FATE - Battletech 2950 Campaign (Inactive)

Game Master Tareth

I have it in my head, I just never really put it down here for other people to read it. I'll have to fix that.

I was debating about rolling Sensors more. I feel like Fate tends towards less "just in case" kinds of rolls, but playing in PbP format I'm not sure how that translates.

Some thoughts on Salvage.

I'm just thinking out loud here.

Tareth, am I correct in thinking that, as Internal hits are marked off, the item is considered destroyed?

I believe I am. In which case, the remains of the Jenner, which you said had a total of 3 IS hits left, would be the fusion core, one hit on the gyro, and nothing else, yeah?

So too, the Panther that exploded left no remains.

Hence, in theory, if we had just fought all four mechs until they all died in the normal way, then we would have found...nothing? Not so much as a medium laser or heat sink to pad our larders?

Can't say I love it.

In the game, the Center Torso is most often hit, so a dead mech can still leave all the good parts around. Now with FATE taking away location hits, and with IS being a linear progression that systematically eats away at the host body until nothing is left, that makes for lean salvage.

On a brainstorm, I might think of some kind of roll to glean the corpse for parts. Like, for each part one could make a Tech roll at +2, and a success means that part can be salvaged...perhaps after paying half the price of replacing.

Or, for every dead mech, one could make a Tech roll at +2, and for every success and shift of success, that is one part that can be useful with a minimum of fuss. (Which ones would be rolled randomly?)

Tareth, am I correct in thinking that, as Internal hits are marked off, the item is considered destroyed?

Per. RAW, when an IS box receives two points of damage it gains the damaged aspect. Damaged aspect means not functioning. When the next item in succession becomes destroyed the item above it becomes destroyed. (There is a chance that the term destroyed might have been a typo (Shrug). I think the intent was, when the next item in line becomes damaged, the item above it becomes destroyed/unrepairable. BUT I'm not sure about this. Until the GM weighs in on it, I don't want to presume my understanding is correct. I've been wrong on more than one occasion.)

I could be wrong on this as well, but I believe what RAW is referring to as an IS box isn't the box in which you check off damage. That box is an internal "STRESS" box. I believe the term "IS box" is referring to the box on the Mech PDF sheet that the item is listed in. So, each internal "STRESS" box represents 1 damage. and each "IS box" can sustain two damage before gaining the "Damaged Aspect." (Could be wrong about this as well.)

Ummm, then, in that case, if the Jenner's Gryo is not destroyed, then the MEd Laser above it is only damaged.

Hmm, other then talking people into surrendering or ejecting, how else to do we grab moar salvage?

Perhaps by invoking aspects that make them fall? ALthough I dont think I see anything about falling causing unconciousness.

Exactly. Slim pickings. Hence my idea that, when a weapon is destroyed it is out for the purposes of that combat, but, after, the hands of a skilled tech could find good meat amongst the bones.

Tactically speaking, this is why I despair at scouting, either here or, say, a party going down a 10x10 hallway.

Usually an armed body scouts when they simply have no idea the disposition of the enemy, when it's likely there could literally be 1 or 100, you have no idea and need to find out.

If you know your force is on par with the enemy force, then its best to just all stick together. Splitting the party to go "scout" just means you either have the scouting force attack, in which case they are fighting with a weakened body and everyone should've stuck together in the first place, or, like we have here, they are out-gunned and need to return to the main body...and everyone should've stuck together in the first place. ^_^

@GM: I notice the prices for the Replacement of items is in Credits. How many credits are we being paid for this contract?

Also, how far are we from the other group at target Alpha?

I took a look and it seems that Charly and Gunny are our best shots with a +2 each. Jack and Lloyd both have a +1, and Lapeidra and Markus round out our fireteam with a couple of goose eggs.

This is going to be interesting if we have to do this on foot.

Hmmm... I feel like we need to decide how often we roll Sensors. Everyone rolling Sensors all the time doesn't feel Fate-like somehow.

I don't have much experience playing Fate, so if you want to expound, please do feel free.

Sorry for the extended delay everyone. The work trip was busier and more tiring than expected. Trying to get caught up on all the questions now. Will work through them as I can.

Lloyd: I'd agree. FATE is a little different from 5E in that it isn't necessary to roll all the time. In fact, it could create more problems depending on what you are trying to do. If it is an Overcome action you are using sensors for, then a fail simply fails OR you could succeed but with a "serious cost." Perhaps more importantly, if someone is trying to Create an Advantage with a Sensors (or any other skill) roll, then a Fail means you either don't create the aspect OR the opposition gets the free invoke meaning they have the advantage. I haven't really played up the potential negative consequences of failed rolls too much, but likely will in the future.

Sensors is probably only required when actively seeking something specific or when trying to overcome some kind of interference or active ECM defense. Otherwise we can simply assume passive sensor sweeps will catch other power sources or anomalies with sufficient warning that the group won't be surprised or unable to act. I'll also try to set up spoilered key Overcome rolls for situations where something is hidden and Sensors or Notice or something would be needed to avoid an ambush or discover something interesting. That way someone can choose to either fail or accept a serious cost if they want to succeed.

Jack: Base payout for this initial contract is 3 credits. You are several hundred kilometers from the Alpha landing point.

