Thinking about Personal Combat for T5

[robject]

Combat in Traveller5

I seek the impossible combat system. The fact that is is impossible doesn't stop me from seeking it.

Traveller's rules are primarily about choice and consistency, more or less depending on which part of the system you're working with. So should be combat.

Who Are You?

Three different creative agendas are: consistency; nuanced characters; a good story. I tend to go for nuance and consistency, sometimes in that order of importance. You'll have a different order and emphasis. I am not "narrativist", but, I have no real knowledge of weapons, and have little time for gaming.

In short, I am a good play-tester for combat in some ways, but also an unsuitable play-tester for combat in other ways.


ROB'S CURRENT RULES (EDIT #7)

Setup: Tactics Mod (not a pool) rolled by character with highest Tactics skill, per T5.

This is the T5.09 section on Tactics.

WHO GOES FIRST? Is moved to here.


THE COMBAT ROUND

1. Sitrep by referee.
2. Decision. Each player states his characters' action:

- Evade. Character may not make any attacks or parries. +2D difficulty to being hit.
- Move. Character may open or close distance to opponents, and may attack or parry.
- Operate a Vehicle, Heavy Weapons, Explosives, etc. Character may not make other attacks or parries.
- Take Cover.

T5.09 Cover and Concealment, heavily modified for the following:

If taking cover behind sufficient protection, the character may be attacked at +2D difficulty. If cover is merely concealing him, then the character makes an average Stealth roll each turn to remain hidden. If the Stealth roll fails, he may be attacked that round at a +1D difficulty.

If taking cover before combat, he may not be attacked
until he reveals his position by making an attack.

3. Resolve Action.


THE COMBAT PROCESS

1. Roll to Hit. This is T5.09 Step 1, except for Melee Attack:

Melee Attack: 2D < Characteristic + Skill ( - Burden )
- 3D if the opponent has a longer reach.
- Lowest success hits.
- Use the weapon's Burden as a negative DM.
- If Unarmed, damage is equal to the Dice Rating for STR.

2. Roll for Damage and Penetration. This is T5.09 Step 3 with the following changes:

Armor is not destroyed when penetrated; rather, armor loses 10% of its original value. For example, when a hit penetrates Ar 42, it reduces to Ar 38. The second penetrating hit, it reduces to Ar 34, and so on.

For longer combat sessions, apply low die rolls to penetration first instead of high values.

3. Inflict Damage. This is T5.09 Step 4, with an additional note:

For longer combat sessions, allow players to allocate damage to characteristics.

T5.09's HITS AGAINST CHARACTERS is moved into this section.



THE ATTACK TASK

A summary is added at the top of this section:

Ranged Attack: Range [dice] < Characteristic + Skill ( - Burden )
- Attack not possible if Size < Range.
- If the weapon's Burden is not zero, use it as a negative DM.
- Minimum task 1D.Melee Attack: 2D < Characteristic + Skill ( - Burden ) - Defender's Characteristic - Defender's Skill
- 3D if the opponent has a longer reach.
- If the weapon's Burden is not zero, use it as a negative DM.
- If Unarmed, damage is equal to the Dice Rating for STR.

Ram/Impact Attack: 2D < Defender Dexterity - Impact Speed

Difficulty per T5.09.
The Target Number per T5.09.
Unskilled or Low Skill per T5.09.

Ranged Attack Modes drastically changed from T5.09 to support:

Burst Fire. Weapons capable of Burst Fire operate this way by default, making two attacks against the target. Single-fire mode may be specified instead. Types which fall into this category include Machine, Accelerator, Assault, Battle, Combat, and Gauss Guns.

Full Auto makes three attacks against the target.

Shotguns and Support Weapons also attack up to two adjacent targets. Support Weapons also typically use Burst Fire (see above).

[No Speed Mods section]
[Target Size mod moved to Special Considerations]
[Cover and Concealment moved to Decision mode]
[No "Cover Me"/Fire Suppression section]

Technological Means per T5.09.

[Tactics section moved in front of the combat round section.]
[Designator fire moved to Special Considerations]

[HITS AGAINST CHARACTERS is moved into the "Inflict Damage" section]

[HITS AGAINST OBJECTS is moved to Special Considerations]

[WHO GOES FIRST? is moved to the SETUP section]



SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ammunition Check. If the players want to track ammo, these guidelines can help. Reloading is typically done when evading or under cover; when Moving, however, there is no reloading possible. If ammunition is depleted, the character must stop and take cover for a round to reload. Make a Check Ammo (2D) task against the weapon's TL to verify that ammunition remains; +1D when in burst mode, and +1D for pistols and exotic weapons. On failure, the weapon is empty, and the character cannot fire this round. Alternately, the round capacity of the weapon under use can be decided before combat. To reload, the character must not take a Move action in the next round.

Blast and Frag damage attack everyone close to the target with the task roll Range [dice] < Weapon TL.

Cautious and Hasty. -1D when Cautious, but the attack is rolled in the next combat round, and a Hit Location may be specified. +1D when Hasty; on success, the target cannot attack or operate equipment for the rest of this combat round.

Designator Fire per T5.09.

Drawing a weapon increases an attack task by +1D.

Explosions per T5.09.

Falling. Per T5.09.

Hits Against Objects per T5.09.

Knockback. Per T5.09.

Parrying uses Skill level as a negative DM against the attacker.

Power Settings. Weapons which have Power Settings (P1, P2, and P3) modify damage as follows: P2 rolls twice damage, and rolls 2D < Quality to avoid a malfunction; P3 rolls thrice damage, and rolls 3D < Quality to avoid a malfunction.

Size of Target. +1D if the target is smaller than human (e.g. Size 4 or less). -1D if the target is larger than human (e.g. Size 6 or greater).

Throwing Blades, Grenades, or Improvised Weapons is a 3D task.

Unaware Targets. -1D if the target is unaware, unconscious, or unsuspecting.

 

[kilemall]

Not speaking for T5 specifically but just in general philosophy, my hierarchy of needs for combat is-

1. Meaningful story advancing combat that they can influence with their strengths and weaknesses in player ability, character and equipment

2. Simple consistency in execution for precious gametime use

3. Toys toys toys (meaning choices in equipment that allows for this classic Traveller character type moment)-

 

[robject]

1. Meaningful story advancing combat that they can influence with their strengths and weaknesses in player ability, character and equipment

2. Simple consistency in execution for precious gametime use

3. Toys toys toys (meaning choices in equipment that allows for this classic Traveller character type moment)

I think we can take #2 and #3 as a given for any edition of Traveller. I will set them aside, knowing they will take care of themselves.

That leaves #1. What can a combat system address from there?

1a. Meaningful story-advancing combat: players influence combat with player ability.

I've grouped players' influence with story-advancing combat, with the assumption that even the referee is a player of the game.

This section includes the "oh yeah" moment to a certain degree, since some players are ready to blow off steam and attack xenomorphs with gusto.

This seems to be social and above the scope of the rules. Am I missing something?


1b. Players influence with character ability.


1c. Players influence with equipment on hand.

 

[Ulsyus]

Rob, shouldn't meaningful story-advancing combat be merely the use of force to advance the characters along a plot line or to a decision point? If they attempted to use other means on that approach then the use of force becomes the option they take having decided that they have no further non-violent options?

If that's the case, does it then t matter whether they're choosing to attack/assault a target, whether they're defending themselves on impulse having been attacked, or whether events have driven a PC/NPC to that point? Combat then just fits into the continuum of play, with the consequences hopefully commensurate with their choices.

 

[David Johansen]

I think next to explosive decompression, combat is the worst possible solution to all problems. It's exciting and thrilling in play but on a strict resource to returns basis it's a clear road to failure.

I like that about Traveller. If you're going to pick a fight you'd better be willing to die for it.

Sure I love the toys and the action as much as the next guy but I like that combat isn't consequence free.

I have a strong preference for simulationist / tactical combat because it's far easier to abstract concrete values than it is to return to concrete values from abstract ones. This has always been a bit of an issue with Traveller as far as I'm concerned. Remembering and using V x T = D is always simpler than figuring out movement in range bands even when you have to occasionally dip into D = 0.5AT^2.

 

[robject]

Remembering and using V x T = D is always simpler than figuring out movement in range bands [...]

Not always, but your point is quite on target -- if we use an abstraction, it had better be easier than using math straight.

 

[robject]

I think game design is not the same as writing simulations (leave that for coders). Game design is an art. It doesn't have to be as generic as a German-style board game, but what the "Germans" understand is that color doesn't require a mechanic. They just take it too far sometimes.

Here's a quote that might explain my feelings on this. Or might not.

...Imagination does not breed insanity. Exactly what does breed insanity is reason. Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic; I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination.


​

(Chesterton, Orthodoxy)

 

[robject]

Here, I had a wild, untamed thought just now, and I'll share it. It won't work as written, but it also gets across my feelings.

At the beginning of combat, each player chooses one mode of fighting, and must adhere to it for the duration of combat. Each mode has its own advantages and disadvantages, depending on the character and the situation.

The mode is chosen once, and is played for the duration of combat.

I can see variations and nuances to this rule too. For example, if the initial Leader task fails, the players write down their modes without discussing it with each other.

