Monbvol's House rule emporium

[monbvol]

I've finally broken down and decided because it does make so many other things easier to keep straight to make an actual time line.  I am still fiddling with dates to give enough time for some of the space born powers enough time to grow but not so much that I wind up with other issues.  Once I get done with my draft I may post up the spreadsheet I'm using for it for comment because I feel like I'm rushing certain things and giving too much time to others.

[monbvol]

I am a little saddened because one of the things I wanted to do for my AU was not to equate RL numbers to anything if I could help it but the more I chip away at certain things the less it seems I can avoid it.  For instance now it will actually be a lot easier for me to make a tech time line which will make it much easier for me to keep straight who has what and when now.

Any way the promised spreadsheet.

[monbvol]

Armed with that spreadsheet and having figured out a few things with MekHQ I may actually finally be able to use my AU but with the bot as the only real opposition.  I still need to work on the name files to get the right flavors for my factions, need to figure out a way to change the scaling on the Interstellar Map(I know I could change the X,Y co-ordinates of my planets to create the proper spacing but that is a lot of work), could use more details on the planets themselves, finish up exporting of mechs, and I need to get infantry reworked correctly.

[monbvol]

I realized there were some things to update and clear up with my house rules and going to update the googledoc version has made me realize how displeased I am with the service for keeping things up to date.  Give me a bit and I'll put everything on my mediafire account.

[monbvol]

Okay for those who haven't checked it out for themselves I have put everything on my mediafire account.  Which is getting more add heavy these days and making me displeased.  I'll tolerate it for now but if I do get complaints/warnings the only delay in me removing them myself will be due to me being out of town with limited computer access.

Since I've got a few more designs worked out I've also updated my ship list.  I'm considering tackling the Espana Class BB next.

Again I'm coming face to face with why it takes me so long to work on my AU stuff, it really seems entirely for my own gratification as I can't even get my oldest friend to comment on even the basic stuff, let alone you lot.  :P

I'll keep working on the faction writeups for my AU and post them up in the fan fiction boards when I get a bit more finished with them.  The rest I won't even bother clogging up the boards with it.

[Maelwys]

I think its because your stuff is pretty daunting Monbvol. 70ish WarShips, who knows how many new factions means alot of people look it over and go "Buh."

Its interesting, but daunting :)

[monbvol]

I do often have to remind myself how long I've been working on this stuff and how much progress I've actually made because of it.

Nine factions counting the Mercenary Guild and the faction that replaces another, hundreds of mech designs, hundreds of combat vehicles, 93 named systems with more likely on their way, and my Warship list isn't even complete yet despite having 73 entries.  Though I did just notice to stay with my intended naming conventions for a faction I do need to change the name of an entry again.

It certainly has given me an appreciation for how hard it is to create a setting even with only 80 years of history behind it.

[monbvol]

One of my goals for my house rules has been to streamline certain aspects and I just read something I completely over looked.  Toughness.  The only real problem is multiplying lethal damage by 0.75 then rounding normally to get the new damage because halving subduing damage and rounding normally I can do a lot faster on the fly.

Of course doing an in depth analysis on the effects of Toughness is making me question the value of Toughness as written anyway.  I'll think on it to see if it can actually be fixed.

[monbvol]

Having reminded myself of yet another area where there is game hiccuping math has given me a bit of an idea.

First Health and Fatigue limits are to be multiplied by 4.  Fatigue modifiers will only start to apply at higher than WILL times 4.  Consciousness checks only get made on hits to the head, injury modifier becomes -2 or higher, or as directed by weapon description or GM.

Instead of single fire, melee, and martial arts damage being Margin of Success times 0.25 it will now be a one for one bonus.  For burst fire and certain special abilities it becomes Margin of Success times 4.

Personal Armor now degrades at 20 damage instead of 5.  Like wise if BAR is higher than the AP damage is reduced by 4 for each point higher of BAR.

Always round down damage for Tactical Armor.

For hand to hand combat or melee combat add the character's Strength score to the damage directly.

Reduce fatigue taken by BOD bonus but only from damage sources.  Fatigue from exertion, environmental sources, or any other source does not get reduced by BOD modifier.

