Personal Combat Questions

[Sojourner7]

I would like to start off by saying that I am very happy with this book for the most part, but I am having trouble understanding how to implement personal combat.

There are two issues I am having with personal combat:

*The organization of the chapter could use some work to make how a round proceeds a little clearer (this is relatively minor, but there doesn't even seem to be stuff like a short premade list of steps to take for each round which would be useful for my players but is easy enough to make)
Has anyone made a personal combat guide or walkthrough that is relatively current to the erratta.

*The way range bands work doesn't make much sense to me except in a one group vs one group combat situation. Also how does stuff like cover and whatnot work when the distances vary so much? Is it that a player declares they get behind cover and if it is reasonable that there is cover then they are behind it? Or is it more tactical? Why is there a artillery/ortiller miss chart (which is awsome btw) when everything is relative?
In short, what I could really use is just an example of personal combat play. Even something very basic would be nice. Does someone have something like this?
Also, how do you deal with more than two groups of combatants?

I am going to have to go reread through the whole book again, since I am not sure if I am remembering everything correctly, and I may have missed something. I noticed that someone did some work on making a tactical personal combat version, but I want to understand how to use this version before I decide what I want to implement. Traveller 5ed is just one of the many systems I am considering for my campaign.

I watched a video that talked about STAMP, but I don't seem to find that fully in one place anywhere in the book? (I have a pdf version) Has there been a revision?

 

[Sojourner7]

Addendum:
Another thing that is confusing me is how to handle grenade/blast weapons when distance is so relative. Is its just gm fiat if they are within the same range?

 

[pendragonman]

Did you get T5.09? That is the most revised version released.

A round is undefined exactly in T5 because several things take a round but not the same amount of actual time.

As gamers, we are used to a round being linked to a fixed amount of time. In T5 a round is linked to the completion of a task, regardless of the length of actual time that takes.

As to range bands, try to think of them as as orthogonal projections onto the same plane. Then the various bands make a bit more sense.

 

[David Johansen]

Personally 5.09 is actually worse than 5.0.

The thing with STAMP is that everything is happening all at once in a crazy variety of orders but you're resolving things one at a time for sanity's sake.

The best discussion of range bands I've ever encountered is in Modiphus's Mutant Chronicles rpg but may also appear in their Infinity or Conan games.

Anyhow, basically build a simple map and set a single terrain type to each range band. So you're on the loading dock, the warehouse full of crates is to your left, the train tracks and shipping containers are to your right. Ahead lies another warehouse and behind you is a deserted street. That kind of thing. It makes the range bands more concrete and easy to work with.

 

[Supplement Four]

Personally 5.09 is actually worse than 5.0.

I agree. And I worked on 5.09.

To me, it feels generic--like a band-aid that will do the job in an ever so predictable fashion. STAMP may not have worked that well, but what it had going for it was a unique, fresh approach that was solely T5.

And still, 5.09 is not quite "right". Way too many dice rolls, imo, and it bogs down game play. Plus, melee or HTH still doesn't work.

I think STAMP should have been fixed, not replaced. Or, if it had to be replaced, it should have been replaced with something more interesting.

The best discussion of range bands I've ever encountered is in Modiphus's Mutant Chronicles rpg but may also appear in their Infinity or Conan games.

Remember that the Range Bands used in T5 are different than Range Bands used in other games (or even in Classic Traveller) in that T5 range bands are not all of the same length.

In CT (and most other games), Range Bands all represent the same amount of distance. In T5, the closer Range Bands cover much less distance than the farther Range Bands

Anyhow, basically build a simple map and set a single terrain type to each range band. So you're on the loading dock, the warehouse full of crates is to your left, the train tracks and shipping containers are to your right. Ahead lies another warehouse and behind you is a deserted street. That kind of thing. It makes the range bands more concrete and easy to work with.

Was I in that discussion you mention about Modiphus' range bands (on enWorld?) That sounds like something I said there.

 

[David Johansen]

I don't do enworld so probably not.

Anyhow, MC range bands aren't uniform in size either.

The biggest issue with 5.09 is that nobody sat down and worked out what the actual chances to hit would be with an average character with a stat of 7 and skill of 3. The multiple attacks solution makes it even easier to hit. There's also the double dipping issue with size and range. Range sets base difficulty and range - size is a modifier. In the end the whole thing becomes very clunky and hard to use. Armor is generally much better than weapons from the same TL. It's impossible to hit in hand to hand combat. 0- on 2d6 for evenly matched opponents.

I suspect that when the revision finally drops it'll be cleaned up a fair bit. If it's not, I'm done supporting T5 in any respect and I'm the guy who gave away half a dozen copies of the hardback.

Personally you almost need half dice to make it work as full dice are too big and modifiers become a separate and rapidly growing problem.

I've posted a number of ideas over the years but who knows where it will go.

I think the cleanest patch would be base difficulty = 3d, keep the cover rule as -1 to hit for -2 to be hit. - target speed. +1 for stationary shooter, +1 to hit first shooter, +1 or group hits for rapid fire, +2 or group hits for very rapid fire, + size, - range. Convert every full three points of modifiers to a 1d difficulty shift.

For melee, I think flux under skill + attribute - target skill + attribute might work, again with a shift in difficulty for every 3 points.

My damage patch is all damage types that hit the same defense are cumulative. I suppose Penetrate should be double against armor before other damage types are applied. I don't really like that solution but it should do something on its own.

If you don't want to roll the stat hit by each die that penetrates, I'd like to suggest dividing the damage by three and applying it equally.

 

[Supplement Four]

I don't do enworld so probably not.

Then we agree.

And, I quite agree with what you say above about T5.

