Sane Starship combat rules for T20.

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
Well we already have a TA for Capital ships. (TA7.) A T20 2.0 would be well served to fix the Starship combat. It is going to ahve to be done for HH anyway.

Design Sequences for Honorverse ships of the line! Oooooooooooo!

Originally posted by Bhoins:
I agree that it looks like it should be SI damage but it doesn't read that way. And Radiation doing structural damage doesn't feel right.

Hmmm, if it doesn't say it does SI, then wouldn't it just hurt the system it hits on the charts? No, wait, then it wouldn't have damage dice. D'oh!

I searched the errata, and there is no mention of the word "radiation".

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
One other point that was actually brought up here. The crit multiplier on page 270 states clearly that this is additional damage. So a x2 crit-multiplier is actually x3? Why would that section be worded that way when the rest of the system isn't?

Well, all I can tell you is that in v3.5, standard weapons say x2 because it's assumed that this means "double", grand total. In game terms, this means you roll an extra set of dice (however many). Two sets of dice = x2. Three sets of dice = x3.

Or, at least, that's always the way I read it, handled it, and ran it, and I never into an objection.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
Well we already have a TA for Capital ships. (TA7.) A T20 2.0 would be well served to fix the Starship combat. It is going to ahve to be done for HH anyway.

Design Sequences for Honorverse ships of the line! Oooooooooooo! </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah but Honorverse ships are boing. They all look the same. Though they don't all act the same.

Ghost Riders (I wonder what influence a certain 20th Century "Movie" had to do with that name. (I know Manticore doesn't have movies but Grayson does.

)) and Super LACs and Honor Harrington, ooops Medusa Class Super Drednaughts.

After all Grayson's fighting style is based on a Movie called the Seven Samuari! (WHere have we heard about that movie before....

)

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
I agree that it looks like it should be SI damage but it doesn't read that way. And Radiation doing structural damage doesn't feel right.

Hmmm, if it doesn't say it does SI, then wouldn't it just hurt the system it hits on the charts? No, wait, then it wouldn't have damage dice. D'oh!

I searched the errata, and there is no mention of the word "radiation". </font>[/QUOTE]I am glad someone else sees the problem.

 

[mike wightman]

Except that Spinals have always been the most accurate weapon in the game.

Not in High Guard, well not all the time

A #9 missile bay hits on a 2+, a PA spinal must be #F to be as accurate, and #L to be more accurate.
Unless you are at close range where the missile suffers a -1 to hit.
Meson spinals are less accurate than #9 missiles unless the range is short, in which case the #D and above meson is more accurate than the missile.

Which is a very long winded way of saying I think spinal meson guns should suffer a penalty to hit in T20 at "long range", perhaps by reducing the weapons range increment to that of fusion bays.
That would give other weapon systems a reason to exist in T20.

 

[mike wightman]

Now there's a thought, why do all the spinals of a given type have the same range increment.
To model High guard the range increments for the small spinals could be reduced...

 

[cmdrx]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Except that Spinals have always been the most accurate weapon in the game.

Not in High Guard, well not all the time

A #9 missile bay hits on a 2+, a PA spinal must be #F to be as accurate, and #L to be more accurate.
Unless you are at close range where the missile suffers a -1 to hit.
Meson spinals are less accurate than #9 missiles unless the range is short, in which case the #D and above meson is more accurate than the missile.
</font>[/QUOTE]Looking at my copy of HG (I practicaly have that thing memorized by now) Meson spinals max out at a base 4+ to hit on 2d6. And that starts with the type D. PAW spinals continue to get more accurate starting with a 3+ at Type A to a 0+ at type T(yikes!) Clearly it is the PAW Spinals that are the most accurate, at least according to HG.

I'm thinking of yet another change for house rules, thankfully we havent done any big ship combat yet (waiting for the Solomani Ships TA to come out). I think radiation should be applied via internal rolls instead of SI damage. That way you get the base SI damage of the spinal, plus 2 internal rolls, one for general, one for radiation with additional internals as per size of the spinal. Reduce rad internals by armour or nuke damper, ignore on crits.

 

[BetterThanLife]

For now, I am not even going to roll the Rad damage. I am going to reduce the remaining damage on the main hit by the Nuke dampers and if it is >0 apply a roll on the rad table. No reduction on a Crit. Spinals will get the same number of rolls on the rad table as on the main table. Ie 2 + 1 per 5 levels above Factor 10. I might also give an additional roll for nukes at Factor 6-9 (Both charts.).

This is actually starting to sound like it might work.

 

[BetterThanLife]

But PAs only roll once. There is no to pen roll. And if the target has Repulsars you had better have more missile batteries than he has Repulser bays. Meson Spinals are about in the same boat as Missiles except to have the high end Meson Screen is rarer than the high end Nuke Damper and/or high end Laser Batteries. The tables show you are more likely to score a hit with a missile but you are less likely to score a hit that causes damage. (The Pen rolls are a bitch.) So in a Practical Sense the Spinals are much more accurate.

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Except that Spinals have always been the most accurate weapon in the game.

Not in High Guard, well not all the time

A #9 missile bay hits on a 2+, a PA spinal must be #F to be as accurate, and #L to be more accurate.
Unless you are at close range where the missile suffers a -1 to hit.
Meson spinals are less accurate than #9 missiles unless the range is short, in which case the #D and above meson is more accurate than the missile.

Which is a very long winded way of saying I think spinal meson guns should suffer a penalty to hit in T20 at "long range", perhaps by reducing the weapons range increment to that of fusion bays.
That would give other weapon systems a reason to exist in T20. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel
Design Sequences for Honorverse ships of the line! Oooooooooooo!

