Alternative "Tech Level" system

[megaplayboy]

So, as I've done world design for superhero and sci fi settings, it's occurred to me to formulate a "technology level" system that is more rooted in modern patterns of technological development and relative sophistication/advancement compared to the norm.

So, this is my basic idea:

Tech Level 0--"Mundane" technology(this is technology that is relatively unsophisticated, and has been around for more than 20 years; examples, rotary dial telephones, CRT monitors, most civilian firearms)

Tech Level 1--"Recent" technology(technology that has been around longer than 2 years but no more than 20 years; examples, a 10 year old Nokia cell phone)

Tech Level 2--"Current" technology(technology that has come out within the past 2 years; example, the latest computer graphics cards, a Tesla Model 3)

Tech Level 3--"Leading edge" technology(technology coming out within the next couple of years)

Tech Level 4--"Developmental" technology(technology coming out within the next 2 to 20 years, exists only in prototype form)

Tech Level 5--"Drawing Board" technology(technology a long ways off but which exists in design/concept form)

Tech Level 6--"Theoretical" technology(technology based upon known, tested scientific principles, not yet feasible but at least theoretically possible)

Tech Level 7--"Speculative" technology(technology based upon speculative science or unproven/untested theories)

 

Adders:

+1 level for Military technologies(fighter jets, missile systems, e.g.)

+1 level for Restricted Access technologies(secret research, government program, etc.)--this can be cumulative with particularly sensitive military technology

+1 level for particularly complex or compound technologies(items which combine multiple technologies)

 

Nuclear weapons, for example, are at least Tech Level 3--complex devices incorporating particularly sensitive miltech.  

 

Additional adders:

+3 to +5--extraterrestrial technology(+5 if the aliens are particularly alien(non-humanoid, e.g.)

+3 to +5--extradimensional technology(ditto)

 

Generally those two adders should be automatically cumulative--alien tech from another dimension adds +6 to +10 to Tech Level

 

The tech level should be used when dealing with various technology and science skill tasks--the higher the tech level, the more difficult the task, and the longer it is likely to take.  

[Killer Shrike]

Are you aware that the 6e "Skills" book has a section on "Technological Skill Modifiers", which includes Advanced, Obsolete, and Alien Tech Modifiers? There's a chart and a full page and a half of expository text on the subject. Page 39-40.

 

 

[archer]

7 hours ago, megaplayboy said:

Adders:

+1 level for Military technologies(fighter jets, missile systems, e.g.) 

+1 level for Restricted Access technologies(secret research, government program, etc.)--this can be cumulative with particularly sensitive military technology

+1 level for particularly complex or compound technologies(items which combine multiple technologies)

 

That would depend on the player's background to some extent. A lot of people get tech training in the military, others work for DARPA. Maybe appropriate for a complete civilian but perhaps not for some player's backgrounds.

 

 

7 hours ago, megaplayboy said:

Additional adders:

+3 to +5--extraterrestrial technology(+5 if the aliens are particularly alien(non-humanoid, e.g.)

+3 to +5--extradimensional technology(ditto)

 

 

I would only use those modifiers if the tech development there is substantially different than it is on the campaign version of earth. You could have the High Evolutionary's Counter-Earth or Alternate Evil Spock Mirror Universe Earth and the tech development path be not much different.

 

 

[unclevlad]

Military tech is generally NOT more advanced than civilian tech.  If anything, it's quite often comparatively dated.  The military does not do Bleeding Edge, not as issued to troops.  They're typically built MUCH more solidly...which is part of the cost aspect...and with a much higher attention to detail.  (At one point at work, I was part of a group that had some work assembling some stuff for NASA.  They had very stringent requirements for the soldering on the boards, for one example.)  

 

The stuff being done at DARPA isn't production-level...and may never be.

 

Nuclear weapons have been around for 60 years, so how can they be Tech +3?  They ARE complex;  IIRC, it's the focusing aspect that's hardest.  Tech+3 is probably 8K displays, high-res flexible displays, full 5G (IIRC that means gigabit transfers even to a moving receiver), long-range electronic cars, gene therapy for cancers (in Europe anyway).  Tech 4 might be layered graphene, high-density flexible (and SAFE) batteries, processors dropping down to 5 nm gate sizes.  Smaller than that is probably Tech 5.  The best prototype solar cell gives 46% efficiency, so Tech 4 might be 50%, and Tech 5 60%.

