T5 Personal Combat System Review, Opinion, and Problems

[Supplement Four]

T5 Personal Combat System Review, Opinion, and Problems


Overview

Although not explained as clearly as it could have been, the T5 personal combat system is pretty simple. The game uses a one minute (or there abouts--time is not rigid) combat round in which characters can take one action and make a move. The character can attack and move, or the character can do some other action, like operate a computer, and make a move.

The round is highly abstract, so even though the character may be firing his weapon several times, he is allowed one attack throw to represent all combat in which he took part during the round.





Attack Types

There are three general attack types: Aimed Fire, SnapFire, and AutoFire.

Aimed Fire is the only attack option available to Single Fire weapons. And, a person cannot move during the same round that he uses Aimed Fire.

AutoFire requires the weapon to be capable of Burst or Full Auto Fire. A person can move up to Speed 1 (Walk) and use AutoFire in the same round. AutoFire adds +1D to difficulty but also adds +2D to damage is the hit penetrates.

SnapFire requires the weapon to be capable of Burst or Full Auto Fire. A person can stand still, walk (Speed-1), or run (Speed-2) in the same combat round as SnapFire is used. SnapFire adds +2D to difficulty and 1D to damage if the hit penetrates.





Movement

Movement is measured in Speed Ratings. The Vehicles section of the book continues with higher Speed ratings. Some aliens may be capable of Speed-3 or higher, especially in flight.

Speed-0 is standing still.

Speed-1 is human walking speed.

Speed-2 is human running speed.





Range Bands

Range in the game is measured in Range Bands rather than exact movement distances. I love using Range Bands. They're so easy on the Ref! If all the bad guys are approaching on foot, at Medium range, then all attacking tasks to hit them will be at 3D. You don't have a lot of measuring to do in the game. Range Bands give you a sense of range without forcing you to use graph paper or some other hard measuring device.

As it was with Classic Traveller, a GM can just keep track of range using a normal sheet of lined notebook paper, placing penciled dots in the lines, each line representing a range band. This allows the Ref to easily describe the action vividly, right from his comfy arm chair, and players don't have to fuss with moving their characters exactly X amount of feet during their turn.

If a GM wants, he can easily use some sort of plot, like hex or graph paper. I've done that in the past, just to show players relative distance. You're still not counting squares or hexes for combat range.

If the range is close to one of the Range Band breaks, I usually use some feature on the map to remind me where the break is. For example, if the NPCs are advancing on the players, if the NPCs get past a certain rock formation, that's the line I've designated as the switch from one Range Band to another.

But, the great thing about Range Bands is that the system allows range tracking without the need for a map. The action can take place in the player's heads as the Ref describes it, and all the Ref need to is put dots on lined notebook paper to tell him target range when he needs it.





Attacks

Making an attack in this game is as simple as rolling a task. Target range gives you the difficulty: The number of dice you throw is equal to the Range Band number of your target. If your target is 57 meters away, then he's in Range Band 3 (which covers distances of 51-150 meters), and you'll roll 3D on your attack throw.

Tasks in this game are typically achieved by adding a Characteristic and a Skill together to get a target number, then rolling a number of dice where success means rolling the target number or less. The harder the task, the greater the number of dice that are thrown.





Modifiers

The game includes some pretty nifty combat modifiers.

Apparent Size: I think this is brilliant. It's a mod to the attack throw to account for the character's perception of his target. The apparent Size modifier is calculated by Target Size minus Range.

Thus, a man is Size 5*. If he's in Range Band 5 (501m to 1000m away), then the modifier is 0. Calculated, that's Size 5 - Range 5 = 0.

If the man is in Range Band 6, then a penalty -1 modifier is applied to the target number: 5 - 6 = -1.

If the man is in Range Band 2 (6m-50m), then the attacker gets a +3 bonus modifier to his target number: 5 - 2 = 3.

Why is this brilliant? Because it's a simple modifier that accounts for the perceived size of the target. A man standing right in front of you is much easier to hit than the same man standing at the end of a football field.

But, doesn't Range and Difficulty take care of that? To a point, yes. But, consider the man in front of you and a football field away, then compare that target to an 18 wheeled tractor trailer truck, right in front of you and 100 yards away. The difficulty stays the same as with the man, but the modifier changes to accomodate different size targets.

Brilliant.

*A man that is half hidden by cover reduces his size to Size 4. A man who sticks his head out of the hatch of a vehicle is considered Size 3.

A crouching man is considered Size 4 becuase he gets -1 Size for the crouch. A prone man is considered Size 3 because he gets -2 Size for lying prone.

A small control sensor (or even a man's eye) is Size 2. Most all vehicles are Size 6. Starships, 2000 tons or less, are Size 7. Bigger starships are Size 8.




