SF RPG's combat
Orc Lord
planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
Snowgen
admin.service.talkway.com>:
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
Traveller and the new GURPS Traveller have excellent ship-to-ship combat
systems. You can usually pick up and old Traveller boxed set from eBay for
$5.00 or so (you'd be interested in Book 2, which outlines the combat
system). GURPS Traveller on the other hand is almost $30, I think.
The system there is a vector based combat system.
GURPS Space used to have an abstract combat system that got the job done in
a few rolls, but I found it too abstract. I don't know if it's still in
the latest edition. GURPS Compedium II has yet another abstract system,
but I haven't checked it out yet.
IIRC, I was displeased with the old Star Frontiers space combat system
(wasn't it called Knight Hawks?).
I have heard, though I don't know first hand, that TSR's (oops--I mean
WOTC's--oops I mean Hasbro's) new SF RPG (Alternities? somthing like that
in any case) has a good ship-to-ship combat system.
Hope this helps!
--Snowgen
Incanus
> GURPS Compedium II has yet another abstract system,
> but I haven't checked it out yet.
Which is called SOCS (Space Opera Combat System), is taken originally
from GURPS Lensman, and is really good for fast and not too realistic
action.
--
Incanus email: inc...@bigfoot.com
Incanus homepage: http://incanus.mcs.hr
Incanus games: http://incanus.mcs.hr/games/
PJS
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
--------------
Do you mean combat between people on ships, or combat between ships?
---
Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere
may be happy.
- H.L. Mencken
Wil
sytem, and the Silhoutte system is easy to use and quick. They just
released Lightning Strike, which is a simplified system for ship to ship
combat.
--
-----
"I don't currently have a personal savior. Jesus Christ is my dog's
personal savior, but I'm still taking applications."
Warp & Weft for Tribe 8: http://www2.crosswinds.net/~warpweft/
The Atomic Rumpus Room (rpgs, PikaDance, Club Metro Survivor's Homepage):
http://www.keyway.net/~sinner/
Mr. Tines
Orc Lord <deathc...@yahoo.com> writes
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
This prompts me to ask the subsidiary question - does anyone choose a
FRP for its Naval Combat rules; or a modern era RPG for its Air Combat
rules (the analogies of choosing an SFRPG for its space combat rules)?
-- PGPfingerprint: BC01 5527 B493 7C9B 3C54 D1B7 248C 08BC --
_______ {pegwit v8 public key =581cbf05be9899262ab4bb6a08470}
/_ __(_)__ ___ ___ {69c10bcfbca894a5bf8d208d001b829d4d0}
/ / / / _ \/ -_|_-< http://www.ravnaandtines.com/
/_/ /_/_//_/\__/___/@ravnaandtines.com PGP key on page
Rachel E. Taylor
wrote:
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
The Star Strike (?) rules for Spacemaster are ahem....rather complex.
Everything up to and including inertialess 3D movement is catered for.
But battles can take a while to resolve. Also has a ground combat
rules supplement called Armoured Assault along the same lines. The RPG
mechanics are fairly simple to get to grips with.
Rachel Taylor
Chris Camfield
<ti...@ravnaandtines.com> wrote:
>In article <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.5...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>,
>Orc Lord <deathc...@yahoo.com> writes
>>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
>This prompts me to ask the subsidiary question - does anyone choose a
>FRP for its Naval Combat rules; or a modern era RPG for its Air Combat
>rules (the analogies of choosing an SFRPG for its space combat rules)?
It's a good point... I would only speculate that maybe the poster was
planning on running an SF *naval* campaign. If you're anticipating
playing through multiple space battles then it could be a
consideration. And actually I think space battles are a bit more
central (common) to SF than naval warfare to fantasy or air combat to
modern-day.
Chris
Doug Berry
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
GURPS Space 3rd edition has nice abstract combat rules along with
fairly simple ship construction rules. A slightly more complex
version of the same system is in GURPS: Traveller.
--
Douglas E. Berry grid...@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/
"We are GURPS. You will be assimilated. We will add
your distinctive setting and background to our own. |
Resistance is futile."
