CT Errata Compendium

[DonM]

Noted on the Adv 0 errata.

In addition to the draft errata I posted to the various threads on specific ships from TTA, here's the last of the ships in that chapter:

Page 140, Oberlindes Cargo Carrier (type CT) (correction): This ship has a 1000-ton custom hull. Cargo capacity is 413 tons. The cargo carrier only requires a crew of 10 (4 engineers). The ship costs MCr401.49 (including 10% volume discount).

I know the Vargr designs in TTA need to be looked at, but I want to do them together with the Vargr designs in AM3 (since they are the same).

 

[DonM]

Errata for Vargr Starships

The following is draft errata for all Book 2-designed Vargr starships I could find.

Vargr Draft Errata
Page 12, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Seeker (correction and omission): The Vargr Seeker uses a standard hull. Fuel tankage of 50 tons supports the power plant for 12 weeks and one jump-1. The ship requires a crew of three: pilot/navigator, engineer, and medic. The ship costs MCr 47.43 (including standard discount) and takes 11 months to build.
Page 12, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Trader (correction and omission): The Vargr Trader uses a custom hull. The ship has two tons dedicated to fire control. The required crew should include pilot/navigator, engineer, medic, and 2 gunners. The ship costs MCr 68.49 (including discounts for this standard ship type).
Page 13, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Corsair (correction and omission): The Vargr Corsair uses a custom hull. The hull is streamlined. The Vargr Corsair requires a crew of nine, including 2 engineers. The ship costs MCr 184.86 (including discounts for this standard ship type).
Page 13, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Packet (correction and omission): The Vargr Packet uses a standard hull. The Vargr Packet costs MCr 273.87 (including standard ship design discount).
Page 13, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Courier (correction): The Vargr Courier requires a crew of three: pilot/navigator, engineer, and medic. The Vargr Courier costs MCr128.876 (including architect’s fees, but not standard discount).
Page 13, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Scout (correction and omission): The Vargr Scout uses a standard hull. The ship costs MCr 35.64 (including discount for standard designs).
Page 13, Standard Ship Designs, Vargr Frigate (correction and omission): The Vargr Frigate uses a standard hull. The cargo capacity is 9 tons. The ship costs MCr506.34 (including standard design discount).

Traveller Adventure Draft Errata
Page 152, Starships, Vargr Corsair (correction and omission): The Vargr Corsair uses a custom hull. The hull is streamlined. The Vargr Corsair requires a crew of nine, including 2 engineers. The ship costs MCr 184.86 (including discounts for this standard ship type).
Page 152, Starships, Vargr Trader (correction and omission): The Vargr Trader uses a custom hull. The ship is streamlined. The required crew should include pilot/navigator, engineer, medic, and 2 gunners. The ship costs MCr 68.49 (including discounts for this standard ship type).
Page 152-153, Starships, Vargr Seeker (correction and omission): The Vargr Seeker uses a standard hull. Fuel tankage of 50 tons supports the power plant for 12 weeks and one jump-1. The ship requires a crew of three: pilot/navigator, engineer, and medic. The ship costs MCr 47.43 (including standard discount) and takes 11 months to build.

K’kree Draft Errata
Page 31, The Vargr Corsair (correction and omission): The Vargr Corsair uses a custom hull. The hull is streamlined. The Vargr Corsair requires a crew of nine, including 2 engineers. The ship costs MCr 184.86 (including discounts for this standard ship type).

 

[DonM]

Draft Errata for Aslan Starships

Page 32, Starships, Scout (correction and omission): The Aslan Scout has a standard hull. The scout requires a crew of two: pilot and engineer. A gunner is a common addition. The ship costs MCr 33.64 (including 10% discount for standard designs).
Page 32, Starships, Trader (correction and omission): The Aslan Trader uses a standard hull. There is one ton of drive waste space, and a cargo capacity of 164 tons. The ship costs MCr123.03 (including 10% discount for standard designs).
Page 32, Starships, Clan Transport (correction and omission): The Clan Transport uses a 600-ton standard hull. The ship costs MCr255.24 (including 10% discount for standard designs.
Page 32, Starships, Courier (correction): The Aslan Courier costs MCr124.16 (including 10% discounts for standard ship designs).
Page 32, Starships, Cruiser (correction and omission): The Aslan Cruiser uses a custom 1000-ton hull. The ship costs MCr568.82 (including 10% discount for standard designs) and takes 30 months to build.
Page 33, Starships, Escort (correction and omission): The Aslan Escort uses an 800-ton custom hull. With two armed pinnaces and five fighters, the ship only requires seven small craft pilots. The ship costs MCr 572 (including 10% discount for standard designs) and takes 28 months to build.
Page 33, Starships, Seeker (correction): The Aslan Seeker costs MCr53.46 (including 10% discount for standard designs).
Page 33, Starships, Researcher (correction): The Aslan Researcher has performance of jump-3 and 1-G acceleration. There is one ton reserved for cargo. The ship costs MCr 231.66 (including 10% discount for standard designs).

