So I’ve been working with the world builder’s handbook and I thought a question thread would be nice. Hopefully Geir will be informed about this. So I’ve figured out what cased my first confusion (orbit # thru me off). But now I’m having another problem. There’s quite a few references to “Post Stellar Objects” but I can’t find a definition of what a “Post Stellar Object” is. I’m guessing that this means stars but I would like actual confirmation so can we get a definition please.
World Builders help
- Thread starter tytalan
- Start date
Neither of those are a help thread. Thank you for the suggestion but with this material we really need a dedicated help thread
What about stars themselves because the modifier says “DM- 1 per post-stellar object (including primary star) “. Does this mean you only count the primary star if it’s one of those died stars. I just want to be clear because the way I read your post you only count the primary star if it’s a post stellar object. (Mostly replying to this post to make things clear for everyone).
As I understand it, the quote should probably omit the word "star" - a system primary can be a post-stellar object, in which case it (both technically and by definition) is not actually a star any more. And in the case of a system in which the primary is (for instance) a neutron star, that central object should indeed contribute a DM -1 to the roll.
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
Yes, it might have been better to just say Primary (maybe - dead is after all an adjective in front of star - a corpse is also a dead human). And yes, it counts for the DM-1 if it's dead.
The potential complication is that for the Primary
*Or that version of "Reality" in which the universe is arranged in a single layer of hex-shaped cells.
Strategiusz
Mongoose
I have two questions.
1. Can you scoop fuel from a brown dwarf? They are somewhere between gas giants and stars. They contain hydrogen. The problem I see is that the more massive ones can have quite a high temperature. But the smaller ones are not as hot.
2. On page 27 there is a table of modifiers for randomizing orbit eccentricity. The condition "For each star an object directly orbits beyond the first" seems unclear to me. How many stars can an object orbit at once? Am I right that it is 2 (a star with its companion)?
1. Can you scoop fuel from a brown dwarf? They are somewhere between gas giants and stars. They contain hydrogen. The problem I see is that the more massive ones can have quite a high temperature. But the smaller ones are not as hot.
2. On page 27 there is a table of modifiers for randomizing orbit eccentricity. The condition "For each star an object directly orbits beyond the first" seems unclear to me. How many stars can an object orbit at once? Am I right that it is 2 (a star with its companion)?
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
Yes, probably. Or it depends. The gravity is likely to be very extreme, though. If you have something the size of Jupiter with 13-70+ times the mass of Jupiter, the gravity will be very high. Luckily the cooler ones tend to be smaller (or older). Since we're not 100% clear in explaining how m-drive works and whether the ship also has lifters to counteract gravity (they would have to, to refuel at Jupiter without M-3 or better drives), then it's a big 'it depends'.
Another 'it depends'. The way the orbits are described (for backward compatibility and sanity's sake and to allow any of this to run without a computer) they're centered on the biggest (Primary) star. So, as they get written down, the orbit of a star or planet outside the orbit of a Close, Near or Far star 'looks' like it is orbiting the Primary star (and companion, if present), but if you looked at it from a barycenter view, it would be orbiting all of the stars inside its orbit.
For the purpose of the sentence and the table entry, any star inside that orbit number would be something to count. Theoretically, it could be as many as six.
ColinD
Cosmic Mongoose
This gives me an idea for an adventure! Thanks for the book, the question and the feedback!
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
You can still use the normal procedure for Star Type with a DM+1 on the table as it says on page 224. That's essentially the 'future' star type - except it isn't: it's the current star type at that moment of survey.
So, if you hold the star temperature steady, changing diameter over time can cause luminosity to fluctuate dramatically, but what you've determined is a snapshot of conditions at the time of survey. Come back ten years after the survey and temperatures (of planets - just keeping the star constant temperature so we add some consistency that's probably not there in 'real life') are possibly going to be different. But since most worlds will be swirling with magma oceans and pummeled under the steady rain of meteorites, then I suppose that isn't the biggest concern...
So, if you hold the star temperature steady, changing diameter over time can cause luminosity to fluctuate dramatically, but what you've determined is a snapshot of conditions at the time of survey. Come back ten years after the survey and temperatures (of planets - just keeping the star constant temperature so we add some consistency that's probably not there in 'real life') are possibly going to be different. But since most worlds will be swirling with magma oceans and pummeled under the steady rain of meteorites, then I suppose that isn't the biggest concern...
