Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Excidium Planetis]

There is a surprising amount (as in most players I know) of FT roleplayers whom, to be blunt, simply do not determine their population statistics (and further demographics) outside of exceptions and broad strokes. I tend to advise players to do the same: population, much like tech, is ultimately a form of window dressing. In most cases I know of, beyond a player's own personal perfectionism, a hard population count is, simply put, not really necessary; what is more important is the aesthetic and atmospheric features that might arise from a high/low population relative to a geographic location. In other words, does a large population lead to density and overcrowding issues? Does a low population lead to rural and agrarian lifestyles becoming preferred amongst a player's polity? These, to me, are far more important questions to answer rather than, "How many fictitious people do I have?"

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

[Huerdae]

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

-_-

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

[Singaporean Transhumans]

There is a surprising amount (as in most players I know) of FT roleplayers whom, to be blunt, simply do not determine their population statistics (and further demographics) outside of exceptions and broad strokes. I tend to advise players to do the same: population, much like tech, is ultimately a form of window dressing. In most cases I know of, beyond a player's own personal perfectionism, a hard population count is, simply put, not really necessary; what is more important is the aesthetic and atmospheric features that might arise from a high/low population relative to a geographic location. In other words, does a large population lead to density and overcrowding issues? Does a low population lead to rural and agrarian lifestyles becoming preferred amongst a player's polity? These, to me, are far more important questions to answer rather than, "How many fictitious people do I have?"

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

*prepares statistic nullifier*

[Diopolis]

Edit: nvm

[Excidium Planetis]

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

-_-

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

I also use NS stats for my economy.

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

Didn't that stop working?

What do you mean?

[Diopolis]

I use NS stats for population...


...don't judge me.

Didn't that stop working?

What do you mean?[/quote]
I confused it with NS tracker. My bad.

[Tierra Prime]

I've been failing to justify in my mind why an ancient technologically advanced race would keep running for eternity. A important part of my nation's background is that the area it occupies was (Unknown to my nation's people) once the home of an ancient race (The Arkad, meaning "Golden People" in fantasy Elvish. They'd look something like LoTR elves) who fled after the warrior race they created (I ended up using 40k Orks as the warrior race, because Warhammer canon says they were created by an ancient race to be soldiers) overthrew them. Some of the survivors entered hibernation in facilities they build on the world's my nation now controls (The idea is that they'll eventually wake up, which will lead to a massive war that may or may not tear my nation apart), while others regrouped into sanctuary fleets and began travelling across the universe, stopping only to sack lower civilisations for resources.

As a part of my entry back into FT, I'm planning to have one of the survivor fleets attempt to sack another nation, but fail because it is too organised. Word of this conflict will (Through trade and shit) eventually reach my people, who will accidentally stumble upon the survivor's hibernation chambers (One of which is right under my capital) and accidentally wake them up. The Orks (Who IC-wise occupy the outer regions of my nation and raid it non-stop) will react to this by finally unifying, basically ripping what is left my nation apart. I want one big war between a bunch of different sides, but I don't know to justify why some survivors ran while others stayed. IC, they have a natural ability to mentally read each other's emotions, even when they aren't present. The constant interaction between so many individuals created a sort of hive mind which is meant to keep them organised (Whether or not it does is debatable, I could imagine it being a hindrance at times).

[The Ben Boys]

I've been failing to justify in my mind why an ancient technologically advanced race would keep running for eternity.

Well there could be a variety of reasons why your space elves do that. First off they could be trying to find a suitable home planet that fits their biological niche nicely, which in RL would be very, very, very hard. The amount of habitable planets in FT right now is so scientifically improbable it's mind boggling, but it makes for a good story and role-play.

In regards to their lack of terraforming which could give them a suitable planet to settle on, remember that just because a civilization is advanced in some areas doesn't mean it would be in others. In Robert Buettner's Orphanage series the space-slugs have incredibly advanced starships but have not invented the propeller, only understanding the basic laws of rocketry and not any of flight.

