Warp Travel and Game Narration

Hey All:

So, I made the mistake of trying to figure out on my own how fast each Warp Factor was and how far a ship travelling each Warp Factor could travel. And I quickly went cross-eyed.

Yes, I could handwave travel times, but in past Trek RPG's I have run into trouble doing that. Clever gamers with a head for details often spotted discrepencies and would think nothing of grinding an entire game session to a halt if they figure I made the mistake of putting Andor further away than Vulcan for instance. So it kinda behooves me to get it right.

How do you guys handle distance and time in relation to Warp Travel in your games? Do you get out the charts, calculate how fast per second Warp X is and compare the resultant distances to indicated speeds or do you just wing it. If you use the former method, what resources do you use and is there a "Warp Factor Guide for Dummies" out there which will allow me to get a hang of things without using algebra? If you use the latter, how do you keep everything straight and avoid arguments at the gaming table over discrepencies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galen

Yes, I could handwave travel times, but in past Trek RPG's I have run into trouble doing that. Clever gamers with a head for details often spotted discrepencies and would think nothing of grinding an entire game session to a halt if they figure I made the mistake of putting Andor further away than Vulcan for instance. So it kinda behooves me to get it right.

---

Um...

Quote:

---

How do you guys handle distance and time in relation to Warp Travel in your games?

---

Well, uh, I'd tell the aforementioned 'clever gamer' to stop disrupting the game.

So:

Player "Hey, GM, You said it takes a ship doing Warp X, Y number of days to get to planet Z. THEN you said it takes the same ship leaving from the same point doing the same speed Y+2 number of days to get to Planet A - except that planet A is CLOSER than planet X - what gives?"

My response should be:

"Hey man, stop disrupting the game" ?

Surefire way to start ANOTHER argument for one thing.

For another, the dude is making an essentially logical argument and what sort of person would I be for - in effect - rapping their knuckles for doing what I want EVERY gamer to do at my table, think.

Hard and fast rules and rulings STOP arguments at the gaming table, they don't start them.

So, sorry, your response won't fly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galen

"Hey man, stop disrupting the game" ?

---

What about "You're here, now, and the warp travel time isn't an issue?" Or, even better, you can leave the time calculation to the player who has already memorized the warp speed chart, thus allowing them the satisfaction of demonstrating their knowledge, and leaving you the freedom to sweat the important parts.

It looks like what you want to do is cross reference the Star Charts with the warp factor chart (maybe rounding it off the distances to the nearest 5 ly).

Quote:

---

For another, the dude is making an essentially logical argument and what sort of person would I be for - in effect - rapping their knuckles for doing what I want EVERY gamer to do at my table, think.

---

Sure, but you're also allowed to point out that certain details are irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Hard and fast rules and rulings STOP arguments at the gaming table, they don't start them.

---

Perhaps your group is better behaved than others... : P

What I've done in the past is use the warp speed chart in the NG but modified the days down to hours for "nearby" threats that the Crew must respond to in relatively quick time. Also, I chop the Federation space down to 1000 LY and use a 20 LY sector to keep things close.

The warp speed chart, which seems to be modelled on the one found in the Star Trek Encyclopedia, sadly only exists to explain why, in a setting where ships have been to the edge and/or center of the galaxy in a matter of hours it would suddenly (in 1994-ish) take Voyager 70 years to get home. :mad:

Thanks for the help guys :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K.G. Carlson

The warp speed chart, which seems to be modelled on the one found in the Star Trek Encyclopedia, sadly only exists to explain why, in a setting where ships have been to the edge and/or center of the galaxy in a matter of hours it would suddenly (in 1994-ish) take Voyager 70 years to get home. :mad:

---

The writers were pretty honest about their non-adherence to any specific reference in calculating relative travel times. Here's a list of the canon references to the speeds of various warp factors; as you can see, not only is it sparse, but the Warp 4 entry is a sixth of the stated time in the TNG Tech Manual chart.

So... yeah.

EDIT: The follow is probably relevant as well : P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Memory Alpha

Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual states the actual speed values of a warp factor are dependent upon interstellar conditions, for example gas density, electric and magnetic fields in different regions of the galaxy, and fluctuations of the subspace domain. Also quantum drag forces and motive power oscillation causes energy penalties to a ship using warp drive. (pg.55)

Star Trek Maps introduced a similar concept as the Cochrane factor, that influences the actual speed by multiplying it. It can be as high as a multiplication of 1500 times within dense interstellar dust and gas , and as little as 1 in the intergalactic void. In the vicinity of massive objects it is so high that disproportionately high speeds are created, and they tend to result in the slingshot effect. Between the galaxies there is no density of matter or curvature of space so the speed follows only the basic cubic formula. (see below) Within the interstellar medium of Federation space the average value for the Cochrane factor has been calculated to be 1292.7238. (pg.6)

---

For what it's worth, here is how I proceeded when I GMed:
- If an adventure took place in a sector, I established the various distances between the various star systems that I would use during the adventures. I then used the warp speed chart (my games happened in TNG era) to find the travel times, using mostly the guidelines : 1 ly per day at warp 6, 2 ly/day at warp 7, 3 ly/day at warp 8 and 4 ly/day at warp 9.
- Otherwise, if the players had bigger distances to cross (usually that happened between two adventures), I simply ruled what the time need to go from A to B was. Any discrepancies could then be explained by varying subspace condition, cruise speed being slower or faster, and whatever technobabble I could spout should the players become really inquisitive ("then you have to stop 3 days at starbase 123 to replenish your whateverium supply").

Dunno if that helps :)

Looks like a very clever way to fudge it.

*giggles* Whateverium. Watch the tide of rising eyebrows in the room full of Vulcans with that one.

I have always run my campaigns day-to-day of a character's life - not to say that we RP'ed and filled in every one of those days, but there were never leaps in storyline from place to place or to a future time. If a PC wants to go here, and it takes 35 days to get there, then I either time crunched it with a little narration as to what happened, or we broke it out into mini-adventures along the way.

Now to apply this to your current question, my Star Trek campaign started with the PC's in the Sol system embarking on a mission to what I called the 'Wedge' - the area of Federation space that squeezes in between both Romulan and Klingon Empires and, thus, would have a neutral zone on either side.

I picked up the Star Trek Star Charts and counted the number of Sectors through which they would travel; assumed a cruising speed of Warp 6; only thought in terms of two-dimension; and did the math from there...

Columbia's course

It roughly came out to 5 sectors that they would be passing through, which are defined as 20 LY each, and per the NG, Warp Factor 6 will get you through 20 LY in 19 days... so, 5 x 19 = 95 days (or over 3 months to get on station).

Once I figured that out, I designed four mini-adventures along the way so the PC's could grow their characters and have fun with more than just the primary mission. Needless to say, the time needed to get there was approx. 95 days, but with our side adventures and such, it took over 100 days to get to the primary mission. But the point is, yes, I drew from resources the distances and the speed to determine the travel time.

This thread may prove helpful, Galen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaconteurX

This thread may prove helpful, Galen.

---

Well that is all you need right there. :D

Get Star Trek Star Charts so you can see where everything is, or go online - I am sure there are fan generated maps of our Trek galaxy. Then do the math and you won't have any worries about players being critical... well you shouldn't. If you do, go back up to what TK says and remind them it is just a game.

I use the method by Star Trek writers that the ship actually travels at the speed of plot.

That means if you need a ship to get there fast, you use the fastest warp speed possible, skip or just summarize the time in the middle discussing what PCs are doing and just begin the next scene w/ the ship arriving at its destination.

I've never been the kind of GM that felt the need to detail every minute or every hour or even every day of the PCs life unless there was a need to get into such a detail based on the particular adventure I was running.

I'm sure every starship is filled w/ many days of mundane activities that no one needs to roleplay. Just focus on the interesting parts of the adventure & skim through the boring stuff. Oh if only real life were that easy.

What I usually do is work out the campaign area (a sector or three), and then note the distances in light years from system to system.

-If you assumke that most of the systems are on the same plane you can use a grid and count 1 sqaure distance as 1 light year.

-In TNG, Warp 6 is 392c or slight (about 7%) faster than 1 light year/day.

So a ship travelling at WF 6 is moving about 1 square per day.

-For other Warp Factors, just dive the speed (in cochranes) by 365 to get sqaures per day.
Use can divide by 52 for squares per week, 12 to get squares per month and so on.


For example
WF 1 (1c) = 1 square per year
WF 2 (19C) = 10 sqaures per year, or 5 squares ever 6 months., or 1 square per 18 days.
WF 3 (39c) = 1 square per 10 days.
WF 4 (102c) = 1 square every 3.5 days, or 2 squares a week.
WF 5 (214c) = about 1 square every 2 days. Or 12 squares per week.
WF 6 (392c) = 1 square per day, or 7.5 squares a week.
WF 7 (656c) = 2 squares a day, or 9 squares in 5 days, or 12.5 squares a week.
WF 8 (1024c) = 3 squares a day, or 14 squares in 5 days, or 20 squares a week.
WF 9 (1516c) -= 4 squares a day, or 29 squares a week

-You can round this off too, using the Z-axis or other navigation hazard as an excuse. As long as the numbers are reasonably close and consistent, it will work fine for a campaign. So you could have WF 6 = 1 sqaure, WF 7 = 2 squares, WF 8 =3 and WF 9= 4. Very easy to use and remember, and close enough for most purposes..


For long distance travel, I invoke the "homical killer" clause. That is, when no one is looking, the ship manages to move very fast, just like in those types of movies, and manages to be right behind (or even ahead) of where it needs to be despite plodding along at a relatively slow speed.

I would like to point out a small problem with the Warp chart from the NG and Encyclopedia. They both list "Across the Federation" as being 10,000 LY, however the Local Sphere (which includes Cardassian, Romulan, and Klingon space) in only approximately 1,500 LY in diameter. At least according to Star Trek Star Charts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by agdiv

I would like to point out a small problem with the Warp chart from the NG and Encyclopedia. They both list "Across the Federation" as being 10,000 LY, however the Local Sphere (which includes Cardassian, Romulan, and Klingon space) in only approximately 1,500 LY in diameter. At least according to Star Trek Star Charts.

---

I think that number is a bit high. Maybe Federation space is 10,000 LY^3, but its a much shorter distance from planet A to planet B. I usually knock that down to 1000 LY from side to side but YMMV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K.G. Carlson

I think that number is a bit high. Maybe Federation space is 10,000 LY^3, but its a much shorter distance from planet A to planet B. I usually knock that down to 1000 LY from side to side but YMMV.

---

Maybe 'across the Federation' equals a circuit visiting each individual member world... : P

Yeah, thats the ticket :D