Book 6: Scouts questions

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

Hey folks, I'm wondering if I can get some help from the assembled regarding some questions I have about extended system generation as described in Book 6: Scouts.

1. Binary and trinary systems can have companion stars in three general locations: close (meaning so close to the primary as to be essentially subsumed by it for generation purposes - cf. the close companion to Regina's primary); far (indicating the star is quite far from the primary and essentially forms its own solar system outside of the primary's system - cf. the far companion to Regina); and finally in a regular orbit.

In the case of close companions I have no questions; the case of far companions poses no technical questions, but does beg the question, what does such a system look like?

The third case, however, is tricky and isn't explained that well, nor is there an example given in the book. The issue I'm having trouble with is that the companion is located in one of the primary's orbits, but does it also have it's own set of orbits? If so, do they overlap the primary's orbits, or are they considered to be in a different plane, or ... ?

2. The second question is with captured planets. I'm assuming that a captured planet is essentially a new orbit to fill, but it doesn't actually say that in the text and I can't be sure.

For example, let's say die rolls show a captured planet is called for. The rules direct me to roll 2d for an orbit; let's say I get orbit 8. Then another set of die rolls is made to modify that orbit by a certain percentage, resulting in let's say orbit 8.4. Does this mean that orbit 8 is moved to orbit 8.4, or that orbit 8.4 is a new orbit in addition to orbit 8, and thus will require generation of a new world?

Any insights appreciated!

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Originally posted by FlightCommanderSolitude:
In the case of close companions I have no questions; the case of far companions poses no technical questions, but does beg the question, what does such a system look like?

The Far orbit case? The companion star is simply orbiting between 1000 and 6000 AU. Well outside the primary's planetary system (I guess that means between orbits 14-16, but it's nonsense to have planets that far out from the star anyway - in practice, orbit 10 or 11 is going to be as far as planets get).

Note that the Far companion is nowhere near a lightyear away from the primary - that'd be more like 63,000 AU.

The third case, however, is tricky and isn't explained that well, nor is there an example given in the book. The issue I'm having trouble with is that the companion is located in one of the primary's orbits, but does it also have it's own set of orbits? If so, do they overlap the primary's orbits, or are they considered to be in a different plane, or ... ?

No... but it is bloody confusing in Scouts, because they use these Orbit Numbers which don't represent the same distance interval. Though yes, the companion star has its own set of orbits. The way 'GT: First in' does it (which is much more realistic) is much easier, and it says that planets can be found around either star within 1/3rd the separation between them, and around both of them beyond 3 times the separation. So it's probably easier to think of it like that, and then convert that back into orbit numbers if you like.

So if you have two stars separated by 5.2 AU, that means that both stars can each have planets orbiting up to (5.2/3=) 1.73 AU from them, and the pair can have planets orbiting beyond (5.2*3=) 15.6 AU from the primary. Translating that into Orbit Numbers, that would mean the companion star is in Orbit 6 around the primary star, each star can have planets located in Orbits 0-4 around them, and both stars can have planets orbiting from Orbit 8 around the primary star and outwards.

Or if you want an example of the Scouts system, there's a paragraph that explains it at the bottom of page 23 in Scouts.

2. The second question is with captured planets. I'm assuming that a captured planet is essentially a new orbit to fill, but it doesn't actually say that in the text and I can't be sure.

Yes, it's given a new orbit. So you'd have a captured planet in Orbit 8.4 and a 'normal' planet in orbit 8 and 9.

Though note that the solar system example at the back of the book puts Neptune in orbit 8.5 (between Uranus (8) and Pluto (9)) and there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Neptune is a captured planet. Which kinda illustrates that the 'Orbit Numbers=fixed distances' system is broken right from the start, if it can't even simulate our own system without fudging.

 

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
In the case of close companions I have no questions; the case of far companions poses no technical questions, but does beg the question, what does such a system look like?

The Far orbit case? The companion star is simply orbiting between 1000 and 6000 AU. Well outside the primary's planetary system [... snip].
</font>[/QUOTE]Ok, I'm clear on the distance issue; I'm just trying to imagine the physical layout such a system. Perhaps one could think of the companion as just a really big planet, orbiting way out there, with its own satellites.

Quasi-graphically, a normal system might look like this seen edge-on:

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">( ) . . o :: o @ @
^
|
Primary</pre>[/QUOTE]whereas the far-companion system might look like this:

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">( ) . . o :: o @ @ o . ( ) . @
^ ^
| |
Primary (1-6K AU goes here) Far companion</pre>[/QUOTE](If you imagine the () is a star, . and o are planets, :: indicates a belt, and @ represents a gas giant!)

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
The issue I'm having trouble with is that the companion is located in one of the primary's orbits, but does it also have it's own set of orbits?

No... but [... huge snip].
</font>[/QUOTE]Ok, so the companion just slips into one of the primary's orbits, and then we use the rules provided to figure out which of the primary's other orbits can still available. That makes sense, and seems relatively simple.

I guess the bit that threw me is the text (in, for example, step 10E of the continuation system) which reads "[Determine] number of orbits available for each star" - implying that all companions have their own orbits in addition to the primary's. In fact, only the primary and the far companion (if any) will have their own orbits; normal-zone companions will impose restrictions on the primary's other orbits.

Which kinda illustrates that the 'Orbit Numbers=fixed distances' system is broken right from the start, if it can't even simulate our own system without fudging.

The only reason I'm going through the pain is because I'm putting together some code to do it all for me, and I'm just trying to stick to the book for now. I like canon, broke or not.

Thanks for the quick feedback!

 

[EvilDrGanymede]

Yup, your little Far Companion diagram was correct.