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

> --- B Lin <lin@rxkinetix.com> wrote:

*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.