BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

BattleTech Player Boards => Fan Designs and Rules => Topic started by: monbvol on 26 January 2011, 03:49:26

Title: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2011, 03:49:26
Welcome!

First off let me say for the most part I do like what Catalyst has managed to come up with for A Time of War, which this thread will deal with primarily.  There may be a few AU specific items here and there but I'll do my best to keep them clearly marked in any documents.  So here's where I'll try and keep everything posted.  Don't worry even though the links don't change the documents may now and again.  I'll do my best to give you the short version of any changes I make in future posts but all links will always be right below and hopefully clearly marked.

This is the main (http://www.mediafire.com/file/k2v30hmjev7z7cg/House_Rules.doc/file) document.  It contains most of what I have worked on/altered.  There are some support documents linked below intended to work in conjunction with this document.

Additional tables (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?303iha3l4bl6ctn) to help see how some of the new traits work.

A work in progress modules (https://www.mediafire.com/file/null/RPGData.doc/file) file that covers primarily stage 1 and stage 2 to support those that don't want to points buy.

With the all fields have 5 skills document here (http://www.mediafire.com/download/27vkg4cq49952xo/AlternateFields.xls).

Optional random events (http://www.mediafire.com/?unlsfmbd332dyhg) tables to help spice up your characters.  All rewards are in XP unless otherwise indicated.

Now introducing a revamp of the tables (https://www.mediafire.com/?303iha3l4bl6ctn) in Field Manual Mercenaries Revised for Mercenary unit creation updated and somewhat tweaked for AToW compliance and personal taste.

Section reserved for future RPG data link for my AU.

The RATs (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?5u6csthdq58jyda) for my AU.  Still need work I know but the stuff that is filled in I'm pretty happy with for now but if I can ever figure out a better way to rework them I will.  May also need naming convention updates.

An Arms, Armor, and Accessories (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?5tsh23ovlsf51ke) document for my AU.

Some Gestalt (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?yxqovgvyvupmnxq) personal AI unit construction rules.

A prototype time line (http://www.mediafire.com/?o23muhudoo6bsid) for my AU.

And just for fun some "In Character" write ups for various factions.  I'm still working on them a bit and I know sections are still not filled out but what I do have I am somewhat happy with but feel free to comment.

Probably overall my most munchy faction first up, the Amegis Compact (http://www.mediafire.com/?dpu6itpijlxl4y5).

Next up the most horrid faction in my AU the Belarus Alliance (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?kz7hgghimo1cudd).

For a bit of a change of pace the introductory document for the Mercenaries Guild (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?stm3mzimddht3pv).

Last but not least the manifest destiny driven bent on re-uniting humanity under their banner Terran Dominion (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?hd6inelnjilzdwt).

I'll do my best to keep these up to date and if there are any conflicts with any of the posts in this thread the documents are considered to trump what is in the post unless you like the way the post works better for your game.  For that reason, as well as allowing you the reader to see the evolution of my house rules I will not be altering any posts beyond this first one.

First up the big one that does nag me.  Natural Aptitudes.  Frankly I understand the idea of making them expensive to keep them rare but I think the cost as they are now is too high for too little gain.  So I plan on eventually introducing the following next character generation:

Complex skills cost 200 and Simple cost 400.  A character may not have more natural aptitudes than intelligence modifier +1.  That's right a minimum INT of 4 is required for a Natural Aptitude.

Now the next set of rules was inspired by the special abilities section and how disappointed I was that there was so little that could be used outside of the cockpit.  Considering the scale of these I intend for them to be cheaper than those abilities that can be used inside.  Let's start with the combat oriented ones.

Muscle Memory
10 XP
Requirements: Martial Arts or Melee Weapons Rank 4 or higher

A character with this ability receives a +1 initiative bonus when combating a foe with a lower Martial Arts or Melee Weapons score so long as the character is using Martial Arts or Melee Weapons to combat their foe.

Death of a Thousand Strikes
50 XP
Requirements: Dex 6+; Martial Arts, Melee Weapons, or Thrown Weapons 4+

A character with this ability as a complex action may unleash a rapid flurry of attacks on their foe as a complex action.  Doing so allows the character to deal Strength divided by 4 rounded normally plus Weapon Damage plus Margin of Success damage as well as the defender having to make a Will check to avoid losing one of their simple actions.

Sweeping Attack
50 XP
Requirements: Strength 6+, Dexterity 6+; Martial Arts, Melee Weapons, or Thrown Weapons 5+; Death of a Thousand Strikes

A character with this ability may take a complex action to attack all foes within three meters of their present location.

Iron Body
50 XP
Requirements: Fit, Toughness, Martial Arts 5+

A character with this ability gains +1 Melee armor even when not wearing any protective gear.

Power Thrower
25 XP
Requirements: Strength 5+, Thrown Weapons 5+, Natural Aptitude Thrown Weapons

A character with this ability multiplies thrown weapon ranges by 1.5 rounding normally.

Fan of Blades
50 XP
Requirements: Thrown Weapons +5, Death of a Thousand Strikes

A character with this ability can unleash a torrent of thrown weapons such that they can make use of the suppressing fire ability normally available only to automatic fire arms but may only target one hex while following all other rules of suppressing fire.

Since Liam's Ghost complained about a lack of non combat abilities when I talked with him on the matter of special abilities I since had a decent brain storm and came up with a few.

Athlete
10 XP
Requirements: Fit

A character with this ability adds +2 to all movement methods and any checks for untrained skill usage for Swimming and Climbing.

Silver Tongued Devil
25 XP
Requirements: Attractive, Charisma 7+, Acting 3+

A character with this ability may elect to use their Charisma bonus instead of Intelligence bonus even if the skill is an advanced skill already linked with Charisma.

Mind Over Body
10 XP
Requirements: Will 7+

Characters with this ability may use their Will modifier instead of their Bod modifier even if the skill is an advanced skill and already linked to Will.

Clever Mind
10 XP
Requirements: Intelligence 7+

With this ability a character may add their intelligence bonus above and beyond any other modifiers for untrained skill checks.

Practical Experience
25 XP
Requirements: Clever Mind

Using this ability a character may roll three six sided dice keeping the two best for any untrained skill check.

As a final warning I may be inclined to change some of the costs of these abilities.

[edit]Changed cost of Natural Aptitude.[/edit]
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 26 January 2011, 18:11:03
I think tying Natural Aptitude to INT is bad as it's not a question of raw intelligence but rather a physiological one.  Sometimes that resides i nthe brain, but other times it resides elsewhere in the body. 

What about tying Natural Aptitude to one of the relevant Attributes for a given skill?

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2011, 20:25:01
The rules as written already tie Natural Aptitude to Intelligence allowing a character to have a maximum number of Natural Aptitudes equal to their Intelligence score.

The problem I see for your proposal is one of complexity, or more accurately in A Time of War terms, Advanced skills that link to multiple attributes.  It's not a bad idea though but since I'm not inclined to go through that much work myself to futz about with figuring out a fair way for Natural Aptitude to cost with limits of how many you can have based on varying attributes.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 26 January 2011, 20:57:04
just follw the KISS principle and allow the palyer to use either ATT for complex skills.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2011, 21:02:50
Which is why I'm inclined to keep the maximum limit of Natural Aptitudes tied to Intelligence modifier.  The cost of them I already have tied to if it is a Simple or Complex skill so you know problem solved there.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 26 January 2011, 21:34:39
Even with the reduced cost, they're not cheap which makes me wonder if tying them to an Att is warranted at all.  The only real reason I can see for the limit is to prevent munchiness.  IMO, i liketo use the rule of thumb that GURPS line edtor Sean "Kromm" Punch uses ie the goal shouldn't be to try to limit munichiness but rather to keep the option from becoming so attractive that it becomes a "must have."

-Jackmc   
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2011, 22:35:44
I'm not sure what you are driving at.

My view is as written Natural Aptitude is so expensive as to be unapproachable despite a character being able to have a maximum of 9 Natural Aptitudes.  My alteration makes the trait itself cheap enough that if I didn't put in a limit that a character could easily wind up with 10 or more.

Intelligence modifier +1 works for my purposes as it keeps it simple and limits to a maximum of 2 Natural Aptitudes on one character without having to figure out some complicated means of enforcing a max based upon link attributes.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 February 2011, 22:22:41
And the latest house rule from my sanity challenged brain.  Optional random events!

I know they're a bit imbalanced just yet but they are still something of a work in progress.  I wrote them per stage rather than per module because I was having enough trouble coming up with things for even that much but they should be workable despite that.

Stage 1
2: Severe accident at a young age.  Choose a following pair:  Combat Paralysis -10 XP, Compulsion/Fear of Guns -10 XP; Slow Learner -10 XP, Introvert -10 XP; Glass Jaw -10 XP, Handicap -10 XP; Lost Limb -10 XP, Compulsion/Chemical addiction -10 XP.  Edge +20 XP.
3: A rare disease strikes at a young age.  Handicap -10 XP, any skill gained from this module -10 XP, Interest/Pharmacology +5 XP, Arts/Any +5 XP, Interest/Any +5 XP and choose one of the following: Glass Jaw -5 XP, Handicap -5 XP, or Lost Limb -5 XP; Toughness +10 XP.
4: Abducted by pirates.  Must choose Adolescent Warfare, Spacer Family, or Street as next module.
5: Orphaned.  Compulsion/Traumatic Memories -15 XP, Connections +10 XP, Interest/Any +5 XP
6: Parents caught up in local revolution but taught you important skills.  Comms/Conventional +5 XP, Small Arms +5 XP, Demolitions +5 XP; Enemy -15 XP; Must choose Adolescent Warfare or Street as next Module.
7: Ordinary childhood. +5 XP to any skill; -5 XP to Edge.
8: Young virtuoso.  Arts/Any +20 XP, Compulsion/Arrogant -20 XP.
9: Early sports star.  Fit +15 XP, Interest/Any sport +20 XP, Compulsion/Chemical Addiction -35 XP.
10: Avid hunter.  Small Arms +10 XP, Tracking/Any +10 XP, Good Hearing +10 XP, Good Vision +10 XP, Introvert -40 XP.
11: On one of your trips you find some interesting items.  Equipped +10 XP, Connections +10 XP, Wealth +50 XP(if Clan exchange for Equipped +50 XP) Enemy -70 XP.
12: Choose one or roll again twice.

Stage 2
2: Run in with a street gang leaves it's mark.  Choose either Unattractive -20 XP or Compulsion/Traumatic Memories -20 XP; Fit +20 XP.
3: Family moves to the frontier and loses it all.  Wealth -15 XP, Equipped -10 XP, Zero-G Ops +5 XP, Survival any +20 XP.
4: The judge gives you a choice, Military or Jail.  Must take either Organized Crime or Military Enlistment/Academy as next module.
5: Part time job after school.  Wealth +5 XP, Slow Learner -5 XP.
6: Gifted student. Add 5 XP to any three skills gained from this module and may enter University next module,  Introvert -15 XP.
7: Boooooring.  +5 XP to any trait; Wealth -5 XP.
8: After school activities.  Choose either Fit +20 XP, Running +20 XP, Throwing +20 XP, Acting +20 XP, Computers +20 XP, or Technician any +20 XP; Edge -20 XP.
9: Family training. Choose either Piloting/Any +20 XP, Driving/Any +20 XP, or Technician/Any + 20 XP; Choose either Vehicle +15 XP or Equipped +15 XP; Compulsion/Stubborn -35 XP.
10: Super prodigey.  Fast Learner +40 XP, Introvert -40 XP.
11: You have an undiscovered talent. Natural Aptitude/Any +70 XP, Unlucky -70 XP.
12: Choose one or roll again twice

Stage 3
2: School scandal causes problems.  Wealth -10 XP, Reputation -10 XP, Choose either Will +20 XP or Patient +20 XP.
3: Field study goes horribly wrong.  Lost Limb -25 XP, Extra Income +25 XP.
4: You earn a trip to the medical labs of a highly regarded university.  Must choose Travel as next module and Handicap -10 XP, Poison Resistance +10 XP.
5: A bit side tracked but worth it.  Dependent -15 XP, Connections +15 XP.
6: Who knew you had such a way with machines? Tech Empathy +15 XP, Unlucky -15 XP.
7: Could be worse but all this free time you have gives you a chance to better yourself.  +5 XP to any attribute,  Compulsion/Arrogant -5 XP.
8: Superior training.  Player may choose an additional training field above and beyond current restrictions/choices for no additional time or may take one less year for this module.  Cost and rebate are not affected by this event and thus are paid and gained normally.
9: Fish to water. Any skill gained at this stage from a field +20 XP, +15 XP to any other skill gained from this module, Slow Learner -35.
10: Wow this is easier than I thought.  Natural Aptitude/any skill gained from this module +40 XP, Enemy -40 XP.
11: Grants come through giving you some extra cash.  Wealth +70 XP, Reputation -70.
12: Choose one or roll again twice

Stage 4
2: You get in over your head gambling.  Wealth -10 XP, Compulsion/Gambling -10 XP, Connections +20.
3: Those are some unsavory characters you've met up with.  Choose either Enemy -25 and Edge +25 or Reputation -25 and Connections +25.
4: Cut backs leave you high and dry for a while.  Must choose Ne'er-do-well as next module.
5: The label said whiskey but the blindness says otherwise.  Poor Vision -15 XP, Poison Resistance +15 XP.
6: Properly “medicated” you become the life of the party.  Gregarious +15 XP, Compulsion/Addiction -15 XP.
7: Nothing out of the ordinary here.  +5 flexible XP, -5 XP Dark Secret.
8: An undiscovered talent sends you back to school.  May choose a Civilian stage 3 module next.
9:  Earn the attention of an important person.  Choose either Wealth +35 XP, Rank +35 SP, or Connections +35 XP; Blood Mark -35 XP.
10: Lucky sob.  Edge +40 XP, Enemy -40 XP.
11: You make one heck of a breakthrough while tinkering.  Choose either Equipped+70 XP, Wealth +70 XP, or Reputation +70 XP; Introvert -70 XP.
12: Choose one or roll again twice
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 14 February 2011, 23:18:00
Overall I like what you have, but I think a full thousand points for rolling a 2 is a bit steep on a 2D6 curve.  With a 2.67% chance per stage, an average sized group would likely end up with a crippled pc out of this.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 February 2011, 00:14:34
My bad.  Those are supposed to be in XP not trait points or skill ranks.

I'll go ahead and see about clearing that up here in a bit.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 15 February 2011, 00:25:06
My bad.  Those are supposed to be in XP not trait points or skill ranks.

I'll go ahead and see about clearing that up here in a bit.

Ah, gotcha.  looks good then, a little character without being derailing.  Good job.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2011, 02:06:25
Noticed I forgot a special ability.

Iron Fist
Requirements: Martial Arts 5+, Fit, Toughness, Iron Body
Cost: 50 XP

Benefit: Character gains 1M Armor Penetration for unarmed attacks.

My next to do is a Random Allocation Table for my Alternate Universe.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 22 February 2011, 07:04:16
Got a reason Iron fist should require iron body? 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2011, 12:02:31
My possibly not entirely correct understanding of real world Martial Arts techniques.  Plus going from 0M to 1M without cybernetic augmentation or equipment is actually a fairly potent capability so making this one fairly expensive seems appropriate for game balance anyway.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 22 February 2011, 12:19:54
Ah, I suppose it's good to have a prerequisite.  It just seems odd to me for the prerequisite to be a defensive ability; I would think being able to take a punch takes a different kind of discipline than knowing whee to hit someone else to do extra damage (what I would assume would give you armor penetration), though since there are no other punch related abilities that I see, I am coming up empty (someone likes throwing knifes quiaff?)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2011, 19:01:35
I will admit if anything I probably do have them backwards in terms of prerequisits from a real world perspective but from a game mechanic perspective it is just too useful of an ability to not cost a lot.  Since most characters can only get 1 or 2 subduing damage in hand to hand fighting someone with even a flak jacket or a good leather coat makes for some rather tough going but suddenly with this ability the fight becomes much more interesting.

I know I probably do overly favor the archiac forms of combat but sometimes it does feel like the rules let them down too much.

I'm still toying around with another idea to have a special ability that allows a character do lethal damage instead of subduing but I'm not quite finished with it since that really needs some hefty drawbacks.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 March 2011, 01:29:47
I'm looking at my optional random events and I am starting to think I should make them zero sum affairs.  Basically they should do nothing to the cost of a module nor should they give you more than normal.  Okay revisions made.  I feel a bit better about it but it still feels a little imperfect.

Might have to give it a try to see how well it actually works.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 March 2011, 23:28:39
And something to make Citizenship a bit more worthwhile.

Character must have Citizenship to enter any Stage 3 Module except Family Training.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 15 March 2011, 01:31:14
Wouldn't that requirement be based on affiliation?  In some places everyone is aa citizen if they were born there.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 15 March 2011, 03:33:22
And something to make Citizenship a bit more worthwhile.

Why bother.  It's worthless.  Far better to make a lack fo citizenship a negative trait for thsoe socities.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 March 2011, 10:48:53
Whether you are automatically a Citizen or not doesn't change if you in fact have the Citizen trait and because it is worthless as presented in AToW is exactly why I'm changing it.

Considering even though I was born in a country where even being born there grants automatic Citizenship I still had to present proof of Citizenship or permission to be in said country to go to college I don't think it is that unreasonable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 March 2011, 15:11:41
Some mulling on the Attributes issue that seems to have come up again.  I'm still toying around with it but I figure why not put my initial thoughts here to see what others think.

Attribute ScoreModifier
0-4
1-3
2-2
3-1
40
50
61
71
81
92
102
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Nargrakhan on 15 March 2011, 21:14:59
The main problems I have with the Attribute/Modifier setup, relate more to the nature of initial character design costs and increased skill roll failure. I don't agree with giving starting PC's more than 5000 XP, just to "fix" that issue either. I simply make "3" an average Attribute. I use this:


Attribute ScoreModifier
0-8
1-4
2-2
30
40
50
6+1
7+1
8+2
9+2
10+3


I increase the penalty for lowered Attributes, to strongly discourage anyone going for 2 so they can min-max, as well as sweetening having 4 at game start, so they'll have a "buffer" in case of something temporarily reducing their Attributes. It also makes things deadlier and interesting when Attributes do slip that far.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Nargrakhan on 15 March 2011, 21:16:43
Oops... Sorry about this... double posted by accident.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 March 2011, 21:24:47
Eh no worries about the double post.  It's happened to most of us at least once.

My main problem is 3 not having a modifier feels too inexpensive no matter how much you penalize 0, 1, and 2.  It probably isn't when you really stop to think about it especially when you have to go and make an attribute check but it is just one of those irrational things that just doesn't sit right with me for no real good reason.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 19 March 2011, 20:24:42
Whether you are automatically a Citizen or not doesn't change if you in fact have the Citizen trait and because it is worthless as presented in AToW is exactly why I'm changing it.

It matters for character creation and it puts players from a minority of affiliations at a notable disadvantage to a character from the majority of affiliations.  That's not to mention that in only two of those affiliations that do require citizenship, do citizens represent the exception rather than the rule.

Quote
Considering even though I was born in a country where even being born there grants automatic Citizenship I still had to present proof of Citizenship or permission to be in said country to go to college I don't think it is that unreasonable.

I don't think it's analogous at all.  It's just a requirement to present your bona fides.  If you lose said bona fides, you don't lose your citizenship, you just have to find/replace the bona fides.  IF you lack the ability to obtain said bona fides, then  your from another affiliation.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 March 2011, 21:40:48
Just because you have something because you can prove you were born in a certain place does not make it worthless.  That's like saying Title is worthless.  The benefits are not immediately observable.  In fact applying the trait evenly actually brings things into balance so that no faction has an advantage over the others.

I know it treads danger close to politics but it is the only example I know.

With my real life citizenship I can:

Get a job with anyone that finds my qualifications acceptable to their opening with no risk of being deported.

Go to college.

Travel the nation I have citizenship with.

If it were not for my age and weight I could even join the military.

I don't know about you but I consider those some pretty nice perks.  Yes I know most of that can be done without citizenship but it often costs more and in several cases would come with significant risk of imprisonment or worse.

I don't find it too much of a stretch to apply these real world standards to AToW.  In fact you've just convinced me to extend the worth of Citizenship to Stage 4 modules.

Modules in Stage 4 that I can see not needing Citizenship:

Agitator
Dark Caste
Guerilla Insurgent
Ne'er-do-well
Organized Crime

There are a couple others that can be fudged but it would really be on a per character and per campaign basis.

Plus on a final note it is not like I am forcing anyone to use any of this.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 20 March 2011, 20:13:54
Another thing about citizenship restrictions:  throughout history there have been numerous societies that either did not require citizenship to serve in the military (French Foreign Legion) or granted citizenship for service (current US policy).

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 20 March 2011, 23:14:30
Funny thing about those though.  While a French Foreign Legion member may not have been a citizen of France they were a citizen of somewhere before hand and could prove it.

Just for fun straight from the French Forgein Legion recruiting website:

Quote
Which documents must be carrier a candidate for the recruitment ?

The presentation of any identity cards ( on current validity ) delivered by the State of membership of the candidate is asked so as to facilitate the process of selection and recruitment (ID card, passport, driving licences, diplomas of state). In every case, an act or a birth certificate with filiation will be required before the end of the first year of contract.

In other words you have to prove you have to have what AToW would call the Citizen trait with someone before the end of your first year.

The US Army citizenship for service?  So much easier to do if you can prove you have what AToW would call the Citizenship trait with someone.  Not to mention the standard background checks that go on to join the US Army.

Plus it seems you completely missed these part of my last post:

Just because you have something because you can prove you were born in a certain place does not make it worthless.  [snip]
Yes I know most of that can be done without citizenship but it often costs more and in several cases would come with significant risk of imprisonment or worse.
[snip]
Plus on a final note it is not like I am forcing anyone to use any of this.

So enough dragging real world politics into this.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 21 March 2011, 19:10:32
Plus it seems you completely missed these part of my last post:

This wasn't in response to your last post, it was a addendum to my earlier post because this was a point I had wanted to make in that post but had forgotten to include.

My general view on Citizenship is that it's bad game design.  It's the default state for the majority of characters with not having it being the exception rather than the rule.  If you're going to use a game mechanic, it should be to address the exception rather than the default.   


-Jackmc. 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 March 2011, 02:47:39
I can agree as written Citizenship is poorly handled.  I am thinking about a mashing together a couple traits, mostly Rank and Title, and calling it Status.  Maybe rolling Citizenship into that would be a better option.  For now I'll use what I got because it works but it does give some food for thought.

What the heck I'll put what I got mulling in my mind out here even though I feel it isn't quite complete.  One of the things I'm toying around with for Status is giving what would amount to specialized Connections trait effects.  Like Military Standing would give better People and Equipment rating, okay Information rating, and worse Wealth rating.  I'm still working on how to balance it so that Connections in of itself is worthwhile as a general trait but your Status in an organization just automatically gives you some of these things.  Though I think I just figured it out.  Use your Status trait for one of the subcategories of the Connections trait, add 3/4s round down to another, 1/2 round down to a third, and 1/4 round down to the fourth.  So like say you want to be a Mechwarrior.  That would be Status 4 with the Military.  As a Mechwarrior you get authority over your technicians that keep your mech running and the grunts who keep the enemy from slitting your throat during the night(People 4), on good terms with the Quartermaster so they'll let you check out better stuff than normal(Equip 3), being a bit of a low man on the totem pole you don't get to hear much(Info 2), and not being allowed to use unit funds because of past problems(Wealth 1).

It doesn't much matter how you break it down as long as it works out.  Like a Lancemate could instead break it down People 1 because he is not well liked by the support grunts, Equip 2 because they've misused issued equipment in the past, Wealth 3 because they have dirt on the disbursing officer, and Info 4 because they have a buddy in intel.

I'm thinking about having it stack with the general Connections trait, I'll have to think about that and maybe see if that would be too powerful.  One thing is certain I do want to add something of an Extra Income flat rate.  By the system it is completely possible to have a Battalion Commander be paid less than one of his Company Commanders just because the Company Commander is better in combat and frankly that irks me.

Any rate the ranks and how much it adds.

-1 Non citizen with my listed effects
0 Could be little more than a slave for those places that don't allow slavery, Slave for those that do.
1 Just enough to get a few perks, 100 extra C-Bills a month
2 250 extra c-bills a month
3 500 extra a month
4 Some appreciable standing now.  May now be a Mechwarrior and/or an Officer now. 750 extra a month pay.
5 1000 extra a month
6 1500 extra a month
7 1750 extra a month
8 2250 extra a month
9 3000 extra a month
10 4000 extra a month and normal player limit unless overruled by GM
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 22 March 2011, 15:23:43
I think you're on the right track.  Waht we really need are three groups of attributes, physical (the 8 we have now), Social and Equipment.  Ideally everyoen would have the same opportunitties in the physical atts (excepting phenotupes) while they would have to dedcide where to invest their points between Social and Equipment. 

The pain is that sometimes in real life, someone gets lucky and gets the best of everything which blows point buy right out the window.  Maybe a hybrid system with a enough default points to build a decent character and then roll for a random number of bonus points?

-Jackmc   
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Tempus on 22 March 2011, 21:27:07
This wasn't in response to your last post, it was a addendum to my earlier post because this was a point I had wanted to make in that post but had forgotten to include.

My general view on Citizenship is that it's bad game design.  It's the default state for the majority of characters with not having it being the exception rather than the rule.  If you're going to use a game mechanic, it should be to address the exception rather than the default.   


-Jackmc.


So drop Citizen as a trait, make a negative trait 'non-Citizen' instead.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 22 March 2011, 22:23:05

So drop Citizen as a trait, make a negative trait 'non-Citizen' instead.

Exactly

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 March 2011, 00:48:10
I'm not sure if I'd go that far but I have to admit AToW does feel like it could benefit from something like the old Social Standing attribute from CBT:RPG/MW3ed, especially for a stratified neo feudalistic society that we've all come to know.

Status does still feel a bit unfinished but with that last brain storm it does feel like I'm homing in on the problem.  My main concern is that it may be a little too over powered to keep a stand alone Connections trait.  Which also begs the question if there should be a stand alone Connections trait at all or if it should have some customization in the four subfactors like what I'm kicking around for Status.

A fair amount to think about but that is for another time as I need to start focusing on my job interview coming up soon.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 23 March 2011, 01:38:02
Personally, I would like connections to me more customized.  The max levels should stay the same but you should be able to trade them around (swap info for people, or wealth for equipment for instance) to represent that different people have different kinds of connections, some people are friends with the quartermaster while others know people who keep their ear to the ground.  I do think it should be kept separate from the person's social standing (though that doesn't rule out standing having some effect on connections in a similar manner to link modifiers effectively adding or subtracting a skill levels); after all, even the lowliest of grunts know people.

I never did MW3ed, what exactly does the SOC attribute affect?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 23 March 2011, 10:10:55
I'm not sure if I'd go that far but I have to admit AToW does feel like it could benefit from something like the old Social Standing attribute from CBT:RPG/MW3ed, especially for a stratified neo feudalistic society that we've all come to know.

GURPS 3rd edition (possibly 4th too, but I don't remember) did a fairly good job of tracking social status and there's advantages/disadvantages in GURPS that mimic ATOW traits which would give you a benchmark for calculating the trait costs for a revised social system.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 March 2011, 10:23:47
Personally, I would like connections to me more customized.  The max levels should stay the same but you should be able to trade them around (swap info for people, or wealth for equipment for instance) to represent that different people have different kinds of connections, some people are friends with the quartermaster while others know people who keep their ear to the ground.  I do think it should be kept separate from the person's social standing (though that doesn't rule out standing having some effect on connections in a similar manner to link modifiers effectively adding or subtracting a skill levels); after all, even the lowliest of grunts know people.

I never did MW3ed, what exactly does the SOC attribute affect?

I too would like Connections to be a little more customizable for pretty much the same reasons and while the trait value will not go past 10 TP to make the customization worthwhile the sub ratings would have to go beyond the normal 10 or else there would be very little variety in a 10 TP Connections trait.

My initial thought on Status and it's specialized Connections is that this should do a pretty decent approximation of what you can use your position of power to get things done without having to deal with the normal once every so many days use your connections that can accomplish more all things said and done.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 March 2011, 01:51:54
I forgot to answer Bird of Prey's question about what SOC covered in CBT:RPG/MW3ed.  The short answer is it pretty much is what the Title trait is now with Citizenship thrown in.  Some affiliations and Life Paths had a minimum SOC to enter or avoid being a slave/political non-entity.  Over all really thinking about it SOC hasn't gone away.

After recent events I am starting to think about certain things a bit more.  I'm thinking about making attributes a bit more expensive by making the progression non-linear or at the very least more expensive.  I'm even entertaining the thought of upping the Target Numbers for several skills so that you can never have better than a -1/-1 G/P when translating to Total Warfare.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 April 2011, 18:21:12
I've been kicking a few things around lately and I find myself ready to get some feedback on a few things.

First up since I've learned about a bit of fluff where Terrans can live to around 200 years or so I've been thinking about the Aging rules and how to reflect that.  I've pretty well come to the conclusion that it needs an overhaul and makes a great opportunity to have another trait in the mix that actually makes sense.  To balance it out I'm going to junk the +/-100 XP per year before/past 21/18 thing.

Aging:

Character gets +25 flexible XP per year that may only be spent on attributes or traits that can be argued as a matter of physical training, mental training, or surgery/drugs up until Peak Age.  After Peak Age is reached -25 Flexible XP is applied each year in addition.  At Middle Age Attributes become more expensive to raise by 25%.  At Old Age Attributes become even more expensive at a total 50% cost increase and an additional -10 XP for a total of -35 XP of flexible XP is applied.  In the End Years the cost for Attributes is doubled from original costs and the negative flexible XP assigned each year becomes a total of -50 XP.  Except for Edge.  Edge may never be altered by this aging effect unless desired by the GM.  To determine Peak, Middle Age, Old Age, and End Years refer to the new Aging trait found below.  Because of how Good/Poor/Genetics interacts with Aging the player should calculate the bonus XP at the Final Touches stage and be spent or banked at that point as normal.

New Traits:

Aging[-5 to 5]
Character Trait

Whether because of genetics, planetary conditions, or access to medical care you suffer from the rigors of aging differently than everyone else.  Aging effects can be altered through access to better medical science or conversely removal of said medical science as well as prolonged exposure to hazardous environments and a character's bad habits(GM's call).  To represent this in game terms the player applies the modifiers of their new Aging trait starting that year and forward.

TP Peak Age Middle Age Old Age End Years
-5 11 22 33  44
-4 16 32 48  64
-3 19 38 57  76
-2 22 44 66  88
-1 24 48 72  96
0  25 50 75  100
1  26 52 78  104
2  28 56 84  112
3  31 62 93  124
4  35 70 105 140
5  40 80 120 160


And I've been thinking about Phenotypes and I find myself not liking their current lack of balance.  Let's face it for most AToW scale campaigns it is just so much better to be an Elemental phenotype.  So instead I'm creating two more traits.  The second is part of a fix to the Skill XP to Rank problems I'm growing unsatisfied with because it does make life a little too difficult at times figuring out how all those traits interact.

Good Genetics[1 to 8]
Character Trait

If by some blessing of chance or through modern science you can excede the limitations of mere mortals.  For each trait point invested a character may receive either a +1 to an Attribute or may adjust their attribute maximums by a combined total of +1 instead.  Attributes may not be increased beyond 10.  Edge is exempted from this trait.  When comined with the Aging Trait the character receives an additional amount of XP each year equal to 10 times trait level(1 TP grants 10 XP, 8 TP grants 80 XP).

Poor Genetics[-1 to -8]
Character Trait

Whether a scientist created you for some sick experiment or your family tree is a little trunk like you have gotten a poor lot in life.  For each rank of this trait an attribute is applied a -1 to either it's final rank or maximum threshold.  No attribute may be reduced to less than a final rank of 1 with this trait and likewise a maximum rank for an attribute may not be reduced below 1.  During Aging a character gains a number of XP equal to the Trait Points of this trait times ten(-1 would be -10 XP, -8 would be -80 XP) to be distributed to attributes or appropriate traits.

Intensive Training[1-2]
Character Trait

Between hard work, natural talent, and a well designed training program you have an easier time with a field of work.  This trait causes one of the Character's advanced fields related skills to have their target number dropped by 1.  For 1-5 skills in the field this trait costs 1 TP.  For 6+ this trait costs 2 TP.

Yes Tech Empathy is getting dropped for Intensive Training.  Now for the rest of the fix.

Revised XP system:
Every time a character rolls for a skill or attribute check they get 1 XP towards that skill or attribute.  On a fumble they get an amount equal to the MoF.  On a success they get 1 additional XP per MoS of 5 or fraction thereof.  For skills this XP can be applied to the skill itself, the link attribute(s), or a relevant trait instead.  Characters will always receive Int divided by 2 round down each month.  Training and awards by the GM function as normal.

Fast Learner[2 TP]
Character Trait

A character with Fast Learner doubles all XP gains from the revised XP system and from training exempting campaign rewards.

Slow Learner[-2 TP]
Character Trait

A character with Slow Learner halves(round down) all  XP gains from the revised XP system and from training exempting campaign rewards.

Illiterate[-1]
Character Trait

As normal except the 10% cost adjustment to skills with a link attribute of Intelligence is dropped.

Gremlins[-2]
Character Trait

As normal except the 10% cost for technical skills adjustment is gone.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Gaifin on 12 April 2011, 20:19:06
I like what you have done with the aging thing! I am going to try it out with the new campaign i have just started.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 April 2011, 20:51:24
Okay Aging brackets for the Aging trait attached as a spreadsheet attachment to previous post along with total XP up to the maximum age of each bracket figured out for you.  I also decided I will be revising the costs of attributes and also did up a table showing how much they cost at each age bracket.

Made a few more adjustments so be sure to go through and reread what I've put up there.

I know it makes some things more complicated but honestly I feel better about handling them this way.

Oh and I've decided since I'm tossing Phenotype and Trueborn for Genetics there will be no free traits.  You want it you got to buy it.  Likewise to represent the stratified society of the Clans and to account for their lack of money for warriors to rework my status trait a bit and make having that level of status a requirement for the indicated Caste.  Likewise they will have to pay the cost for Intensive Training trait I have added.  My only real problem to this point though is I may be hitting the Clans a little too hard for a module build but I do like the implication of not all Clan genetics programs being equal that this creates.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 June 2011, 20:47:21
Having toyed around with these rules a bit more extensively I have hit a bit of an unintended snag.

I'm not sure how much of a snag it really is since I kind of did screw up the experiment and the points of comparison were a bit wonky as a result.

I'm fairly pleased with my random event rolls.  I'll have to take a look here and make sure I did zero sum them in the post like I have in my document.

The main point of contention I am having is more that one of my goals was to make it slightly less expensive to get an attribute bonus.  The thing is now I'm worried one of my traits may create a workaround that makes it too easy.

I'll have to think on if it really actually bothers me that much or not.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Tslammer on 14 June 2011, 11:38:21
Some mulling on the Attributes issue that seems to have come up again.  I'm still toying around with it but I figure why not put my initial thoughts here to see what others think.

Attribute ScoreModifier
0-4
1-3
2-2
3-1
40
50
61
71
81
92
102
We did something similar
1         -3
2         -2
3         -1
4-5       0
6-7     +1
8-9     +2
10      +3

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 June 2011, 12:06:27
I'm still debating that scale somewhat.  I haven't sold myself on having a +3 be possible but it might be a nice incentive for those attributes that don't have other uses beyond the modifiers.  Like Strength adding to melee damage, Body making you harder to kill, and Will making you tire less easily are all good incentives to have those attributes as high as possible.  The rest are nice to have high but really I do feel like there is less incentive to go past a +1.

I'm still toying around with my cost scale too because I do like the idea of it not being xp/100=attribute.  The way I have it now is that yes it costs 50 XP more to have a 6 but the advantage is you get a +1 modifier versus the as written cost to get the same modifier being 50 XP greater than the way I have it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Tslammer on 14 June 2011, 18:10:46
I like the straight cost for Attributes MW2 made them to important and to expensive to buy up later. Because our version of the MW3 Solaris rules uses attributes in mech combat we upped our starting XP to compensate. One year later we still have a balanced group and no one character stands out over the others. So I feel we have avoided some munchkin issues.

One character seems to be better than the rest as she has 7-8 solo kills but that is due to a lucky streak of head kills rather than being built more uber than the rest.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Cannon_Fodder on 15 June 2011, 00:14:51
I'm still debating that scale somewhat.  I haven't sold myself on having a +3 be possible but it might be a nice incentive for those attributes that don't have other uses beyond the modifiers.  Like Strength adding to melee damage, Body making you harder to kill, and Will making you tire less easily are all good incentives to have those attributes as high as possible.  The rest are nice to have high but really I do feel like there is less incentive to go past a +1.

I'm still toying around with my cost scale too because I do like the idea of it not being xp/100=attribute.  The way I have it now is that yes it costs 50 XP more to have a 6 but the advantage is you get a +1 modifier versus the as written cost to get the same modifier being 50 XP greater than the way I have it.

You also have to remember that chart TSlammer posted was also setup for 2D10.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 June 2011, 02:19:42
True.

I like the idea of a progressive scale for attributes because it does feel more realistic and can help with some of the issues I keep coming across.  Mostly that if I do want attribute bonus I feel like I do tend to give up a little too much.  The way I have it now does feel like it needs a little refinement but it is only slightly cheaper to get attribute bonuses and I'm feeling pretty okay with that.

Where I'm having difficulty is with the Genetics trait I added.  It may be too easy of a work around.  Like I've said though I do need to run through more experiments.  Especially without screwing up the points of comparison.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Cannon_Fodder on 15 June 2011, 02:39:29
8 it the normal Maximum for normal humans (for all but CHA and EDG). Having the very top be +2 feels right.

The only time you are going to get into the +3 at attribute 10 is when dealing with Clan Phenotypes combined with Exceptional Attributes.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 June 2011, 10:09:29
I will admit it is tempting and I'm not entirely against it.  I think I just may make the switch once I finish working out my Genetics trait to make sure it isn't quite so easy to get a 10 in an attribute.  I was wanting it to be a bit more free form but I think I am just going to have to make it to where my players have to select a premade phenotype.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2011, 00:00:07
Okay I managed to come up with an alternative that makes me feel a bit better about my Genetics trait.  Cap the actual attribute rank modifier at a maximum of +2.  I'm still debating the target number issue.  Sometimes I think the odds of success are a little too good but at other times not so much.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Cannon_Fodder on 16 June 2011, 09:52:32
The 2D10 conversion for skill targets we used are

Code: [Select]
Old TN New TN
 7 11
 8 12
 9 14

And with a starting skill cap of +4 it seams to be working fairly well.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2011, 10:20:23
Part of my problem is that it just doesn't feel like there is enough disparity between people who've trained all their lives to be masters of particular skills and rank amateurs who practice on the weekends.  Yet at the same time my own experience with fire arms tells me that there are skills that shouldn't take a lot of training before you start getting decent odds of success.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 16 June 2011, 11:35:48
Part of my problem is that it just doesn't feel like there is enough disparity between people who've trained all their lives to be masters of particular skills and rank amateurs who practice on the weekends.  Yet at the same time my own experience with fire arms tells me that there are skills that shouldn't take a lot of training before you start getting decent odds of success.

What you're missing is a ranking on the difficulty of any given skill.  GURPS uses a hiearchy of Easy, Average, Hard and Very Hard.  In GURPS the Guns skill is an Easy skill so anyone with average dexterity and a little bit of training can become a decent shot.  On the other hand, Computer Programming/Hacking is a Very Hard skill which means that excelling in the art takes a massive amounts of both raw intelligence and time expended (skill points in GURPS reflect time spent learning/practicing a skill).   

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: PurpleDragon on 16 June 2011, 11:36:54
lurking to see if there's anything here I'd use in the future.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2011, 12:42:12
I understand that Jackmc.  I'm not missing anything there.  I'm willing to admit it probably is just a matter of perception.  I will also admit the idea of going to 2d10 is an interesting solution that could quite possibly solve a lot of what I perceive to be such problems.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 16 June 2011, 13:28:30
I understand that Jackmc.  I'm not missing anything there. 

sorry, poorly communicated.  What I meant is the concept's missing the skill difficulty ranking, not that you're overlooking it.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2011, 16:32:17
Ah now that makes more sense.  Though I am starting to consider the possibility that it could just be more a matter of that I'm not properly exploiting the existing suggested modifiers.  I know that getting some additional special abilities worked out will probably help the remainder of the issue.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 June 2011, 00:11:05
Recent discussions are now causing me to think about the Equipped trait as a stand alone trait.

As I keep trying to think about how to fluff Equipped I keep coming back to how it seems to depend more on things that really would be better represented by my new trait Status, the existing traits of Connections, and Reputation.

I'm still working out exactly how to express this so stay tuned.

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 June 2011, 01:02:22
Okay this will be reworking my status trait a bit but I think I like it better this way.  Sure it makes the player work/think a bit harder but so far I'm fairly happy with the results.

Both provide a pool of points with which you can buy the subsets of Equipped, Info, People, and Wealth.  To keep Equipped and People from being too easily dominating of choices they take up two points for each level in that subset.  Everything else follows the rules and information as presented in AToW.  Basically Connections still has to be rolled for while Status does not.

I've decided to not enforce maximum limits on People or Info.

Attached is a spreadsheet that'll help customize how you want your subsets for Connections and Status.  I've included dropdowns for everything that has defined limits.  Cells intended for data entry have been shaded yellow.  Tab 2 shows the chart for how many points I intend each level of these traits to provide for their subsets.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 July 2011, 11:35:35
One of the things that has been bugging me lately are the event rolls on my optional random event table that force a player into particular modules.  I'm considering rewriting those particular events and making a couple adjustments on some others to give a little more freedom of choice.  Mostly to keep it simple I want to rework it so that you can wait until you finish up all your module choices to roll for events without things getting wonky.  Plus it feels like there are too few modules to represent certain lifestyles.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 July 2011, 22:49:33
Okay aside from some possible additional organizational improvements I actually feel a lot better about this revised optional random event table.

Stage 1
2: Severe accident at a young age.  Edge +20 XP; Choose a following pair:  Combat Paralysis -10 XP, Compulsion/Fear of Guns -10 XP; Slow Learner -10 XP, Introvert -10 XP; Glass Jaw -10 XP, Handicap -10 XP; Lost Limb -10 XP, Compulsion/Chemical addiction -10 XP. 
3: A rare disease strikes at a young age.  Handicap -10 XP, any skill gained from this module -10 XP, Toughness +10 XP, Interest/Pharmacology +5 XP, Arts/Any +5 XP, Interest/Any +5 XP and choose one of the following: Glass Jaw -5 XP, Handicap -5 XP, or Lost Limb -5 XP.
4: Abducted!  Choose one of the following pairs: Compulsion/Greedy -10 XP, Wealth +10 XP; Compulsion/Addiction -10 XP, Poison Resistance +10 XP; Compulsion/Traumatic Memories -10 XP, Connections + 10 XP.
5: Orphaned.  Compulsion/Traumatic Memories -15 XP, Connections +10 XP, Interest/Any +5 XP
6: Parents caught up in local revolution but taught you important skills.  Comms/Conventional +5 XP, Small Arms +5 XP, Demolitions +5 XP; Enemy -15 XP; Must choose Adolescent Warfare or Street as next Module.
7: Ordinary childhood. +5 XP to any skill; -5 XP to Edge.
8: Young virtuoso.  Arts/Any +20 XP, Compulsion/Arrogant -20 XP.
9: Early sports star.  Fit +15 XP, Interest/Any sport +20 XP, Compulsion/Chemical Addiction -35 XP.
10: Avid hunter.  Small Arms +10 XP, Tracking/Any +10 XP, Good Hearing +10 XP, Good Vision +10 XP, Introvert -40 XP.
11: On one of your trips you find some interesting items.  Connections +10 XP, Enemy -70 XP; Choose Either Connections +60  XP, Status + 60 XP, or Wealth +60.
12: Choose one or roll again twice.

