More Damage Thoughts
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
AT:
I had one cut, rather noteable, 1" long, 1/8" deep... bleeding was stopped in 10, cut remained closed with no further treatment. Impairment was at least drastically reduced, if not eliminated, in under half an hour. (I took a box-knife into the abdomen. Probably a 3-4 point penalty to dex until I performed first aid.)
Most heavy-blade-fencing and SCA Rattan "Heavy Weapons" injuries are no longer impairing within an hour. Sure, the bruises last for days, but the impairment (damage to attributes, in the Traveller case) doesn't.
Just because the damage to atts is healed doesn't mean that the tissue is "Back to Original Condition"
Well, I've had some cuts that have been closed and no longer impairing in 15 minutes. Sucks to shave when one has a tremor. (Which is why I quite doing so...)
I had one cut, rather noteable, 1" long, 1/8" deep... bleeding was stopped in 10, cut remained closed with no further treatment. Impairment was at least drastically reduced, if not eliminated, in under half an hour. (I took a box-knife into the abdomen. Probably a 3-4 point penalty to dex until I performed first aid.)
Most heavy-blade-fencing and SCA Rattan "Heavy Weapons" injuries are no longer impairing within an hour. Sure, the bruises last for days, but the impairment (damage to attributes, in the Traveller case) doesn't.
Just because the damage to atts is healed doesn't mean that the tissue is "Back to Original Condition"
AT:
I had one cut, rather noteable, 1" long, 1/8" deep... bleeding was stopped in 10, cut remained closed with no further treatment. Impairment was at least drastically reduced, if not eliminated, in under half an hour. (I took a box-knife into the abdomen. Probably a 3-4 point penalty to dex until I performed first aid.)
Most heavy-blade-fencing and SCA Rattan "Heavy Weapons" injuries are no longer impairing within an hour. Sure, the bruises last for days, but the impairment (damage to attributes, in the Traveller case) doesn't.
Just because the damage to atts is healed doesn't mean that the tissue is "Back to Original Condition"
Well, I've had some cuts that have been closed and no longer impairing in 15 minutes. Sucks to shave when one has a tremor. (Which is why I quite doing so...)
I had one cut, rather noteable, 1" long, 1/8" deep... bleeding was stopped in 10, cut remained closed with no further treatment. Impairment was at least drastically reduced, if not eliminated, in under half an hour. (I took a box-knife into the abdomen. Probably a 3-4 point penalty to dex until I performed first aid.)
Most heavy-blade-fencing and SCA Rattan "Heavy Weapons" injuries are no longer impairing within an hour. Sure, the bruises last for days, but the impairment (damage to attributes, in the Traveller case) doesn't.
Just because the damage to atts is healed doesn't mean that the tissue is "Back to Original Condition"
Aramis,
Your personal stories do not count. You fence with sociopaths and recieve life-threatening injuries from practice weapons ...
... actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like every ex-marine I ever met. Maybe your personal stories do count after all.
Your personal stories do not count. You fence with sociopaths and recieve life-threatening injuries from practice weapons ...
... actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like every ex-marine I ever met. Maybe your personal stories do count after all.
Aramis,
Your personal stories do not count. You fence with sociopaths and recieve life-threatening injuries from practice weapons ...
... actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like every ex-marine I ever met. Maybe your personal stories do count after all.
Your personal stories do not count. You fence with sociopaths and recieve life-threatening injuries from practice weapons ...
... actually, now that I think about it, that sounds like every ex-marine I ever met. Maybe your personal stories do count after all.
I'm a fractional-term army, with naval and air cadet (NJROTC and CAP) time before that, as well as fire department explorer time (essentially a fire service cadet). Plus I was an Altar Boy, and ran the Altar Serving program for a year, while in HS. I was busy.
The box-cutter was an accident while doing some construction work (drywall).
