D&D 3.5, Now in Sci-Fi Flavor (WIP)

[imp_fireball]

So using Pilot as the example, what seperates a great pilot from a good one is Wis, what seperates a good pilot from a terrible one would be either Wis or Dex.

It could easily be the other way around. What separates a good pilot from a terrible one is common sense, and what seperates decency from excellence is the 'golden hand' (dexterity; granted, that applies more to planes capable of performing highly precise maneuvers such as fighter jets, I think).

I mean, if a slight twitch of the finger can throw the entire plane out of alignment, then pilot obviously needs Dex - otherwise, it's Wis.

Alternatively, if I kill enough imps, I will learn what their guts look like.

Stay the hell away.

[Ashtagon]

The main reason I pick Dex for Drive and Pilot is that, for me, Dex represents (among other things) muscle memory. It's knowing exactly how far to turn the wheel, exactly how much pressure to put on the accelerator, that is reflected in Dex - it's muscle memory.

And this analogy totally breaks down with Helmsman, which is why I'm a bit unhappy with that entry.

[imp_fireball]

The main reason I pick Dex for Drive and Pilot is that, for me, Dex represents (among other things) muscle memory. It's knowing exactly how far to turn the wheel, exactly how much pressure to put on the accelerator, that is reflected in Dex - it's muscle memory.

And this analogy totally breaks down with Helmsman, which is why I'm a bit unhappy with that entry.

Yah I agree with the 'physical intelligence' aspect of the Dex, but it's not really necessary to make everything 'pilot' correspond to one ability score. Different pilot skills can stress different scores. It shouldn't confuse things.

Here's a mechanic, though (since only knowledge: dungeoneering, knowledge: the planes and knowledge: local cover creatures to my own knowledge)

If nothing is covered by the knowledge skills, add up all of your modifiers in each skill and then get the average and use that skill modifier (unless the knowledge skill is very obscure such as 'knowledge: forbidden lore'). If any knowledge skill has a penalty, use the highest penalty - ie. 3 Int = -4 penalty to all knowledge skills - if no skill is trained, then -4 check when recalling knowledge that doens't fall into any skill category - unless the penalty is meant to only apply to a specific knowledge skill; ie. a certain race (let's call them Xepho'ets) might have a penalty to knowledge (geography) checks when navigating due to having a natural inclination to directional miscalculations, because travel isn't as necessary for them and they tend to asexually produce their own foods in the right environs.

That's kinda confusing. There's gotta be a way to streamline it. I'm all about streamlined, user-friendly rules that incompetent players can handle. (DMing hyperactive, emotionally unstable 15 year-olds was a terrible idea.)

Alright, for example: Jack has an Int of 7, 4 ranks in knowledge (local), 8 ranks in knowledge (nature) and 5 ranks in knowledge (history). He also took skill focus (knowledge (nature)).

Respectively, the modifiers are +2, +9, and +3.

The average of those numbes are 5 (rounded to nearest whole number). Considering his greatest penalty to any knowledge skill is -2, he subtracts 2 from 5 - having low intelligence really hurts in the avenue of general knowledge. He also subtracts 4 from the result, since he has left 8 knowledge skills untrained (-0.5 per untrained knowledge skill, round down).

So when recalling general knowledge that does not necessarily fall within the bounds of bardic lore (the GM would have to fine tune a bit on this), Jack has a -1 modifier to this check. If Jack had 10 Int, it would be +2. If Jack's Int was 18, then it'd be +8.

Again, for clarity: The result of +8 is from taking the average of all the modifiers of knowledge skills Jack has trained in, applying Int bonus, and then applying a -4 competence penalty for every untrained knowledge skill; Jack has left 8 skills untrained (this includes knowledge (technology)). Apply a 0.5 penalty for each skill left untrained (round down to nearest whole number).

This general knowledge modifier, if the rules are used, should be recorded at all times. It also encourages a use of all knowledge skills. It is pretty much as useful as bardic lore, but is quite costly skill-wise. Taking only 1 rank in each knowledge skill can bring down the average obviously, but if Jack had taken 1 rank in each of the remaining skills, he would have boosted his general knowledge modifier up to +11. Having ranks in odd knowledge skills such as knowledge (forbidden lore) do not count towards the general knowledge formula.

EDIT: I added in a few extra things to the formula to make it more verisimillitude worthy, so it's not quite like I originally wrote it. Hopefully the examples help the OP understand.

[TabletopNuke]

I will try to get working in a new version of the surgery skill, realistic yet streamlined!

I eagerly await it. Be sure to drop me a line when it's up.

Yah I agree with the 'physical intelligence' aspect of the Dex, but it's not really necessary to make everything 'pilot' correspond to one ability score. Different pilot skills can stress different scores. It shouldn't confuse things.

We've been discussing the issue of mental abilities having less importance. Using Wis for pilot would definitely help that. What do you think?