Revised trait Glass Jaw:

Fatigue damage is doubled but only from damage sources.  For determining reduced damage via BOD bonus the character's BOD bonus, if one is present, is reduced by one.   For lethal damage sources the character takes extra damage equal to their BOD penalty, for example if they have a -1 BOD penalty they take 1 extra damage.  If the character has no BOD penalty they will still take 1 extra damage as if they did.

Revised trait Toughness:

Fatigue damage is halved rounded normally.  For determining reduced damage via BOD bonus treat the bonus as 1 higher than normal.  For lethal damage sources the character subtracts their BOD modifier from the damage as per the rules for reducing fatigue damage.  If the character has no BOD bonus or penalty they are considered to have a +1 bonus for the purpose of these rules for reducing lethal damage.

I'm not going to adjust Fit or Handicap I think.  Since I'm having one of those weeks and doing this at 6:30 AM feel free to comment or check my math.  Except for how I've reworked the Glass Jaw and Toughness traits it should all work mathematically the same or close enough.

[Maelwys]

Ah, interesting idea. Instead of multiplying everything by 0.25, you just increase everything by 4...

Though I have to ask if multiplying by 0.25 or 0.75 is really that hard, especially with the way it always rounds? I mean, its not like you have to come up with an exact answer, IIRC, you just have to get to the "Its 4 point something or rather" phase.

[monbvol]

It isn't something I'd call hard or even terrible but I would certainly call unneccessary because it adds a pointless step and is cumbersom in groups where some people have Toughness and others don't.

Though I'm not so sure if the whole damage reduction/increase is such a great idea as they primarily affect the extremes of the attribute.  I'm seriously considering changing Toughness to a flat BOD*9 for damage capacity and Glass Jaw to BOD*7.  Maybe leave the subdoing damage adjustments alone because those are easy enough.

[monbvol]

I think I may make refits of some more classes but for now stopping at 110 Warships counting existing refits seems good to me.

[monbvol]

I'm still giving some thought to the issue of the multiplications bogging down game play.  I have realized there is a slight flaw in my current proposal.  If I go with it either the AP rating or base damage of weapons will need improving as well.  I had hoped to avoid altering published stats at the AToW scale but doing some rough calculations in my head tell me it just will not work very well if I don't.  So I may have to abandon my current train of thought on that matter for now.

My other train of thought lately has been how to share more of my AU stuff in less daunting ways.  Mostly at this point it is figuring out how to break stuff into chunks so that it is easier to take in pieces rather than having to sift through all at once.  I know my big focus should be on the faction writeups since that will help set the tone and give at least basic background information to help make the fluff for my designs make more sense.

[Maelwys]

I'm still giving some thought to the issue of the multiplications bogging down game play.  I have realized there is a slight flaw in my current proposal.  If I go with it either the AP rating or base damage of weapons will need improving as well.  I had hoped to avoid altering published stats at the AToW scale but doing some rough calculations in my head tell me it just will not work very well if I don't.  So I may have to abandon my current train of thought on that matter for now.

I hadn't considered that, but it makes sense, otherwise the MOS will determine most of the damage. If you improve the AP, does that mean you have to fiddle with armor ratings as well?

[monbvol]

Yes and no.

Let's take the autorifle just so I can put understandable numbers to this.

Standard ammo with a MoS of 3(after adjusting for burst fire of course) against a standard flak jacket.  AP 4 BD is now 16 with MoS.  Flak jacket at 5 B will reduce 4 damage for a total of 12 going through.  Since the average BOD is 4 that leaves 20 Health left.

Change up to AP with all other variables unchanged results in 15 unstopped damage leaving 17 health.

Now let's take that same autorifle up against a mech.  let's increase the MoS to 6 since a Mech grants a +3 bonus for size.

Standard ammo again for the first example.  4 AP and 28 BD subtracting 24 for the BAR 10 of Mech armor means it ain't doing squat.  Now I'm actually pretty okay with this.

Changing to AP again. 6 AP and 27 BD subtract 16 leaves 11.  Divide by 10 means 1 damage is done.  So far not actually out of line.

Here's the kicker.  A lot of Support Weapons get kicked right in the teeth.

