Do the starship design rules need reviewing?

[Jump 6]

Greetings all…

With the vehicle design systems in supplements 5 & 6 including such things as vehicle and component volume (as well as mass), and (some) power rules, is it time now that the starship design system is overhauled to include these concepts, given that they’ve been a part of Traveller starships since the days of MegaTraveller? I for one was slightly disappointed to see that these things weren’t used in the core book for the Mongoose game. It feels kind of clunky to me that the vehicle rules cover these issues, but the starship rules don’t.

Again, I’m calling for a book similar to the old FF&S to provide updated starship design rules (amongst other things), to bring the whole technical aspect of Mongoose Traveller into line. Existing classic ship designs could be released as PDFs on the Mongoose site, or even in book form; a “Deluxe Starships” book, if you like.

And whilst we’re at it, how about more in-depth startship combat rules, maybe a boxed set along the lines of the old GDW “Brilliant Lances”?

Starships should be the meat and bones of Traveller… WHERE’S THE STARSHIP LOVE???

So, what do y’all think?

Cheers!

 

[rust]

So, what do y’all think?

In my case, you probably would not want to know ...

I am quite satisfied with the starship design system as it is, and not at all
a friend of the vehicle design system in Civilian Vehicles and Military Ve-
hicles.
While I could do with a few additional options for starship design, it is ea-
sy enough to adapt those from GT Starships or create my own, and both
would become more difficult with a more detailed system.
And as for starship combat, I am not really into military scenarios, and for
the few combats of my settings a more detailed combat system would be
a waste of effort.

So, if this is what you want, I hope that you will get it, but I can well do
without. :wink:

 

[phavoc]

(1) Think of what IMHO is the best scene in a lousy movie when Prochnow orders the "Tigers Claw" to run silent

Das Boot in Space!!!

Zomg... people were walking out of the theater for Wing Commander it was so bad! Which is sad, since the game universe had such a rich backstory. But the movie was so poorly written that you just wanted to puke. I stayed through the end because a) I couldn't get a refund, and 2) I was hoping there was something redeeming at the end. Sadly I was mistaken.

 

[hdan]

+ Energy consumption/allocation

My number one request. The RP possibilities are great if your PPlant can't quite generate the required energy due to being run down. "I *know* you need to replot our approach vector, but I need the power for the repair drones!"

+ Break up some systems

Hadn't thought of this, but it would fit nicely with power points for the reasons you mention.

+ Do this as an add-on to the base system so those who don't like it don't have to use it

Reluctantly, I agree. At least from a playing perspective, the players and GM should be able to roll along and assume the ship has enough power to do what it was designed to do. If they're not "gear head" players, they may not want to mess with those sorts of details. Much like many players don't want to mess with commerce, they just want to know "how many tons and how many creds".

+ More civilian options.

It would be fun to have a Central Supply Catalog type publication for ship and station systems. That way a group who likes to fiddle with their ship can customize it as much as they can their own personal equipment.

Come to think of it, this sounds like a job of John Brazer!

 

[AndrewW]

+ Energy consumption/allocation

Call it MegaWatt or "Crushed Darrians per Minute" but give me a reactor rating and a consumption rating for the systems. Then add a DM to combat based on reactor output. This gives a "running at reduced power setting" element(1) and some jobs for the engineer

I suggested something like this back in this thread:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39483

 

[rinku]

I think the existing system works fine.

I've suffered through the design sequence in MegaTraveller and while the TNE one worked, it was a lot more effort to produce basically the same result (this starship can jump 2 parsecs, has two turrets and can carry 10 passengers, etc) as the basic one.

The extra options as presented in High Guard are the way to go. But, having said that an optional energy allocation add-on is not a bad idea. It would not, however, require any changes to the design sequence.

As to volume/mass... honestly, the exact volume of a spaceship is a secondary consideration. It's the mass that matters for most purposes, even for cargo. The "14 cubic metres" business was always intended to be a rough rule of thumb to help with drawing up deckplans.

