Deckplans - are they worth it ?

[CaptnBrazil]

Personally, I'd like less of the huge detailed deckplans, which are unclear when shrunk to the size displayed in the High Guard book. A simple schematic deckplan of where the various functional areas are on the ship (i.e. Bridge, Engineering, Crew Quarters), possibly colour coded if the book will be printed in colour. Similar in a way to the Babylon 5 station guide diagrams. A few more detailed insets of "this is the bridge", "this is a standard crew cabin", "this is an officer cabin" might add some detail to important areas or areas that may be used by characters.

Kind of like the original Star Trek Technical Manual - now there's a goldmine for various ship plans: huge starport, details of various sections of the ship, deckplans of the tug modules, including one that would work as a passenger liner for a Traveller adventure. All sorts of 40 year old goodies that, file off the Star Trek serial numbers, would work for quite a few Traveller scenarios.

 

[Dave Chase]

Another reason for some deckplans, Jump.

Even if your players don't own a ship but travel between systems they will havet to jump. (Unless they low berth all the time.)

Of course if as a GM you don't play out the week long time aboard the ship, IMO that is your loss.

Think of the deckplans of a player owned ship as their house or mobile home.

Dave Chase

 

[Da Boss]

I found this approach most impressive (although it helps being a big 40K fan)

http://www.malleus.dk/Ordo/Blueprints.aspx

 

[Gee4orce]

I found this approach most impressive (although it helps being a big 40K fan)

http://www.malleus.dk/Ordo/Blueprints.aspx

That, with Colin Chapman or Ted Lindsey doing the art direction = perfect.

 

[EDG]

Think of the deckplans of a player owned ship as their house or mobile home.

And in how many games is one required to have deckplans of one's own house?

It's fair enough if you do a lot of boarding actions and actually get some use out of properly scaled deckplans. But for me at least, schematics of the type that Da Boss linked to (for 40K) or that were in the JC Ships of the Fleet books are far more concise. I find that descriptions of life aboard the ship, its quirks and idiosyncracies, its history, etc etc are far more informative and useful.

 

[GypsyComet]

I found this approach most impressive (although it helps being a big 40K fan)

http://www.malleus.dk/Ordo/Blueprints.aspx

Meh. That's "hang on the wall" stuff, not a play aid.

Ships are part of the environment of the setting. Adventure can happen anywhere, and that includes on board a ship.

Not everyone plays Traveller as a tactical RPG, but enough do that deckplans are a useful tool.

I personally don't *need* Mongoose to do deckplans for everything, because I'm one of the people who can make my own, but I certainly don't mind their efforts and will continue to buy said efforts unless and until they become too pathetic to function even as inspiration.

 

[kristof65]

Think of the deckplans of a player owned ship as their house or mobile home.

And in how many games is one required to have deckplans of one's own house?

It's fair enough if you do a lot of boarding actions and actually get some use out of properly scaled deckplans. But for me at least, schematics of the type that Da Boss linked to (for 40K) or that were in the JC Ships of the Fleet books are far more concise. I find that descriptions of life aboard the ship, its quirks and idiosyncracies, its history, etc etc are far more informative and useful.

Actually, I've run fantasy campaigns where the PCs have "settled down" and we've had and used maps/plans of their houses or ships.

The thing is about deckplans - despite whether or not they may be needed or used - it appears (from looking at the poll numbers) that most people want them - regardless of whether or not they use them.

From the posts, there also seems to be a general consensus that for the bigger ships at least, the current deckplans aren't all that useful, and people would be willing to go for another solution.

 

[Paladin]

Pretty sure I've used them for the last three session if only for the "where are you" context on occassion.

I really like having them on smaller ships if only to help build character. i.e. Serenity is the 10th member of the cast.

For large vessels, I'm less concerned with an actual floorplan. A rough schematic of blocks for the key areas is fine.

 

[Dave Chase]

Think of the deckplans of a player owned ship as their house or mobile home.

And in how many games is one required to have deckplans of one's own house?

It's fair enough if you do a lot of boarding actions and actually get some use out of properly scaled deckplans. But for me at least, schematics of the type that Da Boss linked to (for 40K) or that were in the JC Ships of the Fleet books are far more concise. I find that descriptions of life aboard the ship, its quirks and idiosyncracies, its history, etc etc are far more informative and useful.

Well, when we were playing a bunch of thieves it was nice to be able to go and buy those home books that had plans in them. I always keep a few around just for that reason (and becaue I am always planning the house I want to build for my self.)

It has even been useful to have such available when dealing with a low tech world that the PC have to deal with.

So, nope, not needed every game session or in most games but when available and used, it really helps set the atmosphere and game play.

Dave Chase

 

[captainjack23]

I do have to agree that the bigger ships are less useful; Even with vector graphics, they are really hard to read or print out at a useable scale. most really need something like the old AHL boxed set. I'd say requiring ships of over about 5K is probably overkill and uneccessary, unless its in its own suppliment.

 

[AndrewW]

I do have to agree that the bigger ships are less useful; Even with vector graphics, they are really hard to read or print out at a useable scale. most really need something like the old AHL boxed set. I'd say requiring ships of over about 5K is probably overkill and uneccessary, unless its in its own suppliment.

If they where vector there wouldn't be any scaling problem would look just fine scaled up.

 

[khazwind]

I'd have to add, if Mongoose are going to publish deck plans, at least print them at a reasonable size.

The Far Trader in the core book is printed so small (to make space for a pretty pic of a Free Trader) that it's practically worthless.

 

[GypsyComet]

I'd have to add, if Mongoose are going to publish deck plans, at least print them at a reasonable size.

The Far Trader in the core book is printed so small (to make space for a pretty pic of a Free Trader) that it's practically worthless.

Yes. There is an opportunity being missed here, and since the published deckplans are not an element of the SRD, it is an opportunity that only Mongoose can pursue for the standard plans.

 

[captainjack23]

I do have to agree that the bigger ships are less useful; Even with vector graphics, they are really hard to read or print out at a useable scale. most really need something like the old AHL boxed set. I'd say requiring ships of over about 5K is probably overkill and uneccessary, unless its in its own suppliment.

If they where vector there wouldn't be any scaling problem would look just fine scaled up.

yes, I know. Printing them out over an infinite number of sheets, or constantly scrolling around ascreen is the issue.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Schematics are fine, general outlines are fine, but let's face it, when does anyone actually use a deckplan during an actual game to move minis of the characters around? How often does combat erupt on a ship with a deckplan?

Depending on the campaign, almost every game.

I see deckplans as an added value for the book I purchase. I don't personally need them because I can draw my own deckplans, but it is a great convenience for me to not have to spend the time or effort to draw a common design that my players ask internal layout questions about.

 

[EDG]

Schematics are fine, general outlines are fine, but let's face it, when does anyone actually use a deckplan during an actual game to move minis of the characters around? How often does combat erupt on a ship with a deckplan?

Depending on the campaign, almost every game.

I see deckplans as an added value for the book I purchase. I don't personally need them because I can draw my own deckplans, but it is a great convenience for me to not have to spend the time or effort to draw a common design that my players ask internal layout questions about.

So you move miniatures around on the deckplans in your books when you're running combats?

One can answer internal layout questions with schematics and overviews. One would need detailed deckplans only if one needed to know the exact square that a character (or enemy) was located in.

 

[captainjack23]

Schematics are fine, general outlines are fine, but let's face it, when does anyone actually use a deckplan during an actual game to move minis of the characters around? How often does combat erupt on a ship with a deckplan?

Depending on the campaign, almost every game.

I see deckplans as an added value for the book I purchase. I don't personally need them because I can draw my own deckplans, but it is a great convenience for me to not have to spend the time or effort to draw a common design that my players ask internal layout questions about.

So you move miniatures around on the deckplans in your books when you're running combats?

One can answer internal layout questions with schematics and overviews. One would need detailed deckplans only if one needed to know the exact square that a character (or enemy) was located in.

And timing/movement; but yes, extreme example aside (unless one has 3mm figs, anyway). Still those happen quite often - even in simple wandering around town encounters. The grids are big help in scaling up for a gaming mat, or simply showing the players how long things will take to do:
"I'm running from the cockpit to the sensor bay if I can do it quickly -how long does it take ?".
"sixteen, seventeen, eighteen squares, two iris hatches and a downhatch to the bay. Call it two rounds and a dex roll to open the locked hatch quickly"
"Screw it ! I'll try and run the scan from the cockpit and take the minus."

Possibly a schematic means something different here, and I'm not getting it, but as I see it,the only difference between a schematic, and a deckplan at this level is the squares. They'd need to be about the same sizes, and frankly, at least the same detail. So if they are a waste of space with a grid, aren't they the same without it, as a schematic ? Plus being harder to transfer when one does need to use them as a player sized map.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Schematics are fine, general outlines are fine, but let's face it, when does anyone actually use a deckplan during an actual game to move minis of the characters around? How often does combat erupt on a ship with a deckplan?

Depending on the campaign, almost every game.

I see deckplans as an added value for the book I purchase. I don't personally need them because I can draw my own deckplans, but it is a great convenience for me to not have to spend the time or effort to draw a common design that my players ask internal layout questions about.

So you move miniatures around on the deckplans in your books when you're running combats?

And I see you wish to be arguementative...

Bye!

 

[EDG]

And I see you wish to be arguementative...

Bye!

I asked: "when does anyone actually use a deckplan during an actual game to move minis of the characters around? How often does combat erupt on a ship with a deckplan?"

You replied: "Depending on the campaign, almost every game."

I replied: "So you move miniatures around on the deckplans in your books when you're running combats? "

And now you claim I'm being "argumentative" by asking for a simple clarification? :shock:

Oh well, business as usual for you I guess. :roll:

 

[EDG]

They'd need to be about the same sizes, and frankly, at least the same detail. So if they are a waste of space with a grid, aren't they the same without it, as a schematic ? Plus being harder to transfer when one does need to use them as a player sized map.

When I say "schematic" I mean something that is mostly there for fluff. It's an outline of the ship says "staterooms are in this coloured block, cockpit's this coloured block, this bit's the engine room" etc. No squares, nothing you could even use minis on if you wanted to - it just shows the general, broad layout of the ship. Or a sideview that breaks the ship down deck by deck (decks 1-2 are command, decks 3-10 are staterooms, etc etc). So there's no details on it.

A "deckplan" on the other hand is what's been in the books so far - a grid, everything to scale, all the bits shown on the map, etc. Something that you can use for minis if it's the right scale, and definitely detailed.