PDA

View Full Version : Magitek!



Paragon Badger
2011-03-25, 08:41 AM
Okay. So a particularly wealthy individual or group of individuals discovers a mineral which magically reduces the weight of any metallic object it is in contact with by about 90%.

Que a boat made entirely from mithral treated with trace elements of this magic mineral and you have an ultra light ship capable of flying with the correct form of propulsion.

A few hundred years later, the skyfleet has become the commercial center of the world. It's also basically magitek incarnate. Not only does it have mechanical tech equal to the industrial revolution and beyond, but multiple wizards in its' employ that have 8th level spell slots... as well as temporary access to wizards with 9th level spell slots.

So, what could you do with that combination?

Here's what the 'city' has to work with;

Lawful Neutral Technocratic Government with figure-head monarchy
30-ish airships housing about 2000 citizens, almost NONE of which have commoner levels. Most have PC or Expert/Arisocrat levels and most are filthy stinking rich.
The PCs can buy most anything under 100,000 GP. Extrapolate from that what you will about the fleet's economy.

I had the following in mind...

Warforged, of course. An entire military force led by wizards. They 'parachute' into enemy held areas by way of featherfalling off the airships' loading ramps. Simple and efficient.

WWI-era Artillery Pieces... enchanted. My first thought was a Spell-storing enchantment, but ranged weapons can't have those. Spell-storing Ammunition? It would be considerably expensive, though. Perhaps not a problem with their resources.

I'd like to see what the Playground could think of...

GodGoblin
2011-03-25, 09:34 AM
Makes me think of the Redstar comics where they have huge ships with sorceress batteries. They disentergrate themselves into pure energy and fire out before reforming back. Something along those lines could be fitting.

As for the magical artillery a lot of the ranged weapon enchantments pass there abilities onto the ammunition so Spellstoring wont work but Shocking burst would :smallbiggrin:

Another thought would be to have a Artificers attached to an artillary piece as part of its team to enchant it and keep it running, like an engineer in Warhammer Fantasy.

Person_Man
2011-03-25, 10:02 AM
Power Armor (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176276)?

FelixG
2011-03-25, 10:33 AM
My google fu has failed me, I think a Iron Man Artificer would be AWESOME to go a long with this, does anyone have a link to that guide?

Another_Poet
2011-03-25, 12:09 PM
Que a boat made entirely from mithral treated with trace elements of this magic mineral and you have an ultra light ship capable of flying with the correct form of propulsion.

How do you achieve lift?

Something 90% lighter than mithral will not float in the air. In fact, 90% lighter than aluminum still won't float in the air.

If you have wings on it like an airplane, then you don't need the magic mineral - you could use steel or wood (presumably much cheaper than mithral) and fly like a normal airplane.

I'm not following your in-world logic for how these ships can fly.

Paragon Badger
2011-03-25, 02:02 PM
How do you achieve lift?

Something 90% lighter than mithral will not float in the air. In fact, 90% lighter than aluminum still won't float in the air.

If you have wings on it like an airplane, then you don't need the magic mineral - you could use steel or wood (presumably much cheaper than mithral) and fly like a normal airplane.

I'm not following your in-world logic for how these ships can fly.

It doesn't float by itself, sure. And it doesn't have wings.

I didn't want to bore my players will detail in how it works, but the propulsion of the ships is also magical and will involve little to no lift or aerodynamics on the part of the ships' construction. Think of a metal East Indiaman with jet-engines at the rudder pointing roughly 45 degrees downward. ...Maybe with a little thrust-vectoring technology.

The decreased weight just reduces the theoretically massive amount of propulsive force that would need to be generated. ...Possibly, I didn't want to go into the specifics. The ultra-light mineral was only going to be hinted at in-game anyways. :smallwink:

Anyways. The whole thing is constructed from many (very well-funded) low to mid level arcane spellcasters in particular, not one very epic level wizard or somesuch.

Ravens_cry
2011-03-25, 02:32 PM
Oh, but have them handy, some of us like details. You have a good beginning with the magic mineral, but I like to know how things work. Even if its just some wings and say, a couple dozen decanters of endless water for propulsion, looking like a magitek ekranoplan, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lun-class_ekranoplan) that is a more satisfying explanation then just "oh, well that's magic" Sure, your going to have to do that eventually, but at least your using the magic as the basis of the tech rather then cutting it out whole cloth. If you are going to do that, why not simply say "we have flying ships" rather then going into detail about this special mineral?

