A Criticism of the Bell Curve
- Thread starter tbeard1999
- Start date
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I assume that you can understand a relatively simple game system like CT. I'd appreciate it if you'd do me the same courtesy. </font>[/QUOTE]TBeard, I'm not making a "dig" at you. You read that wrong. On the contrary, as I stated earlier, I've enjoyed the dialogue.
I'm just pointing out the truth. You are taking the CT system too literally. You believe that a successful to-hit roll in CT means a character was "shot".
Since it's an abstract system, a successful to-hit roll may mean that. And, it may not.
Just like D&D...if you swing your battleaxe at an opponent, hit him, and do 1D8 of damage against his 56 hit points, did you really slice him? Is is life's blood pouring out at your feet?
Of course not. Even 56 hit points reduced by the max of 8 means the target was barely scratched.
The same can be said for vanilla CT. It's an abstract system.
If you roll 20 points of damage vs a normal character with stats 777, then, yes, you've "shot" him...because two of his stats will be reduced to zero, giving him a Serious Wound.
But, if you roll 3 points of damage from a successful gun combat attack, against the same character...have you "shot" him?
No. A gun shot is not being modeled there.
Your mistake has been that you've assumed that a successful to-hit with a firearm also means the target is shot.
Since it's an abstract system, you can't take the successful to-hit literally. And, you've got to consider damage before extrapolating "what really happened."
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I assume that you can understand a relatively simple game system like CT. I'd appreciate it if you'd do me the same courtesy. </font>[/QUOTE]TBeard, I'm not making a "dig" at you. You read that wrong. On the contrary, as I stated earlier, I've enjoyed the dialogue.
I'm just pointing out the truth. You are taking the CT system too literally. You believe that a successful to-hit roll in CT means a character was "shot".
Since it's an abstract system, a successful to-hit roll may mean that. And, it may not.
Just like D&D...if you swing your battleaxe at an opponent, hit him, and do 1D8 of damage against his 56 hit points, did you really slice him? Is is life's blood pouring out at your feet?
Of course not. Even 56 hit points reduced by the max of 8 means the target was barely scratched.
The same can be said for vanilla CT. It's an abstract system.
If you roll 20 points of damage vs a normal character with stats 777, then, yes, you've "shot" him...because two of his stats will be reduced to zero, giving him a Serious Wound.
But, if you roll 3 points of damage from a successful gun combat attack, against the same character...have you "shot" him?
No. A gun shot is not being modeled there.
Your mistake has been that you've assumed that a successful to-hit with a firearm also means the target is shot.
Since it's an abstract system, you can't take the successful to-hit literally. And, you've got to consider damage before extrapolating "what really happened."
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The "4" people you cite above is referencing the Group Hits rule, yes?
Quick note: In order to use that rule, you can only hit up to three targets including the main target, and all three have to be bunched together.
Also note: The Group Hits rule for automatic fire can only be used if the adjacent targets are not evading.
So, let's put this in game terms....
You've got three guards standing in a circle, talking to each other, smoking cigarets.
I'm going to pull out Supplement 1, 1001 Characters, and use the first Army character as the SMG attacker (except I'll ignore the SMG-1 skill for that character), and the other three guards will be the Army characters 2-4.
So, if you don't have that Supplement handy, here are the stats:
Ewe (SMG-0 attacker): A4B454
Guard 1 (Primary Target): 478658
Guard 2 (Adjacent Target): B37C66
Guard 3 (Adjacent Target): A98AA7
Ewe pops around the corner and sees the three guards, bunched together, at about 10 meters away. So, he raises his SMG, squeezes the trigger, and lets 'em have it.
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
+5 vs No Armor
---
+6
Both attack throws are automatic hits.
But NOTE that none of the three targets are expecting the attack. If they were, then the adjacent targets would not be ellible targets because Group Fire is not allowed with the adjacent targets are evading. And, the main character could possibly evade and/or find cover, which would apply some negative DMs to hit him.
I'm using random characters pulled straight out of 1001 Characters--the first four Army characters. And, I'll roll real dice as I write.
Let's see how this scenario turns out.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6.
Damage for the second hit: 5, 5, 5.
Now, let's not forget the deadly First Blood rule. It's worded confusingly, but if you follow the example on pg. 36 of the Traveller Book, you'll see how the designers wanted this rule used.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We've got 11 points of damage to apply randomly, due to the First Blood rule. I roll a 2, meaning that the First Blood damage will be applied to the Guard's STR. So, his STR is wiped out. 078
Now, we have a "1" and a "6" to apply randomly (applying damage from the First Blood rule as indicated in the example). The 1 point of damage will be applied to the Guards END, and the 6 points will be applied to the Guard's END.
So, now, the Guard's stats are 071.
Now, it's up to the Guard to apply the rest of the damage from the second hit. He's got to take it in 5 point lumps, but he can apply it as he sees fit (First Blood Rule no longer applies). Poor bastard, though. I rolled really high for damage.
This character is dead.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
OK, the main target took the SMG spray, and he's dead. Remember, had the adjacent guard (this target) been aware of the attack, he made have evaded. If he had evaded, then he would not be attacked right now.
