What happens if... we double or 1.5x the listed armor values

[Infojunky]

This is regarding Personal Armor.

From a previous thread (I believe it is on rpg.net open rpg forums), people were going through and talking about what would you want to change if there is an MgT 2.0.

One of the items that kept getting mentioned was armor. I'm curious if any of you gents have changed armour values in your game to make it more effective, and if so, how?

I'm considering a multiplier of 1.5 or 2.0. Thoughts?

Why bother?

Or do the Traditional Traveller solution write your own Combat system..... I have frequently considered adapting the the systems presented in Azhanti High Lightning/Striker to MgT. That way you get rid of all the funny nonsensical dice combinations and modifiers..... Say something along 2d6+weapon's penetration-armor.... Just a thought....

 

[Nerhesi]

Which ax? Which page?

Wooden battle axe, CSC - 4d6 base damage.

Ok. So these are power gamers that min/max rather than role-play. Wargamers are not allowed in my Traveller games.

Hah! Since you've applied such an adhoc label to a group of people based on the fact that they dare make a comparisson of something they don't consider sensical and point out a problem in it, I will make the assumption that your gamers are fans of My Little Pony http://www.thestar.com/entertainmen...ho_dig_my_little_pony_feel_misunderstood.html and wouldn't mind then if a well thrown bare-fisted penetrates their powered armor.

After all, apparently thats what dictates power-gaming - if you dare question any combat rule/mechanic to seek to make something more balanced or effective. God forbid power armor be something magnificent and powerful in a space game! :roll:

Thats ok Shawn, apparently the Mongoose crew has on several occasions acknowledged this issue, and I simply wasn't here at the time to notice this and I now dont need to change anything due to the Supplement 5-6 book.

I will now return to my powergaming group consisting which between the 4 guys, has 3 levels of Gunnery and 1 level of vacc suit. I guess when I even let them forgoe qualifications roll, their power-gamer senses decided to enroll in such combat-monster careers as Free Trader, Pathfinder Scout, Corporate Agent and Dilettent!

Perhaps adhoc labelling using controversial terms isn't proper simply because we disagree.

 

[JP42]

First, I just want to say that I think it's pretty crappy to tell someone that their proposed house-rule on how to make armor behave a little more realistically implies that they're Doing It Wrong because they've allowed situations to come up that involve the higher end of combat power. Traveller is a role-playing game, but sometimes the role you're playing is guys in powered armor going up against the equivalent of Mongol horse archers, and when verisimilitude is broken because the rules don't quite simulate that particular corner case very well, a change in those rules makes sense (as OP has discovered, in Supplement 5-6).

I think there's something to be said for several options: Increasing armor value is one, but another is to look at how the old Striker rules handled things, and assign some penetration values to weapons instead of cookie-cutter AP ratings. Another is to have weapon damage scale better or worse depending on the tech level of the weapon, and the armor. Not sure how that would be best implemented, but a simple numerical increase in fixed armor value is probably not the best way - maybe something involving armor having dice of protection that are subtracted from the dice of the attack before any damage is rolled?

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Ok. Don't like the higher damage values used in the CSC book? The 4D6+2 damage from a TL 2 Great Axe scares your TL 14 players? A simple fix would be to change the axe damage to 2D6, rather than re-design Traveller around a frickin' axe.

A real power gamer wouldn't let a guy with a Great Axe even get near him to have any chance at swinging against his newly-bought battle dress anyway.

 

[Nerhesi]

Ok. Don't like the higher damage values used in the CSC book? The 4D6+2 damage from a TL 2 Great Axe scares your TL 14 players? A simple fix would be to change the axe damage to 2D6, rather than re-design Traveller around a frickin' axe.

Because this entire thread was about the single battle axe, not the dozens of other problems that cause this, in the CSC and other books. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Thankfully, logically, the designers/writers had the opposite idea.

 

[JP42]

Ok. Don't like the higher damage values used in the CSC book? The 4D6+2 damage from a TL 2 Great Axe scares your TL 14 players? A simple fix would be to change the axe damage to 2D6, rather than re-design Traveller around a frickin' axe.

Funny, a broadsword does 4d6 as well. Straight out of the CRB. And changing the way that armor and weapons interact is hardly re-designing Traveller.

A real power gamer wouldn't let a guy with a Great Axe even get near him to have any chance at swinging against his newly-bought battle dress anyway.

Y'know, I interact with you all over the place, Shawn. Here, rpg.net, Google+ - you're a huge, massive fan of everything Traveller, and often quite knowledgeable about the history of the game and the rules as written, but your abrasive, argumentative nature makes you one of the worst advocates for the game I think I've ever encountered. To lump everyone that enjoys some minute detail of the game into the Power Gamer class - even those of us who aren't remotely min/maxers or munchkins - to marginalize our opinions? What does that do for the new guy who comes to these fora, hoping to find others who love Traveller to share ideas with? Nothing good, I can tell you.

Use your powers for good, Shawn. Be the font of wisdom that I know you can be. Keep creating the excellent visual materials that you're known for. But open your mind just enough to let in a few differing opinions, or at least allow them to live peacefully beside your own.

