The Most Serious T5 Problems

[Vladika]

The STAMP Combat Round


S - Situation: Attacker notes his weapon and evaluates the combat situation.

T - Target: Attacker identifies a target and notes range, size and target mod.

A - Attack: Attacker rolls to hit.

M - Move: Attacker moves or performs some other action.

P - Penetrate: Hits from successful attacks are checked for penetration and damage.

Gotta love this. Target moves 50 yards AFTER he is hit and AFTER those 50 yards of movement we find out he's deader than last weeks meatloaf...

 

[Supplement Four]

Opposed roll method. Yes the loser takes damage and the winner doesn't. Not an issue for me, as I understand the idea behind it. Abstraction, so that 3 hours of prime rp time aren't tied up with a single combat.

Me and mine do enjoy RP-ing. But, we have a great time, too, with an entire night of combat.

I'm sure many roleplayers are divided on this, but I would wager that just as many like combat encounters as much as they do RP-ing as compared to players who just like RP-ing and minimal combat.

See, I saw what the combat example was in beta. In it, the idea behind the abstractions in personal combat were elaborated so that we could get into Marc's thinking.

I'd like to see that.

Don't you have a problem with having to see that, though, in order to accept the T5 combat system?

As I have mentioned previously in one of your other threads, a "combat round" per Marc's idea is not a fixed length of time, but an "episode" or "act" if you will.

I do understand his description of the combat round. And, I actually like it.

Still, we've got to have ammo tracking. No matter the length of a combat round, we've got to be able to tell about the character who draws the single-shot sidearm from the guard he knocked out.

Taking just one shot per round, how many combat rounds can the character fire his weapon until he is out of ammo?

 

[pendragonman]

Someone with better forum search-fu needs to try to find it. I can't even get the search device to find the word combat...

Honestly, ammo tracking I think is chrome. Useful to enhance the drama at key spots, but not necessarily central to the plot.

 

[Supplement Four]

S4, as to your fist fight, I have already done this while kicking the tires.

Opposed roll method. Yes the loser takes damage and the winner doesn't.

And...is that fun?

You've set up an NPC nemesis for one of your players. It's Rene Belloq to the PC's Indiana Jones. And, you set up an encounter where they will finally meet. Mano-a-mano.

The PC is alone, making his way back to his ship, just leaving the starport bar. And there he is...that sonofabitchthattookhisgirlawayfromhim. It's him.

Brawling time.

And....we roll an opposed throw. Damage to the loser.

Really?





Here's another problem with that system I see.

Let's say that the bad guy's buddies attack the lone PC. Three against one.

How do we settle this fight?

Opposed Throw Cooperative Task?

Is that...fun?

I don't think so.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

@Spaceresearcher

Dude, you are really clogging up what I had hoped (and stated in the OP) would be a clean, easy thread for Marc and the T5-powers-that-be to read.

I don't have any problem discussing the thread items with you. I just wish you had started your discussion in another thread in order to keep this one clean.

Oh well. The plans of mice and men, huh?

My apologies if I've polluted your thread. I was just trying to highlight that the serious problems you are having are not had by all, so perhaps it's the layout that's unfamiliar to you. I myself am getting used to it but it is different to other versions.





So....you don't have a problem with someone going full auto and still moving in the round, but you're OK with someone not being able to pop off a single shot and move in the round....

Hmmm....


What are you talking about? There are 3 modes of firing. Aimed, Auto and Snap. There is no reason why you can't fire a single shot weapon in snapfire mode, with the obvious implication that it will only be a single round fired or an agreed amount of rounds, depending on the duration of the round.

Aimed Fire is simply stating that in order to aim, you must be stationary, or stationary in a moving vehicle. Auto fire involves multiple operations of the weapon but for a single shot pistol for example would be like a police movie shoot out, where the officer empties a clip in the general direction but doesn't really hit the target unless there lucky.

What line is confusing you?

You cannot move and fire in the same round unless your weapon is capable of burst fire or is fully automatic. See page 214.

??? Where does it state this?? You can move and fire, just that your shot will not be aimed(less likely to hit the target).





Hmm. OK. Let's look at some GunMaker outputs provided on page 240.

