[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [cm / hm / y] [3 / adv / an / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / hc / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / po / pol / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / x] [rs] [status / ? / @] [Settings] [Home]
Settings   Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games

File: 1606439629199.pdf (530 KB, PDF)
530 KB
530 KB PDF
>Looking for something
>I think it was a system some anon was making, but it might've been a CYOA
>Either way it was a WIP at the time over a year ago
>Think it was a pdf but I might be wrong, you can see why I can't find it anywhere since I can't remember shit about it
>Centered around creating a gigantic, tank-like vehicle that's used to transport goods and people from one area to another
>The mega-vehicles had stats like speed, power/engine/fuel?, armor, comms/radio?, ventilation/air?, and 1 or 2 others I'm forgetting
>The way the system worked was that at least 1 or 2 of your vehicle's parts would break down every round or 2 so they required constant maintenance, stopping the vehicle for a day for repairs, shit like that
>Setting was post-apocalyptic, snowy/cold as fuck, and referenced a northern region of America, Connecticut or New Jersey or some shit, I forget if the entire setting took place there or that region was just used in an example
>Had some form of zombies or similar monsters
Anyone know what this was?
Nevermind, OP's a faggot, I finally found it. Time to see how much of this I misremembered
File: 1484028824395.jpg (306 KB, 1920x906)
306 KB
306 KB JPG
Comfy snowcrawler apocalypse thred!
We missed you!!
>Searching for "snow" and "crawler" separately yesterday turned up 0 relevant results
Kill me, I knew it was something like that

Noticed my pdf is from 2017, is there a newer version?
File: 1584570357325.jpg (365 KB, 1920x1080)
365 KB
365 KB JPG
I think not.

Also, how crazy is it that I literally read through all the snow crawler archives today, afterwards visit /tg/ for the first time in months, and what do I see?

God damn, those were good times. Although reading through the second thread's archives also dispelled any illusions of /tg/ ever having been better, or worse, than it is now.
File: 1595017380617.jpg (101 KB, 774x960)
101 KB
101 KB JPG
Well shit, I found the pdf at a time when I'm too tired to discuss it. It'd be nice if this thread's still up when I wake up

Pretty wild. Maybe the warmer weather's got us thinking about chilly fictional settings, idk
File: jesse-calder-sc-comp-2.jpg (461 KB, 1600x1000)
461 KB
461 KB JPG
>how crazy is it that I literally read through all the snow crawler archives today, afterwards visit /tg/ for the first time in months, and what do I see?
The gods of the snowy wasteland are smiling.
>Been crawling for weeks with no contact
>Radio crackles to life, but no distinct voice can be made out
>Track the signal, but must go off-route to do so
>Signal leads the crawler into uncharted territory full of snow-covered ancient ruins
>Signal fades, but last-ditch search turns up the broken radio tower of a long-buried bunker
>Sudden distant seismic disturbance
>It turns out their original route, which led through a narrow mountain pass, has been buried under an avalanche of tons of ice and snow
>The bunker is ancient but has been recently occupied
>Plentiful valuable supplies and equipment, apparently unguarded
>No sign of the recent occupants
>Disturbing signs of the original occupants...
maybe I can get the ball rolling, and we'll see if where it goes. If other anons join in, maybe this thing could transcend the ages and finally become something tangible at some point. And then... then maybe /tg/ will have been worth something. When it all comes to an end.

Reason why I reread all the archives is, I'm trying to come up with a world and system that really encaptures the feel of the setting these threads instilled in me. I might have missed some resources out there, but since the idea for the setting has captivated me for a couple of years now, I'm willing to make an effort to give it a go.

What I noted down so far:
>little combat. mostly survival. 90% normal, 10% paranormal creepy stuff
>have a sanity meter. Players NEED cozy moments to recover from the supernatural spooky shit.
>needs a framework for challenges ranging from 'normal' to 'paranormal'. How do solutions change between those?
>anomalies should happen rarely and be, to a degree, impossible to fully understand. Still, need some sort of framework in order to be a challenge that can be overcome or solved, and most of all, follow rules understood by the GM
>simple character creation. No snowflakes (pun intended). the north is deadly and characters will die as they are only human.
>simple psionics. should also be largely mystical and not even fully understood by the people carrying this ability. the only instance of supernatural shit people can potentially learn to control (or dramatically fail to)

agree/disagree? ideas on this?

cheers anon, welcome aboard. have a cup of cocoa and let's ignore the summer together.
File: 5e7dc363a3dd9 (1).jpg (6.19 MB, 1920x4439)
6.19 MB
6.19 MB JPG


I WOULD GIVE ALMOST EVERYTHIGN TO PLAY THIS Airedhmabmeinrzfvbconumdevfrgbthnz
File: high-speed scoutcrawler.jpg (787 KB, 1920x1200)
787 KB
787 KB JPG
Your points all seem good and reflect the old threds nicely. I would add vehicle maintenance and scavenging to your list.
And there should be a certain emphasis on inter-group dynamics, both during the cozy recovery times and during the tense decision times. Fear, paranoia, irrationality, hunger, and just getting fed up with the damned cold should also play a part in the setting/game.
Please i want to play this. please ....
>journey to remote food colony
>famine danger at home
>food colony compromised
>must return with enough food, but food colony survivors must also be rescued, or colony repaired and made viable again
>>simple character creation. No snowflakes (pun intended). the north is deadly and characters will die as they are only human.
This is horrible.
Part of the cozy atmosphere is that you can be yourself, and not necessarily a gruff hero.
Besides, if you rely on your physical characteristics to survive in the icy wastes you're as good as dead anyway.
No matter how much of a gruff megachad you are -60 will kill you, and you will not be able to get the engine running with your bare hands.
oh wow, thread's still alive.
didnt say anaything about gruff megachads, did I? I'll get into my notes on character creation more once I had my coffee...
One question, fellow DMs. How do you make survival and non-combat challenges interesting? I feel like beyond coming up with action movie-like shit that ties into combat, my non-fighty stuff falls a little flat and really stumps the players, bringing the pace of the game down a whole bunch.
File: 1484120040508.jpg (83 KB, 1024x768)
83 KB
First off, nice to see some anons joining in. Thanks for bringing it through the night, lads.

