Understanding Classic Traveller Combat Damage

[far-trader]

OK, I'll play for a minute...

OK, let's take it nice and slow then, for both our sakes.

Does the introduction of Snapshot say that it clarifies rules of Book 1 combat?

Yes or no?

No.

But I guess that won't do will it...

...and as much as I feel this is utterly pointless, on at least a couple levels, here's the full introduction from Snapshot:

-------

Snapshot is a game of close-action combat between individuals, set primarily indoors, and especially inside the starships of the far future. The game deals with the weapons and personal abilities which can reasonably be expected; tactics and strategies then become the realm of player input. The result: varying game scenarios which are true contests of skill and strength.

Traveller is a science-fiction role-playing game dealing with the universe of the far future. Snapshot is an adaptation of the personal combat rules given in Book 1 of Traveller, especially for combat at close ranges. The extent of adaptation includes a conversion from a range-only system to a square grid, and the incorporation of both clarifications and enhancements.

Snapshot, it should be remembered, is aimed at close range encounters; it is not intended, or especially useful, for outside situations with ranges greater than 50 or 60 meters.

-------

Note the paragraphs and sentence structure. Specifically...

Paragraph 1 - Snapshot is a game... (not Snapshot is for use with Traveller) for playing out ...varying game scenarios which are true contests of skill and strength. (not for playing out a role playing session of Traveller).

Paragraph 2 - Traveller is a science-fiction role-playing game... (distinct from Snapshot which is not a role-playing game) ...Snapshot is an adaptation of the personal combat rules given in Book 1 of Traveller... (this is key, Snapshot is an adaptation of Traveller mean simply that it was taken from Traveller, not that it is for use with Traveller, despite many doing so) ...especially for combat at close ranges. (it is self admittedly not suitable for the full range of combat in Traveller, which is further driven home by the last paragraph). The extent of adaptation includes a conversion from a range-only system to a square grid, and the incorporation of both clarifications and enhancements. (and finally, in context, your clarifications and enhancements are specific to and only for Snapshot, they are categorically not clarifications and enhancements for Book 1 combat, again despite many, wrongly by the intent of the letter of the rules, using it for Traveller.

Paragraph 3 - (I won't bother repeating it, it simply drives home the point that Snapshot is a separate game, a standalone game, not a role-playing game, set up for a very limited set of circumstances, as outlined by the rules for the game of Snapshot.)

Feel free to reply but I'm afk for a while...

 

[aramis]

OK, let's take it nice and slow then, for both our sakes.

Does the introduction of Snapshot say that it clarifies rules of Book 1 combat?

Yes or no?

No. At least not in either edition I have (letter-sized Boxed set and Big Floppy Book).

It says that the adaptation includes clarifications and enhancements. Not that it is a clarification of. A subtle distinction, but an important one. Nor does it list those clarifications, nor the enhancements (other than the conversion from range bands to grids, which is lited before the inlcusion bit.).

In the section on characters it mentions that you can use traveller characters as is.

Further, the scope of the game is VERY narrow, as defined in ¶1-3 of Chapter Introduction. That scope is combat encounters aboard ships or indoors, to no more than about 50-60m.

Within that scope, recovery and long-term wound rules are mostly irrelevant; long term injury effects are noted in Traveller, not snapshot, and are UPP reductions.

 

[Supplement Four]

(this is key, Snapshot is an adaptation of Traveller mean simply that it was taken from Traveller, not that it is for use with Traveller, despite many doing so)

I really think you and Wil have flipped a lid, are so blinded by what you've thought Classic Traveller was for so long that you refuse to believe it really is something different, or are just being difficult.

Anybody who knows Traveller knows that Snapshot is exactly the same combat system used in Book 1 adapted (that's for Wil) for action point tactical movement. It can be used, plug-n-play, with Traveller the same way Traveller can be used with free form movement, Range Bands, or tactical grid movement.

You get three movement systems in Book 1, Snapshot adds a fouth option.

If one wanted to just play combats all the time, one could use the Book 1 combat system. That's what Snapshot is. A combat system.

It says that the adaptation includes clarifications and enhancements.

Not that it is a clarification of. A subtle distinction, but an important one.

What do you think it clarifies then? Itself?

LOL.



Snapshot is an adaptation of the personal combat rules given in Book 1 of Traveller, especially for combat at close ranges. The extent of the adaptaion includes a conversion from a range-only system to a square grid, and the incorporation of both clarifications and enhancements.