Welknair
2011-03-25, 02:44 PM
MAGITECH (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=182780)? Doesn't include the "Light Mineral", but does include rules for Skyships and propulsion. Also has stuff for magic artillery, weaponry, gadgets, mechs, and pretty much anything else.

Paragon Badger
2011-03-25, 03:23 PM
Fascinating! I shall be buried in this for the next hour or so. :smalltongue:

Another_Poet
2011-03-25, 03:32 PM
Think of a metal East Indiaman with jet-engines at the rudder pointing roughly 45 degrees downward. ...Maybe with a little thrust-vectoring technology.

The decreased weight just reduces the theoretically massive amount of propulsive force that would need to be generated.

Makes sense.

jseah
2011-03-25, 06:19 PM
Permanency Gust of Wind in a box -> emissionless, limitless propulsion


Permanency Wall of Fire + Decanter of Endless Water -> steam rocket

Paragon Badger
2011-03-25, 07:16 PM
Permanency Gust of Wind in a box -> emissionless, limitless propulsion

Is that potent enough? They have the resources to create dozens of permanent gusts of wind per ship but I think even ultra-light mithral would be too heavy to propel with wind alone.


Permanency Wall of Fire + Decanter of Endless Water -> steam rocket

Steam! It's always steam, huh? :smallwink:

...............................What about massive treads of immovable rods? :smallbiggrin:

jseah
2011-03-25, 09:25 PM
No worries if you have ring gates and adamantine rods!

With this simple setup, you too can convert material strength into movement power today!
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/DriveAmplifier.jpg


Never mind, you don't want to go down the path of violating conservation of momentum (by breaking translational symmetry). That way leads to tiny engines propelling moon-sized battlestations, gravity guns and FTL travel... XD

FelixG
2011-03-25, 11:59 PM
No worries if you have ring gates and adamantine rods!

With this simple setup, you too can convert material strength into movement power today!
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/DriveAmplifier.jpg


Never mind, you don't want to go down the path of violating conservation of momentum (by breaking translational symmetry). That way leads to tiny engines propelling moon-sized battlestations, gravity guns and FTL travel... XD

Explain this please?

A morbid part of me is very interested lol

Welknair
2011-03-26, 12:09 AM
I always enjoy interesting devices like that, but sadly I can't work it out. Those iron bars should be a single bar, as they are attached through the gates. From my understanding, when pressure is applied to the outer casing, it would push both rods, but since they are actually a single one, nothing would happen. Your effectively using a single rod in place of two. With the same result. They keep the casings away from one another. I fail to see how this is supposed to create movement energy...

Radar
2011-03-26, 03:25 AM
A permanent Reverse Gravity effect would provide reliable and adjustable (you can move massive rods into or out of the spell area) antigravity. It also breaks momentum and energy conservation in a simplier way then this Ring Gate setup (which I'd also like to see explained).

jseah
2011-03-26, 06:49 AM
Explain this please?

A morbid part of me is very interested lol
Welknair has the right answer.

Actually the diagram is misleading and I didn't explain the context it was to be used in.
The rods should be pointing 90* to each other and there are supposed to be 3 sets, making the inner drive casing a closed cube.
Furthermore, this is not a drive unit by itself, it is a drive amplifier. You still need an engine to put inside it.


Ok, but Welknair has the right answer.

Yes, when you push on the outer casing, the rods push back and the outer casing is kept at the same distance.

The crucial bit is that NOTHING touches the inner drive casing and ring gates.
The repulsion force that keeps the outer casing where it is, is not exerted on the inner casing AT ALL.

This means, if you attach an engine to the inner casing, and the ship to the outer casing...

when the engine pushes...

the ship doesn't push back...


ie. it doesn't matter how big your ship is, as long as the rods can take the force (acceleration x mass of ship), your ship goes as fast as a naked engine.

Radar
2011-03-26, 08:08 AM
(...)

This means, if you attach an engine to the inner casing, and the ship to the outer casing...

when the engine pushes...

the ship doesn't push back...

(...)
Umm... I'd disagree with that. Consider such a scenario:
setup as on the picture linked, Outer Casing is laid on the ground with the iron rod protruding upwards. You put the Inner Casing on the rod as on the picture and let go of it. If there is no force working on the Inner Casing, then it would just fall down swallowing the whole rod, which is not how the Ring Gates work - they can't swallow thigns. So there is a force working on the Ring Gates. It will be exactly the same force as expected, if there were two rod put between regular iron slabs.
Ring Gate accelerator still works as advertised and is a very neat perpetuum mobile or orbital bombardment weapon.

jseah
2011-03-26, 08:43 AM
What you have in that set up is a broken rod.
Or if your rod cannot break, your planet accelerates at 9.81.