good points. I didn't get into a vehicle mechanic yet, but was thinking about getting some inspiration from OP's pdf.
The sanity meter should also work in things like cabin fever and anxiety not just from spooky stuff, but the harsh world around them as well. Maybe players could earn temporary, and worsening, conditions if they never relax and spend time with a hobby.

to clarify, when i said simple, I meant not 6 different stats and twenty unnecessary skills. Instead of calculating HP, how much you benchpress, and dick size, I'd focus more on fleshing out the character's backstory a bit. For example, every new character should have a fixed idea of how this ice age or whatever it is started. They should have at least one relationship 'back home' in Central. etc. This stuff helps the GM flesh out the world, too.

This I feel will be the biggest, but also most worthwhile challenge of this game. desu I also have played only combat-heavy games so far (in part due to my groups and past GMs), but although that was all fine and dandy for the first few years, I'm growing tired of constantly having combat all over the place.

to be continued
Mix the obstacles into the combat, or just make them optional with a chance for some good shit if they don't fuck up
"roll athletics to cross the river" ain't that interesting unless you are being chased or you can see some ruins with an old chest/weapons cache on the other side
you can also go for the room based exploration that games like Darkest Dungeon have, with the good old "shovel check"

I'm running a realism fag campaign, so the wilds are dangerous and the non-combat encounters are mostly hunting related, consisting of a hunting skill roll, the attack roll and a tracking skill roll if it wasn't a killing blow, they can also roll to see if they get closer (for a better shot) with the sneaking skill. I hope that example helps
File: 1484135785029.jpg (625 KB, 1920x1080)
625 KB
625 KB JPG

The issue I've found is that most TTRPGs don't manage to bridge, or even identify, that there are these two sides to roleplaying: you want a solid, immersive narrative, but also to feel like you're playing a game, with stakes, chance, and rewards. But the way those two aspects work are inherently different from eachother. You can easily tell a gripping story without combat, but you need to put in 'game-y' challenges to make it a game. And the easiest one to implement is combat.

Even good videogames take away control from the player to tell the story through cutscenes etc. And then when they throw you back into the game - you feel it. There's a break of immersion which in vidya I'm used to by now. In TTRPGs the lines blur between narration and game, but also it often leaves both aspects unsatisfied in my experience.

A branch of RPGs tries to solve this by zooming out of the characters more and giving power of narration to the players - basically giving them the right to narrate not only how they would solve a situation, but how the world around reacts to it. Dungeon World, FATE or Swords without Master come to mind. This way you're less dependent on dice rolls and crunchy skill lists, and give players the ability to 'narrate away' an obstacle, as long as it works within the story.

But I gotta say, that also hasn't completely worked for me in the past, since I like being limited to a character's decisions when I play. I like an element of chance and hate it when a GM obviously messes with probability to create an outcome.

to be continued (bear with me, we're going back to snowland in part three of my monologue...)
File: 1484410873589.jpg (28 KB, 500x332)
28 KB
What I've found a cool mechanic around this is to go a middle way and include a sort of 'meta-currency' that can be earned, and used, by the players. Sort of like FATE points, splitter points in Splittermond, or Inspiration in 5e (though inspiration is a bit shit desu), it does give the players the possibility to take the reigns for a single decision (did they REALLY just fail that Pilot check, or did they manage to swivel away from the icy ravine in the last second?), but should be special, and expensive. How exactly to earn those points, I did not figure out just yet, but perhaps they could be representative within the world as some sort of underlying psionic powers characters earn by being exposed to the wilds with their megafauna, mystical creatures, and anomalies.

I'd argue non-combat works, as long as the players are right for it. Sure, you could weave non-combat into a mostly-combat pattern, but it's not really a solution for the problem as you're severly limiting the worlds and feel you can create within your setting. If every setting has to have violent conflict all of the time, it starts being a drag. Why not play vidya instead?

You can bring all the excitement of a fighting scene into a battle with the elements, and more. Have multi-part challenges:
>a storm approaches, and it's bad.
>first, a race with time as players look for or try to build a shelter for the worst of it.
>then, last preparations before it's upon you. secure the crawler, or you won't be able to leave once the worst has passed
>finally, the storm hits. trees fall, and icy shards falling from the skies make the world around a living hellscape.
>players have to simultaneously work to keep the warmth up, deal with failing equipment, and prevent their shelter from being compromised (a breach, broken powerline, megafauna wanting inside the shelter, ...)
That's rad, thanks realismanon. Which system are you using, also?
That's the plot for Wasteland 3, isn't it?

Not a fan of fate points and the like. Minor luck that lets you adjust a number fine, but anything that gives you authorial agency isn't great.

Honestly the one thing i can tell you is that with reducing complexity you are reducing the possibly amount of coziness.

By having complex systems interact you automatically get some tradeoffs and loopholes, and when you manage to make something fit just right, fit that one tiny locker into the tiny free space you had in the crawler, fit that one backup battery right under your carry limit, get that one ability just barely bought with the xp that automatically causes a small sense of comfort of things just fitting together well.
And it also creates a contrast between a large and complex world outside and a smaller comfier part of the world that you have control over.

The entire concept of the cozy home on wheels in a harsh environment is predicated on the concept of a harsh uncontrollable environment and ones own tiny little corner that is controllable and defendable.
I like this. Thanks for sharing the article.

Interestingly, I agree with you. I played FATE once, and didn't like it. I don't like storygames in general, as I stated above.

I think just sticking with D&D isn't the solution, as that's also getting really boring to me. Maybe this is where you have to look for the right players. The ones mentioned in the article, playing D&D for years, only accepting a new experience with resistance, and then deciding NEVER TO TRY ANYTHING NEW AGAIN, sound like the worst kind for me desu.