 

[rust]

... not the dozens of other problems that cause this, in the CSC and other books.

In the end the problems you mentioned are quite typical for
Traveller, the result of different design philosophies of diffe-
rent authors with different approaches to the technological
assumptions inherited from previous versions of the game
and the lack of some oversight to keep the various contribu-
tions at least compatible. In the case of weapons and armour
in the core rules, the Central Supply Catalogue, the Mercena-
ry supplement and the battle dress chapter of the Vehicles
supplement it is sometimes difficult to believe that it all is in-
tended to be for the same game.

 

[Infojunky]

First, I just want to say that I think it's pretty crappy to tell someone that their proposed house-rule on how to make armor behave a little more realistically implies that they're Doing It Wrong because they've allowed situations to come up that involve the higher end of combat power. Traveller is a role-playing game, but sometimes the role you're playing is guys in powered armor going up against the equivalent of Mongol horse archers, and when verisimilitude is broken because the rules don't quite simulate that particular corner case very well, a change in those rules makes sense (as OP has discovered, in Supplement 5-6).

Yep it is, a huge part of the problem here is every Traveller game is different and there is a sizable chunk of the fanbase who can't see this. "My Game is the Only way to Play" is their mantra anybody else who does it differently is wrong. Thus the loud argument when someone says "Hey, this Blank doesn't work right in my Game, here is an idea to fix it". Guys it's all situational to the particular game being played by that group, just because someone else is playing a different game than yours doesn't mean it's not Traveller.

I think there's something to be said for several options: Increasing armor value is one, but another is to look at how the old Striker rules handled things, and assign some penetration values to weapons instead of cookie-cutter AP ratings. Another is to have weapon damage scale better or worse depending on the tech level of the weapon, and the armor. Not sure how that would be best implemented, but a simple numerical increase in fixed armor value is probably not the best way - maybe something involving armor having dice of protection that are subtracted from the dice of the attack before any damage is rolled?

As I stated bluntly earlier I would prefer just a plain Penetration vs Armor solution based on the AHL/Striker mechanic, if I had a decent implementation of it I would post it for all to play with. Right now I tend to start playing with one mechanic and end up across the field bashing on another.

 

[JP42]

Guys it's all situational to the particular game being played by that group, just because someone else is playing a different game than yours doesn't mean it's not Traveller.

And more to the point, even if the changes that someone is proposing make you want to grind your teeth, there's nothing to be gained from bad-mouthing them online. If you must disagree, disagree respectfully. Otherwise you weaken your own argument.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Use your powers for good, Shawn. Be the font of wisdom that I know you can be. Keep creating the excellent visual materials that you're known for. But open your mind just enough to let in a few differing opinions, or at least allow them to live peacefully beside your own.

I have no powers. None. Zero.

JP42, if you made Traveller videos on YouTube, that would be great (awesome in fact, because I'm always looking for some). And the up side would be that your personality would do a better job than mine has. And there would be another viewpoint of the Traveller game discussing how you would go about playing it. Also a good thing.

I did not know that the "power gamer" label was taboo or similar to standing on the third rail. Many players brag they are such things. I have beefs with software game modders. And I see the same thing going on in tabletop RPGs. I'm obviously and vastly out-numbered by the modders, home-brewers, house-rulers, roll-players, railroaders, dice-fudgers. Many players brag about being those things as well. But I am a threat to them still in their eyes.

Anyone who doesn't like my posts, or me, should click on my profile button, right now, and add me as foe. For instance, I've been blocking anyone that mentions how they love T5. I don't want to see posts about T5. This goes for T5 mentioned on Facebook, G+, COTI, and lots of other RPG forums, etc. If someone brings up Bronies because they can't defend their own idea, and then wips out their ad hoc card, should I block them?

Funny, a broadsword does 4d6 as well. Straight out of the CRB. And changing the way that armor and weapons interact is hardly re-designing Traveller.

I don't think Mongoose Traveller (the core rulebook anyway) differentiates between types of protection? A broadsword (which requires strength to even use) is going to do blah blah damage against what exactly? A wooden post? An iron shield? A concrete wall? An armored tank? A refrigerator? The referee decides this since Traveller is not a simulator, at all. It's not meant to be one.

a huge part of the problem here is every Traveller game is different and there is a sizable chunk of the fanbase who can't see this. "My Game is the Only way to Play" is their mantra anybody else who does it differently is wrong. Thus the loud argument when someone says "Hey, this Blank doesn't work right in my Game, here is an idea to fix it". Guys it's all situational to the particular game being played by that group, just because someone else is playing a different game than yours doesn't mean it's not Traveller.

This needs to be said more. Otherwise it is just players here trying to find/fix errors in the game rules that aren't there.

 

[Infojunky]

I'm obviously and vastly out-numbered by the modders, home-brewers, house-rulers, roll-players, railroaders, dice-fudgers.

Shawn the entire game is based on roll your own, while there are some specific tropes built into the rules, it is always been about build your own playspace and go at it.... That's why things like system generation, starship construction et al exist. You and those who chose to play with you all make your own choices as how you play the game.

