Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Streamlined hulls get it for free, and there's no additional tonnage.
Add additional tonnage for the fuel scoops.
Error about Fuel skimming
- Thread starter Vidgar
- Start date
Streamlined hulls get it for free, and there's no additional tonnage.
Add additional tonnage for the fuel scoops.
J. L. Brown
Emperor Mongoose
Companion update 2024, page 163, 'Gas Giant operations' -- skimming fuel at 'extreme shallow' takes 10x as long; at 'shallow' takes 2x as long, at 'Deep' fuel skimming is at normal rates.
Great.
Below 'Deep', you might even splash around in puddles of liquid hydrogen, but there is no effect on fuel skimming rate. That is very strange.
I also think it is strange there is no 'routine' depth between 'Shallow' and 'Deep'; especially since the description of 'Deep' includes these two statements:
'Fuel skimming and commercial exploitation such as petrochemical harvesting is normally done in the Deep zone. Skimming is at the normal rate...' and
'conditions tend to be sufficiently turbulent that Pilot checks are made with at DM-2.'
I would tend to think that normal practice would be to avoid negative modifiers to piloting skill; it just is not safe. I get that 'more risk = more reward', but then where is the increased rate for more hazardous & higher pressure environments?
Great.
Below 'Deep', you might even splash around in puddles of liquid hydrogen, but there is no effect on fuel skimming rate. That is very strange.
I also think it is strange there is no 'routine' depth between 'Shallow' and 'Deep'; especially since the description of 'Deep' includes these two statements:
'Fuel skimming and commercial exploitation such as petrochemical harvesting is normally done in the Deep zone. Skimming is at the normal rate...' and
'conditions tend to be sufficiently turbulent that Pilot checks are made with at DM-2.'
I would tend to think that normal practice would be to avoid negative modifiers to piloting skill; it just is not safe. I get that 'more risk = more reward', but then where is the increased rate for more hazardous & higher pressure environments?
The whole system is too dangerous by half to fit the fiction. But that tends to be the case for most Pilot tests. Look at the ridiculous difficulty for landing a starship. As with all things in Traveller, you should only use the tests when it seems dramatically appropriate. In a well maintained ship with a properly trained crew and no other issues going on, skimming for fuel (even at -2) is not worth a roll.
But if they are trying to skim in a damaged ship or while avoiding pirate patrols, then you can ask for those rolls.
Lots of things are done with more than the minimum risk because of financial interests IRL and, in the vast majority of cases there is no problems. The error rate is lower than any 2d6 roll could simulate.
But if they are trying to skim in a damaged ship or while avoiding pirate patrols, then you can ask for those rolls.
Lots of things are done with more than the minimum risk because of financial interests IRL and, in the vast majority of cases there is no problems. The error rate is lower than any 2d6 roll could simulate.
J. L. Brown
Emperor Mongoose
I tend to think 'being in a rush to skim fuel as quickly as possible' is a bit dramatic -- maybe they have less than an hour until the threat arrives, etc. And I would happily allow the travellers trade risk for reward; deeper dives = faster fueling & bigger minuses. But diving deeper than 'routine depth for skimming' (the 'Deep' depth) does not produce faster fueling.
I would prefer something, at a rough first pass, more like the following:
0 - space
1 - Wisp; pilot -0; fuel at ship tonnage / 1000 per 2d hours; fall to next level in 16d days
2 - Extreme Shallows; pilot -0; fuel at ship tonnage / 1000 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 8d hours
3 - Shallows; pilot -1; fuel at ship tonnage / 200 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 4d hours -- routine fueling depth, above cloud tops
4 - Mid-level; pilot -2; fuel at ship tonnage / 100 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 2d hours -- routine organic chemical harvesting, below cloud tops
5 - Deep; pilot -3; fuel at ship tonnage / 50 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 8d minutes
6 - Extreme Deep; pilot -4; fuel at ship tonnage / 20 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 4d minutes
7 - Depths; pilot -5; fuel at ship tonnage / 50 per 2d (player) rounds; fall to next level in 2d minutes
8 - Abyssal Depths; pilot -6; fuel at ship tonnage / 20 per 2d (player) rounds; bottom in 2d minutes
The number at the beginning of the line is the 'damage category'; dispersed structure and planetoid hulls add +3 to their damage category; close structure and buffered planetoid hulls add +1; standard hulls add nothing; Streamlined hulls -1. Light hulls +1; reinforced hulls -1. Specialty hulls: Basic Ocean Operations hulls is -1; Advanced Ocean Operation hulls -2, Pressure hulls -3. Armor value for non-specialty hulls are halved, but Armor one -1; armor three -2; armor six -3; armor 10 -4, armor 15 -5, armor 21 -6, armor 28 -7, armor 36 -8. Protection from armor and specialty hulls does not stack, use the best modifier.