 

[DonM]

Draft Errata for Zhodani Starships

These are for the ships from AM4 -- Zhodani.

Page 40, Standard Ship Design Plans, Zhodani Scout (correction and omission): The Zhodani scout uses a standard 100-ton hull. The ship costs MCr30.69.
Page 40, Standard Ship Design Plans, Zhodani Trader (correction and omission): The Zhodani Trader uses a standard 400-ton hull. There are 9 tons of drive waste space; cargo capacity is 116 tons. The ship costs MCr124.16 (including 10% standard ship design discount) and takes 14 months to build.
Page 40, Standard Ship Design Plans, Zhodani Liner (correction and omission): The Zhodani Liner uses an 800-ton standard hull. Cargo capacity is 50 tons, of which 24 tons is in the drive section. The ship costs MCr412.83 (including 10% standard ship design discount).
Page 40-41, Standard Ship Design Plans, Zhodani Escort (correction): The Zhodani Escort costs MCr397.67 (including 10% discount for standard ship designs).
Page 41, Standard Ship Design Plans, Zhodani Courier (correction): The Zhodani Courier costs MCr100.67 (including 10% standard ship design discount).
Page 47, The Echtovr Dazhia, Zhodani Council Cruiser (correction): The Zhodani Council Cruiser has a cargo capacity of 40 tons (plus the 11 tons available on the ZC). The ship costs MCr805.5 (not counting the cost of the ZC, but including a 10% standard ship design discount).

 

[aramis]

Supp 7:
p9. Description is "12 meter sphere with 10 meter cone rear tail. Overall length 22 meters." Should be "12 meter hemisphere with 16 meter truncated cone rear tail. Overall length 22 meters." (matches deckplans and needed size for 100Td, as well...)

 

[DonM]

Got the dimension change on the Xboat. I'm trying to finish the Solomani and Hiver Book 2 designs right now, and then I'll have a spreadsheet I'll post for review of those designs.

Except the Solomani Escort. It doesn't add up. I started a thread for that.

 

[aramis]

Another error in S7... p17. Data box shows 24m wide; calculation and plans show 28.5m wide. (Dimensions should be 37.5x28.5x7.5)

 

[nats]

Some errata for you that I have noticed:

Supp 7 pg 6 - sliding doors opening requ strength or lower throw with 2d6, and with -4 DM for a prybar. Pg 7 opening valves - throw strength to open with DMs of -2 for Dex of 10+, -3 if in vacc suit, -2 ship power off, +8 if locked.

Adventure 10 pg 21 valve opening DMs should be +3 if in vacc suit and -2 if ships power is off. Pg 33 Asteltine isnt a desert world.

Supp 3 pg 17 world symbol missing at coords 0504. Pg21 Alell label missing at coord 0106. Pg 18, Asteltine isnt a desert world.

Cheers.

 

[DonM]

Supp 7 pg 6 - sliding doors opening requ strength or lower throw with 2d6, and with -4 DM for a prybar. Pg 7 opening valves - throw strength to open with DMs of -2 for Dex of 10+, -3 if in vacc suit, -2 ship power off, +8 if locked.

Hmm... For page 6, I like the wording in Safari Ship, let's use that: "(throw strength or less to open; DM -4 if a pry bar is used)."

Page 7, I don't see any errata. It requires a straight up roll of 9+, with DMs of +1 if Str 10+, +2 if Dex 10+, +2 if ship power off, -3 if wearing vacc suit, -8 if locked. It does mean that if the valve is locked, you have to have a Str 10+, Dex 10+, the power be off AND roll a 12 (and NOT be wearing a vacc suit) to open the valve.

I think it's meant to be this way... Snapshot (p. 27) indicates that trying to force open a closed valve is a throw of 9+, with DMs of +1 if Str 10+, +2 if Dex 10+, and -3 if in a vacc suit.

Safari Ship uses a different rule (which you point the errata out for below); but is that errata for Snapshot and Supplement 7?

