View previous topic :: View next topic 
Author 
Message 
Naaman Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 1955

Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 7:52 am Post subject: 


I was thinking something similar.
Regarding the capitol ships, Im thinking the only time it might matter is if the PCs stumbled upon a ghost ship or they are scavengers (like Rei) or something like that... 

Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:13 pm Post subject: 


Short version, what I'm considering is for all ships to use the same basic system for Endurance dice, but with very high numbers on the upper end, like in the 20D24D dice range for ISDs and SSDs (which have 6 years of Consumables under the WEG stats). The low end of the scale would have TIEs at 1D, XWings and such in the 2D3D range, space transports in the 5D8D range, with the smaller capital ships scaling up in between.
The idea is that, since capital ship dice would almost never get used, they would pretty much just exist to reinforce the idea that capital ships have a lot more endurance than starfighters. _________________ "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.


Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 12:30 am Post subject: 


Okay, so, I think I've figured it out. My big hangup was finding an equitable way to convert the WEG ship Consumables values into a usable dice code, but there was no way to accurately scale up the dice values to represent, for example, 6 years of Consumables on the ISD and SSD without coming up with some ridiculously large dice numbers. After some consideration, I decided to disregard the WEG numbers except as a basis for conversion. That only left finding a dice value chart for conversion that scaled up the numbers noticeably, but still left the conversion values small enough to port over.
Ultimately, I decided the best fit was to use the Coordination Bonus Chart from the 2E Rulebook.
So, to convert your ship over from WEG's Consumables, use the following formula:1 week = 5 days
1 month = 7 weeks = 35 days
1 year = 10 months + 3 festival weeks + 3 holidays = 368 days Take your ship's Consumables value and convert it to days, then apply it to the following chart:02 = 1D
34 = 2D
56 = 3D
710 = 4D
1115 = 5D
1625 = 6D
2640 = 7D
4160 = 8D
61100 = 9D
101150 = 10D
151250 = 11D
251400 = 12D
401600 = 13D
6011,000 = 14D
1,0011,500 = 15D
1,5012,100 = 16D
2,1012,800 = 17D
2,8013,600 = 18D Here are some example conversions:Super Star Destroyer = 17D (6 years = 2,208 days)
Imperial Star Destroyer = 17D (6 years = 2,208 days)
Torpedo Sphere = 15D (4 years = 1,472 days)
Victory I & II = 15D (4 years = 1,472 days)
MC80 = 14D (2 years = 736 days)
Dreadnaught = 14D (2 years = 736 days)
Assault Frigate = 13D (1.5 years = 552 days)
Interdictor = 13D (1.2 years = ~442 days
Strike Cruiser = 13D (1.5 years = 552 days)
Carrack = 12D (1 year = 368 days)
Escort Carrier = 12D (9 months = 315 days)
Bulk Cruiser = 12D (1 year = 368 days)
Nebulon B = 14D (2 years = 736 days)
Lancer = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
Star Galleon = 11D (6 months = 210 days)
Corellian Corvette = 12D (1 year = 368 days)
Corellian Gunship = 12D (8 months = 280 days)
IPV 1 = 10D (3 months = 105 days)
Guardian Light Cruiser = 10D (3 months = 105 days)
Lone Scout A = 12D (1 year = 368 days)
Gamma Assault Shuttle = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
Skipray Blastboat = 7D (1 month = 35 days)
Container Ship = 13D (500 days)
Luxury Liner = 12D (300 days)
Action VI = 10D (3 months = 105 days)
GR90 = 11D (6 months = 210 days)
Space Barge = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
YT1300 = 9D (2 months = 70 days)
Ghtroc 720 = 9D (2 months = 70 days)
AWing = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
BWing = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
XWing = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
YWing = 3D (1 week = 5 days)
YWing Longprobe = 5D (3 weeks = 15 days)
TIE/ln = 1D (2 days)
TIE Interceptor = 1D (2 days)
TIE Bomber = 1D (2 days)
Z95 = 1D (1 day) These conversion values are not set in stone; if you feel they need to be shifted up or down to suit the needs of your campaign, feel free to do so.
Here's how it works:A ship that has just restocked its Consumables begins with an Endurance Difficulty of 0. Then, at the end of a gaming session, the GM applies modifiers to that Difficulty based on how much the ship was used during the course of that session. Some example modifiers include:
Flew from orbit to surface, or vice versa: +1
Flew from orbit to hyperlimit, or vice versa: +1
Made a hyperspace jump: +1
Every day in hyperspace: +1
Flew at AllOut = +2
Engaged in Combat = +2
Took Light Damage = +2
Took Heavy Damage = +4
Overloaded (Cargo or Passengers) = +1
Badly Overloaded = +3
The ship's Endurance dice is rolled against the Difficulty, then compared to the following chart:
Roll # < Difficulty = Result
010 = Getting Low. The ship has enough Consumables to make it through the next gaming session, but Endurance Difficulty for the next roll goes up by +5.
1120 = Almost Out. The ship will run out of Consumables unless it is restocked during this gaming session.
21+ = Dead In Space. The ship runs out of fuel and is dead in space.
The various addon devices listed in Tramp Freighters, such as the Scoop and the Solar panels will apply negative modifiers when used, allowing the ship to restock to some degree, but this will not be sufficient to operate the ship indefinitely.
I'm also thinking of using Endurance dice to represent a ship's ability to run silent, rolling Endurance dice every minute to represent how much power the ship is losing. Ships with a Backup Battery would roll at different intervals (perhaps more like once per hour, instead of once per minute).
Thoughts? _________________ "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.