Stage 2
2: Run in with a street gang leaves it's mark.  Fit +20 XP; Choose either Unattractive -20 XP or Compulsion/Traumatic Memories -20 XP.
3: Family moves to the frontier and loses it all.  Wealth -15 XP, Equipped -10 XP, Zero-G Ops +5 XP, Survival any +20 XP.
4: Met a bad influence.  Choose one of the following pairs: Compulsion/Gambling -10 XP, Interest/Gambling + 10 XP; Extra Income -10 XP, Pain Resistance + 10 XP; Reputation -10 XP, Connections +10 XP.
5: Part time job after school.  Wealth +5 XP, Slow Learner -5 XP.
6: Gifted student. Add 5 XP to any three skills gained from this module and may enter University next module ignoring prerequisits,  Introvert -15 XP.
7: Boooooring.  +5 XP to any trait; Wealth -5 XP.
8: After school activities.  Choose either Fit +20 XP, Running +20 XP, Throwing +20 XP, Acting +20 XP, Computers +20 XP, or Technician any +20 XP; Edge -20 XP.
9: Family training. Choose either Piloting/Any +20 XP, Driving/Any +20 XP, or Technician/Any + 20 XP; Choose either Vehicle +15 XP or Equipped +15 XP; Compulsion/Stubborn -35 XP.
10: Super prodigey.  Fast Learner +40 XP, Introvert -40 XP.
11: You have an undiscovered talent. Natural Aptitude/Any +70 XP, Unlucky -70 XP.
12: Choose one or roll again twice

Stage 3
2: School scandal causes problems.  Wealth -10 XP, Reputation -10 XP, Choose either Will +20 XP or Patient +20 XP.
3: Field study goes horribly wrong.  Lost Limb -25 XP, Extra Income +25 XP.
4: You earn a trip to the medical labs of a highly regarded university.  Choose one of the following pairs: Compulsion/Arrogant -10 XP, Natural Aptitude/Surgery/General +10 XP; Compulsion/Addiction -10 XP, Interest/Pharmacology +10 XP; Handicap -10 XP, Intelligence + 10 XP.
5: A bit side tracked but worth it.  Dependent -15 XP, Connections +15 XP.
6: Who knew you had such a way with machines? Tech Empathy +15 XP, Unlucky -15 XP.
7: Could be worse but all this free time you have gives you a chance to better yourself.  +5 XP to any attribute, -5 XP Compulsion/Arrogant.
8: Superior training.  Player may choose an additional training field above and beyond current restrictions/choices for no additional time or may take one less year for this module.  Cost and rebate are not affected by this event and thus are paid and gained normally.
9: Fish to water. Any skill gained at this stage from a field +20 XP, +15 XP to any other skill gained from this module, Slow Learner -35.
10: Wow this is easier than I thought.  Natural Aptitude/any skill gained from this module +40 XP, Enemy -40 XP.
11: Grants come through giving you some extra cash.  Wealth +70 XP, Reputation -70.
12: Choose one or roll again twice

Stage 4
2: You get in over your head gambling.  Wealth -10 XP, Compulsion/Gambling -10 XP, Connections +20 XP.
3: Those are some unsavory characters you've met up with.  Choose one of the following pairs: Enemy -25 XP,  Edge +25 XP;  Reputation -25, Connections +25 XP.
4: Cut backs leave you high and dry for a while.  Extra Income -10 XP, Fast Learner + 10 XP.
5: The label said whiskey but the blindness says otherwise.  Poor Vision -15 XP, Poison Resistance +15 XP.
6: Properly “medicated” you become the life of the party.  Gregarious +15 XP, Compulsion/Addiction -15 XP.
7: Nothing out of the ordinary here.  +5 flexible XP, -5 XP Dark Secret.
8: An undiscovered talent sends you back to school.  May choose a Civilian stage 3 module next even if the character is at normal limit.  Wealth -20 XP, Natural Aptitude/Any skill  +20 XP.
9:  Earn the attention of an important person.  Blood Mark -35 XP; Choose either Wealth +35 XP, Rank +35 SP, or Connections +35 XP.
10: Lucky sob.  Edge +40 XP, Enemy -40 XP.
11: You make one heck of a breakthrough while tinkering.  Choose either Equipped +70 XP, Wealth +70 XP, or Reputation +70 XP; Introvert -70 XP.
12: Choose one or roll again twice
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 20 July 2011, 00:39:00
I've been thinking about my aging system again.

I thought about changing it so that it uses the same formula as the downtime XP of 1/2 INT *months of downtime, in this case it would work out to be INT*6.  The trouble is I've realized that would get too complicated to work out a decent system where diminishing returns would ensure that the character isn't crippled too quickly but yet there would eventually be a point where your body would fail faster than you can do anything about it.

So I think I'll keep with the flat 25 XP per year but revise Fast Learner and Slow Learner so that they do not apply to this aging based flexible XP.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 September 2011, 18:57:29
[Edit]Sorry folks links are dead so this post has been removed.[/Edit]
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 16 September 2011, 22:53:43
The Focused Learning is a pretty powerful trait. I understand for the most part why its there, since you seem to have broken up the Trueborn trait into various components, but for 100 points that's a heck of a bonus that's suddenly available to everyone, not just Trueborns. (Hopefully I got the name right, I stupidly closed the file right before going to post this :) )
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2011, 00:06:14
Hey feedback!

You do raise a good point.  I am thinking of limiting to just one such Intensive Training Trait per character period.  That way it is useful but not so powerful that it proves overwhelming.

One of the things I intend to do with my AU is rework the Vehicle RATs and the Custom Vehicle Trait.  What I am thinking for that is each rank of Vehicle Trait represents the column of the RAT to roll on.  Each column would be arranged in such a way to represent rarity/quality so that while there still will be a certain amount of association with weight it will also reduce the stair stepping of needing to invest set amounts of points and thus help prevent gaming the system.  I do have a mostly finished Ground Vehicle RAT for my AU.  I just need to finish populating it with the generic/available to most everyone stuff and on the flipside I do have to finish designing some of the entries I made on there.  Which will be tough because I do not remember where I left off with that let alone if I was using Heavy Metal Vehicle of Megamek Lab.

Anyway onto Custom Vehicle.  This trait has always been a bit tricky but with the Strat Ops refit rules I think there just might be a way to make use of it.

Oy this is going to get complicated.  I may have to do a monster chart/spreadsheet for what I'm thinking.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2011, 00:44:03
And as I guessed it did get too complicated to do anything other than a massive table.

You choose one of the effects listed in the column header and the number clear in column A will tell you what rank of Custom Vehicle you need to get that.  Unless specified with a Choose option player must roll using the indicated modified column for the desired effect.  Only one effect may be chosen per vehicle but at the acquisition of a new vehicle a new effect can be chosen if desired.  A N/A entry indicates that effect is not available to that level of trait.  Refit levels are expressed in Strategic Operations terms and as such see Strategic Operation for rules on how to apply the indicated refit.

[Edit]Removed dead link[/edit]
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2011, 01:23:50
And I still have left over vehicles in my generic directory.  I certainly didn't do as good of a job mixing up the weight on them better like I had some others.  Oh well.

*dead link removed*

I need to recreate a lot of my old ASFs but I do have my mechs mostly restored.  I say mostly because they really need some resorting and renaming.  I also need to fix a few LRM issues.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 17 September 2011, 01:37:38
Even with being limited to only one Intensive Training (man, did I get that wrong) its still a pretty hefty bonus to the character's primary (most likely) skills. Maybe instead of splitting it up as 100 for 5 skills and 200 for 6+, you make it 100for non-combat skills, and 200 for combat, perhaps with a Clanner Trueborn discount?

I somewhat get what you're trying to do with the custom vehicle table, but any gaming table that takes up 28 rows is somewhat suspect :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2011, 10:05:44
Well it is a work in progress and I did just realize it still really doesn't handle once play is underway and the players need a new vehicle in a totally sane and sensible way.

I keep running into the problem that the refit stuff really is better handled by the player's relations with their unit techs or the Connections trait and what salvage is available and once again what their Connections trait can get them access to.  So there goes a lot of columns off that table.  And returning it to a 1-6 point trait takes care of the other issues.

Okay the Refit/Redesign column is there for what the player can do with their Vehicle before play begins.  It is intended to not be used once play has started.  The player only gets to choose from one of the four columns before play begins and as the fourth column becomes more influenced by other traits and game conditions once play has begun they may either choose one of the first three columns when replacing their vehicle or take any available salvage as their new vehicle.

The new, more sane and sensible, *dead link removed*.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2011, 13:16:14
Updated my AU Affiliations document because I found some of my affiliations were not adding up XP wise.  Also made an adjustment to the Carfana Federation Affiliation.  Also found a few instances where obsolete traits were still being used.  Updated previous link but just in case *dead link removed* it is again.

Oh and I almost forgot to mention I am seriously considering reworking all the fields since one of the things I intend to do is have most combat vehicles, all mechs and ASFs have a crew of 2, or more for larger vehicles, and as such I am going to rework the fields to have more specialization rather than general utility.  I have started thinking about cutting each field down to five associated skills.  Some this works great for, others have been tougher to cut down.  So far though I'm not too terribly displeased.  This should help me rework the Intensive Training trait into something a little more workable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 October 2011, 22:41:14
Ah this old thread.

Some more things I have begun thinking about lately.

I have been toying around with the idea of reintroducing LAMs in my setting.  I'm seriously thinking of having it be something that is available to one faction(Amegis Compact) and salvage to all others.  Which will help fill out both my Mech and ASF tables thanks to how I am going to organize my RATs.

I am seriously having to pause and consider my RATs overall simply because I may well have to reorganize some of the few I already have worked out.  Mostly because I just never have really gone through and gotten a firm idea of who has what as far as technology goes.  I may also have to come up with better tech timelines as well just so the vehicle table doesn't have some wonkiness.  Which may force me to go through and rework my mech archive as well so I can start sorting that out as well.  Then I run into the problem that I just don't have hardly any of my ASF designs anymore, nor my BA designs.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 October 2011, 12:12:45
Okay I finished up reworking the Fields to my satisfaction.  I will not be giving out the full document for this one because as it is I feel like I am already precariously close to some legal lines I should not cross.  All is not lost though because I can share the fields that are my own creation.  Probably be Tuesday before I can actually cut down the document to only my creations though.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 October 2011, 20:49:31
Which Tuesday though is a good question.

I'm thinking of creating a new spreadsheet that is compatible with my house rules.  My current one is not.  I'm even thinking of doing something silly for the Fields.  I may actually somewhat predefine them a bit but in doing so create extras of a few.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 November 2011, 20:35:19
Ah scrag pruning and sharing that file.  :P

Something I have been working on lately is I did find an old document with at least the names of all my missing AU designs.  So I've been rebuilding them from scratch and got that finished up all right.

The problem now though is I find I just don't have enough BA designs to fill out a RAT without it getting a bit wonky but at the same time I'm kind of okay with that because I do want certain factions to be BA rich and others very BA poor but as I pointed out for a RAT this creates some problems.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 November 2011, 20:46:09
I have determined I do just need to bite the bullet a bit and fill out at least the lighter spectrum of designs a bit but this does run into the other problem I find with Battle Armor, it is exceedingly difficult to make something that actually feels like it is a different suit and not just a variation on a theme.  To a certain extent I'm okay with that but it does just make for some unbearable blandness.  I'm seriously considering adding some custom weapons to my copy of HMBA to help address this without making things too imbalanced.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 November 2011, 23:44:19
I also just realized something else.  None of my Heavymetal software suites have the Total Warfare weapons in them anymore.  I know not such a big deal for the mechs since I have SSW but everything else, yeah I got some gear I can use to get some variety with now.  I feel kind of silly for that.  Yes I also have Megameklab but frankly that is a bit klunky and not very user friendly for actually making the designs useful for table top gaming.  Plus it doesn't let me do custom weapons which is a big one for me because I'm not afraid to fix some existing weapons to make a better balance.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 20 November 2011, 14:41:50
Okay something weird is going on with the files I downloaded that are supposed to contain them.  I tried to add something to a design that was correctly entered into the custom weapons list for HMAero as a Capital Ballistic weapon but the program displayed a Laser bay with no weight or heat.  Oy.  I'm not sure if I didn't follow the directions as well as I had thought, Windows 7 is just being a pain, or what.  All I know is I really don't want to have to hand enter that many weapons.  I'll have to take some time to think about this and how to solve the problem.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 November 2011, 23:01:58
Okay I got the stuff I care about into HMBA.  I'm also pretty happy with what I have in HMVee as far as custom/revised weapons go.  HMPro I can skip since I have SSW and I have successfully figured out how to make the changes I want with it.  This just leaves HMAero for adding new weapons for some variety.  I have to admit I'm seriously considering calling it good enough with the fair number of ASFs I have and kind of gloss over everything else because honestly as much as StratOps and TW made everything space better the rules for anything space need major overhauls still, at least in construction.

My next AToW campaign will be making use of a few changes to tactical scale equipment.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 December 2011, 12:57:05
I've been thinking of late where I should share some of these changes I've made and this is a house rule thread and A Time of War does deal with Mech combat so it seems here or starting a new thread in Fan Articles seems the best bets.  Since I already have this thread I'll go ahead and list them here.

Autocannons.  I've reduced their weight by 2 tons and criticals by 1 to a minimum of 1.  Increased ammo slightly to make for a total of 120 damage per ton of ammo.  All minimum ranges have been removed.  Specialty munitions that reduced shots per ton now only reduce to 2/3rds rather than 1/2.  This includes the LB and Ultra cannons.

Gauss Rifles.  Likewise I couldn't think of a good reason why there was a minimum range so I've decided to drop it.  For the Heavy I couldn't figure out why the damage dropped as fast as it does and with the removal of minimum range to help keep it in balance it does 20 damage at all ranges.  To help balance them heat was increased. Light now produces 4, standard 8, Heavy 12.  Still explode normally.  On vehicles they work like Plasma Cannons, in other words they need heat sinks and power amps despite being ammo based weapons.

LRMs are my last main  change.  Instead of minimum range impacting to hit it is now a -1 per hex of minimum range to the missile hit chart with any result less than 2 meaning that no missiles did damage.  Clan LRMs now have a minimum range of 4.  Inner Sphere LRM-5 and 15 have had their weight increased by half a ton each and the Clan versions have been recalculated to half the weight.

So far I have only really been able to do thought experiments on these changes but I have been fairly pleased with the results.  The AC-5 now can compete with a Large Laser and heat sinks instead of being a no brainer refit.  The AC-10 goes from easily replaced by a PPC and heat sinks is a debate about which is better to actually giving an incentive to keeping the old AC-10 around, especially once the better specialty munitions hit.  Replacing a LRM-10 with two LRM-5s is no longer a tonnage freeing refit.  I like these implications.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: skiltao on 07 December 2011, 16:53:03
Well I believe even in the era of the single heatsink as the only heat dissipation option all the autocannons are at least two tons and one crit too big

Official C-Bill prices and rarity tables don't exactly weigh in their favor but, I dunno, there's at least one fringe benefit to having lots of crits: advanced rules (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,13260.0.html) allow spacious weapons to continue functioning as long as half of its crits are intact which, since arms get blown off instead of suffering a triple-crit, means that even a 4-crit piddly AC/5 stays in action longer than a 3-crit PPC does.

Also, I thought you were around back when Fallguy mentioned his "autocannon get a natural TN-2 To Hit modifier" house rule. Was that an idea you had considered and turned down?

No thoughts on Gauss Rifles, but you may want to bump LRM 5 heat up to 3; otherwise they still pull (slightly) ahead of LRM 10s by virtue of being harder to knock out.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 December 2011, 17:17:09
Giving ACs a flat -2 seems like an okay idea until you get to the specialty munitions.  I may think on the full implications of that further.

I know the argument, more crits more easily taken out.  I think the balance is actually just fine at least on a theoretical level but then I don't exactly have a lot of capability to put these changes through practical testing just yet and I see that as what I do need.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: skiltao on 09 December 2011, 18:08:05
Yeah; and it's not like MegaMek (presently the easiest way to test practically) makes it easy to use house rules or modified equipment stats.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 December 2011, 18:35:12
*nod*

On paper I really love these changes to the ACs because it makes them better without making them obviously superior.  A Light PPC is still a better choice than a stock AC-5 on most mechs but on vehicles LRM-15s are not so automatically better that it seems a no brainer to swap them out if you have the cash and LRMs to spare and yet there are applications where each has merits over the other now.  Especially since things like BV2.0 wouldn't exactly exist in character's minds.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2011, 19:20:41
Okay now I have a nice new special for everyone.

I still feel like I need to rework some of the tables to create less of a relationship between higher Vehicle netting the player an automatically heavier(and with the prejudice of my players considered automatically better) unit.

I have also gone through and stated everything on the Driving/Ground tab with Megameklab except for a few entries on the Generic table.

Since I can't easily edit Megameklab to use my alternate weights I just over/underweighted the designs as needed.

*dead link removed*

All my Battle Armor is done with HMBA and I did get a little frustrated with weapon choice so I created the PaK-1.  I like how it balances without invalidating anything but comments are still welcome.  100 kg 1 slot 1 damage 3/6/9 range 5 shots per clip 5kg ammo clips.  I should rework the cost though.

*dead link removed*

And the still needs re-arranged *dead link removed*
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 January 2012, 23:26:32
Just to shamelessly plug some more of my own efforts I felt the need to let you lot know I have started working on a revised Cluster Hits table.  Simply put there is no reason for the current one to be the way it is.

I haven't gotten it completely worked out yet but I have some decent ideas on how to handle it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 January 2012, 22:18:03
Well I still need to rework the Cluster Hits Table but frankly that one I may have to learn to live with for a while since there is no good way for me to make it useful without doing a lot of extra printing or creating my own design program that can use multiple tables.

I have updated my RATs though.  Piloting/Mech is now supported in the fashion I wish.

*dead link removed*

And a Zip of the designs as well as the modified weapons.dat file used to generate them.

*dead link removed*
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 January 2012, 22:37:46
Okay I went and consolidated all my links to the first post so any late comers to the discussion have an easy to find repository.

I still need to fix a few things here and there but overall I'm growing more happy with what I've got so far.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 January 2012, 02:28:03
Current project I'm working on is an in-character POV beginner's primer for my Mercenary Guild.  This has also gotten me to start thinking about a mercenary unit construction system to integrate with AToW.

I only have an overview of major commands to finish up for my IC POV document so it shouldn't be long before I get that shared.

The rules I'm still fiddling with the numbers but I at least have something in mind for a place to start.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 January 2012, 12:12:46
Okay I finished up my IC POV document like I figured.  My only debate at this point is how to share it with you lot.  I guess just to keep things simple and standardized I'll just drop it in my megaupload account and if enough people seem to like it I may even put it in fanfiction on this board.

*dead link removed*

Just for an added bonus my *dead link removed* for the Terran Dominion.  I still feel the need to rewrite it and flesh it out a bit more but it should keep you lot tided over for now.  :P
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 January 2012, 14:29:03
All right I think I may need feed back on my mercenary unit construction rules.

I think I've covered everything.  I want transport and large formations to take A LOT of backing to achieve.  I did the absolute value of Reputation because some people that were known for doing some pretty horrible things were able to attract an impressive number of followers.  Indeed it seems more important to be famous rather than what you are famous for.  The rules are intended to use all of my house rules, including the revised traits.  I included that Size modifier to the Skill Field Average as a way to indicate that if you do get too big you do tend to let people in that are of lower quality.  I really like the increasing cost for raising the Skill Field average as well.  Makes it really hard to get a super elite unit.  Though that may make for an interesting situation for how to handle state commands that decide to go mercenary since a lot of that work was taken care of by government vetting and training.  I'll have to think on that some.

Anyway my *dead link removed*
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2012, 13:57:28
Got to thinking, I know a dangerous thing, and decided that rather than try to get overly complex the advantages of being a state command are balanced out by the fact that you don't always get to take everything or everyone with you and it isn't always up to the ringleaders.

Other thought I had was about the Artillery skill.  I got to thinking about what it does, how it works and I realized all the non-gunnery aspects of it could be handled by other skills, and indeed seem more appropriate to other skills.  That lead me to the thought of wouldn't the gunnery aspect then be better covered by the existing gunnery skills.  The only thing that tripped me up was for some PBIs in trucks towing around artillery pieces then it hit me.  I could just use the Support Weapons skill instead.  So I'm more than happy to eliminate the Artillery skill.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2012, 23:43:18
And all my links are dead.  Huzzah.

Well I guess I need to look for another free file hosting site that is not having legal difficulties so I can easily share my work with others.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 22 January 2012, 09:18:04
Why do you want to eliminate the artillery skill?  Personally, my inclination would be to make it a generic indirect fire skill and use it for both firing and spotting for artillery, but also for LRMs firing indirectly.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 January 2012, 11:06:57
Mostly because it is redundant and I like removing redundant skills.  As it is already Gunnery can handle all indirect functions.  So can Support Weapons for PBI gear.  Plus like I said in my previous post it seems more appropriate to handle just about every function it does provide with another skill.

Spotting- Perception to actually see anything

Calling in artillery- Seems to me this would be more appropriate as a Navigation/Ground check to recognize the right coordinates.  Then a Cryptography check to make sure the coordinates are encrypted/decrypted correctly.  Never send anything in the clear unless it is part of your plan.

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 January 2012, 12:51:14
With the legal troubles Megaupload is currently experiencing I figured I better take some time to go ahead and remove all my now dead links.  I think I've got them all.  If not my apologies.  As such if you see one feel free to let me know and I'll take care of it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 February 2012, 14:18:16
Well after thinking about it I have decided to keep Artillery around.  I'm still kind of debating it.  For now though it's here to stay.

My newest project though has been to work out new Stage 3 Modules because frankly I think this is another area where AToW has dropped the ball somewhat.  I understand the balance reasons.  I played 3ed and made use of the supplements and saw how not all academies and universities were created equal.  The problem I think is they went too far the other way.  Now they're all the same and lacking character.  With the XP system of AToW now you can have inequality between the programs but still have them balance by costing the player the appropriate amount.

The base implication is that 10 fields is the maximum you can get since you can go to one Civilian, one Police/Intelligence, and one Military school for 9 fields with OCS being an exception to this normal limit.  So instead of making a player have to jump through all those hoops and to add a bit of variety I've decided to write up some factional(my AU factions only, sorry but I want Catalyst to have some leeway tot take this idea and run with it without it getting needlessly complicated) Stage 3 Modules and use a slightly different approach.  Instead of all the complicated jumping back and forth I'm allowing any school to train up to 10 fields.  Where I'm debating this approach is in time taken.  I'm seriously considering flat amount of time for each field.  For example each field takes 1 year.  I'm also considering quality of training.  Rapid courses take 0.5 years but only provide 20 per skill with 4 rebate.  Also on my mind is how to divide up the XP because I'm seriously considering borrowing a bit from 2ed and having uneven XP distribution.  Like 50XP to one skill, 30 XP to two, and 20 XP to the last 2 since I've reworked all the fields to five skills the total expenditure and rebate remains the same but gives some variety.  I'm also considering diminishing returns on having more fields.  I'm thinking anything beyond 4 fields should be about right for the balancing point.

Right now I'm strongly considering the uneven distribution combined with the quality of training variation as my standard.  I'll play with the numbers a bit but I think I'm pretty close to where I would like to be.

A lot on my mind but I think the end result will be worth it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 February 2012, 03:35:09
I suppose an update is somewhat in order.

I have decided on how to handle the training issue.  Instead of being limited to certain numbers of field selections per school I've decided to use my quality of training idea where the player can devote a certain amount of time to each field and let the field prereqs sort themselves out.  For how much you get I've decided there will be two variations.  Version 1 you get a set amount of XP for each skill.  Version 2 you get a lump sum that you can distribute any way you like.  Either version as long as every skill in the field is at a minimum of +0 when you are done with character creation it works out the same for total XP spent and rebate since I've reworked the fields to 5 skills each.  But here is how I intend to handle it.

Rapid Courses 0.25 years 100 XP total 20/20/20/20/20 20 XP Rebate
Basic Courses 0.50 years 150 XP total 50/30/30/20/20 30 XP Rebate
Advanced Courses 1.00 years 200 XP total 80/50/30/20/20 40 XP Rebate
Specialist Courses 2.00 years 300 XP total 120/80/50/30/20 60 XP Rebate

Same limit of 10 fields that is implied in A Time of War and the diminishing return on investment versus time spent should keep it in check fairly nicely.

Another thing I have started looking at is the Encumbered movement modifiers.  Not so much that I want to change anything but I have been looking at putting together Infantry Combat Kits.  With movement as penalized as it is for an Encumbered character I decided to explore this a bit.  With how fast the weight seems to add up I have thought about formalizing a Strength minimum of 4 on the Infantry field.  Currently it has no minimums and Basic has no Strength requirement.  On the one hand it is a bit redundant because to pack any decent amount of gear(primary fire arm, enough ammo/power packs for at least 60 seconds of sustained combat, armor, grenades/any other sort of explosives) demands at least 3 Strength but I doubt any player in their right mind needs bashed over their head in this manner if they are generating an Infantry soldier.  Still it might be wise to enforce some sort of minimum.  While 3 is enough to get by if shopping smart without getting encumbered I'm thinking 4 might be more reasonable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 February 2012, 00:29:23
Progress!

I still need to finish up the actual module portions but I have finished up two of my AU faction specific school's field lists.

Wow that sounds very confusing.  What I mean is I know what fields my schools/academies for two of my factions will provide but I have yet to start working out trait requirements, attribute, skill, and trait assignments to make them actual modules.

Should get this stuff done pretty quickly.

I still need to find a better way to share all this stuff.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 February 2012, 12:42:19
I'm still looking at the infantry kit stuff a bit.  I found something I never noticed before.  No matter if the Support Weapon is encumbering or not it takes a complex action to deploy or pack up.  Probably a fair compromise considering how much more effective AToW makes support weapons over standard versus what we have in Tech Manual and what it implies about Infantry even though this creates a disconnect by near as I can figure adding any Support Weapon to Infantry at all that Infantry unit becomes Total Warfare/Tech Manual Encumbered.

Another interesting bit I'm looking at is AP specialty ammo.  I may have to see about a clarification on specialty ammunition in general but I have it stuck in my mind that any slug thrower can use the appropriate specialty ammo.  As such it is theoretically possible to load AP ammo into a Bear Hunter Super Heavy and do horrible things.

For Marines I've been looking at the laser/energy small arms.  I noticed that they all top out at 5E for their AP.  The Marine Combat suit has 5 for it's E BAR rating.  Then I remembered the layered armor rules and looked at the Ablative armors.  6 for the E BAR rating.  Then I started looking at the burst ratings of the various laser small arms.  Just because of how the burst fire rules actually work the best small arm energy weapon may well actually be the Mauser 960.  The Clan and IS Pulse Laser Rifles can compete well enough to not make it the absolute best.

The final implication though?

Based on the weights and how everything works I am now seriously considering a Strength minimum of 6 for Infantry and Marines.  Even splitting the weight evenly amongst a crew of 4 some of those support weapons I've been looking at would be so heavy that even though the weapon itself does not have the Encumbering trait it would still be so heavy as to weigh down the Infantry so much to cause them to be Encumbered anyway with anything less than a Strength of 6.

Ah the strange things that run through my head these days.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 February 2012, 18:26:28
Well I'm almost finished with the Stage 3 modules for my AU stuff.  I just have one faction left and then I should go ahead and redo the generic AToW Stage 3 modules because there are a few changes there but not many and that is mostly because of how I've re-worked the fields.

While doing this I did realize with the way I want to handle things it basically makes OCS unneeded.  Likewise with my AU I have no reason to keep the Solaris Internship module either.

Another interesting thought I had was basically get rid of the distinction between Stage 3 and Stage 4.  What I mean is that I feel rather inclined to allow players to have their characters go back to school after working say a Civilian Job.  So long as the 10 module and 10 field limit is observed I have no issues with something along these lines.

Next big thing I need to do is rework probably a total of 4 modules in Stage 1 and 2.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 February 2012, 14:59:44
Well this time I have something for all you Infantry haters out there.

Me and Liam's Ghost not long ago got talking about Infantry and their ability to do damage to Battlemechs.  Short version is neither of us is really a fan of the idea that a Autorifle(and other assorted Small Arms) is as murderous against high BAR targets as it is.

So I got to thinking about how to handle this and today I came up with the easiest solution possible.  Instead of rounding damage normally, always round down.  This still allows an exceptionally lucky Autorifleman to do a point of damage against a Mech but being so much better off with a LAW or VLAW with an AP warhead that I like the implications.  I'll have to look closer at the Support Weapons to make sure I haven't gone too far though.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 February 2012, 15:52:58
You know at first I thought it might be a problem but I'm not so sure I'm against the idea that only high end Support Weapons and Missiles can damage mechs.  I do need to do something to the AP ratings of the Anti-Vehicle Ordinances but turning their AP up to a flat 10 and calling it good is starting to warm me to the idea of always rounding down.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: skiltao on 18 February 2012, 18:33:30
That's a really slick idea.  :o
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 February 2012, 20:23:12
Indeed.

I went and made a spreadsheet to help me see how the alternate methods I was considering actually worked, what kind of Margins of Success I would need under these methods and rounding down actually turns out to more neatly mesh with the AToW to TW conversion.

Heck it is small enough to attach.

The first section is how AToW currently handles Tactical Armor damage as a point of comparison.  The first alteration I started thinking about was doubling the damage reduction for superior BAR.  It actually goes a bit too far the other way I think.

Then I thought about why not give a bonus to the BAR for damage reduction and divisor.  At first I thought a flat (BAR-AP)/3 round up bonus would be sufficient but it turned out not really be all that impressive so I added a flat +1 so that it would be 1+((BAR-AP)/3 round up) but that fell out of favor real fast as I realized it would add a lot more math than would be practical.

Then the always round down.  It doesn't make it impossible for a lot of weapons that AToW frankly implied were even more effective than their Tech Manual stats said but it does move it to being a much more comfortable situation IMO.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 February 2012, 22:10:01
While going through the Stage 4 Modules to see which ones really need re-writing for my AU setting I actually discovered something interesting.

There are 2 repeatable Stage 4 Modules that actually give more XP when you repeat them than what they cost.

There are 2 that actually break even.

Hilarity may now ensue.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 22 February 2012, 02:48:53
Its an interesting point about Infantry. Are you really sure you want to require a strength of 6 though?

It is sort of an interesting point though. I noticed the quirkiness when I was making a WoB Infantryman.

Did you take into consideration the Load-bearing equipment?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2012, 03:26:16
The problem with the load bearing equipment is it counts as armor for the stacking armor rules and thus combining it with real armor makes Infantry automatically Encumbered.

Still though I do consider it likely anyone intentionally building an Infantry character will already have it in mind to have a high Strength so I'm still not sold on the idea of actually enforcing a minimum Strength but the implications AToW converted to TW/TM seems to make it does suggest 6 is the minimum even accounting for load bearing equipment.  Otherwise some of the heavier Support Weapons even with their weight divided up evenly amongst the crew would automatically encumber them with anything less despite not having the Encumbering trait.  Part of my resistance is also the idea that according to AToW it takes a Complex Action to Pack/Unpack a Support Weapon.  This would mean any support weapon should be considered Encumbering anyway by TW/TM.

All things considered though it probably would be easier to House Rule that Load Bearing Gear is designed with the idea of being layered with Armor and thus not Encumbering in that way and Pack/Unpack is a one time a turn only Incidental Action and not bash players over the head with something that I consider likely to happen anyway without having to formalize it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 22 February 2012, 06:20:08
The problem with the load bearing equipment is it counts as armor for the stacking armor rules and thus combining it with real armor makes Infantry automatically Encumbered.

Hmm, that's pretty sill, though I guess that is the rules, since Load-Bearing equipment does have an armor value (even for things like a Packframe).

I did stumble across something rather interesting, and I figured I'd run it by you.

Page 170 states under Encumbering Items "A character already encumbered by weight limit issues who in turn carries encumbering equipment raises his encumbrance factor by one level."

If they don't define "Encumbering" anywhere else, that seems to indicate that you're not automatically encumbered by an Encumbering weapon, you only take a penalty if you're encumbered already. So you can have Encumbering-rated equipment and not be considered encumbering (which is something I thought was the other way around).

Quote
All things considered though it probably would be easier to House Rule that Load Bearing Gear is designed with the idea of being layered with Armor and thus not Encumbering in that way and Pack/Unpack is a one time a turn only Incidental Action and not bash players over the head with something that I consider likely to happen anyway without having to formalize it.

I had a thought about simply allowing Load-bearing equipment to negate Encumbrance to a certain degree, rather than mock adding to the character's basic strength. What about a Vest giving a 1-2 degree discount? So if you had an Encumbering Load you'd be alright, but if you were very encumbered you'd only count as Encumbered?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2012, 13:01:33
Yeah I saw that on page 170.

Part of the problem is some equipment does count as automatically Encumbering and stacking with Weight and Armor Encumbering.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 February 2012, 03:16:01
Another interesting tangent I'm starting to look into is Fire Fighters.  I've got the Field Skills figured out.

Career/Fire Fighter for all the assorted stuff(jaws of life, safely hooking the hoses to hydrants, anything else I'm overlooking)
Climbing since you have to go up and down ladders a lot and being able to do so in a hurry would be a good idea.
Melee Weapons for the Fire Axe.
Perception for seeing through all the smoke and fire.
Support Weapons for the high pressure water systems.

Now I need to remember to grab my notes for my Noble fields.  I came up with three fields to help give a Medieval feel with traditional education with a few concessions tossed in for modern times.

Counting these 4 I'm up to 25 new fields I have added to the existing list.  Despite that I like the implications overall.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 24 February 2012, 05:29:23
Yeah I saw that on page 170.

Part of the problem is some equipment does count as automatically Encumbering and stacking with Weight and Armor Encumbering.

So what you're saying is its all a bit muddled and needs some sort of fix? :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 February 2012, 11:38:43
Yup.

I am warming to the idea that Load Bearing Gear does not count as Armor for purposes of stacking.  That alone goes a long way to actually making a lot of weapons a lot more mobile.

Counting only either Armor or Weapon for instances where both have the Encumbering trait is another interesting idea and I may look at that a bit closer.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 24 February 2012, 15:30:17
Probably a good idea. Giving them N/A for armor values would make the gear useful (since at the moment its "I use Load-Bearing Equipment to keep from being encumbered by all my gear, but it encumbers me since I'm stacking armor.").

Of course, I suppose you could argue that you'd use it to keep from being encumbered by weight so you're not double encumbered by an Encumbering item, since you could make the argument that Encumbering Weapons only increase your Encumbrance when you're encumbered by weight, and not when encumbered by stacked armor..but that might be a bit...convoluted.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 February 2012, 19:33:25
Simpler is better and so far that's the best solution I've come up with that doesn't get overly convoluted.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Miroku2235 on 26 February 2012, 21:35:05
In our games we roll initiative once per side. Whoever loses moves ALL their units before the winner does, and combat follows the same flow.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 February 2012, 23:09:25
That from what I understand is how AToW Initiative is actually supposed to work.

Pretty much the only thing we do different in our group is Tactics up to Leadership as the Initiative bonus.  Works simply enough and is less confusing about how much of a bonus you get than what AToW lays out.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 March 2012, 14:14:04
Well looking at it further and yeah Initiative is a bit of a mess in AToW.

In some instances it does seem that if you win Initiative you can move and shoot first, a major advantage, and others the enemy moves first and you can respond accordingly, basically how Total Warfare does it.

I do like the idea of being able to get the drop on someone, especially in personal combat.  I may keep with this model in AToW scale and think on it some.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 01 March 2012, 16:51:15
That from what I understand is how AToW Initiative is actually supposed to work.

1/3 right.

In ATOW there are three level of intit, and the GM choses one.

Individual: Everyone rolls off and then goes/resolves in that order.  Anyone but the lowest roller can choose a "hold" action when their turn comes up (this is true for the other two levels of init also).  They can then take their turn at anytime afterwards, even interupting someone else's action) up to the end of that turn.  This is what you'd use to setup overwatch fire for example.

Squad: Similar to Individual but characters are grouped up into bunches of up to 4 with a single character serving as the 'squad leader."  Squad leaders roll and then the squads move/resolve in that order.  Squad leaders' Tactics And Leadership skills count as a bonus here (note that the Init rules overrule the wording of the Tactics skill in this which, as written, only convey the bonus at the "team" level of init)

Team: Everyone on one side is grouped together into a team, and only the team leader rolls for init.  Like squad init, Leadeership and Tactics bonuses apply for the team leader.  Unlike the the lower two levels of Init, elements from opposign temas alternate in taking/resolving their actions ala Battletech.

Personally I think their terminology is bassackawards as a fire"team" is smaller than a squad in real life.

-Jackmc
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 March 2012, 17:27:14
Well I did do some more reading since then and frankly the whole thing is a bit of a needless mess.

The way Liam's Ghost does it is Tactics up to Leadership is applied as a bonus and then resolve personal scale in highest to lowest initiative and Tactical Combat getting the same bonus but being resolved ala Total Warfare.

I am rather likely to keep this method for my own games at this point as it does a fairly decent job of keeping the skills relevant without making them overpowering very quickly.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 01 March 2012, 17:41:04
The way Liam's Ghost does it is Tactics up to Leadership is applied as a bonus

Yeah, that's how it worked in MW3ed/CBTrpg.

You mentioned that you think the rules are a mess.  Personally, I don't think it's a mess at all.  The core rule is dirt simple: higher results go first unless they hold their action.  The complexity comes from the optional tool kit that trades a bit of realism and freedom for speed of play and ease of tracking when working with mass combats.  If I were to house rule it at all, it'd be to allow Tactics to be used at the individual level.  Other than that I think the individual and squad levels are simple and usable for the vast majority of engagements at the RPG scale (ie afv company/infantry squad level at most).  If I'm going to go for true mass combat, I'd use something that meshed more seamlessly with BF.  YMMV, and that's what makes this online communitty so awesome.  Screw groupthink!  O0



-Jackmc 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 March 2012, 18:14:40
The biggest mess has been the ambiguity of the rules of what skills apply and when for determining Initiative.

Considering the whole thing is still pending for clarification(see this (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,4871.0.html) thread for reference) a temporary, if not a permanent one, house rule seems in order.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 March 2012, 00:45:08
Lately my thoughts have been turning back to the matter of Custom Vehicle and Design Quirks.

As much as I have already made an attempt at fixing Custom Vehicle it just doesn't sit with me as well as it should.  I am seriously considering dropping it as a trait all together but rolling the effects into my new trait Status, and maybe Connections as well.  I'm still working it out.

Design Quirks I'd just love a better approach to.  The benefits and draw backs they provide are fine.  I'd love to not have to ensure all designs are zero sum affairs is the main problem but I'm not sure how to do that in a fair manner.  Plus I have started seriously considering printing out the design quirks from StratOps to include in my character creation binder.  I know it isn't fair to blame Catalyst for not repeating them in AToW due to page count issues but something better than referring players to a whole other book to see how they are supposed to work would do wonders I think.  Maybe as a PDF exclusive as a quick add on to AToW repeat the information in the AToW PDF version.  Or at least as a companion piece for very low cost.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Jackmc on 08 March 2012, 01:19:29
Design Quirks I'd just love a better approach to.  The benefits and draw backs they provide are fine.  I'd love to not have to ensure all designs are zero sum affairs is the main problem but I'm not sure how to do that in a fair manner.


I personally would take the route that GURPS Vehicles did.  At design time, roll an engineering check at a pretty steep penalty:  Success yields a prototype with a small number of minor defects and a critcal success yields a bonus trait.  Failure yields a design with a moderate number of minor flaws and crit failrue brings in a major flaw.  You can then attempt to debug the prototype with successive rolls each of which is a little less difficult.

I'd take that basic mechanic and figure out how I wanted to work the levels of traits into categories, maybe minor =1 point, regualr = 2 poitners and critcal successes/Flaws are the three pointers. 

For used mechs, I'd make a design roll with a modifier based upon the quality level of the mech, and then assign Traits as appropriate.

-Jackmc           
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 March 2012, 10:53:25
Not terrible but it still kind of feels lacking.  One of the big problems I see with Design Quirks is when characters have an occasion to change vehicles.  Near as I can tell the way it is supposed to work now is that whenever a character has a chance to change vehicles the new vehicle has potentially different design quirks but works out to be the same balance as what the character has.  Problem is I may have to go with it.  It does sort of give me an idea for how to handle the upper limit of Custom Vehicle.  If you invest enough to design your own vehicle it automatically gets the Prototype design quirk.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 March 2012, 02:46:52
You know I never really realized how many people are reading this thread.

With the release of Solaris Armor Works(included in the download for the latest version of Skunk Works, google is your friend) I've been translating my vehicle archive to a modern editor that has the added bonus of letting me apply my weapon stat changes.  Plus one that lets me do WiGE is letting me expand a bit too.

I have also decided that for now I'll keep Custom Vehicle and Design Quirk as I already have them.

Enough of that though.  It is about time for me to start off on another tangent.

One of the things that has bothered me since the beginning but I haven't really found a way to address yet is a decent way to handle large crewed vehicles and if the players want their character to be a member of said crew.  The biggest problem with it I've had in the past is the crew requirements often mean the complication of a lot more recurring NPCs and figuring out the command structure.

But it has hit me lately I do sort of have a way to handle this already.  My Status trait.  Using the People subset as the vehicle crew nets a nice easy way to represent the character's authority over the crew and neatly deals with quality of training issues.

"But monbvol, what if the character isn't the vehicle commander or the players want to share a vehicle?"

Mostly ahead of you on this one.  I'll cover the second half first since it is actually the easier one to actually frame with actual game rules.

The only fair way to keep things sane for more than one player having the same vehicle is to have each character pay full cost for the Vehicle, but here is where it gets tricky.  All characters really should be from the same faction for simplicity but if they aren't, oh well.  They're the ones who'll have to balance the XP.

No matter what all pay the appropriate Custom Vehicle cost to choose the Vehicle.  It is the fairest way really.  No recriminations about who rolls or one character basically getting free trait points.

Next is co-ownership.  If all want to own it, that part is easy, they all pay the extra 200 XP for Owns Vehicle.  If one wants to own but not the others that's fine.  Some of this just isn't going to balance no matter what since there will always be a way to dodge at least some of these costs.

Let Status sort out the chain of command of the crew.  In case of ties look at who has wound up with what skills and do your best to divide up the tasks according to the character's strengths.  Warning this could get ugly really fast as it becomes quite possible for some weapons on the vehicle to have uneven target numbers.  This can be handled two ways.  Be fine with it or making sure all the people who wind up with Gunnery responsibilities have the same total skill levels.

Now we roll back to what if the character isn't the owner/commander of the vehicle.  This really depends on what kind of campaign you are running.  For the most part it works the same as if the character is part of a NPC run unit.  If there is little tactical combat it shouldn't be too much of an issue.  If there is, oh my.  That could be an entire thread in it's own right answering that one.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Deathknight69 on 14 March 2012, 03:04:58
Real quick Monbvol, Where do we find all this neat stuff you've built into this thread???
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 March 2012, 16:27:31
Unfortunately all the links to my electronic materials are dead because the site I was using wound up having a great deal of legal troubles.

Though it occurs to me that I've been overlooking a solution I could easily implement.  I'll put the links in the first post for clarity/ease of finding.

Googledocs should be right workable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 March 2012, 16:44:13
Well there may be some formating errors but the Googledocs links are in the first post of this thread.  I think I've got all the main stuff.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 March 2012, 11:11:41
*memo to self: Need to update Intensive Training in the Electronic Document.  Also update special abilities and natural aptitude limits since I've decided to change those since writing the document.

A recent question to the writers has reminded me I may need to get back to work on adding more special abilities for tiered skills.  Martial Arts and Melee Weapons I already have plenty for.  The rest I will have to start thinking on a bit.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 March 2012, 19:22:44
I suppose time for another update.

I hate to admit it but I think I'm actually rather stumped for more Special Abilities.

I have also finished recreating the last of my vehicle archive for my AU.  I'll admit I just got lazy and started letting SAW allocate the armor how it liked after a while but in general I like the overall results.  Though I have reworked a few and I need to fix the RATs I posted.

Because of how I've divided them up that doesn't count the VTOLs, WiGes, or any Blue Water designs though.  Though that will be a most interesting twist. WiGes didn't exist when I first came up with this AU and I kind of like them but not having an editor for them until now I never got around to designing any.  I expect I may be spending most of my effort on this for the next while.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 March 2012, 16:36:36
I finally figured out another Special Ability.  I'm considering making sub versions that apply the bonus but only to one particular skill.

Master of Improvisation
Cost-100 XP
Requirements: Int 6+, Interest/Biology 4+, Interest/Botany 4+, Science/Chemistry 4+, Demolitions 4+, Technician/Any 4+, Survival 4+, and the character must have a roll of duct tape and a swiss army knife/multitool on them at all times.

The character with this special ability is well versed at using things for purposes other than their original intent that they ignore any penalties to any Demolitions, Technician, Medtech, Surgery, or Survival rolls for lacking proper tools.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 03 April 2012, 18:16:58
I got to thinking.  I know.  How dangerous is that? :D

Anyway one of the things I've always found lacking for Ultra Autocannons is how let down they are by that 2 column on the Cluster Hits table and how rarely I get that second shell to land for it.  Then I realized there is sort of an answer.  Use the HAG modifiers.  +2 to Cluster Hit roll at Short Range and -2 at Long.  For the purposes of C3 the modifier to cluster hit is always based on the actual distance between firing unit and target.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Tslammer on 03 April 2012, 19:24:02
We use margin of success formula to add to the cluster hit table for missiles, LBX and Ultra autocannons.
That way if you roll a lot higher than what you needed you get to add a small bonus to the roll.

Makes missile boats more attractive.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 03 April 2012, 19:50:44
I've not had as many troubles with Missiles because they have ways to get bonuses.

Though you have given me a naughty idea that I may toy around with.

Edge attribute modifier as a bonus/penalty to the Cluster Hits roll.

I'll try out MoS/5 round down as a bonus as well.

Another nice little bonus because I want to help Ultras and Rotary jam rates:

If the To Hit roll would normally result in a jam make an Edge check.  Success means no jam.  Failure means jam as normal.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 April 2012, 01:00:21
To expand on my previous thought further I will apply those modifiers to Missile clusters as well.

Something else has occurred to me.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned for my AU that Mechs, ASFs, and anything else I missed over 20 tons always has a minimum of a second crewman, better known as a Guy In Back or Just Another Freaking Observer.

This is mostly for RPG purposes because I've been looking at how easy it would be to skill lock the primary pilot into not actually taking combat actions because they've used up all their actions on other skill rolls.

