Fractional TL's

[scc]

Not actual fractions strictly speaking, but things like 8.1 and 5.6.

OK, I was mucking around with some stuff for Vehicles, I want to make hyperdrives a lot bigger/heavier to achieve a Dune or BT like approach where hyper capable ships are surrounded by flotillas of carry-ons, but that's another thread.

So I was re-working the hyperdrive weight equation for vehicles to make it a lot bigger when I realized my equation should account for the TL that it's built at, because this was during a walk I was away from my books and I simply added a function that took plugged the TL in as a variable, it wasn't until later that I realized that because of this I wasn't limited to plugging whole numbers into this equation.

So do people think this is a good idea, if used properly?

[Taneli]

If the fidget or doodad in your setting is 10 times heavier and larger than one in the book, just determine it to be so.

There's no need to create arcane formulae for the sole reason of getting some (arbitary) values to grow larger or smaller to fit your vision of the setting.

That said, if you want your setting to have more variation than for example TL8/TL9/TL10 for your fidgets and doodads, the way you have chosen is a totally valid way to get it.

Note however, that it's also totally valid to just say that the Tron Inc Hyperdrive is the base module for the TL, the HyperSpeed Gmbh HyperDrive++ has 110% of the speed and drains double the energy, while SnailShip's EcoHyperDrive is only 50% as fast as the standard, but also only uses 75% of the energy of the standard. You can create variation without creating more formulas :)

[Phil Masters]

It's often tempting to play with fractional TLs, usually because somebody has studied a historical technology in detail and observed the specific progression path, with measurable advances below the level of resolution of a GURPS tech level.

But it's a trap. That way, madness lies.

Remember, tech levels do not exist in material reality. They're an abstract model of the immensely complex pattern of historical and predicted developments in the vast range of entangled fields which we call "technology". They're a useful tool, especially for a generic ruleset like GURPS, but you shouldn't become a slave to your tools. And the more you try subdividing these imaginary things into smaller and smaller fractions, or feeding the arbitrary numbers you've assigned them into complex equations designed to model reality, the messier things will get.

(And yes, I've done a bit of dangerous numeric juggling in places like the GURPS Steampunk books. So I'm speaking from experience here.)

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

(And yes, I've done a bit of dangerous numeric juggling in places like the GURPS Steampunk books. So I'm speaking from experience here.)

As co-author of the Low Tech series, I endorse this message.

You want to fiddle numbers because you want, say, your power plant to be a little smaller than standard for the nominal TL but not so small as the next TL up? Feel free. But don't confuse reasonable variation (which happens in the real world anyway) with the false precision you get from declaring something like fractional TLs. TLs are broad categories telling players "here's what parts of the equipment list you can use." They are not precision instruments.

[Daigoro]

All that said, and rightfully so, there's a Pyramid article called Thinking Machines which gets into the gritty-nitty of computer Complexities, and uses fractional TLs to chart them.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

All that said, and rightfully so, there's a Pyramid article called Thinking Machines which gets into the gritty-nitty of computer Complexities, and uses fractional TLs to chart them.

You can do it that way. But when I was writing up the actual history of computers since World War II for GURPS High-Tech: Electricity and Electronics, I described them as having Medium-Scale Integration, Large-Scale Integration, and Early, Standard, Late, and Advanced Very Large-Scale Integration. I spaced the VLSIs about a decade apart, as convenient breakpoints in an ongoing progression, but I didn't call them TL8.25 or TL 8.5 or anything like that. They were stages in the progression of one specific technology, not of technology overall. Trying to pin an overall progression to that one specific technology strikes me as more trouble than it's worth.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Taneli

Note however, that it's also totally valid to just say that the Tron Inc Hyperdrive is the base module for the TL, the HyperSpeed Gmbh HyperDrive++ has 110% of the speed and drains double the energy, while SnailShip's EcoHyperDrive is only 50% as fast as the standard, but also only uses 75% of the energy of the standard. You can create variation without creating more formulas :)

Absolutely. Stuff in the real world varies by factors of 2 or 3 all the time. Yes usually you trade improvement in one area for another, but I'm sure there are heavy, power guzzling, maintenance hogs with lousy ergonomics and user interfaces that cost twice as much as the competition but stay on the market anyway because of brand cachet or other reasons unconnected to anything that would show up in game statistics. They don't belong to different TLs because of it, real stuff is just variable.

[Kallatari]

There's a distinction between TL and a TL-based factor in an equation. If an equation to measure mass, power, range, or whatever has the TL level of the item in the equation (e.g., enter 7 as the variable for TL7 items), then I believe that it's perfectly legit to add a fraction there. That 7 from a TL7 item could just as easily be 6.8, 7.1, or 7.5 as a 7.0.

But that doesn't mean that the item is a TL6.8 or TL7.1 item. It's still at TL7 item. As others have said, TL doesn't really exist. It's just a generic way to ballpark items. So we're not creating fractional TLs. In that regards, I agree with the others that there is no TL7.5. It doesn't exist.

Does allowing fractions as the variable in an equation mean that it's a neat, linear progression? (e.g, 7.1 then 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, etc.). No, it doesn't. I think you'll get the gamut of ranges so that, for example, 6.5 to 7.5 all exist simultaneously, representing how some variants are just more efficient/effective than others (e.g., better "brand names").

And things sometimes get worse as they try something that improved one issue of the technology but cause a setback in another area of the technology. I can easily see an item's progressions - with respect to variable in equation - jumping around something like the following over the timeframe of the TL (e.g., TL7): 6.8 -> 7.1 -> 7.2 -> 7.0 -> 7.4 -> 7.6 ->7.3 -> 7.4 -> 7.3 -> 7.8 -> 8.1 -> 7.5 -> 8.0. etc.

And when you throw in variant models/makes/brands/companies, it fluctuates even more. So really, you can't say that halfway through the TL (e.g., the so-called TL7.5 point) that you're equal to 7.5 in the formula because you could be any number. I'd personally allow a +/- 0.5 to a TL-based variable without question, and up to +/-1 with a corresponding cheap/expensive type of cost factor. But I'd only do that for GM-made brand names, not generic purchases, with arbitrary GM-made brand-name price modifiers (or other drawbacks). Otherwise, PCs will always plug in the most beneficial fractional value they can get away with, especially if there's no added cost to the increase in effectiveness.

Long story short, fractional TLs don't exist. Fractional numbers in TL-based equations are fine, but it's arbitrary, not based on a specific timeline.

Sticking to the exact TL number (e.g., a 7 for TL7) is the way to make it the most "fair" for everyone (same benefits for same cost). But that's a GM call as to what is fair with respect to equipment.

[Stormcrow]

Short version:

TLs are just a contrivance to help you figure out how your setting should look and work. If you already know how your setting should look and work and TLs don't match that, ignore TLs and just do what you want anyway.

GURPS is not a simulation, and TL is not a variable that you have to set correctly in order for the simulation to work the way you want it to.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by scc

Not actual fractions strictly speaking, but things like 8.1 and 5.6.

OK, I was mucking around with some stuff for Vehicles, I want to make hyperdrives a lot bigger/heavier to achieve a Dune or BT like approach where hyper capable ships are surrounded by flotillas of carry-ons, but that's another thread.

So I was re-working the hyperdrive weight equation for vehicles to make it a lot bigger when I realized my equation should account for the TL that it's built at, because this was during a walk I was away from my books and I simply added a function that took plugged the TL in as a variable, it wasn't until later that I realized that because of this I wasn't limited to plugging whole numbers into this equation.

So do people think this is a good idea, if used properly?

I do not. TL has two game mechanical functions. The first is, it provides a dividing line in technological sophistication that reflects the fact that neolithic flint knappers can't fix, much less duplicate automobiles and we can't copy warp drives from crashed alien starships.

The second is that it changes the default income for starting characters, defining major shifts in lifestyle over time.

Fractional TLs don't work for either purpose. James Watt might not have been able to invent the steam engines from 40 years later from scratch, but he would have understood them, and learned a lot from them if given a chance to take them apart.