Salvage: So I've been continuing to wrestle with the salvage rules because I do want to allow for reasonable amounts of group salvage, but also want to portray the destructiveness of war and the growing scarcity as the Third Succession War grinds on. So what I'm thinking as that for items with the Destroyed aspect, there is a secondary roll at the end of combat. This would be a straight up FATE roll with no skill modifier. From -4 to 0 the item is indeed destroyed and cannot be salvaged. Then from +1 to +4 the item can be salvaged but requires time and a Tech Overcome to rebuild it into working order. I'm thinking the higher the initial salvage roll, then the lower the Tech roll required with +4 being there actually isn't a roll required. So a +1 would require a +6 Tech Overcome. +2 would equal a +5 Overcome. +3 would equal a +4 Overcome to repair. That allows for more potential salvage, but require time and facilities to repair. The exception being when a mech does suffer massive damage and fusion reactor breach. Then there just isn't going to be anything left. So I will go back and roll for the Jenner's medium lasers and SRM4. But the Panther blew up with no possible salvage.

Internal Structure Damage: I think I'd like to keep it that we just work from top to bottom, left to right for now. There are already a lot of rolls happening and adding 'hit location' rolls seems like too much for sure.

I'm also considering doing away with the choice between +2 damage and a Boost for a Success with Style and just going with FATE standard and giving a Boost. Now that we are using the IS Damage table, I don't see the need for additional damage and the additional choice. I could also go with it is just +2 damage and no Boost. Do people have a preference?

So fare. I agree with everything that DM has listed here. I think the salvage option is a nice alternative. That said, could we have some clarification on the following.

_____________________________________________________________________
Internal Structure RAW: Each ‘Mech has two basic Internal Structure Boxes, one for its fusion engine, one for its gyroscopic and control systems. Internal structure boxes are similar to stress boxes for characters. Each IS box buys off two shifts of damage. Once an IS box takes two damage, the module housed in that location gains the Damaged aspect and is no longer functioning. If the next IS box is also "DESTROYED", then the previous module become destroyed and can no longer be repaired. If there is no module housed in the IS box, then roll randomly on the Internal Structure Damage Table to determine the new damage Aspect and its effects. A mech begins with internal structure boxes equal to Tonnage divided by 5.
___________________________________________________________________________ _______

In the following statement, the boldened part states if the box below the "damaged IS box" becomes destroyed then the previous module becomes destroyed.

First, was the term "DESTROYED," which I capitalized in the statement, meant to be damaged? If each box is waiting for the box under it to become destroyed, then none of them ever become destroyed.

Second, how does the (IS) damage progression relate to an item that takes up multiple slots like a LRM 20 or a PPC? Does 2 points of damage also give them the damaged aspect even though they take up 3-4 (IS) boxes?

Yea, that sentence doesn't really work looking back at it now. And the rule is a bit over complicated anyway and doesn't line up with how we are rolling for salvage now. Here is some alternative language I'd like to incorporate:

Each ‘Mech has two basic Internal Structure Boxes, one for its fusion engine, one for its gyroscopic and control systems. Internal structure boxes are similar to stress boxes for characters. Each IS box buys off two shifts of damage. Once a module absorbs half of its available IS damage, then the module gains the Damaged aspect. A small module taking up one IS slot becomes Damaged once it takes 1 point of damage. A huge module becomes Damaged after taking 4 points of IS damage. Damaged modules can still function, but the Damage aspect can be Invoked just like any other aspect.

If all available IS damage for a module is absorbed, then the module becomes Destroyed. Destroyed modules no longer function for the remainder of the combat. Note: Since a tiny module only takes up half a slot, if it takes 1 point of damage it becomes Destroyed even if the full IS slot can still absorb another point of damage. A Destroyed module may be repaired outside of combat depending on the outcome of the scene's salvage rolls.

OK that clears up a lot. I think, overall, it goes well with the salvage change as well.

I think that sums up all my questions, thank you for the reply.

Sure thing. Sorry it took a bit to reply due to work.

Salvage Rolls for Pirate Jenner

Jump Jet: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (1, 1, 1, 1) - 8 = -4
Medium Laser: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (2, 1, 3, 3) - 8 = 1
Medium Laser: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (1, 1, 2, 1) - 8 = -3
SRM4: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (3, 2, 2, 3) - 8 = 2
Medium Laser: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (1, 3, 2, 1) - 8 = -1
Medium Laser: 4d3 - 8 ⇒ (2, 2, 1, 1) - 8 = -2

Boy, those were some crappy rolls. But it does look like the SRM4 (Tech +5) is salvageable and one of the Medium Lasers (Tech +6).

I'm also considering doing away with the choice between +2 damage and a Boost for a Success with Style and just going with FATE standard and giving a Boost. Now that we are using the IS Damage table, I don't see the need for additional damage and the additional choice. I could also go with it is just +2 damage and no Boost. Do people have a preference?

I like just the +2 damage. Boosts, it seems, are hard to keep track of and easy to lose.

I admit I haven't been following the salvage discussion because it seems to keep evolving. Having read through it now, it's getting a little rule-sy, like the comment about Sensors rolls. (Btw, isn't Sensors similar to Perception? Why not roll it.) My impression of this discussion is that we're looking at salvage through the new character lens, as in, shouldn't I be able to fix anything, anywhere, anytime?

Just my opinion, but No.

I own a 2006 Land Rover LR3. It's a wonderful SUV I bought on the cheap with 200K miles on it. But if you know anything about Land Rovers you know they often become money pits. I've spent 3x as much I paid for it getting it running. Parts are hard to come by, and the whole thing is a 6000 lb computer with 4x4, so you need to be an ace mechanic with expensive computer diagnostic tools to have any chance.

As we play on, it's going to be like, that mech isn't destroyed, so... And then automatically rotate it into our fleet of assault mechs we got for free.