If you REALLY want to fiddle around with current performance ratings based on current cargo and fuel loadings and seperate volume and hull area ratings, be my guest. But the anti-gravity and the reactionless thrusters are there as a fudge to make a lot of that moot. I'd suggest that the design sequences in GURPS Traveller/Space or TNE be used if you wish to go that route.

 

[BP]

...As to volume/mass... honestly, the exact volume of a spaceship is a secondary consideration. It's the mass that matters for most purposes, even for cargo.

... But the anti-gravity and the reactionless thrusters are there as a fudge to make a lot of that moot. ...

Exactly - mass is moot.

'Thrust' is given in acceleration, not force (therefore mass is irrelevant).

Gravitics makes volume the limiting factor in commerce - not mass.

 

[Jump 6]

OK then, so what are we thinking about a tactical starship combat game compatible with the core rules...?

 

[rust]

Again, not for me. :wink:

I do not use the Third Imperium setting and its technological assumptions,
and starship combat with enough ships involved to justify a game rarely
happens in my campaigns, so a game based upon the core rules would
not be of much use to me as a roleplaying aid.

Besides, I have yet to see a starship combat game that comes even re-
motely close to a pseudo-realistic simulation of a three dimensional com-
bat situation without requiring a calculator and a lot of time, which slows
down the game immensely and removes all the tension from it.

What would be possible would be a very simplistic, but fast game, and
there are already dozens of those available, and because they are sim-
plistic it would not be very difficult to rewrite their rules for Traveller -
all one would need would be different counters with Traveller-style star-
ships, also something I could well do myself.

So, sorry, nothing I would spend my money on.

 

[DFW]

Someone who is familiar with macro-econ needs to go over the star ship cost structure and the shipping rules. As the current interstellar economy is currently described, it would impossible given the cost of star ships.

 

[captainjack23]

Someone who is familiar with macro-econ needs to go over the star ship cost structure and the shipping rules. As the current interstellar economy is currently described, it would impossible given the cost of star ships.

There are a variety of opinions as to all of your points, up to and including the impossibility of the given system. Many of them informed by macro econ, which may be part of the reason for such a divergence of opinions.

I should also note that the original rules that MGT is based upon were designed by people who crunched the economic numbers and designed playable games; and some may have had quite a bunch of info about economics and shipping.

I'm not saying that they are infallible, just that assuming the rules are broken from the git go may be a bit broad of a premise to start with.

That said, some relevant threads are in the playtest threads here, and, believe it or not, quite a bit of creative and informed thought on this topic has been posted at the Citizens of the Imperium forums - and to those who would advise otherwise, simply lurking , searching and reading should be safe for those with overly-sensitive emotions....

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/

Search commerce, or economics for a good start.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I think the existing system works fine.

...

The extra options as presented in High Guard are the way to go. But, having said that an optional energy allocation add-on is not a bad idea. It would not, however, require any changes to the design sequence.

This. I've built a decent number of ships in my time, for Traveller and for many other systems. The Traveller rules are definitely my favorite since they are simple, easy to fudge on the fly, and don't require a masters degree in the system (*cough*warhammer*cough*d20Future*cough*).

Honestly, I wish the vehicle design rules were alot closer to the ease of the ship building rules.

 

[Dave Chase]

...
That said, some relevant threads are in the playtest threads here, and, believe it or not, quite a bit of creative and informed thought on this topic has been posted at the Citizens of the Imperium forums - and to those who would advise otherwise, simply lurking , searching and reading should be safe for those with overly-sensitive emotions....

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/

Search commerce, or economics for a good start.

Even just visiting there is supporting that website.

Nay, stay over here at Mongoose. You will be better for it. MGT is the Traveller today and tomorrow. Nothing wrong with playing around with the older versions, but if you are wanting to stay current and in the know, Stay here and ask here.

Dave Chase

 

[far-trader]

Nay, stay over here at Mongoose. You will be better for it. MGT is the Traveller today and tomorrow. Nothing wrong with playing around with the older versions, but if you are wanting to stay current and in the know, Stay here and ask here.

