New GM Adventure Question

[rancke]

I've known player (characters) like that. With one of them, after the first time he screwed up, we told him (the character, of course) that if he did anything like that again, we'd kick him out of the group. This was us being nice because we felt obligated to make an attempt to have our characters get along with every other player's characters -- even the doofuses. Otherwise we would have kicked him out after the first time.

When he did it a second time we did kick him out. Or rather, we said we would and the referee had a long talk with the player about how to play his character.


Hans

 

[sabredog]

This brings me to a question... how do I handle shooting at the air/raft? I have recently picked up a reprint of the striker rules and while I haven't had time to look at it in depth, I do not see stats for a standard air/raft. I do also have the mongoose traveller core book (of which we found the events part of character creation to be a nice addition) and that says to treat damage from weapons as normal and then subtract the armor rating (armor is listed as 8 for the air/raft). Then the excess gets applied to hull and structure fo the vehicle (a rating of 2 for each on the air/raft). This would mean that the autocannons will shred them to pieces in one shot. I almost feel it's unfair and mean of me to have the autocannons fire on them, but then they saw them when they flew by at high altitude and scoped the compound real quick. I'd hate to have a tpk in their first adventure, but then they are also a good group who would probably bounce back from that and just make new characters. Even the numbskull who mucked the whole thing up.

Driver of the air/raft should have grav vehicles or air/raft skill. This skill is the negative modifier. The gunner of the autocannon has his/her/its skill as a positive modifier. (BTW: in such instances I usually go with a basic level of Skill Level=1 for the average NPC).

The gunner fires and you use 8+ to hit w/ +DM for gunner and -DM for air/raft driver. Use autocannon vs. Combat/Battle Dress or Cloth for armor depending on how sturdy you figure it is. I generally assume air/rafts are equal to combat/battle since they are the SUV's of the Traveller universe. In Striker terms figure it has an armor point total on all faces equal to 25 in my Traveller universe, and they are often up armored to 30 with applique. Don't forget that it is considered open-topped and any crew damage may be mitigated by the armor they are wearing.

If you have the Striker hit location charts then you can use those to determine damage if the cannon hits, but the caveat is that then you have a chance of brewing up the air/raft and killing all your players at once. Not generally the best way to reward skill, daring, and chutzpah when the players are trying to be heroes.

In one of the supplements I read that air/rafts have 4 grav units in them, and every time you lose one it costs you 1/4 lift, or roughly 1 ton. Lose all 4 and you fall pout of the sky. So you could write up a quick n' dirty hit location chart for your air/raft (and then keep it for later games) or you could just figure that each time the cannon hits you take out a grav unit. The players will do the math pretty quickly and ground the craft fast....or, they might try to press their luck and dive into the castle to get under the fire in which case I would probably reward their daring with a crash landing and bruises, but they make it. The cannon could be mounted in such a way that it cannot fire below a certain plane so the players, once on the ground in the castle now only have to contend with more even odds.



Alternatly

 

[nDervish]

I was talking to one of my friends last night and when I had said that they had basically failed their mission he responded with "well, no because once we fight our way out with Anthony's character, the locals will see that warlord can be fought. Then we can arm and train them and it'll still look like no offworlders were involved. Right now no one knows that it's off worlders attacking and after the war is over the natives can deny it and say whatever they want".

He's awfully optimistic to assume that the natives will deny offworlder assistance rather than, say, immortalizing the PCs in their version of The Ballad of Jayne Cobb.

And that's even assuming that nobody on the other side ever sees the PCs.

 

[sabredog]

He's awfully optimistic to assume that the natives will deny offworlder assistance rather than, say, immortalizing the PCs in their version of The Ballad of Jayne Cobb.

And that's even assuming that nobody on the other side ever sees the PCs.

Oh I don't know - an opportunistic warlord who is uneasy about his ability to rule once the players leave might want to keep the real story of his success under wraps. Otherwise, once the players leave he might be overthrown by a populace that was afraid of the off-worlders, but not of him.

 

[Khan Trav]

I too thought of the Dogs of War.

I have not read the book but the lead character gets the crap beat out of him in the movie.

I think Hans is correct (he normally is) when he suggests the bad actor neads to be dealt with. He is probably impacting the entire group's fun factor. You could simply go with the normal course of events and he will most likely die. Then he can watch the group play the rest of the campaign out from the sidelines. You all could probably use a fetch and carry to bring chips and drinks to the table and throw away the trash and such.