Any way I do realize I need to address the implications of this system and probably should put down in writing some anti-munchkinism rules.

When using BV2.0 to balance the final total Piloting and Gunnery score of the two warriors is used.  For example one warrior is a 1 Gunnery and 8 Piloting and the other is a 8 Gunnery and 1 piloting the final BV2.0 modifier would be as if for a 1/1 warrior.

Whenever pilot damage happens both pilots take the same damage.  When abstracting with Total Warfare instead of A Time of War both pilots use the same conciousness roll as well.

Now back to the AToW focused stuff.

Since the main intent is to shove some of the work load off of the combat warrior and onto the Guy in Back the main advantage is just to have basically double actions.

As such the main draw back for not having this second warrior will be potentially suffering poor conditions due to having to pick and choose which skills to use and when.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 April 2012, 01:07:20
I've been fleshing out designs a bit and working out how units would actually appear if going all the way down to squad detail.

The usefulness of it will make for a nice adhoc encounter resource.

Some things I know I'm going to depart from TechManual/TacOps for unit construction:

Field Guns will pretty universally have reduced crew requirements as I see no reason to establish a 1 crew per ton ratio.  A few instances may see increased crew requirements of a sorts for simplicity's sake.

Medics will not have a limit in my AU simply because they are not marked and often carry weapons.

Likewise I see no reason beyond cost considerations to limit the number of Support Weapons beyond manpower requirements.

PBIs will often be deployed in Squad size(10-16 guys), possibly even Team size(4-6 guys).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 April 2012, 23:01:37
Well folks glad to see so many of you are still reading this.  Been a long time since I've had a thread with so many views.

I don't have much for you guys and gals any more unfortunately.  I'm pretty well at a point where I need to put these rules through game situations to see how well they work and with MM being rather unfriendly to house rules and my group wanting to go other directions currently I haven't really gotten to try them out.

If anybody has tried some of these out in game I would not mind hearing about how it went for your group.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 May 2012, 11:12:25
Nothing?

Well I guess I'll be waiting a while then since my group seems intent on going other directions for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: skiltao on 13 May 2012, 16:14:44
Well, I've been following your ideas mainly with an eye towards borrowing them for other systems. I've long been of the opinion that the TW/TM/TO infantry rules, as well as aToW, need to be reworked from the ground up and I have no intention of ever playing anything built around their current rules.

*shrug*

I hope your group's other directions are sufficiently interesting for you in your meantime.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 May 2012, 16:32:09
Yeah it seems every step forward with PBIs for Battletech also comes with a step to the side and two backwards.

Our group is likely to get a Mekton Zeta game going next time we get together.  Or continue my White Wolf campaign.  Or go a completely different direction.  We're flighty in that way.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 13 May 2012, 17:32:39
Well, under Excel, the Phenotype is still showing up as 0's rather than a specific type.

Also, if I select just "Trueborn Sibko" its giving me points towards things like "Gunnery/Space" which seems..unusual to say the least (Although I suppose that could be one of your home built ones, since there are also specific Sibkos).

And not sure if this is my problem or the sheet, but certain Clans (Hell's Horses among them) that can take the Freeborn Sibko (Cavalry/Infantry) instead of the Clan Washout option, but that doesn't seem selectable.

AS for House rules, I'm still thinking that if your faction matches that of a piece of equipment, you should get a -1 to the availability, at the very least :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 May 2012, 22:02:13
*curses and mutters*

Well as far as my spreadsheet goes it is entirely possible some data entry errors do exists giving incorrect skills for certain modules and fields.  I'll have to take a look to see if this is the case or if M$ Office is doing something goofy still.

Phenotypes I probably did just miss in my last round of corrections.

I'm assuming you mean I'm missing something in the Caste structure rather than any problems in the Modules or Fields as the way I built those it doesn't care what your affiliation is.  I'll take a look.

As to the Equipped stuff that is part of the reason I have decided to dump it as a stand alone trait.  It basically was unworkable in a sane and sensible manner.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 May 2012, 01:01:29
Thanks to Liam's Ghost I've gotten somewhere again on working out gestalt stuff for one of my factions in my AU.

The main problem is I have made the actual weight calculations for what the gestalt "body" weigh so convoluted that it is only workable as a spreadsheet or some other software application.

I'll see about making some more notations so the sheet is a bit more readable for people other than me but I am pretty happy with where it is now.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 May 2012, 17:11:06
Okay I let myself get a little sidetracked.

I got to work on the Faction Writeup for the people who will use this "gestalt" technology.  It is mostly finished but it does need a bit of cleaning up and the military section needs filled out yet but it is good enough for now.

I also need to give some thought to exactly how I want to offer this technology in my games.  It isn't so game breaking that I feel automatically inclined to keep it out of the hands of my players but at the same time I need to figure out what the restrictions I have in my mind for who this technology would be used on translate to in AToW traits.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 May 2012, 12:27:16
I've gone and realized there are still certain elements I am missing in my basic construction rules for my gestalt stuff.

I need to have more AToW trait options available and have them impact the construction appropriately.  I also really need to add a cost component as well.  I am also thinking about if I want to make it available to players.  If I do I'm probably going to have to work out some sort of grading system to help limit how much they can cheese out their gestalt suits.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 May 2012, 19:12:49
I think I have finally figured out a better way to handle Custom Vehicle thanks to Era Report 2750.  I'm still working out the numbers but use the same upgrade system in there and have each rank provide a certain amount of upgrade points.  Still have 1 provide side bonus of choosing from own faction 2 any faction and 6 design your own.  I'm not even sure for 1 and 2 I'd make a difference for the choose for Clan but I do want to have Clan Tech cost more upgrade points for certain.  I'll see what kind of numbers I can come up with this week while I'm house/animal sitting for my Uncle with potentially no internet access.

Also before I leave you lot I am seriously considering handing out some design challenges to expand my AU's design repositories.  I'm pretty happy with the mechs.  Wheeled, tracked, and hover I also am pretty close to happy but I may work on those a bit myself since I feel all I'm missing is more higher tech ground based scouts.  WiGes, VTOLs, ASFs, Dropships, Jumpships, Warships, and Space Stations though all either need some serious redesign for what I do have or new design all together.  So if anyone wants to get a jump on this while I'm away feel free.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 02 June 2012, 17:22:30
Okay been making the biggest dent in Warships for some reason.

Just as a note to myself I'll put up my list of what I have stats for and what I know I still need stats for but only have a class name for.

Finished:

Amegis Compact:
Kagero Class DD
Kagero Class DD-Refit
A Class DD
Tribal Class DD
Diamond Class CL
Emerald Class CL
Ruby Class CL
Barracuda Class Patrol Cruiser
Barracuda Class Patrol Cruiser-Refit
Chokai Class CA
Chokai Class CA-Refit
Chokai Class CA-Remodel
Chokai Class CA-Modernized
Niels luel Class CA
Akagi Class CV
Akagi Class CV-Refit
Akagi Class CV-Remodel
Akagi Class CV-Modernized
War Class DBB
Olympic Class CVB
Asgard Class CVB
Amatsukami Class CCB


Belarus Alliance:
Panzerschiffe Class CRV
Panzerschiffe Class CRV-Refit
Skoriy Class DD
Z1 Class DD(their refit of the Kagero Class DD given to them by the Amegis Compact)
Profintern Class CL
Sverdlov Class CL
Berlin Class CA
Krasnyi Kavkaz Class CA
Borodino Class BC
Gangut Class BB
Moskva Class CVE
Admiral Potrovosky Class CV(their refit of the Akagi Class CV they stole from the Amegis Compact)
Kostromitinova Class CV

Carfana Federation:
Humaita Class CRV
Oruc Reis Class CRV
Maranhao Class DD
Guadiana Class DD
Guadiana Class DD(refit)
Bahia Class CL
Medjidieh Class CL
Provence Class CA
Yavuz Sultan Selim Class CA
Djibouti Class CS
Algiers Class BC
Minas Gerais Class BB
Resadiye Class BB

Corporate Sector:
Jungle Class CRV
Jungle Class CRV(refit)
Saukko Class CRV
Saukko Class CRV(refit)
Saukko Class CRV(remodel)
Lysander Class FF
Lysander Class FF(refit)
Lysander Class FF(remodel)
Lysander Class FF(modernized)
Stringback Class FF
V Class DD
B Class DD
Caledon Class CL
Caledon Class CL(refit)
Caledon Class CL(remodel)
Swiftsure Class CL
Swiftsure Class CL(refit)
Swiftsure Class CL(remodel)
Minotaur Class CL
Minotaur Class CL(refit)
Minotaur Class CL(remodel)
Surrey Class CA
Surrey Class CA(refit)
Surrey Class CA(remodel)
Ilmarinen Class CA
Ilmarinen Class CA(refit)
Ilmarinen Class CA(remodel)
Hermes Class CVE
Hermes Class CVE(refit)
Hermes Class CVE(remodel)
Eagle Class CVE
Ying Swei Class BC
Ying Swei Class BC(refit)
Ying Swei Class BC(remodel)
Ning Hai Class BC
Melbourne Class CV

Darian Supremacy:
Whiskey Class CRV
Romeo Class CRV
Romeo Class CRV(refit)
Romeo Class CRV(remodel)
Romeo Class CRV(modernized)
Galley Class DD
Galley Class DD(refit)
Galley Class DD(remodel)
R Class CL
R Class CL(refit)
R Class CL(remodel)
Raider Type A Class CL
Raider Type B Class CL
Raider Type C Class CL
Raider Type D Class CA
Raider Type E Class CA
Raider Type F Class CA
Trireme Class BC
Trireme Class BC(refit)
Trireme Class BC(remodel)

Ithica Collection:
B1 Class CRV
B1 Class CRV(refit)
B1 Class CRV(remodel)
C Class CRV
C Class CRV(refit)
C Class CRV(remodel)
Alsedo Class DD
Alava Class DD
Nunez Class CL
Alfonso Class CL
Canarias Class CA
Sierra Madre Class CV
Espana Class BB
Espana Class BB(refit)
Espana Class BB(remodel)

Stosh Drift:
No native Warship program.

Terran Dominion:
Crimson Class CRV
Crimson Class CRV-Refit
Crimson Class CRV-Remodel
N'dola Class DD
Bogart Class DD
Hobart Class DD
Town Class CL
City Class CL
Federation Class Troop Cruiser
Dagger Class CVE
Armor Class CVE
Armor Class CVE-Refit
Savanah Class BC
Savanah Class BC-Refit
Volcano Class CB
Volcano Class CB-Refit
Oceanic Class BC
Oceanic Class BC-Refit
Oceanic Class BC-Remodel
Oceanic Class BC-Modernized
State Class DBB

What I still need but have names for:
Kinkaid Class DD*
Quincy Class DD
Kimsatsu Class DD*
County Class CA
Capitol Class CA
Battle Class CVA*
Admiral Class CV*
*More I used to have stats for but am not sure where they got to.

Because I've realized that if I am to make a dent in some of the things I want to flesh out more fully for my universe I am going to need help I may well try some more design competitions.

Heck I should finish up more of my faction write ups so you lot can get a better idea of how some of these factions actually behave.  Hell I may even have to turn loose some of said faction write ups to others as well.

[edit]Don't mind me.  Just found a new resource to help me with naming conventions.

Also realized I wasn't meeting what few naming conventions I do have for a faction.

Yay expansion and progress on stating things out.

Got a few more designs worked out.  Huzzah I guess.

Also decided to cut down on some obvious redundancy since I have enough trouble making distinct warships as it is.[/edit]
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 June 2012, 11:27:55
Having borrowed FM:Mr from Liam's Ghost and finally starting to learn the unit creation rules I think I actually like them better than my offerings but I do have to adjust a couple traits since they don't exist anymore in AToW.

For lack of a better idea I'm thinking replacing Brave with Gregarious and Timid with Introvert for the force creation modifiers.

Again lacking a better idea for the now non-existant Scrounge skill use Streetwise instead.

I'll have to think on how to approach the Dropship and Jumpship stuff a bit more for my AU though.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 June 2012, 13:10:32
I got to pondering some things in my AU thanks to Liam's Ghost.  He got me thinking about my formation sizes and artillery concentrations.  I may have to adjust them a bit.  One of my AU events has 94,752 hostile Battlemechs of roughly 3025 technological parity landing on Terra being defended by at best 65,536 Battlemechs with most being parity of IS 3058 but some being parity of Clans 3067.

Artillery concentration for one of my powers is possibly a bit high with 4 guns in a 300 man Infantry Company.

The rest I honestly haven't fleshed out that much.  I have the organizational schemes worked out but I know when it comes to actual concentrations of Battlemechs, Vehicles, ASFs, BA, and Artillery I'm going to have to give that some careful thought.

For example one of my Factions the Belarus Alliance if it deploys the largest organizational unit it has, called a Battle Group, ideally consists of 1 Battlemech Division, 1 Armor Division, 1 Transport Division, and 5 Infantry Divisions.

Each division will always have 95,820 soldiers assigned to it.

For the Battlemech Division this includes all the support needs, PBIs for base security, technicians, logistical support troops, and of course the Mechwarriors themselves.  At this size of force 3,948 Battlemechs are on the field seeing combat.

The number of troops deployed into combat is a bit higher for the Armor Division simply because of the greater crew requirements of vehicles.  Aside from that it'll be 3,948 combat vehicles seeing fighting.

The Transport Division is the odd one.  It will still have the same total number of troops but it is the ASFs, Dropships, Jumpships, and sometimes even Warships that haul the Battle Group about.  Because of that aspect it gets the most fuzzy.  I haven't given a whole lot of thought to hard and fast numbers but I am thinking of 72 ASFs being the combat detachment to cover the ground campaign.

The Infantry Divisions I know I intend to have pulling a lot of double duty as Engineers, additional base security, logistical, technical, and medical support.  As such I'm still working out how much of these formations would be expected to see front line combat.  I've also given serious thought to these formations being the only source of Artillery support for the whole Battle Group.  If I do that is 5,120 tubes of Artillery that will be available just from these formations.

I know a lot of larger scale stuff I'm going over here but one of the things I've discovered about RPGs in general and AToW continues with is you have to think about this sort of stuff so you know what your players are likely to run into.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 June 2012, 00:24:51
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 June 2012, 00:38:53
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 June 2012, 01:38:22
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 June 2012, 12:16:19
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2012, 01:48:40
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 16 June 2012, 05:27:18
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 :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 June 2012, 10:13:34
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 June 2012, 00:57:28
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 June 2012, 09:45:56
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 18 June 2012, 18:04:07
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 June 2012, 14:16:28
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 June 2012, 12:59:28
I think I may make refits of some more classes but for now stopping at 110 Warships counting existing refits seems good to me.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 June 2012, 00:37:48
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 25 June 2012, 01:38:10
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?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 June 2012, 03:36:54
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Kalten on 25 June 2012, 18:00:16
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 June 2012, 19:17:49
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2012, 19:08:58
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Kalten on 01 July 2012, 09:32:26
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?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 July 2012, 10:04:49
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 July 2012, 10:32:27
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 July 2012, 17:49:48
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 July 2012, 02:10:26
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 July 2012, 20:55:29
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 July 2012, 02:07:07
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 July 2012, 13:54:21
*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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 July 2012, 00:55:44
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 July 2012, 18:38:46
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.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 17 July 2012, 01:24:02
I can't imagine having to try to come up with Warships for one faction, much less 7...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 July 2012, 09:53:36
*nod*
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 July 2012, 23:36:10
Now for a bit more house ruling again.

After talking a bit with Liam's Ghost I realized with how I've decided to remove or rework the minimum ranges for pretty much everything but the PPC and maybe a couple other bits that I can't recall that I've made Range Master in need of revision.  A revision that I think it could stand to do with even in the vanilla no changed weapon stats universe.  Basically Minimum Range is no longer a valid choice for Range Master.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 31 July 2012, 18:28:18
Oh happy day.

I still need to find the files that handle the ammunition counts and I have no idea how to make my LRM minimum range house rule work in Megamek but I have figured out how to make the weight, critical, and minimum range stat changes I want to compile from the source code.  I still have to make changes to everything other than the AC-5 but that is no big deal.  I can finally start reaping the benefits of some of my work finally.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 02 August 2012, 00:32:34
Well bugger.  I went to update my House Rules document and make a couple changes to my Optional Random Events table and only managed to upload my House Rules document.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 August 2012, 14:33:21
I've been giving some thought lately to the whole Status, Vehicel, and Property conundrum.

I have to admit those three items still frankly bother me to a certain extent because of how much of an XP sinkhole they represent even with my alterations to them.  I think I have figured out a reasonable compromise though.

If the campaign I am going to run is going to focus on mechs, ASFs, combat vehicles, the intrigue of high society, or owning large parcels of land/business then I'll award an extra 500 XP to the chracters who make use of those traits but they will be expected to have the appropriate traits.  Battle Armor because of how useful it is in pretty much any campaign at the AToW scale will get no such bonus.  Likewise characters with no such traits can still be quite useful to those who do but recieve no bonus either.

So campaign after next I run I will be holding to my guns and using my house rules to finally give them a workout.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 August 2012, 11:51:11
I forgot to update you lot on the fact I did finally get my alterations made and compiled.

I've been using MekHQ to run a few campaign skirmishes and I have to say I rather like how some of the changes actually work out in table top.  I may have to go through SSW/SAW to make my tech time line changes and rework a couple mechs since I've found a few already with some errors in them as I was rechecking their stats for an RPG campaign I have rattling around in my mind for my AU.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 August 2012, 21:38:26
Well got all but a couple changes made that need made now.

I need to figure out how to change the intro dates for the engine types, armor types, and all that rot.  I've got everything else covered.

I've been kicking around ideas for skill specializations.  I realized there are only a few that really come easy and some skills that don't.  To make things even more confusing it happens for one skill with a sub skill while the same skill with a different sub skill doesn't allow for easy specialization.  Some skills do seem like you could almost make them specializations of other skills, like most of the Protocol skill could really just be rolled into a Career skill specialization.  Because this is a more general food for thought, general advice topic, and less House Rules I will give it it's own thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 20 August 2012, 23:34:20
I have given myself an idea for a campaign to run with my AU and House Rules in full effect and to have as much mercy on my group before hand as I can I generated some point buy template characters and I have to say I like the results.  If I didn't know before hand that they were made using my House Rules I may not even peg them as my House Rules characters at first glance.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 August 2012, 00:06:51
I still have three outstanding issues rattling around my head these days and I may have given myself a bit of an idea on one of them.

The way skill ranks and link attributes work together is frankly a bit wonky.  I've been trying to rattle around ideas how to make them work a bit better since the way they are now can get a bit out of hand pretty quick.  So out of the blue I just had a wonderful thought.  What if there were skill rank caps based on Simple skills?  I started working it out and if I limit Simple skills to a maximum of a +4 rank then max out the link attributes then apply my Intensive Training Trait it quite handily solves most of the AToW to TW translation issues as well as keeping most of the combat skills in check.  I'll have to look closer at the Simple skills to see if it hurts anything too badly.

I also just realized this may go a long way toward solving my other two outstanding issues.  Both are basically about how damage is resolved, specifically about Burst Fire and Small Arms against Tactical Armor.  I've realized an early suggestion I came up with for always round damage down against Tactical Armor hurt certain support weapons too much despite how much it helps keep most Small Arms in check against Tactical Armor.  Something I'm very much in favor of.  Though with the skill cap idea it makes some very subtle but profound changes.  Burst mechanics did kind of bug me.  If you manage to put more than one round in your foe shouldn't you do more than an extra point of damage?  Shouldn't accuracy increase at the expense of damage if you try to fill an area?  Limiting the skill rank actually does a wonderful job of implying that the suppressing fire rules cover the second situation and the normal combat rules cover the first.

[author note]Don't mind me too much if the last bit there doesn't make a lot of sense.  When I typed it up I was about ready to fall asleep where I sat.[/author note]
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2012, 17:03:33
I've reviewed the skills that would be impacted by such a change and honestly I don't think I'm too bothered with the limits it places on non-combat skills.  I'll have to see about incorporating that into my next house rules revisions.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2012, 17:38:31
Well bugger me.  It seems mediafire has decided it no longer wants to play nice with me uploading files.

I guess you lot will just have to read my thread to keep up to date then.

Oh something I forgot when talking about more than one person in the cockpit of a battlemech or ASF.

It is not required for the second occupant to be a mechwarrior or pilot and thus be hooked up to the vehicle in question.  They must still pay the appropriate Vehicle and Custom Vehicle XPs.  As such the second pilot may not connect during the progression of battle, nor do they take damage from feedback.  While they can operate the vehicle with the penalties of operation said vehicle without a neurohelmet they suffer no penalties for operating the computer systems, electronic warfare gear, communications, and may perform any other skill check without penalties.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 02 September 2012, 01:57:38
Been back to work on my Warship designs.

I realized that I could chop off a fair number of designs and be all right since I'm already having trouble making distinct designs.

Two factions are now finished up so I am considering if it would be worthwhile to post up a design thread.  Mostly because I know as soon as I get an up to date design program that will correctly handle subcapital weaponry* I'll probably be remaking a bunch of them and it'll certainly help with the whole everything starts looking the same after a while problem I'm having.

*Yes I know about the custom weapons editor and I know about Rick's batch file and I ran it.  It didn't work.  I've also tried hand editing and for some reason it refuses to enter correctly, well as correct as you have to work around to get them to work for Dropships.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 September 2012, 19:51:11
Finished two more factions and again I debate if it'd really be worth posting up what I have.

For some reason last night while trying to get to sleep I did start thinking about a more fantasy inspired setting for AToW again and started cranking out ideas for how to handle the inevitable magic system.  It is still a major work in progress but once I get things worked out a bit further I'll see about either filling this thread with what I've worked out or maybe even give it it's own thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 September 2012, 17:55:33
Down to one last faction.

Not much more and I should be finished up soon.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 06 September 2012, 18:46:12
I'd assume the easiest basics for a magic system might be an actual magic skill, with different spells/abilities requiring certain MoS, but I can see how that would be problematic :)

I suppose its possible for anything to have a magic system.

I did like the idea for non-MechWarriors in a dual cockpit.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 September 2012, 20:11:40
I'll admit a lot of my ideas about magic are heavily based on the d20/OGL stuff with some influences from White Wolf's awakened magic sprinkled in and thus I'm working out ideas for each theme of magic having it's own skill and using a magic point system to regulate effects.

The dual occupant came to as I looked at how easy it would be to actually skill lock a mechwarrior into being unable to do anything during their turn.  It doesn't even take an especially evil GM to do it either.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 September 2012, 11:24:58
I just had a "well duh, why didn't I think of this sooner" moment.

All personal laser weapons get the benefit of the Laser Sight modifiers built in.  They cannot get the benefit twice by mounting a Laser Sight.

I mean seriously they are lasers.  The gravitational effects on the beam at the maximum ranges of the personal weapons are so close to zero I'm having trouble not giving them slight boosts to hit at all ranges and seriously wondering why they have range modifiers at all.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 08 September 2012, 16:15:31
Most likely because as the range gets greater, the more uneven breathing, shaking, etc matters. Sure, the beam gets there pretty much instantaneously, but you've still got to survive not messing it up when you squeeze the trigger.

Maybe cut the modifiers in half, rather than eliminating them completely? Its probably a struggle to keep them balanced against ballistic weapon if you remove the modifiers completely.

The laser sight is interesting. Sort of like a pre-firing stage for the laser.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 September 2012, 17:03:38
Yeah I haven't quite made up my mind about the range modifiers thing.  I probably will keep them in the end simply for game balance.

Getting the built in bonus for laser sight is more of a real world physics thing.  A sniper with a good old fashioned slug thrower has to aim well above their intended target and quite substantially to the side to account for gravity and wind at great range.  I remember a particular program I was watching about a sniper team shooting at a target up hill and about half a mile away(1,000 yards) and having to be meters above and to the left to get their shot on target.  A laser will have none of that.  Just put your scope on target and that's where it'll connect.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 September 2012, 18:05:35
I've realized I probably can never actually post any of my magic stuff due to legalities and how much I'm cribbing off of other systems to even make it work.

I did manage one fairly nice thing for myself.  I realized I could make Megamek lab use my AC rebalances so I could have my tanks in MekHQ too.

Now if I could just get SSW to compile with the changes I've made to it I'd be golden.  Well sort of.  I do still need a proper ASF, Dropship, Jumpship, and Warship editor that is up to date.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 September 2012, 13:27:28
I think I just had an absolute flash of brilliance on how to handle one of my more outstanding issues I still haven't been able to happily resolve.

Small Arms suffer double the normal reduction of base damage from Tactical Armor and always round down.

Now a bog standard autorifle even with AP rounds has to work incredibly hard to hurt a mech while the Support Weapons aren't bothered in the least.  Frankly that was one of the biggest problems my previous solutions had is that they hurt too many Support Weapons.

I've also realized my efforts to curb the whole negative Gunnery/Piloting\Driving were just not going to work without some major reworks of the SPAs so I'm dropping any of that non-sense.

I'm also reworking some of my gestalt technology stuff.  Mostly it is reworking how to determine the weight of the gestalt that I'm focusing on.  Even though I have a spreadsheet for it that I like the final numbers from I do want to simplify the calculations enough to make it doable by hand.  Technically it is currently possible but the calculations are so convoluted I'd be surprised if anyone in my group other than Liam's Ghost could make their way through them without making horrendous mistakes.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 September 2012, 01:09:15
Progress update again.

I've managed to get to work on my AU additional equipment again.  I've done some mechanical re-balancing though I'll probably need to do more.  In particular a few laser weapons may actually need their ranges substantially increased but I'm pretty okay with it so far.

I have also decided to do a more fluffy document giving short write-ups to each piece of gear and expanding on any special game rules for the item, but only for the things unique to my AU.  A bit mixed IC and OOC stuff but I'm making reasonable progress.

I'm getting my gestalt stuff nailed down fairly well also.  I need to remember to update my notes on what I want to change before I forget.  I still need to digitize the stuff.

If mediafire will let me once I digitize that stuff I'll slip them into the OP of this thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 28 September 2012, 15:10:02
Simplicity is always best.

Interesting take on small arms. Does that reduction also apply to Battle Armor, or just things bigger?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 28 September 2012, 17:57:59
I'm thinking all Tactical Armor.  Since BA isn't always 10 Small Arms won't be hurt as bad against the lighter stuff which I think suits me just fine.

I've gotten my AU specific Small Arms and Support Weapons finished up for my combined Stats/Fluff project.  I found I did need to make some revisions but I'm surprised how well it actually balanced out.  My faction specific stuff I wanted to give some boosts to to help make it more worthwhile to work for a major power rather than being a drifting Mercenary and overall I think it worked out pretty well in that regard.  I just need to enter the adjustments to my electronic documents and I'll be on to the second faction's armor kits as I already have one finished up.

I found a few items I hadn't worked out yet for my gestalt stuff but I think I'm pretty close to having that worked out now.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 October 2012, 18:52:53
And Mediafire has displeased me for the last time.

Oh well.  I finally digitized my Gestalt stuff.  I decided to not do an inherent weapon because I fleshed out the rules for installed gear enough to allow that to be an option instead.  I'll go ahead and post them here since I could use some testers besides myself.  Plus it could be useful for some other people's campaigns.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 October 2012, 23:03:36
And I've already found I need to reduce the base weights to achieve the dynamics I want.  I'll have to take another run at it with some other options to see if the other side of the dynamic is high enough though.  I expect I may have to increase some base weights of the add on gear though.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 October 2012, 01:14:09
And now that I've gotten it corrected at least for now have the updated version and even a basic worksheet to help the less math inclined to make their own.  I think I got all the mass altering traits in but I'm tired enough to not be sure at the time of this post.  It also does not help with if you want to build in the personal gear and I know I included the skill rank table but I'm not ready to go down that path again.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 15 October 2012, 11:12:09
The rules look interest, and rather simple to figure out for the most part. Its interesting to see where you've taken the ATOW rules.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 October 2012, 13:42:05
The Gestalt stuff is something I've been kicking around for years now.  I had developed them in a far more complicated spreadsheet some time back and for a while now it has been a goal of mine to simplify them enough that it was not nearly as convoluted to construct as the earlier sheet.

I suspect I may still have to fiddle with some of the weights but the important part for me is I do need someone who isn't me to shoot holes in what I've done up, ensure it is simple enough, and/or just generally see how well the rules work.

Though so far sounds like I may have achieved at least some of my goals.

My other project currently still underway is making my AU specific personal gear more balanced and presentable.  I've made the pencil notes and digitized all the weapons and the armors for 3.5 factions but still have the accessories to go.

One of the other things I'm contemplating is how my Status and Connections work in providing points and how much the sub categories cost to raise.  Mostly I'm considering dropping the whole 2 points to raise Equipped or People 1 rating and adjusting the point pools some.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 October 2012, 21:05:39
Yay projects!

I got side tracked in my Arms, Armor, Accessories project by returning to work on my factional write ups project.  They still need a lot of work but made some important revisions today.  Of the 8 factions I intend to do full write ups for I'm only really close to being done with 1 and have 2 others I'd call three quarters done.  So really anywhere from 10-20% completion depending on how much I can kick my perfectionist, never happy with what I write, nature into the corner where it belongs.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 October 2012, 23:56:16
Back and forth I go!

I finished up the half faction and another but I did kind of cheat on the other since it only has 4 entries in my Arms, Armors, Accessories project.

And now that I stop to think about it I'm not sure why I'm wasting posts on updating you lot on something you aren't going to see anytime soon(if at all) thanks to mediafire not playing nice with me anymore.

Oh well.  :P
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 October 2012, 00:53:32
I think I've figure out what is going on with Mediafire.  It just don't like small files anymore it would seem.  Either that or certain extensions.  Or perhaps even some combination of both.  I'll try it out when I finish up some more stuff so I can zip it all up and try an upload.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 October 2012, 02:09:27
I got bored of statting out every little piece of kit that I originally was and decided to take a few short cuts towards the end but I'm pretty happy with the compromise as I'm now finished with the presentability aspect of my AU Arms and Armor.  I may still have some balancing to do and need to add some fluffy stuff for faction specific Military Communicators then I should be finished up on one more project.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 21 October 2012, 02:59:14
Its good that you're making progress. Short cuts that get work down well are always a good thing.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 October 2012, 11:00:21
Indeed.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 October 2012, 16:20:09
Pretty much finished my AU Arms, Armor, and Accessories project.

Printed out my electronic document of said project and made a few revisions but most everything I feel pretty good with as it sits.  I will always be a bit worried about things being too good or too poor but then I remind myself that this is an RPG and somethings are just going to wind up that way when it comes to gear.  Since Mediafire seems to play nice with files over a certain size I may go ahead and put up the document once I finish updating it.

Only real thing I have left are some Personal Comm fluff items and Personal Military Comm fluff items.  My plan for them is mostly give them some additional game rules abilities in exchange for being affiliation specific while leaving the weight, power consumption, Technology, Availability, Legality, and cost alone.  So it should go pretty quick once I sit down to work on it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 31 October 2012, 10:12:26
Progress sounds good.

I am sort of curious. Is there really enough difference between them to justify factions specific comms?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 31 October 2012, 10:42:22
Some did wind up getting pretty similar but I did put a few different bonuses to them.

Mediafire link on the first page.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 31 October 2012, 14:27:11
I'll have to see if I can do an upload on it later but I did finally make my Status changes and actually decided to go one step further.  I decided to give characters who have a positive Status trait a free bonus.  And I just realized I have mechanics at my disposal for making the negative Status actually behave differently from null Status.  Wealth and Equipped actually have Negative ratings and I'm seriously considering Status/Civilian -1 to not allow independent Wealth trait and only allowing Status/Civilian to go negative while the others must be positive or meaningless to prevent easy XP generation opportunities.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 November 2012, 00:19:49
Okay made my updates but Mediafire is not playing nice with my main document.  Arggh.  Well I'll just have to see if I can make it a tad bit bigger eh?  Seems to help.  Now what else to put in it.  That is a good question.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 November 2012, 21:15:50
Almost forgot I could incorporate my LAM house rules as well.  Though Mediafire is still refusing to play nice.

Though at this point the only project left on my to do list is my more detailed faction write ups.  I have one that I feel is mostly complete but me being me I doubt I'll every be truly happy with it.  I've chipped away at two others and have another document for the only really successful organized mercenary hiring hall in my AU.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 December 2012, 22:38:33
I remembered I could try using Internet Explorer instead of Opera for Mediafire.  As such I've done a few uploads of the updated versions of my documents and slipped in a few others.  I also need to take a look at the RPG data for my AU to make sure I'm doing some of the things I want to do.  Feel free to check them out and provide comments.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 January 2013, 02:48:59
I've been trying to be good about not rehashing the same old ground with the rash of threads trying to fix DHS/Energy weapons to help the much maligned ACs.  I have to say I've done better than I thought I would.  Though I am reminded I may not have slipped my LRM minimum range fix into my house rules.  Minimum range on LRMs/ATMs or other missiles with a minimum range instead take a penalty to the cluster hits table instead of to the to hit number.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2013, 16:36:09
Which has also reminded me I may not have been very lax about updating my main sheet.

Which does not have my UAC adjustments to help make them a little more worthwhile.

Nor my MRM/RL changes.

I'm still trying to work out some issues with the Cluster Hits table in general so that the 2 column isn't such a disaster but at the same time making sure it doesn't invalidate any of the other columns.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 January 2013, 19:03:59
Had to sneak in a slight adjustment to the Small Arms versus Tactical Armor house rule I have.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 February 2013, 23:03:02
Currently working on some error corrections of my House Rules electronic document and carefully considering some additional new gear.

Which occurs to me I haven't put in the PaK-1 Battlearmor gun for my main document yet.

I'm also considering an Area Effect specialty munition for standard ACs and how to balance it.

The nastiest thing I'm considering though is BA AMS.  Let the hilarity ensue.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 March 2013, 16:01:53
Some discussions lately have force me to start thinking about the thorny issue of how much better AToW makes Support Weapons versus TW and how Battlearmor and Mech scale weapons haven't really been compensated to be properly competitive.

Let's take a Heavy Support Laser as an example of what I mean.  Sure that Heavy Support Laser only reliably does 1 tactical armor damage against a mech but it can do it up to 1900 meters, a range which can only be matched by Mech grade weapons by using Line of Sight rules from TacOps.  Sure I won't expect to hit much thanks to the range modifiers and TMM at that range but considering I can start wearing down my foe from that far away without BA tube artillery I think I'd rather take the Heavy Support Laser than most other options and have my enemy endure the March of a Thousand cuts.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 02 March 2013, 01:00:19
That's definitely a potential problem with integration, and presumably why you should use TW for `Mechscale combat...of course ,that doesn't solve the problem, just kind of pushes it off to the side.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 02 March 2013, 12:06:15
It is one of the thornier issues brought to my attention lately.  Well not as thorny as trying to handle the integration of ASFs and their normally 1 minute turns but it is up there.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 03 March 2013, 12:55:15
I know I'm repeating myself from another thread but I'm almost smacking myself for not thinking of this sooner.

All Small Arms and Support Weapons not making use of Ordinance take a -1 AP penalty at Long Range and a -2 AP(total) penalty at Extreme Range.

I'm still thinking on how to handle the Missile Launchers since the LRM Launcher has a 2,100 meter maximum range and the MRM a 1,500 maximum range.  The MRM could be easier to handle since it is unguided.  The LRM could be made inadvisable to launch at such long range as that is just begging for the inherent ECM on the modern field to defeat it before it hits the intended target.  To model such effects I'm thinking of doubling all the range penalties.  Still doesn't seem quite right but I'm not sure how else to reign in the disparity of ranges between AToW and TW/TacOps.

Mortars, Recoilless Rifles, and the AA weapons I'm inclined to leave alone since their ranges and effects are all fairly reasonable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 March 2013, 02:58:38
Or I'm really just making things more complicated than they need to be.

I could just borrow my TW trick of just forgetting measuring range in meters and turns in seconds.  To do this for AToW scale though I'll have to reference all the TM ranges for infantry weapon base ranges and multiply by two.

I know it doesn't really help the incongruities much but it'll be much less of a headache than trying to figure out a way to resolve all of said problems.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 March 2013, 01:27:51
Curse Liam's Ghost.  He's reposting a story so now I'm getting ideas of doing another Fan Fic set in my AU.  I'm just going to have to carefully consider the form it takes so people will be able to understand it and the alternate time lines and factions.

In terms of rules I'm giving further thought to that AP/BAR system.  Some discussions in other threads have highlighted some problems with how worthless personal armor actually tends to be unless you get the high end stuff.  Now I'm fine with a fairly lethal system but it is something causing me to think carefully.  Of course my AP reduction for Long and Extreme Range for non-ordinance could do a lot to solve the problem.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 03 April 2013, 02:07:10
Okay fiddling with some rough calculations I think I will be adopting my AP reduction for non-ordinance weapons at Long and Extreme Ranges in future games.  It does a lot to make less than absolute top of the line armor more worthwhile.

As to an AU fanfic I realized I already had one that does a fairly decent job of setting up some basics.  I'm going back over it now to clean up some stuff and outright changed/expanded some things.  I may have to add an entire chapter to cover some events that happened between existing chapters.  I'll probably be cleaning it up and expanding it a fair amount over the next few days.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 April 2013, 14:15:38
For some reason mediafire is not letting me log-in so I can update my Amegis Compact faction write up.  It is only a small but substantial change but readers of my current fanfic can probably see why pretty quick if they come here to look into more of my AU stuff.  Which reminds me I should put a link to this thread in my fanfic.  I think my next project once I finish Chapter 3 really should be to do up some role playing guides for my AU.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 April 2013, 00:49:55
I've also decided to drop LAMs from my AU.  I realized they just don't add anything really useful that a more dedicated option doesn't and with the force sizes in my AU having a dedicated option shouldn't ever be a problem.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 April 2013, 20:01:42
Then I go and look at my RATs and realize there was one thing they did that made me a fan of them, they did a great job of letting me divorce Vehicle from higher=automatically higher tonnage machine and in the minds of my players bigger=better so I like making such a divorce.  I guess until I can get my java coding up to snuff I'll leave them out because I need to add some house rules.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 April 2013, 00:54:56
It is interesting to look at how much crap I do have developed for my AU that only now are a lot of you guys getting a glimpse at for the first time recently and yet how much is still locked away in electronic documents I have yet to share.

For a small detail in the latest chapter of What If I dug up a currency conversion spreadsheet I have for multiple time periods in my AU.  Problem is I found it to be rather in error for some things or else I'd probably go upload it to mediafire and stash a link in the first post of this thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 April 2013, 00:19:22
Update on my current projects.

I have been going through my AU mech design archive and been getting rid of the three letter designation that comes from the name syndrome that I fell into by allowing myself to be too influenced by that from canon Battletech.  Like instead of going MAC-2E Macer I'm now going CTM-2E Macer.  This actually makes a lot more sense to me because we don't see any HNT-18 Hornets flying off modern day carriers but instead F-18 Hornets and thus seems a little silly that it is the rule rather than the exception we see WVR-8K Wolverine instead of VI-8K Wolverine.  I may keep it that way for the Corporate Sector mechs because it is oddball spin to help keep the product in the customer's mind but the rest I'll be switching over.  Plus I seem to have a lot of manufacturing data and introdate fixes to make to my archive anyway.  I'm probably screwing up some of the pacing I want to establish but until I can figure out how to make SSW have more eras and fix some intro dates of other gear I'll just have to keep winging it.

I also feel my fanfic set in my AU is going well.  I'm probably going to finish off Chapter 4 before the week is out barring something diverting my attention.  Without my group co-operating Chapter 4 is going to be a lot shorter and generalized than I had hoped for but that is a plus for anyone who feels inspired to try out a game in my AU in my book.  I also realized I've been translating kamijin as wind people when that should be divine/heavenly people.  Which does beg the question of should I leave it as is to help establish some quirkyness to my AU, fix it to translate properly, or change it to kazejin.  All three are viable options in my book.  Feel free to weigh in.  I'm not afraid to relinquish some creative control over my AU to you lot.

Oh and I'm not entirely sure if I've got my Machine Gun ammo count house rules spelled out in this thread or not.  Just in case I don't I've fixed the count to be 120/60/40 for Light/Standard/Heavy and still allow half ton lots.  I like the implication of higher rate of fire this provides while also making them less of bombs and since only SRMs don't work out to 120 points of maximum damage potential for a ton of ammo(something I'm thinking about changing just to be consistent and help round off some of the remaining internal balance issues) it does provide a nice consistancy.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 April 2013, 00:50:00
Another faction updated/converted but I haven't posted them yet.  I'm getting there slowly but surely.

I think I'm just feeling overwhelmed by how there is to do yet, again.  I've got these updates to finish and I really should get more faction write ups going.  I probably should write some role playing guides as well.  All that on top of figuring out the rest of Chapter 4.  Then I got Chapter 5 to work up.

Developing a whole new setting is a lot of work.  I've gotten a lot done but I know I got so much more to go.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 May 2013, 00:44:13
I'm having some thoughts about going back and reworking my redo of mech designations to help make them more unique.  Because right now there is a lack of said uniqueness since so many people are using the three letter manufacturer's code then either number and letter or three number code.  A few exceptions for two number and four number codes do exist already but looking ahead it is going to be the main pattern and I want to see about breaking it up.

I'll leave the stuff I've posted alone even though one of those factions is going to get changed.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 May 2013, 20:05:35
Finally bothered to get around to updating my electronic documents and links to said documents for my main house rules document and Amegis Compact factional write up.  I know I still have some work to do on the write up and it wouldn't surprise me if there is something still missing from my house rule document from this thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 31 May 2013, 10:58:10
Finally got around to fixing the Amegis Compact mech designations and I am much happier with them now.  Going to have a good think on how to handle the Darian Supremacy since I'm done with the Carfana Federation(which I should post one of these days) and am willing to let the Corporate Sector use the Battletech style naming conventions.

I'm also still contemplating reworking my random allocation table to remove LAMs(still on there currently) and the only thing that is stopping me from doing so is how nicely they break up the Vehicle = Tonnage that I dislike so much.  I've also noticed I've been sneaking in new variants and even new designs so I could start sliding some of those into the RATs to break things up.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 June 2013, 13:02:04
I've finally decided to commit some more changes to ACs.

My revisions as they currently stand for stats:

AC-2 4 Tons 1 Critical 1 Heat Short Range: 9 Medium Range: 18 Long Range: 27 Ammo: 60 Standard / 40 Precision and the like / 90 for Caseless and the like
AC-5 6 Tons 3 Criticals 1 Heat SR: 7 MR: 14 LR: 21 Ammo 24 / 16 / 36
AC-10 10 Tons 6 Criticals 3 Heat SR: 5 MR: 10 LR: 15 Ammo 12 / 8 / 18
AC-20 12 Tons 9 Criticals 7 Heat SR: 3 MR: 6 LR: 9 Ammo 6 / 4 / 9

I'm still considering if I need to make them even lighter and, for the ones that can be, more compact.

And a slight adjustment to LRMs:

A target counts as one hex farther away only for the purposes of determining minimum range for indirect fire.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 June 2013, 13:58:36
Slightly closer to the AToW side of things I realized in my optional random events there was nothing to imply starting a family in Stage 4.  So I slipped that in there.  Other than that I'm quite happy with how they've turned out so far.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 June 2013, 22:34:38
Kind of in a gray area right now for continuing my AU FanFic.

Currently covering the False Wars.  About 5 years of mercenaries, pirates, special operations, and intelligence organizations messing with everyone and doing it well enough that no one launched anything more substantial than the odd punitive raid.  If I had a bit more worked out about the Darian Supremacy and Carfana Federation I'd probably call it my overall best era for an AToW campaign set in this AU.  Since I don't that falls to the armed uprising during the Birth of Nations of what would become the Corporate Sector.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 July 2013, 18:02:10
Been thinking a bit lately and realized I do need to clarify something about my AU.  While I'm more than happy to give Rumble Seat for free to everything to actually hook up and use more than one Mechwarrior at a time requires the Command Console option to be installed.

Also been working out stuff for my next segment of my AU fanfic.  If I could just get in a writing frame of mind I could probably have it up today but for some reason I haven't been lately and not sure when that will change.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 July 2013, 13:21:52
With some new interest in my AU setting stuff I figure I might actually go ahead and share a few things I've been keeping to myself about it.

At first I was hesitant to put a time line to it.  I really wanted to avoid any possible issues of having too much time for too few events.  Frankly the Battletech time line could be reworked so that 500-700 years could be chopped out and it wouldn't suffer a damn bit as far as I can tell.  But as I worked on my setting more and more I found I did have to come up with one so that I could develop the AToW side of things more fully.

I do actually have a rough population figure in mind of 10 billion for my setting but I'm not going to ever make that a firm and official number.

I do have a lot of manufacturing details worked out but I do realize I probably should have more manufacturers.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 July 2013, 17:55:58
Made a slight update to the Amegis Compact faction write up.  It still feels a bit incomplete but like it is nearing reasonable completion at the same time.

Either way feel free to give me feed back about items you'd like to see it cover that you feel are missing, anything seems out of place, or jarring.

The Belarus Alliance document I'll try and give a look at next and something I have to consider for them is how to identify individual clones.  I'm leaning toward the fairly obvious idea of an alphanumeric identifier just so I can avoid a purely numeric one as that is even more obvious and feels a bit more done to death.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 July 2013, 01:40:04
I just had a bit of a thought on the BAR rules to make some interesting choices available now.

If AP>=2xBAR reduce BD to 1 and apply MOS as indicated for the attack type.  Unarmored people are considered to have a minimum BAR of 1 for the purposes of this rule/calculation.  Injuries and armor degredation still occur for the damage as appropriate.

As always feed back appreciated.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: BirdofPrey on 24 July 2013, 02:42:14
What's that supposed to accomplish?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 July 2013, 10:43:09
Okay looking at it while it does a decent job of modeling over penetration it is not going to achieve my primary goal of making it more viable to wear the middle of the road armors.  I'll have to think on how to make personal armors with BARs lower than 6 in a category more worthwhile to wear.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 July 2013, 22:59:11
I keep running into one problem with this whole BAR problem I've developed.

I can't fix it without breaking something else.

I guess I'm just going to have to live with having heavy armor or no armor as even with the most durable PC rules from AToW still can have combat decided in the first exchange of gunfire.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Acolyte on 25 July 2013, 23:27:37
Questions:

Do you use the optional rules from AToW Companion?

   If so, the modifier for the second location we use is "If the attack hits armor: -2 if AP and BAR are equal, adjusted by the relative AP to BAR." I.e. the AP has to be 2 points higher for this modifier to be canceled and if the BAR is higher, the modifier is reduced even more. The second change we make is that if the adjusted roll is less than 1, roll 1d6-1 on the Fatigue damage chart. All damage will be fatigue from this hit. Also, if a random Fatigue damage hit would qualify for triple damage it instead does the normal amount, but is Standard rather than Fatigue.

If you don't, how about armor reducing damage by a minimum of 1 unless the AP is double the BAR?

How about if BAR is greater than AP, damage is Fatigue, if AP equals BAR damage is halved but Standard?

These were some of the solutions the we discused and it became a choice between them. We eventually went for the first.

Hope it helps!
   - Shane
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 July 2013, 01:27:55
The only problem I have with the AToW and AToW Companion improved durability rules is that burst fire does so much to make up for any shortfalls of BAR>AP.  I can't think of a way to fix that without screwing over the not burst weapons without doing a complete re-write of the burst mechanics and I don't want to go that far.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Acolyte on 26 July 2013, 16:19:29
Ah, couple options there:

1. Burst fire gets a bonus to hit of +1 for every 5 shots or fraction thereof
or
2. Burst fire rolls separately for every 5 shots normally.

and

3. Burst fire gets a bonus every 4 MOS just like regular single shot weapons, but instead of adding 1 damage, it's another shot hitting and being modified by armor.

Shane
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 July 2013, 16:24:39
I may have to give those a try if I can ever get my gaming group to play AToW again.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 August 2013, 01:32:05
Been mulling over a few things lately.

Mostly I've come to the conclusion that without an active AToW game using my house rules in my or anyone else's group I may be at a point of idleness for coming up with new house rules.  So this is likely to be my last post on this thread for a while.

I'm also realizing I'm losing interest in continuing my AU fanfic.  I will at least try and give it a finish, even if it is a bit rushed and has really short chapters for those that remain but no promises.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 28 August 2013, 00:32:18
I've finally decided to eliminate Wealth as a stand alone trait with how I've worked Status.

Where this could get complicated though is that I fully intend for it to be possible for a character to have say Status/Civilian 3 and Status/Military 5 as say a reservist with a fairly decent regular job and thus some social standing.  For a somewhat realistic and simplistic approach I'm thinking that the Wealth conversions be completed then totaled and buy equipment with the highest Equipped sub category.  For the pay bonus each Status would have to be applied separately to the appropriate field/regular job/criminal racket.

I'll think about how to word this for the master document then see about getting that uploaded.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 September 2013, 01:11:10
I still need to work out the wording on that Wealth update.

For now though I do need to adjust my AU timeline to reflect the changes I've decided to make to it in my AU Fanfic What If... but I'm just not sure if it would really be worth it to do the upload.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Nikas_Zekeval on 16 September 2013, 01:24:45
The problem with the load bearing equipment is it counts as armor for the stacking armor rules and thus combining it with real armor makes Infantry automatically Encumbered.

Still though I do consider it likely anyone intentionally building an Infantry character will already have it in mind to have a high Strength so I'm still not sold on the idea of actually enforcing a minimum Strength but the implications AToW converted to TW/TM seems to make it does suggest 6 is the minimum even accounting for load bearing equipment.  Otherwise some of the heavier Support Weapons even with their weight divided up evenly amongst the crew would automatically encumber them with anything less despite not having the Encumbering trait.  Part of my resistance is also the idea that according to AToW it takes a Complex Action to Pack/Unpack a Support Weapon.  This would mean any support weapon should be considered Encumbering anyway by TW/TM.

All things considered though it probably would be easier to House Rule that Load Bearing Gear is designed with the idea of being layered with Armor and thus not Encumbering in that way and Pack/Unpack is a one time a turn only Incidental Action and not bash players over the head with something that I consider likely to happen anyway without having to formalize it.

Sorry for necroing this part, but I recently read through ATOW and noticed this issue.

Two other solutions.  One, you can have armor incorporate LBE as part of the design, so the cost and mass are extra for a vest, jacket, or suit that employs this option.  You lose the (minimal) armor value of a stand alone LBE vest in the deal.

Alternative, doesn't it seem strange that say an Inner Sphere neurohelmet will equal stagger a forty kilo weakling and an Elemental if they both pick it up?  Maybe an alternate rule for encumbering equipment where due to bulk, bad ergonomics, or in the case of clothing the restrictive nature, the item's weight is multiplied by some factor when calculating encumbrance?

Something like this:
Ecumbering gear.  Multiply the mass by 3-STR modifier, that is the mass for calculating encumbrance.  So a character with STR 2 will barely be able to pick up a 6kg neurohelmet, while a character with STR 7 will be much less inconvenienced with it.

In terms of armor, the inner most piece is the 'base layer' and taken at standard weight, unless it is itself encumbering.  Up to two more layers may be worn over it, each having an encumbering multiplier used on it's effective weight.  Yes, that means if you have an encumbering over-layer the multiplier is effectively squared.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 September 2013, 01:44:41
I welcome input.

I think I like the idea of armor incorporating LBE as standard the best overall.  I'll have to consider the implications for civilian use of LBE under such a change.  After all if LBE is too hard for a civilians to get a hold of even if it is part of their job it'll be rather worthless gear if basic armor kits replicate the bonus.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Nikas_Zekeval on 16 September 2013, 07:56:25
A standalone LBE vest has a B-A(all eras)-A equipment rating.  I believe the description in the RPG version prior to ATOW mentioned building them into the armor.  OTOH that version had an armor value of 1/5/1/1, while the ATOW version had a ballistic armor value of 3.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 September 2013, 09:57:52
Then including them standard as a part of most armor kits works for me.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 October 2013, 12:23:20
Just so I don't have to do a bunch or re-writes I'm going to make a slight adjustment to the load bearing gear adjustment I just made.

Allow it to be an "add on" feature.  For no extra weight but 10% more C-Bill cost you can have load bearing built into your armor.

I've also been doing some fresh module build runs of creating characters using my house rules and AU factions since it has been a while, long enough I've lost my notes from the last time I tried.  It is a little more labor intensive I'd say but not bad.  I'll have to do it a couple more times just so I can get a better sense of how they compare XP wise to vanilla AToW characters but just eyeballing it I can see some differences but not entirely obvious ones.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: PurpleDragon on 07 October 2013, 12:29:08
I've finally decided to eliminate Wealth as a stand alone trait with how I've worked Status.

Where this could get complicated though is that I fully intend for it to be possible for a character to have say Status/Civilian 3 and Status/Military 5 as say a reservist with a fairly decent regular job and thus some social standing.  For a somewhat realistic and simplistic approach I'm thinking that the Wealth conversions be completed then totaled and buy equipment with the highest Equipped sub category.  For the pay bonus each Status would have to be applied separately to the appropriate field/regular job/criminal racket.

I'll think about how to word this for the master document then see about getting that uploaded.


This seems to me like it should be affecting the Income trait rather than the Wealth trait. 

I say this because, as I understand it, Wealth represents what your character starts with through inheritance or whatever has happened in his/her past.  Income, on the other hand, provides a monthly from something like a business; likely some real-estate for rent; which would be affected by social circles.   

Just an observation. 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 October 2013, 12:52:41
The way I intend to handle it is that Status will impact both starting wealth and regular job income in accordance to the rules for rank providing a modifier to monthly income found in vanilla AToW.

And I have no trouble feeding into the perception that with money comes influence that my adjustment implies, even in the case of an inheritance.

Another control method is that I also have no trouble downgrading someone's Status after game starts if they burn through their influence or otherwise sabotage their current social standing.

Overall for the sake of making something that isn't going to be heavily invested in without incentive have more incentive to be invested in I'm unlikely to leave Wealth as a separate trait.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 November 2013, 09:15:15
On a somewhat related note I've started thinking about the value of Vehicle as a stand alone trait.

It may be something exclusive to my group but I've noticed that one of the first things to go or otherwise not even considered in a character creation is Rank.  It is one of the reasons I've come up with my current Status system.  It provides a much better framework of resources you can tap into as a matter of your chosen profession and where you are in your current career path.

My first thought is I need to create probably at least 50 IndustrialMechs, 50 Support Vehicles of each major type, and probably a few other units intended primarily for Civilian use.  If I do that then I can just add some more points to Connections and Status on the premise that they get used for a Vehicle rating.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 November 2013, 02:27:11
Discussion in another thread has given me a bit of an idea I've been going back and forth on.  A character with more than one Status trait.  I've decided for simplicities' sake that this new trait shall be ID specific but at the same time it will be more complicated as Wealth and Equipped will now have to be tracked individually for each ID and consequently each piece of equipment purchased/requisitioned for each ID will need such a note added.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 November 2013, 02:57:54
And looks like I already had it that way in my document.  Oh well.  Took the opportunity to clean a couple things up anyway.  Link should still be valid in first post.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 20 December 2013, 01:11:37
Well after clearing up suppressing fire it seems appropriate for me to share my thoughts on how to solve the teleporting bullet problem for the rules as written.

It requires also tracing line of effect.  For an example of what I mean I have a handy visual aide that I created to help me ask my question to TPTB on the matter.

Blue is where the shooter performing suppressing fire is.  Red are the intended hexes.  Yellow are the hexes where the line of effect is.  So a unit moves into a yellow hex for a person or Battle Armor make an Edge based single attribute check using current edge if lower then base Edge.  On a failure they take damage as described in the rules for suppressing fire with a MoS inversely equal to their MoF as if they had instead moved into one of the Red hexes.  Make this check for each new hex with a cumulative -1 for each Yellow hex entered.  Either way suppression fire continues to the Red hexes as normal for simplicity's sake.

I'm still considering how to handle inserting a barrier(like say someone drives a Goblin APC between the shooter and the Red hexes to provide cover for any targets having to cross through the Red and subsequent Yellow hexes).  I'm seriously considering just saying that such an inserted barrier takes two maximum bursts worth of damage using the normal rapid fire rules sacrificing any TMM mods and applying size modifiers as normal but stops the suppressing fire at the inserted barrier.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 December 2013, 02:51:18
I've decided to revisit something I talked about before at least in passing.

Replacing the Stage 0 Affiliation modules with a somewhat simplified set of modules that can be used to reflect any affiliation using player choice of XP reward options or even just plain free XP to let them reflect the affiliation they wish to belong to.

Like instead of Federated Suns/Crucis March I'd go Core World/Capitol World setting up a few sub options to spice things up.

So far I've got the following in mind for main categories:

Contested Border
Core Region
Fringe Territories
Mixed Borders Region
Multiple Contested Borders Region
Multiple Peaceful Borders Region
Peaceful Border Region

And for second tier choices:

Capital World
Developed World
Frontier Colony
Garden World
Military Post
Neglected Backwater
Regional Capital
Scientific Outpost
Strategically Important Industrial World
Toxic Wasteland

I'll see about getting these written up and if I come up with more I'll get them added in.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 December 2013, 12:54:54
Still working out the XP rewards but I figure I can share the first bit of fluff I'm reasonably happy with:
[sub-affiliation]
Toxic Waste Land
XP TBD

Your world is a difficult world to survive on.  Whether it is from some ancient conflict unleashing nuclear weapons, biological agents, chemical agents, chucking rocks from on high, or just the natural state of your world going outside without some sort of protective gear is ill advised.  As one of the "lucky" survivors of your world's hazards this has given you both a curse and blessing.

[/sub-affiliation]

I'm thinking of keeping the XP costs around 100 total for both the major/minor choice.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 February 2014, 00:59:41
Well since there has been no feed back on my previous project I've switched gears yet again.  This time I realized in all the time I've been playing World of Tanks there was some fodder in there to use as inspiration for more SPAs for AToW.  I'm still not 100% on a couple so feel free to comment about tweaks/adjustments.

Name: Safe Storage
Type: Misc
Cost: 150XP
Requirements: Tech Empathy, Technician/Mechanic 4+, Edge 6+
Effect: On any critical hit that results in an explosive ammunition critical, re-roll.  If the second roll still results in an explosive ammunition critical the second roll stands and the critical behaves normally.

Name: Preventative Maintenance
Type: Misc
Cost: 100 XP
Requirements: Tech Empathy, Technician/Mechanic 4+, Edge 6+
Effect: On any critical that results in a fuel critical, re-roll.  If the secon roll still results in a fuel critical the second roll stands and the critical behaves normally.

Name: Recon
Type: Misc
Cost: 100 XP
Requirements: Natural Aptitude-Perception, Perception 4+, Intelligence 4+
Effect: Gain the effects of an Active Probe out to 60m, if unit has an Active Probe or similar ability increase range by 60m.

Name: Smooth Driving
Type: Piloting/Driving(ground units only)
Cost: 150 XP
Requirements: Natural Aptitude-Driving/Piloting, Driving/Piloting 4+, Dex 6+
Effect: Reduce Attacker Movement Modifier for Walking, Running, Cruising, or Flank movement modes by 1.

Name: Off Road Master
Type: Piloting/Driving(ground units only)
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Speed Demon SPA
Effect: Reduce MP to enter a non-paved/prepared hex by 1 to a minimum of 1.

Name: Dead Eye
Type: Gunnery
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Marksman SPA
Effect: Gain a +1 to all rolls for determining Critical hits.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 September 2015, 19:35:45
Okay I have tinkered around with some things but I still need to update/change a few things in the main document for my house rules.

But while I finish that up I figure I'll announce that I've done away with the age based adjustment to the XP cost of attributes.  As much as I like the idea I've decided it was just a tad too much.  I have also finally figured out a way to handle Vehicle that I like.  Vehicle is now a subcategory of Status and a 1-5 range with 0 being no Vehicle awarded.  You add your Vehicle subcategory to a 2d6 roll to determine the weight class of your mech.  The table has replaced the Custom Vehicle section on my additional tables spreadsheet.  I'll repeat the table below after my next announcement.  My last but probably most important announcement is I went and updated the Field Manual Mercenaries tables for AToW with some tweaks for personal taste to help reward higher levels of certain traits.  You can find these tables here (https://www.mediafire.com/?303iha3l4bl6ctn).  If you know how to set print ranges it is well organized to print to three 8.5"x11" sheets.  Let me know if the comments are not clear enough.

Anyway the Vehicle table:
3: Dispossessed
4: Dispossessed
5: Light
6: Light
7: Light
8: Medium
9: Medium
10: Medium
11: Heavy
12: Assault
13: Heavy
14: Medium
15: Medium
16: UltraLight
17: Super Heavy/Assault

Okay main document has been updated.  Link is in first post.  Or at least should be.  If there are still LAM house rules then let me know as I've redacted those until we get a final presentation of LAM rules in IO.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 October 2015, 12:02:36
Also feel free to say that you'd rather have me reorganize the tables so each major section is on it's own tab so you don't have to define print ranges.

Some other thoughts I've toyed with while this thread has been dormant but I guess I could share now that I've resurrected it:

Returning Gunnery to the Gunnery/Ballistic, Gunnery/Energy, and Gunnery Missile paradigm.  I am not entirely sure about it as there may be enough differences in control inputs to keep at least some of the mess we have now and while I can still split hairs well enough to maintain the same skill specializations and SPAs for Gunnery/Energy, I'm not so sure I can do so for Gunnery/Ballistic and Gunnery/Missile without getting really fine on splitting hairs.

Likewise I've been contemplating changing the Driving and Piloting skills to be more unique to the motive type.  This one while I like it may cause too many problems to ensure your character is assigned to something they can reasonably drive/pilot, especially if you have to roll on the RATs.

Liam's Ghost proposed that a skill cannot be higher than it's lowest link attribute and removing the link attribute modifiers.  I have to admit this may be more of a product of the group I game with and how their characters are always so cookie cutter but I like it and I will probably try it out a couple times before adding it to my main document.

As always feel free to give feedback.  It has caused me to change my mind and alter/refine some of my ideas in the past.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Maelwys on 01 October 2015, 13:40:10
Hmm. I'm not sure about the new vehicle rule. Even at a +5, on an average roll (7) you're getting a heavy. Sure, you're close to getting that assault, but its not guaranteed. Paying 500 and winding up with a light, while unlikely, couple be kind of a pain in the ass for the player.

Of course, such a thing might be more fitting with your game :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 October 2015, 23:50:31
Valid point.  To me I think there should still be a chance for a Light mech even investing 5 points but since I'm making Vehicle a subset of my Status trait and really don't have a reason not to make it a subset of Connections as well it isn't like I'm asking for 500 XP to be spent on something completely worthless if it does go wrong and I think I will go ahead and re-adjust the table so Assault Mech occupies the 7+5 spot.  Though back to my point about not wasting too much XP: 400 XP in Status, which is what I'd consider minimum for a Mechwarrior, would let you put 5 points towards Vehicle and still have 1 left over.  So not a terrible deal all in all.  This all comes back around to my idea that even having a Mech means you have built up some sort of even minimal support structure around yourself and thus have some sort of Status for it.  Note though that I'm not demanding it be Status/Military.  I'm perfectly willing for it to be Status/Criminal and the character is part of a pirate band.  Or any other Status you can think of as long as I buy the story/concept.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 October 2015, 23:57:56
Okay modified the table.  I reduced the possibility of a Light to the 2+5 result so I think it should be sufficiently rare now to not be a problem.  I did have an additional thought in realizing that some people actually like UltraLight or even PAL/Exoskeletons and I didn't have a good place for that on my chart.  So I just replaced the 11+5 spot with UtlraLight but may put some PAL entries lower down to represent they are more common among BattleArmor.  Feel free to give some feedback about where I should put those for BattleArmor as I'm still somewhat debating that.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 June 2016, 20:25:33
Okay I know it has been a while since I've posted to this but I've been kicking around a lot of things lately and realized I haven't actually uploaded a new main document to my mediafire for people to review/comment on.  Link is in the first post of this thread

So the short version of my changes and not in order:

Some other things I'm still tossing around:
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 June 2016, 20:52:51
Just a quick update to let you all know I uploaded my Stage 3 and Alternate Fields documents.  Links on the first post of this thread.  The generic Stage 3 schools should be on their own tab towards the end with a bunch of Stage 3 schools(since I made every field have 5 skills I did change up some of the fields available to each school to make sure no skills got left out that you could have before, if I missed something be sure to check it isn't in a new field I added and if it isn't be sure to let me know, obviously feel free to add some new skill fields if you want, most should be able to add more as I left room for each school to have a good number) I added for my AU before them, each faction getting their own tab.  If you know how to define print ranges most of them will take two pages each with how I have them arranged.  Might take a few more if you don't.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 June 2016, 00:03:09
Found some error and omissions for things I forgot I had changed elsewhere and earlier.


Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 July 2016, 18:58:27
Another update after a ruling on a LAM question and officially committing to my revised link attribute modifier revision.


Things should calm down now as the last outstanding things I'm thinking about are how to simplify my Status and Connections alterations or at least make sure they are giving enough points.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 July 2016, 18:57:47
Okay good thing I went back and double checked my link to the document for the revised skill fields.  Wrong mediafire link got pasted.  Fixed now.  Again a little know how for defining print ranges should let you get everything printed up nice and neat.

With that straightened out and still largely undecided on if I should fiddle with my Connections and Status traits or not I'm going to see if I can focus a bit on something else I should have been working on a long time ago.  Step 1 is because there are always 5 skills in each field this kind of mucks with the Clan Stage 2 Sibko Modules.  Easy solution is to just keep the existing field skills of vanilla.  Also since my intention is to ensure every character actually pays for everything(thus my advice to GMs is to be okay with characters that may not have the same base XP pool to make sure everything works out the way you want or be aware some concepts are going cause XP drains) and thus there may need to be some case by case XP adjustments to various modules, especially for the Stage 1 and 2 modules.  Thus leading to my next grand project.  Writing my own Stage 1, 2, and 4 modules.  I'll be keeping them AU specific though so I don't supplant too much of AToW.  If I can get enough inspiration I'd also like to add unique random events that zero sum XP rewards to each individual module.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 August 2016, 23:46:46
Okay Stage 1 of my project is reasonably complete and hopefully actually being reviewed.

I find myself once again contemplating how to resolve Vehicle and Custom Vehicle.  More precisely while I like the randomness of my current method that ensures it won't be all Assaults all the time, at least if dice are behaving in a reasonable manner, I do realize I need to allow for greater control for the player in deciding what they start with and well my current system doesn't do that very well.

I see three ways to handle it.

1.  Just use the vanilla methodology modified.  Vehicle would still be a subcategory of Connections and Status but would follow the normal 1-10 progression.  This would certainly require me to put more points into Connections and Status*.

2.  Just stick with how I have it now.  Might still have to bump points for Connections and Status but it wouldn't be too much.

3.  Return to an earlier idea I had a while back where Vehicle rating is a column indicator(but as a trait would still be a subcategory of Status and Connections) on a RAT that doesn't have each column entirely sorted by weight(going farther to the right doesn't always mean all the entries will be heavier than the column to their left with some tables not even having all options).  This would require me to create 90 RATs for each era(8 factions plus one generic/mercenary/pirate times 10 columns).  So not super keen on this one but it may actually prove the most practical in the end.

*I've also been thinking about the point totals for customizing the subcategories of Connections and Status as well lately.  I am considering upping the point totals for customizing of the subcategories no matter which way I go.  To a certain extent I don't mind the totals being a bit low as I think you could compensate for it by relying on issued equipment more, which I would probably have to reword the Status trait description to be more accepting of the idea of issued gear that exceeds the Legality, Availability, and Tech codes of what the player invested to with their Status trait.

Another random thought I had a couple days ago:

 I was considering how there seems to be little incentive to put much XP into Language skills.  I can think of ways to at least partially penalize players for not putting much into Language but even then there just seems to be no real reason to put a whole lot into Language.  Just not able to think of things to make having high levels of Language worthwhile without being a huge ****** about it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: PurpleDragon on 13 August 2016, 03:35:23
Okay Stage 1 of my project is reasonably complete and hopefully actually being reviewed.

I find myself once again contemplating how to resolve Vehicle and Custom Vehicle.  More precisely while I like the randomness of my current method that ensures it won't be all Assaults all the time, at least if dice are behaving in a reasonable manner, I do realize I need to allow for greater control for the player in deciding what they start with and well my current system doesn't do that very well.

I see three ways to handle it.

1.  Just use the vanilla methodology modified.  Vehicle would still be a subcategory of Connections and Status but would follow the normal 1-10 progression.  This would certainly require me to put more points into Connections and Status*.

2.  Just stick with how I have it now.  Might still have to bump points for Connections and Status but it wouldn't be too much.

3.  Return to an earlier idea I had a while back where Vehicle rating is a column indicator(but as a trait would still be a subcategory of Status and Connections) on a RAT that doesn't have each column entirely sorted by weight(going farther to the right doesn't always mean all the entries will be heavier than the column to their left with some tables not even having all options).  This would require me to create 90 RATs for each era(8 factions plus one generic/mercenary/pirate times 10 columns).  So not super keen on this one but it may actually prove the most practical in the end.

*I've also been thinking about the point totals for customizing the subcategories of Connections and Status as well lately.  I am considering upping the point totals for customizing of the subcategories no matter which way I go.  To a certain extent I don't mind the totals being a bit low as I think you could compensate for it by relying on issued equipment more, which I would probably have to reword the Status trait description to be more accepting of the idea of issued gear that exceeds the Legality, Availability, and Tech codes of what the player invested to with their Status trait.

Another random thought I had a couple days ago:

 I was considering how there seems to be little incentive to put much XP into Language skills.  I can think of ways to at least partially penalize players for not putting much into Language but even then there just seems to be no real reason to put a whole lot into Language.  Just not able to think of things to make having high levels of Language worthwhile without being a huge ****** about it.

for the vehicle assignment thing, if you have a mechwarrior 1st ed, your assignment was to weight class with plusses for putting points into it or something.  The chart was not completely linear.  You might have it further set where the number of vehicle levels (xp/100) would give extra rolls on said chart in an attempt to get the weight desired for the 'mech wanted. 

I have been struggling with the languages thing as well.  I am bi-lingual and learned my second language only after I was an "adult".  I came up with something like skill level =

1: very basic speech only can ask for emergencies (police, hospital,...) and obtain the very basic necessities (food, drink) but nothing much more.
2: basic conversational speech; can understand conversations and communicate ideas.  Some reading/writing skill may be possible (GM decision; campaign oriented). 
3: Basic conversational speech; can understand conversations and communicate ideas.  Some reading/writing skill is possible if the above is not implemented.  Common Street Slang may be understood here.
4: "High School" level speech with reading/writing skills to match. 
5: "College" level speech with reading/writing skills to match.
6: good understanding of doublespeak. 
7: legalese.

Of course, some of those might be too restrictive or lenient.  feel free to modify and use according to your desires. 
4:
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 August 2016, 11:45:21
The way AToW handles Vehicle as written is you can put 1-12(2 are for Owns Vehicle) points into it.  What you get for those 1-12 points does depend on what kind of Vehicle you want.  So if you put 10 points into it you could own your own Assault Mech.  Then you'd roll for your Assault Mech on the appropriate RAT unless you have Custom Vehicle.  This linear progression means in my group results of Vehicle are very predictable unless I use optional rules to restrict XP.

After creating a mercenary unit using Mercenary Supplement Revised I came up with my current methodology by borrowing the Mass table and saying Vehicle rating is your bonus to the roll on that table.  I still grapple with this methodology because it does make results less predictable but because there is no control on the player's part so it can be a bit unsatisfying.

My original methodology I described in my last post and as stated may ultimately be the best methodology available to me.  Heck I'm pretty sure that I still have an out of date RAT linked in the first post of this thread(I've since redone the naming conventions on almost all my AU mechs) that shows what I'm talking about.

As far as Language I took three years of Japanese in high school so yeah it is an interesting grapple as I can think of things to do for certain levels of Language being a problem but I still largely feel like I'd be purposefully contriving things to punish my players.

One of my more interesting thoughts on the matter is Negotiation is a very Language dependent, to the point I'm wondering if there is really sufficient justification for it to not be a function of the Language skill.

Though I've realized I could post a link to what I've gotten done so far for my alternate modules, including affiliation data.  I'll warn that I let my language and implications get a bit colorful and potentially unpleasant in some of the random event roll descriptions.  While I don't think it actually gets that rough, just enough that a warning on my part is in order.

Link redacted due to new personal policy.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: PurpleDragon on 13 August 2016, 19:22:54
I understand what you are saying about the language thing.  I don't really see it as "hosing" the players over.  I see it more like putting it on par with the other skills in the game.  Characters are not really consider good with a skill until about skill level 3 and they aren't considered masters with it until about 5 or 6.  This would also put a damper on some of those players that just want to go around being able to speak any language in the game. 

I agree with the language used for negotiations comment.  It is also a big part of interrogations.  Maybe it could be done something like with D&D where some skills give a synergy bonus to others. 

I don't think I was clear about the 'mech weight comment.  I understand how it works in AToW.  I was just trying to offer an alternative according to what I had read in the post I quoted.  I'm sorry if I misunderstood something. 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 August 2016, 20:32:29
I probably didn't quite catch what you were trying to say either.  Still catching up on my sleep after getting a short notice overnight bit of work.

But yeah Language, I'm sorely tempted to have it cover Negotiation and Interrogation.  They both cover a lot of the same principles in my mind and it would give Language some actual specializations, something else that I have been having trouble figuring out for Language.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 August 2016, 14:57:32
Something I realized only today is with my stance of no more link attribute modifiers is that it makes some of my new out of the cockpit/combat special abilities not work entirely correctly.

Worry not for I've figured out a fix, one that even allows the attribute modifiers to still exist and matter.  I'll be re-working the affected special abilities so that they allow the attribute modifier to apply and create new ones so each attribute can gain the same benefit.

This also lead me to realize that there is also a better alternative to untrained skills.  Roll using the link attribute modifier against the skill target number.

Also with the loss of link attribute modifiers tiered skills also become a bit complicated but my easy solution is to just use the most advanced form of the skill and be done with it.

This also means I'm going to have to revise some of my just recently written modules.

I've also realized I'm going to have to revisit my gestalt rules.  They are massively out of date and I'd like to simplify them a bit.  It'll probably take me a bit to figure these out but the rest should be updated.

As usual links should be in the first post of the thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 August 2016, 22:38:52
Found a few items where the latest changes were still not fully implemented in the main document and did find that I forgot to update my alternate field list.

I've also decided Survival should not get any sub skills as the principles of survival are similar enough that any differences I feel are more in the realm of skill specialization.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 October 2016, 19:34:12
Okay I've been dragging this out long enough.

I've just not been able to come up with any good ideas about Stage 2 Modules and I'm starting to feel like I'm starting to step a bit too far over the line for what should be permissible of fan rules as well.

So I'm shelving any further public sharing of new modules, at least when I do get back to writing them, and will just be sticking to revising my existing house rules if my group ever decides they want to give them a whirl and we find things that don't work.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 December 2016, 00:34:52
Removed the link to my Affiliation and Module data document in compliance with my new policy of not going where I feel is too far.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2016, 02:13:24
I doubt there are many people left keeping tabs on this but I think I just figured out how to finalize how to handle vehicle.

One of the things I've struggled with was finding a way to ensure Vehicle wasn't more=bigger with the kind of certainty that the vanilla system had, especially since some of my players had to be coerced into not taking all assault mechs all the time via various methods but every alternate method I came up with removed player agency to a degree that never sat well with me.

Thanks to a tangent of thought I realized I could incorporate player agency into a trait that already offers some when it comes to their Vehicle, Custom Vehicle.  I still need to work out the exact mechanics, especially to keep it reasonably simple, but it is certainly a step in the right direction.

Beta version floating around my head:

Each point gives the player another bit of control.

For instance 1 point lets the player dictate weight but they still have to roll on an appropriate RAT.

Or they can randomly roll weight then select from the appropriate RAT.

Or they can change to another RAT and roll for both weight and specific unit.

Or the can apply up to a Class D refit on what they roll.

Might cut it down to a 5 point maximum trait since I can't think of a way to get to 5 points without it being a bit of a waste.

So if they want a specific Light Mech from their affiliation they'd need to spend 2 on Custom Vehicle(1 for ensuring it will be a Light, 1 to choose from their affiliation's RAT).

Alternate example player Bob wants his character to have an Assault mech that they salvaged in their earlier career but at the time they didn't have the spare parts to get it back to original configuration so the techs worked their magic.  This will cost player Bob 4 Custom Vehicle points.  1 for it to be an Assault Mech, 1 to change affiliation RAT, 1 to choose specific design from that RAT, and 1 to apply up to a Class D refit.

I might go with that.  It just looks more complicated than I think it will be when put into action.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 December 2016, 16:35:19
Reading back through a bit, one way to link Language skills to Negotiation and Interrogation is to limit both of the latter to a maximum of the level of the Language they're conducted in.  Heck, you could apply that to all CHA based skills (Acting, Disguise (if speaking is involved), Interrogation, Leadership, Negotiation, Protocol, Streetwise, and Training).  That could drive your "face" characters to share the load more evenly, and make everyone in a leadership role work harder for it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: PurpleDragon on 30 December 2016, 16:55:16
Reading back through a bit, one way to link Language skills to Negotiation and Interrogation is to limit both of the latter to a maximum of the level of the Language they're conducted in.  Heck, you could apply that to all CHA based skills (Acting, Disguise (if speaking is involved), Interrogation, Leadership, Negotiation, Protocol, Streetwise, and Training).  That could drive your "face" characters to share the load more evenly, and make everyone in a leadership role work harder for it.

This sounds like a good idea and I may implement it in any future games I might run. 
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2016, 23:10:16
It is a tricky thing.  Language to me does cover things like expressing yourself and understanding what is being expressed to you.  Like picking up on a white lie or particular wording to evade answering a question or knowing what inflections to put on your words to inspire your troops and clearly communicate your desired tactics in battle.

Of all the skills talked about Language is certainly a key limiter of what can be accomplished and I'll admit that's where I'm having the most trouble because it just feels like if I limit those skills by the level of Language it becomes dangerously close to being a skill specialization instead.

But the food for thought you're giving me does make me realize they probably do need to still be separate skills because I haven't really properly thought about cases where a character has more than one language and the mess having these skills as specializations instead of stand alone would create and the fact that I'd almost certainly have to house rule having more than one specialization per skill being possible.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 31 December 2016, 07:34:33
If you do go the specialization route, I recommend grouping the languages.  Figuring out another language that at least uses the same alphabet as one you already know is significantly easier, and that difficulty pales in comparison to switching from a non-tonal language to a tonal one.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 January 2017, 03:33:56
Well it is in thinking about stuff like that where I am forcing myself to change my mind a bit and keep the skills as stand alone skills moving forward.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 18 March 2017, 19:09:25
Apologies for the necro, had a thought for LB-X pellets to make it a lower need for rolling locations:

The LB-X shot rolls normally on the cluster table to determine how many pellets hit the target.  From there, you divide it into 4 pt groups, similar to LRMs.  You then roll for the location.

On a Mech the damage is applied in the following order:
1st point) that location
2nd point) 1 section 'inwards' on the damage transfer diagram
3rd point) 1 section 'outwards' of the original hit location
If there are additional pts of damage remaining, go back to the 1st and repeat.

So a standard 4 pt hit on the left torso would apply 1 pt to the Left torso (this is also the only one that would get the potential for a through-armor crit), 1 pt to the center torso, 1 pt to the left arm, and the 4th pt to the left torso.  If it is a hit on the leg, the first point damages the leg, the second hits the center torso, but the third has no 'outside' to go to.  The damage starts back at the top by doing 1 pt of damage to the leg, and the 4th pellet does 1 pt to the center torso.  (IIRC, excess damage to legs goes to the center torso instead of the side torso.)

(You would still get to roll normally on the crit table if the location has no armor.)

You would get fewer crits (approx 1/4), but the faster damage allocation means less need for a box-o-dice.

For vehicles, I'd want to make it where if a location receives 2+ pts of damage from pellet clusters it would roll for crits.  So if the last cluster of pellets is only 1-2 pts, it will not cause a crit roll.  The pellet clusters of 3-4 pellets will cause 1-2 crit rolls.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 March 2017, 19:46:31
No worries.  I have been thinking about ACs a lot lately again so this isn't an entirely unwelcome bit of food for thought for my own recent ponderings.

My latest thoughts though to be honest have been more focused around the ideas of reducing the number of ACs in the game and perhaps giving each remaining AC some individual flavor.

Like the AC-5 gets a bit of range, loses minimum range, loses even more weight, and becomes a bit smaller crit wise but is now the only AC to do it's damage in a single grouping.

AC-10 just loses a bit more weight and a few more crits but rolls on the 5 column of the cluster hit table and applies that many 2 point damage clusters.

AC-20 would follow the pattern established so far and roll on the 20 column of the cluster table and apply that many 1 point damage clusters.

No more AC-2, no more LB-Xs, and no more Ultras.  Might consider some second or even third generation versions that give a bit more range or other benefits but I'm not sure what forms those would take.

Of course it's also started me thinking about other more widespread changes.  But without easy/good ways to implement them I've been keeping from sharing.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 April 2017, 03:47:11
I've actually had something of a revelation.

Not a particularly helpful one but a revelation nonetheless.

I've realized a big part of why I've never been satisfied with the Vehicle(and by extension Custom Vehicle) trait is because there has been no consistent system in the game for determining Vehicles.

Add in I'll admit I'm probably not giving the player enough agency/control over what they wind up with and I think it does explain why these two traits in particular keep nagging at me.

I'm stuck on not being able to consider them stand alone traits, especially now that I'm having thoughts about players being able to borrow/arrange a temporary Vehicle from a Connection.

With inconsistent formatting of the Random Allocation Tables over the years and the distancing from the C-Bill I am wondering if I'll ever be able to figure out a methodology that will work in any era and still give the player some measure of control over what they end up with.

I'm also going to try and focus on my Gestalt rules.  They are a tad complicated right now and I'll admit part of them probably always will be, mostly just to help determine the weight of the Gestalt and having a limit of how much stuff you can put on it.  My main thought is for determining what capabilities it has streamline the XP opportunity costs a bit by making it more consistent/in line with just generating a normal character and streamlining most of the weight and costs by using the equipment lists but as previously noted I need to have some sort of balance mechanic and some inherent opportunity costs both in terms of base XP and weight for even being a Gestalt character.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 16 April 2017, 05:31:22
I think the real problem with the Vehicle trait is the huge disparity between vehicle types.  Equating a Medium BA with a Medium 'Mech (at +4 TP in the table) is more than ridiculous.

Custom Vehicle's problem is the lack detail once you get to 4 TP ("Design own vehicle").  AToW came out after StratOps, so they missed an opportunity to leverage the different classes of refit.  Looked at that way, there's really two different aspects that can be tweaked: one is how you determine the base vehicle, and the other is how extremely you can refit it.  I'd be inclined to include the first aspect in Vehicle proper, and reserve the second for the Custom Vehicle trait.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 April 2017, 18:12:44
I can accept the disparity in Battlearmor's case simply because it is so much more utilitarian in a RPG campaign than the other Vehicle types and the other types get certain advantages of what is "Heavy" for them.  For instance the ability to get a 100 ton ASF for just 600 XP does help in that regard.

Tanks get a similar benefit but yeah I think they do suffer the most, especially since they start adding the consideration of crew after 15 tons but that is part of why I think Vehicle should be a subcategory of my Status trait to help handle that aspect and a few others.

Where Mechs suffer is in the RATs.  Compare say FM:Updates RATS to aToW's.

Still though I've had thoughts about using Custom Vehicle as you suggest and I may actually implement that going forward.  Six classes of refits and six levels of trait does have a nice synergy to it that allows it to be unified more neatly, especially now that the tech bases are getting more intermingled.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 April 2017, 21:05:24
I've managed to give this some thought.

I still have the main underlying issue of no one unified system of random unit determination for Mechs.

Still I've thought about a few options.

Option 1: Modify my current methodology by actually making Custom Vehicle a 10 point sub category of Status and Connections.  A point gives you the ability to determine one roll(mass or choose from RAT), change RAT, or increase refit class by one with the tenth point being allowing the player to completely ground up design their own vehicle.  Also Custom Vehicle cannot be taken without also putting 2 points in Vehicle at minimum.  Don't increase the sub-category points any and let the disparity in Vehicle types be for the sake of keeping things from being bogged down in too much detail with the bonus of with the way I'm working things you're always getting some side benefits at least with the added consideration of Vehicle does a lot to make up for not having as much access to gear, as much money, as skilled underlings, or as much access to information.

Option 2: Forget trying to make a unifying random vehicle system for Battletech and just build a system for my AU.  I had actually somewhat made a methodology for this at one point and since it's my AU and I haven't completely built RATs for it yet, I really need to beef up some unit selections for certain eras.  Of course I'm also seriously considering re-doing almost the entirety of my AU design archive again anyway so there is that.

Option 3: See what I can do with the various RATs in MegaMek/MekHQ and adapt my methodology to work with those.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 April 2017, 06:58:20
Have you considered Xotl's RATs?  They're really amazing for the eras he's done so far...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 April 2017, 12:18:08
Yes but you've pointed out their primary problem, they only cover a few eras.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 June 2017, 01:01:21
After much deliberation I have decided on something of a compromise.

Vehicle and Custom Vehicle will be 5 point sub-categories of my Status and Connections traits.

Vehicle mass will be determined as per my revised FM:Mercs methodology.  Roll 2d6 and add the Vehicle trait to the roll and get the mass from the appropriate cell on the table.  So two points ensures you are not dispossessed.  For RATs that use different ratings or modifiers it'll have to be mostly up to the GM to decide how they want to handle that themselves but for me and at my table I'm going to look to the character's Reputation traits and what kind of Status trait they have, especially if they have more than one Status.

For Custom Vehicle, well this gets a bit more complicated.  You must invest at least two points in Vehicle before you can invest in Custom Vehicle.  As per normal you can spend one to change which RAT you roll on for your random mech or select from your faction's RAT.  Also as per normal to not roll on this new table requires a second point spent on Custom Vehicle.  You may spend a point to increase refit by one category(Field, Maintenance, Factory).  One point will let you select the mass of the mech without having to roll.  Or you can just spend all 5 to custom design a new unit but it will automatically have the Prototype design quirk.

Now the only thing I feel I have to hash out is the points to customize the sub-categories of Status and Connections because Vehicle oriented characters are still going to be in a bit of a bind there.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 17 June 2017, 01:23:19
So if I understand your system, I can:

Spend two points on Vehicle so I can spend points on Custom Vehicle
Spend a point in Custom Vehicle to choose my tonnage
Spend a point in Custom Vehicle to choose my RAT
Spend a point in Custom Vehicle to choose my result on that RAT

So, five points total to land any canon 'mech or variant listed on a RAT somewhere?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 June 2017, 01:42:26
Yup.

Since they are a sub-category of my Status and Connections traits you can currently do that for as little as 400 XP in any Status with a left over point you could put into having a crew/support staff(People), gear(Wealth or Equipped), or having reliable military intelligence(Info) or 200 XP in Connections with no left over points.

So not a bad deal at all.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 17 June 2017, 01:48:36
Interesting!  My only reservation is that would seem to put a Super Stinger on par with a Marauder II, points-wise.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 June 2017, 02:05:47
Yeah that is a rather large part of why I'v had so much trouble with this issue.

The only thing I can think of is to require more points of Vehicle in such a situation.  2 gets a Light, 3 a Medium, 4 a Heavy, 5 an Assault.

That might not be too unreasonable.  600 XP in Status to get an Assault that way or 400 XP in Connections and both would have left over points to invest in other stuff.

I think I might do that.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 June 2017, 02:43:40
Updated the master document(link in the first post of this thread).

-Updated the methodology of Vehcile and Custom Vehicle.
-Fixed the section that had Negotiation and Interrogation as skill specializations of Language to indicate they are still stand alone skills but their ranks/attribute bonuses are capped by the character's Language skill that they are using these skills in.
-Added Training to the list of skills to be capped by Language.
-Cleaned up some redundant language and made a few things clearer in the AU specific section.

Now in consideration for future revisions:
-Adding a proviso to Acting that using that skill with a vocal component is also likewise limited by the Language skill the character wishes to use with aforementioned vocal component.
-Perhaps as an AU specific revision altering Precision Ammunition to offset all Movement modifier types to the maximum of 2 to make it more useful a choice against big slow targets where you almost never get the benefit otherwise.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 21 June 2017, 20:49:45
Is your Dropship needing more bang?  Are Fire Control systems taking up too much room?  Well try the new Short Range Naval missiles, fired from cluster launchers:

Short-range Naval Missiles (twin-launcher):
Heat: 20
Damage: 2/*
Range: 1-3/4-6/7-9
Tons: 10
Criticals: 10
Shots/ton: 6

(* 2 Capital pts of damage per missile, number of missiles hitting is determined by rolling on cluster table.  Each still counts as a single missile for AMS purposes, similar to Thunderbolt missiles.)

(Why yes, all I did was take the SRM-2, change it to have 120 1-pt missiles per ton, increase everything but range by 10*, and put it here)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 July 2017, 02:02:43
New design quirk under consideration:

Additional Grousers/Tire Pressure Adjustments
Tracked and Wheeled Vehicles only
1 point positive Design Quirk

Unit with this option receives a -1 TN modifier to bogging down.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 August 2017, 15:58:55
Additional new quirk under consideration:

Magnetic Grip Assists
Available to all non-omni non-flying units
1 point positive quirk

Allows Battle Armor to mount a unit as if equipped with MagClamps.  Reduces speed as per external cargo rules using abstract weight rules(1 ton per suit) unless detailed Battle Armor weight rules are in play.  In such a case round up to the nearest half ton if necessary to determine speed reduction.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 18 August 2017, 16:24:59
I also re-attacked my cargo carrying question up in the rules section in light of the conversation in General Discussion.  We'll see how that goes.  You may not need the quirk...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 August 2017, 18:23:32
We will see.

Overall Battle Armor and how they are currently handled and the resulting discussions are giving me a lot to think about.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2017, 02:14:59
So I've been having a fairly ambitious thought or two about overhauling the Property trait.

Each point of Property lets the player choose a primary income type.  Each type adds a modifier to the Administration roll(which I am personally inclined to make them do monthly instead of yearly).  Each also adds a modifier to a random event table(might make one for each primary type of income).  I also want to have each provide some sort of perk and I even want some to work together to be even more powerful.  I am also thinking of adding ways to give more effective Property points but they come with certain downsides but do come with something interesting.

