S4 was WRONG about CT Combat!

[DonM]

The only think I don't quite agree with, because it feels a little too "mechanic-y" to me, is the clarification on the First Blood rule. I think I will house rule that one in my game to go the way I thought it read in the book: That the rule is applied the first time the character is wounded and not on each first round of each new combat.

Uh oh... did I write the clarification wrong?

I didn't mean to imply that all wounds taken in the first round of a new combat use the first blood rule.

I meant to say that the first TIME a character is wounded in any single combat, first blood applies.

For example:

You're on Efate as part of the Imperial Army callup in 1106. On your fourth day, while patrolling, your team is attacked. On the third round of combat, you get hit for the first time. First blood applies. You get wounded, and after combat, sent back to base for patching and rest.

While at the base, hours later, it gets attacked. You're still wounded, and on the second round of combat you are unlucky and get hit. First blood applies again, because it's a new combat.

The round of a combat in which you take the first damage isn't important -- first blood just happens the first time you are damaged in a combat.

Any suggestions on making that clarification more clear?

 

[Gadrin]

Otherwise you either get unrealistically cautious heroes or unrealistically dead heroes.



Hans

No, the point was, not all the rules are good ones.

We simply stopped rolling in char-gen if the pc died and you took him
"live" from there.

Quick deaths usually put the kai-bosh on new players. A game's no fun if
your PC dies and everyone else is playing while you're sitting around
twiddling your thumbs.

A game S-U-C-K-S if the entire party is killed on the first go-round.
Probably most players have a military background, or know what's
going on, but your average kid is going to hate it if it's just over
with quickly.

I'd be tempted to take the physical characteristics and add them
all together for Hit Points on newbies who were new to the game
esp if they played D&D.

I've played with GMs who are happy to kill the party right off the bat
(not just Traveller) and then rag about it.

Next comes the 40 years of crushing debt. Yawwwwwwwwwwwwn.
Last thing I want to do as a GM never mind as a player is a whole
bunch of bookkeeping. Nevermind the fact that you have little to
look forward to. The whole "bank gives you a ship in an economic
environment that's conducive to defaulting" never won me over.

GURPS Traveller was smart, give away a ship and get on with it.
Same with mustering out benefits from CT.

If you're playing a campaign that's just "what cargo do I take" then
my guess is, it's not a very interesting one. The basic pattern I got
from the CT Adventures is that they're very rarely set in one place
doing the same thing over and over.

Most of the good ones deal with war and combat, megacorps and
big things. Screw the inchworm approach, and have some fun.
Game sessions don't last forever, and campaigns don't last that
aren't interesting.

David Pulver's posting on his campaigns were interesting. Not your
average: "Jump here, look over cargo, then plot the next jump" killjoy
stuff.


>

 

[rancke]

If you're playing a campaign that's just "what cargo do I take" then my guess is, it's not a very interesting one. The basic pattern I got from the CT Adventures is that they're very rarely set in one place doing the same thing over and over.

Actually, The Merchant Game, as I call it, can be plenty interesting. It's just not a roleplaying game. It's not a roleplaying game until the broker you hired turns out to be incompetent or conspires against you, this merchant knows you from before and trust you while that customs officer hates your guts, and the bank you started out with wanted to foreclose the first time you defaulted, but you cashed in a favor from a patron and got him to take over the loan.


Hans

 

[rust]

Any suggestions on making that clarification more clear?

Your clarification is:
"The so-called first blood or critical hits rule applies to the first wound a
character receives in a combat. ..."

In my view this would make it even more clear:
"The so-called first blood or critical hits rule applies to the first wound a
character receives in each combat. ..."

Just an idea ...

 

[Gadrin]

Actually, The Merchant Game, as I call it, can be plenty interesting. It's just not a roleplaying game. It's not a roleplaying game until the broker you hired turns out to be incompetent or conspires against you, this merchant knows you from before and trust you while that customs officer hates your guts, and the bank you started out with wanted to foreclose the first time you defaulted, but you cashed in a favor from a patron and got him to take over the loan.