Heavy blade fencing is VERY different from light-blades/olympic, both in style and risk. Broken blades, while rare, do happen, and a broken blade is a major threat, even with our protective gear. I seldom have fenced for more than 15 minutes without a bruise; as often as not, it's my own fault. The impairment of most of these is gone within an hour; on the field, however, they do matter in a few minutes. That being said, I can kind of make a foil do the right thing, but I have never trained with a weapon under 0.6KG; most of mine run 1-1.5KG.
I also studied kenjutsu using bokken, rather than shinai.
Lots of minor injuries simply don't present long-term impairment, and quite a few more serious ones don't impair immediately, due to adrenaline. MT is my choice of damage system since it covers these aspects quite well. CT is a close second...
The box-cutter was an accident while doing some construction work (drywall).
Heavy blade fencing is VERY different from light-blades/olympic, both in style and risk. Broken blades, while rare, do happen, and a broken blade is a major threat, even with our protective gear. I seldom have fenced for more than 15 minutes without a bruise; as often as not, it's my own fault. The impairment of most of these is gone within an hour; on the field, however, they do matter in a few minutes. That being said, I can kind of make a foil do the right thing, but I have never trained with a weapon under 0.6KG; most of mine run 1-1.5KG.
I also studied kenjutsu using bokken, rather than shinai.
Lots of minor injuries simply don't present long-term impairment, and quite a few more serious ones don't impair immediately, due to adrenaline. MT is my choice of damage system since it covers these aspects quite well. CT is a close second...
I'm a fractional-term army, with naval and air cadet (NJROTC and CAP) time before that, as well as fire department explorer time (essentially a fire service cadet). Plus I was an Altar Boy, and ran the Altar Serving program for a year, while in HS. I was busy.
The box-cutter was an accident while doing some construction work (drywall).
Heavy blade fencing is VERY different from light-blades/olympic, both in style and risk. Broken blades, while rare, do happen, and a broken blade is a major threat, even with our protective gear. I seldom have fenced for more than 15 minutes without a bruise; as often as not, it's my own fault. The impairment of most of these is gone within an hour; on the field, however, they do matter in a few minutes. That being said, I can kind of make a foil do the right thing, but I have never trained with a weapon under 0.6KG; most of mine run 1-1.5KG.
I also studied kenjutsu using bokken, rather than shinai.
Lots of minor injuries simply don't present long-term impairment, and quite a few more serious ones don't impair immediately, due to adrenaline. MT is my choice of damage system since it covers these aspects quite well. CT is a close second...
The box-cutter was an accident while doing some construction work (drywall).
Heavy blade fencing is VERY different from light-blades/olympic, both in style and risk. Broken blades, while rare, do happen, and a broken blade is a major threat, even with our protective gear. I seldom have fenced for more than 15 minutes without a bruise; as often as not, it's my own fault. The impairment of most of these is gone within an hour; on the field, however, they do matter in a few minutes. That being said, I can kind of make a foil do the right thing, but I have never trained with a weapon under 0.6KG; most of mine run 1-1.5KG.
I also studied kenjutsu using bokken, rather than shinai.
Lots of minor injuries simply don't present long-term impairment, and quite a few more serious ones don't impair immediately, due to adrenaline. MT is my choice of damage system since it covers these aspects quite well. CT is a close second...
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
New Thought...
Weapon Recoil:
I'm considering adding a DM on the attack throw for a weapon's recoil. This would make it harder to hit (keeping PCs alive) using a logical and realistic reason for a modifier.
And, if it's harder to hit, then damage can be more devestating when a hit is achieved (since it will happen less often), allow a definition of damage as "all damage is lethal trauma".
I've looked CT over, and I don't see any previous rules for recoil. MT mentions weapon recoil, but the rule is just used when considering the weapon being fired in Zero-G.
Any thoughts on how to easily implement a Recoil DM into a CT game?
My initial thought is to just use Low-Med-High indicators in MT as a guide for an attack throw DM of -1, -2, or -3.
There could be a better way to do it, though.
Any thoughts?
Weapon Recoil:
I'm considering adding a DM on the attack throw for a weapon's recoil. This would make it harder to hit (keeping PCs alive) using a logical and realistic reason for a modifier.
