Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • GM Points



3 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. a round is 6 seconds & move speed is 6m/round. are you trying to claim that someone moving at a brisk 1m/second can easily fire accurately at targets 350m away?
  2. Likely deliberate. the stock 5e hp recovery by going to sleep after a full day instead of going for forced march type penalties is a mess for any kind of plot or story other than dungeon crawls.
  3. It's your strawman. You brought up the idea that it was bad, own it rather than claiming your bad argument is a strawman. Yes the sg team uses those things on tv where the format is focused on something other than the mechanics like a ttrpg, you might as well point at the novels and use the lack of sfx & costume design teams as an excuse for why those should also not be involved when shifting format to movie or tv show. Continuing with the tv show however, on that tv show a p90 does not get used with pinpoint accuracy from nearly two kilometers away as if shooter & target were standing in a small bathroom or closet rather than both running around at a good speed at a distance that is well into the realm of incredible skill for a stationary sniper calculating wind distance with a spotter & so on. As to your confusion over the words "elsewhere in the system", the fact that traveler has simple equipment is ok because the system has depth elsewhere, I linked that up to avoid continuation of the confusion you are demonstrating by expanding in the equipment in traveler. Yes sgp has a lot of feats and such, but the vast majority of those apply to combat & in some cases social interaction. D&D is generally a terrible system for social interactions compared to systems with a greater focus there & sgp has some added structure to help there making the social feats fit some other topic. As to combat, sgp manages to take the already weaksauce tactical combat component of 5e & crank the problems to eleven by making it so a lot of fights the players won't even need to move. Traveler however has an very very different focus such as the lethality & combat rules that include things like parabolic fire, blind fire, panic fire, shotgun spread, suppression fire, & much more. Traveler doesn't need the added design space in the weapons themselves because that design space to make combat more than "I shoot my gun again" over & over again while sgp is lacking in both. @1001100x02 as to you?... still waiting for you to expand onyour comments in the thread you ran away from when asked for details & you aren't exactly adding anything here.
  4. a book of guns is an example because it was frequently raised as a probable extra book in discord to shut down arguments about the asburd ranges & overly simplistic weapons with stats that are largely irrelevant in many cases. You are oversimplifying things to make your point free from half the problem. All of those systems you list are significantly higher on crunch in so many other ways that allow depth elsewhere in the system also. It might be reasonable to make a case for why the magic item cycle is a bad thing, but you aren't even attempting to do that either.
  5. You seem to have misunderstood the problem. Look at it from the perspective of a companion book of weapons, open up a spreadsheet & start filling in values to make a simple collection of 5-10 pistols shotguns longarms & so on. The base ones in core have range ammo & so on of "enough to not matter", "absurdly more than needed", & so on. Imagine a game of d&d as an ongoing campaign where all of this does not exist because there is nothing to hang it on & the gear the party started with is as good as it will ever get. As to your odd choice to jump to a completely different topic by bringing up "weapon creation as a part of the rules"... That is in core, just not in a way that does much other than the not in my game thing you note.
  6. in other words your solution is little more than "why doesn't the gm just build the rest of the system so it doesn't need to be part of core"? It's not at all controversial to say that most people buying a system expect it to reach a level of completeness that requires a bit more than "fix it yourself" or "design the rest on your own." Even if one were to accept your suggestion as acceptable it adds "redesign the character sheet to include room for anything new you add to the weapon/armor designspace", which is a significant leap of efforteven for people who own one or more programs capable of making a (fillable) pdf & says nothing for needing to build digital sheets in various VTTS that require understanding & use of various languages like CSS. As to "The minutae of PCs customising weapons that people here are talking about belongs in an expansion book", there is no room baked in the system's designspace to support such a book. The number of gamers who are itching to buy a book with ten or so weapons $weaponName, Range:plenty, Ammo:Plenty 1d6/1d8/1d10/etc is going to be vanishingly small because they already have exactly that. Needing a 1.5 release to support something as mundane as an expanded weapons book is absurd.