Ammunition-Mode. Ammo for this character is tracked.
Sniper-Mode. This character must always call hit locations, and always takes and gives damage based on hit location.
Defense-Mode. Except for armor, the character rolls his defenses as tasks (instead of them bundling into task difficulty).
Suppression-Mode. This character is dedicated to fire suppression.
Cover-Mode. This character attacks and defends from cover.
Medic-Mode. Every time another character takes damage, this character forgoes his attack for that round and tries to render first aid.
Burst-Mode. Each round, this character may choose to fire in burst mode or full auto mode.

 

[robject]

See the benefit?

There is an element of realism.

BUT, it forces each player to decide which element of realism is the most important to him for this combat session.

It simplifies combat but gives the player the choice.

It's a trade-off. Usually a few, but not all, of these options will tempt the player.

Each has risks, to the character OR to the group. This too is an interesting choice.

Toss in the possibility that they might not be able to discuss it with each other beforehand, and you've got added tension.

 

[robject]

There are two more implied benefits:

(1) New modes can be added. The system feels more modular.

(2) Groups who thrive on more realism may allow players to choose two or more modes, or allow most modes to always be available, or allow players to change mode each combat round.

 

[robject]

Looking through T5.09, I see these rules which I might call "Modes".

If I were pressed, I would almost say that each of these corresponds to a SKILL or KNOWLEDGE. But that might be going too far.

• Cover/Evasion and Target Size ("Cover Mode")
• Aimed Shots and Hit Location (this is the entire "Step 2" in combat) ("Sniper Mode")
• Active Defense Task Rolling (e.g. personal White Globe) ("Defense Mode")
• Burst/Auto/Continuous fire use ("Attack Mode")
• Knockdown
• The Tactics Mod ("Tactical Mode")
• Explosions ("Demolitions Mode")
• Damage Effects other than Pen/Bullet ("Special Effects Mode")
• Vehicle ops ("Driver Mode") - includes Immediate Damage Control

I also still see value in a "Fire Suppression Mode".

 

[robject]

FOR EXAMPLE

Using my highly conceptual suggestion above, consider seven people gathered around Stan Shinn's gaming table for a night of Traveller5.

Suddenly, combat breaks out. Stan, being a careful referee, has already polled the players before gaming started, and they all just wanted to "shoot things" without being particular as to how, so he set the mode for everyone as "Attack" -- i.e. they can select single fire, burst fire, automatic if possible, but no hit locations, cover, target size mods, sniper actions, immediate actions, tactics pool, or special damage effects -- and restricts the game to slug throwers and energy weapons.

In short, they roll to hit, then they roll damage, with armor soak. Penetrating damage hits characteristics.

Combat moves swiftly and the players are satisfied.

 

[robject]

Modes, revision No. 3

All characters may do single fire, snap fire, and Immediate Action First Aid, plus may choose one operational mode for the duration of the combat scenario (or per the referee's direction).

At the beginning of combat, a Leader task roll is made. If it succeeds, the players may discuss and coordinate their decisions. If it fails, each must make their choices in secret. Once all choices are made, then they are revealed to the group (if made in secret) and combat begins.

1. Attack Mode. Character may choose to fire burst/auto/continuous.
2. Knockdown Mode. Attacks are focused on Knockdown.
3. Cover Mode. Uses cover, evasion, and target size mods.
4. Sniper Mode. Uses aimed shots and hit location (this is the entire "Step 2" in combat).
5. Active Defense Mode. Active defenses use their own task rolls.
6. Tactical Mode. Uses tactics pool.
7. Demolitions Mode. Uses explosions rule.
8. Special Effects Mode. Uses damage Effects other than Pen/Bullet.
9. Driver Mode. Uses vehicle ops/movement rules, including Immediate Action Damage Control.

 

[pendragonman]

Being stuck in one mode for the entirety of a combat, unless that combat is short, is way too confining.

EX) Jerry the tank driver takes drive actions. works well for the first couple of turns until Umgalla the missile/explosive guy takes out the drive train. Now, what does Jerry have to do from turn to turn after that?

Why can't Jerry then switch to suppression? Especially if the tank has a driver bow mg...

 

[Reban]

Being stuck in one mode for the entirety of a combat, unless that combat is short, is way too confining.

Agreed. I think it needs a mechanism to allow for change. Possibly a check on the PCs awareness or intelligence where he or she realizes they need to change their approach in response to events.

 

[robject]

Actually all I am describing is a pre-sorting of combat options. My "mode" suggestion is just one way of using the options.

And of course the system is quite flexible, you see. The players can decide up-front with the referee how to dial up the granularity of the system. And for that matter, which "modules" to include.

