View Single Post
Old 09-20-2017, 09:58 PM   #91
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Spitballing a Space Opera Boxed Set

Quote:
Originally Posted by acrosome View Post
. Great technobabble about the stutter warp, for instance.


I hate reactionless thrusters...
The quality of the technobabble for the stutter warp is a matter of opinion. I do not find it useful at all.

However much you hate reactionless thrusters I can guarantee you that there are many more potential players who hate fuel calculations. To the point of not playing any game that uses them and certainly not anything billed as "Space Opera".

In the Gloria Monday campaign I did use a fuel burning drive but it was total conversion with a non-realistic exhaust. It carried 2 weeks worth of fuel in a modestly-sized water tank too.

The normal space propulsion was also hyperdynamic so there was a speed limit. Players hate calculating trip times in accelerating spaceships even more than they do fuel calculations. I can do the math personally but do not think it a good use of game time.

So the players knew that their ship flew at a 2 million miles per hour and needed to be refueled every 2 weeks. Even this was a safety margin. Most trips didn't last over 1 week.

I would judge that this is about the amount of detail you can have ships for a Sapce Opera box that's supposed to have broad appeal.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote