Book 1 Wounds

[kaladorn]

Is Sigg's example correct? The way I read Book1 in the reprints was that each dice was a wound and the first wound (read:dice) was randomly allocated, the others by choice. Now, I used to randomly assign all 3 (though not necessarily to the same stat) on the first hit, but re-reading the confusing Book1 version in the reprint, Robert's original understanding matches *what I read* if not what I remembered.

Can someone, fair use being in mind, reproduce the example for Starter Traveller here for consideration?

Once you play MT, this whole discussion kind of goes away, but I would like to know the right mechanism for CT. Allocating single dice randomly gives a moderate chance of a first-shot knockout, allocating the first dice only randomly gives almost none (as people will allocate the other dice to the other attributes and thus generally not go down), and allocating all X dice at once on one stat gives a very high chance of a knockout (3D will average 10.5).

Interesting contrast to MT: A single shot that isn't just a grazing show will tend to drop most unarmoured characters (doing 3 points). An armoured character will tend to take 1 point. But a good shot (with exceptional success) can take you right out of the picture if you are unarmoured... bang.

I'd just really like to know (from ST) what the actual example says. Thanks.

 

[kaladorn]

Is Sigg's example correct? The way I read Book1 in the reprints was that each dice was a wound and the first wound (read:dice) was randomly allocated, the others by choice. Now, I used to randomly assign all 3 (though not necessarily to the same stat) on the first hit, but re-reading the confusing Book1 version in the reprint, Robert's original understanding matches *what I read* if not what I remembered.

Can someone, fair use being in mind, reproduce the example for Starter Traveller here for consideration?

Once you play MT, this whole discussion kind of goes away, but I would like to know the right mechanism for CT. Allocating single dice randomly gives a moderate chance of a first-shot knockout, allocating the first dice only randomly gives almost none (as people will allocate the other dice to the other attributes and thus generally not go down), and allocating all X dice at once on one stat gives a very high chance of a knockout (3D will average 10.5).

Interesting contrast to MT: A single shot that isn't just a grazing show will tend to drop most unarmoured characters (doing 3 points). An armoured character will tend to take 1 point. But a good shot (with exceptional success) can take you right out of the picture if you are unarmoured... bang.

I'd just really like to know (from ST) what the actual example says. Thanks.

 

[kaladorn]

Just to clarify my middle paragraph:

Shot from an auto pistol had 3D to allocate. Target UPP 777777.

1) Allocate 3D to one random stat. 10.5 points avg to stat 1, 2 or 3. Result: Likely unconciousness. A good roll will yield 15+ pts meaning very bad injury. You are unlikely (6- on 3D... not very likely) to stay concious. One shot usually drops you.

2. Allocate 1D (three times) to randomly determined stats. Average 3.5 damage per stat. No stats will tend to go to zero, though the odds of getting 2D on the same stat are not inconsiderable so it can happen. So, you don't tend to go unconcious, but you can. You probably won't get a serious wound although it is possible.

3. Allocate 1D to a random stat. Then allocate 2 rolls of 1D to chosen stats. Average result will be 3.5 damage to each stat. No stats will go to zero. You won't go unconcious with average rolls. Even with great rolls, you'll have a UPP of 111 at the end. So, no way to knock you out.

I hate to say it, but the middle possibility, which is what book 1 seems to read, seems the most fair to characters. It tends not to instantly drop them (as putting 3D on one stat will tend to do) and it tends not to let them ignore the first hit (as 1D random/2D allocated tends to). So it seems like the middle of the road option.

So, despite what ST may say, it seems to be more geared to 'action oriented' traveller....

 

[kaladorn]

Just to clarify my middle paragraph:

Shot from an auto pistol had 3D to allocate. Target UPP 777777.

1) Allocate 3D to one random stat. 10.5 points avg to stat 1, 2 or 3. Result: Likely unconciousness. A good roll will yield 15+ pts meaning very bad injury. You are unlikely (6- on 3D... not very likely) to stay concious. One shot usually drops you.

2. Allocate 1D (three times) to randomly determined stats. Average 3.5 damage per stat. No stats will tend to go to zero, though the odds of getting 2D on the same stat are not inconsiderable so it can happen. So, you don't tend to go unconcious, but you can. You probably won't get a serious wound although it is possible.

3. Allocate 1D to a random stat. Then allocate 2 rolls of 1D to chosen stats. Average result will be 3.5 damage to each stat. No stats will go to zero. You won't go unconcious with average rolls. Even with great rolls, you'll have a UPP of 111 at the end. So, no way to knock you out.

I hate to say it, but the middle possibility, which is what book 1 seems to read, seems the most fair to characters. It tends not to instantly drop them (as putting 3D on one stat will tend to do) and it tends not to let them ignore the first hit (as 1D random/2D allocated tends to). So it seems like the middle of the road option.