Speed: This modifer is to account for firing at moving targets. If your target is standing still, there's no modifier. If your target is walking, then suffer a -1 modifier to your target number because a moving target is harder to hit than a stationary target. If your target is running, you suffer a -2 modifier to your target number.

Basically, you just subtract your target's Speed from your target number. The faster the target is moving, the harder he is to hit**.

**But, there is a provision for targets moving directly away from you or towards you. Ignore the Speed Modifier in these cases. The modifier applies to lateral target movement.

What about Attacker Movement? There are no modifiers for attacker movement as that is built into the types of attacks that can be made.




Cover and Concealment: If a character has cover, this is a penalty modifier to the attack throw ranging from 0 to -6. The player picks the amount of cover he's using in terms of the modifier. Thus, half cover would be rated at -3 or -4 cover. Cover that includes all but an eyeball, giving the character the least amount of exposure, would be -6 cover.

Any attacker firing at a covered character simply uses the cover modifier as a penalty to the attack roll target number.

I love this part: If a character uses cover, then he must suffer a penalty equal to half the cover modifer on his own attack throws. This is to account for the difficulty of firing your weapon from a covered position (restrictions of movement and vision).

Concealment is handled differently. This is a negative modifier to Target Size, akin to what I write above about about a character crouching or going prone. Concealment makes the target harder to see, and, in effect, reduces its size.

Plug this into the Apparent Size modifier above, and you can see how concealment will have an effect on the attack throw.





Tactics: This is the coolest use of the Tactics skill I've ever seen in any Traveller game. At the start of a combat encounter, a character with the Tactics skill adds it to his EDU score. Then, he rolls 2D and substracts that sum from his Tactics total.

Example: EDU 8 and Tactics-4. 8 + 4 = 12.

Roll 2D: result is 7.

12 - 7 = 5.

The character's tactics modifier is +5, and he can use this modifier himself or direct it any ally with which he can communicate.

If the Tactics mod ends up being a negative number or zero, then there is no tactical benefit the character can discern for that entire combat.

If the Tactics mod is positive (as in the example above), then one character can use that modifier in any combat round. The character with the tactics skill directs who gets to use the Tactics mod during any given round.

C'mon. That's pretty damn cool.

 

[Supplement Four]

T5 Personal Combat System Review, Opinion, and Problems
- continued -



Damage

The T5 Damage System is extremely close to the system used in CT. There are a couple of changes, though.

Armor: In T5, Armor makes does not make you harder to hit, as it does in CT. In this game, Armor absorbs damage.

It's a simple mechanic. Each Armor type has an associated Armor Value. Simply subtract the AV from the total damage. If any damage is left over, then damage penetrates.

If armor is penetrated once, it is destroyed for the rest of the combat encounter.

Thus, Armor-10 would absorb 10 points of damage. Damage of 3D, rolling 11 points, would defeat the armor, applying 1 point of damage on the character.



Protection: Protection is any type of protection that isn't armor. For example, if armor has Insulation-12, then the armor will absorb 12 points of Heat damage in addition to it's normal Armor Value. This is good if you are the target of a flame thrower.



Wounds: T5 wounds are applied just as they are in Classic Traveller. This is thrown just like in CT. Weapons are rated for different types of damage. For example, a revolver that does damage of Bullet-1 will do 1D damage if hit is scored.

The first hit the character suffers is summed and taken from a single physical stat, rolled randomly: STR, DEX, or END.

Damage after the first hit is grouped into dice. For example, if the damage was 2D, then each die is taken on its own. The player of the wounded character decides which stat he wants to lower by the full amount of a single damage die. The player can therefore manage his wounds to keep his character from falling unconscious as long as possible.

Minor Wound: Lowered stats, none at zero.

Minor Wound and Unconscious: One stat at zero means that the character is knocked unconscious for 10 minutes, thereafter treated as having minor wounds.

Serious Wound: Two stats at zero is where damage becomes more than trivial and the character is considered to have taken a serious wound.

Dead: Three stats at zero means that the character is dead.



NPC Damage: There's a special provison to help the GM. If damage to NPCs is 9 or less, then ignore it. If damage to NPCs is 10 or greater, then take them out of the fight.

The NPC may not be dead--but he is somehow rendered ineffective in the combat. Maybe he's suffering from a gunshot wound. Maybe he's unconscious. And, mayber he's dead.

This sounds like it's all GM color.





Initiative

The first rule of Initiative in T5 is common sense. If it's obvious which side or character has initiative, then they move and act first. No dice rolling needed.

If Initiative is contested, then there are a few ways to deal with this.

1. One side can just concede to give nish to the other side.

2. An Opposed Task can be thrown, first comparing Leadership skill, second comparing Tactics skill if Leadership is not present.

The rules give the GM a wide latitude in decide who has the initiative. Characters or sides can also hold back and do nothing, giving up the initiative if they have it and don't want it.



