T5 0.9 Errata Thread

[agorski]

Page 300: 16 Starship Weapons1 Chart

The KK Missile icon in these charts indicates TL 12 availability but it should actually be TL 10.

See: A Weapons Table on page 301 and table on page 370.

 

[agorski]

Page 276: Hulls>Connectors

This sentence mentions "Cradle Plates" which don't appear anywhere else in the rules.

On page 305: G Vehicle Hull Connectors table, the term "Connector" is used.

In both locations either "Cradle Plate" or "Connector" should be used to clarify this.

 

[agorski]

Page 288: Building Barge and Pod Hulls

The last paragraph:

Pods, Barges, and Subhulls are attached to the parent hull with interlocking clamps called Grapples. One Grapple set consists of two 1-ton Grapples (one on the Pod, Barge, or Subhull; one on the parent hull). One set is required for each 35 tons of Pod, Barge, or Subhull.

This is true only if the subhull is detachable. Suggest the following change:

Detachable Pods, Barges, and Subhulls are attached to the parent hull with interlocking clamps called Grapples. Non-detachable Pods, Barges, and Subhulls are attached to the parent hull with Connectors. One set of either type consists of one on the Pod, Barge, or Subhull and one on the parent hull. One set is required for each 35 tons of Pod, Barge, or Subhull.

 

[agorski]

Page 381: A1 Defenses

Costs in this table do not agree with table A1 on page 303. Suggest the following changes:

Meson Screen MCr3.0
Grav Scrambler MCr2.0
Elec Scrambler MCr2.0
Proton Screen MCr1.0
All 4 Globes MCr10.0

 

[Garnfellow]

The "Decimal Orbit" table on page 684 needs a little better explanation -- I did not find it intuitive to read or use. My understanding is that the columns to the left of .0 are added to the next lower base orbit, while the columns are the right of .0 are added to the base orbit. (It might be easier to understand if these column headings run from -0.5 to +0.5.)

So if I am determining a decimal orbit for a world in orbit 3 (1 AU), and I roll a +1 on flux, the resulting decimal orbit is 3 + 0.1, or 3.1 (1.06 AU). If I roll a -1 on flux, the resulting decimal orbit is 2 + 0.9, or 2.9 (0.97 AU).

This decimal system is very helpful, particularly if you have created a system using another world generation method like GURPS Space.

However, this gets really funky if you are working with orbit 0 (0.20 AU). If you roll a +1, the decimal orbit is 0.1 (0.22 AU). Easy enough. But what happens if you roll a negative on the flux for orbit 0? Does the orbit number go negative? Let's say I roll a -5. The result is an orbit of .15 AU. Does that have an orbit number of -0.5?

 

[agorski]

Page 383: Identifying Defenses Table

The last two entries in the table have errors. Instead of:

Std  Vd (FR2) Bay  Nuclear Damper-13 (13) Mod +5  50 tons    MCr6.0 S=2
Ult  Vd (FR2) Main Nuclear Damper-21 (21) Mod+14 600 tons  MCr123.0 S=2

They should be:

Std  Vd (FR2) Bay  Nuclear Damper-14 (14) Mod +5 150 tons  MCr16.0 S=2
Ult  Vd (FR2) Main Nuclear Damper-18 (18) Mod+14 600 tons  MCr63.0 S=2

 

[OjnoTheRed]

Populating World Hexes - p. 435

On p. 435, in the Populating World Hexes table, one possible terrain type for the World Hex is listed as 'Rough'. There is no 'Rough' terrain at the World Hex level when populating the World Map using p. 433. This entry should be removed, or the table on p.433 needs to be updated to include Rough terrain.

In the line if the World Hex overall is Clear and place 2D Wood in WNH, the "Black Is" column lists "Rough Wood". This would result in all clear hexes with Atmosphere 3-10 having Rough Wood in all BNH. I do not think this is the intention of the rules. I think the rules probably are similar to the Marsh/Woods/Swamp rule: if it is already 'rough' and gets 'wood' then it becomes 'Rough Wood'. That is the way I will be interpreting it for the World Mapping Generator.

 

[agorski]

Page 306: Console tons & cost

Console tonnage is determined in table B Consoles as a function of size. Values are also shown in the Consoles and Controllers table for console types but all have the same value (cramped?) and should be removed.