Alan D Kohler
<rachel-...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:52:25 GMT, "Orc Lord" <deathc...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
>The Star Strike (?) rules for Spacemaster are ahem....rather complex.
No, not really. Unlike the rest of spacemaster, making characters in
not required, so it's really not that bad.
Alan D. Kohler(hawk...@NOSPAM.olg.com)
"I once shot a man in Nepal just to watch him reincarnate." -Wierd Al
Hawkwind's RPG Pages are back at last!
http://members.tripod.com/~hawk_wind/homepage.html
Alexander Williams
>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
I strongly suggest Dream Pod 9's JOVIAN CHRONICLES system; it has an
excellently designed underlying mechanical system and a Tactical scale
space combat system that's almost impossible to beat packaged
alongside their RPG system. Translation between the two is seamless.
If you want to run even larger battles than are wieldy in JC, the new
Lightning Strike suppliment lets you do so in a somewhat abstracted
mechanical system but is just as incredible as JC has set as
precedent.
http://www.dp9.com will have all the links you need.
--
Alexander Williams (tha...@gw.total-web.net)
"In the end ... Oblivion Always Wins."
Thomas Bagwell
>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
For personal scale, I recommend CORPS by BTRC. Very realistic, with
scalable detail as desired. Thorough rules give to extrapolate unusual
situations.
The CORPS system works well for vehicle combat, as well, although space
combat is not specifically detailed.
BTRC also has a very inexpensive game (under $10 US) called SLAG!, which
is a very well done space-combat game. Diceless, yet sensible in
resolution. I tend to use SLAG! for my ship-to-ship combats and CORPS
for personal or small-vehicle scale combats.
Tom B.
Brett Evill
>
>
> It's a good point... I would only speculate that maybe the poster was
> planning on running an SF *naval* campaign. If you're anticipating
> playing through multiple space battles then it could be a
> consideration. And actually I think space battles are a bit more
> central (common) to SF than naval warfare to fantasy or air combat to
> modern-day.
That depends. Some GMs doubtless run campaigns in which the PCs direct
ships in space battles. But I have been running campaigns in my 'Flat
Black' setting since March 1987, and there have been only two space
battles. The PCs weren't involved in the first at all, and in the other
they were on an unarmed shuttle.
Normal wartime military service is said to be 99% boredom and 1% sheer
terror. Space combat is likely to be 99% boredom and 1% sudden death.
Regards,
Brett Evill
Chris Camfield
<b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
>Chris Camfield wrote:
>>
>>
>> It's a good point... I would only speculate that maybe the poster was
>> planning on running an SF *naval* campaign. If you're anticipating
>> playing through multiple space battles then it could be a
>> consideration. And actually I think space battles are a bit more
>> central (common) to SF than naval warfare to fantasy or air combat to
>> modern-day.
>
>That depends. Some GMs doubtless run campaigns in which the PCs direct
>ships in space battles. But I have been running campaigns in my 'Flat
>Black' setting since March 1987, and there have been only two space
>battles. The PCs weren't involved in the first at all, and in the other
>they were on an unarmed shuttle.
Brett, is "Flat Black" a naval campaign? I'm not doubting that it's
possible to have SF campaigns without any space battles at all. I was
just speculating as to why the original poster MIGHT be interested in
an RPG with a good space combat system.
>Normal wartime military service is said to be 99% boredom and 1% sheer
>terror. Space combat is likely to be 99% boredom and 1% sudden death.
*Realistically* speaking, yes. Space opera is another story.
Chris
Jeremy Reaban
combat supplement for Star Frontiers to be a lot of fun.
The rules in the Star Wars rpg aren't great, but aren't that bad.
Orc Lord wrote in message ...
Wayne Shaw
<ti...@ravnaandtines.com> wrote:
>In article <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.5...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>,
>Orc Lord <deathc...@yahoo.com> writes
>>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
>This prompts me to ask the subsidiary question - does anyone choose a
>FRP for its Naval Combat rules; or a modern era RPG for its Air Combat
>rules (the analogies of choosing an SFRPG for its space combat rules)?
If I was planning a modern game set around a Top Gun group, or an FRP
for a swashbuckling pirate game, it'd at least be an important issue
for me.
