PDA

View Full Version : Pathfinder Magic in Space (with a side of cyberpunk)



RFLS
2015-02-24, 12:41 AM
Okay, here's the deal - I'm writing a magipunk/cyberpunk setting, detailed here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?396323-Belis-Magic-in-Spaaaaaaace!). A major portion of it is using Kellus' Gramarie (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?291019-By-the-Inferior-Science-of-our-Enemies-Gramarie-Mark-II) system, which I've updated to PF and modified here (https://drive.google.com/drive/#folders/0B81ZfG3kcAroTm5GQ040SGtHODg/0B81ZfG3kcArofkswZUJQZFBkOU9JWVRucm1KUFBIRTVjRlNtO UtWZXdBVHhONnBpM082T1U/0B81ZfG3kcArofnFDajVLQi1HZUg5Ni0zSzNtYzJhbFdWaUhTc GNIY3dJUnR6ZktTa2x0UmM) (if nothing appears to be in a folder, refresh the page. It's a problem with Google Drive). In this setting, I'm using a boatload of homebrew and errata to allow for a magipunk/cyberpunk feel to enter Pathfinder. Here's (https://drive.google.com/drive/#folders/0B81ZfG3kcAroTm5GQ040SGtHODg/0B81ZfG3kcArofkswZUJQZFBkOU9JWVRucm1KUFBIRTVjRlNtO UtWZXdBVHhONnBpM082T1U) the folder I'm storing all of it in.

So - I'm looking for suggestions on modifications to what I've already got and suggestions for things I should add. This is an entirely mechanical thread. World-building stuff should go in the other one.

To-do list:


Spaceship (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SkaJIoTv8BV4VspfdYRxyYohH__EEv1LiocvOEMQyxg/edit)rules.
Gramarie:

Eldrikinetics (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yno-docxA0ld7LWB7vFRE0Sb7obXxmhW48zKyA8qCEc/edit)
Heuristicism (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eLf8r-Ec6BbmyI6huTo2YivALl-G-O142ef72yFwJbw/edit)
Yggdratecture (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDImSZe0yIJg6J-zbjVufxjvG4ZbCMRhcQSGlnHOeP0/edit)

Homebrew feats (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ic0pjizlcJT5VcAcJz46mg045U9w6pFA4L_UmdzrQBo/edit)
Computer rules.


I'd also appreciate links to any homebrew other people have done that might fit the setting. I'll ask their permission and link to the work beforehand, ofc.

For spaceship rules, my first thought is to treat the ship as one giant creature, with some/all of its stats set as null, basically making it a big bag of hitpoints. Thoughts?

Maquise
2015-02-24, 01:05 AM
Have you seen the Technological Equipment? (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/technological-equipment) It's somewhat new, so I figured I'd point it out.

Hmm, I'd probably look at Naval ship combat first, (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/ship-combat) and look for inspiration there.

RFLS
2015-02-24, 01:29 AM
I'm reading through the Technological Equipment stuff right now; it seems as though there are a lot of rules that are referenced that aren't on the SRD. Is that the case, or am I missing something? (Specifically, rules concerning charges and implantation)

The naval combat rules look spot on, but I think I'll end up altering Gramarie's Eldrikinetics to mesh with them a bit better. Thoughts?

Almarck
2015-02-24, 01:36 AM
Playable A.I race in the spirit of the Geth, admittedly, sloppy and in need of serious tune up and stream lining: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?388884

Currently I'm looking at doing a total rewrite. System was originally based off of D20 Future's Robot Rules, but I'm looking to ditch that for a more streamlined and system. I want to ditch more than a couple of things in the original, antiquated design.

It's a future setting, you should literally let your players play robots and customize their bodies to insane degrees. I am currently testing the race in a campaign and it's not too broken in my estimataion, but I understand that I haven't really put it under a battering ram of testing so my data might not be valid.


I am also currently building organic equipment under the sig. Hasn't been updated for a while though, working on the upgrading rules.


Also, I believe charges are explained under gear in the Battery description.

qazzquimby
2015-02-24, 10:07 PM
Refreshing isn't helping.
I'm quite interested in this, mostly because gramarie. In case you aren't aware, gramarie is in the middle of a (long, tedious) update, to a system that will fix most of its surviving problems. Feel free to join the cause if you've interest in the system.

Also, this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?258113-PF-The-Invincible-Iron-Man-Base-Class) may help? I really like this class.

I suggest, with a setting using subsystems as vast as gramarie, you try to make things as coherent as possible, merging systems whenever its feasible.

RFLS
2015-02-25, 04:38 PM
Refreshing isn't helping.

Hm. I'll see what I can do. Do you have a Google account that you're logged into? I don't think it matters because I have it set to allow the folder to be seen by anyone, but it's worth trying, I suppose. Just in case it's some miscommunication, you're clicking on the link, and it's showing either files but no folders or nothing at all, you're refreshing the page, and it's not loading things anyway?


I'm quite interested in this, mostly because gramarie. In case you aren't aware, gramarie is in the middle of a (long, tedious) update, to a system that will fix most of its surviving problems. Feel free to join the cause if you've interest in the system.

I've seen the update (this one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?320298-My-Little-Gramarist-SCIENCE!-is-Magic-Gramarie-Discussion), right?), and while I'll probably end up stealing a little from it, I don't think I'll be using it as a wholesale replacement. It's not done, so I don't want to make assumptions about the finished product for the purposes of the setting, and then have to modify the modifications to the homebrew, if that makes sense. My only real objection is that they seem to have focused on allowing it to provide specific effects, rather than allowing the emergent properties of such a massive system produce the effects for them. Basically, ignoring the KISS principle.


Also, this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?258113-PF-The-Invincible-Iron-Man-Base-Class) may help? I really like this class.

That looks a lot like this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?176276-3-5-Magitech-Templar-Iron-Man), which I've already included in the setting. I'll definitely read it over, though; if it brings something new/is better written, I'll include it or use it as a replacement.


I suggest, with a setting using subsystems as vast as gramarie, you try to make things as coherent as possible, merging systems whenever its feasible.

Absolutely; definitely agree. I think any class I write with any sort of technical leanings will lean heavily on Gramarie; one I'm already considering is a class built around dealing with EIs (specifically, giving it the ability to rewrite their programming, lie to them, etc).

Almarck
2015-02-25, 05:50 PM
Question: for assembling spaceships have you considered a "hardpoints" or "segments" system?

Basically I am thinking maybe instead of treating spaceships as one big "creature" there's all this different sections and such representing a room or a large set of rooms.

this allows among other things having "subsystems" that can be damaged independent of the ships hull.

the ship itself has hitpoints representing the total damage it can take before breaking up. Hit point damage to segment affects the hull for an equal ammount.

mostly that's just me thinking that spaceships should be complex though and more of a vehicle than an actual creature.

What I do think you should do above all else is have the ship have "base attributes" for everything representing automatic systems including its own bab. Players can take control of systems by getting to the right consoles and replace the ship's statistics for using that weapon or systrm much as say jumping into the seat of a gun turret or drooping into the pilots seat. This allows people aside from the pilot to do things and contribute to fighting off an enemy without say, needing to worry about boarding actions.

The indie game FTL illustrates, albeit ovely simplistic, what I think a ship be represented in game form.

RFLS
2015-02-25, 06:02 PM
Question: for assembling spaceships have you considered a "hardpoints" or "segments" system?

Basically I am thinking maybe instead of treating spaceships as one big "creature" there's all this different sections and such representing a room or a large set of rooms.

this allows among other things having "subsystems" that can be damaged independent of the ships hull.

the ship itself has hitpoints representing the total damage it can take before breaking up. Hit point damage to segment affects the hull for an equal ammount.

mostly that's just me thinking that spaceships should be complex though and more of a vehicle than an actual creature.

What I do think you should do above all else is have the ship have "base attributes" for everything representing automatic systems including its own bab. Players can take control of systems by getting to the right consoles and replace the ship's statistics for using that weapon or system much as say jumping into the seat of a gun turret or drooping into the pilots seat. This allows people aside from the pilot to do things and contribute to fighting off an enemy without say, needing to worry about boarding actions.

The indie game FTL illustrates, albeit ovely simplistic, what I think a ship be represented in game form.

I think you're right about hardpoints. I'll see what I can do about writing something up. The biggest hurdle I can see is getting it to interact with Gramarie; especially since living ships are explicitly a thing in this setting. I might just abstract Gramarie into its creation with a bit of handwavium. Maybe a feat that says "required: (some amount of eldrikinetics, biollurgy or Craft Construct, and arcanodynamics), benefit: you can craft ships, with -these- time/material constraints, using the rules written -here-."

Hardpoints I can think of off the top of my head:


Weapons:

Laser battery
Missiles
Flak
etc.

Engines
Armory
Power generator

Pholgiston
Acid
Nuclear
Probably import some of PF's stuff.

Cockpit
Hangar/storage bay


Ofc, by taking things like hangar multiple times, the hangar would simply get bigger (or you could have more of them).

Almarck
2015-02-25, 06:38 PM
Well. I had an entire reply eaten up by a bad connection.

To boil things down I am thinking each seperate weapon or group of smaller weapons (anti fighter point defense for one) on the ship needs a seperate room for it. Drone and fighters store rooms would simply be another type of room. I also think weapons systems of the same type say lasers on bigger ships do more damage or something to make them worthwhile and not get wrecked by action economy. Think of the difference in capability in a dreadnought and a frigate

Also I think that to determine which subsystems get damaged, on the attack rolls, a dice is rolled based on the ship size (d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20). Also on the super smallest ships, this means that there's barely room on anything else since the control roon and engines take up space but I think that's acceptable given that they'd be just above fighters at that point.

Speaking of fighters I think those need their own subsystem. They're so complicated to figure out when you try to build capital ships. It's like building a swarm. They're too small to matter.

Other fun hardpoints:
Armor:divert damage dealt to adjacent subsystems to itself. Maybe gets an adjacency bonus that nets it extra DR and hitpoints with other armor sections
Force fields:regenerating hitpoints
Reactor:not sure yet but maybe providing extrapolate in some fashion, like bonus dice.

RFLS
2015-02-26, 05:59 PM
Here's (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FX_6gfB8YjRjUR5dVvJtItdbsVWls_LpWcHlDwTO4cA/edit) what I've got so far. I think it'll allow for fighters all the way up to capital ships.

qazzquimby
2015-02-27, 01:20 AM
Do you have a Google account that you're logged into? I don't think it matters because I have it set to allow the folder to be seen by anyone, but it's worth trying, I suppose.
Yup.


I've seen the update (this one, right?)
No, not that one. The new one isn't on the boards anywhere, as far as I know. That update is completely finished as far as I know, unless you can point something out. Also the changes will be mostly to the bookkeeping elements, and won't need any changes to the setting.


My only real objection is that they seem to have focused on allowing it to provide specific effects, rather than allowing the emergent properties of such a massive system produce the effects for them.
I need an example, because that is quite the opposite of how I think of gramarie. I've also never heard of the KISS principle.

RFLS
2015-02-27, 01:49 AM
Yup.

Blerg. Alright. I'll start linking specific pages while I try to sort this out. Links'll go in the first post.


No, not that one. The new one isn't on the boards anywhere, as far as I know. That update is completely finished as far as I know, unless you can point something out. Also the changes will be mostly to the bookkeeping elements, and won't need any changes to the setting.

Where is the new one? I'm curious to see it.


I need an example, because that is quite the opposite of how I think of gramarie. I've also never heard of the KISS principle.

Which bit is opposite? That it's supposed to be simple with emergent properties, or that the update I linked is too specific? For the first one, it's just a generalization - none of the principles are overly complicated; I think Eldrikinetics is the most complicated it gets. It only really gets complex when you start linking things together, which is the intent as I understand it. If it's the second one, I suppose it's a matter of taste.