Think of it like this, rods, like most bits of matter, can be replaced with some very stiff springs.

The springs compress, then break. Or the planet moves. ^^


What? When you break conservation of momentum, BAD stuff happens.

EDIT: I'll draw up a diagram.

jseah
2011-03-26, 09:06 AM
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/drivegroundcomparison.jpg

Here you go.

The left one is the normal view (upside down for clarity)
Note that accelerating to the ground at 9.81 m s-2 is the same as the ground accelerating up towards you.

The right one is the view from the point of view of the iron rod. Hence, the universe gets mirror imaged once the rod goes through the ring gate.
In this case, there is ground on both sides of the rod, accelerating towards the center at 9.81 m s-2.
This compresses your rod.

It's like putting a rod on the ground and expecting it to hold up a planet. You break your rod.


Or if your rod can't break, then (to the rod) it will hold the two suspicously identical planets apart.
When you translate that back to normal view, the planet accelerates away from the drive casing at the same rate the drive casing accelerates to the planet.

Radar
2011-03-26, 10:18 AM
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/drivegroundcomparison.jpg

Here you go.

The left one is the normal view (upside down for clarity)
Note that accelerating to the ground at 9.81 m s-2 is the same as the ground accelerating up towards you.

The right one is the view from the point of view of the iron rod. Hence, the universe gets mirror imaged once the rod goes through the ring gate.
In this case, there is ground on both sides of the rod, accelerating towards the center at 9.81 m s-2.
This compresses your rod.

It's like putting a rod on the ground and expecting it to hold up a planet. You break your rod.


Or if your rod can't break, then (to the rod) it will hold the two suspicously identical planets apart.
When you translate that back to normal view, the planet accelerates away from the drive casing at the same rate the drive casing accelerates to the planet.
Important here is the Drive Casing POV. Your interpretation breaks not only momentum conservation, but the relativity principle as well. Since there are no guidelines, how Ring Gates interact with objects going through them, it's much safer to assume, that physics is perserved as much as possible. Even if the Ring Gates themselves would perserve Newtonian mechanics, they can still be used for many shenanigans.
If the planet would start moving with acceleration of 9,81, it would send everyone on that side of the planet flying (they would feel no gravity), people on the other side would feel 2G. It wouldn't make much sense.

Also: it wouldn't make an FTL drive - no source of constant force would be enough for that. It's far easier to use those Ring Gates as intended for that - instant travel.

Touching is not important, when you consider forces between objects. If you are very strict, then nothing ever touches (things just come really close together).

Welknair
2011-03-26, 10:44 AM
So we are assuming a linkage between the rod(s) and the gates, correct? So as Radar said, there is a force working on them, per usual. However, the gates make things a bit more complicated. By standard rules, the Gates can't swallow things. However, their strength is never actually stated. What would happen in your set up if someone were to lift the inner drive casing, and the outer was fixed? We can't swallow the rod, so what happens? Is there a set strength of the gates, such that it could potentially break the rods? I doubt your own strength would be able to break/compress the rods, but the stress being put on the rod(s) would also be being put on the other (side of the) rod. Or something like that.

So either

A) There is a linkage, which means that standard forces are at work, causing this system to not operate

B) There is no linkage, and when the inner is brought towards the outer it swallows the rod(s). This would mean that we're stuffing the rod(s) into another dimension as they are not being compressed, they're being swallowed. I also believe that this option defies RAW.

or

C) There is no linkage, and the gates have a predetermined strength with which they can attempt to compress or break whatever is stopping them. This strength may be infinite. If this is the case, you will, as stated, end up with a broken rod. Then the question is what happens when you get an unbreakable rod. Also if this is the case, I'm sure there are plenty other ways to abuse this...

However, I propose:

D) The gates are somewhat elastic. They can "Swallow" things, but only for a short amount of time. After this, they try to bounce back to an acceptable position. However, this still means that there is a force working on the inner casing. They end up working like quantum springs with this interpretation.

Also, what's this talk about FTL? We have Greater Teleport for that.

I think we may have exited the topic of Magitech and entered into Magic-Physics Shenanigans. I also think that there's a topic for that...

jseah
2011-03-26, 11:33 AM
FTL is something else entirely, and depends on a shaky interpretation of gravitons existing and being able to be reflected by ring gates. Let's not go there.
That or some interpretation of how gravity works on a portable hole.