Hans

A great deal depends on the savvy of the players. If they're new to
Traveller, then it tends to be a simple game, which can bore them
easily.

I recently had a player who went to all sorts of details about his
character and background and such, but when it came to dealing
with politics, he just didn't have it. I mean simple stuff. I find that's
very often the case with most roleplayers (not all). They often don't
understand the basics of the Imperium: trust and logic. They read
it and understand it from a book or story, but gaming it can be
a 180 degree turnaround.

The puzzle post recently was a good one. Yes you can throw out
all sorts of puzzles and mysteries and so on, but if your players
aren't really super puzzle solvers, it's a bust. You can over-engineer
things very easily.

I could come up with all sorts nefarious plots and so on, but they'll
largely be lost on most players. You often need middle ground.

Like I said, if your players are from a military background (most of the
Traveller players I knew were) then it's a lot easier. They grasp the
setting with ease. Others are often hit and miss.

>

 

[far-trader]

...

"If you don't go unconscious in a combat, your characteristics are set to the halfway mark, just like if you did go unconscious but only had one characteristic reset. Those are both light wounds, so they get treated the same way."

Now, I've spent hours looking at all the CT rulesets on this, and I think there's a paragraph missing...

Excellent. That was one clarification I was sure I'd mentioned wanting because yes it's not mentioned in the rules, and I didn't see it addressed in the errata. Saves me asking

Uh oh... did I write the clarification wrong?

Maybe But I was still reading it correctly I still took it to mean the first injury (damage) taken in each new combat, no matter when in that combat. I think S4 was reading it that way too but used "first round" when he meant the "first round that damage is applied".

 

[Supplement Four]

Uh oh... did I write the clarification wrong?

I didn't mean to imply that all wounds taken in the first round of a new combat use the first blood rule.

I meant to say that the first TIME a character is wounded in any single combat, first blood applies.

You wrote it correctly. I expressed myself wrongly.



But, Don, I still feel that the First Blood rule should only be applied when a character is at full strength (and, it does seem to me that the rule is written that way in The Traveller Book).

Justification: It looks as if Marc & Co. were trying to balance a deadly, pseudo realistic combat experience with the need to keep player characters alive.

Average stats are: 777

Average damage is: 3D, or 10 points.

This means the First Blood rule will, more than likely, knock a character unconscious, but not kill or seriously wound him.



Later damage, the defender is allowed to take points in groups of that shown on each die, applied to the victim's stats at the defending player's option.

So, if the Average character above isn't rendered unconscious by the First Blood rule, chances are a second hit will also render him unconscious and not kill him.

Average damage of 3D: Rolled 3, 3, 4.

Defending player reduces 177 stats to 113. Still conscious.



The reason I don't think the First Blood rule should be applied to a character the first time he is wounded in each fight is because it breaks this line of thought above.

Above, the character will be, on average, rendered unconscious (but playable in 10 minutes of game time!)

Using the First Blood rule on an injured character, though, makes for an overwhelming chance that the character will be seriously wounded or killed (For all practical purposes, taken out of the game for a long while or permanently).



In other words...

Apply the first blood rule to a character at full health, you're likely to knock him unconscious but do no lasting damage (nothing greater than a Minor Wound).

Apply regular damage to a wounded character, and you're likely to do the same--knock him to unconsciousness but do no lasting damage (nothing greater than a Minor Wound).

Apply the first blood rule to a wounded character, though, and you are most likely to kill him or inflict him with a Serious Wound (two stats at zero).



What this means is: Wounded characters with Minor Wounds should not engage in combat, period, until they are healed.

Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since Minor Wounds aren't really any type of wound at all. The character heals fully in 30 min if a Medic-1 attends to him. It doesn't compute that this character will be so much more likely to be killed than a character at full health when entering a new combat.

 

[DonM]

Your clarification is:
"The so-called first blood or critical hits rule applies to the first wound a
character receives in a combat. ..."

In my view this would make it even more clear:
"The so-called first blood or critical hits rule applies to the first wound a
character receives in each combat. ..."

Just an idea ...

Thank you!

