.sec file questions

[robject]

Chris,

I'm pretty excited about seeing new system generation rules; the caveat being that they'd have to fit in the same space as LBB6's rules, or perhaps MT's rules (which is just an updated vesion of Book 6's sysgen, yes?). To me, that means some careful compromises will have to be made without damaging the overall goals of an improved system. So to speak.

Rob

 

[RainOfSteel]

Download Galactic 2.4, install, and read up on what the author has done with his "alternate" system generation rules for the UWP. It was very interesting.

 

[Hemdian]

Originally posted by robject:
Chris,
I'm pretty excited about seeing new system generation rules; the caveat being that they'd have to fit in the same space as LBB6's rules, or perhaps MT's rules (which is just an updated vesion of Book 6's sysgen, yes?). To me, that means some careful compromises will have to be made without damaging the overall goals of an improved system. So to speak.
Rob

I'd like to second that sentiment. I also like looking at different system generation rules, but there is a substantial body of work in the OTU that I'd like to keep intact IMTU, even at the cost of realism as it is currently understood.

For those for whom such continuity is not an issue check out the generic world generation system at StuffOnline.

Regards PLST

 

[Hemdian]

Originally posted by robject:
Here are my rules-of-thumb currently. Any suggestions? Additions? I've been running these parameters on the Spinward Marches and doing some sanity checks.

IMTU I use a modified version of the BeRKA system which works out as follows:

- Terran World: Atmosphere 6 or 8, Hydrosphere 3+
- Garden World: Atmosphere 2-9, Hydrosphere 1+, not Terran
- Glacier World: Some Terran worlds or Garden worlds may be Glacier worlds.
- Desert World: Atmosphere 2-9, Hydrosphere 0
- Exotic World: Atmosphere A or D, or (Atmosphere B or C, Hydrosphere 1+)
- Hothouse World: Atmosphere B or C, Hydrosphere 0
- Ocean World: Hydrosphere A
- Ice-capped World: Atmosphere 0 or 1, Hydrosphere 1+
- Rock Ball: Size 1+, Atmosphere 0, Hydrosphere 0
- Asteroid Belt: Size 0
- Unexplored World: No player data is available

The definition for Glacier Worlds is further refined as any Terran World or Garden World where the primary star in the system is a dwarf, sub-dwarf, or is a main-sequence star of spectral class M3 to M9.

This is the same system as used in Universe as decides what icon is used to represent the system. Its only really suitable for mainworld description ... I post it here just as a FYI.

Regards PLST

 

[Hemdian]

Originally posted by robject:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">World Size Atmo. Hydro. Star Orbit
Metallic 1 0 OBA close
Metallic 0 0 F close
Metallic BC warm
Mercurial 0 0 outer
Mercurial 1 0 close
Lunar 0 0 any
Iceball 0-2 1-9 OBAFG outer
Iceball 0-2 1-9 KM any
Europan 0-1 1-9 warm
Thalassic A-F A-F A inside
Martian 1-4 1-4 0-2 FGK inside
Venus I A-F 0-1 FG inside
Venus II A-F 0 FG inside
Terran Ia 0 inside
Terran Ib > 0 > 0 inside
Terran II > 2 > 0 FG hab
T-Prime 6-9 4-9 3-9 FG hab
T-Norm 7-9 6-7 5-7 FG hab
T-Tundric 6-9 4-9 3-9 FG inside
T-Tundric 6-9 4-9 3-9 KM hab
Terran IV 0-A 0-2 inside
Terran IV 0-A 0-2 KM close
Terraformed 4-9 0-9 KM hab
Terraformed 4-9 0-9 OBA inside

Worlds usually qualify for multiple designations.
If the world atmosphere is 2, 4, 6, or 8, I return
the second match (to give terraformed worlds a
chance to surface); otherwise I return the first
match.</pre>

[/quote]One minor niggle with this list is it seems too Sol-centric. Would Class A, Class B, Class C ... Class M ... be too Trek-ish?

Regards PLST

 

[robject]

Not at all. I was trying to figure out how to name those worlds, and decided most of us would understand those terms quite well. It helps to have this frame of reference.

The source I stole these types from used more generic names, like Hermian, Arean, Gaian, but those are just Solar obfuscations. I briefly considered using Vilani words for planetary types, but that's total obfuscation.

My current thought is that the types could be names of Traveller worlds we commonly hear about. But that would be effetive only if the world type is already commonly understood, through the adventure material.