Damage category
0 and less - nothing
1 - Armor and heat shielding apply; 1 per day
2 - Armor and heat shielding apply; d3 per day
3 - Armor applies; d3 per 4d6 hours
4 - Armor applies; d3 per 2d6 hours
5 - Armor applies; d6 per hour
6 - Half Armor applies; 2d per (starship) round
7 - Half Armor applies; 1d per (player) round
8 - Half Armor applies; 2d per player round
9 and higher - No reduction from Armor; 4d per player round, catastrophic destruction on 16+, +1 per round.
I would prefer something, at a rough first pass, more like the following:
0 - space
1 - Wisp; pilot -0; fuel at ship tonnage / 1000 per 2d hours; fall to next level in 16d days
2 - Extreme Shallows; pilot -0; fuel at ship tonnage / 1000 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 8d hours
3 - Shallows; pilot -1; fuel at ship tonnage / 200 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 4d hours -- routine fueling depth, above cloud tops
4 - Mid-level; pilot -2; fuel at ship tonnage / 100 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 2d hours -- routine organic chemical harvesting, below cloud tops
5 - Deep; pilot -3; fuel at ship tonnage / 50 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 8d minutes
6 - Extreme Deep; pilot -4; fuel at ship tonnage / 20 per 2d minutes; fall to next level in 4d minutes
7 - Depths; pilot -5; fuel at ship tonnage / 50 per 2d (player) rounds; fall to next level in 2d minutes
8 - Abyssal Depths; pilot -6; fuel at ship tonnage / 20 per 2d (player) rounds; bottom in 2d minutes
The number at the beginning of the line is the 'damage category'; dispersed structure and planetoid hulls add +3 to their damage category; close structure and buffered planetoid hulls add +1; standard hulls add nothing; Streamlined hulls -1. Light hulls +1; reinforced hulls -1. Specialty hulls: Basic Ocean Operations hulls is -1; Advanced Ocean Operation hulls -2, Pressure hulls -3. Armor value for non-specialty hulls are halved, but Armor one -1; armor three -2; armor six -3; armor 10 -4, armor 15 -5, armor 21 -6, armor 28 -7, armor 36 -8. Protection from armor and specialty hulls does not stack, use the best modifier.
Damage category
0 and less - nothing
1 - Armor and heat shielding apply; 1 per day
2 - Armor and heat shielding apply; d3 per day
3 - Armor applies; d3 per 4d6 hours
4 - Armor applies; d3 per 2d6 hours
5 - Armor applies; d6 per hour
6 - Half Armor applies; 2d per (starship) round
7 - Half Armor applies; 1d per (player) round
8 - Half Armor applies; 2d per player round
9 and higher - No reduction from Armor; 4d per player round, catastrophic destruction on 16+, +1 per round.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Turbulence (and streamlining) affects piloting.
Structural integrity (and armour) mitigates damage.
Structural integrity (and armour) mitigates damage.
J. L. Brown
Emperor Mongoose
I gave the streamlined hull a small benefit because it is expected that such hulls will be skimming for fuel (it even get a fuel scoop for free) and the minimal bracing for that is included. Note that they do not get to count their full armor value for reducing the damage category for the pressure of great depths.
I did not create piloting bonus or malus for hull configuration, although that would make sense, because I was doing a quick-and-dirty simple mod to the existing rules. There is no reason not to do so, though.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Routine tasks could depend on two aspects, degree of skill, and actual attention to the task at hand.
Taking stuff for granted, even if you have skill factor/five, can get you killed; or others.
Taking stuff for granted, even if you have skill factor/five, can get you killed; or others.
NOLATrav
Cosmic Mongoose
I like this quite a bit, cheers. I've been working on something similar and it seems we're in accordance for the most part. I've not addressed as many hull types as they haven't come up for me yet, but the gist is the same. Thanks for sharing.
NOLATrav
Cosmic Mongoose
Squarely in Rulings not Rules territory.
Sure, but "skimming fuel at deep" is the fictional standard action. So it's not intrinsically dramatic. At least, not since they added fuel purifiers to every ship and its cat. Even in ye olden days, it was jumping after fuel skimming that was scary, not the skimming task check itself.
The reality is that the drama isn't from the fuel skimming. Its from the other thing going on. You can just have the pilot say "I'm gonna do something stupid to fuel faster because its important". Because the actual consequence is probably going to be "pirates! pewpew!" more often than "oops, you crashed into a wind vortex and now are small fragments of ship plunging into the depths".
Also have to wonder if speeding up fueling actually helps if your fuel purifier has a fixed rate of purification. Though you can always take the misjump chance, I suppose.
If you like inventing detailed mechanics for rare situations, then sure, go for it. You should always do what's fun for you and your table. That table looks pretty comprehensive.
