Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
That's what I think.
I think it wasn't clear in Book 1, so it was clarified in Snapshot and present in the two latest versions of CT, Starter Traveller and The Traveller Book.
Understanding Classic Traveller Combat Damage
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
- Status
That's what I think.
I think it wasn't clear in Book 1, so it was clarified in Snapshot and present in the two latest versions of CT, Starter Traveller and The Traveller Book.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Now, here, you're not representing my take (or the CT raw) correctly.
I've posted this in response to you bringing this up earlier in the thread.
The END stat is a counter. It counts how many combat blows a person can do before the Weakened Blow penalty is enforced.
Even when the character is at full health, the END counter is lowered, -1 per combat blow.
So, at full health, a 777 character who has taken 3 combat blows in an engagement will be considered to have END-7 for all checks and calculations influenced by END. The END counter, though is set to 4.
What this rule is saying is that wounds count against the END counter. It is not contradicting the earlier rule, as you keep saying.
Thus, consider our 777 character, taking 3 combat blows, and wounded to the tune of 671 during that engagement, finds himself, after no healing, in another engagement two hours later.
During this second encounter, the character will...
- Start the combat with hit points of 671.
- Be considered STR-7 for load/Brawling DM calculations and STR checks.
- Be considered DEX-7 for gun combat calculations and DEX checks.
- Be considered END-7 for END checks.
- Start the round with the END counter at 1 for combat blows.
The rule you cite is not a contradiction, as you keep saying. It's speaks to how the END counter works when the character is wounded with lowered hit points.
EDIT: I should mention that the END counter "resets" itself after every combat unless the character's END stat is wounded. If it is, then the damaged value is used when the END counter starts. This is why that sentence is in the rules--so you won't go back to the full END counter, as you normally do, between combats.
2nd EDIT: In other words...
If your 777 character is not damaged in an engagement but takes 5 combat blows, he begins the next combat, two hours later, with the END counter set to 7 (not set to 2).
This rule clarifies that you use your full END for the END counter at the start of new combats unless the END stat is wounded.
If your 777 character is takes all 7 combat blows, suffers the Weakened Blow penalty for two rounds, and then takes damage to his END that is not healed, leaving him at 775. If he is not healed, he starts the next engagement with END counter set to 5 (not to 0 because he used up all combat blows in the first engagement).
At the start of each blade combat round, the END counter is set to one of two levels: It is to the character's full health END score, if the character is wounded. Or, it is set to the wounded level of END, if the character has taken wounds previously.
Last edited:
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Well, hopefully, DonM will be able to ask Marc...and the rest of you can see that I'm right!
o:
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Regarding the First Blood rule S4. The Rules As Written (TTB pg 36, quotes to follow per your insistence) are clear that you are wrong and I am (we are) correct that it is used each time fresh combat is engaged and not (as you have insisted quite strongly) only when starting at full (uninjured) characteristics.
Paragraph 3 (bold and underlined emphasis mine)
"For example in a firefight... Because this is One's first wounding in the combat, all three hits are applied against one characteristic..."
"...because this is Two's first wounding of the combat, all hits are applied against one characteristic..."
It is clearly stating the parameters of the rule of First Blood to be applied as the first wound in any single combat (engagement - don't muddy up your reply with incorrect "combat round" statements as you seem to have above). We are (and always have been) talking about separate engagements. Not later turns in the same combat engagement.
Further the first line "in a firefight..." sets the parameters for the whole of the combat rules in the opinion of many here. And it is upon this (and other similar notations iirc) that I (we?) base our reading of the rules as written that differs from your own interpretation...
Paragraph 3 (bold and underlined emphasis mine)
"For example in a firefight... Because this is One's first wounding in the combat, all three hits are applied against one characteristic..."
"...because this is Two's first wounding of the combat, all hits are applied against one characteristic..."
It is clearly stating the parameters of the rule of First Blood to be applied as the first wound in any single combat (engagement - don't muddy up your reply with incorrect "combat round" statements as you seem to have above). We are (and always have been) talking about separate engagements. Not later turns in the same combat engagement.