That being said, I also hate ret-conning whole scenes, or writing in shit like 'oh look this item just appeared in my hand what luck I had it with me all this time!' I think what I can agree with is rewriting a detail of a situation that would not break immersion, but just change the outcome of chance. Did that tree land on my head or did I get out in time?

I don't know how to solve this yet, but the article was a good resource and might've changed my perspective a bit, so cheers.

I'm not sure I can totally agree with complexity = cozy. You can create a feeling of safety also with a rules-light system. But I see the point of REALLY having control over a small part of the world, backed up by the game's rules. I'll note that down anon, cheers.
File: 1484203496618.jpg (431 KB, 1920x834)
431 KB
431 KB JPG
In Splittermond ("Splintered Moon"), a german fantasy RPG which is very crunchy and simulation-heavy, player characters carry a tiny Splinter of the moon within themselves, giving them special powers they can use once per session.

This worked well, because as per the game's rules, you could use that point to either re-roll something, force the GM to re-roll, give yourself or an ally a small bonus on a roll, etc. depending on your 'star sign'. It was possible to use it, and lose it, without a change in effect. And I'm not sure it this was RAW or homebrew, but our GM let us regain one such Splinter point by choosing to fail a check we had succeeded at.

That way it was cool, because it was a little bit like a FATE point, but limited, and still felt like a gamble.

But maybe for now we should focus less on player agency, and get back into the setting more. What about anomalies?

I like anomalies, because they are utterly mysterious, alien, and scary. I'm thinking about setting up a framework of what they really are (or what theories exist in the world), how they happen, and what to do about them. Is it possible to 'solve' an anomaly and make it disappear? Or is it just a weird environment factor everyone has to accept? I loved the movie Stalker by Tarkovsky for this, but I don't yet fully know how to integrate it into a game.
Hackmaster 5e, you can get the basic version free on the website and it helps a lot for the seconds based combat
The three players i currently have:
>Survivalist ranger
>Cleric of hunting (Patient arrow church)
>Lone wolf, no big words barbarian that acts as pest control
I was gonna give them some clues about the fuckery going around in the surroundings but they just set out to find the rangers brother in the first session, at least the hexcrawl from city to city is fun

I agree with non-combat working, that's why a put the encounters like the one in your example in the "chased by something" category but i suppose changing it to "time limited" would be better.

all encounters are tests, some are based on the player's creativity or intelligence, like puzzles, and others on the character's skills, giving the players a reason to make those rolls is the most important part, be it time saving, danger or a big(ger) reward.
Thanks for the (you) and making me elaborate on the subject, this board deserves more effort and less goblin smut
>You can create a feeling of safety also with a rules-light system.
I have yet to see it happen.
You need a world that feels big and uncaring and alive without you.
And for that you need a simulationist attitude to things.

Also if you don't want to overdo the crunch, but want something nonetheless immersive you should go the WoD way and have a fixed setting and legends for lore.
Which means a definitive cause and extent of the cold and state of the world, just maybe with differing beliefs about the ultimate cause of the fixed cause.

For example: the sun just stopped putting out enough heat
-because cthulhu
-because an unknownstep in stellar evolution
-because god is angry
-because the universe has gone out of balance with humanities vibrations
-because we have slightly shifted dimension
-because aliens have deployed a radiation collecting energy field around the sun
-because of a secret government plan to cool down the sun
-the sun isn't actually outputting less it's just what nasa wants you to believe it's actually chemtrails cooling earth

With the point being that you would still need to settled on a clear cause and clear consequences for the world.
Which latitudes remain habitable, how much do the sea levels decrease, how many settlements are there, where, what are they like in and outside of the ice-zone, etc
Shit, i forgot to add that i take a lot of inspiration from Revival, its a d&d3.5 podcast

And it does fit in this thread, the whole campaign has been 4 schmucks going around a basically oxygen-less america on a huge armored train, it's high fantasy to the point of not having human characters but i still love it
File: stalker01.jpg (766 KB, 1200x878)
766 KB
766 KB JPG
happy to have people give a shit on this board.

as you said, encounters are tests. whether those include swinging an axe to a tree, or an orc, as long as there are stakes (need to get a fire started fast because your temperature is dangerously low / orc blade to the groin) it should be equally captivating. So the question of getting rid, or reducing, combat is more a question of understanding what combat represents, what it is mechanically, and then changing out a few parts of that mechanic so it's more in the line of 'lonely survival' rather than 'violent overpopulation'.

This thread is starting to convince me to go back to more simulationist roots. I've already noted down the importance of exact resource tracking. It's survival, so knowing just how much food, water, diesel, ammo, heat etc. you have is kind of a key mechanic. Besides, that way you'll always have a reward the players want that replaces a new shiny weapon or magic ability. For this setting, just getting a few days worth of food might be enough to scavenge through those crumbling ruins of a factory.

Maybe it could be a feature of this game, this conflict between rules/safety/order and a chaotic, more narrative element represented by the wilds/anomalies/psionics...
>just getting a few days worth of food
This would massively undermine the coziness along with the "only tough people survive out here" attitude.

Hardships should be plot and interpersonal conflict based to a large part.
Basic survival should all but be guaranteed.
Not necessarily with startrek like replicators, but the point being that the adventure and having a safe spot in the wilderness should be the focus. Because that breeds a cozy dynamic, instead of an apocalyptic "we're gonna die" feel.

One of the constants of cozyness is shipping, trucking.
What if there were large outposts in the ice wastes á la mcmurdo, with their own airstrips, but in between them some people just refused to leave their land and made their own farms iceproof. Sure you have drones and small planes for this and that, but for heavy stuff you need heavy haulers, and the roads are buried under glaciers.
Or even just smaller stations at pieces of vital infrastructure, like the nuclear silos where you couldn't get the warheads out in time.
Or a mine that is full of something super valuable that you can't find closer to the equator.
You'd have a clear job for the people in the crawlers.