  7. That clears up intent a bit but still misses the scale problem 100x100 encoutnter maps are still more than a lot of dungeon crawls. CoS argenvostholt: 2 floors ~26x26 & 18x14 CoS Amber Temple: blank 27x9 & dungeon 28x24 CoS van richtens tower. 4 6x6 floorsplus small outside & 1x2 wagon. CoS wizard of wines: 3 floors, 11x20, 11x20 plus small outside, & 7x13 basement The only maps that have scales capable of even modeling the weapon ranges in sgp are towns & yester hill where they are 50ft/square. LMoP Goblin Ambush: They attack from the trees, not even a map. LMoP Cragmaw hideout you chase the goblins to is 31x20 mostly of tunnels LMoP town of phandain probably about 500x1000 but they just have a bar showing scale rather than sqares. LMoP Cragmaw Hideout: ~29x17 LMoP Ruins of thundertree (a town sized encounter map) ~28x20 LMoP Wyvern Tor ~25x15 LMoP Wave Echo Cave ~33x44 I could continue but the point is made. A GM puts a lot of work into making a map for a dungeon crawl because of how large it is & even those are likely to be only a fraction of a 100x100 encounter map made with a mere "modicum" of effort. Your last paragraph underscores a problem you are treating as a feature that handles a design issue rather than an option. If the assumption is that the bad guys will always be inside limiting weapon ranges to the size of rooms, then weapon ranges should be constrained to something at least close to the size of a large room rather than ranges closer to seeing the building containing that room on the horizon. Not having that limit or some easily applied secondary rule with vision causes all of the problems noted in the OP, requires boatloads of extra effort for encounter maps, & says anything but a dungeon crawl is probably badwrongfun. It may have been a few years since I watched any of the stargates on tv, but I don't remember dungeon crawls being the norm even if there were a decent number of encounters that took place on gouald ships.
  8. 100m in every direction is a freaking gigantic map that makes return to undermountain & other mega dungeons look positively cozy. Having to prep maps of that scale for every possible place the players might need is a gigantic hurdle. Using your own example you call in the quantum ogre with gliders & backup called in. If it doesn't matter what tactic they use the tactic becomes "shoot down the gliders screw the hostages" or "where are the reinforcements, lets target there first"... you have gigantic maps ready for both of those situations right?.. What about if they setup a diversion elsewhere in order to target the reinforcements coming in to handle the diversion?... Alternately are the players not allowed to do those things because the rail is not wide enough to allow or are they not allowed because the quantum jaffa/quantum deathgliders don't exist yet? By comparison, the entire map of undermountain is only about 170x400 squares . Battle maps for encounters on that scale is not a mere "modicum of effort". You even admit these maps made with a mere "modicum" of effort take over a hundred rounds to cross. Simply filling in a map of that scale edges deep into making territory where techniques normally reserved for making world maps called for to make encounter maps
  9. I've been going back & forth on how to respond to this for a few days now, it's quite a bit more than a "modicum of effort" without making a couple problematic elements the core of one's GM style. It's a trivial amount of effort if you rob players of any sort of agency and go hardcore railroad "so your making your way into town from the east">"wait what? when did we decide that?">"I did", but that's pretty universally accepted as a bad thing to avoid as a GM. The other thing is over use of the quantum ogre which is sometimes ok& good but it's a toxic slide that breaks down the motivations for your players to care about your game. If every approach is the same with the same quantum ogre reinforced defense force all the time & the jaffa always magically have handy quantum ogres to hide behind they will gradually start to notice that their decisions don't matter ever. It leaves the players slowly coming to the conclusion that they are just life support for your storytelling sessions.
  10. You misunderstand. Right now you can look at the value we place on gasoline, a bar of naquadah, various precious metals & gemstones, rare elements used in high tech production, advanced alloys , grain prices, & so forth to make a simple chart saying an average civilization of our tech level puts a value of X pounds of gems & rare metals for Y pounds of advanced alloys & has such a low value on grain that the price for Z pounds of rare elements would be measured in tons. Commodities are useful for trade because pretty much everyone needs them provided they are advanced enough to use them.