But, since that was TBeard's example, I'll roll with it.
The Group Hits by autofire rule allows one to-hit throw from the SMG at Guard 2.
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
+5 vs. No Armor
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
+3
A 2D roll of 5+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A hit.
Damage is 3D: 1, 6, 4.
Guard 2's physical stats: B37
The First Blood rule plays. 11 points of damage is applied randomly to STR (Yes, I really rolled that). So, Guard 2 is unconscious with stats: 037.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 5+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A hit.
Damage is: 3, 5, 5.
First Blood rule plays.
13 points taken randomly from Guard 3's DEX.
Damage left (all rolled randomly in groups): 4. Randomly applied to END.
So, Guard 3 ends up with stats: A04.
He's unconscious as well.
So...what happened here, using vanilla CT rules...
Like I said, you have to "extrapolate" after damage is applied.
Ewe came from around the corner, hefted his SMG, and let it spray at the circle of unsuspecting guards.
The one in the center, the main target, took the main force of the burst. He's dead.
The other two guards were not "shot". If a medic sees to them, hits 'em with smelling salts, then they'll be good as new in about half an hour.
Right now, though, they're unconcious, at the mercy of Ewe.
OK, Tbeard, what's wrong with that? You really think that's broken?
It's not broken. It's just abstract vs. literal.
The vanilla CT system works fine, even with SMGs and fully automatic weapons.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The "4" people you cite above is referencing the Group Hits rule, yes?
Quick note: In order to use that rule, you can only hit up to three targets including the main target, and all three have to be bunched together.
Also note: The Group Hits rule for automatic fire can only be used if the adjacent targets are not evading.
So, let's put this in game terms....
You've got three guards standing in a circle, talking to each other, smoking cigarets.
I'm going to pull out Supplement 1, 1001 Characters, and use the first Army character as the SMG attacker (except I'll ignore the SMG-1 skill for that character), and the other three guards will be the Army characters 2-4.
So, if you don't have that Supplement handy, here are the stats:
Ewe (SMG-0 attacker): A4B454
Guard 1 (Primary Target): 478658
Guard 2 (Adjacent Target): B37C66
Guard 3 (Adjacent Target): A98AA7
Ewe pops around the corner and sees the three guards, bunched together, at about 10 meters away. So, he raises his SMG, squeezes the trigger, and lets 'em have it.
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
+5 vs No Armor
---
+6
Both attack throws are automatic hits.
But NOTE that none of the three targets are expecting the attack. If they were, then the adjacent targets would not be ellible targets because Group Fire is not allowed with the adjacent targets are evading. And, the main character could possibly evade and/or find cover, which would apply some negative DMs to hit him.
I'm using random characters pulled straight out of 1001 Characters--the first four Army characters. And, I'll roll real dice as I write.
Let's see how this scenario turns out.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6.
Damage for the second hit: 5, 5, 5.
Now, let's not forget the deadly First Blood rule. It's worded confusingly, but if you follow the example on pg. 36 of the Traveller Book, you'll see how the designers wanted this rule used.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We've got 11 points of damage to apply randomly, due to the First Blood rule. I roll a 2, meaning that the First Blood damage will be applied to the Guard's STR. So, his STR is wiped out. 078
Now, we have a "1" and a "6" to apply randomly (applying damage from the First Blood rule as indicated in the example). The 1 point of damage will be applied to the Guards END, and the 6 points will be applied to the Guard's END.
So, now, the Guard's stats are 071.
Now, it's up to the Guard to apply the rest of the damage from the second hit. He's got to take it in 5 point lumps, but he can apply it as he sees fit (First Blood Rule no longer applies). Poor bastard, though. I rolled really high for damage.
This character is dead.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
OK, the main target took the SMG spray, and he's dead. Remember, had the adjacent guard (this target) been aware of the attack, he made have evaded. If he had evaded, then he would not be attacked right now.
But, since that was TBeard's example, I'll roll with it.
The Group Hits by autofire rule allows one to-hit throw from the SMG at Guard 2.
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
+5 vs. No Armor
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
+3
A 2D roll of 5+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A hit.
Damage is 3D: 1, 6, 4.
Guard 2's physical stats: B37
The First Blood rule plays. 11 points of damage is applied randomly to STR (Yes, I really rolled that). So, Guard 2 is unconscious with stats: 037.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 5+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A hit.
Damage is: 3, 5, 5.
First Blood rule plays.
13 points taken randomly from Guard 3's DEX.
Damage left (all rolled randomly in groups): 4. Randomly applied to END.
So, Guard 3 ends up with stats: A04.
He's unconscious as well.
So...what happened here, using vanilla CT rules...
Like I said, you have to "extrapolate" after damage is applied.
Ewe came from around the corner, hefted his SMG, and let it spray at the circle of unsuspecting guards.
The one in the center, the main target, took the main force of the burst. He's dead.
The other two guards were not "shot". If a medic sees to them, hits 'em with smelling salts, then they'll be good as new in about half an hour.