First Attacker Penalty: There's also a penalty to going first, exposing oneself. Every round, the character who attacks first gives his enemies who attack him a +1 modifier on thier attack against him.

Thus, if you attack first, then everybody that attacks you in that round gets a +1 modifier to hit you.

In other words, you may take out an enemy quickly, but every other enemy will get a bonus to hit you that round.

The First Attacker can change each round.

Besides attacking first in a combat round, the First Attacker also gets a pretty strong bonus. The rule says that if the attack made by the First Attacker is successful, then his target cannot also attack during that round.





Suppression Fire

When you use this rule, your weapon has to be capable of AutoFire. You really don't do anything with this rule except declare that your character is using suppression fire on the enemy. There are no rolls to make UNLESS the enemy makes an attack.

For every enemy that makes an attack, the character making the Supression Fire is allowed to attack them!

That really can "suppress" the other side from attacking! They know that, if they make their attack, they will get an AutoFire attack against them, guarranteed.

This is a brilliant rule.





STAMP

STAMP is an acronym for the game's combat round procedure. The letters each stand for the five phases of the combat round. Every character in the combat, including NPCs, move fully through each phase before the game progresses to the next phase.

So, in the Attack phase, all attacks are made, in initiative order. Once that is completed, we move on to the Move phase, where all movement takes place. Damage is not rolled until the Penetrate phase.

Situation. The characters may pull or change weapons during this phase, as they are evaluating the situation.

Target. Attackers indentify targets and determine Range. This is like a declaration phase with the players announcing which target they will attack.

Attack. Combat throws are made.

Move. Movement is carried out.

Penetrate. Damage is rolled.

Here's what I don't like about this: The rules say that every combatant completes each phase before moving on to the next phase. This means going around the table FIVE times during every combat round. First you go through to see if anybody wants to change weapons or ready some other equipment. Then you go through every PC and NPC to allow them to declare their targets.

Then, you go around the table a third time to make attack throws.

Then...you allow everybody to move.

And then...you go around the table again to roll damage.

I especially don't like this because you've got to remember who hit who two phases after the attack throw was made.

 

[Supplement Four]

T5 Personal Combat System Review, Opinion, and Problems
- concluded -


LIKES & DISLIKES

This is the Opinions and Problems part of this review. There's a lot of things I like about the T5 combat system. Range Bands are awesome--a great boon for Refs running T5 games. There are some fantastic modifiers for the attack throw--well thought out mechanics that work well in the game. I love the Tactics rule. Suppression Fire is brilliant. And, the organic method of Initiative is both old school and inspired.

The CT damage system is an old friend that I've always admired for how it gracefully serves as a wound point system AND a wound penalty system. There's a lot to like in this set of rules.

On the other hand, these rules are not without problems. The rule explanations are sometimes hard to follow, and information is hard to find and located in different parts of the book. Unarmed combat, for example, is no where to be seen in the Combat chapter. You've got to look at the Skills chapter in order to learn that Unarmed combat is handled with an Opposed Task and not the combat attack task provided in the Combat chapter.

There are typos in the book, but they don't bother me unless the change rules. There's a big one in the Combat chapter. On page 214, we are told that SnapFire can be performed at Speed-0 or Speed-1. Then, on page 218, the table shows that SnapFire can be performed at Speed-0, Speed-1, or Speed-2. That's a pretty big game question. If page 218 is correct, then SnapFire is the only attack form that can be attempted while also running during the combat round.

The other question is the difference between SnapFire and AutoFire. According to the rules, both attack types can only be used with weapons that can fire in bursts or fully automatically. If there's little difference between the two, there is little reason to ever use SnapFire. AutoFire is both easier to use (AutoFire is +1D Difficulty vs. SnapFire +2D Difficulty) and does more damage (AutoFire does +2D damage after penetration where as SnapFire does +1D Damage after penetration). If page 218 is correct (discussed in the preceeding paragraph), then the only thing SnapFire has got going for it is that a character can use it while also running.

To hamper this issue further, T5 does not track ammunition usage. GunMaker is a weapon design system provided in the rules, and it doesn't generate ammunition magazines beyond a guestimate, and ammo mags are not listed in the weapon's descriptions. We're told that Single Fire uses one around of ammunition, Burst Fire uses 3 rounds of ammo, and Full Auto will spit out lead as long as we hold the trigger down, but there is no notation on most GunMaker Weaon Descriptions for magazine capacity. The Ref can use some examples provided in the game to make educated guesses as to a weapon's mag size, but what's worse is that there is nothing about the weight of the magazines for character Load reasons.

In T5, weapons are always assumed to have ammunition.

I HATE this. It opens up a whole slew of game problems. Characters always have enough ammo on them. They never run out, even if they've been fighting for days with no resupply. Ammo depletion becomes the province of Ref fiat.

