TheRPGSite

I'm planning my next game (which will probably start this summer) and I'm considering running a game set in the Firefly/Serenity universe.

I have heard that the published Serenity game is so-so (particularly in its match up for system and setting). I'm not terribly informed about this, so I'd like to hear if I'm wrong, and generally whether the Serenity game is good for games in the Firefly universe.

I have also heard that there are close enough similarities between Firefly and Traveler that one could use Traveler's system (one of the many... in this case I'm talking about MongTrav for reasons I'll get to later) for a Firefly game.

That said, would MongTrav work for a Firefly games? What mods might I need to make? How are the ship rules and how easy/hard would it be to write up custom ships if I needed to. I've heard that MongTrav is OGL and has a freely available SRD, which is why I'm considering it. Is this true? Is it any good? Gameable?

Further, what's the best gameable source for setting material on Firefly/Serenity (and the comics)? Does the published game have a good overview of the setting? Or should I look elsewhere? Bonus points if it's free and online where my players can see it.

I may come up with more questions later. Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I knew there was something I was forgetting! Are there published adventures and are they any good?

The rules of Serenity rpg are very similar to Savage Worlds. I have not played it but they seemed pretty solid and a good match to for the Firefly series  in the sense it is more of more of a character-driven system than a tactical one. The book has a fair bit of reference material on "The Black".
 
 The reason I have not run Serenity rpg isn't the system. It was the sad realisation that what made Firefly great was Joss Whedon's dialogue and story telling and no rulebook is going to give that to me. On it's own, the setting is actually rather bland. It's like "take Star Wars and remove all the cool stuff like aliens, Jedi, space dog-fights, simple one-climate planets and annoying robot sidekicks". And as TV series that was a good thing. However I figured if I were to try run it, without weird aliens and awe-inspiring Death Stars to distract the players, I'd have to rely entirely on old fashion storytelling skills and that I found intimidating.

There are ship stats for both CT and T20 (probably MGT by now too) as well as deckplans for Serenity floating around on the net. The chargen rules for MGT should be flexable enough for you to create characters with the required flavor. Ship combat rules are not in the core book, but are probably in High Guard.

You guys are forgetting something - The Serenity RPG book and GM's screen has some realy cool maps of the ships!!!

Especially the GM's screen package - it has a map big enough to use with miniatures on it if someone were to board a Firefly-class freighter.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;283721You guys are forgetting something - The Serenity RPG book and GM's screen has some realy cool maps of the ships!!!

Especially the GM's screen package - it has a map big enough to use with miniatures on it if someone were to board a Firefly-class freighter.


- Ed C.

Like that far trader behind you in your picture?

there are ship combat rules in the rulebook, they may not be awesome rules but they'll do in a pinch.

I have yet to purchase MongTrav, on account of it's hideously overpriced for what's basically just a Classic Traveller variant ruleset.  

But Classic Traveller itself would be pretty damn perfect for Firefly, and I might point out, is a lot cheaper to acquire than Mongooses' 40 fucking dollars for a rather slim B&W hardback.  TravellerRPG.com sells the core book for $12 in handy little digest form.

Hey, J Arcane's back!

I agree with him on the price of the corebook; $40 is a bit much.  I'd go to farfuture.net and get the Complete CT CD-ROM for $35 and shipping instead.  You'll have everything you need and more to run a Firefly game.

The combat system for Mongoose Traveller is far superior to the one in Classic Traveller, IMHO.

Plus, lets face it, how often have interweb noodniks like ourselves paid full cover price for anything thanks to ebay and Amazon and their clones.

You could always get the Traveller SRD for the MGT combat system details if CT, AHL or Striker (all on the CD-ROM!) don't float your boat.

The Pocket Edition of Mongoose Traveller is supposed to have all of the rules, less of the errors, and at a fraction of the price of the hardcover. I think it's like $13.

Quote from: Soylent GreenThe reason I have not run Serenity rpg isn't the system. It was the sad realisation that what made Firefly great was Joss Whedon's dialogue and story telling and no rulebook is going to give that to me.

The dialogue was witty, yes, but I don't think it was the main draw for me. The characters were more interesting to me than the humor (awesome though that may have been). And the stories for each episode were themselves pretty awesome, sometimes for reasons having nothing to do with the dialogue. My favorite was Out of Gas.

Anyway, the main reason I'm thinking Traveller is because what I've heard of the character generation sounds right for this sort of thing. Just making a character gives you a backstory by default. So players get characters with some kind of history, plenty of room to adventure, and a general focus on mundane or relatable plot elements (like reavers, psychics, and being drop kicked into the cold vaccum of space).

Quote from: Rock ViperShip combat rules are not in the core book, but are probably in High Guard.

Not in the core rule book for Mongoose Traveller? That's kind of disappointing. Not that there's much ship-to-ship combat in the show anyway, but it would still be handy to have rules for.

Quote from: Broken-Serenitythere are ship combat rules in the rulebook, they may not be awesome rules but they'll do in a pinch.

And now I'm confused.

Quote from: KoltarYou guys are forgetting something - The Serenity RPG book and GM's screen has some realy cool maps of the ships!!!

Especially the GM's screen package - it has a map big enough to use with miniatures on it if someone were to board a Firefly-class freighter.

I was thinking MongTrav for the SRD (so my players could have easy access to the rules), but I'm not against getting the Serenity RPG for myself if it has good setting info and deckplans and such. And because I wants it.

RE: J Arcane, KenHR, and Jeff:
Hmm... the Classic Traveller CD and MongTrav SRD sounds like a good way to go. How do the rules compare? How compatible are they with one another? What are the ship combat and regular combat rules like in comparison?

And in terms of the pocket edition, what does it have? How much does it cut?

MongTrav and Classic Trav are virtually interchangeable from what I've read.  I've actually adopted a lot of MongTrav stuff for my game already, like the "Hard Science" option for planet creation.  There are some interesting options for starship design that might replace some clunky houserules I've developed over the last year or so of sporadic play.

I haven't looked at the MongTrav space combat rules myself as I like my houseruled system adopted from the range band space combat from Starter Traveller (again, available on the CD-ROM).  Basic CT uses a vector movement system with miniatures that requires a lot of floorspace.  The original High Guard has a more abstract space combat system for large capital ship engagements, which I severely dislike (but I'm apparently in a minority with that opinion).

CT's original combat system (not talking starships now) uses an abstract system of range bands.  I like it for quick combats, but you can run into some conceptual issues if you're not going to play fast and loose with issues like positioning, etc.  However, the system can be easily converted to a grid (this was done in the Snapshot rules; Azhanti High Lightning/Striker use a more detailed system - all on the CD-ROM!).  I like what I've read of the MongTrav combat, as it keeps a lot of what I like about CT's basic combat system (especially damage to attributes), but I'm undecided about using it, as I've grown comfortable with the original combat system.

One problem with CT's combat system had to do with modifiers.  Weapons could have their to-hit numbers modified by range and target's armor type.  Certain weapons could accrue enough positive modifiers to make it impossible to miss a target; this was solved by a bit of house ruling in my game (I basically halved any positive armor modifiers; some like to make armor absorb damage instead).  MongTrav doesn't appear to have this issue, at least on a cursory reading of combat.

I have played Serenity / Firefly games with the Serenity RPG, Classic Traveller, Savage Worlds and Buffy/Unisystem.    

The Serenity game is okay - a tad wonky for my taste and feels like a Savage World ripoff, but the chargen was quite fun.  The characters felt perfect for the game world.

Classic Traveller and Savage Worlds both worked fine and both have very good, very flexible systems and CT can be houseruled fabulously to do whatever you want.   I have heard MongTrav is similiar in this respect.

The best of the bunch as Unisystem, though I did play in a game run by a great GM who really knows the system so that does bias me.   He pulled stuff from Buffy / Angel and some Unisystem sourcebooks to hack together his Firefly game.  It made playing the Supporting Characters much more fun than in the other games.

Quote from: Spinachcat;283981The Serenity game is okay - a tad wonky for my taste and feels like a Savage World ripoff, but the chargen was quite fun.  The characters felt perfect for the game world.
.

Actually, the Serenity system was the old Soveriegn Stone system that came out the year before 3E, much before Savage Worlds came out.

Of course, it is younger than Deadlands, so there is a possible line of transmission there, but honestly there are few ways to use multiple sizes of dice in a game system that make sense...

Quote from: beejazz;283945Not in the core rule book for Mongoose Traveller? That's kind of disappointing. Not that there's much ship-to-ship combat in the show anyway, but it would still be handy to have rules for.

The Ship Combat rules are indeed in the Core Rulebook. I have no idea what Rockviper is talking about saying that they are not there.

Quote from: beejazz;283945RE: J Arcane, KenHR, and Jeff:
Hmm... the Classic Traveller CD and MongTrav SRD sounds like a good way to go. How do the rules compare? How compatible are they with one another? What are the ship combat and regular combat rules like in comparison?