Alright, for example: Jack has an Int of 7, 4 ranks in knowledge (local), 8 ranks in knowledge (nature) and 5 ranks in knowledge (history). He also took skill focus (knowledge (nature)).

If Jack as 7 Int, why the hell is he taking all these ranks in Knowledge? Where is he even getting these skill points?!

The average of those numbes are 5 (rounded to nearest whole number). Considering his greatest penalty to any knowledge skill is -2, he subtracts 2 from 5 - having low intelligence really hurts in the avenue of general knowledge. He also subtracts 4 from the result, since he has left 8 knowledge skills untrained (-0.5 per untrained knowledge skill, round down).

So when recalling general knowledge that does not necessarily fall within the bounds of bardic lore (the GM would have to fine tune a bit on this), Jack has a -1 modifier to this check. If Jack had 10 Int, it would be +2. If Jack's Int was 18, then it'd be +8.

Again, for clarity: The result of +8 is from taking the average of all the modifiers of knowledge skills Jack has trained in, applying Int bonus, and then applying a -4 competence penalty for every untrained knowledge skill; Jack has left 8 skills untrained (this includes knowledge (technology)). Apply a 0.5 penalty for each skill left untrained (round down to nearest whole number).

This general knowledge modifier, if the rules are used, should be recorded at all times. It also encourages a use of all knowledge skills. It is pretty much as useful as bardic lore, but is quite costly skill-wise. Taking only 1 rank in each knowledge skill can bring down the average obviously, but if Jack had taken 1 rank in each of the remaining skills, he would have boosted his general knowledge modifier up to +11. Having ranks in odd knowledge skills such as knowledge (forbidden lore) do not count towards the general knowledge formula.

EDIT: I added in a few extra things to the formula to make it more verisimillitude worthy, so it's not quite like I originally wrote it. Hopefully the examples help the OP understand.

For some reason I'm not feeling to keen on rounding modifiers. I'm actually trying out an RPG right now with a really wonky, unwieldy system with tons of rounding. Luckily it's a really lose game and we're just playing for lulz, but it certainly wouldn't work well for a serious game.

[Kiren]

Pilot: Dex skill
Drive: Dex Skill
Navigate: Wisdom Skill


Exhaust 2 skill points to learn to use Pilot, Navigate or Drive on a unrelated vehicle without penalty. Alternatively, receive training by someone experienced for a time varying per vehicle.

Problem solved more or less.

[imp_fireball]

Pilot: Dex skill
Drive: Dex Skill
Navigate: Wisdom Skill


Exhaust 2 skill points to learn to use Pilot, Navigate or Drive on a unrelated vehicle without penalty. Alternatively, receive training by someone experienced for a time varying per vehicle.

Problem solved more or less.

There's also the matter of user friendly vehicles and vehicles that are incredibly alien - probably use tech device for the latter (figuring out what it does right away) but if there's anatomical limitations or awkwardity (perhaps the vehicle is meant for a race with a different anatomy), then that could mean an extra penalty right off the bat.

Alright, here's Use Tech Device (new draft; I'm feeling too lazy to fix fonts right now):

Any device of that has a trigger method (just like spell trigger) that's completely unknown, will require a certain amount of time of careful study to figure out. Most devices, once figured out, require a standard action to operate, or a full action, or longer, which depends entirely on the device.

Use Tech Device is a skill that can be performed untrained. Once a person has discovered how to use a device, they no longer need to perform further checks pertaining the device, unless there is a special technique involved (ie. computer hacking). Only on some devices may you take 10 or 20 to familiarize with it, if it is certain that you will inevitably discover its function (ie. you have assistance).

Device is massive (size medium or larger) - +1d4 hours.

Device is complicated - 2d20 days

Device requires the work of a professional or trained operator - +1d20 weeks

Device requires scientific knowledge - +2d20 months or Knowledge (Technology) check

Device requires undiscovered scientific knowledge - +1d20 years or GM discretion

Character has a manual written with clear instructions involving working the device. - -20 on use Tech Device check

Device is user friendly with obvious controls. - -20 on use tech device check

Accelerate Use Tech Device check to operate down to standard action (only for items listed in hours or minutes to operate) - +20 on use tech device check DC

Accelerate check to familiarize with device by a step (2 steps would accelerate something from weeks to hours, 3 steps from weeks to minutes, etc. - cannot accelerate to any less then a standard action; maximum 4 steps) - +15 DC per step

Accelerate action for operation down to swift action (from full action) - +50 DC (once successful, this check no longer needs to be made as the technique has been learned).


Unaware of what the device was even designed for - +10 on use tech device check DC

Unaware of most functions of device - +15 DC

Unaware of some functions of the device - +8 DC

Familiar with functions of what device is designed for - -4 DC

Familiar with make of device - -6 DC

Unfamiliar with function of the device (you may have heard of it before but are nonetheless unfamiliar) - +4 DC

Completely unaware of any functions of the device at all - +20 DC (does not stack with 'unaware of most' or 'unaware of some').

