General Armor and Weapons As Mustering Out Benefits

[Baroun Tardis]

Let me be “that guy” and take a COMPLETELY different view of this whole thing.


Rather than view Traveller and the 3rd Imperium (and mustering out with weapons and armor) like 21st Century Western Europe with some of the tightest gun control on the planet (and a goal of protecting a vulnerable local police force from potential abuse by former soldiers suffering PTSD) …

What if there was a REAL Nobility with real interstellar power and these soldiers mustering out were a valuable (and loyal) resource that either the Noblemen, Officers or Military Intelligence Branch might wish to maintain contact with … perhaps officially, perhaps semi-officially, perhaps unofficially. Would it be a TERRIBLE thing if an especially loyal Sergeant left the service of an appreciative LORD with a FGMP as a “thank you”? Would that Sergeant be inclined towards loyalty and support of the services and the Imperium even in their civilian life?

Let’s go one step further and assume that this Sergeant travels to some frontier world where the local LEO encounters some Vargr raiders. As the LEO armed with ACRs faces off against Gauss armed Vargr Mercs, might that Sergeant with a FGMP come in handy?

… but what if he (fill in the blank).

Yes, indeed. What if! What if the sergeant betrays the trust that an Imperial Baron has placed in an NCO under his command? What if a former hero shames his unit of the Imperial Marines? SOMEONE WILL WANT TO DO SOMETHING! Someone will want answers.

… that is the stuff that adventures are born from.

On the other hand, every day that Sergeant has a decision to make about how HE will repay the trust given to him. Quid pro quo. Does anyone remember the scene from Firefly when the Preacher made contact with the Navy? Sometimes it can be GOOD to know people and have a SEH in your service record.

[EDIT] Post edited to redact modern reference and self reported. While I intended NOTHING political in the statement, but was merely contrasting MODERN SOCIETY to a HISTORIC FEUDAL SOCIETY with respect to a "knight" leaving service, it could be read as a rules violation ... and the Rules apply to Moderators as well as everyone else.

Consider this an official reminder to avoid current politics in our discussions.

The idea of Nobility actually meaning something, that loyalty and honor are active elements of personal interaction and that people are mature and responsible enough to handle life are the three cultural things that draw me to the Third Imperium and make the setting one of my favorites

I mentioned farther up in this thread about giving an NCO who got Knighted her arms and armor when she left the Marines - because of reasons very similar to yours above. And... shock... the player got it. She played the character like a mature, honorable, adult.

What I dislike about high law level societies is the idea that everyone is untrustworthy and venal and about to go ballistic, and all that can be done is mitigate the damage by limiting what weapons are available to them. One thing I do when running games is increase the odds of running into people like that, because it's what society seems to expect of them. The logic is :
If the people on Carmel grow up being told that not only can you trust your neighbor with a gauss rifle, but it's a good thing they have one in case a Hellmu comes prowling, then when they reach adulthood they have a mind set that with great firearms come great responsibility.
If the people on <insert high law level world> grow up being told that everyone is out for no one but themselves, and everyone is just a thin veneer of civilization over savagry, and that's why we need the Jackboots and nobody can legally own anything more dangerous than a nail file... then when you're in a dark alley and the Jackboots aren't looking, then you can be fairly sure some junkie with a zip gun is going to mug you.

 

[atpollard]

But if the Lord needed their services again, it should be straight forward to equip them when they returned to service, however brief.

"We need you for the weekend, here's your gun and badge, hold up your right hand" kind of thing.

Makes perfect sense ... in a society LIKE OURS. History offers other models to choose from:

• NORSE: What Jarl would first prove his wealth and honor by giving gifts of Weapons and Armor to loyal followers, then take them back as that follower, friend and companion set out to go a 'viking' on his own with his first raiding party?

• MEDIEVAL: What Lord would reclaim the Horse, mail and sword from a loyal knight that chose to join the crusade to free the Holy Land?

• IMPERIAL ROME: Did a Centurion surrender his sword when he retired from the Army and was granted a landholding in conquered territory? (Actually, I have no idea ... but letting him keep it might not be a terrible idea.)

