The CT Personal Combat Round Experiment...

[Supplement Four]

--Fire Combat Example--


Terran Tukera
DEX-C
SMG-3

Terran, having dispatched one opponent (above) with his cutlass, drops his blade to the ground and points the SMG that is strapped across his chest at the next foe. This is the same round, but Terran has made his Extra Action check.

The new opponent wears Cloth Armor.

Terran rolls 3.

+3DM ... Skill
+2DM ... SMG DEX bonus
+1DM ... UGM Natural Ability bonus
+3DM ... SMG Medium Range
-2DM ... Extra Action Penalty
+0DM ... Panic Fire Penalty
----
+7DM

Terran hits his target with a total of 10!

Since 10 is an even number, we know that the target was hit in his torso--protected by his Cloth armor.

Terran rolls 3D damage.

He rolls 13.

-5AV ... Cloth Armor AV
-3DM ... SMG vs. Cloth
-----
-8DM

Total damage on the target is 5 points (13-8).

 

[Supplement Four]

--Fire Combat Example--


Terran Tukera
DEX-C
SMG-3

Terran, having dispatched one opponent (above) with his cutlass, drops his blade to the ground and points the SMG that is strapped across his chest at the next foe. This is the same round, but Terran has made his Extra Action check.

The new opponent wears Cloth Armor.

Terran rolls 3.

+3DM ... Skill
+2DM ... SMG DEX bonus
+1DM ... UGM Natural Ability bonus
+3DM ... SMG Medium Range
-2DM ... Extra Action Penalty
+0DM ... Panic Fire Penalty
----
+7DM

Terran hits his target with a total of 10!

Since 10 is an even number, we know that the target was hit in his torso--protected by his Cloth armor.

Terran rolls 3D damage.

He rolls 13.

-5AV ... Cloth Armor AV
-3DM ... SMG vs. Cloth
-----
-8DM

Total damage on the target is 5 points (13-8).

 

[Supplement Four]

--NOTING A MISTAKE!!!--


Above, as I discussed rolling for Extra Actions (in all the examples as well), I rolled against the character's DEX score.

THIS IS INCORRECT!

Extra Action throws are made against a character's END score.

STR - is important to a character in Melee Combat.

DEX - is important to a character in Fire Combat.

END - is important to a character in all forms of combat since the number of actions the character can take in the round is tied to his END.

 

[Supplement Four]

--NOTING A MISTAKE!!!--


Above, as I discussed rolling for Extra Actions (in all the examples as well), I rolled against the character's DEX score.

THIS IS INCORRECT!

Extra Action throws are made against a character's END score.

STR - is important to a character in Melee Combat.

DEX - is important to a character in Fire Combat.

END - is important to a character in all forms of combat since the number of actions the character can take in the round is tied to his END.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by WJP:
--MULTIPLE ACTIONS--


Any character can make perform one action (first action) during the round with no penalty and no check.

Any action attempted after the first is considered an Extra Action (second, third, and any other actions are all Extra Actions). Extra Actions require a check and are penalized with a -2DM.

Thus...

First Action ... a character makes does not require a check and is free of penalty.

Second Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 1D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Third Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 2D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Fourth Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 3D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Fifth Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 4D. if successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

ETC...

Once a character fails to make a check for an Extra Action, his round ends. He can perform no more actions until his initiative on the following round.

Why not use UGM to determine extra actions instead?

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by WJP:
--MULTIPLE ACTIONS--


Any character can make perform one action (first action) during the round with no penalty and no check.

Any action attempted after the first is considered an Extra Action (second, third, and any other actions are all Extra Actions). Extra Actions require a check and are penalized with a -2DM.

Thus...

First Action ... a character makes does not require a check and is free of penalty.

Second Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 1D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Third Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 2D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Fourth Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 3D. If successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

Fifth Action ... a character makes can only be attempted if the character rolls his DEX or less on 4D. if successful, this Extra Action is penalized with a -2DM.

ETC...

Once a character fails to make a check for an Extra Action, his round ends. He can perform no more actions until his initiative on the following round.

Why not use UGM to determine extra actions instead?

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by WJP:
--AIMING--

Most attacks are snapshots. Should a character (a sniper, for example) take his time and aim, he will use the entire round (15 seconds) to aim and fire a single shot (no other actions allowed during the round).

Characters who aim benefit (attack throw and damage throw) from these bonuses based on range to the target:

+1DM ... Short or Close Range.
+2DM ... Medium Range.
+4DM ... Long or Very Long Range.