Unaware that the item is even a technological device at all - +20 DC

Device requires consumable material components or operating reagents that user does not have - GM discretion



Device is particularly unusually complicated for its function, exotic or contains a method of activation that user is unused to, or completely alien to user - GM discretion



equires material components.

[Kiren]

Wait, another idea.

Maneuver:Dex Skill
Pilot:Wis Skill
Drive:Wis Skill


Pilot/Drive facilitate the navigation, checking the readings, Maneuver is the movements of the plane or vehicle.

Maneuver, Pilot and Drive will have sub-divisions. However, their are 2 ways to gain access to a sub-division, relinquish skill points or receive training. You must receive training for your first rank or pilot or drive, but after that their is an option for further use of vehicles.

Maneuver encompasses the categories of both Pilot and Drive, one point in Pilot or Drive for that category grants 1 for Maneuver in that category.

Once a category is learned, all the points in Pilot/Drive/Manuever, respectively become available.


EX: Fabbio has received training in Helicopters and Stealth Bombers. He had 5 Ranks in pilot and 4 Ranks in Maneuver.
He Pilots Helicopters and Stealth Bombers with 5 ranks of pilot and manuever then with 4 ranks of manuever. I haven't factored in bonus from abilities, and I haven't factored in MINIMUM RANK REQUIREMENTS, to learn to maneuver or pilot a specific aircraft.

You may ask: We know manuever lets you do fancy tricks, dodge seeking missiles and get behind your opponent, but what can Pilot do.

Pilot represents control of their aircraft, with it you: Land your aircraft, attempt to re-gain control of the aircraft in situations like loss of control, damaged parts, stalling. Pilot check also represents your understanding of where you are going, say you pilot your aircraft and want to go to Kentucky, their will be no combat in between, you roll a pilot check, if you succeed, you arrive in Kentucky and hopefully land, (enough ranks and it will be easy in all but terrible weather) should you fail a pilot check, congratulations you are in Transylvania, please take pictures. (Newbie rolled a 1).

Factors such as bad weather effect your performance.

I left a boating skill out of the post, I let you all work on that.

Also, vehicle and driver should get separate initiatives and actions. A driver loses his move action to drive, but given a successful drive/pilot check, can pull off an attack of his own, passengers can climb out the windows as a move action and fire while hanging onto the roof, just don't scrape a wall.

Drivers of cars can use maneuver to use their handbrake to make sharper, faster turns on streets, or avoid a tree on a collision course.

Uhuh, land vehicles will need a mechanic like flight's manueverability, that will determine turning ability, which should get better at slow speeds, worse at high speeds, but high speed turning is plausible by use of handbrake.

[TabletopNuke]

There's also the matter of user friendly vehicles and vehicles that are incredibly alien - probably use tech device for the latter (figuring out what it does right away) but if there's anatomical limitations or awkwardity (perhaps the vehicle is meant for a race with a different anatomy), then that could mean an extra penalty right off the bat.

Do you think a set penalty would be appropriate? Or should it be left to the DM's discretion?

Alright, here's Use Tech Device (new draft; I'm feeling too lazy to fix fonts right now):
...

Looks awesome. Great job Imp. I can't wait to see the finished version. Any ideas as far as mishaps from critfailing a UTD check go? *sadist DM* There's definitely a chance of breaking some devices if you don't know how to use them. Others might go off unexpectedly...

Wait, another idea.

Maneuver:Dex Skill
Pilot:Wis Skill
Drive:Wis Skill


Pilot/Drive facilitate the navigation, checking the readings, Maneuver is the movements of the plane or vehicle.

Maneuver, Pilot and Drive will have sub-divisions. However, their are 2 ways to gain access to a sub-division, relinquish skill points or receive training. You must receive training for your first rank or pilot or drive, but after that their is an option for further use of vehicles.

Maneuver encompasses the categories of both Pilot and Drive, one point in Pilot or Drive for that category grants 1 for Maneuver in that category.

Once a category is learned, all the points in Pilot/Drive/Manuever, respectively become available.

I'd personally go with spending skill points, rather than allowing in-game training. I was always of the belief that spending skill points represented training. It helps keep characters from having more proficiency than is reasonable for their life experience. My setting will probably be fairly skill-point heavy, too.

Uhuh, land vehicles will need a mechanic like flight's manueverability, that will determine turning ability, which should get better at slow speeds, worse at high speeds, but high speed turning is plausible by use of handbrake.

Good thinking. Will the usual Clumsy, Poor, Average, ect work for that?

[Kiren]

Do you think a set penalty would be appropriate? Or should it be left to the DM's discretion?

Looks awesome. Great job Imp. I can't wait to see the finished version. Any ideas as far as mishaps from critfailing a UTD check go? *sadist DM* There's definitely a chance of breaking some devices if you don't know how to use them. Others might go off unexpectedly...

I'd personally go with spending skill points, rather than allowing in-game training. I was always of the belief that spending skill points represented training. It helps keep characters from having more proficiency than is reasonable for their life experience. My setting will probably be fairly skill-point heavy, too.


Good thinking. Will the usual Clumsy, Poor, Average, ect work for that?

Yes, that should work, we might need a status aliment for vehicles only, overturned. If a vehicle is hit hard from the side or fails a handbrake turn/tries a hard turn without proper experience, they should risk being overturned.

Also, it is the age of information (I believe?). Skills are easier to obtain, their are schools that weren't around in the middle ages, a quest to hunt for a schematic can be ended by checking Google.

Skill points could be gained during play. For obtaining training or performing high DC actions correctly.

Screwing around with a car you find should eventually grant proficiency with that car. It is unrealistic that every month or so, Ted can instantly learn to swim, while he had been practicing all month, and a day before he was drowning.

[imp_fireball]

Skill points could be gained during play. For obtaining training or performing high DC actions correctly.

How about an XP cost that considers the character's ECL (so the cost increases per skill point the higher ECL you are). That way, a character that wants to be a skill monkey won't rely so much on natural 20s.

Ie. - If you are ECL 1, then it'll cost 500xp for 1 bonus skill point.

You can go beyond the maximum ranks allowable for your ECL with skill points purchased with XP, however they always count as cross-class (stacks in the case that the skill is already cross class; in which case, 4 XP invested skill points equals 1 rank for such a skill). If you continue to put skill points into going beyond the maximum rank allowed for a certain skill at one level, then the value of those skill points towards that skill is halved for every rank.

Ie. Jim is ECL 1 and has 4 ranks in swim. He spends 1000XP on 2 skill points, which he further spends in swim. He now has 5 ranks in swim. At ECL 2, his maximum allowable ranks in swim are now 6 instead of the normal 5 (if he spent no XP invested skill points on swim, the maximum rank would be 5 and not 6 at ECL 2). He then decides to invest 2 more XP invested skill points into swim at ECL 2, giving him 7 ranks in swim. He then spends a further 2 XP invested skill points in swim at ECL 2, giving him 7.5 ranks in swim. He must spend another 2 XP invested skill points in swim in order to get 8 ranks in swim at ECL 2, and then 8 XP invested skill points to get 9 ranks in swim at ECL 2, and so on.

If he spent those 8 XP invested skill points on another skill he already had 5 ranks in, then he'd yield up to 2.5 additional ranks in such a skill, or 6.5 ranks in a skill that he previously had no ranks in (if it wasn't cross-class).

Uhuh, land vehicles will need a mechanic like flight's manueverability, that will determine turning ability, which should get better at slow speeds, worse at high speeds, but high speed turning is plausible by use of handbrake.

You should be able to perform any maneuver concievable - it's just that depending on a vehicle's maneuverability (and, currently, there's probably over a dozen compared to flight's 5 or so from what I'm trying to work out), the DC increases. Also, some vehicles find certain kinds of maneuvers impossible - ie. they might have no reverse gear, or the reverse gear might be broken, and so cannot drive in reverse. Note that repairing a small part of a vehicle or item that is broken is either a related craft check or techcraft.

Also, I would just use modern's rules for maneuvering a vehicle (although modern's speed category/turn number table assumes average maneuverability).

I'd also adjust it very slightly just to accommodate the verissimilitude provided by flight maneuvering - ie. if you are at a very high speed in your vehicle and you kick it into reverse, you are effectively moving against your own forward motion (this would be like performing a 'hard break' stunt in that lower yourself up to two speed categories or more or less according to maneuverability of the vehicle; you can lose control of the vehicle with a failed pilot check). Moving in reverse would be moving in the direction opposite your vehicle facing and you take -X penalty to avoid hazards due to sight limitations (unless the vehicle has some feature that assists rear sight - which might lessen the penalty or remove it completely).

Attacking a vehicle from behind the direction it's facing would be flanking it (+2 to DC to avoid with pilot check), unless (again) the vehicle provides some means to assist rear sight.

There's also the matter of modern describing 45 degree turns as costing 5ft. of movement. Flight's rules state that for 'good' maneuvering, you need to move 5ft. for every 90 degrees. This is a little confusing to merge the two rules together. I think that for now, we should just go with modern's rules for turning and then adapt the flight rules for certain special vehicles.

Obviously, flying vehicles such as helicopters move a bit differently - for one thing they don't necessarily need to duplicate 'good' maneuverability for flying creatures in order to hover.
------

As for navigation, just use a knowledge check (GM discretion?). If the vehicle has some means of assisting navigation (ie. GPS), then that's a circumstantial bonus that allows checks to be performed untrained. Same with items like an accurate road map.

Do you think a set penalty would be appropriate? Or should it be left to the DM's discretion?

Set penalty definitely. Although there should be a range of set competence penalties, from 'uncomfortable' to 'very difficult' to 'near impossible' (that's usually how it goes).