There is a Support Laser with 7 AP and 12 BD.  Against a mech that'd require a MoS of 10 with my always round down rule but only a MoS of 5 with only the altered damage calculation.  Those are not trivial MoS compared to a weapon that needs a MoS of 0 to do damage to a mech as written.

In the end it requires far more work to properly sort out than the current way of doing things.

[Kalten]

wow...simply wow!.... Monbvol...You are insane! (In a good way)
I just read through about 80% of these pages and I have to say, that though I don't agree with some of your ideas, you are quite an inspiration! :)

Keep up the good work, don't get too dragged into the pointless bits, and keep that mind working!

The one topic I want to address (and bring up once again in this thread) is the Attribute Modifiers:
My take on them is simply that it's a bit of a strain for the average human to attain exceptional stats, so I overcame the problem with a simple fluff based solution coupled with a GM freebie for my players:
Let me expalin my concept a bit so that it makes sense:
My player's characters are all from the Federated Suns AFFS, the year is 3065(ish - Still tweaking that in my mind) and the characters have been drawn together by a maverick General, who himself is exceptional in the Victor Steiner-Davion mold.
Basiclly this General has spent the last 10 years of his life seeking out and putting together a crack unit of people that have suberb genetics which have granted them expertise in one field or another, be it combat, politics, espionage, etc as well getting them surberb combat training at the best acadamies throughtout the Federated Suns.
The goal is to create a new style of RCT based loosly on a combined force structure similar to all the different style of forces, ie 5 mechs in a lance, instead of 4, combined arms force including armour, mechs, aerotech, and infantry, as well as being self sufficent in the field (able to operate for long periods behind enemy lines, etc)  Effectively an elite unit of sorts (dirty ddozen, etc)

Now, game stats...my answer was to give the players a set of free modules that took them beyond what would be possible with the standardstarting points setup in the book.
There was no need to change the cost of anything for me.
It's not as detailed as your attmepts to fix the percieved issues, but I felt it worked nicely for the campaign style.  IE I've created characters that are that little bit above the average human in most areas, representing their suberb genetics and greater scope for advancement.

Anyway - I just waffled a LOT!
The attributes:
Sticking to the 2D6 form of the game, which I want to do:
Stat Modifier
0     -4
1     -2
2     -1
3     -1
4     0
5     0
6     0
7     +1
8     +1
9     +2
10   +2
11   +3
12   +3
13   +4
14   +4
etc

I guess it's the D&D player in me that prefers this style of progression....I don't know! :)

Anyway - let me know your thoughts (anyone) about the concept and the attributes.

[monbvol]

Thanks.   :D

I myself don't mind the 1-10 range of attributes and I based my theorycraft off that range.  As such I don't terribly mind a 6 giving a +1 bonus but since it costs 650 it costs less than the existing requirement for a +1 but more than the existing cost for a 6.  So I like the happy medium but I've only been able to theorize about it as my group seems very resistant to any house rules currently.

One of my main goals is to off load as much bulk from play time and put it in down time.  So I don't mind throwing extra math at character creation or character advancement if it makes sense but some of these traits that I've been kicking around just cause a lot of problem during play or have needless calculations and limits.

One of the easy ways to make certain things not such horrendous XP sinks is to give more XP.

[monbvol]

I think I may be on to something for Toughness and eliminating an on the fly calculation.  Just adjust the Health of the character 25% higher rounding up.  So far I haven't found a scenario where this does not work out mathimatically the same.

I will have to look at Glass Jaw and Handicap closer to finish off this particular train of thought but I do like that simplification.

[Kalten]

So, are youy basiclly saying that if the character buys toughness they get an extra 25% onto their health as oppossed to a non toughness character?

Have your working out found anything on the Glass Jaw side of things?

[monbvol]

Pretty much.

I have been doing the number crunching and the best I've come up with for Glass Jaw is to do the exact opposite.  Subtract 25% from the character's health.

So for instance a character with a BOD of 4 would normally have 8 health.  Toughness would raise that to 10.  Glass Jaw would reduce it to 6 instead.

While the Glass Jaw doesn't work exactly the same mathematically it does work close enough to not be an issue.