The KISS principle is Keep It Simple, Stupid (not calling anyone stupid; the opposite, really). It's an old engineering phrase to remind people that complicated is often worse than simple.

Almarck
2015-02-27, 02:30 AM
I appologize for the length of this reply. I am quite... zealous when it comes to ship building. I tried making a system for it several times in the past few years, all of it failed and I lack access to my old notes. Needless to say, I fear that you'll fall prey to the same problems I have met when trying to design this system. I never posted it online because, I ended up canning the whole project due to frustration. This is why I am so interested in providing critique on ship building specifically.

Mostly, I find myself leaning towards for more abstraction than simulation in many parts to improve gameplayability as a result of the experience I had with the topic. Simply put, I do not feel it is neccesary to worry or list certain rooms or things Subsystem damage: yes, but individual crew quarters: no.

You're free to discard my opinions and recommendations, but bear in mind, alot of the things that you've listed out in the brainstorming are things I tried doing myself.


Note: I've spoilered the original reply as it was written before I realized that you set up a table indicating "room" numbers. Some of this is irrelevant if you decide to cling to that idea, though I still feel certain parts might be relevant.


Here's (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FX_6gfB8YjRjUR5dVvJtItdbsVWls_LpWcHlDwTO4cA/edit) what I've got so far. I think it'll allow for fighters all the way up to capital ships.


I don't recomend using the same system for fighters.

Believe me I tried it once when I tried to homebrew something for a different system. The main problem is... how do you allocate size and space for that thing? It's hard enough when you do a super tiny frigate, but a fighter because of its small size is really best described as a single ship with changeable weapon systems. Except for in fighter battles, subsystem damage is unimportant for individual fighters.

Have you thought of a method of setting up "Random damage" to subsystems? Mostly, I brought up limiting sizes based on available dice (small as d4s, large as d20s) as a balancing point between playability yet allowing a complex system of allocating damage to a room or set of rooms. In short, whenever attacks hit, a dice with each facing representing a room in the ship is rolled and the result on this dice is the room that gets hit by the attack.

So to exemplify: on a d4 light frigate: 1 is control, 2 is weapons, 3 is shield generator, and 4 is thrusters/power (in many scifi settings I've come across, I find that many people just put the reactor the same place as the engine for the most power possible and treat them as the same "room")

A bigger ship might have 1 control, 2-4 as weapons, 5 is science bay, and 6 is reactor/thrusters.
Ship size determines what dice is used to allocate damage randomly. I think as a balancing factor, on the bigger ships, control and reactor/thrusters should take up more space, such as being rooms 1-3 and 18-20 on the biggest ships.



I'm also not really too keen on having the weapons block set up the way you have it. Simply put, I think it would be better if we treated the weapons systems as a "mount" and have players or ship owners "equip" weapons in a similar manner as how D&D treats weapons. Mostly, this comes out to allow players to do things such as customize their weapons systems with more flexibility.
Secondly, having "weapon mounts" justifies allowing us to just list the smallest "mount" a weapon system can be put in, and say installing a similar weapon on a large ship increasing damage by "1 step".
I suppose I am simply spoiled in this regard. I like having settings with lots of different weapon customization choices for ships, one of my favorites Sword of the Stars has an absurd degree of flexibility on what certain weapon turrets do. The Ballistics tree features things like explosive rounds, "mass shotguns", mass miniguns... I short, I kinda want there to be more weapon choices than just those 3 that you present, sorry.

Oh, and I dislike the "cooldown" mechanic of the missiles and ballistics. If the idea is to allow people to man these systems so that multiple players can do something while in ship-to-shop combat, putting long cooldown times on weapon use is not useful. Maybe for "siege weapons" that the pilot controls, but not every missile system is going to be a made super big.

But enough about weapons, I've talked long about that enough. I'll leave that alone if you feel it's unneeded.


I think we should merge some rooms together, for simplicty. While I get simulation is important, I think we might want to do it because it means we can simplify things a great deal.

Engine and Power should be the same room. Most settings use the drive linked directly to a reactor core so the drive gets the most juice.

We should track "Hab blocks" instead of individual private rooms. Depending on the ship scale (such as say mile long ships) listing out how many individual rooms there are is tedious and offers no real advantage. Just having a housing block and saying that for a ship of size X, it has say 32 15x15 rooms, while a ship of size Y which is bigger has 60 of those same rooms.

AI's should be part of the cockpit, because they're functionally the autopilot for the whole ship. Having them be part of the bridge make sense.



Aside from that, we may need utility rooms, like science and engineering, so can you please put a placeholder for that?

Aditionally, we should make it clear that some rooms are going to be bigger and have more stuff in them in larger ships. A small ship with a science facility "room" is probably a class room, meanwhile, a super big ship that devotes one of its slots to size has a whole school. I do not recomend we construct things via tonnage or have roomsizes be equal for all ship sizes, because if we do, we risk disallowing ships that are quite small or abnormally large.

Also, I just noticed the starship rules table... I'm actually really unsure about having anything go over 40 rooms, mostly as a question of how would you allocate subystem damage to something like that (unless I missed something, I don't recall anything said about it being called shots. At the distances things in space work, it's a miracle to hit something, much less pinpoint a specific part of an object)... then again, I guess when you're big enough, we start using "sides" or "flanks".

Regardless, if I am being a bother, you're free to tell me. I'll admit I am too zealous.


Actually the more I think about it, maybe I should write up an example system of my own to contrast with yours. And improve overall design.

RFLS
2015-02-27, 12:58 PM
Hmm.... I might do away entirely with having to need crew quarters, and just assuming them, tbh. Instead, you just buy crew members as hirelings, with the cap being the listed number.

For power, the reason it's currently separate is because it's to be used by all ship systems.

As far as weapons go...we'll see. There are pros and cons for both sides there.

I'm on my phone currently, so I'll post a more detailed response later.

Almarck
2015-02-27, 01:06 PM
Yeah, I know I went overboard. Don't worry about too much.

My personal leaning on the weapons systems is more to give people choices on what weapons they can use, as even in star wars, there's point defense lasers, turbolasers, superscaled lasers. But as I have said, I am spoiled rotten by Sword of the Star's weapons list.


I do like the idea of removing "essential" crew quarters though and I wish I had thought of just saying "crew maximums" all those years ago.

Question, should we merge Hangar and Armory together as they're more or less the same thing?

qazzquimby
2015-02-27, 01:22 PM
The new one is in fragments on the harddrives of various gramarie workers. If anything is public online, I don't know about it.
Also, make sure you've read this. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?317762-Too-much-Gramarie-Homebrew-Compendium-Compendium-Gramarie)

I'm not sure what parts we disagree on, so my take is that gramarie as a whole (and 2.0 as well, because its virtually identical to 1.0) is focused on small devices interacting to make more complex machinery. When there is a new principle that can only do one thing, its generally removed or reworked. Combining little devices is the whole point, to me atleast. It's this exciting mix of logic and creativity.

Also, I've only skimmed the conversation below, but it looked like building spaceships with craft rules?
Just pointing out that you can build anything (and if there's something missed, it can be made possible) with gramarie. The swiveling laser turrets can be made of a subspace containing two rotational eldk engines rotating the laser, (which itself can be made many ways, depending on the desired effect). If designing every aspect of the ship from scratch sounds less than fun, you can have predesigned blueprints or premade ships, without them needing to worry about it. It just means that if something tears into the wall, you can actually tell exactly what's behind it and what will go wrong. I don't know if that's fun for anyone else, but its very cool to me.

Almarck
2015-02-27, 01:34 PM
In my case, the question is less justifying how to build spaceships and treating spaceships as a playable piece to allow players to do spacebattles, large scale spacebattles that don't don't bog down the game too much or require impossibly big battle maps. While I have little to no experience with Gramaire, I do not know if it can do that.

Does your system have a codified mechanical system specifically built to feature spaceship to spaceship combat and distill it to "models" instead of spaceships being "terrain"? Think... Battlefleet Gothic or Sword of the Stars II style representation; spaceship as a whole "character". That's my vision of it, though I do not know if the OP shares the exact same goal. I assumed he did when he stated he wanted to it to be one big creature.

If Gramaire does, well, it'd be nice.

I probably should cool my jets either way. It's not my project to control over, it's RFLS's. So again I appologize

qazzquimby
2015-02-28, 12:14 AM
Gramarie can do spaceships in two ways, that I can think of off the top of my head.

1. My way: Build it in excruciating detail and love that everything actually makes sense.

2. Biollurgy: It's literally just a big flying creature fluffed as a space ship, that you can go inside and pilot and stuff.

I'm not sure of the difference between terrain and model here, because it seems to me they'll be acting as both in all cases. They move around and maneuver around other ships like a model, and you run around inside them like terrain. You just don't do both those things on the same map.

RFLS
2015-02-28, 01:18 AM
I'm not sure what parts we disagree on, so my take is that gramarie as a whole (and 2.0 as well, because its virtually identical to 1.0) is focused on small devices interacting to make more complex machinery. When there is a new principle that can only do one thing, its generally removed or reworked. Combining little devices is the whole point, to me at least. It's this exciting mix of logic and creativity.

That sounds like what I was thinking, so I think we've got the same idea and just put it different ways.


Also, I've only skimmed the conversation below, but it looked like building spaceships with craft rules?
Just pointing out that you can build anything (and if there's something missed, it can be made possible) with gramarie. The swiveling laser turrets can be made of a subspace containing two rotational eldk engines rotating the laser, (which itself can be made many ways, depending on the desired effect). If designing every aspect of the ship from scratch sounds less than fun, you can have predesigned blueprints or premade ships, without them needing to worry about it. It just means that if something tears into the wall, you can actually tell exactly what's behind it and what will go wrong. I don't know if that's fun for anyone else, but its very cool to me.

My plan with the spaceships was to do the following:


Assign prices (with better pricing) to buying principles.
Figure out how each part of a ship (turrets, engine, etc) would be created.
Provide the relevant data (price and direct capabilities) for the purposes of ship creation.
In a separate section, provide the specific "recipe," and a guide for how to make new components out of Gramarie, and how to integrate those into the simplified space combat rules.


Basically, the goal is to have space combat easy to run, but deconstruct-able to any degree you want.


Does your system have a codified mechanical system specifically built to feature spaceship to spaceship combat and distill it to "models" instead of spaceships being "terrain"?

That's the goal, yeah. I'll have more time tomorrow to work on it, so we'll see where it goes from there.


I probably should cool my jets either way. It's not my project to control over, it's RFLS's. So again I appologize

Don't worry about it. Enthusiasm is great; even if I disagree with what you're saying, it forces me to think about why I disagree, which is useful in itself.


Gramarie can do spaceships in two ways, that I can think of off the top of my head.

1. My way: Build it in excruciating detail and love that everything actually makes sense.

2. Biollurgy: It's literally just a big flying creature fluffed as a space ship, that you can go inside and pilot and stuff.

I'm not sure of the difference between terrain and model here, because it seems to me they'll be acting as both in all cases. They move around and maneuver around other ships like a model, and you run around inside them like terrain. You just don't do both those things on the same map.

I don't actually currently have a plan for how ships will be built. In keeping with the spirit of simplification for the sake of ease of gameplay, I'm inclined to simply attach certain mods to playing with a standard ship vs playing with a living one, and then having the same mods be available to both.

As far as terrain/models, you're absolutely right, I'm thinking they'll be both. No idea how to go about that, though. Thoughts on how to do the interiors easily?

Almarck
2015-02-28, 01:39 AM
So, here's a question, should we make creating the ship "map" as part of creation, or have that as a "as needed". Because if we don't, we don't need to do things like say... define the exact dimensions a given room needs to be, just provide recommended minimum sizes.

Different games are going to have different ideas on what how big a Battleship is supposed to be. Sword of the Stars had absolutely clown car sized ships compared to most settings (lowest tier was smaller than our space shuttles), Warhammer 40k's smallest ships are gigantic in comparison.


