Looking over the Navis Primer rules as they are written, I'm forced to concede that yes, they do make warp travel so hazardous that every trip is potentially as deadly to the group as a combat encounter. This is a long way from ideal, and so a less hazardous interpretation is probably required.

However- it's occurred to me that the danger level of the Navis Primer rules is exactly the right level of danger for a ship plying an uncharted route.

So, when I work out a less lethal method for PCs to use in any campaigns I run, I'll only use them for routes the PCs have a Chart for. There will likely be modifiers for the type of route- even with a Chart to work from, Haunted, Surly or Lightless should be dangerous trips (the Cape of Good Hope was charted, but still feared). At the other extreme, a Stable route with a Detailed Chart should be so safe that the travelling without a Navigator rules can be used casually- this, IMO, is how Chartist Captains work. Sticking to a handful of safe, stable routes that are very well mapped.

When the PCs decide to head out into the unknown and try for a system they've no chart for- that should defintely require the Navis Primer rules in full. A dangerous undertaking that uses up a significant chunk of game time is what this needs. If the route is a Surly or Lightless one? Well, that should explain why the background has people trying to steal or barter for precious charts of warp routes, rather than simply going out and mapping their own.

A quicker simpler version of the Warp Travel rules that doesn't give as much danger to starships is a very desirable thing, as long as it's used for travelling the beaten path. PCs should have a healthy caution regarding sending the ship off the charted routes, and not just do it on a whim.

Tantavalist, I think you've hit on it there. It should be the difference between a known route and striking out into the unknown. I do still think Navis Primer is too rough. A voyage of any length is certain death, as is any voyage into rough seas, and a Rogue Trader campaign is likely to have both. What brings a PC party's vessel through is their unique equipment and sterling stat lines. I just need to find that happy median where that equipment and those stat lines bring danger and excitement, not a certainty.

In the end, the appropriateness of the rules depends on what sort of moods and themes you're trying to evoke. Traditionally, voidfaring in 40k is styled after the age of sail. In the age of sail, if a captain were to set off on a journey he'd better know ***** well* where he intends to go and have maps and supplies in abundance. If you get lost at sea, you're going to starve, dehydrate, and die a generally horrible death that will probably spark mutiny in abundance. If your crew doesn't have absolute confidence in their journey's success, morale will quickly drop, as will performance. If you were going on an exploratory mission, you were probably a madman of some sort. In Europe, there was no knowledge of the Americas. The sailors that found the New World (Amerigo Vespucci et al, iirc) hoped to find a path to Asia and India (hence Native Americans being named Indians). They were lucky that their mission failed (depending on your perspective anyways; they didn't find Asia), because if the Atlantic and the Pacific weren't separate, they'd have died long before they reached Asia because there is nowhere to resupply. This level of danger is represented a little better by the Navis Primer rules. If you travel into the uncharted depths of space, you're a madman (it just seems that Warrants of Trade are a common and effective vector for insanity). If you want to make a journey, it is going to be long, arduous, and the lives of you and your crew depend on your ability prepare almost excessively, in case something goes wrong.

If, however, you want to evoke a lighter mood in your game, more reminiscent of traditional science fiction, you'll do better without the Navis Primer rules. You might choose to even swap between the systems based on the needs of the story. Personally speaking, I find the Navis Primer rules to be excellent in their evocation of the setting and mood, and very immersive, but also cumbersome to implement. I don't use them simply because my group doesn't have the attention span to deal with them, nor the interest in micromanaging resources.

Personally i love the navis primer rules.

i dont always use them. but in situations like

-navigator has an awful map

-Pc's were stupid enough to try a blind jump in order to escape a system

- the PC's are chaseing another ship with no idea what the end destination is

in general i make the warp horrifying and dangerous anyway. my PC's always figure out where they are going and why before they leave port becuase they fear the Navis Primer. i think it is great.

stuff like that. i also love the oportunity to make the navigator look like a huge bad ass hero.

the navigator in my current campaign only cares about staying alive. he runs from combat. the other PC's hate him (he keeps panicking and using lidless stare). he has been at 3 wounds for about 3 sessions becuase he keeps getting shot and no one is good a medicae. But i let him be a total bad ass while piloting in the warp. and some of the most epic things in the campagn so far have happend in the warp.

Sure, they're great rules, provided that you're willing to have only the navigator and the ship's pilot get to do anything for two hours.

I completely agree that the ship's navigator should be a starring role, and that role should shine even if the navigator is an NPC. I agree that the warp should be extremely dangerous. I agree that RT evokes a concept of the Age of Sail.

Not every voyage in the days of sailing ships, though, was fatal. Drake captained his ship around the Earth losing only 2-3 crew in the process, and he fought a few battles as well as storms.

The problem with Navis Primer is the sheer number of rolls to be made. Not only does it take forever to play a voyage, but the number of rolls to be made usually results in catastrophe for the ship. It's just a matter of the odds. Then there's the issue of not engaging enough players for a considerable period of time.

I don't blame players for not wanting a GM to break out the Navis Primer. I'd be bored and I used to play Drang Nach Osten (a divisional-scale and smaller wargame of the eastern front in wwii). I don't get easily bored.

I need another alternative. Hence my attempt at alternate rules. I threw those together in an hour. I'm still tweaking them.

It seems to me like FFG expect that you'll play out the entire travel period with shipboard shenanigans while the navigator does his business in the tower. it'd go a long way to explaining how you're supposed to handle things like your Rogue Trader's sudden desire to vivisect kittens.

something i also do for long trips is use the normal rules but once or twice (beginging and end) throw in the navis primer rules.

the thing is that you dont have to isolate the navigator for the warp tests and include the crew.

-the whole crew prepars the ship for warp traval

- if the navigator gets one of his 'dream' quest type obstcles then you can easily throw the rest of the crew into his dream.

if you make the warp all about rolling on tables it will never be fun. a little bit of the gm saying 'ok you make the journy and nothing goes wrong' every once and a while is fine i think. i look to the tables when the story relys on how you get to the destination and ignore them when they get in the way of what is goin on

In the end, the appropriateness of the rules depends on what sort of moods and themes you're trying to evoke. Traditionally, voidfaring in 40k is styled after the age of sail. In the age of sail, if a captain were to set off on a journey he'd better know ***** well* where he intends to go and have maps and supplies in abundance. If you get lost at sea, you're going to starve, dehydrate, and die a generally horrible death that will probably spark mutiny in abundance. If your crew doesn't have absolute confidence in their journey's success, morale will quickly drop, as will performance. If you were going on an exploratory mission, you were probably a madman of some sort. In Europe, there was no knowledge of the Americas. The sailors that found the New World (Amerigo Vespucci et al, iirc) hoped to find a path to Asia and India (hence Native Americans being named Indians). They were lucky that their mission failed (depending on your perspective anyways; they didn't find Asia), because if the Atlantic and the Pacific weren't separate, they'd have died long before they reached Asia because there is nowhere to resupply.

The Norsemen actually found North America some 400 years before the rest of Europe...

On my groups vessel a trip from Footfall to Damaris would on average produce around 6 Encounters, 18 days of Warp Travel... Average rolls being max amount of DoS, Navigator is just that good and that is at rank 3.

Drachdar, you were not using Navis Primer RAW. A trip from Footfall to Damaris, assuming a Miloslav engine and 4 degrees of success on part of the Navigator EVERY SINGLE TIME would still require 25 days and a minimum of 8 encounter checks.

And I've played with people who are that "successful" with their die rolls. They get to roll my dice (not their own) in a box top in front of all the other players.

All hail Leadeaters! Cheaters suck.

Ship probably has a runecaster as well, that'd drop the time elapse about right.

The Norsemen actually found North America some 400 years before the rest of Europe...

Sorry, I forgot about them.