Request for comments on ship quirks

[mavikfelna]

So in the recent Uranium Fever book, the author had an idea that I really like, ship's quirks by what the ship was doing in it's past. He only provides 3 options, commercial, military and special. So I thought it might be interesting to try my hand making some D66 quirk tables like this, but expand it out a bit.

Currently, I have the following: Commercial, Military, Exploration, Resource Extraction/Industrial, Infrequent/sub-craft, and Special. What other areas might be interesting? These are the areas that I feel most ships would fit into, but there are probably other interesting ones I'm overlooking.

Also, for a D66 chart, what % would be good for positive quirks? Like Well Maintained or Updated Astrogation Software.
What about mixed quirks, that have both positive and negative affects? Famous/Well Known

My thought is about 20% each for positive and mixed?

And I would say negative quirks stack, so if you roll Control Issues, Piloting -1 twice, it becomes Pilot -2, since really old ships could add up alot of quirks. But multiple positive or mixed shouldn't stack, since deterioration over time is more likely, even with good maintenance.

And a final thought, mixed use ships, so say a converted Type J that used to be a Type S would be Exploration and Resource Extraction, so you would split the quirks up as evenly as possible between the two, or more use types.

Is this something anyone is interested in? Thoughts and comments? Cabbages?

 

[shirgall]

It's a good idea. Quirks should never have a greater impact than an advantage or disadvantage from TL differences, as a good guideline, probably more significant to roleplay than gameplay.

A possibility to consider is the kind of careers the user of the ship would have had and look at the events and mishaps tables for that career to have a ship-related event or mishap in the same style. It could possibly be great flavor.

 

[swordtart]

I dislike purely positive quirks as quirks are usually a function of an older and therefore cheaper ship. Double edged ones on the quirks table in the CRB like concealed smuggler compartments, which might cause trouble with customs and provide circumstantial benefit are less of an issue. The result of an upgraded computer however should add to the cost of the ship not be something that makes the ship cheaper.

Quirks should also be locked in if they are to provide an ongoing cost benefit (e.g. reduced mortgage). If you can replace the M-drive for MCr5 then a quirk reducing the effectiveness of the M-drive should give you less than a MCr5 price break. Things generally cost more than the sum of their parts.

Quirks like "the whole ship smells of fish" are ideal as any effect is nuanced and the effect persistent. Clever play can reduce the impact but the referee has scope to introduce a snooty passenger than just wont accept it to make it an unsurmountable problem for a few sessions.

Variance in maintenance costs over the longer term needs to be balanced with buying a ship more cheaply in the first place. Quirks should provide opportunities for making the ship unique. Making those extra costs variable might also be more interesting than just adding a fixed value (which will just blur into the background after it is calculated).

Any of the TL upgrades or downgrades off the standard ship can be easily incorporated (at their book cost rather than just a random roll). Ship vendors will likley be more aware of the value of the ship than a buyer who may not know all the nuances of the quirks up front.

I'd also like quirks to develop over time maybe as a side effect of missed maintenance or critical damage. You can repair it, but it is never quite the same afterward. Just channel every conversation you have had when your car was serviced

 

[mavikfelna]

I dislike purely positive quirks as quirks are usually a function of an older and therefore cheaper ship. Double edged ones on the quirks table in the CRB like concealed smuggler compartments, which might cause trouble with customs and provide circumstantial benefit are less of an issue. The result of an upgraded computer however should add to the cost of the ship not be something that makes the ship cheaper.

Quirks should also be locked in if they are to provide an ongoing cost benefit (e.g. reduced mortgage). If you can replace the M-drive for MCr5 then a quirk reducing the effectiveness of the M-drive should give you less than a MCr5 price break. Things generally cost more than the sum of their parts.

Quirks like "the whole ship smells of fish" are ideal as any effect is nuanced and the effect persistent. Clever play can reduce the impact but the referee has scope to introduce a snooty passenger than just wont accept it to make it an unsurmountable problem for a few sessions.

Variance in maintenance costs over the longer term needs to be balanced with buying a ship more cheaply in the first place. Quirks should provide opportunities for making the ship unique. Making those extra costs variable might also be more interesting than just adding a fixed value (which will just blur into the background after it is calculated).

Any of the TL upgrades or downgrades off the standard ship can be easily incorporated (at their book cost rather than just a random roll). Ship vendors will likley be more aware of the value of the ship than a buyer who may not know all the nuances of the quirks up front.

