| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 2:38 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I am basing it on DISTANCE not time.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I am basing it on DISTANCE not time. |
Okay, but why? Especially when there are real world examples from over 50 years ago that can do better.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because as others said, if jetpacks were unlimited use, WHY BOTHER USING many other forms of conveyances...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Because as others said, if jetpacks were unlimited use, WHY BOTHER USING many other forms of conveyances... |
To which multiple people pointed out other reasons as to why other forms of conveyance exist.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | I am basing it on DISTANCE not time. |
Okay, but why? Especially when there are real world examples from over 50 years ago that can do better. |
But those old real world rocket packs notably also only worked for about 21 seconds until they were out of fuel, and they were larger than Star Wars jet packs. Despite advances in the tech over the past 50 years, the major problem with rocket pack development has always been fuel storage. In zero gravity or on the Moon, no problem because you don't need to work against Earth gravity which requires more fuel. Most environments in Star Wars have Earth gravity or very close to it, and they have similar working conditions. I am all on board for flight packs in the SWU working better than on Earth without getting too technical about it, but I have a little problem with them working drastically better, as far as time of operation (before fuel runs out).
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | Because as others said, if jetpacks were unlimited use, WHY BOTHER USING many other forms of conveyances... |
To which multiple people pointed out other reasons as to why other forms of conveyance exist. |
All true, but there are other downsides to flight packs. In the films we see them in use the most, AotC and RotJ (which only show short bursts), jump/flight packs seem to be volatile technologies prone to malfunction. On Kamino, Jango's flight pack flew off his back, flew into something, and exploded. I am certainly going to devise rules for the volatile aspect. Not only do they provide less cover for "passengers" as other vehicles, damage to them can seriously harm wearers. They are simply dangerous, and thus not well suited to extended travel.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | I mean, factor in things like repulsorlift and portable fusion power generators. |
It is true that small droids are shown using repulsorlift tech, presumably without having to constantly recharge. This probably should be a key to Star Wars flight pack technobabble. But in my mind flight packs having repulsorlifts would still need to also have a second power for fast movement. The way I see it, starships only use repulsorlift engines for hovering and fine maneuvering for landings and takeoffs. Normal atmospheric flight still uses the same main engines that sublight travel in space does (as indicated by movie effects). Airspeeders and ground speeders probably still use a second tech beside repulsorlift tech to move more than very slowly, and this second tech needs more fuel than just sustaining suspension. Even speeder bikes have more room for fuel than flight packs.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | Special: Limited Fuel
Due to their compact size, Jetpacks can only be used for short flights. If the pilot gets a '1' Wild Dice on their Jetpack Piloting roll, roll 1D on the following table:1-4 = Running Low. Jetpack fuel is nearly exhausted. The character must land by the end of the next round, and the jetpack can not be used again until it is refueled.
5-6 = Jetpack may continue normal flight operation. I just came up with this on the fly, so any suggestions are welcome. |
Thanks for this. Based on what I am reading in this thread, this may work for a lot of GMs.
The only problem I have with it is, there is the same chance of running out of fuel the first round it is used to a long adventure of extended use without refueling. To add the realism of the chances of running out increasing with rounds in use, then you are counting rounds and having something more crunchy than just counting rounds only and not rolling dice.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Macavity
Cadet
Joined: 16 May 2021
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 7:34 pm Post subject: Jetpack / Rocketpack flight durations |
|
|
I agree that the existing limitations to Star Wars Jetpacks / Rocketpacks are far too low for the tech level of Star Wars.
Here on earth, without the benefit or repulsorlift belts or compact ion drives (TIE fighter) the size of a suitcase that can propel spaceships into orbit and across a solar system we have this news from Los Angeles:
| Quote: | Local police, the FBI and Federal Aviation Administration had announced an investigation in early September after an August spotting of a suspected jetpack traveler 3,000 feet off the ground near Los Angeles International Airport. Two separate airline crews had reported sightings, but there was no video at the time.
Another airline crew reported a sighting in mid-October, this time at 6,000 feet. |
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9086601/Incredible-video-appears-elusive-jet-pack-guy-flying-3-000-feet-California.html
The video is a minute long from an airplane showing the jetpack man in level flight at 4000 feet. It took time to get up to that altitude, it will take time for him to safely descend from that altitude, and he was able to do that while having to deal with gravity.
Star Wars jetpacks should be able to do far better. Jet fuel and rocket fuel are incredibly energy dense storage medium.