Console cost is determined in the Consoles and Controllers table as a function of type. Values are also shown in table B Consoles for console size but all have the same value (Control console?) and should be removed.

 

[Garnfellow]

Synthetics, p. 92.

The the title of the chapter is "Synthetics and Androids" in the TOC; probably should be "Synthetics and Sophontoids"

Terminology, p. 92.

The term "Pattern" should probably be defined. It seems to be used in two different ways: (1) as the living organism the synthetic is modeled after, and (2) a specific blueprint or template used to build the synthetic.

Faux, p. 92

Change "several together is" to "several together are"

Naasirka-Regina NR1000, p. 93.

Change "has identified an economic for" to "has identified an economic market for"

Change "An organic power system takes nutrient from" to ""An organic power system takes nutrients from"

Change "nu- tirents." to "nu- trients"

Delete garbled line "as The nest contains ach and as a sourc"

The Details of Sophontoids, pp. 93-94

The term "control codes" is used repeatedly in the text, but is inconsistent with the term "control structures" used in table title on page 94. Based on the specific examples in the table, "structures" seems to be more accurate. Replace all uses of "control codes" with "control structures."

Identifying Marks and Control Codes, p. 94.

Change title of the section to "Identifying Markings and Control Structures"

The second paragraph under "Markings" describes features that are actually control structures. Move this entire paragraph down to fall after "Control Structures"

Creating Sophontoids, p. 95

The section under "The Process" assumes the factory always makes sophontoids with the sum of Characteristics C1 C2 C3 C4 being average, meaning all androids should have Characteristics summing up to 28. This does not match up to the subsequent examples, and prevents the creation of androids that are clearly inferior or superior to humans. (So no Nexus-8s.)

Strongly suggest reworking these two paragraphs like this:

The Process. The producing factory creates a pattern or master plan for the sophontoid characteristics. The sum of the characteristics C1 C2 C3 C4 cannot be less than 1 times the dice rolled for those characteristics in the sophont pattern, and the sum of C1 C2 C3 C4 cannot be greater than 6 times the dice rolled for those characteristics in the sophont pattern. Each characteristic cannot be greater or less than the maximum or minimum for the sophont pattern.

For example, a factory chooses to produce a laborer android based on a human pattern. A human character has C1 C2 C3 C4 for a total of 8 dice. The minimum sum would be 8 points (= 8 * 1) and the maximum sum would be 48 points (= 8 * 6). The factory decides to use the average ( = 8 * 3.5 ) = 28 points. The lowest value for Str, Dex, End, or Int would be 2, and the highest value would be 12. The factory allocates Str= 10 Dex= 6 End= 8 Int= 4. Edu and Soc remain at zero.

The members of the batch then receive a standard set of skill levels equal to the sum of their characteristic points, divided by 2. Two levels provide basic behavior compulsions, control structures, and understanding of one language. One level is a sanity-supporting hobby; the remainder are the usable skill set.

Somewhere there should probably be a statement something like this: "A sophontoid normally has the same senses, body structure, manipulators, and size as its pattern sophont. A sophontoid may or may not have any special abilities associated with its pattern sophont. A sophontoid does not possess any uniques or psionics associated with its pattern sophont."

Premium Sophontoids, pg. 95.

Change "it receives 5 additional skill levels at a surcharge of KCr500,000." to "it receives 5 additional skill levels at a surcharge of KCr500." Based on the Translator example, this surcharge can be purchased multiple times.

Table: Example Sophontoid Costs, Pg. 95.

This table has many errors.

