What about the Traveller System Needs Modified.

[Supplement Four]

Sloppy writing and incomplete rules.

For example, pg. 59 of the Core Rule Book, where "Learning New Skills" is described.

How much does training cost?

Just what is considered "training". Spending 12 hours a day on the subject...or 8 hours a day? A 2 hour class each day? What?

How does one increase stats outside of character generation?

What is required to train? Can a person just go to the gun range and shoot targets with his autopistol? Or, is an instructor required.

What effect does sefl-study on training? Just reading a book will get you ...what?

Can characters teach each other? If so, to what limit?

Why does it take longer for a character to pick up his third skill improvement than it did his first? (Although, I like that it does get harder, leaning towards the experience cap used in CT and MT).

 

[beowulf2044]

Three rolls is still one too many for me. As I've stated, I was using a system very simular to MGT way before Mongoose Traveller was, so I'm fine using their system.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Sloppy writing and incomplete rules.

Not something I can fix. Like I said, don't say "It Sucks."

For example, pg. 59 of the Core Rule Book, where "Learning New Skills" is described.

How much does training cost?

Just what is considered "training". Spending 12 hours a day on the subject...or 8 hours a day? A 2 hour class each day? What?

How does one increase stats outside of character generation?

What is required to train? Can a person just go to the gun range and shoot targets with his autopistol? Or, is an instructor required.

What effect does sefl-study on training? Just reading a book will get you ...what?

Can characters teach each other? If so, to what limit?

Why does it take longer for a character to pick up his third skill improvement than it did his first? (Although, I like that it does get harder, leaning towards the experience cap used in CT and MT).

Ok, this is a great example. This I can do something with this. Give me more examples like this.

 

[tbeard1999]

Three rolls is still one too many for me. As I've stated, I was using a system very simular to MGT way before Mongoose Traveller was, so I'm fine using their system.

Well. if for some occult reason, I were gonna require only two die rolls for hitting and damage, I'd go with a variant of Striker or the T4 combat system over the MGT system. Both are superior IMHO to the MGT system. Both decouple damage and penetration, which I think is nearly indispensable for modelling firearms accurately. The T4 damage/armor mechanic gets the nod for smaller combats, Striker gets the nod for larger combats.

That said, my last campaign featured a situation modelled after Rorke's Drift, and the T4-derived combat system worked very well.

At the end of the day, I want *fast* and all three systems are about the same speed (the T4 system is a little faster with smaller combats; a little slower with bigger combats).

I prefer my turn sequencing to MGT, and it has worked with all three damage/armor systems (system C, T4 derived, Striker derived).

 

[beowulf2044]

Modeling firearms accurately? And how do we model laser and plasma fusion weapons? Real world data seems to be lacking.

 

[tbeard1999]

Modeling firearms accurately? And how do we model laser and plasma fusion weapons? Real world data seems to be lacking.

Well, if we make a hash out of modelling known things like guns, how can we have any confidence that we'll do any better with lasers and plasma/fusion weapons?

The answer to your question, BTW, is obvious. We start by accurately modelling known weapons, then extrapolate from there.

In any case, the systems I prefer do a better job (IMHO) of modelling damage, penetration and armor than MGT. They also play faster and do a better job of modeling skirmish infantry tactics than MGT does.

I'd add that the Striker-derived damage system is more "realistic" in the sense that it handles damage most like Real World small arms damage research. The T4 derived system and System C are more satisfactory from a gaming point of view (see my musings on hit points in the CT forum for details), with System C getting the nod for drama (and the ever-popular "John Woo Factor" which has not been retrofitted to the other systems).

 

[dmccoy1693]

accurately modelling known weapons, then extrapolate from there.

I'm going to be frank with you tbeard, assuming that an alternate system books is ever published by my company, I'm not going to attempt modelling of weapons. One simple reason: I'm not a weapons man myself. I've never fired a gun and I hope I never have to. I've studied the science of weaponry in college, but that focused on basic physics and anything else that can be used as a weapon (ohh I miss the giant magnet that could stop your heart). But I know that I will not be able to do the job justice, so I am not going to attempt it.

However, if you want to write it...

 

[beowulf2044]

I did not have confidence in Striker as a combat system as it was written. The high tech laser rifle was a one-shot fatality (with its penatration value of 20) even if the target was wearing Reflec armour (value-10).