So far I've got:

Investments: Still figuring out exactly how I want to work this but I've always been okay with the idea of Property representing investment portfolios and such.

Residential: With plenty of room for people to spread out and housing being so cheap in an interstellar society you're never going to get rich being a land lord.  Thinking as a perk each time you select this you can offer to put up one of your fellow PCs for free without hurting your bottom line and to represent police and garrison 1 foot platoon of Rifle Infantry per point invested.

Commercial: Eateries, shopping centers, transport dealerships, warehouses/shipping, and transportation services.  While I am not super inclined to make the players choose a specific type I might reward them with greater value of goods/services that they can use for themselves without penalty.  Perhaps even allowing PCs to use storage space to house their Vehicles but at limited types.  I'm thinking as far as StratOps maintenance/repair/customization modifiers limit to Transport Bay for Support Units and MFB for all others.

Agricultural: I'm thinking this should be mostly used as a way to bolster Residential in particular but to give it stand alone value I am thinking it should provide plenty of storage space and thus probably use the same perk as Commercial for housing player Vehicles.

Mining: I am tempted to have Mining not play nice with Agricultural on the same property, especially with how useful it would be for the more industrial stuff I am contemplating for the rest of the major income sources.

Light Industrial(Civilian): I am debating about exactly how focused I want this to be and exactly what kind of mechanics I want to put in place for having the trifecta of Residential, Mining, and Industrial.  Might allow for Maintenance for Support Vehicles for StratOps modifiers/conditions.

Light Industrial(Military): I know I want this to be fairly specific.  I am also thinking of limiting to small arms, support weapons, and maybe some of the more common options like armor and heat sinks.  Again I want to have modifiers for having Residential, Mining, and Industrial working together here.

Heavy Industrial(Civilian): Again should be somewhat specific in what it produces but I am pretty inclined it should as a perk allow Class F refits of Industrial/Workmechs or Support Vehicles but need a certain amount invested before that is possible.  Still working on mechanics for output that the owner can nab for themselves without penalty.

Heavy Industrial(Military): I think you get the picture here as well.

Some other modifiers I am thinking of adding in:

Mobile: The player's property can be relocated.  Reduces physical risk but also reduces profits.  GMs highly encouraged to not let players combine with Investments, especially if all a player's Property is all Investments.

Border Proximity: Increases the physical danger to the player's Property but also increases the probability of military assistance from the player's faction.  Not exactly sure how to work the mechanics on this yet.

R&D Lab: Primarily intend this as a way to allow players to for sure have a Class F refit option but make the player's property more prone to physical danger.

Military Facilities: Also still working this out but I am thinking cheaper ways to get repair/refit facilities, bunkers, and additional garrison forces.

A lot to think about and finish working out.  I do want to try and get some simplification going because this is already getting a bit out of hand and has a huge probability of getting even more complicated and detailed.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 November 2017, 06:42:13
Interesting idea!  I'd think Commercial would have the same benefit as Residential, though... Business owners like to have police around too.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2017, 13:20:44
Yeah I am thinking about garrisons for all of them currently and how to upgrade them.  I am thinking all except Investment get the default Rifle Foot platoon per Property point and use Military Facilities or Light Industrial(Military) to upgrade them.  Maybe a sliding scale as well because 10 platoons of Rifle Foot seems a bit low to protect a Property 10.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 November 2017, 13:59:35
Sounds reasonable.  Maybe a squad at one point, a platoon at two, company at three...  A battalion at four seems a bit too much, though...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2017, 14:32:25
It is mostly establishing what would be reasonable at this point for the maximum garrison.  I am actually inclined to have the maximum be a mixed Battalion for Property 10.  Which would work out pretty close to one platoon/lance per Property point.

To deal with some of the odd ball organizational schemes out there(Taurians and their Vehicle Battalions and 4 mech Companies to a Battalion, Comstar/Word of Blake, and I'm probably missing another where Property is possible) to keep it simple I'll just go for the more generic/standard organization and chalk up any differences as this is what the player can put together for the defense of their Property and conforming to their faction's organizational scheme be damned.

Which brings me back to having to deal with certain environmental modifiers next.  I have been wanting to eliminate as many modifiers from the Property Administration table as possible by building them into the primary income types.  Like if you have large Residential tracts and Agricultural tracts on your Property then you have a reasonable source of water but I may have to keep them around and figure out ways to make why you'd want water supply troubles to represent the dark days of the Succession Wars or more frontier like conditions.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 November 2017, 14:52:45
Makes sense... I'll be interested to see what you come up with.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2017, 17:18:42
I could have sworn there were modifiers to the Property Administration roll for things like abnormal gravity or atmosphere composition/pressure.

There are not.

So now I am considering how many of these elements really should impact a player's Property.

I am inclined to think gravity should if it is sufficiently high or low as either way it creates greater health care strains and takes specialized equipment to move bulk goods and in the event of a scenario where the player or even group have to defend the property it can have a considerable impact.  I'll have to look at at Tactical Operations to nail down these mechanics.

Likewise if the climate is overly hot or cold it can demand specialty gear with health concerns and impact combat.

Atmosphere composition and pressure is the trickiest for me.  There are a few combinations of these factors that can make human habitation possible but not easy.  Main issue is frankly how many designs for conventional vehicles do not have environmental sealing and thus could create issues for garrison forces and combat.  There would also be limits on what is reasonable.

The last factor I am thinking about is where the Property is on the interstellar map.  Being near a border would increase odds of being attacked but would also increase the combat experience of garrison forces from fighting off the raids and invasions.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 November 2017, 01:21:54
Making progress.

Still need to work out the random event table.

Except for Investment all Primary Incomes come with a Green Foot Rifle Platoon for garrison.

When rolling for Property Administration add an additional modifier for the character's current Edge as determined by the Link Attributes modifier table.  Also add this modifier to the random event.  Unless noted otherwise the Primary Income's Property Administration roll and any MoS or MoF are also added to the event roll.

Investment
Property Administration roll modifier: -4
Specials: Player may elect to tie Investment with other Primary Income types for additional bonuses specific to that Primary Income type and does not add Property Administration modifier to event roll.

Residential
Property Administration roll modifier: -3
Specials: Does not add Property Administration modifier to event roll if there is a different Primary Income type in the same Property.  May house one character for free at Base Quarters quality per Residential Primary Income selected without penalty.  -1 to Property Administration roll and event roll per additional character housed beyond this limit or per increased housing quality for each Investment the player ties to the Residential Primary Income selected.

Commercial
Property Administration roll modifier: -2
Specials: Player may take 10 C-bills of goods or services per Commercial Property Primary Income selected to the limits of their Equipped sub-trait of the Status trait their Property is tied to.  Each Investment increases the C-bill limit by 10.

Agricultural
Property Administration roll modifier: -1
Specials: Does not apply Property Administration roll to event roll if there is also a Residential, Commercial, or Light Industrial Civilian on the same Property.  Provides one Transport Bay for a Support or Civilian unit and one MFB bay for a military unit.

Mining
Property Administration roll modifier: 0
Specials: If there is a Industrial Primary Income on the same Property increase C-bill limits by a factor of 10 and Availability limits of production by one letter code per Mining Primary Income.

Light Industrial Civilian
Property Administration roll modifier: +1
Specials: Select a reasonably specific civilian good(communicator, noteputer, or trivid sets) and the player may collect 100 C-bills worth of that good per month.  Availability, Legality, and Technology codes all start at A.  Increase one of the codes by one letter for each Connection trait point or Reputation Trait point the player has.

Light Industrial Military
Property Administration roll modifier: +2
Specials: Choose a reasonably specific military good(Autorifles, Jumppacks, Motorized Infantry)and the player may collect 100 C-bills worth of that good per month.  Availability, Legality, and Technology codes all start at A.  Increase one of the codes by one letter for each Connection trait point or Reputation Trait point the player has.  Investment increases C-bill value by 50.

Heavy Industrial Civilian
Property Administration roll modifier: +3
Specials: May produce Civilian Workmechs and Support Vehicles(Player's choice).  If an Investment is tied to this Primary Income type the player may perform a Class F refit.  and the player may collect 1000 C-bills worth of that good per month.  Availability, Legality, and Technology codes all start at A.  Increase one of the codes by one letter for each Connection trait point or Reputation Trait point the player has.  Investment increases C-bill value by 500.


Heavy Industrial Military
Property Administration roll modifier: +4
Specials: May produce a particular component or heavy weapon.  If an Investment is tied to this Primary Income type the player may perform a Class F refit.  and the player may collect 1500 C-bills worth of that good per month.  Availability, Legality, and Technology codes all start at A.  Increase one of the codes by one letter for each Connection trait point or Reputation Trait point the player has.  Investment increases C-bill value by 750.

Abnormal Gravity
Cost: -1 per .2g above/below normal.  Highly recommended to not exceed -5.
Modifier to Property Administration roll: -1 per .2g above/below normal.
Effects:  See Tactical Operations.  I'll have to recheck a few books to see if there is a SPA or other options that I can give the garrison to reflect the fact that they are trained and used to fighting in these conditions.

Atmosphere
Cost: -1, -2, -3
Modifier to Property Administration roll: Equal to grade of modifier selected.
Effects: -1 represents needing breathers, -2 represents full environment suits but atmosphere still present or underwater settlements, -3 is full on vacuum.  Automatically upgrades any Infantry as needed for such extreme environments as long as they remain Infantry.

External Heat Adjustment
Cost: +1 for every extra heat dissipated -1 for every extra heat generated.
Modifier to Property Administration roll: -1 per heat point, either dissipated or generated, due to needing specialized gear and adverse working conditions.
Effects:  Infantry are again upgraded as necessary to cope with the environment.

Government Contracts
Cost: 1
Effects: Increase the Legality of an Industrial Primary Income type by one letter code.

Military Facility(Light Vehicle)
Cost: +1
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Light Vehicle Lance

Military Facility(Medium Vehicle)
Cost: +2
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Medium Vehicle Lance

Military Facility(Light Mech)
Cost: +2
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Light Mech Lance

Military Facility(Light ASF)
Cost: +2
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Light ASF Lance

Military Facility(Heavy Vehicle)
Cost: +3
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Heavy Vehicle Lance

Military Facility(Medium Mech)
Cost: +3
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Medium Mech Lance

Military Facility(Medium ASF)
Cost: +3
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Medium ASF Lance

Military Facility(Heavy Mech)
Cost: +4
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Heavy Mech Lance

Military Facility(Heavy ASF)
Cost: +4
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with a Heavy ASF Lance

Military Facility(Assault Mech)
Cost: +5
Effects: May replace one Garrison Rifle Foot Platoon with an Assault Mech Lance

Mobile
Cost: +1 per Property point
Modifier to Property Administration roll: -1; automatic critical fail reducing Property by 1 when re-located to a minimum of 1 for the next year or a MoS of 10 is rolled.  Whichever happens first.
Effects: This is mostly to give the player a way to have their Property be a Space Station or other such large complex.

Tech Center
Cost: 1
Effect: Increase Technology of one Industrial Primary Income by one letter code.

Volatile Location, lesser
Cost: -1 per Property point
Modifier to Property Administration roll: -1
Effects: Upgrades one garrison platoon/lance from Green to Regular per 2 Property points.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 November 2017, 08:14:39
Progress indeed!  Do you intend to enforce a tree of some kind to prevent characters from loading up with Heavy Industrial Military?  Also, I'd recommend increasing the effect of the Tech Center, as you can get the same benefit and more by spending that trait point in more Connections or Reputation.

Finally, it looks like a line was dropped from Residential (the last sentence ends in the middle).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 November 2017, 14:10:12
Oops.  Finished the Residential note.

The main thing that I think will keep Heavy Industrial Military from getting out of hand is even if you stack up all 10 selections that is only 15,000 C-Bills worth of stuff.  That won't be enough to actually get much hardware.  So even if the players want to do a lot of Class F refits they'll have to acquire most of the stuff through other means.  I also intend to rig the event roll to make this the most likely to be under the most physical threat.  Which means I may have to rework a couple Primary Income types and how their event roll modifiers work.

Though looking at it I may also have to increase the value of Investment on a few to make it worth combining.

As far as the Tech Center and Connections and Reputation I may re-work that so that Connections and Reputation can only work for one Industrial Primary Income.

I'll have to think on that a bit on how exactly to execute it because I do want to reward a Property owner for having a Good Reputation and having the right Connections but as you point out it does make some of the other selections a little less than worth taking as it stands.

I also forgot to do Resource Shortfall and Volatile Location Greater.  I'll circle back to those as I sort some of this out.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 November 2017, 16:34:18
I'm still not clear what that last sentence in Residential is supposed to mean:

"Each Investment the player ties to the Residential Primary Income selected." ???
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 November 2017, 17:14:58
Oy.  One more try.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 November 2017, 17:26:31
Ah, it was supposed to be part of the previous sentence... thanks!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 12 November 2017, 01:44:35
Okay I am starting to realize I've not been doing myself a lot of favors in how to handle the Propert Administration and event rolls.  So I may have to re-think those modifiers as well.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 November 2017, 05:01:15
I'm finding myself considering two possibilities.

1: Instead of selecting a Primary Income type for each individual rank of Property just re-work it all so that you have that one Primary Income type for all your Property.

2: Keep going down this rabbit hole of details and record keeping that will almost certainly result in needing separate event tables for each Primary Income type and figuring out modifiers for how various Primary Income types interact that while it sounds actually more interesting and perhaps even useful for some "world building" that can lead to some great game/plot hooks to help drive adventures might be just a bit too much for most people.

I'll admit it is a tough call for me to actually decide which way to go.

Option 1 is simpler but I think might find itself a little lacking in frame works to help drive a campaign centering around player(s) with Property but said simplicity can be a lot easier on players and GMs even if it doesn't give as good frameworks.

Option 2 will take a fair bit more work to set up, both in me working out the mechanics and for the eventual player(s) to set up their Property, but I think it might not actually be that hard to keep it simple enough to upkeep once the initial work is done to be worth the extra work.

Maybe I'll try and work on both ways with it so that GMs and players can decide for themselves.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 19 November 2017, 08:10:18
I like the both idea, but would add that the second should easily reduce to the first.  I think I've said it elsewhere, but my ultimate goal is to have consistency between all levels of abstraction/scale in the game.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 19 November 2017, 14:02:05
Quick thought about armor.  We have current armor that can put 2 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (3 per pt on the head), and hardened armor, where it can put effectively 4 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (forgot if the head gets 18).

What about a semi-hardened, and a 'foamed' type of armor, where semi-hardened allows putting 3 pts of armor per pt of internal structure, and 'foamed' armor is designed around low-weight (but high-volume materials) that can only get 1 pt of armor per pt of internal structure?  Semi-hardened might not get the 1 pt penalty to running, but would only get 4-5 pts of armor per pt of internal structure for the head, while foamed armor might take 1 less pt of damage from physical and energy attacks due to the armor's false appearance, and the foaming effect ablating energy weapons fire better?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 November 2017, 14:11:56
I like the both idea, but would add that the second should easily reduce to the first.  I think I've said it elsewhere, but my ultimate goal is to have consistency between all levels of abstraction/scale in the game.

*nod*

That may be the tough part, keeping it scalable so that you can go between one or the other without too much trouble.

Quick thought about armor.  We have current armor that can put 2 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (3 per pt on the head), and hardened armor, where it can put effectively 4 pts of armor per pt of internal structure (forgot if the head gets 18).

What about a semi-hardened, and a 'foamed' type of armor, where semi-hardened allows putting 3 pts of armor per pt of internal structure, and 'foamed' armor is designed around low-weight (but high-volume materials) that can only get 1 pt of armor per pt of internal structure?  Semi-hardened might not get the 1 pt penalty to running, but would only get 4-5 pts of armor per pt of internal structure for the head, while foamed armor might take 1 less pt of damage from physical and energy attacks due to the armor's false appearance, and the foaming effect ablating energy weapons fire better?

Personally I am not super inclined to add more hardware to the list for combat units.  Heck I am actually currently considering brutally reducing it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 November 2017, 14:26:13
To sort out the modifiers and mechanics for detailed Property/Primary Income types it would probably be good if I would be consistent on what I wanted for the event roll.

So I think roll low on the event table should be bad would be easier to make consistent and require the fewest revisions.

Investment is causing me some trouble still.  I really like the idea that a player's Property doesn't need to be so tangible and could be a stock portfolio instead and I think it would make a decent way to differentiate a land lord with little to no say on how the Primary Income types on their Property operate and someone who is in an actual position of power.  Making that work though may be a bit much and in thinking about it maybe I should just assume Property also means a certain amount of direct control so splitting off Investment into it's own thing may be the wiser move.

Which could be part of the answer for how to do both a simple and detailed Property.  Investment could be the simple option that just gives you a good chunk of change while Property is the detailed mess that you have to define.

I think I actually like that idea.  May take a bit to refine into mechanics but I think it'll be a very useful way to add some built in hooks for GMs and players to make a campaign focusing around Property more interesting and a bit easier to run if a little more laborious to setup.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 23 November 2017, 00:51:19
Sorry for the delay... it's been a busy week already, and it isn't over.  I think you're on the right track with the Investment vs. Property idea... I look forward to seeing how you refine it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 November 2017, 01:33:38
*nod*

I already have the basics.  I do want Investment to be pretty hard to make a large chunk of money on as either Battletech proper or my AU setting it is an interstellar society we're talking about and some raid or invasion on the far side of the player's faction from where the company HQ is can cause ripples and a massive drop in investor confidence.  Add in HPG delays and it gets really tough.  Which I think provides good incentive to go for the more detailed version instead.

I am also working out the basics to make diversifying the Primary Income types worth more.

With the holidays I expect I won't have anything concrete to post for a while though.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 December 2017, 00:42:57
Been making progress while on vacation with the family.

Got most of the Primary Income types finished.  Might have to tweak the Industrial stuff a bit more but decided to mostly leave it up to GM/Player agreement to flush out the production.

Should have something new to post in a few days.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 December 2017, 00:36:41
So I have hit a new wrinkle.

I'll have to meander a bit to explain it so try and bear with me.

Liam's Ghost suggested that I look at some of the expanded Property information in the Companion.  What I found there led me to check out how much it costs to keep a unit operational.

Now to bring it all together to show what the wrinkle is.

Property 10 nets with no MoS or MoF 15,000,000 C-Bills in personal profit and this is a small moon or a group of continents in rough scope.

This is 5% of the Property's total budget though.  So working backwards that is a total budget of 300,000,000 C-bills.  Checking the Companion 20% of that is to support the defenses/garrison.  So that works out to 60,000,000 a year.  So when I checked Campaign operations the example reinforced mixed regiment was costing less than 1,000,000 C-bills a month.  Multiplying that by 12 to get annual costs a Property 10 can then easily support 5 combat vehicle Regiments with little trouble.

Where I am having difficulty is in reconciling these numbers and how to have Property have any sane correlation with what world it is on while not creating an implication of regiments of garrison troops that would make invasion all but impossible.

I am really starting to think Property may be one of those traits best reserved for only particular campaigns and not allowed for most PCs.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 05 December 2017, 05:24:23
Five regiments isn't so bad once you spread them out across the holding, or try to pay for lift assets to enable to them to get to whatever random piece gets raided before the raiders leave.  That's also for 10 points of Property, so I don't think that's necessarily out of line.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 05 December 2017, 05:58:48
It mostly bothers me in the implications of how much militia there is in a setting where we're told Battalions on down to Companies on rare occasion have captured planets and pirate bands would have trouble even raiding that kind of force without getting bogged down in a fight they really shouldn't win.

Maybe when I do more research on how much it costs to keep base facilities operational to house these forces it might not be so bad in terms of implications.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 December 2017, 17:50:13
Still trying to nail down the upkeep for the base facilities themselves but in looking at the Property trait itself and how much it pays out each year I am having some ideas about how to reconcile some of this.

1. The chart just needs reworked to make things a bit more sensible and make the scaling a bit more even.  Property 5 you're looking at a yearly budget of 400,000 for your defenses.  That would not be able to support some of the Mech Companies I run in MekHQ as they can run 100k+ a month.

2. With the above in mind Property may have to be divorced from square kilometers approximations entirely.  Then I can use some of the location/Property Quirks to help handle that Property 10 means different things if it is on Anywhere versus New Sytris.

3. Instead of trying to establish base line forces maybe I should just embrace the budget aspect and maybe add some modifiers for the force generation rules to help ensure Mechs, ASFs, Dropships, and Jumpships are more difficult to get with Jumpships being all but impossible.  Which does mean figuring out how much it does cost to keep the actual facilities up and running.  This would also somewhat solve something I've been keeping in mind but wasn't sure how to deal with.  Certain environmental factors allow for human habitation but require specially modified units to be part of the garrison.  By allowing the player to use slightly modified force building rules it simplifies some of that.

With that established I need to dig out my jumpdrive again that has my latest revisions on it and get back to work on hashing this out.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 December 2017, 18:52:07
Well I have been over the operating costs section in Campaign Operations and there is nothing that actually considers buildings.

I can extrapolate some numbers.  I am thinking in terms of keeping a building(going hex by hex as individual building even if it is one complex) in good shape could cost CF*levels*0.01*5000 in materials needed to keep the building in good condition.

So a one hex one level CF 150 bunker to give your PBI garrison a place to fight from would cost 7,500 C-bills a month.

Even with where I'm thinking of adjusting Property 1's income that won't let you have any NPC PBIs for your garrison but I still like the calculation enough that until I complete some Infantry upkeep calculations I may keep it as that is a pretty substantial building.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 December 2017, 02:11:42
Property 1 is small enough that I think it's OK if it won't support a dedicated security force.  That said, I'd think a squad of infantry should cost less than 80,000 C-Bills a year... My search-fu is weak at the moment, or I could confirm that...

EDIT: Found it (finally)... a squad of seven troopers would cost 63,000 per year in salaries, plus 10,000 in annual "spares" (???).  That would leave 7,000 more C-Bills for other incidental costs, so yes, even Property 1 could support a minimal security force.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 December 2017, 06:36:18
*nod*

I do kind of like the idea of you can choose between having a bunker that you and your fellow PCs can use for defending the Property or having a security force to do it for you for Property 1.

Only real problem I am still having is finding a cost calculation for buildings in the first place.  I still have to go through Campaign Operations a bit more to see what it offers for determining upfront costs of buildings.  Though it wouldn't surprise me if it was in Interstellar Operations.

If there is no upfront C-Bill cost then well I just might have to make something up.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 December 2017, 07:53:24
I did come across some "base construction" rules in there... let me find them again...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 December 2017, 08:39:23
Hmmm... the rules there (pages 53-55) provide time lines, but refer to the construction rules in TacOps for costs (page 418).  CampOps doesn't provide specific operating costs for buildings, but you might be able to assume they look something like vehicles.  The trick then becomes figuring out how building maintenance should be divided between "Defense" (20%) and "Infrastructure" (15%).

Also, in looking that part up, I see the infantry squad I mentioned previously would only consume 100 C-Bills per year of spare parts (1% of the 1 ton their compartment would weigh).  That's much more reasonable.  With that money returned to the kitty, you could probably afford a dedicated tech (armorer) for the squad.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 December 2017, 13:04:19
I was trying to decide what should be infrastructure and what should be defense myself.

Ultimately I decided that buildings built for the express purpose of defending the Property or otherwise expressly used by the garrison should count against the Defense budget.

And dang I missed 418 in TacOps.

As far as upkeep I do think buildings would be the cheapest as they never go anywhere.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 December 2017, 13:39:22
Makes sense... now to nail down what you want upkeep to cost.  Vehicles annually pay 8,000 per ton of required support, which is figured off of 0.1% of the mass of the vehicle itself (page 24).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 December 2017, 15:11:47
I think using the basis for space stations would be more appropriate but with a lower base cost(hence my CF*levels*0.01*5000 equation for determining upkeep) as space stations are tons of unit*0.01*15000.

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 December 2017, 15:18:46
The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 10 December 2017, 16:01:06
2. With the above in mind Property may have to be divorced from square kilometers approximations entirely.  Then I can use some of the location/Property Quirks to help handle that Property 10 means different things if it is on Anywhere versus New Sytris.

Agree on dumping the land area requirement.  You could have a situation where there is a (macguffin) mine producing several billion per year, but only take up a couple square miles.  Instead of just a Knight/Count being responsible for it due to area, I'd expect a duke to have some sort of security nearby due to the value of the mine.

It means you can have a duke responsible for five systems in the Periphery region that are all barely inhabitable, and just have a few mining operations on them.  Similarly, a duke could be responsible for growing food on New Syrtis that takes up a region the size of Australia, but the food makes enough money for that.  Both earn roughly the same income per year, but one of the two duchies is much smaller (but more valuable due to proximity to the ruling family and ease of habitation).

hat could be referred to as 'Income', while Property might just be land.  The worse off the place, the more square kilometers you get.  You also have to patrol the area to make sure pirates don't set up shop, squatters don't claim it, illegal miners don't go for the good stuff, your bases are kept stocked so they can keep an eye on the system, rogue asteroids are gathered and put into useful orbits (or just diverted), some sort of dedicated transportation is set up (or sufficient medical capability is located there).  Property might be cheap, but you wind up having far too much to deal with once it gets large enough.  The nice part is the GM can us the Property 'advantage' to do stories/missions.  PCs might want to upgrade the region, set up a refining station for the local miners (which means they need a semi-custom station/dropship), or even build a ground colony.  All very expensive and taking a long time to pay off, and unless you have good security someone else is going to want to grab it.


The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.

Wish they would make the formulas easier:
CF*Levels*0.5
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 December 2017, 19:26:50
Agree on dumping the land area requirement.  You could have a situation where there is a (macguffin) mine producing several billion per year, but only take up a couple square miles.  Instead of just a Knight/Count being responsible for it due to area, I'd expect a duke to have some sort of security nearby due to the value of the mine.

It means you can have a duke responsible for five systems in the Periphery region that are all barely inhabitable, and just have a few mining operations on them.  Similarly, a duke could be responsible for growing food on New Syrtis that takes up a region the size of Australia, but the food makes enough money for that.  Both earn roughly the same income per year, but one of the two duchies is much smaller (but more valuable due to proximity to the ruling family and ease of habitation).

hat could be referred to as 'Income', while Property might just be land.  The worse off the place, the more square kilometers you get.  You also have to patrol the area to make sure pirates don't set up shop, squatters don't claim it, illegal miners don't go for the good stuff, your bases are kept stocked so they can keep an eye on the system, rogue asteroids are gathered and put into useful orbits (or just diverted), some sort of dedicated transportation is set up (or sufficient medical capability is located there).  Property might be cheap, but you wind up having far too much to deal with once it gets large enough.  The nice part is the GM can us the Property 'advantage' to do stories/missions.  PCs might want to upgrade the region, set up a refining station for the local miners (which means they need a semi-custom station/dropship), or even build a ground colony.  All very expensive and taking a long time to pay off, and unless you have good security someone else is going to want to grab it.


Wish they would make the formulas easier:
CF*Levels*0.5

*nod*

The only way to make Property workable for a setting as varied as Battletech is to make the trait represent more of the raw value of the Property rather than how much you have.

I also do believe if a PC is going to have Property it should feature in the campaign.

The formula on page 24 uses 0.01%, not 0.01, so your formula should be: CF*Levels*0.0001*5,000.

That is a good point and does raise a question which kind of dovetails into a bunch of other things I've been wrestling with.

The main one is exactly where do I draw some lines for what is workable as a Property.  Personally I don't have a problem with it being some orbiting space complex as an option but then that creates all sorts of issues about how to handle budget and automatically limiting force compositions based on what actual extreme environment is present and we do do have a pretty wide variety present in Battletech.

All in all it is becoming a bit of a mess and I'm becoming less and less sure how to fix some of the primary short comings of how the existing Property trait works now.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 00:34:04
Okay I have made some progress wrestling with this particular beast.

As much as I wouldd love to allow Property to be a Space Station/Complex or even potentially a Dropship I think I have to prohibit all those options as well as prohibit any options that require Extreme Environment Infantry/Units.  I will have to look into the bounds of where all those are then start cobbling some rules together.

Likewise I am finding I am going to have to scrap the idea of detailed Primary Income types on a player's Property and just make the GM and player hash it out with some help from what I have been calling Property Quirks.

So like on the Property Administration table there is that -2 to Property Administration roll for being on the Clan border.  I'm going to expand on the first set of modifiers and re-write some to become quirks and even the negative ones will provide some incentives for taking them by themselves.

As an example On Clan Border becomes within 30 light years of a hostile power(Advanced) and while it still provides the -2 to the Property Administration roll it will also give some benefits like letting some of your defense forces equip salvaged gear and your techs being more used to working on it.

Once I get the research done I should have most of the quirks worked out already or will have very soon.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 02:02:59
Progress is progress!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 03:21:49
So I've gone down another rabbit hole and gotten distracted again but it still ties into re-working Property.

So going by page 24 of Campaign Operations a squad of Regular Infantry is going to cost 5,500 C-bills in salaries(1 squad leader at Rank 4 getting a ~1/3 bonus, 6 guys who don't get Rank salary bonuses) with 100 C-bills of upkeep for their gear(since Infantry Compartments don't come in 0.25 ton increments as far as I can tell and there seems to be no Infantry ammunition usage rates).

Where does this leave me though as that doesn't seem so bad.

So to see if you could maybe get some sort of combat vehicle I start working through some calculations to see if I can start setting a starting budget per point of Property.

A Savanah Master is about all you could keep running(4,000 C-Bills in upkeep plus salaries of the suicidal bastard driver and tech team working out to 8,000 exactly if there are no Rank bonuses).

End result is this leaves me another mess to basically make up my mind about because the numbers at my disposal are not being helpful as the most expensive Infantry squad I can find in MegaMek is still less than 10,000 C-bills and making a Savanah Master affordable for Property 1 means having enough starting budget for a whole Platoon but not enough steady income to keep them up and running.

Progress is progress!

Yeah the Property Quirks are falling into place pretty nicely in my head for the oens that I don't need to research.

As a quick note I am thinking for Garrison creation to have certain limitations like maximum starting skill is Regular as well as Mechs, ASFs, Small Craft, and Dropships take extra modifiers to acquire in the force creation rules once I figure out starting budgets.

All quirks unless otherwise specified can only be taken once and will mention when another quirk is incompatible.

I have also determined you start at 0 so you must take some sort of negative quirk to get a positive quirk.

since my house rules require a Status equal to any Property I am doing away with the Title modifiers but have decided to replace them with the Reputation of the character but just to be clear the player's current edge will only be used on the Property Event table roll with the MoF/MoS of their Property Administration roll which is where you can get the Scandal, Raid, Invasion, and Natural Disaster events which I will have those modifiers carry over to future Property Administration rolls for a year unless a quirk modifies this or the result of an Invasion or Raid renders the point moot.  After all if the player dies defending their Property from invasion doesn't really matter anymore does it?

I will be keeping the separate Investment trait with it's -4 Administration roll modifier with it's own special event table.

So far I have:

Border World(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power more technologically advanced than your faction(represent some of the other eras like Age of War where the Terran Hegemony were being mean to their neighbors or later Clan Eras))
Cost: -2
Mechanics: Player takes a -2 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income but due to the raids and repelled invasions their techs do not take any repair/salvage modifiers for unfamiliar technology and may equip a weapon or piece of equipment available to this enemy power not available to your faction on one garrison unit per point of Property and any such equipped units may exceed the normal average skill rating of Regular and start at Veteran.
Special: To represent less actively hostile periods reduce cost to -1 and lose the ability to mount salvaged gear on garrison units but may still increase the average skill rating as described.  This quirk can be taken up to three times by GM permission depending on era.

Border World, Lesser(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power on the same tech base or lower than yours)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  Due to the frequent raids at the start of the game campaign your garrison may have one unit per rank of Property exceed the normal starting average experience cap of Regular to a maximum of Veteran.
Special: The best count I can come up with is 5 times this quirk may be taken.

Remote(more than 30 Light Years from the closest regional administrative center)
Cost: -1
Mechanics Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  The lack of interference and oversight from their superiors allows the player to be more free in setting their own local laws.  Player may reduce Black Market costs as if they had one better letter code for legality, including eliminating them altogether, for the entire party.

Resource Shortage(mostly to reflect not having enough clean water to go around but I imagine there are a few other things this could cover)
Cost:-1
Mechanics: -1 to Property Administration roll.  Lacking proper supply of a daily need your people are more adept at overcoming adversity but are more impacted in the short term by negative events.  Increase the penalties for all Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions by 50% for the first three month, round to the less favorable to the player penalty, but decrease recovery time by three months.  So a Minor Natural Disaster would apply a -3 for the first three months, -2 for the next six months, but then apply no further modifiers.

Administrative Center
Cost: +1
Mechanics: Player takes a +1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  As an Administrative center this quirk is incompatible with Remote.  With the attention of their superiors more focused on them players are not as free in their actions but are more likely to receive aid in case of emergency.  Reduce Property Administration modifiers for Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions for the last three months by 50% rounded in favor of the player.

Resource Surplus
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  Excess resources make your rivals more covetous and corruption more likely though.  -1 on Property Event rolls.

Lightly Industrialized
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  As with Resource Surplus this attracts the attention of rivals, enemies, and the corrupt but having some production offers some advantages. -1 on Property Event rolls as well as GM and player should work together to determine some good to be taken in trade.

Heavily Industrialized
Cost: +2
Mechanics: +2 on Property Administration rolls.  -2 Property Event rolls.  Work with GM to determine produced good to take in trade and may do a Class F refit of one unit type but takes certain levels of Property to do so.  Mass of unit/25 round up(-1 to a minimum of 1 for Vehicles, +2 for Small Craft) and take a -4 modifier(player does not get the +2 to counter act part of this modifier) while performing the refit.  To re-tool the factory take a total -8 modifier to Property Administration roll for 8+Proprty rank months then player makes a special Administration plus current Edge score against a TN of 8+Property rank each month.  Each success reduces re-tooling penalty by 1.  Each failure extends the modifier another month.  Yes I want retooling to be harsh and something not done lightly.

Yeah I'm skipping Agricultural completely as that can be covered by Resource Surplus and I know I need a couple more negative quirks but a few of those will be determined by some research I need to still perform.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 08:23:08
The salaries on page 25 are per month, not per year, and the same applies to the 100 C-Bills for spares.  Infantry ammunition is specifically mentioned on page 24, but not likely to be expensive.  You just need either the infantry tables errata or AToW weapon tables for the base reload cost, then multiply that by 5 to represent a base load and divide by 4 for a monthly expense (the section doesn't explicitly say monthly, but all the other rules on pages 24-25 are).  If they're non-plasma energy weapons and stationed close to electrical power, divide that cost by 10 to represent only having to replace burned out power packs.

I think you may be overestimating the support costs for a Savannah Master (like I did the first time up thread for the infantry).  8,000 is the cost of a whole ton of support, but you only need 0.1% of 5 tons to support the tank, so your monthly support cost would be 40 C-Bills for a single Savannah Master (plus salaries, of course).

As for your quirks, I like them, but think Heavy Industrial should draw more raids (specifically, beyond the penalty to the event roll).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 10:18:44
OK, I did some quick math:

One Savannah Master, monthly support cost: 40 C-bills (480 annually)

One Savannah Master driver: 900 C-Bills/month (10,800 annually)

One Tech Team: 38,400 annually
One Technician: 800 C-Bills/month (9,600 annually)
Six AsTechs: 400 C-Bills/month each (4,800 annually, each, 28,800 for all)

Based on the above, a lance of Savannah Masters and one tech team would run 83,520 per year.  Dropping a single AsTech in favor of having the drivers help out would get it under the 80,000 you mentioned earlier for Property 1.

And to recap what I did earlier for the infantry, a squad of 7 would run 63,000 C-Bills per year for salaries, 1,200 a year for spares, and some relatively small expenditure for ammunition depending  on the weapons involved.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 13:12:27
I'm really starting to wish the section on page 24 had slightly more verbose language because I keep reading 0.1 as to mean mass*0.1 not mass*0.001.

And yes I am aware that the salaries are monthly.  The chart in Campaign Operations also does not match the math or have all the options of the one in AToW.  AToW Rank 4 Regular Mechwarrior should be drawing 2,500 C-Bills a month while Campaign Operations has the same Warrior drawing 2,000 C-bills a month.  I may have to ask a question about this in the rules forum.

One of the other things I am going to go ahead and do for Property is fix the starting amounts to, among other things, make it easier to divide into monthly rolls/incomes.  Something the existing amounts don't do well at all for most ranks of Property.

Which means I have to make up my mind about how I want the chart to go.  I do have an idea and it'll be pretty simple math too.  I am probably just going to double the income for each rank of Property unless that causes some issues.  I know it does make Property 10 less valuable than current rules in terms of raw income but that doesn't really bother me too much as by then they really should be getting some other perks via my Status trait and evens out some of the lesser ranks.

Property 1 will get boosted to 2,000 C-Bills a month, 24,000 C-Bills annual, personal income as a starting point for sure.  Makes it a lot easier to divide up into what ever time periods the GM and player decide on to roll for personal income and it is not much more than what Property 1 already gets.

So Property:
1=24,000
2=48,000
3=96,000
4=192,000
5=384,000
6=768,000
7=1,536,000
8=3,072,000
9=6,144,000
10=12,228,000
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 13:21:24
Cool... will the boost carry on through to the amount available for defense and such (i.e., Property 1 will now have 96,000 to work with vice 80,000)?  That would be enough for a squad AND a Ferret for them to ride around in (assuming the troops do double duty as AsTechs)...

As for salaries, I'd be inclined to use the newer book values (CampOps) as the baseline from which to vary.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 13:49:43
24,000 annual nets 8,000 monthly in defense budget.  So yes I am inclined to have the boosts carry over as it makes all the math easier.

*nod*

Yeah I'll use CamOps math with the extra options AToW offers for base salaries for now but did bring the mismatch to the attention of TPTB so it can be resolved via errata.

Which does mean I need to go back and look at my Status trait rules a bit to see how well I handle salary modifiers and Officers already. May have to add some stuff.

I also need to re-write some of my Property Quirks so that their effects can match up with the variable increments of when to roll for Property Administration.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 14:24:12
Excellent thanks!  I seem to be having an issue with the forum display, so I may have to reboot... not sure when I'll be back online...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 16:16:02
Yeah all the time I was going to use on working out some of these things today got used up doing other stuff.  This evening is going to be particularly brutal as thanks to traffic a drive that should take maybe a bit over an hour, possibly an hour fifteen minutes could easily run into the three or four hour mark just because of traffic.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 16:27:41
Good luck with traffic... I'm going down for yet another nap shortly.  I had a kidney stone removed yesterday, and the drugs are throwing me for a loop.  On balance, I'll take the drugs over the stone any day...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 20:09:35
I woke up and did some math... with Property 1, it would be possible to have a 30 ton all energy weapon mech (say, a Fire Javelin) on call 24/7 (8,000 a month will cover three pilots and the tech team too).

Separately, it looks like  it would take at least Property 6 to afford one of my combined arms companies (one lance of Goblins and two platoons of infantry; I haven't worked out the ammo costs yet, but spares, salaries, and one tech team have already exceeded what Property 5 can get).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 22:00:09
On my phone.

I may have to nudge the incomes a bit as I think 5 should be enough to cover a full vehicle company.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 22:29:45
I think a 5 could get there with smaller vehicles.  Like real life, it's personnel costs that get you in the end...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 December 2017, 22:38:05
Some math seems in order.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 December 2017, 22:59:18
The Savannah Master math I did this morning means a 5 can support a full company of those with three tech teams and still have ~100,000 per year left over.  What kills my combined arms company is the two platoons of infantry.  Payroll gets you every time.  People are just plain more expensive than machines (which is both realistic and drives you to 'mech forces, serving the core design of the game).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 December 2017, 01:44:35
It does present a slight problem though.  Battletech is also a setting where you don't always have a mech, even for your most prestigious front line unit in some eras, even if you have the cash.  It also creates the problem of where do you set the initial force building budget.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 14 December 2017, 03:52:10
True, true... I've been looking at it purely from support costs, not initial investment.  The trick there is that a MechWarrior's salary is only equal to two infantry troopers, but the one MechWarrior can bring many times the firepower.  Vehicles fall somewhere in between (unless they only have a crew of one, in which case they act as really cheap 'mechs).

The support cost for even a 100 ton 'mech is only 1,000 C-Bills per month, but one way to partially level costs would be to hold the line on tech team requirements.  As we worked out before, a full (regular) tech team costs 3,200 per month (800 for the Tech, 2,400 for six AsTechs).  Requiring one tech team per 'mech, one per lance of light vehicles, one per two heavy vehicles, and just a Tech per company of infantry (the troops can act as their own AsTechs) should level things out a bit.  Even with that though, a single 'mech is going to come out to less than the salary cost of a single squad of infantry (5,250).

This will definitely require more thought...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 December 2017, 12:38:53
*nod*

I have had to do a lot of battle with the concept of how do you keep things true to the setting versus making sure the player can feel involved, be invested, and have fun.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 15 December 2017, 03:37:10
Perhaps the solution is to give a discount to salaries (at least for infantry)?  I could see 750 per month being for someone willing to travel the galaxy at the drop of a hat.  If you fluff some of the salary of the defense force as "in kind" housing (and possibly board), that could tilt things back toward infantry as your primary component.  Another way to look at it is that infantry skills are so common (as compared to MechWarrior, or even vehicle crew skills), that it's not worth the same premium.  Just a thought...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 December 2017, 06:04:41
Yeah I am going to just have to run some numbers to figure out a good medium point.  Something that will make it hard to initially invest in a mech as those are supposed to be rare in garrisons but still provide enough to have a decent force.

One immediate conclusion I have come to is that making the garrison Green instead of Regular really seems to beat down those salary costs.  Can actually almost afford two squads of Infantry if you make them all Green with Property 1.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 15 December 2017, 07:40:29
That would certainly help, though I don't think I'd go so far as to require them all to be Green.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 December 2017, 13:19:57
Just another tool I can give to players.  They want a larger garrison then they can make some Green so that the salaries are affordable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 15 December 2017, 13:31:37
Sounds good... btw, I don't know if you saw my post to the AToW Companion Errata thread earlier today, but it appears the bog standard Auto-Rifle qualifies for the Heavy Burst special.  I prefer to think it's a typo in the criteria on page 171, personally...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 December 2017, 17:44:50
Finally got around to researching the various extreme conditions that impact Infantry and Vehicles more than mechs.

Since there are so few vehicles with fusion engines and environmental sealing eliminating any of those the conditions that require those actually removes most of the issues for Infantry as well.

I was thinking about making Extreme Cold a positive quirk because of how useful it is to Mechs but then I realized it would still be a net negative thanks to most economic activity on the Property being done by people and vehicles.

Of course all of this is now making me contemplate how to add frameworks for taking an AToW character into Battleforce or even ACS all the way up to potentially ISaW games.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 16 December 2017, 19:40:35
Sweet!  Top to bottom consistency is one of my ultimate goals too.

And I agree extreme cold is more of a minus than a plus to general economic activity.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 December 2017, 20:41:13
The upside is that Extreme Cold does have a built in incentive as to why you would take it, the aforementioned making mechs run cooler.

Now to figure out an incentive as to why you would want to take Extreme Heat.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 16 December 2017, 20:45:04
Extra effective solar power?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 December 2017, 21:08:15
Hmmm, not sure how I could work that in a consistent manner with the complications of special gear needed for your people to work outside and vehicles being less efficient.  Also a world can be hot without letting a lot of sunlight through.

Perhaps the added defensive bonus of enemy mechs that come to raid your property generate more heat, slower enemy vehicles, and enemies also needing specially equipped infantry will have to do.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 17 December 2017, 06:06:59
Ah, right... I hadn't thought of a Venus situation at first.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 December 2017, 07:13:00
*nod*

It is a bit maddening to be sure.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 17 December 2017, 11:17:55
Hmmm, not sure how I could work that in a consistent manner with the complications of special gear needed for your people to work outside and vehicles being less efficient.  Also a world can be hot without letting a lot of sunlight through.

Perhaps the added defensive bonus of enemy mechs that come to raid your property generate more heat, slower enemy vehicles, and enemies also needing specially equipped infantry will have to do.

Even that is not as big of an issue, as anyone raiding your planet will likely be smart enough to scan the planet before they land and get a temperature reading that way.  Extra heat would just be horrible for both sides to deal with, and worse for your landhold as they have to deal with the heat all the time, vs the attackers having to deal with it only when they strike.

Extreme cold could be useful though, as when you start to get enough industry and people you will put out enough heat to slowly warm the planet up (for large values of 'enough').  About 2 Trillion would be the planetary population limit (https://youtu.be/XAJeYe-abUA?t=10m40s), due to the need for lots of industry.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 December 2017, 14:26:02
I have come to the conclusion I may have to just accept that some negative Property Quirks won't have enough inherent incentive  to them and that be okay as it'll let players buy positive Property Quirks and thet be the incentive.

While Extreme Cold could potentially be overcome with enough time or technology these Property Quirks are intended to be in effect for the entirety of the campaign.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 December 2017, 02:39:25
Still wrangling with re-writing some stuff to make it consistent across any time frame for Property Quirks and Property Administration rolls and it is proving a little tricky.