Can you tell me how much ammo the P-5 (top line) has?

How many rounds can the weapon be used if the character only has one magazine?

Is it six rounds? 17 rounds?

The detail on the amount of rounds as stated on P248 is stated as not delving into the process in great depth(probably to make way for a detailed equipment book to come out later). There is however some examples on that page, shown via pictures. For all intents and purposes, using that picture I would select either of options: F=10 rounds,M=32 rounds(could be a moded pistol) or P=6 rounds. Obviously the calibre would only of a low mm but this is irrelevant as the range and effect for the P-5 is shown on page 252.

I think where your coming from is having those samples in more table like form and simply adding in the amount of rounds that fit in a standard clip. The entire gunmaker chapter however, is open ended in this way as it's a creation tool. Eg, open ended. Fair enough, it wouldn't have taken a lot to include some sample magazine sizes and examples for those sample weapons, but again, it's referee dependent so as long as player and referee agree at the start it shouldn't really be a major issue.

It looks like a sample equipment book is required.

Or...how about the Re-4 (second weapon on page 240). Since it's a revolver, is that a 6 round weapon?

Or, it is like the Revolver-8 pictured on page 236 that uses a cylinder that holds 36 rounds?

Again as it's a 'gunmaker' that's up to the creator going by these rules but allowed/governed by the referee.


In other words, it needs House Ruling because T5 ignores this aspect that should be in the game.

It's not ignoring house rules, it's simply providing a framework to create your own weapons. The issue seems to be a desire for classic Traveller weapons to be clearly laid out. Having said that, the weapons could vary from world to world anyway. The point is a standard and I see what you mean. It allows for ease of integration without double checking everyones weapons to make sure someone doesn't have a custom pistol with 3 clips, each of 100 rounds or something rediculous.

Here's another question for you. If a PC uses the ACR-10, from page 240 again, then why would he ever use SnapFire?

Won't he always use AutoFire?

Not if it's not allowed by the referee due to the situation. EG, if the person is running along, then he may only be capable of snapfire, however if their in charge of the situation, then obviously Autofire. I would probably declare that any surprise attacks would result in a snap fire, whereas attacks involving 'I can see the target and know where they are, but they can't see me', would be autofire. Likewise for a draw at dawn on the planet flabberbut etc. Also once the battle was on, snapfire would probably change to autofire after the first round but it's again going to be dependent on the referee's decision as to when autofire can come into play. Another use for snapfire would be unfamiliarity of the environment, heat exhaustion etc.

 

[Supplement Four]

Honestly, ammo tracking I think is chrome. Useful to enhance the drama at key spots, but not necessarily central to the plot.

So, a character with a revolver fires it ten times in a row, once per combat round.

He must have a revolver that features 10 bullets, huh?

That a character always has the amount of ammo he needs, except by Ref fiat, is what I object to.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

Drat, my quotes didn't indent in that last post. Apologies all.

On the weapons tables, it would look as if the exact number of clips etc, may be dependent upon which era your playing in, since the rule book outlined examples are not complete. Correct me if I am mistaken but a number of weapons vary slightly between the different versions. T5 is attempting to be the ultimate version hence to define weapons exactly would impose restrictions to the various era's of Traveller. Would fellow Travellers agree or is this beyond the scope of this thread? Just a passing thought anyway.

 

[Supplement Four]

Not if it's not allowed by the referee due to the situation. EG, if the person is running along, then he may only be capable of snapfire, however if their in charge of the situation, then obviously Autofire.

That depends on which page of T5 you read.

If you read page 214, there's no real reason to ever use SnapFire.

If you read page 218, then SnapFire becomes useful only if the character is running at Speed 2.

Which rule is correct?

Problems, problems.

 

[pendragonman]

See, now instead of accepting the answer to your question you are chosing to change the question parameters.

Of course I would use a different method for a BOSS FIGHT, but that is not what you asked, now is it? You asked about two guys leaving the starport for a fist fight. Not the same as a BOSS FIGHT at all.

And the three on one? Easy peasy. The single target rolls once, and compare the results with the roll for each of the others. Our hero wins one or two, or loses one or two. Damage to both sides. Next round please.

