Question regarding Tidal Lock Status in World Builder's Handbook

Derpious

Mongoose
Hi!
I don't know if this is the right place to post a question like this but, I'm feeling really lost haha

In the World Builder's Handbook, the part about determining Tidal Impact and Tidal Lock status, I feel really confused about what the effects on the Tidal Lock Status table does to the different planets/moons?

1:1 Lock I think I understand, same goes for the day length multipliers.

But what effect does a 3:2 lock have? or the Prograde and Retrograde effects? I feel like the book isn't super clear about what these changes actually do. I may just have missed it though haha

For a 3:2 lock, the remarks state that the world spins 3 times every 2 rotations, so to rephrase, a day is 2/3 the length of the year. This is the situation on Mercury. So when determining temperature, you're going to have the extremes of a long day.

Prograde and retrograde are defined in the glossary (phew, I checked, because if they hadn't been, that would be bad on me). Prograde is just like most planets, but on the table, it's a longer day; retrograde means it spins the wrong way, which makes the math for determining length of day (Solar Day, page 104) come out a bit strange (Venus comes to mind, its retrograde rotation takes longer than its year, but the actually length of a 'day' from sun-up to sundown is about half its year). Again the main effect is on length of day (long) which factors into the hot and cold temperature calculations as the Rotation Factor on p. 113. And for descriptive colour as in: "On this world the day is three weeks long!" or some such.

So for the pro/retrograde it says something like, 1D x 20 x 24 hours. So that means, adding whatever I get to the Sidereal day? I did that, atleast, I think it worked out haha.

Another question I have is, for worlds with an Insidious type E atmosphere, where the atmospheric pressure is considered as 10+ minimum and unbound span. For those types of worlds, there is no way other than hand-wavery to determine general atmospheric pressure? And then that follows, any further equation that requires a worlds atmospheric pressure is irrelevant for those planets?

I would ignore them but when I then later got to other parts where it referes to atmospheres of B and C, just makes me wonder

I love this book though! I'm having a blast generating worlds, even if it's heavy to get through. Feels like I'm discovering worlds, in a way.

So for the pro/retrograde it says something like, 1D x 20 x 24 hours. So that means, adding whatever I get to the Sidereal day? I did that, atleast, I think it worked out haha.
For results of 7 or more on the table on page 105, the intent was that you would just replace the values with the ones originally determined. Though adding the hours to a long prograde day wouldn't material change much, so it's fine either way.
Another question I have is, for worlds with an Insidious type E atmosphere, where the atmospheric pressure is considered as 10+ minimum and unbound span. For those types of worlds, there is no way other than hand-wavery to determine general atmospheric pressure? And then that follows, any further equation that requires a worlds atmospheric pressure is irrelevant for those planets?
You're referring to the subtypes table on page 89? Yeah, I'm surprised nobody (including me) caught that, because, yeah, you sort of need a span... another thing for another version. Hmm.
What I should do is... ignore the span. Instead. roll D3 to determine the number of zeros, then roll d10 (with 10=10, not 0) in front of it. So if you had a 1 for the D3, you'd get a total atmospheric pressure of 10-90, and with a D3 of 3, the range would be 1000-9000 and then if you want, roll d10 (with 10=0) for additional digits of accuracy if desires.

I would ignore them but when I then later got to other parts where it referes to atmospheres of B and C, just makes me wonder

I love this book though! I'm having a blast generating worlds, even if it's heavy to get through. Feels like I'm discovering worlds, in a way.
Thanks!

Sounds great, and happy to help!

I've just one last question, when it comes to the World Social Characteristics Chapter, should an expanded SAH/UWP be determined for every world? Including extremely inhospitable worlds? Or is it more a case of, do however much you feel like doing? Haha

I've rolled for a starport of quality X on an insidious type E planet with a tech level of 4. I figure that there likely isn't any life on that one...

I've just one last question, when it comes to the World Social Characteristics Chapter, should an expanded SAH/UWP be determined for every world? Including extremely inhospitable worlds? Or is it more a case of, do however much you feel like doing? Haha
No. The whole basic idea is to only do what you need to do. The SAH should inform the mainworld, and the mainworld should be the one to detail (as much as necessary) for the system. Only if it makes sense should you look at any of the other worlds. And depending on the type of region: settled, frontier, beyond the frontier, or whatever (like fallen empires or whatever) even the mainworld might not be inhabited.
I've rolled for a starport of quality X on an insidious type E planet with a tech level of 4. I figure that there likely isn't any life on that one...
Not human anyway.

Not human anyway.

This here has been the most difficult concept wrangle with. My initial instinct is to always come up with some way to explain how and why humans would be somewhere, and I never think outside of the box. Even when I do get creative enough to imagine a species that could survive, I struggle to come up with how to determine their stats, skills and other things in a balanced way that might be needed for an encounter, so I just always default to human... I'm so boring. Lol.

Not human anyway.
Or it's a 'research station' with a single digit's worth of staff, all of whom pissed off someone with enough juice to get them assigned there.

Replies
22
Views
705
Replies
79
Views
6K
Replies
207
Views
11K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
3K