MGT Only: Weapons Playtest for Traveller

[MongooseMatt]

We are currently looking at some revisions to the way shooting weapons work in Traveller, and would like you to have a look through the new rules and make comment on the changes we have made. Specifically, we are looking for comments on;

· Do the new Armour Piercing and Destructive rules work?
· Are there any weapons that don’t have AP or Destructive on them and should (bear in mind high damage weapons will punch through a lot of armour without needing either)?
· Are there some weapons with AP or Destructive that should not have them or need them tweaked?
· Do the new skill specialities make sense, and have they been assigned to the right weapons?
· We have made a few tweaks already to some weapon stats – is there anything else that we should be looking at modifying or changing for any weapon listed here?

The new rules can be downloaded from http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/travshooting.doc

 

[Jame]

I do know that Star Wars: Edge of the Empire uses Ranged: Light, Heavy and Gunnery, for pistols, rifles and heavy/vehicle/starship weapons in order. In addition, T20 did have the Marksmanship feat which works similarly.

I'm half-thinking that Mongoose could do something similar as follows:
Ranged: Personal, covering revolvers, auto-, gauss- and laser-pistols, SMGs and shotguns*
Ranged: Military, covering Shotgun, SMGs, Carbines and Rifles (regular, auto, gauss and laser**)
Gunnery: Heavy Weapons, covering Light through Heavy MGs (regular, gauss and laser), Grenade Launchers, and plasma/fusion weapons both troop-carried and vehicle-mounted
Gunnery: Starship Turret (all)
Gunnery: Starship Bay (all)

*Shotguns and SMG/PDWs are included in both light and heavy less as coverage and more to allow a civilian to get them when taking Personal weapons. So I suppose that they could be called "Ranged: Civilian" and "Ranged: Military."

**Laser and gauss are included to reduce skill bloat (sort of like they were included in CT under Combat Rifleman), though I offer the story factors of saying that when someone in the far future is training with weapons would say "hmm, I've got all these different types of pistol I can use; I should try them all out while training so I know what works best to me - plus they all have there 'cool bits' to try!"

 

[RandyB]

I do know that Star Wars: Edge of the Empire uses Ranged: Light, Heavy and Gunnery, for pistols, rifles and heavy/vehicle/starship weapons in order. In addition, T20 did have the Marksmanship feat which works similarly.

I'm half-thinking that Mongoose could do something similar as follows:
Ranged: Personal, covering revolvers, auto-, gauss- and laser-pistols, SMGs and shotguns*
Ranged: Military, covering Shotgun, SMGs, Carbines and Rifles (regular, auto, gauss and laser**)
Gunnery: Heavy Weapons, covering Light through Heavy MGs (regular, gauss and laser), Grenade Launchers, and plasma/fusion weapons both troop-carried and vehicle-mounted
Gunnery: Starship Turret (all)
Gunnery: Starship Bay (all)

*Shotguns and SMG/PDWs are included in both light and heavy less as coverage and more to allow a civilian to get them when taking Personal weapons. So I suppose that they could be called "Ranged: Civilian" and "Ranged: Military."

**Laser and gauss are included to reduce skill bloat (sort of like they were included in CT under Combat Rifleman), though I offer the story factors of saying that when someone in the far future is training with weapons would say "hmm, I've got all these different types of pistol I can use; I should try them all out while training so I know what works best to me - plus they all have there 'cool bits' to try!"

That is, IMO, a good stab at an appropriate level of granularity. Too much granularity puts too much emphasis on combat skills and the acquisition thereof.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Ranged: Personal, covering revolvers, auto-, gauss- and laser-pistols, SMGs and shotguns*
Ranged: Military, covering Shotgun, SMGs, Carbines and Rifles (regular, auto, gauss and laser**)
Gunnery: Heavy Weapons, covering Light through Heavy MGs (regular, gauss and laser), Grenade Launchers, and plasma/fusion weapons both troop-carried and vehicle-mounted
Gunnery: Starship Turret (all)
Gunnery: Starship Bay (all)

I would actually be an advocate of this. Someone give me a reason not to do it...