Mike Short
> I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
> planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
> science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
Star Fleet Battles and Starfire.
Mike...
Michael T. Richter
news:7t8b1t$q00$1...@madmax.keyway.net...
> Jovian Chronicles by Dream Pod 9. Uses a fairly simple 3D-vectored
> movement sytem, and the Silhoutte system is easy to use and quick.
> They just released Lightning Strike, which is a simplified system
> for ship to ship combat.
"Fairly simple" and "3D-vectored movement" don't really belong in the same
sentence unless separated by some form of negation....
--
Michael T. Richter <m...@ottawa.com> http://www.igs.net/~mtr/
"get a life. its a plastic box with wires in it."
-- Nadia Mizner <nad...@onthenet.com.au> (in private correspondence)
Wil
news:Wq2K3.253$HG2...@198.235.216.4...
> Wil <sin...@keyway.net> wrote in message
> news:7t8b1t$q00$1...@madmax.keyway.net...
> > Jovian Chronicles by Dream Pod 9. Uses a fairly simple 3D-vectored
> > movement sytem, and the Silhoutte system is easy to use and quick.
> > They just released Lightning Strike, which is a simplified system
> > for ship to ship combat.
>
> "Fairly simple" and "3D-vectored movement" don't really belong in the same
> sentence unless separated by some form of negation....
Y'know, I thought the same thing until we actually played it. We had a
blast! I realize it's not the first game to do so, but it uses a
destination counter - as soon as you make the move, you move the destination
counter to where the unit will be if no thrust is expended (we actually also
used origin counters to make it a little bit easier). Course changes are
just a matter of counting the hexes between you and the destination counter
and figuring out how much of it you want to negate. If you're being highly
efficient, you can use some of the velocity to your advantage - us, we
tended to counter all of the movement if it wasn't where we wanted to go and
then apply a new vector. Sure, it used reaction mass like crazy, but we
weren't counting ^_^
Bertil Jonell
Mr. Tines <ti...@ravnaandtines.com> wrote:
>In article <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.5...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>,
>>I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>>planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>>science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
>FRP for its Naval Combat rules; or a modern era RPG for its Air Combat
>rules (the analogies of choosing an SFRPG for its space combat rules)?
Hah! I have run Harpoon (the miniature rules, not the computer game)
as a RPG :)
-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."
M.S. Caldwell
Mike Short <mara...@cix.co.uk> writes:
> In article <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.5...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>, Orc
>> I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
>> planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
>> science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>>
> Star Fleet Battles and Starfire.
Or if you want something a little different:
"Full Thrust" from Ground Zero Games for which an adaption for Babylon 5
can be found in the Babylon Project RPGs Earth Force Source Book. Very
good (and fairly realistic) without too much book keeping.
If you prefer something more fighter orientated try ICEs Silent Death.
Both War Games (except for B5 RPG of course)
The rules in the last Unicorn Star Trek RPG give very good Star Trek Like
combat.
The rules in the old TSR Buck Rogers Game were quite good if you like an
AD&D approach.
> Mike...
Cheers
Mark
Mark Caldwell
Connect Centre, Dept. of Computer Science, University Liverpool.
http://www.bifrost.org.uk/ Bifrost 99 14 November West Bromwich
David P. Summers
> deathc...@yahoo.com (Orc Lord) wrote in <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.50481@c01read02-
> admin.service.talkway.com>:
>
> >I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
> >planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
> >science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
>
> Traveller and the new GURPS Traveller have excellent ship-to-ship combat
> systems. You can usually pick up and old Traveller boxed set from eBay for
> $5.00 or so (you'd be interested in Book 2, which outlines the combat
> system). GURPS Traveller on the other hand is almost $30, I think.
>
> The system there is a vector based combat system.
>
> GURPS Space used to have an abstract combat system that got the job done in
> a few rolls, but I found it too abstract. I don't know if it's still in
> the latest edition. GURPS Compedium II has yet another abstract system,
> but I haven't checked it out yet.
Compendium II has both the "Abstract Space Combat System" and the Space
Opera Combat system (the cinematic one). There is a new abstract one
in GURPS Space, I haven't seen it yet. The one in GURPS Traveller is a
fairly detailed one...