And in terms of the pocket edition, what does it have? How much does it cut?

Everything that is in the Mongoose Traveller Core Rulebook is in the Mongoose Traveller Pocket Edition, it is just in a smaller font and thus a bit harder to read. The only thing missing are some small "fluff" bits that were placed in the margins of the Core Rulebook.

KenHR already gave a great overview of the personal combat section, so I'll hit the starship combat section.

In CT, starship movement and combat had to deal with vector movement and algebraic equations. Mongoose Traveller has moved away from that and made starship combat much more accessible for the math phobic (and for those of us who found it slowed things up). Space combat becomes more of a resource usage challenge with range bands to create to hit modifiers. Do you use your lasers in an offensive or defensive mode? Do you use your sandcasters as a defense or do you close to a range in which they can be used offensively?

That is one of the alterations to MongTrav, you can buy different loads for a sandcaster in High Guard (the basic sandcaster loads are in the MongTrav Core Rulebook and can be used for offense).

There is also a section telling you haw to use starship wepons against personnel and vehicles, or vice versa.

Quote from: Soylent Green;283705The reason I have not run Serenity rpg isn't the system. It was the sad realisation that what made Firefly great was Joss Whedon's dialogue and story telling and no rulebook is going to give that to me. On it's own, the setting is actually rather bland. It's like "take Star Wars and remove all the cool stuff like aliens, Jedi, space dog-fights, simple one-climate planets and annoying robot sidekicks". And as TV series that was a good thing. However I figured if I were to try run it, without weird aliens and awe-inspiring Death Stars to distract the players, I'd have to rely entirely on old fashion storytelling skills and that I found intimidating.

Interesting post.

I was never interested in the Firefly RPG for a similar reason. I was never able to put my finger on it till soylent pointed it out.
I saw the entire series and the movie as well as read the comic series. The characters were the thing that made the series cool. Without them, it's just another bland setting. I think the Battlestar Galactica RPG has the same problem.

I think I've got a clearer picture now of the rules for CT and MongTrav. I'll need to see if the starship rules are in the SRD for the mongoose version... the CT starship combat sounds bad... in fairness probably sounds worse than it actually is.

Additionally, what are "sandcasters?"

I think the CT space combat rules are great for a roleplaying session if you ditch the miniatures-based movement.  Based on Jeff's comments, I'd review the MongTrav rules, though (I know I'm going to), especially if they preserve what's good about CT and use the range band system.

Sandcasters are defensive weapons that fire clouds of reflective material/chaff to interfere with incoming laser fire, dispersing it.  The downside is they also interfere with outgoing laser fire.

I have been running Firefly games (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=303099) for a few years now on the UK convention scene. The system I use is HeroQuest, but any system can be used really - Traveller is a good match.


First pick a crew to be the PCs. You can use the basic archetypes of a captain, mechanic, mercenary, pilot, etc., as they will fill in the different roles on the ship.
The captain should be incompetent in ways that allow the crew and the PCs to remain some control of their own characters.

If you follow a basic set up like the Serenity crew you need four things.

1. A ship. Preferably a broken down vessel that needs plenty of attention.
2. Money. The need to spend money on lots of items like food supplies, spare parts, fuel, guns, ammo, docking fees, booze, etc. They also need to earn money [or steal it] to keep on buying stuff.
3. Guns. Some of the characters need a fine selection of weapons to do their 'work'.
4. A job. They need to be able to work to get some money. It can be simple heist, smuggling operation, a postal drop, etc.
5. A Past. Firefly is all about escaping your past, hence the name of the ship.
6. A BIG Secret. Behind the scenes, yet the crew are always almost falling over this secret during their 'jobs'.

I gave the players some props to use in game.

I gave them a ship.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o270/DarranSims/betty22.jpg)

I gave them some money [easy come easy go].
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o270/DarranSims/10Crednote.jpg)

I gave them some guns.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o270/DarranSims/AGunCardLS-01-1.jpg)

Each job is a scenario, kept simple as the players would complicate up any job quite easily.

The props really help especially the money as the players can see the amount of cash [or how little] they have straight up and will often take the most dodgy jobs once they have been shown the green!

Darran's advice is excellent!

Beejazz, if you do go with Traveller and have a specific sort of game in mind (I enjoy figuring out how to incorporate a bunch of randomly rolled guys into a cohesive campaign, filling empty slots with NPCs, but not everyone does), consider using the Skill Packages rule from MongTrav.  I understand the corebook (not the SRD) has a point buy system for characters, as well.  That might be an important consideration.