I'd argue with this one

Most firearm tasks should involve some attempt to aim. An unaimed snapshot has next to no chance of hitting beyond a couple of metres - hence a hefty penalty to the to hit number should be in order (raise the difficulty?)

Taking the time to aim for longer should give a bonus to hit.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by WJP:
--AIMING--

Most attacks are snapshots. Should a character (a sniper, for example) take his time and aim, he will use the entire round (15 seconds) to aim and fire a single shot (no other actions allowed during the round).

Characters who aim benefit (attack throw and damage throw) from these bonuses based on range to the target:

+1DM ... Short or Close Range.
+2DM ... Medium Range.
+4DM ... Long or Very Long Range.

I'd argue with this one

Most firearm tasks should involve some attempt to aim. An unaimed snapshot has next to no chance of hitting beyond a couple of metres - hence a hefty penalty to the to hit number should be in order (raise the difficulty?)

Taking the time to aim for longer should give a bonus to hit.

 

[Ranger]

Originally posted by WJP:
--NOTING A MISTAKE!!!--


Above, as I discussed rolling for Extra Actions (in all the examples as well), I rolled against the character's DEX score.

THIS IS INCORRECT!

Extra Action throws are made against a character's END score.

STR - is important to a character in Melee Combat.

DEX - is important to a character in Fire Combat.

END - is important to a character in all forms of combat since the number of actions the character can take in the round is tied to his END.

May I suggest using INT for this. Since INT and EDU are seperate, I've always taken INT to reflect "common sense" and "situational awareness" to a large degree. Part of taking an extra action is having the "situational awareness" to be able to take on one threat while not loosing track of the other threats around you.

Just a thought...

 

[Ranger]

Originally posted by WJP:
--NOTING A MISTAKE!!!--


Above, as I discussed rolling for Extra Actions (in all the examples as well), I rolled against the character's DEX score.

THIS IS INCORRECT!

Extra Action throws are made against a character's END score.

STR - is important to a character in Melee Combat.

DEX - is important to a character in Fire Combat.

END - is important to a character in all forms of combat since the number of actions the character can take in the round is tied to his END.

May I suggest using INT for this. Since INT and EDU are seperate, I've always taken INT to reflect "common sense" and "situational awareness" to a large degree. Part of taking an extra action is having the "situational awareness" to be able to take on one threat while not loosing track of the other threats around you.

Just a thought...

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Why not use UGM to determine extra actions instead?

Classic Traveller allows, basically, two actions in a round. A character can move and act once per 15 second round (move and fire his weapon, for example).

My goal was to keep these rules close to that "official" allotment of actions during the round.

So, in effect, what I'm doing is giving each character a free action, and any extra action is accomplished if they roll END or less on 1D....another action if they roll END or less on 2D....another action if they roll END or less on 3D....another action if they roll END or less on 4D...etc.

Using that mechanic (increasing the number of D6 each time to roll END or less for an extra action) nicely gives us a number of actions, per round, close to what is "officially" provided in CT.

Unless your character has a very low END, he will get his two actions during the round. He'll get his freebie, and he'll probably automatically make his END or less on 1D.

It's the characters with higher END that will consistently get 3+ actions during a round--a bonus for having high END.

And, because the chance of success goes up exponentially each time by adding another die to the check, we won't have characters makeing 7 or 10 actions in a 15 second combat round.

Pretty much any character will be capped at 3-5 actions (more likely 3-4) each round, no matter his END score.

So, to answer your question, the reason I use this method of dicing the check (instead of a UGM task roll) is because it fits my needs so well.

It's a simple check (END or less on a number of increasing dice) that's easy to remember and easy to implement in the game. Everyone knows that on the second segment of the game, they've got to make the END or less on 1D to get an action that segment. On the third segment of the round, they've got to make END or less on 2D to continuing moving their character. ETC.


--------------------------------

A note about UGM--

UGM is just an extrapolation of the loose CT task system outlined on pgs. 28-29 of The Traveller Adventure.

There, checks of characteristic or less is discussed (the Natural Ability portion of the UGM), and the standard roll-two-dice-for-a-target-number-or-better is detailed as well (the other half of the UGM).

When I came up with the UGM, I just combined these two concepts.

In my game, I use UGM for a lot of things (even combat), but I don't use it for everything. I also use those CT checks for Stat or less mentioned in TTB.

If I throw 2D or higher, I will 99.99% of the time make that a UGM task roll (simply by picking a governor stat), but rolling stat or less on 2D...or 3D also has its uses.

In this case--the case of checking to see if an extra action is called for--a check vs. natural ability (END score) not only makes good mechanical sense but are easy to remember and easy to implement as well.