 

[rancke]

Apply the first blood rule to a wounded character, though, and you are most likely to kill him or inflict him with a Serious Wound (two stats at zero).

You won't kill someone unless you do damage equal to or exceeding his remaining stats. If you do, you kill him whether or not the First Blood rule applies. If anything, the First Blood rule keep characters alive (albeit unconcious) because the player don't distribut the damage so as to JUST stay concious and then get hit by a second shot that does kill him.


Hans

 

[DonM]

Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since Minor Wounds aren't really any type of wound at all. The character heals fully in 30 min if a Medic-1 attends to him. It doesn't compute that this character will be so much more likely to be killed than a character at full health when entering a new combat.

Why should the fact that your strength is reduced from F to E make you immune to first blood if you insist on going out for another fight?

In fact, by your interpretation, you would want to fight the tiniest skirmish first, so that when the real fight comes along, you're already "blooded".

"We landed on the planet, and found the secret Zhodani base, hidden in the mountains. But before we started the assault, we attacked the stone age village in the valley below without our armor and energy weapons, so we would all be stoked for the big fight ahead. What we didn't realize is that half the villagers disappeared during the fight, and when we attacked the Zhos, a bunch of them were apparently stoked too... (because I'm that kind of referee)"

I don't get that.

And Marc's point (way back) was that all of this is why medics are so important. One thing that is consistent across editions and even various games (Striker, etc) is that in Traveller combat, medical access is extremely important. It affects rolls in Striker, it affects recovery in CT, it shows up in MT, etc...

 

[DonM]

Excellent. That was one clarification I was sure I'd mentioned wanting because yes it's not mentioned in the rules, and I didn't see it addressed in the errata. Saves me asking

Ok, does this set of combat clarifications make it clear what we're doing now? If there are better ways to phrase this, or better ways to break it up, please point it out.

First Blood, p. 34, 47: The so-called first blood or critical hits rule applies to the first wound a character receives in each combat. Entering a combat wounded from a previous combat does not make you immune to the first blood rule.
Wounding and Death, p. 35-36, 47: Wounds from a second combat should be tracked separately from those from an earlier combat (since they will heal at a different times), unless the characteristic goes to zero; if that happens, just use the newest injury for healing times.
Effects of Characteristics, p. 36: The statement "wounds do not affect characteristics as they are used to influence blows, swings, or shots" applies only to a single combat. When a character is out of combat and has wounds applied, the resulting wounded levels do apply to any future combats after receiving such wounds. The intention of this rule was that during a combat, the game need not slow down to deal with such changes. The intention was not that already wounded characters could operate in future combats prior to recovery (or even treatment) as if they were uninjured.
Unconscious, p. 36, 47: Characters who are wounded when a combat ends but never go unconscious (because no characteristic ever is reduced to zero) have their characteristics reset to halfway between the wounded and full strength values. Unconscious characters with only one characteristic going to zero also get their characteristics reset to halfway between the wounded and full strength values after regaining consciousness. However, unconscious characters with two characteristics at zero, do not receive the halfway reset after regaining consciousness. In this case, the rule on p. 36 applies: "Their characteristics remain at the wounded level (or 1, whichever is higher). Recovery is dependent on medical attention (a medical facility and an individual with Medical-3 skill; recuperation to full strength without medical attention is not possible)."
Morale, p. 37: The point in time when a party must begin making morale throws should be 25%, not 20%.

Once we finish cleaning this up (and once a couple of HG issues are resolved over on ct-starships), it should be ready for an "almost-final" re-review by Marc.

Now, just to make things clear, I created a flowchart. This is my creation, not Marc's, so any screwups are mine:

After Combat Recovery Chart (by DonM)

1. If character has no physical characteristic reduced to zero, all wounded characteristics are placed midway between wounded and full levels, rounding fractions down; go to 2. If any physical characteristic is reduced to zero, go to 5.

