Travellers Needed! High Guard Updates

[Sigtrygg]

Can I pump the entire load of a drop tank into a jump drive in one turn?

I therefore have pumps that can shift that volume of fuel in that time frame.

 

[Condottiere]

Have you tried mounting the fuel bladder on the drop tank mountings and jumped, in official Traveller gaming session?

The results should be illuminating.

 

[Vormaerin]

Last game I was in, we used fuel bladders but they were permanently hooked up to the main tanks and basically part of the cargo hold.

That describes what the Fuel/Cargo container is supposed to be.

 

[Vormaerin]

Can I pump the entire load of a drop tank into a jump drive in one turn?

I therefore have pumps that can shift that volume of fuel in that time frame.

There's a lot of weirdness in Traveller. You can drain a fuel tank in 6 minutes, regardless of size, but filling it at a starport takes 10x+ as long.

With the rules as currently laid out in HG, Fuel bladders are just a cheaper, less space intensive way to allow multiple jumps. Because transferring the fuel from the bladder to the fuel tanks has no listed amount of time necessary. And it isn't clear that you can't just do it during the week in jump, making any time you give essentially irrelevant.

The only actual reason in RAW to use Fuel/Cargo containers is to add cargo space on short jumps when you have a high rated jump drive. And this is so valuable that it is not clear why it is not standard. The flexibility to switch 5/6 of your fuel tank to cargo makes your J6 merchant vastly more viable.

 

[Condottiere]

Considering it's three millenia in the future, you could probable reconfigure the shape, and fill up a cargo hold.

Cargo holds aren't renowned for their plumbing.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Batteries are detailed in how they work in combat, but there is no clue how long batteries last when under normal usage. How long would 1 power point keep an emergency low berth functioning? Hopefully more than six minutes. Batteries aren't just for combat. That needs to be spelled out.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Another thread just asked about ramming rules. Maybe not needed all the time, but intentional and unintentional ship-to-ship impact rules need to be spelled out. Or when one rams a space station.

 

[Condottiere]

When you don't necessarily want to use the front airlock.

 

[Perkanis83]

Think this has been said before but I will ad another voice to the choir of please please gather up the differing high guard additions made through adventures and place them into high guard, pretty please with a cherry on top.

 

[Endie]

Think this has been said before but I will ad another voice to the choir of please please gather up the differing high guard additions made through adventures and place them into high guard, pretty please with a cherry on top.

This but retcon away deep space manoeuvre drives.

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

The sensor detection rules are a bit scattered. Getting them in one place would make referencing them easier.

Agreed!
Moreover, I would like more rules in this and less hints at possible narrative. I am mainly speaking of the descriptions of "full, limited, minimal" followed by descriptions of "fine details"
... what "fine details" exactly?
Why does effect of the roll have zero influence as to how much detail I get but range to target is absolute in what detail is available?

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

Here is my own outline form I use for Starship Combat in 2e. I have consolidated rules from multiple 2e sources.
It is meant to be used with my Starship Encounter Outline which I will publish once I clean up my notes.
I hope someone finds this useful. It is my hope to one day see this or something like it incorporated into a Mongoose 2e boxed release of "Brilliant Lances" full of counters and playmats useful to Core and High Guard starship combat of the sub-10K ton variety.

Be advised; there is some home ruling in this outline. Especially regarding sensor details and intel. Sometimes noted with (HR) instead of a book/page reference. I tried to limit home ruling as much as possible, but some things just were either missing or I never found them in the RAW.

 

[swordtart]

Can we do away with the 6+ effect rolling on the critical table (or make it formally optional). Make it do double damage or bypass armour or something else. Allowing a hit that gets a a few points through armour to potentially disable a battleship is a bit much. The cumulative damage critical rule is plenty.

Can you make it explicit if with Missiles or Torpedos can get 6+ crits or if they should use a different mechanism.

If you do decide to retain effect 6+ crits rolling on the table it at least make it a single Sev 1 crit regardless of the Effect rolled. Jumping to Sev 3 because of a lucky roll is excessive.

You could also do away with the special missed maintenance critical results and roll them on the damage ship critical table to reduce the number of tables and rules to look up.

 

[Endie]

. Allowing a hit that gets a a few points through armour to potentially disable a battleship is a bit much. The cumulative damage critical rule is plenty.

Mods please ban this Death Star apologist.

More seriously: I agree.

 

[wintertraveller]

Hello, what should we expect regarding when this update will appear on the release schedule? Thank you

 

[Terry Mixon]

High Guard 22 has this about spinal mounts. The text implies no cap, but the chart only goes to +3. @paltrysum, I suggest the text say if it is open-ended or capped. Also, as we are discussing the rule now, can we get a call on what the current rules mean. Is it capped or open-ended? @Arkathan and I would like to know.

EDIT: Also, they get more expansive as the TL goes up? That seems to be the reverse of how TL affects everything cost wise. Shouldn’t they go down in cost as the technology matures?

EDIT: Now with chart!

 

[Yenaldlooshi]

High Guard 22 has this about spinal mounts. The text implies no cap, but the chart only goes to +3. @paltrysum, I suggest the text say if it is open-ended or capped. Also, as we are discussing the rule now, can we get a call on what the current rules mean. Is it capped or open-ended? @Arkathan and I would like to know.

So a TL20 Rail Gun that costs zero tonnage? There'd be no room for the railgun ammo!

You're not wrong though. TL+3 max should be stated explicitly.

 

[Terry Mixon]

So a TL20 Rail Gun that costs zero tonnage? There'd be no room for the railgun ammo!

You're not wrong though. TL+3 max should be stated explicitly.

You’re probably right that there needs to be a cap, though one could argue that the tech might be far obsolete by TL20.

I made an edit to my question above. All other tech gets cheaper as TL improves it. Shouldn’t the costs go down for mature tech?

 

[ProfGrizzlyJon]

For those weapon systems that use the trait, how is the Auto trait meant to be applied to starship scale weaponry? I don't think I've seen this clarified in any of the current rules.

Just re-emphasizing this one here.

 

[ProfGrizzlyJon]

t’s good that SOM clarifies things about how to get off a planet, but High Guard doesn’t even mention lifters. What are they? How do they work? Exactly what do they do? How much do they cost or are they included with the maneuver drives? Things like that.

I always assumed that lifters were included in the cost/power of a gravity hull. If that is incorrect, it should be addressed in the update.