  11. Yea it's not a bad currency, just there's a big difference between baking in a currency & having the gm need to make something up. If it's baked in then the players can look at a list & get a vague estimation for what some basics might cost if supply & conditions were not influencing it. It's fine to do a resources ability or something instead, just they should pick something & bake it in
  12. I don't think that stargate ever introduced any form of currency including worlds that were advanced enough to make its development an absolute certainty.Most worlds were still in barter phases of trade, I think the closest they came to touching on it was when they found an outpost with a holigraphic display in ancient/asgard/1-2 others that showed all the known elements plus a few more that they figured was used in trade between those civilizations in the episode Torment of Tantalus Edit: With that said it's probably a good idea to introduce some form of currency, probably by tech level. A TL 0/1 civilization probably doesn't have as much vlue for naquadah or advanced metal alloys but puts a lot of value in bags of grain (ie corn/wheat/barley/rice/flour/etc) while a stable TL2/3++ civ is likely able to source their own staple foods like grains but has a lot of use for raw materials & rare elements. That sort of table might be useful for conversion of trade goods between civs.
  13. Some of us were talking in discord yesterday about how the mechanics of d&d/5e make things like the tactical retreat commonly used in the tv series difficult with slaughter to a man kind of being the default as a result & how other ttrpgs with a clear & simple "this combat is going to obviously end in one way, lets discuss that & launch from there on to doing cool stuff" mechanics for lets agree to win/lose like fate's conceed. Since the closest fit for a mechanic like that might be the encounters chapter & that is a harder to explain gem in the sgp rules that doesn't get enough attention I decided to give it an in depth review/critique as an easy "no man I'm serious it really improves a lot, look how improved it is over 5e" reference if nothing else. This is based on my reading of version 061320 so barring any crossed wires on my part any criticisms or praise may fit oddly with versions. Encounter Pacing: Right away on Page 138 in the first sentence of the first paragraph in the chapter there is a massive improvement in going from the standard 5e 6-8 encounters per day to more manageable 3-5. Since the average encounter s going to be a few baddies those numbers get multiplied & 6-8/day translates to the party massacring hundreds of people in a small sleepy town every week if they aren't engaged in dungeon crawls where they move from room to room slaughtering bad guys because they are bad. It's a subtle difference that takes a certain level of experience to grasp how significant this little improvement is, but in short it's the difference between "we know there are gouald supporting rebels in town but haven't been able to identify them" and "There is literally a newly built fortress filled with a hundred or so gouald supporting militant rebels overlooking the town but haven't noticed it till you showed up so can you look into why our crops are failing this season?". It's possible to scale up for more encounters by stretching resources, giving out magic/higher TL items/whatever... but if you want to shrink the overinflated encounter number down to focus on plot or any of the noncombat things in the player style paragraph there you move extremely powerful sometimes abilities meant to be used sparingly to the default mode in nearly every combat & run into a whole host of problems so I can't praise this enough. Yes not every encounter needs to be combat & some have no combat, but at least in standard 5e the combat is tuned extremely tight to the assumption that they will be. It's also one of the first things I noticed in sgp back in march that really grabbed me. Splitting the party: This is a sidebar on pg185 that I really like & wholeheartedly agree with but I feel like it's missing a signpost saying that it's ok to break the normal d&d box of reactive players working to handle whatever new situation the gm threw out one by one & move towards seizing upon the fact that the PCs are highly competent skilled professionals able to proactively do things the GM might not have even considered in his notes. In order for this to feel empowering to brainy/skilled characters it needs to be something capable of really changing the course of things at the table in a more shared narrative style than is typical for d&d. Noting something about shared narrative here would be good. If all hanging back to research the virus or understand the technical logs noted can accomplish is to effectively obtain the red key to let the more fighty inclined players progress then everyone will hang back with bob rather than leave him out & a good gm will encourage it rather than leave poor bob twiddling his thumbs the whole session. Doing that requires a level of thinking outside the box that in some ways requires explosives and fire. Using the Broca Divide episode as an example, lets say the GM went in with notes about a gould/ancient weapon with automated defenses that needed