Also, this wasn't answered. Are we going to do "Called Shots" as part of the system? Or if not, do we have randomized subsystem damage? What are your thoughts on that subject? My main reason to have randomized damage dice is that "Called Shots" would make no sense in any range except point blank, even factoring missiles, but we gotta do... something about it having subsystems getting pinged.

Also, want to know what your thoughts on the expansive weapon list that I put in the spoiler/weapon cool down things. You did kinda promise on answering that, sort of.



And, how do we intend to handle really big capital ships with lots of weapons? Another reason I wanted the "20 rooms" cap was to allow for big ships without letting them roll 20 dice per combat round before rolling damage. The room cap means that the big ships have fewer "attacks" to throw everywhere, but because the weapons size up with the bigger ships (It actuallity, it may be multiple copies of the same gun treated a weapons bank, just treated as "one gun" for abstraction), they do proportionally more damage and thus combat speeds up faster and feels effective.



Oh, and we should probably include space cities and space stations and "non-mobile ships". I think this we can agree on no contest.


Anyways, glad to be of help, to know that I can atleast use my critism to your advantage. I'll try to be even more critcal without malice for better results. I do quite like the fact you've already got prices listed for over the top ship sizes. It actually looks like players can conceviably do "Starship only" games using that.

Milo v3
2015-02-28, 07:08 AM
I actually think gramarie type stuff in PF works best being done either through the systems in Ultimate Campaign and it's plug-ins. Have it so you can spend downtime and Magic to create magic science effects, or have some magic stuff come from adding in new Magical Improvement types, Buildings in the vein of the continual flame streetlights, and alter the aerial mass combat rules to function in space.

Then you just add in the Technology Guide's stuff (which I find much easier to look through on the PRD rather than d20PFSRD) so you have cybernetics base. Though personally I prefer to just use arcanetics as wondrous items in the form of prosthesis with two main varieties, crude arcanetics (which use up the associated body slot) and masterwork arcanetics (which have a x2 increase to cost and price).

Finally, eventually DSP will be releasing a book with more tech stuff, even a base class focused around using a mechsuit type device.

RFLS
2015-02-28, 03:30 PM
So, here's a question, should we make creating the ship "map" as part of creation, or have that as a "as needed". Because if we don't, we don't need to do things like say... define the exact dimensions a given room needs to be, just provide recommended minimum sizes.

I think ship map will be up in the air until it's necessary; it's not something that'll come into play much without the DM seeing it coming.


Different games are going to have different ideas on what how big a Battleship is supposed to be. Sword of the Stars had absolutely clown car sized ships compared to most settings (lowest tier was smaller than our space shuttles), Warhammer 40k's smallest ships are gigantic in comparison.

Star Wars X-wing is about the minimum, with Imperial Class II Star Destroyers as the general max (ofc, the system allows for much, much bigger ships).


Also, this wasn't answered. Are we going to do "Called Shots" as part of the system? Or if not, do we have randomized subsystem damage? What are your thoughts on that subject? My main reason to have randomized damage dice is that "Called Shots" would make no sense in any range except point blank, even factoring missiles, but we gotta do... something about it having subsystems getting pinged.

My plan for called shots is to allow them for any external system. If you miss your called shot (with systems having higher AC than the overall ship), but you beat the ship's overall AC, you just hit the ship. This means that you can deliberately cripple ships, but you'll generally have to be in close range to do it without endangering the ship. Randomized damage adds an extra step to this that, overall, has the same outcome as just damage to the ship's general HP.


Also, want to know what your thoughts on the expansive weapon list that I put in the spoiler/weapon cool down things. You did kinda promise on answering that, sort of.

I haven't really thought about it too much yet; it's further down on the list of things to do. I would like 5-6 different weapon systems, but anything beyond that seems excessive.


And, how do we intend to handle really big capital ships with lots of weapons? Another reason I wanted the "20 rooms" cap was to allow for big ships without letting them roll 20 dice per combat round before rolling damage. The room cap means that the big ships have fewer "attacks" to throw everywhere, but because the weapons size up with the bigger ships (It actuallity, it may be multiple copies of the same gun treated a weapons bank, just treated as "one gun" for abstraction), they do proportionally more damage and thus combat speeds up faster and feels effective.

My best idea for this so far is that you just add a bonus to hit if you're generalizing weapons across a bank, with every X over the target AC dealing extra damage. I'll have to work out the numbers to get it to the same outcome as just having each individual weapon fire.


Oh, and we should probably include space cities and space stations and "non-mobile ships". I think this we can agree on no contest.

They're pretty well covered by the rules anyway; all you have to do is build a ship with no engines.


Anyways, glad to be of help, to know that I can atleast use my critism to your advantage. I'll try to be even more critcal without malice for better results. I do quite like the fact you've already got prices listed for over the top ship sizes. It actually looks like players can conceviably do "Starship only" games using that.

That's the idea! =D


I actually think gramarie type stuff in PF works best being done either through the systems in Ultimate Campaign and it's plug-ins. Have it so you can spend downtime and Magic to create magic science effects, or have some magic stuff come from adding in new Magical Improvement types, Buildings in the vein of the continual flame streetlights, and alter the aerial mass combat rules to function in space.

Then you just add in the Technology Guide's stuff (which I find much easier to look through on the PRD rather than d20PFSRD) so you have cybernetics base. Though personally I prefer to just use arcanetics as wondrous items in the form of prosthesis with two main varieties, crude arcanetics (which use up the associated body slot) and masterwork arcanetics (which have a x2 increase to cost and price).

Finally, eventually DSP will be releasing a book with more tech stuff, even a base class focused around using a mechsuit type device.

I'm not super inclined to use Ultimate Campaign as a primary source book. I love it to death, but it's not very well written, as it was adapted from a module without enough thought put into it. Both times I've used it have involved extensive house rules to make it work.

Technology Guide's stuff is absolutely on the table, probably with a bunch more stuff added in. Also, super excited about DSP doing tech stuff.

What's arcanetics?

qazzquimby
2015-02-28, 03:52 PM
Some of these things I don't recommend exactly as they are, but the concepts are worth looking at, at least.

For the warforged stuff, what if anyone can take warforged feats?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?254437-Magipunk-Campaign-Setting
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?114229-Base-Class-The-Engineer-3-5-PEACH
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?252385-Warforged-Conglomeration&p=13708074#post13708074
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?182666-Tome-of-Iron-MK-II-3-5-Construct-Resource
http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=138.0
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?211379-3-5-The-Generator-a-steam-punk-machine-warrior-Base-Class
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?228049-Scrap-SCRAP!-These-are-my-BEST-FRIENDS!-3-5-Base-Class-PEACH
http://www.ruleofcool.com/smf/index.php/topic,730.0.html

Almarck
2015-02-28, 04:48 PM
So... on thinking on it, the absolute minimum HP for a fighter should be around... 120 total. At least, if we're dealing with things on a Air to ground fight. Perhaps we should do some form of number squashing so people don't have to track 2,000 hp ships constantly. In either case, I wouldn't object that in some situations that mages with fireball or disintergrate are able to go affect the course of a space battle... provided they are of an appropriate level to do so. Once we get into big stuff, they shouldn't matter too much that it's gamebreaking.


It gets treated like an animated object and has hardness and reduces damage from magic ect, but it's in the range of things for people to actually destroy with the right setups, right?


For weapons, I'm thinking more and more about it and well, perhaps we should focus less on "category" of guns such as lasers and ballistics, because those tend to be specific and make them more "effects" based, the type of function the weapon performs.

So:
Heavy Blast- High ranged and really high damage, compensated by really high costs and
Rapid Blast - Faster version but has less accuracy and range
Rapid Attack - Miniguns, small, weak compared to big guns, but they can keep shooting. Midrange.
Scatter Weapon - The shotgun option. Relatively short range and does less damage the further away, but knife fight ranges are deadly.
Spinal Mounts - Because why not have heavy seige weapons that can only be fired from the front with no turrets?

Then we add a twist, based on the "type" of weapons for some complexity.
Missiles have longer range
Ballistics can pierce hulls
Energy weapons do energy damage (Tech Guide compatibility, only upscaled)
I can easily think of more, perhaps for more complexity we can have EMP or status effect causing weapons: little to no damage, but do things. EMP, Antilife beam that harms crew, Plague Missiles, "Burrowstrike" missles.... They'd be more like "spells" than standard weapons of course.

Perhaps called shots should only be doable in the weapon's first range incriment, but I dunno, I would want some way to easily randomly allocate damage from say far as away as possible as a "lucky shot" thing. Perhaps on a crit, we just add a table and have instead of a crit confirmation roll, the table lists out a part the weapon


I don't like the idea of factoring every single turret of a given type into a bank that adds a bonus, because it has too many moving parts. Also, if we have to factor in and modify every single turret, we add too much mathmatical complexity, even if we treat them as banks, it'd still be simpler to just "upscale" weapons and say that they're either fluffed as size appropriate or
become a size appropriate number of turrets that are treated mechanically as a single weapon. There's going to be hundreds of small laser turrets on a star destroyer class Capital ship, I don't think we can really... math out in a simple manner. It'd be too complex and while I wouldn't mind crunch, not everyone who wants to make big ships is going to need to do that.

If we had to count individual turrets banks, what would be the mechanical difference of of 12 size 2 Turrets versus size 40 size 1's? And how meaningful is the difference between 21 and 23 small sized turrets? If there any difference at all because of stat counting, wouldn't people just not get the 23 turrets? and just wait to say get 24 because the way the stats work, they actually have the affect of getting a +1 to hit?

Another advantage of if we factor in all "banks" as being a single weapon: we can upgrade banks like magic weapons. If we were to treat each an every individual turret, it'd be really tedious to allow upgrading even for let's call them mid class ships. But that may be hit or miss on your part.



I'm thinking that we should have room specific conditions: "Breached", "Off-Line" and "Destroyed" are particularly important for marking whether subsystem failure has occured.


We may need unique terminology to define ship sizes. We certainly need to define how big Capital ships are.

Milo v3
2015-02-28, 07:05 PM
I'm not super inclined to use Ultimate Campaign as a primary source book. I love it to death, but it's not very well written, as it was adapted from a module without enough thought put into it. Both times I've used it have involved extensive house rules to make it work.
Which is why I mentioned the plug-ins. They apparently fix a lot of Ultimate Campaign's stuff, but was forced to be cut out of the main book because of space concerns, and then extra stuff was made to fix a few problems he found with Ultimate Campaigns stuff. Still, it's not a perfect system, but its probably better than trying to shove gramarie into a PF system when it comes to balance.


What's arcanetics?
I just call magic cybernetics arcanetics because mananetics doesn't sound right.

RFLS
2015-02-28, 11:47 PM
So... on thinking on it, the absolute minimum HP for a fighter should be around... 120 total. At least, if we're dealing with things on a Air to ground fight. Perhaps we should do some form of number squashing so people don't have to track 2,000 hp ships constantly. In either case, I wouldn't object that in some situations that mages with fireball or disintergrate are able to go affect the course of a space battle... provided they are of an appropriate level to do so. Once we get into big stuff, they shouldn't matter too much that it's gamebreaking.

I agree about the HP. I was thinking HP would be number of available hardpoints*20, with bonus HP for specific slots.


It gets treated like an animated object and has hardness and reduces damage from magic ect, but it's in the range of things for people to actually destroy with the right setups, right?

Yup.


For weapons ... than standard weapons of course.

I'm going to temporarily put the discussion of specific weapons off the table. They're a rabbit hole that should come out of the system, not something to base the system around.


Perhaps called shots should only be doable in the weapon's first range incriment, but I dunno, I would want some way to easily randomly allocate damage from say far as away as possible as a "lucky shot" thing. Perhaps on a crit, we just add a table and have instead of a crit confirmation roll, the table lists out a part the weapon

I think called shots should be allowed, and a miss that still hits the AC of the ship + say, 5 (for example) hits the ship's general HP, rather than the specific HP of that component.