Further the first line "in a firefight..." sets the parameters for the whole of the combat rules in the opinion of many here. And it is upon this (and other similar notations iirc) that I (we?) base our reading of the rules as written that differs from your own interpretation...
Last edited:
It won't make much difference to me either way. If you turn out to be right, I'd just have to houserule a few more things than if Dan and Wil and I turn out to be right. Either way the CT combat system leaves much to be desired as RPG rules, whatever their worth as wargames rules. The one about wounds not affecting performance is just the kind of rule that gets right up my nose and those of my players.Well, hopefully, DonM will be able to ask Marc...and the rest of you can see that I'm right!
I moved on from D&D, CT, and In The Labyrinth to my own rules long ago.
Hans
mctesla
SOC-10
Not to muddy the waters more...
But the interpretation that statistics for the purposes of skill checks, etc., aren't recalculated during a given combat encounter, but then are re-evaluated after the encounter is ended also matches closely with what was written for the MegaTraveller system (and yes I know it was DGP who wrote it, etc).
This approach has the advantage of not slowing down combat (you only have to track the stats for wounding purposes, and not recalculate "to-hits", etc.) but also has the advantage of real in game ramifications of getting into a firefight. If Joe just got out of a combat encounter with a serious wound, he better not attempt to enter that weightlifting competition! S4, based on your position, Mr. FFF who just finished a firefight in which his wound levels for combat ended up at 111 could theoretically win olympic gold, since all his skill checks aren't affected at all by his near death experience.
I guess what I'm saying, based on reading the whole thread (yes, I'm a masochist as well) is that I would have to agree with Wil, Dan, Hans, etc., in the interpretation that during a given combat encounter, you operate at the characteristic levels that existed at the beginning of the encounter-- if your normal stats are 777 for the character, you get those for the duration of the fight. Fight ends (baddies dead, run off, whatever), your stats are re-evaluated by the damage rules to the new damaged values 417 or whatever, and during the next fight you get into, until you've had a chance to heal up, you're a hurtin' unit-- you fight as if your stats are 417. That will teach you to not to fight after a serious wound! Similarly, the first wound rule applies on a combat encounter by combat encounter basis (first wound of a given encounter, until after combat encounter wound resolution is done, uses that rule). Just my Cr 0.02
In any case, this is a *GREAT* discussion, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out, and at the end of the day, it will end up being an IMTU decision for everyone involved.
mega:
But the interpretation that statistics for the purposes of skill checks, etc., aren't recalculated during a given combat encounter, but then are re-evaluated after the encounter is ended also matches closely with what was written for the MegaTraveller system (and yes I know it was DGP who wrote it, etc).
This approach has the advantage of not slowing down combat (you only have to track the stats for wounding purposes, and not recalculate "to-hits", etc.) but also has the advantage of real in game ramifications of getting into a firefight. If Joe just got out of a combat encounter with a serious wound, he better not attempt to enter that weightlifting competition! S4, based on your position, Mr. FFF who just finished a firefight in which his wound levels for combat ended up at 111 could theoretically win olympic gold, since all his skill checks aren't affected at all by his near death experience.
I guess what I'm saying, based on reading the whole thread (yes, I'm a masochist as well) is that I would have to agree with Wil, Dan, Hans, etc., in the interpretation that during a given combat encounter, you operate at the characteristic levels that existed at the beginning of the encounter-- if your normal stats are 777 for the character, you get those for the duration of the fight. Fight ends (baddies dead, run off, whatever), your stats are re-evaluated by the damage rules to the new damaged values 417 or whatever, and during the next fight you get into, until you've had a chance to heal up, you're a hurtin' unit-- you fight as if your stats are 417. That will teach you to not to fight after a serious wound! Similarly, the first wound rule applies on a combat encounter by combat encounter basis (first wound of a given encounter, until after combat encounter wound resolution is done, uses that rule). Just my Cr 0.02
In any case, this is a *GREAT* discussion, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out, and at the end of the day, it will end up being an IMTU decision for everyone involved.
mega:
Last edited:
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Hey man, I was just trying to lighten the mood a bit. Maybe I didn't tickle you.
I have no objection to house rules. I started this thread because I recognized that many people don't know CT as well as they think they do.
I wanted to clear the smoke away, so to speak.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
In any case, this is a *GREAT* discussion, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out, and at the end of the day, it will end up being an IMTU decision for everyone involved.
Glad you're enjoying it.
Plus, it's nice to have a discussion like this, with two strong opposing sides, without a flame war. So far, everybody's seemed to keep their cool. That's a nice change.
Personally, I'm just interested in Classic Traveller as written. I want to share what the rules really say with other people. It might make sense that your stats gradually decrease due to wounds, and that's a fine house rule. But, that's not what the CT rules say.
I'm trying to illuminate what the CT rules say as written.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
No sir, you are not correct.
The part you left out with the "..." shows the characters in the example to be at full health. This says nothing to support using the first blood rule against a previously wounded character.
Plus, just think about the logic of the rule...
Average stats are: 777
Average damage is: 3D (10 points)
If you do damage normally, where wound dice are applied at the defender's options, then combat, in the beginning, is not a thread.
Thus, the first blood rule is used for targets at full health.
Later, after a character is damaged, the normal method of applying damage dice is just as deadly as the first blood rule used against full stats.
If you use the first blood rule against wounded stats, the game becomes too deadly.
A nice dilemma ... :rofl:
Either you are right, and the system is broken because even severe wounds
have no meaningful consequences for the performance of characters ("What
do you mean, I cannot win that Ironman Contest, only because that subma-
chine gun salvo yesterday almost killed me ?"), or you are wrong, and have
misinterpreted Classic Traveller's rules for years ... :devil:
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
I really don't think so. You just aren't giving it a fair look. Your own interpretation is as clouded as you insist ours is by your own long reading of the rule your way.
I left it out because it's not germane. It's a poor example in that it doesn't include an already injured party member. It quite specifically reads (RAW) "in a firefight", "in the combat", "of the combat". All quite specific, repeated, and singular. Not "in the first firefight entered with full (uninjured) characteristics" or any other such convoluted implications you are reading between the lines.
I have. We all have who think this way. And we have explained it repeatedly. It comes down to "Combat is dangerous and deadly. Doubly so if you are foolish enough to try to fight while injured." You know, like reality.
Have you really looked at your own logic? You would suggest that you accept that combat is deadly, but only for characters with full (uninjured) characteristics. Combat is much safer for those who have already been hurt. Maybe bullets are scared of bandages or something. Maybe people who are in pain are averse to being killed so they shrug off what would otherwise be a killing blow. Is that logical? Sensible? Realistic?
For an example, One (UPP BBB) and Two (UPP 555) get into a fight. One is injured (UPP 11B) protecting Two. One took First Blood damage, Two did not. Later they get into another fight. This time they are both hit for 10 points total. One laughs (using his full BBB for the fight) and ends up with UPP 111. Two is seriously wounded and unconscious and was still less effective than the previously multipally hit One. One can still bodily pick up Two and carry him off, and even get into another fight with no penalties at all.
Do not tell me this is at all logical or worthy of a sci-fi game. Sword and sorcery fantasy sure, D&D sure, but not Traveller.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
I've lit a couple matches, but I always blew them out before setting a fire. I think
And I think I've caught the whiff of sulfur on a few other posts too :devil:
I think you're playing with fire too, but yes so far so good (said the man falling past the 6th floor... )...
...maybe, just barely, there are some very close or toe over the line remarks up thread.
You have not yet proven that...
(and to be honest I doubt the rules as written can prove it one way or the other, or we wouldn't be having this discussion)
In your opinion...
Last edited:
If S4 is correct, then it displays a huge flaw in CT combat that fails a reality check ( imho) thus forcing the writing of houserules ( such as many, if not most, would probably do anyways ). Isn't there something written in the rules about how the ref should feel free to change or ignore anything he doesn't like? If so, then THAT should take precedent over everything else making this entire conversation moot.
If S4 is incorrect, then nothing much changes from how many/most people interpret the rules.
