RULE 68A - A Ref's Guide to the Classic Traveller Task System

[pendragonman]

I second that, Maladominus! WJP, you have stated what I am guessing is what most of us old hacks have been doing all along...but siad it better than we could have.


Thanks!

 

[Supplement Four]

Thanks for all the words. I appreciate it. It's nice to know one's effort is valued.

I've been using Rule 68A for quite a while now. As the last two posters have said--it's intuitive to Classic Traveller. The reason I posted it is because of a conversation I had the other day with a GM new to Classic Traveller but experienced with other forms of Traveller and many other rpgs.

He was attracted to CT, but like so many people have said, including myself, he didn't like how "old" CT was because it "didn't have a task system."

I pointed out that CT did indeed have a system. The system was just loose and easy, quick and dirty...on-the-fly.

This is where most GMs, ingrained with structured task systems in every game they've ever played (he's younger than me), start to turn away from such a thought as a "structureless" system. "You mean, the GM makes it all up?"

"Yep."

"But, doesn't that lead to a lot of fights? Don't the players feel cheated?"

"Well, do they feel cheated when you make up a scenario and all the enemies they're going to fight during the game?"

"I see your point...but still, I dunno. It seems like a lot of work--always having to make up stuff on the fly. I like the security of knowing what an "Average" task is."

And, this is where I told him about Rule 68A.

It was like a lightbulb went off.

He seems to finally "get" CT.

I thought about that for a few hours, and then I thought, heck, if he got something out of 68A, then maybe other CT GMs would as well.

So there you have it....why I posted it.

Glad to hear most people reading the thread "get" it.

 

[scout_harris]

Good explanation...

Yep, that's how I used to play CT as well.

I stopped using CT because combat doesn't work that well when armour modifies the "to hit", but I notice that you use the armour modifiers on the damage roll, nice little house rule there, well done.

However, this will not be enough to make me pick it back up again, the CT rules still have too many issues that need to be house ruled around. (complete lack of vehicle combat rules, inconsistent starship combat construction and combat rules between B2 and B5, and a few others)

I referee two different groups at the moment, for one I use Megatraveller, and the other I use T20. With both I play the rules fast and loose, and yes, both of those are not ideal either, but they do more of what I want than CT does.

I still pull CT out every now and again and have a read. After all, its where I started, I even ran a game with it once late last year just for laughs.

If I ever run another game I'll keep in mind some of the things I have seen in this thread.

 

[Supplement Four]

However, this will not be enough to make me pick it back up again, the CT rules still have too many issues that need to be house ruled around. (complete lack of vehicle combat rules, inconsistent starship combat construction and combat rules between B2 and B5, and a few others)

There are choices to be made for combat with CT. I think choice is good. The CT rules sets allow for customizition. A GM can pick a system that suits his tastes and his game.

For traditional personal combat, there's the system in LBB1. If you want to use that same system with tactical points, then Snapshot is your rule set. If you want to go abstract, look inside the interior of LBB4.

Some people use Azhanti High Lightning as a personal combat system, and it can work well in that capacity, although it was designed to cover mass interior conflicts--a companion to Striker. If you want to handle large, mass combat, then either the system inside LBB4 or Striker is the game system to use.

The same choice appears for space combat.

My personal favorite is the space combat system in LBB2 as it lends itself to a simple strategic game on a map, or the GM can focus all the action inside the ship, roleplaying the encounter (this is what I typically do). The LBB2 system is abstracted and played on a larger scale in the Mayday game. Mayday is a great choice is both small and large ships, or even fleets, are involved in the encounter.

There's a great little, almost unknown, set of rules for abstract dogfighting and the like contained under the Ship's Boat skill description in LBB1.

LBB5's combat system is designed for large fleet actions (where as LBB2 would get cumbersome with so many vessels).

BTW, there is a Vehicle Combat System in CT. You're just missing it. It's in Striker.

 

[aramis]

There is another vehicle combat system buried in (IIRC) Across the Bright Face.

 

[Supplement Four]

There is another vehicle combat system buried in (IIRC) Across the Bright Face.

Nice to know. I've owned Across the Bright Face for two decades, but I've never read.

I think I'll go read it now.

 

[aramis]

Nice to know. I've owned Across the Bright Face for two decades, but I've never read.

I think I'll go read it now.

I know there are rules for shooting ATV's in at least one of the modules. ISTR Across the Bright Face or Mission on Mithral. Burried in the specs on the Horronon ATV.

 

[Supplement Four]

I know there are rules for shooting ATV's in at least one of the modules. ISTR Across the Bright Face or Mission on Mithral. Burried in the specs on the Horronon ATV.

Just read the Across the Bright Face stuff. Pretty simple, really. Handled just like personal combat, except that a space combat-like damage chart is used.

I like it. Very intuitive. Very simple. That's what I like about CT. Quick and Dirty.

I was reading about small arms fire vs. the ATV. Neat. Roll attacks vs. the ATV normally, as per normal personal combat rules. ATV is not damaged, though, until 24 points of damage are accumulated.

Each "lump" of 24 points of small arms damage nets you one throw on the ATV damage table.

It's a good example to extrapolate for other vehicles, too. The GM can come up with six damage possibilities (sky's the limit with imagination), and those ATV rules can be easily modified to other types of vehicles.

This system will become my Vechicle Combat System of choice with regards to CT. Striker can be used to design vehicles. Or, just pick them out of the equipment section--or take 'em from other Traveller supplements (even from other editions of Traveller).

Then simply apply a 6 point damage table, and adapt the rules for combat with the ATV to whatever vehicle you're using. Handles vehicle vs. vehicle too.

Ya know...now that I think about it, I think there are some other neat little rules out there in JTAS. I can remember specifically a dogfighting system in JTAS.

 

[vraymond]

Ya know...now that I think about it, I think there are some other neat little rules out there in JTAS. I can remember specifically a dogfighting system in JTAS.

You might be thinking of the Foxhound Striker variant in JTAS #14. There was also an adventure in High Passage #2 or #3, IIRC, that involved fighters (but can't recall about air-to-air combat).

 

[scout_harris]

Some people use Azhanti High Lightning as a personal combat system, and it can work well in that capacity, although it was designed to cover mass interior conflicts--a companion to Striker. If you want to handle large, mass combat, then either the system inside LBB4 or Striker is the game system to use.

I had Snapshot back in the day, the big chart of modifiers came in very handy, so did the deckplans (I love deckplans). I didn't get Striker till after I was playing with MT, (actually, until after I was playing with TNE). So I had moved on in my thinking by the time I got it.

The way I see it, MT incorporates a lot of the stuff you mentioned above. (Pity about the Errata). I use a house ruled version, but I still see MT as the definitely being CTv2.

My personal favourite is the space combat system in LBB2 as it lends itself to a simple strategic game on a map, or the GM can focus all the action inside the ship, roleplaying the encounter (this is what I typically do).

My preference is definitely for roleplaying space combat. I have a fondness for simplicity LBB2. I really like what has been done in T20, where all players can meaningfully contribute to a space combat, rather than just the pilot and the gunner.

LBB5's combat system is designed for large fleet actions (where as LBB2 would get cumbersome with so many vessels).

Oddly enough, I have never run a large fleet action with my players, its not something we have ever needed to do. Once the combats get big, I generally make up the results based on what I think furthers the story.
I actually don't like the LBB combat system, and wished they hadn't imported it into MT, but had instead gone with something more roleplaying based.

BTW, there is a Vehicle Combat System in CT. You're just missing it. It's in Striker.

I still collect CT stuff. When I picked up Stiker I finally saw where the MT rules came from.

Anyway, if they ever produced a version of CT with a simplified version of the Striker rules incorporated into the main game, T20 like starship combat, changed the world generation to make more sense, updated the equipment list, changed the tech level descriptions (for TL7,8 and 9), updated the combat rules with some of your ideas in this thread, I would likely start using it

But then, I am a market of one person.

 

[Supplement Four]

In defense of CT mods....

The CT 'weapon vs range' and 'weapon vs armor' tables bristle with +/- modifiers of 3, 4, and 5 that yield far too many 'cannot miss/cannot hit' situations.

Even though my personal house rules make for a game where the to-hit roll means "was a hit accomplished?", and the damage roll means "how much damage was inflicted", let's not forget that the CT system doesn't quite model both of those roll the same way.

The CT system (like the d20 D&D system) has a To Hit And Damage roll.

It's not just a "to hit" roll. CT is not concerned with whether a hit was scored but no damage was inflicted. All CT cares about if if a hit was scored that also caused damage to the target.

That's why CT uses the armor mods on the to-hit roll. It's success at the hit and penetration all in one.

If you throw a CT to hit throw and miss, then that may mean you missed the target all-together, but it also may mean that you hit the target but did no damage.

