ERRATA - It Begins!

[tneva82]

More importantly, most animals do not have ranged weapons. If they attack, they will certainly want to close that range gap as soon as possible. I can't imagine a referee, while running The Chamax Plague, would allow the Chamax to simply walk to their prey while the characters obliterate them with their rifles. :wink:

That would be handled by using major action to get 2 more minor action giving you 3 move action aka 18 meters yes? How fast you want characters to move

 

[Infojunky]

That would be handled by using major action to get 2 more minor action giving you 3 move action aka 18 meters yes? How fast you want characters to move

Fast enough to make them happy?

 

[SimonJester]

<snip previous quote>

So multiple receipts get you nothing. However, you could assume that multiple receipts get you a newer ship that the default one.

Then again, five receipts of a ship roll for a Free Trader would get you it without a mortgage, fully paid off but 40 years old. (The first gets the ship, each subsequent one gets another 10 years paid off).

Not any more. Five rolls of Free Trader will net a Merchant PC exactly 25 shipshares if used for a Free Trader, or 10 shares for any other kind of ship.

In other words, he'll wind up with a 25% share of a brand new Free Trader, not a paid-off 40-year-old one.

Of course if he takes advantage of the Old Ships option and DOES go for a 40-year-old-clunker, he'd gain an average of 14 extra shares, bringing his total ownership to 39% (or 24% if any ship other than a Free Trader). If he manages to max out all four share rolls at 6 each, he'd have a total of 49 shipshares for the used trader (34 for...you get the idea). Oops, forgot about that 'maximum 10 shares' bit. Sucks to be him.

This is in conflict with established canon, going right back to the original LBBs. More realistic, perhaps, but off-putting for an old fan of the merchant class.

BTW: One house rule I'm using on this is to allow the "Free Trader" rolled shares to be applied as full 5-share options on any Free, Far or Fat Trader ship the party may seek to purchase. It's not much but it takes some of the sting out of the change.

 

[Mithras]

Is this thread going to be stickied??!!! I think it needs to be.

 

[Mithras]

I can't find the range DMs for space weaponry that is alluded to in FIRING BEAM WEAPONS, pg 147.

I can see the Optimum Ranges isted in the TURRET WEAPONS table on pg 111. Don't know how they relate to range DMs though .....

 

[Infojunky]

I can't find the range DMs for space weaponry that is alluded to in FIRING BEAM WEAPONS, pg 147.

I can see the Optimum Ranges isted in the TURRET WEAPONS table on pg 111. Don't know how they relate to range DMs though .....

I thought we threw this one up earlier in this topic.

 

[zanwot]

The Scout career does not give access to the flyer skill. The problem being that every scout ship contains a grav car, which is piloted with flyer(grav). So it is inconsistent (I cannot remember what it was like in CT, except the scout ships definitly had a grav car)...
Anybody have an idea? Maybe Pilot(small craft) should be replaced by Flyer (Grav) or maybe a grav car can be piloted with pilot (small craft)?

 

[-Daniel-]

The Scout career does not give access to the flyer skill. The problem being that every scout ship contains a grav car, which is piloted with flyer(grav). So it is inconsistent (I cannot remember what it was like in CT, except the scout ships definitly had a grav car)...
Anybody have an idea? Maybe Pilot(small craft) should be replaced by Flyer (Grav) or maybe a grav car can be piloted with pilot (small craft)?

I just gave my scout Fly(Grav) as one of his Contact skills so he made sense. I agree, though, it does seem odd it is not on the list and small craft is when they mostly use the Scout and the Air/Raft.

Daniel

 

[zanwot]

Actually I may as a personnal mod to fix this try to squeeze in Flyer(grav) in the Personnal development table, makes sense, along with replacing any Pilot(small Craft) of the specialty tables with Flyer(grav). Like that The service table can be left untouched (replacing pilot by flyer on that table would just be nonsensical for a scout).

(And thanks for Air/raft name, could not seem to remember it, shame on me)

EDIT: Actuall, maybe when one flies an Air/raft from orbit it counts as a small craft and not a flyer? That may ring a bell...

 

[Chronus]

The Scout career does not give access to the flyer skill. The problem being that every scout ship contains a grav car, which is piloted with flyer(grav). So it is inconsistent (I cannot remember what it was like in CT, except the scout ships definitly had a grav car)...

On a similar note, the Navy career doesn't give access to the Medic skill ... a rather odd deficiency considering all the naval battles that may occur. I'm not convinced that every naval craft has a marine on board. :wink:

Also, the Naval Advanced Education table has Navigation. Why? The skill definition on page 56 says that Navigation is the "planet-side counterpart of astrogation ... finding directions on the ground". Perhaps it should be changed to Astrogation?