What is being clarified? BOOK 1 COMBAT!

What is being enhanced? BOOK 1 COMBAT!


C'mon, guys. You two are educated men. This is like arguing with a three year old about whether the sky is blue or azure.

Read those two sentences above. In other words, they say: Snapshot is the Book 1 Combat system with the Range Band movement section removed, replaced by a tactical action point system. Snapshot both enhances and clarifies Book 1 Combat.

You can say the sky is not blue all you want, but that's what that paragraph says.

I feel like I'm arguing with Clinton about whether a blow job is sex or not.







How is Book 1 Combat being enhanced? With the tactical rules and the extra situational rules!

How does Snapshot clarify Book 1 Combat? With comments like the specific way stats are meant to be used as hit points!

Snapshot is literally a "snapshot" of Book 1 Combat. Almost every aspect of it is the same as the combat rules presented in Book 1. Why would MWM keep the game exactly like Book 1 Combat but change that one thing about how wounds are used as hit points?

Mayday is different, mechanically, from both High Guard and Book 2 Space Combat. AHL and Striker are both different from Book 1 Combat. But, Snapshot IS Book 1 Combat with a different movement system.

It makes no sense that MWM would keep everything the same in both Book 1 and Snapshot except for how wounds are handled.







And, the clarification in Snapshot about wounds supports the quotes from The Traveller Book. You say that stats are lowered due to wounds in between combat rounds, yet the Traveller Book says that STR is used at its full value even if it's been reduced due to wounds.

The approach that you're taking makes that statement from the Traveller Book false.

You need to buck up and admit you've been wrong on this issue, gentlemen. The evidence in the rules strongly outweighs your opinion.

 

[hdan]

That's fine that you play that way, but I've presented at least three quotes above from the Traveller Book that support the things I've said. I'm not guessing here or saying "looks like". I'm supporting what I say with cold, hard rules from the book. Look at the quotes I mention to Aramis above.

Sorry for the late reply - I've been away for a few pages it seems.

Yeah, I retract my comments after digging out my TTB and re-reading the section. I honestly don't know how I missed it, but you're exactly right - the temporary UPP values don't impact the current combat, as per the rules. Does the TTB text not match LBB1? I no longer have my LBBs to cross-reference. Eh, it doesn't matter.

 

[rancke]

I really think you and Wil have flipped a lid, are so blinded by what you've thought Classic Traveller was for so long that you refuse to believe it really is something different, or are just being difficult.

It sounds to me like you're a Flat Earther complaining about how unreasonable those Round Earthers are. As has been pointed out to you several times, Snapshot pertains to a limited subsection of the situations Traveller does (to wit, individual combat encounters). Within that scope, it contains clarifications and enhancements. But the scope does not go beyond that of individual combat encounters. Which is lucky, as otherwise people who are rendered unconcious would be out of the game. This example alone shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that Snapshot does not cover post-combat recovery.

It really sounds to me like you are so blinded by what you've thought Classic Traveller was for so long that you refuse to believe it really is something different.

That, incidentally, is not something I can be accused of, as I can't remember the last time I used the CT combat rules. The opinion I'm expressing here is based solely on the quotes you and Dan and Wil have provided in this thread.

Note that you're not just claiming that you're right, you're claiming that it is so obvious that you're right that only people with the mentality of a three year old would be able to believe otherwise. On that point your are obviously wrong.


Hans

 

[Icosahedron]

One of the Book 1 rules that Snapshot makes more clear is the use of wounds against characteristics, the full quote being:

"It is important to note that the marking off of wounds against characteristics has no effect on the person's abilities as dictated by the characteristics. Thus, someone with a strength of 11 who sustains wonds on his strength characteristic is still treated throughout the game as having a strength of 11. Wounding of characteristics is imply a bookkeeping system."

...and as much as I feel this is utterly pointless, on at least a couple levels, here's the full introduction from Snapshot:

-------

Snapshot is a game of close-action combat between individuals, set primarily indoors, and especially inside the starships of the far future. The game deals with the weapons and personal abilities which can reasonably be expected; tactics and strategies then become the realm of player input. The result: varying game scenarios which are true contests of skill and strength.

Traveller is a science-fiction role-playing game dealing with the universe of the far future. Snapshot is an adaptation of the personal combat rules given in Book 1 of Traveller, especially for combat at close ranges. The extent of adaptation includes a conversion from a range-only system to a square grid, and the incorporation of both clarifications and enhancements.

Snapshot, it should be remembered, is aimed at close range encounters; it is not intended, or especially useful, for outside situations with ranges greater than 50 or 60 meters.

-------

I have taken the liberty of underlining what I consider to be the key phrases in your quotes.

The question is whether 'throughout the game' refers to the game of Snapshot, where game = a single combat session, or whether it refers to the game of Traveller, where game = an entire evening's play and perhaps an entire campaign.

Personally, I'd go with the former explanation simply because it makes more sense in terms of realistic wounding effects (sorry S4).

 

[Gadrin]

So Combat Environment Suit treated as Cloth -1, I'm assuming that's -1 to any
bonuses that the cloth gives, since it's TL10 item.

The one in GURPS Traveller is very nice.

The same with the some of the other weapons vs armor "Treat as carbine for
short and such a range" -- why didn't they just plug in the numbers for us ?
I guess that sounds like a demand, but, why not just supply the numbers so
people don't have to do another dozen lookups in various pages/columns and...
okay it was the 70's going on the 80's in RPG land.


The reason I'm whining is because I'm making a weapons matrix based off each
weapon/range/armor/fire selection and ammo; in HTML, so that a GM can select
a weapon, click on the particulars and the javascript will do the calcs and
spit out the final bonus, plus any other relevant data (like when selecting
ROF=10 with the Gauss Rifle, it'll mention you get 3 attacks and all
non-evading adjacent targets also get attacked at -3; that sort of thing).

>

 

[Supplement Four]

Personally, I'd go with the former explanation simply because it makes more sense in terms of realistic wounding effects (sorry S4).

But, even if you don't believe that Snapshot clarifies Book 1 Combat as it says it does, there's still the sections in the Traveller Book that support Snapshot's rule that wounds are just hit point, and a characters uses his full stat after being wounded.

Pg. 36, under THE EFFECTS OF CHARACTERISTICS: "Wounds do not affect characteristics as they are used to influencd blows, swings, or shots. For example, a still-conscious character with strength reduced from 9 to 7 would still unction as if he had strength 9."

Does that sound more like what Snapshot says--that wounds are hit points? Or what Aramis/Far Trader are saying--that stats are reduced to their wounded levels after the fight and used at that lowered level for the next fight?

Pg. 37, under WEIGHT: "Individuals carrying sufficient weight to become encumbered have their UPP values temporarily reduced; these reduced UPP values are used when computing wounds and unconsciousness."

Notice how the UPP reduction is only used as damage, and the character still uses his full stat for other purposes. Does this sound like Snapshot, or what Will/Dan say?

 

[Supplement Four]

Note that you're not just claiming that you're right....

Actually, I've supported everything I've said with quotes from the rule books.

Which is much more than what you, Dan, and Wil are doing. I show you proof, and you're just nodding your heads saying, "Nope, it doesn't say that."

Show me something--anything--that supports your side of the argument.

It ain't there.

Just during this debate, I've re-read the combat section several times to ensure I didn't miss anything.

I didn't.

I've presented several rules that support what I've been saying. I haven't seen a single rule that supports your take.

 

[rancke]

But, even if you don't believe that Snapshot clarifies Book 1 Combat as it says it does, there's still the sections in the Traveller Book that support Snapshot's rule that wounds are just hit point, and a characters uses his full stat after being wounded.

No one has disputed that Snapshot clariefies Book 1 Combat the way it says it does. What they are saying is that it doesn't clarify Book 1 Combat the way you says it does. To repeat, once again, Snapshot says that characters uses full stats after being wounded, for the duration of the fight. It doesn't say anything, one way or the other, about using stats after a fight is over (and referees and players have had time to recalculate swings and blows based on reduced characteristics without interrupting the flow of the fight).

Pg. 36, under THE EFFECTS OF CHARACTERISTICS: "Wounds do not affect characteristics as they are used to influencd blows, swings, or shots. For example, a still-conscious character with strength reduced from 9 to 7 would still unction as if he had strength 9."

Could refer to a still-concious character who is still engaged in the fight. So it doesn't prove anything either way.

Does that sound more like what Snapshot says--that wounds are hit points? Or what Aramis/Far Trader are saying--that stats are reduced to their wounded levels after the fight and used at that lowered level for the next fight?

It sounds like either wounds are hit points or that stats are reduced to their wounded levels after the fight and used at that lowered level for the next fight. In other words, it doesn't prove anything one way or the other. And it really does not require the mentality of a three year old to believe that.

Pg. 37, under WEIGHT: "Individuals carrying sufficient weight to become encumbered have their UPP values temporarily reduced; these reduced UPP values are used when computing wounds and unconsciousness."

Notice how the UPP reduction is only used as damage, and the character still uses his full stat for other purposes. Does this sound like Snapshot, or what Will/Dan say?

It sounds like someone who is encumbered is under a strain and thus more easily rendered unconcious (I think that's a rather simplistic rule and one I'd houserule in a minute, but that's how I read it). What do you think it represents? Why do you think someone who is carrying around a bunch of stuff has three hit points less but still has his full dexterity and endurance? After all, every other encumbrance rule (from other, non-Traveller, game systems) that I can recall reduce effective DEX and END for encumbered characters.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Show me something--anything--that supports your side of the argument.

[...]

I've presented several rules that support what I've been saying. I haven't seen a single rule that supports your take.

"[...]The number of blows and swings is based upon endurance at the beginning of the combat encounter; wounds suffered during the encounter do not reduce the possible swings and blows, but wounds suffered prior to the encounter which reduce endurance will reduce the allowance accordingly.[...]"​

The book is pointing out a ramification.


Hans

 

[Supplement Four]

No one has disputed that Snapshot clariefies Book 1 Combat the way it says it does. What they are saying is that it doesn't clarify Book 1 Combat the way you says it does.

That's actually not what Wil and Dan are saying at all. They're trying to say that Snapshot is a completely different game that should not be compared with Book 1 Combat--almost as if Snapshot is a board game like Imperium.

To repeat, once again, Snapshot says that characters uses full stats after being wounded, for the duration of the fight. It doesn't say anything, one way or the other, about using stats after a fight is over (and referees and players have had time to recalculate swings and blows based on reduced characteristics without interrupting the flow of the fight).

Did you not read the quote I posted from Snapshot? It says, specifically, in no uncertain terms, that wounds applied against stats is a bookkeeping measure only. Stats are never used in the game at any level other than their max level (except for the END blade combat counter, and rightly so).

It sounds like someone who is encumbered is under a strain and thus more easily rendered unconcious (I think that's a rather simplistic rule and one I'd houserule in a minute, but that's how I read it).

That's exactly how I read it, too (because that's what it says).

Example:

You've got 777 physicals. You pick up double load. Your physicals are considered 777 for all dice throws and stat influenced calculations. Your hit points are 666, though, making you more easily rendered unconscious, as you said. And, if you get into a brawl, your END counters starts at 6 rather than 7 (which makes sense too).

What do you think it represents? Why do you think someone who is carrying around a bunch of stuff has three hit points less but still has his full dexterity and endurance?

Yep. That's the rule says.

I'm not arguing taste, opinion, or how I think it should be. I'm arguing how its written in the book. See my example above.

 

[Supplement Four]

"[...]The number of blows and swings is based upon endurance at the beginning of the combat encounter; wounds suffered during the encounter do not reduce the possible swings and blows, but wounds suffered prior to the encounter which reduce endurance will reduce the allowance accordingly.[...]"
​

The book is pointing out a ramification.

The way this is handled makes a lot of sense.

BECAUSE stats are normally used at their full level in the game, even after wounds are applied, this passage ensure that you don't start a new melee round with max END stat each time.

END is a counter. It makes sense that you'd start at a lower number. It's in-keeping with the way the system works.



Examples

You've got 777.

You can do 7 combat blows before the weakened penalty kicks in.



You're damaged to 774

Your END score is considered 7 for all checks based on END. But, since END is a counter that gradually ticks down, you pick up where you left off, starting a new melee combat round at 4 combat blows before the weakened penalty kicks in.

If you want to make an END check, it will be 2D for 7 or less. If you're using END as a combat blow counter, it starts at 4 not 7.

That's how the rule reads.

 

[rancke]

Did you not read the quote I posted from Snapshot? It says, specifically, in no uncertain terms, that wounds applied against stats is a bookkeeping measure only. Stats are never used in the game at any level other than their max level (except for the END blade combat counter, and rightly so).