From a gameplay/system or rules standpoint, I agree with Tareth in that I do also like the recent BT game rule where if you find 3 broken mechs of the exact same type and trim level you can cobble together 1 full working mech. My Land Rover LR3 can be repaired with LR3 parts but it cannot be made into a LR4, or vice versa, no matter who is working on it.

My proposal would be, so long as the mech is salvageable, aka not "destroyed", then you still need the body and guts from two more identical mechs and then you can begin to build a functioning mech out of that. Or you can salvage it for parts and then only the parts that are not destroyed. I think that anyone with at least basic Technical skill and a mech bay can affect this work; higher skill/better roll/improved facilities reduces the time it takes to do the rebuild. Same with any repairs. Also just my opinion, but I don't like the idea of field repairs. I don't see how, realistically, any repair can be performed without a hoist, number one, and appropriate tools.

On a related note, how do we measure repair time? I think a non-arbitrary way to do is by mission count. From the standpoint of repairs, a junior tech working in basic facilities could rebuild a mech from 3 salvaged mechs in the timeframe of 5 missions, as an example. Whereas a senior tech in an optimal facility can do it in 1. Alternatively, there could be a time/money dynamic, where we could just fly around the known galaxy until we get something finished but we might run out of funds, again, just like the BT video game does it. (What a smart game!)

I really don't like how the Griffon went down. That was way too easy. This is our modern Westernized thinking at play, that continuing our lives at any cost is the most important thing. From my standpoint as a writer, I think it's perfectly acceptable to allow foreign and futuristic cultures permission to place the value of an individual's own life further down the list of priorities, below things like honor, dignity, despair, sportsmanship... Going out in a blaze of glory has to be part of the ingrained character of every mechwarrior, or else who would do it? The only perk of surviving is to do it all again tomorrow, but that's the one thing worth fighting for.

This was a nice introduction but we can't expect everything to be so easy as we've had it. That will be very boring.

Tactically speaking, this is why I despair at scouting, either here or, say, a party going down a 10x10 hallway.

Wait, you despair at scouting? What happened to "bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty..."?

Btw, isn't Sensors similar to Perception? Why not roll it.

You can consider Sensors similar to a Perception roll for sure. But I think this is one of the areas where FATE really differs from 5E in that there isn't really a need to roll unless you are actively trying to accomplish something.

Remember the four Actions in FATE are Overcome, Create an Advantage, Attack, and Defend. Whenever someone rolls it is with one of these actions in mind no matter the skill being used. In the case of Sensors is a person rolling to Overcome something like natural interference, distance, obstructions, ECM? This is why I need to be better about putting up spoilers for these types of Overcomes so you all know whether you want to spend FATE points or not to try and beat the difficulty. OR even if you fail at beating the difficulty, you could still succeed but with a serious cost.

For instance, you roll a +4 for the current sensors Overcome. You spend a FP to get that to +6, but you really want to gain the info under the +7 spoiler. So you decide to gain what you want and succeed, but at a serious cost that I assign. Something like "Your passive scans got you a lot of information, but to really get through the enemy passive defenses you need to light things up with your active scanners. Unfortunately this reveals you as well and whoever is manning that facility knows you just pinged them and your location."

The other possible action would be someone trying Create a new aspect. Again using Sensors this might be something like an ECM Cloud. Jamming All Communications. Disguising Our True Size or something. In this case there might need to be an opposing Sensors roll or I need to set a difficulty that allows the aspect to be put in place. A failed roll might mean no aspect is created. But it could also mean the aspect is created, but the opposition gets any free invoke.

So someone tries to Create an Advantage by creating a Jamming all Communications aspect. There's a contest and after all is said and done, the opposing sensor jockey wins the contest. There would still be a Jamming All Communications aspect in place. Anyone could use it for relevant Invokes, but the opposition would get the one Free Invoke, while the party would get zero.

This might be a good time to also remind everyone that Create an Advantage isn't just a fancy Help action. Whenever you initiate the action you are creating a new Aspect. Aspects can be invoked and compelled by anyone with a relevant reason to do so. So while Markus attempted to create a new aspect which I'd probably label something like Unorthodox Sensor Technique. His roll of +4 would be a success. So the aspect is created and the group gets one free invoke. Charly could use that free invoke to gain a +2 bonus on a sensors roll. But now that it exists, I could also Compel that aspect. Perhaps offering a complication that the method overtaxes the battered systems of Charly's old Wasp. Once she gets her initial read, her entire sensor suite goes temporarily offline. If she accepts the Compel, she gains a FP and probably a new Aspect like 'My Sensors Are Offline'. Or she can say 'no way' and spend a FP to get out of the Compel, ideally by having a narrative reason for how. Perhaps by managing to quickly replace some fuses or override the safety settings to bring things back online.

All this is not to say that rolling is bad or not to try to create advantages, but that there may be unexpected consequences or complications down the line which is generally different from what most of us are used to with systems like 5E/PF.

Finally, for some of these Sensor type rolls, it might be worth giving the FATE Teamwork rules a try. Given that I think everyone has at least a +1 in Sensors, then that would give someone like Lloyd a +2 bonus (Only Lape and Charly are there to actually help) for his already really good +4 skill.

But now that it exists, I could also Compel that aspect. Perhaps offering a complication that the method overtaxes the battered systems of Charly's old Wasp. Once she gets her initial read, her entire sensor suite goes temporarily offline. If she accepts the Compel, she gains a FP and probably a new Aspect like 'My Sensors Are Offline'. Or she can say 'no way' and spend a FP to get out of the Compel, ideally by having a narrative reason for how. Perhaps by managing to quickly replace some fuses or override the safety settings to bring things back online.

