Printable View
I was checking the fighter pilot template (Dominion War Sourcebook). My question is which skill would be used to fly the valkyrie strikefighter, Shipboard systems (flight Control) or Vehicle Operation?
The Valkyrie is the size of a shuttlecraft so it should be Vehicle Operations. But then again its so overpowered, you may need shipboard systems...comments.
Aren't they interchangable? You could use both when flying a runabout, IIRC.
------------------
Robbert Raets, winner of the annual 2001 StyroFoam pig Latin/babbling
Crossover Festival Tournament, designer of the Parsley-class captain's yacht, director of And-you-thought-Q-was-all-powerful Law Firms United and Keeper of the Crazy Unicorn (hey, if you're a virgin, at least use it!)
http://www.smilies.nl/space/alienborgsmile.gif
'The Farce is my ally, and a powerful ally it is....'
'I sense much beer in you. Beer is the path to the Dim side.'
'When 900 years you drink, look as good you will not!'
http://www.smilies.nl/bounce/6.gif http://www.smilies.nl/tales/lsabre.gif
d'oh! Either, not both.
Both in my opinion.
Vehicle ops for flying, shipboard systems for wps,shields etc.
------------------
Thats Cpt SIR SIG to you!
More then meets the eye,
His a MapMaker in disguise.
Only problem is that the template says Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) 2(3)...meaning that the basic skill should be shipboard systems to both fly and operate the strikefighter.Quote:
Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Both in my opinion.
Vehicle ops for flying, shipboard systems for wps,shields etc.
So the question is, is the strikefighter a very small starship or a very overpowered shuttlecraft?
How about creating a fighter pilot specialization just for the valkyrie for the Vehicle Ops skill? May be simpler.
It should be Vehicle Ops if you base the skill use on the Size of the craft.
Karg:D
I always used Shipboard Systems for capital ships and Vehicle Ops for smaller vessels. I think it makes more sense to do it that way.:)
Makes sense and ties in with the shuttle skills.Quote:
Originally posted by Brad
I always used Shipboard Systems for capital ships and Vehicle Ops for smaller vessels. I think it makes more sense to do it that way.:)
What size is the Valkyrie; 2 or 3?
AFAIK size is 2, but you may want to consider a house-rule from our series:Quote:
Originally posted by SIR SIG
Makes sense and ties in with the shuttle skills.
What size is the Valkyrie; 2 or 3?
We treat fighters as size 2 for combat purposes, but size 3 for shuttlebay space they take up (ie. 6 SUs). This accounts for the larger resupply and repair facilities a fighter needs IMHO, when compared to a shuttle.
As to the skill involved: I don't see, why not Vehicle Ops and Shipbord Systems could be used interchangeably. Just take the higher skill and of you go.
After all flying a fighter and a capital ship is more or less the same, ie. both have essentialy the same systems and piloting is computer-assisted button-pushing.
Shuttles OTOH would require their own skill, ie. Vehicle Ops (Shuttlecraft), mainly because they can go places where a capital ship usually can't go, eg. planetary atmospheres. Second reason would be, that shuttles are usually underpowered and often lack systems from capital ships (eg. in many cases no warp drive), meaning flying a shuttle in space should be easier than flying a ship.
Hmmm, now that I think of it a fighter should probably use Shipboard System(Flight Control) for piloting purposes, since it seems to me it's much closer to a big ship when you look at systems involved. The same case could be make for Runabouts, BTW.
I use to run a Shuttle based game, mainly Talons & Danubes. During that, for Piloting I had them use Vehicle Operation (Shuttlecraft). I did this due to the fact that, ok . . . these vessels do have relatively the same systems as an actual SHIP . . . can do manuevers that a ship couldn't even dream of, the systems are miniturized, the power relative to the size of the ship is far different then those of a ship, operating in conditions that a ship wouldn't opperate in should fall under another catagory, and last but not least, the mass is far less, thus handling is different.
So the way I see it, if someone says you can use Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) instead of Vehicle Operations (Shuttlecraft) . . . it would be the equivalent of me saying . . . if you know how to drive a Honda Civic (Hatchback) you can drive a big 18 Wheeler Long Haul Truck.
Remember in the State of California there are different grades of licenses. One must posses a Type A license in order to drive a 18 Wheeler, while it only takes a type c license to drive a normal passanger vehicle.
But JALU, you should also rmember that there is no inertia in space, and combined with weightlessness, Mass is no longer a concern...
The rest of what you say is try, the small ships will however have a totally different flying style, usually at faster standard impulse speeds, the small size allows maneuvres and access to places that a Starship simply cannot go...
These are all arguements to using Vehicle Ops for the small craft. But at a pinch, if required Ships Systems (Flight Control) would do.
Dan, there is inertia in space. Whether or not there's any weight, you can't have mass without inertia. Inertia is the same as momentum. Without it, satellites wouldn't be able to stay in orbit and the whole galaxy would collapse.
This message has been removed on request by the
poster
>Dan, there is inertia in space. Whether or not there's any weight, you can't have mass without inertia. Inertia is the same as momentum. Without it, satellites wouldn't be able to stay in orbit and the whole galaxy would collapse.
And ramming your Maquis raider (TM) into that big ol' Kazon upersay star-estroyerday wouldn't give such a big, cosy explosion...
But Damage would depend on how much velocity the ship has at the time of ramming
Karg
>But Damage would depend on how much velocity the ship has at the time of ramming
Yeah, velocity times mass equals momentum. (I may be wrong, though. Dutch physics laws sometimes use different terms from the English ones to describe certain effects....)
That's how I do it as well :)Quote:
Originally posted by Brad
I always used Shipboard Systems for capital ships and Vehicle Ops for smaller vessels. I think it makes more sense to do it that way.:)
Makes senses to me :)
Opinions may vary, but I use vehicle operation for any flight related ability, example: your transporter operator with the Shipboard Systems, Transporters at a 3[4], and a Vehicle Operations, Shuttlecraft at a 1[2] might by real good at pushing buttons to get a computer to do things, but the knowledge of momentum has nothing to do with it (unless you count the motion of your hands...he he), or the ability to shift a vehicle like an extension of yourself in combat. Now while the Conn uses button pushing to move the ship there's more to it then that.
But as I said, opinions may vary.
Phoenix...
There's a description somewhere (hows that for helpful) that lists there's one person that works half the controls, and another person working the other half when it comes to the Starfleet Fighter ships - Methinks it's the Ship Recognition Guide...
I figure you're using "Shipboard Systems" on anything you're not flying solo. To me, Vehicle Operations is when you're operating the entire vehicle by yourself, such as in shuttles/shuttlepods. For the fighter, I vaguely recall that description splitting piloting/tactical/navigation/sensors etc up between two people. That's just my little humble opinion, and likely not up to snuff for everyone else. ;)
The Doc
Sounds about right to me too
Karg