Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Greetings, all!

So I decided to equip the base of operations given to the PCs with several labs. I went on to construct the base as a building with a basement, yadda yadda. Then I realised that my Habitat modules cost $3M. That's rather a lot given that the whole installation costs $25M before modifiers.

Checking Spaceships:

• a regular lab (Good, +1) for 2 people costs $1M (or $10M for Physics, $30M for Science!).
• a Large Lab (Fine, +2) costs $10M, though it is good enough for 20 people.
• a Major Lab (best, +TL/2) costs $100M, good for 200 people.

However, checking both Ultra-Tech and* High-Tech, I see:

• Suitcase Lab (Basic, +0) costs a mere $3k. Okay, Spaceships shouldn't bother itself with such petty labs, but then
• Field Lab (Good, +1) still costs a mere $15k. So I might as well equip my base/ship/etc. with field labs housed in unused crew quarters or the like, and save a whopping $985k. But wait.
• Semi-Portable Lab (Fine, +2) costs $75k. 20 SPLs cost $1½M, as opposed to $10M that would be spent on a Large Lab (which supports 20 people).
• There is no official number for a Cutting-Edge Lab (+TL/2), but the ×5, ×5 progression implies that it would cost around $375k. But 200 of those would cost $75M, finally comes close to the $100M required for a Major Lab for 200 people. I suppose rounding it up to $½M for a Cutting-Edge Lab makes the top-of-the-line lab costs between UT/HT and SS compatible.

So, what makes the SS numbers so brutal? Is this an erratum?

Thanks in advance!

* == While UT gets some flack as a hastily published book with large errata, High-Tech is generally considered very solidly researched, and thus the fact that numbers between the two match means that the HT/UT numbers are to be treated seriously.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Space labs seem to be a lot more expensive, according to wiki the Columbus lab module at the ISS cost a whopping 1.4 billion euros, so this being essentially a one of a kind prototype a mass produced variant should be significantly cheaper, but the extra requirements for being space worthy, like life and pressuresupport or radiation shielding will make them significantly more expensive then simple earthbound labs.
And i would argue the field lab and the semi portable one consist mostly of the equipment and lack all of the structural and installation stuff, a lab will probably get at least some isolated venting, an an extra plumbing, maybe special waste disposal, internal airlocks, without artificial gravity all of the equipment will need to be installed in secured racks and you will also need rugged equipment that can withstand the g forces of space flight and will also function in 0 gravity. So I see a lot of potential extra cost for a spaceship lab that can account for the increased cost.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Cutting edge wouldn't keep to the progression. It would be much more.

As for the spaceships labs those are Star Trek "we can do anything" labs. The labs in the tech books would be for specific disciplines. (And maybe even specialities within those disciplines.)

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Only if you select the Science! Labs, which are 30 times as expensive. The labs in UT and HT make no mention of being specialty-specific, just skill-specific.

I do think it makes sense for zero-G labs to be more expensive (though most science fiction gets around that feature of space in one way or another). Pricing for spaceship habitats and structures should be more expensive than terrestrial ones. While it's feasible to use the SS rules to create ground-based vehicles and installations, IMO it rarely gives very satisfactory results.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Spin gravity is perfectly reasonable and should increase the price of labs much if at all.
And nearly two orders of magnitude is a bit much.
I never noticed the huge discrepancy before.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Additionally, the Spaceship labs are room sized. E.g. If you want to analyze a urine sample, the portable lab will likely do just as well as your spaceship's lab. If you want a full-body scan, you're not going to be able to do that without that massive contraption that's in the spacehsip's lab.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

It's a combination of problems with SS and problems with UT; the SS numbers are too high in typical configurations, the UT numbers are too low unless they represent labs that are only for initial investigation, where you take it to a real lab once something interesting comes up. Offhand, change it to 'Suitcase Lab: -3. Field Lab: -2. Semi-Portable Lab: -1'.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I already pointed this out, but the numbers in HT are the same as in UT.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

That doesn't prevent them from being wrong. Not everything in HT was researched thoroughly. Truth is, it's not at all clear what a 'lab' is supposed to be in the first place so it's hard to price, but several (say, 5) times the starting wealth of a typical employee is a reasonable place to start, so a lab appropriate to a single GSI would be 50-100k, one appropriate to someone with actual prestige would be several hundred thousand (as a rule of thumb, the more it costs, the more associated staff it has, even if it doesn't really need those staff), and a lab with significant space constraints will cost more.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

That number sounds smack in the middle of the two extremes, for the most part.
The size constraints sound like a good reason for an optional cost saving rule.
Double, triple, or whatever the number of cabins a lab takes and reduce the price by whatever seems reasonable. It might even decrease the risks of accidents and machinery break down. No bumping elbows with the guy carrying anthrax or stool samples. :)

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

As a participant in all the playtests in question I can tell you that the subject did not come up as best as I can remember. The numbers might well be the same as in 3e.