 

[Rauthik]

First off, I have to say thank you again to everyone for all the great ideas and feedback.

Sadly my game has been post poned a little while we have some scheduling conflicts in the group. We'll be back in session soon though and then I'll keep you all updated to how it all works out. -As a side note, one player feels they could salvage the mission if they can kill off the character who mucked it up and convince the warlord that they are not with him, while another player has flat out said that they've failed the mission and his character has debated getting out of there with or without them (He's the one with the ship too).

However, before then, I have another question. I'm making a GM screen so that I can have all my important charts etc. right at hand during the games and I've come across something. The weapons vs armor chart in Book 4: Mercenary has a lot of weapons listed with 2 values (ie: +4/+6) and I don't know what that exactly means. Anyone got a simple explanation for me? I didn't see anywhere that mentioned in book 1 or 4.

 

[sabredog]

The two values are for single fire/automatic fire. Use the first number for single shots and the second for bursts, and don't forget that autofire gets 2 or 3 chances to hit. Gauss rifles firing a 10-rd burst, and weapons only capable of firing full-autofire get 3 chances to hit.

 

[Rauthik]

Ahh, that makes sense. I guess I dismissed that because of the auto fire considerations in Book 1 where it says an auto rifle is just considered a rifle in single fire mode, but then the differences do between an auto rifle and rifle do not seem to match up with the negative DM for multiple shots taken in a round. Also, Book 1 says that autofire only allows 2 rolls to hit. For character creation and all my group has been sticking to the first 3 books and not using Mercenary, High Guard, etc. (however we have instituted using the events table from the Mongoose book because we liked how it added to the character creation). Is there a change in the rules from book 3 to 4 that I should be aware of?

 

[Hyphen]

Also, the book by David Drake (best known for the Hammer's Slammers books) called, The Forlorn Hope, is one of the best of the "mercs get betrayed and fight to freedom" type stories in science fiction. IMHO it makes an excellent mercenary adventure for Traveller. The merc company in it is more like what players would belong to, or form themselves, and isn't full of heavy blower tanks and elite troops nobody can defeat, so the plot is easier to integrate into a game.

Oh! Someone else knows The Forlorn Hope! For years I've wanted to sucker in - er, maybe I should say, "place" - some merc PCs in this kind of scenario! I've always thought it would be great fun.

(Well, for me, at least... ;-)

 

[sabredog]

Ahh, that makes sense. I guess I dismissed that because of the auto fire considerations in Book 1 where it says an auto rifle is just considered a rifle in single fire mode, but then the differences do between an auto rifle and rifle do not seem to match up with the negative DM for multiple shots taken in a round. Also, Book 1 says that autofire only allows 2 rolls to hit. For character creation and all my group has been sticking to the first 3 books and not using Mercenary, High Guard, etc. (however we have instituted using the events table from the Mongoose book because we liked how it added to the character creation). Is there a change in the rules from book 3 to 4 that I should be aware of?

Only that Mercenary just takes into account the higher volume of fire from gauss rifles and fully automatic weapons like LMGs, MGs, etc. Otherwise Mercenary doesn't supersede the rules in LBB1, it just fills out the military grade weapon lists.

When a gauss rifle fires a 4 round burst it gets 2 chances to hit...10 round burst = 3 chances to hit. They are pretty much the King Of The Battlefield as smallarms go and even Battle Dress/ Combat best beware.

Machineguns, autocannons, VRF GG's, and other fully-automatic weapons are used they get 3 chances to hit unless otherwise indicated. Some, like the LMG, can be used to fire multiple 10-rd bursts each combat round. The LMG might jam if more than 2 bursts are fired in a round, but that still gives it 6 chances to hit with just the 2 bursts.

 

[Carlobrand]

This brings me to a question... how do I handle shooting at the air/raft? I have recently picked up a reprint of the striker rules and while I haven't had time to look at it in depth, I do not see stats for a standard air/raft. I do also have the mongoose traveller core book (of which we found the events part of character creation to be a nice addition) and that says to treat damage from weapons as normal and then subtract the armor rating (armor is listed as 8 for the air/raft). Then the excess gets applied to hull and structure fo the vehicle (a rating of 2 for each on the air/raft). This would mean that the autocannos will shred them to pieces in one shot. I almost feel it's unfair and mean of me to have the autocannons fire on them, but then they saw them when they flew by at high altitude and scoped the compound real quick. I'd hate to have a tpk in their first adventure, but then they are also a good group who would probably bounce back from that and just make new characters. Even the numbskull who mucked the whole thing up.

