Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Settings
The Cosmonomicon
The Vehicle Construction System: Level based
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wyvern" data-source="post: 1571335" data-attributes="member: 2374"><p>Actually, what I recommend is using (TL+1) squared, so that Stone Age vessels aren't completely useless. At first I couldn't imagine what kind of engines a Stone Age vessel would have, but then I remembered that "engines" in this case needs to cover muscle-powered devices (pedals, giant space hamster-wheels, or even "Fred's two feet"). Also, it's more elegant for the point scale to range from 1-100 than from 0-81. The same applies to fuel (gotta have something to feed than hamster) and possibly power as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Fuel usage wouldn't increase with more engines because fuel capacity is tied to range. More engines means you can go faster, so you use up your fuel supply that much faster, but the total fuel needed to go a given distance is the same regardless of whether you're a tortoise or a hare. Note that this is based on the assumption that you get the same "miles per gallon" at any speed. Obviously that doesn't hold true in the real world, but I'm glossing over it for the sake of simplicity. (I suppose you could argue that maneuvering thrusters use up fuel as well, but I'm also ignoring that for the same reason.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>That's what that component that converts power to movement points is for.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If you look back at the example I gave in my previous post, you'll see that any number of speed points from 1 up to your hit dice gives you a speed of 1 square/round.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that's not what I suggested. If you have 16 HD, you only need 17 speed points to move 2 squares/round, not 32.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Absoutely. The thing is, you don't need to specify minimum speed and manueverability for individual vessels if they're built into the system (i.e. so long as you have at least one engine, minimum speed is 1 square and minimum maneuverability is clumsy).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I like that idea. Hadn't thought of doing it that way before.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really, as long as you keep it in terms of multiples of a base speed. For example, a ship might move 3 squares/round in slow winds, 6 squares/round in moderate winds, etc.. If the winds get too high (gale force and beyond), the speed levels out and the maneuverability drops as the ship becomes more difficult to control. High winds should also result in a penalty to Pilot checks.</p><p></p><p>As far as sails vs. engines go, I think it's simplest to go with an either/or scenario instead of allowing a vessel to use both at once.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Only if your engines are running directly off the power supply. If that's the case, then you just have to figure out how many speed points you get and convert that to squares/round. A bit tedious, yes, but you'd only have to do it once for a given scene, and only in special circumstances.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, you get that result (more or less) if you use (TL+1)^2 to calculate fuel points.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree. See my comments above about fuel and engines.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't follow your reasoning. What is it about 30' grids that makes it hard to determine face and reach? Sure, it's not going to give you nice round multiples of 100, but that shouldn't be our primary concern; compatibility with existing rules should. If you were going to change it to anything I'd suggest a 40' grid because that's the increment used in long-range spells.</p><p></p><p>On a new topic, I had an idea about how to calculate movement points for "engines" that use magic instead of technology. The cost of conventional magic items is determined by spell level and caster level, of course, but since we're trying to emulate a generic magic engine that can use any of a number of different methods to produce movement, we don't want to have to define the specific spells involved and who's casting them.</p><p></p><p>My idea is to ignore spell level entirely and just use the formula (MA+1) x (MP+1) where MA is the magic achievement level of the cosmos and MP is the magic potential level. This gives the same range as for the tech level and ignores spell level entirely. My reasoning is that you get more "bang for your buck" in a cosmos with a high ambient magic level (i.e. magic potential), while cultures with advanced magic techniques (i.e. magic achievement) will know how to harness magical power more efficiently. As always, you can upgrade or downgrade, but in this case what that represents is using higher or lower-level spells than the default (which is deliberately left undefined).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, one of the features of the system I suggested is that you have a fixed price per level of engines, power, etc. no matter what your TL or ML is, unless you up/downgrade. The reasoning is that the relative cost of the "standard" components stays constant due to evolving production techniques, but their effectiveness (measured in movement points, fuel points, power points) increases as tech/magic level does. That is, an F-16 would cost the same now as a B-15 did 50 years ago (I have no idea if that's true; I'm just using it to illustrate how the system would work), but to buy an F-16 50 years ago (if that had been possible) would have cost a lot more.