 

I dunno that your system makes sense, but one question to ask first is, what do you want to do with it?

[Christopher]

2 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Military tech is generally NOT more advanced than civilian tech.  If anything, it's quite often comparatively dated.  The military does not do Bleeding Edge, not as issued to troops.  They're typically built MUCH more solidly...which is part of the cost aspect...and with a much higher attention to detail.  (At one point at work, I was part of a group that had some work assembling some stuff for NASA.  They had very stringent requirements for the soldering on the boards, for one example.)   

Fun fact of the Curiosity Rover:

It was launched 2011.

It uses the RAD750 CPU. Wich was released 2001.

It's actuall specifications are identical to the Power PC 750 processor, wich was released 1997.

So the computer technology in curiosity is 21 years old. That is just how much resources have to be spend on acceptable reliability.

[megaplayboy]

16 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Military tech is generally NOT more advanced than civilian tech.  If anything, it's quite often comparatively dated.  The military does not do Bleeding Edge, not as issued to troops.  They're typically built MUCH more solidly...which is part of the cost aspect...and with a much higher attention to detail.  (At one point at work, I was part of a group that had some work assembling some stuff for NASA.  They had very stringent requirements for the soldering on the boards, for one example.)  

 

The stuff being done at DARPA isn't production-level...and may never be.

 

Nuclear weapons have been around for 60 years, so how can they be Tech +3?  They ARE complex;  IIRC, it's the focusing aspect that's hardest.  Tech+3 is probably 8K displays, high-res flexible displays, full 5G (IIRC that means gigabit transfers even to a moving receiver), long-range electronic cars, gene therapy for cancers (in Europe anyway).  Tech 4 might be layered graphene, high-density flexible (and SAFE) batteries, processors dropping down to 5 nm gate sizes.  Smaller than that is probably Tech 5.  The best prototype solar cell gives 46% efficiency, so Tech 4 might be 50%, and Tech 5 60%.

 

I dunno that your system makes sense, but one question to ask first is, what do you want to do with it?

Nukes are Tech +3 because, among other things, full knowledge of the technology involved is fairly restricted.  So not every Bruce, Hank and Tony inventor has that knowledge/skill set in their CV.  They are also comprised of multiple techs, not just a single principle. Military techs sometimes employ stuff that's not public knowledge(the exact nature of composite armor for tanks, for example; stealth materials and design for another).  

The general idea is to have a way of figuring out modifiers for working with, developing and adapting technologies, AND to convey some sense of the possible to players who want to make new stuff or figure out how some exotic tech works. 

[unclevlad]

Full knowledge of nuclear weapons design is EXTREMELY restricted.  FAR above standard Top Secret, altho that terminology isn't in use much in the US any more.  If you have clearance for nuclear secrets, you're watched for life...there is no expiration date on this info.  And if at all possible, everyone with nukes *really* wants to make sure this NEVER gets rolled out beyond them.

 

So trying to conflate pure tech level with restricted nature is mixing apples and chicken nuggets.  Leave the tech level alone, for what you want to do;  there's an entirely separate aspect for Access.  Detailed nuke tech is pretty much at the absolutely highest level there is.  Weaponized biologicals, same.  But this is a bad example, as no PC, ever, should probably be considering  working this out.

 

And how is this going to translate to the players?  As a modifier to e.g. a gadgeteering or inventor roll?  There's already a modifier based on active points;  does this supplement or supplant that?  In many cases, the deep secrets aren't in the realm of the tech...it's crypto.  Want military-grade location?  You have to crack the high-res GPS signal.  Mislead a missile?  Need the frequency and the command set/comms protocols.  There's almost always a self-destruct, too, if you want to dig that out.

For stuff like the composite tank armor:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour

 

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/8144/u-s-army-m1-abrams-tanks-in-europe-are-getting-explosive-reactive-armor

 

Heck, starting from just that, a good inventor or gadgeteer can probably progress quite a ways.  Unless you're intending your inventor/gadgeteer types to be relatively constrained to real-world considerations, a Hero System Inventor skill generally means they're QUITE good at this kind of stuff.