Back to top 


Naaman Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 1955

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:10 am Post subject: 


Just for variety's sake, what do you think of adding pip intervals for a few
of the ships to represent a plusorminus value?
For example, a Mc80 might be 14D+1 vs a dreadnought which has 14D, or, about a month or so less endurance.
Just a thought to "fill in" some of the obvious gaps left over from the port, as well as providing for a slight edge on certain ships when shopping. 

Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:29 am Post subject: 


Naaman wrote:  Just for variety's sake, what do you think of adding pip intervals for a few
of the ships to represent a plusorminus value?
For example, a Mc80 might be 14D+1 vs a dreadnought which has 14D, or, about a month or so less endurance. 
Per WEG, the MC80 and the Dreadnought both have 2 years of Consumables, so it would work out the same either way.
Quote:  Just a thought to "fill in" some of the obvious gaps left over from the port, as well as providing for a slight edge on certain ships when shopping.  You're welcome to alter this as you see fit, but I'm fine with how it is. I already had to cut the numbers down for the larger ships quite a bit already, and adding in pips would only bring the numbers even closer.
The only exception I can see is coming up with a formula to allow PCs to modify their ships for greater Endurance at the expense of Cargo Capacity, but I'm not entirely sure how that would pan out... _________________ "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.


Back to top 


Dredwulf60 Commander
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 478

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:54 am Post subject: 


"Gaming session" as a unit of measure is a little broad when you are calibrating the ratings from a rating of days.
I have gaming sessions that vary pretty widely in the amount of time that passes.
When would you roll the endurance dice?
Start of the session?
You track the modifiers based on the ship activity of the previous game?
Or do you roll at the end of the session...in which a result of
"1120 = Almost Out. The ship will run out of Consumables unless it is restocked during this gaming session.'
actually means *next* session, as you've just finished the current one. 

Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:46 am Post subject: 


Dredwulf60 wrote:  "Gaming session" as a unit of measure is a little broad when you are calibrating the ratings from a rating of days. 
The idea here is a method of tracking a ship's Consumables in a manner that moves the numbercrunching as far off the gaming table as possible, so as to avoid interfering with the action. It's tracking consumables as a method of furthering the plot.
The GM crunches the numbers once gameplay has ended (so it doesn't interfere with the pace of the game), and either rolls the Endurance dice himself or lets the shipowning / piloting character do it. The result sets up the ship's fuel state for the beginning of the next game session. This gives the GM time to build restocking into the next session as an objective, if necessary. _________________ "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.