Also, vehicle and driver should get separate initiatives and actions.

I'd considered this, initially. However, players will need to constantly delay or ready actions for until the vehicle moves when they wanna do things like drive by shootings.

If you want vehicle initiative, use the pilot's initiative + vehicle's speed category.

Here's what I have so far; what each category means will be fleshed out later (you guys can each think of something too): +0 (average), -1 (below average), -2 (stubborn), -3 (poor), -4 (very poor), -5 (terrible), -6 (abysmal), -7 (atrocious), -8 (rigid), -9 (turning is impossible), +1 (above average), +2 (decent), +3 (good), +4 (very good), +5 (excellent), +6 (amazing), +7 (phenomenal), +8 (nigh-perfect), +9 (perfect; treat as a creature at any available speed category)

There needs to be a lot of maneuvering categories to catch everything, I believe. There's also variation from the categories - ie. some vehicles move many speed categories higher then 'all out'. Some also can have their maneuvering affected when they are modified to have a higher top speed (they still maneuver the same but the new higher, previously un-achievable speeds actually penalize maneuvering enough to average out at a worse maneuvering level).

Some vehicle's require a guided path, ie. a train with rail road tracks. Off of the tracks these vehicles likely wear and tear in the wheels/movement supports/run out of fuel pretty quickly at GM discretion and have very bad maneuvering (anywhere up to 'rigid'). Such vehicle's aren't meant to turn at the will of the driver, but you can make improvised pilot checks to turn them... somehow (ie. leaning out the window, I don't know).

[TabletopNuke]

Yes, that should work, we might need a status aliment for vehicles only, overturned. If a vehicle is hit hard from the side or fails a handbrake turn/tries a hard turn without proper experience, they should risk being overturned.

Definitely.

Also, it is the age of information (I believe?). Skills are easier to obtain, their are schools that weren't around in the middle ages, a quest to hunt for a schematic can be ended by checking Google.

Skill points could be gained during play. For obtaining training or performing high DC actions correctly.

Screwing around with a car you find should eventually grant proficiency with that car. It is unrealistic that every month or so, Ted can instantly learn to swim, while he had been practicing all month, and a day before he was drowning.

I'm not sure how the best way to dole out skill points in play would look. On one hand, it would make for a ton more bookkeeping if they get skill points in-game. What about a small XP award for crit success on skill rolls?

How about an XP cost that considers the character's ECL (so the cost increases per skill point the higher ECL you are). That way, a character that wants to be a skill monkey won't rely so much on natural 20s.

Ie. - If you are ECL 1, then it'll cost 500xp for 1 bonus skill point.

Whoa! 1 skill point costing half as much as your next level? Where did you get those numbers from?

I don't know nearly enough about piloting tanks/aircraft to be much help with the maneuvering rules (I don't even know how to drive yet). I might be able to help you streamline them so the mechanic isn't to complicated, though.

[Kiren]

Definitely.

I'm not sure how the best way to dole out skill points in play would look. On one hand, it would make for a ton more bookkeeping if they get skill points in-game. What about a small XP award for crit success on skill rolls?

Whoa! 1 skill point costing half as much as your next level? Where did you get those numbers from?

I don't know nearly enough about piloting tanks/aircraft to be much help with the maneuvering rules (I don't even know how to drive yet). I might be able to help you streamline them so the mechanic isn't to complicated, though.

I had a funny idea, the reason why everyday humans don't level up is because they spend all their experience on skillpoints!

A group will be in trouble if no-one can drive a car, and it will be fun when everyone is piled in a car, shooting at enemies driving along side with their revolvers, but the driver has his driving ranks in a unrelated char, taking penalties and improvising to stay alive.

Imp, lets go simple with these driving rules, that or someone needs to write up a quick reference sheet.

And we really should have a initiative for driver and vehicle, otherwise the driver will get bored. Imp, your mechanics are great though, lets try to streamline. But I find driving mechanics in all other games overcomplicated, the rules should be easy to remember, takes everything into account, and versatile.

I would lower the xp amount for a single skill point, that or grant a specilized XP for receiving training.

ALSO: Up for consideration: Allow taking a standard action inbetween a move action.

[imp_fireball]

On one hand, it would make for a ton more bookkeeping if they get skill points in-game.

People already gain skill points in-game when they level up.

ALSO: Up for consideration: Allow taking a standard action inbetween a move action.

You should get your houserules peached dude. There was one thread out there about 'interrupting move actions', but I don't know where it went. Google it if you want.

But I find driving mechanics in all other games overcomplicated, the rules should be easy to remember, takes everything into account, and versatile.

Modern has pretty much the easiest to understand driving rules there is.

Essentially there is turn number - which is the number of spaces you need to move before making a turn. A turn can be of any angle, but every 45 degrees costs 5ft. of movement.