Secondly, take a page out of RL. What you are talking about are essentially nomads. As defined on Wikipedia, a nomad is a "a person with no settled home, who moves from place to place as a way of obtaining food, finding pasture for livestock, or otherwise making a living." So are you trying to obtain food like a hunter-gatherer, find resources like a pastoral nomad, or make a living like a merchant/raider? The nomadism could be part of their culture rather than an immediate need, though I don't think that's what you're looking for.

Thirdly, they could be looking for something. Maybe on some noble quest to find a relic or on a holy crusade, or maybe just have a thirst to plunder. After all the Hunnic Empire was composed mostly of nomads but built an empire by conquest and raiding, same as the Dothraki in ASOIAF.

Hope my ravings helped a bit.

[The United Dominion]

I've been failing to justify in my mind why an ancient technologically advanced race would keep running for eternity.

Well there could be a variety of reasons why your space elves do that. First off they could be trying to find a suitable home planet that fits their biological niche nicely, which in RL would be very, very, very hard. The amount of habitable planets in FT right now is so scientifically improbable it's mind boggling, but it makes for a good story and role-play.

Estimated numbers of Earth-like planets in the galaxy range between 5 billion and 40 billion. For the sake of argument, let's say those estimates are overly optimistic by two orders of magnitude - that's still 50-400 million.

If we were to count all of the Earth-like habitable planets in the Milky Way that are actually portrayed in NSFT RP - even counting terraformed planets that could have been anything to begin with - I would suspect we would only have a couple thousand total (actually, I suspect far less amongst RPers who actually interact with the mainstream community and don't make outlandish claims to be cool). That's not particularly improbable or mind-boggling.

Tierra: you could just be pursued by the Orks constantly, a la Battlestar Galactica. Or they could just find no good reason to settle as a whole, while every so often, groups do splinter off because they're sick of being nomads.

[The Ben Boys]

Well there could be a variety of reasons why your space elves do that. First off they could be trying to find a suitable home planet that fits their biological niche nicely, which in RL would be very, very, very hard. The amount of habitable planets in FT right now is so scientifically improbable it's mind boggling, but it makes for a good story and role-play.

Estimated numbers of Earth-like planets in the galaxy range between 5 billion and 40 billion. For the sake of argument, let's say those estimates are overly optimistic by two orders of magnitude - that's still 50-400 million.

If we were to count all of the Earth-like habitable planets in the Milky Way that are actually portrayed in NSFT RP - even counting terraformed planets that could have been anything to begin with - I would suspect we would only have a couple thousand total (actually, I suspect far less amongst RPers who actually interact with the mainstream community and don't make outlandish claims to be cool). That's not particularly improbable or mind-boggling.

Of the 100 billion stars in the Milky Way, there are about 300 billion plants. I'm inclined to the more conservative numbers, with means with 500 million stars then 0.0016% of the galaxy is made up of earth-like stars. I'm no professional and I'm also on the conservative side with this stuff, but having multiple earth-like planets in one system is mind boggling to me, let alone neighboring systems like is frequently featured. Not speaking against the practice, as I abide by it, but just my opinion.

[Sunset]

I've been failing to justify in my mind why an ancient technologically advanced race would keep running for eternity. A important part of my nation's background is that the area it occupies was (Unknown to my nation's people) once the home of an ancient race (The Arkad, meaning "Golden People" in fantasy Elvish. They'd look something like LoTR elves) who fled after the warrior race they created (I ended up using 40k Orks as the warrior race, because Warhammer canon says they were created by an ancient race to be soldiers) overthrew them. Some of the survivors entered hibernation in facilities they build on the world's my nation now controls (The idea is that they'll eventually wake up, which will lead to a massive war that may or may not tear my nation apart), while others regrouped into sanctuary fleets and began travelling across the universe, stopping only to sack lower civilisations for resources.

