| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 4:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Whill wrote: | | It's crunchy, but I think it fills an important gap that may come up in campaigns. I prefer to let as much if this stuff as possible happen offscreen in between adventures and not deal with it much, but there still may be times I may need something like this so it's good to have this to fall back on. I'm sorry I don't have much to add but I'm looking forward to seeing how this develops. |
I agree with you on crunch minimization; I've been playing around with this idea for a while, based on the old Fuel Cell rules from 1E Tramp Freighters, but the in-game math was a real stumbling block. However, the distinction here is that the crunch happens after the game. Calculating the Endurance Difficulty is something that can be saved until after the game, when CPs are being awarded and such. Crunch isn't so huge an issue if it isn't interrupting the story; the GM could even save it for pre-planning the next session.
And yes, at the moment, it's more complicated than I would like, but I plan to pare it down to something manageable. I'm also warming to the idea of having separate Endurance and Reliability stats, representing Consumables and the potential for mechanical issues respectively.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Raven Redstar wrote: | Maybe just some of the stock freighters.
YT-1300
Ghtroc 720 |
Since both have 2 months of Consumables listed under the RAW, their Endurance Rating would be the same...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just for reference on converting Consumables into Endurance, here is the SWU calendar system, along with the Consumables rating converted to Days (using the SWU calendar) for all starships in the 2R&E Rulebook and the three core sourcebooks:1 week = 5 days
1 month = 7 weeks = 35 days
1 year = 10 months + 3 festival weeks + 3 holidays = 368 days
Super Star Destroyer = 2,208 days
Imperial Star Destroyer = 2,208 days
Torpedo Sphere = 1,472 days
Victory I & II = 1,472 days
MC80 = 736 days
Dreadnaught = 736 days
Assault Frigate = 552 days
Interdictor = ~442 days
Strike Cruiser = 552 days
Carrack = 368 days
Escort Carrier = 315 days
Bulk Cruiser = 368 days
Nebulon B = 736 days
Lancer = 5 days
Star Galleon = 210 days
Corellian Corvette = 368 days
Corellian Gunship = 280 days
IPV 1 = 105 days
Guardian Light Cruiser = 105 days
Lone Scout A = 368 days
Gamma Assault Shuttle = 5 days
Skipray = 35 days
Container Ship = 500 days
Luxury Liner = 300 days
Action VI = 105 days
GR90 = 210 days
Space Barge = 5 days
YT-1300 = 70 days
Ghtroc 720 = 70 days
A-Wing = 5 days
B-Wing = 5 days
X-Wing = 5 days
Y-Wing = 5 days
Y-Wing Longprobe = 15 days
TIE/ln = 2 days
TIE Interceptor = 2 days
TIE Bomber = 2 days
Z-95 = 1 day
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | It's crunchy, but I think it fills an important gap that may come up in campaigns. I prefer to let as much if this stuff as possible happen offscreen in between adventures and not deal with it much, but there still may be times I may need something like this so it's good to have this to fall back on. I'm sorry I don't have much to add but I'm looking forward to seeing how this develops. |
I tend to agree, hence, my first post in the thread: only roll if the ship actually plays a crucial role for an extended period of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I'm also warming to the idea of having separate Endurance and Reliability stats, representing Consumables and the potential for mechanical issues respectively. |
So... I'm working on an A-Wing ace pilot character right now, so this issue strikes close to home for me. If I were to incorporate something like this, I would probably increase the A-Wing's stock in-game performance in order to make it worth the while if I'm risking a greater chance of failure.
I rather interpret the A-Wing's track record not so much as a "reliability" issue but a wear and tear issue (in other words, the ship holds up to its mission requirements, but is nevertheless maintenance intensive). In any case, depending on how you read it's fluff, the A-Wing is either unreliable or high maintenance.