That seems adversarial, and has the potential to be dangerous to the health of the game.

Jack Elroy Powers wrote:

Tactically speaking, this is why I despair at scouting, either here or, say, a party going down a 10x10 hallway.

Wait, you despair at scouting? What happened to "bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty..."?

Please tell me that’s not a Buck Rogers reference. LoL

Salvage: I agree with the concept that it takes 3-parts to have a chance at piecing a Mech together. I don’t think that 3-parts should equal an automatic Mech. It should require some skill to put it together and the level of success should reflect the Tech’s roll. That said, I’m not opposed to Dm awarding a complete Mech for a creative solution to a problem. I wouldn't like to see a situation, like the one used to gain the Griffin, taken advantage of. It should be a one off. New Mech’s should be challenging to acquire, seeing they represent one of the biggest motivations in the game.

In the case of the Griffin. I don’t think that Mech, in its current state, possess an imbalance. Its load out is a couple long range shooters that are not that devastating. Now, if we modify it into an upfront brawler, and put it in the hands of Gunny, that could cause an imbalance for our current lineup. Simply put, the DM would be forced into one of two decisions for an encounter. First, he could put smaller Mech’s that Gunny would hatchet or blast into scrap, or he would compensate for the added muscle, which would pose a serious and immediate threat for a Mech like a Wasp. If I was making the call, I would delay any such upgrades for at least a few missions. Salvage needing time to repair, the job requiring more time to complete, Griffin has a combat quark preventing the upgrade until it’s worked out, etc.

Currently stated component salvage, I like the option. Balancing the numbers, well that could be adjusted as we go, if it seems like things are two scarce.

Compelling Aspects: Nothing more than my opinion. Positive result on an aspect = free invoke for the creating side. Negative result = a free invoke by the opposing side. What happened with Gunny’s Commando in the beginning of this last skirmish was perfect. He took a massive hit because of failing to create a piloting advantage. The Locust used it to compel the situation and received a +2 to an already solid attack, making it impossible to negate. Narratively, it made sense. It hurt! But it made sense.

Field Repairs: I think these are necessary if we intend to not simply do one off missions. The absence of a lift is compensated by using other Mechs and making positioning adjustments with the Mech being worked on. In my opinion, armor repair should be something like one bubble per. Tech success level. +2 = 2 points added to armor, etc. Without field repair, when a Mech becomes disabled, or has taken a lot of damage, it could result in a mission being delayed or scrubbed all together.

Component repairs: I think this should also reflect on the Tech's level of success. Target should be based on how many hits it took, one for one. Three bubbles filled; target success number is +3 to minimally repair it. Anything over the target repair number imparts some small positive aspect. 0- minimum number to repair it, simply fails. -1 to -6, imparts a negative aspect to the item that now requires an overcome with a target number equal to the failure number to repair.

I also wanted to say that I have been delaying on posting in game play in order to allow more time for the Dm to focus on the scouting party. I feel the scene should be more focused on that than repairs.

Jack Elroy Powers wrote:

Tactically speaking, this is why I despair at scouting, either here or, say, a party going down a 10x10 hallway.

Wait, you despair at scouting? What happened to "bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty, bitty..."?

That was for the FULL party, Thereneger! Friends don't let friends bitty alone. When I wanna bitty, I bring da whole boys to da bitty. If'n a bro wants t' bitty, I'm all up for some bitty. If you can't bitty with a bunch of bitty, well that you gots no business to do da bitty.

some stuff

Wow there's a lot to unpack here.

1) 2006 SUV and field repairs.

There's a video around the internet (I'll post it later maybe) of some guys in South America going into the full-on jungle and coming across a car. Like, this thing is a rusted out husk. It has trees growing through the engine and stuff. To us it looks like its not even worth the scrap metal price.

Using only their wits and scrap metal just laying around they GET IT TO RUN!

Gen. Patton was once asked why the American tank army moved so much faster than the German. He replied that Americans grow up working on cars, so they all can lend a hand fixing tanks.
Also, American tanks were made with field repairs in mind, while German Panzers were like well-designed Swiss watches, with tighter tolerances and fine machining. This was all very well, but when things went wrong, you couldn't just rub some dirt on a P.IV and get it to run again, like you could with a Sherman.

Hence, to us Weseterners running fragile modern autos, we might think that field repairs are some high-magicks, unavailable to mortals. I tell you I have seen mechanics to road repairs that would make us sick with envy.

2) I concur with Gunny that ingenuity and another working mech can be so useful as to make a hoist or a mech bay unnecessary for the most part.

Also, we didn't get that 3 part mech for free. We had to kill it three times and then harvest it.

3) I do like how the Griffin went down. That you don't means there's a lot to be said.

Firstly, no, it's not game-breaking. It's basically a big under-gunned support mech right now.
And, yes, we can't rely on that happening much. BUT had it not happened this game would have a real problem with Believability.

Yes, I said it. For a bandit to stand to the death and, after it's three friends have been taken out, to say, "Nay, Sirah! I shall stand to the death for honor! Yea though I am a low-born bandit and hath not teeth nor words, I should rather go to my grave before I submit to the disgrace of surrender! Nay, nay, a thousand times nay I say to you!"

It seems like you're really clinging to this high-minded notion that all warriors have a code and everyone will rather seek an honorable death than give up a thing that is very, very valuable. It is important to me that this be explained. I shall have great anxiousness if I can not explain this thing in a way that is understandable.