Driver of the air/raft should have grav vehicles or air/raft skill. This skill is the negative modifier. The gunner of the autocannon has his/her/its skill as a positive modifier. (BTW: in such instances I usually go with a basic level of Skill Level=1 for the average NPC).

The gunner fires and you use 8+ to hit w/ +DM for gunner and -DM for air/raft driver. Use autocannon vs. Combat/Battle Dress or Cloth for armor depending on how sturdy you figure it is. I generally assume air/rafts are equal to combat/battle since they are the SUV's of the Traveller universe. In Striker terms figure it has an armor point total on all faces equal to 25 in my Traveller universe, and they are often up armored to 30 with applique. Don't forget that it is considered open-topped and any crew damage may be mitigated by the armor they are wearing.

If you have the Striker hit location charts then you can use those to determine damage if the cannon hits, but the caveat is that then you have a chance of brewing up the air/raft and killing all your players at once. Not generally the best way to reward skill, daring, and chutzpah when the players are trying to be heroes.

In one of the supplements I read that air/rafts have 4 grav units in them, and every time you lose one it costs you 1/4 lift, or roughly 1 ton. Lose all 4 and you fall pout of the sky. So you could write up a quick n' dirty hit location chart for your air/raft (and then keep it for later games) or you could just figure that each time the cannon hits you take out a grav unit. The players will do the math pretty quickly and ground the craft fast....or, they might try to press their luck and dive into the castle to get under the fire in which case I would probably reward their daring with a crash landing and bruises, but they make it. The cannon could be mounted in such a way that it cannot fire below a certain plane so the players, once on the ground in the castle now only have to contend with more even odds.

25? That's one tough air/raft. MT calls it a 4. You could up-armor to 18 (TL15) at the cost of a couple tons cargo capacity, assuming you built (or modified) the thing with the intent of sending it into harm's way; the air-raft's the equivalent of a flying truck, and even Army trucks don't generally go around with a lot of armor unless they're intended to be in the midst of nastiness. I figure 22-23 armor, 4 passengers and no other cargo would be max.

Autocannon vs air-raft usually means a rain of powdered air-raft, but a lot depends on altitude. There's a limit to how far you can elevate any gun, and if these aren't specifically intended for antiaircraft work, the players may be able to work their way into a blind spot above the guns. If they can get high enough while out of range, they can stay above the autocannon's range vertically until they move into that blind spot, then use the gravitational high ground to drop bombs to destroy the cannons and otherwise make people on the ground miserable.

If they can achieve an advantaged position where he can't hit them but they can hit him, they may be able to persuade the warlord to surrender his captive rather than face the loss of his autocannons and other material. He has to retain a certain amount of firepower to remain warlord - if he allows himself to suffer too much damage, a competitor may take advantage of his weakened state. His men certainly aren't going to complain if he surrenders a captive in order to keep them from being bombed by an attacker they can't reach.

 

[sabredog]

I dunno..."22-23" points of armor isn't that much less than 25. Not as much as starship hull (40), and certainly not the value of the average grav tank (IMTU that would be 80 on the front glacis). So all things being relative a 25 point air/raft is about right when you consider its job and the environments it operates in. It isn't just some Jeep you know. And a grav carrier would be more, but then it is specified as an APC of sorts.

The rules for air/raft damage came form one of the adventures, can't remember which off the top of my head, but clearly they are for quick n' dirty play when you don't want to arbitrarily kill off everyone playing just because you can. Sure, if you use the Striker rules (and yes, even the CT rules will do) then you can whip up a 20mm autocannon that will shred any air/raft "logically" but where's the fun in that? Maybe a wing hit is the best the natives can do with their cannon? Isn't that serious enough?

