Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I like it. If you make some rule changes/additions, post them here. I want to take a look at them as I might use them for my game as well.
Sandcasters.... How do they WORK?
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I like it. If you make some rule changes/additions, post them here. I want to take a look at them as I might use them for my game as well.
Well, whatever the GOO's said about DGP, I'm a firm believer that DGP did Traveller better than ANY other producer to date, including GDW.
IMO, most other Traveller items fade in comparison to DGP's stuff.
</font>[/QUOTE]I tend to agree about quality. DGP materials are not, however, permitted to be used for further materials. Much the same as GT; neither defines canon (anymore).
Aramis is incorrect (not entirely unusual, from what I've seen). The SOM specifically speaks to damaged hull grids. Up to 10% of a ship's hull grid can be damaged, and the ship can still jump.
More than that, and we're either talking about a misjump or, more likely, no jump at all. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, WJP, I cited the damage tables in MT"s HG. NOT the sum total of the rules. I generally don't include SSOM as canonical, mostly because it is too hard to find to be useful as a citation. The citation was to counter one specific assertion, specifically that there being no reference in CT Bk5 precludes them, as MT RM does not include them either, and does not include the ability to take out the hull grid separate from the drive.
Canonical MT ship combat does no "Hull Hits", either. Yes, the stat is generated, but the HG derived material does not include the various DGP stuff.
For reference: MWM prohibited the DGP materials in the T20 development.
Well, whatever the GOO's said about DGP, I'm a firm believer that DGP did Traveller better than ANY other producer to date, including GDW.
IMO, most other Traveller items fade in comparison to DGP's stuff.
</font>[/QUOTE]I tend to agree about quality. DGP materials are not, however, permitted to be used for further materials. Much the same as GT; neither defines canon (anymore).
Aramis is incorrect (not entirely unusual, from what I've seen). The SOM specifically speaks to damaged hull grids. Up to 10% of a ship's hull grid can be damaged, and the ship can still jump.
More than that, and we're either talking about a misjump or, more likely, no jump at all. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, WJP, I cited the damage tables in MT"s HG. NOT the sum total of the rules. I generally don't include SSOM as canonical, mostly because it is too hard to find to be useful as a citation. The citation was to counter one specific assertion, specifically that there being no reference in CT Bk5 precludes them, as MT RM does not include them either, and does not include the ability to take out the hull grid separate from the drive.
Canonical MT ship combat does no "Hull Hits", either. Yes, the stat is generated, but the HG derived material does not include the various DGP stuff.
For reference: MWM prohibited the DGP materials in the T20 development.
mctesla
SOC-10
To get back to the original topic-- I've been giving thought to sandcasters being special multi warhead packages placed on standard missile frames.
You launch a sandcaster when you believe combat to be imminent (no ranging laser response), and you launch it at the threat. The constellation deploys (hopefully before countermissile fire takes the bus out) close enough to the threat that it covers a significant apparent diameter of the sky, then releases the sand along with some 15mm penetrators to give limited kinetic kill ability against someone who tries to navigate through the cloud.
The idea here would be no repulsor guidance of sand, no magnetic fields, instead, you get the sand as close as possible to the opponent, so all his weapons have to fire through it, and if he doesn't change course to avoid the cloud, there is a chance that he'll collide with one of the penetrators. It gives the defender the chance to restrict his opponent from closing as rapidly as he might like.
Of course, this all would depend on thin skinned book 2 designs, and not the megaton monsters of HG that can shrug off a collision with a planet.
You launch a sandcaster when you believe combat to be imminent (no ranging laser response), and you launch it at the threat. The constellation deploys (hopefully before countermissile fire takes the bus out) close enough to the threat that it covers a significant apparent diameter of the sky, then releases the sand along with some 15mm penetrators to give limited kinetic kill ability against someone who tries to navigate through the cloud.
The idea here would be no repulsor guidance of sand, no magnetic fields, instead, you get the sand as close as possible to the opponent, so all his weapons have to fire through it, and if he doesn't change course to avoid the cloud, there is a chance that he'll collide with one of the penetrators. It gives the defender the chance to restrict his opponent from closing as rapidly as he might like.
Of course, this all would depend on thin skinned book 2 designs, and not the megaton monsters of HG that can shrug off a collision with a planet.
mctesla
SOC-10
To get back to the original topic-- I've been giving thought to sandcasters being special multi warhead packages placed on standard missile frames.
You launch a sandcaster when you believe combat to be imminent (no ranging laser response), and you launch it at the threat. The constellation deploys (hopefully before countermissile fire takes the bus out) close enough to the threat that it covers a significant apparent diameter of the sky, then releases the sand along with some 15mm penetrators to give limited kinetic kill ability against someone who tries to navigate through the cloud.
