Low Berths (revised)

[Rerednaw]

Since I use a few house rules (mainly a mash of classic books 1-3 and some mongoose) I also decided to change how low berths worked.

Survive hibernation (low-berth). Routine (6+), Endurance, +Medical skill of attending physician. Failure results in 1D of damage per point missed by.

This way you get a bit of frost burn and are only in real danger if you are old, infirm, or such and also roll very poorly.

I also created more advanced versions of low berths which grant a positive DM at higher TLs.

TL 12 Low Berth 75kCr +1 DM to survival roll. Same mass and other characteristics.
TL 15 Low Berth 100kCr +2 DM to survival roll. As above.

Granted the economics of low passengers are a bit wiggy. When building a ship, cargo space costs zero credits extra versus the cost of a low-berth. And at base 1000 Cr base per ton of cargo you are making credits back much sooner. Whereas with low berths you don't even break even for years (assuming 1 jump per month).

 

[Timerover51]

I am looking at the low berth as a way for colonists to move animals to a new planet, so I like your approach. Basically, the low berth approximates a 5 foot by 5 foot by 10 foot box (sorry, my mind still operates on the English system, and so do some planets in the new sector), so can carry a fairly wide range of domestic stock. Larger ones are needed for larger animals like elephants, giraffes, adult draft horses and cattle, etc. Yes, I am moving African fauna to a colonized planet, while others are using draft horses and mules for farming.

Remember, animals reproduce, do not require spare parts, and can help to raise what they eat, along with supplying a wide range of eatables and additional materials. It makes sense for a colony that has a reasonable planet to settle on to use animals for the initial agricultural effort.

 

[wellis]

You think said animals might be genetically modified in some way as well?

 

[Timerover51]

You think said animals might be genetically modified in some way as well?

Actually, I am more concerned with having enough non-modified wild animals for adequate breeding stock. I am considering setting up one planet as a Krell Zoo of Terran animals as a wild life reserve, especially for Africa. I already have the Krell adding Terran river, sea, and ocean life to various planets, as Altair IV looked in the movie to be fairly arid, as presumably the expedition ship would have landed in the most favorable location available. I assume that the Krell would have been absolutely blown away by the incredible variety of marine life on Terra, along with the wide range of vegetation and animal life.

For those who do not know who the "Krell" are, I suggest that you look up the movie "Forbidden Planet".

Domestic livestock have already been pretty heavily genetically modified, except for maybe the Texas Longhorns running loose on El Paso and New Texas. The El Paso breed produce much better leather than the New Texas breed, as the climate is a bit harsher on El Paso. The residents of El Paso view New Texans as a bit "sissified".

 

[Grav_Moped]

Since I use a few house rules (mainly a mash of classic books 1-3 and some mongoose) I also decided to change how low berths worked.

Survive hibernation (low-berth). Routine (6+), Endurance, +Medical skill of attending physician. Failure results in 1D of damage per point missed by.

This way you get a bit of frost burn and are only in real danger if you are old, infirm, or such and also roll very poorly.

I also created more advanced versions of low berths which grant a positive DM at higher TLs.

TL 12 Low Berth 75kCr +1 DM to survival roll. Same mass and other characteristics.
TL 15 Low Berth 100kCr +2 DM to survival roll. As above.

Consider the option of applying damage to INT or EDU as well (that is, brain damage). For the sake of playability, maybe make damage to physical stats more likely than damage to mental stats, or splitting the 1D damage between INT and EDU (and allowing partial recovery, eventually).

That said, coming out of cold sleep with partial amnesia could be a useful plot hook.

 

[kilemall]

OP, I've done the same thing with similar probabilities.


Don't forget small children, often parents will buy a passage for the children while one or both parents go Low Passage to save money while not risking their precious offspring.



So you could have an orphan at the end of a journey.


Also of course the steward could find an unaccompanied child to be the most challenging passenger to manage. I'd definitely require a High Passage for such circumstances.

 

[McPerth]

Since I use a few house rules (mainly a mash of classic books 1-3 and some mongoose) I also decided to change how low berths worked.

Survive hibernation (low-berth). Routine (6+), Endurance, +Medical skill of attending physician. Failure results in 1D of damage per point missed by.

This way you get a bit of frost burn and are only in real danger if you are old, infirm, or such and also roll very poorly.

I also created more advanced versions of low berths which grant a positive DM at higher TLs.

TL 12 Low Berth 75kCr +1 DM to survival roll. Same mass and other characteristics.
TL 15 Low Berth 100kCr +2 DM to survival roll. As above.

Of course that makes them quite more survivable.

See that any such changes in the low berths (incuding the one from CT to MT, that lowered manyfold the death possibility) has also strategic significance.

In CT, you cannot move troops in low berths, as you would have about 8-10% fatality rate before entering in combat, while in MT you could do it, as the fatality rate was nearly negligible, and most troops having some ill effects from it would be recovered in a matter of days.

In this aspect, your system seems more MT than CT...

Granted the economics of low passengers are a bit wiggy. When building a ship, cargo space costs zero credits extra versus the cost of a low-berth. And at base 1000 Cr base per ton of cargo you are making credits back much sooner. Whereas with low berths you don't even break even for years (assuming 1 jump per month).