If S4 is incorrect, then nothing much changes from how many/most people interpret the rules.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
The system is not broken because it doesn't implement wound effects.
You wouldn't call d20 D&D broken because there are no wound effects.
In D&D (at least in every edition up through 3.5..I know little about 4th edition), nothing happens to the character as he loses hit points until he reaches zero hit points.
This is akin to Classic Traveller as no wound penalties are applied until one stat drop to zero (at which the penalty is that the character is rendered unconscious).
Actually, I have misinterpreted CT rules for years, just not in the way you think. Until the last couple of years, when I got "real serious" about CT, I thought the system played just like Dan, Wil, and Hans thinks it plays.
You can find posts of mine, to that effect, right here on this forum from a few years ago (before my solid switch to CT).
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
No no, I got that. Those four smileys were a blatant clue.
Good. I'm glad.
Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and hope that DonM can get the word from MWM.
I'm completely confident that I'm not misinterpreting the rules as written, though. If MWM says I am, then I'm man enough to say I'm wrong.
I'd bet real money that I'm correct, though.
I've lit a couple matches, but I always blew them out before setting a fire. I think
Not from my side of cyberspace, if that's what you think. I've just been thinking this is a lively debate with two sides that both believe that they're "right".
You've always been a bit sensitive and quick to flare up in the past (which is why I questioned you becoming a Mod...but that's another discussion). You may want to keep that in check with your new duites.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
No, not really.
There are several games that don't have wound effects, even today. Just look at D&D (up to v3.5). A character takes all sorts of damage, losing hit points, and never suffering any penalties.
If you've got 21 hit points, in the current Conan game by Mongoose (based on d20 3.5), nothing happens to you if you get hit with a sword doing 1d6 damage. You just lose 1d6 points. Your stats remain the same.
When your hit points reach zero or below, you collapse and start to die (dying at -10 hit points).
A similiar mechanic is at work with CT. Stats are used as hit points. Nothing happens to you until one stat goes to zero--at which point you're considered unconscious. Two stats at zero indicate you've got a serious wound. All three stats at zero spells death for you.
The system isn't "broken". It's just a hit pont bookkeeping system, as clarified in Snapshot.
Now, I can see a lot of house rules popping up, doing things the way Hans, Dan, and Wil (and the way I used to) think of wound points. And, that's perfectly fine.
This thread isn't about discussing house rules. I started it because I suspected a lot of people--people who think they know Classic Traveller--don't know it as well as they think they do.
I wanted to increase understanding of Classic Traveller rules as written in the book.
Absolutely. And, I'm a big proponent of that. Classic Traveller, imo, encourages house rules. There's an entire section about writing House Rules in Book 0. Plus, LKW shows us how to interpolate new things from that already in Traveller in his "From The Management" article in JTAS #2.
But, again, this thread isn't about house rules.
It's about understanding Classic Traveller as written.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Nevertheless, this is how Classic Traveller is written.
To ensure I'm following your example correctly (I think this will say the exact same thing...).
Fight #1
One is wounded, reduced from BBB to 11B, using the first blood rule and obviously some extra damage besides (otherwise, he'd be at 0 on one stat due to the first blood rule).
Two is not wounded, and ends the fight with his max stats of 555.
In between fights, One doesn't receive medical attention, so his wound points remain at 11B (although his stats are considered BBB for all other purposes).
Fight #2
One is hit and takes a total of 10 points of damage. He is able to take that off his END, keeping himself consicous, but wound points are now at 111*
*Note that this is akin to having 1 hit point in D&D. You still operate at full stats.
Two is hit this time, though, also taking 10 points of damage. Because this is the first itme that 10 is wounded, he will be subject to the first blood rule. And, since it's 10 points applied to his 555 stats, he's going to be seriously wounded because, no matter how the random rolls work out, two of his stats are going to zero.
That's how it's played by the book.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
I have proven it, with several quotes from both the Traveller Book and from Snapshot.
You just refuse to accept the evidence.
You, yourself, said earlier in the thread that you're not sure if Marc Miller himself told you I was correct. That tells me you're not really looking at what I'm saying objectively.
You can lead a cow to water...
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