As a part of my entry back into FT, I'm planning to have one of the survivor fleets attempt to sack another nation, but fail because it is too organised. Word of this conflict will (Through trade and shit) eventually reach my people, who will accidentally stumble upon the survivor's hibernation chambers (One of which is right under my capital) and accidentally wake them up. The Orks (Who IC-wise occupy the outer regions of my nation and raid it non-stop) will react to this by finally unifying, basically ripping what is left my nation apart. I want one big war between a bunch of different sides, but I don't know to justify why some survivors ran while others stayed. IC, they have a natural ability to mentally read each other's emotions, even when they aren't present. The constant interaction between so many individuals created a sort of hive mind which is meant to keep them organised (Whether or not it does is debatable, I could imagine it being a hindrance at times).

The important thing to remember about anything Games Workshop writes is that it is there to keep the Realms/Galaxy/Football Pitch in eternal conflict. Rational thought, logic, and reason does not enter into it and is often used as the 'How can we make it worse?' counter-example. Except maybe the Tau and even that is a maybe. Does that mean you can't do the same thing? No, of course not! But you're bound to end up with some logic holes and if you ever run across a civilization like my own there will probably be a lot of face-palming involved.

As for justification; Religion, culture, idiots with good hair. Pick one or all of them. Just look at all the idiots out there blowing each other up and killing each other for nothing more than 'My Invisible Sky God is better than yours!' The same goes for idiots with good hair. Personal charisma seems to trump* sound logic and rational thought when it comes to politics on a regular basis. Leaders of this nature often make foolish decisions and more importantly people often follow them. Look at the great holocausts and follies of the... Well, all of human existence. Often all it would have taken would have been someone stepping up and doing some basic 1+2 math to show why what they considered doing was dumb, but those same leaders tend to surround themselves with like-minded idiots.

To corrupt a quotation; This is called 'Bad Luck'.

So, to add some reasons (not good reasons, but reasons) just add a dash of greed, lust, envy, stupidity, and irrational emotionalism. And don't worry about the plot holes.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

I am working a bit on a FT version of my nation since I already have experience with that so its easier to conceptualize.

I was thinking of how I'd write my ships, and I was thinking of doing what I do with my faux A.I/robots just on a bigger scale.

Each ship has an artificial soul made, where once it was just a ritual, it now involves science of computers to help calculate everything easily, while the magic handles the traditional requirements. These Souls are bound to a core inside a ship and is linked with the systems within. This grants it the ability to appear as any of the civilized races with a spiritual avatar. It can also power up magical barriers with its soul, and a ships main weapon, which cast over sized spells. They also are responsible for the main thrusters working. Of course, who would wanna fight for some empire if you have a consistent chance to die has a ship, the passengers have a chance to save themselves, you're stuck. Because of this they're possessed to work for their creators, perpetually enslaved to follow their will first and foremost.

Does this look sound as a concept so far?

[Kyrusia]

I am working a bit on a FT version of my nation since I already have experience with that so its easier to conceptualize.

I was thinking of how I'd write my ships, and I was thinking of doing what I do with my faux A.I/robots just on a bigger scale.

Each ship has an artificial soul made, where once it was just a ritual, it now involves science of computers to help calculate everything easily, while the magic handles the traditional requirements. These Souls are bound to a core inside a ship and is linked with the systems within. This grants it the ability to appear as any of the civilized races with a spiritual avatar. It can also power up magical barriers with its soul, and a ships main weapon, which cast over sized spells. They also are responsible for the main thrusters working. Of course, who would wanna fight for some empire if you have a consistent chance to die has a ship, the passengers have a chance to save themselves, you're stuck. Because of this they're possessed to work for their creators, perpetually enslaved to follow their will first and foremost.

Does this look sound as a concept so far?