So the THIRD IMPERIUM could follow the example of soldiers being discharged from the Army after WW2 and collect weapons to stack in armories and with time pass down to National Guard forces to store in their armories until someone liquidates a stash of bolt-action rifles on the Civilian market. Or the THIRD IMPERIUM could follow the examples of the NORSE Jarl or MEDIEVAL Lord and honor their warriors, knights and Centurions.

I just thought that it was worth considering alternatives to "how we do things HERE and NOW."

 

[atpollard]

And, specifically regarding something like the FGMP, the FGMP is not what I would call a "precision device". It's an anti-armor weapon, and a messy one at that. Granted, the troops are running around in armor - that's the point, but by the same notion, since troops are running around in armor, the FGMP is, sort of, "safe" to use as the armor can readily deflect the splash damage from an FGMP.

OK ... no excuse. It was just the first thought that popped into my head, but it was a TERRIBLE selection.

1. Unless it is the HIGHEST TL, it requires BattleDress to use.
2. It is the HIGHEST TL ... come on, let's offer 1 TL lower than the best so the active front line troops can keep TL 15.
3. Taking out a building at a time is not the best choice for a personal weapon ... Mortars make bad gifts for a similar reason.

The DAMAGE was not really an issue for me ... either you trust the man with the weapon (in or out of service) or you do not.
The LASER in the Starship Turret (operated by the LOWEST PAID CREW MEMBER) is far more deadly of a weapon.

 

[Baroun Tardis]

Makes perfect sense ... in a society LIKE OURS. History offers other models to choose from:

• NORSE: What Jarl would first prove his wealth and honor by giving gifts of Weapons and Armor to loyal followers, then take them back as that follower, friend and companion set out to go a 'viking' on his own with his first raiding party?

• MEDIEVAL: What Lord would reclaim the Horse, mail and sword from a loyal knight that chose to join the crusade to free the Holy Land?

• IMPERIAL ROME: Did a Centurion surrender his sword when he retired from the Army and was granted a landholding in conquered territory? (Actually, I have no idea ... but letting him keep it might not be a terrible idea.)

So the THIRD IMPERIUM could follow the example of soldiers being discharged from the Army after WW2 and collect weapons to stack in armories and with time pass down to National Guard forces to store in their armories until someone liquidates a stash of bolt-action rifles on the Civilian market. Or the THIRD IMPERIUM could follow the examples of the NORSE Jarl or MEDIEVAL Lord and honor their warriors, knights and Centurions.

I just thought that it was worth considering alternatives to "how we do things HERE and NOW."

There's another difference:
At the end of WWII, if a new war broke out they could have mail to the veterans in a couple days saying "Come Back!" and reissue would begin in a week or two.

In the Third Imperium.... it could be months before the government even knows that something happened, and more months of communication time to send out orders and start the recall.
Having the veterans armed on-site could cut a quarter-year off the response time

 

[Condottiere]

There are complexities and nuances in every society.

You can bet that being a warrior culture, Aslan males are going to have access to weapons; Vargr probably wouldn't trust anyone beyond their immediate pack(s).

Issuing someone with a pointy stick is fairly easy; training them to coordinate in a group to maximize effect is something else, and presumably providing them with protective clothing requires a more collective effort.

 

[Grav_Moped]

What I dislike about high law level societies is the idea that everyone is untrustworthy and venal and about to go ballistic, and all that can be done is mitigate the damage by limiting what weapons are available to them. One thing I do when running games is increase the odds of running into people like that, because it's what society seems to expect of them.

I have the same reaction to low law level societies. The guns are out there, so they're going to get used. It describes a government that either chooses not to, or lacks the ability to, prevent such use.

The concept that "everyone is (increasingly) untrustworthy and venal" (as law level increases) is baked into the ruleset (c.f. the bribery skill description). I'm not sure I entirely accept that premise.

 

[Dragoner]

USSR put guns in everyone's hands after '68, and that became a nightmare after the fall.

