GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 11:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Roger Gammans
(16 Oct 2021 12:28 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 15:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(16 Oct 2021 14:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 15:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 15:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(16 Oct 2021 23:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(16 Oct 2021 23:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(17 Oct 2021 02:22 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(17 Oct 2021 03:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(17 Oct 2021 15:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(19 Oct 2021 02:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(19 Oct 2021 13:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(19 Oct 2021 14:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(19 Oct 2021 19:27 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Charles Hensley
(20 Oct 2021 21:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Phil Pugliese
(20 Oct 2021 21:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance Rupert Boleyn (21 Oct 2021 00:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Phil Pugliese
(21 Oct 2021 02:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(21 Oct 2021 02:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Alex Goodwin
(21 Oct 2021 17:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(21 Oct 2021 17:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(21 Oct 2021 18:56 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Phil Pugliese
(21 Oct 2021 18:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Bruce Johnson
(21 Oct 2021 19:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPSmaintenance
Timothy Collinson
(21 Oct 2021 20:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(20 Oct 2021 05:54 UTC)
|
[TML] GURPS maintenance
Jonathan Clark
(21 Oct 2021 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Thomas RUX
(22 Oct 2021 20:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Alex Goodwin
(16 Oct 2021 15:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 16:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Alex Goodwin
(16 Oct 2021 16:04 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Oct 2021 16:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(16 Oct 2021 23:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] GURPS maintenance
Ingo Siekmann
(16 Oct 2021 18:08 UTC)
|
On 21Oct2021 1018, Phil Pugliese - philpugliese at yahoo.com (via tml list) wrote: > They, of course, always failed to improve their skills due to havbing to attend to all the many things constantly breaking down( gee I wonder why? ;-) ), right? > PC's can do whatever they want but the PC's don't run the game, the GM does, last I heard. And the players, once they're told they can't study all the time successfully because of breakdowns, will be wanting to know what the new rules are, so that they can intelligently play their characters. It's hardly unreasonable to want to know how much time maintaining their ship takes, so that they can know what spare time their characters have to devote to self-improvement, hobbies, etc. And, it's hardly unreasonable to want to know how this will change if their characters get holds of a different ship that could be more or less worn, bigger or smaller. And, this being the case, it's not surprising that many GMs would want some guidance from the rules, especially if they themselves know little of maintaining a ship or aircraft today, let alone in the 56th century. Such guidelines are also of assistance to a GM in setting 'colour' - if ships require minimal maintenance, that implies very mature technology that very seldom breaks down and which lasts for a very long time or has a lot or inbuilt self-repair capability. It probably looks all shiny and new all the time, too. If instead ships require constant tinkering with and tuning from a team of mechanics, they probably look like the inside of the /Millennium Falcon/ with replacement wiring poking out all over the place, the access panels mostly missing (because they're never in place anyway), and so on. An example of why this matters would be the Type S, which many rule sets tell us is designed for a crew of two, but which can be handled by a solo crew member. But what does this really mean? That one person can fly the thing but it will break down in a few weeks unless they pay for ground crew to work on the ship at every stop over? Or will it run as normal, but the solo pilot/engineer/mechanic must spend every waking moment either flying or maintaining the ship, so after a while they themselves start showing the wear and tear of having no downtime or personal maintenance? Or does it just mean an extra hour or so a day spent in maintenance, the slow loss of fine tuning and that 'spick and span' look, and having to get annual maintenance done every 6-9 months rather than once a year? Note that whatever the answer to the above, it has follow-on implications for other ships, and while some groups of players might not explore those, others will. -- Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>