Has anyone experimented with combat by removing the positive to hit DM bonus for armor vs weapons? I am not sure what the rationale is for this DM. Since armor deflects damage one would assume that either you have protection or you don't. A throw of 8+ (at least to me) assumes you are striking a target without any significant protection. Many of the weapons have large bonuses to unarmored/Jack targets. Why is a Foil +2 to hit a naked man? Club/Body Pistol 0 (I guess my skin is tough enough to stop bullets and blunt force trauma). Submachine gun +5. Perhaps this is to account for all of the billions of scrubs who no training with weapons, not even skill 0? I can see armor making it hard to hit (penetration) but I have never seen a game mechanic where it makes you easier to hit (unless my understanding of the 8+ roll to hit is flawed).
Eliminating postive DM bonus due to armor
- Thread starter ddamant
- Start date
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The rationale is that Classic Traveller is a "to hit and damage" system. It's exactly like first edition AD&D, a contemporary game of the time. That attack roll is not just to hit, but it is the throw required to hit and damage.
That attack and damage system used in Classic Traveller (and in AD&D) is abstract. AD&D uses a one minute combat round. A single attack throw represents all the attacks, feints, hits that score damage that doesn't count as 1 hp of damage, near misses, grazes, etc.
The same goes for Classic Traveller. Abstract combat round which is 15 seconds long*.
Why is a Foil +2 vs no armor? A club or body pistol +0? A SMG +5?
Because, in the author's reckoning, it's easier to stick a man and hurt him with a foil than it is a club. I'm guessing MWM (or whomever created the weapon tables) figured that a person could withstand club blows easier than a stick with a foil. Thus, there is more "armor", more defense against such an attack. More successful foil attacks result in more damage than the same number of club blows.
The same holds true for a body pistol vs. an SMG. A BP fires a single, small round. An SMG fires four small rounds in quick succession (and don't forget the AutoFire rule--the SMG gets two attacks at +5!).
This says that it's harder to hit and damage a target with a single shot from a BP than it is the same target, at the same range, using a burst from an UZI. Which makes sense to me.
*Classic Traveller combat is, more correctly, a mixture of abstract and non-abstract concepts, which is more akin to the AD&D attack throw for Bows. It's still a one minute combat round in AD&D, but the bow fires twice within that minute--where, if the attacker is using a longsword, there could be abstractly one swing or ten swings or some other number of swings represented by that one attack throw. With bows, the attack throw is for the actual attack, and that's how Classic Traveller gun combat works--like bows in AD&D--in a 15 second abstract combat round but with specific attacks from weapons.
Brawling and melee weapons in Classic Traveller are treated like their counterparts in AD&D, in an abstract way. So, if you make a Brawling attack in Classic Traveller, that one roll could mean that the character swung his fist once. Or, it could mean that the character head-butted, kneed, backhanded, and punched his target three times--all of those cumulatively represented by the one Brawling attack.
That attack and damage system used in Classic Traveller (and in AD&D) is abstract. AD&D uses a one minute combat round. A single attack throw represents all the attacks, feints, hits that score damage that doesn't count as 1 hp of damage, near misses, grazes, etc.
The same goes for Classic Traveller. Abstract combat round which is 15 seconds long*.
Why is a Foil +2 vs no armor? A club or body pistol +0? A SMG +5?
Because, in the author's reckoning, it's easier to stick a man and hurt him with a foil than it is a club. I'm guessing MWM (or whomever created the weapon tables) figured that a person could withstand club blows easier than a stick with a foil. Thus, there is more "armor", more defense against such an attack. More successful foil attacks result in more damage than the same number of club blows.
The same holds true for a body pistol vs. an SMG. A BP fires a single, small round. An SMG fires four small rounds in quick succession (and don't forget the AutoFire rule--the SMG gets two attacks at +5!).
This says that it's harder to hit and damage a target with a single shot from a BP than it is the same target, at the same range, using a burst from an UZI. Which makes sense to me.
*Classic Traveller combat is, more correctly, a mixture of abstract and non-abstract concepts, which is more akin to the AD&D attack throw for Bows. It's still a one minute combat round in AD&D, but the bow fires twice within that minute--where, if the attacker is using a longsword, there could be abstractly one swing or ten swings or some other number of swings represented by that one attack throw. With bows, the attack throw is for the actual attack, and that's how Classic Traveller gun combat works--like bows in AD&D--in a 15 second abstract combat round but with specific attacks from weapons.