Now, if you are going to change question parameters after you ask a question you will be quickly out of people willing to discuss the subject.

 

[Murdoc]

I know that adding my 'opinion' to this doesn't really help the argument that different systems work for different people, but my opinion is that T5 does have some very real, objective problems with its combat system, based on my experience of playing over a dozen different RPGs. Now, I've never done mass-combat with any of those, such as T5 says it is supposed to be able to handle as well (or so I remember hearing somewhere), so maybe that changes things a bit. If that is the case then it comes down to whether that advantage is worth the disadvantages it currently has. And yes, I haven't been able to properly put the T5 combat rules through all the proper paces yet (my group has only had time for one sample combat so far*), but until we do figure it out, or get a nice example that explains everything, T5 certainly seems lacking. Even if it is not lacking in performance, it certainly is in explanation, otherwise there wouldn't be all these debates trying to figure out how it works.

Now if I may add my own bit to the original point of the thread, I know that this may be a fringe topic to most but its a big one for me, and that is the Robot chapter. I like many of the new things it brings in lacking in previous versions (like organic brains and personalities and such), but in actually trying to use them I've found them extremely limiting in what I can design. In terms of canon I tried to design three of what I think are some of the most recognizable/popular robots to test for compatibility (like how we often do with ships and worlds), the Hiver Bruiser, Zhodani warbot (medium), and AB-101. I found that I couldn't do any of them. And I don't mean that I couldn't make them exactly, I mean not even close. And many other designs I could think of couldn't be done, from simple roller security droids, to maintenance and cargo robots, etc., unless they are just variations on the basic sophontoid model. Basically the system seems set up only to be able to make robots that either look like a specific sophont, or a vehicle. There are hints about another "Surrat" design system, so perhaps that will come out later, but for now, the only use I can see for these rules are to make sophontoid player characters and talking cars like KITT (or whatever vehicle). So no, this doesn't make the rest of the game unplayable, but it does make this part of them nearly so, IMO.

* And even that didn't go well.

 

[pendragonman]

So, a character with a revolver fires it ten times in a row, once per combat round.

He must have a revolver that features 10 bullets, huh?

That a character always has the amount of ammo he needs, except by Ref fiat, is what I object to.

Nope, not a revolver with ten rounds, but how long does it take to use a speed loader? This is exactly where the GM can lean in and switch the combat round to enhance the drama by making a target close to personal range during reload.

Since CT, there has been the 10% weapon cost for "clips" or accessories. If tracking cost is your issue, there it is. As a GM, I find it tedious to have to watch everyone's in weapon ammo stock for them. Let them shoot for several rounds, then require a clip change. If you don't need it for drama purposes, at the end of combat tell the shooters they went thru x clips. done.

 

[Spaceresearcher]

So, a character with a revolver fires it ten times in a row, once per combat round.

He must have a revolver that features 10 bullets, huh?

That a character always has the amount of ammo he needs, except by Ref fiat, is what I object to.

Depends on the type of game you want to have Supplement Four. Traveller has always been designed to be open ended in that you can game what ever SciFi game you like. Eg, I can tell your the type of gamer who enjoys detail and very nailed down structure, particularly in your games combat areas.

Other players enjoy a game where they don't have to worry about every meal or amount of bullets etc and just have fun enjoying the adventure in a lightsaber is limitless Star Wars, space opera style game.

Myself I like a balance between the 2. I agree though, there's nothing wrong with nailing down specifics on some items etc. It avoids "I'll just pump 1000 rounds into that mutant K'Kree snail omnipoid and onwards we go to the secret base, oh wait I've only got a customized automatic pistol. Oh well, rounds are irrelevant 275 of those rounds hit, it's an automatic splatter, now back to that base".

Again, I think a T5 common weapons of the universe book is in order with details that pin down common 'un-customised' weapons. That is an exciting point on T5, the customization aspect really does open up a universe of possibilities. In a lot of games, when I'm playing I'm not really concerned by the combat, being more interested in the actual adventure and role playing the character. That said, detailed combat can make a battle a lot more interesting and often surprising.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Where's the problem?