Might as well just say - "Gee, I know you guys aren't really in the military, and you are only playing characters who have had far more experience at this sort of thing than you, but even though this is just a game we play for fun if you can't figure out all the angles and such that someone who may have actually seen let alone used a real autocannon (and has flown a real by-golly air/raft and can tell me for sure it isn't made of plastic) I'm going to have to kill all of you all the time till you learn what you are supposed to do. 'Cuz I know after I keep doing that without giving you any chance at all of success, even at the slightest cost of realism, you'll still keep coming back for more."

Better to let the players muddle through with some dings and bruises than just chase them off for doing it "wrong".

 

[shield]

an airraft armour is usually low - about 4 ish in striker terms. Its just a flying car so the skin is only desigend to withstand air flows at speed + possibly containing an atmosphere if the air/raft is sealed. You don't see extra armour as the designers have better things to spend their money one - passenger space and cargo mainly.

A typical 2cm TL9 autocannon (1 or 2 barrels) will have a striker penetration of somewhere between about 9 to 13 depending on ammo type and velocity of the weapon. To Hit bonus is probably about +3 to +5 in striker terms.

The local gunners probably aren't well trained - skill 0 so no bonuses to hit (who needs skill when using an autocannon vs low tech locals).

Air/raft size will give them about a +1 to hit. negative DMs against being hit are pilot skill and airraft speed.

So best means of not getting shot - come in fast and get into a blind spot - probably best to do it at night or other conditions of poor visibility - the local gun crews probably don't have sensors.

If you want to warn the travellers about the guns without killing them, then let the inexperienced gunners open up at extreme range its 12+ to hit then and they may miss - they are not use to anti-aricraft fire.

if they do get hit, the autocannon shells will go straight throught the armour and serious damage the aircraft. If the crew are wearing armour, then the airraft hull and their armour combine (see striekr rules) and they may survive the bullets or only take light wounds. They still have to deal with the probably airraft crash.

 

[aramis]

MT armor ratings are (at least below rating 100) identical to Striker ones. MT Pens are almost always the same as Striker ones.

MT gives the Air/Rafts armor 4.

This means a snub pistol with HEAP rounds can take it out of the sky...

the G-Carrier is a measly 10...

 

[pendragonman]

the G-Carrier is a measly 10...

Kinda like what the old M113 personnel carrier had...

 

[sabredog]

MT armor ratings are (at least below rating 100) identical to Striker ones. MT Pens are almost always the same as Striker ones.

MT gives the Air/Rafts armor 4.

This means a snub pistol with HEAP rounds can take it out of the sky...

the G-Carrier is a measly 10...

To me that seems pretty flimsy for a vehicle that scout ships are equipped. My take has always been that the air/raft is a heavy-duty ATV kind of vehicle that is ruggedly designed for use in nearly any environment. Of course, there can be a plethora of air/raft designs available, and a lightweight family car version probably wouldn't be ruggedized to the point that it has as much structural integrity that it translates to what combat armor would have for a value. Common sense would seem to dictate, however, that the family car version wouldn't be what you find in the players' ship as a vehicle.

Jeez, 10 points for what is described as a "military or para-military personnel carrier", given the tech level these things show up and the type of small arms they are supposed to be protecting the passengers against is just laughable and makes no sense at all. A grav-carrier should be, IMHO, 30-40 points. A PG/FGMP can still kill one, or seriously damage it, but anything less than that or a HEAP RAM grenade will only do minor surface damage and protect the troops inside. Even an M113 could keep out anything lighter than a .50 machinegun - and relative to the tech levels, that's about the equivalent for keeping out 20mm CPR gun fire at TL-15.

For an air/raft 25 points keeps out any small arms fire, but hardly protects it from 20mm+ cannon rounds. Even a laser carbine or rifle will do some damage - but a snub pistol ..no. And air/rafts are open-topped, so if you are using the Striker rules (and I assume MT is the same) then any hits to the turret will just mean direct hits to the crew compartment without armor protection beyond what the crew is wearing. Even combat armor and battle dress won't save you from autocannon fire in that case. Plus, if you even consider that the crew is only vulnerable from the waist up, then per Striker the damage to the character is automatically stepped up one level to reflect hits to the upper torso and head. That means light wounds are now serious, and serious wounds are death.

So if anyone is worried that armoring the air/raft to give it some common sense structural integrity, and the players a fighting chance when going up against an autocannon mounted in a position that will allow it to fire on the air/raft for several rounds before they can get past it, fear not. The players can still be killed with impunity using the rules as they stand.