Cars have speed categories. Each speed category has a different turn number and defense bonus/penalty (I'd call it speed bonus in 3.5; applies to both flatfooted and touch AC; the penalty always applies to attacks made from people within the car including the driver - they are always identical to the AC bonus). The highest speed category is 'all out' which is at least 90 miles per hour or so. Below that is 'high way speed'.

A car can increase it's speed category by one as a free action each round. They can also slow down one speed category (but they can't slow down and speed up in the same round). Finally, they can perform 'stunts' which are drive checks (modern uses a skill called 'drive' for cars and pilot for pretty much everything else). Stunts can, ie. be 'hard break' which allows the car to slow down up to two speed categories in one round or a maneuver to avoid a hazard - a hazard is any obstacle that the car cannot normally traverse (ie. difficult terrain without four wheel drive, a boundary or another vehicle or creature). Ramming another car to throw it out of control is also a stunt (I think).

If you want better vehicles, besides better hp/hardness/weapons/passenger space/etc. (which is all modern suggests to make them better), make them have better maneuvering (this is where the maneuver categories idea came from).

Ie. a car with better maneuvering (granted, this would be a top of the line futuristic car), might cost 5ft. of movement per 90 degree angle of turn instead of 5ft. of movement per 45 degree angle of turn, have less turn numbers at higher speed categories and be able to accelerate or slow down faster.

If the car is really powerful, it can have higher speed categories than 'all out'. The higher the speed category is, the higher the turn number of defence (speed) bonus to AC/penalty to attacks made from vehicle is.

Some vehicles require 'co-pilots' and some also require crew. Anything requiring a crew requires a pilot check from the helmsman. This is all modern rules already.
---
Warning: The Below Suggested Rules are For Advanced GMs that Favor More Verisimillitude

If you want to rule what occurs to a damaged vehicle in terms of broken parts, etc., then you can make the GM roll on a random general table, depending on vehicle's damage and the general nature of the vehicle (ie. does it have a crew? Is it size medium? Etc.).

Once the GM rolls ie. 'Specific tiny part integral to vehicle breaks; vehicle must be repaired in 1d4 hours or stop completely and suffer X% more damage of damage already suffered due to broken part interfering with function of other parts', they can, at their discretion, rule which parts breaks.

Some vehicles will say things in their (mostly) fluff description like 'does not have any specific tiny parts integral to vehicle', in which case the GM has to roll again when rolling the description from the above paragraph.

Whoa! 1 skill point costing half as much as your next level? Where did you get those numbers from?

Well it might be maybe half your level up until ECL 5, where it becomes a quarter of your level (and then an eighth of your level at even higher ECLs, 16th of your level, etc; we should make a table) how about?

[Kiren]

Edit: Alright I guess that works.

[imp_fireball]

Check 'vehicle movement' in the modern srd. You can find it on google.

[TabletopNuke]

People already gain skill points in-game when they level up.

I meant independent from the normal skills gained at a level.

Well it might be maybe half your level up until ECL 5, where it becomes a quarter of your level (and then an eighth of your level at even higher ECLs, 16th of your level, etc; we should make a table) how about?

From levels 1-5, you're getting 1 skill point for 1/2 the price of another HD, improved BAB, saves, spell progression, class features, AND AT LEAST 1 skill point. Not a good trade off.

Imp, Kiren, why don't you two dump all your vehicle rules and ideas in IF's new thread?

[Zexion]

I meant independent from the normal skills gained at a level.

The Burning Wheel system has an interesting set of rules on skills... you might want to check it out.

[TabletopNuke]

The Burning Wheel system has an interesting set of rules on skills... you might want to check it out.

What is that?

[Kiren]

Im not familiar but I hear they have great rules for negotiation and the sort.

[Kiren]

Would operating a robot be use tech device?

[imp_fireball]

Would operating a robot be use tech device?

Yep.

But it also, depends on what the robot involves. Is it sentient (like an animal, but perhaps a very logical one, or sapient like a human)? Does it require remote control?

[TabletopNuke]

I managed to track down the Burning Wheel site, but I dunno anything about it.

I'd really like to get started statting sample characters, so we gotta get all the skills figured out. We haven't addressed Knowledge (outside of Technology). What about a kinda hybrid between 3.5's knowledge skills and D20 Modern, mostly using Modern's expanded Knowledge list with a few things like The Planes taken from 3.5?

Edit: Oh, and I tried posted more epic mindscourge stuff that is in dire need of PEACHing.

[Zexion]

I managed to track down the Burning Wheel site, but I dunno anything about it.

Well, for example, to improve a skill without leveling up, you can either succeed at a certain difficulty task (For example, a DC (your skill modifier+20 critical success would count as a Challenging success, which would be enough to improve your skill rank from 8 to 9.)
Does that make sense?

[imp_fireball]

Earlier, you guys were discussing equipment slots.