Makes it relatively straightforward to have a plug-and-play combat model. Someone wants Ammunition tracking? Write up the "module" in an Imperiallines article and it's ready to go.

It's not really much different than the current draft. What it does is logically separate each additional detail of combat into an orthogonal piece. It starts from the "shoot things" foundation, upon which you then layer on as much as you want.

In other words, it makes it easy to tailor the system to:

* allow multiple modes for players
* allow mode switching per round, or even mid-round
* add or subtract or limit modes based on the combat situation
* add or subtract or limit modes based on mutual decision

And that's the point. It's designed to be tailored. You don't have to wade through it and sift it out yourself. It's pre-sifted.

 

[Original_Carl]

Modes, revision No. 3
All characters may do single fire, snap fire, and Immediate Action First Aid, plus may choose one operational mode for the duration of the combat scenario (or per the referee's direction).

At the beginning of combat, a Leader task roll is made. If it succeeds, the players may discuss and coordinate their decisions. If it fails, each must make their choices in secret. Once all choices are made, then they are revealed to the group (if made in secret) and combat begins.

This is terrific, Rob. I really like what you're proposing and I'd like to try out a modified version of it this Saturday.

I propose a simpler modes list to give characters a bit more flexibility within the modes. This also allows for a sort of bidding mechanic which you can do every round, allowing characters to change modes from round to round. I'll explain this after.

1. Attack Mode
   • Character may choose to fire burst/auto/continuous
   • Character may use aimed shots and hit locations
   • Character may choose to focus on Knockdown
2. Defense Mode
   • Character may use cover, evasion and target size mods
   • Character may use their own task rolls for Active Defense
3. Tactical Mode
   • Character uses its tactical pool
   • Character may attempt non-combat actions
4. Heavy Weapons, Demolitions & Vehicles
   • Character may use heavy weapons
   • Character may use weapons with Effects other than Pen/Bullet
   • Character may use explosives
   • Character may enter, exit or operate a vehicle

Hand each player four different colored stones at the start of the game. They will use these to declare their mode after the leadership roll is made.

All characters may do single fire, snap fire, and Immediate Action First Aid before the leadership roll.

If the leadership roll is successful, the players may discuss and coordinate their decisions. If not, each player secretly selects a stone corresponding to one of the four modes listed above and all players reveal simultaneously, signaling the start of the combat round.

Initiative is determined by the order in which they acted on the opening round of combat. When the last player acts on the round, the referee declares the Situation and the whole thing repeats in the new round.

1. Situation
2. Immediate Action
3. Leadership Roll
4. Mode Declaration
5. Combat Resolution in order of Immediate Action

I think this is going to be fun. I'll make a report to the thread if I manage to sneak a combat in on my group.

-Carl

 

[robject]

Great variations, Carl. My thoughts were generally stream of consciousness, so there is room for improvement in the idea at all angles.

Marc's first comment was "but I want to be able to switch modes!"

 

[Original_Carl]

You should be able to switch modes from round to round. As fast as Traveller combat is, I don't think it's reasonable to expect a player to remain committed to the same subset of combat actions for the duration.

Do you think melee combat could be used in this context? For example, I have a couple guys with pretty good battle dress and they really like their Space Axes -- especially for use on armored fighting vehicles. If I were to referee right now, I'd have them take the Attack mode and then move and strike, but how many dice should they roll? Under my interpretation of T5, I think they'd roll 1D which is pretty much a guaranteed hit.

Under the old system, STAMP, damage was applied to recipients at the end of the round. Would that still be the case here or should we apply effects and damage immediately?

 

[robject]

You should be able to switch modes from round to round. As fast as Traveller combat is, I don't think it's reasonable to expect a player to remain committed to the same subset of combat actions for the duration.

Sure. The main idea is that the decision limits the number of DMs used per turn.

Do you think melee combat could be used in this context? For example, I have a couple guys with pretty good battle dress and they really like their Space Axes -- especially for use on armored fighting vehicles. If I were to referee right now, I'd have them take the Attack mode and then move and strike, but how many dice should they roll? Under my interpretation of T5, I think they'd roll 1D which is pretty much a guaranteed hit.

It depends on how the rest of the system hangs together. A guaranteed hit is not necessarily a bad thing. It does tend to decide matters quickly. It is not an SCA re-enactment, for sure.

Under the old system, STAMP, damage was applied to recipients at the end of the round. Would that still be the case here or should we apply effects and damage immediately?

My preference is to Keep It Simple, but what is more simple, to keep track as you go, or wait until the end? It depends.

What I haven't done is really drive down the "up/hurt/down" angle far enough to know whether or not it would be a good thing.