Many players brag about being those things as well. But I am a threat to them still in their eyes.

Anyone who doesn't like my posts, or me, should click on my profile button, right now, and add me as foe. I'll wait...

Do we need to be so melodramatic? You have Opinions, I have Opinions, heck Opinions are like assholes everybody's got one. All I ask if you disagree with me, politely tell me where, I am interested in your point of view, I may not agree, but that all comes down to the utility of it in terms of dealing with the question at hand. Heck there is even a good chance I will see you position and adopt it.

a huge part of the problem here is every Traveller game is different and there is a sizable chunk of the fanbase who can't see this. "My Game is the Only way to Play" is their mantra anybody else who does it differently is wrong. Thus the loud argument when someone says "Hey, this Blank doesn't work right in my Game, here is an idea to fix it". Guys it's all situational to the particular game being played by that group, just because someone else is playing a different game than yours doesn't mean it's not Traveller.

This needs to be said more. Otherwise it is just players here trying to find/fix errors in the game rules that aren't there.

Yes, in the end this is only a game. With a large and diverse fanbase. A question asked here is a request for help with an issue that the questioner has with the game in his own setting. Here soliciting ideas that work or have been thought about by others who share the same framework. Whether Traveller is the Universe, the Game rules or some other set of tropes we all exist in the same plain. So we should do our best to help each other as we can, often a opposing viewpoint tearing apart and idea can be more useful than blank agreement. The trick is to disagree with the idea without tearing apart the person.

 

[rust]

Otherwise it is just players here trying to find/fix errors in the game rules that aren't there.

On the other hand, it is not always easy to see what is an error
and what is not, and what needs to be fixed and what not. My
favourite example is this one from page 66 of the core rules:

A hit with Effect 6+ always inflicts at least one point of damage,
regardless of the target’s armour.

So better watch out for that guy who throws marshmellows ... :twisted:

 

[F33D]

Otherwise it is just players here trying to find/fix errors in the game rules that aren't there.

On the other hand, it is not always easy to see what is an error
and what is not, and what needs to be fixed and what not. My
favourite example is this one from page 66 of the core rules:

A hit with Effect 6+ always inflicts at least one point of damage,
regardless of the target’s armour.

So better watch out for that guy who throws marshmellows ... :twisted:

If 100 people were to throw marshmallows at a guy in Battledress... :lol:

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I'm obviously and vastly out-numbered by the modders, home-brewers, house-rulers, roll-players, railroaders, dice-fudgers.

Shawn the entire game is based on roll your own, while there are some specific tropes built into the rules, it is always been about build your own playspace and go at it.... That's why things like system generation, starship construction et al exist. You and those who chose to play with you all make your own choices as how you play the game.

All that can be done no problem using the rules as written, though.

Many players brag about being those things as well. But I am a threat to them still in their eyes.

Anyone who doesn't like my posts, or me, should click on my profile button, right now, and add me as foe. I'll wait...

Do we need to be so melodramatic? You have Opinions, I have Opinions, heck Opinions are like assholes everybody's got one. All I ask if you disagree with me, politely tell me where, I am interested in your point of view, I may not agree, but that all comes down to the utility of it in terms of dealing with the question at hand. Heck there is even a good chance I will see you position and adopt it.

I can agree to disagree with some people. More than some, probably. But if they are hopping all over the place, changing the subject before the first item they brought up is resolved, it's easier for me to just block them.

Otherwise it is just players here trying to find/fix errors in the game rules that aren't there.

On the other hand, it is not always easy to see what is an error
and what is not, and what needs to be fixed and what not. My
favourite example is this one from page 66 of the core rules:

A hit with Effect 6+ always inflicts at least one point of damage,
regardless of the target’s armour.

So better watch out for that guy who throws marshmellows ... :twisted:

When I first read that rule I thought, "So there is a way to still get at the guy inside." Just have to roll a 14 every time is all. Piece of pie.

If 100 people were to throw marshmallows at a guy in Battledress... :lol:

Now how would you role-play that out?

 

[rust]

If 100 people were to throw marshmallows at a guy in Battledress... :lol:

Or, as one of the players did put it: "So that's why they never
wear armour during those confetti parades." :shock:

 

[rust]

Just have to roll a 14 every time is all. Piece of pie.

Just make it a task with a difficulty of Simple / +6 ... 8)

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

100 people in a circle around the battle dress guy. Each with a simple DM to their marshmallow throw to hit the guy. Still an effect of 6. And every marshmallow hits hopefully. Otherwise you have people getting hit by friendly fire. Now to see what marshmallows do against plain clothes humans.

 

[rust]

Now to see what marshmallows do against plain clothes humans.

That's the famous Confetti Parade Paradox, do not wear armour
and there is no damage.

 

[F33D]

If 100 people were to throw marshmallows at a guy in Battledress... :lol:

Or, as one of the players did put it: "So that's why they never
wear armour during those confetti parades." :shock:

:idea: :twisted:

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I probably should have looked first at what marshmallows do for damage before walking into this universe.