clarence
-
Posts
1,104 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
24
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Profiles
Events
Everything posted by clarence
-
I've been experimenting a bit with the different scales, and I feel that a Capital Ship scale of x4 might be a bit small. For Starship scale (formerly medium scale), designs up to about 200 modules are quite manageable. Above that, the smallest Capital ships should reside, and that landed me at yet another x10 up from Starship scale. That means, for example, 1 module for ten people, or 3 people for longer trips (actually 2.5, but with the earlier discussions on hot bunks etcetera, rounding up seemed like a good idea). By introducing half modules, some of the less desirable effects can be dealt with, as Bridges being too big for example. Rounding the total number of modules up I think is the way to go here too. What do you think about this? Does it wreck some of the other ideas we have played with here? I also find that the modules always refers back to the basic Starship-scaled module. A 20 module long ship in Capital scale is 10 times (or 4 times if we go with that multiplier) longer than a 20 module ship in Starship scale. 1 Starship module = 10 Capital modules. Maybe I'm a bit too drawing-centered, but area seems to be a very natural way of working with this (except that dividing a module sketch into four pieces is much easier than dividing it into ten pieces...). It looks like a good start! This could easily be fit in as another chapter in the text, if you want to. I just want to point out that with the current layout, texts need to be kept quite short. For military starships I think this looks very good. A short description for each of the ship types would be good though. But doesn't this mess up the direct module-to-size relationship we've had so far? Could it be linear up to size 1000, and then logarithmic (to deal with really big objects, not often coming into play)?
-
Yes, good observation! It's actually a complete, small community (or village) on those ships. For some reason this makes me think about Eddie Izzard's "Death Star Canteen" ( ). Designing and drawing modules on paper… always easier to think with a pen in my hand. Do you think it is wise to deviate from the BGB definition of size? If it's really needed (perhaps for Puppeteer-like aliens, moving planets around before breakfast), it might be better to introduce more scales perhaps.
-
Ok, I think it will work quite well with a chapter named Advanced Combat to collect most of the optional rules. Some adjustments will of course end up in the other chapters as well, but the overall simplicity will remain, hopefully with a bit more consistency. If the advanced chapter is at the end of the text or following right after the existing combat chapter, I think is perhaps less important. Yes, I hope those fine adjustments will come when the rules are used in play. I think the worst unbalancing has been ironed out by my playtesting, but more people using it will make it better I'm sure. I will have to think this through a bit. 541 size/hit points for a planet sounds very little! What size is Cthulhu and his distant cosmic relatives? And Death Star's cannon - couldn't it be a special case, a weapon working on an entirely different principle, and thus inflicting outrageous amounts of damage? Seems a bit like cheating, but blowing up planets with a big gun is quite fictive too...
-
Well, I think that as long as we consider the crew some kind of military personnel, (hot) bunks with 8 crew per Capital Ship module would be fine. (I have always wondered though what all those people are doing all day on sci-fi battleships…) Is 240 modules enough for the other stuff? Not sure I follow you here... Love the number crunching you've done here! : ) For continuous fire rules, I would say we drop it. It was a very vague idea to start with, and I don't see it working very well. What I can't stop thinking about though, is how many hit points a medium sized, earth-like planet has. : ) Death Star's spinal weapon would have to beat that, right? It is too much to ask of the rules to simulate everything from a small shuttle up to Death Star though. We could do away with the +1s, if it makes the system neater/easier. I'm ok with that. I think we can wait and see if it is needed perhaps, and go with miniatures for arcs. Or what do you think - is it better to give both options? Or will too many options make the rules confusing?
-
Oh yes, in Capital Ship scale I would say it's ok. In other cases it might get too crowded (?). And 300 modules seems like a good size! Yes, but only as a rough guide. I'm not sure how useful it would be, but I was thinking multiple rounds. Death Star was my vague point of reference - not sure if that was what you had in mind originally... I get it! This flexibility seems like a good idea. How do the original damages relate to BRP Mecha - you see no need to adjust them? Four fire arcs seems logical, and keeping the system simple is very good. Is it possible to use the fire arc rules without some kind of miniatures?