I say this flies in the face of Human Nature. We came from a long line of people who but "Survive now and let the future take care of itself" before, literally, everything else.

Don't believe me?

I make a hobby of studying war. And death. And history is rife with examples.

1) Giving up an army, without fighting.

The Surrender of Harper's Ferry in the Civil War was the greatest surrender until the Bataan Death March in WWII.
Harper's Ferry is a town surrounded by three hills. The Union general was told to hold the town. He took this literally and failed to post positions on the three hills. When the Confederates were seen he did nothing. When they put troops on the hills he did nothing. When he got shelled he endured it for two days and surrender 12 THOUSAND troops.

Had he held out for even a little longer then Stonewall Jackson doesn't join Lee at Antietam, and after his battle plans are leaked to the Union, Lee finds himself hopelessly outnumbered and the whole War might've ended in 1862.

2) Giving up your wife's purity, and your own life, without fighting.

The Golden State Kill is credited with -at least- 13 kills and over 50 rapes over a 12 year period. How did one man do so much? His MO was to enter a home with a gun. He would point it at the man and the woman and say he was just here to rob the place, no one need get hurt. He just needs to tie you up, rob the place, and leave, no one gets hurt. After the man is tied up he rapes the woman. Then sometimes he kills them.
We would all like to think that we would stand up and say Nay! in such an instance, but with such a track record, obviously a lot of people would not.

3) Giving up an entire country, without fighting.

When Hitler wanted the Sudetanland he held talks with the President of Czechoslovakia. Hitler demanded Germany be given the Sudetenland because of all the Germans that lived there. The President pointed out that the Sudeten mountain range was the only defense they had. He made Hitler promise not to move his troops past the agreed-upon border. Hitler promised. Then the President made him sign a paper that he supe-DUPER promised not to go any farther than the agreed border. Hitler signed.

The Wehrmacht didn't even slow down as it crossed the Sudetenland and occupied Czechoslovakia for all of WWII.

Histories agree that had the Allies (France and Britain) stood fast with Cz at that time then the whole thing would've ended there. Or, had Cz said no and agreed to fight, that would've brought the allies onboard and WWII doesn't happen. (Fully a third of German armor at the start of WII was from Cz.)

Hence, yes, people surrender stuff to trade for life all the time.

Also, yes, it was nice this happened one time and, no, we can't count on it happening overmuch. But to show that one can conquer without fighting is good storytelling. =)

3) I do like how the Griffin went down. That you don't means there's a lot to be said.

Firstly, no, it's not game-breaking. It's basically a big under-gunned support mech right now.
And, yes, we can't rely on that happening much. BUT had it not happened this game would have a real problem with Believability.

Yes, I said it. For a bandit to stand to the death and, after it's three friends have been taken out, to say, "Nay, Sirah! I shall stand to the death for honor! Yea though I am a low-born bandit and hath not teeth nor words, I should rather go to my grave before I submit to the disgrace of surrender! Nay, nay, a thousand times nay I say to you!"

It seems like you're really clinging to this high-minded notion that all warriors have a code and everyone will rather seek an honorable death than give up a thing that is very, very valuble.

I say this flies in the face of Human Nature. We came from a long line of people who but "Survive now and let the future take care of itself" before, literally, everything else.

Don't believe me?

I make a hobby of studying war. And death. And history is rife with examples.

1) Giving up an army, without fighting.

The Surrender of Harper's Ferry in the Civil War was the greatest surrender until the Bataan Death March in WWII.
Harper's Ferry is a town surrounded by three hills. The Union general was told to hold the town. He took this literally and failed to post positions on the three hills. When the Confederates were seen he did nothing. When they put troops on the hills he did nothing. When he got shelled he endured it for two days and surrender 12 THOUSAND troops.

Had he held out for even a little longer then Stonewall Jackson doesn't join Lee at Antietam, and after his battle plans are leaked to the Union, Lee finds himself hopelessly outnumbered and the whole War might've ended in 1862.

2) Giving up your wife's purity, and your own life, without fighting.

The Golden State Kill is credited with -at least- 13 kills and over 50 rapes over a 12 year period. How did one man do so much? His MO was to enter a home with a gun. He would point it at the man and the woman and say he was just here to rob the place, no one need get hurt. He just needs to tie you up, rob the place, and leave, no one gets hurt. After the man is tied up he rapes the woman. Then sometimes he kills them.
We would all like to think that we would stand up and say Nay! in such an instance, but with such a track record, obviously a lot of people would not.

3) Giving up an entire country, without fighting.

When Hitler wanted the Sudetanland he held talks with the President of Czechoslovakia. Hitler demanded Germany be given the Sudetenland because of all the Germans that lived there. The President pointed out that the Sudeten mountain range was the only defense they had. He made Hitler promise not to move his troops past the agreed-upon border. Hitler promised. Then the President made him sign a paper that he supe-DUPER promised not to go any farther than the agreed border. Hitler signed.

The Wehrmacht didn't even slow down as it crossed the Sudetenland and occupied Czechoslovakia for all of WWII.

Histories agree that had the Allies (France and Britain) stood fast with Cz at that time then the whole thing would've ended there. Or, had Cz said no and agreed to fight, that would've brought the allies onboard and WWII doesn't happen. (Fully a third of German armor at the start of WII was from Cz.)

Hence, yes, people surrender stuff to trade for life all the time.