[monbvol]

Okay found scenarios where it doesn't work exactly the same mathematically because of the introduction of armor but it still works close enough and well enough that I will be making the change.

Also cleaned up the spreadsheet to be a bit more presentable.  Yellow shaded cells are the ones intended for editing.

[monbvol]

Once again I am at work on my AU designs.  I seriously need to think about how I'm going to break them up a bit better so that I can start posting them or something.

Surprisingly I think it is the Chokai Class CA-Modernized that scares me the most of my designs so far.

[monbvol]

Oy.  I'm not sure why but I've been working on the rank structures for my AU factions and also working on essentially a fact sheet for each faction.  I'll have to work on the formating a bit but it is coming along nicely.

[monbvol]

I'd like to put a bit more variety in some of my ranks but what I have now will work quite fine.

I had already worked out a rank structure for CBT:RPG for my rank structure and converting it to AToW was a little troublesome as I had to come up with two new Officer ranks for each faction.  I was missing the naval equivalents but I have those in there now.

Next big thing is to finish up giving names to the Intelligence Agencies and the branches of armed forces.  Got the major schools and manufacturers worked out already so a lot of stuff is already in place.

[monbvol]

You know it still amazes me how much crap I seem to have come up with for my AU and how much more still needs to be done.

But I am getting close to getting over one more hurdle as I have the source code for Megamek and a SDK for editing it.  Now I just have to bash my head up against relearning how to compile the blasted thing.  It still isn't going to be perfect as I can't implement my minimum range for LRMs rule change quite so easily but I can now finally re-balance the ACs for Megamek once I make my edits and compile.

Only what another 50ish Warships to go, faction datasheets, faction writeups, and still figuring out how to share all of this in a sane and sensible manner to go.

[monbvol]

*grumble grumble grumble*

Days like this help remind me why I gave up computer programing and went for a networking specialization instead.

I managed to make my edits for the most part and now I'm having trouble getting ammunition to show up correctly.  Oy.  So I must still be having compiler issues and it has been way too long since I programed to sort out what I need to do different.

[monbvol]

Well one last update before I once more have to head out of town once again to help my Grandmother on my father's side who is in ailing health.

I've been consolidating my various data files into one central file for easier reference.  At least I hope that will be the end result.

I've made some minor updates to my Belarus Alliance faction write up but I want to make more substantial updates before I update the mediafire link.

I'm still formulating everything I want to put on my "at a glance" AU faction datasheets.  I know I want to put most of the basics like the faction's name, the accepted abbreviation for the faction, official government language, title of the ruler, and probably the names of various organizations such as what they call their ground combat arm and their intelligence agencies.  I'm still heavily debating if I should put major manufacturer and sub affiliations on there or not.

Of course some of this stuff is giving me thoughts of heavily reworking the stage 0/1 stuff and how it works but I've already got something good enough so don't expect much but to give you an idea of what is rattling around in my head what I'd do is first you get to choose your birth environment like space colony or tainted world with as many options as could be mustered then you'd make a selection for the sociopolitical elements of your early child hood like capital world or neglected backwater then finally would come the more traditional Stage 1 choices.  I may come back to it and like the thread title implies I may give more than one option for certain elements.

[monbvol]

Back and forth.  Back and forth.

One of the big problems I'm finding in trying to fill out 7 factions worth of Warships is just how difficult it is to create truly distinct Warships with the rules as written.  Hell I'm also being reminded how poorly the rules work for space design on top of that.  I really want to avoid the whole "well if you cut 50,000-200,000 tons out of the cargo bay this design would actually be fairly reasonable" that plagues a lot of published warships but that is surprisingly difficult to do with some concepts.

Something to devote thought to later.

I've worked out a revised cluster hit chart because frankly the existing one is nonsense.  Most of the changes come after the 10 column because 10 and below work fairly well as is.  Since I'm more than willing to open up a lot more modifiers for this roll I'll have to repeat that it is intended to have any roll less than a 2 be treated as a 2 and any roll greater than 12 will be treated as 12.  I'll need to clean out the existing chart before I can share it to avoid any IP issues.

[Maelwys]

I can't imagine having to try to come up with Warships for one faction, much less 7...

[monbvol]

*nod*