In this particular situation, I can't really think of how a use of the UGM would be better than this simple check I'm using.

If you've got an idea, I'd love to hear it, though.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Why not use UGM to determine extra actions instead?

Classic Traveller allows, basically, two actions in a round. A character can move and act once per 15 second round (move and fire his weapon, for example).

My goal was to keep these rules close to that "official" allotment of actions during the round.

So, in effect, what I'm doing is giving each character a free action, and any extra action is accomplished if they roll END or less on 1D....another action if they roll END or less on 2D....another action if they roll END or less on 3D....another action if they roll END or less on 4D...etc.

Using that mechanic (increasing the number of D6 each time to roll END or less for an extra action) nicely gives us a number of actions, per round, close to what is "officially" provided in CT.

Unless your character has a very low END, he will get his two actions during the round. He'll get his freebie, and he'll probably automatically make his END or less on 1D.

It's the characters with higher END that will consistently get 3+ actions during a round--a bonus for having high END.

And, because the chance of success goes up exponentially each time by adding another die to the check, we won't have characters makeing 7 or 10 actions in a 15 second combat round.

Pretty much any character will be capped at 3-5 actions (more likely 3-4) each round, no matter his END score.

So, to answer your question, the reason I use this method of dicing the check (instead of a UGM task roll) is because it fits my needs so well.

It's a simple check (END or less on a number of increasing dice) that's easy to remember and easy to implement in the game. Everyone knows that on the second segment of the game, they've got to make the END or less on 1D to get an action that segment. On the third segment of the round, they've got to make END or less on 2D to continuing moving their character. ETC.


--------------------------------

A note about UGM--

UGM is just an extrapolation of the loose CT task system outlined on pgs. 28-29 of The Traveller Adventure.

There, checks of characteristic or less is discussed (the Natural Ability portion of the UGM), and the standard roll-two-dice-for-a-target-number-or-better is detailed as well (the other half of the UGM).

When I came up with the UGM, I just combined these two concepts.

In my game, I use UGM for a lot of things (even combat), but I don't use it for everything. I also use those CT checks for Stat or less mentioned in TTB.

If I throw 2D or higher, I will 99.99% of the time make that a UGM task roll (simply by picking a governor stat), but rolling stat or less on 2D...or 3D also has its uses.

In this case--the case of checking to see if an extra action is called for--a check vs. natural ability (END score) not only makes good mechanical sense but are easy to remember and easy to implement as well.

In this particular situation, I can't really think of how a use of the UGM would be better than this simple check I'm using.

If you've got an idea, I'd love to hear it, though.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WJP:
--AIMING--

I'd argue with this one </font>[/QUOTE]And I would welcome your arugment!

You always keep me in line with these rules, pushing me to "keep them simple"--a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with.

I've never actually played with this rule, and I'm not really attached to it. It just seemed to make sense, so I thought I'd try it.

I wanted some rule where, if a character aims for the entire round, forgoing other actions, he gets a bonus to-hit and damage.

He's giving up a lot (especially with the panic fire rule allowing 3 pulls of the trigger during one action), but in some cases, the extra damage might be worth it (deadly).

Most firearm tasks should involve some attempt to aim. An unaimed snapshot has next to no chance of hitting beyond a couple of metres - hence a hefty penalty to the to hit number should be in order (raise the difficulty?)

I can see that you and I are using two different defintions of "snapshot" and "aimed shot".

I consider a "snapshot" any type of quick aim and pull the trigger type of scenario. (There is quick aiming involved.) Most types of shots are snapshots.

When someone takes several seconds to level his weapon, breathe, line up the shot, and squeeze the trigger--that's what I consider an aimed shots. Someone at a shooting range would used aimed fire. A sniper using a scope would be aiming in this method. A character with a pistol who can stand for a long time (15 seconds) aiming at his target before pulling the trigger is using this rule.

But most types of shots I consider to be snapshots. There is the ususal aiming involved. A marine firing his M-16 would be trained in the use of snapshots.

I don't consider snapshots to be blind, point-and-click, fire. Shapshots are typical shots that a policeman would fire at a suspect or a soldier in a combat situation would fire from around the corner of a broken building.

I think we've just got a terminology issue on this one.

-------------------------


You could, I guess, come up with a third type of shot--as what you're speaking of with a bonus to hit.

I'm not quite sure how that would fit into my combat round, because the extra aiming portion would have to take longer than one segment (what I call a snapshot), but you'd have to be able to do more than one of these shots in a round (otherwise, it's my aimed fire).

