Official MGT2e Bug Report Thread

Another thing or two rumbling in my head ...

1st:
atm every "to hit" roll is average difficulty. And this might actually be, what Mongoose intended, as they write in their 2E rulebook:
"[...] The Traveller declares he is going to attack and selects
a target. The target may then choose a Reaction. The
Traveller then makes an appropriate skill check and, as
normal for any Average skill check, if he scores 8+, the
attack is successful and damage is dealt to the target [...]"

But if this is true, how do you work in difficult situations, i.e. with a lot of movement or range or something else, that makes it difficult to hit the target?

2nd:
During combat, in the chat window of the player, you can read the armour of your opponent. Now I know from a D&D campaign I'm in (also using FG), that this is not displayed there and their reasoning is, that it might enable "meta play". You don't always know the armour (or in D&D armour class) of your opponent. Do you think, this should be left out, or otherwise be selectable in the options (if that is possible -> looking over @MBM)?

1st: I generally assign modifiers for the players based on whatever it says in the various books. Like for instance, Aim provides a +1 to hit based on the number of minor actions applied up to 6. Usually they just aim and shoot so I just say apply a +1. Or whatever the appropriate modifiers are for whatever is going on.

2nd: I agree, I think it should be option selective for players to see the armour rating of an opponent. I do want to see it as a GM but I'd like to be able to set it off for players, but I also know that some people would rather leave it on so definitely an option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esmdev

1st: I generally assign modifiers for the players based on whatever it says in the various books. Like for instance, Aim provides a +1 to hit based on the number of minor actions applied up to 6. Usually they just aim and shoot so I just say apply a +1. Or whatever the appropriate modifiers are for whatever is going on.

2nd: I agree, I think it should be option selective for players to see the armour rating of an opponent. I do want to see it as a GM but I'd like to be able to set it off for players, but I also know that some people would rather leave it on so definitely an option.

---

I'll add it as a game option. I did the chat window to show the sums mostly to prove the end result, now if we're all happy it's accurate I can hide it. There's a nice armour update coming to v1.1 for the CSC book, because all the new weapon traits and armour traits I thought I'd update it all and make it simpler.

Cheers

Fairly minor thing, but the deck plan for the Far Trader is the deck plan for the Free Trader (I know they're quite similar, but in this case they're the same map, and there is a difference). One way to tell the difference is that the Free Trader deck plan has a legend 1-4, and the Far Trader has a legend 1-5. There's also a small corner cut out towards the back end of the map for the Far Trader deck plan.


I'd probably have to take it up with mongoose themselves as to why they list a Type A variant as a Type A2 instead of using an actual Type A2. (This is in the print/pdf versions as well so not an FG version issue).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sjard

Fairly minor thing, but the deck plan for the Far Trader is the deck plan for the Free Trader (I know they're quite similar, but in this case they're the same map, and there is a difference). One way to tell the difference is that the Free Trader deck plan has a legend 1-4, and the Far Trader has a legend 1-5. There's also a small corner cut out towards the back end of the map for the Far Trader deck plan.


I'd probably have to take it up with mongoose themselves as to why they list a Type A variant as a Type A2 instead of using an actual Type A2. (This is in the print/pdf versions as well so not an FG version issue).

---

The A2 also has the passenger commons in the back and the A in the front (these are both copies of the A). It's possible that MBM just duplicated the same image. It's really easy to do when you're looking at ships that look almost identical.

To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't use the Marava in the main book so that the Free and Far would be different enough at a glance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esmdev

The A2 also has the passenger commons in the back and the A in the front (these are both copies of the A). It's possible that MBM just duplicated the same image. It's really easy to do when you're looking at ships that look almost identical.

To be honest, I'm not sure why they didn't use the Marava in the main book so that the Free and Far would be different enough at a glance.

---

When the images 'come' to me, they're named 'XXXX-XXXXX.jpg' so it's down to me to rename them something more suitable. This is my mistake, and oddly, I thought I double checked all of the maps. I do have the older 2d maps almost ready to add as well, I'll make sure I get this issue sorted in 1.0.3 which is almost finished.

Cheers,
MBM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadBeardMan

... oddly, I thought I double checked all of the maps...

---

Yep, you did. And I did, too. Some things keep popping up, that are a tad strange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordNanoc

Yep, you did. And I did, too. Some things keep popping up, that are a tad strange.

---

It gives us something to find, and since they are mostly just appearance and wording and not function, that's okay. :)

I'm not sure if this is a bug or by design. In the mustering benefits table does not allow players to apply modifiers to the table rolls. You can click the bottom left and that will work but they have to remember to keep adding it. Being able to use the table would be preferable because the modifier is retained however many rolls you make.

Attachment 30761 Entering a modifier into this box allows you to add modifiers on table rolls