The Most Serious T5 Problems

[pendragonman]

Murdoc, exactly. However, ammo is not explicitly detailed in T5 at this time. Not mag size, not ammo characteristics. This is S4's issue.

It is not am issue for me.

S4 also has an issue with the brawling rules. Apparently he likes the idea of a fair fight between mook NPCs and the characters. In my book, the mooks are supposed to lose the vast majority of the time, which the current rules do.

There is an issue with STAMP as well, but Hans may have the quick-fix--Mutilate and Perambulate which would let only the still mobile still move.

 

[Murdoc]

Lol, sorry, I should have been more clear. I was talking about ammo tracking in general, since that's where the conversation seems to have been leading. Yeah, I know about these issues and generally seem to agree with S4. I just haven't been able to comment much because of the rapid pace of the thread. By the time I've read, wrote a reply, and checked it, four more messages have popped up!

But I also think that I have given up on trying to run T5 straight, as I've found a fix for most of these problems that I think satisfies me. Still needs some work though, and definite testing.

And yes, I love the "Mutilate and Perambulate"! Both functionally and aesthetically; I tend to like big words.

 

[Supplement Four]

My deal with ammo tracking is the limits it should impose on characters.

I'd rather not track anything. But, how much ammo a character carries is important because that put a limit on how many times the character can use the weapon.

It also helps the player decide what type of attack to make--single shots, burst fire, or full auto.

I do not like the idea that a character can have as much ammo as the Ref feels is "right" in any combat situation, and I don't like the idea that there is nothing keeping a character from using full auto when, if ammo were scarce, single shots would be the norm.

Then, there's the trade off that should be there for characters in the equipment that they carry. Should they carry that combat knife, or another mag? Should they carry three grenades at the expense of ammo?

A character's Load, which is in T5, should also factor in the amount of ammo a character has on him. T5, the way it is, ignores ammo and allows characters to really carry no ammo, carrying other stuff instead, and still allows the character to have as much ammo on him for as many full auto shots as the character wants to make.

I'm in favor of a simple system to figure ammo use that involves little or no bookkeeping.

 

[rancke]

And yes, I love the "Mutilate and Perambulate"! Both functionally and aesthetically; I tend to like big words.

It was meant as a joke, but if it works for you...

...you can't use it, because I came up with the idea, so now I have copyright to using those two words. :smirk:

Wait, Pendragonman changed my 'Mutilation' and 'Perambulation' to 'Mutilate' and 'Perambulate'. Curses! Foiled!

EDIT: Hmmm... that makes Pendragonman's version derivative...


Hans

 

[Supplement Four]

Broken Brawling Rule



I discovered this up thread, when making a reply to someone. For comparison's sake, lets consider the PC and three baddies, all with the same skill and attributes for Brawling.

The rule for resolving Brawling every round is broken if some of the combatants are allies.

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.

A PC fighting three enemies of equal skill, and the PC is the favorite to win the fight?

That's not right.

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

Which is a brain scratcher, too.

 

[Vladika]

It was meant as a joke, but if it works for you...

...you can't use it, because I came up with the idea, so now I have copyright to using those two words. :smirk:

Wait, Pendragonman changed my 'Mutilation' and 'Perambulation' to 'Mutilate' and 'Perambulate'. Curses! Foiled!

EDIT: Hmmm... that makes Pendragonman's version derivative...


Hans

Oh Oh Oh...not again...

 

[pendragonman]

It was meant as a joke, but if it works for you...

...you can't use it, because I came up with the idea, so now I have copyright to using those two words. :smirk:

Wait, Pendragonman changed my 'Mutilation' and 'Perambulation' to 'Mutilate' and 'Perambulate'. Curses! Foiled!

EDIT: Hmmm... that makes Pendragonman's version derivative...


Hans

Leave it to a mathematician to take a derivative.

 

[rancke]

Oh Oh Oh...not again...

You are most persuasive. Very well, I hereby give my permission to use 'Mutilate' and 'Perambulate' as the actions the 'M' and 'P' in STAMP stands for. And you don't even have to attribute the idea to me.


Hans

 

[Vladika]

A PC fighting three enemies of equal skill, and the PC is the favorite to win the fight?

As it should be...

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

Madness! Madness I say! Obviously an Errata issue. Couldn't be correct...

On a serious note: I'm enjoying the obvious thought you've put into these posts.

It appears that there should have been SOME critical play testers.

 

[Fovean]

It appears that there should have been SOME critical play testers.

There were. And there were copious T5-beta threads here on these subjects (weapon stats, combat, ammo, etc). But it seems none of the feedback was considered relevant.

Count me in the "personal combat in T5 as published is broken" camp. I'm trying to make some vehicles and ships, once I get used to it maybe it will be better but right now that feels wonky too.

 

[PhilB]

I'm in the personal-combat-is-broken camp too. I've skim read the final version several times; I'm going through it much more slowly again. But it feels inconsistent in the levels of detail and resolution.