The Gravity jet pack by Richard Browning is able to climb to an altitude of 10,000 feet and reach speeds of 80kph (50mph) as tested it in front of stunned onlookers at Loughborough's Design School.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAJM5L9hhBs
50 mph at 5 minutes (longest flight time) = 4.17 miles range
That is currently available human tech on earth, working now.
Pair that with a repulsorlift belt (exists in Star Wars) and I think you could easily multiply that range by a factor of 10-20. Replace the jet engine with a more powerful and energy efficient Ion drive, could be even further.
On 13 October 2015, Yves Rossy and Vince Reffet, wearing jetpacks, flew in formation alongside an Airbus A380 for 10 minutes. The slowest the Airbus A380 must fly faster than its landing speed of 159 mph (256 km/h) so Yves and Vince must have flown more than 27 miles in formation with the A380- probably in the 30-40 mile range.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WJD5kXB1_Y
As to why everyone in Star Wars doesn't fly using a jetpack, it's a pain to lug around when you're not flying, it requires special skills to use, you're exposed and you can't carry much cargo.
It is probably much more comfortable to just jump on a speeder bike and go, and then park the bike when you get where you're going and walk into a crowded cantina without heavy armor and a jetpack on.
The Mandalorians never take off their armor and have trained to wear the weight. A jetpack's just another part of their armor to them, so they DO wear them all the time, and probably use them all the time as well.
I think we have to take the Mandalorian TV series as a new part of the Star Wars cannon. They certainly do a better job of adhering to the original trilogy than the prequels and new Star Wars films do.
I don't think that Star Wars wants to put limitations on Jetpack/Rocketpack use for characters, and if you're using an Ion drive on your "Jetpack" with a fusion powerplant, you have effectively unlimited usage in an atmosphere that can be accelerated out the Ion drive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2021 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | But those old real world rocket packs notably also only worked for about 21 seconds until they were out of fuel, and they were larger than Star Wars jet packs. |
Yes, but they also had Jet Packs, distinct from rocket packs, which were developed in the same era but had much greater endurance, with the trade-off being greater complexity and maintenance difficulty. This is what I was referring to above.
| Quote: | | I am certainly going to devise rules for the volatile aspect. Not only do they provide less cover for "passengers" as other vehicles, damage to them can seriously harm wearers. They are simply dangerous, and thus not well suited to extended travel. |
Absolutely. In the films and TV show, jet packs appear to be the sole province of characters who need to have immediate access to flight capability. I've theorized elsewhere that a flight mechanism (whether a flight pack or something like Can Bane's rocket boots) is an essential component of a non-FS character being able to survive a close-up fight with a Jedi.
| Quote: | | But in my mind flight packs having repulsorlifts would still need to also have a second power for fast movement. |
Agreed. My take is that repulsorlifts provide lift only - it even says so in the name - and that thrust must come from a different source. However, if a jet pack also incorporates repulsorlifts, the jet (or rocket, as the case may be) no longer has to provide both lift and thrust, which takes a lot of the load (both power output and fuel consumption) off of the thruster.
| Quote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | Special: Limited Fuel |
The only problem I have with it is, there is the same chance of running out of fuel the first round it is used to a long adventure of extended use without refueling. To add the realism of the chances of running out increasing with rounds in use, then you are counting rounds and having something more crunchy than just counting rounds only and not rolling dice. |
I considered that possibility as I was typing it out, but I mostly just wanted to get the ball rolling on a possible solution. I'm perfectly fine with an alternate version.
My general position (which has evolved over time) is that consumption of a limited resource in a cinematic setting should only be a factor when it is cinematically appropriate, as in, it should stay in the background until "I'm running low on fuel" or "Ammo's almost out." I proposed something similar w/r/t Blaster Ammo and my Endurance Dice rules for starships. Something along the lines of the Blaster Ammo rule would work well with jet / rocket packs, along with low Body ratings and 0% Cover.
Could also potentially make them Availability: R, so that only the appropriately licensed (accredited Bounty Hunters and the like) can wear them openly on Imperial planets.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2021 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | All true, but there are other downsides to flight packs. In the films we see them in use the most, AotC and RotJ (which only show short bursts), jump/flight packs seem to be volatile technologies prone to malfunction. On Kamino, Jango's flight pack flew off his back, flew into something, and exploded. I am certainly going to devise rules for the volatile aspect. Not only do they provide less cover for "passengers" as other vehicles, damage to them can seriously harm wearers. They are simply dangerous, and thus not well suited to extended travel.
|
One game session i did many moons back at Gencon, a PC had his jetpack SHOT By an imperial, putting a hole in it, but he didn't notice, and jumped BACK to the party, streaming fuel out that got, ignited. SO WHEN He landed, it went BOOM right on his back.
