DS: II vs III generic system, and more on Walkers vs Mecha (OH SO LONG)

--- B Lin <lin@rxkinetix.com> wrote:
> If you take giant humanoid machines (mecha) in the
> anime spirit over the strict current realism
> "walker" description, then mecha are a viable
> battlefield vechicle.

*SNIP A BUNCH*

Thiswhole thread leads me back to some things I'd like
to see from DS III:
1. A completely generic costing system completely
independent from any capacity system.
2. An optional capacity system ,roughyl based on the
current DSII system, but highly revamped, which would
be useful for introductory play and/or play within the
Tuffleyverse.
3. Supplemental publications for:
A. Application of the DS system to different
genres/backgrounds, including optional rules and
construction systems tied into said backgrounds (e.g.
a Hammer's Slammers DS Supplement or a War of the
Worlds supplement, etc.)
B. Expanded rules for specific unit types to simulate
all the optional ways different backgrounds handle
given units (e.g. an expanded Walkers supplement
covering what we've been discussing, or a supplement
on different ways Grav is treated in different
backgrounds)

Granted, all of this is probably pipe dreams, but at
least I know what I want, even if I may never get it. 

Having said all that, I noticed right away how
divergent Binhan's view of walkers/mecha are from,
say, Symon, or my own, or Brian Bell's.  We all have
different ideas.  If the system's generic, it
shouldn't preclude any of those.  So for that reason,
I'm going to propose more distinct levels of
differentiation between walkers than I did before. 
Apply as many as you want, and PLEASE, help me with
some ideas for different rules for operation of each
type.  I'd suggest you apply only those types which
fit the background/genre you play.  Here goes:

1. Manga
This would cover your classic Anime mecha such as
Robotch or Gundam, with their fully articulated
appendages, better-than-human reflexes, and amazing
abilities to jump, dodge, fine manipulation, etc. 
Binhan's ideas would definitely apply to these
walkers.

2. Mecha
Slightly less amazing than Manga, these cover such
backgrounds as Battletech and Heavy Gear, where
walkers still show some impressive agility and ability
to manouver.  I like using the word Mecha and not
humanoid for these because, at least in battletech,
there are many non-humanoid bipedal mechs with just as
much agility as the humanoid ones, they'd still fall
into this category.

3. NMH (Non-Manga/Mecha Humanoid)
This would cover walkers such as WH40K Titans,
dreadnoughts, etc., and any background with walkers
that, while normal vehicles in performance, still show
vaguely humanoid traits, advantages, and limitations
(weapon/equipment appendages where we have arms,
humanoid gait, cockpit or sensor pod where our head
is, etc.).  Current combat walker rules seem to fit
this category to a T.

4. NHB (Non-Humanoid Bipedal)
AT-St's, etc.  These walk upright, with two legs, but
have a variety of different gaits and ways of mounting
weapons.  I'll have to think about these.

5. Tripods
Tri, Pod.  'nuff said.	Haven't given them much
thought.

6. Tall Multipods
AT-AT's, Goliaths, Thunder Stallions, etc.  Almost
exclusively 4-legged.  Stable, huge.  Definitely still
suffer from the height +1 signature.  Suggestions:  
Allow same weapon construction as any other ground
vehicle.

7. Low-slung multipods
B-tech Tarantulas and Scorpions, etc.  Can be 4, 6, or
8-legged, more than that would probably be rare if at
all.  Insectoid or arachnoid legs configuration
provides lower signature, more nimble terrain ability,
but limits weapon configurations because they get in
the way.  Eliminate the +1 signature, but also maybe
apply some of Symon's weapon mounting limitations.

=====
Qui me amat, amet et canem meum.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com