Also, the armour values themselves seemed strangely put together. They mirrored Azanti High Lightning with the exception of Cloth and Flak Jacket (and the Combat Enviroment Suit) which were dropped one level of protection. All other armour remained the same as AHL, and then high tech versions of Combat Armour and Battle Dress were added, which made an enormous leap up in protection value.

Now, under Striker rules, one level of protection is a significant reduction in the case of Cloth and Cloth related armour. One level could mean the difference between a Light Wound or a Serious Wound, and a Serious Wound or a Fatality.

I never heard of an explantion for these changes from AZL to Striker. That, and the conversion from the Wound System into damage for characters was poor. If your character received a Light Wound, you would receive 3D6 in damage, for a Serious Wound, you got hit with 6D6. Some of those Seriouly Wounded suddenly found themseles deceased. That was too arbitrary for me.

 

[saundby]

The three biggest problems are
1) dropped power points. creates some illogical inconsistencies, like a 100 Ton ship with PP C being able to mount an energy bay, but a 400 tonner with the same plant not being able to mount even plasma or fusion turrets... A flat rate power production and power usage would have been a far better choice than what was presented in release; the playtest draft rules were workable, but maneuver drive power costs were flawed (but easily fixed).

2) The pricing for passengers. At J1, with steward skills 1 or 2, passenger space makes less per ton than the much-less-hassle cargo space as freight.

I echo these.

Ty's also got me interested in trying out T4 combat now.

 

[tbeard1999]

I did not have confidence in Striker as a combat system as it was written. The high tech laser rifle was a one-shot fatality (with its penatration value of 20) even if the target was wearing Reflec armour (value-10).

That's a data issue, rather than a system issue can can be easily addressed if need be,

And as I noted, my Striker-derived system is uh, Striker-derived, which, interestingly enough, has a fix for that exact issue. (In my system, penetration is decoupled from damage by simply limiting the maximum modifier to the penetration roll.):

Blowthrough

Penetration rolls against people have a maximum penetration bonus, depending on the calibre of the weapon:

               Max
Cal            Pen
11mm-            +3
18mm-            +4
25mm-            +5
Laser sm arms   +4
Plasma sm arms  +5
Fusion sm arms  +6

So, a TL13 laser rifle (pen 20) firing at an unarmored man adds 4 to its penetration roll. If that same man is wearing cloth, the roll is 2d6 + pen (20) - armor (5) = 15, which is reduced to the maximum of 4.

Also, the armour values themselves seemed strangely put together. They mirrored Azanti High Lightning with the exception of Cloth and Flak Jacket (and the Combat Enviroment Suit) which were dropped one level of protection. All other armour remained the same as AHL, and then high tech versions of Combat Armour and Battle Dress were added, which made an enormous leap up in protection value.

Again, data issues.

That, and the conversion from the Wound System into damage for characters was poor. If your character received a Light Wound, you would receive 3D6 in damage, for a Serious Wound, you got hit with 6D6. Some of those Seriouly Wounded suddenly found themseles deceased. That was too arbitrary for me.

I didn't use the suggested conversions because I also found them too severe. Rather, I stayed with the concept of light wounds, serious wounds, and mortal wounds:

Damage Effects

A light wound causes you to take a -1 penalty to all rolls. The modifiers are cumulative with other light wounds. You can take an unlimited number of light wounds.

A serious wound causes you to fall unconscious, unless you can roll 8+ (DM +1 if END 10+; +2 if END 12+). If you stay conscious, you're considered to have taken 2 light wounds and can only move ½. You will require Treatment (below).

A dead result will kill you, unless you make a Not Dead Yet Roll. The target number depends on what the final adjusted penetration roll was:

Pen
Roll NDY Roll
12-15...8+
16-20..10+
21-25..12+
26-30..14+
Etc.

DM +1 if END 10+
DM +2 if END 12+

If you're "Not Dead Yet", you'll still die in 3D-5 minutes. If a medic treats you for a round, you may stabilize for 15 minutes (roll 8+; medic cannot do anything else, DM+Medical skill, -1 if no first aid kit).