IIRC i gave it 1d of damage per charge of fuel left in it. (So it had 7d by the time it went boom)..
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | My general position (which has evolved over time) is that consumption of a limited resource in a cinematic setting should only be a factor when it is cinematically appropriate, as in, it should stay in the background until "I'm running low on fuel" or "Ammo's almost out." I proposed something similar w/r/t Blaster Ammo and my Endurance Dice rules for starships. Something along the lines of the Blaster Ammo rule would work well with jet / rocket packs, along with low Body ratings and 0% Cover. |
Which is something i've never really liked. Why should what ever you have, last just 'as long as cinematically appropriate'/?
Might as well say Everything is that way, including how long air lasts in your space suit, or how long you can survive in the desert without water or food...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2021 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
CRMcNeill, good ideas.
| Macavity wrote: | | I think we have to take the Mandalorian TV series as a new part of the Star Wars cannon. |
The Mandalorian TV show is part of the new canon. That is an absolute fact not subject to debate. But we don't have to take it, or anything else, as part of our personal canons.
| Macavity wrote: | | ...the Mandalorian TV series... They certainly do a better job of adhering to the original trilogy than the prequels and new Star Wars films do. |
You're definitely not alone in this sentiment, but I vehemently disagree with it. Whether you like it or not, and whether it is part of your personal canon or not, the PT "adheres" to the original trilogy fairly well. And this is considering that TESB and RotJ didn't perfectly adhere to ANH in the first place. The PT didn't adhere to the existing EU at the time (but it never had to). The PT was certainly at odds with a lot of fan head canon (16-years-worth). TESB is not a perfect gel with ANH, and the PT is not a perfect gel with the OT but discontinuities are minor and easy to smooth over.
Take Boba Fett. He had a few lines in TESB and RotJ, but it was clear that didn't care about the Empire or Rebellion, and he only cared about the money he was going to get from the Empire and Jabba the Hutt for Han Solo. In AotC, Boba's father was a mercenary trying to make his way in the universe, by being paid a lot of money to work for both Sith-controlled factions in that galactic conflict. Little kid Boba sees his father decapitated by a Jedi, but inherits his father's armor and ship, ending up a cold, heartless mercenary working for cash just like his dad. In The Mandalorian, suddenly Boba Fett has an honor system and must fulfill an obligation to help Mando? And in the OT, Boba Fett's main purpose is slapstick comedy, but in The Mandalorian, Boba Fett is suddenly a badass who kills stormtroopers with glee. The PT expanded the original Boba Fett character but did not contradict it. The Mandalorian's Boba Fett is a completely different character who just wears the same armor and flies the same ship. Adherence? This is just one example. The first season of The Mandalorian wasn't too bad, but the second season was a lot worse at adhering to continuity of the Lucas (and Disney) films. (But I'll give The Mandalorian that it is less contradictory to the films than the canon cartoons are.) But this is a stray tangent in a thread about jet packs.
Your point in making the statement seem to be that The Mandalorian portrayal of jetpacks should be have weight for us because it is more in line with the OT. In the OT, we only had a single intentional quick burst that was successfully executed (getting Boba from the sail barge to the skiff), and an unintentional quick burst that sent Boba wildly out of control into the side of the sail barge (caused by a blind man accidentally hitting the jet pack with a boat paddle). The PT also only showed very short flights, and thus no contradiction to the OT. The Mandalorian did show Mandalorians in atmospheric flight beside Mando's ship, so this is beyond what either Lucas trilogy shows us, but there still hasn't been any concrete evidence of extended flight durations, what this discussion has largely been about since my little comment about wishing for use duration rules for flight packs.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2021 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | One game session i did many moons back at Gencon, a PC had his jetpack SHOT By an imperial, putting a hole in it, but he didn't notice, and jumped BACK to the party, streaming fuel out that got, ignited. SO WHEN He landed, it went BOOM right on his back. |
Sounds more like you withheld pertinent information from a PC. I could see something like this happening on a Wild Dice failure, but having it happen all because the GM decided the PC didn't notice is pretty suspect.
| Quote: | Which is something i've never really liked. Why should what ever you have, last just 'as long as cinematically appropriate'/?