Also, yes, it was nice this happened one time and, no, we can't count on it happening overmuch. But to show that one can conquer without fighting is good storytelling. =)

Also, yes, it was nice this happened one time and, no, we can't count on it happening overmuch. But to show that one can conquer without fighting is good storytelling. =)

I agree with this statement. Any reservations I might have, is more in line with game balance than story telling. As long as something like this doesn't cause an imbalance, I'm good with it. I could see a Mech being acquired in a number of ways beside salvage. Payment for a difficult mission. A negotiation that makes sense. A long-lost Mech stash or crashed dropship that has a Mech still intact. There are endless ways that the story arch could deliver a Mech. That said, it's up to the DM to maintain a balance so that everyone can participate and enjoy the game.

And it should be absolutely ok for everyone to share their thoughts in here without ire. That's what this tab is for. Speaking for myself, its ok to disagree with me and state as much. No feelings on my end, at all.

Eh, we all know this is a work in progress that we're all learning to use. Some discussion of what's working and what's not is going to be needed, so hopefully we are all fine with doing so.

I'm kind of ambivalent on the salvage front. I feel like I'd have to see it in play to really get a feel for how it would , well, feel. I do expect this kind of surrender to be unusual. More often I'd expect someone to fight for a bit and then eject instead of surrendering immediately.

And it should be absolutely ok for everyone to share their thoughts in here without ire. That's what this tab is for. Speaking for myself, its ok to disagree with me and state as much. No feelings on my end, at all.

I was interrupted while typing this and it looks like we lost a part that I added saying that I have great anxiety that Lape is not comfortable with this and I greatly desired to put forth much effort so this instance could be seen in not just not a negative light but a positive one. :)

Re: Field repairs. I knew you were going to go with the Mech can substitute for a hoist and I don't want to say that's ridiculous, but imagine a rescue helicopter trying to lower an engine into your car while hovering at 300 feet altitude. Best of luck. Some mechs don't even have hands. But okay.

I also suggested a sliding timeframe for rebuilds and I think it is a good idea to use difficulty in making field repairs. If your standard difficulty number to fix something in one day in a basic Mech Bay is a 1, then not having the basic Mech Bay makes that a 2. Doing it in half the time doubles the difficulty, etc. And are you suggesting our mechs are more like Chrysler K Cars as opposed to Land Rovers? Yes, I feel you on that.

Atlas, your examples of surrender are from relatively contemporary Westernized ideals. The grandfather of my great-grandmother, who was alive until I was 10, was in the Civil War. Chances are most of us knew somebody who knew somebody that was alive in the mid 19th century. Crazy.

Gunny, I disagree with you on the Griffon. As long as we have it, you should pilot it and it should be massively advantaged. That allows GM to craft more difficult, exciting encounters. I love the idea of modifying mechs. Give me a Firestarter any day of the week and let me jam it full of jump jets and machine guns. So long as we're earning it, why not?

DM - Tareth wrote:

But now that it exists, I could also Compel that aspect. Perhaps offering a complication that the method overtaxes the battered systems of Charly's old Wasp. Once she gets her initial read, her entire sensor suite goes temporarily offline. If she accepts the Compel, she gains a FP and probably a new Aspect like 'My Sensors Are Offline'. Or she can say 'no way' and spend a FP to get out of the Compel, ideally by having a narrative reason for how. Perhaps by managing to quickly replace some fuses or override the safety settings to bring things back online.

That seems adversarial, and has the potential to be dangerous to the health of the game.

I don't think Compels are necessarily 'adversarial,' but they are certainly meant to be complications to keep the narrative interesting and challenging. And a player does have the choice to avoid any compel with a FATE point. To be honest, I'm still working to get a good sense for compels verses just invoking so I'm not using them very much and don't intend to use them too often. In fact, I think the first full fledged compel we had was actually initiated by you all. :)

On salvage, I'm inclined to keep successful salvage between +1 and +4. At least initially. Definitely willing to adjust as we go if it seems like too slim pickings.

As for the repair rolls, the table in the rules is meant to be more for repairs or replacement of Damaged modules. Salvaged items should have higher repair difficulties and times and require some kind of facility to make basic parts, fittings, etc. (You have a basic repair facility aboard the dropship.) But we could simplify things a little bit by setting a single repair Overcome difficulty for Damaged and Salvaged modules. Maybe +2 for Damaged modules and +4 for Salvaged regardless of size but modified by rarity?

A salvage roll of +3 or +4 means the actual module is still intact and doesn't require additional repair. That would account for times where maybe the mounting or limb or something was blown off, but the module itself came through okay. Of course there would still need to be a tech roll, time, and a facility to remount the salvage to another chassis.

It seems like we've got solid agreement on the 3 destroyed mech chassis equate to one rebuildable mech. So we will go with that.

Also, the Jenner wasn't destroyed. The pilot ejected once his gyro started to give out. It currently has no working weaponry and would be tough to pilot with a Damaged gyro, but otherwise the chassis is intact.

Finally, I'd agree that surrender won't always be the chosen course. Then again, he was outgunned 6 to 1 and had most of his armor shot off and only long range weapons. So taking a chance you all will stick to your bargain to allow him to live another day seemed like a reasonable choice. He also isn't Kuritan or a Comstar fanatic which would have made him more likely to fight to the end out of honor or zealotry more than anything else. Of course to Lapeidra the only good pirate is a dead pirate, so I can see her side of it as well. ;)

I don't think Compels are necessarily 'adversarial,' but they are certainly meant to be complications to keep the narrative interesting and challenging. And a player does have the choice to avoid any compel with a FATE point. To be honest, I'm still working to get a good sense for compels verses just invoking so I'm not using them very much and don't intend to use them too often. In fact, I think the first full fledged compel we had was actually initiated by you all. :)

Maybe not. As long as it doesn't feel arbitrary, like it makes sense that you would choose to spend that precious FATE point in that situation as opposed to some other. I was also thinking that the advantage the players have - 15 FATE points to your 3 - is too lopsided, and it will force you to throw bigger mechs at us to compensate, instead of having a balanced battlefield where smart decisions are rewarded.