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WJP:
--AIMING--

I'd argue with this one </font>[/QUOTE]And I would welcome your arugment!

You always keep me in line with these rules, pushing me to "keep them simple"--a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with.

I've never actually played with this rule, and I'm not really attached to it. It just seemed to make sense, so I thought I'd try it.

I wanted some rule where, if a character aims for the entire round, forgoing other actions, he gets a bonus to-hit and damage.

He's giving up a lot (especially with the panic fire rule allowing 3 pulls of the trigger during one action), but in some cases, the extra damage might be worth it (deadly).

Most firearm tasks should involve some attempt to aim. An unaimed snapshot has next to no chance of hitting beyond a couple of metres - hence a hefty penalty to the to hit number should be in order (raise the difficulty?)

I can see that you and I are using two different defintions of "snapshot" and "aimed shot".

I consider a "snapshot" any type of quick aim and pull the trigger type of scenario. (There is quick aiming involved.) Most types of shots are snapshots.

When someone takes several seconds to level his weapon, breathe, line up the shot, and squeeze the trigger--that's what I consider an aimed shots. Someone at a shooting range would used aimed fire. A sniper using a scope would be aiming in this method. A character with a pistol who can stand for a long time (15 seconds) aiming at his target before pulling the trigger is using this rule.

But most types of shots I consider to be snapshots. There is the ususal aiming involved. A marine firing his M-16 would be trained in the use of snapshots.

I don't consider snapshots to be blind, point-and-click, fire. Shapshots are typical shots that a policeman would fire at a suspect or a soldier in a combat situation would fire from around the corner of a broken building.

I think we've just got a terminology issue on this one.

-------------------------


You could, I guess, come up with a third type of shot--as what you're speaking of with a bonus to hit.

I'm not quite sure how that would fit into my combat round, because the extra aiming portion would have to take longer than one segment (what I call a snapshot), but you'd have to be able to do more than one of these shots in a round (otherwise, it's my aimed fire).

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ranger:
May I suggest using INT for this. Since INT and EDU are seperate, I've always taken INT to reflect "common sense" and "situational awareness" to a large degree. Part of taking an extra action is having the "situational awareness" to be able to take on one threat while not loosing track of the other threats around you.

Just a thought...

And, it's some good input.

I do agree with you about INT. EDU is "learned knowledge" while INT is solving puzzles and situational awareness.

I use INT as a modifier in the initiative throw. At first glance, it's only a -1DM to the 2D morale throw, but this is more powerful a modifier than it seems on first glance.

If your 2D initiative throw is equal to or lower than your character's morale, then your initiative is what you throw. If your throw is higher than your morale, then your initiative is your throw +10!

So, having a high INT will influence your initiative to more often be below your character's morale number.

If you have the lowest initiative number, it's a pretty powerful situation to be in because your character is acting first in each round segement.

Low initiative numbers also have an advantage in the form of the use of the Hold Action.

So...having a high INT, and getting that -1DM (the only beneficial DM to the initiative roll) is definitley GOOD.


========================

Now, about using the END to make the extra action check (instead of INT as your propose).

I actually played around, at first with using INT for this (to let you know that we're thinking alike with regards to INT).

But, I changed to END because...

(1) END can be reduced, due to wounds, during combat. It makes sense to me that a wounded character will take less actions during a round (so, lowered END means that the END Extra Action check won't be made as often).

(2) END is appropriate because people rapidly get tired (especially in melee combat, but in fire combat too) when expending the energy to fight. END is the most appropriate stat to consider that fact during a fight.


==================

So, in sum, both END and INT are important for a character during a fight. (Both his ability to expend energy in the fight and resist the fatigue, and his situational awareness.)

I higher INT will get your character to act earlier during the round....on each segment of the round.

A higher END score will get your character more actions during the round (act during more segments).


Consider this...

You've got a very smart character (high INT) who's got aesthma (low END), and this character gets into a fist fight.

This character will probably act early in each segment of the round (low initiative due to his situational awareness), but he'll tire quickly and not be effective in the fight (won't make his END check and probably end up with only two actions during the round).

This character is fist-fighting a football player...lineman...dumb as a brick, but very much in shape. His low INT will not influence quick action during the round, but his high END will net him more segments in which to act.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ranger:
May I suggest using INT for this. Since INT and EDU are seperate, I've always taken INT to reflect "common sense" and "situational awareness" to a large degree. Part of taking an extra action is having the "situational awareness" to be able to take on one threat while not loosing track of the other threats around you.

