| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 7:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I'm considering making a change to the Cargo Increment rule, specifically, that the Difficulty Modifier described in Part 2 also be applied to Astrogation rolls. Strictly speaking, being overloaded with cargo should affect the ship's ability to travel in hyperspace, yet nothing in the RAW reflects that.
Under this proposed rule, a ship carrying 5 increments of cargo would also suffer a +5 modifier to Astrogation, and so on and so forth. Astrogators already have the option of off-setting penalties by increasing the length of the trip by 1 hour per pip of Difficulty, so if the example vessel was making a trip of 12 hours in length, they could increase the length by 5 hours (thus reducing the Difficulty by -5).
Thoughts?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10488
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | That is quite reasonable. The miracle of lightspeed shouldn't be easy, so why shouldn't the variable mass from hauling cargo be a factor in the difficulty of astrogation? |
I'll go ahead and make the change, then.
Actually, now that I think about it, that would be a good formula for calculating the Difficulty of a route: Base Route Length in Hours x How Frequently Traveled the Route is.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Savar
Captain
Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Posts: 591
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | That is quite reasonable. The miracle of lightspeed shouldn't be easy, so why shouldn't the variable mass from hauling cargo be a factor in the difficulty of astrogation? |
In the fluff is hyperspace drives bad on mass or volume? Reason I ask is some SiFi extra luminary drives had either mass or volume limits depending on the physics of the author. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
If the Death Star can travel through hyperspace, I'm guessing no. However, simple physics would indicate that pushing additional mass requires additional power or some other compromise.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Although, on a somewhat related note, I have considered something similar to the wormhole-based junction concept from the Honorverse, combined with something like the jump gate from Babylon 5. Simple version, unlike the Honorverse, where ships with a hyperdrive can use the junction on their own, using a wormhole jump in the SWU would require massive, coordinated "transceiver" arrays (ala Babylon 5 jump gates) on either end, which work together to push objects through the wormhole and catch them at the other end. This system would work even for non-hyperdrive ships.
Of course, there would be just a handful of viable wormholes scattered across the galaxy (viable meaning a wormhole where the expense of using it is less than the expense of just traveling in hyperspace to the other end), so it would in no way threaten the existing paradigm of hyperdrives as the de facto method of interstellar travel, but it would allow for the space-born equivalent of things like the Panama or Suez canals.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10488
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Savar wrote: | | In the fluff is hyperspace drives bad on mass or volume? Reason I ask is some SiFi extra luminary drives had either mass or volume limits depending on the physics of the author. |
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | If the Death Star can travel through hyperspace, I'm guessing no. However, simple physics would indicate that pushing additional mass requires additional power or some other compromise. |
It's funny that both of you mention things that were in my original reply above, which was a lot longer but kept coming out worded in a wonky way, so I just took it out.
I don't know about the fluff but I'm thinking that each ship's hyperdrive is capable for working with a certain size and base mass of the ship. The Death Star's hyperdrive works for the Death Star, but you couldn't just swap it out for a light freighter hyperdrive and expect it to work. If a light freighter is modified externally such as with add-on external cargo holds and such, its hyperdrive could probably be "tuned" to handle the slightly different shape and size, but the extra mass of even the empty hold would be beyond what the hyperdrive was designed for (the ship's original cargo capacity stat), so it would bring the added astrogation difficulty according to its mass, and then any added mass for cargo would also.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10488
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Although, on a somewhat related note, I have considered something similar to the wormhole-based junction concept from the Honorverse, combined with something like the jump gate from Babylon 5. Simple version, unlike the Honorverse, where ships with a hyperdrive can use the junction on their own, using a wormhole jump in the SWU would require massive, coordinated "transceiver" arrays (ala Babylon 5 jump gates) on either end, which work together to push objects through the wormhole and catch them at the other end. This system would work even for non-hyperdrive ships.
Of course, there would be just a handful of viable wormholes scattered across the galaxy (viable meaning a wormhole where the expense of using it is less than the expense of just traveling in hyperspace to the other end), so it would in no way threaten the existing paradigm of hyperdrives as the de facto method of interstellar travel, but it would allow for the space-born equivalent of things like the Panama or Suez canals. |
I don't think wormholes are completely out of place in Star Wars, but like you said as long as they are fairly rare and don't upset the existing paradigm of hyperdrive as the primary method of FTL travel. In my SWU, subspace is another dimension of existence like hyperspace, and although it is only used for short range FTL communication today, before the invention of hyperdrive subspace was used as a slower method of FTL travel. Subspace drives were abandoned and outlawed after their use "polluted" realspace with space-time anomalies. Perhaps that created some of the wormholes.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Savar
Captain
Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Posts: 591
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Although, on a somewhat related note, I have considered something similar to the wormhole-based junction concept from the Honorverse, combined with something like the jump gate from Babylon 5. Simple version, unlike the Honorverse, where ships with a hyperdrive can use the junction on their own, using a wormhole jump in the SWU would require massive, coordinated "transceiver" arrays (ala Babylon 5 jump gates) on either end, which work together to push objects through the wormhole and catch them at the other end. This system would work even for non-hyperdrive ships.