Sigtrygg
Emperor Mongoose
Fuel skimming is a routine...
any routine should just happen unless the referee decides something unexpected happens, and even then the routine checklist may be consulted which states - if X then do Y. It's why air travel is so safe.
There is a curious desire to have a dice roll for everything because of the "excitement" - remember the first rule of probability
roll enough times and you will fail.
I didn't like it when GT introduced the dice checklist for standard operations, and I do not like that MgT has continued it.
any routine should just happen unless the referee decides something unexpected happens, and even then the routine checklist may be consulted which states - if X then do Y. It's why air travel is so safe.
There is a curious desire to have a dice roll for everything because of the "excitement" - remember the first rule of probability
roll enough times and you will fail.
I didn't like it when GT introduced the dice checklist for standard operations, and I do not like that MgT has continued it.
Fulcs
Banded Mongoose
I agree.
It's just my opinion, but I much prefer to follow the core rulebook where it states that "most actions undertaken by Travellers do not require a skill check" and "Often, if the Travellers have the requisite skills the referee can just assume they succeed".
It makes sense to me to save the rolls for the type of situations described in the core rulebook; when they're in danger, when the task is especially difficult or hazardous, when they're under pressure of time or when success or failure are especially interesting.
Even then, instant death on a single failed roll is probably not going to make your players very happy.
Personally, I think a series of rolls to try and overcome their mortal peril would make for a much more dramatic and tense game session, and if the worst comes to the worst they'll still remember for years to come their epic struggle to, for example, escape the gravity well of the gas giant that eventually claimed them and their ship.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
NOLATrav
Cosmic Mongoose
There's nothing indicating rolling for the sake of rolling, or creating rolls where none are needed. The idea is that it's meant to provide more choices for the players, at least for me and my group. Want to shave a few hours off the skimming run? Gotta go deeper, make a roll. That's all. It's not playing wrong or dismissing the nature and spirit of the rules, it's merely an optional level of detail codified to be consistent.
My comment was in response to the "I would think that normal practice is to avoid negative modifiers". I don't think you can make that statement without considering that *any* die roll is too high a risk for the in universe fiction about how commonplace this activity is supposedly. Therefore, the mechanic only works if you limit the rolls to dramatically significant moments. This is NOT a comment on how to play. It is intended to convey that I believe that the modifiers to the action should come from the situation necessitating the die roll, which is not the actual act of skimming.
In a normal all systems are go situation, skimming at Deep is a routine thing. But trying to do it in a pressure situation is hard. I would prefer to focus on the things causing that to be a pressure situation rather than having an elaborate mechanic around the otherwise routine activity. I don't feel like the actual situation is going to be the same often enough to benefit from a more elaborate set of modifiers. Am I making a die roll here because the ship is damaged or the pilot is capacitated? Maybe they'll want to ease up on the depth and go slower. Are they trying to skim before the hostile ship finds them? My inclination would be to make that more about "can you hide the ship with fancy piloting and/or electronics work" than about picking the right depth to skim at. Skimming at Deep while doing evasive maneuvers and your sensor tech is focused on countermeasures is "Hard". You can dive to extreme depths to make being spotted harder, not necessarily to "skim faster".
But, then, I don't think the mechanics in the companion about how fast you can skim are generally a good framework to build off of. "Roll 40d6 to see how many minutes it takes to fill your fuel tanks for a jump 2".
Given that the most common reason you'll care about how long it takes is an enemy ship either approaching or fleeing, why not tie it to ship combat turns? And then give people roles to play in speeding up the process? The engineer boosting the fuel purifiers or the pilot making riskier passes, etc.
The framework J.L. created is better than the Companion version. I just don't see how that would ever be how I framed the situation.
In a normal all systems are go situation, skimming at Deep is a routine thing. But trying to do it in a pressure situation is hard. I would prefer to focus on the things causing that to be a pressure situation rather than having an elaborate mechanic around the otherwise routine activity. I don't feel like the actual situation is going to be the same often enough to benefit from a more elaborate set of modifiers. Am I making a die roll here because the ship is damaged or the pilot is capacitated? Maybe they'll want to ease up on the depth and go slower. Are they trying to skim before the hostile ship finds them? My inclination would be to make that more about "can you hide the ship with fancy piloting and/or electronics work" than about picking the right depth to skim at. Skimming at Deep while doing evasive maneuvers and your sensor tech is focused on countermeasures is "Hard". You can dive to extreme depths to make being spotted harder, not necessarily to "skim faster".
But, then, I don't think the mechanics in the companion about how fast you can skim are generally a good framework to build off of. "Roll 40d6 to see how many minutes it takes to fill your fuel tanks for a jump 2".