I don't like the idea of factoring every single turret of a given type into a bank that adds a bonus, because it has too many moving parts. Also, if we have to factor in and modify every single turret, we add too much mathmatical complexity, even if we treat them as banks, it'd still be simpler to just "upscale" weapons and say that they're either fluffed as size appropriate or
become a size appropriate number of turrets that are treated mechanically as a single weapon. There's going to be hundreds of small laser turrets on a star destroyer class Capital ship, I don't think we can really... math out in a simple manner. It'd be too complex and while I wouldn't mind crunch, not everyone who wants to make big ships is going to need to do that.

If we had to count individual turrets banks, what would be the mechanical difference of of 12 size 2 Turrets versus size 40 size 1's? And how meaningful is the difference between 21 and 23 small sized turrets? If there any difference at all because of stat counting, wouldn't people just not get the 23 turrets? and just wait to say get 24 because the way the stats work, they actually have the affect of getting a +1 to hit?

Another advantage of if we factor in all "banks" as being a single weapon: we can upgrade banks like magic weapons. If we were to treat each an every individual turret, it'd be really tedious to allow upgrading even for let's call them mid class ships. But that may be hit or miss on your part.

I think the simplest solution that still maintains balance is to allow identical weapons to be collected into banks of 10. Each weapon past the first grants a +1 bonus to hit to the bank. You roll to hit your target's AC once. If you hit, you deal damage. For every 1 you exceed the AC by, you deal the weapons' damage again. The specific effect of this is that it's hard to miss completely, and you have a 5% chance of max damage, vs a .001 percent chance of max damage. Basically, firing all at once means you're more likely to hit.

Thoughts?


I'm thinking that we should have room specific conditions: "Breached", "Off-Line" and "Destroyed" are particularly important for marking whether subsystem failure has occured.

I'm going to put this in the same territory as weapon categories for now, if that's okay.


We may need unique terminology to define ship sizes. We certainly need to define how big Capital ships are.

Gramarie actually did us a service there; the sizes are described in Eldrikinetics, and again in the Spaceship rules page at the top of this thread.


Which is why I mentioned the plug-ins. They apparently fix a lot of Ultimate Campaign's stuff, but was forced to be cut out of the main book because of space concerns, and then extra stuff was made to fix a few problems he found with Ultimate Campaigns stuff. Still, it's not a perfect system, but its probably better than trying to shove gramarie into a PF system when it comes to balance.

Oh, cool. That makes more sense. Where can I find the plugins? Googling hasn't kicked anything up on the SRD, unless I'm missing something.


I just call magic cybernetics arcanetics because mananetics doesn't sound right.

Coolio.

Almarck
2015-03-01, 12:05 AM
I'll shelve weapons for now. Conditions too probably.


I do not like the "beat the ac for more attacks clause", because it's inconsistent. They'll always be needing to double check for attacks.

Additionally we will end up having to make DR tables in order to prevent big ships from being shredded by light arms since the weapon damage per hit would get reduced on a hit by hit basis. The problem with that though is we get into the rabbit hole of having to be so careful with how we allocate numbers. Lots of small weapon banks might be too ineffective, but midsized weapons aren't penalties so much and thus out damage the bigger guns that are actually scaled appropriately.

If we ended up doing something maybe borrowing d20 moderns rule of beating ac for every 5 does extra damage it might work but again it feels so swingy. I guess it's less prone to breaking the game in half though. For me, the all or nothing thing does feel less inconsistent. It still feels a little too slow too.





I'm thinking that instead of using rooms we should describe ships being made up using "modules" then for ease of communication and other things. It's an immersion thing

Milo v3
2015-03-01, 12:07 AM
Oh, cool. That makes more sense. Where can I find the plugins? Googling hasn't kicked anything up on the SRD, unless I'm missing something.
They can be bought Here (http://www.makeyourgamelegendary.com/products-page/ultimate-plug-ins/), though I haven't read through Ultimate Relationships it doesn't sound like it'd be necessary in this case.

Almarck
2015-03-01, 01:20 PM
So I'm thinking about developing computer rules and I'm wondering if it's already been developed by your team quazz?

Mostly I'm wondering if such rules can be governed entirely by a skill like Spellcraft or disable device. Mostly I'm thinking that say rogues should be able to be good at hacking and don't need special powers except skill point investment to pull it off.

qazzquimby
2015-03-01, 01:55 PM
There are two ways to do computers in gramarie, that I can think of now. You can use heur bubbles to process things instantly, and store the information physically (I'm not sure how) or in an EI, or you can just have an EI as your computer and hope it doesn't try to kill the crew like in all the movies.

In the first case, understanding the computer architecture, being able to somehow crack the password or other security measures, or being able to directly read the data store give you the information. If you have a higher autohypnosis than the maker, (the heur skill) you can also interfere with the heur bubbles, and probably just get free reigns on things.

In the second case, you'd have to fool the intelligence somehow, perhaps appearing to be a member of the crew, or have a really high autohypnosis as in the first.

In basically every case, having a skill higher than the maker's lets you wreck their stuff. Make engines explode, open the airlocks, and other fun things.

Almarck
2015-03-01, 02:18 PM
Well the auto hypnosis thing might be somewhat of a problem but not too much as DSP has already posted it. However I think for preserving well... thematics it has be sliced into "computer" to allow nonpsionics access. All that might be needed is renaming the skill and stating it is not auto hypnosis and listing which classes get it to their skill list.

Granted I am a little wary but more specifically, I want to know if someone can hack and do things just by being a straight classed rogue with no magic talents or such. How does heursterics work for a completely mundane character, especially in the case they want to build or manage computers? If it can do this it will suffice I believe. I would also like to know what kinds of alterations might need to be done to make it more "techy". I understand it's capable of doing alot.

My plan originally was that I was looking to build a "permissions " based security system. It was Probably needlessly complicated but the idea for hacking worked on grades of permissions and taking control of security nodes and working your way to the mainframe.

qazzquimby
2015-03-01, 04:17 PM
I'm for changing it off of autohypnosis.

Heuristics is deceptively simple. It basically just does what you tell it to, with information and triggers and responses. I'll have to check a few fringe cases, but for the most part, a heur computer functions exactly as a normal computer would. It either detects speech or you use a keyboard, it takes commands and gives outputs. Trying to interact with a heur bubble will be the same whether you have gramarie class features or not, its just a matter of permission and skill-check overrides, or finding other ways around like guessing passwords, faking identies, ect, as I described in my last post.

How techy it is is entirely fluff. Most things are left pretty vague. I like to fluff heur bubbles as bundles of cables with an interface, and instead of etherically connecting, its just got a reinforced wire, or is wirelessly connected.

Building a universal security system isn't technically needed, because that's a job of the ship builder. There will probably be standard, but people can develop their own defences, and a newly discovered alien race will not be using the the usual security system. For the standard, we should probably copy and simplify modern security systems.

RFLS
2015-03-01, 05:43 PM
They can be bought Here (http://www.makeyourgamelegendary.com/products-page/ultimate-plug-ins/), though I haven't read through Ultimate Relationships it doesn't sound like it'd be necessary in this case.

Hmm. When I have a bit of cash on hand, I'll shell out for them. In the meantime, though, the idea is to write something that's entirely open source.


So I'm thinking about developing computer rules and I'm wondering if it's already been developed by your team quazz?

Mostly I'm wondering if such rules can be governed entirely by a skill like Spellcraft or disable device. Mostly I'm thinking that say rogues should be able to be good at hacking and don't need special powers except skill point investment to pull it off.


There are two ways to do computers in gramarie, that I can think of now. You can use heur bubbles to process things instantly, and store the information physically (I'm not sure how) or in an EI, or you can just have an EI as your computer and hope it doesn't try to kill the crew like in all the movies.

In the first case, understanding the computer architecture, being able to somehow crack the password or other security measures, or being able to directly read the data store give you the information. If you have a higher autohypnosis than the maker, (the heur skill) you can also interfere with the heur bubbles, and probably just get free reigns on things.

In the second case, you'd have to fool the intelligence somehow, perhaps appearing to be a member of the crew, or have a really high autohypnosis as in the first.

In basically every case, having a skill higher than the maker's lets you wreck their stuff. Make engines explode, open the airlocks, and other fun things.

Designing a computer from the ground up is absolutely doable. You have a way to change the flow of energy in a system, and you have a very open-ended if-then statement (which can actually be used to represent any logical function in this case). For long term storage (past one round), you can either brute force it by having the computer arrange grains of sand (or some other form of physical memory) in a manner that can be read later, or you can simply have a very simple EI that has strict rules and uses Autohypnosis checks to remember anything you tell it.

Or, you can make a high-functioning EI, abuse the heck out of the fact that you can program rules in, and do computers like that. Either way works.

Here's (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eLf8r-Ec6BbmyI6huTo2YivALl-G-O142ef72yFwJbw/edit) Heuristicism, and here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ic0pjizlcJT5VcAcJz46mg045U9w6pFA4L_UmdzrQBo/edit) are the homebrew feats (Cyberneticist and EI Manipulator are the relevant ones).

Almarck
2015-03-01, 05:51 PM
Alright, so Computers seems done. Might want to alter the to-do list appropriately.

Have you have a chance to reveiw the last reply I did on starship stuff?

RFLS
2015-03-01, 06:32 PM
Alright, so Computers seems done. Might want to alter the to-do list appropriately.

Have you have a chance to reveiw the last reply I did on starship stuff?

Sorry about that, totally missed it.


I do not like the "beat the ac for more attacks clause", because it's inconsistent. They'll always be needing to double check for attacks.

Additionally we will end up having to make DR tables in order to prevent big ships from being shredded by light arms since the weapon damage per hit would get reduced on a hit by hit basis. The problem with that though is we get into the rabbit hole of having to be so careful with how we allocate numbers. Lots of small weapon banks might be too ineffective, but midsized weapons aren't penalties so much and thus out damage the bigger guns that are actually scaled appropriately.

If we ended up doing something maybe borrowing d20 moderns rule of beating ac for every 5 does extra damage it might work but again it feels so swingy. I guess it's less prone to breaking the game in half though. For me, the all or nothing thing does feel less inconsistent. It still feels a little too slow too.

I think you might have misinterpreted what I said. I wasn't suggesting beating the AC should grant extra attacks, I was suggesting it should grant extra damage.


I'm thinking that instead of using rooms we should describe ships being made up using "modules" then for ease of communication and other things. It's an immersion thing

Sounds good to me.


I'm for changing it off of autohypnosis.

Any particular reason? All of the other skills for disciplines are pre-existing skills. I think it might be easier to just alter who has Autohypnosis on their class skill list.


Heuristics is deceptively simple. It basically just does what you tell it to, with information and triggers and responses. I'll have to check a few fringe cases, but for the most part, a heur computer functions exactly as a normal computer would. It either detects speech or you use a keyboard, it takes commands and gives outputs. Trying to interact with a heur bubble will be the same whether you have gramarie class features or not, its just a matter of permission and skill-check overrides, or finding other ways around like guessing passwords, faking identies, ect, as I described in my last post.

How techy it is is entirely fluff. Most things are left pretty vague. I like to fluff heur bubbles as bundles of cables with an interface, and instead of etherically connecting, its just got a reinforced wire, or is wirelessly connected.

Building a universal security system isn't technically needed, because that's a job of the ship builder. There will probably be standard, but people can develop their own defences, and a newly discovered alien race will not be using the the usual security system. For the standard, we should probably copy and simplify modern security systems.

I agree, fluff is entirely mutable.

As for security systems, those'll probably go the way the spaceship rules are going - I'll provide simplifications of what's happening for ease of gameplay, but the players are free to make their own. Thoughts?