The combat rules are dangerous enough without having to make things any harder on the players by punishing them for doing what they think might work to rescue their buddy. I honestly think sometimes people forget that this isn't some first-person shooter and the referee is in competition with the players, instead of an impartial referee. The opposition can and should make mistakes, too, and never have more info than they logically can have.

The players shouldn't feel that the odds are constantly stacked against them and arbitrary. If they come up with a daring plan to rescue a buddy that sort of thing ought to be rewarded so they are encouraged to be more daring as they grow into the campaign. Beat on them a bit - they can rescue their buddy but they lose the raft, get shot up a bit, and its maybe a world they can never go back to..throw in some new enemies for later as a result and you have an exciting end without killing everyone off just because "that'd be realistic."

It's a game not real life. Traveller doesn't have levels so the only way player characters "improve" into better characters is if the players are encouraged to improve their play. Now if you want exciting two-fisted play with gunfights, rescues, and action then you can't punish players when they try to do that sort of thing. If they makes mistakes then guide them towards a better solution so they learn, then see what happens. If you just kill them off every time you'll only end up without players and some cranky friends. What's the point in that?

 

[Carlobrand]

I dunno..."22-23" points of armor isn't that much less than 25. Not as much as starship hull (40), and certainly not the value of the average grav tank (IMTU that would be 80 on the front glacis). So all things being relative a 25 point air/raft is about right when you consider its job and the environments it operates in. It isn't just some Jeep you know. And a grav carrier would be more, but then it is specified as an APC of sorts.

The rules for air/raft damage came form one of the adventures, can't remember which off the top of my head, but clearly they are for quick n' dirty play when you don't want to arbitrarily kill off everyone playing just because you can. Sure, if you use the Striker rules (and yes, even the CT rules will do) then you can whip up a 20mm autocannon that will shred any air/raft "logically" but where's the fun in that? Maybe a wing hit is the best the natives can do with their cannon? Isn't that serious enough?

Might as well just say - "Gee, I know you guys aren't really in the military, and you are only playing characters who have had far more experience at this sort of thing than you, but even though this is just a game we play for fun if you can't figure out all the angles and such that someone who may have actually seen let alone used a real autocannon (and has flown a real by-golly air/raft and can tell me for sure it isn't made of plastic) I'm going to have to kill all of you all the time till you learn what you are supposed to do. 'Cuz I know after I keep doing that without giving you any chance at all of success, even at the slightest cost of realism, you'll still keep coming back for more."

Better to let the players muddle through with some dings and bruises than just chase them off for doing it "wrong".

Or, we could offer the varying viewpoints to the OP and let him make his own choice.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

The players shouldn't feel that the odds are constantly stacked against them and arbitrary.

Agree wholeheartedly.

If they come up with a daring plan to rescue a buddy that sort of thing ought to be rewarded so they are encouraged to be more daring as they grow into the campaign.

Daring rescue plans should only be rewarded if they aren't inordinately stupid. (This assumes they know the parameters of the game and setting.) I wouldn't punish the whole group (they're just trying to save their buddy), but I certainly would look at teaching the one bozo a lesson (that would resonate with his buddies, too).

 

[Rauthik]

I don't want to punish them (though, the one guy has put his character into a position that is not good for his health). The big problem I have is how they basically blew the mission, meaning the corp won't want to pay them, because they went all cowboy and assaulted the warlord's compound in full off worlder glory. This violation of the mission parameters exposes the corp has having a paramilitary influence in the area to destabilize the warlord's control. Honestly, I'm fine with them going in to save their friend, but it just blows the secrecy part of the mission. I still feel they could have mounted a rescue with out storming the walls and throwing grenades... but then maybe that's just me.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

You're right, Rauthik, they could have concocted a more nuanced rescue approach. I think some of the initial responses were right on: have the corp "disavow any knowledge of [their] actions". If they have their own ship, make sure that it mysteriously gets impounded/grounded. Offer up a possible way out somewhere across the face of the planet (having to walk because their busted-up hoopty air-raft got shot down adds to the fun), with the warlord chasing them them the whole way. If you can manage to have them do in one of the corp reps in the process, they have now created a long-term enemy in the corp (though, blowing this mission could be enough to do that!). Make sure that at some point they realize they will possibly need to be looking over their shoulder for the rest of their lives (paranoia in players is good).