|
Post by Sojourner on Dec 28, 2003 15:34:11 GMT -5
Is the GURPS-style generation system a gospel thing? That is, must a world be defined by the system set out?
I'm just a bit miffed because some of the categories don't seem relevant.
Law level, for example. What has this got to do with anything? Political system also, not so much irrelevant, far from it, but a governmental system in a civilisation of such diversity can't be defined by one line of statistics.
I'm pretty much putting forward these questions with a view to breaking the rules, as I did put a fair bit of effort into writing a narrative before realising that the generation system was required, and it doesn't seem to fit into any of the pregenerated worlds I can find.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Dec 28, 2003 18:00:20 GMT -5
Is the GURPS-style generation system a gospel thing? That is, must a world be defined by the system set out? First off, the system is not GURPS-based, but rather one from an old RPG system by the name of MegaTraveller. It was the most comprehensive and detailed that I could find that was not totally inaccessible (as with the Traveller 2300 system) and which didn't just require that people 'make stuff up'. It has it's problems but it also means that everyone is working from the same base... Ooh... I've just seen how pedantic this point is. Erm, consider it as there for information purposes only! I'm just a bit miffed because some of the categories don't seem relevant. This is explained in the document. The 'non-relevant' categories that you describe are there only as guidelines, to suggest things that people might not otherwise think of. (This is after seeing that many worlds that people provided were entirely clones and that they often missed the concept that the adeptus terra is an imposition and not necessarily an integral part of every world. It was also there to prevent people having multiple 'habitable' worlds within a system following GW's horrendous examples.) Law level, for example. What has this got to do with anything? Political system also, not so much irrelevant, far from it, but a governmental system in a civilisation of such diversity can't be defined by one line of statistics. Again, it's meant as a guideline only. I haven't managed to finalise the example of world-generation which includes the examples to show how this would work. I don't think that it is too much of a problem to see how it could be useful in developing new and interesting governments which work with the concept rather than merely imposing the concept... Again, though, it is a guideline only. I'm pretty much putting forward these questions with a view to breaking the rules, as I did put a fair bit of effort into writing a narrative before realising that the generation system was required, and it doesn't seem to fit into any of the pregenerated worlds I can find. The guidelines are just that: guidelines. They are meant to provide a consistent set of rules for generating worlds which does not allow for continual clones of the same worlds and which allows for something other than a world for an army. As a general rule only the physical statistics of a world should not be changed. The social data is entirely changeable and, unsurprisingly, is only meant to be there as a guideline. If you check out the example.pdf (link in the sticky thread) you will find that there are times when I discard this social information in favour of something that is more consistent with the concept that I have in mind... But you will also note that I use the data to provide changes or new information to the concept. It is this feature that is most important to a world-builder: flexibility. If you are unable to modify a concept to a world then there are obviously going to be problems since not every world type can be included in the 'random' generation of worlds created for a subsector. Thus as a general rule I would say this: If you're having to throw out all the randomly generated statistics to put your world in there then you're not participating in the act of creation as laid down as part of the project. From what I've seen this would be a shame for your world since there is a level of detail that transcends the normal GW 'fluff' that I've seen so often submitted as a concept. Therefore let us tackle the specific questions and concerns that you have in this thread. What are the specific problems that you are having in finding a place to locate your world? (I'm going to take another look at your thread and try to identify the problems...) Kage
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Dec 28, 2003 18:09:01 GMT -5
I've taken a look at the concept that you posted in the other thread and, to be honest, I cannot see why you're having any specific concerns. As posted in that thread any M-class star should be a suitable location for the world concept and we have a profusion of this star type. Indeed, it is one of the reasons that I posted the possibility of changing the star-class because everyone has having cold and barren worlds! Given that the population, government and law levels posted on the UWP associated with stars are just guidelines, there should be no problem. Indeed, the system that you propose should be entirely definable within the rules presented in guide.pdf. So it looks like you're going to have to post specific concerns so that I can address them here. That is, after all, what this forum is for! ;D Kage
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Dec 29, 2003 13:45:00 GMT -5
Specifically, I don't seem to be able to find any cold worlds with a high (~80%) water content and a non-hostile atmosphere.
I've seen plenty of cold worlds but; all have an unbreathable atmosphere.
That's about it, I think.
As you can see from my blurb, it isn't a *very* exotic planet, so primarily Earthlike conditions are pretty much essential. It just needs to be Siberia-ish cold, iced pretty much all over and have about the same gravity, and a breathable atmosphere.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Dec 30, 2003 8:55:56 GMT -5
Perhaps if you are slighty more flexible with regards to to hydrographic percentage, remembering that anything from 4-9 in terms of atmosphere is habitable. However, just based upon your hydrographic 8 and 'cold' concept the following worlds (locations) could be located: 7,27,21 (Forgeworld subsector) 56,47,52 (Hiveworld subsector - might be a bit warm) 53,50,50 (Hiveworld subsector) 54,50,55 (Hiveworld subsector) 56,49,52 (Hiveworld subsector) If you open up the hydrographic percentage then this number increases dramatically. Kage
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Dec 30, 2003 15:45:03 GMT -5
This is explained in the document. The 'non-relevant' categories that you describe are there only as guidelines, to suggest things that people might not otherwise think of. (This is after seeing that many worlds that people provided were entirely clones and that they often missed the concept that the adeptus terra is an imposition and not necessarily an integral part of every world. It was also there to prevent people having multiple 'habitable' worlds within a system following GW's horrendous examples.) Just one point: system with three-five worlds is much easier to patrol/defend, and thus it is quite possible that mankind agrees to live in a very inhospitable environments rather to die from the myriad threats that are waiting over the corner. In the universe where is only war this is ‘natural’. In order to came out with alternative choices we should make a benefit-cost analysis of them. So...
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Dec 30, 2003 16:10:08 GMT -5
He who goes with the concept "in the dark future there is only war" only tends to catch the war highlights! There is much more going on in the Anargo sector than just war... And in the rest of the Imperium itself. Obviously. ;D Kage
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Feb 4, 2004 15:46:30 GMT -5
He who goes with the concept "in the dark future there is only war" only tends to catch the war highlights! No Kage, it wasn't me...<sobs>... not me bat GW done this... I'm good, you should blame them
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Feb 4, 2004 19:19:48 GMT -5
I frequently do. After all, it is their fault... Kage
|
|