| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16174
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 10:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
So, I've been doing some housecleaning of old SW-RPG documents that I've kept lying around in hard-copy from a time when I didn't have my own computer. I've shredded probably 2/3 of the material, mostly duplicates of official material or stats that had me shaking my head at how ridiculous I was back then. However, I've also come up with a few gems that I expect I will be posting here on the Forum in the future.
Something that has always bothered me about sensors is how ships, per the RAW, seem to have an equal chance of detection regardless of their size. The only mention of it is that the character rolling Sensors gets a +10 to their roll to detect a Capital Ship, or +20 to detect something Death Star scale. Earlier in this topic, we discussed a rather complicated formula to calculate a sensor signature value for every ship, based on different aspects of their stats. It got complicated fast.
In the interests of jump-starting this thread and simplifying the original idea, I offer the following, recently recovered from my archives:Craft = Bonus to Sensors Roll
Starfighter = -2
Light Freighter = 0
Corvette = +4
Frigate = +6
Cruiser = +8
Star Destroyer = +10
SSD = +12
Death Star = +20
Moving @ Cautious = -5
Moving @ Cruising = 0
Moving @ Full = +5
Moving @ All-Out = +10
Shields Up = +3
Energy Weapons Charged = +2
Flying in Formation = +1
It won't be perfect, but it will be at least somewhat more realistic than what currently exists. 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.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14032
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
So a frigate scanning a star destroyer only gets +4?
_________________
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: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | So a frigate scanning a star destroyer only gets +4? |
No, these are straight modifiers. Any ship gets the same bonus.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think the modfiers for shields and weapons should reflect the strength of the devices and scale.
How about +1 to detect per 2D of strength, round down.. Scale adds in to the strength, starting from from character scale,
So a Starfighter with 1D shields would be at +3 (1D+6D= 7D/2= +3) to detect, while a Star Destroyer with 3D shields would be at +7 (3D+12D= 15D/2 = +7) to detect. |
|
| 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: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Part of the reason I went with flat rates is because of the complexity involved in actually calculating everything out. I like the idea of tying a ship's sensor signature to its dice in Hull and Shields, but it falls apart for capital ships when you try to calculate weapon strength. It's all well and good to say +1 for every 2D of weapon strength, but then the question becomes how many guns does the ship have? I chewed on this for weeks before I gave up, and in the end, I decided to go with a flat rate. I admit up front it isn't a perfect fit, but it gets the gist of the idea without resorting to massive math calculations.
_________________
"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: Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | So a frigate scanning a star destroyer only gets +4? |
No, these are straight modifiers. Any ship gets the same bonus. |
Why not have it based on the scale difference between targets? Why have it all ships get the same bonus?
_________________
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: Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because the rules for ship sensors are the same regardless of vessel size. The only real difference is the ranges.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | Part of the reason I went with flat rates is because of the complexity involved in actually calculating everything out. I like the idea of tying a ship's sensor signature to its dice in Hull and Shields, but it falls apart for capital ships when you try to calculate weapon strength. It's all well and good to say +1 for every 2D of weapon strength, but then the question becomes how many guns does the ship have? I chewed on this for weeks before I gave up, and in the end, I decided to go with a flat rate. I admit up front it isn't a perfect fit, but it gets the gist of the idea without resorting to massive math calculations. |
If you assume a doubling progression for dice in D6, something that is somewhat supposed by the game mechanics, then you could just apply a modifier tot he D strength based on the number of guns, like so:
2 = +1D
4 = +2D
8 = +3D
16 = +4D
32 = +5D
64 = +6D
128 = +7D
256 = +8D
So an ISD2 would would work out as follows:
Hull: 7D+12D scale
Shields 3D +12D scale
Weapons: 60 TBLs at 5D capital scale would be 5D+ 5D+2 (60 guns)+12D scale = 12D+2 which would be worth a +8 bonus to detect. The ion guns and tractor beams would boost the power output slightly, but not enough to warrant another +1 pip.
Total: 56D+2, divided by 2D = +28 to detect. Not much different that what you got. |
|
| 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: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You mean apart from the fact that 15 is just over half of 28?
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2015 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | You mean apart from the fact that 15 is just over half of 28? |
Oops, my bad. I misread the craft bonus. 
I'll fix my math. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2015 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the moving modifier might be a bit much. I would think that an ISD moving cautiously along is going to be throwing off a bigger sensor signature than an X-Wing going all out. |
|
| 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 Jan 17, 2015 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | I think the moving modifier might be a bit much. I would think that an ISD moving cautiously along is going to be throwing off a bigger sensor signature than an X-Wing going all out. |
As I said, this concept isn't perfect, and with this many variables, I'm not sure perfection is attainable. In the end, what I'm looking for is a rule that:
A) represents a decent facsimile of the concept in question.
B) is easily applied to the existing rule-set in an easily understood form (i.e. one that doesn't bring the game to a screeching halt to calculate a specific ship's sensor profile).
C) fits within the existing sensor difficulty parameters as set by the Sensors skill in the rulebook.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2015 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Would speeders be -6, and Walkers -4 to detect? |
|
| 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 Jan 18, 2015 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I expect so, if I were to carry it out to that point.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2015 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I could see situations where the PCs try to locate the bad guys on a planet with the sensors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