Most starship economics are based on 2 jumps per month. A ton deicated at low berths would give you Cr 1800/jump (once life support is deducted), so he benefit over cargo is Cr 800/jump.

As they cost Cr 50000, you'll break even in about 60 jumps, or a little over 2 years...

 

[Rerednaw]

I never really liked the concept of hibernation pods with a 1 in 6 (5+) mortality rate. I mean why have them at all? Also for the 'Frozen Watch' concept so that's why I bumped up the survival rates. If this is in effect flying coach...I wouldn't want to fly if I was told 1 in 6 folks died on a given plane trip.

I do reserve the option of ability damage (healable and not for the insane creds normally set) based on if someone rolls a crit fail and has the appropriate risk factors.

So basically it is more of a viable option if you just want to get somewhere and don't have the credits.

And yes I also use low berths as the livestock option as well. Mainly small critters such as chickens and rabbits though. They are easier to care for, and the production/break even point is sooner. Maybe a goat. Bovines are generally not as efficient.

But I'm getting a bit off topic.

 

[Timerover51]

I never really liked the concept of hibernation pods with a 1 in 6 (5+) mortality rate. I mean why have them at all? Also for the 'Frozen Watch' concept so that's why I bumped up the survival rates. If this is in effect flying coach...I wouldn't want to fly if I was told 1 in 6 folks died on a given plane trip.

I do reserve the option of ability damage (healable and not for the insane creds normally set) based on if someone rolls a crit fail and has the appropriate risk factors.

So basically it is more of a viable option if you just want to get somewhere and don't have the credits.

And yes I also use low berths as the livestock option as well. Mainly small critters such as chickens and rabbits though. They are easier to care for, and the production/break even point is sooner. Maybe a goat. Bovines are generally not as efficient.

But I'm getting a bit off topic.

No, you are not getting off topic. One, low berths have many uses, just like Duct Tape. Second, it is amazing how much threads can wander as ideas are mentioned. I mentioned the livestock at that is what I will be using in my new sector, but I like your ideas of bumping up the survival rate. I would not be flying if the death rate was one in six either.

 

[Enoki]

One thing I allow players to do with low berths is when these are used at a starport they have the option of hiring a low berth specialist in some cases to put passengers in or take them out.

The starport has to be an A or B and TL = A or better. They pay x hundred to thousand credits per berth for the specialist, but then they are absolved of any liability for injury as well as ensuring there's a near 100% rate of survival.

They are also free to charge passengers for this service if they want. The steward / ship's crew says "We can put you in and take you out, but for an extra thousand credits we'll hire the starport low berth specialist to do it..."

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If Low Berths are quite safe and much cheaper than other options, they should be the standard option for interstellar travel, both commercially and for troops.


A bit boring for the travellers with no passengers in space, but very convenient for passengers: just go to sleep on Rhylanor, wake up on Regina a few weeks later, without having to spend a lot of time waiting in space.


The trade roll should be modified to generate more low passengers and less high and mid. Standard ships, such as Free Traders, would need to skip most of the staterooms and add a lot of Low Berths instead.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

They pay x hundred to thousand credits per berth for the specialist, but then they are absolved of any liability for injury as well as ensuring there's a near 100% rate of survival.

Already considered:

Refunds or civil liability if a low passenger fails to survive the trip are not allowed.

 

[willtron3030]

CTL-F "DUMAREST": 0 results

Low berths in the SF sources were for livestock. It was an act of financial desperation to offer to pay a captain to travel in them. And I can see obvious advantages for using low berths for livestock. I've hauled livestock in-game, but it was always live, and usually the source of grief or a complication to an existing situation.

I wonder why one doesn't just take a bunch of "Low" passengers, give them all fast drug plus a mild time-release sedative so that they can sleep for the duration. Rack'em, stack'em, and pack'em in bunks or tubes far more cramped than steerage or even low berth, nearly to the point of palletizing them. Very low life support load per pax. A two-week trip becomes a 6 hour power-nap.

At the destination, you unpack them, and administer fast drug antidote, then something to reverse the sedative. Revive them in a warm, reassuring and comfy, but clinical-looking space, then hand them their travel bag and show them the door to the main concourse. Heck, you could have them "decelerated, sedated and crated" by a service provider at the starport, and deliver them to another one at the destination port for revival.

Downsides: passengers with a resistance to either fast drug, or the sedative. Max time in the crate is 60 days, and If you don't have resources to fed or house them, there will be hard decisions to be made. Palletized lowpax would be a priority target for pirates that don't mind a little slavery profit.

 

[kilemall]

Low berths in the SF sources were for livestock. It was an act of financial desperation to offer to pay a captain to travel in them. And I can see obvious advantages for using low berths for livestock. I've hauled livestock in-game, but it was always live, and usually the source of grief or a complication to an existing situation.

I wonder why one doesn't just take a bunch of "Low" passengers, give them all fast drug plus a mild time-release sedative so that they can sleep for the duration. Rack'em, stack'em, and pack'em in bunks or tubes far more cramped than steerage or even low berth, nearly to the point of palletizing them. Very low life support load per pax. A two-week trip becomes a 6 hour power-nap.