Brawling and melee weapons in Classic Traveller are treated like their counterparts in AD&D, in an abstract way. So, if you make a Brawling attack in Classic Traveller, that one roll could mean that the character swung his fist once. Or, it could mean that the character head-butted, kneed, backhanded, and punched his target three times--all of those cumulatively represented by the one Brawling attack.
I played a lot of AD&D 30 years ago. A naked man was AC10; only a 50/50 chance of hitting another naked man. I understand that in AD&D parries and feints are assumed, which lowers the to hit roll.
In CT, to hit that same naked man with a Broadsword (+5) only I only need a 3+ (97% chance of success) at skill 0. Even if he parries he only gets +1DM for each skill level. Hardly enough to come close my +5. If I have skill 1 then naked man is hit 100% of the time. It would seem that in the 51st century people have forgotten to duck and dodge, hence killing naked men in the Far Future is easier than in the Far Past.
The 2d6 bell curve is (as well all know) can be broken quickly with too many DMs. Traveller characters have few skills compared to other game systems but some of the DMs seem a bit large.
Maybe I am out to lunch. Feedback welcomed.
In CT, to hit that same naked man with a Broadsword (+5) only I only need a 3+ (97% chance of success) at skill 0. Even if he parries he only gets +1DM for each skill level. Hardly enough to come close my +5. If I have skill 1 then naked man is hit 100% of the time. It would seem that in the 51st century people have forgotten to duck and dodge, hence killing naked men in the Far Future is easier than in the Far Past.
The 2d6 bell curve is (as well all know) can be broken quickly with too many DMs. Traveller characters have few skills compared to other game systems but some of the DMs seem a bit large.
Maybe I am out to lunch. Feedback welcomed.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I was never a fan of the combat matrices in CT or Snapshot.
I much prefer the AHL/Striker model of a to hit roll based on range and a roll for damage with armour acting as something to be penetrated or as damage reduction.
If you don't want to go the route of adopting AHL/Striker you can keep the range table matrices and then have the armour DM difference act as damage reduction.
Armour DM difference is the difference between the to hit DM for no armour on the table and the DM for the armour type.
I much prefer the AHL/Striker model of a to hit roll based on range and a roll for damage with armour acting as something to be penetrated or as damage reduction.
If you don't want to go the route of adopting AHL/Striker you can keep the range table matrices and then have the armour DM difference act as damage reduction.
Armour DM difference is the difference between the to hit DM for no armour on the table and the DM for the armour type.
These are all good suggestions.
I know this is a CT-only thread, but another option is to import the damage-dice reduction values for armor from T4, which I have always thought was rather elegant, and not much of a divergence from the general flavor of CT combat anyway.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I'm not trying to defend the choices the GDW crew made in making the weapons mechanics in CT other than to say it has served me well through the decades. And, I quite enjoy the CT system--it's still my favorite of all the Traveller systems that have come out to date.
Don't forget, though, that you've got to look at the damage to get a clear picture of what happened. I don't think you're taking into account the abstract nature of the CT system.
In AD&D, you've got a Longword that does 1d8 damage. You swing it and hit, making the attack roll, then you roll an 8 on your damage--max damage. Then, you get another +1 to damage because of your STR. You've done 9 points of damage. Your foe has 22 it points, and now has 14 points.
What really happened? Did you swing and slice your foe in twain because your attack roll said that you hit?
That can't be true because, for all practical purposes, your foe is uninjured. Yes, his hit points are lowered, but he moves as fast as he did before. He attack you the same. There is no real difference in the target. He's not clutching a wound.
The damage is abstract. You can make up what happened based on the results. I'm going to say that you swing your longsword, and your foe dodged out of the way--but he's getting tired (which is why his HP is lowered). You've caused him to expend energy.
Now, let's look at Classic Traveller. You swing your sword at your foe and hit. The damage is 2D, and you get lucky and roll maximum damage. This is not the first time the foe has been damaged, so the First Blood Rule doesn't apply.
The foe's current stats, with respect to damage, are 587967.
The defending player (in this case, the Ref) can apply damage to his best advantage as long as he applies whole dice. You rolled 6, 6. So, the Ref applies damage to the foes DEX and END. His stats are now 521967.
Do you see much of a difference in this character and the AD&D character after a successful sword attack?
