On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Onno Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> David replied to me:
>> > The drawback is that only the color text can tell bioships from
>> > metal and composite ones.
>>
>> That's not a disadvantage!  That's the Generic and Universal bits of the
>> name.
>> If the two things have the same results, the only thing that should be
>> different is color
>> text.
>
> Hello David,
>
> you're right when it comes to different explanations/technobabble
> for exactly the same effect. It shouldn't matter if the stardrive
> uses "subspace field theory", "telekinesis" or plain "magic", if
> the game mechanics are the same.
>
> I would expect some game mechanics differences between bioships
> and dead steel technology:
>

Then you haven't built the things right, if they don't behave the way
you want them to.  ($e is much better at this than 3e was, though.)

> * A living, fundamentally healthy bioship should be able to
>  regenerate minor damage or wear and tear.

There are disadvantages to cover "Doesn't Heal".  And modifiers to get
the rates and limits of healing required for the bioship.

> * On the other hand, a bioship should be less resistant to
>  gross physical damage (bone is weaker than steel), and damage
>  may snowball until it dies if major organs are hurt. A steel
>  hull might be salvaged and fitted with new power plants or
>  computer systems.

A bioship could get "organ transplants" or the like.

> * A bioship cannot shut down completely and go into mothballs.
>

Maybe, maybe not.  That's setting specific.  I see no reason they
couldn't go into hibernation for long periods of time.

-- 
David Scheidt
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l

Reply via email to