Back to top 


Naaman Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 1955

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:48 am Post subject: 


Next question: how shall we figure out the cost of restocking? A result of "almost out" means a much larger deficit for a freighter than it does for a Z95.
Also, if not enough money is available, can the crew opt to stock just one interval (from "almost out" to "getting low")? 

Back to top 


Bren High Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3599 Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 12:04 pm Post subject: 


You set the formula as
Quote:  Roll # < Difficulty = Result 
Example 1A: An MC80 makes a 5day hyperspace jump (+1+5), closes to a planet (+1), engages in combat (+2), flies away from the planet, and takes a long 10day jump to a new system (+1+10), and closes to a friendly planet (+1) for a total difficulty of 21. The MC80 has 14D consumables. The average roll on 14D=49. So comparing that to the difficulty 21 we would easily have a success.
But your table seems to work on degree of success or failure since we have different numbers with different and increasingly severe results similar to a wound table. That would imply we look at either how much we exceed the difficulty by or we look at how much we failed the difficulty by. If we subtract the difficulty from the endurance roll we get 4921 = 28. According to the table that is dead in space. So that can't be correct.
Based on your table where a high positive number indicates low fuel, air, etc. shouldn't the formula subtract the difficulty from the roll as follows?
Difficulty  Roll
Example 1B: Same example as above but with the modified formula. We have 2149 which is less than 0 which means we don't need to restock yet and we have no negative modifier to our roll in the next session. With an average value of 49 for an endurance roll it looks like it will be virtually impossible for the MC80 to ever fail its endurance roll.
Example 2: On the other hand if that was a YT1300 with a 9D endurance (average 31.5, call it 31). Compared to a difficulty of 21 we have 2131 which is again less than zero and we donâ€™t need to restock yet and we have no negative modifier for the next session. Unless we carry over the difficulty numbers from previous sessions it seems unlikey that a YT1300 will ever need to restock during a session.
Example 3: Same situation but with an Xwing which has a 3D endurance (average 10.5, call it 10). Compare to the 21 difficulty and we get 2110=11 and according to the table we are barely into needing to restock this session. But since we spent 16 days in hyperspace (among other activities) and an Xwing has an endurance by the RAW of 5 days the GM would already know that the Xwing MUST restock now. So while the difficulty modifiers and die roll give us a result that makes sense it isn't really giving us anything much we didn't already know with die rolling.
Something seems off here in my interpretation of the formula. 

Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:29 pm Post subject: 


Naaman wrote:  Next question: how shall we figure out the cost of restocking? A result of "almost out" means a much larger deficit for a freighter than it does for a Z95.
Also, if not enough money is available, can the crew opt to stock just one interval (from "almost out" to "getting low")? 
Offhand, I'd base the cost of restocking on whatever the ship's current Endurance Difficulty is. This will allow for partial restocking to reduce the Difficulty even if the ship owner can't afford to replenish completely. _________________ "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.


Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:42 pm Post subject: 


Bren wrote:  Based on your table where a high positive number indicates low fuel, air, etc. shouldn't the formula subtract the difficulty from the roll as follows? 
I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're saying. Here's how it works.
The ship's Endurance dice stays constant, with the Endurance Difficulty increasing up from 0 based on the modifiers above. So, using your example, an MC80 would roll 14D against 21, beat it easily and the ship would continue on as usual in the next mission. However, the Endurance Difficulty of 21 would remain, and be added to by whatever the ship did in the next session.
So, eventually, after a few sessions, the modifier makes it up to 53. The MC80 rolls its 14D Endurance and comes up short, with a 51. Because the ship's Endurance Dice Roll # was < the Endurance Difficulty by 2 points, it falls into the Getting Low result, and the characters should start thinking strongly about replenishing sometime soon. However, because of the way the chart is structured, the consumables shortage won't become critical until the next time the ship rolls its Endurance dice.
I have some additional ideas as to how to refine the list, such as applying modifiers to the list depending on Scale, with StarfighterScale Space Transports shifted down 1D2D, DestroyerScale Capital Ships shifted up 1D2D, and DreadnoughtScale ships shifted up 4D. _________________ "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.


