Upcoming New Vehicle Handbook
- Thread starter phavoc
- Start date
Mithras
Banded Mongoose
phavoc said:
Certainly, I use alot of vehicles, its the way I personalize my worlds, making one desert world different from another. One might use AT-ST-like one-man sand-walkers, another wind-powered sand-yachts, another solar-powered ATVs. They get written into the setting, and become memorable. So I need ways to create them quickly ... because next week, they're off to yet another world ...
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
Mithras said:
I've been doing this for the sector I'm rehabbing (for a campaign, not publication) out beyond the Julians. Starting with the ships and their architectural choices. I'll get to vehicles as well. Why go to the trouble? Because this is beyond most of the standardization of the Imperiums, and because, like Star Wars, being able to set a scene by identifying the apparent origins of a ship flying overhead is a big part of the immersion.
Colin
Mongoose
DFW said:
OK. Then it obviously isn't for you. Those details you mention are, to my mind, fluff. However, if that is what important to you, then get Fire, Fusion, and Steel, or GURPS vehicles, and go to town.
Vacuum environment protect is an option. If a vehicle doesn't have it listed in the description, then it doesn't have it. Range is listed for all vehicles. Fuel type is irrelevant, though if that detail is important to you, make it up. There are notes in book for adding fluff text to your vehicles, if your players are the type who like that sort of thing, including power plants and fuel types.
No Traveller vehicle design system has ever provided dimensions beyond volume/mass, so where that criticism comes from confuses me.
However, when you are belting down a narrow city street, 500 story towers all around you, and the bad guys are following close behind, peppering you with gauss rifle fire, whether your air/raft uses hydrogen for fuel or the souls of lost children is largely irrelevant. What is relevant is how fast it can go, agility, range, hull, structure, armour, and weapons. This system provides what is relevant. You can add all the fluff you want.
It is pretty obvious that you have made your mind up on this, sight unseen. That is your prerogative. However, many people disagree with you, me included. That doesn't make us wrong, just holding a different opinion.
True, but even then something might be a megacorp design and meet all the "ISO standards"* and yet still look completely different to another megacorp's design that's the same gross tonnage for the same function.
Never underestimate hamster-power.
Speak for yourself. I'm perfectly normal - it's the rest of reality that's bizzarre.
Fair enough. I think DFW and I must have noticably different player groups; mine are fine with this sort of thing. There is 'blatantly silly science' and 'not blatantly silly science' but as far as most of mine are concerned, once you reach the point that anti-gravity technology is available over the counter to the public from a genetically engineered sentient wolf, being too nit-picky about the science is not going to end well.
I wouldn't want it to, I think. Volume is something you can stretch to make a shape. I don't want you telling me that a ground car has to be exactly this shape; I might want anything from a stretch limo to a fat hummer. I may be misunderstanding the question, though, so please correct me.
I suppose the counterargument is that a lot of people use traveller for something other than 'bunch of miscreants in a clapped out starship'.
An investigator (Judge Dredd) might be actively looking for details about a vehicle which are out of place, or are distinctive, and is likely to ask awkward questions.
A field commander (Mercenary) is primarily interested in whether he can get the tank to the battlefront and what skills, tools and personnel he needs to maintain it.
A colonist (No sourcebook yet but I keep asking Rust to do one!) is primarily interested in the peculiarities of his environment, so things like weight, size and fuel availability are important.
However, these can be just fluff guidance - at least to me - rather than necessarily doing something to the Nth degree. As long as it's simple, quick, and doesn't contain anything blatantly illogical (like sloped armour being worse in practical terms), I'm looking forward to it.
* Or whatever. Has it ever been said what the standards organisation/codes are called in the 3I?
Since I mentioned dimensions, too, I should perhaps explain what I was
thinking of.
I had something like the (otherwise not very convincing) d20 system in
mind, a single table which gives an approximate impression of the dimen-
sion of a vehicle based upon its volume. For example, in the Babylon 5
RPG a vehicle which is "Large" has a length of 8 to 16 feet, and I would
find a similar approximate information for the volume of vehicles very
useful. I am not very good at mathematics, and the way from, for ex-
ample, 10 dtons to an idea of the approximate dimensions of the vehi-
cle is a bit long for my brain and requires the use of a calculator.
So, no precise length/width/height, only a general idea of the size, from
which I can work out the details if I really need them.