But anyway:

1. Momentum is not conserved by ring gates no matter how you look at it.
A basic use of ring gates (as intended in fact) is to put things in one end, and they come out the other end.
If the ring gates don't face each other, you have just changed the direction of the objects momentum with no acceleration applied. Momentum is not conserved.

By their very existence, ring gates do not conserve momentum.

2. Similarly, the relativity principle does not apply. In fact, THAT is the reason why momentum is not conserved.

The moment you have a pair of gates not facing each other, your position as a coordinate from the position of those gates becomes important to determining what happens to you as you move.

IE. translational symmetry is broken, and via Noether's Theorem, momentum is not conserved.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. You CANNOT conserve momentum and still have ring gates work as they are described in RAW.

This would result in ring gates completely failing to work.

Case 1: Objects continue to move in the same direction as they did before transferral.
Result: You cannot put objects into ring gates unless the ring gates are facing each other. Trying to do so will result in the object moving into itself.

Case 2: The ring gates experience force from objects moving through them.
Result: Ring gates (and whatever they are anchored on) will move slightly when an object moves through it. This will cause either a bit of the object to not connect up with other bits of the object (gates move toward each other) or it will cause a bit of the object to exist inside another bit of the same object (gates move away from each other).

EDIT:
Sorry, I failed to realize what you mean by strength Welknair.

I am saying that assigning a "strength" to something that bends space is meaningless.


Ring gates: Things go in one end, things come out the other.

It doesn't matter what goes into the gate, if they don't touch the rings, it is as if the gates don't exist.
Spells go through the gates. Light goes through the gate. You can't push those. They are obviously not material objects, and yet they still go through the gate.
In fact, if you read the description, being able to cast spells through a gate means that the gate preserves line of effect.

The gates do not "push" things or even interact with anything going through it. Space just bends, and objects residing in that space bend with it.

EDIT EDIT:
Also, you won't push the planet using that trick above.

Even if you got really strong rods, the moment the rods get stronger than what the ground is made of, the rods will just break the ground and bury themselves.
The contraption just sinks into the ground (and falling speed too!) and once the inner drive casing hits the ground, all forces cancel each other and the shenanigans stop.

Radar
2011-03-26, 11:55 AM
(...)

Case 2: The ring gates experience force from objects moving through them.
Result: Ring gates (and whatever they are anchored on) will move slightly when an object moves through it. This will cause either a bit of the object to not connect up with other bits of the object (gates move toward each other) or it will cause a bit of the object to exist inside another bit of the same object (gates move away from each other).
That's the case I consider the most reasonable. It won't create the paradox you're talking about. If Ring Gates move relative to each other, it just means, that things moving through the Gates get that additional velocity as well - nothing unusual (if you consider wormholes usual).
Explanation: let's say you have a pair of Ring Gates and an iron ball. It won't (and shouldn't) make any difference whether you move the ball toward the Ring Gate or the Ring Gate toward the ball. If their relative velocity is the same, then the ball will arrive the same way through the second Gate.
Relative velocity between both ends of the Gates shouldn't change the relative velocity between particular Gates and the teleported object.

edit: it really helps to think of Ring Gates as wormholes - those things don't break momentum conservation that easily (they do allow time travel on the other hand).

Psyren
2011-03-26, 11:56 AM
A mineral that reduces mass, you say? A... mass effect, if you will? :smallwink:

jseah
2011-03-26, 12:19 PM
edit: it really helps to think of Ring Gates as wormholes - those things don't break momentum conservation that easily (they do allow time travel on the other hand).
Resolve this quandry:
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/Forces20example20gates.jpg

All objects are floating in space with no gravity or friction to worry about. One object travels on a path described by the black line (start/end doesn't matter). Acceleration comes from somewhere, doesn't matter where.

This object is long, like a quarterstaff or something.
If the gates move while the object is in transit, the object gets sheared. Since the gates are floating in space, any force on them will move the gate. (ie. you can't put things through it)

How do you not break conservation of momentum?



Wormholes have different properties to ring gates. They have specific requirements for transit as putting things in them destabilizes them for the very reason that they don't break conservation of momentum.
Also, wormholes aren't objects. They're space put in a strange shape. They don't have mass.
The closest thing to a wormhole ring gates have is the interface between gates.

Ring gates have no transit requirements apart from 100lb per day, which isn't relevant.


