Jump to content

SSand

Members
  • Content Count

    164
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SSand

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Marysville, Washington, United States
  1. I use the old original Traveler grid to track range bands. Abstract and easy.
  2. A small exception should you give people the wrong idea. Navy uniforms are more cultured than the rest. Never worse.
  3. You have one I usually lay my screen flat so I can see the charts and it doesn't block my view.
  4. For me I think they will continue the character option splat books and a trickle of adventure modules until the next movie releases (plus the sprinkle of TV based items). Once that happens FFG will have a firm grasp of where canon is going and be able to start some useful books. A real Atlas with current transit times between the known major worlds plus times for the major trade routes. Pointers on generating systems and planets . At least more than the current "nothing". Indepth rules for exploration, trade and general star travel. A real guidebook for the GM on the Imperial forces. Spaceborn and Planetary. A real guidebook on the Imperial secret services. A real guidebook on Law Enforcement in the galaxy. In other words something that can be used by the GM to build coherent adventures based on something other than just making it up on the fly. And please do not mention the NON EXISTENT supplement for a long and very dead ancient RPG. Repeatedly mentioning a product that does not exist in the here and now is just a demand that FFG quit the Star Wars line for RPG's. If they don't sell books they don't pay the bills and they stop making them. Stop being saboteurs and instead let them know what you would really like FFG to make and print. What you would really like to buy. For myself I just think splat-books are a waste of resources. But MANY of you love them. So I say bring on more splat-books. I will even buy them. There is no Star Wars Atlas for the FFG Star Wars game. Instead of digging up old bones, ask FFG to not only put one together based on canon, but also add in game specific guidance.
  5. The program includes a Data Editor and the User Manual is well put together. I believe the information you are looking for starts on page 32 of the manual. I am not a programmer or data base expert at all and I have been able to add and customize at will. Though I did have a whole slew of basic questions a while back. What I did was create a duplicate Data Set to play with and destroy . I read through the version of the manual available then and played a bit and asked a lot of questions when something went wrong. My issues were mostly because I was duplicating tags (if I am using the correct term) already in use. Now I preface all my tags with SAND so they are always unique and I can find them. The biggest thing I have discovered is that the only way to understand any answers you may get here, you have to actually tinker/edit the data. A lot doesn't make any sense to the layman like me until you are actually doing it. But OggDude and the more advanced users are spectacular in their support and ability to make said laymen understand. Once we make that first step that is
  6. Aarrrgghhhh....... You have crushed........my ability to procrastinate any more. I have been putting off the stat'ing part of my next game write up until I could enter Inquisitors. Now I have no more excuses....... Thanks for another awesome update.
  7. I approach them entirely by perspective. The builder/emplacement rolls to successfully build and/or place the mine. The successes of their rolls establish the base "difficulty" of the mine. The targets roll to avoid/detect/determine damage from the mine. Exactly what they roll against what skill depends on how they narrate their effort. For the Targets a Triumph can mean the mine failed to explode. For the Builders a Triumph can mean an upgrade of a Difficulty die to Challenge on the Targets roll. All in all, I try to not get bogged down in rigid chart reading, and instead use the charts as examples and suggestions, and then determine die pools based on the PC's narrative. Sometimes (in other threads) it may sound like I am trying to rules lawyer or try and get a lot of ironclad rules put out. But I am really looking for more samples of the way the writers interpret things to give me a better feel and more examples so my games can flow easier. The books may call out Skill A as the one to use, but if the player can give a great and imaginative solid sounding narrative reason Skill B would work, I'll go with it. Given the choice of RAW or "in the moment Role-playing awesomeness", Awesomeness wins
  8. Well my primary reason for having the PC's roll is nothing to do with whether Star Wars tech could support it or not. It is a narrative story-telling system. As Han said "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it." Sure, the flagship could pass on the calculations and everyone just hits the mark. But where is the fun in that? If the PC's are on their own, I do the astrogation check as normal. If the PC's are part of a squadron/fleet, they still have to make an astrogation check that is easier and failure isn't as harsh. But will be dramatic and help drive the story.
  9. My assumption is that the rough data is the same and shared by the flagship to all other hyper capable ships. But every ship is unique and its individual mass/shape/configuration will affect their jump. So I the ship makes a roll to determine how accurate they were. Did they break out in formation? Out of formation? Misjump? It is a much easier roll than a regular calculation since they had were given most of the calculations. But the chance of screwing up is still there.
  10. Ditto, except the Obligation part. I allow the players to use Obligation, Duty or Morality as needed for the character concept.