In addition, with no ammo restrictions (such as how much ammo a character can carry at one time), there's no reason to ever use Aimed Fire or SnapFire if a weapon is Burst or Full Auto capable.

I really do hate that.

And, I'm going to go one step further and hamper the issue SOME MORE. Aimed Fire is the only attack type available to Single-shot weapons. This means almost all handguns and many, non-assault, rifles. But, the Aimed Fire attack type restricts movement. You cannot move if you use Aimed Fire during the entire one-minute round.

What? Yes. If you have a handgun in this game, then you have a choice. You can attack in a round, or you can move in a round. But, you can't do both.

That's a real problem, especially since we're talking about a game with long, one-minute, abstract combat rounds--where it would be quite acceptable to fire off several rounds of aimed fire and still move.

While I'm on things I truly dislike about the game: I just plain don't like breaking up a combat round as suggested with STAMP. You have all combatants make their attack throws, then you let them all move. Then, you apply damage, having to remember who hit whom? That's not for me.

And, I'm real suspect about the First Attacker rule. The First Attacker in any combat round gives his enemies a +1 modifier to hit him. I can see that part of the rule--it reflects a person's general hesitation to expose himself to danger.

It's the second part of the rule I don't get. The First Attacker in any round, if successful with his attack, penalizes his target by not allwing the target to attack that round. The target is basically suppressed by the First Attacker's attack.

Why is that, when every other character attacked during the round can fight back?



No Game Breakers

There are some definite things I don't like about this game, but are those issues so bad that the game is not enjoyable to play? Are they game breakers? That's for you to decide.

I think a lot of stuff will be fixed with eratta. In the mean time, most of these issue are easily fixed. My dislike of STAMP? Simply don't play the combat round that way. The First Attacker Rule? Don't use it. Allow characters with single shot weapons to use SnapFire, or, instead, allow those who use Aimed Fire to move at Speed-1 (Walk).

See? Most of these issues are easily fixed by the Ref. The biggest problem, I think, is the issue of ammo. But, I've already fixed that. If you go to the CotI forum, look for a thread called S4's Ammo Tweak for T5 (Just find one of my many posts over there--I linked that tweak in my signature.). Within those pages you will find an easy-to-use fix for ammo magazines in the game.





Summary

I hope this review of the combat system in T5 will inform you about both the the glossy sides and nasty warts that is presented in the Fifth Edition of Traveller. This is a long review, but I've endeavored to be detailed about the claims I make. I hope you find my comments useful.

I'm going to leave you with my first impression of the book, the day I opened it, about five days ago....



It was a long day at work, then I had an appointment after work...and then, I had dinner with a friend.

As I dragged myself up to the front door just a few minutes ago, I spotted the box. I knew what was in it, and I smiled to myself.

I haven't had time to evaluate any of the material. I'll write my thoughts on specifics later. But, my very first impression of Traveller 5, as I cut open the tape before folding back the box lid, was akin to that feeling I had, years and years ago, when I first spied the Little Black Box with the Beowulf on the cover, lying alone on a store's shelf. That was over 30 years ago.

When I saw it--that shining black cover, red line, and all--no lie, I got goose bumps.

Then, I pulled it out of the box--the MASSIVE tome of a role-playing game. And, I smiled so much that my teeth dried.

I flipped through, scanning the pages, looking here and there: I LOVE the look of the book! The illos. The typeface. EVERYTHING about the look of the book SCREAMS Traveller to me!

The actual look of the book could not have looked better, imo.

And, flipping through the pages, it truly reminds me of an old school RPG. I'm talking really old school--lots of detail and war game influence. Tons of text.

I'll dig into this slowly. There's no way I could (or, I think, anyone could) read this thing quickly then start playing ASAP. No, this book is going to take time--patience.

As I go through it, I'll write more thoughts.

But...just from the look of it (and the fact that MWM signed it guarrantees that I will not sell it), I'm extremely happy so far.


And, what you see above--this Review--are those further thoughts that I've had since receiving the book on Monday.

Ciao for now,

S4

 

[Oracle]

A very well and insightful review...nice job!

I have always used armor absorbs damage, not makes it harder to hit someone. I need to read the whole Personal Combat system again, but I like what you have said. Also ammo runs out and regardless of the rule when the clip or etc runs out, then your done. I don't play the A-Team TV show.

 

[Wil Mireu]

The lack of ammo tracking is baffling, especially given the level of detail in the design system (which from the sounds of it also 'forgets' about it). I think ammo magazines for weapons were part of the design system in the original FF&S so you could maybe use that at least... but it should have been in here.

The "STAMP" combat round system does sound terrible though.

 

[Cutter]

It's a simple mechanic. Each Armor type has an associated Armor Value. Simply subtract the AV from the total damage. If any damage is left over, then damage penetrates.