Almarck
2015-03-01, 06:45 PM
The reason is because autohypnosis involves mental disciple rather than cognition. It is primarily involved with psychic powers and has uses specific to psionics, such as getting psionic focus, but just as well, it invoves forcing yourself to ignore wounds, potentially fatal ones.Basically, autohypnosis is meditation and concentration as a D&D skill. The reason I would want to separate them is because if we don't it means all computer geeks who otherwise wouldn't suddenly is able to ignore pain.

The only way autohypnosis = computer skill would work is if we're dealing with computers in a manner similar to how Tron does it and even then it'd only work like that in cyberspace (if we have it).

It also wisdom governed, not intelligence, which I feel does not suit it. Fluffwise, wisdom works for autohypnosis because it is about forcing and altereting your own perceptions. While this works in magictech stuff, it doesn't work as well if you're making a Vanila style computer.


Also, I consider "Automatically hitting extra attacks" and "extra damage based on how much you beat the AC" about the same thing in most cases. Sorry if I failed to clarify that, but still, I feel my criticism still stands. Additionally, I would point out that it also might increase the amount of math needed to be calculated.

I fear that extra damage from smaller turrets is harder to scale well as things like ship size get bigger. We have to start having to define how many turrets equal X bonus, and how many past that is X+1. While it works for a ship of small scale, when sizes get really big, it'll start getting complicated and balance will go up and down accordingly.

Also, comes the problem of if small sized weapons when banked get extra damage for beating AC, what'd the point of bigger guns be? And how do we prevent big ships from getting shredded with small point defenses meant to face fighter craft? Or then how do we calculate the damage of bigger guns that are then banked?

Hence, my original plane prior, but since then I have changed my mind and come up with something simpler. It made more sense on the 20 Module limit I proposed earlier, and honestly, I don't find it as good as I thought it was before. I thought of a better idea for how weapons should work.


I'm thinking that instead of hard turret numbers, we instead define the effectiveness and type of the "weapon modules".

In short, we say that a weapon module is "Ballistics, light" and it has "3d6 damage, range 200, crit x4, extra damage to ships under size 4" or whatever. Another is "Missiles, Long Range" and has "5d6 damage, range 2000 no crit, takes up 2 rooms". Even more, another is "Ballistics, Heavy" and has "3d6 damage, range 200, crit x4, armor piercing 10" None of these numbers or abilities are set in stone, I was just thinking of how to best... exemplify my thought process.

We do not state the number of turrets a weapon module has, just the total effective result of all the weapons on that module put together and these numbers are the same no matter what ship size we're dealing with. Ships are composed of modules anyways, I mean, maybe it'd be simpler to base all effectiveness, even weapon things on module allocation rather than defining how many turrets there are on said ship. The big difference is that big ships can afford to put more space for the same weapons systems.

An honestly, on thinking on it, we don't need to set up "linked fire" rules for anything but really big ships, which are likely going to be on 1 and 1 duels already because of their sheer size and the fact that players are going to have only 1 anyways.

It also allows us later on if we want to design oversized or more complex weapons; we just make some weapons systems cost more module space than others. And it means it's considerably easier to track destroying or sabotaging turret control rooms.


Anyways, that should probably be it for weapons: I think I've spent too much time debating on this, unless you want to give me the go ahead for more discussion on the topic; anything else you want feedback on?

RFLS
2015-03-04, 09:30 PM
The reason is because autohypnosis involves mental disciple rather than cognition. It is primarily involved with psychic powers and has uses specific to psionics, such as getting psionic focus, but just as well, it invoves forcing yourself to ignore wounds, potentially fatal ones.Basically, autohypnosis is meditation and concentration as a D&D skill. The reason I would want to separate them is because if we don't it means all computer geeks who otherwise wouldn't suddenly is able to ignore pain.

The only way autohypnosis = computer skill would work is if we're dealing with computers in a manner similar to how Tron does it and even then it'd only work like that in cyberspace (if we have it).

It also wisdom governed, not intelligence, which I feel does not suit it. Fluffwise, wisdom works for autohypnosis because it is about forcing and altereting your own perceptions. While this works in magitech stuff, it doesn't work as well if you're making a vanilla style computer.

Hmm....I dunno. I think adhering to real world views on what users of computers do is limiting ourselves unnecessarily. Wouldn't it be cool if computer users were so mentally disciplined that they could force their body to stop dying? I think it'd be more reasonable to simply add Autohypnosis to a few class skill lists than it would be to write a new skill to conform to the real world. Mechanically, I'm inclined to stick with it because none of the other disciplines have their own skill, so making a new one just for Heuristicism seems a bit off.

Almarck
2015-03-04, 11:20 PM
Well my reply just got eat. Again.

Long story short, I don't like the idea of autohypnosis as a skill for nonpsionics because it then brings up problems justifying it. It also disallows computer interactions that do not involve Tron style virtual worlds. Not every species that makes computers ends up making them with mind machine interfaces.

Autohypnosis is cool, but I dunno it doesn't feel to me something that everyone who wants to get into computers should do.

Perhaps as a comrpomise, computer is actually governed by multiple skills depending on what you're doing or how you're doing it. You use autohypnosis when using a mind machine interface but if you have to use a keyboard you don't. And knowing computer subjects is governed by a knowledge.

qazzquimby
2015-03-05, 12:13 AM
Maybe make it linguistics?

And this (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=71.0) could have a major place in things, for those who don't want to learn gramarie especially.

RFLS
2015-03-05, 01:54 PM
Well my reply just got eat. Again.

Long story short, I don't like the idea of autohypnosis as a skill for nonpsionics because it then brings up problems justifying it. It also disallows computer interactions that do not involve Tron style virtual worlds. Not every species that makes computers ends up making them with mind machine interfaces.

Autohypnosis is cool, but I dunno it doesn't feel to me something that everyone who wants to get into computers should do.

Perhaps as a compromise, computer is actually governed by multiple skills depending on what you're doing or how you're doing it. You use autohypnosis when using a mind machine interface but if you have to use a keyboard you don't. And knowing computer subjects is governed by a knowledge.

Autohypnosis doesn't necessitate a Tron style computer. Read through Heuristicism real quick; it explains it all in there.

The multiple skills thing is interesting. What other skills would you recommend, and what for? I'm pretty firmly against writing new skills.


Maybe make it linguistics?

And this (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=71.0) could have a major place in things, for those who don't want to learn gramarie especially.

Linguistics could be pretty cool, although Yggdratecture already uses it, so we'd have to find something else for Yggdratecture to use.

Also, that homebrew is majorly cool. Thank you. I've messaged the person that wrote it to get his permission to port it over to PF.

qazzquimby
2015-03-05, 02:08 PM
YGGD uses forgery. Nothing uses linguistics unless my life is a lie.

RFLS
2015-03-05, 02:21 PM
YGGD uses forgery. Nothing uses linguistics unless my life is a lie.

Forgery got rolled into Linguistics in PF, sadly.

Almarck
2015-03-05, 03:00 PM
Disable device, linguistics, autohypnosis.


disable device mostly comes as a result of me realizing that in normal pf you take a feat to use disable device to disarm tech traps, even computers. Just treat computers as locks or security measures for disable device and it works okay is for most things. Maybe just rename disable device to "interact with technology" and it covers mechanical and software things. Does Gramaire use it for anything important?

Linguistics works for me in pure software. You're using your knowledge to decode and use software to break things using computer languages. Obviously has he YGGD problem so maybe only for pure software interactions. Maybe autohypnosis is better at building while disable device is better at breaking??

Autohypnosis is used instead for if a mind machine interface is involved. Though I have yet to figure out the specifics. Mostly I just think it doesn't feel it is appropriate to use for computers that do not involve magic in them.

I'll be perfectly fine if the only difference between using disable device or autohypnosis is what means is used to access the computer. Maybe a penalty to some rolls based on context to allow neither of them perfect access to computers all the time.

Knowledge computer is basically a knowledge skill not used to interact it's just you know knowledge....it's just a subset so, does that bother you as much as a full computer skill?

RFLS
2015-03-08, 03:24 PM
Disable device, linguistics, autohypnosis.


disable device mostly comes as a result of me realizing that in normal pf you take a feat to use disable device to disarm tech traps, even computers. Just treat computers as locks or security measures for disable device and it works okay is for most things. Maybe just rename disable device to "interact with technology" and it covers mechanical and software things. Does Gramaire use it for anything important?

Linguistics works for me in pure software. You're using your knowledge to decode and use software to break things using computer languages. Obviously has he YGGD problem so maybe only for pure software interactions. Maybe autohypnosis is better at building while disable device is better at breaking??

Autohypnosis is used instead for if a mind machine interface is involved. Though I have yet to figure out the specifics. Mostly I just think it doesn't feel it is appropriate to use for computers that do not involve magic in them.

I'll be perfectly fine if the only difference between using disable device or autohypnosis is what means is used to access the computer. Maybe a penalty to some rolls based on context to allow neither of them perfect access to computers all the time.

Knowledge computer is basically a knowledge skill not used to interact it's just you know knowledge....it's just a subset so, does that bother you as much as a full computer skill?

I think a feat allowing Disable Device to shut down a gramaric device for some number of rounds would be a decent idea, yeah. As for Autohypnosis, it doesn't mean you have to go into a mind interface. It's used for the simple physical interactions with the circuits (whether programming or using), and can be fluffed however you desire. Adding Linguistics to the mix would make things a bit messy, especially since Yggdratecture already uses it.

For the Knowledge skills, I think I'll definitely spell out which disciplines are covered by which Knowledge skill.

EDIT: Here's the feat:


Prerequisites: Disable Device 5 ranks, Int 13
Benefit: While you are touching or within a gramaric creation, you may make a special Disable Device check to disable the device. In order to disable it, your check must equal or beat the check made to create the device. If you succeed, the device is shut down for a number of rounds equal to your check divided by 5, rounded down. A disabled device cannot function in any fashion in this time.
Special: You may not use this ability on a non-circuited Biollurgical chassis. If you disable an Yggdratectural semi-space (or demi-plane), the opening is merely closed for the duration. Objects and creatures within are trapped for the duration, and no object or creature may enter it for the duration.

Milo v3
2015-03-08, 06:43 PM
Feat


You might want to put in a note or something that makes it do extra bonus against ELDK engines or something, since those can be disabled by disable device to begin with.

qazzquimby
2015-03-08, 10:30 PM
Theres a whole class based around wrecking gramarie stuff. I think the required skill check should be quite difficult, something like 20+check used to create the device, otherwise theres no point in specializing in a gramarie skill to counter that discipline.

Make yggd appraise, make heur linguistics.

Almarck
2015-03-09, 12:33 AM
I'll go with Quazz's suggestions as I think they do make the most sense. Autohypnosis=computer skill still makes no sense to me, either mechanically or fluff wise (I really don't get how being Zen makes you a computer expert) and I guess it's just one of those things we won't really agree on.

Seconding Linguistics and Appraise with the relevant skill checks seems appropriate.

Also, RF, have you ever thought of using Akashic Mysteries/Magic of Incarnium mechanics to display how "power" works for generators and such. I forgot who gave me the idea, I think it might have been Quazz.

Anyways, the idea is pretty simple; generators provide power every "turn" and rooms consume it on a per round/per use basis. The idea is to allow reactors to have a really important, job, allowing really risky or desperate fighters the option to shoot it down to cripple the whole ship.

RFLS
2015-03-09, 12:56 PM
I've made a table of contents (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ll0MGqrSSqKIi5tgGSO0ti2punDvZu0B8o0JPOY6SE4/edit). It's got links to everything we've discussed so far (and some stuff we haven't). I'm in the market for new class ideas or good homebrew, by the way.


You might want to put in a note or something that makes it do extra bonus against ELDK engines or something, since those can be disabled by disable device to begin with.

Noted and updated. Thanks for the heads up. There's a link to homebrew feats in the table of contents.


There's a whole class based around wrecking gramarie stuff. I think the required skill check should be quite difficult, something like 20+check used to create the device, otherwise there's no point in specializing in a gramarie skill to counter that discipline.

