Driverless Starships

[JimMarn]

Hmmm... a possible story seed.

Years ago I read a story where a rich guy bought a starship that had voice control. He would tell it what star to go to, and which planet to land on.

He woke up one morning ship time, and his hoarse throat convinced the ship he was not the ship's owner. But an imposter.

The passengers, mostly his buddies, tried to show the ship that a voice can become distorted due to talking excessively, etc. And how they had to be themselves as the airlocks hadn't been opened.

Somewhere in there the ship's security system became convinced that one or more of the people were not who they said they were, but bad people and it initiated security measures and stopped in interstellar space.

They did eventually convince the ship they were who they said they were, and it went on to the planet/solar system the owner had wanted to go to.

 

[Ulsyus]

:rofl:

It's a legitimate question!

If there can be assertions made that a steward could be the most important character for generating connections to rich patrons, then running an actuary could be a really useful character to have. Especially if they're sent on field trips...

 

[Timerover51]

Hmmm... a possible story seed.

Years ago I read a story where a rich guy bought a starship that had voice control. He would tell it what star to go to, and which planet to land on.

He woke up one morning ship time, and his hoarse throat convinced the ship he was not the ship's owner. But an imposter.

The passengers, mostly his buddies, tried to show the ship that a voice can become distorted due to talking excessively, etc. And how they had to be themselves as the airlocks hadn't been opened.

Somewhere in there the ship's security system became convinced that one or more of the people were not who they said they were, but bad people and it initiated security measures and stopped in interstellar space.

They did eventually convince the ship they were who they said they were, and it went on to the planet/solar system the owner had wanted to go to.

I can see using voice-recognition systems, along with facial imaging systems and also DNA testing to confirm an owner's identity.

 

[kilemall]

I can see a rich hassled noble trying to persuade "Uber StarFreight" to let him categorize a Basic Vacuum World Habitat Module as '50 tons of cargo' and load it, with himself on board, for transport wherever it happens to be Jumping to next. (He wants to get away from his entourage for a week or two or three.)

I actually had an entrant who suggested this in my starship design contest.


Looks like mobile home/RV park, or luxurious personal Pullman car, depending upon the appointments I guess.


Not for the casual as he would be spending Kcr50 on top of life support and other costs, including likely a personal steward.


I would personally lean more towards personal small craft yachts as a cheap 50-ton way to do cruising without funding the full jump capability.

 

[JimMarn]

I can see using voice-recognition systems, along with facial imaging systems and also DNA testing to confirm an owner's identity.

I think this story was written and published before DNA testing was well known.

 

[Kilgs]

From a RPG standpoint, it is probably a terrible idea. Games are about people doing things at places. If the ship has no crew, then who cares about the ship, or transportation between worlds or Jumpspace. Characters might as well teleport from starport to starport and just skip the ships. All of the "action" will take place where the people are and skills like Pilot, Navigator, Gunner and Engineer are no longer needed ... the ship already handles that.

While I definitely agree 100% with the above... I don't know anyone who plays space games to not have a ship.

But!

It does bring to mind a certain series of books where each start with the protagonist (from Terra...) waking from a cryo after FTL, goes into adventure, and then ends with the protagonist getting back into cryo for another jump.

A series of books that influenced Traveller quite a bit... ;-)

So if you were inclined to run such an adventure, driverless ships would be an excellent way of accomplishing it.

 

[Grav_Moped]

It's a legitimate question!

If there can be assertions made that a steward could be the most important character for generating connections to rich patrons, then running an actuary could be a really useful character to have. Especially if they're sent on field trips...

As the airlock completed it's cycle, he checked his weapons one last time. Blaster on the right, PersComp on the left. Good.

The door spun open.

It was time to Balance. The. Books.


-- From The Adventures of Zack Fairplease, Galactic CPA

 

[epicenter00]

Looking at the rise of driverless technology in everyday life, I was thinking about how this effects Traveller. Why would you need a crew especially trading on known routes?

You don't.

I think the only reason would be a safety case.

Safety problems could be minimized. In some ways, Jump in Traveller is a lot like air travel today. The things that go wrong around landing and takeoff are the ones that can be dealt with and are a concern. If your airliner breaks up at cruising altitude, you're pretty much doomed. Similarly, if a ship has some crazy problem mid-jump, it's likely doomed.

How do you think the game handles or should handle automation?