 

[mbrinkhues]

And some more from going through my notes/draft reviews:

+ Adapt/change the ranges of heavy weapons to be a bit more realistic

You can do the "Twilight" approach where they reduced ranges because they assumed "bullet shyness" and "buck-fever" as part of the task roles. But currently ranges are to long/to short. Nothing an errata can't change. You are Brits, buy a Janes

+ If you make changes, consider writing an article for S&P on the "why"

Changing the OTU is one thing. It would help if you could write a short article in the S&P about the "why" you made them. Might cause some tensions to evaporate

+ Don't over-detail the universe

Sounds strange when I demanded more detail in an earlier post. But IMHO Traveller has always struck that fine balance. I.e the TL14+ VacSuits are "self-sealing" but the "how" is never explained. Could be anything from Nanoware to crushed baby Hivers. So IMHO it's good to tell us "will seal up to x points of damage" but bad to tell us "due to an advanced Nanoware design".

+ Less deckplans

Or more exactly "less big-ship deckplans". For big ships something like the schematics found on channel ferry are good enoug IMHO. Now for small (< 5000dton) or "Adventure class" ships (to use the FASA term) deckplans are interesting.

(This differs a bit from the plans Mongoose currently has)

+ Smaller ship data format

The ships sheet with the construction data takes up a lot of room. Maybe reduce that or at least only do it for a base ship and use a shorter form for variants (like the "Fat Explorer" in Scouts)

+ Better Art / less Spikes

Art is like the Sword+2 (In the eye of the Beholder) but quite a few of the ships look strange/wrong to me. And unlike T4s "Foss" pictures the wrong type of strange/wrong, those in T4 at least looked interesting if not Traveller. Something along the style of the TerranTradeAuthority books would be prefered.

 

[Jame]

IMNHO, increase the pistol damage to 3d6 and the rifle damage to either 3d6+3 or preferably 4d6 (with shotgun and gauss rifle doing 5d6) and increase armor to match; increase heavy weapons/artillery damage and vehicle armor to match.

Also, remake the tech level scale so that TL0 is the stone age, TL1 is the Bronze age only, TL2 is the Iron Age only, TL3 the Middle ages only, TL4 the Renaissance and TL5 WW1.

 

[dmccoy1693]

My biggest complaint is with the combat system.

Tbeard, I've downloaded your v1.6 pdf and I gotta say the core idea is really good. I'm not committing myself to an alternate rules book at this time, but if it does happen, you should be pleased.

 

[tbeard1999]

Tbeard, I've downloaded your v1.6 pdf and I gotta say the core idea is really good. I'm not committing myself to an alternate rules book at this time, but if it does happen, you should be pleased.

Thanks. I do intend to produce an alternative combat system to MGTs (which is my major remaining complaint with MGT), which will be some variant of Combat System C. I'll probably offer several armor/damage systems -- the System C system and a T4-based system.

But in case I was unclear, I didn't intend to solicit your company, though I'd be happy to discuss anything you might want to.

FYI--System C and its predecessors use essentially the same sequencing and many of the same concepts as my modern skirmish rules "A Fistful of LAWs" (which has appeared in somewhat altered form as "A Fistful of Bolters" -- a WH40K alternative). The intent is to enable decent sized RPG battles (since my campaigns feature a lot of gunfire), while modelling skirmish tactics reasonably well. It's worked well for us. And since "A Fistful of LAWs" (and its squad level cousin "A Fistful of Dragons") are on my list of games to release for sale someday, it's likely that the RPG combat system can be tied into the larger scale games for referees who want to model really large battles.

 

[dmccoy1693]

But in case I was unclear, I didn't intend to solicit your company, though I'd be happy to discuss anything you might want to.

Well you will receive appropriate credit (again, should the project go forward, I don't intend to make any additional commitments upon my life until July, when a class I am taking finishes up).

 

[tbeard1999]

Well you will receive appropriate credit (again, should the project go forward, I don't intend to make any additional commitments upon my life until July, when a class I am taking finishes up).

What would I be receiving credit for?

 

[dmccoy1693]

What would I be receiving credit for?

Special thanks for the "gmish" of systems (if I can borrow the german word).

 

[SuperGamera]

I would really like to see a re-worked computer section, to better reconcile personal, small-ship, and capital-ship systems and software. You can have a personal comp that can fly your ship, but you can't have a small ship computer that can run decent programs and an interface at once.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I would really like to see a re-worked computer section, to better reconcile personal, small-ship, and capital-ship systems and software. You can have a personal comp that can fly your ship, but you can't have a small ship computer that can run decent programs and an interface at once.

Good one. Yes. Please, keep the ideas coming gentlemen.