Right now, though, they're unconcious, at the mercy of Ewe.
OK, Tbeard, what's wrong with that? You really think that's broken?
It's not broken. It's just abstract vs. literal.
The vanilla CT system works fine, even with SMGs and fully automatic weapons.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
You know what? If anything, you're convincing me to lean towards using vanilla CT rules instead of my own House Rules.
I'm starting to debate whether my changes are necessary.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
You know what? If anything, you're convincing me to lean towards using vanilla CT rules instead of my own House Rules.
I'm starting to debate whether my changes are necessary.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Comparison of my House Rules and vanilla CT with the example...
For my own interest, I want to check what would have happend with my own version of CT rules vs. what happened in this scenario using vanilla CT...
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
---
+1
Instead of an automatic hit, both SMG hits would require a roll of 2D for 7+.
I'll roll that: 1 miss and 1 hit.
Damage is 3D +5.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6, 5.
This is added together but taken as a whole at the defender's choice.
16 points of damage.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We'll reduce stats to: 300.
Notice that my system is still deadly, here, but the character is alive (albeit severely wounded) rather than dead.
Also, note that my damage application moves a bit faster because we've dropped the random application.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
-2
A 2D roll of 10+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A miss.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 10+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A miss.
So...given my combat system, in once sense, it's a bit easier on player characters--simply because it's harder to hit (and armor absorbs damage).
But, my gun combat damage is akin to using the First Blood rule every time you're shot, whereas with vanilla CT, you only have to survive it once (as unlikely as that is).
For my own interest, I want to check what would have happend with my own version of CT rules vs. what happened in this scenario using vanilla CT...
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
---
+1
Instead of an automatic hit, both SMG hits would require a roll of 2D for 7+.
I'll roll that: 1 miss and 1 hit.
Damage is 3D +5.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6, 5.
This is added together but taken as a whole at the defender's choice.
16 points of damage.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We'll reduce stats to: 300.
Notice that my system is still deadly, here, but the character is alive (albeit severely wounded) rather than dead.
Also, note that my damage application moves a bit faster because we've dropped the random application.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
-2
A 2D roll of 10+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A miss.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 10+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A miss.
So...given my combat system, in once sense, it's a bit easier on player characters--simply because it's harder to hit (and armor absorbs damage).
But, my gun combat damage is akin to using the First Blood rule every time you're shot, whereas with vanilla CT, you only have to survive it once (as unlikely as that is).
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Comparison of my House Rules and vanilla CT with the example...
For my own interest, I want to check what would have happend with my own version of CT rules vs. what happened in this scenario using vanilla CT...
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
---
+1
Instead of an automatic hit, both SMG hits would require a roll of 2D for 7+.
I'll roll that: 1 miss and 1 hit.
Damage is 3D +5.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6, 5.
This is added together but taken as a whole at the defender's choice.
16 points of damage.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We'll reduce stats to: 300.
Notice that my system is still deadly, here, but the character is alive (albeit severely wounded) rather than dead.
Also, note that my damage application moves a bit faster because we've dropped the random application.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
-2
A 2D roll of 10+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A miss.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 10+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A miss.
So...given my combat system, in once sense, it's a bit easier on player characters--simply because it's harder to hit (and armor absorbs damage).
But, my gun combat damage is akin to using the First Blood rule every time you're shot, whereas with vanilla CT, you only have to survive it once (as unlikely as that is).
For my own interest, I want to check what would have happend with my own version of CT rules vs. what happened in this scenario using vanilla CT...
Resolve the main target first...
Roll 8+, on 2D, to hit. Fully automatic fire allows you to roll this twice, with two chances to damage the main target.
DMs
----
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
---
+1
Instead of an automatic hit, both SMG hits would require a roll of 2D for 7+.
I'll roll that: 1 miss and 1 hit.
Damage is 3D +5.
Damage for the first hit: 2, 3, 6, 5.
This is added together but taken as a whole at the defender's choice.
16 points of damage.
So, from above, Guard 1 has physical stats of 478.
We'll reduce stats to: 300.
Notice that my system is still deadly, here, but the character is alive (albeit severely wounded) rather than dead.
Also, note that my damage application moves a bit faster because we've dropped the random application.
Resolve the first adjacent target...
Roll 2D, for 8+, rolling only one time.
DMs
---
+0 SMG-0
-2 DEX Penalty
+3 Short Range
-3 Group Hit Penalty
---
-2
A 2D roll of 10+ is needed to hit the adjacent target. Remember, I'm rolling real dice as I write.
2D...6. A miss.
Resolve hit to second adjacent target...
Same DMs and notes as Guard 2.
Guard 3's physical stats: A98
Roll 2D for 10+ to-hit: Rolled a 9. A miss.
So...given my combat system, in once sense, it's a bit easier on player characters--simply because it's harder to hit (and armor absorbs damage).
But, my gun combat damage is akin to using the First Blood rule every time you're shot, whereas with vanilla CT, you only have to survive it once (as unlikely as that is).