Total damage? What's your opinion on weapons with multiple damage types?

 

[Supplement Four]

Here's my guess: I now think that all damage effects are rolled separately.

Reasoning: It's easy. Read the damage effect, then roll it. Plus, some damage effects that must defeat armor can have different results.

For example, if a weapon does both Blast and Pain damage (maybe a grenade that explodes spraying an acid based liquid all over the place), both of those damage effects must defeat Armor in order to harm the character.

But, Blast damage does damage to a character's three physical stats, while Pain damage will stun the character for a number of rounds.

Therefore, it's got to be that different damage effect types are rolled separately.





But, here's a new question.

Is there any order to rolling damage effects? Does it matter?

For example, the AC-7 Assault Shotgun from page 240 does damage of: Bang-1, Blast-2, Bullet-1.

If we roll these in order, and 2D Blast damage defeats armor, is the armor then useless because it was penetrated? Allowing the 1D of Bullet damage to penetrate completely?

Or, does the Armor stand up through the entire damage process and isn't considered penetrated until all the rolling is done?

Common sense is telling me the former is the way to go--that armor stands up through the entire damage process, only considered penetrated after the dice have stopped rolling.




But....let's take that question a bit further.

Damage is rolled in the last phase of combat, during the Penetration phase. Let's say a character got hit 3 times by three different opponents. And, all three hits penetrate his armor.

Is Armor considered to hold up through the entire phase? Or, is Armor defeated after the first attacker penetrates?

I'm thinking that Armor holds up through the entire phase and is only considered penetrated after the combat round is over.



Thoughts?

 

[SSWarlock]

<snip>
Or, does the Armor stand up through the entire damage process and isn't considered penetrated until all the rolling is done?

Common sense is telling me..<snip>..that armor stands up through the entire damage process, only considered penetrated after the dice have stopped rolling.
<snip>
I'm thinking that Armor holds up through the entire phase and is only considered penetrated after the combat round is over.

My understanding matches the above.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

I know that T5 has been making a number of appearances on this board recently, and thanks to Supplement Four for posting all of this about the combat system.

Personally, it has removed any interest I might have had in the T5 system, in all points mentioned it seems to add nothing to MgT, and in some cases create a less effective system.

So, on quick read through.

1 minute rounds? The MgT 6 seconds gives a more realistic, but still playable and fast game.

Attack type, aimed fire, cannot move. Really, in a whole minute you can take one shot, and not move, is everyone equipped with matchlock muskets and damp powder?

Speed ratings. Why not just use metres, or yards?

Range bands? I cannot see what is so new here, using sketches to show action? Modelling reduced accuracy with range?

Attack resolution. Though conceptually interesting, just cannot see any great advantage in the T5 method, the MgT target number 8 modified as appropriate works very well.

Apparent size of target. Surely this is taken into account in the target range bands anyway, and can be modified by target size, hardly a great advance in game design.

So thanks, but we will be sticking with MgT for the foreseeable future.

Egil

 

[Supplement Four]

1 minute rounds? The MgT 6 seconds gives a more realistic, but still playable and fast game.

I don't mind the 1 minute rounds. I cut my roleplaying teeth on AD&D 1E and 2E, and both of those games use one minute rounds. In those games, you could attack one enemy with your sword or up to two with a bow (only one with a crossbow).

It never hurt our games before.

Plus, if it's not to taste, the Ref can change it. Classic Traveller uses 15 second abstract rounds, and I love that game.

This is not to say that I don't have issue with T5. I do. But, I put most of my gripes in the review above.

Attack type, aimed fire, cannot move.

Yeah, that's got to be changed. It's either going to be part of the eratta, or it's something I'd fix as a T5 Ref on the first game session.

I'm betting that it's eratta.

Speed ratings. Why not just use metres, or yards?

Speed Ratings actually work better than hard measurement, imo. Classic Traveller used the same Speed ratings. And, if you needed hard measurement for some reason, the game gave you that info.

This is really a non-issue, I think.

Range bands? I cannot see what is so new here, using sketches to show action?

Nothing new! Range Bands were introduced to Traveller in the CT LBBs. And the CT edition called Starter Traveller uses Range Bands for Starship Combat.

Range Bands are awesome. More games should use the concept.

Attack resolution. Though conceptually interesting, just cannot see any great advantage in the T5 method, the MgT target number 8 modified as appropriate works very well.

I'm not sure "better" is the way to look at any edition of Traveller. I think it's just a personal taste thing. I'm a CT guy, myself. I love CT, and I saw no reason to move to MGT. You like MGT and see no reason to move to T5. That's completely cool. T5's there if you want it. MGT is there if I want it. Play what you like, is what I think.