-----------------------------------------
If anyone else had an opinion on any of this, do you think they
would have _me_ give it?
Wayne Shaw
>to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
If he wasn't, I would. The fact they might not show up in any given
campaign doesn't change that assertation. It just says that the fact
a space battle is, on the whole, rather more likely to show up in a
random SF campaign than an air battle in a random modern campaign. I
think given the general thrust of SF RPGs that's quite defensible.
Brett Evill
>
> On Mon, 04 Oct 1999 14:24:07 +1000, Brett Evill
> <b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
>
> >Chris Camfield wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I think space battles are a bit more
> >> central (common) to SF than naval warfare to fantasy or air combat to
> >> modern-day.
> >
> >That depends. Some GMs doubtless run campaigns in which the PCs direct
> >ships in space battles. But I have been running campaigns in my 'Flat
> >Black' setting since March 1987, and there have been only two space
> >battles. The PCs weren't involved in the first at all, and in the other
> >they were on an unarmed shuttle.
>
> Brett, is "Flat Black" a naval campaign? I'm not doubting that it's
> possible to have SF campaigns without any space battles at all.
I have run Flat Black campaigns in which the PCs were secret agents; in
which they were wealthy dilettantes; in which they were field agents of
the Justice Department; and (four campaigns) in which they were among
the crew of a naval vessel involved in exploration and gunboat
diplomacy.
> I was
> just speculating as to why the original poster MIGHT be interested in
> an RPG with a good space combat system.
Sorry, I thought you were asserting that space battles are more central
to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
> >Normal wartime military service is said to be 99% boredom and 1% sheer
> >terror. Space combat is likely to be 99% boredom and 1% sudden death.
>
> *Realistically* speaking, yes. Space opera is another story.
The facts of space opera ought not to be generalised to SF.
Regards,
Brett Evill
Brett Evill
>
> "Fairly simple" and "3D-vectored movement" don't really belong in the same
> sentence unless separated by some form of negation....
>
I would have said so too, until I saw the space combat system in first
edition ForeSight. This, by a simple trick, allowed Newtonian dynamics
without any book-keeping or vector addition. A simple option allowed 3-D
combat: but this required the use of Pythagoras' Theorem (and therefore
the taking of square roots) for determining the ranges between ships.
The weaknesses of this system were that it chopped up time into discrete
turns (of several minutes duration) and space by means of a hex-grid.
Regards,
Brett Evill
Jim Davies
<b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
>Sorry, I thought you were asserting that space battles are more central
>to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
If an RPG of genre x is supposed to mirror the fiction of genre x,
it's certainly true that many SF RPGs are going to use some manner of
space combat now and again. Especially for space opera (Star Wars,
Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5, Lensmen, etc).
Obviously, many don't. However, I suspect it's more down to a matter
of there being some correlation with the amount of private
transportation in the given genre. So an FRP needs (horse-) mounted
combat rules; a modern-day RPG may need car combat rules;
swashbucklers need wet ship rules. And so on. Thus I'd expect the
SFRPG to have some ground, air and water vehicle combat rules too.
A modern RPG doesn't really need air combat rules because normal
people fly by airliner, not by armed private hoverpod. This may change
for SF.
I'd expect a game like Blue Planet (I've never seen it) to have rules
for boat and air combat, but maybe not for space combat.
As far as the *best* SFRPG for space combat, there's no contest. Prime
Directive. While the RPG itself is mediocre, the space combat section
is sublime - Star Fleet Battles.
Jim Davies
------------------------------------------
Spamfilter: remove all clothing to reply.
This does not affect your statutory rights.
Frank J. Perricone
> >Sorry, I thought you were asserting that space battles are more central
> >to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
>
> If he wasn't, I would. The fact they might not show up in any given
> campaign doesn't change that assertation. It just says that the fact
> a space battle is, on the whole, rather more likely to show up in a
> random SF campaign than an air battle in a random modern campaign. I
> think given the general thrust of SF RPGs that's quite defensible.
