[Spaceships] Antimatter Plasma Torch fuelled by Water?

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Without knowing already, that might or might not be where the relevant info is.

It is. The entire discussion is about rules on that page, under that header.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

What page?

23

[lexington]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Ah, so it's an assumption. Okay.

It's an assumption that's much more reasonable and easier to defend than the assumption that "antimatter engines don't need antimatter to work".

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

I understand antimatter fine. You appear not to understand the issue -- It's about the rules, not the physics.

Which totally misses the point. This is how these things would work in reality, which the game is attempting to simulate. If you are having this discussion at my table, about here you get told your ridiculous rules hack does not work. Debate closed. Pushing the rules over the setting, or basic logic, is sometimes OK in an abstract game, but almost always bad form in an RPG.

If you want an engine that you can just run water into and get thrust out, get a Conversion Drive.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by malloyd

Which totally misses the point. This is how these things would work in reality, which the game is attempting to simulate. If you are having this discussion at my table, about here you get told your ridiculous rules hack does not work. Debate closed. Pushing the rules over the setting, or basic logic, is sometimes OK in an abstract game, but almost always bad form in an RPG.

If you want an engine that you can just run water into and get thrust out, get a Conversion Drive.

Or a Fusion drive.

In theory they might need something else to fuel the fusion reaction, but the book offers no hint of that.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Or a Fusion drive.

In theory they might need something else to fuel the fusion reaction, but the book offers no hint of that.

They do, but the quantity and price is considered insignificant. The only reason it's tracked for antimatter plasma is because antimatter is really really expensive.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by lexington

It's an assumption that's much more reasonable and easier to defend than the assumption that "antimatter engines don't need antimatter to work".

The issue appears to be whether you need to buy the fuel with it in, or whether you put it in yourself.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

The issue appears to be whether you need to buy the fuel with it in, or whether you put it in yourself.

Antimatter-boosted X is just Spaceships terminology for a "tank of X, and enough antimatter to boost it to plasma." It isn't any special blend or anything, and a "fuel tank" designed for it would actually be a standard fuel tank and an antimatter trap.

You could use any water (or hydrogen) source along with a suitable supply of antimatter, but the reaction mass is such a tiny part of the cost for all of the antimatter fuels that the cost savings amount to less than the rounding that's been applied.

[Kax]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Antimatter-boosted X is just Spaceships terminology for a "tank of X, and enough antimatter to boost it to plasma." It isn't any special blend or anything, and a "fuel tank" designed for it would actually be a standard fuel tank and an antimatter trap.

You could use any water (or hydrogen) source along with a suitable supply of antimatter, but the reaction mass is such a tiny part of the cost for all of the antimatter fuels that the cost savings amount to less than the rounding that's been applied.

True. You could use mercury for the reaction mass and the cost would still disappear into the antimatter cost.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Antimatter-boosted X is just Spaceships terminology for a "tank of X, and enough antimatter to boost it to plasma." It isn't any special blend or anything, and a "fuel tank" designed for it would actually be a standard fuel tank and an antimatter trap.

You could use any water (or hydrogen) source along with a suitable supply of antimatter, but the reaction mass is such a tiny part of the cost for all of the antimatter fuels that the cost savings amount to less than the rounding that's been applied.

Makes sense, but I can't see where that's spelled out in the book.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Makes sense, but I can't see where that's spelled out in the book.

Spacships doesn't do that level of detail. The antimatter is is far, far less than 5% of the mass of the "fuel". It can't be seperated out into its' own system.

Spaceships doesn't even separate the LOX and the LHyd in chemica rocket fuel (if that's even the mix, LOX and Kersosene is quite viable).

The old Ve2 did full detail and I suspect the forthcoming system for 4e will also but Spaceships is broad brush.