"Lab" is an abstraction anyway. I'm sure HT is pretty good about specific items of equipment but a generic "lab" that covers an entrie field and is conicidentally the same cost and weight as all the equipment you need for a completely different science specialization seems like an obvious and arbitrary simplification of complex realities.

If nothign else you might notice that the HT/UT "labs" don't include buildings to keep the equipment in much less power and life support for the users.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

But Spaceships accounts for these separately. First you have to pay $200K for the Habitat to get the equivalent of two cabins - and thus cover the cost of gravity, life support, etc. - and then you add an additional +$1M to turn it into a lab. You could have that cost without life support, as you get twice as many cabins, so only need "half" the habitat to get the same sized lab.


Back to the main question, I've noticed several anomalies along those lines, going both ways (e.g., everything you get with the Control Roll is significantly cheaper than if you purchased each of them separately, including computers, very-long range comms extrapolating costs from communicators in HT, radar, etc.). The Laboratory was admittedly the most significant difference in price, if I remember from my work at bringing everything in line with each other.

Anyway, my houserule in this case was two-fold. First, I changed the cost of Semi-Portable Lab to $60K instead of $75K, ruling that it was merely a Fine Quality (+2) suitcase lab, at x20 the cost and mass - which is the standard that applies to everything else in the rules.

Then, with respect to Spaceships (or buildings), I require that you purchase the habitat (thus at least $200K), and then, instead of adding $1M for a lab, you add +$60K for specifically the price of the Semi-Portable Lab. If a lab costs difference by specialty, modify the $60K accordingly (as you would the Semi-Portable Lab).

The +(TL/2) for best available lab comes when you combine 100 such labs together.

The fact that more people can use it, to me, is window dressing. When you have a larger (i.e., better quality) toolbox, of course more people can use the tools at the same time, as you'll likely have multiple slightly different hammers, screwdrivers, etc., and perhaps only a few rarer items that you'll only have 1 off and have to time-share. Spaceships is effectively telling me that a semi-portable laboratory, which fills a room in terms of equipment, is easily useable by 2 people at once without.. probably means back up equipment, additional vials and burners, larger fridge, multiple plugs and battery supplies, whatever. Personally, *I have no problem with that.

I personally let my players share first aid kits by passing bandages around and such. I would be more restrictive on something like a mini-tool kit, but not a full size kit or larger. The way to limit sharing or too many people at once is to give them a "number of uses" before you have to replenish the supplies, and set up a cost for supplies. Multiple people using the kit, lab, tools, whatever, just uses up the supplies faster. Doesn't necessarily make sense for all kits or labs, though, so judgement is required.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I imagine our resident geneticist would love to have a fully equipped state of the art lab for so cheap.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Yeah, no kidding. But I just used the value there without changing the cost... other than making things match between the two, using HT/UT as the basis.

Granted, I could have gone the other way, started with the $1M from Spaceships for the semi-portable, dividing by 20 for fine quality gives a $50,000 for the basic lab kit... but that then seems a little too expensive for a small, easily portable 10 lbs kit. Seemed too expensive for my liking.. and I didn't feel knowledgeable enough to pick a middle ground that would be appropriate.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

The appropriate middle ground depends a whole lot on what a lab is supposed to actually let you do. Realistically, a lab isn't entirely or even primarily a bonus to tasks; mostly, it determines what you can do at all, and then equipment quality may affect how good a job you can do.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Well, yes, it is an abstraction, but it's an abstraction that permeates the rest of the gaming activity.
'I need to fix a paper shredder. Now, I have an Electronics Repair toolkit in my inventory, but I wonder if it includes a screwdriver type #6 that matches one of its screws.'
'I am using a Silver Crescent type of punch, so he will get a +1 to Parry if he decides to defend with a Swampy Woodland arm parry, but -1 if he tries the Shaky Bamboo parry against it.'

These things are mostly abstracted by necessity, as a GM and player can not be expected to be proficient in the intricacies of all the skills out there. Or else there goes death to roleplaying and life to playing oneself only. Usually, when a player wants to perform a chemistry task, the GM has to answer what does the PC need in terms of tools.
The problem is that the tools in SS and UT/HT are the same, but with wildly different prices and masses.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Maybe the "tools" are the same, but I think a UT/HT vs. Spaceships lab are quite different in scope. E.g. A man-portable lab may be as good as the spaceship's lab as far as collecting and analyzing a sample of an infected colonist's blood. But once the contagion is discovered, you're going to want to use the spaceship's lab to find and mass produced a cure. You might be able to do both of these with a the man-portable lab, but it would take much longer.

Of course, this does not address why a full room-sized lab from UT/HT differs in any way from the same room-sized lab in Spaceships. The only thing I can offer is that the UT/HT lab does not include the costs for the fairly regular replacement of consumables, and Spaceships lab does.

I'm being a GURPS apologist here. I have no real insider knowledge into why the prices and masses are different. My guess would be the games effects of price and mass for labs was arrived at independently in all cases, without consulting the other books. Different assumptions resulted in different results. What these assumptions are, and how they arrived at the stats given, only the authors can tell us for sure.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I think that there is an unspoken assumption that Suitcase, Field and Semi-Portable labs are only good for the sort of work you'd do in the field and would be inadequate for many longer and more complex tasks. For one thing, they include no (or at best limited) storage facilities for samples and probably have a very limited supply of any perishables needed.

Then there's the fact that the portable labs require housing, for some kinds of work very specific and expensive housing. Add to that power requirements.

I won't pretend that once this is all accounted for, the prices will match exactly, but as a GM, I'd react to a suggestion that Labs on a research ship will consist of Suitcase labs stored in personal quarters by reminding the player that this would mean that there were a lot of tasks that he simply could not do with his tools unless he had a real Lab module.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

It hasn't permeated my gaming activity. In fact it's never come up at all.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

On the contrary, people regularly use abstract toolkits and other stuff in RPGs, install abstract programs on abstract computers with no regard for compatibility between architecture/OS and the program (which is not a given), etc. and nobody notices. It's just the way things are.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I'm not sure how you can present a contrary to my personal experience that any discrepancy in the labs in HT/UT and SS has never come up.

That specific issue or any thing much like it really hasn't come up in my personal gaming experience.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Hmmm. It seems there's been a misunderstanding. Somehow I parsed that as abstractions never coming up, so countered that in most cases, issues of compatibility, tools fitting the task etc. are simplified/abstracted.

Anyway, the price discrepancy sort of came up when I designed a base using the expanded Pyramid rules, and its 3 or 5 labs accounted for 20% of its total cost. It was weird in that those rooms cost so much compared to the hangars, power plant and other stuff.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Hey which pyramid was this in?

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Pyramid 3-34: Alternate GURPS.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I don't find it particularly shocking that laboratories where you can safely examine alien microbes demand a level of care in construction and engineering that is far beyond the standard required for hangars or engine rooms.

Other rooms just don't require the same safety protocols, with multiple layers of airlocks and suchlike.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Lets pretend for a second these microbes are somewhat similar to earth life. In fact, lets assume they are so similar the only difference is they are a mirror image of earth life. They have mirror image humans, Ebola, cows. Everything.

We cannot eat their food, we cannot get their illnesses, we cannot interbreed. Our DNA and RNA will not bind to theirs. We could probably eat Ebola from their world and be fine.

Now these are not alien microbes, these are nearly identical microbes. Our biggest concern with alien life would be us contaminating it.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Not in the majority of fiction where spaceships explore alien worlds. In reality, of course, interstellar travel doesn't work on a timescale relevant to intrepid explorers and alien lifeforms are not compatible with us in any way. GURPS Spaceships is mostly not aimed at that reality.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

Do NOT depend on this. Many organisms are not terribly fussy about the exact chemical identity, let alone the chirality of the stuff they are digesting, and many potentially very toxic waste products are not chiral at all (H2S or HCN for example...). You won't catch an alien virus. An alien bacterium or fungus or algae might be happy to grow in you and secrete something that will kill you very effectively in the process.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

If the price comes from Andromeda Strain protection levels, then that needed to be stated explicitly. Also, one would think that price hike would be most noticeable in Biology related labs, not all equally.

Strangely most fiction I've see in which characters get infected, they are horribly blase about even basic precautions. Star Trek away teams almost never wore suits and touched everything with bare hands.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

To each one's own.
My current setting doesn't even have bioweapons or genetics to speak of, and yet, before going to an unfamiliar medical facility they're preparing to suit up in full NBC gear.
Bare hands? Forget it.

Re: Labs (Laboratories) in UT & HT vs. Labs in Spaceships. What gives?
 

I didn't mean to imply that I like that commonality of near naked exploration. I just meant that it seems overly common. And if as Icelander implied that Spaceships is written for the most common form of gaming, then his assumption that the lab price comes from safety precautions, he kind of negated his own argument.
I hope that makes sense. My sentence structure feels a little rough even as I wrote it.