But which game? Every Traveller campaign run by the book from the Classic Traveller rules? Or just any Snapshot game? If it's the second, Snapshot doesn't support the point of dispute either way, and if it's the first, any character rendered unconcious is out of the campaign for good. How anyone can seriously claim that anything said in Snapshot can possibly prove anything about how the Classic Traveller rules work except within the scope of a single fight is beyond me.

I'm not arguing taste, opinion, or how I think it should be. I'm arguing how its written in the book. See my example above.

Wow. Somebody points out a rule that states, clearly and unequivocally, something the doesn't fit with your interpretations of the rules, and you explain it away. I wonder what the people who hold an opposing view think of your refusal to accept such a plain and simple rule?


Hans

 

[aramis]

S4:
Snapshot is NOT an errata list for CT Bk 1. Don't treat it as one.

It includes material that was on the errata list, but is not, itself, the errata list. It includes other material as well, that isn't errata. Like action points.

Further, since it predates Bk1-81, it is likely that Bk1-81 already includes any such clarifications.

That's actually not what Wil and Dan are saying at all. They're trying to say that Snapshot is a completely different game that should not be compared with Book 1 Combat--almost as if Snapshot is a board game like Imperium.

No. We're saying it has a VERY narrow scope, which you are trying to get us to expand well beyond. That scope is the duration of the combat encounter only. Not ONE action past it.

The fact that the example on TTB 64 shows the UPP is adjuted after combat is the point where I draw the "Wounded stats are used" beacause the UPP is changed by the wounds, and it says to use the UPP.

 

[Supplement Four]

It sounds like your issue (replying to Wil and Hans) is Snapshot.

Fine. Take it off the table.

The rules strictly from The Traveller Book support what I've been saying.

Neither of you have provided any rule support for your take on it.

 

[rancke]

The rules strictly from The Traveller Book support what I've been saying.

Part of the rules from the Traveller Book support your interpretation. Other parts just as strongly implies that reduced characteristics are, indeed, reduced.

Neither of you have provided any rule support for your take on it.

"Minor wounds Any wound points applied to a character which does not reduce more than one physical characteristic to zero are considered minor wounds. The character is treated as having the reduced characteristics until medical care or recovery has taken place."

Unconciousness One characteristic reduced to zero results in unconciousness for ten minutes. Upon recovery of conciousness, any wounded characteristics are placed midway between between their wounded and full levels; round fractions down.

Serious wound Two characteristics reduced to zero results in a serious wound and uncounciousness for three hours. Upon recovery of conciousness, any wounded characteristics remain at at the wounded level (or at 1, whichever is higher) until proper medical attention or recovery procedures are followed."​

(Emphasis mine) [TTB, p. 47]

These staterments seems to directly contradict the statements you've quoted. Is there a way to reconcile the two sets of statements? Why, yes, there is. If your statements (the canonical statements you've pointed out, that is) are taken to apply during the course of the fight in which the wounds are inflicted and the other statements are taken to apply AFTER said combat is over, they can both be true.

As you've expressed rather forcefully, you propound a different way to interpret the rules. That's one thing. But your claim that the rules cannot possibly be interpreted any way other than yours is, quite simply, not true.



Hans

 

[aramis]

It sounds like your issue (replying to Wil and Hans) is Snapshot.

Fine. Take it off the table.

It's one of several issues, not because it's wrong to use it in understanding CT combat, but because you don't restrict that scope to the combat encounter it is resolving.

The rules strictly from The Traveller Book support what I've been saying.

no, they can be interpreted to support, but do not overtly rule out the far more common understanding which you are rejecting.

Neither of you have provided any rule support for your take on it.

Bullshit. Now you're just ignoring 3+ pages of posts.

Given the disconnect between P36 LC ¶4 "Wounds do not affect characteristics as they are used to influence blows, swings or shots." and and p36 RC ¶9 "The number of blows and swings is based upon the individual's endurance at the beginning of the combat encounter; wounds suffered during the encounter do not reduce the total possible swings and blows, but will reduce the allowance accordingly."

The UPP at the end of combat is adjusted, not the wounds total, but the UPP.

Note that page 47 says that wounds in combat temporarily reduce the attribute for the duration of combat. Under Minor Wounds, it ends the paragraph with "The character is treated as having the reduced characteristics until medical care or recovery has taken place."

Note that is says "is treated as having the reduced characteristics"... once you have ended the combat you have reduced stats.