For instance, Yori could potentially take the 'Martian' or 'Terran IV' type, maybe. Regina could be 'Terran II', perhaps.

Or, alternately, I can just chuck a couple more codes in the 'trade codes' section that points to the appropriate planetary characteristics... I dunno. I'm open to suggestions, and though Trek-like doesn't really appeal to me, a shorter scheme would be worth looking at.

Of course, with close to 20 planetary types, that uses up a lot of the alphabet.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Hemdian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by robject:
Chris,
I'm pretty excited about seeing new system generation rules; the caveat being that they'd have to fit in the same space as LBB6's rules, or perhaps MT's rules (which is just an updated vesion of Book 6's sysgen, yes?). To me, that means some careful compromises will have to be made without damaging the overall goals of an improved system. So to speak.
Rob

I'd like to second that sentiment. I also like looking at different system generation rules, but there is a substantial body of work in the OTU that I'd like to keep intact IMTU, even at the cost of realism as it is currently understood.

For those for whom such continuity is not an issue check out the generic world generation system at StuffOnline.

Regards PLST </font>[/QUOTE]The only trouble is, the Spinward Marches and the Solomani Rim aren't "substantial" in comparison to the rest of the Imperium, much less the rest of Charted Space.

Those two Sectors, plus a small handful of other published subsectors are all the "canon" planetary material there is.

As has been explained to me by LKW and other luminaries, all the Sunbane/GEnie data was non-canon, and is highly suspect (since it is based on the CT system generation rules, which most believe are flawed or worse).

However, even the "canon" Spinward Marches has lots of curiosities, but for it, the great "Sector, Interrupted" explanation goes a long way toward deflecting questions about insanities, though not all of them.

 

[Hemdian]

Any classification system needs to take into account who the classification system is for. Here's a first pass at an alternative ...

As a traveller I'd want to know if there was significant gravity, if there was an atmosphere (and if so is it (a) breathable, or (b) corrosive, etc), does it have a surface you can land on, and is there water (for fuel). Unless its a terran world I don't care if its been terraformed, and I don't care if its hot or cold. This gives us 32 initial combinations ... but some of those are impossible (for example: if there's no gravity then there's no atmosphere) so I think there are actually 12 types (not counting gas giants):

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Gravity Atmosphere Surface Water
No No Yes No Planetoid
No No Yes Yes Planetesimal
Yes No No No Exotic I
Yes No Yes No Rock ball
Yes No Yes Yes Europan world
Yes Some No No Exotic II
Yes Some Yes No Martian world
Yes Some Yes Yes Barren world
Yes Breathable Yes Yes Terran world
Yes Bad No No Exotic III
Yes Bad Yes No Venesian world
Yes Bad Yes Yes Poisoned world</pre>[/QUOTE]Planetoid: Basically a rock. An asteroid, or a world with a size code of "S".

Planetesimal: A snowball. A comet or smallish Kniper belt object.

Rock ball: Mercury and Luna are examples.

Martian world: There is an inoffensive, but unbreathable, atmosphere, but no water.

Terran world: Not saying how comfortable it is, but you could live there.

Barren world: Could have been a terran world but there is insufficient oxygen producing life.

Exotic: There's some problem with the surface ... either its molten or its covered with a non-water fluid of some kind. Comes with or without an atmosphere. Io might be an example.

Europan world: Either a rock ball with significant surface water (probably frozen) but no atmosphere (example: Europa), or a largish Kniper belt object (Pluto and Charon?).

Venesian world: A rock ball with a threatening atmosphere (corrosive, insideous, etc).

Poisoned world: Should be a terran world but the atmosphere is seriously bad.


Okay, so some of the names are too sol-centric but you get the idea. If I was a belter I would probably want different info, so different classifications (eg. Metallic, Molten, etc) would be appropriate for them.

Regards PLST

 

[robject]

>significant gravity,
>if there was an atmosphere
> (a) breathable, or
> (b) corrosive,
> etc
>does it have a surface you can land on,
>is there water (for fuel).

Hmmm. Yes, you do have a point, it should be exactly enough for role-playing.

And I guess the UWP does a good job at this:

Size can be a fudge for gravity;

The atmosphere code is centered around breathability, and contains corrosive and insidious values;

The hydrosphere code notes whether or not there is land and water.

Your suggestion is that names can denote general categories within these paramaters only, which sounds good to me.