Bare fists against Battledress, for example, cannot hit in CT. Does that mean a bare fist cannot connect with a target wearing battledress? Nope. It means the bare fits can beat on the battledress all day long and not damage the person wearing the gear.

In a way, CT's method of rolling is slicker, easier, and cleaner than my house rule.

Under my house rule, one can hit but do no damage. CT says, "why bother with that? Let's just focus on when the hits actually damage."

Looking at it in that light, CT's to-hit really isn't all that bad.

One just has to remember that "penetration" and "damage" are all accounted for in the one economical roll.

 

[Supplement Four]

I wanted to check my facts, because I wrote (above) that a situation where a bare handed combatant fights an opponent in battledress has no chance of damaging the battledress dude.

What I found, was interesting.

At Short range (typical brawling range) a bare handed individual with Brawling-0, STR-7 has no chance of damaging an opponent in BattleDress.

But, if the character is STR-9 or better, he can damage a target in BattleDress on a roll of 12 only!

That's really quite elegant. There's no chance at all unless the character is strong enough to punch through the weak spots at the joints of a character in BattleDress...and even then, it's a very low probability that it would ever happen.

That's really a nice rule.

As the character's skill increases, the chance to damage the BattleDress target increases. For example, Brawling-1, STR-7 would damage on a roll of 12. Brawling-2, STR-7 would damage on a roll of 11 or 12. Brawling-3, STR-7 would damage on a roll of 10-11-12. Etc.

I think it's handled rather nicely. I may re-visit my house rules in favor of CT as written.



On the other hand, an AutoRifle, firing burst fire at a target at Medium Range, will hit and damage the target if the target is not armored.

AutoRifle-0, DEX-6

-2 DM (DEX)
+2 DM (Range)
+6 DM (Armor)
+0 DM (Skill)
-----
2D +6 for 8+ = 100% chance of success.

But, this doesn't necessarily mean that the target is shot. He could easily be grazed or tired out. Two of the target's stats have to be reduced to zero in order for the character to be considered shot. Otherwise, he's just winded or grazed or lightly wounded somehow and will heal completely, with medical attention, in about half an hour.

Point being: One has to consider the damage inflicted in order to take a guess as to what happened.

Let's say the target's stats are B76884, and he hasn't been wounded.

How grave an issue is it that someone is 6 meters away (or 50 meters, Medium range is a big range category), plucking away with fully automatic fire?

Answer: It's a pretty damn big issue.

Since autofire allows two attack throws, it's very likely that the burst from the autorifle will hit both times. That's 6D damage.

And, all 6D damage is applied to a single stat using the first blood rule. The average on 6D is 21 points of damage...but what happens if the roll is low? (This is why damage must be considered in the equation).

Let's say the dice look like this: 1, 1, 3, 2, 2, 1

That's 10 points of damage. And, let's say that damage is applied randomly to the target's STR. What happens?

His stats are reduced to 176884.

So what happened? It's abstracted a bit, but probably the attacker let loose with the ammo spray, and the defender tried not to get hit, dodging out of the way (because he's not shot. He's still up and walking around without penalty.).

Pont here is: A 100% chance of attack and damage does not mean that the character is shot. It can't mean that. This character will be fully healed as soon as this combat is over (provided he takes no more hits).



Looking at the CT system that way, it's really not that bad at all. 100% chance of damage doesn't mean the character is 100% shot, bleeding, dying.

But, it's likely.

I'm really starting to think the CT designers knew what they were doing.

 

[aramis]

Back in my CT days, I did up charts like the old FASA STRPG (1E) used, to make mayday/b2 combats more role-playing intensive.

To be honest, I find (and found) Bk2 to be very non-RP in scope.

 

[Supplement Four]

Back in my CT days, I did up charts like the old FASA STRPG (1E) used, to make mayday/b2 combats more role-playing intensive.

Man, I love that old FASA Star Trek rpg. What an exceptional and fun game. Sure captured the "feel" of Trek.

To be honest, I find (and found) Bk2 to be very non-RP in scope.

Why is that? I find it extremely easy to role play using LBB2 space combat, especially (but not necessarily) if you use Starter Traveller range band movement in place of the movement system in LBB2.

I typically will lay deck plans out on the table for the players to see. I'll keep track of range on a piece of scratch paper using the range band method.

All the attention of the game is focused one what's happening inside the ship. The player don't need to see a plot. I'll describe what they see on their instruments, and I can easily tell them range by looking at my range band ladder.

