What RPG has the best spaceship design system?

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Naturally, a lot depends on what the GM and players are going for. If everyone is only interested in what happens at the destination, and don't want to bother with stuff like timing, travel, etc, "speed of plot" works fine

Agreed.

Tonio Loewald once said that anyone can read rules as guidelines, but that it takes ability and work to turn guidelines into rules that work well and don't Murphy. Which is why he designed ForeSight to be a much more complete game than he usually wished to play. As an example, there is an advantage to having a map, a set of travel rules, and a well-defined situation on the map (even if partly obscured by the fog of war) in case of the instance in which players become interested in where to go and when to leave, rather than just what happens when their characters get there. But of course there are groups that never want to use that advantage, and for them it is null.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Agemegos

That isn't my position, though. In a situation like that the players could still make meaningful choices about, for instance, whether to make full preparations before leaving or to risk travelling light for an early departure and an early arrival. I criticised "travel at the speed of plot", not "travel at random speed" or "travel times independent of route length".

As I said earlier in this thread, in my view a good Star Wars RPG would define how long trips take in general (the movies are very vague and that does not work in tabletop RPGs), but not provide some rigorous way of calculating the travel time between any two points. The GM or adventure designer can define times between relevant points if trip planning will be a significant decision. To me, this is "travel at the speed of the plot." You may define it differently, but I explained what I mean earlier in this thread.

I definitely was not envisioning any rigorous in-setting model like "due to the nature of hyperdrive each jump takes a certain amount of subjective time." I was imagining a quick way of answering "how long does it take?" so you can get on with the adventure.

I don't touch "story beats" with a 16 cubit sarisa. My understanding is that they came into fashion recently, so the 20th century films and shows I used as examples were probably written without them.

[RogerBW]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

I don't touch "story beats" with a 16 cubit sarisa. My understanding is that they came into fashion recently, so the 20th century films and shows I used as examples were probably written without them.

Recently in RPGs - Mike Pondsmith was the first I think, in Dream Park (1992), and then nobody else tried again until Robin Laws revived it in Hamlet's Hit Points. But the idea was certainly being used in 1970s procedural TV writing, and quite possibly earlier.

[sir_pudding]

Save the Cat was published in 2005, so the Brandon Snyder beat sheet is popularized then.

Robert McKee's STORY seminars start in 1983, and that's probably when the terminology became widespread.

It apparently was an industry term already though.

Stage "business" is even older, of course.

[Polydamas]

Thanks RogerBW and sir_pudding. I thought that weird "Save the Cat" book on screenwriting had popularized it within the past 20 years or so.

I tend to like American fiction from the 1930s through 1970s, TV and films up to a bit later.

[sir_pudding]

Synder's methodology is more systemized than previous iterations and has a dedicated following now.

Note though the idea that business signals the end of a dialog scene is present in e.g. Shakespeare.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

I've looked at a lot of RPG spaceship design systems, and have never been quite satisfied with any of them—particularly when it comes to the handling of space combat. I'm coming at this from a position of not minding complexity much, but being deeply annoyed by things that make no in-universe sense. Here are the systems I'm familiar with:

• GURPS Vehicles 3rd edition. Like I said, I don't mind the complexity, but in spite of all the attention to realism, there are some definite wonk elements, like the laser rules.
• GURPS Spaceships 4th edition: has a lot going for it, but the lack of support for custom missiles/drones less than 10 tons (and the fact this decision wasn't wholly arbitary—which becomes apparent when you try to home-brew a fix) is a real problem. The limited choice of hulltonnages also isn't ideal, though IMHO not as bad as the hard lower limit.
• GURPS Transhuman Space Classic: being specific to one setting has major benefits to the point that I struggle to point to any really fatal flaws, but it is very setting-specific and the range of what you can do is limited in some ways.
• Classic Traveller: a major influence on probably every subsequent sci-fi RPG, but it's hard to get something right when you are the first person doing it ever, and it shows. Numerous tables that almost follow a pattern but don't, and IIRC other wonkiness.
• Alternity: For those who don't know, Alternity was a short-lived RPG by TSR whose setting got recycled as d20 Future. Actually my first sci-fi RPG ever, and the source of my handle on these forums (my real name isn't Michael!) I don't actually remember much about the spaceship design system, except that in retrospect the Traveller influence is obvious, and unfortunately the core mechanic (for the entire game, not just space combat!) is pretty wonky.
• Squadron Strike: technically a tabletop wargame, I mention it here because I really respect the author, Ken Burnside. Unfortunately, IIUC the ship design rules are so complicated they exist only in spreadsheet form, and I'm not sure the ship point costs are meant to be economically meaningful rather than a game balance mechanism.

I suspect the thing I want is a more recent edition of Traveller, or maybe 2300 AD, but I don't want to plunk down $50+ on anything before soliciting some opinions. Note that I already understand Traveller 5 is quite complex, and while that isn't necessarily a deal-breaker for me I know it can be hard to make every part of a really complicated game work together with every other part in the intended manner, which is probably the biggest reason I haven't bought it yet.

A couple more that are less complex but still well grounded:
CORPS VDS (for CORPS 2e). It's easier to work than GV, and just a bit less realistic, but avoids flavoring the futuretech with specific labels, unlike G:V. Back in the 00's, I designed an SSTO suing VDS... it had the correct lack of payload that a pre-fusion rocket should have... and was sized similarly to the Starship+Booster stack.

EABA Stuff - same basic concepts as CORPS VDS, and same author, but a number of years later. Streamlined the process a bit, too. And for EABA, not CORPS...

If one can accept Fusion and an FTL as acceptable handwavium, the Albedo Ship Sourcebook is probably the most realistic RPG supplement for the N-space side of space ships I've seen. And, appropriately, starship battles are won or lost on the programming beforehand, since no biological can react fast enough. Fusion Torch for a couple days in/out, with near instant jumps, conflicts between ships will be single pass, and put as much stuff in their way as one can for the insane KE dump on impact... explosives become redundant at that point.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

conflicts between ships will be single pass, and put as much stuff in their way as one can for the insane KE dump on impact... explosives become redundant at that point.

Gurps Spaceships cals this a "fast pass" and it is indeed a major (or _the_major) form of ship engagements in hard science universes. Spaceships jsut handles other stuff too.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

A couple more that are less complex but still well grounded:
CORPS VDS (for CORPS 2e). It's easier to work than GV, and just a bit less realistic, but avoids flavoring the futuretech with specific labels, unlike G:V. Back in the 00's, I designed an SSTO suing VDS... it had the correct lack of payload that a pre-fusion rocket should have... and was sized similarly to the Starship+Booster stack.

EABA Stuff - same basic concepts as CORPS VDS, and same author, but a number of years later. Streamlined the process a bit, too. And for EABA, not CORPS...

If one can accept Fusion and an FTL as acceptable handwavium, the Albedo Ship Sourcebook is probably the most realistic RPG supplement for the N-space side of space ships I've seen. And, appropriately, starship battles are won or lost on the programming beforehand, since no biological can react fast enough. Fusion Torch for a couple days in/out, with near instant jumps, conflicts between ships will be single pass, and put as much stuff in their way as one can for the insane KE dump on impact... explosives become redundant at that point.

Hmmm, might check out Albedo, that's the RPG of Albedo Anthrophorphics, right? I remember the Atomic Rockets website had good things to say about that.

I've already checked out CORPS VDS, but was turned off by the worked example of how to build a fission thermal rocket—the Isp is roughly correct but it's calculated based on two AFAICT totally meaningless numbers; I also suspect it would require the rocket to get a resupply of fissionables more often than would actually be necessary in real life.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Hmmm, might check out Albedo, that's the RPG of Albedo Anthrophorphics, right? I remember the Atomic Rockets website had good things to say about that.

Yes. One and the same. It's labeled "first edition", tho' it was actually second ed, and Platinum Catalyst is 3rd ed...
The boxed set by T&I was 1st ed; the chessex book was second, with very few changes, and the Ship Sourcebook was released via chessex.

Albedo as a setting has no artificial gravity (other than by spin), doesn't have much using spin, and uses fusion torches for continuous burn-turn-burn with acceleration serving as gravity simulant. decks are perpendicular to the thrust axis.

The corebook isn't needed to use the design system, but it's not a bad system.

Platinum Catalyst, which is essentially third ed, is incompatible on all mechanical levels, and doesn't have ship rules, either. (Even if Structural Integrity was done by Greg Porter...)