Plus there could be rumors of abandoned buildings with loot. Some scientist in a station realizing he needs a specialized uranium handling robot that existed in this or that abandoned powerplant. Or some harddrives that contained data for the cure of covid-23, etcetc

Exploration missions with a regular supercozy slack of all day essentially at home job seems cozy.
Oh maybe some places are also inaccessible by plane due to weather conditions as is the case in some antarctic stations for several months at a time.
And the strongest planes might be needed for actual military shit not your mission to resupply some dumb farmer who decided that he was gonna stick to his fields come hail or bigger hail.
File: IMG_1180-860x558.jpg (79 KB, 860x558)
79 KB
genuinely a good point. the challenge should 90% of the time be your task at hand and not survival. And then there are those times when shit hits the fan.

However, doing just cozy trucking is going to be difficult, lest it gets boring. How many common encounters can you come up with that could happen any time on a normal work day as a courier, and have at least a minimum of stakes to make it interesting?

For example, stuff like road maintenance, courier service and the like should absolutely be one of the most common jobs a snowcrawler team would have to do, right?
How do you keep that playable?

Not trying to disagree, just one of the hurdles I feel like I need to find a solution to here.
you also mentioned loot. What kind of loot would players even care about?
>I WOULD GIVE ALMOST EVERYTHIGN TO PLAY THIS Airedhmabmeinrzfvbconumdevfrgbthnz
some anomalies
>players find shelter under a huge upturned satellite dish. underneath they hear strange echoes of radio broadcasts, historical speeches, people whispering. The night passes without incident, but it's spooky nonetheless.
>in the middle of a field there's a line where the wind has swept the snow in a perfectly linear way, as if blocked by something. if seen from above, this shape forms a rectangle. people in the nearby settlement mention there was a building there once that burned down with many inhabitants burned alive. identifying the entrance and walking backwards through it lets you see and hear the house as it once was, as long as you don't breathe.

I also suggest watching The Lost Room. It's old and a bit shit, but has some interesting concepts on weird spooky stuff.
File: D8NFJtWXUAUHTDb.png (969 KB, 800x880)
969 KB
969 KB PNG
I'll do the autist rant on this one.

The thing about 'survival' challenges is that you have to understand how good they're going to be is always going to be a function of how much time you're actually willing to spend on these things and how much you actually care about having them in your game. (I'll use D&D as an example, because it's what I play the most currently, but I'll try and make this as broadly applicable as possible.)
If your party has to cross the wilderness to get to Shangri'la or the next town over or whatever the fuck, you *need* to decide how much of your groups limited playtime it's going to be worth devoting to this. From there you can decide how long their travel time is, what level of effort you're going to accept for overcoming various challenges and how many of these challenges you're going to hand wave away. Likewise you're also going to need to decide how any relevant skill interacts with the challenge.
Say the river crossing example from an earlier post. If you don't care about this or don't think it's worth your time, ask for an acrobatics, or a swim check, or a survival check and let them move on.

Or, you could say 'this river is too wide to jump' now you've limited the number of skills available for use, and thus the number of party members capable of shrugging and tossing a dice. This means that now the players need to put in a small bit of thought into figuring out how the members of the party who *can* get across help those who can't.

'This river is too wide to jump and it's moving very fast so it's going to be very difficult to swim.' Is the higher level of engagement. You can always layer on various things to add to the complexity, but this is fine for a demonstration. So in this instance, what you've done is taken away raw physical abilities as a solution. Now they need to actually think about what skill they plan to apply and how they're going to justify that skill being used to get them all across.


So this is (broadly and basically) how you set a challenge rating for a survival 'encounter'. How many skills are you going to allow to solve this problem and how high are you going to set the DC for those relevant skills: all with actual reasons that make sense. Now you need to know how to make this actually *engaging*. And this is the reason it's important you decide how much of your campaign you're going to devote to this.

You have to decide how far a dice roll in relevant survival skills will get your players and you *MUST* be consistent with it.

Going back to the river scenario, the water is moving too fast and the river is too wide to cross with physical abilities alone. So your nature type wants to roll survival (more likely than not they'd choose perception or knowledge: engineering to try and build a bridge. But for this example we'll go with it.) The easiest answer is to just set a number, and depending on whether they meet it or not you can tell them how they get past it. This is also the quickest and least engaging.

The thing that's going to eat your playtime, but also drive engagement would be having them give you a plan of action before you allow them to roll (I.E. I want to try and create a bridge by felling this tree in just the right way) and setting a target DC based on that.
But it's important to note that this is why I emphasized consistency. If you choose this or the other as your options, you need to stick with them for every situation.

This is because at their core survival challenges are about using your knowledge and the things you thought to bring with you to solve super important issues that most people never really think about. Did you bring supplies to preserve the meat you're gathering? Did you know how to find actual safe shelter in complete wilderness? Did you bring a source of heat, or light, or medicine, or anything to chop down trees or clear a path? All of these little things *have* to exist (cont..)
File: 1611318125424.jpg (82 KB, 678x824)
82 KB
In your players heads any time they decide to step out into the wilderness. So if you want them to exist, you have to *make* them matter. And you have to do it consistently. Pay attention to travel times, weight limits, food consumption, weather and what paths your PC's plan to take. Is the terrain bad? What things live there? Did the PC's even *bother* planning a path or learning what they might have to deal with? Are there any rare and valuable plants or animals or anything for them to harvest along the way? Did they actually have the *ability* to harvest it? Encourage them to the first few times and if they immediately drop planning their trips make their next one fucking miserable, as it would make perfect sense to do.

Then sit down and talk to your players about whether they feel like this aspect of things is something they actually care about, or if they would rather skip it. Because ttrpgs are a social game and it's important everyone is actually enjoying it.
It's not what the players would care about. It's what they could
a) sell, they are truckers and merchants after all
b) get for the people that hire them to do the trucking route
c) find to help with supernatural mysteries encountered during their travels
d) use to make their stay even more comfy

Because this is literally what i've been fantasizing about basically every day to fall asleep. It's the second most cozy thing i can imagine.
>this would massively undermine the cozy feel
I actually think there might be a middle ground on this one. Have food supplies cost a certain amount of currency, and be expensive enough that the players have to care about it, but cheap enough that they can pretty much always afford it as long as they stick to a planned route. Then give them incentives for spending valuable money and cargo space on enough food to take detours to explore this or that interesting little blip on the map that might hold some kind of treasure or something the players might be interested in for one reason or another.

>what kind of loot?
Old tech you might be able to use to upgrade your crawler in one way or another, valuable and rare medicines, information about this or that settlement's secrets, shiny little gubbins you can trade for currency your crew can save up for bigger and better crawlers.
OP here, I saw all the demand for a setting & game like this and have decided to start working on a Forever WiP game & setting that incorporates the core premise of snowcrawlers. It'll be surprisingly similar to >>79670779 (if I ever finish it)
Could be, I don't play vidya.
>Then give them incentives for spending valuable money and cargo space on enough food to take detours to explore this or that interesting little blip on the map that might hold some kind of treasure or something
Yes, this is good. Give the players rope so they have the option of hanging themselves - this would give the players control over their 'comfiness level', as it were.

here. wanna work together? got a discord?
File: 1622982653489.jpg (34 KB, 736x335)
34 KB
Looted this from another thread.
It seems suitably comfy and appropriate.
>waste fuel burning awa
>do we waste fuel burning eldritch horrors, or getting the hell out of here?
Check out Heart: the city beneath. It's a game with very straight forward mechanics focused on gaining nd spending resources with a tilt towards paranormal stuff
File: winter-2015-art-5-2.jpg (77 KB, 877x574)
77 KB
Yeah, this would work well I think. Keep clear track of resources (honestly, maybe even give a physical tracking sheet to one of the players. One of the characters probably needs to be responsible for keeping track of storage anyway) and most of the time have plenty, so they move around in the 70-100% and feel safe, cozy and prepared in their little trucking home. Then they themselves have the option to get off track, into the wilderness where it's hard to restock, if they so desire. Might work well to naturally simulate the need to stay close to civilization after a few close calls.
File: winterholm.jpg (64 KB, 1210x522)
64 KB
I did have that on my radar, because I loved how they experimented with classes and setting. Did you play it?

thread questions to start a few discussions while I'm off to bed:
>what reasons could there be for this frozen apocalypse?
science gone wrong, earth slowly drifting away from sun, planet's core giving out...
>what creates anomalies and spooky things?
was thinking it could be something like parallel realities shifting and overlapping at places, which results in the fabric of reality being compromised. places of great emotional energy or other mental/metaphysical concentration could become holes to other worlds, letting through strange phenomena and potentially even trap people within.
>where do people build their settlements? What parts of the old world make good, sustainable (or not) heatsources.
>generally share cool plot hooks of dangerous, supernatural, cozy nature. whatever you want

Cheers, /tg/. let's continue this. Slowly, like a glacier, this will become something. I can feel it.
File: 1511190016198063822.jpg (170 KB, 1600x1066)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
I missed this post.
>How do you keep that playable?
The solution would be to have a complex simulationist attitude to the crawler systems.
Sometimes you went over too sharp a rock and the tooth of the crawly bits snapped off and you have to weld it back together. Sometimes your engine will break down and you have to try and find the root issue first from the inside while trying to conserve heat as much as you can because it could take days. Sometimes you have replacement parts, sometimes you can make them, sometimes you have to improvise, sometimes you have to hold out for rescue, sometimes you have to try and limp to the nearest mechanics shop to try and salvage something usable. Individual crew skills, the complexity of the crawler systems, the modernity of the crawler impacting autodiagnostics, the quality of its manufacture, what stuff you carry with you, the rating of it and the danger of the environment could all influence how easy things are to repair. Each could also have design quirks like the kharkovchanka where there wasn't a backup generator, so the main engine needed to run all the time to stay warm, but it was also not separated airtight from the passenger compartment so everything was full of engine fumes all the time.
>pic related
All of these could mean difficulties.
And unless you want MREs all the time - and no one wants that - you have to prepare meals, keep up morale, watch broadcasts, catch a supply drone, lay low when in hostile territory, fight cabin fever, deal with paranormal stuff,

And as for courier service, that's what most questing in any RPG is really.
>Did you play it?
No, I've been listening to a podcast though. The skills/domains system is intriguing, and could be adapted to a snowcrawler setting without much difficulty
File: Compilation1c.jpg (706 KB, 2680x780)
706 KB
706 KB JPG
Oh hey, snowcrawler thread! It's been too long.
Don't know if anyone remembers but I posted some snowcrawler and snowcrawler related art for my setting a while back, would love to see what you guys think.

Granted, it's pretty old and I've grown a lot since then. If you guys keep the thread alive long enough I can try doing up some new drawings.
>Corkscrew propulsion
It's space inefficient, but damn if it isn't stylish
File: Compilation 1b.jpg (4.24 MB, 3164x1869)
4.24 MB
4.24 MB JPG
Some lore work, gonna try and keep it succinct:

World's frozen over. Civilization lives entrenched within reinforced cities, only remaining connected through the efforts of motorised convoys and caravans.
Despite general lack of armed conflicts, most caravans/buildings must be heavily armored to withstand the Tide - severe weather conditions ranging from whiteout conditions to lethal hailstorms.
At Low Tide, extravehicular activity is still possible, if somewhat dangerous. General low temperatures and aerial predators still make such activity unadvisable for the most part.
At High Tide, snow/fog can easily result in people losing bearing and visibility beyond a meter or two. Heavy hailstorms can injure or maim exposed crew, or in extreme cases - outright destroy and incapacitate less prepared vehicles.

Different nations and factions have each developed their own ways of dealing with the dangers of travel through the frozen wastes. Some clad their crawlers in thick insulated armor, while others opt to outrun the Tide with ekranoplans. Perhaps the most novel of all are the submarine trains of the Northern regions, crawling underneath the ice floes to avoid the dangers of the surface.

>what reasons could there be for this frozen apocalypse?
Onset of the Tide and the development of thick cloud layers, + the region was originally quite cold in the first place.
>what creates anomalies and spooky things?
Spooky things are a mix of natural and seemingly unnatural creatures in the ecosystem. Giant wyrm-like siphonophores and other floating predators drift along the wind currents, while stranger creatures lurk beneath the ice.
The Tide itself also brings a host of unpredictable events. Some have reported finding long-lost convoys or pristine old-world artifacts left behind after the Tide recedes, alongside creatures that boggle the mind.
File: Compilation 1C.jpg (2.2 MB, 4628x1213)
2.2 MB
2.2 MB JPG
>where do people build their settlements? What parts of the old world make good, sustainable (or not) heatsources.
Geothermal hotspots are a favorite, as are old coal mines. A primary consideration for suitability is whether or not the terrain is or can be modified to minimize either above-ground exposure or allow for natural terrain features (ie. mountains and forests) to shield structures from the wind. The constant hailstorms and gale-force winds during High Tide mean that open settlements are generally prone to heavy maintenance costs, so most cities tend to be shielded by heavy walls or built low to the ground.
>generally share cool plot hooks of dangerous, supernatural, cozy nature. whatever you want
A big one would be Downbursts.
Downbursts occur when one of the aforementioned wyrm-siphonophores, or any other sky fauna of significant size, dies and falls to the surface.
The death of such a creature can be a boon in resources such as flammable gases, oils and flesh; however, humans aren't the only ones looking out for such a bounty. Other aerial and terrestrial predators are quick to close in as well, and native parasites can pose a danger to processing crews.
The capture, securement and extraction of a major Downburst event can be a significant operation involving multiple cruiser-size crawlers and thousands of crewmembers. It's a frantic mix of crawler crews trying to fend off enroaching predators as processing teams attempt to butcher the corpse as quickly as possible while fighting off its resident parasites.

There's a wide variety of crawlers in my setting; since large swathes of terrain in some parts can be either mushy tundra or even outright open water, some crawlers are designed with amphibious capability in mind.
Granted, in retrospect it's definitely way too top heavy. I'll have to mess around with proportions more.
File: tomopteris2.gif (912 KB, 245x133)
912 KB
912 KB GIF
Oh, and clarifying just in case - it's just stuff I've been building for my own personal setting these past few months. Whether or not you guys want to use any of those ideas is up to you, not gonna force it through.

But yeah /tg/, I'm down to do some art for this if you guys keep the engines running. It'd be good practice and most of it would be usable for my own project, too.
Btw how about combining crawlers with icebreakers.
Like HUGE nucler icebreakers.
Or even fusion powered.
You have practically infinite energy, a lot of space for hydroponic farms and factories to manufacture stuff, and you can be a hub of civilization in the frozen seas.
Enough room for landing vehicles, multiple crawlers, helicopters, drones, etc.
File: Spoiler Image (182 KB, 1300x957)
182 KB
182 KB JPG
saying this here
Because i can't personally imagine anything more cozy as a homebase.
A practically unsinkable, little maintenance requiring, infinitely powered, somewhat mobile comfy place with your own tiny cabin, but with people and social interaction just outside your door if you want to.

Sitting rolled up in warm blankets on a bed, maybe with a friend or partner, while looking out of a strong porthole into the unending icy winds blowing snow around outside, the reflection of the ship's lights barely visible through it on the water on the water.

Something like this

just with a massive ship like pic related.
File: shipbreaker3.jpg (124 KB, 800x533)
124 KB
124 KB JPG
File: R002main.jpg (105 KB, 1024x426)
105 KB
105 KB JPG
The only reason that we don't have this stuff already is the lack of need at the moment... but imagine....
Combine in your head the complexity and durability of an atom-icebreaker weathering any storm, any weather indefinitely, the capacity and mobile city quality of a cruiseship bringing life to smaller ports whenever they pass by, with the commanding size and safety of a massive ship like this.
My snowcrawler world has no liquid oceans...put tracks on them bad boys and you may have something.
No liquid oceans is not scientifically possible.
Also you can not have something this huge moving over land.
Seriously reconsider the liquid.
>Btw how about combining crawlers with icebreakers.
>Also you can not have something this huge moving over land.

Sounds to me like you just want nuclear icebreakers - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, mind - but that kind of detracts from the whole point of having crawlers.
I meant combining as in having them be the base of operations for the crawlers.
Because why have a stationary home base when you can have a mobile home base.
It would literally be a life always in motion always in a cozy comfortable space.

Variety is good ans having some firm barriers like oceans is nice.

Besides you need to have temperatures above freezing at least near the equator otherwise civilization at large could not have survived.
And without that no one to make giant ice crawlers be the hottest new fashion trend
Also without that it would be more a sad apocalypse not just the end of the world as we know it.
Also you need more of a tundra than a total dead snowy wasteland if you want variety in enemies and whatnot.
Most of the pics in this thread have trees in them which means that even in some of the snowy parts there must be at least a few days above 0.

Anyway think of the giant ships as homes for the crawlers.
Each could house a few depending on size.
Several of these
Only one of these

And it could add another element of time pressure:
>The ice is starting to get real thick around here, so in a few days we'll be floating south. If you haven't made it over here by then you're shit outta luck til next summer.

Stuff like this.

It's also an escape from any monsters.

Just because there are other vehicles in a setting doesn't mean that snowcrawlers are less important.
Just like snowcrawlers can't go over the ocean icebreakers can't go on land. And on land is where all the interesting things are.

Plus it would add variety to the world.

And they can be even more comfy, and almost as creepy as snowcrawlers.
Just imagine finding an empty one lodged in the ice.
Yes it is. Frozen Earth is a thing that happened; it could happen again.
Yes you can. >>79693881
Good lord, you're bad at this.
File: 585.jpg (63 KB, 962x642)
63 KB
>frozen earth
Snowball earth is a HYPOTHESIS
Even if it existed it was most likely not completely frozen.
Even if it was it was just ice covered oceans, not 'no liquid water'.

And i was also including in the sense that if that happened life on earth would not be possible any more, no matter how you try and get around it, especially not in comfy snowcrawlers.

And finally compare the size of your example to the absolutely massive scale of this:>>79695286
It's not even comparable.

In short: Don't be mean. I'm just trying to have examples for the cozy creepy isolation in a comfy ice apocalypse setting. And i think Giant icebreakers would go well with giant snowcrawlers.
Also i don't wanna rain on your parade either if you really want a completely frozen earth we could come up with a couple of ways to make that happen too, i just thought it might be fun to have things be a bit less harsh, and to have big comfy ships.
So whats this thread about? I see a lot of trains and snow.
The latest in a series of threads about settings/games/systems focusing on the crews of snowcrawlers - large, all-terrain vehicles trudging through icy environments.

Hey, I get that you're really passionate about icebreakers, but could you tone it down a bit? Between your imagedumping and rapid one-sentence replies it's getting kind of spammy.
good mooorning /tg/!
can't believe this thread survived another night. there might be hope for us yet. good to see some fresh anons joining in.
wow, that's cool art. I assume you do this for a living? I'm an artist too and I am impressed!
so I think your setting has a lot of neat ideas to add, but seems much less cozy and much harsher than most folks here tend to favor. please do keep adding your two cents though!
I like the concept of Tide being able to transform the landscape and basically 'washing up' well preserved resources from the past.
And the downburst event is sweet too, though I think it's fascinating enough to make for a few sessions actually. Instead of being something regularly occuring, having one weird alien leviathan fall from the skies, having all kinds of different nations vying to get there first to examine it for science, all the while smaller, poorer settlements send their boys to cut off some delicious eldritch fillet under the radar... so many possibilities!
that's actually pretty cool too. At first I was against the idea of having open waters, but if it's reduced to a stretch of ocean running along the equator it could add a lot to the setting. perhaprs theres only a handfull of these ships left, and they present a reasonable way to get across the frozen seas (which, yknow, can be a hassle to drive over). I imagine them living largely off what they can catch in their enormous nets... and then, sometimes, their nets get caught by something even bigger.
lots of potential for comf and spook for sure. personally can't think of many things in the real world that are scarier than the open ocean.
File: 1483992422764.jpg (473 KB, 1920x1080)
473 KB
473 KB JPG
basically what >>79697808 said.
If you're interested, there are some archived threads from 2017 that birthed this idea and fleshed out the feeling. a good read!
I missed a few threads about this, seeing as I've not been active on 4chan for years (this is kind of a rennaissance for me). Did anon ever achieve and share even a kind of fixed system?
>. perhaprs theres only a handfull of these ships left,
I was thinking more along the lines of some of these ships being specifically made for this, same as the snowcrawlers.
It implies that humanity has largely survived even though the world as we know it is gone.
It's this whole idea of humanity at large being thrust into a completely weird and hostile environment and people making it work in different ways.
Most move to the equator, some stay and mine/make things for for themselves somehow.
And some move around in the giant icebreakers and snowcrawlers, being the lifeblood of the new world.

A reason to have a less completely frozen earth is because in order to have forests >>79698687 and other creepy things you need occasional thawing.
Not to mention that you also need thawing to have atmospheric moisture to result in pretty things like snowstorms.
I was thinking on summer there could be some thawing and even warm, blue skies for a short period of time. trees grow slow, unless helped by technplogy, but they do grow. It's generally a time of recuperation and stocking up.

In winter the clouds become a thick blanket, drowning out the sun. This ultimately results in what is called the 'Long Night': two weeks of darkness, when the clouds block out close to all sunlight. Creatures and mysterious phenomena abound.
>wow, that's cool art. I assume you do this for a living? I'm an artist too and I am impressed!
I'm glad you like it - I'm still a student working on polishing my skillset, but I do intend to pursue a career in concept/entertainment design in the future.
>seems much less cozy and much harsher than most folks here tend to favor.
Is that so? My design mentality for implementing the Tide / harsh weather system was to play up the contrast between the severity of the outdoors environment and the comfort / control within the snowcrawlers. You'd have plenty of cozy moments at ports and settlements and during the Low Tide, while High Tide is where shit meets fan and truly inexplicable events start happening. I think maintaining that sort of dichotomy is really important, to give games / stories a means of rocking the boat to keep things fresh and interesting.
>I like the concept of Tide being able to transform the landscape
High Tide is in part a mechanism to sort of keep introducing new areas and encounters without needing players to venture all the way out into uncivilized territory. I think it's important that players can still experience the thrill of discovering the unknown without being forced into completely leaving civilization behind, especially in such a logistically demanding context. Was debating if the Tide should also wash up things not "native" to the region, like vehicles or tech clearly intended for a completely different environment; it'd make for interesting plot hooks and another avenue for tech progression.
>the downburst event
Yeah, major downburst events like what I described would have to be an extremely rare occurrence - the ones where the corpse stretches hundreds of meters long. Those would probably only happen once every several decades. Most downburst events would be significantly less dramatic, probably closer to the 10-20m range like real whalefalls.
The notion of unsanctioned scavengers is interesting, too.
>downburst event cont.
Hadn't really thought about potential illegal harvesting of the corpses, but it does present interesting scenarios such as intercepting smugglers or defending your stake against other, less-savory crews.
Maybe specific organs or substances found in the bodies have valuable medicinal / drug properties that can fetch high prices, like with ambergris. Would also present another incentive for smaller harvesters without requiring them to have the infrastructure to process and store the gases/oils/flesh in bulk.

There's an interesting phenomenon - Krummholz - that refers to the twisting and sculpting of trees and forests by high winds (pic related). Since the weather in my setting is pretty heavily focused on wind / hail effects, I figured it'd be pretty appropriate to use some of those concepts for vegetation in my setting.