Sound as an idea? In my personal opinion? Sure. In the end, regardless of what you call it, it's a sentient (potentially sophont) intelligence running systems of a vessel in a (semi-)autonomous fashion or otherwise acting as a "slave system" to a larger, super-system architecture. It's a fairly standard trope in science-fiction; don't misconstrue me calling it a "trope" to mean it is "bad." Some things are "tropes" or even "cliche" for a reason: they work and serve as avenues for plot and plot creation. Even so, if you have not already, I'd advise giving the guide "Roleplaying as Humans and Aliens" a read given playing as a synthetic intelligence, transcendental being, or even a "simple alien" and portraying it in a fashion that is truly unfamiliar to us is quite difficult - if not mechanically impossible, due to us being humans and not x-creature - and said guide provides tips and suggestions, as well as a healthy dose of food-for-thought, regarding said topic.

Aside from this, the only potential "rub" you might encounter involves the actual usage of terms such as "magic," "soul," etc., but this often has very little to do with what the thing actually is, after all, in the end it's, again, just an intelligence running the systems of a vessel (also: Clarke's Third Law applies). Any rub you run across - if you do at all - will likely be found, at least in majority, in the usage of the terms themselves due to their "out of place" nature in a science-fiction setting (excluding, for the sake of convention the issues of science-fantasy); I detail this more thoroughly here and here. You also might consider reading the rather lengthy discussion about "magic" and the usage of "fantasy wording" which surrounds said posts.

Hope that helps.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

Thanks, although it won't be hard to necessarily portray them.

Most species in my FT state would simply be the species I have no, just likely to have greater social representation, I'd say only Giants would be gone.

I'll give them a ready anyways :P

[Kyrusia]

Thanks, although it won't be hard to necessarily portray them.

Most species in my FT state would simply be the species I have no, just likely to have greater social representation, I'd say only Giants would be gone.

I'll give them a ready anyways

In this case, I was more referencing the issue involving portraying the perspective of a "soul." Sure, if it's a soul of one of your own species which you portray, that solves a considerable amount of issues involving portraying their perspective - and thus their social, political, economic, cultural, personal, etc. biases, prejudices, and preconceptions - but then we fall to the fundamental issue involving portraying an intelligence which now might exist purely as either a) a metaphysical construct, b) a preternatural formation, or c) some mixture of the two.

Look at it this way: how might one write for an electron in a toaster - presupposing first the electron is self-aware, capable of meta-cognition, and otherwise sentient, sapient, and sophont? What does the electron "see," "feel," etc. while it is coursing through the minute, thin, seemingly one-dimensional volume of a wire, where it's only potential movement in the grand scheme of its "universe" is forward or back, vibrating along perpetually? Would this electron be "born" when it was generated in, say, a coal power plant and live much of its life passing from their to the outlet on your wall? Would this be its preadolescence and adolescence? What might this intelligent, self-aware electron perceive between the power plant, along a life traveled through a thin tube of a universe, hopping between atom to atom? Did it find another electron to love at some point? Would once it passes to the toaster and make its way to the coils of the machine be its "twilight period"? Would it perceive becoming ambient radiation (heat) as death, or merely a new phase? How would this little electron feel about either?

Sure, my example - an intelligent and self-aware electron - might seem silly, but portraying an alien, a synthetic intelligence, and even a soul runs into much the same issue: fundamentally, humans are not non-humans and, thus, cannot ever truly be said to objectively portray an alien or a synthetic intelligence any more "properly" than they might a being unbounded by time, such as a soul.

As Rethan outlined in his guide, "Roleplaying as Humans and Aliens," players run into these problems a lot; the trap many fall into is trying to truly portray anything that is not human as "actually alien." At the end of the day, most readers prefer to read about, and most roleplayers prefer to interact with, entities with perspectives they can, at least to some degree, understand and "see" for themselves; empathy, ultimately, is vital in characterization. If a reader does not empathize with a character, either positively or negatively, then their is no investment on the part of the reader (or the roleplayer) to continue reading, much less enjoy reading, about that character (the same for interacting with that character can be said for roleplayers).