Also realizing that I am not really doing enough to make a difference between an Enlisted(or equivelant for the other Status types) and an Officer.  I also am facing the problem that mechwarriors/pilots/whathaveyou may not be getting enough points via my Status trait to make my Status trait work the way I want to.

I may have to do something along the lines of the existing Rank and how Officer interacts with it but provide more actual frameworks/incentives.  Perhaps more variety as well.  Like Officer could also cover being senior management at a large firm as well as actually being an Officer in the Military, a Crime Syndicate, or Intelligence Agency and just add raw points to customize the subcategories with since that can be rather varied as well.  While something like Pilot could give at least 1 point to Vehicle and some points you can put to something else.

I just have to figure out the benefits and costs.  Though for costs I am thinking it should be 200 XP.  Having some self debate to drop it to 100 XP.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 December 2017, 19:56:51
In my now typical scatter brained nature I was working on a spreadsheet to help deal with managing budgets for Garrisons just so I could give myself a tool to help me figure out what can be supported and hopefully put out something less record keeping intensive.

I kind of realized the only way I am going to be able to do this is to track each and every individual member of the garrison separately.  Which is a bit of a pain since I am warming to the idea that Property 10 should have about a Regiment protecting it.

Still I will probably share this spreadsheet as it will be rather helpful for the rules in Campaign Operations.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 18 December 2017, 23:13:12
Sounds good, I can't wait to see it!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 December 2017, 00:29:29
Well I may be able to compress things a bit after all.  Just going to be a bit of a pain assigning the correct ranks to people in the correct ratios and will have to sacrifice individually racking people's ranks and skills but that doesn't seem a huge issue to me.

Still I've attached the preliminary quick and dirty version I have worked up.  I haven't put in hardly any of my usual automation or color coding but I have filled in all the formulas to allow entries down to row 250 for now.

Also with my research complete I have finished up another draft of the Property Quirks.  I know I need a couple more negative ones or perhaps some other way to get positive quirks without having to take negative ones.  Perhaps Just caving in and allowing a separate Property Quirks trait like there is already a Vehicle trait can work.

Thinking of adding Research Center and Higher Learning(to include Military Academies) positive quirks but really not sure how I can work those mechanically just yet.

Anyway what I currently have:

Border World(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power more technologically advanced than your faction(represent some of the other eras like Age of War where the Terran Hegemony were being mean to their neighbors or later Clan Eras))
Cost: -2
Mechanics: Player takes a -2 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income but due to the raids and repelled invasions their techs do not take any repair/salvage modifiers for unfamiliar technology and may equip a weapon or piece of equipment available to this enemy power not available to your faction on one garrison unit per point of Property and any such equipped units may exceed the normal average skill rating of Regular and start at Veteran.
Special: To represent less actively hostile periods reduce cost to -1 and lose the ability to mount salvaged gear on garrison units but may still increase the average skill rating as described.  This quirk can be taken up to three times by GM permission depending on era.

Border World, Lesser(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power on the same tech base or lower than yours)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  Due to the frequent raids at the start of the game campaign your garrison may have one unit per rank of Property exceed the normal starting average experience cap of Regular to a maximum of Veteran.
Special: The best count I can come up with is 5 times this quirk may be taken.

Remote(more than 30 Light Years from the closest regional administrative center)
Cost: -1
Mechanics Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  The lack of interference and oversight from their superiors allows the player to be more free in setting their own local laws.  Player may reduce Black Market costs as if they had one better letter code for legality, including eliminating them altogether, for the entire party.

Resource Shortage(mostly to reflect not having enough clean water to go around but I imagine there are a few other things this could cover)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: -1 to Property Administration roll.  Lacking proper supply of a daily need your Property is more severly impacted by Political Scandal and Natural Disasters.  Increase the penalty for these events by 50% round up(-1 becomes -2 for example).

Administrative Center
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a +1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  As an Administrative center this quirk is incompatible with Remote.  With the attention of their superiors more focused on them players are not as free in their actions but are more likely to receive aid in case of emergency.  Reduce Property Administration modifiers for Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions by 50% rounded in favor of the player to a minimum of -1.  Of course if the Player is involved in a Political Scandal the extra attention of their superiors increases the penalty they take 50%, round up, more severe penalties and take the normal penalties for being involved in such a scandal if another player in the group is somehow involved.

Resource Surplus
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  Excess resources make your rivals more covetous and corruption more likely though.  -1 on Property Event rolls. Incompatible with Resource Shortage.

Lightly Industrialized
Cost: +2
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  As with Resource Surplus this attracts the attention of rivals, enemies, and the corrupt but having some production offers some advantages. -1 on Property Event rolls as well as GM and player should work together to determine some good to be taken in trade.  May also provide sufficient facilities to perform Class D Refits for one unit type but take a -4 on Property Administration rolls while performing the refit.

Heavily Industrialized
Cost: +4
Mechanics: +2 on Property Administration rolls.  -2 Property Event rolls.  Work with GM to determine produced good to take in trade and may do a Class F refit of one unit type but takes certain levels of Property to do so.  Mass of unit/25 round up(-1 to a minimum of 1 for Vehicles, +2 for Small Craft) and take a -4 modifier(player does not get the +2 to counter act part of this modifier) while performing the refit.  To re-tool the factory take a total -8 modifier to Property Administration roll for 8+Proprty rank months then player makes a special Administration plus current Edge score against a TN of 8+Property rank each month.  Each success reduces re-tooling penalty by 1.  Each failure extends the modifier another month.  Yes I want retooling to be harsh and something not done lightly.

Extreme Cold or Extreme Heat
Cost: -1 for each 10 degress(Celsius) below -30 or above 50
Mechanics: The special gear and reduced efficiency of vehicles reduces the economic output of your Property.  Take a -1 to Property Administration rolls.  When defending your Property consult Total Warfare and Tactical Operations for rules on extreme tempratures.

High/Low Gravity
Cost: -1 for each 0.2g or fraction thereof above or below 1g(recommended maximum limits of 0.2g and 1.5g)
Mechanics: Take a -1 to Property Administration Rolls due to the unusual gravity of the world your Property is on.  Consult Tactical Operations and A Time of War for rules on abnormal gravity.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 19 December 2017, 05:30:42
In the spreadsheet: salary doubles from rank 2 to rank 3 (and squad leaders make the same as mechwarriors?)?  I'll have to double check CampOps on that one, as it just doesn't sound right, especially when the step from 3 to 4 is so small in comparison.

On the quirks, I think you may need to adjust where zero is.  Resource Shortage, for example, is all negative but worth the same -1 as some of the others that have factors in their favor.  In that vein, did you intend for Administrative Center to be a negative?  It seems the effects are all benefits vice penalties.

Also, I don't think it's a good idea to scale the penalties for gravity or temperature.  I think a straight -1 for below -30/above 50 or below 0.2g/above 1.5g is sufficient.  Beyond those (admittedly arbitrary) limits, the effects are really just fluff.  The important thing is that you have to pay for special gear to adapt, or you don't.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 December 2017, 13:37:59
I'm still double checking some of the math for salaries.  Page 25 of Campaign Ops says Rank/3 minimum 1 +1.  I might still be missing a +1 on an equation in an if statement.

As far as pay goes a squad leader by AToW terms should have Rank 4.  So should a mechwarrior.  So a mechwarrior with their higher base salary should be paid more than an Infantry squad leader end of the day.

Resource Shortage, yeah I probably should bump that down to a -2.  Administrative Center I figured would be a net negative because of the Political Scandal modifiers and the extra political oversight, especially the enhanced guilt by association aspect where the penalty for Political Scandals are increased if the Political Scandal involves anyone in the player group, not just the Property owning player.  Might have to write up something more on the political oversight aspect.

Probably do need to put more negative mechanics on Remote.  I'm thinking increase the penalties for Raids and Invasions to represent the lack of available aid in the form of reinforcements to help fight them off or reconstruction funds/assets to help with the aftermath.  That may bump it to being worth a -2 though.  Border World(both versions) won't have a lot of direct mechanics as most of their impacts should be felt via the event rolls.

Main reason I made Gravity and Extreme Hot/Cold scale was to provide incentives for why a player should take more than the minimum amount.  If it doesn't get them something more why should a player take 100 Celsius average when 80 Celsius gives them the same Quirk points and doesn't impact their mech forces as bad is the basic thought.  Especially as I think I can argue the penalties for Gravity should scale as well.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 December 2017, 16:09:40
I missed that rank bump for salaries.  That seems really excessive on its face, honestly.  I mean, at a minimum it means salary doubles every three points of rank.  I don't think any military pay structure is built that way.

For scaling temperature and gravity, I think the steps are just too small to justify a full 100XP each.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 December 2017, 16:48:22
It isn't quite that bad for Rank if I'm reading it right.  1+(Rank(minimum 1)/3)*monthly salary.

Gravity and Temperature the more I look into the rules for them the more I think you're right.  I do worry though if I don't make them scale it may not have enough incentive to go beyond the limits.

For Remote instead of increasing the penalties for Raids and Invasions, because that can get pretty harsh, I am thinking increase the TNs for the force building rules in Campaign Ops.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 December 2017, 17:17:55
Looking over the examples in CampOps, it looks like they ignored the Rank multiplier completely except for "Officer".  And I'm really not sure how they intended the formula to be read.  I see: "(Rank Trait Points/3)+1, minimum 1".  What I don't see are any guidelines on rounding.  There are four cases there: don't round, round normally, round up, or round down.  Not rounding means the "base" salary isn't the lowest pay (assuming there's no such thing as "Rank 0").  The lowest pay would be 4/3 times the base (i.e., a nice round 1,000 for infantry, and a nice round 2,000 for MechWarriors; many others aren't so nice and round).  Rounding normally means Rank 1 gets the base salary, Ranks 2, 3 and 4 get twice the base, Ranks 5, 6 and 7 get triple, etc.  That seems to be an unreasonable jump in pay at the bottom end of the scale, and fairly wide bands of pay.  Rounding up or down just moves where the break points are, but leaves the wide plateaus in pay intact.

I think the adjustment you're looking at for Remote makes sense.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 December 2017, 22:12:59
Infantry really seem to suffer the most from this potential issue.

A lot of the problem comes from the fact that I don't think anyone has ever tried to actually create an official down to the individual TO&E before, especially not anyone who knows how military structure actually works.

Of course Battletech makes the mess worse by having so many different support weapons for Infantry that have rather unhelpful crew requirements and have different formation configurations depending on the motive type of the Infantry.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 December 2017, 22:20:44
Absolutely, though vehicles also suffer somewhat due to crew requirements.  As I mentioned in PM, I think the real issue is that the base pay doesn't align to Rank 1, or at least not in a way that doesn't result in outright doubling the pay at Rank 2 (i.e., what rounding causes), which is just as broken.  I think it's fixable, though.  Hopefully Cray will have an idea or two...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 December 2017, 22:45:43
I've been re-reading what AToW has to say about what the responsibilities for each Rank work out to.  For some reason I kept thinking E4 was Squad Leader because Mechwarriors are supposed to be E4s when you look at the Field Requirements in Stage 3 and Mechs are organizationally the same as a Squad.  The manpower actually works out(1 tech, 1 pilot who is expected to also be an Astech, and 5 Astechs for a total of 7 people*).

But looking at the actual Rank trait it does state that Mechwarriors are actually supposed to be E5s and Squad Leaders should be E6s.

All in all I am starting to think that AToW's Rank/6 may actually be the better equation.  I'll have to start plugging some numbers.

*Which is causing me to think that all formations are actually supposed to work out like this and people may have to pull double duty to make it work.  Which kind of makes sense in an interstellar setting where transport space is limited.  Which falls apart for some Infantry formations, Administrative support needs, and medical support unless that all gets folded in too via people filling more than one role each.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 December 2017, 22:53:28
Yes, the rank stuff in AToW is wonky on several levels.  Cray did respond via PM, but I didn't notice until after I replied to him that he didn't copy you on his reply.  I forwarded it so you at least have his initial response.

And I pretty much always use double duty folks to fill out the AsTech requirements.  Basically, that's where the 'mech lance's infantry platoon comes from (with a leavening of actual infantry leadership that may or may not contribute to maintenance duties).  I've been sketching out a mercenary 'mech lance parallel to these discussions, and I'm up to 70 personnel so far.  It's also made me realize I think CampOps made a mistake in lumping the medics into the "Admin" requirements.  A full medical team per StratOps is 5 personnel (one Doc and four assistants).  StratOps implies they should follow the technical support model vice the Admin support one.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 December 2017, 23:08:55
Yeah if I can think of the appropriate forum to open a new thread(since cray is not allowed in this one) so we can discuss this without anyone getting left behind I think it'd be best we did that.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 December 2017, 23:20:29
Oh right!  I totally forgot he's not allowed down here anymore.  And sorry for the slow responses on my end.  Blizzard is trying to update StarCraft II, and it's slowing everything else to a crawl on this ancient machine.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 December 2017, 23:21:52
No worries.  And if you can think of where to start it I'd say go for it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 December 2017, 23:28:45
Rog, I'll open the discussion shortly in "Strategic Combat"...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 22 December 2017, 23:37:25
Dang it, the lag here meant I ended up cross posting my last post here into Strategic Operations, and it got 5 views before I was able to get it edited properly...  :P
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 December 2017, 15:19:55
Okay so I'm getting back to working on some modifiers, I guess I'll call them Quirks too to keep language consistent, for my Status trait.

To be honest it does feel a bit lacking in points it gives with all the things that at least potentially demand points from it now.

First up

Officer(Plenty of ways it can apply beyond Status/Military)
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: +1 People(which has no cap in my House Rules) to help represent you're in charge of something, +1 to Equipped(capped at 10 in my House Rules) because position is as important as wealth for getting a hold of stuff, and +1 Info(again no max in my House Rules) because you have a support structure that can help you find out things.

Pilot
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: +1 People as you should have at least something of a technical crew, +1 Equipped because getting pilot gear isn't entirely easy, and +1 Vehicle(capped at 5 in my House Rules) because you're Piloting something.

Still trying to think up more.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 December 2017, 18:34:35
So looking through Campaign Operations a bit more I have stumbled on something workable, I think.

There is a fairly short section on Player character influence on force building.  You add up a bunch of traits, Administration, and Negotiation then divide by 10 to get a starting budget multiplier.

Depending on how high you roll on that initial budget you can actually get a pretty sizable force.  Of course those force building rules do have one problem and another presents itself.  The smallest Infantry formation in them is a Platoon and the second problem is if you roll really well for a starting budget you may not be able to afford the upkeep of what you can afford to buy.

So frankly a bit unsatisfying with so many potential issues.  So I am thinking instead a combination approach.  Starting budget is what you get for defense spending for a year multiplied by (Reputation+Connections+1 if Gregarious+Administration+Negotiation+additional Status traits not tied to the Property)/10 and any other Campaign Operations force building modifiers you want to toss in.

I have a feeling I may have forgotten a trait or skill that may not be currently factored in that could be.  Will re-check when I'm done moving some files around.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 December 2017, 19:28:10
I thought the force building rules let you buy anything for C-Bills?  So why couldn't you buy a squad?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 December 2017, 20:22:19
Ok, I just finished kluging together a lance with supporting elements that came out to 70 personnel total.  Payroll was (of course) the biggest chunk of ongoing support (~135K after making adjustments for some of the officers... the XO of the unit (being infantry) just wasn't being paid enough, for example).  Ammunition took the next biggest bite (between the 'mechs, they carry 6 tons of LRM ammo and 3 tons of AC/2): 45,750 plus a pittance for infantry ammo.  Fuel for the (one!) ICE vehicle was 10,800 per month (Heavy BattleMech Recovery Vehicles are gas HOGS).  Spares were less than 3,500 (and might be even less if the "Rugged" quirk reduces costs).

Overall, monthly support costs are a little shy of 200,000 C-Bills per month for:
A custom Banshee (Blazer Cannon, AC/2, and Recon Camera)
JM6-A (LRM JagerMech) [S-3]
HBK-4J (LRM Swayback) [S-5]
WTH-1 (stock Whitworth) [S-7]
Heavy BattleMech Recovery Vehicle (5+1 extra crewman to fill out a tech team)
3 5-ton Jeeps (fusion powered) (3 drivers)
3 5-ton Trailers (Fuel, MASH, C2 with 3 tons of Comms Gear; 3 crew for the Comms Gear)
1 platoon of Infantry (4 squads of 7, plus an officer and a 1st Sergeant for the whole unit; 30 total; only the 24 troopers do AsTech duty)
6 Industrial Exoskeletons (200kg each, 2 ton cargo lifters and 1 MP)
7 techs (4 'Mech, 2 Vehicle, 1 Exoskeleton; AsTechs sourced from the infantry and vehicle crews; I refuse to assign a 7 man team to every 5 ton vehicle) (the Lead Tech is also the S-6)
Medical Team (5 Personnel)
6 Staff/Admin types (the MechWarriors make up the Admin requirement for the 7th between them; this includes the Lawyer/S-1, S-2, and S-4, plus three Admin clerks)

Initial procurement cost was just shy of 25,000,000 C-Bills, a good chunk of which was the Banshee alone.

I may do an even more minimalist lance along the lines you suggested at one point (4 'mechs, 4 techs, 20 AsTechs) just to see how that looks.  Technically, I think they require a Medical Team if they're an independent unit (which might satisfy their Admin requirement, though I really think Medical Teams should be treated as Tech Support, not Admin).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 December 2017, 20:46:25
Campaign Operations doesn't have anything smaller than a Platoon for generic prices or availability rolls.  Which I suppose you could divide the cost by 3 and lower the TN to acquire by one or something.

And I've already determined that I may have to modify starting budgets a bit.  Just shy of 15 million isn't going to cut it for affording anything substantial for protecting a Property 10.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 December 2017, 21:20:32
Yeah, that's definitely too low.  You can't even get a company of bug 'mechs for that.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 December 2017, 22:24:19
A raw not modified multiplier of the size of the Property is seeming like the easy solution.

150 million is still a bit low but considering how easy it is to double or even triple that base with the right traits and the skills you really should have being in charge of a Property and it might not be so bad.

In fact I think to make it even easier and to provide a reason to invest in the skill I'll add Protocol to the mix.  Should help boost the budget even further.  Shouldn't be too much trouble to get a mixed regiment by then.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 December 2017, 22:36:39
Excellent ideas... You'll need to caveat Protocol though (i.e., "the highest appropriate Protocol sub-skill"), to avoid gaming the system with multiple low level Protocol skills.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 December 2017, 23:24:09
A quick back-of-the-spreadsheet calculation shows the minimum support costs for a 'mech lance (4, 20-ton 'mechs, all energy weapons) is 23,000 per month (22,200 for salaries: 4 MechWarriors (the lead being a TP4 Officer, the others TP3 Officers), 4 Techs (The lead being TP4 Enlisted, and the rest TP3 Enlisted), and 24 AsTechs (all TP1 Enlisted), and 800 for spare parts (200 per 'mech)).  The MechWarriors do all the admin work as double duty (which also supports them being officers, even if "Rank 0").  This unit is obviously part of a larger formation, as they have no medical support.  If a House unit, their admin work is less onerous, but still performed by the MechWarriors.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 December 2017, 01:09:37
No doubt about making sure Protocol only counts once and only if it is for the faction you hold Property in.

So it seems like at this point I just need to:

1:  Decide what should be done with left over initial budget as depending on what you decide to support you can have quite a bit left over.  I'll have to see what Campaign Ops says on the matter.

2: Join you in making some example forces just so I can have bench marks to ensure a player can support what seems reasonable for that level of Property.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 December 2017, 08:09:20
1 is covered on page 20 (there's a whole step!)... Basically, bank the funds.

2 is the fun part... let me know if there's anything specific you'd like me to look at... O0
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 December 2017, 13:12:04
The only issue with 1 and Campaign Operations page 20 is if a player decides to skimp and bank they could still get a halfway decent mixed Regiment with a VERY sizable budget left over.

Liam's Ghost actually gave me something of a challenge recently to see what can be supported on 1,000,000 C-Bills a month.  I managed a fully supported Vehicle Battalion and two Infantry Battalions with money left over.  MekHQ pegs it's assets at less than 12 million.

As far as what to look at for #2 the main thing I worry about is that Infantry may not be affordable enough for the smaller Property levels.  So that's where I'd be inclined to start looking first.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 December 2017, 14:37:48
Rog, I'll start looking at low end infantry this week.  Purchase prices will be low (a straight Rifle platoon is around 500,000), but salary is going to be painful.  Using Inteks as secondary weapons to increase range about doubles the price, but throwing in Auto-Grenade Launchers (or Heavy Grenade Launchers) for damage isn't quite as bad.

BTW, I posted something I recently found in AToW regarding camouflage over in Truetanker's thread in the Battle Armor sub-forum.  Basic (2 point) camouflage can be added to any armor for a 25% premium and no weight.  That's enough for a -1 to (be) hit modifier when not moving.  Seems like a no-brainer expense to me.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 December 2017, 15:34:52
Yeah.  That seems like something worth shelling out a few extra C-Bills for.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 December 2017, 16:56:29
Here's a thread from Rules Questions that hasn't made it's way into errata yet (I think): http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=54683.0

Bottom line: Cray says the spare point cost for infantry should be 0.2% vice the 1% in the book.  I can't say I disagree.  Putting a foot platoon on par with a 30 ton 'mech is a little ridiculous.  Phoenixstorm gets full credit for working this one out with Cray.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 December 2017, 20:39:26
Ok, with 1 TP4 Officer, 3 TP4 Enlisted Squad Leaders, and 24 Rank 1 Troopers, a Rifle Platoon (Auto-Rifles for everyone) costs 8,480 per month: 8,350 in salaries, 60 in spare parts, and 70 in ammunition.  That's 100,920 per year.  If they use energy weapons instead (and standard vice high capacity power packs), ammunition cost drops to 17.5 per month, or 210 per year (vice 840).  That comes at a huge up front cost though.  The cheapest laser rifles roughly quadruple the price (the square root of 1,250 is about 35, while the root of 80 is about 9).  Even only going my usual route of using Inteks as secondary weapons (2 per squad to stretch the range), it roughly doubles the cost.

If you're looking to just boost damage, Automatic Grenade Launchers are the way to go.  There's no advantage to Heavy Grenade Launchers (both give you 6 damage with 2 per squad, or 5 with one per squad, and neither improves the range of Auto-Rifles).  Auto-Grenade Launchers are 975 C-Bills each (the square root is around 31).  Assuming you use smoke for training rounds (of which you need 25 per launcher per month; 100 is a "basic load" of 5 reloads), the ammunition cost would be 50 C-Bills per month.  If you insist on real anti-personnel or high explosive rounds for training, the price quadruples (to 200 per month per launcher).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 December 2017, 14:37:22
Hmmm.  I am thinking to help mesh things with the setting Militia/Garrison troops may have to always be paid with the Green pay modifier.  Otherwise low levels of Property are going to have issues supporting even fairly basic Garrison/Militia troops.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 December 2017, 14:55:04
I did some math up in General Discussion, and when you throw in the Tech Team, 'mechs come out right around the platoon costs, but I'd hesitate to force people to hire Green troops.  Fewer experienced ones should at least be an option.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 December 2017, 15:00:33
Well I am thinking more of how standing armies always pay Regular skill modifiers even if someone is Green,  Veteran, or Elite but to represent the more limited nature of Garrison/Militias they could always use the Green skill pay modifier even if someone is Regular, Veteran, or Elite.

That way you can have higher skilled troops, afford them, and have everything mesh up a bit better.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 December 2017, 15:05:07
In the real world, seniority is how they usually pay for experience, though specific skill bonuses are also in the mix.  It's hard to simplify those charts without losing quite a bit of granularity.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 December 2017, 17:39:17
Well A Time of War on page 335 does say standing armies only use Regular modifiers to salary no matter how skilled someone is. 

And I've got most of my Property overhaul ready for another draft review.  I am a bit worried I may have ran out of space on the Property Event tables a bit too quickly and thus things might get a little overly harsh.  Which is even after I broke down and created a subtable each for Military, Natural Disaster, and Political events.  I've still got to write a bit of something for the actual force generation/support sections.  Once I do I should have some pretty hefty stuff to post again.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 December 2017, 19:31:09
On a lark, I threw together a single 'mech with a single Tech Team (minimum ranks for everyone: 3TP Officer, 3TP Tech, 1TP AsTechs).  It came out to 8,400 in salaries, very close to the cost of the Platoon built under the same rubric (8,350 for salaries).  Spares for an all energy weapon 20 ton 'mech would be 200 per month (ammunition makes everything more expensive).  Bottom line: 'mechs and infantry are comparable at the platoon vs. individual 'mech level (which I think was the intention).  Vehicles get trickier due to crew size and tech team requirements.

Speaking of which, I think we really need to redefine tech team requirements for vehicles under 20 tons.  Something like 1 tech team per every 20 tons of vehicles under 20 tons (round normally, so technically, one team could service up to 29.5 tons of smaller vehicles).  There should also probably be a discount for trailers, since they don't have engines.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 December 2017, 19:44:41
*nod*

A lot of how they re-worked things in Strategic Operations for tech support never really seemed to fit with the established setting and previous rules very well.

As far as salaries, yeah the way I'd work the rankings would cut down a lot.  Of course it doesn't help that AToW does imply two different ranks as what a Mechwarrior should be then lists yet a third rank for what should be a Squad Leader.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 December 2017, 19:17:43
So I got around to doing some math for starting budgets.  I'm not so sure I need to let the Property be a raw multiplier now.

If somehow a player maxed every bonus they could without taking any of the pnealties for the Player Influences from CamOps the multiplier would be 6.4.

If you add Protocol to the list as I propose that raises to 7.4.  Yearly defense budget for a RAW Property 10 is 60,000,000 C-Bills.

384,000,000 without Protocol and 444,000,000 with.  Sure you can't do an all Mech Regiment on that but I've seen how cheap the initial outlay can be for a mixed Regiment.  So I think leaving Property as it is in CamOps will work just fine.

As a point of comparison with the revised values I'm still somewhat pondering that would be 363,724,800 for Property 10.

Wish there was an easier way to share the event tables but just going to have to put in the spreadsheet.  I am still a bit mixed on them but with how quickly I ran out of room I'm not sure what I can do to get a bit more variety.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 December 2017, 19:21:31
And for the latest draft of the Property Quirks.

Should have the section on force building the garrison soon.

Values for Property income have been adjusted so that at GM option the player can instead roll monthly, quarterly, semiannually, or yearly as desired.  Once a year a Property Event will be rolled for.  If rolling more often than once a year work with the GM to determine which Property Administration roll should be used to influence the Property Event roll. The margin of failure or margine of success for this roll will be added to an event table roll as well as the character's current Edge link attribute modifier modifier.  In the event of rolling a result that provides modifiers to the Property Administration rolls it is highly recommended to only apply them to one roll when rolling more often than once a year.

To compliment Property a new trait Investments has been introduced and a new Property Quirk trait.

Investments[ID and Status based]:
Modifier: -4
Investments largely work as the old Property trait and to represent their more volatile nature get the -4 as far off events can ripple more easily and with considerable time delays it will be tough maximizing your profit margins by making the correct moves.

Investment may not be higher than the Wealth subcategory of the Status trait it is tied to.

Property still largely works as previous but instead of not having any guidelines on how to figure out what modifiers to assign I have created Property Quirks.

Border World(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power more technologically advanced than your faction(represent some of the other eras like Age of War where the Terran Hegemony were being mean to their neighbors or later Clan Eras))
Cost: -2
Mechanics: Player takes a -2 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income but due to the raids and repelled invasions their techs do not take any repair/salvage modifiers for unfamiliar technology and may equip a weapon or piece of equipment available to this enemy power not available to your faction on one garrison unit per point of Property and any such equipped units may exceed the normal average skill rating of Regular and start at Veteran.
Special: To represent less actively hostile periods reduce cost to -1 and lose the ability to mount salvaged gear on garrison units but may still increase the average skill rating as described.  This quirk can be taken up to three times by GM permission depending on era.

Border World, Lesser(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power on the same tech base or lower than yours)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  Due to the frequent raids at the start of the game campaign your garrison may have one unit per rank of Property exceed the normal starting average experience cap of Regular to a maximum of Veteran.
Special: The best count I can come up with is 5 times this quirk may be taken.

Remote(more than 30 Light Years from the closest regional administrative center)
Cost: -1
Mechanics Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  The lack of interference and oversight from their superiors allows the player to be more free in setting their own local laws.  Player may reduce Black Market costs as if they had one better letter code for legality, including eliminating them altogether, for the entire party.  Being so remote also makes it harder to raise a well equipped defensive force.  Increase all unit type target numbers by one.

Resource Shortage(mostly to reflect not having enough clean water to go around but I imagine there are a few other things this could cover)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: -1 to Property Administration roll.  Lacking proper supply of a daily need your Property is more severly impacted by Political Scandal and Natural Disasters.  Increase the penalty for these events by 50% round up(-1 becomes -2 for example).

Administrative Center
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a +1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  As an Administrative center this quirk is incompatible with Remote.  With the attention of their superiors more focused on them players are not as free in their actions but are more likely to receive aid in case of emergency.  Reduce Property Administration modifiers for Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions by 50% rounded in favor of the player to a minimum of -1.  Of course if the Player is involved in a Political Scandal the extra attention of their superiors increases the penalty they take 50%, round up, more severe penalties and take the normal penalties for being involved in such a scandal if another player in the group is somehow involved.  So if the Property Event Roll results in a Minor Political Scandal another PC in the group is involved the Property Owning Player would take -3 to their Property Administration roll.

Resource Surplus
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  Excess resources make your rivals more covetous and corruption more likely though.  -1 on Property Event rolls. Incompatible with Resource Shortage.

Lightly Industrialized
Cost: +2
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  As with Resource Surplus this attracts the attention of rivals, enemies, and the corrupt but having some production offers some advantages. -1 on Property Event rolls as well as GM and player should work together to determine some good to be taken in trade.  May also provide sufficient facilities to perform Class D Refits for one unit type but take a -4 on Property Administration rolls while performing the refit.

Heavily Industrialized
Cost: +4
Mechanics: +2 on Property Administration rolls.  -2 Property Event rolls.  Work with GM to determine produced good to take in trade and may do a Class F refit of one unit type but takes certain levels of Property to do so.  Mass of unit/25 round up(-1 to a minimum of 1 for Vehicles, +2 for Small Craft) and take a -4 modifier(player does not get the +2 to counter act part of this modifier) while performing the refit.  To re-tool the factory take a total -8 modifier to Property Administration roll for 8+Proprty rank months then player makes a special Administration plus current Edge score against a TN of 8+Property rank each month.  Each success reduces re-tooling penalty by 1.  Each failure extends the modifier another month.  Yes I want retooling to be harsh and something not done lightly.

Extreme Cold or Extreme Heat
Cost: -1 for below -30 Celsius or above 50 Celsius
Mechanics: The special gear and reduced efficiency of vehicles reduces the economic output of your Property.  Take a -1 to Property Administration rolls.  When defending your Property consult Total Warfare and Tactical Operations for rules on extreme cold and heat.

High/Low Gravity
Cost: -1 for 0.8g and below or 1.2g and above(recommend minimum of 0.2g and maximum of 1.5g)
Mechanics: Take a -1 to Property Administration Rolls due to the unusual gravity of the world your Property is on.  Consult Tactical Operations and A Time of War for rules on abnormal gravity.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 27 December 2017, 19:55:49
Yikes!  Looking at that table would dissuade me from taking the Property trait entirely (I roll way too many 2's).

The quirks look like they're getting there, and I dare say you're on the right track with Heavily Industrialized.  You might even want to put in a +10 quirk for "Shipyard"...  Oh, hey... how about +8 for a yard that can do DropShips, +10 for JumpShips, and +12 for WarShips (since +6 will get you to Small Craft, though I recommend only enforcing that for Small Craft above 100 tons)?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 December 2017, 20:44:47
I am considering I may have to make it a 3d6 table and each subtable also 3d6 so the effects are less severe because I did really feel like I was running out of space and had so many negative events.

As far as Shipyards the normal limit of Property 10 I feel like is right at the limit of a Dropship yard so I wasn't super inclined to put it in as an option but re-checking the prices for small civilian Dropships I could see it being good enough to pump out a few small Dropships a year.

So maybe have Shipyard be a further +2 Quirk that requires Heavily Industrialized.

And re-write the re-tooling rules to be more time frame independent.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 28 December 2017, 00:37:00
Don't forget that 10 is only a limit for creation... If people want to sink XP into upgrading their yards (on top of the money), I think that's the way to go.  If it was just a matter of money, it would have been done right after the Amaris coup...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 28 December 2017, 01:49:20
*nod*

Makes sense and one of my aims for this project is to help bridge between AToW and the more strategic levels of play so I may as well make my frame works fully extensible.  Which may require me to make the payouts of Property more exponential in growth for Property 11+.  Which AToW and Companion's chart only goes up to 11 too.

Which may mean also working out a way to convert Property to Inner Sphere at War Resource points too.  I know I worked out how many Resource Points it would take to support the maximum Other World garrison and using some math I remember working that back to an Other World must then produce 10 RP, 2 of which it passes to the House but now I can't remember how much it could keep for itself and I rather suspect I didn't keep any notes.  So I may have to redo those calculations and re-figure out what the minimum and maximum garrisons are.  If that holds true I may be willing to do a 1:1 conversion.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 December 2017, 19:03:05
Still working on the re-tooling Industry rules so that they work the same no matter how often you roll Property Administration but I did decide that Dropships are in the realm of Property 11+.  Just felt a little too powerful/profitable for Property 10.  I'll have to think on their tonnage framework.

So to do list:
-Rework retooling rules
-A big old section on Property and how to generate garrison forces for it needs worked in somewhere
-Dropships
-Going from AToW to Inner Sphere at War.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 29 December 2017, 19:19:42
Since you're pushing DropShips in to the 11+ range, that would seem to be an opportunity to build the framework to support JumpShips (and even WarShips someday...).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 December 2017, 20:57:08
 :D

I have no idea how to work those but it should be doable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 29 December 2017, 21:01:55
I'd give them either the same boost of DropShips over Small Craft, or a geometric (or even exponential) progression beyond that... :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 December 2017, 23:01:30
It certainly is going to have to be exponential.  Rank/Title 15 is supposed to be a Successor Lord.  So it doesn't really leave a lot of other options by that point.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 29 December 2017, 23:06:19
So 11 for DropShips, 13 for JumpShips, and 15 for WarShips?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 December 2017, 23:11:15
Hmmm.  I almost want to have more wiggle room but I'm not sure I can work any in so that could wind up being the end point.

And I forgot a to do list item.
-Property Events rework to make them less severe

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 29 December 2017, 23:16:21
You could always bump up what it takes to be a Successor Lord, or say 15 is what it takes to be the Chancellor of the Capellan Confederation, and the others are more...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2017, 00:40:44
Hmmm...

15 as a Bandit Kingdom/Minor Periphery Nation, 20 for one of the protoNations/Major Periphery Nation/something like the SiC/FRR, 25+ for a Successor State.

I think I can live with that.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 December 2017, 01:05:56
Sounds more than reasonable to me! O0
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2017, 16:44:46
Realized I made a slight omission in my Property Quirks.  I never really accounted for the Periphery modifier fully.  Remote was my initial stab at it but then I realized a world can be in the Periphery but near an Administrative Center too.  So a slight variation on Remote is being added to account for such situations.  I decided it doesn't get the Legality benefit for Black Market purchases that Remote does but gets the same Target Number modifications for force building and the same -1 to Property Administration rolls.

I'm also working out an Independent Property Quirk.  I know I want it to be overall positive and expensive but I also think it should have the same Political Scandal modifiers as Administrative Center but without the same support structure I can't see giving the same benefits to Raid/Invasion and Natural Disaster modifiers that Administrative Center gives.  Trouble is I'm having difficulty coming up with anything that can be expressed in game mechanics for why you'd want to make such an investment.

Which is making me consider more advanced forms of Administrative Center like Regional Capital and National Capital.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 December 2017, 17:03:10
I think adding tiers to Administrative Center is a good idea, then you can just make modifiers for Inner Sphere vs. Periphery (Major, Minor, and Independent powers)...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2017, 17:29:46
I am thinking Regional Capital would require minimum of Property 11 and National Capital minimum Property of 15.

Independent is proving troublesome.  I went and realized at lower levels of Property it probably would be an over all negative as being a member of a bigger faction has it's benefits but being Independent does make you more of a target and not having that support structure of a larger faction hurts but the larger the Property the less it matters and might actually become a positive or even mandatory.  So I may have to scrap it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 December 2017, 17:47:57
Nobody ever said being an independent was easy (just ask the Lothian League!), so it being a negative isn't necessarily a bad thing.  Honestly, the negatives might give you enough points to invest in defenses that might actually hold (or screw holding and just go full on pirate)...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 December 2017, 18:12:58
The main problem is it is great being Independent if you're the Federated Suns.

So I've decided because there would be no easy way to work it and take such extremes into account it'd be best to at most offer up a game philosophy section on what one can expect for choosing between the two.

I have also decided my Property rules will only lever deal with one planet at most and no more because beyond that really is starting to get into the realm of Inner Sphere at War. I am still going with the idea that Sian could be worth Property 25 and the Status 25 to go with it but being Hanse Davion or George Hasek doesn't seem to really come with the perks and responsibilities of running multiple systems.  They'd have some pretty significant staffs to handle all that administration for them and handling the AFFS's budget seems a little below their pay grade.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 January 2018, 22:51:27
So time for another draft.  I'm pretty happy with where I am overall.  I still need to figure out some numbers for past Property 10 to establish budgets.

Quote
Property in these revisions no longer has a  strict correlation to the amount of land you control but more a measure of the economic value of your land that you are in control of.  Certainly as the Property value climbs the more likely it is that your character is in charge of more actual physical land, perhaps even an entire planet, but ultimately there is no minimum or maximum.  This is to help represent that Property on the barely developed fringe of human occupied space can result in the player controlling a lot more physical land to get the same kind of profitability as a highly developed world with greater economic output.  Property must be linked to a Status trait of some kind.  It does not strictly have to be Civilian as there are other ways to be in charge of land.  Status/Military with property could be a military governor of a recently conquered world for example.  For simplicity's sake Criminal organiztions can have their own Property and will use the same rules.  I know this isn't terribly realistic but this is more for keeping things simple, consistent, and for the sake of game play.  Property also provides some bonuses to the subcategories of the associated Status trait.  Increase  People and Wealth by 1 for each rank of Peoperty.  This may not cause Wealth to exceed 10.

Likewise Status is more of a relative than absolute measure of power/position.  So Status/Civilian 10 with Property 10 could get you a decent tract of land on a prosperous/populated world in the heart of your faction or let you be a petty warlord in charge of some far off rock on the fringes of human occupied space.

These rules are only really intended to handle at most one planet.  Even if that particular planet happens to be a highly developed National Capital of a major faction these rules will not deal with national budgets, federal armies, or any other such factors.  While I will try and provide frameworks for larger scale games but even then the rules below will only focus on one particular planet.  Scales beyond that are best handled by Inner Sphere at War found in Campaign Operations.

As such a guideline for more strategic levels of play 15 could represent the capital of some Bandit/Petty Kingdom or a District Capital overseeing a few dozen worlds.  20 represents the capital of a realm with about 20-50 inhabited worlds. 25 and up would be suitable for a the capital of a major power.  Not all major powers and their capitals are created equal nor do they hold the same strength/value through all eras so Gms and players are highly encouraged to work together to find some value that seems appropriate.

A quick note for determining if the player and their Property should be part of a faction or independent.  Both options have their pros and cons.  Independent grants greater freedom in what actions you can take while also giving the player potentially more direct control without having to conform to a superior's minim rights and responsibilities.  Also without a higher up taking a portion of your tax income you can have more funds to divide up.  In an age of interstellar empires though you can find yourself pretty easy prey and your citizenry could easily be more critical of you and your associates.  Being part of a faction can mean having certain expectations put on you, less freedom in your decisions, and actions but access to support systems that can give you aid in times of need.  This can range from relief funds to help rebuild after a raid or natural disaster, troops in the form of federal regulars or mercenaries that you don't have to support from your tax budget to help protect your lands, or even being rewarded for loyal service.

For players wishing to use Campaign Operations force building rules there are two slight changes to the Player Influences section.  Instead of rolling for a starting budget you start with the yearly defense budget for your Property(given in the additional tables section).  The second change is you also add the highest appropriate Protocol for the faction your Property is located in.  For independent Properties use the highest Protocol skill.

Property incomes and budgets for beyond 10 are not currently given in any tables or charts as personal wealth for Property 11 and beyond really starts becoming less important.  Now if you want to continue to use Campaign Operations force building rules and thus need to determine your budget exact numbers are still forthcoming but Property 15 should be able to get 1-2 Mech Regiments with a few Vehicle and Infantry Regiments to back them.  20 should yield enough to afford about 20 Regiments of mechs with numerous Vehicle and Infantry Regiments backing them.

Values for Property income have been adjusted so that at GM option the player can instead roll monthly, quarterly, semiannually, or yearly as desired.  Once a year a Property Event will be rolled for.  If rolling more often than once a year work with the GM to determine which Property Administration roll should be used to influence the Property Event roll. The margin of failure or margine of success for this roll will be added to an event table roll as well as the character's current Edge link attribute modifier modifier.  In the event of rolling a result that provides modifiers to the Property Administration rolls it is highly recommended to only apply them to one roll when rolling more often than once a year.

To compliment Property a new trait Investments has been introduced and a new Property Quirk trait.

Investments[ID and Status based]:
Modifier: -4
Investments largely work as the old Property trait and to represent their more volatile nature get the -4 as far off events can ripple more easily and with considerable time delays it will be tough maximizing your profit margins by making the correct moves.

Investment may not be higher than the Wealth subcategory of the Status trait it is tied to.

Property still largely works as previous but instead of not having any guidelines on how to figure out what modifiers to assign I have created Property Quirks.

Administrative Center
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a +1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  As an Administrative center this quirk is incompatible with Remote.  With the attention of their superiors more focused on them players are not as free in their actions but are more likely to receive aid in case of emergency.  Reduce Property Administration modifiers for Natural Disasters, Raids, and Invasions by 50% rounded in favor of the player to a minimum of -1.  Of course if the Player is involved in a Political Scandal the extra attention of their superiors increases the penalty they take 50%, round up, more severe penalties and take the normal penalties for being involved in such a scandal if another player in the group is somehow involved.  So if the Property Event Roll results in a Minor Political Scandal another PC in the group is involved the Property Owning Player would take -3 to their Property Administration roll.

Border World(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power more technologically advanced than your faction(represent some of the other eras like Age of War where the Terran Hegemony were being mean to their neighbors or later Clan Eras))
Cost: -2
Mechanics: Player takes a -2 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income but due to the raids and repelled invasions their techs do not take any repair/salvage modifiers for unfamiliar technology and may equip a weapon or piece of equipment available to this enemy power not available to your faction on one garrison unit per point of Property and any such equipped units may exceed the normal average skill rating of Regular and start at Veteran.
Special: To represent less actively hostile periods reduce cost to -1 and lose the ability to mount salvaged gear on garrison units but may still increase the average skill rating as described.  This quirk can be taken up to three times by GM permission depending on era.

Border World, Lesser(Within 30 Light Years of an actively hostile power on the same tech base or lower than yours)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  Due to the frequent raids at the start of the game campaign your garrison may have one unit per rank of Property exceed the normal starting average experience cap of Regular to a maximum of Veteran.
Special: The best count I can come up with is 5 times this quirk may be taken.

Extreme Cold or Extreme Heat
Cost: -1 for below -30 Celsius or above 50 Celsius
Mechanics: The special gear and reduced efficiency of vehicles reduces the economic output of your Property.  Take a -1 to Property Administration rolls.  When defending your Property consult Total Warfare and Tactical Operations for rules on extreme tempratures.

Fringe World
Cost: -1
Mechanics: Either literaly on the edge of occupied space or some world that has fallen between the cracks your world is nigh forgotten. -1 on Property Administration rolls.  Increase all unit type target numbers by one when building, replacing, or upgrading your garrison.

High/Low Gravity
Cost: -1 for 0.8g and below or 1.2g and above(recommend minimum of 0.2g and maximum of 1.5g)
Mechanics: Take a -1 to Property Administration Rolls due to the unusual gravity of the world your Property is on.  Consult Tactical Operations and A Time of War for rules on abnormal gravity.

Remote(more than 30 Light Years from the closest regional administrative center)
Cost: -1
Mechanics Player takes a -1 on their Property Administration roll whenever determining their income.  The lack of interference and oversight from their superiors allows the player to be more free in setting their own local laws.  Player may reduce Black Market costs as if they had one better letter code for legality, including eliminating them altogether, for the entire party.  Being so remote also makes it harder to raise a well equipped defensive force.  Increase all unit type target numbers by one when building, replacing, or upgrading your garrison.

Resource Shortage(mostly to reflect not having enough clean water to go around but I imagine there are a few other things this could cover)
Cost: -1
Mechanics: -1 to Property Administration roll.  Lacking proper supply of a daily need your Property is more severly impacted by Political Scandal and Natural Disasters.  Increase the penalty for these events by 50% round up(-1 becomes -2 for example).

Resource Surplus
Cost: +1
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  Excess resources make your rivals more covetous and corruption more likely though.  -1 on Property Event rolls. Incompatible with Resource Shortage.

