Slaved Turrets

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by the Bromgrev:
That's a good point, one which I've never considered. Engineers are assigne only based on engine tonnage. Whether a ship has no weapons or a couple of turrets or a type-T particle accelerator and half a dozen hundred-dton bays, you don't get any more engineers.

That makes a case for allocating weapos maintenance to gunners.

It is an interesting take--one that requires more digesting.

I'm not sure if I'll interpret the gunner skill like that in my game, but I have thought of something related:

Officially in CT, Sensor Ops is an included skill of Navigation. That is, if you've got Navigation skill, then you also have Sensor Ops at one level lower.

Makes sense, right? What does a navigator do but spend much of his time interpreting sensor data.

It's not too much of a leap to assume the same thing about a gunner. What do gunners do but spend a majority of their time interpreting sensor data, trying to make the best possible fix on their targets.

In my campaign, if you've got Gunner-1, then you've also got Sensor Ops-0 (just like the Navigation skill).

Now, if you assume that gunners can work on their weapons, you're assigning more implied skills to the Gunnery skill.

Gunnery-1 would also mean the character has Mechanical-0 and Electronics-0.





Now, I'm not real opposed to this. Classic Traveller characters have recieve few skills. I've always seen the intention in CT to consider skills broadly. Default weapon skills is a good example. All characters in CT have all the weapons listed in Book 1 at Level-0. In my campaign, I keep the spirit of that. All characters have any skill in Traveller that does not require specialized training at Level-0. So, every character has Bribery-0, Forgery-0, Administration-0, etc. But, they won't have Medical-0, Swimming-0, Engineering-0, etc.

Looking at skills this broadly makes a CT character that much more useful (and realistic) in a game. Basically, what you have, is that just the skills a character excells at is listed on his sheet (all the ones at Skill-1 or higher). But, the character is considered to have many more skills at Level-0 than are what's listed on his sheet. There's no use listing them if everybody is considered to have them at Level-0 anyway.

The "included" skills supports this interpretation of CT as well. A character with Engineering-2 should be considered as having Mechanical-1 and Electronics-1 as well.

A Pilot-2 is considered as having Ship's Boat-1.

A Navigator-2 is considered as having Sensor Ops-1.

And now, if you go the route proposed here, a Gunnery-2 character would be considered as having Sensor Ops-1. (And, if the gunner also fixes the weapon when it is damaged in combat, then the Gunnery-2 character should also be considered as having Electronics-1 and Mechanical-1).





Food for thought.

-S4

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by the Bromgrev:
That's a good point, one which I've never considered. Engineers are assigne only based on engine tonnage. Whether a ship has no weapons or a couple of turrets or a type-T particle accelerator and half a dozen hundred-dton bays, you don't get any more engineers.

That makes a case for allocating weapos maintenance to gunners.

It is an interesting take--one that requires more digesting.

I'm not sure if I'll interpret the gunner skill like that in my game, but I have thought of something related:

Officially in CT, Sensor Ops is an included skill of Navigation. That is, if you've got Navigation skill, then you also have Sensor Ops at one level lower.

Makes sense, right? What does a navigator do but spend much of his time interpreting sensor data.

It's not too much of a leap to assume the same thing about a gunner. What do gunners do but spend a majority of their time interpreting sensor data, trying to make the best possible fix on their targets.

In my campaign, if you've got Gunner-1, then you've also got Sensor Ops-0 (just like the Navigation skill).

Now, if you assume that gunners can work on their weapons, you're assigning more implied skills to the Gunnery skill.

Gunnery-1 would also mean the character has Mechanical-0 and Electronics-0.





Now, I'm not real opposed to this. Classic Traveller characters have recieve few skills. I've always seen the intention in CT to consider skills broadly. Default weapon skills is a good example. All characters in CT have all the weapons listed in Book 1 at Level-0. In my campaign, I keep the spirit of that. All characters have any skill in Traveller that does not require specialized training at Level-0. So, every character has Bribery-0, Forgery-0, Administration-0, etc. But, they won't have Medical-0, Swimming-0, Engineering-0, etc.

Looking at skills this broadly makes a CT character that much more useful (and realistic) in a game. Basically, what you have, is that just the skills a character excells at is listed on his sheet (all the ones at Skill-1 or higher). But, the character is considered to have many more skills at Level-0 than are what's listed on his sheet. There's no use listing them if everybody is considered to have them at Level-0 anyway.

The "included" skills supports this interpretation of CT as well. A character with Engineering-2 should be considered as having Mechanical-1 and Electronics-1 as well.

A Pilot-2 is considered as having Ship's Boat-1.

A Navigator-2 is considered as having Sensor Ops-1.

And now, if you go the route proposed here, a Gunnery-2 character would be considered as having Sensor Ops-1. (And, if the gunner also fixes the weapon when it is damaged in combat, then the Gunnery-2 character should also be considered as having Electronics-1 and Mechanical-1).





Food for thought.

-S4

 

[Plankowner]

I don't have a problem with Gunners having Mechanical and Electronics at -1.

Based on my experience in the US Naval Submarine Service, the Missile Men (Gunners) and Torpedo Men (Gunners) had good mechanical and electrical skills. They also had COMPUTER skills (the Missile guys at least). BUT, none of them were as good as the Engineers and Computer Techs.

 

[Plankowner]

I don't have a problem with Gunners having Mechanical and Electronics at -1.

Based on my experience in the US Naval Submarine Service, the Missile Men (Gunners) and Torpedo Men (Gunners) had good mechanical and electrical skills. They also had COMPUTER skills (the Missile guys at least). BUT, none of them were as good as the Engineers and Computer Techs.

 

[BlackBat242]

According to the book 5 rules, the larger weapons (bay & spinal mounts) have multiple crew assigned... 10% officers, 30% petty officers, and 60% enlisted (lower ranks).

It also says that they are drawn from both the Gunnery and Technical Services branches... but this is on Military vessels... and even there, turrets get only 1 person.

Therefore, while large weapons do have specialist electronics and mechanical crew, turrets do not... indicating that those turret gunners are perhaps the "multi-skilled" type to start with.

And it is these which will find their way to the smaller shps typical of adventurers... where each crewmember wears more then one "hat" as a matter of course.

 

[BlackBat242]

According to the book 5 rules, the larger weapons (bay & spinal mounts) have multiple crew assigned... 10% officers, 30% petty officers, and 60% enlisted (lower ranks).

It also says that they are drawn from both the Gunnery and Technical Services branches... but this is on Military vessels... and even there, turrets get only 1 person.

Therefore, while large weapons do have specialist electronics and mechanical crew, turrets do not... indicating that those turret gunners are perhaps the "multi-skilled" type to start with.

And it is these which will find their way to the smaller shps typical of adventurers... where each crewmember wears more then one "hat" as a matter of course.

 

[robject]

You know, if it comes down to being eaten by Vargr pirates or violating the law by slaving turrets...

 

[robject]

You know, if it comes down to being eaten by Vargr pirates or violating the law by slaving turrets...