 

[coliver988]

For me, I've allowed the weapons that are on the mustering out table. As most Traveller games are thousands of years in the future, and separated by some pretty wide cultural differences (Vilani), I've just assumed what is listed in the muster out tables is what you can get. And this may have already been said - while I've been reading the thread, it is pretty long!

And they need to have training on that weapon, though the rules do state that the 1st benefit is the weapon and the 2nd training. I just can't see any organization giving you a weapon that you are not trained on and never used (though again, CT does give a 1/2 skill level for all weapons, which I actually ignore in MTU) Though in rechecking, it does just say gun. Though technically, a fusion gun is an infantry support weapon so perhaps not classified as a gun?

While it is interesting to hear how other cultures do things I figure 5000 years is a long time and, though I personally revere cats like the Egyptians did, it does not mean everyone else does.

In the end, as it is not really specified in the rules, I'd go with: it depends on the game I am running. Way back, my marine kept her battle dress and plasma gun (and due to the ref really wanting to play D&D, we misjumped and she killed a red dragon with that, though she was also killed). most games I run now I would not allow anything more than a non-combat type of gun. Pistols, rifles, bladed weapons yes. Weapons of mass destruction (including military weapons such as gauss or plasma/fusion) no. Gets a tad iffy over laser weapons, and I'd do that on a case-by-case basis.

 

[Krikkitone]

It could also be the result of the 57th Century Bill of Rights granting every citizen the right to bear arms for personal defence.

*as a citizen of the imperium, your noble exercises your rights on your behalf. (so you don’t have to worry about them)

 

[kilemall]

The Third Imperium allows civilian ships to have starship grade ortillery. Lasers or gauss just isn’t a big deal.

 

[Grav_Moped]

The Third Imperium allows civilian ships to have starship grade ortillery. Lasers or gauss just isn’t a big deal.

Starport point-defense (at C+ starports) should stop outbound missiles from ships on the ground, and there are line-of-sight issues with lasers. Lift to get better LOS and your ship will be re-landed, in pieces. This is one reason for centralized starports...

Try it from orbit and (assuming reasonable TL), you're up against planetary defenses.

So, what's allowed for ships isn't that closely connected to what's allowed as personal defense weaponry.

 

[Condottiere]

The basic set for a civilian spacecraft are lasers, missiles and sandcasters.

The limitations to those are nothing radioactive.

And I suspect a non detachable clause.

 

[kilemall]

Starport point-defense (at C+ starports) should stop outbound missiles from ships on the ground, and there are line-of-sight issues with lasers. Lift to get better LOS and your ship will be re-landed, in pieces. This is one reason for centralized starports...

Try it from orbit and (assuming reasonable TL), you're up against planetary defenses.

So, what's allowed for ships isn't that closely connected to what's allowed as personal defense weaponry.

I was emphasizing amount of firepower not probable use case. Still can be used for piracy or merc tickets, so million credit damages/loss of life potential either way vs personal weapons short of AT/FGMP.

 

[atpollard]

Starport point-defense (at C+ starports) should stop outbound missiles from ships on the ground, and there are line-of-sight issues with lasers. Lift to get better LOS and your ship will be re-landed, in pieces. This is one reason for centralized starports...

Try it from orbit and (assuming reasonable TL), you're up against planetary defenses.

So, what's allowed for ships isn't that closely connected to what's allowed as personal defense weaponry.

If only Small Craft were allowed to mount the equivalent of one turret worth of Starship weapons as fixed mounts ...

 

[mike wightman]

What, you mean like this:

Weaponry may be added to small craft. Each small craft may allocate one ton to weaponry and install up to three, weapons. The individual listings indicate specific weapons which are available on the craft.

Weapons: A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the
mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. All computations,
however, may assume that the craft carries one turret. Weight, tech level, cost, and
energy point restrictions must be observed. The pilot is assumed to be the gunner
for one type of weapon on the craft. If additional types are mounted (a craft could
conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each
additional weapon. Exception: no additional gunner is required for sandcasters.

 

[Baroun Tardis]

I have the same reaction to low law level societies. The guns are out there, so they're going to get used. It describes a government that either chooses not to, or lacks the ability to, prevent such use.