Might as well say Everything is that way, including how long air lasts in your space suit, or how long you can survive in the desert without water or food... |
You make it sound like I'm arguing for stuff to never run out, which is not something I've ever advocated. Nowhere in the films or the various tv shows do we see characters bean counting their ammo or other consumables; it only ever becomes an issue when it's running low as part of the story. I'm just saying that it should be the same way in the game. I have no problem keeping track of how many grenades a character has left, or the number of proton torpedoes left on a starfighter, but other stuff doesn't need to be that precise.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2021 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: |
Sounds more like you withheld pertinent information from a PC. I could see something like this happening on a Wild Dice failure, but having it happen all because the GM decided the PC didn't notice is pretty suspect. |
I gave him a per check (6 difficulty) and he rolled THREE 1's.. That wasn't me 'dicking him over'.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Nowhere in the films or the various tv shows do we see characters bean counting their ammo or other consumables; it only ever becomes an issue when it's running low as part of the story. I'm just saying that it should be the same way in the game. I have no problem keeping track of how many grenades a character has left, or the number of proton torpedoes left on a starfighter, but other stuff doesn't need to be that precise. |
In practically every battle, we've seen at most maybe 40 shots PER PERSON, and that was even in the large scale battles.. Hell, some of the combats, you saw MAYBE a dozen shots. So of course "they never run out of ammo, when they are shooting less than 20 shots per person".
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2021 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | In practically every battle, we've seen at most maybe 40 shots PER PERSON, and that was even in the large scale battles.. Hell, some of the combats, you saw MAYBE a dozen shots. So of course "they never run out of ammo, when they are shooting less than 20 shots per person". |
So why nickel-and-dime PCs by tracking blaster gas expenditures across multiple combats, especially when most weapons have 50-100 shots? You've basically made my point for me.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 910
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Quote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | Special: Limited Fuel |
The only problem I have with it is, there is the same chance of running out of fuel the first round it is used to a long adventure of extended use without refueling. To add the realism of the chances of running out increasing with rounds in use, then you are counting rounds and having something more crunchy than just counting rounds only and not rolling dice. |
I considered that possibility as I was typing it out, but I mostly just wanted to get the ball rolling on a possible solution. I'm perfectly fine with an alternate version. |
I do it pretty much as CR describes. Running a mando game, a few characters have jet packs.
Because in my game, I routinely (and sacrilegiously) use dice other than the D6 for certain things, I assign a die type as a durability/endurance for certain makes and models of jet and rocket packs.
Each round of flight prompts a roll on that durability/ endurance die. A '1' result on the roll is a warning. The user ow knows there is a potential issue.
The endurance die is now 1 class worse. (ie a D6 has a 1 in 6 chance of rolling a 1. After rolling a '1' for a warning, it would automatically go to a D4; now a 1 in 4 chance of rolling a 1 each round of continuing flight.)
Another '1' result means the jet pack stops working. Immediately.
Thus after the first warning, most characters will land unless the story factors are urgent enough to risk it.
For those failures that occur on the first round of flight...
Well...it can happen.
I rationalize it with the assumption that it's not JUST about fuel. When is the last time there was maintenance on it? What other factors might have gone wrong? When was the last time the characters actually made sure it was topped up?
One of those negative factors for why not everyone uses them is the reliability.
If a character went out of his way, just before a mission that he knew flight was going to be important, and made sure to tell me as GM that he was doing maintenance and topping up the fuel cells, then I'd probably let him ignore the the first 'warning' result and let him keep his original durability die class until he rolled another '1'.
Or maybe allow the die class to be one better (ie a D8 for a 1 in 8 chance of getting the first warning) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I recall you mentioning the use of non-D6 dice in the ammo discussion I linked above. I can see the same system working with D6 dice by increasing the Difficulty 1 step for every Wild Dice result, then give the packs a D rating with which to roll against it.
Say a jet pack has a Fuel rating of 1D, with Difficulty starting at 0. The jet pack operator gets a Wild 1, but since the Difficulty is 0, it's an automatic success. However, the Difficulty for the next roll is increased to 5, which the pack has only a 1/3 chance of tieing or beating.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | In practically every battle, we've seen at most maybe 40 shots PER PERSON, and that was even in the large scale battles.. Hell, some of the combats, you saw MAYBE a dozen shots. So of course "they never run out of ammo, when they are shooting less than 20 shots per person". |
So why nickel-and-dime PCs by tracking blaster gas expenditures across multiple combats, especially when most weapons have 50-100 shots? You've basically made my point for me. |
I was saying that, as a reason WHY in the films, they never seemed to worry about replacing power packs etc. NOT a reason for why WE shouldn't worry about it..
BUT we did see R2 get recharged Several times.. SO obviously THERE IS issues with fuel/power to worry about.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