 

[whulorigan]

[FONT=arial,helvetica]We are currently looking at some revisions to the way shooting weapons work in Traveller, and would like you to have a look through the new rules and make comment on the changes we have made. [/FONT]

I am still looking the document over, but one of the first things that caught my eye is that it is somewhat amusing to have an "Ultra-Destructive" weapon referred to as a "DUD".

Perhaps:
Destructive = "DD"
Ultra-Destructive = "DU" or "DDU"

 

[MongooseMatt]

I am still looking the document over, but one of the first things that caught my eye is that it is somewhat amusing to have an "Ultra-Destructive" weapon referred to as a "DUD".

That did cross my mind (a bit like the WtF stat in Dredd...).

Was originally going to be DDD, but that looked a bit confusing. If it raises the occasional light smile, I am okay with that...

 

[aramis]

I would actually be an advocate of this. Someone give me a reason not to do it...

Because shooting pistols, be they automatic or manual slugthrowers, are far more like each other than shooting a longarm; shooting any handheld longarm slugthrower is more like any other handheld longarm than any pistol, and SMG's are somewhere in between. And pintel/tripod/firing-port is a third set of skills.

Shotguns are a special case, as are indirect fire weapons (Grenade Launchers, longarm mortars).

Worse, logically, and realistically, they should overlap more than MGT cascades provide for, but less than being the same skill.

 

[McPerth]

Because shooting pistols, be they automatic or manual slugthrowers, are far more like each other than shooting a longarm; shooting any handheld longarm slugthrower is more like any other handheld longarm than any pistol, and SMG's are somewhere in between. And pintel/tripod/firing-port is a third set of skills.

Shotguns are a special case, as are indirect fire weapons (Grenade Launchers, longarm mortars).

Worse, logically, and realistically, they should overlap more than MGT cascades provide for, but less than being the same skill.

But that would require special rules, and, guessing is not Mongose intent to load the game with them, we have to accept treating temas a single skill or as cascade skills. And in this view, while claiming again my inexperience in weapons use, I'd prefer the least specialties the better, as is in most skills: just energy vs slug and hand weapon vs long one. Heavy weapons should have more specialties, as their basics are quite more different (a mortar is more different from a MG that a SMG from an assault rifle, I guess).

See the many criticisms that the various specialties in Engineering have received (some of them by myself, BTW), while there's the same logics under it, or how Medical is a single skill, while a medical doctor (without specialization) is nearly inexistent in the developed world, and the specialties are as different as any other skill might have.

 

[robject]

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Do the new Armour Piercing and Destructive rules work?
[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica]

If I understand correctly, the AP rules are a consolidation and rationalization of existing rules. If that is correct, then I think that aspect (at least) works wonderfully.
[/FONT]

 

[Jame]

Because shooting pistols, be they automatic or manual slugthrowers, are far more like each other than shooting a longarm; shooting any handheld longarm slugthrower is more like any other handheld longarm than any pistol, and SMG's are somewhere in between. And pintel/tripod/firing-port is a third set of skills.

Shotguns are a special case, as are indirect fire weapons (Grenade Launchers, longarm mortars).

Worse, logically, and realistically, they should overlap more than MGT cascades provide for, but less than being the same skill.

Okay, then keep Shotguns in with Ranged Heavy, and leave them out of Ranged Light.

Indirect fire heavy weapons should, in my opinion as far as a roleplaying game is concerned, :CoW:, be kept in with Gunnery: Heavy Weapons.
I advocate this primarily for reducing skill bloat, though I would allow my original post could be expanded upon as desired by GMs who want to separate the skills.

Though my other logic for keeping them together would be the needed level of familiarity that a military would want its soldiers to have - a navy wants its spacers to know all sorts of turret weapons, or all types of bay weapons, so that they can operate any of them as needed, while a militia wants its artillery soldiers to know a bit about grenade launchers even though they're plasma gunners just in case their plasma guns run out and grenade launchers are the only thing handy.

Oh, MongooseMatt, if you want to use my logic in the book (however rewritten), feel free, but make sure to credit me properly!