The concept that "everyone is (increasingly) untrustworthy and venal" (as law level increases) is baked into the ruleset (c.f. the bribery skill description). I'm not sure I entirely accept that premise.

The higher the law level, the more the official has to bargain with.

I mean, imagine on a LL1 world, the cop can't really ask for a bribe to overlook a speeding ticket. There's no speed limit.
On an LL9 world, you aren't going to make it through a typical day without one police interaction.

Once the regular folks realize the cops and system are corrupt, they see no reason not to join the game themselves.

I'm not mentioning this as a political comment in any way, but one inspiration I use for handling high law level worlds are a bunch of emails I traded with a friend who was in Zimbabwe when things went sour there. Not for the political side, but for the way the police interactions worked and why the cops did what they did: the economic situation sucked, and they needed to feed their families, and there was this revenue source...

Insofar as the guns getting used... well, perhaps. I tend to look at the way things were historically in frontier towns as to how often they get used. Piper's Little Fuzzy is a fictional model for me handling such places, or Teddy Roosevelt's book on life in the West for a more factual model.

 

[whartung]

History offers other models to choose from:

But the key criteria of many of those other cultures is the time in which they lived. And a key component of those times is simply speed of travel and speed of communication. In those times, clearly, both travel was communication, and travel was slow. In those conditions, autonomy and local authority were very important.

As communications sped up, authority becomes a bit more centralized. Response times much faster. There's no need for "Frontier Justice" if you don't have a frontier.

There was also very little record keeping back then, and a persons word was bond. Now it's all in the contract, or what's on the video or audio recording. A handshake won't do.

Clearly the density of the society plays a large part here. There are frontier worlds, as abstracted by Law Levels.

So, it's not that those other models don't exists, but, rather, how germane they are in high tech, high density society.

 

[whartung]

The DAMAGE was not really an issue for me ... either you trust the man with the weapon (in or out of service) or you do not.

But it is an issue, to a point.

It's more the role you see the weapon playing.

Some will distinguish the capabilities of an armed populace and the capabilities of the State. Armor being a simple example. The State may well choose to not let civilians have arms that can readily penetrate State armored personnel, along with outlawing civilian access to such armor. This creates a gap in personal capability between a civilian and a representative of the State. I'm not talking about State forces showing up in armored vehicles or other mechanics of "The Army". But you can see how this can extend to local police forces.

Simply, it's ok to be armed for "Personal Defense", but not necessarily personal defense against the State.

 

[mike wightman]

When the state can meson you from orbit an FGMP-15 doesn't help...

 

[Baroun Tardis]

But it is an issue, to a point.

It's more the role you see the weapon playing.

Some will distinguish the capabilities of an armed populace and the capabilities of the State. Armor being a simple example. The State may well choose to not let civilians have arms that can readily penetrate State armored personnel, along with outlawing civilian access to such armor. This creates a gap in personal capability between a civilian and a representative of the State. I'm not talking about State forces showing up in armored vehicles or other mechanics of "The Army". But you can see how this can extend to local police forces.

Simply, it's ok to be armed for "Personal Defense", but not necessarily personal defense against the State.

Nicely phrased.
Makes me want to avoid living in those states, but ... anyway

The Imperium maintains that it has control of nukes and TL15 infantry, as I remember it. There's some vagueness about ship-to-ship nukes in the rules as I remember (I could be wrong). IMTU, to legally have nuke ship-to-ship missiles you're either the IN or Imperial approved planetary authority and operating only in your own system (ie, SDBs) or you're a Noble. Perk of the nobility is the Emperor trusts you with naval-level firepower for your own defense. That is to say if a Baron or a Count has control of SDB's with nukes, then it's not a big worry to let them have a few on their Yacht.

But it's a rare Count that's got the cash to be able to fund a personal ship with a meson gun....

On the other hand, going back to personal weapons... a Scout can have a Type-S for free. That and a box of bowling balls is potentially as destructive as a small nuke, and compared to an individual with a gauss rifle, it makes the worst the rifleman could do seem trivial.