This is why many of us advise players to write for an "alien," AI, etc. just like you would any human character: portray the character in a fashion people can understand, and augment their own understanding relative to the reader in ways which the human can intuitively grasp, logically reach the conclusion thereof on their own, or - as is the case at times - are willing to accept, "I cannot understand this," but it is written and portrayed in such a fashion as to enrapture the reader's interests to the point that despite this fundamental barrier to understanding, they want to keep trying to understand, even if that endeavor is ultimately futile (see: eldritch horror).

Anyway, I hope that helps.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

Ah I see, souls in my writing are a bit more complicated than that.

From what I understand, what you are getting at is what a soul would be like after the body dies.

And I'm not sure if I want to go into depth of what the ethereal world is like, more like allude to it.

of course that has a whole host of problems of wanting to attempt that.

[Kyrusia]

Ah I see, souls in my writing are a bit more complicated than that.

From what I understand, what you are getting at is what a soul would be like after the body dies.

And I'm not sure if I want to go into depth of what the ethereal world is like, more like allude to it.

of course that has a whole host of problems of wanting to attempt that.

Aye, that was, more or less, what I was getting to; I would advise, if that's the case, to do exactly what you just said: provide allusion, but avoid detail. This will allow you, more or less, to "overlook" certain issues that you might face or might bog-down your readers and roleplay partners, whilst also acting to preserve the mystique and aesthetics of a postmortem consciousness.

[Ictia]

Ah I see, souls in my writing are a bit more complicated than that.

From what I understand, what you are getting at is what a soul would be like after the body dies.

And I'm not sure if I want to go into depth of what the ethereal world is like, more like allude to it.

of course that has a whole host of problems of wanting to attempt that.

Aye, that was, more or less, what I was getting to; I would advise, if that's the case, to do exactly what you just said: provide allusion, but avoid detail. This will allow you, more or less, to "overlook" certain issues that you might face or might bog-down your readers and roleplay partners, whilst also acting to preserve the mystique and aesthetics of a postmortem consciousness.

This remind me the machine spirit from warhammer 40k

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Machine_Spirit

This means that the Adeptus Mechanicus, the group which is in charge of most of the technology in the Imperium, is like a religious group. Also this is because some technologies were lost by the Imperium, and people (even the Techpriest from the Mechanicus) have acces to them but have no idea of how the work. But mixing technology and religion is not a bad idea (it's something quite original). The Mechanicus has became something caracteristic of Warhammer 40k, and they have many fans.

[The Armed Republic of Dutch Coolness]

Aye, that was, more or less, what I was getting to; I would advise, if that's the case, to do exactly what you just said: provide allusion, but avoid detail. This will allow you, more or less, to "overlook" certain issues that you might face or might bog-down your readers and roleplay partners, whilst also acting to preserve the mystique and aesthetics of a postmortem consciousness.

This remind me the machine spirit from warhammer 40k

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Machine_Spirit

This means that the Adeptus Mechanicus, the group which is in charge of most of the technology in the Imperium, is like a religious group. Also this is because some technologies were lost by the Imperium, and people (even the Techpriest from the Mechanicus) have acces to them but have no idea of how the work. But mixing technology and religion is not a bad idea (it's something quite original). The Mechanicus has became something caracteristic of Warhammer 40k, and they have many fans.

Yeah, I immediately thought of that as well.

It is pretty cool, though!

[Tierra Prime]

I should be able to come up with a valid justification then. Thanks for the help, guys.

But you're bound to end up with some logic holes and if you ever run across a civilization like my own there will probably be a lot of face-palming involved.

This is going to be a plot point. The refuge fleet will eventually run across an enemy that trumps then. The distress signal the destroyed fleet sends out will end up awakening the aliens hibernating underneath my cities. Having a science team discover one of the hibernation chambers probably wouldn't be enough to wake all of the aliens up, but a distress signal would.

[Atomic Utopia]

So how do story arcs tend to go in RP's?

