Re: TNE character generation

hi,

>Scott writes:
>> Subject: Homeworld Environment Effects

>[Some good arguments about the influence of environment on character
>stats.]

>> Thus:  High Gravity planets:  Strength +1
>>                               Agility  +1
>>        Low Gravity planets:   Strength -1
>>                               Agility  -1

>>        High pressure planet:  Constitution -1
>>        Low pressure planet:   Constitution +1

>All very well, but this is also a game. For game balance purpose
>any advantage should be balanced by a disadvantage


I liked Scott's comments about homeworld environmental effects.  They make
sense (to me at least).  The point about balancing advantages and disadvantages
is only relevant when the player is given the choice.  For a randomly generated
or GM allocated home world this is less important (stochastic variation will
balance things for you).




GDW writes:

>   Scout/Couriers are technically loaned to ex-Scouts and are subject to
>recall; because of upheaval in the Imperium, the Scout/Courier is effectively
>owned by the characters but cannot be sold. Corsairs are owned by the
>character. Regardless of how many times a character receives a Scout/Courier
>or a Corsair as a bene@t, he can receive only one ship.

No imperium, therefore no unified scout service.  Certainly no Imperial
scout ships for new scout characters.  There ought to be plently of old scouts
floating around but they will be very very very old.



>   We need a system for shared ownership of starships, particularly in the
>case of merchant characters. Terms and rank should contribute to "shares" in
>a ship, with a total of maybe 100 shares. Characters need a minimum of, say,
>20 shares between them, with each additional share representing 6 months of
>the 40-year mortgage.

>   Scouts probably get a cut on any mineral wealth or technological salvage
>on newly surveyed worlds (or at least officers do), which may be converted to
>shares in a scout/courier.


The share idea seems like a nice way of handling a loan when nobody
would be willing to loan the large quantities of money necessary.  Shares
could also be a way of providing some form of yearly income to the players.

Would providing shares as mustering out benefits work?
First 'share' is worth so many shares, second worth less and so forth.
(e.g. 15 for the first, 10 for the second and 5 for every receipt thereafter)
Maybe a flat system would work out better (5?, 10? per receipt).  Also, some
share could be awarded for final rank.

Then let players buy shares from the other shareholders when they earn
enough money.  The economics would have to be worked out (because if the
dividend from the share is too big, you wouldn't sell and if too small
they are a terrible investment).


>   Corsair? I'm not sure of this one, and I'm inclined not to allow it.  We
>don't want characters tooling around in hot ships I wouldn't think.

If interstellar trade is collapsing, then piracy will also be collapsing.
When small empires are reopening the trade routes, piracy will lag behind a
bit (but given the resale price of a slightly damaged ship and its cargo and a
few slaves, one catch will set you up for quite a while).

Then again as it has been pointed out several time on the tml, it isn't
excessively expensive or difficult for a decent population world to
provide adequate anti-piracy protection for merchants for every system
it routinely trades with.  So if a player gets a corsair, they also get lots
of big repair bills.



        						Pauli

Paul Dale                       | [email removed]
Department of Computer Science  | [phone removed]
University of Queensland        |
Australia, 4072                 | Did you know that there are 41 two letter
                                |     words containing the letter 'a'?