Back to top 


Bren High Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3599 Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:13 pm Post subject: 


Thanks for clarifying that the difficulty number from session N carries over as the starting difficulty for session N+1.
So the formula should be the following:
R = D + M  Consumables Roll
where D = difficulty number from the previous session, M = modifiers for this session, and Consumables Roll is a roll of the ships consumables dice. We then compare R to the following table
R........Outcome
010 = Getting Low. The ship has enough Consumables to make it through the next gaming session, but Endurance Difficulty for the next roll goes up by +5.
1120 = Almost Out. The ship will run out of Consumables unless it is restocked during this gaming session.
21+ = Dead In Space. The ship runs out of fuel and is dead in space. 

Back to top 


Dredwulf60 Commander
Joined: 07 Jan 2016 Posts: 478

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:17 am Post subject: 


CRMcNeill wrote:  Dredwulf60 wrote:  "Gaming session" as a unit of measure is a little broad when you are calibrating the ratings from a rating of days. 
The idea here is a method of tracking a ship's Consumables in a manner that moves the numbercrunching as far off the gaming table as possible, so as to avoid interfering with the action. It's tracking consumables as a method of furthering the plot.
The GM crunches the numbers once gameplay has ended (so it doesn't interfere with the pace of the game), and either rolls the Endurance dice himself or lets the shipowning / piloting character do it. The result sets up the ship's fuel state for the beginning of the next game session. This gives the GM time to build restocking into the next session as an objective, if necessary. 
I think I'm tracking your intent.
The same reason I went with a die code for weapons ammo capacity instead of tracking each shot.
But what you're describing seems to be exchanging one running tally for another. Instead of tracking the days a ship has spent in operation, you are keeping a running total of modifiers to the consumables roll. Same amount of bookkeeping, no?
EDIT:
Rereading what you wrote again, I see that it's not really about less bookkeeping. It's about putting it behind the GM screen/ aftergame admin so it doesn't interfere with or eclipse the story. Gotcha. 

Back to top 


CRMcNeill Grand Moff
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 10267 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 1:54 pm Post subject: 


Dredwulf60 wrote:  Rereading what you wrote again, I see that it's not really about less bookkeeping. It's about putting it behind the GM screen/ aftergame admin so it doesn't interfere with or eclipse the story. Gotcha. 
Exactly. It's taking a page from episodic media like Firefly or Battlestar Galactica, where critical supply shortages were something built into specific episodes. Having it happen between sessions also gives the GM breathing room to build that complication into the next session, along with basic guidelines for how urgent it it. _________________ "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.


Back to top 


Bren High Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3599 Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 3:32 pm Post subject: 


CRMcNeill wrote:  Dredwulf60 wrote:  Rereading what you wrote again, I see that it's not really about less bookkeeping. It's about putting it behind the GM screen/ aftergame admin so it doesn't interfere with or eclipse the story. Gotcha. 
Exactly. It's taking a page from episodic media like Firefly or Battlestar Galactica, where critical supply shortages were something built into specific episodes. Having it happen between sessions also gives the GM breathing room to build that complication into the next session, along with basic guidelines for how urgent it it.  I'm still not getting the advantage you are seeing to a consumables die roll. Instead of waiting until the end of the current session to roll a consumables roll the GM could wait until the end of the current session to do his tallying of days usage. That way the GM can build a supply shortage into the plot of the next adventure just like a GM using a consumables die roll. The only thing the die roll seems to do is to sometimes add a bit of uncertainty to whether or not resupply will be an issue in the next session.
If I'm going to use a die roll I want the die roll to cut down on the need to track a running total of +1s and +2s. (Similar to what the ammo die roll house roll tries to do.) But as it stands the die roll for consumables system doesn't do that. 

Back to top 


