Traveller Weapon Playtest Comments

[dmccoy1693]

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

I like. 1 vote for.

What about this thought as being a simple way of explaining the difference between them:

If the gun is commonly referred to with a name or a bullet size:
i.e. Winchester, Desert Eagle, Glock 9mm, .22, Tommy Gun
then it's a civilian weapon.

If the gun is commonly referred to by a model number or has the word "heavy" anywhere in its name:
i.e. AK-47, M-16, heavy gauss pistol
then its a military weapon.

Thoughts?

 

[Fovean]

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

I like too, +1. But perhaps a small refinement?...

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things.
Gun Combat (assault): (military/police/megacorp) SMGs/PDWs, assault/combat shotguns, Low-G.

Dunno, just trying to hit that balance...

 

[Infojunky]

Okay, new proposal from the COTI forums for weapon skills, and one I like - so I am looking for someone/somepeople to argue against it and convince me it should _not_ be done

Break down weapons skills/specialities thus;

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

If you are going to simplify along those lines then How about;

Gun Combat (Slug Thrower)
Gun Combat (Energy)
Gun Combat (Zero G)
Heavy Weapon (Slug Thrower)
etc .etc....

In that the various classes have more in common with each other.

 

[Infojunky]

if I understand it a beam laser for example would be "1d6 destructive" or "1dd10"

I can almost live with that....

 

[dragoner]

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

Maybe to simplify it a bit:

Personal Firearms: Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Military Weapons: Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs. [I would put grenades, claymores/mines, LAW/Bazookas and GL's]
Heavy Weapons: FGMP's, VRF GG's, Auto-Cannons, Flame-Thrower, etc..
Artillery: Howitzers, Cannon, but also what was always good in game: Light Mortars.
Vehicle Mounted Armament: AFV Gunner.

So it abbreviates down to: PF, MW, HW, Art, & VMA on a character sheet.

 

[tuz_sen]

Okay, new proposal from the COTI forums for weapon skills, and one I like - so I am looking for someone/somepeople to argue against it and convince me it should _not_ be done

Break down weapons skills/specialities thus;

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

So while I am not against less this in general but the civilian vs military breakdown seams like it could vary a lot from one setting to the next and with the goal of it being non-setting specific that could cause issues.

And for the vehicle category, when you consider a vehicle, what weapon are you going to put on a vehicle that wont fall into a different category?

 

[Benzaiten26]

You really don't see such narrow specialization in any of the other skills. I.e. power plants split up into fusion, fission, internal combustion, batteries, etc. So, why narrow it down so much in gun combat?

Again the principles, usage, maintenance and aiming (the skills) required to effectively operate are the same for all slug weapons, regardless of the barrel length. The weapon ranges table on page 65 of the core book takes care of these differences. Unless there are differences in how the mechanisms of the weapon work the skills needed to operate them would be the same.

Go with:
Gun Combat - Slug Weapons, Energy Weapons, Gauss Weapons

This also leaves the system open for any other new weapon systems you wish to add later or with a different setting.

Zero-G could have Zero-G specializations for each weapon type as well as melee weapons. But, considering how often a person in the Traveller setting would be expecting to use the weapon in a Zero G environment, I find it doubtful this would be neglected during their training.

Vehicle and ship weapons should have a similar split based on the mechanism of the weapon not the way it's mounted to the ship.

Gunner - Laser Weapons, Particle Accelerator Weapons, Torpedoes, Plasma Weapons, etc.

Be consistent and keep it simple.

 

[locarno24]

Interesting, score one for political correctness in sanitizing the name SMG. Certain names have always had this though, assault rifle comes from nazi propaganda re-naming the successor to the MP-40, the StG-44, when it had been developed as an SMG basically. Looking at the weapons, they seem to be pistol type SMG's; and where as the common SMG has been replaced by a carbine, such as the M-4.

It's not just political correctness - there is actually a difference in the class.

Submachineguns (like the UZ1 or MP-5) are compact automatic weapons that eat relatively large-calibre "short" pistol ammunition (usually 9mm).

PDWs (like the P-90 or MP-7) instead eat small-calibre "long" pistol ammunition - i.e. scaled-down rifle ammunition, usually unique to the weapon (I think the MP-9 uses something like 4.6mm). The weapons were developed as a sub-carbine weapon you can issue to vehicle crews, etc, because it was realised that a classic SMG performs poorly against modern body armour.

 

[Stainless]

However, is this the prelude to a 2nd edition of the core rules???!

No. However, as I just posted on another forum...

We are not looking at doing a revised/second edition of the core rulebook, in any shape or form at the moment. However, we _are_ starting to think about what such a beast would look like.

Can anyone else see the incongruence here? Perhaps the important bit is, "...at the moment".