Lightly Industrialized
Cost: +2
Mechanics: +1 on Property Administration rolls.  As with Resource Surplus this attracts the attention of rivals, enemies, and the corrupt but having some production offers some advantages. -1 on Property Event rolls as well as GM and player should work together to determine some good to be taken in trade.  May also provide sufficient facilities to perform Class D Refits for one unit type but take a -4 on Property Administration rolls while performing the refit to a minimum of once on the next Property Administration roll.

Heavily Industrialized
Cost: +4
Mechanics: +2 on Property Administration rolls but -2 Property Event rolls.  Work with GM to determine produced good to take in trade and may do a Class F refit of one unit type but takes certain levels of Property to do so.  Mass of unit/25 round up for Vehicles, +1 for Mechs, +2 for Small Craft and take a -4 modifier(player does not get the +2 to counter act part of this modifier) while performing the refit. For campaigns with Property exceeding the recommended maximum of 10, Dropships may also be produced and refit.

Re-tooling Industry rules:

Changes in technology, shifting demands, or a number of other factors could make a player consider changing what their industry produces.  This should not be done lightly though as it takes a great deal of time to change production and your factories will not be operating very efficiently, if at all.  While retooling Heavy Industrialized Properties your Property trait is effectively reduced by half, round down to a minimum of 1.  Light Industrialized Properties reduce Property by 2.  All Property Administration rolls take a penalty equal to the lost Property for re-tooling to a minimum of -1.  Apply this penalty to all Property Administration rolls until Property Recovery rules presented below indicate otherwise.

Recovering Property:
If you re-tool, suffer a raid, or repel an invasion but your Property takes damage sufficient to reduce productivity anyway there are two ways to recover this lost Property productivity.

You recover 1 Property one time a year when you roll a Property Administration roll with a Margin of Success of 5.
Certain events may allow you to recover Property.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 January 2018, 23:36:40
And now a revised event table.  Political events wound up being a bit cluttered again anyway despite expanding to 3d6.  Maybe shifting some results around to make No event! more likely will have to do.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 January 2018, 21:10:07
So in trying to figure out some things for going from AToW to possibly ISaW I am finding the garrison section really unhelpful with what it implies for how much garrisons can vary and thus how much it implies a world has to produce in terms of RP to support itself.

It is quickly looking like another thing I may have to just kick in the teeth and establish more consistent and usable starting point for.
Title: Autocannon flash & noise affecting enemy Mechs
Post by: idea weenie on 06 January 2018, 21:32:20
Had a thought about making autocannons more effective, based on MWO videos of autocannon fire making the target Mech's operator have to deal with the flashes and noise:

Autocannon damage taken to the front torso or head location, quartered (FRD), is the gunnery penalty for the next turn.

So AC/2 firing at an enemy Mech does no trouble.

A single AC/5 shot will cause the affected Mech to have a 1 pt Gunnery penalty for the next turn only

A single AC/10 shot will cause a 2-pt penalty for next turn only

A single AC/20 shot will cause a 5 pt penalty.

Makes a RAC/5 fairly nasty as if you can get 4 shots hitting the target, they have a 5 pt penalty for the next turn.

I went with next turn penalties since all fire in BT is simultaneous, so affecting this turn wouldn't make sense.  By making it only affect one turn, it encourages autocannon equipped Mechs to hit hard and keep hitting hard when they are shooting.  Depending on the range/capability, taking a targeting penalty limit hits the Punch table would be worthwhile.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 January 2018, 22:45:23
I don't know about that for entering my house rules.  Not a fan of adding extra special conditions that will come up that often.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 06 January 2018, 23:34:55
And now a revised event table.  Political events wound up being a bit cluttered again anyway despite expanding to 3d6.  Maybe shifting some results around to make No event! more likely will have to do.
Finally had a chance to look over the new table... much better than the last one!  I like the "spin doctor" results, but it strikes me those should have lingering effects, and the potential to die/retire, thus imposing a lingering penalty for a few turns on the other end of the table...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 January 2018, 00:26:51
To an extent that is me trying to keep them brief enough that I can get the tables printed out, the rest is me trying to keep it so the effects work the same no matter how often the Property Administration roll is made despite me making it a lot easier on myself having events only be rolled for once a year.

I am thinking about doing more expanded descriptions in another supporting document and maybe address some of the lingering effects as a GM philosophy guideline more than hard mechanics as a compromise.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 January 2018, 23:31:53
Okay made the adjustment to my Property event tables I was talking about to make No event! results statistically more likely for Political events but I did notice I could do the same for Disasters.  Military I think is fine for that.  I know it forced me to put negative event rolls at the higher numbers but I think it will work out in the end because of statistical probabilities.

I'll try and get the expanded event descriptions worked out and the GM philosophy section written up.

Though another discussion did get me to think about re-working my old Aging trait and gave me an idea how to implement it while being very simple.  It'd just be a direct roll modifier for my simplified aging adjustments or perhaps as a modifier as to when to start applying modifiers.  Since there are direct fluff quotes about Terrans living to be over 100 years old and often waiting into their 70's to have kids I think this could work out pretty well either way and I really should come up with actual rules on this, at least as a starting framework.

Also it is making me go back through my master document and I noticed there were some things I could just plain take out so I'll probably get a revised version on my mediafire account here soon(link in OP).  Also incorporating my Status Quirks and looking for other updates/revisions I need to make before I do so.  Probably have a few I need to do.  Still going to hold off on incorporating my Property revisions until I get a better sense of where I need the garrison budget to be and what is a reasonable budget for each Property rank.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 January 2018, 00:56:29
I think I've corrected everything that needed correcting and did find a couple other things I could adjust.  Hell if I can remember them all now.  I will hold off uploading until certain things are resolved for Campaign Operations, salaries, and I get a better idea of what an appropriate garrison is for each rank of Property.  Once those are all resolved one way or another I will go ahead and slide in the Property revisions.

What I remember:
-I decided to add a foreword to the reader.
-Fixed some skill advancement issues where I was basically doing what AToW was doing already and not realizing it
-Which made me have to make some adjustments to Fast Learner and Slow Learner.
-Came up with three more Status Quirks.  While some might appear to be contradictory I'm not convinced they need to be.
-Added some preliminary Aging roll modifiers frameworks while I still ponder if I want to put Aging back in and if I do how I want it to work.

Some things I am considering:
-My latest addition/revision for Aging modifier is set to apply a -1 for each 10 years or fraction thereof above 50 with Unlucky kicking in and modifiers for appropriate compulsions, injuries, and events being suggested.  Currently thinking Aging should modify the 10 years bit.  So Aging -5 would be a -1 for every 5 years or fraction thereof and Aging 5 would be -1 for every 15 years or fraction thereof.
-Seriously considering adding points to Connections and Status for having a Reputation trait.
-Figuring out a better way to add some descriptive text to my Status Quirks and Property Quirks.

Anyway I'll go ahead and paste the entire thing into a quote block for now.

Quote
Foreword:

The main intent of these house rules is to make certain elements of A Time of War more sensible or logical.  Sometimes it will make the mechanics simpler and easier to use in game, other times it will make things more complicated and force Gms and players to have to make certain decisions and perhaps more of them.  I will make what efforts I can for these to be frameworks to build from or discard as you see fit as the first rule is to have fun, not get too mired down in details and complexity.

As such expect some GM/gaming philosophy sections to pop up where I talk about things.  Also certain elements of these rules revisions/additions I put in supporting spreadsheet documents and may not make sense without said spreadsheets.

Rules adjustments:

Link Attribute modifiers and skill limitation revisions:

Attributes no longer provide direct bonuses to skills without Special Abilities.  Furthermore increasing a skill rank higher than the lowest linked attribute increases XP cost by one factor.  Characters are assumed to have trainers during character creation for purposes of determining this modified XP cost.  As such at character creation increasing a skill beyond this limit would cost double while a complex advanced skill without a trainer would cost triple XP.

Suppressing Fire Combat Action Revision:

Since the current rules only consider what happens to the inhabitants of the hexes/area actually being suppressed and make no mention of what happens if using an attack type such as bullets or lasers and someone getting between the character using suppressing fire and the target hexes to cover this rule oversight if a character enters a hex/area that falls along the firing line of hexes/area being suppressed and no mitigating factor is involved(such as the firer being at a higher elevation, trenchworks/alternate paths exist to go over or under the area in question, or the firer using a weapon type capable of suppressing fire but requires a trajectory that leaves a safe zone for characters to enter ) roll a single attribute Edge roll with current Edge and apply a -1 for every 15 meters or fraction thereof to be crossed and apply a modifier  equal to the firer's Margin of Success.  Apply the Margin of Failure as though it were the firer's Margin of Success on a successful attack roll using the weapon that they are suppressing an area with up to a maximum number of rounds that are designated for each area suppressed.

Revised Spending Edge in Advance:

To help make spending Edge in advance a more attractive option the bonus per Edge point spent on a roll in advance increases by +1 for each additional point of Edge spent in advance.  So if a player spends 2 of their character's Edge in advance they would receive a +6 instead of the normal +4 on the appropriate roll.  If they spent 3 the total bonus would be +12 and so on.

Aging:

Instead of applying XP modifiers to attributes at certain age thresholds once a year a character makes a double attribute check pairing each of Strength, Body, Dexterity, Reflexes, Intelligence, Will, and Charisma with current Edge(not base).  Add the Margin of Success(or the Margin of Failure) to the non-Edge attribute in XP.  Modifiers and multipliers are up to the GM and are highly recommended.  Especially using the Unlucky trait.

As a starting framework for modifiers to this aging roll I suggest a base line modifier of -1 for every 10 years, or fraction thereof, over 50 years old.  Appropriate addiction compulsions should also provide a modifier equal to their rank.  Thus a Compulsion/Chemical Addition 2 would apply a -2 to these rolls.  If the character lost consciousness for any reason or took a lethal injury that needed surgery to repair apply a -1 to Body or Will.  Or both if you want.  A hit to the head? -1 to Intelligence and/or Will.  Spend a lof of time in lower or micro gravity? -1 to Strength and Body(this time I actually do recommend both instead of one or the other as the baseline).

Education/Training/Stage 3:

This section can be ignored completely if using unmodified Stage 3 modules.

A character instead spends a certain amount of time learning each field up to a maximum of 10 fields but not exceeding a maximum of 8 years.  All fields now have five skills each, each one receiving a certain amount of XP based upon how long was spent on training in that field.  Use the stage 2 modules as written with no changes unless desired.  For the sake of simplicity and consistency if you select two or more fields that have the same skill you still get the full rebate as listed on the additional tables document as well as the specified XP in the skill.  New additional specific to these house rules and my AU life modules will also be made available so that there are no adjustments necessary.

Skill revision:

It just makes too much sense to me that the gunnery control inputs would be similar enough between the units that skills should be largely interchangeable. So I've decided to go back to the MW3E of having Gunnery/Ballistic, Gunnery/Energy, and Gunnery/Missile as it makes more sense to instead divide based on flight characteristics of the weapon in question. It is highly recommended that Game Masters apply an automatic specialization to these Gunnery skills appropriate to the unit type the player wishes to primarily use, especially when gained from a training field.  Since this does muck with the existing easy specializations(and increasing the limit to two specializations for these skills only) some alternatives would be(coming up with your own is highly recommended):  It is also highly recommended to use negative design quirks related to accuracy to apply even further disadvantage.

Gunnery/Ballistic:
Direct(Standard Acs, LB-Xs, and Gauss rifles); Indirect(tube artillery, sawed off artillery); Rapid fire(Machine guns, UACs, RACs)

Gunnery/Energy:
Laser(duh); Particle(PPCs); Plasma(flamers and plasma rifles)

Gunnery/Missile:
Guided(LRMs, SRMs, ATMs); Unguided(MRMs, Rocket Launchers); Large(Arrow, Thunderbolt, Cruise missiles)

As you might imagine this has caused me to remove Artillery as a stand alone skill as one of the other gunnery skills can handle firing it and a Navigation/Ground with a Communications/Conventional check would be more appropriate for calling in the strike.

Likewise Piloting/Battlearmor I feel is sufficiently redundant as any task it would reasonably cover could be covered by Running, Climbing, or Swimming, or Acrobatics/Free Fall(on the basis of it also covering regular infantry jump packs) instead.

Negotiation , Interrogation, and Training are now limited by the Language skills of the character.  So even if you have more ranks in one or more of these three skills you can never add more than the bonus of the Language in which you are trying to use them in.

New Traits:

Exceptionally Bad/Good Attribute(s)[-10 to 10]
Character Trait

If by some blessing of chance or through modern science you can exceed the limitations of mere mortals.  For each positive trait point invested a character may adjust their attribute maximums by a combined total of +1 instead.  Attributes may not be increased beyond a maximum of 10 nor may any attribute receive greater than a +2 bonus to it's rank without GM  approval.

Conversely whether a scientist created you for some sick experiment or your family tree is a little trunk like you have gotten a poor lot in life.  For each negative rank of this trait an attribute is applied a -1 to it's maximum threshold.  No attribute may be reduced to less than a final threshold of 1.

All attributes start with a maximum threshold of 6 without this trait and may not be raised any further.

Intensive Training[2]
Character Trait

Between hard work, natural talent, and a well designed training program you have an easier time with a field of work.  This trait causes one of the Character's fields related skills to have their target number dropped by 1.  Character may only receive this trait once.

Status[-1 to 10]
Character Trait ID Based

Whether it is a position in a social, mega corporation, religious, or military organization this trait represents your character's current lot in life.  As such it is entirely possible for a character to have the Status trait multiple times with the same ID but within different organizations.  A non-exhaustive suggested list is Civilian, Criminal, Intelligence, and Military.  To represent what your character can call upon as part of their status in this organization the player may distribute a number of points to the same sub categories of Connections.  While this trait does not provide as much of a point pool as the Connections trait it has the advantage of not needing any rolls to tap but the GM is encouraged to exploit any inappropriate uses of the character's authority.  See the section on Connections for more information.  Only Equipped and Wealth may go into negatives

-1  Slave or other Ward of the State with restricted rights(prisoners/ex-cons).  -2 points.  Available for Civilian only.  May not possess Property, or Vehicle traits without Alternate ID or Status in another category.
0  Non citizen.  Reserved for scenarios where a character is traveling in a foreign nation.  If a character has no other Status trait they are entirely dependent on black market purchases for all but the most basic of goods.
1  Basic ordinary citizen or grunt.  Poor selection of equipment and little potential for earnings.  1 point.
2  Position of minimal importance.  3 points.
3  Low level supervisory position.  4 points.
4  A person of modest influence: Manager, Mechwarrior, Officer, Pilot, or Vehicle Commander.  6 points.
5  Really still the beginnings of power and authority but more than previous. 9 points.
6  Got a good number of people who'll do your bidding, control over sizable funds, or a good selection of gear available to you. 12 points.
7  Breaking into the upper ends of power.  15 points
8  Near enough to Nobility to not make a difference or someone of similar major importance.  19 points
9  In charge of large groups of people, land, or large corporations.  24 points.
10 Normal maximum unless over-ruled by GM whims.  Positions of great authority and respect.  29 points.

Status Quirks[1 to 5]

Bad Reputation Organization/Unit
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: -1 Equipped(must be bought up to -1 via other quirks or via Status point pool) as bad reputations make it harder to get the good stuff, +1 People to represent the make the best of what you do have mentality, +1 Info as people are more willing to talk to your people, +2 Wealth because there is always something going on and you can have a cut.

Legacy(your family line is known to have performed well/featured heavily in your particular Status)
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: +1 People because your family has made friends and friends make sure you have the best staff, +1 Equipped because they want you to have the best stuff too, and +1 Info because people are more likely to tell you stuff.

Officer(Plenty of ways it can apply beyond Status/Military)
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: +1 People(which has no cap in my House Rules) to help represent you're in charge of something, +1 to Equipped(capped at 10 in my House Rules) because position is as important as wealth for getting a hold of stuff, and +1 Info(again no max in my House Rules) because you have a support structure that can help you find out things.

Pilot
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: +1 People as you should have at least something of a technical crew, +1 Equipped because getting pilot gear isn't entirely easy, and +1 Vehicle(capped at 5 in my House Rules) because you're Piloting something.

Staffer
Cost: 100 XP
Benefit: -1 People as you are part of a higher up's staff(must be bought up to 0 via other Quirks or Status point pool), +1 Info as you have more direct access to information or at least a research team, +1 Equipped as you have to get things for your boss, +2 Wealth as you have access to an expense account.

Removed traits:

Equipped, Phenotype, Rank, Tech Empathy, Title, Trueborn, and Wealth have all been removed in favor of Exceptionally Bad/Good Attribute(s), Intensive Training, and Status as these traits better represent the game effects of the removed traits.  For module builds player may substitute Connections or Status for Equipped or Wealth, Intensive Training for Tech Empathy and Field Aptitude, Status for Bloodname, Citizenship, Rank, Title and Exceptionally Bad/Good Attribute(s) for Phenotype plus Trueborn at indicated values.

Fit is being incorporated in Toughness and thus for module build characters using unmodified modules may instead apply the appropriate XP to Toughness instead.

Attractive is being removed as what is Attractive varies in a subjective manner and it is so easy to acquire.  Certain things however seem to be nearly universally Unattractive: scars that didn't heal right, broken bones that were never set correctly, and other physical deformities.  As such Unattractive will be remaining.

Revised traits:

Connections[1 to 10]

These represent favors, access to gear, access to funds, and allies that are capable of going above and beyond what the character's normal position of authority allows.  Connections can be with entire organizations and may even include people already under a character's authority.  To represent the often varied nature of connections there are five sub categories available.  Equipped, Info, People, Vehicle and Wealth.  The player may distribute the pool of points as they see fit among these categories.  While there is no upward limit on People or Info there is on Wealth and Equipped.  It costs one point for each rank of Info, Wealth, People, Equipped, Vehicle, and Custom Vehicle.  Equipped and Wealth both have a maximum value of 10.  All other categories have no upper limit beyond the point limitations of the trait.  Vehicle has a maximum value of 5.  Vehicle may have a zero rating.  If a character needs a vehicle from their connection or requires one as part of their Status trait roll 2d6 and add the Vehicle value and consult the table in the supporting documentation.  For all other sub categories see A Time of War for what these sub categories do.

1:  3 points
2:  5 points
3:  8 points
4:  12 points
5:  17 points
6:  21 points
7:  25 points
8:  29 points
9:  33 points
10:  38 points

Fast Learner[2]

Doubles all downtime XP rewards and characters do not require trainers to avoid skill increase XP penalties but still pay double for raising any skill beyond lowest linked attribute.  No longer modifies XP to Rank conversions.

Gremlins[-2]

No longer modifies XP to skill rank conversions.  Otherwise unchanged.

Illiterate[-1]

No longer modifies XP to skill rank conversions.  Otherwise unchanged.

Natural Aptitude[2 or 4]
Character Trait

Complex skills cost 2 TP and Simple cost 4 TP.  A character may not have more natural aptitudes than base Edge.

Slow Learner[-2]

Halves all downtime XP gains and the character must see a trainer or pay double(triple in the case of an Advanced skill without a trainer or raising a Basic skill beyond lowest linked attribute, and quadruple if raising an Advanced skill beyond lowest linked attribute) XP instead of double when increasing a skill.  No longer modifies XP to skill rank conversions.

Toughness[3]

Instead of modifying damage Toughness instead adds a 25% bonus(round normally) to the character's health pool and 50%(round normally) to their Fatigue pool..

Custom Vehicle:

You must invest at least two points in Vehicle before you can invest in Custom Vehicle which is now a subcategory of Status or Connections.  As per normal you can spend one to change which RAT you roll on for your random unit or select from your faction's RAT.  Also as per normal to not roll on this new table requires a second point spent on Custom Vehicle.  You may spend a point to increase refit by one category(Field, Maintenance, Factory).  One point will let you select the mass of the unit without having to roll.  Or you can just spend all 5 to custom design a new unit but it will automatically have the Prototype design quirk.  Increase the Vehicle point requirement by 1 for each weight class of Vehicle desired when using Custom Vehicle to determine the weight category of the Vehicle without rolling(1 point for Light, 2 for medium, and so on).

New Special Abilities:

Note:  The limit for all Special Abilities is equal to the Character’s base Edge score and thus does not drop as Edge is spent.  For example if a character has an Edge of 4 then they may have 4 Special Abilities.  This also applies to the special pilot abilities found in A Time of War and A Time of War Companion.

Name: Athlete
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Strength 7+

Effect: A character with this ability adds their Strength modifier to any trained skill checks that link to Strength.

Name: Clever Mind
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Intelligence 7+

Effect: With this ability a character may add their Intelligence bonus to all trained skill checks that link to Intelligence.

Name: Conditioning
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Body 7+

Effect: With this ability a character may add their Body modifier to any trained skill check that links to Body.

Name: Death of a Thousand Strikes
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Dex 6+; Martial Arts, Melee Weapons, or Thrown Weapons 4+

Effect: A character with this ability as a complex action may unleash a rapid flurry of attacks on their foe as a complex action.  Doing so allows the character to deal Strength divided by 4 rounded normally plus Weapon Damage plus Margin of Success damage as well as the defender having to make a Will check to avoid losing one of their simple actions.

Name: Fan of Blades
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Thrown Weapons +5, Death of a Thousand Strikes

Effect: A character with this ability can unleash a torrent of thrown weapons such that they can make use of the suppressing fire ability normally available only to automatic fire arms but may only target one hex while following all other rules of suppressing fire.

Name: Flexible
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost :10 XP
Requirements: Dexterity 7+

Effect: With this ability a character may add their Dexterity modifier to any trained skill check that links to Dexterity.

Name: Iron Body
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Toughness, Martial Arts 5+

Effect: A character with this ability gains +1 Melee armor even when not wearing any protective gear.

Name: Iron Fist
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Martial Arts 5+, Toughness, Iron Body

Benefit: Character gains 1M Armor Penetration for unarmed attacks.


Name: Iron Will
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements : Will 7+

Effect: Character may add their Will bonus to any trained skill checks that link to Will.

Name: Lethal Techniques
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Martial Arts 6+, Natural Aptitude Martial Arts, Iron Fist

Effect:  Character as a complex action instead deals Lethal damage with Martial Arts attacks

Name: Lightening Reflexes
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Reflexes 7+

Effect: For any trained skill check that links to Reflexes the character may apply their Reflexes modifier to the roll as a bonus.

Name: Master of Improvisation
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Int 6+, Demolitions 4+, Science/Any 4+, Survival/Any 4+, and Tech/Any  4+

Effect: Character with this special ability ignores any modifiers for not having the correct tools for the job as long as they have something to improvise with.

Name: Muscle Memory
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Martial Arts or Melee Weapons Rank 4 or higher

Effect: A character with this ability receives a +1 initiative bonus when combating a foe with a lower Martial Arts or Melee Weapons score so long as the character is using Martial Arts or Melee Weapons to combat their foe.

Name: Power Thrower
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 25 XP
Requirements: Strength 5+, Thrown Weapons 5+, Natural Aptitude Thrown Weapons

Effect: A character with this ability multiplies thrown weapon ranges by 1.5 rounding normally.

Name: Practical Experience
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 25 XP
Requirements: Clever Mind

Effect: Using this ability a character may roll three six sided dice keeping the two best for any untrained skill check.

Name: Silver Tongued Devil
Type: Personal Improvement
Cost: 10 XP
Requirements: Charisma 7+

Effect: A character with this ability may add their Charisma bonus to any trained skill check that links to Charisma.

Name: Sweeping Attack
Type: Arcane Combat Arts
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Strength 6+, Dexterity 6+; Martial Arts, Melee Weapons, or Thrown Weapons 5+; Death of a Thousand Strikes

Effect: A character with this ability may take a complex action to attack all foes within three meters of their present location.

Name: Safe Storage
Type: Misc
Cost: 150XP
Requirements: Natural Aptitude/Tech/Mechanic, Technician/Mechanic 4+, Edge 6+

Effect: On any critical hit that results in an explosive ammunition critical, re-roll.  If the second roll still results in an explosive ammunition critical the second roll stands and the critical behaves normally.

Name: Preventative Maintenance
Type: Misc
Cost: 100 XP
Requirements: Natural Aptitude/Tech/Mechanic, Technician/Mechanic 4+, Edge 6+

Effect: On any critical that results in a fuel or Engine critical, re-roll.  If the second roll still results in a fuel critical the second roll stands and the critical behaves normally.

Name: Smooth Driving
Type: Piloting/Driving(ground units only)
Cost: 150 XP
Requirements: Natural Aptitude-Driving/Piloting, Driving/Piloting 4+, Dexterity 6+

Effect: The driver may elect to reduce the Attacker Movement Modifier for Cruising or Flanking by one but in doing so also reduces their Defensive Target Movement Modifier by 1.

Name: Off Road Master
Type: Piloting/Driving(ground units only)
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Speed Demon SPA

Effect: Reduce MP to enter a non-paved/prepared hex by 1 to a minimum of 1.

Name: Dead Eye
Type: Gunnery
Cost: 50 XP
Requirements: Marksman SPA

Effect: Gain a +1 to all rolls for determining Critical hits.

Revised SPAs

Range Master
As normal except now Minimum Range and Line of Sight Range are no longer valid choices.

Revised combat rules

Tactical Armor provides twice the normal damage reduction against any weapon classified as a “Small Arm”.  Additionally always round down the result of adjusted BD divided by BAR calculation.  Weapons classified as Support Weapons or Ordinance weapons are unchanged.  Long Ranged attacks apply a -1 AP to all Small Arms and Support Weapons not using Ordinance or eXplosive AP type attacks.  Extreme Range further increases the penalty to a total of -2 AP.  When shooting through cover/barriers any barrier rated at least 1 BAR automatically reduces the attack AP by 1 before penetrating to the next layer.

Internal Structure of all support vehicles is always a minimum of BAR 10.

To prevent weirdness with LAMs, aerospace units may now be equipped with any specialty ammunition but be advised many will have no effect in aerospace combat(such as Thunder Ammunition), do not provide their bonus but still deal appropriate damage(Precision Ammunition), or have reduced effect(AP versus Capital grade Armor).  While I will not make an exhaustive list GM's best judgment should be applied on a case by case basis.


AU Specific:

Autocannons(including LB-X and UAC versions) are -2 tons to a minimum of 0.5 tons, -1 critical to a minimum of 1 critical, and have no minimum range.  Ammunition counts per ton have been changed as follows with the ammo counts for specialty ammunition types altering shots per ton following the slash in the order of reduced then increased after the second slash:

AC-2(includes LB-2X and UAC-2): 60/40/90
AC-5(includes LB-5X and UAC-5): 24/16/36
AC-10(includes LB-10X and UAC-10): 12/8/18
AC-20(includes LB-20X and UAC-20): 6/4/9

Flak and Flechette are now combined into one specialty ammunition.  Armor Piercing no longer applies a +1 to hit modifier.  Tracer is removed and night modifiers for combat will also be capped at -2(+2 in TW play).

All Gauss Rifles have no minimum range and count as Energy Weapons for purposes of determining Heat Sink capacity and Power Amplifier tonnage.

Heavy Gauss Rifle now produces 12 heat and explodes for 30 damage.  Range adjusted to 6/12/18 and damage to 20 at all ranges.  Ammo per ton adjusted to 6.

Light Gauss Rifle now produces 4 heat.

Standard Gauss Rifle now produces 8 heat.

LRM-5 and 15 have had their weight increased by 0.5 tons each, Clan versions as normal weight half as much measured to the quarter ton but now have a minimum range of 4. 

Unguided weapons that roll on the cluster table(ACs/RACs/UACs in Rapid Fire Mode, MRMs, and Rocket Launchers) apply a +2 to the cluster table row at Short Range, no modifier at Medium Range, a -2 modifier at Long Range, -4 modifier at Extreme Range, and a -8 modifier at Line of Sight Range.  A result less than 2 results in all clusters failing to deliver damage.  Any result above 12 is treated as a 12.  LB-X Cluster munitions use a proximity fuse system that provides no range modifier to the cluster roll.

MRMs and Rocket Launchers no longer have +1 to hit and instead take a -1 to all cluster table rolls(stacks with the above).

SRMs, ATMs, LRMs, and LB-X Cluster munitions as guided/variable fused weapons behave as normal except as noted below.

LRMs and ATM munitions with minimum ranges instead of applying a +1 to hit per hex take a -1 to the cluster hit roll per hex with results less than 2 result in all missiles failing to deliver damage.  For example a Clan technology LRM firing at a target at 1 hex would take a -4 modifier to cluster hit rolls.

All ammunition counts have been adjusted so that maximum damage potential is 120 points per ton except for certain specialty ammunitions.

All Battlemechs and ASFs come with the Design Quirk Rumble Seat for free and it does not count against any other limits for Design Quirks.

As such all units of that type operate at highest efficiency with someone occupying the extra seat and performing various supporting duties.  If so desired they can be a backup Mechwarrior or ASF pilot as well as long as the rules for Command Consoles are followed.

When using Battle value the best piloting and best gunnery scores between the two warriors are used.

Rules for co-ownership of a Vehicle:

If two or more characters wish to own the same vehicle then they both must pay the appropriate points for Vehicle, including ownership of said Vehicle, and Custom Vehicle.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 January 2018, 20:14:46
Okay I sat down and did some pretty basic and incomplete math while waiting for cray to get back to us in the other thread about Campaign Operations pay issues to see if I can at least establish a basic starting point for what kind of forces we should be talking about for each rank of Property.

According to ISaW the smallest garrison possible for an Other World is 1 vehicle regiment and 2 conventional infantry regiments.

Using the rules as they currently stand to determine just the payroll of the troops, ignoring the tech, admin, and spare parts needs, I come up with 2,984,040 C-bills a month(assuming vehicles with crews of 7 just to set the highest possible salary costs).

A Property 10 as it stands in AToW, not my house rules revisions, according to the Companion has a monthly defense budget of 5,000,000 C-bills.

Pretty easily capable of supporting that I'd say.

I think just so we can all have a point of comparison I will go ahead and put these findings in the other thread too.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 January 2018, 20:21:43
Good idea... I've been short of time this week, but I'll try to look at your most recent revisions this weekend.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 January 2018, 20:53:44
Well by the time I got there and started thinking out how to express the math I did in a relevant way I kind of realized maybe we have been making a bit of a mountain out of a mole hill.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 January 2018, 18:24:57
Finally had time to sit down and read through all the updates.  My comments are below.

For the event tables, I think the bottom results of all the tables practically requires pre-spending Edge to avoid them.

As a whole, I think the list of house rules increase overall complexity, though that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I'm not entirely sold on the revised aging rules, but we discussed that in another thread (I'll mention here that at 46, I'm stronger, faster, and have more endurance than ever before in my life; aging is what you make of it).

I'm also not sold on the changes to Stage 3... what problem were you trying to address?

I thought you were going to add Protocol to the list of language dependent skills?

Did you reverse the base rules on Natural Aptitudes?  I thought Complex skills were more expensive...

Toughness makes sense, but I think I would have left Fit a separate trait, but used the same principle.

For the SPAs, I think it would make sense to group the attribute linked ones together, vice making the reader sift through the whole list to find the CHA linked one.  Also, it should be "Lightning Reflexes" vice "Lightening".

Similarly, I recommend grouping all the Martial Arts ones together.

I strongly recommend "Practical Experience" be more expensive.  Taking the 2 best of 3 dice roughly translates to a +2.

Conversely, I recommend "Smooth Driving" be cheaper.  It has a built in drawback, so no need to overly penalize someone for taking it.

I'm inclined not to comment on your AU specific rules, but I have to ask: with your changes to LRM-5s and LRM-15s, why not just make it half a ton per tube, and remove the restrictions on rack size?  The cluster table has all the columns now, so it will support them.  By assigning an appropriate (fractional) heat value to each tube and rounding up, you could easily yield the current heat values for the existing racks.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 January 2018, 20:54:31
With 3d6 a lot of the really nasty events just are not going to happen a lot(3 is a 1 in 216 probability) and honestly that is the kind of thing Edge is for.  It is only 20 XP to restore a spent point of Edge and frankly Edge is kind of a dump stat  in my group.

The upside to the complexity I am adding is a lot of it is only during character creation and won't really come up again.

Aging, well I do despise how it works currently because it is so cookie cutter and really I want to emphasize campaign award XP instead of just getting older to get better.

Mostly the changes to Stage 3 came about because of wonkyness with the fields to prevent Intensive Training from being too good of a trait and I was going to try and do something overly ambitious for full conversion Stage 3 for AU specific modules.  Having been forced to take a good long hard think on that I am certainly considering giving this an overhaul.

Honestly if I was going to I forgot about that completely but thinking about it that may not make as much sense, especially when I quite often see forms at local government offices in multiple languages.

Natural Aptitude RAW is more expensive for Advanced skills than Basic skills.  To me that is backwards.  A Natural Aptitude that you can roll with more often, potentially in the same turn, should be the more expensive option.  And as good as 3d6 keep the 2 best is they did seem a bit expensive RAW.

Toughness and Fit are another couple of traits that I admit I keep going back and forth on.  People who are in shape can tend to take more of a beating then those who are not so a certain amount of overlap does seem a bit unavoidable to me and combining them to get some simplicity may be the best I can do as I am not sure how to keep them separate in such a way that makes sense or that couldn't be represented just as well by just raising relevant attributes and skills.

Yeah re-arranging may be in order for the special abilities and oops typos.

Practical Experience only looks cheap.  It requires Clever Mind.  Which requires an Intelligence of 7+.  So to get it the player has to invest some not insubstantial XP.

Smooth Driver I take your point.  Especially with how many other ways there are to mitigate to hit penalties.  I think taking that down to 50.

I want that to be the implication for sure and if I ever get good enough with java to code all that into MegaMek(Lab in particular) I probably will make those kinds of adjustments.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 January 2018, 21:08:09
On the Fit/Toughness thing... I've known people who were both, sure, but more who were only one or the other (I'm far more Fit than Tough, for example, being relatively scrawny).  I think they used to call Toughness "Thick Skinned" or something?  It's been a while.  Anyway, my point is Toughness is more naturally opposed to Glass Jaw than a combined Toughness/Fit, I think.  It's totally reasonable for a Fit person to have a Glass Jaw.

Otherwise, it all sounds reasonable.  Thanks for hearing me out!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 January 2018, 22:18:18
Well that can just be you having a good Will stat or my revised Toughness trait and a kind of poor Body score.  Though I see I forgot to add in a note mentioning it should always add at least one to the health pool.  Add in that it can only ever add three at max it's main benefit is the extra fatigue a character can endure anyway.  I chalk it up to it doing a decent job of representing an in shape person even if a bit scrawny can take a few more punches if in shape than someone not in shape but it isn't really going to matter too much how many push ups they did if they get shot.  So yeah as I said I think some of these distinctions might be better handled by raw attribute scores than trying to have two different traits that realistically speaking do have a fairly large amount of overlap.

And yeah I do take feedback under advisement.  It has helped me refine some fairly large sections of my house rules.  I've lost track of the number of revisions I have made because of feedback.

I am now thinking about how to refine my Stage 3 stuff in particular.  I do kind of want to keep the 5 skills a field thing and the varied levels of training mostly because I think it does give a good way to introduce concepts like abbreviated training due to national emergency or the difference between taking a few courses here and there and being a true dedicated student in a field that does demand a lot of time, study, and effort before you can even enter the workforce proper but also make sure it still gives plenty of player freedom of choice.  So we'll see what I can do with that and perhaps getting those special abilities re-organized.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 January 2018, 23:28:31
Okay I've already re-organized the Special Abilities into rough categories though I'll probably wind up going through again and putting them in alphabetical order in those categories.

My Stage 3 revisions are proving troublesome.  I've taken the point of what I'm trying to setup with those revisions has undergone some significant change itself and as a result some scrutiny could be applied here to see if there is really a problem that still needs solving but I still find myself attracted to the ideas of variable training times and unified skill fields.

What doesn't show up in what I posted is what I was doing with the varied training time.  Like say you just want your character to get out there and into the action you could invest 0.25 years in your only field costing you 100 XP and all your skills in that field are at 20 XP and you have 20 XP of rebate XP and use that to reflect abbreviated Basic Training for a Taurian PBI in the Reunification War or a college drop out.

Next step up is 0.5 years which costs 150 XP one skill getting 50 XP, two 30 XP, and two 20 XP with a rebate of 30 XP.  I made it uneven to help bring back some of that second edition flavor where some skills would just be better than others for the same training.

Did similar for 1 year and 2 years.  The idea was to make it all nice and unified so you could have some of that second edition flavor without certain skill fields throwing that for a loop by having more skills than others which neatly helps keep the power of my Intensive Training trait fairly even all while giving the player more freedom and granularity in how they wanted to customize their character.

What has changed is that I've decided rather than write sufficiently altered modules that could be used with Battletech proper(ultimately coming down to even if I could alter things enough I didn't want to compete too much with AToW and CGL if it came down to it) I would just write AU specific modules for my own setting(which was going to include a wider variety of Stage 3 options, most of which would be faction specific, but I quickly realized writing event tables for each and every one would be too much, especially since I'd have to write up generic stage 3 options on top of those anyway) and with me contemplating not going so far down the rabbit hole because it is already causing burnout and some good points being made does raise questions of if I really should still be trying to do keep these revisions or not.

Either way it is not like I can just borrow AToW's Stage 3 stuff for such a wholesale re-write of the modules, especially if I want to share them eventually.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 13 January 2018, 23:51:35
If you're trying whittle down skill fields to only 5 skills, I think some of the larger skill fields will end up having to be split into two, though that could work.  The larger skill fields are things like Scout or Covert Ops that could benefit from a few more skills.  The trickier ones will be the aerospace/naval fields.  They're mostly 6 skills to include Zero-G Operations.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 January 2018, 02:36:49
Oh I already did all that.  But it is like I said I'm now contemplating if it was wasted effort or not because as much as I like the ideas, controls, and concepts I'm now questioning how necessary it is.

Also the ethical/legal issues I face in sharing it are worth bringing up since a lot of it is copied directly from AToW(since there are quite a few 5 skill fields already).

I'll probably stick with it for my AU specific material, which I probably should separate out into it's own document.

So my idea to replace that for more general utility is perhaps a bit of a compromise.  Uneven skill distribution options for four to seven skill field combinations, at least I don't remember a field having eight skills off the top of my head, and an abbreviated/emergency training option.

Basic field only I am thinking but I could be persuaded to extend it to advanced and specialist fields too, half time, all skills get 20 XP each with 4 XP rebates each skill as I'm not inclined to let the player drop down lower than that for Stage 3 field skill rewards.

I'll have to run through some math to see how many options/combinations can be done and what they might look like.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 January 2018, 02:50:45
And already threw together a table in a spreadsheet.  I wanted to stick to the XP to skill rank milestones in the rewards to keep the number of possible combinations manageable.

If I wind up finding out I did forget a field with 8 skills in it I can add in those combinations easy enough.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 14 January 2018, 08:29:53
When I was building my spreadsheet, Herb had asked me to "minimize verbatim content", but blessed off on using what was necessary to make things work.  I think this project may tread a bit closer to his line, and I don't know how the new guy feels about it, but I think you'll be OK.  Downloading now...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 14 January 2018, 08:34:35
What exactly did you have against 30XP per skill again?  I think the "balanced" option would be better served with that, but I like the abbreviated and focused options.  And I don't see any fields bigger than seven skills either, so I think you're good on that score.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 January 2018, 16:14:00
Well mostly I admit I kind of missed the way 2nd Edition did it's version of stage 3 where not all skills got the same bonus and thought it would make a fairly interesting alternative to bring that back but going going forward it will be an option, not the new standard.

So you can have the all 30 XP each skill default or if you want to mix it up you can have some alternatives that I have made sure work out to be the same total XP and rebate.

As far as sharing what I put together as an exclusively AU option I think you may be right because to an extent it is unavoidable but I am at least re-arranging the fields and creating enough new ones that it should be fine.

For my AU specific stuff I've managed to create what I can admit at times is heavily inspired by AToW life modules but even then are pretty unique with most I think being clearly different all the way through Stage 2 with a bit of inspiration for some stage 4 options causing me to jump ahead.  All with unique random events to add flavor but made painstakingly sure are rather balanced.  So even if you roll a 2 on 2d6 you will get an offsetting bonus of some sort that works out to the same XP as the penalty that just got applied.  I did decide 7 would just give +5 XP with no negative offset but all others XP balance.  No result forces the player to pick a particular path.  The only thing I worry about is I probably did get a bit too dark and suggestive for people's tastes a bit too often.  I guess I'll find out for sure when I figure out my Stage 3 modules and decide how to incorporate all this stuff into a single document.

Ultimately though all in all I actually feel like I'm getting close to a finished product for my house rules.  I may have to make some adjustments to my Status trait once the payroll stuff is finished and then I should be able to finish off my Property section too once that is settled and I think those are the last two major issues to tackle.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 14 January 2018, 17:40:36
Makes sense... if 30XP per skill is still on the table, I think "balanced" needs a different name since it does actually lead to some specialization.

Best of luck putting it all together!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 January 2018, 18:20:25
Fair enough point about the naming conventions.  Hmmm... Semi-Balanced perhaps.  Or would Semi-Focused be clearer?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 14 January 2018, 18:27:33
Maybe use "focused" for that level, and "specialized" for the more extreme version?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 January 2018, 18:50:32
Yeah that would probably be better.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2018, 18:02:10
I actually realized something about my Property events table, well two really.

1. Even though statistically speaking re-arranging some of the vents I did the way I did technically makes them less likely to occur than the way I had them before that is actually only true if using straight up 3d6 not 4d6 keep the three best.  So I'm going to have to work on re-arranging the tables yet again.

2. Spending Edge in advance isn't worth as much on 3d6 tables as +2 is less meaningful and since everything else is 2d6 it isn't terribly internally consistent but as previously discussed 2d6 runs out of room entirely too fast.

This raises a couple issues in my mind.  Bad events will be a little too common if I rearrange events as I had them before on straight 3d6 but having them the way I do now makes them more common on 4d6 keep the three best.  Leaving the tables 3d6 makes spending Edge to just re-roll a bad result so much more valuable than spending in advance to avoid a bad event in the first place that there really doesn't seem to be a decision there on which way to go.

The only way I can think to fix both issues is add another layer, possibly two, of tables.  First one determines if it is a bad event or good event.  Second determines if it is Political, Military, or Natural Disaster.  Then six tables, one for good event for each type of event and one for bad events of each type.  Should make things a bit better.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 January 2018, 18:58:34
I don't know... I was thinking pre-spending was always the way to go, but then I guess I'm more conservative in general when it comes to property management...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2018, 20:06:30
The trouble is the wider range of 3d6.  +2 on 2d6 makes getting a 12 a 1:6 chance while it only improves getting an 18 on 3d6 to 5:108 chance.  So rather less valuable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 January 2018, 20:12:17
Less valuable from the perspective of obtaining the maximum result sure, but just as valuable (if not more so, given the dire consequences) in avoiding the least desirable results.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2018, 20:47:31
Eh still doesn't seem as valuable thanks to the wider range of possible results.

Ultimately though what is driving the change is a desire to remain internally consistent.  No other mechanic has 3d6(Natural Aptitude and Combat Sense still boil down to 2d6 in the end).  Plus by going for more layers of tables I could potentially actually uncrowd some and make it a lot less likely to even get a crippling event in the first place.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 January 2018, 22:19:21
Makes sense... I'll reserve judgment until you give us the new tables... Looks like they'll be interesting either way...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 January 2018, 22:20:39
I'll admit even with the change to 3d6 it has been gnawing at me a bit that they did feel a bit crowded still so a change was probably inevitable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2018, 00:44:18
Okay Negative Political Events is still pretty crowded but I think I have made up for it by making it as unlikely as I think I can to get a Negative Political Event.  Not sure I can make it much better.

Might add an event where your overlords poach one of your better militia units as a Negative Military event to help illustrate some of the downside to having an overlord but then I'd have to put in something that shows why it is bad to be independent and the only thing I can think of to do for that is increase TN to acquire new units by a further 1 but that's not an event.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2018, 05:10:11
I'll have to take a look after work tonight, but will definitely get you some feedback then...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2018, 21:14:26
Hmmm... I think you have the ends of the table in roughly the right order (i.e., that Natural Disasters should be rarest, then Military, then Political).  I also think you've shifted the ideal point to inject Edge to after rolling the dice.  That said, the asymmetry of the table seems to throw things off.  I'm leaning toward 7 on the event severity table being "No Event".  How about keeping 2 and 12 to being Natural Disasters (positive/negative), 3 & 11 Military, and 4 & 10 Political.  That leaves only 5 and 6 to figure out.  I like using the 3d6 use two best/worst mechanic, but I think it should be symmetrical.  I suppose it should be based on what kind of universe you want, as you've got two dice mechanics to choose from, and two tables (positive/negative).  I'd propose 5 be the Military and 6 the Political event, of whichever flavor you want...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2018, 22:11:26
The main reason I didn't make 7 No event! on the main table is because the Negative Political Event table is full of bad things and so I felt having more ways to avoid that or get better odds of getting Positive Political Events was the best way to do that because if you get on that table it is going to hurt.

Overall with that in mind I'm not sure what more I can do with it without adding another layer of tables.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2018, 23:25:48
I'll have to sleep on it... maybe I'll think of something tomorrow...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 27 January 2018, 07:54:56
How about this:

Drop the initial "Event Table" and put No Event! in at 6, 7, and 8 on the Severity Table.  For 5 and 9, I'd go with Political Events, and do the "Two Best" on the negative table (5) and "Two Worst" on the positive table (9).