I grok that you have issues, or had anyway. I've been burned too (not by Hunter or CotI). I decided to forgive and move on, and I'm feeling much better.

Instead of the constant ragging just make a welcoming place here if you really want to sell that line. I've seen and experienced enough hate here that it's driven me away a couple times. Only from a couple trouble makers though. I came back to give it another chance, and found more of the same in short order, but so far, mostly, I'm just ignoring it.

Even just visiting there is supporting that website.

Hey, I'm all for supporting your right to cut off your nose to spite your face but advising others to do the same? Really?

 

[simonh]

I much prefer the ship design system as-is. IMHO there's nothing wrong with assuming that ships have a basically uniform density so volume can be used as a proxy for mass. I just don't believe that adding complexity in this respect would make the game any more 'realistic' yet would definitely increase the complexity of ship design and therefore put off many people from using it who otherwise would.

Power point allocation is silly. There's just no reason to design a ship that isn't capable of powering all it's critical systems at the same time, given the super-advanced state of power systems technology in Traveller. Anyway power point allocation would only be interesting for the player's ship, it's be a book keeping nightmare for the GM to have to deal with it for 'NPC vessels', so a better approach might be to come up with an optional system that retrofits existing designs with power point allocation rules.

Simon Hibbs

 

[AndrewW]

Different people will have different experiences, but problems from other forums aren't needed here. How about everyone just agrees to disagree and move on?

 

[alex_greene]

+ Energy consumption/allocation

My number one request.

I find myself thinking of all that Star Trek dialogue: "Captain, we're diverting all the power we've got to the shields! We can't spare anything on weapons!" "That's the best I can give you on the intermix flow equation!" "Get down the Engineering and help the Chief Engineer with that simulation! We've got to get more power!" "Divert power to propulsion from all decks! Minimal life support! We've got to catch up with that ship!"

Thing is, your Referee can be all over that anyway, by giving your engineer characters plenty of Engineering rolls to make and gently ruling here and there so the story doesn't get derailed by the engineer rolling a -6 Effect on his Engineering roll, dropping a spanner in the power plant reg coupler manifold and the ship suddenly vaporising as a consequence.

You guys really need a Referee's expansion of that Starship Operations section of the core rulebook to cover circumstances like this.

 

[rust]

I suspect it depends a lot on what kind of game one prefers.

If one wants a simulation, a true "what if" game, more and more detailed
rules probably are better. However, there is the danger that in the end
one just can lean back and watch the events unfold, with neither an in-
teresting story nor much player involvement - the rules handle that, one
just puts a situation into their system and gets a result one has to live
with, even if it is boring or kills the plot.

If one wants a story, especially a specific story, the more and the more
detailed the rules are, the more they can get in the way of the storyline.
If a referee makes the decisions instead of leaving them to the rules me-
chanics, he can keep the events on track with a little handwaving here
and there, and thereby make sure that the adventure remains an adven-
ture.

 

[DFW]

I should also note that the original rules that MGT is based upon were designed by people who crunched the economic numbers and designed playable games;

It is truly a pity that their knowledge wasn't used when it came to the ship design rules in MGT.

I'm not saying that they are infallible, just that assuming the rules are broken from the git go may be a bit broad of a premise to start with.

After 33 years of playing & play testing, including the MGT rules set, it isn't "assumption"...

 

[rust]

I have only playtested Traveller's economy on a small scale, with settings
including a few dozen planets at most, and usually concentrating on the
economy of one specific, well detailed planet.

From my experiences with this, Traveller's economic model - all versions -
does not convince me at all. While I would very much have preferred to
use Traveller's rules for ship costs, shipping and thelike to keep things ea-
sy for me, in the end I was always forced to make lots of modifications to
get a plausible result.

For my purposes, the system from GURPS Far Trader worked much better
than that of Mongoose Traveller, but it did still not produce results useful
for a long term campaign. However, I have not yet seen the new Merchant
Prince supplement (I am currently more into medieval settings than into
science fiction), perhaps it would solve at least some of the problems.