Then, I just move through the phases of LBB2 space combat.

I'll adjust range on each round on my range band ladder. During the Laser Fire phase, I'll describe what it feels like to operate the weapon...what appears on the monitors. Same thing with ordance launch.

And, when the ship is hit, that's the most fun time for role playing. Instead of a generic hit, I'll describe what happens to the ship. Gasses escaping. Locks on emergency close.

A hull breach may block the corridor between engineering and the bridge, depending on the ship's layout. There are about 15 minutes (1000 seconds) in each space combat turn, so, I'll allow the players to do things that will take them 15 minutes or so, then I'll go into the next space combat round.

For most, sitting on the bridge or in the ship's turrets, this 15 minutes is played fairly quickly. It's the characters running around the ship not on the bridge that takes more role playing time.

I like getting elaborate with whatever damage is indicated by the starship damage tables. The players will typically form damage control crews with the character not engaged on the bridge or in the turrets. Boarders are always fun. We might have all sorts of encounters. I've even had players move their characters to the hull of the ship during the combat scenario in magnetic boots, rolling their Zero-G throws, and the pilot keeping the ship at a constant G rating in order not to swing off the EVA damage control team.

What a game that was!

LBB2 can be quite the role playing platform if you GM the game as needed.

 

[aramis]

it was very much a separate game merely bound in. Not unlike BL was cribbed into TNE; the role of various positions not specified well, if at all. No rolls needed for piloting...

Both good games, but the tie ins are almost exclusively gunnery.

 

[BlackBat242]

Ok, I played CT from 1983 on, and everyone I ever played with had "snake eyes" (two 1s - a 2) on the dice as an automatic miss, and box-cars (2 sixes - a 12) on the dice as an automatic miss... unless the modifiers totalled enough to make a roll of 15+ necessary to hit.

Was any part of this BTB... or was it just a common "house-rule"?

 

[scout_harris]

Nope, it has the same problems as when I left it...

BTW, there is a Vehicle Combat System in CT. You're just missing it. It's in Striker.

I just had another look at Striker.
As far as I am concerned, it suffers the same problem from as High Guard and Book 2 Starship combat. Its a different combat system that does not fit with book 1 or Book 4.

I think this was (in my opinion) the main failing of CT. Too many different systems that didn't fit well together. Yes I had AHL, Mayday, Snapshot, Striker, Book 1, etc, but they weren't really designed to fit together. It really did (and still would) take a large amount of house-ruling and shoehorning to make CT work. Reading through Striker and Book5 again tonight reminded me of all the work I used to to make the game work when I was reffing it. (Damn, the player just threw a grenade... now how do grenades work again, which book is that rule in? Gah... just make something up.. what did I make up last time?)

Last night I breifly considered trying it again, tonight, after a reread, I decided against.

There would have to a a lot of changes in a new version of CT before I would buy it, or reccomend it to my gamers.

 

[Mithras]

Under my house rule, one can hit but do no damage. CT says, "why bother with that? Let's just focus on when the hits actually damage."

Looking at it in that light, CT's to-hit really isn't all that bad.

One just has to remember that "penetration" and "damage" are all accounted for in the one economical roll.

You could say that, but to be honest the ONLY problem I have with CT mechanics is armour. Armour. And that's it. Fitting the beautiful ethos of Classic Trav, I love the penetration/to hit is all in one, but those DMs are awful and wreck the combats I ran. I ignored all postive armour DMs, just keeping the negative ones. It worked a dream, never needed a unified task system really, before or since.

Look at it. A gangster with SMG used to using guns (skill-2), with postive Dex DM of +2, tries to shoot an unarmoured cop who walks around a corner. Range is, say 5m? Short range. He might hit, chances are he will. Always a chance of a miss however.

Range DM +3
Skill DM +2
Dex DM +2
Armour DM +5

Thats + 12 on a 2d roll to hit on 8+ No way he can miss.

OK. Move it out to Medium range. 40m away. Our gangster sees a cop across the main road on a parking lot close to his car. 40m. Fair chance he will hit with a SMG, but at that range - never certain.

Range DM +3
Skill DM +2
Dex DM +2
Armour DM +5

Thats still + 12 on a 2d roll to hit on 8+ No way he can miss!!

OK. Move it out to Long range! That's maybe 100m? Way, way, way down the bottom of the street.

Range DM -3
Skill DM +2
Dex DM +2
Armour DM +5

+9 on a 2d roll to hit on 8+. Still no way he can miss!!! Wow!

