Archive through August 08, 2002
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Prime Directive RPG: NEW KINDS OF RPG PRODUCTS:
GPD Deck Plans:
Archive through August 08, 2002
I'm not sure that, for RPG purposes, you couldn't just as well have lots of generic parts (large command bridge, medium flag bridge, etc.) and put together something that would work well enough for every starship.
Let's say, for example, that we do a bunch of "Fed cardboard compartments". Does that mean that, for the six months before we do the "Klingon Cardboard Comparments" that players couldn't cobble up a Klingon ship out of Fed parts and have something "good enough for tonight's game"? I wouldn't see why they couldn't.
MJC, your idea is fine except its *too* micro scaled, you've broken that balance between accuracy and usefulness. As a GM I am not going to want to have to take 10 minutes out of a game session to have to dig through all the components and set up a fairly standard room, nor am I going to want to take the HOURS it would take to cut all the little components out. Again, PLEASE go look at Cardboard Dungeons. To make the item profitable, these things are not precut or perfed or anythng.
Steve has exactly the right (VERY RIGHT) idea and all we as players will have to content with is that we don't get EVERYTHING at once. These things take production and marketing time.
We live with in for the rest of SFB, GP should also be allowed it too, especially as this is a fairly good sized book of custom art and as some folks have pointed out, there is going to have to be some exceptions, also.
Davyd, I understand that there are *some* odd rooms here and there but as I look at my sets of plans of the Fed CA, the Kling D7, & the Rom WB I'd say the situation you describe is less than 1% of time. the HUGE advantage to the guys that are designing and drawing up these plans that we all want is that standardized rooms, where usable will make their lives a LOT easier and will help them get things done faster with less hassle.
Henery Ford liked the idea and so do I. 
Robert
Obviously I'm biased, but I like the somewhat generic, race-specific packs idea that has been put forth by several people.
I figure if it has, say, cruiser(+) & destroyer(-) sized control rooms, and a variety of others that would probably be common across classes, such as transporter rooms, standard cabins, standard corridors, etc., then I'd be happy as a clam.
Then produce small scale deckplans (or possibly just include them in sourcebooks/adventures as necessary) that I can use as a reference to put my standardized bits together (even though they may not be absolutely perfect). I'd be wandering around with a silly grin on my face 
.
It keeps the number of SKUs down, so the distributor/retailer chain doesn't get too irate, and I still get deckplans with which I can approximately put together any situation my players are likely to encounter.
R.H.:
I don't know.
You put your floor pannels in the lid of you boxed set of SFB and you props in the bottom of the box and after you placed down you're floors, you place down the props.
A group of 4 rooms and a connection passageway should take about 6 minutes to lay and populate with inanimate objects.
Is that too long, compaired to how long the actual combat will take to resolve!?!
Robert:
I _AM_ the guy designing the Klink frigate. And I standardised as much as possible. But there are still a lot of rooms stuck in wherever they'd fit, because I don't have the luxury of designing the overall shape of the vehicle.
On the subject of those old deckplans...
I honestly feel that if we're going to use them as the basis for anything, ADB ought to try and find some way to get them back into print. If they can't be gotten into print, we ought not to be basing our designs off of them. I haven't seen the D7 plan ever, so any resembelance between it and the F5 is purely coincidence.
I know this isn't the time to raise this question, Steve, but it will need to be addressed: are we taking those plans as "cannon", or not? And it needs to be addressed before too much more work gets done, so we can be sure all our new deckplans are in line with whatever the policy is.
As far as "cardboard compartments" go, I doubt I'll ever bother. I want the map of the ship, definitly, and an idea of the internal layouts of the compartments. But when it comes to combat, I'll just sketch real quick on a blank hex-map. It's what I do now, and it's cheaper.
For any number of reasons, I am uncomfortable in basing "our" crop of deckplans off of old material -- especially deckplans done years ago -- that was not done "in-house".
ibid.
Re: Deck plans and minis. I've been out of this one for a wile but I took careful time to catch up. I think there is the making of a great product here and would like to lay out a picture of the finnished product I had in my head.