I think T5 requires too much work when there are other viable Traveller rule sets to use.

Any other Traveller rule set will cost the Ref less time in prep (creating and fixing rules).

There's a lot of good ideas in it, though. It seems very "unfinished" to me. Good ideas not implemented well.

 

[Fovean]

In T5 v5.09 on pg 189 at the bottom is the Range Reference Chart, which gives distances in meters for each numbered range band. Hopefully this can help you, Soujourner7, at least with regards to multiple combatants at different ranges.

Unfortunately Very Short (5m) leads to Short (50m) so grenades and such seem to get lost in the sauce. 5 to 50 meters is a really big spread for a personal area-of-effect weapon IMO. I think Short being 25m makes more sense (Pistol range, I guess). Still, that's a big spread for a grenade.

I think there's a simple, elegant mechanic in T5 combat somewhere but no one seems to be able to find it.

 

[Supplement Four]

Nice, constructive post, Fovean.

To add to it...

@Sojourner7

Page 295 (of the original book, not 5.09) shows a Speed chart. Speed 0-16 are listed. As with Classic Traveller, Speed 1 is Human Walk Speed. Speed 2 is Human Run Speed.

Walk is 5 kph.

Run is 10 kph.



If you want to use a traditional 1.5 m squares, considering the original T5 one minutes combat round, you can run combat on a grid and forget about the Range Bands.

5,000 meters / 60 minutes = 83 meters per round

83 / 1.5 = 55 squares per round



One of the arguments I had with T5, when we were writing 5.09, was that the one minute combat round was too long. I suggested a 15 second combat round, like Classic Traveller, or a 5 second combat round, like most modern rpgs.

You can adjust the number of squares per round based on the length of the combat round that you use (you can also adjust the size of the square or hex--say, if using 10 meter hexes for outdoor terrain, or even 10 km hexes and the like for long distance movement. (Don't forget to adjust for terrain type when dealing with long distance travel.)



You can use the Range Band sometimes, and you can use grid movement at other times--whatever is appropriate for the scene that you are running.

If there's no map, and you're just describing the action in the players' mind's eye, then use Range Bands. It's easy.

If you've got a grid map, say for a building or a starship interior, then you can use actual distance moved as I described above.

So...

If using a grid map with 1.5 meter squares and one minute combat rounds (which is a long time)...

T5 Humans can Walk at Speed 1 up to 55 squares in a round. If they do anything else, then you must detract from that distance. If a character fires his weapon and then walks, I would cut the number of squares down in half.

If a character aims and fires in the same round, then no movement is possible.

If you are using the 5.09 combat system, then you can play around with this to get your preferred mix.

 

[Sojourner7]

Thank you for all the advice. I've been reading through the book a lot recently, and I've been trying to test out various systems. I've been pretty busy so I've only really tested character creation. I am somewhat unclear as to what constitutes being in the reserve? Is it all veterans? Or just NROTC and ROTC graduates? The example character creation answers a lot of questions, but not all of them. I'll have to read things again. I expect I'll have a lot of questions.

My impressions so far is that Traveller 5 has a lot of potential, but that it still has a few quirks. I like how everything is organized so I plan to playtest everything. Worst comes to worst its time spent learning to appreciate how organization and shorthand can make a more complex system more manageable. It sounds like the current version needs some work.

I think I somewhat understand rangebands now, and I think I will implement them like Supplement 4 recommends "You can use the Range Band sometimes, and you can use grid movement at other times--whatever is appropriate for the scene that you are running.". I am also considering running with stamp. It seems similar to the battletech system, and more or less seems to jive what what I feel combat is like. The only problem that I foresee with stamp, besides player unfamiliarity, is if you have tons of combatants it might get hard to keep track of everything.

 

[Sojourner7]

Then we agree.
I think T5 requires too much work when there are other viable Traveller rule sets to use.

I own most of the Mongoose Traveller 1ed books, and I like them, but i like how unified 5e is. I especially love all the equipment/vehicle generators, and wish they'd include a comprehensive small craft section. However, as you said, despite there being a lot of good concepts the implementation isn't quite there yet (at least if what everyone in this thread says is true).

 

[whulorigan]

. . . I especially love all the equipment/vehicle generators, and wish they'd include a comprehensive small craft section. . .

Robject has the following links for T5 over on his profile (among others):

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Small Craft
Small Craft List (using ACS): http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...012#post489012
Using the old draft's VehicleMaker: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=30503
Using ACS: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=29680[/FONT]

 

[Sojourner7]

Robject has the following links for T5 over on his profile (among others):

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Small Craft
Small Craft List (using ACS): http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...012#post489012
Using the old draft's VehicleMaker: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=30503
Using ACS: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...ad.php?t=29680[/FONT]

Thanks for pointing that out. I had found all but one of those before I registered for the site, it seems a lot of people have done a lot of good work. I was just hoping there was something that was official, but I was planning to use those links and some others I found to do what I wanted.

 

[David Johansen]

The thing is that anything made with the makers is official.

 

[Sojourner7]

Ah, good to know. I am going to have to look up who all the makers are and look at all their work.

 

[Ulsyus]

My impressions so far is that Traveller 5 has a lot of potential, but that it still has a few quirks... The only problem that I foresee with stamp, besides player unfamiliarity, is if you have tons of combatants it might get hard to keep track of everything.

I reckon T5 has as much potential as anyone wants to put effort into it: it's a great system in that it can capture the feel of whichever game you want to run.

As for combat with lots of combatants, if the system isn't working for you just abstract it out. I know you know that the whole thing is meant to be about fun, so just keep it that way rather than trying to adhere to rules that don't seem to keep your game and scenario flowing with the tempo you want it to have.