fighting but early on one of the players raised the idea of the aberrant behavior being a plague with something protecting the locals for some quick back & forth table discussion where the GM admits some of the original threadbare plot &everyone agrees that using tranq guns to cure all the infected while they themselves are still suffering from hallucinations & hormone problems would be more fun. A lot of times people will say "yea we do that all the time in my games" but players tend to limit themselves to things they think will fit within the GMs plans to a certain degree & telling the players "here's some plot your characters don't know" is a big problem compared to shared narrative games where it's pretty normal where there is an implied player/gm agreement for the player characters not to abuse that player knowledge. 139 touches on that to a degree, but it's often good advice for the GM to give three or more clues pointing with a neon arrow at something before the players wonder if the culprit is even involved so touching it a few places is probably an improvement Action encounters: Pg139 has this bit "he most recognizable action encounter is combat, which can take many forms from a bar brawl to an extended firefight. Others exist, including traversing dangerous terrain or engaging in an aerial dog-fighting." Seems like something along the lines of "finding an interesting way to creatively influence the action with your noncombat skills" or similar would slot nicely into that others exist section for a third clue that shared narrative is encouraged This sort of addition is important to make it clear that these other ways of dealing with things are just as valid as "the big stupid fighter can almost always add violence" option even when the smart/sympathetic/charismatic folks are trying to do their thing Determination 140: This is a great addition that occupies a nice middle ground between fate's "everything is combat" & standard d&d's "my charisma based SAD class can & should brainwash people with a smile by RAW through diplomancy has no real mechanic other than gm's whims". Not only is it great for that but it keys off int & wis on top of charisma, Bob might not be very good at conveying himself, but he's got enough int to make sure his stuttering mumbles about that gouald supporting rebel fortress messing with our crops are worth listening to & Cindy has the wis to be sympathetic enough for the same. That's something traditional d&d is pretty bad at even with 5e's phb174/175 attribute checks/skills with different abilities where decades of reinforcement set charisma based skills off in a special box that no other ability shall violate the sanctity of. Convince Encounter 142: A lot of the good things I said about splitting the party/action encounters applies to this and the other encounters, one thing I especially like is that it specifies "each PC." I've seen players who are monstrously good at riffing off each other in social encounters to setup the other for a sure thing or snatch their bud from failure as carter regularly does with "what he means to say" type stuff... Then I've also seen two other normal types of players I'll call alice & bob. Alice wants to be involved but due to some social anxiety or whatever holds back while bob just wants to show up & hang out but is always lurking there in hammerspace ready to be summoned in a pinch. Bob doesn't do anything on his own & the gm will bring the game crashing to a halt if NPCs try to interact with him. Having to spend determination each round of it gives Alice some support & footing to jump in when she's interested & keeps Bob from being yanked from hammerspace for every interaction without the gm needing to be a killjoy playing teleport cop and ask the guy who's not going to volunteer an answer if he's going with anyone whenever the party splits but later the party realizes they need one more whatever. One of my pre-covid games had both an alice & a bob, alice would regularly tell us how d&d helped her social anxiety so much. I'm not sure why the convince encounter sidebar is on 148 but those are some nice examples of how it could be used. Roll then Role 142: Basically this amounts to doing the dice portion using the 142 encounter template or whatever then roleplaying out the results of that quickly don't know how I feel about this, in theory it might work great or it might be a mess. I feel like the answer might depend on the particular gm & set of players but the mere existence is undoubtedly a good thing for newer/less experienced GMs who need this kind of advice when they are just getting started so it's great to see. Diplomatic Function 144: I was really confused about what seemed to be a really complex scene that almost felt too complex for a ttrpg just from the 144 part alone, but after I read through the 145 mechanics for it a few things clicked when I went back to read it again. It's hard to imagine using this & I feel like getting the "diplomatic actions" to the average group of players might be difficult enough to avoid this kinda thing, but I've known players who will read anything I give them in addition to a bunch of stuff on their own & it seems like this is probably a good thing for any group that can juggle the plates involved. Infiltration encounter 148: I really like this as someone who's been involved with physical datacenter security+pentests of it & have had players who occasionally did penetration testing so it's really great to see some basic mechanics for things like that alertness track. One thing I'd note is that it mentions using stealth, but not the kind of near SEP field social engineering tactics the team frequently uses when dressing up like the locals & walking right in the front door like the locals do. That sort of social engineering is frighteningly effective but without a mechanic that spells out that it's ok to translate know stuff skills to walk out the door with 75k handed to you, walk out of multiple grocery stores with palettes of beer, or much much worse you often wind up with GM's sidelining those attempts with "roll dex(stealth) to walk in the front door like that" even though trying to be stealthy would make you obviously out of place. Calling out that sort of look like you belong & brazenly lean into it style of infiltration might make this a lot more interesting for the whole group instead of just the sneaky types in the group. Seems like maybe the infiltration mechanics or example might be the place for that kinda stuff. Also it might not be a bad idea to mention that even advanced security is usually really bad. Here's a bunch of examples of real world electronic security & the trivial ways of walking all over it in the form of a bunch of defcon talks that might not all track over cleanly but there's going to e a bunch of gadgets that can be translated over neatly to the equipment lists & give inspiration for cool alternatives to "The door is locked with a dc16 lock" Interrogation 150: The thing I really like about this is that it beats back the high CHA quick brainscan/brainwashing diplomancy expectation with all the brutality it deserves & gives a nice little mechanic to structure something. step2 aid interrogation is missing things like leveraging culture against the subject, just being there as scary muscle, & so on Personal Transport & mounts 162: "If an effect moves your personal transport against. its will, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the vehicle, landing prone in a space within 1m of it." What about seat belts & enclosed transports like an airplane hitting turbulence? That wording works well for horses & such but kinda falls down when applied to a lot of vehicles as written. contest 168: These are great when they apply, but extending it with the addition of fate style challenges where a really high dc thing is broken up into smaller plausible chunks within the reach of PCs might be a nice addition Aerial combat 170/171: assist specifies dex(pilot), but once you move from single pilot stuff to anything larger like an alkesh or bigger you've also got all the times Sam Daniel or whoever rearranging crystals, rerouting power, altering shield frequency, the classical signal interference, & so on to assist or harass other enemy craft. Not sure if that kinda stuff would be an addition to existing actions or new actions though. Duels 172: It's just a blank page in 063120, but these are reasonably common in my experience & almost always just a painful slog of one PC & one NPC beating on each other while the rest of the party watches on twiddling their thumbs, any mechanic breaking away from that is certain to be great. that leaves the tactical retreat/concede Edit: I wrote about other things that could be added to Aerial combat, but might not have been clear on the problem having every included action being dex(piloting) it would be trivial to have a situation where much of the group had no effective way of contributing at all & not much harder to have a situation where some players literally have nothing they could be doing. Starfinder handles this by having a lot of weapons, ship systems, & so on key off various skills but I've still seen a group of 4-5 run into a situation with a good sized ship (similar to ds9's defiant or millennium falcon in size maybe) had 1-2 players who literally could do nothing but twiddle their thumbs because there was only one included weapon in the module supplied ship that fit their skill but two players who had only that as an option.
  14. Agreed that it was absolutely electrical, for comparison though the boston dynamics big dog darpa project had a speed that varies from a 0.45 mph (0.2 m/s) crawl to a 3.6 mph (1.6 m/s) trot according to it's wikipedia page
  15. This is really important catch & touches on a lot of the reason it's a problem to just reduce ranges or whatever without being a hot wire. No player ever complains when the gm puts narrative over crunch to kick a boring or uninteresting/irrelevant bit of stuff behind the curtain like declaring the FRED is faster if the party has something else more interesting to be doing/focused on. When the GM moves from letting the players be awesome together by describing competence porn & focusing on the fun parts to being the fun referee kneecapping them for being too good like 5e so often forces the gm to... that's when fights start over the math & specific wording. The gm advice section isn't quite in/ready yet from what I've heard, but noting those two styles of gming might be a good inclusion.
  • Create New...