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
That is why I use the combat system from Don Featherstone's Skirmish Wargaming for combat. Armor reduces the chance of damage if you are hit. Conversely, heavy caliber weapons increase the damage if you are hit on an unprotected spot. It is based on an percentile roll, and each level of training from Novice to Elite gets an increased 10% chance to hit. Parrying or dodging is also factored in. Basically, one roll does everything once you plug in the modifiers.
I love the T4 damage system and especially Emperors Arsenal. The only think that bothered me was that someone in battle dress was effectively immune to everything except heavy weapons. I always thought that there should be some chance of suffering a 1 point wound from each damage die blocked, even if you are wearing rigid armor. Perhaps by making an Strength check for each point (with augmented armor this is somewhat easy). Being able to walk though a hail of small arms without a care in the world seemed a bit overpowered.
However, back to CT. I have never thought of using CT armor DMs as damage reduction. Will have to think on that. Would you reduce the damage by whole dice (similar to T4, so cloth stops 3D from a submachine gun attack, effectively negating it) or by dice value (with Cloth stopping 3 points of damage total from a submachine gun attack, or perhaps 3 points per damage die...so many options)? One could apply T4s flexible and rigid system for armors which I think it a clever concept.
It is a pity that T4 and CT do not share the same range band values. It would make it much easier to combine the two if they were the same (I hate using different rule books for different systems).
However, back to CT. I have never thought of using CT armor DMs as damage reduction. Will have to think on that. Would you reduce the damage by whole dice (similar to T4, so cloth stops 3D from a submachine gun attack, effectively negating it) or by dice value (with Cloth stopping 3 points of damage total from a submachine gun attack, or perhaps 3 points per damage die...so many options)? One could apply T4s flexible and rigid system for armors which I think it a clever concept.
It is a pity that T4 and CT do not share the same range band values. It would make it much easier to combine the two if they were the same (I hate using different rule books for different systems).
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
A couple of remarks...
Let's look at this...
We'll use the average man. Both attacker and defender have stats 777777.
Attacker has Broadsword-1. Defender has Broadsword-1. Both have Broadswords as weapons. Neither are wearing armor. They're at Brawling range, which is Short.
The Attacker rolls 2d6 +1 skill +5 armor +3 range -4 STR (-3 if weakened blow) -1 defender skill. That's 2d6 +4 or 2d6 +1 if weakened.
The chance of hitting is 92% or 58% if weakened.
But, the damage is only 2D vs. human average stats.
That's a 58% chance of downing the foe (not killing him, but rendering him unconscious or ineffective) on the first attack only, using the first blood rule.
If stats are 777777 after the first blood rule, then it's a 100% chance that the foe can withstand the blow (two physical stats would be a 1 if max damage is rolled).
Does that help?
Not to be persnickety, but 2d6 is a pyramid formation. It takes 3d6 to form a bell curve.
There is no doubt that Classic Traveller combat can be deadly. But, upon closer inspection, I think that you will find that characters are more often rendered unconscious and ineffective rather than seriously wounded or killed, given the rules. It takes two physical stats at zero to make a serious wound, which would be a gunshot, deep stab or cut, broken bone, etc.
Don't forget Evasion, which is most helpful for gun combat. And, characters should move from cover to cover when in a firefight. The rules for cover are in the Traveller Book (not in Book 1).
Evasion can provide a -2 DM to attack rolls at Medium (typical gun combat) Range. And, cover provides a solid -4 DM to the attack roll. So, always attack from cover, around a corner, behind a crate, etc.
Of course, the best thing for Traveller players to recognize is this: Traveller combat is deadly. It's probably deadlier than games the players are used to playing. Respect combat. Try to avoid it. Think tactically and strategically. And use armor if you know that you're going into a tense situation. Cops wear armor--so should you!
Let's look at this...
We'll use the average man. Both attacker and defender have stats 777777.
Attacker has Broadsword-1. Defender has Broadsword-1. Both have Broadswords as weapons. Neither are wearing armor. They're at Brawling range, which is Short.
The Attacker rolls 2d6 +1 skill +5 armor +3 range -4 STR (-3 if weakened blow) -1 defender skill. That's 2d6 +4 or 2d6 +1 if weakened.
The chance of hitting is 92% or 58% if weakened.
But, the damage is only 2D vs. human average stats.
That's a 58% chance of downing the foe (not killing him, but rendering him unconscious or ineffective) on the first attack only, using the first blood rule.
If stats are 777777 after the first blood rule, then it's a 100% chance that the foe can withstand the blow (two physical stats would be a 1 if max damage is rolled).
Does that help?
Not to be persnickety, but 2d6 is a pyramid formation. It takes 3d6 to form a bell curve.
There is no doubt that Classic Traveller combat can be deadly. But, upon closer inspection, I think that you will find that characters are more often rendered unconscious and ineffective rather than seriously wounded or killed, given the rules. It takes two physical stats at zero to make a serious wound, which would be a gunshot, deep stab or cut, broken bone, etc.
Don't forget Evasion, which is most helpful for gun combat. And, characters should move from cover to cover when in a firefight. The rules for cover are in the Traveller Book (not in Book 1).
Evasion can provide a -2 DM to attack rolls at Medium (typical gun combat) Range. And, cover provides a solid -4 DM to the attack roll. So, always attack from cover, around a corner, behind a crate, etc.
Of course, the best thing for Traveller players to recognize is this: Traveller combat is deadly. It's probably deadlier than games the players are used to playing. Respect combat. Try to avoid it. Think tactically and strategically. And use armor if you know that you're going into a tense situation. Cops wear armor--so should you!
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
S4 has written up a lot of what I would say.
But I want to add some additional points:
- If you get caught out in the open without armor when some guy is attacking you with a Broadsword (which does 4D damage, by the way). Don't get caught without armor with some guy who knows what he's doing!
- Run to Open Range... get out of range. An enemy can't run and strike in the same turn, so you have dodge the risk of death for at least one round
- Or... charge him! Try to grapple him. At Close range the DM moves from +3 to -8 and you bring the fight's odds closer to your favor
- Also, Evade... when you are at Close or Short range you get a DM -1 in your favor if someone is swinging at you. Not great! But it can help!
By these two points I want to illustrate larger points about CT as designed:
- It moves combat along without having 25 minute (or longer) fights where combatants are constantly whittling each other down
- It behooves characters to have the right tool for the job. Seriously. If someone is coming at you with a weapon, you are really better off with armor.
- The movement, range, and DM rules all work in concert to keep the fight dynamic. You are just standing there training blows. (How many games have taught us to just be standing there trading blows?) If someone is coming at me with a Broadsword I am running to stay out of range, I am looking for a weapon, I am looking for a means of escape, I am looking for friend, I am looking for any clever idea to turn the odds in my favor. This isn't a flaw in the system. In my view, at least, it is a huge, huge feature. The game is designed to have the players keep coming up with bits of description and fictional detail that make a fight colorful and fun.
In short, the point of a DM +8 at Short range is to make you terrified of being at Short range with someone swinging a Broadsword at you. It is there not so the Referee can make a roll at you with a really high probability of success. It is there to drive you to come up with ideas so he does't make that roll at those odds.
What this does is produce moments of decision and description closer to the actions sequences of SF pulp adventure stories and adventure movies than the stand up back-and-forth "You shoot, I shoot" fight of a war-game. The former was the point of the original Traveller rules: to moments of action and drama that would feel like they came out a frantic fight from a pulp story.
Last edited:
All this is excellent advice, and since I run CT combat like this it does play out exactly as described. Very dynamic, dramatic fights, with lots of descriptive involvement from the players: I've had a foil-wielding noble disarm an auto-pistol armed thug, RAW. The biggest hurdle is explaining that there's no initiative in CT combat, just descriptions and an impartial Ref.
I am curious where the Disarm rules are. I know T4 had a DM of -6 but I don't see anything like that in Book 1.
The disarm came out of the description of the noble PC ("I lunge for his weapon hand with my foil") and the die rolls: he rolled well enough on his hit and damage roll that I ruled the disarm worked. My ruling was more generous than T4's -6, however: I believe he rolled 4 more than he needed to hit, then a decent damage roll. But don't quote me on that.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
The problem with some of the armor in Classic is that the assumption of the combat tables is that all hits are on armor. Cloth is described as a "body suit", the same way Jack and Mesh are, so I view it as the equivalent of the current flak vests or body armor worn by police, that is protecting the torso primarily. Under the Skirmish system, hits are scored on body location: Head, Torso, Arms, and Legs. Now, if your submachine gun rounds hit the body suit, that I would rule 1 point of bruising damage per die, but also according to the rules, with automatic fire, you roll twice to hit the target. Under Skirmish rules, you may hit something besides the torso with the second roll, with the chance of Dead, Serious Arm or Leg wound, or Light Head Wound. Under the Classic tables, all you can do is hit the armor again.
As for Combat Armor, in My Traveller Universe, there is no private possession of combat armor. However, I do allow for penetration of Combat Armor via hitting the head visor, which in order to be transparent cannot be bullet resistant. I also allow for it to be penetrated by 40mm High-Explosive Dual Purpose Grenades fired from the equivalent of an M79 or M203, or what I call High-Explosive Concussion grenades, also in 40mm caliber, These are basically 40mm Grenade High-Explosive Plastic rounds which squash against the target and then explode. Combat armor also will not stop a .50 Caliber AP round in My Universe. Your various light anti-armor weapons also are effective.
I understand that this does reduce the protection of Combat Armor, but I am not a fan of characters essentially invulnerable to damage at the lower Tech Levels. Also, cloth armor is listed at being available at Tech Level 6, so roughly the range of World War 2 and the Korean War. I have collected quite a bit of data on armor penetration over the years, so I know what is required to stop a given type of round.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Do the combat tables assume this? They DMs for each armor might reflect that the given armor only partially covers the wearer.
As has been discussed elsewhere the combat Throw in CT Is not “to hit” But a chance to do damage. A “miss” might be a “hit” on the target —. If it does no damage. The damage roll shows the severity of the hit—which might indicate location based on the severity of the roll.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Waaaahhhh! I guess I was looking at the line above Broadsword on the table, at the Sword, that does do 2D damage. Or, I was mixing up my swords as I wrote.
It tis a mistake! Thanks for catching it. :rofl:
My turn to correct you!
Each character in a combat round is allowed to move and attack. That's from page 34, TTB, under The Combat Round.
Remember the rounds are 15 seconds long. That's quite an amount of time. And, the combat round is partly abstract, too.
A character can move one range band per combat round if walking, which is 25 meters. A character can run 50 meters, or two range bands, in a round.
Before each combat round, a player should state his character's movement status. Then, when the character's turn comes up, the character will complete movement before his turn is over.
There is no initiative in CT, and the during the combat round, all combatants are considered to move simultaneously. Thus, a character with a sword cannot first attack his close enemy and then run 50 meters without being attacked himself.
The Ref must go through the round, allowing actions, as he sees fit, using logic to decide when one character attacks and another moves.
Any damage suffered in the round does not take effect until the end of the round once all characters have moved. So, even if a character shoots an enemy and kills him, the enemy still gets his turn this round.
Simultaneous action.
The only real way to run away from an enemy is to use the Escape and Avoidance rules, or to start the round at 51+ meters (which is Long range, or Rifle range) so that, even if running, a character can't reach his target to hit him with the sword.
MOVEMENT
Page 34 of TTB, under The Combat Round, the last sentence is very useful. "Generally, all individuals perform movement first, followed by attacks."
I've found this to be true. When you start a new round, take care of all the movement first, then do attacks.
The word, "Generally," indicates that this is not a hard rule written in stone, because it isn't. Sometimes, a character may want to swing his sword first and then move away from his foe. That should be allowed, because it is necessary for the character to be close to his foe in able to hit him. With a gun, a character may fire first and then duck back behind a wall. The Ref needs to judge these types of situations to the best of his ability.
That's 100 combat rounds! Remember, the CT combat round is 15 seconds long.
You might be thinking of Starship combat rounds, which are 1000 seconds long.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Characters who run when they open or close distance expend a point of Endurance and cannot attack that round, per the rules. I was referring to running in my post above.
If one is using the 1981 abstracted Range Band System one could run from the broadsword wielding opponent from Short to Medium range. The attacker could keep up with you, also running, but not attack that round. You both would also lose a point of endurance.
As for my joke about the length of combats... sorry I wasn’t clear. I was talking about 25 or more minutes of REAL time. I was referring to fights in AD&D or CHAMPIONS that sometimes could chew up a hefty amount of any game night. Traveller seems designed to get the right going and wrapped up so players and PCs can deal with the fallout of the fight. The fights are still compelling — but don’t take forever to play out.
If one is using the 1981 abstracted Range Band System one could run from the broadsword wielding opponent from Short to Medium range. The attacker could keep up with you, also running, but not attack that round. You both would also lose a point of endurance.
As for my joke about the length of combats... sorry I wasn’t clear. I was talking about 25 or more minutes of REAL time. I was referring to fights in AD&D or CHAMPIONS that sometimes could chew up a hefty amount of any game night. Traveller seems designed to get the right going and wrapped up so players and PCs can deal with the fallout of the fight. The fights are still compelling — but don’t take forever to play out.
Similar threads
MT Only:
My MT Errata Odyssey