There are lots of reasons for this, mostly due to what we perceive as
"cool" (i.e., what there's a market for). But perhaps it's also because of
how space works -- i.e., there's so much of it, you have to spend so much
time moving through it, and while doing so, you're vulnerable to the
extremely hostile surroundings -- naturally people who want you to die are
going to use that to their advantage. While 30,000 feet is also a pretty
hostile environment, you don't spend a lot of time there unless you're in
one of a very few professions.
--
* Frank J. Perricone * hawt...@sover.net * http://www.sover.net/~hawthorn
Prism: http://www.sover.net/~hawthorn/Prism/
Just because we aren't all the same doesn't mean we have nothing in common
Just because we have something in common doesn't mean we're all the same
David L. Pulver
>
> > >Sorry, I thought you were asserting that space battles are more central
> > >to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
Since space _travel_ is fairly central to SF, then this is true.
For modern day rpgs, the central means of travel is not air, but ground.
Thus, a modern day rpg needs rules for car chases and shooting out tires.
A more complete/detailed game (say, simulating James Bond) will probably
include rules for helicopter and light aircraft action; rules for naval
combat are unlikely unless doing a Tom Clancy simulation...
For medieval/fantasy rpgs, the central means of adventuring travel is
horseback. Thus, you need rules for fighting mounted.
For a swashbuckler/pirate rpg, naval rules.
The key point is to make sure that combat rules are applied for means of
transportation that characters can own/operate. If the background of a
space game is likely to give PCs command of spacecraft, and also permits
armed spacecraft, then combat rules are necessary. If the background does
not (typical cyberpunk game, or a game strongly emphasizing space
exploration rather than armed conflict, for example) such rules are
unneeded. In a generic sf - space setting, the genre makes space actions
likely, even in stories involving merchants (e.g., Cherryh, Heinlein) so
rules for space combat should be provided as a default for such a book.
Michael T. Richter
news:37fa4690...@news.powernet.co.uk...
> As far as the *best* SFRPG for space combat, there's no contest.
> Prime Directive. While the RPG itself is mediocre, the space
> combat section is sublime - Star Fleet Battles.
That's odd. My dictionary doesn't define "sublime" as "bloated, slow and
humourously unplayable".
Bob
> Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 12:34:56 +0100
> From: Mike Short <mara...@cix.co.uk>
> Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
> Subject: Re: SF RPG's combat
>
> In article <ZYKJ3.2692$%62.5...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com>, Orc
> Lord wrote:
> > I am sort of an experienced fantasy RPG player and DM. Now I am
> > planning a SF campaign and find the choice of system difficult. What
> > science fiction system has a really good set of rules for space combat?
> >
> I'd be inclined to have a look at two stalwarts of the tabletop SF arena:
> Star Fleet Battles and Starfire.
I agree (esp. StarFleet Battles). We used to play in the Star Trek RPG,
and when any ship-to-ship combat came up, we simply shifted over to SFB
for the duration of any conflict, and then returned to Trek afterwards...
This is not too hard to do for any system BTW, if you like a certain part
of any RPG, use it when needed. Of course, it helps to make any necessary
conversions before game time, as much as possible...
Alea iacta est!
-Caesar, 49 BCE
Bob McCann
rmc...@mesastate.edu
Frank J. Perricone
<b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
> > There are lots of reasons for this, mostly due to what we perceive as
> > "cool" (i.e., what there's a market for). But perhaps it's also because of
> > how space works -- i.e., there's so much of it, you have to spend so much
> > time moving through it, and while doing so, you're vulnerable to the
> > extremely hostile surroundings -- naturally people who want you to die are
> > going to use that to their advantage. While 30,000 feet is also a pretty
> > hostile environment, you don't spend a lot of time there unless you're in
> > one of a very few professions.
>
> This depends, surely. Not all SF campaigns posit space travel at all.
Certainly not. But if you take a random sampling of 100 science fiction
novels or movies I warrant space travel will be a non-trivial element in at
least half of them. It's conceivable that you could do a pirate-era story
all set on land (such as Morgan's march on Panama in 1670) but that doesn't
mean sailing isn't a key part of the pirate genre. (The example is more
extreme by far and was chosen on purpose to make the point.)