That gets rid of a layer, and keeps Political events as the most likely kind.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 January 2018, 13:05:18
Hmmm...

The intended procedure is add MoS/MoF with current Edge modifier to the Event Table roll so I'll have to think if that works going straight to the Event Severity Table.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 January 2018, 14:32:22
I think it'll work if I drop the MoS/MoF to the event roll but I am inclined to keep Edge modifier.  Which is probably more reasonable anyway.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 27 January 2018, 16:59:04
Sounds like a plan!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 January 2018, 19:53:29
*nod*

It is also a bit more reasonable than the rules as written and what they suggest should happen if you roll a 2 on Property Administration rolls.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 16 February 2018, 15:29:58
When going through my industrial re-tooling rules I found I actually made Light Industry potentially more severe to re-tool for smaller properties than heavy industry.  So instead of the flat -2 it reduces Property by 1/4 rounding to the less favorable for the player penalty.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 16 February 2018, 17:28:16
Makes sense to me! O0
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 April 2018, 01:12:23
Recent conversations have made me reconsider my stance on limiting skills to their lowest linked attribute or Intelligence if lower.

Decided the extra complexity wasn't worth it.

I'll hold off updating my main document until something more substantial in terms of revisions is made.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 May 2018, 13:14:22
And now for something a bit out of left field.  I binge watched the anime Gate yesterday and it inspired me to start thinking about doing some stuff with Nebula California and I couldn't help but notice a few conversion issues/oversights.  So to correct some of that a conversion supplemental:

No BOD oversight:

Divide Constitution by 2 to determine Body attribute but only for purposes of attribute checks and attribute link modifiers.  Characters still get the normal HP/2 for determining how tough they are.

Natural Armor Bonuses:

To convert Natural Armor into AtoW's Melee/Ballistic/Energy/eXplosive standard perform the following steps for each category.

Divide Natural Armor by 2 and apply to Melee of character/creature.

Divide Natural Armor by 10 round normally and apply to Ballistic of character/creature.

Natural Armor no matter how high does not add any BAR rating against Energy attacks.

Divide Natural Armor by 5 round normally and apply to eXplosive of character/creature.

Natural Armor does not count as stacked armor for purposes of endurance but does follow all other rules for stacked armor.  Natural Armor also never suffers degradation from damage.

Damage dealing class/racial/spell-like features:

If the ability mimics the effects of a spell use the lowest spell level the spell can be cast at to determine the AP of the ability if it does damage.  If for some reason it has a save DC but does not provide a calculation to determine save DC then also use the lowest spell level to determine save DC normally.

For class features that deal damage, such as an alchamist's bombs, divide the character's level by 2 and round up to determine the AP value of such attacks.

For breath weapons and similar such attacks to determine thier AP subtract 10 from their save DC then divide by 2 round up.  Any resulting AP above 10 does not provide additional effects or damage.

Special materials:

Adamantine weapons increase their AP to 10.  Adamantine armor degrades at 10 points of damage instead of 5.

Mithral armor can be stacked one time with any other armor without increasing encumberance and degrade at 8 damage instead of 5.  Mithral weapons have no additional effects.

Other special materials pending further review to determine if they have any special effects/abilities.

Still debating how good certain immunities should be as well.  Like how good should immunity to fire be for resisting lasers since Battletech lasers operate like real world lasers and thus cut by heat.  Then there is immunity to electricity but it does seem pretty clear that may have little to no impact on PPCs.  Acid, Cold, Sonic, and Force seem to be sufficiently edge cases to not need worrying about.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 May 2018, 18:17:08
And something for going the other direction that I was tossing around.

AToW characters with Martial Arts 4+ would count as having the Improved Unarmed Combat feat.  Otherwise things could actually get bad for AToW characters if caught in hand to hand and I can think of plenty of ways to force some hand to hand.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 29 June 2018, 23:54:06
Thanks to another thread I've been reminded that I wanted to work out a couple new traits.

Petite and Large.

I'm thinking Petite would be overall positive and probably only 100 XP.  Benefit is you ignore the Cramped Cockpit design quirk.  I might allow it to ignore the actual Small Cockpit construction option penalties as well but haven't fully decided yet.  I know I want to give modifiers for carrying capacity, melee combat, and maybe even make Petite characters less durable.  Might also give them a bit of a break for high gravity situations but I do feel like a lot of this could potentially make some other traits less desirable so I'll have to think about this some before I finalize it.

Large obviously goes the other way and probably would be an overall negative trait at -100 XP.  Increased penalties for Cramped Cockpits, Small Cockpits(if I extend Petite's bonus to them), and some bonuses for melee and carrying capacity but almost certainly going to increase penalties for high gravity.

I'll be giving these a fair amount of thought and hope to finalize them this weekend.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 06:18:13
It strikes me those traits should probably be added to the Aerospace Pilot and Elemental phenotypes...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 12:11:46
It certainly would make sense to do that.  For my house rules I've been of a mind that if you want a trait you pay for it, especially since the phenotypes as presented in AToW are not all created equal and don't all work out to 200 XP o net traits and attribute modifiers.  Though now I'm starting to think about phenotypes but better.  Cost will be more balanced but since you have to have certain traits and cannot buy them off ever I might give small bonuses to make up for the lack of player choice.

I think I've got a rough first draft of the traits ready to go.

Petite
Cost: 100 XP
Counters/negates Large

A petite character is notably smaller in height and general frame than the average person.  This confers some advantages though in that Petite characters ignore the penalties associated with the Cramped Cockpit design quirk and the Small Cockpit construction option.  Their smaller frame also reduces any high gravity penalties by 1 and allows them to fit through tighter spaces.  However this smaller size does have some drawbacks.  In normal size cockpits they have a harder time reaching certain controls, increasing the shutdown avoid TN by 1 and any other checks not related to piloting/gunnery are also increased by 1.  The character's smaller frame also makes it harder for them to carry as much though lifting is generally less affected.  Carrying capacity is 3/4s the appropriate amount in relation to an average sized person.  The lack of reach and body mass of such character does put them at a disadvantage in melee and hand to hand combat, apply a -1 roll modifier to these skill checks against larger opponents only.

Large
Cost: -100 XP
Counters/negates small.

Large characters are taller and larger in frame than the average person.  So much so that even normal sized cockpits seem small/cramped to them.  As such a character with Large treats normal cockpits as if they were Small Cockpits for purposes of determining skill modifiers.  For actual small cockpits or mechs with the cramped cockpit design quirk the penalty to piloting is doubled and an additional -1 roll modifier to Gunnery is applied.  High gravity is far more debilitating to a Large character.  All penalties are doubled.  The larger frame does come with some advantages.  Carrying capacity is increased by 50% compared to an average sized person with the same strength and the increased body mass and reach provide a +1 roll modifier on Martial Arts and Melee skill checks in combat against smaller opponents.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 13:13:06
Hmmm... I like the first draft, but I think it begs to also add a "Large Cockpit" quirk and/or construction option...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 13:45:16
Which I'm not against adding as a new design quirk.  I'll have to think on the game mechanic benefits a bit for it because to be honest I'm not sure what it'd reasonably do for average sized characters and might actually make things worse for Petite if I go a bit too realistic.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 13:47:45
Maybe an extra (i.e., removable) Rumble Seat?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 14:05:16
Hmmm...  That does raise a fair point, there is precedent for 0 point design quirks that don't offer much in the way of game mechanics.

Large Cockpit
Cost: 0 XP
Counters/Negates Cramped Cockpit
Special: May not be applied to Small Cockpit construction option equipped units.

Large Cockpits allow characters with the Large trait to pilot mechs with no penalties.  Average sized characters suffer penalties as Petite characters in normal cockpits.  Petite characters suffer double penalties.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 14:39:36
Looks good, though I don't know if negating Cramped Cockpit should be zero cost...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 15:03:33
*nod*

I was a little concerned about it being potentially overpriced for all the negatives then I realized this really should be something only used in fairly narrow circumstances and thus not really be a problem most of the time.

Barring any other odd interactions/oversights I think these are all reasonably finalized now.  So just the revised version with some hopefully slightly improved wording.

Large Cockpit
Cost: 100 XP
Counters/Negates Cramped Cockpit
Special: May not be applied to Small Cockpit construction option equipped units.

Large Cockpits allow characters with the Large trait to pilot mechs with no penalties.  Average sized characters suffer penalties as Petite characters in normal cockpits.  Petite characters suffer double their penalties from using normal sized cockpits.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 15:05:56
An idea: since you're charging XP for it, how about removing the penalty for normal sized pilots, but retaining the doubled penalties for the petite?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 17:45:12
I have to admit I was contemplating doing just that and am kind of waffling on it still.

After all it is a design quirk I only expect to see with Large characters using customized mechs and thus only something normal or Petite characters would have to worry about in rather unusual circumstances but at the same time it is an overall positive quirk and does feel wrong having so many negatives for it.

Maybe as a compromise maybe add a framework for technicians to be able to adjust it down and back up again later but only to the limit of the design quirk.  That way something that starts as a Cramped Cockpit will stay a Cramped Cockpit but a normal cockpit could be adjusted down to a Cramped Cockpit so that Petite characters don't suffer any penalties.

I'm thinking an hour and a Tech/Mechanic and Tech/Electronic for each step should be reasonable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 18:59:19
Even with the compromise, I think I'd still drop the penalties for the normal sized.  Otherwise, I think the whole thing is working out well!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 June 2018, 22:44:41
Hmmm...

Yeah I think I'll relent on that so it more properly feels like an overall positive design quirk.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 30 June 2018, 23:26:12
Now I just have to figure out how to play in one of your games... :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 July 2018, 14:49:56
Been thinking about unit qualification, especially in regards to how I want to handle the gunnery skills.

As I have them it is probably a little too easy to put a vehicle gunner or asf pilot in a mech and not have an issue.

Debating between rolling the skills back to as written or adding a new trait.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 23 July 2018, 19:52:07
I think that would depend on how many levels of a skill you let people buy at once.  A vehicle or aerospace gunner will have the right attributes, but unless they can buy three levels all at once (four, if you count zero as a level), they're going to have a problem.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 23 July 2018, 22:42:28
It is my biggest current debate.

How I have it currently as an example a veteran MechWarrior could have Gunnery/Ballistic 5 and if you put him at the firing controls of a Dropship's ballistic weapon bay he'd still be Gunnery/Ballistic 5.

One of my house rules though is to require a character special ability before they get the link attribute modifiers to skill rolls, thus making skills more important to invest in and since a character is limited to max edge(total number not value) it does force some interesting choices, at least to me. Though I do worry that approach might make attributes a bit too low value, especially for the somewhat less useful attributes.

So three ideas are presenting themselves to remedy my skilled but out of their element approach.

1. Keep my skill change but add a new trait called Unit Qualification.  Without it apply the -4 of untrained but you get skill rank and skill TN instead of two attribute check and it's hefty TN.  Tempted to extend this to piloting different models(but not variants) of units too so that players might be a bit less able to jump into a brand new mech/asf/vehicle and be good to go.  For Gunnery I'm thinking add additional penalties if it is a different unit type.  Give each character one free Unit Qualification per appropriate field.  100 XP trait.

2. Revert to rules as written.

3. Revert but also add unit qualification as a new trait.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 July 2018, 04:51:51
I think #3 might be the best option.  RAW don't allow link modifiers, so a trait to add them would make sense.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 July 2018, 12:55:40
When I say I removed link attribute modifiers I meant all skills, not just piloting and gunnery.

I already have new character special abilities to add them back in.

The way I am envisioning Unit Qualification as a new trait is that if a character who was trained in the family's old 4g hunchback but tries to hop into a new 3r crusader they will take the -4 to piloting and gunnery.

The main thing I am debating on it is that even at 100 Xp it feels too expensive for how quickly characters in fluff can change rides.

Certainly a lot for me to consider.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 24 July 2018, 19:45:06
Ah, I see what you mean.., yeah, that's a much harder decision...  :-\
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 24 July 2018, 20:32:46
*nod*

Part of why I like my Gunnery/Ballistic, Gunnery/Energy, Gunnery/Missile approach is that it is easier to take someone who already knows how to shoot and stick them at pretty much any weapons station and they'll be able to cope fairly well, especially as to me it is more important how the weapon flies/delivers it's damage than what it is mounted on for what makes the real difference, while it also lets you create a character who's entire service career/training has been with a 4G Hunchback(just as an example) in that they'd be really terrible at using missiles but not so much Ballistics and Energy weapons.  And using my Unit Qualification idea I'd not apply a penalty if they found themselves at the controls of a 4J but because they would have such a low Gunnery/Missile it'd still be a bad fit.

Still either way Unit Qualification does feel like it needs a lot more work to be fair and not overly expensive to overcome.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 August 2018, 18:13:41
I think I've figured it out.

The solution is to further refine the skills themselves rather than add any new traits.

What I'm thinking it will look like is something like this:

Air Gunnery/Ballistic
Air Gunnery/Energy
Air Gunnery/Missile

Ground Gunnery/Ballistic
Ground Gunnery/Energy
Ground Gunnery/Missile

Space Gunnery/Ballistic
Space Gunnery/Energy
Space Gunnery/Missile

If I apply all this realistically it will require ASF pilots to have both Air and Space while LAM pilots would need all three.  Despite all the XP this could potentially chew up I'm finding myself not overly bothered by taking a more realistic approach.

Pretty major update inbound then.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 08 August 2018, 19:01:24
Nice solution... I also think it'll work just fine despite the potentially high XP costs.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 August 2018, 20:44:13
*nod*

I'll admit it does make me inclined to make a change to the piloting skills to where an ASF pilot would need two separate skills depending on where they are and thus LAM pilots needing three all said and done.

Of course I've stopped myself from making a lot of piloting skill changes because if I went realistic for those too it'd make ensuring pilots/drivers could control what they were assigned quite the task but it is something I've long wanted to do.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 08 August 2018, 20:48:01
I don't think it's a bad idea to do it to piloting too... LAMs are most useful in atmosphere anyway, so they don't HAVE to be flown in space.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 August 2018, 22:50:59
Another side benefit I forgot to mention is I can actually apply some sanity to the skills in changing their link attributes.  For instance Intelligence seems a lot more important than Dexterity or Reflexes in space combat where more often than not the only way you actually see someone something has gone terribly wrong thus making it more important to be able to read sensor displays and make predictive calculations about where your target is going to be by the time the projectile/beam gets there.

The only thing stopping me is I really do not want to have to figure out a way to redo the unit assignment/RATs, especially doing it in such a way that a character doesn't get an effectively free but limited amount of Custom Vehicle.

Still I can't help but start to spitball some ideas.

Driving/Conventional Naval
Driving/Hovercraft
Driving/Hydrofoil
Driving/Tracked
Driving/Wheeled
Piloting/Aircraft
Piloting/Mech
Piloting/Spacecraft
Piloting/Spheroid(Atmospheric)
Piloting/VTOL

I thought about branching off Submarine due to how they have to deal with water in all three dimensions and thermals, maybe I will.

Likewise thought about branching Mech into Biped and Quad but fluff seems to indicate that isn't too much of a problem for mechwarriors to switch between.

Though I feel like I'm missing a motive type that shouldn't/couldn't be lumped in with one of the others already listed.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 09 August 2018, 04:35:35
WiGE?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 August 2018, 10:49:33
Hmmm...  Not sure if it is different enough from Aircraft but I'll see what I can find.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 August 2018, 00:40:15
Having thought about it if I did make such a revision I'd probably show the small mercy of allowing Piloting/Aircraft to be able to handle WiGE rather than split it off as a separate skill.

Also thinking I probably could combine Driving/Wheeled and Driving/Tracked into Driving/Ground.

If I can think of a good way to re-work the fields for stage 3 I don't think I'll be able to stop myself anymore. :D
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 August 2018, 02:08:01
Sounds reasonable... btw, when you say "Spheroid (Atmosphere)", do you mean Spacecraft?  It seems odd to make landing any harder than it already is...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 August 2018, 02:51:25
The trouble is when I think about it I can't help but see flying a Spheroid(Small Craft or Dropship) would be very different inside an atmosphere than outside it.

Aerodynes(again Small Craft or Dropship) I would see using Piloting/Aircraft in atmosphere.

ASFs, Aerodynes, and Spheroids would use Piloting/Spacecraft in space since Battletech does use a physics based model, or at least tries to I should say.

To compensate I'd take a two prong approach of probably making it easier under non-combat conditions,possibly in general, and probably would advise that a player invest more in the atmospheric skill than the space skill since space is big and consequently less important to have really good skills for.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 11 August 2018, 03:06:07
Makes sense... perhaps leave the existing penalties in place if using Piloting/Spacecraft, and remove some of them when using the "proper" skill?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 11 August 2018, 10:16:44
*nod*

There are certain things about Battletech that do just seem overly difficult and to a certain extent I do know that is to try and create challenges for even elite crews on a 2d6 curve.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 14 August 2018, 01:03:40
Been giving how to revise the fields a lot of thought.  If I want to stay with my revision of only 5 skills per field I just need to add additional fields that include the new additional gunnery and piloting skills.  I'm certainly leaning towards this as the ideal solution as it makes it a lot easier to reflect a properly trained LAM pilot.

It kind of makes for a rougher situation for an actual ASF pilot or Dropship pilots as it now takes multiple fields to get them ready to do their jobs but I'm not overly bothered by this as there is at least one Dropship class that can't even go into atmosphere and some of the things we're told happen as routine trade can only possibly work if there are huge numbers of Dropships that never enter atmosphere once they get to space.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 21 August 2018, 00:42:10
Having found myself working 10 hour days for a bit of temporary work does make it a bit tough to update the stage 3 fields for my new paradigm.  Might be a while before I can properly get this sorted out.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 21 August 2018, 04:51:28
No worries... I'm still settling in to the new house and my new job.  I'll be here whenever you're able to get back to it...  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 00:15:58
I decided to leave Driving/Tracked and Driving/Wheeled split because it let me have enough fields on my spreadsheet that it didn't look off by having a partial row of fields.

I was able to mostly adjust existing fields but I do feel like I may still be missing some skills here or there.

With that in mind I would appreciate another set of eyes looking it over:link (http://www.mediafire.com/file/27vkg4cq49952xo/AlternateFields.xls/file)

I do already suspect just to support some of the multi-crew, especially the non-space larger unit types and infantry field guns/artillery, properly I may have to adjust/add some more fields.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 06:52:11
After a quick skim, I see:

Neither Pilot/Exoskeleton nor Pilot/Battle Armor include piloting
Staff Officer should have Computers vice Sensor Operations
Radioman should have Computers and/or Sensor Operations instead of one or both languages
I think Ship's Crew is a little off with two "Technician/Any" skills.  That's more like an "engineering crew" field.
I think one of the "Science/Any" for Forensic Specialist should be "Tracking/Any"
I think "Covert Operations" should have a Language vice Tracking
Technician/Civilian and /Military seem like they should have at least one "Technician/Any"
I think Zero-G Operations would be more appropriate for a JumpShip Pilot than "Science/Math"
The Lawyer field should replace "Language" with either Interest/Law or Art/Writing
The "Communications" field appears to be trying to be two things at once.  One is a technician (as in the prerequisite for HPG tech), and the other is what Communications major would be at college.  The two skill sets are very different, and should be different fields.

Hope that helps!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 13:29:45
As far as the Piloting/Exoskeleton(or Battlearmor) I was just having too much trouble making those stand alone skills and be meaningful at the same time as most checks that I could assign to those skills I could have another skill handle.
 So I've excised that particular skill until I can figure out a way to make it more meaningful without having to get too bogged down.

I had a reason why I gave the Staff Officer Sensor Operations over Computers at one point but I'll be damned if I can remember it now so I think I can agree to that revision.

Radioman I gave two languages largely because I wanted to add more variety/flavor by making it a bit more clear not everyone would speak the same languages, especially in battle situations.  Still I take your point that it might be a bit much but I do see the basic Radioman more as the grunt with the other PBIs who has the larger more capable communication set so Computers and Sensor Operations feel a bit odd to me as possible replacements.  If I can think of a better replacement I'll slip it in for one of the Language skills.

Ship's Crew I largely lifted from AToW with little modification.  All I did was replace the existing Gunnery skill with another Technician skill.

Forensic Specialist you present a good conundrum on.  This is largely meant to reflect a Crime Scene Investigator type person so I can see them needing to be able to follow tracks but at the same time I also know they do need to have a fair amount of cross discipline Science.  Since they do require Scientist as a foundation I think I'll swap in Tracking.

Covert Operations is a bit of an oops in what skills I pruned off when taking it down to 5 from AToW's and yeah a Language skill makes more sense than a Tracking skill.

Technician/Civilian and Technician/Mech are lifted straight from AToW without modification.  Technician/Mech does require either Technician/Civilian or Technician/Military so it should be fine as is.  Technician/Civilian since it does seem to be a foundation to build off I'm not bothered by it not having a Technician/Any.

Jumpship pilot already gets Zero-G Operations from their foundation field so I figured the Science/Math would be a good way for them to have a way to calculate jump points in situations where the computer that normally does this for them is unavailable.  But I do see something of an opportunity here anyway as Basic Training(Naval) should also be a way to get to this field.

Lawyer I do see a potential oversight there as General Studies does not seem to have an Art skill of any sort but does have an Interest/Any that can be put into Interest/Law.  Best way I can think to handle that is to drop Perception from General Studies and add an Art/Any.  Meanwhile Legal Assistant(the other foundation field that lets you become a Lawyer) has both so no issue there.

All I did(versus AToW) for the Communications field is drop the Sensor Operations and what is left does look like a Communications Major in college more than an HPG Tech.

I've also identified that I probably do need to add a more dedicated Gunner field for Ground and Air units that require them and I probably should put together a field for Infantry Field Artillery/Guns.

Once I figure those out another spreadsheet update should be going up shortly.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 13:39:22
Nice summary... In that context, it looks to me like Radioman and Communications are the two fields the original "Communications" was trying to be.  Might be something to consider there...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 14:07:05
*nod*

The way AToW had Communications originally was a bit weird.  Not sure why that field needed Sensor Operations.

Radioman I pulled a Language for the Running skill because Battletech PBIs as AToW has them are actually incredibly slow, to the point of they can't actually cover 30 meters of good open ground in ten seconds.

So the two should be a bit clearer as separate paths now.

Added the mentioned fields.

Field Gunner since I don't remember there being a motive type restriction on Mechanized Infantry towing guns I gave them the three Driving skills to cover that and the two Ground Gunnery skills to cover Arrow 4, tube artillery, and the field guns.

Air and Surface Gunner were likewise pretty straight forward.  The three relevant Gunnery skills, Sensor Operations, and a Technician/Any so they can help keep their weapons in good working order.

Still feel like I might have some orphaned skills that have no fields or that I might need to have some more fields but that is something I suspect I'll always feel.

Updated spreadsheet is at the same link as before.

My appreciation for once again providing valuable feedback.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 14:37:23
My pleasure!  It's going to be a bit until I can look over the revised spreadsheet, but I'll try to get to it today.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 15:56:15
One general comment: "Prerequisite" is missing an "e" throughout the spreadsheet.

Hmm, here's a random thought: Interrogation for Lawyers (maybe instead of Language)?

A second random thought: In the absence of Piloting/Exoskeleton (or /Battlesuit), Acrobatics/Free Fall?  It covers jump packs and such...

I figured out what was bugging me about Technician/Civilian... I think the Technician/Nuclear should be Technician/Any.  That implies fusion engines are rather less common than having every ITT college graduate in human space knowing how they work...

I'm thinking your point about Running should apply to the Infantry field too.  Perhaps replace Comms/Conventional (since that's more an NCO/Officer function)?

Also, I think Comms Officer and Sensor Officer should be "Technicians" instead.  No commission required.  Further, I think Comms/HPG being in that field would be era dependent...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 17:05:26
Typos seem to be a specialty of mine.

I can see either Interrogation or Language depending on the Lawyer's specialization but since Language is easy enough to pick up elsewhere I'll go ahead and switch to Interrogation for the field.

I see what you mean but to an extent that makes me a little hesitant to give them Technician/Any but the only alternative I can think of is an Interest/Any and not allowing for Technician/Any could leave them in a tough spot for certain character concepts.

In light of the fact I do have the Radioman field yeah I can see making that switch and letting them double down on Running would help offset the extra gear they'd be carrying.

Technician seems the wrong title as it could cause some confusion with the other fields for Technicians, Specialist feels clearer to me.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 17:07:17
Specialist sounds even better!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 19:05:58
Now for the mind numbing part, I've got to figure out a way to integrate all this stuff into the Stage 3 modules and I don't have a lot of space I've left myself for some of these schools to add more fields.

I'm almost tempted to say screw it and rather than list fields for each school to make the player and GM come up with a good explanation of why their field choices work for the school they have chosen.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 25 August 2018, 19:21:38
Well, since you're more than likely going to be the GM, it sounds like you're damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 25 August 2018, 19:26:41
*nod*

Most of it is really me wanting to do faction specific schools rather than the selection of generics already presented in AToW as far as what is causing the issue.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 October 2018, 19:26:16
Something I've actually had rattling around the back of my head for a bit now but have been forgetting to put up a first draft of is rules for technicians being able to fix negative design quirks or add positive design quirks.

Basics are make appropriate technician/computer rolls for the design quirk desired to be removed or added and add MoS as XP to the desired trait, and vice versa subtract MoF in the case of a failure.  Design quirks are not removed or added in this manner until completely paid for.

Each roll is for an eight hour work day.

Skills required should be logical to the quirk and modifiers are highly recommended.

Since some will represent actual physical re-working of components and thus supplies(like say adding reinforced legs like on the Highlander) there should be some cost in unit supplies or monetary units in ordering needed supplies.

So as an example something like the Stalker's Combat Computer should be pretty easy to replicate in another mech with just a Computers roll and maybe a +1 roll modifier.  Exact cost ranging from salvage to a few thousand c-bills depending on era, location, or even setting.

The aforementioned Reinforced Legs would be rather time consuming and require a lot of materials but would probably be a purely Technician/Mechanic roll.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 07 October 2018, 22:38:19
I think the main thing to consider when working out those rules is repeatability... If they work out the design details once, do they have to do that again for the same model of 'mech/vehicle/whatever?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 07 October 2018, 23:03:52
The most I can see for that is applying some minor roll bonuses, just to keep it from becoming too easy.  Especially since most of the work will actually be the labor side and this being something you should only really try with absolute superb technicians.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 08 October 2018, 05:44:01
Would a design roll be needed when converting to a known variant that has different quirks?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 October 2018, 11:25:25
I'll have to research if there are any variant swaps that actually change quirks, what kind of refit it is to swap to that variant, and may have to think about how to integrate this entire concept I have into the Frankenmech rules because that is a definate work around for certain.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 08 October 2018, 12:13:44
I think the Cyclops variants have differing quirks, and as I recall, only the stock Wolverine has "Difficult to Maintain" (linked to a jump jet manufacturer).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 08 October 2018, 14:17:13
Hmmm...  This is starting to get a bit tricky.  Going to have to give this some serious thought how to ensure that there isn't an easy way to get around spending XP but still support the idea that techs can add/remove design quirks as it is obviously possible.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 10 October 2018, 18:46:09
I'll have to research if there are any variant swaps that actually change quirks, what kind of refit it is to swap to that variant, and may have to think about how to integrate this entire concept I have into the Frankenmech rules because that is a definate work around for certain.

How about if whenever a Mech gets its internal structure repaired or refitted, you roll for a random applicable flaw?  (Applicable means no LRM issues for a refitted Marauder that replaced the AC/5 with a Large Laser.)

So players will be hesitant about making changes to Mechs, as they then have to devote a dedicated tech just to remove the problem that is created.

The Flaw is removed and replaced with a negative Quirk, and then the negative Quirk can be removed.

All of this would cost time and money.

Frankenmechs would get Flaws at a rate of 1 per part from another Mech.  So if you start with a Griffin torso and legs, then start adding arms from a Phoenix Hawk and a Shadow Hawk, that means your refit gets 1 Flaw due to the internal change, and 2 additional Flaws due to the parts being from 2 different types of Mech.  Hope your Master Tech has a free week, because she will be busy.

But if you really need a Mech in action you my need to put up with the Flaws and Quirks, as otherwise you wind up second in a one-on-one match.


This would show how OmniMechs are so nice, as you can refit them without worrying about any problems showing up.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 October 2018, 20:10:15
That is actually part the general idea I'm working toward, that any time you customize a mech you take your chances on picking up negative design quirks.

Or that instead of breaking something during routine work your mech picks up a negative design quirk.

What is the main hang up for me right now is figuring out reasonable progression rates for establishing them and working them out and regulating adding positive quirks so that this all doesn't become too easy of a work around.

I've got something of an idea forming but it'll take me putting together a fair bit of stuff to make it presentable.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 18 October 2018, 22:03:26
This whole design quirk project of mine is getting frustrating.  Every time I think I'm on to something for where to begin and establish a reasonable pace I realize some other aspect that makes it very difficult to work it out in a sane and sensible manner.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 19 October 2018, 04:21:22
That's BattleTech for you! :)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 October 2018, 13:09:54
Yeah.

All my ideas so far are boiling down to me having to create a lot of tables and relationships of skills to design quirks and see about detailed conversions of Strat Ops' routine work and refit/customization since AToW has detailed Tech rolls while Strat Ops doesn't.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 19 October 2018, 21:10:28
I might have missed it, but are there rules for using TAG with CF/ASF external munitions for laser-guided bombs?

We have Arrow IV Homing rounds that use TAG, Artillery-delivered Copperhead rounds, so I'm wondering if ASF bombs can get the same treatment.

(Yes,  just saw the thread about Conventional Fighters being bomb carriers only, and started wondering)
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 19 October 2018, 21:21:38
There are laser guided bombs in the rules already and I am pretty sure you can also put laser guided arrow 4 on as ordinance.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 30 October 2018, 19:01:29
Okay having a bit of trouble finding mech variants that actually change design quirks between variants to help me base my technicianing in/out design quirks around.

Also unless I'm missing some factor I have confirmed MekHQ does vastly over calculate how much time is required to refit a mech to a different variant.

I come up with 1890 minute to take a 6R Wolverine to a 6M while MekHQ says 5505 minutes.

120 minutes to replace the AC-5 with a Large Laser
120 minutes to install a new Medium Laser
90 minutes to add armor
120 minutes to remove the AC-5 ammo
180 minutes to add 2 heatsinks

630 minutes * 3 for a class D refit= 1890 minutes total.

I'll definately have to see if I'm missing something or if MekHQ is overcharging time.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: idea weenie on 02 November 2018, 21:40:41
One idea I saw in another game was that some weapons could keep up to 1 ton of ammo on-weapon.  It saves a critical slot, but you still have to pay for mass.  Since this could also get applied to quarter ton machine guns, I house-ruled it to be up to 1/4 the mass of the weapon, or 1 ton, whichever is less.

The advantage is that you have one less critical slot full of ammo that can go boom.  The down side is if the weapon got hit, you have a chance of that location going boom.  Also, if one weapon runs out of ammo (for whatever reason), ammo that is on-mount for another cannot be used to load it.

So assume you have a light Mech with 8 machine guns (2 per arm and 2 per side torso).  CBT Machine guns are half a ton each, so they can each have up to 1/8 of a ton of ammo on-mount.  So instead of needing a critical slots to store 1 ton of machine gun, the designer chooses that each machine gun will have 1/8 of a ton of ammo on-mount, or 25 shots per machine gun.  Later in the game, the PC has been preferring to use the left arm machine guns and as a result they are out of ammo.  Because the designer put all the ammo on-mount, that means the ammunition stored in the other machine guns cannot be used to load the machine guns in the left arm.  Perhaps the designer should have 13 shots per gun on-mount, and left the rest of the ammo (96 shots) in a central ammo bin, risking the ammo critical hit?


This would be fairly useful for handheld weaponry, where you aren't going to be reloading the weapon during combat anyways
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 04 November 2018, 01:32:04
I already have my own ideas for fixing weapons that need ammunition.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 November 2018, 20:30:28
I've still not found any variants that actually change design quirks.

At least nothing intrinsic to the chassis.

Prepare for a bit of crunch but I'm having trouble figuring out something better.

So my idea is adding/removing a design quirk is a class F refit with an extra penalty equal to the point value of the design quirk and uses whichever time is greater between repairing the most logical item and replacing the most logical item.  So adding Accurate Weapon to an AC-5 would have in AToW terms a -5(-4 for class F and -1 for a 1 point design quirk) roll modifier and since the weapon has 4+ critical slots and thus would take 250 minutes base repair time would have a total time of 1250 minutes.

Fail the roll by 5 or more and in the case of removing a quirk if a more severe version of the quirk exists(like poor cooling jacket can go to no cooling jacket) the unit gains that design quirk in place of the existing one.  If no more severe version of the quirk exists or the most severe version is already on the unit/item then the player and GM should work together to choose an appropriate quirk as really there are just too many variables to cover reasonably.  If trying to add a new quirk and the roll is failed by 5 or more if an opposing quirk exists then apply that quirk instead(accurate weapon-inaccurate weapon).  Again if no opposing quirk exists the GM and player should work together to determine the new negative quirk to be applied to the unit.

If using the maintainance rules in strategic operations and failing the roll instead of degrading or damaging the unit a 1 point per margin of failure negative design quirk may be added instead.  If no negative design quirks are available for the margin of failure these negative design quirk points can be banked by the GM until there are enough to apply a new negative quirk and until these points are used in this fashion there is an additional -1 roll modifier to all maintainance checks and instead of increasing unit quality when rolling a high enough margin of success a point is instead negated.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 09 November 2018, 20:45:15
I just looked back at Xotl's RATs, and that's definitely what I was thinking of with different variants having different quirks.  The Wolverine is one example, as he specifically states the "Difficult to Maintain" quirk was based on the jump jets, so the Kurita variant doesn't have it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 09 November 2018, 22:53:49
Per the Battlemech Manual the Wolverine does not have Difficult to Maintain listed in the official listing anywhere for design quirks.

Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 09 November 2018, 23:08:26
I suppose they didn't use his RATs as the basis for the BMM.  He mentions a few other 'mechs with quirks differing across variants, but not many.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2018, 00:06:38
Yeah and what is worse is I think I do have to reject his efforts for the sake of simplicity.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 10 November 2018, 05:37:43
It's not simple, but I'd be inclined to leave in some wiggle room for reasonably related quirks (e.g., Improved Communications and Cramped Cockpit).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 10 November 2018, 12:35:22
*nod*

I don't entirely disagree but the only alternative I can see to my first draft there is to get even more detailed, to establish for people the kind or quirk relationships you suggest(rather than leave it up to the GM and player to decide for themselves since most don't actually have opposites), and quite likely having to do some extensive data mining.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 17 November 2018, 00:28:45
I have to be honest I feel like I'm forgetting some bit of house rules I was working on previously but am not sure what it is as Design Quirk as much as I'm still not happy with where I've left it I still don't see much more I can do with it without turning it into a far more convoluted and complicated mess.

So I'll have to clean that up to integrate into my house rules and besides maybe figuring out how to finish up all the stage 3 revisions so I can adjust what fields go with each school in a more sane and sensible manner without losing what little is left of my mind I think everything is actually in a finished state, at least until I start putting this stuff through some actual play testing.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 17 November 2018, 06:58:51
Sanity is definitely the number one priority!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2019, 02:32:48
Something I finally remembered to take a look at:  Range Master.

I'll admit I really don't like it as it is.  Just a bit too much for me to wrap my head around how the heck it is supposed to actually work.

Initial thought for how to make it better:

For weapons that lose damage at Medium or Long Range(Snub Nose PPC, Heavy Gauss Rifle) increase their damage at Medium Range and Long Range by 1 for every five points of damage or fraction thereof.  Likewise for weapons that apply penalties to the cluster hit table due to range(HAG) reduce the penalty by 1.

My main worry is since it does nothing for the majority of weapons as I have the first draft that it may not have enough utility yet I also worry I might be making it a little too good for the weapons it does impact.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2019, 08:45:38
Range Master is a strange one.  I'd be more inclined to just increase every range band by one hex or so (and reduce minimum ranges by the same).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2019, 13:42:09
*nod*

I've never really liked swapping modifiers like that and in thinking about what I would like from a SPA I don't think my first draft works due to lack of utility.  I also hesitate in adjusting weapon stats in any form.

Honestly Sniper is probably what I'd do with Range Master and Sniper I'd change to be like Marksman.  Which probably would force a bunch of other SPAs to have to be revised/renamed.

Which doesn't bother me doing as much as it probably should.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2019, 14:06:02
Hmmm... here's an idea: how about using "Range Master" as the name for a bonus (or reduced penalty, rather) at LOS range?  Since I asked TPTB about Sniper last year, it's the only band that gets no love.  Since it has Sniper as a pre-requisite (which makes Extreme a +3 penalty), I think +5 for LOS range would be reasonable (down from +8).
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2019, 14:56:57
Well that is kind of why I'm thinking of a potentially wide spread restructuring of the SPAs.

The name Range Master makes me think it should have the mechanical benefits currently assigned to Sniper, with some slight adjustment to keep it from being too good.  Likewise Sniper should have the mechanical benefits of Marksman.

I do realize if I go that route I'll have to change the requirements for a bunch of them too.

I'll have to look up the various requirements but what I'd think I'd do for Range Master:

Range Master
Requirements: TBD/To Be Re-balanced

Player adds a +1 roll modifier to all attacks at Medium, Long, Extreme, and Line of Sight range.  Including Small Arms and Support Weapons attacks at applicable ranges.

Simple and utilitarian.  Also doesn't get mucked up by the C3 family.  Might take me a bit to fully go through the requirements and fully resolve the butterfly effect that will result from this re-structuring but I think it'll come out a lot better.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2019, 15:08:27
Interesting idea... To minimize the butterfly effects, you could set Range Master up as the pre-requisite for Sniper, and just make Sniper another +1 at all ranges beyond Short.  That mildly nerfs Sniper at Extreme, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2019, 16:19:08
I find myself rather hesitant at reducing the Long Range penalty to 2.

So a rather smaller butterfly effect than I thought with how simple it is.

Especially when I consider that it'd be simpler to just drop Range Master all together and just adjust Sniper.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2019, 16:49:36
If that's your hesitation, then dropping Range Master is probably the best route, though requiring two SPAs to get there seems a high enough price.  Having used Sniper in a game recently, I didn't find it that bad.  Granted, the Griffin in question consistently missed on 6's.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 January 2019, 16:54:48
I've used Sniper a few times now and 2 is a bit too good for Long Range.  Especially if you can start pilling on other bonuses.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 26 January 2019, 17:02:44
Makes sense!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: rogueranger1993 on 12 February 2019, 22:18:34
The link in the first thread for the main document is broken. Can you fix that Monbvol? Would love to download a copy of it.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 13 February 2019, 12:55:30
Well that was weird.  Should be fixed now.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: rogueranger1993 on 22 February 2019, 15:29:30
It's working again, thanks for the quick response!
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 22 February 2019, 15:34:12
No problem.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 15 June 2019, 20:19:57
Yanked the stage 3 stuff for my work in progress modules for my AU.

I'll warn that they are not going to be that great as yet and I haven't worked on them in over a year at the time I made this post but for my purposes they work well enough.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 August 2019, 23:25:30
Had a thought about another possible house rule to try and simplify the skill list a bit.

I have a separate skill for piloting a Spheroid dropship while it is in atmosphere.  I know I initially put that in for a realism reason and to not overly prune the skills.  But I'm thinking screw it, I can scrub that and change the one and only alternate field I have it in.

So going into my spreadsheet where I have my altered fields to change that I found some other oversights on my part.  I don't actually have a way for civilians to get Piloting/VTOL or any of the Driving skills I altered.

I'm only somewhat concerned about the Driving skills as that seems like something you can build into the modules but VTOL probably should have a Stage 3 training field option for Civilians.

So I'll be looking at what I can do to get that in there.  I do have an overly similar Pilot/Aerospace(Civilian) and Pilot/Dropship that I can alter one into a Pilot/VTOL field.

For that Piloting/Sphereoid(Atmosphere) I do need to think of a replacement skill for the field.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 01 August 2019, 23:47:27
Okay updated the documents in question and thus I think I'm finally done mucking with skills and traits.  Well aside from possibly re-balancing the point pools from my Status trait because I do admit with all the things I want it to cover it might not have enough points or ways to get points.

But I probably won't know that for sure until I actually get some play test data from people actually using it.

I hope to get working on my AU specific modules again and because I find the Nebula California stuff interesting but a bit lacking for the super powers in particular I'll try and make myself work on further supplements for that as well.  But the Nebula California stuff will be in another thread.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 August 2019, 16:16:35
Recent discussions about AToW's failings and how people don't like the way Fast/Slow Learner work as written, which based off the fact I've changed how they work in my house rules I do agree with the overall sentiment, combined with how people are also somewhat dissatisfied with even the rebates for field skills is making me think about a few things.

I am finding that I would not be opposed to dropping the rebate system all together when I think about it aside from the idea it is supposed to help represent how you learn things easier/faster at certain ages than others.  Even then with that in mind I would not mind it being dropped.  Heck there is a member of my gaming group who doesn't even make use of it just to save time and not have to do the math.

For Fast/Slow Learner as it stands in my house rules they either double or halve all non-reward XP gained by the character.  So training, downtime, and the new source I put in of fumble a roll gain 2 XP(1 XP Slow, 4 XP Fast) whil gaining 1 XP anytime you get a margin of success of 5(MoS needs to be 10 instead for Slow Learner, Fast gives 2 XP for MoS of 5).  I'll admit despite me already reducing the costs they do occasionally make me think they may not be doing enough to be worth it.  The only idea I have is to adjust the downtime XP income rates.  The half Intelligence rate would then be Slow Learner, Intelligence would be normal, and double Intelligence would be Fast Learner.

Another thought rattling around my head is Extraordinary Attribute.  I've come to the opinion the way I have it now may make it too much of an XP sink for too little benefit/drawback.

So wild crazy experimental thought.  What if I incorporate certain traits into it?  Like Extraordinary Attribute(Positive)/Intelligence builds in Fast Learner?  Extraordinary Attribute(Negative)/Intelligence could build in Slow Learner.  Body could have Thick/Thin-skinned.  Not sure what to have as a Positive for Edge but the Negative would be Gremlins.  I'd have to give some thought for the rest and quite possibly invent new traits.

Or I could go the other direction to maintain my current ideas about attributes maxing at 6 without Extraordinary attribute and requiring a rank of Extraordinary Attribute for each rank adjustment.  Gremlins then would come with the drawback that the character can never raise their Edge above 5 ranks/points until they get rid of Gremlins.  I'd probably swap Body to Toughness/Glassjaw in this case and probably further revise both those traits.

Well Glassjaw for sure as looking at my house rules I haven't actually done anything to Glassjaw and I really should either way I go with this idea.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 06 August 2019, 17:03:26
For a positive Edge Trait, might I recommend "Lucky" from Campaign Ops?  It isn't listed anywhere else, to my knowledge...
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 06 August 2019, 18:35:33
Lucky is just Edge re-branded/renamed for games not using fully developed AToW characters.

Which does point out a bit of a problem.  To make this idea work I really should ensure the traits are opposed.

With my rolling Tech Empathy and the Field Training bonuses into the combined trait of Intensive Training Gremlins doesn't have a true opposing trait anymore in my house rules unless I make that an opposing trait to Gremlins.  Which seems a little ham handed to do and only makes a vague amount of sense with some questionable logic but I don't see a way around it without getting overly convoluted in inventing a new trait.

Some attributes are going to require inventing new traits for sure though.

Which gives me this list for traits I can build a max attribute adjustment into:

Strength I know I've talked about incorporating Fit into Toughness before and have that in my document but I think I am going to back off that idea because Fit/Handicap would seem the best opposed traits.

Dexterity I like the idea of Ambidextrous enough that I may have to invent a new opposed trait.

Reflexes I don't see any good candidates.

Body Toughness/Glass Jaw.

Intelligence Fast/Slow Learner.

Willpower I know it might be a little too much unless I also increase the costs/benefits but Patient/Impatient seem the best candidates.

Charisma Gregarious/Introvert but likewise I'll probably have make those +/-200 XP each as well.

Edge Intensive Training/Gremlins.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 26 August 2019, 21:52:59
I finally figured out good candidates for Reflexes.  Combat Sense and Combat Paralysis.

Rather than Intensive Training i am currently considering an alternate/massively reworked Tech Empathy.

I'm debating exactly how it'll work still but my initial idea is +1(or -1 if for some reason it is the better modifier) roll modifiers to MASC, Supercharger, Blue Shield, and maybe disengaged PPC safety rolls.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 27 August 2019, 04:26:28
Maybe throw Sensor Operations, Computer and Communications rolls into the mix?
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: monbvol on 27 August 2019, 09:37:18
I would if Intensive Training didn't already provide a way to get the same bonus.

The only other idea I have is maybe it act as a tie breaker on such rolls or maybe scour for more equipment that have dice rolls involved with their use.

I may have a third option now rattling around in my head but I'll need to look at a couple things first.
Title: Re: Monbvol's House rule emporium
Post by: Daryk on 27 August 2019, 17:28:02
I like the tie-breaker idea... it's an advantage without being an explicit +1.  :thumbsup: