 December 27, 2007 - 4:31pm | Refer to: Ship Operations. I was thinking the primary skill areas were good for the ship skills. It seems like going into beyond a basic rules set to get more ellaborate. |
December 27, 2007 - 6:13pm | It's a work in progress...so we will see where SS is going. |
 December 29, 2007 - 6:49am | The KHB is in the "I'm getting ahead of myself" pre-prototype stage, so to speak...although finishing touches are being applied to the initial project. Basic Revisited is pretty much ready, I think we have all the info we need to get it going and I'm slowly revamping each page (check it out if you haven't lately...lots of detailed stuff being inserted). As far as ship skills will go, the PSA will determine what the character can do. Techs will be able to pilot, navigate and serve as engineers while Militants will be gunners. BioSocials will be ships doctors/science officers (I'll probably need to drum up something for that one). There won't be any skill levels, a pilot will be able to pilot any craft, etc. I'll simply give bonuses like we have established in the B+ section (such as to hit with weaponry, evasion bonuses, etc) I have a slew of space ships in that section, with the ideal that rather than going through the complexities of design/construction the players or ref will simply select a base type and modify/adjust from there |
 December 31, 2007 - 12:29pm | Gotta have ship design..... Simplified of course, but.... ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) |
December 31, 2007 - 2:29pm | Blending the basic boardgame and KH Campaign Book, design will be a tricky endeavor. For one thing, the Basic boardgame (and advanced for that matter) does not mention anything about hull size, which is the premise of design cues in the Campaign Book. Then you have to add in things like variable drive systems, and break it down from there. I've wrestled with the idea and just can't come up with something in between, at least nothing beyond starting with a basic design and drives and personalizing it from there with options. Also, any ship designed in KHB would have to be transferable to the Campaign Book/AD Expanded later on, which is where teh idea wrestling comes into play. If I opt for the KH Campaign Book design cues, then it works on that end but fails on the simplicity angle by becoming far more complex than what is laid out in the Basic/Advanced "tactical manual". |
December 31, 2007 - 2:43pm | Aye, I understand the complexities inherent in 'Expanded' / the Campaign book -- working on a 'Conon-ish' design spreadsheet.... And IMO, some items could be added to basic without making things too much more complex (HS, for example.) Somethink I'll think about, although even in 'Expanded', things aren't deterministic and have to make additions / changes to have consistent rules for design. |
December 31, 2007 - 3:30pm | Basic and Advanced in the TAC doesn't cover HS, because they covered only boardgame rules with pre-made ships. This is why there's a discrepency between ships in TAC and flat ship design rules in the Campaign Book. The campaign book takes into account that the ships you are building do not contain a pilot, engineer, or gunner until you add them. The TAC ships make up for the lack of consideration of pilots, engineers, and gunners by bolstering the stats. |
January 1, 2008 - 4:59pm | And IMO, some items could be added to basic without making things too much more complex (HS, for example.) True, I could probably use something along those lines for ship creation without diving too deep into complexities. Like Corjay said, TAC covers premade ships...I suppose a Hull Size/specifications table similar to the one in the KH Campaign Book can be utilized, and rather than offer the multitudes of drives (atomic, ion, chem) and sizes (A, B, & C) simply make it a factor that is multiplied by hull size, such as "Star Drive" for starships and "space drive" for system ships. I could probably even whip up something for weapons/defenses consideration, assigning a "space" value for each system like I did on the Computer programs, naturally with warships having a much greater value over civilian ships. Another factor system no doubt, HS * X for warships and HS * Y for civilian. The campaign book takes into account that the ships you are building do not contain a pilot, engineer, or gunner until you add them. The TAC ships make up for the lack of consideration of pilots, engineers, and gunners by bolstering the stats. Sort of...my loose interpretation of the two sets of stats on the combat tables would be that the Basic ships do in fact have a crew, and the higher numbers reflect an average for "skill". The second set (lower numbers) reflects adding the actual skill of each crew member to the percentages to said numbers. On that premise I was thinking of just sticking with the higher/Basic numbers, without having to actually delve into things like skill levels. A PSA:Tech character may opt to become a pilot, navigator, or engineer and a Military character may become a gunner, and use those numbes without having to expand into skills and subsets. Of course by making Basic into a campaign, I opted to add in the DCR as characters will want to fix things as they break. |