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
Actually, I don't agree, as I pointed out in the recent posts (you probably haven't seen them yet).
You're (1) not considering the effects of damage with respect to the CT to-hit roll, and (2) you're being too "literal" with an abstract system.
A successful to-hit roll in vanilla CT doesn't always mean the target was "shot".
Damage applied to the target will help you extrapolate what was modeled with the abstract system.
Let me ask you this:
Most weapons in CT do 3D damage.
Average stats for a CT character are 777.
Average damage, then, is 10 points (average of 3D).
That means, on average, that any single successful to-hit roll will only effect the defender with a Minor Wound that will be healed, completely, in half an hour if proper medical treatment is avaialable.
Here's my queston: Does that sound like a "literal", Oh-My-God-I'm-Shot! system? Or does that sound like an abstract system?
You're taking the system too literally. You're considering every successful "to-hit" roll as a literal "that character was shot" mechanic. And, you're not considering the part damage plays in this abstract system.
If a pistol is fired at an unarmored man, at point blank range, doing 3D damage of 1, 3, 6....
...and, the target's physical stats are 777.
...And, the target, after being shot, has stats 641.
Was that target really "shot"?
Of course not.
Why. Because you can't take the "to-hit" roll literally.
It's an abstract system. </font>[/QUOTE]You seem to be ignoring the issues I've raised in favor of issues that I have not raised.
Perhaps I've been unclear on my core contention, although it sure seems like I have repeated the same statements over and over. So let me try one more time.
FIRST – IT'S TOO EASY TO WIND UP WITH AUTOMATIC HITS (OR AUTOMATIC MISSES) IN THE CT COMBAT SYSTEM WHEN USING BOOK 4+ WEAPONS AND CHARACTERS.
SECOND – THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE ADDRESSED BY FOCUSING ON THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE PROBLEM, WHICH I THINK ARE (A) THE TO HIT MODIFIERS OF AUTOMATIC AND BOOK 4 WEAPONS; AND (B) “SKILLS BLOAT” FROM BOOKS 4+ CHARGEN.
This is it...the key problem I have with the CT combat system and what I think can be done about it. I don’t think I can put it any clearer.
If you disagree with the first statement, then there’s no point in addressing the second statement.
Nor is there much point in bringing up other flaws in the CT combat system (like damage allocation) because my “fix” is not concerned with those other flaws. (And in the case of damage allocation, I believe that that is a campaign design issue.)
Comments:
1. I think that the CT works adequately when limited to Book 1 weaponry. I think that the SMG is grotesquely overpowered, but that's an easy fix. If I didn't think that Book 4 stuff was cool, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
2. The statistical component of my first contention (that automatic hits/misses can be obtained) can be objectively verified by simply looking at the numbers.
Whether it's "too easy" to do this, or whether it happens “too often” however, are subjective claims, and there can certainly be disagreement. But I am skeptical that someone who went to the trouble to create a new combat system would really think that the CT combat system is just fine as it is.
And note I never claimed that that the distortions fall evenly, or are universal. They don’t and they aren’t. As you showed, some outcomes are reasonable. But in my opinion, too many of them are unreasonable. And I can preserve the reasonable outcomes in any case, so I'm not worried about throwing the baby out with the bath water.
(A game design comment -- I don't care at all for specialized systems like the CT combat system. I doubt I'd *ever* use an "index the weapon with the armor and range to get a hit number" system in one of my designs. However, it has one major virtue...you can tweak weapons to a very considerable level to produce reasonable outcomes. I don't think I appreciated that before I started this thread.)
CT's problems are worst (in my opinion) when dealing with unarmored targets and with automatic weapons in general. The Gauss Rifle (aka the "Waste-O-Matic") is particularly egregious...
And at the end of the day, I just can’t accept a system that allows a nominally trained individual to have a >95% chance of hitting 4 times with a 4 shot burst from a hand weapon.
3. My indictment of “skills bloat” from Book 4+ chargen systems is simple (and easy to fix). Such systems will tend to produce characters with high weapons skills if only because it's far more likely for those characters to have higher skill levels. Changing the gun combat skill into a skill that covers groups of weapons, though perhaps logical, exacerbates the problem by making high skill levels even easier to get.
4. So it looks to me like these problems are the result of failing to appreciate the statistical nature of the 2d6 system and its limits -- i.e., the FACT that very modest modifiers can dramatically shift the probabilities. (Which works both ways, incidentally. A net -2 will make it highly unlikely you'll succeed (17% chance of success); a net -3 will make it nearly impossible (9% chance of success).
And the reality is that multiple classes of modifers (skill, DEX, range, armor) that apply to most situations, combined with wide ranges (0 to 5+ with skills, -8 to +8 with range, -8 to +9 with armor) can easily yield very high or very low modifiers a lot of the time. And since a +4 is a 91% chance of success and -3 is a 91% chance of failure, we aren't talking about huge quantities here.
5. Since it seems obvious to me what the root causes are, I think that it's reasonable to focus on those root causes -- the to hit modifiers and Book 4+ skills bloat. With a little care and attention to the statistics, it should be possible to retain the reasonable outcomes in the CT combat system and eliminate the troublesome ones. And Book 4+ skills bloat is a simple, one sentence fix.
To the extent that you agree with me that (a) it is easy for characters to get automatic hits (or misses); and (b) that this is not a Good Thing, then you should agree that the problem should be fixed. The reverse is true, of course.
I realize that agreeing with the need to fix the problem is not the same as agreeing with my proposed fix.
But I've identified the constraints I've imposed on my tinkering and am not much interested in debating them (though I am very interested if anyone finds them contradictory or illogical or truly unreasonable). Working within the framework that I imposed on myself, my solution seems to me the best way to go. Of course, that would be expected; if I thought there was a better way, I'd use it instead.
Regarding damage, well, I'm currently agnostic on the way CT handles it. It's pretty easy to render someone combat-ineffective (unconscious) with a single shot, but effectively impossible to kill him. That sounds like a reasonable compromise and I'm not moved to mess with it.
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
Actually, I don't agree, as I pointed out in the recent posts (you probably haven't seen them yet).
You're (1) not considering the effects of damage with respect to the CT to-hit roll, and (2) you're being too "literal" with an abstract system.
A successful to-hit roll in vanilla CT doesn't always mean the target was "shot".
Damage applied to the target will help you extrapolate what was modeled with the abstract system.
Let me ask you this:
Most weapons in CT do 3D damage.
Average stats for a CT character are 777.
Average damage, then, is 10 points (average of 3D).
That means, on average, that any single successful to-hit roll will only effect the defender with a Minor Wound that will be healed, completely, in half an hour if proper medical treatment is avaialable.
Here's my queston: Does that sound like a "literal", Oh-My-God-I'm-Shot! system? Or does that sound like an abstract system?
You're taking the system too literally. You're considering every successful "to-hit" roll as a literal "that character was shot" mechanic. And, you're not considering the part damage plays in this abstract system.
If a pistol is fired at an unarmored man, at point blank range, doing 3D damage of 1, 3, 6....
...and, the target's physical stats are 777.
...And, the target, after being shot, has stats 641.
Was that target really "shot"?
Of course not.
Why. Because you can't take the "to-hit" roll literally.
It's an abstract system. </font>[/QUOTE]You seem to be ignoring the issues I've raised in favor of issues that I have not raised.
Perhaps I've been unclear on my core contention, although it sure seems like I have repeated the same statements over and over. So let me try one more time.
FIRST – IT'S TOO EASY TO WIND UP WITH AUTOMATIC HITS (OR AUTOMATIC MISSES) IN THE CT COMBAT SYSTEM WHEN USING BOOK 4+ WEAPONS AND CHARACTERS.
SECOND – THESE PROBLEMS CAN BE ADDRESSED BY FOCUSING ON THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE PROBLEM, WHICH I THINK ARE (A) THE TO HIT MODIFIERS OF AUTOMATIC AND BOOK 4 WEAPONS; AND (B) “SKILLS BLOAT” FROM BOOKS 4+ CHARGEN.
This is it...the key problem I have with the CT combat system and what I think can be done about it. I don’t think I can put it any clearer.
If you disagree with the first statement, then there’s no point in addressing the second statement.
Nor is there much point in bringing up other flaws in the CT combat system (like damage allocation) because my “fix” is not concerned with those other flaws. (And in the case of damage allocation, I believe that that is a campaign design issue.)
Comments:
1. I think that the CT works adequately when limited to Book 1 weaponry. I think that the SMG is grotesquely overpowered, but that's an easy fix. If I didn't think that Book 4 stuff was cool, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
2. The statistical component of my first contention (that automatic hits/misses can be obtained) can be objectively verified by simply looking at the numbers.
Whether it's "too easy" to do this, or whether it happens “too often” however, are subjective claims, and there can certainly be disagreement. But I am skeptical that someone who went to the trouble to create a new combat system would really think that the CT combat system is just fine as it is.
And note I never claimed that that the distortions fall evenly, or are universal. They don’t and they aren’t. As you showed, some outcomes are reasonable. But in my opinion, too many of them are unreasonable. And I can preserve the reasonable outcomes in any case, so I'm not worried about throwing the baby out with the bath water.
(A game design comment -- I don't care at all for specialized systems like the CT combat system. I doubt I'd *ever* use an "index the weapon with the armor and range to get a hit number" system in one of my designs. However, it has one major virtue...you can tweak weapons to a very considerable level to produce reasonable outcomes. I don't think I appreciated that before I started this thread.)
CT's problems are worst (in my opinion) when dealing with unarmored targets and with automatic weapons in general. The Gauss Rifle (aka the "Waste-O-Matic") is particularly egregious...
And at the end of the day, I just can’t accept a system that allows a nominally trained individual to have a >95% chance of hitting 4 times with a 4 shot burst from a hand weapon.
3. My indictment of “skills bloat” from Book 4+ chargen systems is simple (and easy to fix). Such systems will tend to produce characters with high weapons skills if only because it's far more likely for those characters to have higher skill levels. Changing the gun combat skill into a skill that covers groups of weapons, though perhaps logical, exacerbates the problem by making high skill levels even easier to get.
