Subject:
|
Re: Rules Talk: JumpShip Ideas
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming.starship
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 May 2003 16:07:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1925 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.gaming.starship, Richard Parsons wrote a bunch o' stuff.
Hmm. Interesting thoughts. I am happy with the direction of this discussion
thus far...
> This way the true JumpDrive ships can flit about anywhere in a week.
So you are proposing a re-write of the previously stated rules on Full JumpShips
to reduce their travel time to one week per jump.
> I would hope that there'd be precious few of these vessels about.
So long as we continue to say the Full JumpShip engine costs 1 Fast (HQ) slot
against propulsion, then any single player could never have more than five Full
JumpShips in their fleet at any one time.
...I am still concerned about the lack of restriction on Ferries, however, since
the 5 HQ limit does not prevent a player from designing a micro-fig scale
JumpShip and claiming that it is a Ferry large enough to carry all the other
ships in his fleet. This scenario would pretty much make the propulsion
characteristic irrelevent. (Of course, an SM can restrict the number of ships
from a single player within their own sector, so perhaps a giant fleet could
never actually be useful versus a single desitination. This is the only
fail-safe I can think of against this scenario.)
> Ships with the lesser 'JumpGate Generator' type engines would have some more
> strategic options, and could get about the large distances of the map more
> speedily (max three weeks). It would also mean that a ship using its
> engines to create an adhoc exit gate would be isolated from JumpSpace for
> three weeks until the engines recharged.
I do like the basic idea here. But I am concerned with the complexity of how to
explain it. I would rather keep the rules as simple as possible. So a Medium
JumpShip (or whatever name we want to give it) has a choice between a three-week
jump between any two points, or a one-week jump as long as one of the two points
is an existing Gate? Could work. I think worrying about recharging times
before and after is an extra complexity we don't need in the rules. Plus it
would add the requirement that the GM would then need to spend more time
tracking who is charged and who is not. I'd rather leave recharge times out of
it, and just say that the recharge is included in the time required for the
given jump. Otherwise, I like your revised proposal.
> The perils of sitting around in scary and hard to navigate JumpSpace are
> managed by the GM...
Early on, we had discussed what level of involvement the GM might have regarding
encounters or experiences during Galactic Movement. It was at the time agreed
that the GM would just track travel between sectors and that true adventure
activities would remain inside active sectors. However, I did at one time
suggest that this added duty would be a possibility. It would be fairly easy to
create a random-event chart that could have several chances for no event and
then a few special events ranging from the good ("solar winds speed your
travel") to the not so good ("exploding nebula sends you off-course") to
downright bad ("collision with uncharted comet causes damage").
With the number of ships flying about, it would be too much work for the GM
(IMO) to actually roll on a chart for every ship. But with JumpShips, and there
being never more than 5 per player, it would be easier to manage. As current
GM, I would be willing to put together a chart especially catered to JumpSpace
travel. The possibility of the unexpected actually would be yet another way to
prevent over-usage of JumpShips.
...Another thought I just had is that perhaps, just maybe, a player could build
a super-JumpDrive by taking both a HQ and a MQ slot to have a ship that can jump
with perfect safety. Or is that getting too complicated?
> To those of you who find this vaguely familiar, yes this is exactly what I
> lobbied for early on (with only partial success :-), and it is based
> unapologetically and in a completely un-revenue raising and non-brand
> diluting way, on Bablyon 5's jumpgate system (except that the writer, JMS,
> called it hyperspace, I think, probably because Hendo was not there at the
> time to suggest JumpSpace).
Ah yes, I do recollect you mentioning that at one point. Too bad we can't go
back into the old boards to see things. ...As for me switching to the term
JumpSpace, I guess I'm just a sucker for the use of two capital letters in one
word. :)
> Sooooooooo, muse on.
>
> And Hendo's trying to integrate the thinking with the propulsion tiers is
> most laudable.
Thank you. :) ...I have always liked the 3-tier system for describing things for this game. I think one reason we left out discussing Jump rules for so long is that they did not fit in perfectly with the 3-tier (we had slow, medium, fast, and wait there's a fourth one!! ack!). So, I came up with this latest plan of having them take up extra slots versus medium or fast. ...The only other way to deal with it that I can think of would be to add a new characteristic of JumpAbility to each ship, but then things would just get messy (IMO).
> I for one would be entirely happy for jhk to be swanning about anywhere to
> anywhere (developed sectors aside) at will, in weekly trips, and the rest of
> us to have the opportunity to (come to New Pacific and, at great expense)
> acquire Jump Engines that would us to access the Gate system more
> practically.
(joking...)
Aha! So your support to revamp the JumpShip rules is nothing more than a ploy to
make New Pacific the most profitable sector in the galaxy! I knew it!
Hmmm...actually, I know a certain slow moving DC3 ship that might have need of
one of those drives...
•Commander Lee Magisoto turns from the terminal, having read the recent
transmission from Port Block Yards. "The Wolfpack?!" he says aloud. "D@mned if
I knew they'd ever take to space." The dark-haired commander swings around to
face the two flight specialists and begins barking orders. "I want a course set
to New Pacific immediately! And I mean now, $%&! Dennsen, get this blasted
@#$$! crate moving!"
•The scrawny helmsmen smiles at Magisoto's over-done anger as he fingers the
controls in front of him. "Sure thing Skipper. Sure thing."
-GM Hendo
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Rules Talk: JumpShip Ideas
|
| Hi! If I may interject, as someone who's mulling over joining up (unless my lack of any actual Brick at the moment is an intent-killer) and has read the rules as a fresh outsider: (...) This sounds fair. Otherwise, no significant gain is made by (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.gaming.starship)
| | | Re: Rules Talk: JumpShip Ideas
|
| In lugnet.gaming.starship, John P. Henderson wrotemore worthiness. (...) I guess I am (sorry :-). (...) I wonder even if we end up with a 'Full Jump Engine' setting, a 4th and super setting, of which we are each only allowed one. I appreciate your (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.gaming.starship)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rules Talk: JumpShip Ideas
|
| In lugnet.gaming.starship, John P. Henderson wrote stuff. Currently: (...) Proposedly: (...) I don't want to cruel my own proposals to the Glorious Galactic Grand Guarantor, but (I do want to see good rules made that improve gameplay): These two (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.gaming.starship)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