Gotta love this. Target moves 50 yards AFTER he is hit and AFTER those 50 yards of movement we find out he's deader than last weeks meatloaf...

Why is this messing with you? It happens a lot. In real life people can fall dead from adynamic (does not contribute to death) like grazes and cases where the subject sustained multiple dynamic (directly contributing to death) wounds and stay up and fighting well after the body should be/was dead.

So, some one acting, running to cover and dropping dead is not that unrealistic or implausible. Nor is getting automatically slapped around in HtH combat.

The single fire issue seems to be case of marksmanship versus suppression fire. If you want to be sure that you want to drop your target then you take Aimed Fire, if you are not so much concerned about body count, you use Snap or Auto Fire.

Just my quick thoughts about this supposed problem with T5 Personal Combat.

Now the 1D pistol, that I am got nothing for. *shrugs* It happens, as I was called on yesterday by one of my oldest friends and fellow gamer, I am rusty.

 

[pendragonman]

I know that adding my 'opinion' to this doesn't really help the argument that different systems work for different people, but my opinion is that T5 does have some very real, objective problems with its combat system, based on my experience of playing over a dozen different RPGs. Now, I've never done mass-combat with any of those, such as T5 says it is supposed to be able to handle as well (or so I remember hearing somewhere),

This is from the example combat that I can't find. If your forum search-fu is strong, perhaps you can try?

Now if I may add my own bit to the original point of the thread, I know that this may be a fringe topic to most but its a big one for me, and that is the Robot chapter. I like many of the new things it brings in lacking in previous versions (like organic brains and personalities and such), but in actually trying to use them I've found them extremely limiting in what I can design. In terms of canon I tried to design three of what I think are some of the most recognizable/popular robots to test for compatibility (like how we often do with ships and worlds), the Hiver Bruiser, Zhodani warbot (medium), and AB-101. I found that I couldn't do any of them. And I don't mean that I couldn't make them exactly, I mean not even close. And many other designs I could think of couldn't be done, from simple roller security droids, to maintenance and cargo robots, etc., unless they are just variations on the basic sophontoid model. Basically the system seems set up only to be able to make robots that either look like a specific sophont, or a vehicle. There are hints about another "Surrat" design system, so perhaps that will come out later, but for now, the only use I can see for these rules are to make sophontoid player characters and talking cars like KITT (or whatever vehicle). So no, this doesn't make the rest of the game unplayable, but it does make this part of them nearly so, IMO.

* And even that didn't go well.

There is a guy who designed a robot character for Mag's ATU PBP below. Chargen is posted in the dossiers file if that helps at all.

 

[Supplement Four]

There is no reason why you can't fire a single shot weapon in snapfire mode...

Read SnapFire again.

Page 214. The attacker must use a weapon capable of burst, automatic, or continuous fire.

Aimed Fire is simply stating that in order to aim, you must be stationary, or stationary in a moving vehicle.

You're confusing that with the Aim rule (Cautious Attack, page 212). Aiming takes two rounds, but the shot becomes one die easier.

Aimed Fire is the deliberate, careful use of a weapon, as described on page 214.

Auto fire involves multiple operations of the weapon..

All the attack types involve multiple operations of the weapon. When you use Aimed Fire, your character could easily empty is magazine during the single round.

Me: You cannot move and fire in the same round unless your weapon is capable of burst fire or is fully automatic. See page 214.

You: ??? Where does it state this?? You can move and fire, just that your shot will not be aimed(less likely to hit the target).

I listed the page number for you. Page 214.

 

[HG_B]

Why is this messing with you? It happens a lot.

If you get hit in the head with a 7.62 you aren't running anywhere. And no, if you take a blast in the chest with a modern assault rifle you aren't running anywhere. o:

Pretty simple. The combat sequence needs serious alterations to make it seem plausible.

 

[Supplement Four]

See, now instead of accepting the answer to your question you are chosing to change the question parameters.

No, I was just expressing the same example in a different way in an effort to be more clear to my point.

Of course I would use a different method for a BOSS FIGHT...

Then, you'll make up something? I don't see a T5 process for Brawling other than what I've already explained.