That means every supplement we do now is with a possible/potential revised rulebook in mind, be it with rules, graphical layout or anything else (so as little as possible gets invalidated by a new rulebook).

This sounds like redesigning the game in reverse (i.e., with the rulebook designed after the supplements). I suppose it could work, but looks like a risky approach. Good luck.

...what we decide here will very likely be what is done in a revised edition of the core book.

Yet, "We are not looking at doing a revised/second edition of the core rulebook, in any shape or form at the moment."

[Scratches head] Walks away [/Scratches head]

 

[MongooseMatt]

[Scratches head] Walks away [/Scratches head]

You are really reading too much into things

Think of it as a games designers' disease. We started thinking about what new edition would look like the day after the rulebook got released, even though we were at least ten years away from doing one.

We are a bit closer to that ten year mark now, and have plenty of supplements that have added new things to the game. It is fairly natural that when we do a supplement now, we don't want it invalidated by a possible new rulebook. Better for you, better for us - everyone is happy if that new rulebook comes along in the future but this new Mercenary book can remain as it is for years to come, regardless of which rulebook you have...

 

[Prime_Evil]

I think the time for a new edition is almost here - there is a enough material scattered across multiple books that could be moved into the core rulebook to consolidate the system. Plus there are some areas where the rules that could be streamlined a bit or explained a little better. Also, I know that this is a matter of taste, but the graphic design of the rulebook could be improved - I know that you were deliberately trying to evoke the feel of the LBBs, but the layout more recent releases is a lot more polished than the core rulebook. I figure that you can do a LOT to update the 'feel' of the game without substantially changing the rules simply by changing the visual presentation and artwork.

 

[Condottiere]

I've never fired a laser, energy weapon or gauss gun, but besides handling, I'd say it comes down to recoil and the experience of how the weapon performs if I hold it a certain way and point it at a certain distance.

One computer game where I had a character holding a 20mm gun, it finally dawned on me that I needed a battledress to absorb the recoil and stop killing myself.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Okay, new proposal from the COTI forums for weapon skills, and one I like - so I am looking for someone/somepeople to argue against it and convince me it should _not_ be done

Break down weapons skills/specialities thus;

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

I like the reduction in specialities a lot, bearing in mind once you have level 1 in a speciality, you get 0 in all the rest.

There _are_ arguments to be made that Weapon X is different from Weapon Y. But, in a game like Traveller, how much detail do we really need in this? Do we need people specialised in an SMG, MG, _and_ a Rifle, or do we just want someone we know can use all three without problem?

I know what I want to do (!), but I would like to see at least something approaching consensus with you chaps.

As the one who proposed it here is my take on it:

Ranged: Civilian includes single-shot laser and single-shot shotguns and gauss weapons, which function like regular such weapons save for having an Auto rating of "no"; the automatic versions of these could be seen as military. This skill includes lasers, gausses, SMGs and shotguns on theory that a civilian shooter would try out the various available types of weapons to see what works best for himself.

Ranged: Military would include those heavy lasers, pulse lasers and very rapid fire gauss guns which are equivalent to machine guns, unless Mongoose decide to put all support weapons into the "Man Portable" category, so here's my suggestion if you do:

Ranged: Man Portable, also called Ranged: Support, includes flamethrowers, machine guns, pulse lasers, launchers both rocket and grenade, plasma/fusion weapons and vehicle mounted versions of all.

Ranged: Vehicle Mounted would include vehicle Mounted version of Ranged: Man Portable and Ranged: Military, and proficiency V-M would allow the character to use the dismounted versions too.

Ranged: Artillery is a good addition, though I would add tank cannon in as well.

Heavy Weapons would actually put man-portable and vehicle-mounted weapons in the same specialization as most militaries would train its heavy gunners how to use weapons on vehicles and vice-versa - the same for machine guns, so if a soldier has "Ranged: Military" for machine guns, the soldier would be able to use a machine gun on a tank without penalty, and someone with "Ranged: Vehicle Mounted" would be able to operate a dismounted vehicle-weapon without penalty. Similarly, a GM is free to move SMGs to Ranged: Military if that's suitable for that GM's game.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Gun Combat (personal/civilian): Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Gun Combat (military): Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Heavy Weapons (man portable): To include existing man portable (FGMP/PGMP, etc), launchers and flamethrowers
Heavy Weapons (artillery): Really big guns
Heavy Weapons (vehicle): The stuff you get on tanks

Maybe to simplify it a bit:

Personal Firearms: Covers most pistols, shotguns and possibly SMGs/PDWs.
Military Weapons: Rifles, MGs, higher tech things and possibly SMGs/PDWs. [I would put grenades, claymores/mines, LAW/Bazookas and GL's]
Heavy Weapons: FGMP's, VRF GG's, Auto-Cannons, Flame-Thrower, etc..
Artillery: Howitzers, Cannon, but also what was always good in game: Light Mortars.
Vehicle Mounted Armament: AFV Gunner.