Just a thought...

And, it's some good input.

I do agree with you about INT. EDU is "learned knowledge" while INT is solving puzzles and situational awareness.

I use INT as a modifier in the initiative throw. At first glance, it's only a -1DM to the 2D morale throw, but this is more powerful a modifier than it seems on first glance.

If your 2D initiative throw is equal to or lower than your character's morale, then your initiative is what you throw. If your throw is higher than your morale, then your initiative is your throw +10!

So, having a high INT will influence your initiative to more often be below your character's morale number.

If you have the lowest initiative number, it's a pretty powerful situation to be in because your character is acting first in each round segement.

Low initiative numbers also have an advantage in the form of the use of the Hold Action.

So...having a high INT, and getting that -1DM (the only beneficial DM to the initiative roll) is definitley GOOD.


========================

Now, about using the END to make the extra action check (instead of INT as your propose).

I actually played around, at first with using INT for this (to let you know that we're thinking alike with regards to INT).

But, I changed to END because...

(1) END can be reduced, due to wounds, during combat. It makes sense to me that a wounded character will take less actions during a round (so, lowered END means that the END Extra Action check won't be made as often).

(2) END is appropriate because people rapidly get tired (especially in melee combat, but in fire combat too) when expending the energy to fight. END is the most appropriate stat to consider that fact during a fight.


==================

So, in sum, both END and INT are important for a character during a fight. (Both his ability to expend energy in the fight and resist the fatigue, and his situational awareness.)

I higher INT will get your character to act earlier during the round....on each segment of the round.

A higher END score will get your character more actions during the round (act during more segments).


Consider this...

You've got a very smart character (high INT) who's got aesthma (low END), and this character gets into a fist fight.

This character will probably act early in each segment of the round (low initiative due to his situational awareness), but he'll tire quickly and not be effective in the fight (won't make his END check and probably end up with only two actions during the round).

This character is fist-fighting a football player...lineman...dumb as a brick, but very much in shape. His low INT will not influence quick action during the round, but his high END will net him more segments in which to act.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by WJP:
If I throw 2D or higher, I will 99.99% of the time make that a UGM task roll (simply by picking a governor stat), but rolling stat or less on 2D...or 3D also has its uses.

For example, if a character walks into a room where a foreign creature is clingling to the ceiling, I'll typically make this an ability "check" rather than a task roll.

I would probably have the character roll INT or less on 2D to notice the bug clingling to the ceiling.

If I think the character is more focused on the ground, or at eye-level, for some reason, I'll make this check harder by requiring a check of INT or less on 3D.

And, if the player has stated specifically that his character is enterin the room cautiously, scanning the walls and ceiling as well as the floor, then this character has earned a very easy check at INT or less on 1D (which will be automatic unless he's got a low INT).


So, these standard CT-type checks definitely have a use in my game.

When I created UGM, I never intended it to replace everything in CT. The UGM, in my eyes at least, is just a structured way for the GM to implement those "2D for a target number or better" that present themselves all the time in CT.

I do use UGM for all task-based rolls.

But, typicaly ability checks, using stat or less on 1-3D, have their place as well.

At least, imo.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by WJP:
If I throw 2D or higher, I will 99.99% of the time make that a UGM task roll (simply by picking a governor stat), but rolling stat or less on 2D...or 3D also has its uses.

For example, if a character walks into a room where a foreign creature is clingling to the ceiling, I'll typically make this an ability "check" rather than a task roll.

I would probably have the character roll INT or less on 2D to notice the bug clingling to the ceiling.

If I think the character is more focused on the ground, or at eye-level, for some reason, I'll make this check harder by requiring a check of INT or less on 3D.

And, if the player has stated specifically that his character is enterin the room cautiously, scanning the walls and ceiling as well as the floor, then this character has earned a very easy check at INT or less on 1D (which will be automatic unless he's got a low INT).


So, these standard CT-type checks definitely have a use in my game.

When I created UGM, I never intended it to replace everything in CT. The UGM, in my eyes at least, is just a structured way for the GM to implement those "2D for a target number or better" that present themselves all the time in CT.

I do use UGM for all task-based rolls.

But, typicaly ability checks, using stat or less on 1-3D, have their place as well.

At least, imo.

 

[aramis]

This would be easier to follow if it were fewer posts of greater length...

Looks fairly reasonable. I like using morale for initiative; it is a very interesting take.

 

[aramis]

This would be easier to follow if it were fewer posts of greater length...

Looks fairly reasonable. I like using morale for initiative; it is a very interesting take.