Currently looking at equaling the skill check made to disable it for a few rounds using Disable Device. For clarification, are you saying that the disable check should instead be made using the same skill used to make the device?


Make yggd appraise, make heur linguistics.


I'll go with Quazz's suggestions as I think they do make the most sense. Autohypnosis=computer skill still makes no sense to me, either mechanically or fluff wise (I really don't get how being Zen makes you a computer expert) and I guess it's just one of those things we won't really agree on.

Seconding Linguistics and Appraise with the relevant skill checks seems appropriate.

Honestly, my primary objection is that a simulation of the real world isn't really what I'm after. Programmers don't have to be book-dwelling nerds; there's no reason for them to not be badasses capable of halting their own death with the power of their mind. It works, in my head, because you're using Autohypnosis to think things into reality out of nothing. Also, Eldrikinetics already uses Appraise.


Also, RF, have you ever thought of using Akashic Mysteries/Magic of Incarnium mechanics to display how "power" works for generators and such. I forgot who gave me the idea, I think it might have been Quazz.

Anyways, the idea is pretty simple; generators provide power every "turn" and rooms consume it on a per round/per use basis. The idea is to allow reactors to have a really important, job, allowing really risky or desperate fighters the option to shoot it down to cripple the whole ship.

That's a pretty cool idea; I like it. I'll have to work out what boosts in power do to everything, but I definitely like it.

Almarck
2015-03-09, 01:37 PM
Well, we're clearly arguing over "setting" versus "generic" at this point over how computers should work. I think that's the main crux; I would want computer science to be "mundane", whereas you don't. I'm not saying that people who take computer skills should be weak or whatever, but it seems kinda strange to me why computer skills specifically, not other skills, would be tied directly to intense focus and not say, computer study. That isn't to stay that computer science makes you weaker, but does invite a little weirdness.

It means for some strange reason that the average monk (assuming you rule they get autohypnosis) would be better at building computers than rogues, but that might be something you'd want in setting wise. I don't know, I don't particularly like the idea of ascetics getting better as technology than a city dweller (stereotyping of course, but that's generally how the archetypical classes are set up).


Aside from that, to build on the idea of Modules and Power consumption, I got a few ideas.

So, I'm thinking that ship modules often come in grades, determining their energy cost and effectiveness via certain thresholds. Abilities should mostly be scaleable to reduce math and higher tier Modules can downgrade their Power costs to act as lower tier modules when the need arrises.

Higher "Tier" modules are gated by price, representing technological differentials. Generally, the higher up and more advanced you are, the more power you drain.


Another idea to add more variance is that there should be say 3 modules of each type, so say 3 different reactors. Like say: 1 low speed, high capacity generation, 1 high power output but low capacity, and an average between them.

On the subject, I wouldn't object to higher tier reactors, but I don't know I think I'll be fine if we don't make upgrades and say that you have to get more of them to power biggerships. I mean, typically all of the really big modern ships have multiple reactors. I know that modern aircraft carriers use nuclear. Maybe they should be the odd sort of module class with more variants but no "upgrades".

RFLS
2015-03-09, 06:28 PM
I just updated the spaceship rules with your suggestions in mind. (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SkaJIoTv8BV4VspfdYRxyYohH__EEv1LiocvOEMQyxg/edit) Lemme know what you think.

Almarck
2015-03-09, 07:39 PM
Pretty neat except for pricing and the way it's set up feels a little too exploitable and well. Odd. I'm thinking of something along the lines of different reactor types myself. I dislike the pricing system you put to upgrade reactors partly because it feels a little exploitable due to relative cheapness and mostly it feels a little hard to calculate. You havbe constantly keep track of how many increases have been applied. And honestly I don't think

My thoughts were to have seperate reactor types with their own caveats. Here's a quick run through of some of my thoughts to give an example.

Solar: 10 power, 30 storage and only works in the sun. No maintanence 15k.
Nuclear: 30 power, 30 storage, needs fuel every day. 10k
Steam: 5 power. Needs constant coal input every minute to generate power 1k

I also think capacitors should be another power module of their own basically am entire module to just holding power.

I also think to counter balance capacitors and reactors, reactors could only store power from tthemselves, so a solar panel cannot store power in the nuclear reactor and vice versa
Capacitors meanwhile can siphon off power from anywhere and can store alot of it.

I do however like your rules for power generation otherwise. It's a nice way to make logistics on a spaceship matter. Say perhaps at every turn before actions are taken power is generated then per round base consumption like fueling the engines,life support or whatever is taken from the power generated. Whatever is then left over becomes the ship users pool of energy to act with with actions and using modules drains power, used in the order of initiative. Sp depending on how bad things have gotten, the last guy might not get any power. Then after that come automatic systems, then the next power phase, with leftover power all located as it should be.


Also what do you think about perishable goods such as ammo and fuel being tracked? I wouldn't mind say rocket fuel for some reactor types to be a concern.

qazzquimby
2015-03-09, 07:52 PM
Its kind of funny looking at it from the macro perspective, because its telling the gramarist "make something that produces about this much, and costs about this much" just because its so backwards.

About the autohypnosis thing, is this about building your setting, or building a system to run spacemagic settings?

If its yours, then whatever you say goes.

If its for everyone, I think a more computery skill will fit most groups better, and autohypnosis can be listed as an alternative, or houseruled in.

RFLS
2015-03-11, 11:40 AM
Pretty neat except for pricing and the way it's set up feels a little too exploitable and well. Odd. I'm thinking of something along the lines of different reactor types myself. I dislike the pricing system you put to upgrade reactors partly because it feels a little exploitable due to relative cheapness and mostly it feels a little hard to calculate. You have to be constantly keep track of how many increases have been applied.

Hmm....is it exploitable because of the pricing, or because you find scaling in general to be abusable?


My thoughts were to have separate reactor types with their own caveats. Here's a quick run through of some of my thoughts to give an example.

Solar: 10 power, 30 storage and only works in the sun. No maintenance 15k.
Nuclear: 30 power, 30 storage, needs fuel every day. 10k
Steam: 5 power. Needs constant coal input every minute to generate power 1k

My reasoning for having scale-able reactors is that they can actually emulate any of those, and there's no clearly "better" option. Essentially, it's internally balanced.


I also think capacitors should be another power module of their own basically am entire module to just holding power.

I also think to counter balance capacitors and reactors, reactors could only store power from themselves, so a solar panel cannot store power in the nuclear reactor and vice versa
Capacitors meanwhile can siphon off power from anywhere and can store a lot of it.

I like your concept for capacitors. I'll add it in. I might call them batteries, but in this case, it's semantics.


I do however like your rules for power generation otherwise. It's a nice way to make logistics on a spaceship matter. Say perhaps at every turn before actions are taken power is generated then per round base consumption like fueling the engines,life support or whatever is taken from the power generated. Whatever is then left over becomes the ship users pool of energy to act with with actions and using modules drains power, used in the order of initiative. Sp depending on how bad things have gotten, the last guy might not get any power. Then after that come automatic systems, then the next power phase, with leftover power all located as it should be.

Honestly, I think I'll have the ship itself go on the captain's turn, with the only separate initiatives being the players'. Keeping track of everything on a spaceship of moderate size would be nuts. Power allocation will definitely be done on the captain's turn.


Also what do you think about perishable goods such as ammo and fuel being tracked? I wouldn't mind say rocket fuel for some reactor types to be a concern.

I hadn't actually gotten there yet. I definitely don't want to keep track of specific amounts of ammo, but there does need to be some sort of cost to run a ship.


Its kind of funny looking at it from the macro perspective, because its telling the gramarist "make something that produces about this much, and costs about this much" just because its so backwards.

Yeah, I'm a little unhappy with how that turned out, mostly because if a few 7th+ level gramarists got together, they could, per the rules, build one for basically free. I don't know how to make that particular kink come out, though.


About the autohypnosis thing, is this about building your setting, or building a system to run spacemagic settings?

If its yours, then whatever you say goes.

If its for everyone, I think a more computery skill will fit most groups better, and autohypnosis can be listed as an alternative, or houseruled in.

I hadn't thought about it like that. You're right, I was doing it for my setting in particular, not for a general use system. I'll include a bit about how to convert it over for other groups.

qazzquimby
2015-03-11, 12:00 PM
My reasoning for having scale-able reactors is that they can actually emulate any of those, and there's no clearly "better" option. Essentially, it's internally balanced.
Potentially blasphemy, but I believe internal balance here is unnecessary. If we naturally see what engines are efficient (will require me and other gramarists to get to work), many models can exist, and a few will be all around the best, depending on the situation. But if its possible to fuel yourself by flying to a star, using the heat to supercharge your engines and flinging yourself at the next star, that should be an option, regardless of terrible and imbalanced it is.

I think allowing the tech to balance itself naturally will make things feel much more real, and less like playing dress-up with your ship, knowing you can't really go wrong.


Yeah, I'm a little unhappy with how that turned out, mostly because if a few 7th+ level gramarists got together, they could, per the rules, build one for basically free. I don't know how to make that particular kink come out, though.
To make anything of any size would take months to years. Ships are built by factories, not by hand. This isn't really a problem.

Almarck
2015-03-11, 12:18 PM
Scaling if you do it on a wide enough set of numbers is very abusable. The main problem is that people with really good understanding of numbers would rig the system to their liking for the minimum costs to suit their loadout, especially if power generation is cheaper than capacity.

I also dislike the point per point "upgrade" system as that's a rather videogamey mechanic that is a little mathheavy. It also requires keeping track of the upgrade level per reactor and that adds a little more math than I'd feel would be neccesary. If you must make "scalable" upgrades, prewrite the levels and their total costs instead of giving formulas. Mostly, I think it might easier on everyone involved to have that data written up already. (I'll see about getting an excell spreadsheet to show the progression.)

The other problem is the way it upgrades at past 20, where it starts taking up extra module space. I feel it's a little shoehorned in honestly. It feels like you ere adding stuff to make reactors bigger or take up more room, while while I agree with should be a thing, I don't particularly like the execution because it's so variable.




Anyways, my ideal solution is to create "classes" and "grades" of reactors.

"Classes" determine type and the "base stats" and "caveats" which I have discussed before.

"Grades" meanwhile are in a sense, the distinction of level of how advanced or how large the output goes. They act as multipliers for both the cost and the base stats. I'm thinking there's 3 grades: Lesser, Nomal, and Greater.

People would just have the option of buying a more advanced reactor or converting extra module space for two smaller ones; simple as that. It also prevents people from minmaxing or optimizing their price/output as cleanly.

And it's also easier to figure out since it's just basic addition and simple multiplication instead of a quadratic formula.

RFLS
2015-03-11, 12:49 PM
Potentially blasphemy, but I believe internal balance here is unnecessary. If we naturally see what engines are efficient (will require me and other gramarists to get to work), many models can exist, and a few will be all around the best, depending on the situation. But if its possible to fuel yourself by flying to a star, using the heat to supercharge your engines and flinging yourself at the next star, that should be an option, regardless of terrible and imbalanced it is.

I think allowing the tech to balance itself naturally will make things feel much more real, and less like playing dress-up with your ship, knowing you can't really go wrong.

Burn the heretic! No, I think your suggestion is reasonable. It's something I always waver on, tbh. Balance is easier when you tone simulation and fluff down. In this case, I think you're right; I'll write rules for different types of reactor and let the gameplay balance them out.


To make anything of any size would take months to years. Ships are built by factories, not by hand. This isn't really a problem.

Hmm.....the problem I have there is that spaceships should cost money. If you remove the abstraction that the Craft Spaceship feat provides, then you lose any reason for the ships to cost money. I can't really see a way around or through this one. Thoughts?


Scaling if you do it on a wide enough set of numbers is very abusable. The main problem is that people with really good understanding of numbers would rig the system to their liking for the minimum costs to suit their loadout, especially if power generation is cheaper than capacity.

