I'm old enough to remember the discussion related to the Davy Crocket tactical nuke - the destructive radius exceeded the weapons firing range. And as for the concept of employing nuclear mines in West Germany in the event of a Soviet invasion, the Germans were (unsurprisingly) none to keen on the idea. [Gives new meaning to the phrase, "we had to destroy the village to save it."]
MGT Only: Seems Insane to use FGMP except in special circumstances
- Thread starter CaptRet
- Start date
If the zone becomes irradiated, not contaminated with radioactive materials, there will be no problem after the radiation source has ended (think on an X-ray machine: while it irradiates, it is not dangerous when turned off).
If each shoot radiaton can be stopped by your BD, they will not be additive, as it affects each hit (again, when comparing it with the X-ray machine, the leaded cristal that alows the radiologist to see the patient (or the leaded smock he wears) stops each shoot's radiation, while the cummulative radiaton of a day's work, if shoot at once, whould probably not be stopped).
Last edited:
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Mongoose handling of radiation is, ehum, highly simplified. By RAW each instance of irradiation is handled separately, as far as I understand.
Hmm, more like support rifle spitting HEAT round bolts that maintain cohesion for x hundred meters.
In MgT 2e FGMPs inflict between 40 and 240rads (per the radiation weapon rules). At the upper limit this equates to just under half a lethal dose of radiation (5greys/500rads). Little Boy released almost 10 greys (based on absorption in the bones of people less than a mile from the impact). Tac nukes are between 24x and 12x less powerful in yield but this only affects the radius of the dosage zones not the dosages emitted the smallest radius I could find was for a 1kt nuke (about five times the yield of a SADM but at the upper limit of tac nukes) that was lethal at about 800m from point of detonation) FGMPs have a radius of 20m from the firer and 20m from the target. Tac-nukes are much worse than FGMPs on a detonation by detonation basis.
Long lasting effects wise neither are particularly bad (though a surface detonated tac-nuke will of course irradiate more ground than a FGMP which is basically an airburst). Regardless the 7:10 rule of thumb is worth remembering 14 days (or so) after the blast you’re at only 1rad/hour above your base line. After a year or so the area won’t be any more dangerous than the rest of the planet.
As a comment on the thread you linked - the reason the 3I bans nukes and not FGMPs is to do with TL and cost. You can make fission nukes late TL6 and for high TL societies they’re trivially easy to make, and to make at a scale that is insanely destructive (the new Russian Poseidon has a 200MT yield). A FGMP is complex to make and can only be done (at great cost) by the highest tech societies within the 3I and for all that it would suck to be shot by one they can’t wipe out cities that easily. (Aside ofc from starship scale but most starship weapons are WMDs tbh)
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
There is, as far as I know, no reason to believe fusion guns would leave much radiation behind.
The lingering radiation from nukes are mostly remains of the weapon, not an effect of the initial burst of radiation.
Depends on what they ionise ofc - but as I said the tac nuke will have worse long term affects (particularly if aforementioned tac nuke is surface detonated rather than airburst).
In the end, regardless of RAW, there's a tacit assumption that FGMP Works, that it's used "routinely" by guys in Battle Dress, so while there are certainly considerations, in the end the weapon can be used "safely".
Now, the points about radiation vs lingering radiation are valid as well.
If the FGMP is considered little more that really powerful flash bulbs, yea, they're bright, but not lasting. Perhaps you don't want two guys with FGMPs standing next to each other and firing simultaneously (since the combined simultaneous exposure may overcome the armor protection), but since the FGMP is more a support weapon than anything else, this can fall under a similar criteria of not using it in small rooms either. i.e. "Don't do that."
And that goes back the fact that, in the end, the FGMP has to be usable on the battlefield as a practical weapon. Running around and irradiating the zone to the point of uninhabitability notably by troops NOT in BD, does make it very useful. May as well lay down tactical nukes. "Only way to be sure."
So, anyway, regardless of RAW, you have to put the weapon in to context.
Now, the points about radiation vs lingering radiation are valid as well.
If the FGMP is considered little more that really powerful flash bulbs, yea, they're bright, but not lasting. Perhaps you don't want two guys with FGMPs standing next to each other and firing simultaneously (since the combined simultaneous exposure may overcome the armor protection), but since the FGMP is more a support weapon than anything else, this can fall under a similar criteria of not using it in small rooms either. i.e. "Don't do that."
And that goes back the fact that, in the end, the FGMP has to be usable on the battlefield as a practical weapon. Running around and irradiating the zone to the point of uninhabitability notably by troops NOT in BD, does make it very useful. May as well lay down tactical nukes. "Only way to be sure."
So, anyway, regardless of RAW, you have to put the weapon in to context.
So from a gaming perspective, the FGMP in MgT (both 1e and 2e) is much more powerful for roughly the same weight (in 1e they're the same weight and there isn't much difference in 2e) and at TL14 an identical cost (100,000Cr). From this perspective, it's a way for high-level groups to have an option for hard-hitting weapons, do they want the extra damage (good if there is some heavily armoured enemies/vehicles about) or do they want the much greater portability of the TL14 PGMP. Since PGMPs become essentially normal weapons at TL14 (MgT 2e removes bulky and MgT 1e allows those with the requisite STR to fire every round) the only way that they could possibly be improved above that is to make them cheaper or to make them not use the Heavy Weapons skill (which the TL16 Plasma Rifle does) this changes the mechanical role of the PGMP a fair amount (which is why TL16). FGMPs are also a tool for GMs to use for storytelling - they are Traveller's big bad man-portable threat as much as anything else.
From an in-universe perspective, the FGMP is an evolution of the PGMP and a fairly logical one (what happens if I get this plasma hotter before shooting it). It also provides a squad support weapon for PGMP armed troops at the TL14+ levels just as the PGMP provided a squad support weapon to Gauss Rifle/Laser Rifle armed troops at TL12-13.
Ignoring rules for the moment, but using the commonalities across the rulesets...
The FGMP is better versus armor.
