So, this week I've been working on a re-write of Galaxies in Shadow as a modern game.  There's a variety of reasons, not the least of which is how much good sf stuff is out there already.  But also, doing a modern version gets rid of many complications relating to alien races and varied technological paradims.

It's moving along well enough.  I'm doing a re-write but not a redesign.  It's proving very helpful because it's making me re-read and think about the rules.  In fact it's helping me get the sf game done.  Even if I have made some small improvements here and there that I might have to put into Galaxies in Shadow.

Currently the core book will be mainly aimed at action oriented campaigns.  Policemen, soldiers, pilots and such.  As a parallel project, the first source book will cover gritty supers.  I want to run some supers but GURPS just handles them poorly (a very odd blind spot that...).  I want the game Heroes Unlimited should have been if you're wondering.  A cross between Villains and Vigillanties and Recon.

Anyhow, now for the questions!

Should I try to do a simple core game with supplements or a super complete and integrated game?  One of the reasons Galaxies In Shadow is taking so long is that it's very much the super complete model.

I'm avoiding the cut and paste rules re-write approach that Palladium uses at the moment, but I'll probably wind up with a condensed and complete version of the rules and re-use the condensed version in any genre specific game I write up.

I'm not so sure I want to have firearms listings dominate the core book.  Should I just use generic gun stats or just a few iconic guns?  Vehicles?  Equipment?

On a related note, how much background material should be in there.  From my own perspective, we live in an information rich world and there's not much point in re-writing Wikipedia.

Would you adopt a new scale of miniatures if it was well supported with civilian and vehicles?  Or would it be better to try doing vehicles that match up well with miniatures and have similar proportional distortions?

QuoteShould I try to do a simple core game with supplements or a super complete and integrated game? One of the reasons Galaxies In Shadow is taking so long is that it's very much the super complete model.

Do you think the rewrite will attract a fundamentally different kind of gamer?? If so, I'd include only the necessary rules while pointing out the system compatibility between the two settings for the completists.

QuoteI'm not so sure I want to have firearms listings dominate the core book. Should I just use generic gun stats or just a few iconic guns? Vehicles? Equipment?

Maybe do a generic list with several real world examples listed and perhaps a short note on how to customize the generic list for the hardcore gearhead. Call of Cthulhu is generic, while Delta Green gets more specific but both are roughly compatible. Vehicles and equipment also could be listed generically with notes or a bibliography pointing to real world resources for more specific info. The James Bond RPG did this really well, highlighting interesting gear without pages of spreadsheet style lists.

QuoteOn a related note, how much background material should be in there. From my own perspective, we live in an information rich world and there's not much point in re-writing Wikipedia.

Just point out the important DIFFERENCES in the game world with a timeline and perhaps a prose 'Secret History'.  A sample location that exemplifies how to incorporate & alter real world info in the setting might also help.

QuoteWould you adopt a new scale of miniatures if it was well supported with civilian and vehicles? Or would it be better to try doing vehicles that match up well with miniatures and have similar proportional distortions?

If you're thinking of 1:76 scale, my answer would be yes, go for it. Most rp-gamers aren't going to splurge on resin-cast 28mm vehicles but 1:76 modern vehicles and men are available cheaply almost everywhere.

Just my .02

Should I try to do a simple core game with supplements or a super complete and integrated game?

Basically that depends on how many worldbooks you expect to write. Not want to write, but expect to write. If it's just a few, then you may as well make each one a complete game in itself; if it's more than half a dozen, it becomes worth it to have a separate corebook.

I'm not so sure I want to have firearms listings dominate the core book.  Should I just use generic gun stats or just a few iconic guns?  Vehicles?  Equipment?

If it's important to the game, put it in; if you put it in, people will think it's important to the game. You know how when you're GMing any time you describe something in detail, the players assume it must be important, and latch onto it like barnacles? Well, people are the same when they read stuff in a gamebook - if it's presented at length, it must be important.

On a related note, how much background material should be in there.  From my own perspective, we live in an information rich world and there's not much point in re-writing Wikipedia.

Two things.

First, as Kellri says, you should mention anything different from the real world. If only to save the GM hassles with the players. Just think of all the arguments about what the real world is like - 9mm vs .45 and all that nonsense. If you lay it out in the book as "this is the game world", then players for some reason are more likely to just accept it.

Second, don't assume everyone is going to spend hours on wikipedia or in the library looking things up for a game session. Often they'll rely on a combination of what they read in the game book and some movie they saw recently.

Would you adopt a new scale of miniatures if it was well supported with civilian and vehicles?  Or would it be better to try doing vehicles that match up well with miniatures and have similar proportional distortions?

That's just personal taste, whether you like messing about with miniatures or not - seems to be closely tied to the hack end of the hack/thesp range.

[QUOTE="David Johansen]I'm not so sure I want to have firearms listings dominate the core book. Should I just use generic gun stats or just a few iconic guns? Vehicles? Equipment?[/QUOTE]

I would go slighly different aproach from listing firearms, because I think for most RPGs listing several pistols with slightly different stats is quite meaningless players after all will go for best deal, so most of them won't see much use anyway, rather than I would list different types of weapons and what are they used for and give bopnuses or penalties based on their usefullness in said action, so for example stats for shotgun group would look like this:

Shotguns.
Provide bonuses for for close range shooting and point blank shooting, penalties for long range shooting. (and some then some fluff about shotguns in your setting)

(note, that this is example and I know a lot depent on ammmunition and all that and I am no weapon expert.)

Thanks...

Part of the problem is that as a percentile system it can show very small differences between things.  Generally I've stuck with even tens, but it's set up so you could drop it down to individual points if you wanted for just about everything.