 

[MongooseMatt]

Oh, MongooseMatt, if you want to use my logic in the book (however rewritten), feel free, but make sure to credit me properly!

Up in the air (for debate) at the moment, mate, but just in case, what is your full name?

(you can email me that if you prefer).

Currently raising this up for debate on our own forums as well...

 

[McPerth]

Just some coments:

I tried to open the document, It opens as a Word document but I'm not ablt to see the full tables, as they are cut after the damage column, Not sure if it's a problem of lacking the proper software...

I like the armor piercing part, as it fixes (at least partially) the problem I stated with penetration vs damage in this post. I miss a WAP (Weack Armor Piercing, or something similar) that makes it more affected by armor tan usual (e.g. Shotgun pellets), though.

About the Destructive (or Ultra Destructive) Damage, While I like the idea, I haven't seen any example of them (I expected the Meson Accelerator to be one of such, but is not so marked in the damage cell, maybe it is in some cell I cannot see, as explained above).

 

[whulorigan]

I tried to open the document, It opens as a Word document but I'm not ablt to see the full tables, as they are cut after the damage column, Not sure if it's a problem of lacking the proper software...

I had the same problem. I put a continuous section break after the discussion text but before the tables, and then on the pages with the tables I converted the layout in MSWord to US Legal size (8.5" x 14"), and then changed the orientation of the pages with the table to landscape instead of portrait. The data is all there, it is just getting cut in the display due to the size and orientation of the page.

I like the armor piercing part, as it fixes (at least partially) the problem I stated with penetration vs damage in this post. I miss a WAP (Weak Armor Piercing, or something similar) that makes it more affected by armor tan usual (e.g. Shotgun pellets), though.

I believe it is there at the bottom of the 1st page and in the table:

If a weapon is listed as being Weak, all Armour values should be doubled against it.

Old AP	New AP
Soft Target (ST)	Weak

Or did I misunderstand your point?

 

[Dagrill]

Heavy weapons should have more specialties, as their basics are quite more different (a mortar is more different from a MG that a SMG from an assault rifle, I guess).

Hi,

I agree that Heavy weapons needs a split between direct and indirect fire weapons (like mortars), I would add that a skill like Gunnery - Field Artillery
and Gunnery - AT Artillery is needed as well (but I'm still at TL6).

Kind Regards

David

 

[MongooseMatt]

Just to let you know after debate and a lot of meditation, we are going with the Gun Combat personal/military split and Heavy Weapons man-portable/artillery/vehicle.

Unless a better idea comes along

 

[mike wightman]

Handgun, rifle, heavy weapon.

There is no difference between military shooting and civilian shooting - it's a matter of familiarity with the weapon and what you can legally get hold of. The skill is lining up the sights, controlling breathing and squeezing the trigger, everything beyond that is tactical training/experience not weapon handling skill.

Maintainance and minor repair is likewise more of a learned process than a skill. Equipment qualified on should be the result of training and experience - TL may well come into it.

Our quaint TL7.8 weapons are going to be like antiques to a TL10 trooper trained on his TL10 ACR with its computerised battle-sight, caseless ammo etc.

 

[Jame]

Up in the air (for debate) at the moment, mate, but just in case, what is your full name?

(you can email me that if you prefer).

Currently raising this up for debate on our own forums as well...

I will post there (I'm the same person there too), with a revision added for clarity and a nod at Aramis.

 

[aramis]

Just to let you know after debate and a lot of meditation, we are going with the Gun Combat personal/military split and Heavy Weapons man-portable/artillery/vehicle.

Unless a better idea comes along

You've been presented with a half dozen.

This split makes ZERO sense to any competently trained shooter.

You're, again, taking the WORST case presented, and because it fits your preextant misconceptions, running with it.

 

[atpollard]

Just to let you know after debate and a lot of meditation, we are going with the Gun Combat personal/military split and Heavy Weapons man-portable/artillery/vehicle.

Unless a better idea comes along

I'll throw a hat in the ring ... I always liked the longshots

I doubt iron-mongery will ever be pared down this far, but I generally agree ... K.I.S.S. ...

