I'm not so sure that interlocing sections are all that good an idea.


They're great for dungeons because the holes between the peices ( and there will be holes unless all the peices tessalate ) can just be called solid rock and that's fine, but ships don't have bulkheads, 7 feet thick.


There are two ways around this.

Create every peice on a standard tessalating mat.
Say 200mm by 200mm.
Unfortunately this creats STANDARDISATION in the internal and external form that may not already exist in the vessel layout.

Or

Create the separate sections for each room and place them ( in play ) over the top of a basic mat ( that looks like deck plating ) and then have lots of small wall to create impromtu rooms or repadative objects like lockers and turbo lift shafts and communication points and walk in wardrobes.


So the question is.
Which is better, the Geomorphic map and it's restrictions or the underlay map?

Or should we just get maps of individual ships and not try the STANDARDISED thing.

By Nick Blank (Nickb) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 11:47 am: Edit

I can see doing two scales (overview and a larger key room scale), but am skeptical of the possability of standard rooms, even across one race. Different ships are often shaped differently enough that a transporter room from a Frigate and one from a Cruiser are likely to be shaped differently in their outer dimensions, simply by the need to fit them in with everything else in a differently shaped hull outline.

I think it would work for each individual ship though, i.e. you have a module that has the overview plans (at a smaller scale), a couple of pages of key rooms at the larger miniatures scale, or maybe put the key rooms on cardstock if feasable, along with some generic larger scale corridor sections. Maybe include some of those Cardboard Heroes as well.

By Nick Blank (Nickb) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 11:49 am: Edit

Oh, and throw in some half a dozen to a dozen door markers as well, to place along the corridor sections.

By Robert Herneson (Herneson) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 12:06 pm: Edit

MJC, have you looked at Cardboard Dungeons? It is not interlocking. You either place the parts you want next to each other or can overlay them to create bigger or smaller areas.
Also, everyone remember, with rare exceptions, for roleplaying, you won't need to lay out more than 1 or 2 areas at a time.
Nick, from what I have seen, I would think that ship design within a race is as much prefab, cookie cutter as possible. Those doggone saucers are pretty interchagable within size clsses and I agree that the transporter room on a tug may be be the conference room in fast cruiser, for example, but modern ship design tends toward that kind of modular abilities & if we look at the on-screen stuff it seems that way. (Example; the armory in ST IV that was converted into a galley.)
I guess that is a request I would make to you guys drawing up these plans, but at the same time, I'd think that would make your lives easier, too.

Robert

By Nick Blank (Nickb) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 01:03 pm: Edit

For some ships modularity works, for example Fed CA, DD, SC, TUG, all have essentially the same saucer design. Many rooms could be identically shaped but with different equipment installed in each. But the Frigate, NCL, and Old Light Cruiser are actually very different. Yes, the FF and NCL have saucers, but of quite different design from the CA saucer. The DN saucer is another design type.

Again, the Gorn BC/CL would be essentially identical with the exception of the rear bubble.

Then you have things like the ISC: DN, CA, CL, DD, FF. All of these ships while looking similar, have different sized sponsoons, different sized rear hulls, and having modular rooms common between different classes becomes much more difficult.

For such ships as these last ones it is easier to custom design each one than to try to fit a modular room into a space not shaped for it.

Nick

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 01:16 pm: Edit

Remember that cardboard dungeons is just a copy of Dungeon Tiles, done by TFG.

Back when I played D&D, I had a sheet of masonite cut into blocks 2.5 inches square, and used yellowish paint to paint corridors on them. Then you could make up your dungeon as you went along.

By Robert Herneson (Herneson) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Nick,
I agree and think that those would require custom packages, but a lot of the races use modular parts -- Klingon booms, Seltorian all over, Some Kzinti stuff, Romulans (who made it an art), as well as the Fed & Gorns mentioned above.

Robert

By Sean Bayan Schoonmaker (Schoon) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 02:51 pm: Edit

This has turned into quite an interesting thread.

I very much like the idea of a smaller scale overview sheet, along with specific "play scale" sheets for specific areas/rooms.

While I agree that there is certainly some variance between ships (enough to make "generic" rooms not exactly accurate), I still think that they may be the way to go.

The difficulty as I see it is that you can't produce a different plan for each ship and expect them to be commercially viable (as in store sales). Certianly there are some of us that would buy them all, but generally speaking, the more there are, the fewer of any given one that sells.

Thus, IMO a good "middle path" would be to make them race, but not necessarily ship specific.

By Kerry Drake (Kedrake) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 03:50 pm: Edit

Dare I suggest they become available in electronic format, cuts down the cost of production somewhat.

I know, mean, evil people will distribute them electronically, but they will also photo copy the paper version.

By David Lang (Dlang) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 06:13 pm: Edit

re: cargo space size.

remember that those cylindrical pods have their internal space divided up, not all of it is used for cargo, you also have cargo handeling equipment, corridors, heating/cooling equipment, etc so the 'cargo boxes' can be considerably smaller then raw numbers indicate (look at the old deck plans of a small freighter and see how much space is used up by such things)

By David Lang (Dlang) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 06:16 pm: Edit

re: electronic format of sheets.

while it wouldn't be perfect, it would be possible to put in an overlay in the file with the name of the person who purchased the file. a determined enough person could eliminate this, but it would be a lot of work to do so and if they didn't would make people think twice about handing out the file as it could be traced back to them

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:41 pm: Edit

Actually.


Has anyone got a copy of a book called; " The Art of Star Trek "?

It shows that one of the cost cutting measures was to make one room many rooms and use different lighting and the right props to make people beleive that there were many rooms.