4. So it looks to me like these problems are the result of failing to appreciate the statistical nature of the 2d6 system and its limits -- i.e., the FACT that very modest modifiers can dramatically shift the probabilities. (Which works both ways, incidentally. A net -2 will make it highly unlikely you'll succeed (17% chance of success); a net -3 will make it nearly impossible (9% chance of success).
And the reality is that multiple classes of modifers (skill, DEX, range, armor) that apply to most situations, combined with wide ranges (0 to 5+ with skills, -8 to +8 with range, -8 to +9 with armor) can easily yield very high or very low modifiers a lot of the time. And since a +4 is a 91% chance of success and -3 is a 91% chance of failure, we aren't talking about huge quantities here.
5. Since it seems obvious to me what the root causes are, I think that it's reasonable to focus on those root causes -- the to hit modifiers and Book 4+ skills bloat. With a little care and attention to the statistics, it should be possible to retain the reasonable outcomes in the CT combat system and eliminate the troublesome ones. And Book 4+ skills bloat is a simple, one sentence fix.
To the extent that you agree with me that (a) it is easy for characters to get automatic hits (or misses); and (b) that this is not a Good Thing, then you should agree that the problem should be fixed. The reverse is true, of course.
I realize that agreeing with the need to fix the problem is not the same as agreeing with my proposed fix.
But I've identified the constraints I've imposed on my tinkering and am not much interested in debating them (though I am very interested if anyone finds them contradictory or illogical or truly unreasonable). Working within the framework that I imposed on myself, my solution seems to me the best way to go. Of course, that would be expected; if I thought there was a better way, I'd use it instead.
Regarding damage, well, I'm currently agnostic on the way CT handles it. It's pretty easy to render someone combat-ineffective (unconscious) with a single shot, but effectively impossible to kill him. That sounds like a reasonable compromise and I'm not moved to mess with it.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
OK. Well, your previous example used the SMG from Book 1. Now, you're focussed on Book 4+.
I'll roll with that.
So, I'll consider what you posit with an example from Book 4.
A Gauss Rifle, fired at an unarmored target, at Medium Range. The target is not moving (no evasion or cover DMs), and the Gauss is fired in fully automatic mode.
Let's say a DEX-7, Combat Rifleman-2 character is firing this weapon. Fair enough?
DMs
---
+2 Skill
+0 DEX Bonus
+4 Medium Range
+7 vs. No Armor
---
+13
And, to max this out as far as possible, let's say we're firing a 10 round burst, which will net us 3 Attack Throws.
All three attacks are successful automatically.
Let's roll Damage--
4D: 1, 2, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 2, 1
(That's low damage I'm using to make a point.)
The target has physical stats of CF8.
The damage is applied (let's ignore the First Blood rule for these purposes), and the target's stats are now: 358.
Do you get my drift?
The target is scratched even though he just took a full 10 round burst of automatic fire from the most advanced slug-thrower in the game.
The target will be fully healed in half an hour if a medic puts a bandaid on him.
Now, you're looking at the "to-hit" percentage only (only a part of the abstract combat system), and you're saying, "Look here. This Guass Rifle hits 100% of the time even if the character has Skill-0!"
And, what I'm saying to you is this: "Was that a hit the target just suffered? Was he shot? Can a target be fully healed from being shot in just half an hour?"
The answer is "no".
So, the gause rifle doesn't really have a 100% chance of placing a gunshot wound on a target, does it?
No, it doesn't. And the percentage chance of that is not only lower than 100%, but it's dependent on it's target (because that same damage on a target with physicals of 343 would have been out-right killed).
CT is an abstract system, and you can't look at the to-hit roll without looking at CT's damage roll too.
To use a similar example from another game. You fire two arrows with your composite bow at a hobgoblin coming your way. You hit both times. Each arrow does 1D6 damage.
You roll 2D6 for damage and end up with boxcars. You've just done 12 points of damage.
But, your hobgoblin has 24 hit points.
What just happened?
Did you actually stick two arrows into the hobgoblin and yet he's coming towards you as if nothing at all had happened?
Doubtful.
In reality (or to extrapolate reality from the absbtract system that is D&D) you probably missed your target (even though your dice said you hit), and the hobgoblin deflected the arrows with his shield as he continues to advance upon you.
Contrast that with the same two arrow shots at a goblin that's only got 8 hit points. You hit twice doing 12 points of damage.
What happened?
Well, both arrows struck home, and now the goblin lays in front of you, dead.
You see, CT and D&D are very alike in this manner. This is why I said you didn't quite understand the CT combat system. Because a 100% chance of success on a CT to-hit roll does not mean there's a 100% chance of success the target will be wounded with a serious gunshot wound (two stats at zero).
Your 100% to-hit chance can easily mean that you missed your target if you roll low damage and apply that to a target with high stats (as in the gauss rifle example above).