-
This looks very, very good! It makes a great addition to the rules, and adding them in as options is perfect. The combat rules will feel much more well-rounded now. Looking forward to seeing more! Some questions: Why +1 for Blaster and Ion gun? Isn't it better to stick to the damage ladder, now that we have one? The Spinal Weapon is great! I have some problems with the free upgrades though. Maybe only range and damage upgrades are applicable with giant cannons like these? Fire arc, Autofire and Point defense at least seems a bit off. Instead perhaps something like "Continuous fire"? Are you planning for more info on fire arcs? I can make the final graphics, if any are needed. Are blank hex maps needed too? @Hexelis: Thanks for the comment - it seems Atgxtg got you covered on that. : )
-
1. LOL, I just wasn't familiar with the exact wording. This was one of the things I wanted to stay away from - but as an optional rule I guess it's fine. Doesn't it get overly complicated and you need to involve hex papers and miniatures - and then you realize you actually need a 3d representation…? 3. I knew this one too It would be a great addition. 4. Excellent. 5. Ok, your idea sounds good: Some "free" shots, and then an ammo module must be bought if you want more. What is the easiest way to keep track of ammo during play if there are lots of them? Would an abstract concept work, like "1 Ammo Module lasts one major battle or four minor"?
-
1. I'm not sure what a fire arc is... 2. No problem. Costs aren't very fine tuned as it is now, so go ahead. 3. Forgive my ignorance - could you describe autofire? (My interest in weapons is really low…) 4. Yes, that makes sense to add. Perhaps as an optional rule? 5. Tricky question. For believability, yes. For playability, no. As the rules stand now, they are not tracking energy expenditure in any way, and it seems a bit illogical to track ammo. What do you think? For Capital Ship weapons, I think the two options you mention are fine.
-
About naming armor, I came up with an idea: Multi-Primed Armor (Standard), Single-Primed, Duo-Primed, Tripple-Primed and Quad-Primed. This way it is very obvious how the system is working. I get it to four or five types of damage (laser, particle/blaster, electric/ion, corrosion (will this work in space?), kinetic/missile/projectile) and a corresponding number of armors. Is that right? And I have started adding Capital Ship scale to the rules, trying to keep it together under one heading so far, with some small adjustments here and there too.
-
You're welcome! I hope you find some use for it.
-
Ah, so Standard armor is the best, with downgrades possible if you need to cut costs or perhaps simulate low-tech armor. Yes, I think that will work. Maybe the term Standard is a bit misleading though - is there another convenient word for "protection from everything" (English is not my first language as you may have noticed, so I'm sure you can come up with something better than me…)? You mention kinetic, laser and missile - any more types of damage needed?
-
Looking forward to seeing that! Intriguing! Could you elaborate a little on this? I'm not sure I follow you all the way through here...
-
I also like the idea with up- and down-gradable weapons. Simplicity and complexity united. How many different types of weapons are you thinking about adding Atgxtg? Capital Ship scale it is! And the x4 concept I think will work very smoothly, and solves one of the problems I have had with large ships. I will try to integrate it with the other design rules. With armor, I'm afraid it will make the rules unnecessary complex, if certain weapons are better against certain types of armor. Naming different types of armor might be good though.
-
It seems to work out very well! A thought though: Lots of different lasers you have there - will you have as many power levels for the other weapon types too? Won't that be too much? With armor I went the simple route of not naming different types of armor, but only assigning a number to it. Would it benefit from a little more detailing à la BRP Mecha?
-
Yes, that seems to work fine! I was considering buying BRP Mecha when writing the first draft, but decided against it as I have some difficulties with giant combat robots… I will better get it now, I think.
-
Well, if you think it will be easier to make the rules work with 1:10, I'm ready to abandon the old scale. The problems I had with scale was that I very early tied the number of Modules tightly to Hit Points and Size, to make the system as simple as possible. If you start changing damage made by weapons, that close link will not remain. And probably rightly so - a multiplier of some sort would make as much sense, and reduce the problems involved with scale. It will be slightly more complex, but I think that's ok. So, go ahead and try 1:10!
-
Please do! That part is a bit simplistic as it is now, and fleshing it out would be a welcome addition.