A most welcome bonus would be different tables of that kind for ground
vehicles (usually more like boxes), aircraft (usually more slender and
therefore longer) and watercraft (usually about length 3 : width 1 becau-
se of hydrodynamics).
thinking of.
I had something like the (otherwise not very convincing) d20 system in
mind, a single table which gives an approximate impression of the dimen-
sion of a vehicle based upon its volume. For example, in the Babylon 5
RPG a vehicle which is "Large" has a length of 8 to 16 feet, and I would
find a similar approximate information for the volume of vehicles very
useful. I am not very good at mathematics, and the way from, for ex-
ample, 10 dtons to an idea of the approximate dimensions of the vehi-
cle is a bit long for my brain and requires the use of a calculator.
So, no precise length/width/height, only a general idea of the size, from
which I can work out the details if I really need them.
A most welcome bonus would be different tables of that kind for ground
vehicles (usually more like boxes), aircraft (usually more slender and
therefore longer) and watercraft (usually about length 3 : width 1 becau-
se of hydrodynamics).
I'm reserving judgement until I get to see the book, but I'm with the majority it seems - the way I GM tends to be fast and loose with the rules (the game's more important than precision - it's not book-keeping) with any information handed out to the players being noted and then filed for future reference as needed (I use a cardfile for this sort of thing with a folder for more detailed records if needed). If I get it wrong, then I tend to find some kind of excuse or reason - the vehicle's too light? OK, it was obviously made with either composites or a light metal like Aluminium... a vehicle is too long? OK, so it either has extended wheel "arms" or has either decorative wings on the back or is a low-but-long design...
Personally, I'd sooner not have a book tell me too many details, like what power plant a vehicle uses - I'd sooner look at the whole local TL, trade availability and proximity to major trade routes thing and decide from there - I'd sooner not have a book tell me that it's a grav-drive and then find out that the planet is an agri world, 5 parsecs from the nearest trade route and even further than that until the nearest planet capable of building the power plant... at least not for a "normal" vehicle... instead I'd sooner use an advanced fossil-fuel, solar-powered or similar (maybe use a Harry Harrison-style flywheel design) and have the TL 8 or 9 civilisation a few parsecs away build them for this planet... (yes, I know 8 is fusion and 9 is grav, but it might not be small enough for smaller vehicles or it might not be cheap enough for your common sophont to afford).
I don't think any off-the-shelf product can satisfy all their customers - most seem to get modified in some way anyhow... see all of DFW's threads on various topics to see that... but that's healthy to a degree.
I'm afraid that I'm more a storyteller than a rules-lawyer when I GM any game - if I can't remember a rule and can't look it up in 30 seconds or less (except when learning a system) then I'll wing it and look it up later - recording the results in both cases so I can notify the group if I need to or come up with an explanation. True a few NPCs have gained powers they shouldn't have in some systems, but then I hate having predictable NPCs anyhow - a player should never be able to second-guess what an NPC has in terms of skills or equipment (unless the latter is standard-issue and the NPC is part of an organisation or the the item is very common-sense). I'd sooner use a judgement call and get it slightly wrong than to spoil the flow of a game just to look something up or work something out - unless that rule is critical to the game, the plot or to the players' plans. I'm also not adverse to using a player to look something up for me if they're not currently involved in the action while using a judgement call in the meantime if needed (usually means that someone got lucky or unlucky).
Personally, I'd sooner not have a book tell me too many details, like what power plant a vehicle uses - I'd sooner look at the whole local TL, trade availability and proximity to major trade routes thing and decide from there - I'd sooner not have a book tell me that it's a grav-drive and then find out that the planet is an agri world, 5 parsecs from the nearest trade route and even further than that until the nearest planet capable of building the power plant... at least not for a "normal" vehicle... instead I'd sooner use an advanced fossil-fuel, solar-powered or similar (maybe use a Harry Harrison-style flywheel design) and have the TL 8 or 9 civilisation a few parsecs away build them for this planet... (yes, I know 8 is fusion and 9 is grav, but it might not be small enough for smaller vehicles or it might not be cheap enough for your common sophont to afford).
I don't think any off-the-shelf product can satisfy all their customers - most seem to get modified in some way anyhow... see all of DFW's threads on various topics to see that... but that's healthy to a degree.