Witness the conference room which servered as the galley, the chapple and a rec' room as well as it's primary design.


A cost cutting measure for sure, but canonical proof that the ships use module design.


Aditionally Matt Jeffery who designed the form of the USS Enterprise ( and the Romulan Warbird and the Klingon D7 ) had been in the USAF during WWII and hated repairing aircraft as it was so increadibly difficult and wanted a simply system of repairing NCC 1701 buy sloting in and sloting out the parts ( all done from the nside of the vessel ).

This carries further weight to the idea that regular and standardised form would be used for the individual rooms.


SVC:

2.5" , was that 2 squares per block of wood or 5?
I suspect that, that may have been a very workable system.

By Robert Herneson (Herneson) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 10:52 pm: Edit

And on a totally unrelated point, what D&D class did you like playing the best?

Robert

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 11:40 pm: Edit

two point five inches square.

I don't understand "two squares per block of wood or 5".

It was a square piece of masonite two and a half inches on each side. Paint down the middle leaving a quarter inch of dark brown masonite on each side, you have a corridor. Leave two adjacent sides brown, you have a corner. Three, a dead end. Four, a small room.

By Gary Plana (Garyplana) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 02:13 am: Edit

Michael, they did it in TNG and the other series as well. If you pay attention to most of the landing party scenes where there are cliff walls, it is the same set dressed up all over again. It's probably common practice for most other shows as well.

In any event, it won't work for deckplans because the shape of the rooms isn't as important as what's in them.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 04:26 am: Edit

SVC:

masonite = plywood , no?

I meant 2 squares along the edge or 5 squares along the edge. 4 and 25 total squares. I was really after the size of squares, which you've decribed quite well.

Like I said, that's a really good system.


G.P.:

Well maybe that brings in it's own idea.

Overveiw items.
Transporter-pads, desks, beds, chairs, stoves, computer banks, etc.
Then just lay them over the floor in the places you want them.

Could work well, could be very fiddly.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 10:22 am: Edit

Masonite is not plywood. It's a composite material, very hard and dense, dark brown. I guess they make it by grinding up trees, mixing the sawdust with glue, and mashing it under extreme pressure and heat, but I really don't know.

Squares... Ah, I see. We didn't use squares. We had rules that normal swordsmen could have four per tile, two in front and two in back. The guys in back could only fight with bows or spears. You could have a fifth guy but he had to be a hobbit or a wolf or something short, even a dwarf was too big. You could also, if you used "military spearmen", put four of them on the front row with two more (spears or bows) on the back row.

By Sean Bayan Schoonmaker (Schoon) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:28 am: Edit

Masonite is a composite made from wood pulp and resin. It has one very smooth face (much more smooth than even interior-grade plywood) and one rough face. It's not quite as strong or durable either, but not bad.

I made a reduced scale (1'=1cm) "game table" out of it to playtest Full Thrust scenarios without having to occupy a 6'x8' space. It's holding up great.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:37 am: Edit

Actually, masonite comes with both one and two smooth faces. It also comes as tempered and untempered. Tempered is much harder and twice the price. I used tempered for my blocks, and got the double-sided so I could paint different things on each side. That way, I had double the number of options.

By Davyd Atwood (Blackelf) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 07:04 pm: Edit

Standardised rooms don't work even in a single ship. On the Klink F5, crew quarters are all just four beds, a closet and a head. But depending on what part of the hull they were squeezed into, they're all different shapes.

By Sean Bayan Schoonmaker (Schoon) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 08:03 pm: Edit

Davyd: I'll grant you that standardized rooms for deckplans will never be perfect in every detail.

However, they are a good representation of common rooms on many ships and make it easier and less costly for ADB to produce deckplans.

Sure, I want every ship in SFB done out in "miniatures scale" too, but I don't believe it's commercially viable for ADB to do so.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 09:11 pm: Edit

D.A.:


I'm quite sure that some boom quarters on the F5 will match perefectly the dimensions of boom quaters in the Narrow End of the D7 and D6 Booms and some of the narrow end Boom Quarters of the F5 will match the Boom quarters of the E4 and E3.

Even if they don't, they'll definately match the F6 and every F5 varrient, Boom quaters "tiles".

By Gary Plana (Garyplana) on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 12:32 am: Edit

Clarification: I did NOT mean generic across ship classes, ie F5-D6-D7. I meant within a single ship design, ie F5.

By Robert Herneson (Herneson) on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 02:10 am: Edit

And Gary has made a VERY important clarification, most prefabing would be within a ship class.
It would be rather silly now wouldn't it to expect to be able to fit a frigate bridge onto a dreadnaught and vise-a-versa, as an example.

Robert

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 02:35 am: Edit

This is why I'm going for the idea of PROPS.


A bridge isn't a bridge.


It's any old room ( with a step in the middle apparently ) that has:-

1) A definate front. Created by the veiw screen.

2) Chairs and spacialise desks ( control stations? ).

3) Chairs and desks mounted against the walls ( work stations? ).

4) Entry doors ( be they the turbo lift doors or not ).

5) A big chair?


Sure, rectangular rooms and square rooms for a bridge would be "wrong".

But the thing that makes a Bridge a Bridge is really the props.


This is even more true of , the mess hall, the galley, the quarters, the engine room, the tranporter room, the phaser battery control rooms, etc.


By placing down props in the room, a small room becomes a frigate so and so room and large room is that same room.


Apart from highly specialise rooms ( brdges which should be the same dimensions based on size class ), I'ld say every room in the fleet not if not the universe should be made from just a few dozen standard dimensions of rooms.