For ships with such a reputation (or that are extensively modified to the point of being "quirky"), I'd want to make clear distinctions between "quirky," high maintenance, and problem prone. That may be getting more nit-picky than you care to, but... in case it gives you an idea, there it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | I tend to agree, hence, my first post in the thread: only roll if the ship actually plays a crucial role for an extended period of time. |
Just to be clear, are you saying that, if all the characters did was fly their ship from orbit to planet, you wouldn't roll Endurance at the end of the session, but you would still increase the modifier by an appropriate amount?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | For ships with such a reputation (or that are extensively modified to the point of being "quirky"), I'd want to make clear distinctions between "quirky," high maintenance, and problem prone. That may be getting more nit-picky than you care to, but... in case it gives you an idea, there it is. |
This isn't something I've put a lot of thought into, so you're actually a little ahead of me at this point. I will say that, whatever a particular ship's Reliability rating ends up being, it will be based much more on fluff description than on anything from the stats.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Raven Redstar wrote: | Maybe just some of the stock freighters.
YT-1300
Ghtroc 720 |
Since both have 2 months of Consumables listed under the RAW, their Endurance Rating would be the same... |
Yes, I realized that after the fact... I was just coming up with 2 common freighters I've seen picked.
| Quote: | | The more I think about this, the less I think Capital Ships need to convert to an Endurance rating. Unless I'm very much mistaken, most campaigns are going to take place with starfighters and space transports. Something with the size and endurance of a capital ship will always have better range than fighters and transports, so it's probably just simpler to just come up with a rule that works for the smaller ships. |
I tend to agree in principle. However, with a Pirates and Privateers type game, the endurance dice could be a blessing or a curse...
I feel like the job of maintaining a large ship and crew should be at least mildly tedious with book keeping, because if the players are going to be handling administrative duties for a ship of that size, then it could be appropriate to have to wade through the muck of balancing & maintaining the ship's books. More so if they're managing a small fleet.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 910
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
In my current game:
Every ship needs many substances to operate; from fuel, lubricants to food and water.
Every ship has Consumables listed in a measurement of months. This is how long the ship can operate before running out of vital supplies.
Cost: Take the full purchase cost of a ship 'as new' and divide that cost by 1/1000. This is the base cost of consumables per day.
This base cost is further modified by the efficiency of the engines and the ship's seals and by how many passengers it can hold. (based on my wear ratings house rules)
Starfighters have their base cost reduced by approximately half.
The players then purchase tokens at the consumables cost; each token is for a day of operation.
Wear is a separate house-rule system; typically wear is checked whenever a wild '1' is rolled; the powerplant or the hyperdrive or the sublight engines of the repulsorlift or the seals...etc can all have a chance of causing problems or failing under that system.
In essence, for me the consumables is 'filling up with gas' while the wear system serves as the endurance system you are going for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Naaman wrote: | | I tend to agree, hence, my first post in the thread: only roll if the ship actually plays a crucial role for an extended period of time. |
Just to be clear, are you saying that, if all the characters did was fly their ship from orbit to planet, you wouldn't roll Endurance at the end of the session, but you would still increase the modifier by an appropriate amount? |
Oh, I don't know, honestly. I suppose it would be a matter of available resources. If the characters are broke, then a short trip to a neighboring planet would actually impact their lifestyle (do they have enough gas in the tank?). But when life is good, just deduct the cost of the re-fit from their credits and move on, I suppose.
It all depends on the play style, I think. If you want to track every single thing that the ship does, go for it; I tend to put my energies toward reducing paperwork and making as many costs/penalties as possible built into the action resolutions in-game. Of course, it's not 100% achievable, but it what I tend to shoot for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
A couple things I see:
1) Why does routine repair and maintenance cost CPs to perform? Can those CPs be put towards practice in improving your Repair skills?
2) I run into a bit of problem with the modifier for damage... namely, a Star Destroyer, for example, can take heavy damage and not really need repair and restock unless it takes a LOT of heavy damage. Like, it takes heavy damage like 10 times, it's average roll is still going to be pretty high. Now, obviously, this is going to have several other factors, but the scaling might get difficult at high levels.