• The examples are categorized as "Batch," "Premium," and "Cheap." While Batch and Premium categories are described in the text, Cheap is not. It is not clear what distinguishes Cheap sophontoids, since 5 of the Batch examples are actually cheaper than the Cheap "Laborer."
• The Guard should have 14 skill levels (9+9+10+5)/2 -2, not 12. Change "Fighter-9. Slug-Thrower-2." to "Fighter-9. Slug-Thrower-4."
• The Rentacop should have 8 skill levels (5+5+5+5)/2 -2, not 12. The total skill levels are 13. Price should be KCr313, not KCr625 (5*5*2.5*5). Change "Fighter-5. Admin-3. Slug-Thrower-2. Medic-2." To "Fighter-3. Admin-2. Slug-Thrower-1. Medic-1." Change "Musican-1" to ""Musician-1"
• The Broker should have 13 skill levels, not 12 (6+6+6+12)/2 -2. Rather than change skill levels, reduce Int from 12 to 10, so all characteristics sum to 28. Revised cost is KCr540.
• The costs for all of the Premium sophontoids include a KCr500 surcharge, although only the Translator has extra skill levels.
• For the Astrogator, change "Astrogator-9. Pilot-7." to "Astrogator-12. Pilot-9."
• The Engineer should have 17 skill levels but only 15 are spent. Change "Engineer-10. Jump-2. Small-Craft-2." To "Engineer-12. Jump-5. Small-Craft-4."
• Change "Sensor/" to "Sensor/Gunner". The Sensor/Gunner should have 17 skill levels but has spent 19. Change "Pilot-2. Sensors-7. Gunner-7. Turret-2." to "Pilot-3. Sensors-8. Gunner-7. Turret-3."
• For Drive Tech, change "Mechanic-6. Gravitic-5. Electronic-5." to "Mechanic-8. Gravitic-7. Electronic-6."
• The Translator should have 16 skills, not 17 (10+8+8+10)/2 -2. Rather than reduce skills, increase Int from 10 to 12, giving all Premium sophontoids characteristics summing to 38. The Translator has 30 additional skill levels, which indicates a surcharge of KCr3,000 (500 * 30/5). The revised cost for the Translator should be KCr4,920 (10 * 4 * 4 *12 + 3,000).
• The cost for the Clerk should be KCr64, not 32 (4*2*2*4).

The revised table should look like this:

Android	Str	Dex	Agl	Gra	End	Vig	Int	Skills	Skills	Hobby	KCr	Occupation
Batch	7	7			7		7	12	Driver-9. Wheeled-2.	Chef-1	2,401	Driver
Batch	9	9				10	5	14	Fighter-9. Slug-Thrower-4.	Forensics-1	2,025	Guard
Batch	5	5				5	5	8	Fighter-3. Admin-2. Slug-Thrower-1. Medic-1.	Musician-1	313	Rentacop
Batch	5		8			8	8	12	Admin-6. Bureaucrat-5.	Vacc-1	640	Clerk
Batch	5	8			8		7	12	Chef-7. Teacher-2. Medic-2.	Author-1	2,240	Chef
Batch	8	8			6		6	12	Fighter-7. Slug-Thrower-2. Unarmed-2.	Computer-1	2,304	Soldier
Batch	12			5		5	6	12	Fighter-9. Unarmed-2.	Magnetics-1	450	Brute
Batch	6		6			6	10	12	Broker-6. Trader-5.	Animals-1	540	Broker
Batch	7			5		5	11	12	Computer-2, nine Knowledges-1.	Seafarer-1	481	Librarian
Premium	10	9			9		10	17	Astrogator-12. Pilot-9.	Counsellor-1	8,600	Astrogator
Premium	9	10			10		9	17	Engineer-12. Jump-5. Small-Craft-4.	Dancer-1	8,600	Engineer
Premium	10	8				8	12	17	Pilot-3. Sensors-8. Gunner-7. Turret-3.	Medical-1	4,340	Sensor/Gunner
Premium	12	7			7		12	17	Mechanic-8. Gravitic-7. Electronic-6.	Photonics-1	7,556	Drive Tech
Premium	10			8		8	12	17	Anglic-12. Vilani-12. Trokh-11. Zhedtl-11.	Craftsman-1	4,920	Translator
Cheap	7		6		7		5	10	Mechanic-5. Electronic-4.	Musician-1	735	Laborer
Cheap	4		4			4	4	6	Bureaucrat-5.	Polymers-1	64	Clerk

 

[Garnfellow]

I would be inclined to ditch the Cheap/Batch/Premium classifications for something else:

Menial Sophontoids are available at TL 13. The sum of the characteristics C1 C2 C3 C4 ranges from 1 to 2.5 times the dice rolled for those characteristics in the sophont pattern. Menial Androids, based on a human pattern, would have a sum of characteristics ranging from 8 to 20. Menial Sophontoids are produced with one Obvious Identifying Marking and one Unobtrusive Marking. Example: Loader Android, Str= 6 Dex= 2 End= 6 Int= 2 Edu= 0 Soc= 0.

