Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 6142123" data-attributes="member: 92305">T5 Personal Combat System Review, Opinion, and Problems- concluded -LIKES & DISLIKESThis is the Opinions and Problems part of this review. There's a lot of things I like about the T5 combat system. Range Bands are awesome--a great boon for Refs running T5 games. There are some fantastic modifiers for the attack throw--well thought out mechanics that work well in the game. I love the Tactics rule. Suppression Fire is brilliant. And, the organic method of Initiative is both old school and inspired. The CT damage system is an old friend that I've always admired for how it gracefully serves as a wound point system AND a wound penalty system. There's a lot to like in this set of rules.On the other hand, these rules are not without problems. The rule explanations are sometimes hard to follow, and information is hard to find and located in different parts of the book. Unarmed combat, for example, is no where to be seen in the Combat chapter. You've got to look at the Skills chapter in order to learn that Unarmed combat is handled with an Opposed Task and not the combat attack task provided in the Combat chapter.There are typos in the book, but they don't bother me unless the change rules. There's a big one in the Combat chapter. On page 214, we are told that SnapFire can be performed at Speed-0 or Speed-1. Then, on page 218, the table shows that SnapFire can be performed at Speed-0, Speed-1, or Speed-2. That's a pretty big game question. If page 218 is correct, then SnapFire is the only attack form that can be attempted while also running during the combat round.The other question is the difference between SnapFire and AutoFire. According to the rules, both attack types can only be used with weapons that can fire in bursts or fully automatically. If there's little difference between the two, there is little reason to ever use SnapFire. AutoFire is both easier to use (AutoFire is +1D Difficulty vs. SnapFire +2D Difficulty) and does more damage (AutoFire does +2D damage after penetration where as SnapFire does +1D Damage after penetration). If page 218 is correct (discussed in the preceeding paragraph), then the only thing SnapFire has got going for it is that a character can use it while also running.To hamper this issue further, T5 does not track ammunition usage. GunMaker is a weapon design system provided in the rules, and it doesn't generate ammunition magazines beyond a guestimate, and ammo mags are not listed in the weapon's descriptions. We're told that Single Fire uses one around of ammunition, Burst Fire uses 3 rounds of ammo, and Full Auto will spit out lead as long as we hold the trigger down, but there is no notation on most GunMaker Weaon Descriptions for magazine capacity. The Ref can use some examples provided in the game to make educated guesses as to a weapon's mag size, but what's worse is that there is nothing about the weight of the magazines for character Load reasons.In T5, weapons are always assumed to have ammunition.I HATE this. It opens up a whole slew of game problems. Characters always have enough ammo on them. They never run out, even if they've been fighting for days with no resupply. Ammo depletion becomes the province of Ref fiat.In addition, with no ammo restrictions (such as how much ammo a character can carry at one time), there's no reason to ever use Aimed Fire or SnapFire if a weapon is Burst or Full Auto capable.I really do hate that.And, I'm going to go one step further and hamper the issue SOME MORE. Aimed Fire is the only attack type available to Single-shot weapons. This means almost all handguns and many, non-assault, rifles. But, the Aimed Fire attack type restricts movement. You cannot move if you use Aimed Fire during the entire one-minute round.What? Yes. If you have a handgun in this game, then you have a choice. You can attack in a round, or you can move in a round. But, you can't do both.That's a real problem, especially since we're talking about a game with long, one-minute, abstract combat rounds--where it would be quite acceptable to fire off several rounds of aimed fire and still move.While I'm on things I truly dislike about the game: I just plain don't like breaking up a combat round as suggested with STAMP. You have all combatants make their attack throws, then you let them all move. Then, you apply damage, having to remember who hit whom? That's not for me.And, I'm real suspect about the First Attacker rule. The First Attacker in any combat round gives his enemies a +1 modifier to hit him. I can see that part of the rule--it reflects a person's general hesitation to expose himself to danger.It's the second part of the rule I don't get. The First Attacker in any round, if successful with his attack, penalizes his target by not allwing the target to attack that round. The target is basically suppressed by the First Attacker's attack.Why is that, when every other character attacked during the round can fight back?No Game BreakersThere are some definite things I don't like about this game, but are those issues so bad that the game is not enjoyable to play? Are they game breakers? That's for you to decide.I think a lot of stuff will be fixed with eratta. In the mean time, most of these issue are easily fixed. My dislike of STAMP? Simply don't play the combat round that way. The First Attacker Rule? Don't use it. Allow characters with single shot weapons to use SnapFire, or, instead, allow those who use Aimed Fire to move at Speed-1 (Walk).See? Most of these issues are easily fixed by the Ref. The biggest problem, I think, is the issue of ammo. But, I've already fixed that. If you go to the CotI forum, look for a thread called S4's Ammo Tweak for T5 (Just find one of my many posts over there--I linked that tweak in my signature.). Within those pages you will find an easy-to-use fix for ammo magazines in the game.SummaryI hope this review of the combat system in T5 will inform you about both the the glossy sides and nasty warts that is presented in the Fifth Edition of Traveller. This is a long review, but I've endeavored to be detailed about the claims I make. I hope you find my comments useful.I'm going to leave you with my first impression of the book, the day I opened it, about five days ago....It was a long day at work, then I had an appointment after work...and then, I had dinner with a friend.As I dragged myself up to the front door just a few minutes ago, I spotted the box. I knew what was in it, and I smiled to myself.I haven't had time to evaluate any of the material. I'll write my thoughts on specifics later. But, my very first impression of Traveller 5, as I cut open the tape before folding back the box lid, was akin to that feeling I had, years and years ago, when I first spied the Little Black Box with the Beowulf on the cover, lying alone on a store's shelf. That was over 30 years ago.When I saw it--that shining black cover, red line, and all--no lie, I got goose bumps.Then, I pulled it out of the box--the MASSIVE tome of a role-playing game. And, I smiled so much that my teeth dried.I flipped through, scanning the pages, looking here and there: I LOVE the look of the book! The illos. The typeface. EVERYTHING about the look of the book SCREAMS Traveller to me!The actual look of the book could not have looked better, imo.And, flipping through the pages, it truly reminds me of an old school RPG. I'm talking really old school--lots of detail and war game influence. Tons of text.I'll dig into this slowly. There's no way I could (or, I think, anyone could) read this thing quickly then start playing ASAP. No, this book is going to take time--patience.As I go through it, I'll write more thoughts.But...just from the look of it (and the fact that MWM signed it guarrantees that I will not sell it), I'm extremely happy so far.And, what you see above--this Review--are those further thoughts that I've had since receiving the book on Monday.Ciao for now,WB</blockquote>

Verification