And, if it's harder to hit, then damage can be more devestating when a hit is achieved (since it will happen less often), allow a definition of damage as "all damage is lethal trauma".
I've looked CT over, and I don't see any previous rules for recoil. MT mentions weapon recoil, but the rule is just used when considering the weapon being fired in Zero-G.
Any thoughts on how to easily implement a Recoil DM into a CT game?
My initial thought is to just use Low-Med-High indicators in MT as a guide for an attack throw DM of -1, -2, or -3.
There could be a better way to do it, though.
Any thoughts?
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
New Thought...
Weapon Recoil:
I'm considering adding a DM on the attack throw for a weapon's recoil. This would make it harder to hit (keeping PCs alive) using a logical and realistic reason for a modifier.
And, if it's harder to hit, then damage can be more devestating when a hit is achieved (since it will happen less often), allow a definition of damage as "all damage is lethal trauma".
I've looked CT over, and I don't see any previous rules for recoil. MT mentions weapon recoil, but the rule is just used when considering the weapon being fired in Zero-G.
Any thoughts on how to easily implement a Recoil DM into a CT game?
My initial thought is to just use Low-Med-High indicators in MT as a guide for an attack throw DM of -1, -2, or -3.
There could be a better way to do it, though.
Any thoughts?
Weapon Recoil:
I'm considering adding a DM on the attack throw for a weapon's recoil. This would make it harder to hit (keeping PCs alive) using a logical and realistic reason for a modifier.
And, if it's harder to hit, then damage can be more devestating when a hit is achieved (since it will happen less often), allow a definition of damage as "all damage is lethal trauma".
I've looked CT over, and I don't see any previous rules for recoil. MT mentions weapon recoil, but the rule is just used when considering the weapon being fired in Zero-G.
Any thoughts on how to easily implement a Recoil DM into a CT game?
My initial thought is to just use Low-Med-High indicators in MT as a guide for an attack throw DM of -1, -2, or -3.
There could be a better way to do it, though.
Any thoughts?
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
My first thought on a recoil DM is it's not realistic. Let me explain...
Any weapon that can be used by a properly trained person won't present a problem in operation due to recoil. It will be compensated for by a proper brace position or bipod or other mounting/balance.
Conditions which will cause problems due to the weapon's recoil will be because the person is untrained, not properly braced, or the weapon is being used in a manner it was not intended for such as firing a HMG from the hip rather than on a tripod with proper anchoring.
And even then if the weapon is a single shot* the recoil effect and problem happen after the first shot* is made and may only affect subsequent attempts. Shot(s) fired in a seperate round of attack might be considered re-aimed and not subject to the effect of previous recoil.
* or a well built high cyclic rate weapon may get off a tight burst before recoil causes barrel climb
So a simple blanket circumstance DM is probably more the way to go. If only CT didn't say that every player character had every weapon skill at zero we could just use a non-skilled penalty. I suppose a non-skilled penalty could still be used as a circumstance penalty for attempting to use a weapon in such a way.
Using a weapon in zero-g would also fall under this circumstance DM when appropriate. There'd be no problem firing a long gun if your feet are anchored (magnetic boots or such) and you assumed a properly braced standing position. Ditto the other standard firing brace positions. And likewise firing a hand gun.
Any weapon that can be used by a properly trained person won't present a problem in operation due to recoil. It will be compensated for by a proper brace position or bipod or other mounting/balance.
Conditions which will cause problems due to the weapon's recoil will be because the person is untrained, not properly braced, or the weapon is being used in a manner it was not intended for such as firing a HMG from the hip rather than on a tripod with proper anchoring.
And even then if the weapon is a single shot* the recoil effect and problem happen after the first shot* is made and may only affect subsequent attempts. Shot(s) fired in a seperate round of attack might be considered re-aimed and not subject to the effect of previous recoil.