Standard Sophontoids are available at TL 14. The sum of the characteristics C1 C2 C3 C4 ranges from 2.5 to 4.5 times the dice rolled for those characteristics in the sophont pattern. Standard Androids, based on a human pattern, would have a sum of characteristics ranging from 21 to 36. Standard Sophontoids are produced with one Obvious Identifying Marking and one Unobtrusive Marking. Example: Belter Android, Str= 8 Dex= 6 End= 8 Int= 6 Edu= 0 Soc= 0.

Premium Sophontoids are available at TL 15. The sum of the characteristics C1 C2 C3 C4 ranges from 4.5 to 6 times the dice rolled for those characteristics in the sophont pattern. Premium Androids, based on a human pattern, would have a sum of characteristics ranging from 37 to 48. Premium androids are produced with one Unobtrusive Marking. Premium Sophontoids can be produced with extra skill levels for a KCr500 surcharge per package of 5 skill levels. Example: Combat Android, Str= 12 Dex= 9 End= 12 Int= 9 Edu= 0 Soc= 0.

 

[Garnfellow]

Strangeness

Strangeness is the degree of difference from the norms of interstellar society. High Strangeness is evidenced by unusual or outwardly incomprehensible actions, statements, or responses in the course daily activity. Low Strangeness reflects activities close to interstellar norms.

Strangeness is generated by Flux +5, resulting in a range from 0 to A, with 5 being the average. Given the description of strangeness, shouldn't 0 be the average result, with higher strangeness scores being less and less likely?

Something like this:

	1	2	3	4	5	6
1	0	1	2	3	5	7
2	0	1	2	3	5	7
3	0	1	2	4	5	8
4	0	1	2	4	6	8
5	0	1	3	4	6	9
6	0	2	3	4	6	10

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The formulae for Anti-armor layers do not appear to be correct. Some anti-armor has a multiplier of 10, and some a multiplier of 100. This conflicts with Table B on page 293, which lists the anti-armor multipliers at 10.

For example, the formula for EMP for Armor Plate is TL x 10. The formula for Anti-rad is TL x 100.

If the anti-armor multiplier is truly 10 then it would appear that the formula for all the anti-armors should read "<type> x 10" where <type> is BF, EMP, RAD or Kinetic. This will then correctly apply a multiplier of 10 to the original armor value of the type.

For example, the calculation for Anti-blast would read BF x 10 instead of TL x 10.

It would also make sense to have a footnote similar to "The anti-armor multiplier applies to the original protection for that armor type and category. For example, the BF calculation for Armor Plate is TL x 10. The BF calculation for anti-blast Armor Plate would be TL x 10 x 10."

There is a much simpler interpretation:
Each armour layer gives AV = TL ( ×1, ×½, ×2, or fixed 20 depending on type) + Stage mod.
Each layer gives ten times as much AV vs Pressure and 100 times as much AV against Heat (unless Polymer, Organic).
Each anti-layer gives 10 times as much AV against that particular type, otherwise normal.
Normal layers give no AV against EMP and Trac attacks. (p391)
That's it.


This interpretation is consistent with all the tables on p292-3 if they try to summarise layer and anti-layer in each table.


Example: TL-12, Structure: Plate, one layer
one layer: AV=12 ( 1200 vs Heat, 120 vs Pres, 0 vs EMP )
two layers: AV=24 ( 2400 vs Heat, 240 vs Pres, 0 vs EMP )
two layers, one with Anti-Rad:
Layer 1: AV=12 ( 1200 vs Heat, 120 vs Pres, [12 vs Rad,] 0 vs EMP )
Layer 2: AV=12 ( 1200 vs Heat, 120 vs Pres, 120 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )
Sum __: AV=24 ( 2400 vs Heat, 240 vs Pres, 132 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )

Example: TL-15, Structure: Charged, Stage: Generic
two layers, one with Anti-Rad:
Layer 1: AV=28 ( 2800 vs Heat, 280 vs Pres, 0 vs EMP )
Layer 2: AV=28 ( 2800 vs Heat, 280 vs Pres, 280 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )
Sum __: AV=56 ( 5600 vs Heat, 560 vs Pres, 308 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )

 

[Wol]

not sure I follow the RAD levels in the last example.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

not sure I follow the RAD levels in the last example.