[Christopher]

4 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Full knowledge of nuclear weapons design is EXTREMELY restricted.  FAR above standard Top Secret, altho that terminology isn't in use much in the US any more.  If you have clearance for nuclear secrets, you're watched for life...there is no expiration date on this info.  And if at all possible, everyone with nukes *really* wants to make sure this NEVER gets rolled out beyond them. 

My knowledge of Nuclear weapons is this:

There are two designs, Gun and Implosion design.

There is two primary materials, rare enriched Uranium and common Plutonium (or rather their two commonly useable Isotopes).

 

The Gun design is simple, but thankfully needs the more difficulty to produced enriched Uranium. If you try to pull it off with Plutonium you will get a early detonation. Wich is the nuclear equivlanet of a "dud". You would do more damage with the same weight of TNT.

Implosion design can use Plutonium. But Uranium is still prefered. The design of the neuron reflectors and the mathemathical models is what is kept secret.

 

Once we are in teh SciFi/Superheroic levels, Nuclear weapons are a old hat anyway. I think Trans-Nuclear weapons is what the villains make:

Weapons with the destructive power of nuclear weapons, but none (or less) of the downsides:
- No rare nuclear materials needed
- Reuseabiltiy (death rays)
- No fallout (if you want fallout, you can always make your trans-nuclear weapon "dirty" easily)

 

In particular in space warfare, Nuclear weapons are not themself usefull. without a atmosphere to create a shockwave from, all conventional explosives only produce something between "heat" and a "light shootgun spread" effect. Both easily compensated for by armor that has to withstand space.

[unclevlad]

Plutonium is NASTY TOXIC..  It is picked up by body tissues, which means it's not gonna get excreted.  And it's a nasty big alpha emitter.  Alpha particles don't penetrate skin...but from the inside, they rip cells apart.  The metallic form is flammable, AND expansive so it might break out of its containment.  And it goes critical at a much lower mass.  Sure, the latter two issues are addressable;  facilities handled plutonium for quite some time.  But it is still hellishly dangerous.

 

A nuke will also produce a massive EMP and do radiation damage, but yes, the shock wave (and the superheated air) is what causes the great spread of damage.  I think the value of a nuke in space is likely dependent on combat velocity, and maneuverability.  The nuke's gonna have to get VERY close, in space terms...10 km at the outside, and probably less.  If we're talking 5% of c, that's 15,000 km/sec, so the tracking and timing have to be VERY tight.  And let's not forget that small-matter and radiation shielding are absolute requirements for this.

 

But if we're getting to interstellar travel, we're into pie in the sky.  Fundamentally, you need FTL to support any kind of space battle, IMO...because a battle largely implies a level of traffic consonant only with FTL.  Non-FTL simply takes TOO DAMN LONG!!   

 

Last, my definition of a nuke is Too Many Active Points to Ever Consider.  There's a writeup in the equipment guide...20d6 Drain BODY with godawful return rate, NND Does Body...comes out to over 1000 points.  THEN that's linked to Drain CON 10d6 similarly specified...another 500.  That's the radiation.  The flash aspect is about 370.  Thermal's 20d6 killing with somewhat different scaling...750.  EMP is another 500.  The blast wave is 20d6 killing physical...another 1100.  Total active points:  5600.  And THAT only because Megascale stuff is ridiculously too cheap, and because they're not defining indirect effects such as fallout, which are so greatly variable.  Wanna steal the notions behind an F-35?  The stealth tech for a next-gen fighter or bomber?  Launch and flight control tech for Standard MIssile 6?  Yeah, those I can see...but we don't need to go to nukes.

[Christopher]

3 hours ago, unclevlad said:

A nuke will also produce a massive EMP and do radiation damage, but yes, the shock wave (and the superheated air) is what causes the great spread of damage.  I think the value of a nuke in space is likely dependent on combat velocity, and maneuverability.  The nuke's gonna have to get VERY close, in space terms...10 km at the outside, and probably less.  If we're talking 5% of c, that's 15,000 km/sec, so the tracking and timing have to be VERY tight.  And let's not forget that small-matter and radiation shielding are absolute requirements for this. 

No need to guess, when we can simulate it:

https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com/

[Scott Ruggels]

9 hours ago, Christopher said:

No need to guess, when we can simulate it:

https://childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com/

 

Also, the Albedo game by Paul Kidd.