EDIT:
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/relative20velocity20problem20gates.jpg
here's another one, dealing with relative velocity.

Here, I keep the relative velocity of Gate Entrance to ball and Gate Exit to ball constant. Momentum not conserved.
Note that if the gate exit moves backwards, the bit of the ball that went through first will no longer be connected to the bits of the ball that haven't gone through.

Radar
2011-03-26, 01:14 PM
I should have been more specific: momentum can be at least locally conserved. If we assume, that objects travelling through Gates interact with the Gates themselves, then momentum can be globaly conserved:
If an object goes into the Gate with momentum p, then this end of the Gate gains momentum p (in addition to whatever it had before). If an object leaves the Gate with momentum p, then the output Gate gains -p momentum. This way you retain momentum conservation and sanity.
About shearing: it won't happen as relative velocity and positioning of the Gates is irrelevant to their working (or at least it should). What matters is the relative velocity between the object and the input Gate. Exactly that velocity will be replicated at the endpoint as relative velocity between the output Gate and the object. Momentum difference will be paid by respective ends of the Gate.

To make things clear: we are talking about a magical black box in a game system, so both our interpretations can be correct, because we feel like it. Still, I think Ring Gates can make some semblance of sense and not break physics too hard.

Also: space folded in weird shapes is totaly a thing and interacts with matter. Folded space has energy, so it has mass as well (sort of). It doesn't matter, if it's material or not; space is quite tangible.

Welknair
2011-03-26, 02:34 PM
I'm starting to feel a little out of my depth here. Sadly, I am yet to take a proper physics class which I believe would be very useful in this discussion. My primary question is: In the original setup, what happens when a force causes the inner casing to move towards the outer, but when the outer is fixed? We can't swallow it, and you stated that the gates will not do a thing to the bar as they are not touching it. So what occurs?

Oh, and random theory as to the prior discussion of the conservation of momentum: So in order to change the direction of an object passing through the gates, you require twice as much energy as the object being passed has. The first amount to stop it's movement, then the second to replicate that speed in the new direction. What if the clause for items that are put in, then pulled back out (or never fully pass either way) not counting towards the 100 lbs was due to an elasticity effect allowing for temporary breakages of the Conservation of Momentum. The rest of the time, the gate provides the requisite energy, but is limited in this regard, hence the 100 lb limit. This works up until you realize that the limit doesn't take into account the inertia of the object in question which is what would be important if the above were the case...

As previously stated, I haven't even taken a physics class. As such all opinions presented by me are relatively uninformed and may be wildly inaccurate. If that turns out that I'm spouting incorrect gibberish, please tell me so I can be quiet.

jseah
2011-03-26, 03:20 PM
Radar:
Let me think about that. Your solution does work for my two examples.

I'm sure I could come up with something that makes it not work.

EDIT: Well, never mind, I'm sure we can agree on separate interpretations. I think if I was going to cause problems in your solution, I would need to mirror image a gate. (you do that by shrinking it and pushing it through it's exit)

Guess you win. =)


I'm starting to feel a little out of my depth here. Sadly, I am yet to take a proper physics class which I believe would be very useful in this discussion. My primary question is: In the original setup, what happens when a force causes the inner casing to move towards the outer, but when the outer is fixed? We can't swallow it, and you stated that the gates will not do a thing to the bar as they are not touching it. So what occurs?
so, in this scenario, if you take my interpretation of ring gates not interacting with the objects passing through...

Your inner casing is moving towards the outer casing.
Your outer casing is fixed, lets say it's a wall of force.
The force exerted on the iron rods will increase asymptotically (ie. it will reach infinity in a very short amount of time) until the rods break.


If your rods are invulnerable, and your outer casing is not so much "fixed" as attached to something very very big (like the Death Star)....
The force exerted on the iron rods increases asymptotically as before, but in this case, the first to give is the thing "fixing" the outer casing in place. IE. the Death Star moves.


My interpretation of how ring gates work makes them an unstoppable force.
The rod gives or your obstruction gives. It's just a matter of which one is stronger.