So, despite what ST may say, it seems to be more geared to 'action oriented' traveller....

 

[mike wightman]

It's not just ST that says it, The Traveller Book has the same example.
One of the problems that the FFE reprint of the rulebooks has is that it isn't based on the final version of the CT rules - which would be a combo of TTB and ST - so it is missing the example of combat.

Oh, and my example is correct if using the description in ST/TTB

 

[mike wightman]

It's not just ST that says it, The Traveller Book has the same example.
One of the problems that the FFE reprint of the rulebooks has is that it isn't based on the final version of the CT rules - which would be a combo of TTB and ST - so it is missing the example of combat.

Oh, and my example is correct if using the description in ST/TTB

 

[aramis]

I never bothered with carry-over in play; I just treated neg's as longer healing times, and no more dice could be allocated. In my more gritty games, I would apply the neg as a hit to "Unwounded" stat, as well....

 

[aramis]

I never bothered with carry-over in play; I just treated neg's as longer healing times, and no more dice could be allocated. In my more gritty games, I would apply the neg as a hit to "Unwounded" stat, as well....

 

[kaladorn]

Sigg, I wasn't disputing your example as you have more current examples (though if TTB has the example, I have that too, just never dug it out). I'm just saying allocating all dice (usually 3) to the first stat means most first gunshots will produce unconciousness. (10.5 vs. 7 for the avg stat) so one has to know if this is the kind of combat you want to run with.

 

[kaladorn]

Sigg, I wasn't disputing your example as you have more current examples (though if TTB has the example, I have that too, just never dug it out). I'm just saying allocating all dice (usually 3) to the first stat means most first gunshots will produce unconciousness. (10.5 vs. 7 for the avg stat) so one has to know if this is the kind of combat you want to run with.

 

[mike wightman]

Sorry kaladorn,
my earlier reply does come across as a bit terse, doesn't it?
I did intend to write out the whole example for you , but I wonder if it is allowed under fair use and all that?

The first hit rule does seem to be unbalanced when compared to real life cases, and probably does need some sort of revision IMHO.

I use a hybrid version of CT and T4 for combat resolution, where armour provides damage reduction , and the "first hit" rule is only applied on a critical hit (a roll 4 greater than needed to hit).
But then I also use hit location and bleeding rules, so combat is definitely a last option

 

[mike wightman]

Sorry kaladorn,
my earlier reply does come across as a bit terse, doesn't it?
I did intend to write out the whole example for you , but I wonder if it is allowed under fair use and all that?

The first hit rule does seem to be unbalanced when compared to real life cases, and probably does need some sort of revision IMHO.

I use a hybrid version of CT and T4 for combat resolution, where armour provides damage reduction , and the "first hit" rule is only applied on a critical hit (a roll 4 greater than needed to hit).
But then I also use hit location and bleeding rules, so combat is definitely a last option

 

[kaladorn]

For MT:
FWIW, I use hit locations too, using a D66 system. The 'exceptional success' does not gaurantee minimum damage. It just allows you to shift your target 1 to 3 boxes around the 6x6 hit location matrix to find a more weakly armoured or damage multiplying area. This prevents the relatively ludicrous guy with a .22 from taking down battle dress using an exceptional success +8. But at the same time, it allows partial armours to make sense (your flak jacket gives you AV 5, but on the chest/abdomen, not anywhere else).

Anyway, all interesting discussions.

 

[kaladorn]

For MT:
FWIW, I use hit locations too, using a D66 system. The 'exceptional success' does not gaurantee minimum damage. It just allows you to shift your target 1 to 3 boxes around the 6x6 hit location matrix to find a more weakly armoured or damage multiplying area. This prevents the relatively ludicrous guy with a .22 from taking down battle dress using an exceptional success +8. But at the same time, it allows partial armours to make sense (your flak jacket gives you AV 5, but on the chest/abdomen, not anywhere else).

Anyway, all interesting discussions.

 

[Frankymole]

"Guy 904xxx, unconscious.

Guy's player can decide how to allocate the 5 and 4 from the dagger.
If it were me I would choose the 5 to affect STR, and the 4 to affect END."

What if he selected 5 to affect END, and 4 to affect STR? does he get one less point damage, or does the result turn out exactly the same (the spare 1 point carries over to END anyway)?

 

[Frankymole]

"Guy 904xxx, unconscious.

Guy's player can decide how to allocate the 5 and 4 from the dagger.
If it were me I would choose the 5 to affect STR, and the 4 to affect END."

What if he selected 5 to affect END, and 4 to affect STR? does he get one less point damage, or does the result turn out exactly the same (the spare 1 point carries over to END anyway)?

 

[mike wightman]

It doesn't matter what he chooses

The damage point carries over so the final outcome is:
Guy 400xxx

 

[mike wightman]

It doesn't matter what he chooses

The damage point carries over so the final outcome is:
Guy 400xxx