Warglory 2119 Black Marines proposed 'webbing slots' which are additional slots that stick on any part of the body, besides the actual body parts themselves. They require an item, such as a vehicle (like a mech walker) that has the webbing or special suit though.

I understand that most webbing would be assumed whenever a character has an inventory (just like a backpack or large sack that somehow assists encumberance or is also assumed) - but others could function in place of additional equipment slots for special items (ie. leg clasp, elbow button, funny bone lever, titanium knee cap of doom, etc.). That's what I propose.

Imp, Kiren, why don't you two dump all your vehicle rules and ideas in IF's new thread?

And yet that was never done. I feel ignored.

EDIT: Also, if you haven't seen 'repo men' with Forest Whittaker, see it. It's all about corporate monopolies on artificial organs and binding contracts of death. Gave me some ideas concerning this setting.

[TabletopNuke]

Warglory 2119 Black Marines proposed 'webbing slots' which are additional slots that stick on any part of the body, besides the actual body parts themselves. They require an item, such as a vehicle (like a mech walker) that has the webbing or special suit though.

I understand that most webbing would be assumed whenever a character has an inventory (just like a backpack or large sack that somehow assists encumberance or is also assumed) - but others could function in place of additional equipment slots for special items (ie. leg clasp, elbow button, funny bone lever, titanium knee cap of doom, etc.). That's what I propose.

"With my jockstrap of smiting, I WILL DEFEAT YOU!" Yeah, not feelin' it.
How much would it cost to add a webbing slot? Would certain items requite a specific webbing slot or could they be adapted?

And yet that was never done. I feel ignored.

Aww. Poor Imp. Those are some neat rules, you need to add them.

EDIT: Also, if you haven't seen 'repo men' with Forest Whittaker, see it. It's all about corporate monopolies on artificial organs and binding contracts of death. Gave me some ideas concerning this setting.

I have not seen the whole thing, only clips. I was never too motivated to see it 'cause I'm generally not a musical fan and I didn't think the songs were great. If it's good inspiration I might have to reconsider though...

[Kiren]

"With my jockstrap of smiting, I WILL DEFEAT YOU!" Yeah, not feelin' it.
How much would it cost to add a webbing slot? Would certain items requite a specific webbing slot or could they be adapted?

Aww. Poor Imp. Those are some neat rules, you need to add them.

I have not seen the whole thing, only clips. I was never too motivated to see it 'cause I'm generally not a musical fan and I didn't think the songs were great. If it's good inspiration I might have to reconsider though...

Uh, Tabletop, I never seen Repomen, BUT: I think you are talking about a different movie: REPO: The Genetic Opera

In unrelated news, I have not worked on surgery class at all, probably not going to until I get the game: Trauma team. May be a while, or I might work up the want to work on a new version beforehand.

In other news, unrelated to setting: I got a cool idea for a magic system thats plausible and quote on quote balanced.

Edit: That could be reworked into a nano-tech system, that is much more realistic then using spells for nanotech, rules light and flexible.

[TabletopNuke]

Uh, Tabletop, I never seen Repomen, BUT: I think you are talking about a different movie: REPO: The Genetic Opera

LOL you are correct, Sir! I recall my theater-loving friend telling me about the Repomen in it, thus the confusion. I do not know of the movie "Repomen".

In unrelated news, I have not worked on surgery class at all, probably not going to until I get the game: Trauma team. May be a while, or I might work up the want to work on a new version beforehand.

Ah, understandable.

In other news, unrelated to setting: I got a cool idea for a magic system thats plausible and quote on quote balanced.

Edit: That could be reworked into a nano-tech system, that is much more realistic then using spells for nanotech, rules light and flexible.

You have my attention...

Also, I'm trying to work on more sci-fi monsters. I want my extradimensional creatures to be nothing like Earth's inhabitants. Unfortunately, designing something like nothing you've ever seen is surprisingly difficult. Other than the "energy beings" from Thoughtspace (Thought eaters and the like), I don't have a ton of set ideas yet. Anyone wanna brainstorm with me? I can provide hasty sketches if we come up with anything awesome.

[Kiren]

LOL you are correct, Sir! I recall my theater-loving friend telling me about the Repomen in it, thus the confusion. I do not know of the movie "Repomen".

Ah, understandable.

You have my attention...

Also, I'm trying to work on more sci-fi monsters. I want my extradimensional creatures to be nothing like Earth's inhabitants. Unfortunately, designing something like nothing you've ever seen is surprisingly difficult. Other than the "energy beings" from Thoughtspace (Thought eaters and the like), I don't have a ton of set ideas yet. Anyone wanna brainstorm with me? I can provide hasty sketches if we come up with anything awesome.

Suggestions highly welcomed!

Ok, what I have so far is a basic, un-refined premise, a mental idea of crunch and an mental scene of what should be able to be done.

I plan to base this system on a rule I constructed.

The Rule of Three: In this system, the number three governs magic, crunch wise I mean, fluff not so much.