The point of this thread was just to get out some info about T5. I tried to provide an unbiased look at the game, showing both it's Warts and Shiny pieces.

Hell, I bought T5, and the jury is still out for me. I'm not yet convinced to jump from CT to T5.

But, there are some definite things I like about T5, along with the things I don't like.

 

[Supplement Four]

1 minute rounds? The MgT 6 seconds gives a more realistic, but still playable and fast game.

I should elaborate on T5's combat round length. They're not measured to a hard set of time. One round may take a few seconds while another round takes a couple of minutes. It's all very abstract. If you play out 10 combat rounds, then that will represent about 10 minutes of time that has passed. But, if you focus on any one round, the round length can vary by a large amount.

One part in the game where this is expressed is in movement. Remember that Speed-1 is human walking speed and Speed-2 is human running speed.

Range Band 0 - Contact Range

Range Band 1 - Very Short Range. 5m.

Range Band 2 - Short Range. 50m.

Range Band 3 - Medium Range. 150m.

Range Band 4 - Long Range. 500m.

Range Band 5 - Very Long Range. 1000m.

And so on...



A character, at Speed-1, can move from Contact to Very Short range in one combat round. That's a maximum 5 meter move. In round 2, the character can walk to Short Range. That's 6-50 meters away.

It doesn't really matter in the span of a game, so specifics are not addressed. Ease of play is important (at least with this rule--other rules can be debated in T5!). But, if you examine what is happening in those two rounds, the character is walking no more than 5 meters away in the span of time that is less than a minute. The character is walking further away, somewhere between 6 and 50 meters, in a span of time somewhat more than a minute.

The two combat rounds, together, take about two minutes.

So, when you're counting combat rounds, you're using the rule of thumb that each round averages roughly a minute. But any single combat round can be a second or two, or even several minutes long.

It's abstract.

 

[Supplement Four]

I read a comment by another T5 reviewer that I thought even more appropriate than the author's original intent.

He said that he hadn't tried to forge through such a dense, thick book since he first picked up the AD&D (1E) Dungeon Master's Guide.

Remember that thing? Very dense. Small type. Lots and lots and lots of topics covered.

The author of that statement was referring to similarity in the two books (although I think T5 is much, much more dense). But, his statement is also true of the style of the book.

The AD&D DMG always looked to me to be more of a random collection of Gygax's notes--the stuff he created and used in his game as he played--than a well documented game supplement.

I feel the same about T5. It's like this big, bound, unpolished collection of notes that Marc has created over the years. Where a lot of game authors might use these notes as the basis for an RPG book, re-writing and clarifying concepts in the final product, T5, as the AD&D DMG did before it, feels more like just a cleaned up bundle of Traveller Ref's notes.

Now, I do love and admire a good, clean set of rules that has been well-play tested--a set of rules with minimal things that you want to change, where everything is very easy to understand. Mongoose's Conan RPG Core Rulebook is like that.

T5 is not.

But, that's really not all bad, either.

T5 is like having another Ref give you his hard written, sometimes conflicting, campaign notes with the intention of you picking and choosing what you want to use, what you want to change, and what you want to throw away.

And, there's a certain "fun" that some people get (I do) out of digging through these Ref notes, thinking about the concepts, sometimes altering them. It's a bit of a creative endeavor.

This type of thing has always been "Traveller", since the beginning. CT Book 0 says, "Referees should feel free to modify any rule to whatever extent they see fit...." (Page 34, Book 0).

And, remember those old GDW adventures for CT? Where TSR was putting out modules that included every last detail about the scenario, GDW took the approach of giving the Ref a location, maybe some ideas about a scenario, and not much more, forcing the Ref to be creative and customize that adventure to fit into the Ref's game.

It's like other (most) RPG products are saying, "This is exactly how you do it. Follow what it says here to the letter. That's how to play this game."

And, Traveller products say, "Here's a neat idea. What do you think? Mold it. Change it. Customize it. Run with it. Get creative!"

T5 is definitely more the latter rather than the former.

 

[mr31337]

Thanks for this detailed and interesting summary!

I think the majority of Traveller fans lean more towards facts than vagaries even if they don't like bean-counting ammo I don't think they'll like that aspect of the game removed. For me this is almost a deal breaker as far as T5 is concerned. It's looking more and more like it's a big book of house rules to supplement Mongoose. :roll:

 

[Supplement Four]

I think the majority of Traveller fans lean more towards facts than vagaries even if they don't like bean-counting ammo I don't think they'll like that aspect of the game removed. For me this is almost a deal breaker as far as T5 is concerned.

Yes. I understand why Marc did it. He wrote it with easy of play in mind. But what he should have done is give us SOME sort of rule that a Ref can use to know when a character is out of ammo.