Adventure 10 pg 21 valve opening DMs should be +3 if in vacc suit and -2 if ships power is off. Pg 33 Asteltine isnt a desert world.

Supp 3 pg 17 world symbol missing at coords 0504. Pg21 Alell label missing at coord 0106. Pg 18, Asteltine isnt a desert world.

Already had the page 33 correction for Adventure 10. For Supplement 3, on page 18, Asteltine isn't noted as a desert world (at least in my copy).

 

[DonM]

It has been pointed out to Marc (who forwarded it to me) that the weapons charts in the skills section have different DM listings than the actual weapons charts.

Compare Book 1 '81 page 17 to Book 1 '81 page 45. Adjust for the different weapon order, and the fact that one column on page 17 is "DM-", and the column on page 45 is "required dexterity minimum", and there are still differences.

The two differences are:
1: p. 17 has the Cutlass with a DM- of 7-, and p. 45 has a required Str of 7 (DM- 6-).
2: p. 17 has the SMG with a DM- of 6-, and p. 45 has a required Dex of 6 (DM- 5-).

Suggestions as to which values for the Cutlass and SMG would be correct? Don't base your answers on which values appear more often, but on what values would play more correctly for the weapon...

 

[DonM]

I updated my website with the updated errata (v0.05)... link is in my signature.

 

[Traveller]

Possible Fuel Purification Errata

In the revised version of High Guard, the Fuel Purification list on page 36 seems to have an error in that the TL 13 and TL 15 plants have the same price per 1,000 tons: Cr150,000. Shouldn't the TL 15 plant be Cr130,000 since the TL 14 plant is Cr140,000?

I wouldn't have noticed it, except I'm trying to create a High Guard spreadsheet with the corrections already included.

 

[dean]

Clarifications request

Don / Marc:

In another thread about "weapon mounts and batteries", I recognized the following:

...that there is a case which the rules do fail to address. In HG, how does one treat a ship 1000 tons or under with, say, 10 turrets with less than ten mounts of one type (5 sandcasters and 5 missles, or 2 50 ton bays with the same or even different weapons)?

If the weapons are not organized into batteries, what factor are they? Except for mixed turrets, the rules don't say, explicitly. (Bk 5 p 29)

One could rightly infer either way that the weapons are organized by mount, or as individual weapons, or any combination of the two.

The rules state "may organize into batteries" (for mounts =<10 of a type) but don't address what to do if you choose not to organize into batteries.

Is there a clarification to be had here? Can ships 1000 tons and less organize his weapons willy-nilly or is there some sort of structure that should be adhered to?

ALSO, can we please, please, please! publish the clarification of:

"Weapon mounts are turrets, barbettes, bays, and spinal mounts." (Bk 5 p 29)

Thank you!

 

[DonM]

The rules state "may organize into batteries" (for mounts =<10 of a type) but don't address what to do if you choose not to organize into batteries.

Is there a clarification to be had here? Can ships 1000 tons and less organize his weapons willy-nilly or is there some sort of structure that should be adhered to?

ALSO, can we please, please, please! publish the clarification of:

"Weapon mounts are turrets, barbettes, bays, and spinal mounts." (Bk 5 p 29)

Actually, this is already in the errata:

Page 29, Batteries (clarification):​

​

​

​

​

The text is somewhat confusing. In order to use the HG Combat rules, all ships must organize their weapons into batteries. All weapons in a mixed turret must be organized as single weapon batteries, even if a mixed turret has more than one of the same weapon in it, and weapons in a mixed turret cannot be organized into batteries with weapons from other turrets (including other identical mixed turrets).

Is additional clairification needed? The answer is probably yes, if just to define weapon mounts?
​

 

[aramis]

Actually, this is already in the errata:

Page 29, Batteries (clarification):​

​

​

​

​

The text is somewhat confusing. In order to use the HG Combat rules, all ships must organize their weapons into batteries. All weapons in a mixed turret must be organized as single weapon batteries, even if a mixed turret has more than one of the same weapon in it, and weapons in a mixed turret cannot be organized into batteries with weapons from other turrets (including other identical mixed turrets).

Is additional clairification needed? The answer is probably yes, if just to define weapon mounts?
​

The issue is that "mounts" is used in exactly ONE CT definition: ships with more than 10 mounts must organize them into batteries. Mounts appears to mean turrets, but it's not terribly clear (tho' in MT, it's explicitly clear that a turret is a mount, not the weapon mounted within it).