2. If someone with Medical-1+ skill and medical kit available, go to 3; if not, go to 4.

3. Complete recovery takes 30 minutes; until recovered, character is treated as having the midway characteristics.

4. Complete recovery requires 3 days rest; until recovered, character is treated as having the midway characteristics.

5. If character has one physical characteristic reduced to zero, go to 6; if more than one physical characteristic is reduced to zero, go to 9.

6. Character regains consciousness in 10 minutes; once conscious, all wounded characteristics are placed midway between wounded and full levels, rounding fractions down. If someone with Medical-1+ skill and medical kit available, go to 7; if not, go to 8.

7. Complete recovery takes 30 minutes; until recovered, character is treated as having the midway characteristics.

8. Complete recovery requires 3 days rest; until recovered, character is treated as having the midway characteristics.

9. If character has two physical characteristics reduced to zero, go to 10. If all three physical characteristics are reduced to zero, go to 13.

10. Character regains consciousness in 3 hours. Once conscious, any wounded characteristics remain at the wounded level (or at 1, whichever is higher). If someone with Medical-3+ skill and medical facilities available, go to 11; if not, go to 12.

11. Complete recovery requires 5 days in medical facility; until recovered, character is treated as having the wounded characteristics.

12. No recovery possible until facilities and skill are available; until then, character is treated as having the wounded characteristics.

13. If character has three physical characteristics reduced to zero, character is dead.

 

[Supplement Four]

Why should the fact that your strength is reduced from F to E make you immune to first blood if you insist on going out for another fight?

I guess because I'm looking at the First Blood rule as a game mechanic and not a logical model of real life combat.

If we forget the First Blood rule and use regular, defender's option, damage mitigation, then characters are super heroes, taking too many hit to even be knocked unconscious.

Thus, it stands to reason to me that, with full stats, a more severe rule is needed. With wounded stats, the normal damage mitigation turns out to be just as severe.

In other words: First Blood vs. full stats = wounded stats vs. normal damage mitigation.

It's a mechanical way of bringing the same threat to the character no matter if his stats are full or wounded.

And Marc's point (way back) was that all of this is why medics are so important. One thing that is consistent across editions and even various games (Striker, etc) is that in Traveller combat, medical access is extremely important. It affects rolls in Striker, it affects recovery in CT, it shows up in MT, etc...

I really like this, and agree with Marc on this.

After Combat Recovery Chart (by DonM)

1. If character has no physical characteristic reduced to zero, all wounded characteristics are placed midway between wounded and full levels, rounding fractions down; go to 2. If any physical characteristic is reduced to zero, go to 5.

I suggested a combat example to you before, via PM, but I think this is better.

You should definitely include this Recovery Flow Chart with the CT errata. Just about all questions are answered therein.

I'd add the interpretation of the First Blood rule, to it, somehow, or with it, in a sentence or two.

If you don't, some idiot out there may think that the First Blood rule only applies to when a character is at full health. o:





NOTE: Scratch that...You've covered First Blood fine in the First Blood clarification.

 

[Supplement Four]

BTW, just a thought...

If a character is successfully attacked, and the First Blood rule knocks him unconscious for 10 min, what happens when a grenade goes off next to his unconscious body?

Does the player still apply the grenade damage in the normal damage mitigation way? Or, does the fact that the character is unconscious affect how damage is applied?





*I vote that damage is applied in the normal way, but, hell, my outlook on how CT is supposedly written isn't too popular lately. Bring on the arguments as to why the damage should be randomly applied like the First Blood rule!

 

[Gadrin]

Shouldn't it affect him in the same manner as if he were conscious ?

If the GM wants to run the Home for Injured PCs I Don't Want to Kill™
he can find a way around it.

>

 

[dean]

You wrote it correctly. I expressed myself wrongly.



But, Don, I still feel that the First Blood rule should only be applied when a character is at full strength (and, it does seem to me that the rule is written that way in The Traveller Book).

Justification: It looks as if Marc & Co. were trying to balance a deadly, pseudo realistic combat experience with the need to keep player characters alive.

Average stats are: 777

Average damage is: 3D, or 10 points.

This means the First Blood rule will, more than likely, knock a character unconscious, but not kill or seriously wound him.