Their are 3 factors to performing magic: The strength of the will, the precision of the hands and the focus of the voice.

At its core, magic is a force from the will and even imagination, few things govern it, its effects aren't cemented, they can't be controlled by the confines of a spell. At its core, it is this: The caster's immense want for an effect, produces the effect, mentally and physically this will drain the caster. Although, not everything is of course possible. This effect cannot be defined, a man may be thrown against a wall by a sonic blast or zapped along with his friends by a blast of a chaining lightning, but banishing a demon or placing a ward against evil is too defined, too draining to most all, simply won't happen.

Will produces the effect, the hands guide it to its location. A wave of the hand and a group of enemies within the wave are knocked away by the wind in that direction, a bolt of lightning being guided to the location of a pointed hand. Just as a paintbrush guides creative talent, the hands guide the imagined force.

Words focus the will, pronunciation the desired effect, to enhance its hold on this world, but only in so many words.


Now onto what I have for crunch

Magic is constructed on the fly, quickly and tailored to the situation.

Using only three words

Three words are chosen, spoken aloud and the effect hopefully is produced.


Word one: An action/effect: Enflame, stone, maul, jolt, knock. Words such as these are given values, enhanced by a mechanic I will produced to keep the effects leveled. But only one word, not a word like Chain Lightning, only lightning.

Word two: Target or AOE: Who the spell goes to or what area it affects. Luckily, problems are bypasses by an unclear word, as the hands help to guide word two, saying them as your word is made clear by choosing with the hands. You may also use burst or cone, range made clear by hands. Word two without hand movements however, is a destructive unruly force.

Word three: When, simply saying Now will have immediate effects, easily done, unfortunately, delaying the effects isn't clear. With only one word, a time frame is uncertain, saying soon as you word leaves it to the whim of the DM, as with tomorrow or later, you can set a basic time frame with one word, anything more requires more thought.

Examples: Just how the format of it would work, no real crunch created.

Enflame Him Now
Electrocute them now
Stone Cone later


Ok ok, ill use a thesaurus. I am just getting the basic idea out, this is something I want to work on, but first I need to get a mental picture of what to do, what I plan is to have a power pool of points, however simple effects, perhaps like Push as a first word, a single target word like him, and Immediately as effect time, will cost nothing, they are low power cantrips you can call them, they leave the caster in the fight until they can build up energy again.

Edit: Their also variations on choice of words, like maybe a class ability that may substitute word three's time with a trigger instead like, Trip. I am open to suggestions, anything.

[imp_fireball]

Anyone wanna brainstorm with me?

Just go with popular references to various sci-fi.

- aliens similar to aliens from the movie 'aliens'

- evil robots that conquered earth from a parallel universe and enslaved mankind

- silicone based extremophiles that absorb radiation

- intelligent cannibals

- creatures without souls; they are 'alive' even after death

- a universe resembling man's vision of 'hell'; from here comes demonic beings that revel in carnage but can be killed by bullets, as that is their one weakness (going off from doom video game here)

- a race of spiders that have energy reactors powered by undeath (because undead keep on 'living', they are essentially perpetual energy)

And the 'nice' creatures

- creatures that will die if they do not find a partner (any race) and have endless sex with them

- creatures that come from a universe with cartoon physics

- a race of super powered time manipulating environmentalists (Arthur C. Clarke actually wrote this one in 'a time odyssey')

- Creatures that exist only in hyperspace (0 dimensions; cannot be percieved by humans, ever). They resemble blue whales.

- Creatures that exist only in warp space (beyond the speed of light). They resemble squids and thrive off tachyon particles.

- Creatures that exist because of imagination

[Kiren]

Just go with popular references to various sci-fi.

- aliens similar to aliens from the movie 'aliens'

- evil robots that conquered earth from a parallel universe and enslaved mankind

- silicone based extremophiles that absorb radiation

- intelligent cannibals

- creatures without souls; they are 'alive' even after death

- a universe resembling man's vision of 'hell'; from here comes demonic beings that revel in carnage but can be killed by bullets, as that is their one weakness (going off from doom video game here)

- a race of spiders that have energy reactors powered by undeath (because undead keep on 'living', they are essentially perpetual energy)

And the 'nice' creatures

- creatures that will die if they do not find a partner (any race) and have endless sex with them

- creatures that come from a universe with cartoon physics

- a race of super powered time manipulating environmentalists (Arthur C. Clarke actually wrote this one in 'a time odyssey')

- Creatures that exist only in hyperspace (0 dimensions; cannot be percieved by humans, ever). They resemble blue whales.

- Creatures that exist only in warp space (beyond the speed of light). They resemble squids and thrive off tachyon particles.

- Creatures that exist because of imagination

Lets also try originality too, although borrowing ideas from other works to help works great, the problem is working out what an otherworldy creature would look like, without taking inspiration from earth animals. Still, I will search more sci-fi for ideas, nice selections though, sci-fi is awesome and a few I recognize from your list.