Brett Evill
>
> There are lots of reasons for this, mostly due to what we perceive as
> "cool" (i.e., what there's a market for). But perhaps it's also because of
> how space works -- i.e., there's so much of it, you have to spend so much
> time moving through it, and while doing so, you're vulnerable to the
> extremely hostile surroundings -- naturally people who want you to die are
> going to use that to their advantage. While 30,000 feet is also a pretty
> hostile environment, you don't spend a lot of time there unless you're in
> one of a very few professions.
This depends, surely. Not all SF campaigns posit space travel at all.
There are post-holocaust settings, near-future settings, time-travel
campaigns.... I ran an SF campaign once that was set almost entirely on
a university campus and the town and countryside around it in the 1950s.
The SF content was provided by transplant technology, fantastic serums,
murder by honeybees, relict populations of Neanderthals, etc., etc.
Also, despite the presence of commercial spacetravel in my far future
setting 'Flat Black', the PCs in several campaigns set there have spend
most of their time stationed on particular planets, and have travelled
through less often in the course of adventures than my Call of Cthulhu
characters have taken 'plane trips (let alone liner voyages).
Regards,
Brett Evill
Brett Evill
>
> On Tue, 05 Oct 1999 01:47:10 +1000, Brett Evill
> <b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
>
> >Sorry, I thought you were asserting that space battles are more central
> >to SF that naval battles are to fantasy or air combat to modern-day RPG.
>
> it's certainly true that many SF RPGs are going to use some manner of
> space combat now and again. Especially for space opera (Star Wars,
> Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5, Lensmen, etc).
>
> Obviously, many don't. However, I suspect it's more down to a matter
> of there being some correlation with the amount of private
> transportation in the given genre.
A most astute observation, if I may say.
> So an FRP needs (horse-) mounted
> combat rules; a modern-day RPG may need car combat rules;
> swashbucklers need wet ship rules. And so on. Thus I'd expect the
> SFRPG to have some ground, air and water vehicle combat rules too.
Yes. All three and perhaps mounted combat also are necessary for a set
of general-purpose SF RPG rules.
> A modern RPG doesn't really need air combat rules because normal
> people fly by airliner, not by armed private hoverpod. This may change
> for SF.
It happens that in my SF setting there are no private spaceships. The
Empire doesn't allow them because they are so bloody dangerous. Even a
piddling thousand-tonne freighter can turn a city into a pretty mushroom
cloud. Regardless of the capabilities assumed for space-travel, too. So
although ForeSight has a workable set of Spaceship construction and
combat rules, I have rarely used them.
> As far as the *best* SFRPG for space combat, there's no contest. Prime
> Directive. While the RPG itself is mediocre, the space combat section
> is sublime - Star Fleet Battles.
It is well enough for most space-opera. And at need is can be used as a
WWII naval simulation. But you will understand that it does not suit the
needs of those of us who prefer slightly harder SF.
Regards,
Brett Evill
Brett Evill
>
> Since space _travel_ is fairly central to SF, then this is true.
I think you are over-generalising. A great deal of SF doesn't admit
space travel at all. And in many more examples space travel is assumed
for the setting but does not appear in the story.
For example: 'The Time Machine', 'The Invisible Man', 'Frankenstein',
'The Day of the Triffids', 'A Boy and His Dog', 'Lucifer's Hammer' and
literally thousands of others.
There is a lot more to SF than space opera.
Regards,
Brett Evill
Drew
<b.e...@tyndale.apana.snipthis.org.au> wrote:
>It happens that in my SF setting there are no private spaceships. The
>Empire doesn't allow them because they are so bloody dangerous. Even a
>piddling thousand-tonne freighter can turn a city into a pretty mushroom
>cloud. Regardless of the capabilities assumed for space-travel, too.
There is another good reason, for which I am considering adopting this idea.
The dirty little secret about warp/jump drives is that they are expected to be
able to double as time machines. I can't see any sensible Empire allowing random
characters to get their paws on something like that either.
----
- Drew.
Orc Lord
would be inclined to use a mixture of systems for this matter.
In my situation I am pretty much tied to GURPS, because my player group
has experience with the system. And they have the rulebooks, most
importantly. GURPS space is an excellent sourcebook, too. This doesn't
necessarily mean I will also use standard GURPS space battle rules
(they suck if you ask me).