 

[Licheking]

Surely the easy fix is make it an opposed Fighter/Blade/Unarmed check loser takes whatever damage from weapon or 1d for fist. Multiple attackers against one opponent would be done as a cooperative roll for the side with the greater number.

 

[Supplement Four]

Surely the easy fix is make it an opposed Fighter/Blade/Unarmed check loser takes whatever damage from weapon or 1d for fist. Multiple attackers against one opponent would be done as a cooperative roll for the side with the greater number.

I haven't seen anywhere in the game where the damage is for "Hands" or "Claws".

Maybe it's hidden in the BladeMaker or BeastMaker sections--haven't looked at those closely yet.

 

[Vladika]

I haven't seen anywhere in the game where the damage is for "Hands" or "Claws".

Maybe it's hidden in the BladeMaker or BeastMaker sections--haven't looked at those closely yet.

This is another major problem. No index. No cross reference. Poorly laid out.

 

[Reban]

I haven't seen anywhere in the game where the damage is for "Hands" or "Claws".

Maybe it's hidden in the BladeMaker or BeastMaker sections--haven't looked at those closely yet.

Its in BladeMaker, the second table on p260.

 

[cuTTer]

Hidden in plain sight.

I haven't seen anywhere in the game where the damage is for "Hands" or "Claws".

Maybe it's hidden in the BladeMaker or BeastMaker sections--haven't looked at those closely yet.

p.260, Category Body Weapons, Code Fi, Descriptor Fists, Range R, H1 Blow, D1 =C1

So the average human PC will inflict 7 points of damage type 'blow' for a firm punch.

A severity 3 wound going by the Injury table (p.222). This is kinda whacky, as the average damage you can expect from a knife is also 7, but that will only be a severity 2 wound, because you divide Cuts by 3, not 2.

The lesson for today? Don't bring a knife to a brawl, unless you have less that STR 7.

(And for Strephon's sake don't bring a pistol, only 1D damage after all.)

 

[Vladika]

p.260, Category Body Weapons, Code Fi, Descriptor Fists, Range R, H1 Blow, D1 =C1

So the average human PC will inflict 7 points of damage type 'blow' for a firm punch.

A severity 3 wound going by the Injury table (p.222). This is kinda whacky, as the average damage you can expect from a knife is also 7, but that will only be a severity 2 wound, because you divide Cuts by 3, not 2.

The lesson for today? Don't bring a knife to a brawl, unless you have less that STR 7.

(And for Strephon's sake don't bring a pistol, only 1D damage after all.)

Totally screwed up system...

 

[robject]

My deal with ammo tracking is the limits it should impose on characters.

I'd rather not track anything. But, how much ammo a character carries is important because that put a limit on how many times the character can use the weapon.

It also helps the player decide what type of attack to make--single shots, burst fire, or full auto.

I do not like the idea that a character can have as much ammo as the Ref feels is "right" in any combat situation, and I don't like the idea that there is nothing keeping a character from using full auto when, if ammo were scarce, single shots would be the norm.

Then, there's the trade off that should be there for characters in the equipment that they carry. Should they carry that combat knife, or another mag? Should they carry three grenades at the expense of ammo?

A character's Load, which is in T5, should also factor in the amount of ammo a character has on him. T5, the way it is, ignores ammo and allows characters to really carry no ammo, carrying other stuff instead, and still allows the character to have as much ammo on him for as many full auto shots as the character wants to make.

I'm in favor of a simple system to figure ammo use that involves little or no bookkeeping.

The draft text (page 202; the draft text is on the CD) has a simple rule for determining when reloads happen. It does not require counting bullets. However, if you want to track reloads, this is a way to do it. Perhaps it should go back in; however, I'm not sure if it will increase average satisfaction across all owners of T5.

As far as SnapFire goes: pistols qualify as automatic weapons, don't they? Revolvers don't, and I assume launchers don't.

We've done some hand-to-hand combat in T5 games, and most of it is movement -- running towards a bad guy, running away from a bad guy -- and it's largely role-played, since my players like it that way. And I use the brawling mechanic when they start trading blows, but I grant mods based on what they are doing, what the environment is like, what footing they're on...

 

[robject]

Armor Penetration

I believe the armor damage rule is too drastic. The problem in particular is that armor is ineffective against clearly superior weapons. Though this might be realistic to some degree, it's too harsh against players, who are used to frequent combat.

I note that the draft text has a very gradual armor damage, which I think is not drastic enough.

I and my players have come up with several possible alternatives. We haven't tested them, though. My current favorite is to use the same rule as that in "the personal day": after three hits, armor is out of commission for that combat session. A close second is to nullify armor by location, and let the players track that. After all, it's their armor...

 

[robject]

Psionics Exhaustion

Psionics poop out way too unpredictably and catastrophically. This results in players who either cannot dare to use psionics (thereby rendering it only a last-ditch solution, i.e. nearly useless) or psionicists who are SO powerful that nothing can stop them.

I'd rather the rules favor some middle ground; for example, re-using the Personal Day rules for psionics: three failures and you're out. That gives all psionic players a chance to figure out what their limitations are, and when to take calculated risks.