And the three on one? Easy peasy. The single target rolls once, and compare the results with the roll for each of the others. Our hero wins one or two, or loses one or two. Damage to both sides. Next round please.

But the rule states that the highest throw gets 3D damage.

To make it a fair comparison, let's say the PC and the three NPCs all have the same chance at the Opposed Throw.

This means that each fighter has a 1-in-4 chance each combat round of being the character that receives the damage.

This means...that the PC has a much better chance of winning the combat encounter. He'll be hurt 1/4 of the time while his enemies will be hurt 3/4 of the time.

So....you don't think the rule is broken? A PC fighting three enemies of equal skill, and the PC is the favorite to win the fight?

Or, to turn this around, three PCs vs. one NPC, and the NPC is the favorite to win?

Nope, not a revolver with ten rounds, but how long does it take to use a speed loader?

Assume no re-loads in that example.

Why is this messing with you? It happens a lot. In real life people can fall dead from adynamic (does not contribute to death) like grazes and cases where the subject sustained multiple dynamic (directly contributing to death) wounds and stay up and fighting well after the body should be/was dead.

For me, I don't have a problem with it occassionally. The problem I have is that people will never drop in their tracks using STAMP unless the target just doesn't want to move.

And, I think it's leads to a messy, hard to handle combat round when you've got to remember who hit who two phases ago, once you get to the last phase of combat.

 

[pendragonman]

As has been pointed out more times than I care to count, T5 is a toolkit. Use the parts you like, don't use the parts you don't.

Are you being disingenuous, or do you ALWAY use EVERY rule in ANY rpg (or any game for that matter) that you play? I point out your 68A isn't exactly canon.

In the BOSS FIGHT I would want the interchange to have short combat rounds with lots of skill checks to keep the drama high so lots of cinematic action. So I would (still using the T5 skillcheck mechanic) go with the CT combat round.

On the other hand, before you continue to scream about the HTH rules, have you looked at MongTrav's brawling rule?

Grappling
A character can attempt to wrestle or grab another person instead
of hitting him. The attacker must move to Personal range and beat
his target in an opposed Melee (unarmed) check. If he wins, he may
do any one of the following:
• Knock his opponent prone.
• Disarm his opponent. If he succeeds by 6+ he can take the
weapon away; otherwise it ends up on the fl oor.
• Throw his opponent up to three metres for 1d6 damage.
• Infl ict damage equal to 2 + the Effect.
• Escape the grapple and move away (as if with a normal
movement action).
• Continue the grapple with no other effects.
• Drag his opponent up to three metres.
Throwing an opponent always ends the grapple. With any other
option the winner can choose to end or continue the grapple as he
sees fi t. A character in a grapple cannot move or do anything other
than make opposed Melee checks. Each time an opposed check is
made the winner can choose an option from the above list.​

Not so very different from the T5 rule

EDIT: To tell the truth at risk of being branded a Heretic, there is alot to like about MongTrav, and I might mix T5 with Mong, since you can get the Mong books in your local gameshop.

 

[rancke]

For me, I don't have a problem with it occassionally. The problem I have is that people will never drop in their tracks using STAMP unless the target just doesn't want to move.

It's too bad STAPM isn't as euphonious as STAMP.

I suggest changing M and P to stand for Mutilation and Perambulation.


Hans

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Sure they do...

/snip/

This means...that the PC has a much better chance of winning the combat encounter. He'll be hurt 1/4 of the time while his enemies will be hurt 3/4 of the time.

So....you don't think the rule is broken? A PC fighting three enemies of equal skill, and the PC is the favorite to win the fight?

Or, to turn this around, three PCs vs. one NPC, and the NPC is the favorite to win?

Assume no re-loads in that example.

For me, I don't have a problem with it occassionally. The problem I have is that people will never drop in their tracks using STAMP unless the target just doesn't want to move.

And, I think it's leads to a messy, hard to handle combat round when you've got to remember who hit who two phases ago, once you get to the last phase of combat.

Well, actually I don't have a problem with the PCs winning most of the time. And if three PCs are whooping on one NPC, well that sounds like a Nemesis fight.

People drop, they just do it in the Penetrate phase.