Finally, the Rogue(Pirate) career has Navigation listed for the Leader rank. Again, I suspect this should be Astrogation. The definition for this career is "space-going corsair", not "ocean-going corsair". Then again, maybe they pilot their spacecraft from planet to planet so that they can hitch a ride on some sailing vessel to do some real ol' fashioned pirating. :wink:

 

[Chronus]

Not sure if this was touched before but the Bay Weapons table, on page 112, does not list an auto crew hit for Fusion Guns. According to pages 149 (Special Attacks) & 150 (Trigger Screens), Fusion Guns inflict a radiation crew hit.

 

[zanwot]

On a similar note, the Navy career doesn't give access to the Medic skill ... a rather odd deficiency considering all the naval battles that may occur. I'm not convinced that every naval craft has a marine on board. :wink:

That one seem normal to me: On most naval ships you will probably have proper specialised medics (from scholar). This is very different to Marines for example. Of course that does not take account of Medics getting military ranks within the navy, but not too dramatic.

Also, the Naval Advanced Education table has Navigation. Why? The skill definition on page 56 says that Navigation is the "planet-side counterpart of astrogation ... finding directions on the ground". Perhaps it should be changed to Astrogation?
Finally, the Rogue(Pirate) career has Navigation listed for the Leader rank. Again, I suspect this should be Astrogation. The definition for this career is "space-going corsair", not "ocean-going corsair". Then again, maybe they pilot their spacecraft from planet to planet so that they can hitch a ride on some sailing vessel to do some real ol' fashioned pirating. :wink:

Planetside navigation includes seaships, but also land and FLIGHT orientation on a planet, as well as probably planning planetary strikes. So it is not totaly incoherent for Navy and Corsairs, as they can have to raid/attack etc specific places on planets, and they can fly their fighters/shuttles etc over continents.

 

[EDG]

Raised elsewhere, but on page 180 in the "Space Opera" variant rules section is the -6 DM to hydrographics for size 0-1 worlds supposed to replace the default rule that size 0-1 worlds should automatically have 0 hydrographics? If not, it seems somewhat redundant to me and therefore should be removed.

 

[EDG]

EDIT: Moved to Worldbuilding Clarification thread

 

[EDG]

EDIT: Moved to Worldbuilding Clarification thread

 

[EDG]

Page 175:

Government - the table only goes up to D, when it should go up to H - the maximum government for population 9 is 12-7+9 = 14 (E), max gov for pop A is 12-7+10 = 15 (F), max gov for pop B is 12-7+11 = 16 (G), max gov for pop C is 12-7+12 = 17 (H).

Without the E+ governments we will have too many high population worlds that have gov D (assuming that any gov roll higher than 13 is adjusted back down to 13).

Also, gov E is listed as having a DM+1 in the Tech Level table on page 179, so apparently it does exist...

 

[EDG]

Deleted - I missed it in the existing text, thanks E.T. Smith.

 

[EDG]

Page 181:

Trade codes:

Lt (Low Technology): should have pop 1+ as well, otherwise you're going to list Barren worlds as "low technology".

Ni (Non-Industrial): should be pop 1-6 surely, not pop 4-6 as shown in the table??

Po (Poor): Should this have pop 1+ as well, or do you really want Barren worlds with atm 2-5 and hyd 0-3 to be listed as Poor?

Ri (Rich): CT defines rich as having gov 4-9 as well, but MGT doesn't. Is this an error in MGT?

Va (Vacuum): Needs to be size 1+ as well, unless you really want to have asteroid belts also calssified as Vacuum worlds (may be true technically, but I don't think that's been done traditionally - Asteroid Belts are usually just referred to as that, not a Vacuum Worlds as well).

Also, Va is missing from the trade table on page 165 and 166 - is should probably be listed as the same as "Asteroid Belt".

 

[E.T.Smith]

Page 173-175: Government/Law/Starport/Techlevel: Clarification needed - do you still roll for Gov, Law, Starport, Bases, and Tech Level if the pop = 0. It doesn't make any sense to do so IMO.

Very top of the left column on page 173: "If a world has a population of 0, it is uninhabited and so has a Government, Law Level and Technology Level of 0."

 

[EDG]

Very top of the left column on page 173: "If a world has a population of 0, it is uninhabited and so has a Government, Law Level and Technology Level of 0."

Ooops, I didn't spot that there. Thanks!