Of course, there would be just a handful of viable wormholes scattered across the galaxy (viable meaning a wormhole where the expense of using it is less than the expense of just traveling in hyperspace to the other end), so it would in no way threaten the existing paradigm of hyperdrives as the de facto method of interstellar travel, but it would allow for the space-born equivalent of things like the Panama or Suez canals. |
The gate from the Dark Stryder campaign!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Savar wrote: | | The gate from the Dark Stryder campaign!!! |
Close, but no. The Launch Gates in the Kathol System were apparently used to boost ships into hyperspace, whereas my wormhole concept would bypass hyperspace completely (or at least have that effect). Ships would enter the gate on one end, and then that gate would charge up in time with the gate on the other end to push a bubble of real space across the gap, with the ship inside it, essentially teleporting the ship instantaneously from one gate to the other.
Wikipedia won't let me post the link, but it's effectively a lock in space. And since it's not dependent on hyperspace, even non-hyperdrive-equipped spacecraft can use it. Of course, successful use requires control and coordination from both ends, as well as the transceiver arrays...
EDIT: It's closer in concept to the Kwa Infinity Gates or the Gree Hypergates, but in a much more limited form. This way, it uses similar tech while maintaining the mysterious nature of the ancient alien tech.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A thought on the rule concept I posted here...
While I like the concept, I find myself more and more preferring house rules that resemble the RAW (or at least a familiar aspect of it) as much as possible. In this case, the RAW already has rules for Standard, Free and Non-Roll Actions. Carrying cargo above a certain amount could simply be treated as one of those three, depending on what they're carrying.
So, for instance, if a ship has a Cargo Capacity of 50 metric tons, carrying up to 50 tons would count as a Free Action; carrying between 50 and 100 metric tons would count as Non-Roll; carrying over 100 metric tons would count as a Standard Action, which would, in turn, stack as the weight increases.
Thoughts?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10488
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | A thought on the rule concept I posted here...
While I like the concept, I find myself more and more preferring house rules that resemble the RAW (or at least a familiar aspect of it) as much as possible. In this case, the RAW already has rules for Standard, Free and Non-Roll Actions. Carrying cargo above a certain amount could simply be treated as one of those three, depending on what they're carrying.
So, for instance, if a ship has a Cargo Capacity of 50 metric tons, carrying up to 50 tons would count as a Free Action; carrying between 50 and 100 metric tons would count as Non-Roll; carrying over 100 metric tons would count as a Standard Action, which would, in turn, stack as the weight increases.
Thoughts? |
So free action would mean no MAPs, non-roll action means a 1D MAP, and standard action means a separate piloting roll per standard action? If so, I like increasing difficulty modifiers better for a single piloting roll better, like how going a higher speed just makes it a harder piloting roll. Having multiple rolls is going backwards, like how movement was handled in Blue Vader. It was changed in R&E for a good reason.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It could just be stacking Non-Roll Actions, so it's still only one roll, but with increasing penalties applied to the Standard Action of Piloting.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 462
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2022 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I think the norm of a ship is with cargo.
More than likely, a drive on a vessel is designed to move that vessel at its operational effective load - not empty.
Or some reasonable percentage of that (ranges on aircraft are not based on empty planes - they are based on with load).
(the comments on free action vs. map action kind of reflect this).
I would just adjust hyper difficulty level based on cargo load:
* Light cargo / no cargo : decrease difficulty one or two levels.
* Normal Cargo: no change in rules.
* Heavy cargo / overloaded : increase difficulty one or two levels.
Note: for military vessels - the weapons, armor, ordinance etc. IS their cargo. They just can't remove most of it ....
A few other cargo facts....
Also, while not 100% relatable to star wars (the stats on ships are a bit silly) = in actual shipping;
"Light cargo" - is 1 ton per cubic meter or less.
"Heavy Cargo" - is > 1 ton per cubic meter.
That is typical bulk shipping - boat, train etc.
Air freight is measured a lot differently - anything more than 166kg/m3 is considered heavy.
just my 2 credit worth.....
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16381
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2022 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The problem there is that the baseline for ships in general (including warships and starfighters) is how they perform without being fully loaded with cargo. I much prefer to have one unified rule, and not two separate rules for freighters and starfighters/warships. Also, based on film evidence, we never see the Millennium Falcon operating with any cargo apart from passengers or boxes of money (the reward from ANH), so there isn't really any on screen precedent for treating ships like they're always loaded.
Speaking from personal experience (driving a big rig for the last ten years), while trucks do actually handle somewhat better (more stable) under load, an unloaded truck is still capable of pretty impressive performance (Example video of an empty Peterbilt 379 dump truck accelerating onto the interstate).
Based on my most recent suggestion, I'd say anything up to 50% loaded is a Free Action, then up to 100% is a No-Roll, with an additional No-Roll for every 50%. That's for weight only, as volume is still an absolute. The accrued Action Penalties are then applied to all Piloting and Astrogation rolls, but are also applied to the Hull when rolling for Long Distance Movement effects while at Full or All-Out.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