I'm afraid that I'm more a storyteller than a rules-lawyer when I GM any game - if I can't remember a rule and can't look it up in 30 seconds or less (except when learning a system) then I'll wing it and look it up later - recording the results in both cases so I can notify the group if I need to or come up with an explanation. True a few NPCs have gained powers they shouldn't have in some systems, but then I hate having predictable NPCs anyhow - a player should never be able to second-guess what an NPC has in terms of skills or equipment (unless the latter is standard-issue and the NPC is part of an organisation or the the item is very common-sense). I'd sooner use a judgement call and get it slightly wrong than to spoil the flow of a game just to look something up or work something out - unless that rule is critical to the game, the plot or to the players' plans. I'm also not adverse to using a player to look something up for me if they're not currently involved in the action while using a judgement call in the meantime if needed (usually means that someone got lucky or unlucky).
This is a referee's perspective, but there is also the perspective of theBFalcon said:
players, who - depending on setting and campaign - often want to know
exactly what their characters' equipment is like and can do in order to
plan their activities. Besides, at least in my campaign the characters can
design, build or modify their vehicles, which requires a minimum of com-
mon technological standards. Sure, I can handwave all the vehicles I in-
troduce into the campaign - but I think the campaign would quickly go
belly up if I would allow the characters to handwave their designs, too.
I tried this, but it resulted in too many time consuming discussions aboutBFalcon said:
what is possible or not, and so we now use the GURPS Vehicle system, in
the much simplified version used in the Transhuman Space books. This
way the players can look up what their engineer characters can do, and
I can concentrate on the plot instead of debating things like whether a
pocket version of a tight beam radio is possible or whether a human size
robot with a fuel cell can contain enough fuel for six weeks of operation.
Hehe I'm afraid I'm a bit old-school when I GM... what I say, goes, until the end of the session - THEN you can discuss it, provided you abide by my decision when I make it finally... (I had to bring that rule in after one player would go on for weeks after we'd had the discussion). Breaking either rule attracts the usual "unlucky extra chance" that's my usual punishment.
In the case where an in-game decision is overturned, then I usually say that it either broke (when I allowed it) or they were missing a crucial part at the time they asked... whereupon if they find the part, they can build it.
And if you think I'm being harsh... one of my friends used to be even more strict when he GMed...
In the case where an in-game decision is overturned, then I usually say that it either broke (when I allowed it) or they were missing a crucial part at the time they asked... whereupon if they find the part, they can build it.
And if you think I'm being harsh... one of my friends used to be even more strict when he GMed...
I'm keeping an open mind on this one. The previous system was, umm, clunky. Yeah, let's keep it charitable.
So hopefully with the new vehicle design system you will be able to create vehicles that look and feel reasonable.
Details like power per sq inch are not so important. What would be nice is perhaps some sidebars, that list different types of powerplants that let people fill in details that are important to them and/or their campaign.
It would be very nice to have a solid and well-thought out core design system that takes care of most things. You can add overpressure NBC or fully-sealed systems as an afterthought. So if they are, like, listed as a smorgasboard of details, then anybody can just slap them on the vehicle and viola! They have their own customized 14x14 ATV with 2 gauss cannons on the roof and (heated) cupholders for all 3 passenger seats!
So hopefully with the new vehicle design system you will be able to create vehicles that look and feel reasonable.
Details like power per sq inch are not so important. What would be nice is perhaps some sidebars, that list different types of powerplants that let people fill in details that are important to them and/or their campaign.
It would be very nice to have a solid and well-thought out core design system that takes care of most things. You can add overpressure NBC or fully-sealed systems as an afterthought. So if they are, like, listed as a smorgasboard of details, then anybody can just slap them on the vehicle and viola! They have their own customized 14x14 ATV with 2 gauss cannons on the roof and (heated) cupholders for all 3 passenger seats!
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
The best swing at submarines in Traveller that I recall was the draft version of what eventually got published in Challenge during MT for wet navy designs. Terry McInnes ran it back and forth across a bunch of the early TML and GEnie heads, several of which were very talented people, THEN ran it past an actual naval architect. Sadly GDW edited it a bit for reasons unknown, and their printer mangled it after that. The results as published were much harder to use. While rather number crunchy, as was typical of MegaTraveller, it managed to convey the important bits.
Colin said:
As much as I used to like gearheadding, this is as much info as I'm ever likely to use in-game. Maybe the only thing extra I could think of would be costs for refueling, maintenance, or repair. Back when I had way more spare time, I didn't mind gearheadding all sorts of vehicles & equipment, but in the end most people I've gamed with only care about the basics of a vehicle: what it can do, for how long, and how much it costs.
