not all shotguns are legally classed as shotguns though e.g. semi-automatic guns capable of holding more than 3 shots, short barrelled guns etc. You can own certain types of pistol if you are a member of a gun club, others are banned outright. You cannot own a self-loading rifle unless it is a "smallbore" (.22 rimfire for example). Using a "full bore" rifle of any kind requires a special license unless you only intend to fire blanks (in the UK the license also covers the purchase of a certain quantity of ammunition), so owning the weapon itself might not require such a restrictive FAC. You can own antique weapons designed for "obsolete ammunition" with no restriction even if you actually own some ammunition, except that some have been specifically restricted because they have been commonly converted to modern ammunition. You can own a smooth-bore muzzle-loader of up to 2" bore on a shotgun license (which is easier to obtain than a firearms certificate - FAC). Whilst you cannot buy ready made slug shells for a regular shotgun without a FAC, there is no such restriction on owning loose ball, powder etc. Some forces have asserted that loading a muzzleloader with loose powder and balls turn it into a firearm requiring a FAC, but the law does not appear to support this assertion, but good luck arguing that at the point of arrest. Recently certain brands of smokeless powder were reclassified as requiring a special license to own, but the orginal formulation does not.
We have laws covering specific prohibited melee weapons and these are almost exclusively a result of some highly publicised incident by idiots. Whilst the intent is clearer, sometimes the implementation is almost random. Under a strict interpretation of the law I can own a sharp full-sized rapier, but not certain types of cheese knife. Most of these are mitigated by the "reasonable" defence. I cannot carry any knife larger than a non-locking penknife "just because". I can carry even a large knife or sword if I have a good reason. The reasonableness will be tested in court so again it won't necessarily stop you being arrested (though if you can convince the police officer that you have good reason it may not get that far). A muster out weapon might come with a built in good reason "this was a personal gift from the sector baron - I am required to wear it as part of my uniform"
It should also be remembered that not all officers of the law actually know the law or they may be operating on "local" interpretations or might be bringing other baggage to their judgements. A pragmatic officer that is about to go off shift might be keen to avoid the paperwork, but an overly zealous officer, in the midst of a messy divorce and who also really doesn't like off-worlders, especially the mouthy type he is currently dealing with, might be looking for a scalp.
Real legal complications are not neat distinctions and LL is pretty clear cut because it is a game. Personally I like the randomness to keep players on their toes. Visitors to a new world should always be wary about tripping over some local regulation that they either did not understand or even know about. It is the referee to make that interesting rather than irritating. When you get hassled outside the starport, the actual LL might be less important than the characters attitude, which ensures the player has agency and the disposition of the authority you are dealing with, which ensures the referee retains fine control. If for plot reasons you want to take that high tech laser weapon out of the game temporarily then a slavish adherence to Law Level should not prevent you. As long as the player isn't permanently denied their cherished "Best Gun", you are not required to allow players to dictate the terms of the adventure.
The story is in that specific interaction with the law enforcement officer, not in the technical difference between a self-loading pistol and a repeating pistol. That will come out in the court case and that probably isn't the adventure you or they want to be having.
Last edited:
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
On the civilian side, it tends to come down to local culture, and culture comes down to experience, traumatizing or otherwise.
I came across a civilized law level zero world, and decided to give them a rational as to why that was, and how that affected their treatment of weapons.
You could abuse the shotgun allowed loophole, but I rather suspect there is a minimum barrel and overall length, and magazine capacity.
I came across a civilized law level zero world, and decided to give them a rational as to why that was, and how that affected their treatment of weapons.
You could abuse the shotgun allowed loophole, but I rather suspect there is a minimum barrel and overall length, and magazine capacity.
MasterGwydion
Emperor Mongoose
This is how I treat local law, a mixed bag of you have no idea what, but you can read all of the applicable laws on your computer before you land. If is it a high law planet, it may take you a whole study period to learn all of the laws, but hey, you'll have Advocate/0 afterwards...lol...
CordwainerFish
Emperor Mongoose
I'm with that one guy in Total Recall [1]: "Don't fuck with your brain, pal. It ain't worth it."
[1] There is only one Total Recall.
Anstett
Emperor Mongoose
Pel agrees.
Quint
Mongoose
I suspect (though have never confirmed this) that is has to do with original definitions of SMGs (pistol ammunition, lower range, not as accurate - all not as compared as to military automatic rifles/weapons) and its utility for Ship Crews in civilian ship defense. It allows the Imperium (and the GM) to grant civilians (and PCs) in legitimate need for some extra firepower to get it but still restrict "military-grade' weapons (better range, better damage/penetration, more accurate) and keep them out of the hands of 'the wrong sort of people'.