I also dislike the point per point "upgrade" system as that's a rather videogamey mechanic that is a little mathheavy. It also requires keeping track of the upgrade level per reactor and that adds a little more math than I'd feel would be neccesary. If you must make "scalable" upgrades, prewrite the levels and their total costs instead of giving formulas. Mostly, I think it might easier on everyone involved to have that data written up already. (I'll see about getting an excell spreadsheet to show the progression.)

The other problem is the way it upgrades at past 20, where it starts taking up extra module space. I feel it's a little shoehorned in honestly. It feels like you ere adding stuff to make reactors bigger or take up more room, while while I agree with should be a thing, I don't particularly like the execution because it's so variable.

Anyways, my ideal solution is to create "classes" and "grades" of reactors.

"Classes" determine type and the "base stats" and "caveats" which I have discussed before.

"Grades" meanwhile are in a sense, the distinction of level of how advanced or how large the output goes. They act as multipliers for both the cost and the base stats. I'm thinking there's 3 grades: Lesser, Nomal, and Greater.

People would just have the option of buying a more advanced reactor or converting extra module space for two smaller ones; simple as that. It also prevents people from minmaxing or optimizing their price/output as cleanly.

And it's also easier to figure out since it's just basic addition and simple multiplication instead of a quadratic formula.

I'm currently inclined to write a few kinds of reactor in (steam, nuclear, etc) and allow scaling of each, with special abilities for each, with a cap on scaling as suggested. You're right about the increase in space; that's definitely going out the window.

Almarck
2015-03-11, 02:46 PM
Those are fair, yeah. I'd like it for each of the reactor types to have their own cost progression if nothing else to ensure some case by case tweaking is possible for if we find an issue, but it's minor right now since we have yet to figure out how much power should ships of X size draw from and thus eyeballing prices is gonna be hard.

We should at least straighten up the math by some manner, too, but this is just me disliking odd things in the hundreds place and preferring more rounded numbers.

Reactor ideas: Fission/ Nuclear, Fusion, Solar, Antimatter.



Also, I've been thinking on the supply mechanic. I think first of off, we should make a "Cargo" module and is able to hold "Units" of some number. Unless we're going to have each unit be a single type of item or something like in normal D&D, I have an idea for an vague abstraction of supply while still abiding by mechanics.


In short, all Supply is a total number of consumable resources of some vague description that is necessary for the ship to function, from food, to spare electronics, to ballistics, to fuel. Different rooms drain supply when used either on a daily upkeep manner or on a per use manner (such as daily meals versus ballistics) and the number drained varries based on the modules used.

Here's where it gets interesting:
To represent Supply not being universal, each module has a supply "type" that refers to what specific subgroup of Supply it needs to function such as "fuel", "food", "parts", "ballistics", "missiles", ect.

Normally, Supply is universal, but occassionally, the ship can get conditions that represent varying levels of supply in a category There are 3 conditions that apply to specific resource within Supply, "Shortage", "Surpluss," and "Exhausted".

Shortage means that using general supply to accomplish something or in paying up keep doubles the cost of how much supply is consumed.
Surplus meanwhile cuts it in half.
Exhausted means you can't use supply to accomplish that task at all.
(Maybe there should be an "Endless" condition too, representing that a certain task or upkeep has no cost in Supply)

Each only applies to a specific type of Supply within the general pool and it's possible to have multiple instances. So, at 100 supply your food could be Exhausted meaning there's a famime, but you're well gifted with bullets at Surplus. You can even have multiple things in Shortage or Surplus.

Supply Conditions are gained via events or as the result of combat. Shortages and Exhaustion can be earned by a breach happening in a Cargo module. Yet, they can can be repaired such as by buying more Supply or the right type ending the conditon, or using modules of the right type to add more Supply (asteroid harvesting and processing for more parts, hydroponics for food or fuel for a bioreactor, ect).

This allows for both abstraction, yet also avoids the condition of say, using extra toilets for food.

qazzquimby
2015-03-11, 05:36 PM
Anything with an engine or transformer (everything) costs materials, and time of a professional costs money.

RFLS
2015-03-11, 08:15 PM
Anything with an engine or transformer (everything) costs materials, and time of a professional costs money.

True. I went and reread the Gramarie thread; I'd forgotten about the pricing rules. It actually looks like things come out pretty close to what I'd spitballed in terms of price; I think I'll leave those prices as "normal price," remove the Craft Spaceship feat (because you're right, it's kinda nonsensical), and then let the players do as they wish on their downtime.

Looking around, it looks like the most efficient generator is a phlogiston+mercury transformer. It generates 98 ebbs/round forever, and costs 7290 gold, plus whatever the mercury costs and some fireproof material. Yes? If I didn't miss something, that means that that's really the best method to go about doing that (base assumption is a magisterial level setting).

Hm. There's really no reason to get anything else, is there?

Almarck
2015-03-11, 09:02 PM
I kinda feel that's too cheap honestly. Unless we jack up module costs to compensate, which may or may not be good/establish limits on reactor use.


How do you feel about the Supply suggestion earlier?

RFLS
2015-03-11, 09:51 PM
I kinda feel that's too cheap honestly. Unless we jack up module costs to compensate, which may or may not be good/establish limits on reactor use.


How do you feel about the Supply suggestion earlier?

I'm still mulling the Supply stuff over. My goal is to make this fit with Gramarie first, though, so until this is worked out everything else is tabled for a bit.

Especially since I just realized that by using Arcd 101 once, Bioy 101 500 times, and Arcd 176 once, you get a generator that pumps out 125 ebbs for 4158 gp.

I'm starting to think I should revisit some base assumptions for the setting. Looking at what exactly Gramarie can do (which I hadn't really thought through 100% yet), I think spaceships are entirely capable of needing absolutely no fuel. Sooo....yeah. I'm probably going to have to build a lot of spaceships from the ground up (and various subsystems) to see what exactly they cost and can do, and then write the rules to abstract that. Anyone want to help put some ships together using just Gramarie (and none of the spaceship rules as written)?

RFLS
2015-03-15, 02:33 PM
Okay, it looks like spaceships cost roughly what I ballparked if the gramarist(s) are charging the amount listed in the gramarie thread. Energy costs are negligible with the use of a Biollurgical reactor; if you can lay hands some phlogiston you can get more energy out. Anyone have suggestions for how to get a ship to act on one initiative? The best I've got is to have one or more EIs running everything that the players aren't directly running.

qazzquimby
2015-03-15, 09:47 PM
I'll help build ships. I would have done more already, but I've got some critical schooling happening at the moment, which will calm down around next weekend.

I talked to Milo about the ship building, and there were two things of note:
1. The way blueprints are recorded spatially is very important, given its a huge ship with lots of small parts. Recording that in words and little diagrams may be hard, and we need to make a standard method.
2. He has an amazing computer system using only spells (I think, as I forget how exactly it works), that takes the form of a book and a glove. The book stores information and projects silent images as output, while motions with the glove provide input. I thought that was fairly fantastic.

Also, if there is a phlog engine or something that outshines everything else possible, it should be tweaked. Maybe phlog should decay over time, along with other energy emitting materials.

Does magisterial level mean no doctorate abilities exist, or they're just more expensive?

Milo v3
2015-03-15, 10:28 PM
From a principle standpoint the easiest spaceships would be vast size flying biollurgical chassis, but that can take generations to complete and they are quite slow. Question with your version of ELDK, have you introduced any of my ELDK update? It should help when it comes to space travel and such.


2. He has an amazing computer system using only spells (I think, as I forget how exactly it works), that takes the form of a book and a glove. The book stores information and projects silent images as output, while motions with the glove provide input. I thought that was fairly fantastic.

Oh, thanks.

It's a book enchanted with Arcane Mark, Detect Magic and Silent Image, and a glove enchanted with Magic Aura. The glove allows the wearer to send out a fake signal of any spell or magic item at a specific "frequency", he books detect magic effect searches for these frequencies and transfers the information gained into the Arcane Mark effect causing the information to be instantaneously written into the book. All the while, the silent image effect is creating an display over the book based on the text in the book, immediately updating when the book is changed.

This allows for someone to interact and edit the computer, by simplying touching the hologram it projects with the exact response being also decided via you sending out different spell signals.

RFLS
2015-03-16, 12:43 AM
The disciplines I've modified so far are linked in the first post. The big changes are as follows:


Yggdratecture's instant teleportation has been moved from a baccalaureate principle to a doctorate level principle. Things have been shuffled around to accommodate this. This was done to make FTL travel more difficult.
Atypical Ballistics was made a baccalaureate principle. Unnatural Propulsion is now non-specialist. The two doctorate principles were rearranged to make the Aetheriel engine a magisterial principle. This was done so that the Ethereal Plane could be used for faster travel between planets in a system.
HEUR 302 can be used for spells (with an increase in casting time/cost in ebbs/specification that costs must be met each time), but had a clause added specifying that it cannot be prepared into itself. This was done to stop the first doctorate level gramarist from completely turning the setting on its ear.


Obviously, these aren't set in stone, and they won't be the only changes. I'm wary of making sweeping changes without a good reason. The ones I've made have been thought out as best I could manage, done with an eye on keeping things balanced or making them balanced, and done to bring Gramarie in line with the setting. I'm more than open to suggestions on what, if any, further changes should be made.


I'll help build ships. I would have done more already, but I've got some critical schooling happening at the moment, which will calm down around next weekend.

I talked to Milo about the ship building, and there were two things of note:
1. The way blueprints are recorded spatially is very important, given its a huge ship with lots of small parts. Recording that in words and little diagrams may be hard, and we need to make a standard method.

I was thinking this, too. I feel like a few assumptions need to be made to simplify it:


HEUR 101 and ARCD 101 can be assumed to connect, well, everything needed. Specifying them is generally a waste of time unless they're needed to say something other than "this functions."
Ships can generally be divided into parts that can be described independently. Instead of referencing every single principle for the overall ship, you just reference blueprints. Standard blueprints can be made, and specific modifications are noted. Should speed things up.
Ships are airtight and have basic life support from BIOY 101.


I can't really think of any other ways to speed things up off the top of my head. My main goal here is to make spaceship based gameplay as fast as possible.


Also, if there is a phlog engine or something that outshines everything else possible, it should be tweaked. Maybe phlog should decay over time, along with other energy emitting materials.

Honestly, I suspect that it's futile to try to quash all of the ways that exist to generate ebbs for free. I don't have a deep understanding of the system, and I've already come up with two. I'm inclined to let it slide. If everyone can do it, it's still balanced.


Does magisterial level mean no doctorate abilities exist, or they're just more expensive?

It just means that almost no one is at a doctorate level. So, doctors of gramarie exist, but they're rare enough that they don't make a massive impact on the setting.


From a principle standpoint the easiest spaceships would be vast size flying biollurgical chassis, but that can take generations to complete and they are quite slow. Question with your version of ELDK, have you introduced any of my ELDK update? It should help when it comes to space travel and such.

I haven't actually found your ELDK update; got a link handy?


It's a book enchanted with Arcane Mark, Detect Magic and Silent Image, and a glove enchanted with Magic Aura. The glove allows the wearer to send out a fake signal of any spell or magic item at a specific "frequency", he books detect magic effect searches for these frequencies and transfers the information gained into the Arcane Mark effect causing the information to be instantaneously written into the book. All the while, the silent image effect is creating an display over the book based on the text in the book, immediately updating when the book is changed.

This allows for someone to interact and edit the computer, by simply touching the hologram it projects with the exact response being also decided via you sending out different spell signals.

Beautiful. That's awesome.

Milo v3
2015-03-16, 12:57 AM
I haven't actually found your ELDK update; got a link handy?
It's in the first post of the 3rd Gramarie Thread, here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=17659595&postcount=681)is a direct link. Admittedly it uses the new rules for points and stuff, but could give you some ideas.

qazzquimby
2015-03-16, 11:29 AM
Yggdratecture's instant teleportation has been moved from a baccalaureate principle to a doctorate level principle. Things have been shuffled around to accommodate this. This was done to make FTL travel more difficult.
The teleportation is known to be incredibly overpowered, and there was talk of bumping it to doctorate, or even making it a theory, or removing it all together.