The idea here would be no repulsor guidance of sand, no magnetic fields, instead, you get the sand as close as possible to the opponent, so all his weapons have to fire through it, and if he doesn't change course to avoid the cloud, there is a chance that he'll collide with one of the penetrators. It gives the defender the chance to restrict his opponent from closing as rapidly as he might like.
Of course, this all would depend on thin skinned book 2 designs, and not the megaton monsters of HG that can shrug off a collision with a planet.
You launch a sandcaster when you believe combat to be imminent (no ranging laser response), and you launch it at the threat. The constellation deploys (hopefully before countermissile fire takes the bus out) close enough to the threat that it covers a significant apparent diameter of the sky, then releases the sand along with some 15mm penetrators to give limited kinetic kill ability against someone who tries to navigate through the cloud.
The idea here would be no repulsor guidance of sand, no magnetic fields, instead, you get the sand as close as possible to the opponent, so all his weapons have to fire through it, and if he doesn't change course to avoid the cloud, there is a chance that he'll collide with one of the penetrators. It gives the defender the chance to restrict his opponent from closing as rapidly as he might like.
Of course, this all would depend on thin skinned book 2 designs, and not the megaton monsters of HG that can shrug off a collision with a planet.
WJP,
You've misunderstood me, perhaps purposely and perhaps not.
The only MegaTraveller rules are those found in books published by GDW.
SOM was published by DGP for use with MT and not for use as MT. SOM is a variant produced by a third party and the rules it contains must be viewed in that manner no matter how good, interesting, or exciting they may be.
Yes, the third party in question did 'handle' MT for GDW for a period, but SOM and the hull jump grid materials in it are 'DGP-only' work. The GDW imprint is not on them.
Again, whether you use hull grids IYTU is your decision and how those hull grids effect sandcaster operations is your decision. However, hull grids are not strictly GDW canonical. Without the third party variants and additions found in SOM, hull grids do not fit in canon. Because of this lack of canonicity, hull grids cannot be used to explain the canonical operation of sandcasters. They can, however, be used IYTU to explain anything you wish them to explain.
That is all I'm saying or implying in these posts. No judgement is being made on hull grids per se, my comments are about canonicity alone. This is an "IYTU vs OTU" issue and nothing else.
Have fun,
Bill
WJP,
You've misunderstood me, perhaps purposely and perhaps not.
The only MegaTraveller rules are those found in books published by GDW.
SOM was published by DGP for use with MT and not for use as MT. SOM is a variant produced by a third party and the rules it contains must be viewed in that manner no matter how good, interesting, or exciting they may be.
Yes, the third party in question did 'handle' MT for GDW for a period, but SOM and the hull jump grid materials in it are 'DGP-only' work. The GDW imprint is not on them.
Again, whether you use hull grids IYTU is your decision and how those hull grids effect sandcaster operations is your decision. However, hull grids are not strictly GDW canonical. Without the third party variants and additions found in SOM, hull grids do not fit in canon. Because of this lack of canonicity, hull grids cannot be used to explain the canonical operation of sandcasters. They can, however, be used IYTU to explain anything you wish them to explain.
That is all I'm saying or implying in these posts. No judgement is being made on hull grids per se, my comments are about canonicity alone. This is an "IYTU vs OTU" issue and nothing else.
Have fun,
Bill
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
FYI - DGP stuff has not been de-canonized, at least according to LKW recently on the TML.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
FYI - DGP stuff has not been de-canonized, at least according to LKW recently on the TML.
In mayday, it's a marker, which stays on vector of launching ship. TTB makes similar but isn't crystal clear on it.
I've always used a 25mm diameter (1" is close enough) marker for sand. Of course, I got mayday 6 months after getting CT, and didn't do space combat often.
To be honest, I think it should be a 5mm for -5, then a 10mm for -4, 15mm for -3, 20mm for -2, and 25mm for -1, then dispersed; one step per CT turn. I'd throw 2d for |LaserDM| or less to kill a missile.
One more MT thought: The sandcaster can be fired as a direct fire anti-personnel weapon. (MTPH p. 80)
This jives well with the mayday marker.
I've always used a 25mm diameter (1" is close enough) marker for sand. Of course, I got mayday 6 months after getting CT, and didn't do space combat often.
To be honest, I think it should be a 5mm for -5, then a 10mm for -4, 15mm for -3, 20mm for -2, and 25mm for -1, then dispersed; one step per CT turn. I'd throw 2d for |LaserDM| or less to kill a missile.
One more MT thought: The sandcaster can be fired as a direct fire anti-personnel weapon. (MTPH p. 80)
This jives well with the mayday marker.
In mayday, it's a marker, which stays on vector of launching ship. TTB makes similar but isn't crystal clear on it.
I've always used a 25mm diameter (1" is close enough) marker for sand. Of course, I got mayday 6 months after getting CT, and didn't do space combat often.
To be honest, I think it should be a 5mm for -5, then a 10mm for -4, 15mm for -3, 20mm for -2, and 25mm for -1, then dispersed; one step per CT turn. I'd throw 2d for |LaserDM| or less to kill a missile.
One more MT thought: The sandcaster can be fired as a direct fire anti-personnel weapon. (MTPH p. 80)
This jives well with the mayday marker.
I've always used a 25mm diameter (1" is close enough) marker for sand. Of course, I got mayday 6 months after getting CT, and didn't do space combat often.
To be honest, I think it should be a 5mm for -5, then a 10mm for -4, 15mm for -3, 20mm for -2, and 25mm for -1, then dispersed; one step per CT turn. I'd throw 2d for |LaserDM| or less to kill a missile.
One more MT thought: The sandcaster can be fired as a direct fire anti-personnel weapon. (MTPH p. 80)
This jives well with the mayday marker.
WJP,
Re-read what LKW wrote. Especially this bit: If you don't like jump flash, or the hull grid, or anything else, you are free to not use it.
There is a heirarchy or 'pecking order' among Traveller products with GDW published materials at the top. SOM is not a GDW published product.
Furthermore, thanks to Mr. Sangers' actions the DGP materials are being slowly overwritten. While authors cannot violate IP of DGP's MT materials, the fact that they are not readily available for reference and use means that the DGP information is being ignored instead. There's a project underway on this very site organized by Robject and guided by MWM himself that is overwriting all the DGP UWPs.
Hull grids are not present in GDW's CT, MT, and TNE, Imperium Game's T4, SJGames GT, or QLI's T20. They are present in one publication, SOM, written by a third party, DGP, for a single version of the game, MegaTraveller. Four versions of Traveller have followed SOM's release and none have seen fit to include hull grids. That in itself should give one pause.
Again: You may use hull grids IYTU for whatever you wish. In the OTU however, there is no conclusive evidence for the presence of hull grids and much evidence for their absence.
Have fun,
Bill
WJP,
Re-read what LKW wrote. Especially this bit: If you don't like jump flash, or the hull grid, or anything else, you are free to not use it.
There is a heirarchy or 'pecking order' among Traveller products with GDW published materials at the top. SOM is not a GDW published product.
Furthermore, thanks to Mr. Sangers' actions the DGP materials are being slowly overwritten. While authors cannot violate IP of DGP's MT materials, the fact that they are not readily available for reference and use means that the DGP information is being ignored instead. There's a project underway on this very site organized by Robject and guided by MWM himself that is overwriting all the DGP UWPs.
Hull grids are not present in GDW's CT, MT, and TNE, Imperium Game's T4, SJGames GT, or QLI's T20. They are present in one publication, SOM, written by a third party, DGP, for a single version of the game, MegaTraveller. Four versions of Traveller have followed SOM's release and none have seen fit to include hull grids. That in itself should give one pause.
Again: You may use hull grids IYTU for whatever you wish. In the OTU however, there is no conclusive evidence for the presence of hull grids and much evidence for their absence.
Have fun,
Bill
Bob Weaver
SOC-12
For what it's worth . . .
IMTU, the 'sandcaster' long ago stopped containing sand or any particulate matter. The name just stuck, like 'destroyer'. Modern (TL 12+) 'sandcasters' can be things like super-compressed, quick-expanding ablative material screens; battery-powered disposable repulsor field generators or anything at all that can be projected from the ship to get in between it and the enemy's fire.
Breaking out of the 'sandcasters use sand' paradigm is not canon, but it does open up new 'color' possibilities.
Best Regards,
Bob
IMTU, the 'sandcaster' long ago stopped containing sand or any particulate matter. The name just stuck, like 'destroyer'. Modern (TL 12+) 'sandcasters' can be things like super-compressed, quick-expanding ablative material screens; battery-powered disposable repulsor field generators or anything at all that can be projected from the ship to get in between it and the enemy's fire.
Breaking out of the 'sandcasters use sand' paradigm is not canon, but it does open up new 'color' possibilities.
Best Regards,
Bob
Bob Weaver
SOC-12
For what it's worth . . .