CT is an abstract system. You've got to consider all three: to-hit, weapon's damage, and the target's ability to withstand damage. Once you know all three of those, you can extrapolate what was modeled during the fight.
Make sense to you?
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
OK. Well, your previous example used the SMG from Book 1. Now, you're focussed on Book 4+.
I'll roll with that.
So, I'll consider what you posit with an example from Book 4.
A Gauss Rifle, fired at an unarmored target, at Medium Range. The target is not moving (no evasion or cover DMs), and the Gauss is fired in fully automatic mode.
Let's say a DEX-7, Combat Rifleman-2 character is firing this weapon. Fair enough?
DMs
---
+2 Skill
+0 DEX Bonus
+4 Medium Range
+7 vs. No Armor
---
+13
And, to max this out as far as possible, let's say we're firing a 10 round burst, which will net us 3 Attack Throws.
All three attacks are successful automatically.
Let's roll Damage--
4D: 1, 2, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 2, 1
(That's low damage I'm using to make a point.)
The target has physical stats of CF8.
The damage is applied (let's ignore the First Blood rule for these purposes), and the target's stats are now: 358.
Do you get my drift?
The target is scratched even though he just took a full 10 round burst of automatic fire from the most advanced slug-thrower in the game.
The target will be fully healed in half an hour if a medic puts a bandaid on him.
Now, you're looking at the "to-hit" percentage only (only a part of the abstract combat system), and you're saying, "Look here. This Guass Rifle hits 100% of the time even if the character has Skill-0!"
And, what I'm saying to you is this: "Was that a hit the target just suffered? Was he shot? Can a target be fully healed from being shot in just half an hour?"
The answer is "no".
So, the gause rifle doesn't really have a 100% chance of placing a gunshot wound on a target, does it?
No, it doesn't. And the percentage chance of that is not only lower than 100%, but it's dependent on it's target (because that same damage on a target with physicals of 343 would have been out-right killed).
CT is an abstract system, and you can't look at the to-hit roll without looking at CT's damage roll too.
To use a similar example from another game. You fire two arrows with your composite bow at a hobgoblin coming your way. You hit both times. Each arrow does 1D6 damage.
You roll 2D6 for damage and end up with boxcars. You've just done 12 points of damage.
But, your hobgoblin has 24 hit points.
What just happened?
Did you actually stick two arrows into the hobgoblin and yet he's coming towards you as if nothing at all had happened?
Doubtful.
In reality (or to extrapolate reality from the absbtract system that is D&D) you probably missed your target (even though your dice said you hit), and the hobgoblin deflected the arrows with his shield as he continues to advance upon you.
Contrast that with the same two arrow shots at a goblin that's only got 8 hit points. You hit twice doing 12 points of damage.
What happened?
Well, both arrows struck home, and now the goblin lays in front of you, dead.
You see, CT and D&D are very alike in this manner. This is why I said you didn't quite understand the CT combat system. Because a 100% chance of success on a CT to-hit roll does not mean there's a 100% chance of success the target will be wounded with a serious gunshot wound (two stats at zero).
Your 100% to-hit chance can easily mean that you missed your target if you roll low damage and apply that to a target with high stats (as in the gauss rifle example above).
CT is an abstract system. You've got to consider all three: to-hit, weapon's damage, and the target's ability to withstand damage. Once you know all three of those, you can extrapolate what was modeled during the fight.
Make sense to you?
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
The "4" people you cite above is referencing the Group Hits rule, yes?
OK, Tbeard, what's wrong with that? You really think that's broken?
It's not broken. It's just abstract vs. literal.
The vanilla CT system works fine, even with SMGs and fully automatic weapons. </font>[/QUOTE]I mispoke. There's a >95% of scoring 4 hits on 3 targets with a 4 shot burst. And that's by a nominally trained shooter with no DEX bonuses. Sorry, but I'm just not persuaded by the "it's abstract" defense.
As a game designer, I'm all too aware of how "abstraction" can be used as a catch-all excuse for lousy design. I don't rely on it -- unless it really is something I abstracted. And while I'd certainly listen to Marc Miller's explanation of *why* it was abstracted, your explanation is speculation. And in any case, I find the outcome objectionable, regardless of the designer's motives.
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
The "4" people you cite above is referencing the Group Hits rule, yes?
OK, Tbeard, what's wrong with that? You really think that's broken?
It's not broken. It's just abstract vs. literal.
The vanilla CT system works fine, even with SMGs and fully automatic weapons. </font>[/QUOTE]I mispoke. There's a >95% of scoring 4 hits on 3 targets with a 4 shot burst. And that's by a nominally trained shooter with no DEX bonuses. Sorry, but I'm just not persuaded by the "it's abstract" defense.
As a game designer, I'm all too aware of how "abstraction" can be used as a catch-all excuse for lousy design. I don't rely on it -- unless it really is something I abstracted. And while I'd certainly listen to Marc Miller's explanation of *why* it was abstracted, your explanation is speculation. And in any case, I find the outcome objectionable, regardless of the designer's motives.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Maybe a shorter way of saying this is: The way CT looks at it, when you're dealing with a weapon like this, the issue of whether you're shot or not is not a condition of the to-hit roll, but a condition of the damage roll.
