T5.09 Errata Discussion Thread

[Epee]

True enough. Of course 7 kg is what; about 15 pounds? Place that around your body and you can still jog and hike but your sprint is seriously degraded.

Abstract is good, I don't want to end up counting match stems either and certainly it is a refs job to keep players from abusing the system by carrying too much.

 

[DonM]

Could someone go to the Errata thread and clearly specify what is missing and where for Unrefined Fuel?

 

[Hyphen]

The Errata Review document is dated 28/08; I'm assuming that's the latest one?

Just wondering: how close are we to an official errata as reviewed by Marc?

 

[DonM]

There's an updated unofficial document I haven't uploaded yet with a LOT of changes.

Marc and I are hoping to meet again next week; I'll upload what I have after that, or if that gets delayed.

Right now, there's a red "Marc's review stops here" line at page 45. We've done more than that, but some were "needs more review".

 

[warwizard]

Now add to the discussion of burden as applies to a starship.
What is an effective mass reduction of 10% per level in a system where mass is not tracked. In 1.0 For ship designs I converted mass to volume so a 10 dt power plant with a -3 burden only uses 7 dt and the other 3 Dt is applied to open space to improve the San of the crew. (it is NOT available to mount more equipment.)

 

[Ackehece]

Pg. 378 Globe Series

Jump Drive Capacitors
multiple references to them but they do not appear in the Jump section of the book or anywhere else.

 

[Ackehece]

Pg 52 and Pg 53 Continue Conditions

04 Citizen Roll 10 to Continue
pg. 58 Citizen - no listed continue condition

07 Spacer Roll 7 - to Continue
pg.61 Spacer Continue Str

08 Soldier Roll 7 - to Continue
Pg. 62 Soldier Continue End

13 Functionary no indicated method to continue
pg. 67 Office Politics to continue
also
Must Continue (Risk Success)
Cannot Continue (Risk Failure)

 

[Ackehece]

Sorry hit the wrong thread with those.:CoW:
Ducks under cover from the incoming fire....

 

[DonM]

Sorry hit the wrong thread with those.:CoW:
Ducks under cover from the incoming fire....

You really mess me up doing that... :rant:

 

[Garnfellow]

World Size

For mainworlds, size is generated by 2D -2, as in previous editions (p 409). T5 allows for larger worlds, though: If 2D -2 =10, reroll 1D + 9, which gives worlds of up to 15,000 miles in diameter (size F).

However, as this second roll is a flat distribution it is just as likely to produce a size F planet as a size A planet.

I wonder if the second should be modified to create a weighted distribution: if 2D -2 =10, reroll 2D +3, and treat rolls <10 as 10. This would still allow for size F mainworlds, it would just make them much rarer.

 

[whulorigan]

For mainworlds, size is generated by 2D -2, as in previous editions (p 409). T5 allows for larger worlds, though: If 2D -2 =10, reroll 1D + 9, which gives worlds of up to 15,000 miles in diameter (size F).

However, as this second roll is a flat distribution it is just as likely to produce a size F planet as a size A planet.

I wonder if the second should be modified to create a weighted distribution: if 2D -2 =10, reroll 2D +3, and treat rolls <10 as 10. This would still allow for size F mainworlds, it would just make them much rarer.

What about instead of 1D+9, you rolled [GOOD FLUX] + 10?

 

[Garnfellow]

What about instead of 1D+9, you rolled [GOOD FLUX] + 10?

Yeah, the math would be the same as 2D+3. I'd get behind that.

 

[aramis]

What about instead of 1D+9, you rolled [GOOD FLUX] + 10?

Yeah, the math would be the same as 2D+3. I'd get behind that.

None of the three are equivalent odds.

	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36	0 0 0 0 1/36 2/36 3/36 4/36 5/36 6/36 5/36 4/36 3/36 2/36 1/36	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6/36 10/36 8/36 6/36 4/36 2/36 0
Mean	12.5	10	10.9444

Histograms

odds of 36	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	| | | | | | | | | |****** |****** |****** |****** |****** |******	| | | | |* |** |*** |**** |***** |****** |***** |**** |*** |** |*	| | | | | | | | |****** |********** |******** |****** |**** |** |
Mean	12.5	10	10.9444

Note that goodflux is 0-5 output.

 

[whulorigan]

None of the three are equivalent odds.

	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36	0 0 0 0 1/36 2/36 3/36 4/36 5/36 6/36 5/36 4/36 3/36 2/36 1/36	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6/36 10/36 8/36 6/36 4/36 2/36 0
Mean	12.5	10	10.9444

Histograms

odds of 36	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	| | | | | | | | | |****** |****** |****** |****** |****** |******	| | | | |* |** |*** |**** |***** |****** |***** |**** |*** |** |*	| | | | | | | | |****** |********** |******** |****** |**** |** |
Mean	12.5	10	10.9444

Note that goodflux is 0-5 output.

BTW, note that I had suggested [GOOD FLUX]+10, not +9. So all of the the values of that particular column need to be shifted down by 1 row, and the mean is [FONT=arial,helvetica]11.9444.

[/FONT]

	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36 1/6=6/36	0 0 0 0 1/36 2/36 3/36 4/36 5/36 6/36 5/36 4/36 3/36 2/36 1/36	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6/36 10/36 8/36 6/36 4/36 2/36
Mean	12.5	10	11.9444

Histograms

odds of 36	1d+9	2d+3	GoodFlux+10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15	| | | | | | | | | |****** |****** |****** |****** |****** |******	| | | | |* |** |*** |**** |***** |****** |***** |**** |*** |** |*	| | | | | | | | | |****** |********** |******** |****** |**** |**
Mean	12.5	10	11.9444

 

[SanDragon]

3D-3!!!

 

[whulorigan]

3D-3!!!

Yeah, that would be the simple solution, wouldn't it.

Of course, that will shift the mean from "5" (for 2D-2) to "7.5" (for 3D-3). But then we are adding an additional roll to the 2D-2 roll, so that will shift the mean above "5" anyway.

 

[SanDragon]

It isn't perfect, but it hits the 0 to 15 range, yes.

 

[whulorigan]

3D-3!!!

Yeah, that would be the simple solution, wouldn't it.

Of course, that will shift the mean from "5" (for 2D-2) to "7.5" (for 3D-3). But then we are adding an additional roll to the 2D-2 roll, so that will shift the mean above "5" anyway.

It isn't perfect, but it hits the 0 to 15 range, yes.

I just had a thought: What about [3D-3] + [BAD FLUX] ?
That would still generate a skewed bell-curve from 0-15, averaging about "5.5" to "6.0".

 

[Garnfellow]

None of the three are equivalent odds.

True -- I thought whulorigan had suggested 10 + flux; I'm not as familiar with good flux/bad flux.

But note that I suggested 2D +3, with anything less than 10 = 10. A different distribution again than what you mapped.

Size	Probability (%)	Total Probability (%)
10	58.3	1.61
11	13.88	0.38
12	11.11	0.31
13	8.33	0.23
14	5.55	0.15
15	2.77	0.08

The first "Probability" column is the probability for rolling each size once the initial 10 was rolled; the second "Total Probability" is the overall chance of rolling a world of that size during worldgen.

 

[DonM]

I like the suggestion that allows for the possibility of >10, but keeps it limited. Because I'm confused this morning, what are the options again?