Handgun: Any weapon designed to be fired one-handed.
Longarm: Any weapon designed to be fired two-handed.
Support: Tripod-mounted Machine Guns, Mortars, etc.
Gunnery: Cannon, Howitzer, Turret, Bay, Spinal

As long as I can dream ...
I like to view a skill as 2 years of work experience ... about 4000 hours of accumulated skill and knowledge ... so I paint skills with a broad brush. Where I like to throw detail is into expertise ... the higher the skill, the narrower the field of expertise. I like to use nested cascades to define that expertise.

HANDGUN-1
So using the weapons skills, I would expect someone with Weapon Skill-1 to choose one of the four broad classes of weapons [Handgun, Longarm, Support or Gunnery] ... So for the sake of argument, let's say he picks Handgun-1. IMO the character has about 4000 hours of experience handling handguns - some of it at the range, some in training seminars, some possibly in combat situations. He knows enough to pick up any handgun, point it at a target and get it to fire.

HANDGUN, PROJECTILE-2
For skill-2, the character will now be more familiar with handguns and has begun to specialize. Either Energy handguns (practicing line-of-sight shooting and energy management) or slug thrower Handguns (dealing with recoil and parabolic trajectories) ... and in either case familiarity with the basic weapon system internal components (part identification - strip and reassemble). So the character selects Handgun, Projectile-2. This gives him skill-2 with any projectile handgun and skill-1 with any other handgun.

HANDGUN, PROJECTILE, GAUSS-3
For skill-3, the character will need to specialize further. At this skill level, the difference between a traditional bullet, a self propelled gyroc round, and a gauss round has a significant impact on his performance and the character can probably perform simple repairs on handguns and may begin to request special modifications based on his 12,000+ hours of experience shooting handguns. So the character selects Handgun, Projectile, Gauss-3, which gives him skill-3 with any gauss handgun, skill-2 with any projectile handgun and skill-1 with any other handgun.

HANDGUN, PROJECTILE, GAUSS, TARGET-4
At Skill-4, the character will start to break the 2D6 curve, so at this level of skill mastery the specific weapon matters. 'Gauss' is no longer good enough, so the character needs to decide wheter he has further specialized with a compact "pocket gauss pistol", or a standard "service gauss pistol", or a competition "target gauss pistol". So the character selects Handgun, Projectile, Gauss, Target-4, which gives him skill-4 with a target gauss handgun, skill-3 with any gauss handgun, skill-2 with any projectile handgun and skill-1 with any other handgun.

HANDGUN, PROJECTILE, GAUSS, TARGET, LING STANDARD-5
At Skill-5, the character is a world-class marksman and using his gun or another gun makes a difference. At this point, he has a favorite make of Gauss Target Pistol, that gives him a slight edge over other brands. So the character selects Handgun, Projectile, Gauss, Target, Ling Standard-5, which gives him skill-5 with a Ling Standard target gauss handgun, skill-4 with any other target gauss handgun, skill-3 with any gauss handgun, skill-2 with any projectile handgun and skill-1 with any other handgun. The brand stuff is just chrome ... recognition of the character's skill achievement.

HANDGUN, PROJECTILE, GAUSS, TARGET, LING STANDARD, "BLACK MAMBA"-6
At Skill-6+, the curve is broken, you can do the impossible ... as long as you have your specific, custom made weapon ... which you named "Black Mamba".

So that's how I would do it, if I were king of the universe.

 

[Jame]

You've been presented with a half dozen.

This split makes ZERO sense to any competently trained shooter.

You're, again, taking the WORST case presented, and because it fits your preextant misconceptions, running with it.

I have no training as a shooter. I don't really want to be. That said, while I understand your point, I've presented the version Matt took from in order to 1.) reduce rpg skill bloat and 2.) present a way to keep the action moving.

Keep in mind that this is presented as the basic, standard rule, and while I'll be happy if someone uses it, I will accept anyone going with another rule that fits their group.

If you and I meet and you run, I'll happily use your rule as long as you do the same if I run.