I wrote a pretty easy House Rule to account for ammo usage. I took the same approach as T5 takes with the combat round itself that I mention above. That is, I wrote a general rule that removes ammo from a weapon (in magazines--I don't track individual bullets), depending on the weapon's capability (Single Fire, Burst Fire, Full Auto) and the attack type the player uses in the combat round (Aimed Fire, SnapFire, or AutoFire).

A weapon is given three simple codes that look like this: AmF-X, SnF-X, AuF-X. X is the number of magazines that are spent if the weapon is used for the particular attack type (AmF = Aimed Fire, SnF = SnapFire, AuF= AutoFire).

Adding the codes to weapons is easy and can be done is seconds. Once it's part of the weapon's stats, they do not change.

And, playing with the codes is extremely easy. Every three combat rounds, you simple mark off a number of magazines equal to the weapon's code. Since most combats last five rounds or less, this is a process that is typically only done once during a combat (I didn't want to bog the game down with a lot of bookkeeping).

The player can control his expenditure of ammo by the attack type he makes during combat rounds.

 

[Wil Mireu]

It's like other (most) RPG products are saying, "This is exactly how you do it. Follow what it says here to the letter. That's how to play this game."

And, Traveller products say, "Here's a neat idea. What do you think? Mold it. Change it. Customize it. Run with it. Get creative!"

T5 is definitely more the latter rather than the former.

I think it depends on how you want to paint it really.

Some (like you) could look at it and say "Here's a neat idea. What do you think? Mold it. Change it. Customize it. Run with it. Get creative!"

Someone else may look at the same thing and say "here's a half-finished idea that you have to spend time fixing to make it work properly, which is what the author should have done in the first place."

I guess it boils down to whether you want to persuade yourself that what you've got is salvageable or not.

Similarly:

Now, I do love and admire a good, clean set of rules that has been well-play tested--a set of rules with minimal things that you want to change, where everything is very easy to understand. Mongoose's Conan RPG Core Rulebook is like that.

T5 is not.

But, that's really not all bad, either.

So, taking you at your word, you're telling us that "T5 is a poor, rough set of rules that hasn't been well-playtested - a set of rules with a lot of things that you would want to change, where everything is very hard to understand"... and you're saying that's "really not all bad"?! In what universe is that not a bad thing?

I don't know about anyone else, but if I am expected to pay $75 for a book then I expect something that is worth that money. Something that has been professionally edited (apparently T5 never even saw an editor), playtested fully and properly, clearly organised, indexed, and with all the unnecessary crap cut out of it. But from the moment it was released even to the backers, people have been finding problem after problem with it.

T5 wasn't sold as a bunch of half-finished notes, it wasn't even sold as a toolkit, it was sold to people as as a roleplaying game - as the ultimate version of Traveller. Shifting the goalposts in your mind after it was released doesn't make it OK to be "the author's notes" or "a toolkit to take rules from". If it can't stand alone by itself as a usable roleplaying game then it's a failure as one.

But I think that's exactly what a lot of people who have T5 are doing; they're shifting the goalposts so that they're not disappointed with what they actually received.

 

[Supplement Four]

There's another problem we've uncovered with the T5 combat round over on CotI, too. As written, T5 only allows a character to attack one enemy per combat round. That's kinda crazy, especially since the combat rounds average one minute in length.

But, I and a couple of others on CotI wrote a House Rule for this, too. Allow the character to attack as many targets as he wishes, but each additional target costs him a +1D penalty to difficulty.





Thus, if a character has DEX-7 and Pistol-3, then his target number is 10. The Range Band number (distance to target) gives him his difficulty.

Let's say this character needs to fire at a target a Short Range (Range Band 3). He would roll 2D, looking for 10 or less.

Now, let's say that there are two enemies, both at Short Range, and the character wants to shoot at them both. He now gets two attack throws, one for each enemy, but his difficulty on each shot is penalized by +1D.

So, on each attack, he's rolling 3D for 10 or less.

Every target added adds a new attack throw and a +1D difficulty to all of the attacks that character makes that round.

Pretty easy rule, really.

 

[GamingGlen]

There's another problem we've uncovered with the T5 combat round over on CotI, too. As written, T5 only allows a character to attack one enemy per combat round. That's kinda crazy, especially since the combat rounds average one minute in length.

But, I and a couple of others on CotI wrote a House Rule for this, too. Allow the character to attack as many targets as he wishes, but each additional target costs him a +1D penalty to difficulty.

Why are you trying to fix a system that you do not like? Stick with CT, or whatever system you are using now.

One minute rounds? I thought we were done with that nonsense in RPGs a long time ago.


In general from all the things said about T5 so far:
I did not buy T4. I will not buy T5. And this time, I have some clout (tiny as it is). I told my game store partner not to put one on the shelf until he looks at a printed version sometime this summer when he goes to the big cons (Origins and GenCon) and decide for himself is it worth the price, even at wholesale. We know who might special order one from us, but a T5 book on the shelf will sit there probably forever. (also, fantasy RPGs are the preferred genre around here )

 

[Supplement Four]

I think it depends on how you want to paint it really.