Okay, so there's a lot to unpack here.

1. WWII Talk - I'm probably not as well read as you are on the subject, Atlas, but my understanding is that even if the Sudetenland wasn't handed over to Germany, it would have likely only delayed the outbreak of hostilities in Europe a year or two. I'd have to check a map, but I think Hitler could have still invaded Poland and partitioned it off with the USSR before swinging around and nabbing Czechoslovakia. Besides, even if that hadn't happened, Germany would have started strong arming France before the UK could finish its buildup, and that would have likely kicked off the European side of things. The Asian-Pacific theatre already had active conflict between China and Japan, and it was going to come to blows between Japan and the colonial powers in the area and the US who had territorial holdings in the Philippines among other possessions.

WWII was going to happen either way, the start date was really the only thing that would have changed, and if Japan had waited about six to eight months, things would have been very interesting at Guadal Canal and Coral Sea. I need to pull up some stuff I found about listening to Chris Weuve. He's an analyst and wargamer with the DoD and has some interesting presentations on Starfleet Tactical where he talks about space navies.

2. Bandits surrendering - Six of one, half-dozen of another. It made sense this time, but it could have also worked the other way. People who are stressed make some extraordinarily dumb decisions. He could have easily panicked and decided that fighting his way out was his only option instead of giving up is mech.

3. Field repairs and salvage - This one's a bit to unpack. On the one hand, you can jerry-rig (remember, jury-rigging is a felony ;P) up a hoist using cable, some timbers to make an a-frame, and having a mech walk back and forth to lower and raise whatever's on the other end of the winch. On the other hand, you aren't going to fit a tool kit that allows you to fix everything in a tool bag on your mech. For that matter, you'd probably need something closer to the size of a mechanics rolling toolbox to carry everything you'd need for field repairs on a mech around.

The field repair on that car worked because, when you get right down to it, internal combustion engines are simple. The kinds of stuff you're likely to find on a 30th century battlefield are almost certainly not simple. In fact, you'd almost certainly need some seriously huge machine tools to even maintain a mech and its weaponry. If we posit that Battletech is 80's to 90's tech with lasers, warp drives, fusion reactors, particle cannons, and big stompy mechs, then we're left in a position that necessitates that we don't have access to some of the things that would make what Jack described possible. A lot of it would require some pretty impressive computing power, and one of the things that I've found as a Computer Science is that people constantly both overestimate how good things like AI and Machine Learning are and underestimate just how powerful computers have gotten in the past ten years much less the past twenty to thirty.

A lack of computing power, especially cheap computing power, means a correspondingly higher need for skilled machinists and precision machine tools. A small machine shop for hobbyist engineering projects is the size of a 1-car garage. A small machine shop capable of working on parts for mechs would probably be the size of a large house (2000-2500 sqft., 200-250 sq. meters if I did the math right.)

So we could probably field strip mechs and get them back on their feet in a pinch, but full repairs? That's going to take a mechbay and a well equipped machine shop.

And since the Sherman was brought up, here's a video by a guy who's probably the most famous tanker on Youtube. TL;DR: the US army was after reliability and numbers. They were going to have to ship the stuff across at least one ocean and they couldn't very well count on being able to ship it back if something broke. They needed a lot of tanks and they needed them to all use the same parts to keep logistics just hard not futile.

Sorry, A bit frazzled. I probably killed one of my 3d printers and it's going to be at least $115 to get the parts to fix it.

Seeing as Lloyd beat me to the punch, I'll go ahead and spend my last FATE point on this.

I had something to say about that as well, but that kinda of got forgotten with everything else swirling in my head.

That said, GM, feel free to compel my trouble or aspects anytime.

Okay, so there's a lot to unpack here.

Yes. Yes there is. =3

Things that have nothing to do with the game I'll spoiler. =]

The more I think about it, the less I see the need a mech bay, or why field repairs would even be difficult. Why can't a mech just lay on its back until you're done? Need to access a back panel? Have it turn over.

For everything else I see the rules set down by Tareth for repairs are useable. =]

Because mech parts are made of steel and are very very heavy. Also, aremechs meant to simply lay down? We're in meme territory now.

And since the Sherman was brought up, here's a video by a guy who's probably the most famous tanker on Youtube. TL;DR: the US army was after reliability and numbers. They were going to have to ship the stuff across at least one ocean and they couldn't very well count on being able to ship it back if something broke. They needed a lot of tanks and they needed them to all use the same parts to keep logistics just hard not futile.

I'm not clicking on the link of a tank expert unless it's Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Shermans, we got here because of Shermans, Jack. :P

Re: MAAAAHHHCKS!
I don't think most Mechs can stand on their own, just mechanically speaking. I need to find that page I found going over how fast mechs would actually be. It's pretty interesting.

I think your underestimating how much precision work you'd need to do when you are starved for spares. If you have to rebuild something, you have to have precision machine tools. If you watch some vintage machine rebuilds, you'll see what I'm talking about. You can swap stuff out all day long as long as you have access to spares, but the second you have to rebuild something, you need machine tools.