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | It all depends on the play style, I think. If you want to track every single thing that the ship does, go for it; I tend to put my energies toward reducing paperwork and making as many costs/penalties as possible built into the action resolutions in-game. Of course, it's not 100% achievable, but it what I tend to shoot for. |
My goal was more to incorporate the idea behind the 1E Fuel Cell rules in a manner that didn't interrupt gameplay, specifically, by making the calculations more general and performing them after the gaming session was over.
I wish my pickup consumed gas in the manner you're describing; "so long as I don't do anything really important with it, the tank will stay full forever." 
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16172
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MrNexx wrote: | | 1) Why does routine repair and maintenance cost CPs to perform? Can those CPs be put towards practice in improving your Repair skills? |
Because I'm not going to offer a benefit (i.e. reducing the modifier) for free. If you want to increase your ship's endurance, its because you spent time working on it that would've otherwise been spent training and improving your skills.
| Quote: | | 2) I run into a bit of problem with the modifier for damage... namely, a Star Destroyer, for example, can take heavy damage and not really need repair and restock unless it takes a LOT of heavy damage. Like, it takes heavy damage like 10 times, it's average roll is still going to be pretty high. Now, obviously, this is going to have several other factors, but the scaling might get difficult at high levels. |
What is this based on? I pretty much added the mechanical failure results on a whim (and am actually considering dropping it from the Endurance aspect entirely), and there is no basis in the RAW for how much repairs a Star Destroyer will cost to repair when it takes damage. I mean, how much is 10% of Not Available For Sale, anyway?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | MrNexx wrote: | | 1) Why does routine repair and maintenance cost CPs to perform? Can those CPs be put towards practice in improving your Repair skills? |
Because I'm not going to offer a benefit (i.e. reducing the modifier) for free. If you want to increase your ship's endurance, its because you spent time working on it that would've otherwise been spent training and improving your skills. |
Then make the time requirement exclusive of training. But consider this: Resetting the modifier to zero is a complete restock and refit. What does the routine repair and maintenance represent? Replacing fuses, cleaning the fuel injectors, changing the oil... stuff that takes TIME, but not necessarily a lot of mental energy to do correctly.
I just think a CP cost for a short-term benefit of decreased endurance checks is expensive for the benefit, and it seems out of line to charge CP for "equipment maintenance", instead of credits. It is conceptually equivalent to improving a blaster's damage with CP, instead of cash and time.
| Quote: | | What is this based on? I pretty much added the mechanical failure results on a whim (and am actually considering dropping it from the Endurance aspect entirely), and there is no basis in the RAW for how much repairs a Star Destroyer will cost to repair when it takes damage. I mean, how much is 10% of Not Available For Sale, anyway? |
If a SD is rolling 18D (average 63) for endurance, then it can have a lot of damage and fly for a long time before the damage starts to really tell. Which may be the point, but a heavily damaged Star Destroyer (+4) can make about 30 trips around space (each assuming a both Realspace an Hyperspace) before they run into needing a complete refit... that is, unless they can convince a portion of their staff to invest 1 CP a year into maintenance and repair, which will let them fly indefinitely.
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Naaman wrote: | | It all depends on the play style, I think. If you want to track every single thing that the ship does, go for it; I tend to put my energies toward reducing paperwork and making as many costs/penalties as possible built into the action resolutions in-game. Of course, it's not 100% achievable, but it what I tend to shoot for. |
My goal was more to incorporate the idea behind the 1E Fuel Cell rules in a manner that didn't interrupt gameplay, specifically, by making the calculations more general and performing them after the gaming session was over.
I wish my pickup consumed gas in the manner you're describing; "so long as I don't do anything really important with it, the tank will stay full forever." |
I'll have to go back and look at 1E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