My current plan is to do genre and setting books while building up specific rules relating to those and then drop them into the Galaxies in Shadow core book.  So, super powers, psi, and magic for example would be found in appropriate sub games but the core book would contain all those rules and the substructure from which they were assembled.

The system is crunchy...I'm a Rolemaster and GURPS guy and I much prefer actual accelration and velocity figures to fuzzy chase mechanics.  There will be some fifth grade math in there.  So those who whine about third grade math in other games won't be too happy.

It's very much mid eighties game design: unified mechanics, random character creation,  detailed life paths, no class restrictions, careers as qualification requirements, hit locations, wound levels.  It's a hair crunchier that BRP.

As far as scale goes, I'm talking about 1/32, this originally started as a GURPS related scale obsession thanks to their 1" hex equalling 3'.  Yes that's 1/36 but try finding a nice range of cars and semi trucks in that range.  On the other hand you can get a wide range of iconic tanks, planes, trucks, cars, and even skidoos in 1/32.  There's decent representation of troops from various eras too, though it's lighter on the military end than 1/35.

mmmkay, the file manager and my website seem to be down this morning.

edit* There we go, my webspace is back!

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Core.pdf

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Characters.pdf

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Careers.pdf

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/skills.pdf

http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/Combat.pdf

QuotePart of the problem is that as a percentile system it can show very small differences between things. Generally I've stuck with even tens, but it's set up so you could drop it down to individual points if you wanted for just about everything.

Try a modular build table of adjustments. For example...a stock light handgun has a base % chance to-hit. From there add semi-automatic/full auto, manufacturer quality, and any other die mods both positive and negative to build the specific weapon stats. Note the requirements for each class of weapon and give a few examples to show off the method or even genre-specific tables of prebuilt weapons.

QuoteAs far as scale goes, I'm talking about 1/32, this originally started as a GURPS related scale obsession thanks to their 1" hex equalling 3'. Yes that's 1/36 but try finding a nice range of cars and semi trucks in that range.

Those are medium scale plastic models. I've only seen this once in a Phoenix Command convention game. Just how tactical do you plan to get?

Well, you can break the ten second rounds down into individual seconds, though a standard action with no modifiers for taking more or less time is five seconds.  For a lot of tactical vehicle movement at any scale over 1/300 you'll wind up needing to go second by second since it won't be on the table or even in the same room by the end of the round.

One option I discuss in Galaxies in Shadow is using two scales of figure on the same table with a marked area representing the table in x10 or x100.  When something moves into the area it's moved back onto the table in the larger scale.

So, uhm, tactical...But considering that a Universal Soldier Panzer IV is half the price of a smaller Games Workshop tank and Forces of Valour is about on par with GW for a very detailed and functional painted metal vehicle and that Italiari and Airfix figures are about a buck a piece, it's actually a much cheaper option than traditional gaming minis.

The gun stats are Range Increment, Penetration, Damage, Weight, Recoil, and Rate of Fire.  The range, damage,and penetration are derived from Muzzle Energy and Bullet Mass (as a functional volume indicator).

A direct comparison of mass and recoil with character Strength determine a few things like readying time and whether the weapon becomes unready after attacking.

Quote from: David Johansen;244659Part of the problem is that as a percentile system it can show very small differences between things.

Sure, but remember that a lot of those small differences will be lost between the cracks of randomness. Could anyone tell, just looking at the results of their dice rolls, the difference between someone with 62% skill and someone with 63% skill? Less than 5-10% just isn't a noticeable difference in actual effect. Though it does make a difference to players, but all sorts of merely cosmetic things do

Actually, what percentiles give you is flexibility of probability. You can make percentiles into a bell curve, an asymmetric curve, a linear curve, or whatever else you want with tables. It's like digital sampling - the steps can be so small they aren't noticeable. I also like some things you can pull with percentiles in play, like reading them backwards and forwards for two different results in one roll, like 48 chance and 84 quality, or 48 quality and 84 location.

-clash

My favourite feature of percentiles is that they reduce the number of ties.

In spite of being a big Rolemaster fan, I'm not all that fond of looking up charts.

I do have a hit location table, but it's a d10 table so you can roll entire volleys at a time.

Here's a link to Traveller weapons tables which cover everything from a rock to  planetary bombardment missiles. They use a unified range table found here.

I'm pretty fond of %s from Boot Hill, FASA Trek, and FGU games. Crunchy cool for combat games with lots of skills and modifiers. How are you doing skill experience gain?

Experience is gained at a rate of three points per month, just like in character generation.  The best learning experience available is Initial Base Stat + 30.  With Stats being intiallly generated as 3d10 + 40.

I might go with the heroic character generation version for Galaxies.

That uses d% adding 50 to rolls under 40 for stats.

In that case the a best learning experience available would be equal to the Initial Stat.

Yes, I know some people want to have their character "level up" every day or two.  This really isn't the game for them.

It occurred to me at work today that the ultimate cool modern game would be all about modern military hardware being used to fight alien monstrosities.  Except it would be a better fight than, say, Transformers.

I'm thinking more towards the cthulhoid end of the spectrum though.  Rubbery misty critters that harm the world with their very presence getting blown to bits by Abrahms MBTs and Black Hawks.

Quote from: David Johansen;245956It occurred to me at work today that the ultimate cool modern game would be all about modern military hardware being used to fight alien monstrosities.  Except it would be a better fight than, say, Transformers.

I'm thinking more towards the cthulhoid end of the spectrum though.  Rubbery misty critters that harm the world with their very presence getting blown to bits by Abrahms MBTs and Black Hawks.

A forthcoming supplement for IHW: Wild Blue?

-clash