I'd also like quirks to develop over time maybe as a side effect of missed maintenance or critical damage. You can repair it, but it is never quite the same afterward. Just channel every conversation you have had when your car was serviced

While I agree, at least to some extent, with everything you've said, there is a long history of positive quirks being a part of the setting, and they do add to the special feel of a beloved old ship. While I think the majority of quirks should have a non-positive or at least mixed aspect, I don't think the occasional positive quirk is either game breaking, nor unreasonable.
It is possible to come across a gem of an old ship that has been lovingly cared for, with meticulously kept records and quality parts always used. Such a ship should have a benefit of some sort, though I would also agree it should be reflected in the cost of the ship.
In the same vein, it's always possible to come across that rare old single user getting rid of an old friend that may not have been meticulously cared for but is in decent shape and they are selling it for cheap to get rid of it fast because of some old, painful memory or the fact they just want it go to someone who will take care of it since they can't any longer.
I would call both of those positive quirks, but they do affect ship cost, which affects maintenance. I don't know that decoupling cost from maintenance would be a bad thing, but it's certainly not in the rules currently.

 

[swordtart]

While I agree, at least to some extent, with everything you've said, there is a long history of positive quirks being a part of the setting, and they do add to the special feel of a beloved old ship. While I think the majority of quirks should have a non-positive or at least mixed aspect, I don't think the occasional positive quirk is either game breaking, nor unreasonable.
It is possible to come across a gem of an old ship that has been lovingly cared for, with meticulously kept records and quality parts always used. Such a ship should have a benefit of some sort, though I would also agree it should be reflected in the cost of the ship.
In the same vein, it's always possible to come across that rare old single user getting rid of an old friend that may not have been meticulously cared for but is in decent shape and they are selling it for cheap to get rid of it fast because of some old, painful memory or the fact they just want it go to someone who will take care of it since they can't any longer.
I would call both of those positive quirks, but they do affect ship cost, which affects maintenance. I don't know that decoupling cost from maintenance would be a bad thing, but it's certainly not in the rules currently.

You don't have to reduce the maintenance cost of a cheaper ship. The monthly maintenance is set at the time the ship is built. If you get a 10% discount for some reason it reduces your mortgage but it won't make maintenance any cheaper.

People sell ships for different prices for a number of reasons. If you want to give the characters a price break or stiff them then that is a good way, but it should be a referee call, not baked into the rules and expected.

 

[Condottiere]

The overall issue for me, I feel, is that one size doesn't fit all.

Quirks can either be present from the manufacturing process, either as the whole run, or from batches, and could be isolated to an individual ship system.

Or, developed from the spacecraft's history.

 

[mavikfelna]

You don't have to reduce the maintenance cost of a cheaper ship. The monthly maintenance is set at the time the ship is built. If you get a 10% discount for some reason it reduces your mortgage but it won't make maintenance any cheaper.

People sell ships for different prices for a number of reasons. If you want to give the characters a price break or stiff them then that is a good way, but it should be a referee call, not baked into the rules and expected.

While I agree with this, the rules as written do not read this way, and many, though not all, of the official designs calculate the maintenance cost based on the discount rate for the hull rather than the design cost.

The other rule introduced in Uranium Fever that I'm thinking of modifying and using is the maintenance calculation. They have base maintenance of .05% for ships 1-10 years old and proceed through various tranches up to .2% at over 50 years.
I would change the first 10 years to .075%, then goes in 30 year tranches of .1, .125, .15, .175 and finally ending at 160+ years at .2%. Overhauls would reduce age of the ship for maintenance, and quirks could include overhauls or other minor adjustments to the maintenance %, either directly or by affecting maintenance age.

 

[swordtart]

Sorry I didn't mean the discount for a standard design, I meant the 20% discount for it being 26-50 years old for example.

 

[AndrewW]

It is possible to come across a gem of an old ship that has been lovingly cared for, with meticulously kept records and quality parts always used. Such a ship should have a benefit of some sort, though I would also agree it should be reflected in the cost of the ship.

My granny only used it to hop over to Regina once a year to visit her granddaughter.

 

[Condottiere]

Problem is that maintenance cost is time period, not miles.

It sort of screws with the one shot jump drive cost of ownership, for those times you just need to get away from it all.

 

[swordtart]

Car annual MOT is time based. Many vehicle service regimes are monthly checks, quarterly checks and annual checks or per X miles whichever is sooner. A lot of it will be checks rather than actual repairs.

Traveller ships being run economically are going to jump every 2 weeks so for the majority a year is going to equate to 25 or so jump.

 

[mavikfelna]

Car annual MOT is time based. Many vehicle service regimes are monthly checks, quarterly checks and annual checks or per X miles whichever is sooner. A lot of it will be checks rather than actual repairs.

Traveller ships being run economically are going to jump every 2 weeks so for the majority a year is going to equate to 25 or so jump.

Yea, I suppose positive quirks represent those ships that didn't actually get used as normal but got run easy. But maintenance normally assumes time, not actual activity.

 

[Condottiere]

Optionally, you could assume, that maintenance cost are time based, as per rules stated.

However, repairs and replacements are in addition, assuming you're willing to spend the time rolling for each ship system, percentage based on actual usage.