I was thinking of a story ark involving a group in my nation, the White Horses. They are inspired by Revelation 19:11. They will be called the "White Horses" (it also has a double meaning because of Revelations 6:2) and will intend to replace the current government with their own leader who genuinely believes he is Jesus Christ (he is not) and was sent to cleanse the universe of the unclean. He intends to exterminate all of the "impure" which involves most people. He will have people in the army and civilian life running this organisation.

Yes, they are kind of based on the KKK and ISIS.

[Kyrusia]

So how do story arcs tend to go in RP's?

I was thinking of a story ark involving a group in my nation, the White Horses. They are inspired by Revelation 19:11. They will be called the "White Horses" (it also has a double meaning because of Revelations 6:2) and will intend to replace the current government with their own leader who genuinely believes he is Jesus Christ (he is not) and was sent to cleanse the universe of the unclean. He intends to exterminate all of the "impure" which involves most people. He will have people in the army and civilian life running this organisation.

Yes, they are kind of based on the KKK and ISIS.

I think you may have posted in the wrong thread; this thread is meant to provide advice and assistance as such relates to Future Tech. I believe you may be looking for the "RPing Questions? Ask Here!" thread or, given your mention of designing plots, the "RP Think Tank."

That being said, story arcs tend to go in roleplays as well as one might imagine: it depends. There is no universal answer to your question, as it depends on a myriad of factors, to include but not be limited by: the interest in said sub-plot on the part of your roleplaying partners, the level of cohesion between the plot and sub-plot, the theme of the sub-plot as it relates to the overarching themes of the plot itself, and numerous other factors. In general, this is why we often advise players to sit down with their roleplaying partners and design a general outline for plots (and sub-plots), with major events and instances planned to a certain degree and set to occur at a certain time or after certain prerequisites are met. This can allow a player (or players) to have both the freedom of freeform roleplaying, while still having a general idea of a beginning, middle, and end of their plots and sub-plots.

Hope that helps.

[Liivland Abufan Se Steorre]

Okay, just a few quick questions atm, I think. I'm more interested in the story telling so much of this Soft-FT nation is shrouded in the mists of vagueness, and I'm nowhere near as anal about the tech and military stuff for this nation as I am with my MT/FanT one. However, I need to give some though to at least what sort of techno-babble goes on the front of 'rifle' or 'cannon' for the military, and I'm bad at this.

I'm thinking that as there's a vague (lol@'vague') knightly/medieval vibe to this nation everyone and their dog will have hardlight melee weapons. For that it'd basically be a case of depending on the output levels it'll either look like a steel sword and cut like one but better, or it'll be glowing AF and be like a lightsabre in terms of it having a more energy weapon effect. There'll also be hardlight armour which can supplement regular armour and energy shields, and hardlight shields, likely of a Round-top Kiteshield design. For ranged weapons, I'm not so sure. I'm thinking usage of some kind of generic energy weapon combined with miniature smart missiles that pack a disproportionate punch for their size.

For the blaster weapons, I'm not sure what technobabble should go before 'blaster'. I've already mentioned hard-light technology before, so I don't know if that would offer any inherent difficulties in forming a projectile to be launched at a distance to the emitter. I suppose one advantage is that if I run with the same rules on power output as the melee weapon then I've got either somekind of projectile-style weapon, or powerful disintegrating energy weapon that will be melting shit. Any thoughts on that, or ideas of other technologies to use in relation to that? As for the explosives and missiles, I only know of one explosive that's FT and that's anti-matter, which is notoriously unstable. I don't know if photons will set off anti-matter, but if they won't then hardlight storage containers can be used to keep in with the aesthetic. I don't think i can properly get away with anti-matter for infantry weapons though - what do you guys think? If not, are there any other explosives I can consider, or should I just go with a generic unnamed explosive? The missiles will be used somewhat like the sub-munitions of the Jericho from Iron Man - either a bigger missile fired which then unleashes independently targeting submunitions, or a gyrojet-style rifle which fires a single sub-munition with the power to fuck up a CR2 (why not both? ).