D.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
The first major federal firearms law passed in the 20th century was the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. It was passed after Prohibition-era gangsterism peaked with the Saint Valentine's Day massacre of 1929. The era was famous for criminal use of firearms such as the Thompson submachine gun (Tommy gun) and sawed-off shotgun. Under the NFA, machine guns, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, and other weapons fall under the regulation and jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) as described by Title II.[35]
Yeah, I strongly suspect range and accuracy were mostly on Marc's mind here. Again, it's worth stressing that these are very low law levels.
I'd be interested to see how people define Military weapons. There is a pretty big gulf between Portable Energy and Laser and Personal Concealable and quite a few weapons in that band that could be either Light Assault or Military (considering that assault pretty much means a military application).
I would agree a good definition of Assault weapons are ones with the Auto trait. So the question is what makes it light vs. military. I think we have a ready made definition as we have a Heavy Weapons skill.
Non auto pistols from the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL5.
Non auto weapons from the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL4.
So to my way of thinking anything in the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL3.
Military weapons are all weapons in the Heavy Weapon group that are neither Energy (inc. Laser) nor Explosive, they become legal at LL2.
Nothing in the Energy Weapons group or Energy/Laser weapons in the Heavy Weapons group become available until LL1.
This interpretation avoids the apparent illogic of allowing Assault Rifles but not SMGs. They are both personal weapons and reasonable for self-defence, it is not until you start considering full machineguns that they start to be classed as Military weapons.
I would agree a good definition of Assault weapons are ones with the Auto trait. So the question is what makes it light vs. military. I think we have a ready made definition as we have a Heavy Weapons skill.
Non auto pistols from the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL5.
Non auto weapons from the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL4.
So to my way of thinking anything in the Slug Weapons group are legal at LL3.
Military weapons are all weapons in the Heavy Weapon group that are neither Energy (inc. Laser) nor Explosive, they become legal at LL2.
Nothing in the Energy Weapons group or Energy/Laser weapons in the Heavy Weapons group become available until LL1.
This interpretation avoids the apparent illogic of allowing Assault Rifles but not SMGs. They are both personal weapons and reasonable for self-defence, it is not until you start considering full machineguns that they start to be classed as Military weapons.
Last edited:
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
You probably have to take the point of view of the jurisdiction that's enforcing gun control.
This is just me, and I'm more interested in the Confederation.
Anything that causes five plus damage dice, is considered destructive, so definitely in the control category, whatever that is.
Shotguns would seem innocuous, going by the law level.
So, four dice is tolerated.
And, I'd say it depends on traits, especially armour piercing, and automatic.
And, while it's not mentioned, I bet long range.
This is just me, and I'm more interested in the Confederation.
Anything that causes five plus damage dice, is considered destructive, so definitely in the control category, whatever that is.
Shotguns would seem innocuous, going by the law level.
So, four dice is tolerated.
And, I'd say it depends on traits, especially armour piercing, and automatic.
And, while it's not mentioned, I bet long range.
Legislators try to simplify things and focus on what is enforceable.
"any firearm which is so designed or adapted that two or more missiles can be successively discharged without repeated pressure on the trigger", the UK firearms law makes a good definition of the Auto trait. It can be established as a matter of fact in a court of law. It would likely not cover a volley gun (as all barrels are discharged more or less simultaneously).
Destructive weapons are DD weapons and normal weapons need to be increased to 10D before they become 1DD.
Damage is very gamey. Is 3D-3 more legal than 3D+3. What about "Deadly" weapons that count all 1's and 2's as a three. A deadly 2D+3 weapon would on average be more dangerous than a non-deadly 3D-3 weapon. What about if you load enhanced wounding ammunition - does that turn the weapon into a different thing. Do you control the ammunition, the weapon that fires it or both.
It is more that they have been traditionally used by farmers rather than any intrinsic damage potential. Anyone who has fired a shotgun knows that at close range even birdshot will knock a single bore sized hole in a target.
Again simplicity is the key, especially when these traits can be acquired by using specialist ammunition. UK law for example specifically prohibits armour piercing rounds, but you can own a 2" bore cannon that will know a hole in a wall on a shotgun certificate.
Range is hard to define. Are you talking effective range, maximum range? Most firearms are capable of inaccurately lobbing rounds miles in the right circumstances. Effective range will depend on more than just the gun and would need to consider the situation, sights, competence of shooter. These are are circumstantial factors and could not be determined at a customs point or if arrest was made for possession.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Like I said, it probably depends more on the jurisdiction.
My view is that if the local military is using gauss rifles, they'll view technological level seven fully automatic assault rifles as quaint, if hazardous (in contrast to dangerous) in the wrong hands.
They might be less tolerant to a civilian using an advanced combat rifle.
My view is that if the local military is using gauss rifles, they'll view technological level seven fully automatic assault rifles as quaint, if hazardous (in contrast to dangerous) in the wrong hands.
They might be less tolerant to a civilian using an advanced combat rifle.
Similar threads
