And I say a light cruiser or better because if you're sending somebody out beyond the borders of the Imperium by himself, there are certain requirements to be met if you want him to survive

I agree that around half of the ~30 or so named dynasties have LCs or greater but as the fluff suggests the existence of at least 60 Warrants in the Expanse, if not more, that changes the percentages somewhat. I always figured that the named dynasties represented only the most notable - the richest, the maddest, and the most archetypal - and that most RTs fell somewhere around the middle of the SP:PF ratio used during character creation.

As for Battlefleet numbers, well, Imperial doctrine would seem to suggest that most deployments would consist of 1-3 destroyers and/or a frigate or two to every cruiser. BfK lists most of the capital ships of the Passage Watch but I assumed there were three or four times as many escorts, as they tend not to have individual names - eg "Echo 2" for a frigate of Echo squadron or "RX-117" for a destroyer.

As always, though, YMMV; this is just my version of things.

Another little question for EK, sort of to go along with this; your stuff is rather prolific, so it might actually just be quicker to ask, than to search: do you do something like Upkeep for your players who sport cruisers? As I've sort of said here, now, by these rules, there could be seen a lot of incentive to get that LC/cruiser, from the beginning, where a "cruiser" is somewhat easier to obtain, as opposed to later, where it could be a VERY expensive acquisition, and someone with a true warship could find themselves in a very good position to be able to decide exactly what fights they will get into, and not, as numerous potential enemies might just hoof it, upon seeing the warship that is your vessel. However, we've had numerous discussions about the system's sort of lack of Upkeep tests, on bigger, more powerful ships, even though operating a cruiser might be a very costly endeavor. Do you make it harder for your groups to operate the bigger, more powerful ships, whether to accentuate their greater power, elsewhere, or just because it makes sense?

And I say a light cruiser or better because if you're sending somebody out beyond the borders of the Imperium by himself, there are certain requirements to be met if you want him to survive

Given that Warrants are not-infrequently given merely to get rid of political opponents, profligate sons and others too high-profile to simply execute, I think "wanting them to survive" is far from a given.

I agree that around half of the ~30 or so named dynasties have LCs or greater but as the fluff suggests the existence of at least 60 Warrants in the Expanse, if not more, that changes the percentages somewhat. I always figured that the named dynasties represented only the most notable - the richest, the maddest, and the most archetypal - and that most RTs fell somewhere around the middle of the SP:PF ratio used during character creation.

While that first part is true in these later days, the part of the bureaucracy that decides what ship or ships to give to a newly issued Warrant usually isn't the same part that decides who gets a newly issued Warrant. And the bureaucrats deciding on the ship or ships to give to a newly issued Warrant don't care about the "why" the Warrant was issued - they're looking at the Warrant itself to determine what's going to be issued.

Besides, whether or not you want the person you're getting a Warrant issued to to survive, you want him to be forced to take his supporters with him - ie, a bigger ship - so that they aren't staying behind to cause trouble for you or look out for his interests while he's gone. In addition, once the Warrant is issued, you don't really care all that much - if it's been issued as a punishment or to get someone out of the way, the Warrant is likely to have very strict limits on how much time the bearer can spend inside the Imperium and where they can do so.

Plus, I'll say again - "or an arbitrary equivalent in lesser ships" ... as determined by the bureaucracy, which may well have no resemblance to reality.

So you're assuming that the Dynasties that are implied to exist but we don't have any other information on are all (or mostly) single-ship (escort or transport) Dynasties? I very strongly disagree with that concept. I also think that using the character creation guidelines to create NPC Dynasties doesn't really work, because FFG didn't do a good job with creating and involving the Dynasty itself.

In my opinion, Dynasties that have only a single ship are either brand new Dynasties (and thus most likely have a ship pulled out of a Reserve Fleet), or have suffered near-crippling losses and have yet to recover, and so they have whatever ship managed to avoid/escape/survive whatever disaster(s) befell the Dynasty. Either way such a Dynasty should not be considered representative of an average Dynasty.

I think that the typical established mid-grade, or "average", Dynasty is more likely to have a single Light Cruiser(or better) or 2-4 frigates, and 3-6 escorts (mix of frigates and destroyers), and perhaps two to three times as many light transports, that it either owns outright, has a majority/controlling stake in, or are owned by another party who has sworn allegiance to the Dynasty as a vassal, plus any hired ships, which will usually be transports. Most of the time, these ships aren't going to be in the same place, and the Warrant Bearer is usually only going to have one or two ships with him, because the rest are all busy carrying out the Dynasty's routine operations, and the Dynasty can't normally afford to pull its own ships from routine business and cover for them with hirelings for very long.

the typical established Dynasty

This is my point. Most of the Rogue Traders in the Expanse aren't yet dynasties, the largest number of them having been created by Marius Hax, current governor of the Calixis Sector.

So you're assuming that the Dynasties that are implied to exist but we don't have any other information on are all (or mostly) single-ship (escort or transport) Dynasties?

Um, nope, I never said anything of the sort, just that most RTs wouldn't have a cruiser.

I mean, perhaps I'm misinterpreting all the bits that say things like

Capital warships are substantially rarer in the Calixis Sector than frigates, raiders, or transports, and are usually only found in the Imperial Battlefleet. Even if a Rogue Trader is able to procure one, the advanced technologies and arcane knowledge required to maintain such vessels is rare, and only found in naval yards and forge worlds.

but I don't think so.

Can we agree to disagree and stop side-tracking this thread?

I let this topic get away from me and now there's too much to comment on. Heh. I'll start here...the frequency of capital ships.

One source tells us that battle fleets have 50-75 ships, on the average. Now I've read plenty of discussion about what types of ships those are and the consensus was that this counted only capital ships. I now know this to be incorrect. This is the total number of all ships, according to the oldest source of this number I could find. No, I don't remember where to get that information off-hand and I don't feel like defending it. If you don't like it feel free to change it in your campaign, but that's the original thought...battle fleets have 50-75 total ships. How many escorts are there to each capital ship? I have never found a number for that but 2-4 seems to be what I've most often seen in the fluff, but I'm not a fanboy of the pulp fiction surrounding this genre. And of course the Imperial Navy is perhaps only 10% of the Imperial ships in the galaxy. This suggests to me that "average" sector BATTLE FLEETS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY have 5-25 capital ships at their disposal, and that's a number I'm comfortable with. That doesn't include capital ships that are Rogue Traders, Monitors, Hulks, or in the Reserve. The "average" sector has 500-750 total ships, and that includes the Imperial Navy, Ad Mech, Rogue Traders, Navigator House fleets, Free Captains, slowboats...everything except system ships.

I'd always assumed (but am open to other interpretations) that the flagships of RT Dynasties are usually capital ships, and that these were the ships attached to the original Warrant of Trade. I've nearly always run it so that RTs out there with escorts and transports are scions of larger dynasties...with notable exceptions (Jonquin Saul comes first to mind). I'm exceptionally open to the notion that Warrants given out effectively as Letters of Marque are for dynasties with escorts for their flagships.

And Venk, yes I do mention maintenance in my house rules. I distinguish between "working" and "non-working" ships. If you put a ship to ply a trade route (a la background endeavors), then that ship needs to have a cargo component of some kind. Stowage bays would be minimal and I'd give that trade route a bonus for larger cargo components. I don't worry about maintenance for working ships. That's all assumed in the PF generated. Can an escort also be detailed to that same route? Yes, but if it does not have a cargo component then it is not a working ship and thus doesn't generate income...but it does cost in maintenance. I give a limit to non-working ships of PF/10 = points, where non-working capital ships are worth 3 points and non-working non-capital ships are worth 1 point. Anything above that limit comes straight off PF. That's not a permanent penalty to PF and can be nullified by adding components to a ship. It only becomes tricky when your players want to field a mercenary Imperial Guard/PDF/what-have-you transport that needs to be kept busy in order to be considered "working." Trade routes, pilgrimage routes, etc., are easier to determine. In fact, almost any endeavor can be reduced to a "trade route." It's only that mercenary vessel I have a hard time categorizing, and even that is only because it isn't constantly being kept employed.

So Errant Knight any updates to your house rules lately? Is the stuff on your google drive still there?

I let this topic get away from me and now there's too much to comment on. Heh. I'll start here...the frequency of capital ships.

One source tells us that battle fleets have 50-75 ships, on the average. Now I've read plenty of discussion about what types of ships those are and the consensus was that this counted only capital ships. I now know this to be incorrect. This is the total number of all ships, according to the oldest source of this number I could find. No, I don't remember where to get that information off-hand and I don't feel like defending it. If you don't like it feel free to change it in your campaign, but that's the original thought...battle fleets have 50-75 total ships. How many escorts are there to each capital ship? I have never found a number for that but 2-4 seems to be what I've most often seen in the fluff, but I'm not a fanboy of the pulp fiction surrounding this genre. And of course the Imperial Navy is perhaps only 10% of the Imperial ships in the galaxy. This suggests to me that "average" sector BATTLE FLEETS OF THE IMPERIAL NAVY have 5-25 capital ships at their disposal, and that's a number I'm comfortable with. That doesn't include capital ships that are Rogue Traders, Monitors, Hulks, or in the Reserve. The "average" sector has 500-750 total ships, and that includes the Imperial Navy, Ad Mech, Rogue Traders, Navigator House fleets, Free Captains, slowboats...everything except system defense ships.

I'd always assumed (but am open to other interpretations) that the flagships of RT Dynasties are usually capital ships, and that these were the ships attached to the original Warrant of Trade. I've nearly always run it so that RTs out there with escorts and transports are scions of larger dynasties...with notable exceptions (Jonquin Saul comes first to mind). I'm exceptionally open to the notion that Warrants given out effectively as Letters of Marque are for dynasties with escorts for their flagships.

And Venk, yes I do mention maintenance in my house rules. I distinguish between "working" and "non-working" ships. If you put a ship to ply a trade route (a la background endeavors), then that ship needs to have a cargo component of some kind. Stowage bays would be minimal and I'd give that trade route a bonus for larger cargo components. I don't worry about maintenance for working ships. That's all assumed in the PF generated. Can an escort also be detailed to that same route? Yes, but if it does not have a cargo component then it is not a working ship and thus doesn't generate income...but it does cost in maintenance. I give a limit to non-working ships of PF/10 = points, where non-working capital ships are worth 3 points and non-working non-capital ships are worth 1 point. Anything above that limit comes straight off PF. That's not a permanent penalty to PF and can be nullified by adding components to a ship. It only becomes tricky when your players want to field a mercenary Imperial Guard/PDF/what-have-you transport that needs to be kept busy in order to be considered "working." Trade routes, pilgrimage routes, etc., are easier to determine. In fact, almost any endeavor can be reduced to a "trade route." It's only that mercenary vessel I have a hard time categorizing, and even that is only because it isn't constantly being kept employed.

Actually, thinking about this some more, would it be possible for you to put all of your Rogue Trader Files into one location on google drive for easy downloading?

I wish Battlefleet Gothic the new game could be modded into a GM/Player experience ala virtual game table using their game engine sort of like " Sword Coast Legends" whereby one player is DM and controls in game assets while the rest are the players - just food for thought...

So Errant Knight any updates to your house rules lately? Is the stuff on your google drive still there?

Everything is available, for the asking, if not outright. I closed some of it since people post it on other forums. I don't mind that people do that at all, except that my players sometimes visit those forums. Since several GMs also access the files, I'd suppose they might also have that issue. When our campaign is concluded, and I don't expect that for another year or two, then I'll just stick it all in generally available folders. Of course, the non-rule sections are getting quite chaotic as the campaign files get added to then not constantly updated as we get further into our campaign. It's impossible for me to both GM and keep all these files updated for other GMs. I have literally 50-60 files, and some of them have exceeded 30 pages in length. I'm happy to open any of them to any GM, and I'm happy to correspond on any aspect as well. I don't get to this forum often these days. I have too much going on at work and in life, but I do enjoy my games and always find time here and there to shoot the breeze with people about my favorite hobby.

Hey Errant,

I just sent a google doc request. Thanks!

Greetings traveller,

I just sent a google doc request. Would appreciate if I receive the green light.

Great house rules, implemented the navigation rules so far, hopefully more.

I've updated all requests. I was on vacation when they came in and wasn't checking my email. Enjoy.

Hi Errant. I sent you some new requests today. I am eagerly anticipating the day you release all of your House Rules and other content, it's great stuff.

Any of my stuff is available for GMs. I just haven't posted it openly since it tends to end up in odd places. Feel free to request any file you'd like though. If there's one thing I'd really like to share it's my campaign pages in roll20. I've had little luck incorporating theme music into my games but I've gone all out on maps and visuals. While we've only had a single dungeon crawl, I had artwork for each scene of that adventure. The party's starting ship is a 10-page file with photos and descriptions, not just components and numbers. I've really tried to immerse my players this time around and been pretty successful with it. We will soon be entering a war phase of the campaign and that should prove particularly interesting, since I've had no chance to playtest my mass combat house rules. I've gone off the abstract deep end.

If you or anyone ever want to wander through my files, just let me know, and if you want to see the roll20 stuff, we can work out a time. I've had a few people go through it all before, just to mine for ideas, and I've certainly done the same with the logistics of others. Our group plays bi-weekly on Saturday evenings, but we usually Hangout on off-Saturdays. I've known most of the players for 35+ years.

I have been doing this lately as well - throwing in a theme song for an encounter or something to set the mood, as well as visuals (since I too run only PbP games). It has been a lot of fun.

I've gotten together all the rules I've evolved through in one folder and packaged it. Much of this stuff is still a work in progress, but due to several recent requests I've decided to share it all at once, even if some of it is incomplete. Some notes on the files...

Acquisitions - the end of the file is full of acquisition modifiers for Imperial Guard forces. I'm still working on the mass combat rules I'll be using for our upcoming war so much of this is still a hodgepodge of numbers.

Colony Endeavors - I reduced the Stars of Inequity rules to a few pages and I abstracted the rest. My players love colonization but they don't want to play with spreadsheets.

Dramatic Moments - These are events that can happen in play. I give them out randomly as RP awards. I have the players vote on one at the end of each session. We haven't quite gotten the art down yet. They like the events but feel I should be giving them out, or they need to be given out less often, or something. In other words, we like it, but we aren't happy with it.

Hordes - I think I picked this up from someone else. I don't use it anymore.

House Rules - a compilation of all the problems I've run into with RAW and my fixes for them.

Imperial Guard Vehicles and Weapons - a loose file I started to compile for acquisitions that was never completed.

Mass Combat - my current objet de jour, it needs much work and is getting almost daily attention.

Navigation - my simplified navigation rules that permit the tracking of relative and subjective time

Ship Complications - additions I've stolen from this forum and maybe some other venues

Space Combat Revisited - my new abstract rules for starship combat, with the map I use for maneuvers at the end of the file, or a screenshot of the map I have in roll20. We've only played a couple battles with this new system and the players like it. It's real test in coming up with a war that's brewing. If you like pushing around miniatures then this isn't your cup of tea. If you want a way to play fleet battles without taking hours just for the maneuvers then you might like this. The maneuver map is an abstract representation of a 3-D area.

Starship Combat - This was a cheatsheet for the players when we ran the old system

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B27-rpfJRdnvfmdBdFJiU0E1djd2d25BYnhIQlNuTVJYdkxqVS1iLVJRUUpuMmZfUlpneTg&usp=sharing

Here is the link for my star system maps, and the navigator's map my players found on Damaris that led them to these systems, nestled within the Cauldron, and inaccessible except for the narrow route the star chart reveals. The maps are incomplete. I just draw the most basic information on the maps and upload them to roll20, where I add another level of detail that only the GM can see. I can blank the whole thing out and only show parts as I desire. I also have maps of some of the major planets, but I store them completely on roll20. Still, if you can read the Sandbox Cluster files, then you can determine where each of the significant locations are by simply looking at these maps, and then you know what I'm adding once I port it to roll20.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B27-rpfJRdnvfi02WWRDU0QxMHJrY2dRcldnRUNZY2RXMktQb2M0YUV1LXp6SHlqWnl6T3M&usp=sharing

I'm doing another complete rewrite of the Mass Combat rules. My players are getting involved in a war that includes ~150 Imperial Guard regiments and even more Orks. I once mentioned something about the need for a grand strategic overview. This is exactly what I was talking about. The numbers in this war approximate those in Barbarossa. And while the area involved is even larger, the major arena of combat is concentrated. I need abstract, with the option of telescoping.

Mass Combat is rewritten. It requires considerable work by the GM to prepare maps and OBs. I'll let you know how it works out. Turns out my war is about 10 times the size of Barbarossa. No kidding. There are about 30 million Orks and over 200 Ork ships. It gives the players control and decisions to make, but with fast adjudication.

I'm personally moving to a new phase in our campaign so I've gathered the campaign material into a single folder. I'm still consolidating but I'll go ahead and share that file. I've had quite a few requests lately, so here it is.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B27-rpfJRdnvdVA1VmVFMmhyQWs&usp=sharing

Mass Combat is rewritten. It requires considerable work by the GM to prepare maps and OBs. I'll let you know how it works out. Turns out my war is about 10 times the size of Barbarossa. No kidding. There are about 30 million Orks and over 200 Ork ships. It gives the players control and decisions to make, but with fast adjudication.

I'm personally moving to a new phase in our campaign so I've gathered the campaign material into a single folder. I'm still consolidating but I'll go ahead and share that file. I've had quite a few requests lately, so here it is.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B27-rpfJRdnvdVA1VmVFMmhyQWs&usp=sharing

Awesome, thanks again for sharing.

After adjudicating a space battle involving 30 ships last night, I've rewritten the Space Combat Revised file to speed things up, allow for more streamlined squadron maneuvers, and just simplify in general while still leaving interesting decisions for the players to make. I'll post updates in 2 weeks (maybe 1 if we decide to hold a 'tween session). I also doubled the size of the battle board. The smaller board works for ships meeting in space, but it didn't suffice for a planetary assault scenario.

So, this isn't about a house rule per se, but an interpretation of an already existing clause. We've run into the problem of Imperial ships being unable to do any damage to incoming Orks, especially in the large numbers I like to throw at my players. We use mathhammer rules so macrocannon damage doesn't stack. Each damage attack separately has to penetrate armor, something Orks have no lack of, especially in the front quadrant.

In Deathwatch core rules, there is a use for Evaluation that permits its use to look for the weak spot in a person's armor. Success and each DoS ignores 4 AP in the next attack. I've allowed my players to apply that concept to starship combat. So far it doesn't seem unbalanced, though I've degraded it to reducing starship armor by 1 +1/DoS.

We've run into the problem of Imperial ships being able to do any damage to incoming Orks, especially in the large numbers I like to throw at my players. We use mathhammer rules so macrocannon damage doesn't stack. Each damage attack separately has to penetrate armor, something Orks have no lack of, especially in the front quadrant.

We have run into exactly the same problem and after some discussion decided that all works as intended: sometime you just need lances.

Well, after another round of large space combats and another grand ground war I find myself dissatisfied with mass combat, though not deterred from searching for answers. My players can't wait to get to the end of a massive ground war, and this is a group that started wargaming over 35 years ago and only picked up roleplaying later. Still, the feeling is that if we want to play a wargame, let's break out a wargame. We want war in our game, but the players want a speedy resolution so they can return to empire building.

The problem lies in speedy adjudication. They players enjoy talking strategy for hours, considering resources and stratagems to employ, and getting downright nit-picky over deployments, but then they want to push a button and view the resolution. I guess I can see their perspective, but I have to point out that this is the opposite of so much that I've read on these forums in what other groups like in mass combat. Is my group just different or is this a common feeling? I'd love to hear some opinions.

Regardless, it's back to the drawing board for me and mass combat.

It boils down to what's important. Players want to make decisions that affect the outcome. The more their decisions are decisive, the better.

With mass combat - would you be interested in "pushing tokens"? If so - perhaps the answer is to make each individual token into Units (squads of 10 individuals) - sort of like the mini table table experience? If - I'd be interesting into helping collaborate something for the community herein...

Morbid