HEUR 302 can be used for spells (with an increase in casting time/cost in ebbs/specification that costs must be met each time), but had a clause added specifying that it cannot be prepared into itself. This was done to stop the first doctorate level gramarist from completely turning the setting on its ear.
I believe it already can't, or at least was updated so it couldn't. Also, there is a transformer that channels ebbs to spells, in a prc. One of the basic transformers did originally, but spells are so varied that a lot of problems could be solved with a single transformer doing all your work for you through mass spelling. The cost was later made quadratic (level 9 costing 81 ebbs) which was still too little. After it was scrapped, the version in the prc was made, which is cubic I believe (level 9 costs 729 ebbs).


I can't really think of any other ways to speed things up off the top of my head. My main goal here is to make spaceship based gameplay as fast as possible.
Keeping things very two dimensional should help a lot, because every layer needs to be visible. Small ships could easily be a single floor, and larger should rarely go above three levels, just for convenience. You then have a floor plan of each floor, with rectangles plotted out for the machines behind the walls. If you take a wall panel off and start tampering with things, you go to that machine's blueprint.

The blueprint itself should describe what it looks like from each side, what they see when they first expose it, and then probably just a rough description of what is in each 5ft square inside. If a machine has a specific direction it needs to face, or connects to another machine, that should be marked on the floorplan with symbols.


Honestly, I suspect that it's futile to try to quash all of the ways that exist to generate ebbs for free. I don't have a deep understanding of the system, and I've already come up with two. I'm inclined to let it slide. If everyone can do it, it's still balanced.
True, but it seems not so fun to me. Gathering resources is an interesting challenge. Finding yourself out of fuel and dead in space is an interesting challenge. Especially seeing as this is gramarie, and your ship could run on nuts and berries, or the blood of the innocent, resources are very fun. Also, sticking to the real world rule that you can't generate anything from nothing, everything is just transformed, gives some realism.


It just means that almost no one is at a doctorate level. So, doctors of gramarie exist, but they're rare enough that they don't make a massive impact on the setting.
That's good. You might want to look through and see what theories you want included, if any.


Admittedly it uses the new rules for points and stuff, but could give you some ideas.
I wouldn't worry much about the new rules vs the old rules. Gramarie itself is identical, its just the nature of gaining access to it that changes. You can just shove it in somewhere it fits, if there isn't a place for it..

RFLS
2015-03-16, 02:13 PM
The teleportation is known to be incredibly overpowered, and there was talk of bumping it to doctorate, or even making it a theory, or removing it all together.

I think I'll leave it in; it's the only real way for sustainable interstellar travel. All of the normal ways rely on high level casters, which are canonically few and far between in this setting. If it's just a doctorate level principle, then the handful of doctorate level gramarists with access to it can set portals up once and that's enough. No need for maintenance or continued effort.


I believe it already can't, or at least was updated so it couldn't. Also, there is a transformer that channels ebbs to spells, in a prc. One of the basic transformers did originally, but spells are so varied that a lot of problems could be solved with a single transformer doing all your work for you through mass spelling. The cost was later made quadratic (level 9 costing 81 ebbs) which was still too little. After it was scrapped, the version in the prc was made, which is cubic I believe (level 9 costs 729 ebbs).

That makes more sense, yeah. I updated the bit about spells to require spell level in ebbs cubed per round, with the casting of the spell requiring 10x the normal casting time.


Keeping things very two dimensional should help a lot, because every layer needs to be visible. Small ships could easily be a single floor, and larger should rarely go above three levels, just for convenience. You then have a floor plan of each floor, with rectangles plotted out for the machines behind the walls. If you take a wall panel off and start tampering with things, you go to that machine's blueprint.

The blueprint itself should describe what it looks like from each side, what they see when they first expose it, and then probably just a rough description of what is in each 5ft square inside. If a machine has a specific direction it needs to face, or connects to another machine, that should be marked on the floorplan with symbols.

Yeah, I think you're right. I think when I'm compiling everything I'll provide a bunch of stock blueprints for the innards of a ship; ditto for actual spaceships. I think the only way to prevent every session from getting bogged down in the particulars is to just do a lot of the legwork for the DM beforehand. Most people won't find designing a spaceship from the ground up particularly fun.


True, but it seems not so fun to me. Gathering resources is an interesting challenge. Finding yourself out of fuel and dead in space is an interesting challenge. Especially seeing as this is gramarie, and your ship could run on nuts and berries, or the blood of the innocent, resources are very fun. Also, sticking to the real world rule that you can't generate anything from nothing, everything is just transformed, gives some realism.

I do agree that the dead in space trope is interesting, but I'm not sure it's actually possible to carry enough fuel into space to move yourself for any length of time. The only thing I can think here is that instead of eliminating high-ebb sources, they just need to run out slowly.


That's good. You might want to look through and see what theories you want included, if any.

The only theory that I think would add to the setting is the Caloric Theory; I'm mildly tempted to switch that and phlogiston in terms of what they do.

RFLS
2015-03-16, 05:13 PM
So, I was just poking at the numbers for interplanetary travel a bit. Turns out that you need engines significantly larger than the ship in question to get anywhere in any reasonable amount of time. Anyone have any thoughts on this? At this point, I'm tempted to write in an Eldrikinetic principle that allows for FTL travel.

Milo v3
2015-03-16, 06:42 PM
So, I was just poking at the numbers for interplanetary travel a bit. Turns out that you need engines significantly larger than the ship in question to get anywhere in any reasonable amount of time. Anyone have any thoughts on this? At this point, I'm tempted to write in an Eldrikinetic principle that allows for FTL travel.

In my ELDK I increased the speed out putted by vehicles, and had a principle that increased the speed output further when in a low or zero gravity environment, and I also put in FTL travel.

As for the YGGD teleport thing, the current plan is to sort of remove it at least for low-levels, replacing it instead with two portals that form a passage between each other, and this passage is only a fraction of the actual distance (thus speeding up the travel time significantly).

qazzquimby
2015-03-21, 02:02 AM
I'm finally ready to start making stuff. What would be most useful to begin with?
I also got a copy of Diaspora, which is a tool kit for running realistic hard science fiction games, and I could post some concepts from there if people are interested.

Problem, unless I'm mistaken, YGGD allows any machinery to be stored on a ship of any size, or on the end of a ballpoint pen.

RFLS
2015-03-21, 01:11 PM
I'm finally ready to start making stuff. What would be most useful to begin with?
I also got a copy of Diaspora, which is a tool kit for running realistic hard science fiction games, and I could post some concepts from there if people are interested.

Problem, unless I'm mistaken, YGGD allows any machinery to be stored on a ship of any size, or on the end of a ballpoint pen.

Reactors and engines would probably be the most useful place to start, I think. The best I've come up with is 4 groups of 125 different biostructures being rotated through an input silver transformer by an output iron transformer. The biostructures' fast healing means that this generates infinite ebbs (with a per round limit).

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(novel)) Diaspora? If so, that'd be awesome. If not, probably still pretty awesome =P

YGGD actually doesn't let you do that, because of this clause:


Bubbles and other area effects which are created on one side of a portal do not pass through the portal to the space on the other side. In order to affect the area on the other side of the portal, whatever is causing that effect must be inside the other space. This effectively means that the area effect from, for example, an arcanodynamic transformer, doesn't pass beyond the boundaries of the portal, and the transformer must be more than 50% on whatever side of the portal the bubble is going to take effect on.

Honestly, I have no idea how to handle engines for interplanetary travel. I'm tempted to modify the lightningleap engine to allow FTL travel, but I don't know how to do it in a way that can't be abused at a tactical level.

qazzquimby
2015-03-21, 04:41 PM
Reactors and engines would probably be the most useful place to start, I think. The best I've come up with is 4 groups of 125 different biostructures being rotated through an input silver transformer by an output iron transformer. The biostructures' fast healing means that this generates infinite ebbs (with a per round limit).
I guess infinite generation is unavoidable, but hopefully destructive generation can at least have its moments. I made an engine at some point that used a heavy ball on a stick on an axle, and used yggd to set gravity to an angle perpendicular to the stick, so it would spin and accelerate forever. Then had a spin input draw puissance. I'll see how effective that is, and if it's still possible.

Nope, this (http://www.vsca.ca/Diaspora/) one.


YGGD actually doesn't let you do that, because of this clause:
Does this mean you can't use heur to link machines inside to machines outside? I'm sure there's some sort of work around, but I thought you could do that. I remember laser pistols using yggd to hide the machines, and shoot out the portal, but I don't remember exactly how that worked.


Honestly, I have no idea how to handle engines for interplanetary travel. I'm tempted to modify the lightningleap engine to allow FTL travel, but I don't know how to do it in a way that can't be abused at a tactical level.
Lets see what comes up naturally first. It's probably possible.
This (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16568281&postcount=1173) isn't finished, but its relevant. It should probably be tagged onto yggd.

Milo v3
2015-03-21, 05:42 PM
YGGD actually doesn't let you do that, because of this clause
One of the discoveries lets you put Heur circuits through portals, increasing the size each time, especially if you cover the ship in teeny tiny microportals. That's how we made ships generally. Though, gravity ships were generally better than engine based ships in mark 2.


Honestly, I have no idea how to handle engines for interplanetary travel. I'm tempted to modify the lightningleap engine to allow FTL travel, but I don't know how to do it in a way that can't be abused at a tactical level.
The interplanetary engine I made was for Doctorate level.

qazzquimby
2015-03-21, 06:33 PM
I think gravity manipulation should be knocked back, maybe even to theory level. It's effectively just giving you huge amounts of force for free.

altona
2015-04-12, 02:25 AM
I hoping this is the right place. I was looking over the Magitech Templar and while I find the repeating crossbow neat, it seems a little out of place in a setting where guns are common. I was thinking that a second tier upgrade that requires the repeating crossbow but allows a 1 handed firearm would be pretty sweet. It seems inline with the power of some of the other abilities ie power fist
Something like:

Wrist Cannon (Requires Repeating Crossbow)
Your armor has a special masterwork pistol built into one of its arms (1d8, *4). You are treated as being proficient with this weapon. You may hold or otherwise manipulate a weapon, shield, or other object on the same arm as your Pistol, though you may not use them both during the same round. As part of your armor, the Pistol cannot be Sundered, Disarmed, or dropped while you are wearing it. You may treat the weapon as a pistol of any type for any feat or ability that affects weapons. Your armor contains an extradimensional space which can store up to 100 bullets, and the pistol automatically loads any stored bullets of your choice as a free action. You may enchant the Pistol just as you would a normal pistol, paying the full costs and following the normal rules for doing so. You may take this upgrade multiple times once for each arm that you possess.

And another that struck me as typing

Shoulder Turret(requires Wrist Cannon and Great Strength)
Your wrist cannon has been removed and replaced with a larger more dangerous shoulder mounted machine gun. (2d8, *4). You are treated as being proficient with this weapon. You may hold or otherwise manipulate a weapon, shield, or other object on the same arm as your Shoulder Turret, though you may not use them both during the same round. As part of your armor, the machine gun cannot be Sundered, Disarmed, or dropped while you are wearing it. You may treat the weapon as a pistol of any type for any feat or ability that affects weapons. Your armor contains an extradimensional space which can store up to 1000 bullets, and the machine gun automatically loads any stored bullets of your choice as a free action. You may enchant the Pistol just as you would a normal machine gun, paying the full costs and following the normal rules for doing so.

qazzquimby
2015-04-12, 01:35 PM
Those both look very good. We'll probably end up making partial rewrites of the classes to make everything fit thematically and be as compatible as possible.

Also, I was just looking at dragonmech since the related homebrew was posted, and it seems potentially useful.