Traveler, just about any version, would certainly do a better job of "Firefly" in a campaign than the Serenity RPG did; and its kind of sad that one says that with all seriousness.
But shit, you have a tv show that is basically Traveler on Film, and they go and give the license not to anyone who does Traveler, but to the crazy dragonlance lady who hasn't made a relevant RPG product since the mid-80s, and hasn't made a good RPG EVER.

RPGPundit

Quote from: jeff37923;284010In CT, starship movement and combat had to deal with vector movement and algebraic equations. Mongoose Traveller has moved away from that and made starship combat much more accessible for the math phobic (and for those of us who found it slowed things up). Space combat becomes more of a resource usage challenge with range bands to create to hit modifiers.

Range band combat for starships actually goes back to original Traveller - Deluxe or Starter Traveller if I remember correctly.

The little black box introduced vector movement for space combat, and it's my favorite system - then again, I still keep a small tape measure in my gaming stuff, a legacy of my wargaming days. However, I used Mayday's hex-grid system instead when I ran a short-lived Traveller campaign a couple of years ago.

Also, algebra is not required - the core books included some (simple, to me) equations for calculating trip times between a planet and a jump point, a mainworld and a gas giant, and so forth, but these played no role in combat.

Quote from: KenHR;283953CT's original combat system (not talking starships now) uses an abstract system of range bands.  I like it for quick combats, but you can run into some conceptual issues if you're not going to play fast and loose with issues like positioning, etc.  However, the system can be easily converted to a grid (this was done in the Snapshot rules; Azhanti High Lightning/Striker use a more detailed system - all on the CD-ROM!).  I like what I've read of the MongTrav combat, as it keeps a lot of what I like about CT's basic combat system (especially damage to attributes), but I'm undecided about using it, as I've grown comfortable with the original combat system.

I'm not a fan of Mongoose's system myself. I'm partial to Snapshot with some bits (pun intended) from At Close Quarters.

Quote from: KenHROne problem with CT's combat system had to do with modifiers.  Weapons could have their to-hit numbers modified by range and target's armor type.  Certain weapons could accrue enough positive modifiers to make it impossible to miss a target; this was solved by a bit of house ruling in my game (I basically halved any positive armor modifiers; some like to make armor absorb damage instead).

There's an excellent article in Space Gamer 43 called "Expanded Combat for Traveller" that addresses this very problem.

Quote from: KenHRMongTrav doesn't appear to have this issue, at least on a cursory reading of combat.

I'm not a fan of armor-as-damage-reduction - you end up with characters who cannot hit instead of characters who cannot miss.

It also feels too much like Chinese-menu d20 combat to me: one action from column A and one action from column B, or two actions from column B, and with two orders you get side of spring rolls free.

There's been a tendency over editions of Traveller - T4 caught a nasty dose of this - to make battle dress increasingly invulnerable. Mongoose's game continues that trend. It's a small thing, but it bugs me.

Quote from: Soylent Green;283705The reason I have not run Serenity rpg isn't the system. It was the sad realisation that what made Firefly great was Joss Whedon's dialogue and story telling and no rulebook is going to give that to me. On it's own, the setting is actually rather bland. It's like "take Star Wars and remove all the cool stuff like aliens, Jedi, space dog-fights, simple one-climate planets and annoying robot sidekicks". And as TV series that was a good thing. However I figured if I were to try run it, without weird aliens and awe-inspiring Death Stars to distract the players, I'd have to rely entirely on old fashion storytelling skills and that I found intimidating.

This is exactly why I can't run Star Wars. My brain just doesn't wrap itself around EPIC! I like (dare I say it? I dare, I dare!) more intimate circumstances for the adventurers. Destroying the Empire and saving the galaxy? Nope, doesn't work for me. Caging enough credits to pay for life support to get to the next world while avoiding a bounty hunter looking to haul in the ship's engineer? Yeah, I can do that.

Quote from: Soylent Green;283705The reason I have not run Serenity rpg isn't the system. It was the sad realisation that what made Firefly great was Joss Whedon's dialogue and story telling and no rulebook is going to give that to me. On it's own, the setting is actually rather bland.

Heh. Yup.

I rewatch Firefly from time to time, because it's that cool. The sorts of missions and situations they run into are the exact sort of thing that my players end up doing in my game.

I am running Mongoose Traveller as my home game right now, and also ran it at the last NC Game Day. Whenever I run a game for players new to Traveller but who are familiar with firefly, I explain that the typical Traveller free-trader game is "like firefly with a few less western references." And pretty much, they get it.

But as much as I love Firefly, I'd never run a game using its setting. When GMing, my brain runs on having a rich tapestry for a backdrop and source of ideas. And frankly, the Firefly universe ain't it. I can tap into some firefly for some pieces of local flavor for a few worlds. But overall, the richness that Traveller setting provides (both immediately in the world generation sequence, implied setting, etc., and in the OTU) is the sort of thing that fills up my imagination gas tank.

Quote from: The Shaman;284929Range band combat for starships actually goes back to original Traveller - Deluxe or Starter Traveller if I remember correctly.

It's in Starter Traveller.

Quote from: The Shaman;284929The little black box introduced vector movement for space combat, and it's my favorite system - then again, I still keep a small tape measure in my gaming stuff, a legacy of my wargaming days. However, I used Mayday's hex-grid system instead when I ran a short-lived Traveller campaign a couple of years ago.

Also, algebra is not required - the core books included some (simple, to me) equations for calculating trip times between a planet and a jump point, a mainworld and a gas giant, and so forth, but these played no role in combat.

The math still turns some players off. I agree with you that the math is simple and doesn't require a lot of effort, but that is still enough to cause some players to avoid space travel or space combat in any other kind of approach with Classic Traveller. Mongoose Traveller solves this and makes these topics more accessible to players who do not want a lot of math in their RPGs.

Also, when you add vectors together for Classic Traveller Space Combat, you are using algebra. When finding out the travel time for a ship using constant acceleration with midpoint turnover, you are using an algebraic formula. Sorry, but even though we agree that they are simple to do, they are still algebra.

EDIT: Just one more point. You've mentioned several very good products to help expand a player's enjoyment of Classic Traveller. Unfortunately, unless you go for the CD-ROM for Classic Traveller, it is very hard to find those out-of-print products (and I don't even know how hard it would be to dig up a back issue of Space Gamer). Not everyone can get these products or have the desire to get these products.

Quote from: jeff37923;284934Also, when you add vectors together for Classic Traveller Space Combat, you are using algebra. When finding out the travel time for a ship using constant acceleration with midpoint turnover, you are using an algebraic formula. Sorry, but even though we agree that they are simple to do, they are still algebra.

Marc Miller disagrees with you.

Quote from: Book 2 Starships (1981), p. 28The important thing to note, however, is that mathematics is not required for the solution of vector problems; a new vector is generated by simply laying all required vectors on the playing surface, and connecting them as shown above.

All we ever needed was that little tape measure and a mini which was oriented in the direction of travel.

Mayday also manages vector movement without solving triangles, using counters and the hex grid.

Quote from: The Shaman;284938Marc Miller disagrees with you.All we ever needed was that little tape measure and a mini which was oriented in the direction of travel.

Ever try that with more than 20 objects on the map? Or if you didn't have minis? Math helps a lot in those cases.

I also notice you decided to skip over the constant acceleration with midpoint turnover issue for space travel.

Quote from: The Shaman;284938Mayday also manages vector movement without solving triangles, using counters and the hex grid.

Yes, it does. However, if I had to buy a seperate game just to have space combat in Classic Traveller, then I wouldn't enjoy the game so much or think so highly of it.

Quote from: jeff37923;284940Ever try that with more than 20 objects on the map?

Sure. Our Star Fleet Wars (now sold as Galactic Knights (http://www.mondayknight.com/GalacticKnightRules.htm)) utilized vector movement in combats between fleets of more than a dozen vessels on each side. Never required a calculator, or even a scratch pad, to resolve movement.

Btw, because of the scale of the battles, we usually played on the floor, not a tabletop. Mom nixed changing the living room carpet from beige to black, unfortunately, but with the minis laid out and a Styrofoam ball painted to look like a gas giant, a few marbles for moons, or some rocks for asteroids, it looked pretty cool to my teenage eye.

Quote from: jeff37923Or if you didn't have minis?

I've never been without markers of some kind: spare dice, bits of paper, small rocks.

Quote from: jeff37923Math helps a lot in those cases.

Again, not in my experience. Your mileage most certainly may vary.

Quote from: jeff37923I also notice you decided to skip over the constant acceleration with midpoint turnover issue for space travel.

Not at all - I already answered it thus:

Quote from: The Shaman;284929Also, algebra is not required - the core books included some (simple, to me) equations for calculating trip times between a planet and a jump point, a mainworld and a gas giant, and so forth, but these played no role in combat.

I'm not sure why you're conflating the equation for calculating the travel time between two points in space and vector movement for combat maneuvering between starships. Little help?

Quote from: jeff37923However, if I had to buy a separate game just to have space combat in Classic Traveller, then I wouldn't enjoy the game so much or think so highly of it.

As Book 2 lays it out, you don't.

Quote from: The Shaman;284950Your mileage most certainly may vary.

And it does...

Most often when playing Classic Traveller, we didn't have a floor upon which we could place styrofoam balls to act as planets or miniatures for space combat. We didn't need it. If the number of ships was small, we used a sheet of paper, a pencil, and a calculator - that was it, made lunchtime gaming at school much easier.

Now, the algebraic equations for space travel, the gravity algebra equations for space combat near planetary templates, and the vector addition in space combat are equated by me because they are all examples of math that people have told me in in the past have turned them off of the game or aspects of it. Now, I like math. I've already said that. Then again, I'm a Gearhead and it comes with the territory. The problem is that what I like is not neccessarily what other people like in Traveller, or gaming in general, and to accomodate those people in Classic Traveller I had to drop the math so that I wouldn't alienate players.

Mongoose Traveller has also removed much of the math and in doing so has made the game far more accessible to people who do not enjoy the math part of the game. I like this because more accessibility means more potential players which means more chances for playing Traveller.

Sorry, it seams we both like math, but not everyone does in gaming.

Quote from: jeff37923;284953Most often when playing Classic Traveller, we didn't have a floor upon which we could place styrofoam balls to act as planets or miniatures for space combat. We didn't need it. If the number of ships was small, we used a sheet of paper, a pencil, and a calculator . . ..

Why did you need the calculator? What couldn't you resolve it with just paper, pencil, and a ruler?

Quote from: jeff37923Now, the algebraic equations for space travel, the gravity algebra equations for space combat near planetary templates . . .

There's no need for algebra in resolving the effects of gravity on a spacecraft using the vector movement rules, either.

Quote from: jeff37923;284953. . . and the vector addition in space combat are equated by me because they are all examples of math that people have told me in in the past have turned them off of the game or aspects of it. Now, I like math. I've already said that. Then again, I'm a Gearhead and it comes with the territory. The problem is that what I like is not neccessarily what other people like in Traveller, or gaming in general, and to accomodate those people in Classic Traveller I had to drop the math so that I wouldn't alienate players.

If solving a simple equation was too much for your players, well, that's just how some people are.

But vector movement doesn't require mathematics. It requires no equations, no calculations - heck, you don't even need a ruler, just a piece of string and a couple of paper clips will do.

So I'm not really seeing the problem there.

Quote from: jeff37923Mongoose Traveller has also removed much of the math and in doing so has made the game far more accessible to people who do not enjoy the math part of the game. I like this because more accessibility means more potential players which means more chances for playing Traveller.

Sorry, it seams we both like math, but not everyone does in gaming.

Okay.

Quote from: The Shaman;284959Why did you need the calculator? What couldn't you resolve it with just paper, pencil, and a ruler?

To figure out what the ships initial vectors were for one thing. A big part of the combat was ensuring that the ships could actually engage each other without massive penalties to the attack rolls.

Plus since we often had combats at distances larger than any reasonable map area, the 1mm=100km scale notwithstanding, we had to figure out if the ships would get into a decent range. We'd figure if missiles would intersect a targetted ship (or close enough to be effective).

The math was easier to handle with a calculator.

Quote from: The Shaman;284959There's no need for algebra in resolving the effects of gravity on a spacecraft using the vector movement rules, either.

You need the algebra to determine the templates to begin with. We used the chart in the book, but we also used the equations to determine templates when we engaged in combats that weren't standard fare, like close around stars with ships protected by black globe generators or nuclear dampers.

Quote from: The Shaman;284959If solving a simple equation was too much for your players, well, that's just how some people are.

Ok, I agree with you except I want some players in my games because of their other talents that do not relate to math but do heighten the enjoyment of the game for all involved.

Quote from: The Shaman;284959But vector movement doesn't require mathematics. It requires no equations, no calculations - heck, you don't even need a ruler, just a piece of string and a couple of paper clips will do.

I won't argue that there are multiple ways to handle vector movement. We just did it our own way.

Quote from: jeff37923;284969*snip*

Thanks for clarifying that for me. I grok.