Space combat will likely be similar - a combination of energy weapons and torpedoes (Is it considered a faux pas to fit some kind of FTL sabot to a torpedo and make it come out of 'generic FTL dimension' inside the enmy's ship to try and bypass their shields?). Are there any disadvantages to these technologies at the greater scale or can I just go with anti-matter torpedoes and 'whateverium blasters'?

Another aspect will be spehs-magic, a little like either the Force's more direct applications but ultimately more comparable to the biotic powers in Mass Effect, but I don't really need much help with a wall to bounce those ideas off of.

The final query I have is what colour is best for blasters? Would any one colour theoretically be more damaging or less damaging? Like, would red light be more intense than any other light? Because I know white light is invariably more intense than any other light from my torch, so would white lasers be possible and be theoretical best option?

[Diopolis]

Okay, just a few quick questions atm, I think. I'm more interested in the story telling so much of this Soft-FT nation is shrouded in the mists of vagueness, and I'm nowhere near as anal about the tech and military stuff for this nation as I am with my MT/FanT one. However, I need to give some though to at least what sort of techno-babble goes on the front of 'rifle' or 'cannon' for the military, and I'm bad at this.

I'm thinking that as there's a vague (lol@'vague') knightly/medieval vibe to this nation everyone and their dog will have hardlight melee weapons. For that it'd basically be a case of depending on the output levels it'll either look like a steel sword and cut like one but better, or it'll be glowing AF and be like a lightsabre in terms of it having a more energy weapon effect. There'll also be hardlight armour which can supplement regular armour and energy shields, and hardlight shields, likely of a Round-top Kiteshield design. For ranged weapons, I'm not so sure. I'm thinking usage of some kind of generic energy weapon combined with miniature smart missiles that pack a disproportionate punch for their size.

For the blaster weapons, I'm not sure what technobabble should go before 'blaster'. I've already mentioned hard-light technology before, so I don't know if that would offer any inherent difficulties in forming a projectile to be launched at a distance to the emitter. I suppose one advantage is that if I run with the same rules on power output as the melee weapon then I've got either somekind of projectile-style weapon, or powerful disintegrating energy weapon that will be melting shit. Any thoughts on that, or ideas of other technologies to use in relation to that? As for the explosives and missiles, I only know of one explosive that's FT and that's anti-matter, which is notoriously unstable. I don't know if photons will set off anti-matter, but if they won't then hardlight storage containers can be used to keep in with the aesthetic. I don't think i can properly get away with anti-matter for infantry weapons though - what do you guys think? If not, are there any other explosives I can consider, or should I just go with a generic unnamed explosive? The missiles will be used somewhat like the sub-munitions of the Jericho from Iron Man - either a bigger missile fired which then unleashes independently targeting submunitions, or a gyrojet-style rifle which fires a single sub-munition with the power to fuck up a CR2 (why not both? ).

Space combat will likely be similar - a combination of energy weapons and torpedoes (Is it considered a faux pas to fit some kind of FTL sabot to a torpedo and make it come out of 'generic FTL dimension' inside the enmy's ship to try and bypass their shields?). Are there any disadvantages to these technologies at the greater scale or can I just go with anti-matter torpedoes and 'whateverium blasters'?

Another aspect will be spehs-magic, a little like either the Force's more direct applications but ultimately more comparable to the biotic powers in Mass Effect, but I don't really need much help with a wall to bounce those ideas off of.

The final query I have is what colour is best for blasters? Would any one colour theoretically be more damaging or less damaging? Like, would red light be more intense than any other light? Because I know white light is invariably more intense than any other light from my torch, so would white lasers be possible and be theoretical best option?

I'm not an expert, but an interesting FT-explosive would be hafnium,which has the potential to bypass the critical mass requirement of nuclear detonations. Unfortunately, there's no way to make it trigger at the moment, but a soft FT nation can bypass that really easily.

[Ictia]

Okay, just a few quick questions atm, I think. I'm more interested in the story telling so much of this Soft-FT nation is shrouded in the mists of vagueness, and I'm nowhere near as anal about the tech and military stuff for this nation as I am with my MT/FanT one. However, I need to give some though to at least what sort of techno-babble goes on the front of 'rifle' or 'cannon' for the military, and I'm bad at this.

I'm thinking that as there's a vague (lol@'vague') knightly/medieval vibe to this nation everyone and their dog will have hardlight melee weapons. For that it'd basically be a case of depending on the output levels it'll either look like a steel sword and cut like one but better, or it'll be glowing AF and be like a lightsabre in terms of it having a more energy weapon effect. There'll also be hardlight armour which can supplement regular armour and energy shields, and hardlight shields, likely of a Round-top Kiteshield design. For ranged weapons, I'm not so sure. I'm thinking usage of some kind of generic energy weapon combined with miniature smart missiles that pack a disproportionate punch for their size.

For the blaster weapons, I'm not sure what technobabble should go before 'blaster'. I've already mentioned hard-light technology before, so I don't know if that would offer any inherent difficulties in forming a projectile to be launched at a distance to the emitter. I suppose one advantage is that if I run with the same rules on power output as the melee weapon then I've got either somekind of projectile-style weapon, or powerful disintegrating energy weapon that will be melting shit. Any thoughts on that, or ideas of other technologies to use in relation to that? As for the explosives and missiles, I only know of one explosive that's FT and that's anti-matter, which is notoriously unstable. I don't know if photons will set off anti-matter, but if they won't then hardlight storage containers can be used to keep in with the aesthetic. I don't think i can properly get away with anti-matter for infantry weapons though - what do you guys think? If not, are there any other explosives I can consider, or should I just go with a generic unnamed explosive? The missiles will be used somewhat like the sub-munitions of the Jericho from Iron Man - either a bigger missile fired which then unleashes independently targeting submunitions, or a gyrojet-style rifle which fires a single sub-munition with the power to fuck up a CR2 (why not both? ).

Space combat will likely be similar - a combination of energy weapons and torpedoes (Is it considered a faux pas to fit some kind of FTL sabot to a torpedo and make it come out of 'generic FTL dimension' inside the enmy's ship to try and bypass their shields?). Are there any disadvantages to these technologies at the greater scale or can I just go with anti-matter torpedoes and 'whateverium blasters'?

Another aspect will be spehs-magic, a little like either the Force's more direct applications but ultimately more comparable to the biotic powers in Mass Effect, but I don't really need much help with a wall to bounce those ideas off of.

The final query I have is what colour is best for blasters? Would any one colour theoretically be more damaging or less damaging? Like, would red light be more intense than any other light? Because I know white light is invariably more intense than any other light from my torch, so would white lasers be possible and be theoretical best option?

Well, everything depens of how realistic do you want to be.

For the melee weapons I would use the steel sword option (maybe looking for a stronger material, as wolfram). New tecnologies (laser, nanotech, more advanced metallurgy) would make the rest of the work, giving a better quality to your weapons (more resistance, better blade). Using a lightsaber doesn't make sense: too much heat for the soldiers (and for the own saber), too much power needed (imagine holding a nuclear reactor in your hands). But of course, it's your world, you can change physics if you want.

For the range weapons, just as an idea: you are using Direct Energy Weapons (DEW), no matter if they are lasers or particle beam weapons. They need a lot of power, and probably, they produce a lot of heat. Imagine that after shooting, the weapon needs time for getting cool before shooting again (and even putting another power cell). It woul be like a laser arquebus. It shoots slowly, but it's very effective againts armours. It would make your range weapons looking more medieval (more or less), and also it gives more importance to melee weapons, beacause range weapons wouldn't be so effective as they are now.


It's not exactly an explosive (and in fact they are MT, but they are not as well known as TNT or C4) but you could use thermobaric weapons.

I don't really understand what do you mean with hard light.