* or a well built high cyclic rate weapon may get off a tight burst before recoil causes barrel climb
So a simple blanket circumstance DM is probably more the way to go. If only CT didn't say that every player character had every weapon skill at zero we could just use a non-skilled penalty. I suppose a non-skilled penalty could still be used as a circumstance penalty for attempting to use a weapon in such a way.
Using a weapon in zero-g would also fall under this circumstance DM when appropriate. There'd be no problem firing a long gun if your feet are anchored (magnetic boots or such) and you assumed a properly braced standing position. Ditto the other standard firing brace positions. And likewise firing a hand gun.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
My first thought on a recoil DM is it's not realistic. Let me explain...
Any weapon that can be used by a properly trained person won't present a problem in operation due to recoil. It will be compensated for by a proper brace position or bipod or other mounting/balance.
Conditions which will cause problems due to the weapon's recoil will be because the person is untrained, not properly braced, or the weapon is being used in a manner it was not intended for such as firing a HMG from the hip rather than on a tripod with proper anchoring.
And even then if the weapon is a single shot* the recoil effect and problem happen after the first shot* is made and may only affect subsequent attempts. Shot(s) fired in a seperate round of attack might be considered re-aimed and not subject to the effect of previous recoil.
* or a well built high cyclic rate weapon may get off a tight burst before recoil causes barrel climb
So a simple blanket circumstance DM is probably more the way to go. If only CT didn't say that every player character had every weapon skill at zero we could just use a non-skilled penalty. I suppose a non-skilled penalty could still be used as a circumstance penalty for attempting to use a weapon in such a way.
Using a weapon in zero-g would also fall under this circumstance DM when appropriate. There'd be no problem firing a long gun if your feet are anchored (magnetic boots or such) and you assumed a properly braced standing position. Ditto the other standard firing brace positions. And likewise firing a hand gun.
Any weapon that can be used by a properly trained person won't present a problem in operation due to recoil. It will be compensated for by a proper brace position or bipod or other mounting/balance.
Conditions which will cause problems due to the weapon's recoil will be because the person is untrained, not properly braced, or the weapon is being used in a manner it was not intended for such as firing a HMG from the hip rather than on a tripod with proper anchoring.
And even then if the weapon is a single shot* the recoil effect and problem happen after the first shot* is made and may only affect subsequent attempts. Shot(s) fired in a seperate round of attack might be considered re-aimed and not subject to the effect of previous recoil.
* or a well built high cyclic rate weapon may get off a tight burst before recoil causes barrel climb
So a simple blanket circumstance DM is probably more the way to go. If only CT didn't say that every player character had every weapon skill at zero we could just use a non-skilled penalty. I suppose a non-skilled penalty could still be used as a circumstance penalty for attempting to use a weapon in such a way.
Using a weapon in zero-g would also fall under this circumstance DM when appropriate. There'd be no problem firing a long gun if your feet are anchored (magnetic boots or such) and you assumed a properly braced standing position. Ditto the other standard firing brace positions. And likewise firing a hand gun.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
And given a moment of thought I think the way to handle it would be a seperate roll, perhaps vs Dex or an appropriate skill such as the actual weapon skill and/or zero-g combat. If you make the check then recoil effects are managed and there is no penalty to the attack roll. If you fail the check then recoil effects are not managed and you automatically miss.
Note that this wouldn't negate the effects of an action such as suppressive fire, it'll just mean that the rounds used for such won't have any chance of doing actual harm.
And of course some weapons, such as lasers, would never have to make such a check being there is zero recoil.
Note that this wouldn't negate the effects of an action such as suppressive fire, it'll just mean that the rounds used for such won't have any chance of doing actual harm.
And of course some weapons, such as lasers, would never have to make such a check being there is zero recoil.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
And given a moment of thought I think the way to handle it would be a seperate roll, perhaps vs Dex or an appropriate skill such as the actual weapon skill and/or zero-g combat. If you make the check then recoil effects are managed and there is no penalty to the attack roll. If you fail the check then recoil effects are not managed and you automatically miss.
Note that this wouldn't negate the effects of an action such as suppressive fire, it'll just mean that the rounds used for such won't have any chance of doing actual harm.
And of course some weapons, such as lasers, would never have to make such a check being there is zero recoil.
Note that this wouldn't negate the effects of an action such as suppressive fire, it'll just mean that the rounds used for such won't have any chance of doing actual harm.
And of course some weapons, such as lasers, would never have to make such a check being there is zero recoil.
Ken,
That's because recoil is folded into another part of the overall weapons picture. Look at page 45 of LBB:1. You'll find a list of DMs by dexterity for each firearm.
Those DMs model a characters ability to both aim and control the operation of a firearm. Control includes the ability to handle recoil, so recoil is folded into and part of the dexterity DM keeping things neat and simple. Where recoil was extreme, as with the PGMP and FGMP, GDW declared battledress was mandatory keeping things simple again. Please note, I said simple and not simplistic.
GDW were first and foremost wargamers. As long time wargame players and designers they were keenly aware that adding yet another die roll or yet another DM or yet another step rarely did anything to improve playability. They knew that in any design as many details as possible needed to be folded into each other because many of those details would eventually end up canceling each other out.
In our desire to model every jot and tittle of every potential action we eventually reach a point of diminishing returns where the details we add choke the very life out of the game itself. Let me provide a real life example of this.
In the early 1990s a friend of mine designed several well recieved and published wargames on WW1. At a gaming convention he and I attended he was berated by one individual for not modeling the use of armored cars by Astro-Hungary during the Brusilov Offensive. The fellow in question was upset that penny-packet, platoon-sized or smaller units of armored cars were not explicitly modeled in a game that used divisions and corps for maneuver units.
In his desire for accuracy and detail, this fellow couldn't see that the effect of those armored cars was below the level of resolution for the game in question. Ted could have provided armored car units for the game along with rules for their use. Given the size disparity involved, Ted would have also been forced to inflate the combat factors on all the other units so that the car unit would have a whole number interger. That inflation in turn would have meant that the tiny combat factors assigned to the car unit would have no actual effect on combat between the much larger units thus modeling the same result Ted achieved by not including separate armored car units in the first place. All those additional armored car rules would end up slowing down play for no actual effect.
It's the old story of min and max curves. Just where those curves intersect depends on the game and the 'taste' of the players, but the curves always intersect. May I point to Avalon Hill's Trobruk as an example?
Have fun,
Bill
Ken,
That's because recoil is folded into another part of the overall weapons picture. Look at page 45 of LBB:1. You'll find a list of DMs by dexterity for each firearm.
Those DMs model a characters ability to both aim and control the operation of a firearm. Control includes the ability to handle recoil, so recoil is folded into and part of the dexterity DM keeping things neat and simple. Where recoil was extreme, as with the PGMP and FGMP, GDW declared battledress was mandatory keeping things simple again. Please note, I said simple and not simplistic.
GDW were first and foremost wargamers. As long time wargame players and designers they were keenly aware that adding yet another die roll or yet another DM or yet another step rarely did anything to improve playability. They knew that in any design as many details as possible needed to be folded into each other because many of those details would eventually end up canceling each other out.
In our desire to model every jot and tittle of every potential action we eventually reach a point of diminishing returns where the details we add choke the very life out of the game itself. Let me provide a real life example of this.
In the early 1990s a friend of mine designed several well recieved and published wargames on WW1. At a gaming convention he and I attended he was berated by one individual for not modeling the use of armored cars by Astro-Hungary during the Brusilov Offensive. The fellow in question was upset that penny-packet, platoon-sized or smaller units of armored cars were not explicitly modeled in a game that used divisions and corps for maneuver units.
In his desire for accuracy and detail, this fellow couldn't see that the effect of those armored cars was below the level of resolution for the game in question. Ted could have provided armored car units for the game along with rules for their use. Given the size disparity involved, Ted would have also been forced to inflate the combat factors on all the other units so that the car unit would have a whole number interger. That inflation in turn would have meant that the tiny combat factors assigned to the car unit would have no actual effect on combat between the much larger units thus modeling the same result Ted achieved by not including separate armored car units in the first place. All those additional armored car rules would end up slowing down play for no actual effect.
It's the old story of min and max curves. Just where those curves intersect depends on the game and the 'taste' of the players, but the curves always intersect. May I point to Avalon Hill's Trobruk as an example?
Have fun,
Bill
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Sure. That's a concern I have as well.
Right now, under my house rules, for a gun combat attack roll, it is only modified by three things:
-- Weapon Expertise (skill)
-- Weapon DEX DM
-- Range to target
Note that the usual CT armor mod is missing. Instead, I use that mod to modify damage instead of the attack roll (allowing armor to reduce damage instead of make it harder to hit).
Given the three DMs, I don't think one more for recoil would reach that point of diminishing returns you're speaking of (especially since it's taking the place of the armor DM from CT, and the DEX DM is many times not used).
But, Dan, above, does have a fair point about recoil being rolled into the DEX DM.
My concern is more mechanical (re: game mechanics) rather than for "real life" modeling: I've taken the armor DM away from the attack throw and started using it to modify the damage throw. This means, in CT, hits are going to be achieved more often (because you don't have that -3DM against attackers using a shotgun when you're weaing Cloth armor).
Now, I've countered the hits more often by the way I apply damage (with the lethal and non-lethal damage and random damage dice).
This system actually works very well. It allows for PCs go get into many fights and take damage--but, often, that damage is non-lethal and heals very quickly.
The system works so well that I'm not sure I should be monkeying around with it. BUT, I thought I'd look at replacing those DMs on the attack throw (I was thinking through a recoil DM), making it harder to hit...but damage would be all be lethal damage is a hit is achieved.
I was just exploring the options here. I'm not convinced that I'll make something better than I have--I just thought I'd look at it.
See, under my current system, hits are achieved more often than in regular CT because of (1) no armor DM, and (2) it is possible to make more than one attack in a round (using a negative DM).
But, when a hit is achieved, much of the damage is non-lethal.
With the random dice rule in my system, I've set up a pretty good balance between fast and furious game action gun fights and keeping combat situations lethal.
I was just exploring options to improve the system...brainstorming, if you will.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Sure. That's a concern I have as well.
Right now, under my house rules, for a gun combat attack roll, it is only modified by three things:
-- Weapon Expertise (skill)
-- Weapon DEX DM
-- Range to target
Note that the usual CT armor mod is missing. Instead, I use that mod to modify damage instead of the attack roll (allowing armor to reduce damage instead of make it harder to hit).
Given the three DMs, I don't think one more for recoil would reach that point of diminishing returns you're speaking of (especially since it's taking the place of the armor DM from CT, and the DEX DM is many times not used).
But, Dan, above, does have a fair point about recoil being rolled into the DEX DM.
My concern is more mechanical (re: game mechanics) rather than for "real life" modeling: I've taken the armor DM away from the attack throw and started using it to modify the damage throw. This means, in CT, hits are going to be achieved more often (because you don't have that -3DM against attackers using a shotgun when you're weaing Cloth armor).
Now, I've countered the hits more often by the way I apply damage (with the lethal and non-lethal damage and random damage dice).
This system actually works very well. It allows for PCs go get into many fights and take damage--but, often, that damage is non-lethal and heals very quickly.
The system works so well that I'm not sure I should be monkeying around with it. BUT, I thought I'd look at replacing those DMs on the attack throw (I was thinking through a recoil DM), making it harder to hit...but damage would be all be lethal damage is a hit is achieved.
I was just exploring the options here. I'm not convinced that I'll make something better than I have--I just thought I'd look at it.
See, under my current system, hits are achieved more often than in regular CT because of (1) no armor DM, and (2) it is possible to make more than one attack in a round (using a negative DM).
But, when a hit is achieved, much of the damage is non-lethal.
With the random dice rule in my system, I've set up a pretty good balance between fast and furious game action gun fights and keeping combat situations lethal.
I was just exploring options to improve the system...brainstorming, if you will.
Similar threads
