VehicleMaker breakdown

[Licheking]

Actually i agree with you up to a point. I loved the Megatraveller design system the amount of detail and the fact everything was built for that vessel not taken from some pre-made parts was great. Also you could do certain designs in MT that are impossible in T5 but that cuts both ways.

The problem with MT was the ship/vehicle design system was the only system, you couldn't build guns or robots (at least not until the robot book came out), or equipment now with T5 you can. The Makers are quick and designed so that stuff can be made on the fly with a couple of die rolls, but when used as a deliberate system the results work with the system and as an older gm i don't have the time to go through the MT style design process to get a decent sized catalogue of items for my games.

Still MT and FF&S are my favorite design systems but i do like the Makers as well.

 

[Reban]

But can I use the Fossil mod with the other stage mods or not? Either way I think it should be more clear. Heck, I think most of it should be. You say that there is lack of description on purpose. Maybe it's just my way of thinking or whatever, but so far I am not enjoying this having to 'creatively interpret' the rules in order to get what I want. I'm sure its good for some people, but it's just another thing driving me more back to MT.

Referring to the Fillform, which is meant to guide the process, there's only one space for Stage, so I'd say no you can't have a VEarly Fossil or an Advanced Fossil, nor can I see why you'd want to.

Sticking with IC Engines for a second compare VEarly and Fossil. GroundCars with either Stage will both be produced at TL-2 but VEarly adds less tonnage representing a smaller engine than Fossil and inquires a -1 to Speed where as Fossil with its +2tons of "engine" leaves speed unaffected from the Standard model. VehicleMaker is a system of trade offs.

I use the same rule for Bulk, you can't have a VLite/VHeavy vehicle, but for Environment and Options I allow multiple uses within reason ie. enclosed or open only one use.

I see T5 design systems as having 3 Levels. Level 1 uses random generation or plug & play to produce a LongName and bare bones numbers that you can use straight away in the game. Level 2 adds equipment and fittings from the other Makers to differentiate your design from all the similar Level 1 designs. Level 3 is where you carefully make design decisions and craft your product to make a plausible example of an item. Level 3 requires imagination and a little technical understanding.

I've never used MT to design anything, but I've never found MT designs to have any depth to them either. I loved FF&S and FF&S2 but I always got frustrated when sitting down to build something because I found i had to go a build the major subsystems first and the start my design and then go back and tweak the subsystems to fit my design. I'd often end up in a feedback loop and walk away.

T5 allows me to do as much or as little as I need to. It does make me work hard for some things because it doesn't hand me explanations, but overall what it spits out is more believable, more real than other versions.

I've an interest in how the Defense Industry designs, develops and produces systems and T5 VehicleMaker actually maps it pretty well in my head. You might have gotten an idea of how my head works from this thread http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?p=435685#post435685 and I encourage anyone that figures out new ways to use what VehicleMaker presents or new insight into what it desribes to post there.

 

[Murdoc]

Actually i agree with you up to a point. I loved the Megatraveller design system the amount of detail and the fact everything was built for that vessel not taken from some pre-made parts was great. Also you could do certain designs in MT that are impossible in T5 but that cuts both ways.

The problem with MT was the ship/vehicle design system was the only system, you couldn't build guns or robots (at least not until the robot book came out), or equipment now with T5 you can.

I understand that in terms of scope there are advantages to either system (such as, in MT, you can use that 'one system' to make vehicles, small craft, and starships), but it's more the process that I am talking about. MT also had extended rules in the magazines and such that helped it cover much more of the ground T5 does (although yes not quite all).

The Makers are quick and designed so that stuff can be made on the fly with a couple of die rolls, but when used as a deliberate system the results work with the system and as an older gm i don't have the time to go through the MT style design process to get a decent sized catalogue of items for my games.

The random aspect is nice and I do hope to incorporate those into my house rules at some point as well. But the quickness of the system is a trade-off for flexibility. As for the catalogue, that's why we have (or are supposed to have) pre-made ones, like 101 Vehicles, 101 Robots, Central Supply Catalogue, etc. I hope we'll still see something like this in the future for T5.

Referring to the Fillform, which is meant to guide the process, there's only one space for Stage, so I'd say no you can't have a VEarly Fossil or an Advanced Fossil, nor can I see why you'd want to.

Because there are big differences between a 2013 Lotus Esprit and a 19th century steam-car. But I suppose that comes close to answering my question as to whether or not it is allowed in the rules as is or not, although it still could be clearer.

I've never used MT to design anything, but I've never found MT designs to have any depth to them either.

I suppose that depends on how you define 'depth'. I have never used FF&S because I never had T3 or T4 (well I got the core rules for T4, but didn't really have any intention of using them one I read them), but I've always found MT designs more satisfying and detailed than T5 designs. Like I said, if it works for you then great, but it's not my preference.

I've an interest in how the Defense Industry designs, develops and produces systems and T5 VehicleMaker actually maps it pretty well in my head.

Again, that's probably how the military planners lay out their requirements, but I don't think that it's how the engineers actually put them together. It's a matter of perspective.

You might have gotten an idea of how my head works from this thread http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Dis...685#post435685 and I encourage anyone that figures out new ways to use what VehicleMaker presents or new insight into what it desribes to post there.

I just read that and it is a clever interpretation of the rules, but I don't like having to creatively re-interpret the rules in order to get things done. This might be alleviated somewhat if there was a section describing this idea in the book, but I shudder to think what my 14-year-old self would have done with T5, as compared to what I actually did do with MT. My imagination was left to the actual design, not the rules, which were pretty straightforward.