Automation is tricky subject in RPGs, especially futuristic ones. Looking at the march of technology, automation should exist and it should become ever more capable, ever more safe, ever more reliable. But if it does these things, it's a black hole that ends in the technological Singularity: Automation feeds on itself, more and more things become automated until you come to the inevitable conclusion that with sufficient automation, humans are no longer necessary in human society; there's nothing that machines will not be able to do better at some point. Then what kind of society would result? This is one form of the technological singularity and to paraphrase the late Mssr. Wiseman: "You could make an RPG based on such a society and it might be fun, but it wouldn't be Traveller."

 

[BwapTED]

Automation is tricky subject in RPGs, especially futuristic ones. Looking at the march of technology, automation should exist and it should become ever more capable, ever more safe, ever more reliable. But if it does these things, it's a black hole that ends in the technological Singularity: Automation feeds on itself, more and more things become automated until you come to the inevitable conclusion that with sufficient automation, humans are no longer necessary in human society; there's nothing that machines will not be able to do better at some point. Then what kind of society would result? This is one form of the technological singularity and to paraphrase the late Mssr. Wiseman: "You could make an RPG based on such a society and it might be fun, but it wouldn't be Traveller."

You could run after the humans rebel against the Machine Civilization.
Think Dune and its Butlerian Jihad.

 

[Timerover51]

Does not Adventure 1: The Kinunir give some idea as to what could happen with an AI running a star ship?

 

[robject]

Does not Adventure 1: The Kinunir give some idea as to what could happen with an AI running a star ship?

Indeed, my players would probably not trust me to run an on-board ship AI. Kinunir, HAL 9000, Eddie (the Heart Of Gold's shipboard AI from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), not to mention Terminator, have got them suspicious...

 

[Whipsnade]

"Driverless" vehicles are part of MTU and for many of the reasons already stated in this thread. I regularly use the example of a "driverless" taxi to illustrate my belief that robots aren't missing in Traveller as much as they are overlooked: A robot isn't driving the taxi because the taxi is the robot.

"Driverless" ships are also overlooked. Mind you, not overlooked by the fictional inhabitants of my fictional setting. They've been overlooked by me.

When first written, Traveller didn't preclude robotic or cybernetic PCs or NPCs. There weren't specific rules for them, but nothing prohibited you from doing it. As more CT materials and other versions were released it became easier to "build" such PCs/NPCs. Sadly, in my case, the way I was currently playing and thinking about the game was colored by the way I had previously played and thought about the game. I simply didn't think about such PCs/NPCs, how they could fit, and how I could use them. I was wearing blinders and didn't know it!

What makes my blind spot all the worse is that I eagerly read Poul Anderson's Polesotechnic League years before I started playing Traveller. How could I enjoy the adventures of David Falkayn, Adzel, Chee Lan, and Muddlin' Through so much and still not think about ships acting as PCs/NPCs in my games?

I'm blaming it on a 40+ year long brain cramp.

 

[aramis]

You don't.

au contraire....
In the 3I at least...

• Liability
• Prevention of accessioning

We know that an unmanned spacecraft is subject to being accessioned by salvagers, and turned over for a prize award by the local admiralty court. This amounts (per various sources) to upwards of 10% of ship's current value. The owner can recover the vessel, probably for several percent more than the prize court issued, but the exact amount isn't specified.

We also know that the 3I doesn't extend civil rights to machines - and even abridges civil rights on certain levels of cyborg... Even the Shell-Person solution isn't sufficient to qualify as manned, because a shell-person is over the allowed cybernetic percentage.

While it's possible to build them as totally crew-less, you need someone aboard for the legal wrangling as to whether or not the ship is salvage or not.

We also know it's unlawful in the 3I to arm robots with weapons of mass destruction; a human has to be behind them, and that human is liable for them. A ship is, axiomatically, a weapon of mass destruction.

So, the ship can be all self-sufficient, but if it's in space without a crew and without a designated parking orbit protected by local ordinance (inside the 10 diameter limit) or specific location decree (as in the naval mothball fleets at the Depots), the general salvage laws apply....

 

[Timerover51]

au contraire....
In the 3I at least...

• Liability
• Prevention of accessioning

We know that an unmanned spacecraft is subject to being accessioned by salvagers, and turned over for a prize award by the local admiralty court. This amounts (per various sources) to upwards of 10% of ship's current value. The owner can recover the vessel, probably for several percent more than the prize court issued, but the exact amount isn't specified.

We also know that the 3I doesn't extend civil rights to machines - and even abridges civil rights on certain levels of cyborg... Even the Shell-Person solution isn't sufficient to qualify as manned, because a shell-person is over the allowed cybernetic percentage.

While it's possible to build them as totally crew-less, you need someone aboard for the legal wrangling as to whether or not the ship is salvage or not.

We also know it's unlawful in the 3I to arm robots with weapons of mass destruction; a human has to be behind them, and that human is liable for them. A ship is, axiomatically, a weapon of mass destruction.