I buy a package similar to a SFB module in size and shape. I unwrap the celephane(sp?) and dig in. Inside there is a scenario book. I look at the cover real quick and set it aside. Next I open up the deck plans (no staples just folded together). They are 11"X17". I lay them out on the table and scan them for about 15 minutes. Then I pick up the cardbord laminated rooms. There is one for a standard bridge, a sick bay, small control (aux of emer), a transporter room, and two standard rooms (diferent sizes). There is a blank hex sheet (also laminated) with tiny writing at the bottom. It says "Use greese pancil or dry erase pen for custome rooms." Next to that is a short "legend" of componants.
I lay those out next to the deck plans and compare them. Then I draw part of the engine room. After a wile with that I pick up the scenario book and sit back in my chair with a big smile on my face and begin to read.
Two hours later I go back to www.starfleetgames.com to find out when the next one is going to be released!
(P.S. I don't play RPGs any more. But thats what would happen!)
In running PD1, and other Star Trek games, most of the action occured in certain rooms: Main Bridge, Conference room, Aux Con, Sickbay, individual quarters, main engineering, transporter room, and mess hall.
In almost all cases, I simply broke out the photocopies I made from the FJD SFTM. (I put a viewscreen and command console, as well as the commo and engineering stations into aux con in the space in the center of sickbay.
The way I figure it, based upon the minis as well as SFTM, pictures in varous SFB products, etc, is that all Fed 2 space bridges are nigh-identical, and all fed 1 space bridges are nigh identical, and all ships' sickbays surrounded the 2 space aux con.
Fed Impulse engineering should probably be 2, 3 and 4 space versions; as these match the SSD's in use.
Modularization is both good and bad; major systems (like the impulse assemblies and main bridge) have certain set sizes, and the minis and pics reflect this, and so should the deck plans.
Also, by having certain "Standard" areas, as FJD did, you can simply show the "Block" and refer to a closer scale view of say, engineering.
One thing I don't like about the plan in GPD: The bridge has no details at all. Is there a cmmd-helm-nav console? This perhaps could be answered in somme later product with different "racial-influenced" bridge designs which one can drop in as needed... overlays.
all IMO.
A set of simple deck plans that I think are needed asap are simple deckplans for basic shuttlecraft (maybe room here for racial variations, keeping the same stats, though), HTSs, and MRSs.
I know they are simple, but they would be used a lot, I bet!
R
Good call. A Shuttle Plan Pack. Could be big enough for minature use on a 11X17.
Already suggested for MPA. Admin, GAS, HTS, etc etc. No decision made as to whether it will make it.
Ummm... wouldn't the deck plan of a shuttle just be a box? One about five squares wide and ten long?
SVC: I'm not sure if you were actually asking but in case you are I would give my oppinion.
To answer: No. The Star Trek shuttle had two compartments. One was the crew compartment with six passenger seats and two pilot/navigator seats. The rear was a small engineering compartment about two meters deep by the width of the shuttle. Also, on a deck plan, the location of verious controls and pannels and the location of the weapons locker would be helpful. THen there is the GAS and the HTS. Does the HTS have a rear opening door?
Anyway, I'm sure you don't need me telling you all this. My point is, shuttle deck plans would be useful and though "I" may not ever get the chance to really play GPD, I would buy them. TO be sure.
SVC: yes. But players want to see where the seats are, what the consoles look like, where the storage lockers are, windows, doors, etc etc.
Plus they may want to drop it into a larger area for escapes and shuttle captures.
Maybe we should print it where you cut it out and fold up the sides so you have "walls" of the shuttle. This might accomodate the "landing in a field for escapes and shuttle captures" concept.
THe Ertel model would be about the right size. Just cut off the top.
Let me try something and see if it works.
It didn't.
Steve, no image showing (just a Your Image Here box).
Trying again.
Ok, the above is a fold-up "3d floor plan" of a shuttle. (I didn't remember if it had 7 total seats or 9, but this is just a test anyway). I'm not entirely sure how big it's supposed to be, but for now, the point is, you could take the above, cut it out, fold it, and have a 3-dimensional shuttle to "land in an open area" for rescues and such. Thoughts?
Print it on cardstock so it's nice and sturdy...schweet!
That ROCKS! Yes, cool, agree. That works for me.
SVC: I is so hard, sometimes, to know if you're kiddin' around or not.
And five pass and two pilot is right. I was wrong.
Needs some work, obviously, storage boxes and the like. Thoughts?