-
It looks very promising! Sometimes it's good to forget, I believe - and instead get some thinking done and take down a few notes to get the larger picture right. I have dug up some old notes on alien species creation, and have slowly started to structure and improve on them - still a lot of work to be done though. It is quite difficult to devise a system for the unknown - either it gets very superficial or way too detailed. I hope to find a good balance eventually. One of the ideas I'm toying with is a kind of "weirdness scale", determined very early in the creation process. Further decisions can then be evaluated with this in mind - a long thin neck for example, could be very different if the weirdness scale is set to "Human-like" (thin and long neck compared to the average human) or to "Really strange…" (a giraffe's neck might be a better starting point to picture this).
-
I just uploaded BRP Starships 1.5 to the Downloads section here on BRP Central, to make it slightly easier to grab. It's in the Science Fiction folder. @NathanIW: How is your hit location system developing? Any progress?
-
New version of BRP Starships uploaded to http://ge.tt/7ID2lsY1/v/0?c! Changes in 1.5: - New chapter on world building. I have been trying to find a way to make a world come alive with these simple rules, with some selected parameters to make the creative work easier for the GM. - New modules for Engine and Maneuvering Thruster, and consequently a new way to calculate Speed and Handling. (Thanks to Atgxtg for inspiration!). Old rules included as a simpler option. - New rules for upgrading engines, working better with the above changes. - Slightly changed Starship Sheet to make room for more Modules. - Layout re-flowed and re-bookmarked. As always I appreciate all comments!
-
It's actually a quite neat system. A bit intimidating at first (it took me a while to get through the examples and their differences), but once I got it it's not that difficult. How important do you think it is where the different modules are placed? Do you just place them anywhere or does it require careful consideration to get best results? In a way it's a graphical representation of a deck plan, but avoiding the design aspects. Looking forward to seeing how it develops!
-
The hit location system sounds intriguing! In all the rules for starships I have seen, hit locations are difficult to manage, because of the wildly different layouts. Your ideas seem to get around that problem - maybe for the cost of being more time consuming to set up for a ship. But please keep us posted on your continued work! It's always interesting to see different approaches to these things. Have you seen the system in Gurps Spaceships? It seems like a good solution too, though requires a bit more rigidity when designing ships. I have skimmed through the world building rules for Stars Without Number and, as you say, they seem quite good. I especially liked the Tagging rules, dealing directly with the problem of filling planets with interesting conflicts, people and locations. My own world building rules are nearing final proof-reading. I hope to get some insightful comments on it here on the forum. And looking forward to your take on the personal shields!
-
That's great to hear! Let me know how it develops. The grid system for hit locations sounds interesting. Would you mind describing it a bit more? And combining it with more detailed rules for damaging specific systems seems like a good idea. And about the word artillery: I used gunnery first, but I wanted to use the same skill name as in the main rulebook. I prefer gunnery though… A write-up on a personal energy shield is essential to sci-fi! Could I maybe add it to the rules when you have finished it? I haven't added any equipment at all to the rules, because I find it exceptionally boring with those lists. I have almost finished work on some simple rules for world building - it seems to add up to 10+ pages. Focus is not so much on astronomical details, but more on the societies' internal conflicts. Hopefully some fodder to make the creative parts of sci-fi world creation a little easier. I still remember the combined fascination and disappointment after reading Travellers' world creation rules for the first time in the mid-eighties. Lots of information, but not much help in creating a world that could actually be used in play.
-
Latest download on http://ge.tt/1tpFKDS1/v/0?c Changes in 1.2: New Module: Extra Sensors New Module: Robot Arm Bookmarked pdf –30% Pilot skill for non-streamlined ships in atmospheres List of useful occupations from BGB Hit Points for NPC pilots on NPC Starship sheet Plus some more details I hope you'll enjoy those small additions! Next update will probably bring larger chunks of new material.
-
@Aramone: Good to hear! I will give it some more time then to see where it's leading. @nerdvana: You didn't miss it - I just got held up on the finishing line by the engine module stuff. I can probably post it on ge.tt this weekend. Only some small changes in this update. I will post something here when it's available.