So, the ship can be all self-sufficient, but if it's in space without a crew and without a designated parking orbit protected by local ordinance (inside the 10 diameter limit) or specific location decree (as in the naval mothball fleets at the Depots), the general salvage laws apply....

Interesting, I was not sure if salvage rules would apply to unmanned ships, but based on your reasoning, the salvage laws would apply. I might go higher than 10% of the ship's value. Salvage law should not apply to the Kinunir however, as that is an Imperium warship.

 

[epicenter00]

au contraire....
In the 3I at least...

• Liability
• Prevention of accessioning

You know, you're right, though IIRC the Accords are not law - they're a custom that people follow, so technically you could use armed robotic stuff, no? (Or has that changed in T5?)

As for a crew...I am actually imagining now a ship that has a single "crewmember" in a Low Berth for legal reasons. The ship actually handles everything, but the human is just a person who is there for pay lip service to the law. The "crewmember" most likely has no skills relating to ship operations and is simply a contractor (kept in a Low Berth to keep them from doing some sort mischief as well as to keep them getting bored). It might be a form of a kind of "summer job" or something similar; others might use as a kind of "time travel" if they find the present a bit dull, they can go into low berth, putter around the galaxy while in suspended animation for decades on end and wake up at the end with a significant amount of money in the bank from the megacorp to live off of (the job might not pay outrageous amounts of money, but what little credits you have to pay for life support is paid for by the hiring company).

 

[ovka]

"Driverless" vehicles are part of MTU and for many of the reasons already stated in this thread. I regularly use the example of a "driverless" taxi to illustrate my belief that robots aren't missing in Traveller as much as they are overlooked: A robot isn't driving the taxi because the taxi is the robot.

Reminds me of one of the first CT games I played in. There was a driverless taxi that would take us anywhere we wanted to go for 10 Cr. We could go to the other side of the planet for 10 Cr. But if our (previously unknown) destination was across the street, that was also 10 Cr. The vehicle knew where everything was, but wouldn't tell us that our 10 Cr wasn't going to take us anywhere, or that our 10 Cr was going to be a 3 day trip -- and we were locked in.

Cheers,

Baron Ovka

 

[aramis]

You know, you're right, though IIRC the Accords are not law - they're a custom that people follow, so technically you could use armed robotic stuff, no? (Or has that changed in T5?)

The shudasham accords are canon in CT bk 8. The basis of local laws throughout the imperium... but also the definition that robots are not sentient, and thus not protected beings, is part of the ongoing accords.

As for a crewmember in LB... Nope, not IMTU. Crew who aren't awake aren't crew. Especially given the hazard that LB travel is.

 

[McPerth]

Among my designs (listed in my blog) I have three crewless drones (all of them build with MgT1 system):

• the cargo/fuel barges in the Star Class Jump Frame and Barges (post #2 of the thread)
• the Zhodani Drone Courrier (also quite usable by the K'kree ,as explained there).
• the Zhodani light fighter drone

As Aramis points, I made the two last designs Zhodani due o the status robots have in 3I (though I latter realized how useful would the courrier be for the K'kree, and probably the figher drone too).

So, the ship can be all self-sufficient, but if it's in space without a crew and without a designated parking orbit protected by local ordinance (inside the 10 diameter limit) or specific location decree (as in the naval mothball fleets at the Depots), the general salvage laws apply....

So would any of those be so subject to salvage rules as you tell?

As only the barges are thought as Imperial, they are the ones with more such problems, as I guess in the Consulate (or K'kree territory, for the courrier) there would be less such problems, laws being different...

As for a crewmember in LB... Nope, not IMTU. Crew who aren't awake aren't crew. Especially given the hazard that LB travel is.

Just curious: so what status have Frozen Watch crew IYTU?

 

[aramis]

Just curious: so what status have Frozen Watch crew IYTU?

Cargo. At least until fully thawed.
Or, on military ships, it's often "Prisoner"... with the death rates in CT, it is clearly a punitive measure, as the death rates are...
... 1 in 6 healthy (End 7+) in emergency conditions
... 5 in 18 less than healthy (End 6-) in emergency
... 1 in 12 healthy in safe thaw (with attending Nurse = Medic 2)
... 1 in 6 less than healthy in safe thaw

Putting someone into a frozen watch is basically a death sentence during war.

MT is a little more forgiving... but it's still risky, and they're not up to par for up to a month...
plus, the guy in the low berth can't be held responsible for approving the actions of the robot ship.

 

[BwapTED]

Does anybody here use jump-capable message torpedos?