Yeah but Honorverse ships are boing. They all look the same.
</font>[/QUOTE]That's ok, because I can't draw them anyway!

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
I searched the errata, and there is no mention of the word "radiation".

I am glad someone else sees the problem.

</font>[/QUOTE]Well, since you discovered it, you need to write it up and post it to Errata - The Traveller's Handbook.

 

[mike wightman]

What do you all think about adapting saving throws to cover things like nuclear dampers and meson screens?
Bad idea of worth a look?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
What do you all think about adapting saving throws to cover things like nuclear dampers and meson screens?
Bad idea of worth a look?

Hitting is already too easy, even with my modifications. I like them as additional armor and making you more difficult to hit. Allowing a ship to avoid a Nuke, PA or Meson weapons effects will change the dynamic of ship combat in unexpected ways. Making Bomb Pumped Lasers the King of the spaceways. You would be down to Lasers and repulsers (for defense) and missiles for offense. Of course if too many people decided to not install a Meson Screen because nobody was installing Meson weapons....

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
What do you all think about adapting saving throws to cover things like nuclear dampers and meson screens?
Bad idea of worth a look?

First, it just sounds cool. I'd always like to be able to Save vs. Starship Explodes.

If a starship can save vs. one thing, it should be able to save against virtually anything else. We'd need a table to determine Saving Throw bonuses, etc. Can starships be built with features that enhance Saving Throws? If so, that'll be a boost to the complexity of the Design Sequences, something us gearheads will always vote for!

 

[BetterThanLife]

Saving Throws for Starships would imply that starships have reactions. I think it sounds neat but is a bit cheesey. I do agree that if you do it for one kind of weapon then you have to do it for all types. Your saving throw would have to be based on Agility and your pilot. Hey wait a minute, it already exists. Look under feats for an Ace Pilot.

If you really want to frag with your players' minds then have that Cruiser have an Ace Pilot at the helm and have it be his personal ship.

Just like the main gunner is very likely to have PMOS Gunnery on a ship that size or larger, the Command pilot should have it be his personal ship and PMOS pilot.

 

[mike wightman]

One other thing - let's bring back true vector movement for ship combat.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
One other thing - let's bring back true vector movement for ship combat.

I always found the vector movement in Mayday sufficeint for 2D combat. 12 points of a compas is enough. Though I was looking at Ad Astra for 3D vector combat. You would have to import the T20 tables though and wouldn't be fixing anything, aside from maneuvering in 2D.

 

[GypsyComet]

IF you were going to bring the Saving Throw mechanic to starship combat, it's DCs would be set by the weapon's rating (not necessarily directly), while the ship's bonus to the roll would be set by the appropriate defenses. Some defenses would provide constant bonuses, while others would have limited goes per turn.

This mechanic would make starship combat very much like the combat seen in Mutants & Masterminds, a D20 superheroes game. Somewhat more generic details can also be seen in the WotC book "Unearthed Arcana".

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by GypsyComet:
IF you were going to bring the Saving Throw mechanic to starship combat, it's DCs would be set by the weapon's rating (not necessarily directly), while the ship's bonus to the roll would be set by the appropriate defenses. Some defenses would provide constant bonuses, while others would have limited goes per turn.

This mechanic would make starship combat very much like the combat seen in Mutants & Masterminds, a D20 superheroes game. Somewhat more generic details can also be seen in the WotC book "Unearthed Arcana".

There already is a saving throw for starship combat, in T20. A 7th level Ace Pilot gets it. (Though he can get it at 4th level if he already has Vessel (Starship), Vessel (Small Craft), Vessel (Aircraft) and Vessel (Grav).

"Once per round, if a vehicle, an Ace is flying is hit for damage, he may make a Pilot skill check (DC equal the attack roll made to hit). If successful, the Ace has managed to evade the attack and the vehicle takes no damage." (THB pg. 185)

Now an 11th level character (7 of which are Ace pilot) Ace Pilot, Dex or Int 20, flying his personal vessel with a Skill Focus (Pilot), 14 ranks of pilot skill and PMOS pilot, has a base number of 25 or if he takes 10 that is 35.

Now a Spinal J, has a base to hit number with an average gunner, 11 (Skill ranks and specialization) +18 (Factor J Spinal) +9 (Computer model number) or 38+ a D20, giving the gunner PMOS gunnery, that gives a take 10 to hit score of 48 and if it is a spinal meson an automatic critical hit. (Still toast.)

Was this actually playtested?

 

[GypsyComet]

Depends on your definitions, I suppose.

The Pilot's save you describe comes from the Mounted Combat mechanic in D&D3.

To do the least violence to the system as it stands, this mechanic should probably stay in place. Obviously, however, the save needs further mods. As my previous post suggests, the appropriate defensive weaponry to oppose the attack may be a start, as well as "Assist Other" rolls from the captain (on Ship Tactics, if seperate from the pilot) and crew that man those defenses.

Obviously, this sort of thing is best left to RP level ship combat, but the mechanic could be represented at naval scale with some sort of "Crew Quality" score that assists the Pilot's Save.

 

[GypsyComet]

Hmm. Looking at HG, I'm seeing "a bit" of disparity between the HG relationship between Meson Guns and Screens and the T20 relationship.

The easiest fix for Mesons is to halve the Gun USPs (or halve their effects on the to hit roll). HG had only a 15 point range across ALL Meson weapons, against which the 9 point range of the Screens stacked fairly well. T20 has a 27 point weapons range vs the same 9 point screen range. That the T20 mesons don't already double the HG range is due to that 3 point "skip" from bay to spinal in the HG meson tables.

Off to check the errata for my 1e T20 book...