At the destination, you unpack them, and administer fast drug antidote, then something to reverse the sedative. Revive them in a warm, reassuring and comfy, but clinical-looking space, then hand them their travel bag and show them the door to the main concourse. Heck, you could have them "decelerated, sedated and crated" by a service provider at the starport, and deliver them to another one at the destination port for revival.

Downsides: passengers with a resistance to either fast drug, or the sedative. Max time in the crate is 60 days, and If you don't have resources to fed or house them, there will be hard decisions to be made. Palletized lowpax would be a priority target for pirates that don't mind a little slavery profit.

Got that covered too, call it 'warm passage'. Big option for colonial ships not wanting to pay high end life support costs even if they own the ship.


The problem commercially is that even with the 60:1 ratio you still have basic sweating and bodily waste going on, so they are going to go to the bathroom at least once even during a week long trip. Somebody has to diaper and clean that up, quite a bit more unpleasant work then a mid passage passenger.


Not to mention the passenger has to be secured, I mean strapped down, because they cannot possibly react to any 'bumps' or even vector changes without smashing into a wall or floor without being able to avoid or cushion the fall.


Then there is the scenario where the ship falls under attack or gets into some other trouble and you need them to be at normal speed and suited up.


Except under very controlled trust situations like fellow colonists, I don't see it as commercially viable.

 

[McPerth]

I wonder why one doesn't just take a bunch of "Low" passengers, give them all fast drug plus a mild time-release sedative so that they can sleep for the duration. Rack'em, stack'em, and pack'em in bunks or tubes far more cramped than steerage or even low berth, nearly to the point of palletizing them. Very low life support load per pax. A two-week trip becomes a 6 hour power-nap.

At the destination, you unpack them, and administer fast drug antidote, then something to reverse the sedative. Revive them in a warm, reassuring and comfy, but clinical-looking space, then hand them their travel bag and show them the door to the main concourse. Heck, you could have them "decelerated, sedated and crated" by a service provider at the starport, and deliver them to another one at the destination port for revival.

Downsides: passengers with a resistance to either fast drug, or the sedative. Max time in the crate is 60 days, and If you don't have resources to fed or house them, there will be hard decisions to be made. Palletized lowpax would be a priority target for pirates that don't mind a little slavery profit.

Albeit for MT (but I guess also aplicable to CT, as their basics are quite close), TD#21 has an article about low berths that distinguishes among chill berths (TL 9-11), that really freeze the passenger, and the low berth (TL12+), that mainly keeps him in this hibernation state by the use of drugs (moslty fast drug/antidote), more or less as you say.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The problem commercially is that even with the 60:1 ratio you still have basic sweating and bodily waste going on, so they are going to go to the bathroom at least once even during a week long trip. Somebody has to diaper and clean that up, quite a bit more unpleasant work then a mid passage passenger.

Fast Drug does not knock people out, they will still experience the time, at about 3 h per jump.

People will resent being stacked in boxes or kept in diapers.

We already have a reasonable model for keeping people for a few hour of travel:

Of course, allowing this will make interstellar travel vastly cheaper. Packing in people ~10 per Dt (like current cattle class) a ticket would cost a few hundred, mostly for the Fast drug.

 

[Major B]

A bit boring for the travellers with no passengers in space, but very convenient for passengers: just go to sleep on Rhylanor, wake up on Regina a few weeks later, without having to spend a lot of time waiting in space.

Not so convenient though when you go to sleep on Rhylanor and instead of Regina, you wake up on Jae Tellona and are told you must work in the mines until you've earned enough to pay for your unfreezing.

 

[willtron3030]

Fast Drug does not knock people out, they will still experience the time, at about 3 h per jump.

People will resent being stacked in boxes or kept in diapers.

Well, I added the idea of a sedative, just this side of a medically induced coma, for that reason. It's three hours (I figure six for transfer, etc.) that they sleep through the journey. You can't resent what you can't perceive.

I see the protocol as: 1) Sedate. 2) Fast Drug. 3) 'Box'. 4) Transport. 5) Unbox. 6) Fast Antidote. 7) Reverse sedation.

Pax show up at their appointed check-in time, hand the steward their baggage, lie down on a couch, the steward administers a couple of injections or med patches. They then awaken on a similar couch in a different system two weeks later.

 

[willtron3030]

Not so convenient though when you go to sleep on Rhylanor and instead of Regina, you wake up on Jae Tellona and are told you must work in the mines until you've earned enough to pay for your unfreezing.

It's a bonanza for slavers. I'd mail my itinerary and shipper tracking number to my insurance company, and some of my better armed pals.

 

[willtron3030]

even with the 60:1 ratio you still have basic sweating and bodily waste going on, so they are going to go to the bathroom at least once even during a week long trip.

This is six hours of sedated sleep from their perspective. I've been able to sleep twice that without soiling myself since I was a child. And I managed to go through a medically induced coma for two days without... no, I was catheterized for that, so I probably would have pissed myself. But I still on 1:1 time w/out fast drug.