So it abbreviates down to: PF, MW, HW, Art, & VMA on a character sheet.

I like this - it's what I suggested in the first place.

 

[Jame Rowe]

One more thought:

0-G weapons such as snub pistols fall under Ranged: Civilian, while Snub Rifles/Accelerator Rifles fall under Ranged Military. Snub SMGs can fall under both at GM's discretion.

Bows, Crossbows, primitive firearms and primitive artillery can fall under an optional addition called Ranged: Primitive and Ranged: Primitive Artillery.

I've never fired a laser, energy weapon or gauss gun, but besides handling, I'd say it comes down to recoil and the experience of how the weapon performs if I hold it a certain way and point it at a certain distance.

One computer game where I had a character holding a 20mm gun, it finally dawned on me that I needed a battledress to absorb the recoil and stop killing myself.

This is why I included the lasers and gauss weapons in civilian - not because I expect your PCs to use these in combat, but because I figure he'd have gone and tried them out along with the regular slugthrowers to see which he preferred, and then gone from there.

 

[dmccoy1693]

games designers' disease.

*laughs* OMG! So True! I do that all the time with everything I do.

 

[Sigtrygg]

How do you handle cultures like the USA where civilians can own and practice with civilian assault rifles, smgs etc?

You have a character trained to hunt using a civilian semi-automatic rifle, they pick up an identical military version and can't use it?

The skill is to learn how to point the weapon and hit something.

 

[Infojunky]

[Scratches head] Walks away [/Scratches head]

You are really reading too much into things

There is a Paranoid Conspiracy joke in there but it is too early here for me to figure it out.

Think of it as a games designers' disease. We started thinking about what new edition would look like the day after the rulebook got released, even though we were at least ten years away from doing one.

We are a bit closer to that ten year mark now, and have plenty of supplements that have added new things to the game. It is fairly natural that when we do a supplement now, we don't want it invalidated by a possible new rulebook. Better for you, better for us - everyone is happy if that new rulebook comes along in the future but this new Mercenary book can remain as it is for years to come, regardless of which rulebook you have...

I would like to point out that Classic Traveller had three, possibly four distinct editions alongside 4+ games that could be integrated with the core game changing them as well. In light of all that Matt show us your chops, what else you got that will work.

 

[dragoner]

It's not just political correctness - there is actually a difference in the class.

Submachineguns (like the UZ1 or MP-5) are compact automatic weapons that eat relatively large-calibre "short" pistol ammunition (usually 9mm).

PDWs (like the P-90 or MP-7) instead eat small-calibre "long" pistol ammunition - i.e. scaled-down rifle ammunition, usually unique to the weapon (I think the MP-9 uses something like 4.6mm). The weapons were developed as a sub-carbine weapon you can issue to vehicle crews, etc, because it was realised that a classic SMG performs poorly against modern body armour.

Just mostly political correctness? Any weapon system the military picks up has a logistical footprint, something that has to be justified. FN Herstal and H&K, etc.; are businesses like any other, and they have to create demand for their products. But "unique to the weapon" also says fancy toy, due to that logistics footprint. It is basically the wonder nine scenario over again, which most people don't realized how many 9mm bullets there are: .38, .380 ACP, 9mm Makarov, 9mm Parabellum, etc.; and as far as it goes, the biggest killer of the lot. But sidearms are largely useless, something for you to be gigged by your captain for being out of uniform because you stashed it someplace; and my .45 rattled like a maraca from a worn barrel bushing, light is a Ma Deuce anyways. Vehicle crews usually have better things to do with a full schedule than keeping watch over a sidearm that will be stolen if not watched and have to be checked in and out of an armory.

The classic SMG was a weapon designed to fill the gap between the old bolt action rifles in a close combat ambush situation; something eliminated by the modern carbine/assault rifle. Give it ten years and the PDW might disappear altogether, just like the ACR did, but that is ensconced in Traveller's rules. Most of the discussion about small arms usage is derived from Hollywood sources, they cause generally around 2-3% of battlefield casualties, IED's have been the big one in Iraq and Afghanistan. While if things had got hot vs the Soviets, FO's would have been the threat as the grid square removers just backed up and fired into the salient. P90's might have looked good in SG1, I'd still rather have a M249 or so, put up a wall of steel.

 

[dragoner]

So it abbreviates down to: PF, MW, HW, Art, & VMA on a character sheet.

I like this - it's what I suggested in the first place.

Looks good, I was just cutting it down so the abbreviations were not GC,P; GC,M; etc.. I have a tendency to think of "slug throwers" is from Gamma World? IMO it should actually be Projectile Weapons.