Later damage, the defender is allowed to take points in groups of that shown on each die, applied to the victim's stats at the defending player's option.

So, if the Average character above isn't rendered unconscious by the First Blood rule, chances are a second hit will also render him unconscious and not kill him.

Average damage of 3D: Rolled 3, 3, 4.

Defending player reduces 177 stats to 113. Still conscious.



The reason I don't think the First Blood rule should be applied to a character the first time he is wounded in each fight is because it breaks this line of thought above.

Above, the character will be, on average, rendered unconscious (but playable in 10 minutes of game time!)

Using the First Blood rule on an injured character, though, makes for an overwhelming chance that the character will be seriously wounded or killed (For all practical purposes, taken out of the game for a long while or permanently).



In other words...

Apply the first blood rule to a character at full health, you're likely to knock him unconscious but do no lasting damage (nothing greater than a Minor Wound).

Apply regular damage to a wounded character, and you're likely to do the same--knock him to unconsciousness but do no lasting damage (nothing greater than a Minor Wound).

Apply the first blood rule to a wounded character, though, and you are most likely to kill him or inflict him with a Serious Wound (two stats at zero).



What this means is: Wounded characters with Minor Wounds should not engage in combat, period, until they are healed.

Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since Minor Wounds aren't really any type of wound at all. The character heals fully in 30 min if a Medic-1 attends to him. It doesn't compute that this character will be so much more likely to be killed than a character at full health when entering a new combat.

Actually, if you are already wounded, the compounding effects of blood loss, and shock, do indeed make it far more likely that a pre-wounded character would in fact be killed than a healthy one.

And your statement that wounded characters should avoid combat until fully healed is consistent with the practice of every military organization in the world. We don't purposefully send our wounded soldiers back into combat unless it's an absolute necessity...

 

[rust]

If a character is successfully attacked, and the First Blood rule knocks him unconscious for 10 min, what happens when a grenade goes off next to his unconscious body?

In my campaign I would apply the damage normally, because I do not see
any reason why the grenade should affect an unconscious character dif-
ferently than a conscious one.

 

[rancke]

So I have a follow-up question. As per the clarification, if someone with physical stats 888 gets into a fight and has his stats reduced to 044, he'll wake up 10 minutes later with his stats temporarily set to 466, right? And if he gets into a new fight, he starts that fight with the stats 466. Now, say he is reduced to 022. When he wakes up, are his temporary stats 244 or 355?


Hans

 

[far-trader]

A nice summary chart, except for this bit...

11. Complete recovery requires 5 days in medical facility; until recovered, character is treated as having the wounded characteristics.

...the rule in TTB is 5 to 30 days (obviously a 5D6 roll imo). Unless you meant to replace that with a simple 5 days for other reasons.

 

[far-trader]

BTW, just a thought...

If a character is successfully attacked, and the First Blood rule knocks him unconscious for 10 min, what happens when a grenade goes off next to his unconscious body?

They'll probably be dead anyway no matter how the damage is applied. With 4, 6, or 8D damage applied to just two (possibly reduced as well) characteristics they'd have to be pretty lucky (high characteristics and low damage rolls) to live.

For just a normal attack that succeeds (roll to hit, factor armor) I agree with you and would treat it normally and allow the player of the character to apply the damage as desired. The burst area would be used to apply to other nearby characters.

 

[BlackBat242]

First Blood, p. 34, 47: .
Wounding and Death, p. 35-36, 47:
Effects of Characteristics, p. 36:
Unconscious, p. 36, 47:
Morale, p. 37:

Once we finish cleaning this up (and once a couple of HG issues are resolved over on ct-starships), it should be ready for an "almost-final" re-review by Marc.

Ok... my copy of book 1 (second edition) has the following:
Wounding and Death pg 33-34
First Blood pg 34
Effects of Characteristics pg 34-35
Unconscious pg 34
Morale pg 36

Additionally, pg 47 is the Range Matrix for weapons, and there is no second discussion of wounds.


So what you cite must be the revised, re-written Book 1 you are producing now?
Or is it the 1st edition book?