Traveller 2nd edition clarifications and questions

[GarethL]

Though this part is only in the print copy?

(capped by the number of missiles remaining in the salvo)

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Is this a change from the core rules, as I checked both my print copy and the pdf download and both say:

The intention is that the to hit roll determines how many missiles hit, the Effect is how many missiles hit. This is why the Effect is limited to the number of missiles in the salvo. If 0 missiles hit, the target sustains no damage.

If you launch 20 missiles nearly all of them will hit, regardless of evasion. Missiles are one of the best weapon systems in the game, they are not penalised by this.


My pdf Core book says:

If an attack roll for a missile salvo is successful, the target will sustain damage. Roll for damage as if for a single missile and deduct the target’s armour as normal but do not apply the Effect of the attack roll. Instead, any damage is then multiplied by the Effect of the attack roll (the Effect cannot exceed the number of missiles in the salvo).

Check if there is an updated pdf?

 

[FallingPhoenix]

The intention is that the to hit roll determines how many missiles hit, the Effect is how many missiles hit. This is why the Effect is limited to the number of missiles in the salvo. If 0 missiles hit, the target sustains no damage.

So, the target number to hit with any missiles is, in effect, 1 higher than with all the other weapons because Effect 0, which is normally a success, means no missiles hit?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Yes, but note that you get a DM +1 for each missile in the salvo so for 1 missile you get +1 on the to hit roll.

And all other missiles after the first that hits, hits automatically.

 

[FallingPhoenix]

Yes, but note that you get a DM +1 for each missile in the salvo so for 1 missile you get +1 on the to hit roll.

And all other missiles after the first that hits, hits automatically.

Ah. Missed that piece. That explains why it's per missile and not per missile after the first.

 

[GarethL]

Check if there is an updated pdf?

I downloaded it from the Mongoose site a week ago?

 

[GarethL]

We do seem to be getting to the heart of my question, which is that, if I am firing a pulse laser and roll a (modified) 8, then my attack deals 2d6 damage, but if I roll a (modified) 8 with a missile then I deal zero damage.

Not an issue as such, but it seems out of line with the rules as presented in the rulebook - namely that a success with an effect of zero is still a success, which this does not seem to be - it is an odd exception to the rules?

Really I just wanted confirmation that this is the intent of the rules as it seems out of kilter with everything else,

As an aside, another oddity with missiles is that damage is very... Swingy. An exceptionally lucky or unlucky damage roll can cause wild swings in damage inflicted as the damage is then multiplied by the effect of the attack roll... Effectively every missile in the salvo gets exactly the same damage roll (e.g.: a flight of six missiles striking an armour 5 foe and then rolling 4d6 damage for a total of (4 [roll] -5 [armour]) x 6 = 0 damage), however unlikely that is. That said, I suspect this is intended to be a simplification to prevent the need for lots of damage rolls in large salvos.

 

[arcador]

Yes, I think you see the purpose of this simplification. As you know how it works, you can modify it for your own purposes - i.e. you can make an attack with effect 0 - at least 1 missile hits. Also, you can split the multiplication on a few rolls, to obtain a better-distributed average.

 

[FallingPhoenix]

We do seem to be getting to the heart of my question, which is that, if I am firing a pulse laser and roll a (modified) 8, then my attack deals 2d6 damage, but if I roll a (modified) 8 with a missile then I deal zero damage.

It is odd-looking to need at least effect 1 for a missile to be effective, but since even the first missile adds +1 to your roll, the results are the same. In fact, since the missile adding 1 was pointed out to me, I seem to remember this being deliberately decided this way during the playtest.

As an aside, another oddity with missiles is that damage is very... Swingy. An exceptionally lucky or unlucky damage roll can cause wild swings in damage inflicted as the damage is then multiplied by the effect of the attack roll... Effectively every missile in the salvo gets exactly the same damage roll (e.g.: a flight of six missiles striking an armour 5 foe and then rolling 4d6 damage for a total of (4 [roll] -5 [armour]) x 6 = 0 damage), however unlikely that is. That said, I suspect this is intended to be a simplification to prevent the need for lots of damage rolls in large salvos.

The easiest fix I can think of would be to just use average damage if you have too many missiles to roll all the dice. So a flight of 5 missiles hitting would do (4d6 average = 14...14 * 5 = 70) damage. That'll prevent the swing effect, which I agree is not ideal.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I downloaded it from the Mongoose site a week ago?

Interestingly, the files:
Traveller_Core_eBook.pdf
Traveller_Core_Rulebook_BW_PRINTFRIENDLY.pdf
contain the phrase "(the Effect cannot exceed the number of missiles in the salvo)" on p162, but the file:
Traveller_Core_Rulebook_erratajun2016_Ebook.pdf
does not.

At least for me...

 

[GarethL]

I downloaded it from the Mongoose site a week ago?

Interestingly, the files:
Traveller_Core_eBook.pdf
Traveller_Core_Rulebook_BW_PRINTFRIENDLY.pdf
contain the phrase "(the Effect cannot exceed the number of missiles in the salvo)" on p162, but the file:
Traveller_Core_Rulebook_erratajun2016_Ebook.pdf
does not.

At least for me...

Just to add to the confusion, my download doesn't seem to include a file called: Traveller_Core_Rulebook_erratajun2016_Ebook.pdf

I've just got:
Traveller Core Rulebook BW PRINTFRIENDLY.pdf
Traveller Core Rulebook ebook.pdf
Traveller Deckplans PRINTFRIENDLY.pdf

Did you get your pdf from Mongoose or RPGNow?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Did you get your pdf from Mongoose or RPGNow?

http://www.drivethrurpg.com

 

[Reynard]

Mis post