Given that the most common reason you'll care about how long it takes is an enemy ship either approaching or fleeing, why not tie it to ship combat turns? And then give people roles to play in speeding up the process? The engineer boosting the fuel purifiers or the pilot making riskier passes, etc.The framework J.L. created is better than the Companion version. I just don't see how that would ever be how I framed the situation.
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
The problem with the mechanic in the Companion is the need to make a check at every level transition and then roll multiple times for passes.
Instead, a standard % of hull tonnage per hour of fuel collected at a certain depth and a single check based on depth with faster fueling on a good Effect and increasingly bad things happening with a bad Effect would be much more practical.
Six rolls to go to Deep and back (and another bunch of rolls for actual fueling) almost guarantees something bad will happen each time (even if it's just more Pilot checks) and definitely guarantees tedium.
Yes, in general I agree with the 'do not roll for routine things' convention. Skimming (a simplified single roll) probably deserves a check just to make buying fuel the smarter solution. The other thing not handled well (*cough* Deepnight Revelation progress speeds *cough*) is the amount of time required to go from 100 gas giant planetary diameters (with a compete accelerate/decelerate cycle each way - or at least inbound) in addition to the fueling time - and then any refining time (which can start the moment you start skimming, but not before) when computing how long a quick refueling fly-through a system actually takes.
Instead, a standard % of hull tonnage per hour of fuel collected at a certain depth and a single check based on depth with faster fueling on a good Effect and increasingly bad things happening with a bad Effect would be much more practical.
Six rolls to go to Deep and back (and another bunch of rolls for actual fueling) almost guarantees something bad will happen each time (even if it's just more Pilot checks) and definitely guarantees tedium.
Yes, in general I agree with the 'do not roll for routine things' convention. Skimming (a simplified single roll) probably deserves a check just to make buying fuel the smarter solution. The other thing not handled well (*cough* Deepnight Revelation progress speeds *cough*) is the amount of time required to go from 100 gas giant planetary diameters (with a compete accelerate/decelerate cycle each way - or at least inbound) in addition to the fueling time - and then any refining time (which can start the moment you start skimming, but not before) when computing how long a quick refueling fly-through a system actually takes.
Oh, I'm definitely in favor of the idea that skimming (and unrefined fuel in general) is a rare thing only done by the desperate and the crazy (or military/scout ships with expensive specialized engines). But I think refined fuel is dead as long as shipboard fuel refineries are as small and inexpensive as they are.
J. L. Brown
Emperor Mongoose
I also have other questions about refining fuel -- starship based fuel refineries seem far better than space-station based fuel refineries. And station-based fuel refineries actually seem to get more expensive per dTon of fuel produced as TL increases. Maybe this is due for a bit of a re-examination? Or was this changed in the HG 2022 update?
And another question cropped up in relation to this when I was working on a spreadsheet to examine the costs at each TL: does 'residential block' housing in a space-station include or incur life-support costs?
And another question cropped up in relation to this when I was working on a spreadsheet to examine the costs at each TL: does 'residential block' housing in a space-station include or incur life-support costs?
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
It is not, but space station fuel refineries include the gathering equipment (drones and their hangars) as well as the refinery equipment itself, so it' not a fair comparison.
Does not seem to, but if you have to account for the per person costs, then you have to deal with occupancy levels and it's probably best to just assume it goes into monthly maintenance costs. Same goes for commercial zones for that matter - but they all need power - in addition to what the station needs for tonnage, so that's a tradeoff with standard stateroom costs.
I haven't actually looked at the space station refinery math. But shipboard refineries have been steadily made better and better over time. We are now at the point, imho, that distinguishing between refined and unrefined fuel is a pointless relic.
In the original edition of Traveller, "military and scout" ships could use unrefined fuel without having to risk misjumps and damage to the power plant and manuever drives. But there was no mechanical distinction between what a "military or scout" ship was vs any other ship. Just the DM said so.
So they added shipboard fuel refineries in high guard. But they were huge. Smallest was like 30 to 40 dtons at commercial tech levels. Later, you could get them smaller if needed, down to 1/5 that size. And now they are whatever size suits you.
What they should have done, imho, is make "military grade" engines an upgrade to your standard engine instead of making fuel purifiers as a thing anyone can (and SHOULD) buy.
In the original edition of Traveller, "military and scout" ships could use unrefined fuel without having to risk misjumps and damage to the power plant and manuever drives. But there was no mechanical distinction between what a "military or scout" ship was vs any other ship. Just the DM said so.
So they added shipboard fuel refineries in high guard. But they were huge. Smallest was like 30 to 40 dtons at commercial tech levels. Later, you could get them smaller if needed, down to 1/5 that size. And now they are whatever size suits you.
What they should have done, imho, is make "military grade" engines an upgrade to your standard engine instead of making fuel purifiers as a thing anyone can (and SHOULD) buy.