Sorry if I was unclear.

The second example works like the first:


Example: TL-12, Structure: Plate, one layer
two layers, one with Anti-Rad:
Layer 1: AV=12 ( 1200 vs Heat, 120 vs Pres, [12 vs Rad,] 0 vs EMP )
Layer 2: AV=12 ( 1200 vs Heat, 120 vs Pres, 120 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )
Sum __: AV=24 ( 2400 vs Heat, 240 vs Pres, 132 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )

Example: TL-15, Structure: Charged, Stage: Generic
two layers, one with Anti-Rad:
Layer 1: AV=28 ( 2800 vs Heat, 280 vs Pres, [28 vs Rad,] 0 vs EMP )
Layer 2: AV=28 ( 2800 vs Heat, 280 vs Pres, 280 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )
Sum __: AV=56 ( 5600 vs Heat, 560 vs Pres, 308 vs Rad, 0 vs EMP )


Armour has it's basic AV against Rad, Pen, and Blast, but AV 0 against EMP. With an anti-layer it has 10 times as much. So in the second example a layer either has AV 28 or AV 280 against Rad, summed to AV 308.

 

[Wol]

Thanks for that. Understand now.

regards

 

[Ackehece]

Base Unit of Shipment is the lot PG 475
which is not defined (well) in size other than 1 or greater dton

"lot is a single shipment of goods. A lot is identified
by its displacement in tons (one ton equals 13.5 cubic
meters). Each lot is a distinct shipment and may not be
subdivided. A ship captain may accept or reject specific lots
based on their best fit within the ship’s cargo hold. A lot can
be freight, cargo or mail."

this leads to confusion such as
"how much tonnage the cargo is when doing speculative trade. I've got the costs, codes and all that figured out (well, I think I do), but there seems to be nothing to indicate tonnage."

I suggest that clarify 1 lot is 1dton and then you have multiple lots of the same cargo if you have greater than 1 dton.

 

[Major B]

I suggest that clarify 1 lot is 1dton and then you have multiple lots of the same cargo if you have greater than 1 dton.

I think your suggestion goes against the intent behind creating the term lot. I recently re-read that section for a new project and it seemed to me that the point was to create a dilemma for the ship's captain. This is the kind of dilemma I mean:

A Free Trader lands on planet x and checks for available freight bound for planet y. The captain wants to fill his hold as close to his 82 available tons of cargo space but finds two lots waiting, one of 45 tons and another of 48 tons, he has to pick one because he cannot break a lot. He can delay departure to see what else comes up for freight or he can look into speculative cargo to fill the rest of the hull (assuming he has the available funds).

I agree that we need the mechanism to determine lot size but setting the size at 1 ton will not create this sort of dilemma. Maybe roll a number of dice equal to the Importance of the destination world and subtract the importance of the departure world from the result?

On world x (I=2) seeking freight bound for world y (I=4) lot size is 4D-2 giving a numerical range from 2 to 22 tons per lot. For a reverse trip, 2D-4 or 1-8 tons per lot (treating 0 or negative numbers as 1 ton). This assumes that important worlds import more which may not always be the case, so perhaps another mechanic would be better.

 

[coliver988]

I think your suggestion goes against the intent behind creating the term lot. I recently re-read that section for a new project and it seemed to me that the point was to create a dilemma for the ship's captain. This is the kind of dilemma I mean:

A Free Trader lands on planet x and checks for available freight bound for planet y. The captain wants to fill his hold as close to his 82 available tons of cargo space but finds two lots waiting, one of 45 tons and another of 48 tons, he has to pick one because he cannot break a lot. He can delay departure to see what else comes up for freight or he can look into speculative cargo to fill the rest of the hull (assuming he has the available funds).

I agree that we need the mechanism to determine lot size but setting the size at 1 ton will not create this sort of dilemma. Maybe roll a number of dice equal to the Importance of the destination world and subtract the importance of the departure world from the result?

On world x (I=2) seeking freight bound for world y (I=4) lot size is 4D-2 giving a numerical range from 2 to 22 tons per lot. For a reverse trip, 2D-4 or 1-8 tons per lot (treating 0 or negative numbers as 1 ton). This assumes that important worlds import more which may not always be the case, so perhaps another mechanic would be better.

I agree that 1 lot <> 1dton. I like the idea of the size of the lot being dependent on the origin world, but not so sure about destination as this is speculative trade: bulk trade (the base Cr1000/ton/parsec) has a destination world, spec trade is yours to do what you want with).

Lot size may be based on population & tech level of the origin world: a tech level 4 world with a dozen inhabitants may not be able to produce 40 dTons of stuff - they have enough to do just staying alive!

Maybe 1d per population code tons? Pop 1 world would have 1-6 tons per lot, pop 2 would range 2-12 (2 dice), and so on?

If we wanted to factor in TL maybe, add TL to total? Pop 1 / Tech 4 = 1-6 + 4 => 5-10 tons per lot, Pop 1 / Tech F = 1 - 6 + 15 => 16-21? I don't know, I would like a potential wider range at higher TL as more automation should produce more goods at a lower price.

edit: my question referred to spec trade: the freight trade actually does have the tonnage for major, minor and incidental based on current world and destination world. I've got that working in my trade program, but hiccuping over the T5 spec trade part.

 

[Major B]

I agree that 1 lot <> 1dton. I like the idea of the size of the lot being dependent on the origin world, but not so sure about destination as this is speculative trade: bulk trade (the base Cr1000/ton/parsec) has a destination world, spec trade is yours to do what you want with).

Lot size may be based on population & tech level of the origin world: a tech level 4 world with a dozen inhabitants may not be able to produce 40 dTons of stuff - they have enough to do just staying alive!

Maybe 1d per population code tons? Pop 1 world would have 1-6 tons per lot, pop 2 would range 2-12 (2 dice), and so on?

If we wanted to factor in TL maybe, add TL to total? Pop 1 / Tech 4 = 1-6 + 4 => 5-10 tons per lot, Pop 1 / Tech F = 1 - 6 + 15 => 16-21? I don't know, I would like a potential wider range at higher TL as more automation should produce more goods at a lower price.

edit: my question referred to spec trade: the freight trade actually does have the tonnage for major, minor and incidental based on current world and destination world. I've got that working in my trade program, but hiccuping over the T5 spec trade part.

I just looked at pg 486 again (bottom of center column) and I think I missed something.

Freight = ((Flux + Pop) x (total TCs + 1)) + Liaison
TCs = Ag As Ba De Fl Hi Ic In Lo Na Ni Po Ri Va only

Maybe this means you can roll for 1 lot per day and the size of the lot is the result of the above formula in tons.

 

[aramis]

I think your suggestion goes against the intent behind creating the term lot. I recently re-read that section for a new project and it seemed to me that the point was to create a dilemma for the ship's captain. This is the kind of dilemma I mean:

A Free Trader lands on planet x and checks for available freight bound for planet y. The captain wants to fill his hold as close to his 82 available tons of cargo space but finds two lots waiting, one of 45 tons and another of 48 tons, he has to pick one because he cannot break a lot. He can delay departure to see what else comes up for freight or he can look into speculative cargo to fill the rest of the hull (assuming he has the available funds).

I agree that we need the mechanism to determine lot size but setting the size at 1 ton will not create this sort of dilemma. Maybe roll a number of dice equal to the Importance of the destination world and subtract the importance of the departure world from the result?

On world x (I=2) seeking freight bound for world y (I=4) lot size is 4D-2 giving a numerical range from 2 to 22 tons per lot. For a reverse trip, 2D-4 or 1-8 tons per lot (treating 0 or negative numbers as 1 ton). This assumes that important worlds import more which may not always be the case, so perhaps another mechanic would be better.

Part of the problem is that prior editions were in fact discrete lots of 3 size ranges:

Incidental: 1d6 Td
Minor: 1d6 × 5 Td
Major: 1d6 × 10 Td

Freight in T5.09 is one roll per day for freight, one for mail. Cargo is a flat 100Td - but should it be?