Likewise, the section on Weight specifies the UPP is reduced.
"Individuals carrying sufficient weight to become encumbered have their UPP values temporarily reduced; these reduced UPP values are used when computing wound and unconsciousness."
Parsing this:
it's a compound sentence
part 1: "Individuals carrying sufficient weight to become encumbered have their UPP values temporarily reduced"
Part 2: "these reduced UPP values are used when computing wound and unconsciousness."

Part 1 is simple enough. (Remember that UPPs are collected at start of encounter, per p33 LC ¶5.)
Part 2 is the interesting part.
The "reasonable assumption" for many players is that being encumbered should not make you hurt worse by a given value of damage.
If it is read as these reduced UPP values are used when computing wound and unconsciousness." it becomes an assertion that the reduction from encumbrance includes that reduction.

If one instead reads it "these reduced UPP values are used when computing wound and unconsciousness.", it implies very weakly that it isn't used for other things.

Now, given that the section on Weight is the same level of header as the section on Effects of Characteristics (both bold all caps), I'm inclined to parse part 2 in the first mode, not the second.

Further supporting this is the end of the third paragraph of section Weight.
"For example, a character with UPP 788953 carrying 12 kilograms of load would be treated as 677953 until such time as 5 kilograms had been shed." Not "...would be treated for wounding and unconsciousness as ..." but merely "... would be treated as ..."

Further, given the lack of penalties for wounds in both CT Bk 1 and in Snapshot, and the real world knowledge that pain hurts, and makes life difficult, including shooting, swinging swords, and lifting, after the adrenaline wear off, applying those wounds as penalties makes perfect sense.

My other CT books are not to hand, but I'm fairly certain at least one adventure mentions wounded stats as penalties, specifically a previously wounded character not getting his normal bonus to hit. I know that all later editions which use stat damage do apply, post combat, the reductions as the values used.

Fundamentally, the wounding rules alter your UPP, which is defined in chapter "Characters" as the characters score in the 6 attributes. Altering the UPP when figuring the effects of wounds (creating a temporary UPP), is consistent with the examples on p36, and the wording on p36-37 and p47.

Bottom line: I understand how you get your point of view; I disagree with your conclusion, because the rules imply more strongly the other way. And the rules are not overly clear.

 

[rancke]

A few question tangent to the previous discussion relating to encumbrance reducing physical stats.

1) Say you have a character with enough encumbrance to reduce his physical stats by 1 each. He gets into a figt and takes enough damage to reduce him to 044. As per the combat rules, he goes unconcious. One of his buddies hastens to remove his knapsack, reducing his encumbrance. Is his UWP now 155, 055 or 044? Does he immediately recover from his swoon? If he does, is he suffering from a minor wound?

2) Same question as above, except that this time his friends don't get around to him until a few minutes after the fight is over.

3) The encumbered character is hit by precisely enough damage to reduce his physical stats to 000. Is he dead? Does he stay dead when his encumbrance is removed? If he doesn't die, how fast does he recover?


Hans

 

[far-trader]

My personal take...

A few question tangent to the previous discussion relating to encumbrance reducing physical stats.

1) Say you have a character with enough encumbrance to reduce his physical stats by 1 each. He gets into a figt and takes enough damage to reduce him to 044. As per the combat rules, he goes unconcious. One of his buddies hastens to remove his knapsack, reducing his encumbrance. Is his UWP now 155, 055 or 044? Does he immediately recover from his swoon? If he does, is he suffering from a minor wound?

I've always found this an awkward rule, since as noted all one has to do to avoid the penalty is drop something.

In your example above though the character didn't before the fight was engaged so I'd say they are stuck with the penalty for that fight and all effects of it. Even if they were to drop their pack or something in the middle of the fight. Nothing gets recalculated once combat is engaged. It's enough to keep track of the ammo and swings and who's weakened and all.

In my opinion he falls unconscious and removing the pack won't help, except by making him lighter to carry. His characteristics remain at 044 until healing improves the situation.

2) Same question as above, except that this time his friends don't get around to him until a few minutes after the fight is over.

No change, situation is the same as above.

3) The encumbered character is hit by precisely enough damage to reduce his physical stats to 000. Is he dead? Does he stay dead when his encumbrance is removed? If he doesn't die, how fast does he recover?

Sucks to be them. Yep. DOA. Still DOA after his friends loot the corpse (i.e. remove his backpack )...

...of course in Traveller, with the right treatment even dead isn't buried.