Lloyd Dupont

Nice one!  

It got me thinking! ...

nowadays theoretical nuclear physics (i..e the fundamental theory of everything) is at least 50 years ahead of its experiment.. and there is nothing much is left to discover...

Admittedly 90% of the universe is missing (dark matter, dark energy).... but it's doubtful we could do something with it....

Anyway.. that's not really the question nor the point.. we are already way in imaginary tech.. just trying to keep it... credible?! 😜

Good effort!

Mmm... right now I am hit by a cognitive dissonance....

On one hand, when you play MoO, you send your scout ship all around, you want to find and colonise planets. When I listen to Isaac Arthur, I want to build space habitats!

But, on the other hand, when I reflect on the real world, no government is paying for Mars colonisation, too expansive, no return on investment. And also almost want to go. Fair enough, why would you goon this god forsaken planet month away from anything, with nothing friendly to life?! 😮 

Why does it hit me?
I try to summarily describe various planet biome and reason for colonisation....

I can imagine asteroid belt being interesting.. more than that... why colonise a planet hostile to life in the vague hope of eventual return on investment in.. 1000 years?! 😮
And who would volunteer anyway?! 😮 🥴

I did agree....
If not explicitly enough, let me do it here!..

Doing my tech and equipment summary list now.. might post for review this weekend (still missing drugs and explosives)
While it's a matter of taste there a few things that should be obvious no-no or yes-yes.... 

The one thing quite debatable on my list so far is that I gave each item a tech level (from 3 to 21,or perhaps should I say 12 to 21, since 9 represent nowadays) and me think... does it really matter? I am planning on some mini rule though, to use various tech level as inspiration for trade between planet though...

Anyway I don't know where you came with the idea that Bulrathi should be less good at jumping when I explicitly said they were made of lighter stuff and more powerful muscles...

Trying to stretch it perhaps you mean their physiognomy was made for standing and not for jumping perhaps?
Well, be assured, such is not the case!  

Just now, Mugen said:

Oh, you meant the creature's length, not the jump's length...

Ahem, yes..  reading my post again I can see how one could miss that....

The cube why?
The height you go is roughly the energy provided during your jump divided by your mass and some constant. In fact you said so your self!  

And mass is proportional to volume which is a the cube of a significant length time some constant (approximately) (because we are 3 dimensional beings! ) 
I.e. creature twice as tall are roughly 8 times heavier...

For example
Cats are about 0.5 meters long and weight about 5 kg
Tigers are about 2.5 meters long and about 120 kg, 24 times heavier for 5 time longer (5^3 = 25)

Anyway power generation also increase by the same ratio.. so weight is not that important... mostly geometry...

I see it differently..... Big and heavy creature cant jump much and small and light creature can jump well. Though if they are too small they are also limited to a multiple of body length so it goes down as well...

So, onto Bulrathi, they are no elephant, in fact they are even lighter than human! So they jump better!
Although, everyone (be it elephant, human or ants) has trouble jumping in High G (i.e. all jump length are divided by 2 and fall damage is doubled)

mmm... some googling later.... 
it seems that jumping doesn't change much between creature to creature, from 1 meter for giraffes, 2 meters for a flea and human a bit better than the giraffe, but not so much...

As someone on Reddit says it:
The energy to spend is proportional the cube of the length, but so is the muscle power..

yeah.. I went with my idea of simply doubling the value for HighG creature. Easier to understand and use in game.

Horse still puzzling though.... a MOV of 12 seriously limit it sprint speed... Though it probably  show OK value for daily or walk movement rate...
Maybe quadruped should get a x2 multiplier on sprint values?

I was reviewing Jumping rule.. not that I think it might be important but I was reviewing all skills, be sure I understand them and find them a use, and I wanted to give Bulrathi amazing Jumping ability since they are creature from High G world. Dunno it f it's important... but it's cultural!  
For the record I made Bulrathi lightweight and strong, ie. SIZ 2D6+2, STR 3D6+9

Now jumping in the rule book is a bit lackluster. it's 3m x 1m. which you can double on special. In D&D (sorry about that unholy name 😮 ) it's 1 foot per STR point... mmm... not good either huge creature in BRP have high STR and automatically jump very far! 😮 

I was thinking how about I base it on MOV and tweak it a bit with Skill% and STR/SIZ ratio. A human has 10 MOV. So 10 feet base. And maybe I could add Skill/10% in feet. In case of failure I remove the skill bonus, or double it in case of special, seems nice.
Question 1: I would still like to spice it up with a SIZ/STR ratio bonus still... perhaps simply multiply by STR/SIZ but this might be "too Math intensive" for smooth game play...
Or maybe I simple add a G factor? HighG creature => x2 jumping range (in normal G). and when jumping in HighG divide by 2....

Out of curiosity I looked at horse, how much could they jump with that hey? And then it hit me... Horse MOV is... 12? Seriously? Really?
For the record I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_gait
Mmmm yeah, after all Horse do have a walk speed barely faster than human... ok then...
Question 2: Though, obviously, their top speed is a lot higher (By that I mean a lot more than 20% faster, more like 250% faster - i.e 3.5 times faster), how does that work in BRP?! 😮 
Question 2a. How about jumping? Apparently world record in 2.4 meters up and 8.4 meters long.... mm... doesn't quite scale like human! 🥴

Yes, thinking about the science, or pseudo science, does help create substance!

River flowing uphills! 😮 
I would be intrigued too, to say the least!

I quite like your suggestion so far Atgxtg!

Also I realised, worrying about "degrees of realism" when the thing is clearly not realistic to start with is.. unproductive to say the least... 😅
(A better word is, perhaps, arbitrary, hence no such thing as "thinking" it)

Nevertheless I have some cool new ideas to think of now!

Plenty of good idea here.. I particularly like your idea of hoverbike / vehicle to only work in purpose build area!

one thing I should add , for it might lead to good suggestion.... is that due to high damage of scifi weapon I feel like I need to include forceshield tech... (like the Energy Armor from the BGB) plus.. it's properly ultra scifi....And this "repulsor field science" I created explain it all: forcefield, hoverbike, pseudoantigravity...

But my ideal scifi-science-fantasy.. would mayeb some hoverbike in special environment like Atgxtg suggested, energy armor, for survival reason plus it's super cool, maybe no antigravity... it's no big deal, zero cost involve narratively, and make space a more alien frontier... 

Mm.. I feel like I might be cutting hair here.. mmm.....
Though there is something cool to imagine a principle and exploit it as much as possible, it's what we human do!

1 hour ago, seneschal said:

Banks?  Loans?  Why, we've evolved beyond such things.  The Party, er, Starfleet says so.

They might be wrong... look either cook or prostitute (depending of the source) is the oldest job known to man, yet it is still here and thriving! 😛 

To be fair, swordsmiths are on a downward spiral though.... 😅

this looks clunky (those blades! 😮 ) (and btw, following the link, the range is 13 miles...) though nice as well thanks for link (I mean name)!

But I was thinking about

Me think I should put a budget on vehicle power and costs.. drive an hoverdrive costing intrinsically more than a wheeled one, and maintaining pseudo grav seriously draining power.. this way it all makes sense...

However, I should also avoid burdening players with trivia! 😮😅🥴

Thanks for reading tip too!  

Mmmm.. thanks for your input....

Now.. I am sad to report I haven't followed either much! 😕 
But hey I liked the latest Star Trek on Netflix might have a second look., And maybe I could find some starcraft guide hey? Actually I quite like that one  

The point or question of this thread is not clearly defined, it's a bit like, please pitch in.
Also sorry if I might be difficult (with contributions), I noticed that I have quite a different approach to some people here. Sometimes it's a matter of different taste (fair enough ) sometimes.. I noticed I have idea which are not conducive to adventure though... but hey I do change my mind (slowly...). 😮

Anyhow, after that preamble, what prompted that post?

As some of you might know, I am working on a scifi setting / adventure / ruleset (will share when I am happy )  and I am at the equipment and vehicle list design stage now....
I am trying to be.... "relatively" plausible, though it's a Master of Orion setting and I have a number of space fantasy tech already:  FTL ship all around (arguably plausible alcubierre dive), psionic powers (pure fantasy), and "repulsor fields" (total nonsense tech which enables to reactionless propulsion, which enable landing spaceship in town, also flying cars, forcefield and, why the hell not when use indoor, pseudo antigravity), (arguably plausible using quantum entanglement) ansibles.
So.. mmmmm.. maybe not so realistic after all...

Anyway watching Isaac Arthur talking about hollow rotating asteroid as space habitat. It's a time where ingenuity and science produce some really cool ideas.
But now I am thinking pseudo antigravity as mentionned above kind of throw to the bin all the ingenious beauty of those space habitat.
If I scrap it, I should scrap my repulsor fields too, hence no forcefield, no hoverbike, no landing your spaceship in the city.. losing some fun here... and also witout forcefield bullet become much more of a problem... (arguable this might be desirable for some.. but I happy to have a tech mitigating the deadliness of future weapons..)

So.. I have a tech conundrum, or mmmm, agonising choice? between cool scenic space fantasy tech or cool ingenious real ones?
And also, since I am going to have FTL... maybe the choice is already made? mm...

What I am trying to say.. I am trying to maximise cool space fantasy fun, while also maximising real science ingenuity and I am not sure how to have both sometime...
in that particular case I was thinking space habitat!

I am also still wondering whether spaceship will use the pseudogravity tech outline earlier (which would help doing acrobatic manoeuvre) or they should be the rotating type... 
I know, it's clearly a matter of taste here... but what would be the most science friendly space fantasy kind to your taste here?

Seems like a lot of RPGer are old RPGer... And it would probably be the norm if not for the surprising revival or RPG those recent years....

Shub-Niggurath approves!  

16 minutes ago, g33k said:

I think this is the bit I missed.  You had said you had a "galaxy map" and I presumed you meant "map of the (whole) galaxy" rather than "map of (this sliver of) the galaxy."

 

Haha... Alright then!

I will challenge you though, that no Game Master could produce a (remotely) accurate map of the galaxy that is usable for table top play! 😜 
You know, 3D with 10^11 stars in it....
Although.. come to think of it, from a quick glance at it, I think the galaxy maps from some Star Wars RPG claim to do it...

Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with my writing style.. due to needless and sometimes mislead conflicting argument...
But this time I am sure you didn't read what I write, so here is quick summary! 😜 

- I have a 2D map of a 2D galaxy, which will reduce the number of star dramatically. Yes it's unrealistic, but it's practical. And it does not really matter, it's just a game hey!  
- the average star density in our neighbourhood is 1 star per 3.26 light year, I have 4 light years hex map (which contains 0, 1 or 2 stars), fairly reasonable simplification
- my corner of the galaxy is only a sliver of the whole thing 100 by 60 light years (by 1, flat map, remember!?)

This galaxy (sliver) has 375 hex, I probably will fill 200 of them... there will be void and pack of stars)...
I can hardly have much more star than that (with those reasonable simplifications)

Beside it's good enough, its plenty enough, and at 100 lightspeed you can hardly have bigger semi cohesive single political unit....

As a side note, to show you the dramatic impact of the missing 3rd dimension, if the map were a "cube" (i.e. 3 dimensional) with 40 lightyear aside (i.e. much smaller side length) I would have 1000 slots, and maybe. mm.. 600 stars in that "3D map"... so the flatness has a big impact... But hey, for simplicity sake I am not going to use 3D map... because it doesn't really matter... and it's much easier to manage...
It happens in the kitchen too, people underestimate the impact of the 3rd dimension in containers.... Which is missing in my case! 😜 

BTW a source for stellar density, just to see my number are reasonable, though reduced to 2D....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_density
(actually the cubic root of 0.004 is ~ 0.158, which means a star roughly every 6 light years... so I am packing them quite tightly...)

---

Other than I though about car, boat, cruise ship... I guess the limitation is like you said, you have to pay the crew and the fuel!
I didn't like that initially because I was thinking to do "cheap fuel" (i.e. negligible price), and expensive repair.. But cheap fuel is a bummer, gotta charge for it in both storage space and credits...

And of course, it's about 1 week travel for 1 hex, those things annoys real people when stuck in a tiny ship...

--

9 hours ago, g33k said:

Unless the PC's are quite unique in the galaxy, this "hidden" system will have been "stumbled across" again and again and again.  It will be an "open secret" in the spacer community (dive bars, guild-halls, whatever you have) that there is Something Very Very Substantive going on in this "uninhabited" and "worthless" system...

It's arguable unrealistic, I'll grant that... My angle (which is a bit stretching it) would be most commercial shipping don't bother to do exploration, since it's quite cost ineffective. But obviously I would also need active information suppression as Lawrence suggested..... But.. yeah, you right, it probably should be.. what's the expression.. an "open secret"? or something...

I haven't made the map yet.. but there will be, I think, about 100 empty world... And while, of course I want them to go there! I was a bit concerned they just randomly select the system and jump to it on day 1!

But, as you just suggested, and as I realised myself just before (see! I typed that!)

16 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Also, come to think of it, I don't need to worry. It will be hidden and defended. And if they jump on it first time, big deal.. They will just have to run away as they will detect enemy cruisers honing on them... And the mystery will remain, and possibly even, be increased, which is good!....  😅

It's not big deal if they go there, it will be defended..... They will run away, and be all the more surprised and curious...

That said, and somewhat related, I also want to give spaceship ongoing running costs which, while not prohibitive, encourage productive usage of them as much as possible....

4 hours ago, lawrence.whitaker said:

If you're set on running a sandbox campaign that involves the characters whizzing around the galaxy, then my advice would be to create a bunch of random charts (such as the many found in Traveller) that allow you to quickly create an inhabited world from a few dice rolls, if the characters suddenly head into uncharted territory. Customise the tables to fit the local authorities/rulers/empire so that it fits the themes of the campaign. And roll up a few worlds in advance and have some scenario seeds developed for them in case the characters head out there. In other words, you need to be prepared, and be ready to improvise. These are two of the most important things for any GM

Lawrence you misunderstood me... the plan is for the galaxy to be (more or less) "fully mapped" (albeit in a summarily expedient fashion), the plan is NG437 to be a "hidden world" (hidden by the government that is) (and a few other system as well). And I want to avoid players going systematically into unpopulated planet one by one or, luckily (or unluckily) jumping on it the first time.
So I want to make the plan to systematically explore unchartered world cumbersome and tedious.

Though when I say it like that I guess a little bit of fuel expense, a little bit of accident and a lot of boredom is all it wood take to stop exploration I guess.... And also... maybe I can "move secret planet a bit"...

Also, come to think of it, I don't need to worry. It will be hidden and defended. And if they jump on it first time, big deal.. They will just have to run away as they will detect enemy cruisers honing on them... And the mystery will remain, and possibly even, be increased, which is good!....  😅

58 minutes ago, seneschal said:

That celestial dragon isn't eating ships, he's charging interstellar transit fees.  In space no one can hear you max out your credit cards.  If you're strapped for cash he will still let you pass -- for unspecified favors to be determined later.

I was not planning on accommodating monsters taking credit cards!
In fact I was not planning on intelligent monsters!
But I guess, if some of them are somewhat related to the Sillicoid, possibly a few of them could be smart and communicative enough... Theoretically... still feels strange to me though....