Concerning surrenders:

People surrender all the time. Both in history and in setting. While the inner mind set of someone from the inner sphere can be from any culture or era (note, it is a Bandit, not a DCMS member. Also, Canopians are in setting semi reknowned for treating captives relatively nicely.).

Lets have some rather random examples:

Julius Caesar was captured by pirates. His ransom was paid.

John Elphinstone (British Admiral who went on to serve the Russians in one of the Russo-Turkish wars) was captured by the French, it wasnt a very big deal and didnt stop his career much.

There are some Moscovite army summons responses remaining, out of a couple of hundred of Boyars who were supposed to show up, a sizeable number of them was "currently captured by X" (X variably being the Nogais, the Crimean or the Poles/Lithuanians).

Breitenfeld during the 30 year war had some 12K killed/missing and 7K prisoners. If one side wins, they typically end up with prisoners.

Fighting to the death as in "we never surrender" was a rare exception. Capturing a quarter of the enemy force is not particularly noteworthy either.
I like that part of the enemies got away, its quite realistic.

I also doubt that there is any problem for the GM to make things challenging if we have a Griffin rather then a Locust.

Fighting to the death as in "we never surrender" was a rare exception.

I've never been a soldier but I can't imagine a CO saying, "Don't surrender... unless you might die." And anyway, like I said originally, we're applying our Western bias and not really allowing for a futuristic setting where you're only truly living when sitting in that mech.

Related. I recently had a Pathfinder DM roll Intimidate (successfully) against my PC. That's a door we do not want to open.

I did serve in the German army.

Overall, if you can attack, attack.
If you cant attack, defend.
If you cant defend, retreat.
If you cant retreat, flee.
If you cant flee, surrender.
If you cant surrender, die.

The order of this is universal, the probabilities arent and depend on culture, technology, etc. .

Now, you are to trust your officers about making the determination of what is currently possible.
In most cases, you surrender when your relevant CO gives you the order to surrender.

Battletech is actually notable for most protagonists who arent Clanners, Kuritans or Wobbies having fairly relatable mindsets.

Very well, I'm on board.

Personally, I can't speak on what another person would do as a rule of thumb. Circumstances and people's perspectives can vary so greatly. From my perspective, there are somethings in this world that are simply important enough to die for. I don't necessarily mean a willingness to risk your life, which is an accepted possibility in positions like the military, law enforcement, firefighting, etc. I mean more in line with actually accepting your death as a result for making a personal choice. For me, an example of this would be protecting family. Other things, like preventing massive loss of life, or the suffering of masses might warrant such a choice. I know there have been cases where a stricter military has demanded a no retreat policy with penalty of death. Consequences like that might cause someone to stay the course. In a case like the one we are investigating, where loved one's lives might hang in the balance, might motivate someone to fight to the death. (Shrug) I know I would if I thought surrender would cause may family's demise. It's really hard to stapple a one size fits all adjustment to what a pilot might do under a specific situation. I suppose that's where the GM has to make a call, based on their opinion, and run with it. The one thing I think I can speak on, is the fact that there are many subjects that come up in life that there is no right answer to. Where the argument from both opposing sides have merit. Unfortunately, when those subjects come up, people's opinions on such subjects are generally staunch and have little wiggle room.

@Markus: Just curious, what did you do while you were serving?

Heh, Charly, now we can do your double-envelopment plan. =]

I'm not sure how a 3-sided attack would work in our 1-dimensional map. I suppose we could just split into two groups. That's fine two.

If I had to guess, I would say it would probably create a tactical advantage aspect for the encounter. What skill you would use to create the aspect, I'm not sure.

@Markus: Just curious, what did you do while you were serving?

Extended conscript, never left Germany. Most military relevant things were guard duty and playing opfor during maneuvers. I do speak Russian, so I got to "play" Serbian radicals a lot, a couple of grunts from my unit also had Russian backgrounds, so they got assigned as well.

I got chewed out by an irate US lieutenant colonel who, while having learned Russian at university (his Russian was indeed pretty solid, and he could recite some parts of war and peace by heart), could not understand the russian communications we were using (we were using our own mobile phones for realism, and they had little issue listening in), partly because of my severe German accent speaking Russian, and partly because about every second word we used was some kind of swear word.

Our german Oberst protected us, stating that "nope, their use of Russian is mostly realistic, although his german accent is a bit over the top, being more intense then what they use for Hitler in Russian WW2 movies, but get used to every second word being a swear word, and yes, *Blyad* can mean about 50 different things, at least".

Given time to think about it, I have a better battle plan for the Phoenix Hawk engagement.

I prefer just coming at it from 2 sides. Stronger forces and it fits the line-map we have working well for us.

As SOON as we are known to the enemy (probably before firing range) we start the Psychic Battle!

This time we're not asking them to give us their mech. It's simpler than that. We tell them that we're going to liberate the mine, and it would be great if they helped us. Or, at least, just stood down and stayed out of the way.

We'll also ask them what's going on with whatever the work mech is doing.

This way we neutralize an enemy, and possibly gain an ally, without expending any of our own resources, so we can hit the mine at full strength. (Which we'll need because it sounds like a tough nut to crack.) If the Hawk is on our side, all the better.
I think there's a good chance they might be a local that has hostages at the mine site and will be just as willing to join us.

And if they don't go for it, at 6 on 1 we'll just do the Steiner Scout on them and move on. =]

I doubt the hawk is the only Mech to contend with. If I'm thinking correctly that digger is likely going to be a nasty melee Mech.