The campaign type I was planning is somewhat space-centered. Mostly due
to inability of humanity to keep their planet intact. For this reason
space flight would be central.
About vectored systems: I have one (bad) experience with this.
A friend of mine experimented with a 'frictionless' system of space
battles which was rather complex. The space ships have speed vectors on
a hex board and need to plan a course for two turns in advance. The
resolution phase per turn has 10 phases in which the ships move
according to their speed vector.
Realistic perhaps, but it took us an evening to get ships through the
initial crossfire. Then the combat bogged down into shooting and taking
hits from a short distance. The battle ended with a disappointed crew
and an angry GM. Admittedly I was the pilot and took too much caution
prolonging the struggle at first. The gunner cursed me loudly for that.
Combat didn't really get exciting since hit angles were too big and
maneuvering was easy. Such a detailed system as his is unplayable and
unenjoyable in my opinion.
In short, the longer I am at SF games the more I believe too much
realism sucks. Especially in combat. Who wants to run a campaign where
PC's suffer a 50% casualty rate per combat? A hard SF campaign would
profit with some simplifications. No friction in space is a pain in the
neck too, so I would happily sacrifice some realism to be able to have
a maximum velocity stat.
If there are no enjoyable space combat systems to be found, then I will
happily leave space combat to NPC military. It is a little late to
design my world differently 'space travel is not open to PC's because
of reason a, b, c and the empire forbids it too' but that could be
overcome. It is just a little sad if it can't be done, that's all.
Availability is a big problem, that much I found out too. Most of the
older RPG's are out of print and not really profitable (I think). Is
there perhaps some international store that has second hand RPG's?
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
Ann Dupuis
> Availability is a big problem, that much I found out too. Most of the
> older RPG's are out of print and not really profitable (I think). Is
> there perhaps some international store that has second hand RPG's?
I recommend Crazy Egor's, at http://www.crazyegor.com. Anything he doesn't
have in stock, he'll search out for you.
There are other games retailers who'll search out used rpgs for customers, I'm
sure, but Crazy Egor is a friend of mine. :-)
Best regards,
Ann Dupuis
Grey Ghost Press, Inc.
ghost...@fudgerpg.com
http://www.fudgerpg.com
Wil
news:nOFM3.8266$%62.1...@c01read02-admin.service.talkway.com...
> Combat didn't really get exciting since hit angles were too big and
> maneuvering was easy. Such a detailed system as his is unplayable and
> unenjoyable in my opinion.
Yes, but systems such as the vectored combgat system in Jovian Chronicles
are not nearly that complicated - and Lightning Strike, the JC mass combat
system that was just released, are even simpler.
DailyRich
>have in stock, he'll search out for you.
>
>There are other games retailers who'll search out used rpgs for customers,
>I'm
>sure
Check out eBay, it's a veritable goldmine of out of print games. I got a copy
of the original FungShui game for about ten dollars, and the third edition of
Ars Magica for about fifteen. It's definitely worth a look.
DailyRich
"The ability to type does not make one intelligent."
Thomas Merring
On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:57:59 -0400, Ann Dupuis
<ghost...@fudgerpg.com> wrote:
>Orc Lord wrote:
>> Availability is a big problem, that much I found out too. Most of the
>> older RPG's are out of print and not really profitable (I think). Is
>> there perhaps some international store that has second hand RPG's?
>
>I recommend Crazy Egor's, at http://www.crazyegor.com. Anything he doesn't
>have in stock, he'll search out for you.
>
>There are other games retailers who'll search out used rpgs for customers, I'm
John Scott
dail...@aol.com (DailyRich) wrote:
> >I recommend Crazy Egor's, at http://www.crazyegor.com. Anything he doesn't
> >have in stock, he'll search out for you.
> >
> >There are other games retailers who'll search out used rpgs for customers,
> >I'm
> >sure
>
> Check out eBay, it's a veritable goldmine of out of print games. I got a copy
> of the original FungShui game for about ten dollars, and the third edition of
> Ars Magica for about fifteen. It's definitely worth a look.
Of course, the fact that Atlas Games are selling third edition for $5
really shouldn't be mentioned at this point, should it?
john