• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

*Another* System?

Originally posted by Aramis:
RoS: I spent many hours in high-school (quite literally) generating Characters. Not to play them, but just as a form of solitaire game. Likewise, I took a couple of my MP characters and ran them solitaire on trade and commerce.
I too generated many a character while experimenting with how PC generation worked.


Originally posted by Aramis:
FASA-Trek had a ship construction manual.
I believe I mentioned that one, I didn't like it.


Originally posted by Aramis:
Mekton II, Mekton II + VDS, and Mekton Zeta all have multi-vehicle design rules... Mekton Empire, Mekton II + VDS, and Mekton Zeta all have ship design rules specifically. (Mekton II alone only does vehicles and small craft...) And MZ is in print. (MZ+ is also nice, more options!)
Yup, I knew there was something I forgot. Mekton Empire's starship construction, though, is pretty much a light-hearted joke. The chapter leads off with ". . . or why this isn't Star Fleet Battles." It has a severely limited number of hulls, components, and options.


Originally posted by Aramis:
Car Wars [...]
For some reason, I was never interested.


Originally posted by Aramis:
Web of Stars has a ship design system. Comparable to HG... although less realistic, more handwavish.
I'll have to look that up.


Originally posted by Aramis:
Worlds Beyond: Some schmuck's attempt at an ATU using BRP rules mechanics (sans license)... the Swarr are very clearly modeled off the Aslan as portrayed in Best of JTAS 1.
D'oh!


Originally posted by Aramis:


Champions/Hero System: Star Hero (3rd Ed Hero rules) had a nice ship design system... very much aimed at hero fans who were gearheads, and giving them something to crank over besides characters.
The trouble with Hero is that it's wide-open to interpret exactly how to use the powers to create the vessels.

I was over at the site doing Traveller Hero lately (grrr, the forum wouldn't send me my registration activation, and there is no email address to mail for support), and checked out the Tigress Battleship done in Hero rules. It was odd. Most of the systems seemed right, but it failed, most oddly, to mount 430 50 dTon Missile Bays. Instead, it mounted one, and had a line-item entry for "seven more". Maybe I was reading it incorrectly. The batteries didn't seem right, either.


Originally posted by Aramis:
CORPS has VDS: all the options of GV, in half the space. You CAN build a modern SSTO with it....
Corps? Really? Two systems to check out.


Originally posted by Aramis:

GURPS has GV: Options for everything.
Ick! Like some people dislike d20, I dislike GURPS. (Although I found that site with hundreds GURPS Traveller starships and vehicle designs to be quite impressive.)


Originally posted by Aramis:
[...] Classic Battletech: Less realistic, but still a gearhead's dream. With Battlespace, adds ship construction rules. Fairly realistic ones, too.... and complexity is similar to HG.
I used to play quite a bit of the original Mechwarrior. I designed over forty mecha and vehicles (some did better than others). I still have some writes up on my hard drive. But in the end, the fixed engine table drove me bananas, as did a couple of other elements.


Originally posted by Aramis:
Gearheadism is, in fact, common in gaming systems covering SciFi.
I never said it wasn't. I said I couldn't remember how many systems I'd dismissed . . . which is not quite the same thing.
 
RoS (Chris, is it?):

Don't waste your time on Web of Stars... there is good reason Web Games isn't in print.

Worlds Beyond is actually worth a look.

Star Hero (1990ish edition, not the current one) was FAR less open than the current one. the one for HSR 5 (There was no HSR4 Star Hero, and SH1 was the LAST HSR3 product. HSR 3 never came out as a single rulebook; each was a fully playable game, and they all happened to share parts of the same system. HSR editions are identical to Champions editions for numbering purposes...))

CORPS and EABA are both by Greg Porter (Emperor's something-or-other for T4). EABA is on par with HG/T20. VDS is on par with FF&S in detail level. Both require some interpretive work to fit to a setting. (IE, They don't talk in real-world materials, just in real world units...)

Both CORPS and EABA have been used to run traveller (In fact I Playtested EABA under the OTU setting, as it followed on the heels of T20 playtest.)

MektonZeta has a unified design system (an expansion of the Mekton Technical System book from Mekton II); these two provide Ships as Units, not ships as Backdrop. (I do, however, Like ME's setting and psionics rules....)

Two more for consideration:
Alien Space Battle Manual, by Zocchi. (I can't find mine... either copy... I think they were stolen. I know one copy of its companion Star Fleet Battle Manual was stolen. Grrr)

Fasa's Renegade legion: more gearheadish than Battletech, and a killer setting, but far less well known. Like Battletech, has roleplay, tactical ground, tactical space, and fleet engagement space scale games.

And I, too, detest GURPS.