 

[dean]

Actually, this is already in the errata:

Page 29, Batteries (clarification):​

​

​

​

​

The text is somewhat confusing. In order to use the HG Combat rules, all ships must organize their weapons into batteries. All weapons in a mixed turret must be organized as single weapon batteries, even if a mixed turret has more than one of the same weapon in it, and weapons in a mixed turret cannot be organized into batteries with weapons from other turrets (including other identical mixed turrets).

Is additional clairification needed? The answer is probably yes, if just to define weapon mounts?
​

Ah Sweet. Thanks for pointing that out to me Don.

And, yes, since it seems a number of people can't deduce from the text of the rule "Weapon mounts = turrets, bays, spinals, and small craft JUST AS if a turret were present, with all restrictions including battery assignment" then I do believe a one-line clarification is in order. Then the rest of us can joint point to the reference and be done with it.

I mean, I did a Proof using the rule text only, demonstrating what most of us see, but it is sorta kinda vague, so I think a short, sweet clarification statement is in order.

It might also be useful to state that weapons in a Turret mount MUST all belong to the same battery, including those on Small Craft, unless the intent is otherwise. No real support for that either way, as the rule itself is vague. I mean if a mixed turret can have each weapon as a separate battery, why not do so with non-mixed turrets? The mixed turret special case provides an out for those that think assigning each weapon as a battery in non-mixed turrets is OK, but I am pretty sure that was not the intent of the rules (but rather to punish allocating mixed turrets, thereby discouraging their use).

 

[DonM]

Actually, I think the word mounts was NOT used in the clarification on purpose. It says that all weapons must be assigned to batteries. It eliminates the use of the word completely.

As to Dean's point of all weapons in a turret being in one battery, I don't think that is the case. Remember that a mixed turret could be two lasers and a missile launcher, and the two lasers must each still be in their own battery. So I think the designers intended to allow that a triple beam laser turret could be three batteries of one beam laser each. Seems very counter-productive, but still legal.

Hmm... seems I should ask another clarification. Under Small Craft weapons, it reads "the pilot is assumed to be the gunner for one type of weapon on the craft". Should that read "battery" instead of "type"? As soon as I'm done with my current project, I'll go do that...

 

[aramis]

Actually, I think the word mounts was NOT used in the clarification on purpose. It says that all weapons must be assigned to batteries. It eliminates the use of the word completely.

The problem is the requirement of any ship with more than 10 mounts to group them into batteries is still present and not covered.

 

[dean]

The problem is the requirement of any ship with more than 10 mounts to group them into batteries is still present and not covered.

Here's my "proof" using just the text of the rules and the logic that has to apply to define "weapon mount":

Fact from sentence one: Weapon mounts may be organized into batteries.
Fact from sentence two: More than ten mounts of one type must be organized into batteries.
Fact from sentence three: Turrets may be organized into batteries.
Logic: If weapon mounts may/must be organized into batteries, and turrets can be organized into batteries, then turrets are weapon mounts.
Fact from sentence four: Each bay weapon is a battery.
Logic: If weapon mounts may/must be organized into into batteries, and bays are batteries, then bays are weapon mounts.
Fact from sentence five: Spinal mounts are a battery.
Logic: If weapon mounts may/must be organized into into batteries, and spinals are batteries, then spinals are weapon mounts.

This set of statements, which is in effect a "Proof", identifies all statements related to the definition of weapon mounts. Since no other definition exists in the rules, these must be what constitute weapon mounts: Turrets (and by extension Barbettes), Bays, Spinal Mounts.

So, Don, the BOOK 5 rules don't address the state of whether or not individual weapons CAN be assigned as batteries, EXCEPT mixed turrets. If the ruling is that any ship can assign batteries as weapon mounts (as the Proof defines them) or individual weapon-based batteries, then what's the point of saying batteries have to be made up of weapon mounts? (Unless you are saying only on ships 1000 tons or less, only.)

Thanks for discussing this.

I still think we need Clarification saying a weapon mount is a Turret, Bay, Spinal, or Small Craft, and does not refer to individual weapons (except in the special case of "mixed turrets").

And then also clarify that vessels 1000 tons and less can have mixed turrets, with each weapon as a battery... and then whatever clarification needs to happen to handle your additional case.

::bow::

 

[BlackBat242]

I still think we need Clarification saying a weapon mount is a Turret, Bay, Spinal, or Small Craft, and does not refer to individual weapons (except in the special case of "mixed turrets").

::bow::

Except that spinal mounts are always singular, correct?

In which case right there is an example of an individual weapon being a weapon mount!