Most weapons have two "checks". You check to see if you make the to-hit check. Then you check to see how bad your damage is.
With a powerful weapon like what you see in Book 4, the first step is skipped. All you really have to do is roll damage.
If that damage is high, then you're shot.
If that damage is low, then you were not shot (but maybe you're winded, or battle scared, or scratched, or whatever) so that you'll heal completely in half an hour.
Abstract system. Needs damage roll to be fully understood.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Maybe a shorter way of saying this is: The way CT looks at it, when you're dealing with a weapon like this, the issue of whether you're shot or not is not a condition of the to-hit roll, but a condition of the damage roll.
Most weapons have two "checks". You check to see if you make the to-hit check. Then you check to see how bad your damage is.
With a powerful weapon like what you see in Book 4, the first step is skipped. All you really have to do is roll damage.
If that damage is high, then you're shot.
If that damage is low, then you were not shot (but maybe you're winded, or battle scared, or scratched, or whatever) so that you'll heal completely in half an hour.
Abstract system. Needs damage roll to be fully understood.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
OK. Well, now we're just down to that you don't like the CT system.
And, that mucho OK. You don't have to. Heck, I'm more partial to armor absorbing damage than how it is handled in vanilla CT.
But, as I've pointed out, vanilla CT isn't broken. It's just abstract. You don't like abstract, and that's OK. Tweak it.
Heck, I've tweaked the hell out of CT over the years.
You were claiming that CT was broken though, when it really isn't. It just doesn't fit to your tastes.
That's pretty much been my point.
Now, *if* every successful to-hit roll meant the character was actually shot (on average, damage would exceed two stats on most characters), then I'd have to agree with you. Because then, and only then, a successful to-hit roll would also indicate a gunshot wound on the victim. You'd have a strong point, if that were the case.
And, therein lies the error I see you've made when considering the CT system.
TBeard, I haven't been trying to make an enemy of you. I hope you haven't taken my comments that way. I've just been arguing the other side of the issue.
You've got some damn good thoughts, and they're well worth listening to (and reading).
I just think your point of view on reading the CT combat system is off. I hope I was able to correct it.
I don't think you're an idiot or anything of the sort. Heck, I like ya.
To me, this has just been two GMs discussing the finer points.
I hope you feel the same.
S4
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
OK. Well, now we're just down to that you don't like the CT system.
And, that mucho OK. You don't have to. Heck, I'm more partial to armor absorbing damage than how it is handled in vanilla CT.
But, as I've pointed out, vanilla CT isn't broken. It's just abstract. You don't like abstract, and that's OK. Tweak it.
Heck, I've tweaked the hell out of CT over the years.
You were claiming that CT was broken though, when it really isn't. It just doesn't fit to your tastes.
That's pretty much been my point.
Now, *if* every successful to-hit roll meant the character was actually shot (on average, damage would exceed two stats on most characters), then I'd have to agree with you. Because then, and only then, a successful to-hit roll would also indicate a gunshot wound on the victim. You'd have a strong point, if that were the case.
And, therein lies the error I see you've made when considering the CT system.
TBeard, I haven't been trying to make an enemy of you. I hope you haven't taken my comments that way. I've just been arguing the other side of the issue.
You've got some damn good thoughts, and they're well worth listening to (and reading).
I just think your point of view on reading the CT combat system is off. I hope I was able to correct it.
I don't think you're an idiot or anything of the sort. Heck, I like ya.
To me, this has just been two GMs discussing the finer points.
I hope you feel the same.
S4
tbeard1999
SOC-14 1K
OK. Well, your previous example used the SMG from Book 1. Now, you're focussed on Book 4+.
I'll roll with that.
So, I'll consider what you posit with an example from Book 4.
A Gauss Rifle, fired at an unarmored target, at Medium Range. The target is not moving (no evasion or cover DMs), and the Gauss is fired in fully automatic mode.
Let's say a DEX-7, Combat Rifleman-2 character is firing this weapon. Fair enough?
DMs
---
+2 Skill
+0 DEX Bonus
+4 Medium Range
+7 vs. No Armor
---
+13
And, to max this out as far as possible, let's say we're firing a 10 round burst, which will net us 3 Attack Throws.
All three attacks are successful automatically.
Let's roll Damage--
4D: 1, 2, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 1, 3
4D: 2, 1, 2, 1
(That's low damage I'm using to make a point.)
The target has physical stats of CF8.
The damage is applied (let's ignore the First Blood rule for these purposes), and the target's stats are now: 358.
Do you get my drift?
</font>[/QUOTE][/QB][/QUOTE]
I've gotten your drift all along; I just don't find it convincing.
And I notice that you seem to be going to a great deal of trouble to defend a combat system that YOU yourself found inadequate.
I also find myself wondering how much you'd have been persuaded by the "it's just abstracted" defense when you were working on your combat system.
Unless of course, you've had a sudden change of mind brought on by this brilliant and insightful thread?