Some (like you) could look at it and say "Here's a neat idea. What do you think? Mold it. Change it. Customize it. Run with it. Get creative!"

Someone else may look at the same thing and say "here's a half-finished idea that you have to spend time fixing to make it work properly, which is what the author should have done in the first place."

I guess it boils down to whether you want to persuade yourself that what you've got is salvageable or not.

Sure. It's all up to taste.

I remember, back in the day, when CT was the only Traveller around, I bought the Research Station Gamm adventure published by GDW. Once I read it, I wondered why they called it an "adventure" and not a "supplement".

It didn't have any details. There were no enemies to fight. It had some rules for some robots, and some stuff about submarines. And, there was a little bit (not much) that set up the scenario. But, basically, the "adventure" was just a location. A blank location.

You see, I was used to the AD&D adventures from TSR that filled in all the details. You got the senario. You got the maps. You got stats on all the monsters. You basically just read an AD&D adventure then implemented it.

GDW's Traveller adventures took another approach. Their approach is akin to the one a GM has who prefers to create his own world and scenarios rather than buying published adventures. GDW's stuff was more "sandbox" oriented. They provided the basics, but it was up to the Ref to take those basics and run with it.

If you played Research Station Gamma in one Ref's campaign, then chances are, even though the place is the same, and some of the elements are the same, going through that same adventure at the hands of a different Ref was a COMPLETELY different experience.

So, yeah, I guess it comes down to taste.

So, taking you at your word, you're telling us that "T5 is a poor, rough set of rules that hasn't been well-playtested - a set of rules with a lot of things that you would want to change, where everything is very hard to understand"... and you're saying that's "really not all bad"?! In what universe is that not a bad thing?

That's just your perception of it, and from talking to you, T5 is definitely not for you.

T5 is probably best appreciated by old CT grognards--those who enjoy spending an evening designing robots and spaceships for their games, or working through the chargen system to create interesting NPCs.

I'd say T5 is a tool kit for creating personal GM game universes, the same as CT before the 3I came along.

T5 is for people who enjoy the old GDW adventure format, where they are given a framework but its up to them to make it their own.

T5 wasn't sold as a bunch of half-finished notes, it wasn't even sold as a toolkit, it was sold to people as as a roleplaying game - as the ultimate version of Traveller.

Niether was the AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide.

To some, it just may be the ultimate version of Traveller. It depends on your taste.

Shifting the goalposts in your mind after it was released doesn't make it OK to be "the author's notes" or "a toolkit to take rules from". If it can't stand alone by itself as a usable roleplaying game then it's a failure as one.

That's really only your opinion--one based on what others have said about the game and not your own reading of it or experience playing it. Some quite like what they are seeing in T5 from the posts I've seen on CotI.

As I said, it doesn't look like it's a good game for you.

But I think that's exactly what a lot of people who have T5 are doing; they're shifting the goalposts so that they're not disappointed with what they actually received.

Or, rather, they are realizing that T5 is not what they expected, but something else. And, that something else is still interesting and worthy of their time.

As I said above, I'm not sold on T5 yet either. I do like some things, and other things I don't. I'm still reading it, though, and I think it's quite interesting. I'm glad I bought it.

What the verdict will be with me and T5, though, I just don't know.

 

[Supplement Four]

Why are you trying to fix a system that you do not like?

I haven't made a determination on whether I like or dislike T5 yet. I'm investigating it, and I've been reporting my findings.

There are things I quite like. If you read the first three posts, there are things about the game that I think are flat out brilliant. That Suppression Fire rule is amazing.

And, there are things I despise about the game, like the lack of ammo tracking.

At some point, I'll decide if T5 is a game I want to play. I'm just not there yet.

It's a DENSE book. There's a lot of stuff in it--a lot to comprehend.

I will not buy T5.

That's totally your prerogative. I did buy it, and I'm glad I did. OTOH, there are a lot of things I don't like about MGT, and I didn't buy that one (though I should probably give it another chance one day). But, I don't want to get into an MGT discussion.

And, don't take me for someone endorsing T5 either. Because, I'm not. I'll just as easily report something I hate about the game as something that I truly like.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

This is the first review of T5 that I have read that goes into specifics of how one of the systems works.

Thanks S4, I really appreciate the time and effort to go through this in detail.

Regarding STAMP, I think I would change it around to STAPM (I know not as cool an acronym), so that you roll damage immediately after rolling the attacks, then do movement. That at least keeps them together and easier to track. As a Ref, I might also let the damage affect movement, but that would have to be fluid, like the combat round length.