OK. Move it out to Very Long Range (out to half a km). That's a -9 on the range.

Range DM -9
Skill DM +2
Dex DM +2
Armour DM +5

This insane shot is still +0 on a 2d roll to hit on 8+. Chances of a hit are 42%!!!!!!!!

Would you like me to go through hand weapons likewise? Single shot guns don't do too badly, but anything auto or bladed just kills and kills with certainty.

DMs for 'auto fire' are already incorporated into the range DM so the high armour DM is unneccessary. Remove it at once

 

[Supplement Four]

Look at it. A gangster with SMG used to using guns (skill-2), with postive Dex DM of +2, tries to shoot an unarmoured cop who walks around a corner. Range is, say 5m? Short range. He might hit, chances are he will. Always a chance of a miss however.

Range DM +3
Skill DM +2
Dex DM +2
Armour DM +5

Thats + 12 on a 2d roll to hit on 8+ No way he can miss.

As I said above, you have to consider damage in the entire evaluation. The SMG does 3D damage. So, two hits, under the autofire throw would hit, penetrate, and damage the unarmored cop.

Let's say your unarmored cop has physcical stats of 987.

First roll of 3D damage, under the first blood rule, is taken from one stat randomly. Let's say that damage was 1, 1, 3. That's 5 points of damage, rolled randomly, taken from the cop's END.

Now, his stats are 982

OK, second roll of 3D damage is made, rolling 4, 5, 1.

Now, the defender can choose where to allot the dice. He takes 4 points from his DEX, 5 points from his STR, and 1 point from his END.

The cop's stats are now: 441

What really happened? Was the cop actually shot?

No, he wasn't. That 100% throw you cite above does nto mean it's a 100% chance the cop will be shot. The cop is still able to act. He's not incapacitated (as he would be if he were shot), and he can easily shoot back, now.

The system is a bit abstract (and so are most combat systems in rpgs), but we can deduce, from the damage, that the crook sprayed a burst from the SMG, and bullets popped and zipped all around the cop.

He's winded and scared. But, he wasn't shot.

Remember, two stats have to be reduced to zero before a character is considered seriously wounded (or shot). Anything less than that means something else...some lighter damage.



Let's say the cop returns fire now. His stats are 441, but the rules say that these wounds do not affect DMs for shots. So, the cop will return fire as if his DEX were still DEX-8.

He's got a revolver, and he's trained to Revolver-2.


-3 Drawing weapon penalty
+2 Skill
+2 Range (Short)
+1 Armor (Target has no armor)
+0 DEX (No DEX bonus)
---
2D +2 for 8+
or
2D for 6+

Let's say the cop hits. The crook's physical stats are 795. The revolver does 3D damage: 3, 5, 4. Using the first blood rule, that 12 points of damage is applied to the crook's END, reducing it to zero. The rest of the damage folds over into STR.

Leaving the crook with stats 090.



What really happened?

Was that 100% chance of a hit with the SMG as damaging as it actually looks?

It's certainly scary, but what I've shown here is not outside the realm of possibility at all.

The crook sprays a burst at the cop, missing him (the cop was not shot though damage was inflicted). Maybe he was grazed.

Then, the cop drew his pistol from his holster and fired back, a single shot, hitting the crook.

And, the crook is gunshot. He's down with a major wound, bleeding.


The CT combat system really isn't that bad if you look at the whole picture. You can't just look at the "to-hit-and-damage" percentage. You've also got to look at the damage inflicted.

A weapon may do 3D damage, and it may have a 100% chance of hitting and infliciting damage. But, if 3 aces are rolled, then damage of 3 points typically isn't a gunshot.

Thus, a 100% chance of hitting doesn't mean a 100% chance of inflicting a gunshot wound.

 

[Supplement Four]

I just had another look at Striker.
As far as I am concerned, it suffers the same problem from as High Guard and Book 2 Starship combat. Its a different combat system that does not fit with book 1 or Book 4.

Hey, I'm not trying to sway you either way. I love CT, and it's good enough for me. It's my Traveller system of choice, and I think it is superior, in many ways, to all the other Traveller editions. You, obviously, feel differently, and that's great. Other editions of Traveller need lovin' too.

One thing, though. That vehicle combat system that Aramis pointed out in Across the Bright Face does fit in exactly with LBB1 personal combat. I like it, and I'll use it next time I have a vehicle in my fights.