  11. I would think starships would have to be able to handle pressures > 1 atm, because planet variety is huge, and there might be nebula or solar coronas or some other weird thing they're expected to handle without issue. So if you want to get technical, anywhere from 2 to 5 atm might be reasonable, which would be 10-40m below the surface on an earth-like planet. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/eoi/nemo1998/education/pressure.html Just looking in the movies we can see that the ships/technology can withstand a very wide sweep of adverse environments. From cloud cities to underwater cities to buildings that are essentially sitting in lava. While the Cloud City in the movie was at an altitude suitable for humans/Humanoid beings, nothing says there aren't others at much deeper depths being used by other than human races. For me, my house ruling would be, if you want to park a starship on the floor of the Pacific, as long as you have power to support the atmospheric force fields/structural force fields, you are good to go. Lose power though and there would be leaks everywhere.....cue dramatic music and let hope those rolls are favorable.
  12. This makes sense. A small group could do some very basic stuff for a short time, such as fire up the engines, move forward and make a jump into hyperspace. For extended operations, however, you'd need a full complement to keep abreast of everything that happens aboard a large, complex piece of machinery like a spaceship. And keep in mind that the full crew listing is probably meant to represent everyone aboard; only a third of those could be expected to be on duty at any given time, the other two shifts would be having time off. If someone wanted to run a ship with a below-requirements crew, I'd just assign a number of setback dice (and possibly difficulty upgrades) to all the checks they make to represent how minor but important functions aren't being performed. The further below the crew requirements they are, the more setback dice. Yep, But I was answering the OP. Most of what the game lists as Capitol ships aren't actually capitol ships by definition. Ships filling the roles of Destroyers, Frigates and Corvettes were some of the smallest warships in a fleet, and in some periods they didn't even get names, but simple number designation instead. Modern technology has Destroyers and Frigates stepping up into the Cruiser role, but that is more driven by a lack of viable active threats. The ADZ, CR90 and IR-3F are all listed as only needing 30, 30 and 20 crew at a minimum (I personally take the low number as the crew size of the ship itself without embarked fighter squadron or dropships and assault element). So yes, manning a ship that small would be fairly easy and can be done by a handful (player group size) for a short duration. But a Capitol Ship (read Battleship, Fleet Carrier etc) such as a Victory Class, Dreadnought-Class, Vindicator Class, Imperial I-Class or Praetor II Class ships with crews in the thousands are another thing. But in the end it is Space Opera. So what ever fits the Plot....
  13. Well this is Space Opera and not Hard Science Fiction or even Soft Science Fiction. If read/watched SciFi where space vessels are able to submerge by default and I have read/watched the opposite. It is extremely unlikely that FFG will actually give any useful guidance when it comes to ships.... So pick what works best for your plot and group and run with it.
  14. Hmmmm…. Depends on the detail you want. Most modern US Naval Units use four sections. The concept being that one section is enough to execute the mission, even if not able to do everything. For instance, one section should be able to get underway and fight the ship. Though they would not have any extra personnel to account for casualties, damage control and extended operations. The Port or Starboard Watch (each comprised of two sections, usually odd and even) can fight the ship for a more sustained time period. The full crew would be expected to go the long haul. In intense operations they could go Port & Starboard, with each Watch (half the crew) working 12 on 12 off. When sections are organized, each section is balanced so that the members assigned cover all the needed skills, training and knowledge. At least that is the concept. Sometimes while it all looks good on paper, you simply do not have the right mix in the real world. But to answer your question, a warship should at a minimum would have 25% of the crew onboard at all times unless in special circumstance, such as dry-dock. With less than 25% the question is not how many, but instead it is how many of what kind? To maneuver the ship you will need some of the bridge crew (those involved in flying the ship) and mostly the “Black Gang” from engineering plus some from Deck to handle all the sundry tasks. My guess from the capabilities of an Imperial Star Destroyer (mixed cruiser/carrier/assault ship) the majority of the crew numbers would be in supporting the Space Wing (Air Wing in a carrier) and Imperial Landing Force (Marine Landing Force) so the actual number of ship’s crew would be less than 30% of the number listed. For a Victory Class Star Destroyer with a listed crew of 6107, probably less than 1000 are actually involved with the ship itself. If I was making things up, I’d say about 100-150 of them would be “Black Gang”. Break that into sections and you have 25-37ish needed to get underway in the engine room. For a CR-90 things would depend on configuration. If it is supporting fighters the number of personnel increases significantly. The same if it is acting as an assault ship with Troops and Landers. But you could use the same general rules of thumb to figure out something that sounds right. Which ship are you talking about exactly? All in all though, exact numbers don’t really matter. It’s all about the story.
×
×
  • Create New...