Only traveller, GURPS, and one or two others go to the detail level of what armor metals are, rather than advanced composite TL X.

In any case, I don't see why Traveller has to be the "Hard Gearheadism Champion" of science fiction gaming; nee, I feel that cuts it off from many who might otherwise approach it.
 
With Mekton mentioned I'm a bit surprised Dream Pod 9's design system (VCS) hasn’t come up.

There's a free download of I believe Heavy Gear 1st edition's version of it here:

http://www.dp9.com/Funhouse/Aids_HG.htm
http://www.dp9.com/PDF/VCS.pdf
http://www.dreampod-ent.com/PDF/VCS_worksheet.pdf

Now it doesn't have the wonderfully illustrated fluff on the technology behind the Gears but this version is free. It's been a while since I had a Silhouette version of Jovian Chronicles so I can't remember if the VCS also handled spaceships.

One thing I like about DP9 was they usually had (I'm behind since Gear Krieg started) an illustration for every piece of equipment with the illustration *by* the text description. 200 illustrations for 200 weapons are nice but if none of them are labeled or by the text descriptions they're nigh useless.

On a related note since David Pulver had a hand in at least the original version is BESM’s Own a Big Mecha (OBM) attribute and the related (and with ties to DP9) d20 Mecha SRD. Even more effects driven than the VCS (esp. OBM) and very nice for creating a design on the fly. The version of OBM in Tri-Stat dX is free but IMO not as good. It’s too restrictive and diminished.

http://www.guardiansorder.com/downloads/#dx
http://www.guardiansorder.com/games/d20/srd/

As for gearheading, these days I only do it to test out an idea for use in game. I burnt out on Battletech and Car Wars gearheading years ago. I can sologame to my heart’s content on a computer (though that pales IMO), for a RPG or board/war game I prefer to actually play and with a group of people.

As an accountant friend of mine who I game with says, “I do this for a living during the day, why would I want to come home and do this?” He’s in the group I’m thinking of running a Traveller game for sometime BTW. Fortunately there’re already more than enough Traveller ship, vehicle, and weapon designs out there for what I’ll need.

As always, YMMV and HTH.
 
Originally posted by Aramis:
RoS (Chris, is it?):
Yes! I am me, and me is I . . . what? ;)


Originally posted by Aramis:
MektonZeta has a unified design system (an expansion of the Mekton Technical System book from Mekton II); these two provide Ships as Units, not ships as Backdrop. (I do, however, Like ME's setting and psionics rules....)
<Looks at wallet, then at bank account; grrrr />


Originally posted by Aramis:
Fasa's Renegade legion: more gearheadish than Battletech, and a killer setting, but far less well known. Like Battletech, has roleplay, tactical ground, tactical space, and fleet engagement space scale games.
Oh yeah! I owned all those games, and played Interceptor extensively.

The Interceptor design sequence was highly enjoyable to work with. However, it was also plagued by FASA's pandemic fixed engine table system. I designed somewhere between 10 and 15 serious Interceptors, and maybe another ten experiements or failures. I played most at least once, and my favorites quite a bit. I also designed gunboats, etc. Although I never played them.

The combat damage chart was revolutionary, and hardly anything has ever equaled it to this day (although it could be a bit much to interpret, on some occasions).

I had Centurion, and designed a few tanks. The design sequence was a little different than for Interceptors, and wasn't as enjoyable to work with. I only played a couple of times, as my other friends only had Interceptor.

As for Ships of the Line, what a total joke! The design system was hideous. You slapped on the engines and spinal mount (if you chose to include one), and then the laser bays, and a missile system, and as long as you didn't exceed energy or bay geometry limitations, you were done. I actually designed a number of capital ships, but at the time I was designing an RPG campaign and wanted to fill out some OoB tables, etc.

The combat system for Ships of the Line was worse than than the design sequence. Essentially, you closed to missile range, and fired. If you had the right missile system, you pretty much either destroyed the enemy you hit, or burned off so much armor that laser bay fire would be likely to finish them off. Missile systems had either 1, 2, or 3 shots (IIRC); period. Spinal Mounts were pretty powerful, although less so than the missile systems. To the game's credit, spinal mounts were quite difficult to use (you had to line up an enemy on a hex-row). We only played it two or three times before throwing up our hands in disgust (whereas we all thought Interceptor rocked).

A book was published containing 55 Capital Ship designs. I was using them as examples to help me design my own vessels, when I noticed one of the official ships didn't conform to the design sequence rules (and there were only a total of two (2) rules that really mattered, energy and bay geometry). I was puzzling this over, when I noticed the ship on the next page suffered from problems, as well. I then sat down and went over every ship in the book. 26 of 55 designs were illegal by the game's not-too-restrictive design sequence. Hilarity stacked upon insult.

I really got the impression that FASA hadn't spent much time on SotL, perhaps it was a poor orphaned cousin project, or something.

Unfortunately for me, I loaned quite a bit of this game, "for a couple of days", to a "certain individual", who never returned them; and was never at home after that to let me retrieve them. He'd seemed like a good friend before that, too. The thief has never returned them and never given me their value in return. After this happened, I packed up the rest into a box and haven't looked at it much since then.
file_28.gif
 
Originally posted by Aramis:


Two more for consideration:
Alien Space Battle Manual, by Zocchi. (I can't find mine... either copy... I think they were stolen. I know one copy of its companion Star Fleet Battle Manual was stolen. Grrr)

Aramis if you realy want to replace Alien Space, Lou still does the summer comventions like GenCon. I know that comming from Alaska for a con is asking a lot but it is an option, or I can get in touch with Lou through a friend and see if he still has copies. He did two years a go the last time I was at GenCon.
 
Hmm... Lou's last public email addy that I have found died, otherwise I'd just email him direct... ;)

If he still has copies, I'd be interested in one each AS and SFBM (so I have one uncut...), and a point of contact for Lou. Heck, would be really neat if someone could convince him to put them up on DTRPG...

Or better, do a second edition of the whole shebang.
 
Originally posted by Jeffr0:

Yes. For most of you, this is Traveller's greatest strength. You love it. For me, I just want to be able to sit down with a friend that's never played this sort of stuff, and I want to play a game. I want to able to say, "we just played Traveller!" I want the light bulbs to go off. And I want to have that warm feeling that I have had a legitimate Traveller experience. The net affect of the online community on my subconscious is that anything I might do with Traveller is somehow illegitimate.
I just want to cast my vote for the 'T5 must appeal to non-gearheads and space opera lovers.' I've never understood (mind you I was less than a year old when the first LBB came out) how anyone can descsribe Traveller as not being space opera. I mean, its got an Imperium of 11, 000 worlds, assasinations, civil wars, talking wolves, the total collapse and rebuilding of interstellar civilization not once, but twice, pirates, mercenaries, and eeire subsectors of space.

So yeah, its a space opera setting to me (and why can't you have a space opera grounded in 'hard' principles?). And honestly, the depth, texture, history and potential of this setting is what has driven me to near bankruptcy tracking down items on ebay and picking up PDFs. I think T5 has to show off the dizzing potential of the system (ie. having space for gearheads and story oriented gms) and the setting without overwhelming new consumers.

Oh, and it really, really, needs some cyborgs, nannites and genetic engineering retconned into the setting/system. Even if such technologies only exist on the fringes of Imperial space and there are good reasons for it being banned within the Imperium they need to appear in the rules. And maybe in an illustration (a cyborg in a scummy crowd scene?).
 
But whatever happens, no free-roaming nano-technology, or nano that has the ridiculous capacity to replicate itself without requiring the correct source elements in the correct quantity.
 
Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
But whatever happens, no free-roaming nano-technology, or nano that has the ridiculous capacity to replicate itself without requiring the correct source elements in the correct quantity.
I dunno, one planet overrun with TL-15 or 16 free-roaming nannites sounds like a good excuse for a red zone system. And a good reason to seriously restrict research into the area. It could be framed with a blurb reading:

'During the height of the Ramshackle Empire those pesky terrans started applying banned Vilani research to their own advances in nanotechnology. As a result, a high-pop sub-sector capital in Zarushagar sector was entirely decimated. The system has been under strict interdict since and even the Solomani have ceased pushing for advanced nannites.'
 
That's how I've always explained it. The other option would be that the Vilani feared it due to the use of "black goo" Nano-weapons by the Ancients. This and the Analog only computer option goes a long way to making it more understandable how the seemingly incessant Terran progress could be slowed and even reversed in some ways.

Additionally there is some research of late indicating that the aging is built into cells at a very basic level that may not be able to be engineered out. That, at least, makes an acceptable handwave for the lack of drastically increased lifespans.

William
 
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Good point.

An awful lot of Imperial tecnological conservatism could be the result of catastrophic accidents in the past.
That would also put the Virus incident in a sort of historical context. The development of Virus would likely be exactly the kind of research that previous near catastrophes had taught the 3I to restrict. Of course--since military scientists under power-mad rulers during times of war are amoung the most likely folks to go poking into forbidden areas of tech development--such restrictions were likely thrown out the window once the civil war got under way.

The net result though, is that one can look at Virus as the result of the erosion of another of the 3I's foundations-careful and generally accepted restrictions on research in the interests of social stability. Had the ethic of the 3I been strong Virus wouldn't have been developed, never mind released.
 
Back
Top