</p><p></p><p>Wyvern</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wyvern, post: 1571335, member: 2374"] Actually, what I recommend is using (TL+1) squared, so that Stone Age vessels aren't completely useless. At first I couldn't imagine what kind of engines a Stone Age vessel would have, but then I remembered that "engines" in this case needs to cover muscle-powered devices (pedals, giant space hamster-wheels, or even "Fred's two feet"). Also, it's more elegant for the point scale to range from 1-100 than from 0-81. The same applies to fuel (gotta have something to feed than hamster) and possibly power as well. Fuel usage wouldn't increase with more engines because fuel capacity is tied to range. More engines means you can go faster, so you use up your fuel supply that much faster, but the total fuel needed to go a given distance is the same regardless of whether you're a tortoise or a hare. Note that this is based on the assumption that you get the same "miles per gallon" at any speed. Obviously that doesn't hold true in the real world, but I'm glossing over it for the sake of simplicity. (I suppose you could argue that maneuvering thrusters use up fuel as well, but I'm also ignoring that for the same reason.) That's what that component that converts power to movement points is for. If you look back at the example I gave in my previous post, you'll see that any number of speed points from 1 up to your hit dice gives you a speed of 1 square/round. Except that's not what I suggested. If you have 16 HD, you only need 17 speed points to move 2 squares/round, not 32. Absoutely. The thing is, you don't need to specify minimum speed and manueverability for individual vessels if they're built into the system (i.e. so long as you have at least one engine, minimum speed is 1 square and minimum maneuverability is clumsy). I like that idea. Hadn't thought of doing it that way before. Not really, as long as you keep it in terms of multiples of a base speed. For example, a ship might move 3 squares/round in slow winds, 6 squares/round in moderate winds, etc.. If the winds get too high (gale force and beyond), the speed levels out and the maneuverability drops as the ship becomes more difficult to control. High winds should also result in a penalty to Pilot checks. As far as sails vs. engines go, I think it's simplest to go with an either/or scenario instead of allowing a vessel to use both at once. Only if your engines are running directly off the power supply. If that's the case, then you just have to figure out how many speed points you get and convert that to squares/round. A bit tedious, yes, but you'd only have to do it once for a given scene, and only in special circumstances. Again, you get that result (more or less) if you use (TL+1)^2 to calculate fuel points. I agree. See my comments above about fuel and engines. I don't follow your reasoning. What is it about 30' grids that makes it hard to determine face and reach? Sure, it's not going to give you nice round multiples of 100, but that shouldn't be our primary concern; compatibility with existing rules should. If you were going to change it to anything I'd suggest a 40' grid because that's the increment used in long-range spells. On a new topic, I had an idea about how to calculate movement points for "engines" that use magic instead of technology. The cost of conventional magic items is determined by spell level and caster level, of course, but since we're trying to emulate a generic magic engine that can use any of a number of different methods to produce movement, we don't want to have to define the specific spells involved and who's casting them. My idea is to ignore spell level entirely and just use the formula (MA+1) x (MP+1) where MA is the magic achievement level of the cosmos and MP is the magic potential level. This gives the same range as for the tech level and ignores spell level entirely. My reasoning is that you get more "bang for your buck" in a cosmos with a high ambient magic level (i.e. magic potential), while cultures with advanced magic techniques (i.e. magic achievement) will know how to harness magical power more efficiently. As always, you can upgrade or downgrade, but in this case what that represents is using higher or lower-level spells than the default (which is deliberately left undefined). Actually, one of the features of the system I suggested is that you have a fixed price per level of engines, power, etc. no matter what your TL or ML is, unless you up/downgrade. The reasoning is that the relative cost of the "standard" components stays constant due to evolving production techniques, but their effectiveness (measured in movement points, fuel points, power points) increases as tech/magic level does. That is, an F-16 would cost the same now as a B-15 did 50 years ago (I have no idea if that's true; I'm just using it to illustrate how the system would work), but to buy an F-16 50 years ago (if that had been possible) would have cost a lot more. Wyvern [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Settings
The Cosmonomicon
The Vehicle Construction System: Level based
Top