IMTU, the 'sandcaster' long ago stopped containing sand or any particulate matter. The name just stuck, like 'destroyer'. Modern (TL 12+) 'sandcasters' can be things like super-compressed, quick-expanding ablative material screens; battery-powered disposable repulsor field generators or anything at all that can be projected from the ship to get in between it and the enemy's fire.
Breaking out of the 'sandcasters use sand' paradigm is not canon, but it does open up new 'color' possibilities.
Best Regards,
Bob
IMTU, the 'sandcaster' long ago stopped containing sand or any particulate matter. The name just stuck, like 'destroyer'. Modern (TL 12+) 'sandcasters' can be things like super-compressed, quick-expanding ablative material screens; battery-powered disposable repulsor field generators or anything at all that can be projected from the ship to get in between it and the enemy's fire.
Breaking out of the 'sandcasters use sand' paradigm is not canon, but it does open up new 'color' possibilities.
Best Regards,
Bob
Bill & Kenneth,
I find it almost a bit tiring that once in a while someone post a message that triggers another that has to mention DGP, "overwriting" and Mr.Sanger.
Even though you are probably both correct in what you mean and want to say, I'm beginning to feel it's like the proverbial flogged horse.
There's a lot good stuff in this thread, and it has made me more interested than ever in reading the SOM. Who cares if some canon mentions it or not? Let's talk cannons!
Time to return to the on-topic discussions.
I find it almost a bit tiring that once in a while someone post a message that triggers another that has to mention DGP, "overwriting" and Mr.Sanger.
Even though you are probably both correct in what you mean and want to say, I'm beginning to feel it's like the proverbial flogged horse.
There's a lot good stuff in this thread, and it has made me more interested than ever in reading the SOM. Who cares if some canon mentions it or not? Let's talk cannons!
Time to return to the on-topic discussions.
Bill & Kenneth,
I find it almost a bit tiring that once in a while someone post a message that triggers another that has to mention DGP, "overwriting" and Mr.Sanger.
Even though you are probably both correct in what you mean and want to say, I'm beginning to feel it's like the proverbial flogged horse.
There's a lot good stuff in this thread, and it has made me more interested than ever in reading the SOM. Who cares if some canon mentions it or not? Let's talk cannons!
Time to return to the on-topic discussions.
I find it almost a bit tiring that once in a while someone post a message that triggers another that has to mention DGP, "overwriting" and Mr.Sanger.
Even though you are probably both correct in what you mean and want to say, I'm beginning to feel it's like the proverbial flogged horse.
There's a lot good stuff in this thread, and it has made me more interested than ever in reading the SOM. Who cares if some canon mentions it or not? Let's talk cannons!
Time to return to the on-topic discussions.
Cymew,
Returning to the topic; what do you think of my first post in this thread? It was the second post overall.
Do you think that how sandcasters work may change as TLs improve? Will the 'sand' change in consistency or makeup? Will the shape of the sand cloud change as TLs improve? Will an ability to 'shape' or 'redirect' sand after it deployed be developed?
I made my opinions from My Traveller Universe be known. I also made sure to point out that my ideas regarding sandcasters do not fit OTU canon. Let's hear your ideas now.
Have fun,
Bill
Returning to the topic; what do you think of my first post in this thread? It was the second post overall.
Do you think that how sandcasters work may change as TLs improve? Will the 'sand' change in consistency or makeup? Will the shape of the sand cloud change as TLs improve? Will an ability to 'shape' or 'redirect' sand after it deployed be developed?
I made my opinions from My Traveller Universe be known. I also made sure to point out that my ideas regarding sandcasters do not fit OTU canon. Let's hear your ideas now.
Have fun,
Bill
Cymew,
Returning to the topic; what do you think of my first post in this thread? It was the second post overall.
Do you think that how sandcasters work may change as TLs improve? Will the 'sand' change in consistency or makeup? Will the shape of the sand cloud change as TLs improve? Will an ability to 'shape' or 'redirect' sand after it deployed be developed?
I made my opinions from My Traveller Universe be known. I also made sure to point out that my ideas regarding sandcasters do not fit OTU canon. Let's hear your ideas now.
Have fun,
Bill
Returning to the topic; what do you think of my first post in this thread? It was the second post overall.
Do you think that how sandcasters work may change as TLs improve? Will the 'sand' change in consistency or makeup? Will the shape of the sand cloud change as TLs improve? Will an ability to 'shape' or 'redirect' sand after it deployed be developed?
I made my opinions from My Traveller Universe be known. I also made sure to point out that my ideas regarding sandcasters do not fit OTU canon. Let's hear your ideas now.
Have fun,
Bill
