Digest Group Characters

[rogermccarthy]

Also given that average stat in TNE is 6 and most skills will be at 1-3 level the division by difficulty means a lot of tasks are going to require a roll of 2- or 4- on D20.

One way around the stat overweighting of TNE would be to only divide the stat but not the skill by the difficulty multiplier.

So if you have Pilot-3 your TN will never be lower than 3-

This also makes stats more important for easy tasks and less so for difficult ones.

So for the two medics the Edu-9 Medical-1 paramedic may well in fact be 'better' than the surgeon if the task is a relatively easy one - because he actually has a wider but shallower knowledge base - the Edu-5 Medical-4 surgeon however will be much more likely to succeed at the hard tasks where his depth of knowledge is crucial.

Similarly, run a short simple race on a flat straight course and I'd bet on the inexperienced young guy with Dex-10 and Vehicle-1 to roar off and win while the old geezer with Dex-5 and Vehicle-5 is still adjusting his wing mirror and checking his fuel gauge.

Make it a long cross-country race with temperamental vehicles and it would be much more equal.

 

[Jame]

S4's list:

3D +1 vs. No Armor
3D +1 vs. Jack
3D -3 vs. Mesh
3D -8 vs. Cloth
3D +1 vs. Reflec
3D -2 vs. Ablat
3D -13 vs. Combat
3D -15 vs. Battle Dress

is why I want and am in favor of rifles doing 4d6 damage as a baseline - represents better penetration and more effectiveness against armors.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Jame:
S4's list:


is why I want and am in favor of rifles doing 4d6 damage as a baseline - represents better penetration and more effectiveness against armors.

Actually, I think rifles do quite nicely. Compare the AutoRifle to the AutoPistol stats above.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">3D +6 vs. Nothing
3D +6 vs. Jack
3D vs. Mesh
3D -6 vs. Cloth
3D +6 vs. Reflec
3D +2 vs. Ablat
3D -11 vs. Combat
3D -13 vs. BattleDress</pre>[/QUOTE]The rifle penetrates better than the pistol and does more damage (because of its better penetration and longer range).

 

[Plankowner]

Originally posted by Supplement Four:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kafka47:
We perhaps will have to wait for ACT for the perfect system.

Perfect system? You've got to be kiddin'?

ACT?

Good Gawd, don't get me started on that.

-S4 </font>[/QUOTE]It's not going to be a problem since ACT is DEAD. Marc wouldn't give his approval, so the whole project had to be dropped. Check out the Avenger/Comstar website if you want the history (I think it is still there...).

 

[Jame]

I still would improve rifle damage to 4d. Yes, it's deadlier, but rifles are deadlier IRL anyways.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Jame:
I still would improve rifle damage to 4d. Yes, it's deadlier, but rifles are deadlier IRL anyways.

We seem to be hijacking this thread, but what you bring up, Jame, is something I've been toying with lately in my own house versio of CT.

I've been looking at both sides of the old question: Which is better? Deadly weapons that can kill characters in a single shot (simulation of realism in the game)? Or, weapons that allow characters to get hit more than once without typically sustaining character-ending wounds (allowing the game to be played with gunfight action).

It's a tight rope we walk, between those two. My combat system I use in my current campaign does balance that a bit. If a character gets hit once, he's unlikely to be wounded worse than a stun or being knocked unconscious. But, on the other hand, some damage is applied randomly, and enemies can fire up to three times in a round (up to six attacks if using full auto), which makes players respect gun combat. I mean, it's definitely not D&D where characters with high hit points can survive multiple blows.





The question brings most GMs to the decision: Do they want to have exciting gun fights in their game? Or, do they want their players to avoid gun battles at all costs, as a real person would in real life?

If you make the game too deadly and realistic, will the game still be fun?

Questions to ponder.

-S4

 

[Alleyne]

Dont worry about hijacking the thread.
I am looking at staying with CT for the Digest Adventures and using your house rules. From memory there is not that much fighting in the series.
Has anybody played these adventues through to the end?
I am surprised you old timers have not discused this Skill, Combat material before.
I remember converting Stiker and coming up with my own system for combat years ago, because I was just so disgusted with the published system.

 

[rogermccarthy]

You might also want to check out the At Close Quarters supplement from BITS which has a nice combat system that works with all versions of Traveller - there's another recent thread about it here: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001975#000000

It uses action points like Snapshot and Azhanti High Lightning but is way better laid out and organised.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Supplement Four:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Alleyne:
Do you have those house rules in one document somewhere?

I haven't gotten around to doing that yet. Most people copy and past from the thread.

Employee 2-4601 (can't remember the numbers) has a pdf file in his sig that is a write-up of the UGM rules (not the combat rules).

Just find one of his posts, and you can get that pdf on the UGM (it's just a tad different from what I've put on the thread).</font>[/QUOTE]For your convinience, here's an updated version of the one-page UGM system.

EDIT: New version uploaded.