Welknair
2011-03-26, 03:32 PM
With that interpretation however, the rings are affecting objects passing through. They are exerting force on the rod until said rod breaks, the target does, or the target moves. So my next question is: Why wouldn't the same occur with the opposite? What if the rings were affixed to a Wall of Force and the outer casing was the one that was moving towards the inner casing? Wouldn't it act the same way? The result would just be that the rings act as a type of unbreakable welding. I think. (See previous disclaimer about credentials)

Paragon Badger
2011-03-26, 06:11 PM
I should have known it would have come to this;

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060605112733/uncyclopedia/images/b/be/God_kills_catgirl.gif

I'm kidding. :smallwink:

As far as propelling giant airships go... I was more or less just relying on a hopefully well-concealed deus ex magiteka instead of anything really concrete and plausible in physics. Maybe just a home-brew spell like Welknair's Create Thrust amplified on a massive scale.

I was more looking for unexpected and crafty uses of enchantments or other spells. For instance...

The ability for a wizard/cleric's magic to function without the wizard or cleric being present. For instance, 'Create Food and Water' Dispensers. Or some way to automatically featherfall anyone who jumps off the side of a 'assault bay'

Namely, I also wanted to know what kind of enchantment would you put on an 18-pound cannon capable of dealing 5d12 damage a hit. A 'warship' would have upwards of 40 of these. The largest ship in the fleet has at least one 60-pound cannon capable of dishing out 12d12 damage... according to D20 Modern Past. :smallwink:

Heroes of Battle suggests a few seige-weapon specific enchantments, but none of them really fit the flavor of an advanced magitek artillery piece... Namely, they are designed for air-to-surface bombardment or at the very least, airship on airship combat.

Also, they have access to many low and mid level wizards, but only a handful of high ones. Efficiency, practicality, and conveincence is their design ethic.

Welknair
2011-03-26, 06:34 PM
My system can do all of that. It's relatively simple to make a neat little device composed of a Cap 1 Battery, a CL 5 Arcane Power Tapestry, a Runestone of Featherfall, and a button. Push the button, and it casts Featherfall on the wearer. Using a schematic, the total cost would only be... 3205gp. And if you wanted, you could throw in a 1/day Charging Crystal and it becomes usable once per day for only 200gp more.

jseah
2011-03-27, 07:29 AM
The rings aren't exerting force.

The example above about putting the outer casing on the ground, shows what I am talking about.

From the point of view of the rod, the only things exerting force is the outer casing. The inner casing does not even exist to the rod.

That force the outer casing exerts is directed in two directions that are mutally opposite and compressing the rod.

This cancels out.


From the POV of the gates, the force comes in one gate, goes out the other in the opposite direction and cancels the force coming in that gate.

The gates exert no force themselves, they merely change the direction the force points in.


EDIT:
The force that is exerted until the rods break is exerted by the outer casing.

If the outer casing is moving, then the force exerted to make it move is the one breaking your rods.

Maerok
2011-03-27, 07:13 PM
Simply dropping something from high up is too plebian for an elite warship.

If I had the gp to lay down for my own ship, I'd have batteries of necromantic cannons based off of wands/rods. The spell itself tears up and consumes mortal souls and uses them to recharge the wand/rod weaponry. It's Evil but it's also pretty economical.

I figure in peace-time and elevator system like a ranged circle of teleportation or like the ring-gate tech in Stargate would work.

If you dabble in epic shadow magic or something along those lines, give the ship's shadow some kind of Lady of Pain effect. Or absorb the heat to freeze everything in ice below while you power whatever's at the core of the ship.

jseah
2011-03-27, 07:21 PM
Simply dropping something from high up is too plebian for an elite warship.
Hey, don't diss the kinetic missile.

It may be simple and blunt, but nothing says "you're fruited" more than an incoming relativistic ton of bricks.

Maerok
2011-03-27, 07:37 PM
Hehe. You're right.


If the ship is predominantly civilian then it might be interesting to see the ship's everyday functions convert to wartime use.

Ravens_cry
2011-03-27, 07:46 PM
Rods from god, friend, rods from god. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment) You don't even need to get up to anywhere near significant fractions of the speed of light to get really, really, scary energies.

jseah
2011-04-23, 07:02 PM
This way you retain momentum conservation and sanity.
Been thinking about this.

It is right. You can conserve momentum your way. Energy... not quite so much, so you can still use it as a drive. (needs to use the ring gate to transfer objects up/down a potential field, magnetic or gravity. To conserve energy, you need ring gates to transfer magnetic and gravity fields, which results in even more interesting applications... FTL travel anyone?)

It is however, possible to set up a system through which you pass all the momentum onto the rod itself. So you have a rod going backwards very very fast in a vacuum to cancel out the ship going forwards, resulting in an emissionless drive. (bypass the weight limit by abusing the clause that objects that don't fully go through a gate don't count to the weight limit)