Couldn't it get up to DM+7 for the Far Companion in an 8-star system, i.e. primary + Close + Near + Far, each with a companion?
Aa - Eccentricity is always 0
Ab - DM+0, only orbits 1 star
Ba - DM+1, orbits Aa+Ab, or is that only counted as a single Aab (A)?
Bb - As Ba+1, i.e. either DM+2 or DM+3, depending on answer to above
Ca+, if Aa+Ab is counted as 1 for Ba, would Ba+Bb also be counted as 1 for Ca+?
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
Depends on the word 'directly' - if it is a Companion it only orbits it's Far or whatever, 'directly'.
But now I'm getting a headache... (not your fault, I'm always getting a headache...)
Lol yeah, I've been banging my head against the wall the last couple of days, too.
If it helps, if 'directly' means only the host for companions, then a Companion would always be rolled at DM+0 (ignoring, for now, other modifiers), since this mod ignores the first star.
Then Close = DM+0 (orbits Primary), Near = DM+1 (orbits Primary+Close), Far = DM+2 (orbits Primary+Close+Near)
Which that's simple enough it may have been the intent.
EDIT: Then again, thinking about it more it could also be this:
Aa = DM+0 (primary)
Ab = DM+0 (Companion only directly orbits its host)
Ba = DM+1 (Ab)
Bb = DM+0 (Companion)
Ca = DM+3 (Ab+Bab)
Cb = DM+0 (Companion)
Da = DM+5 (Ab+Bab+Cab)
Db = DM+0 (Companion)
If it helps, if 'directly' means only the host for companions, then a Companion would always be rolled at DM+0 (ignoring, for now, other modifiers), since this mod ignores the first star.
Then Close = DM+0 (orbits Primary), Near = DM+1 (orbits Primary+Close), Far = DM+2 (orbits Primary+Close+Near)
Which that's simple enough it may have been the intent.
EDIT: Then again, thinking about it more it could also be this:
Aa = DM+0 (primary)
Ab = DM+0 (Companion only directly orbits its host)
Ba = DM+1 (Ab)
Bb = DM+0 (Companion)
Ca = DM+3 (Ab+Bab)
Cb = DM+0 (Companion)
Da = DM+5 (Ab+Bab+Cab)
Db = DM+0 (Companion)
Last edited:
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
No, you're right, it ought to be a copy of the Ca data for those columns, not the Cb data... I'll put it in my running list of 'things not right'.
And it needs to be fixed on p. 63 and p. 140 as well. At least it's consistent.
I noticed that Giant Class stars begin increasing in mass as they cool starting at G1 (or, for Class III, K1).
This leads to a tricky situation when generating a Secondary star using the Random/Lesser methods, as those suggest moving to a cooler type which, in the case of Giants, will almost certainly result in the Secondary having a higher mass than the primary (or host) star.
E.g. a primary F5 II would become G{reroll} II, with every possible result but a G0 II having more mass than the F5 II.
What's your preferred workaround for this situation?
Perhaps instead of changing the type to one cooler, change the class? E.g. F5 II could become F{reroll} III (or even G{reroll} III), guaranteeing it has a lesser mass.
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
The non-programmatic way to deal with it is to flip the Primary and Secondary stars. It would be a manual process or a bunch o extra convoluted code, depending on how it was implemented (in my spreadsheet method it would be a nightmare - not using any macros, so it all has to flow basically linearly). Given how rare they are, there's unlikely to to be more than one supergiant per sector (Unless you're in a young star cluster like the Orion or Carina nebulae and then you'd have to toss out the random generation almost entirely). Regular giants (III) have a reasonable chance of hitting the issue, though.
Flipping them might lead to some rework of the orbits in the system, but that would probably the 'book' (as in manual creation) answer.
The lazier way would be to make them twins (same mass, anyway) if the they come up that way.
I took a look at the random sector I generate as a test (Storr) and it didn't come up as an issue in the actual sector, though there are two systems of multiple Class III stars in the thousand systems I did a first pass upon. Unfortunately both of those were beyond the 439 systems I actually used for the sector, so I didn't do anything with those results beyond generating the star types. I don't know if my spreadsheet would have choked (or given, um, potentially incongruous results) if I had continued.
Dropping a II to a III is a little problematic, since IIs are massive Supergiants that are likely only a few millions years old and III are lower mass old stars near the end of their lifespans. If you were going to drop it in class, it would be better to drop it all the way to V, so into the main sequence.