Personally, I feel that'd it be better to have these ships be truly rare and unique, rather than being common equipment. Each vessel should represent a huge investment - beacons of civilization in an otherwise untamed frontier.
Rather than just being bases, I think they'd be more interesting as mobile settlements and cities; not tied to any one fleet, but essentially trade towns and logistics centers that move up alongside the borders of the unexplored frontier.
Instead of just being frontline bases, they'd represent the second line - the expansion of civilization behind the crawlers blazing the trail.
File: AN-14SH.jpg (395 KB, 1600x1066)
395 KB
395 KB JPG
What do you guys think about the possible role of air travel in such a setting? I feel like it should be limited by weather conditions, range or carrying capacity, such that they don't outright replace crawlers for most roles. Liason work like short-range spotting or light courier services should be fine, but not long-range freight or long term patrols.
FIrst idea good, second idea eeeh.
A bit too supernatural.

As i said the icebreakers *would* be cities... that's what i meant by bases. All cities are sortof fortified and base like in these troubled times. But i don't think they should be uncommon.
Think about it this way, they present an attempt to bring civilization back north.
In order for manufacturing that can make crawlers to still exist, and in order for things to be comfy most of humanity would have to survive.
While the overwhelming majority would be down by the equator in megacities and slums working on new colossal farms, if even a teeny tiny fraction of humanity Not 1% but 0.01% of humanity wants to be on these boats free from the grip of the new countries near the equator and their powerstruggles and punitive taxes....
That's still a million people to put into these ships, so you'd need at least a thousand of them.

Because actual large scale cities are not possible up north, this is the next best thing.
These would be the equivalents of cities.
Except in order to actually stay ahead of destructive weather patterns and possibly hostile factions or raiding parties and whatnot they would have to be mobile. And at that scale that's only possible on the seas.
That would leave the land with smaller settlements and only an occasional huge bunker city.
And population centers would instead by floating on the mostly ice covered oceans.
>Like essentially inverting the current state of things where people live on land and there are only a few outposts and hosueboats on the sea, and ships to travel to and fro.
>People would be living on the sea, and with only a few bunker cities and tiny communes on land, and snowcrawlers to travel to and fro.
File: phoenix_c17_landing.jpg (328 KB, 750x500)
328 KB
328 KB JPG
As i said above air travel is easiest to exclude with the excuse that drones can't carry much, and large planes that aren't specifically hurricane proof have a hard time landing at least half of the year due to weather.... as it is in antarctica.
Also by too supernatural i don't mean that mysterious things shouldn't happen, i mean that the dark clouds blocking out the sun is a bit too arbitrary and inexplicable.
>But i don't think they should be uncommon.
I feel that making them common would be thematically inappropriate and undermine the aesthetics of the setting.
IMO, one of the core facets of a snowcrawler setting should be the contrast between your crawler and the vast, empty wilderness. Just you, your crew and your machine doing your best to overcome the environment and explore the unknown.
Having thousands of massive city ships not only removes that sense of isolation, but also raises the question of why people would even bother with snowcrawlers or tech reclamation in the first place. If you're in the spot where you can comfortably produce, fuel and maintain literally thousands of city ships, you're probably far better off than what the post-apoc setting would suggest.

>in order for things to be comfy most of humanity would have to survive.
That's just plain false - comfy settings are not inherently tied to the majority survival of humanity. Having a sparse number of survivors or a couple of cities leading fulfilling lives can be just as comfy, if not more so.
If anything, your description of megacities and super-slums sounds very distinctly shitty to live in.
>Because actual large scale cities are not possible up north
Russia has a pretty decent number of examples that would prove you false.

Personally I feel like you're placing far too much emphasis on your icebreakers - while that's fine for your own work, most of what you've discussed sounds a lot more like "Mr. Anon's Winter Cruise" rather than the more logistics and survival focused theme of the thread so far, and I'm not sure it fits well.
>Having thousands of massive city ships not only removes that sense of isolation,
That's my entire point, it doesn't!
The ships can't go on land, and snowcrawlers mainly operate on land.
You would literally have the isolation of an entire continent.
Ships would occasionally come close to the shore to pick you up.

>you're probably far better off than what the post-apoc setting would suggest.
That's the point, the post apocalypse doesn't have to mean that you're in an awful situation. It just means that the world as we know it stopped existing.
>why people would even bother with snowcrawlers or tech reclamation in the first place.
Just because we can make f35 fighters for billions of dollars with incredible effort in some places of the world doesn't mean that an entire CONTINENT full of abandoned cars and planes would be worthless.
The same goes here. Just because we can make a fusion powered icebreaker and various crawlers, doesn't mean that it's not worth trying to reclaim the portable fusion reactors, industrial machinery, supercomputers, nuclear weapons, etc etc etc from under the snow.

We literally still cut apart massive ships for the scrap metal and that's despite iron being super common and us having a functional global industry.

Scavenging doesn't have to mean that your tech is shit.
It just means that you take abandoned stuff.

>sounds very distinctly shitty to live in.

Hence why many people go scavenge stuff in snowcrawlers!

Also my issue is with realism.
If you have just a few cities globally, then you are
a) wiping out everyone who didn't live there, and that's sad
b) you simply don't have the manpower to make anything advanced like new comfy snowcrawlers
c) you wouldn't want to anyway because the entire society would be focused on trying to survive and get food.
I don't know if you realize how absolutely massive the supply chains are to get you to be able to live an even somewhat comfortable lifestyle.
File: harkovchanka_1.jpg (58 KB, 640x766)
58 KB
>Russia has a pretty decent number of examples that would prove you false.
Yes currently, but the setting would include worse weather conditions in most of the world. Think greenland. There you even have thawing seasons and still the biggest city is Nuuk with a population of not even 20000 people. That's a tiny rural town by modern standards.
Also it's the russians.

>the more logistics and survival focused theme of the thread so far
That's EXACTLY why it fits.
I'm working off of the basis of existing crawlers, mostly the kharkovchankas and how they were operated.
>pic related
Ships are absolutely crucial if you want land exploration based on individual snow crawlers.
Also as i said here >>79695286 >>79694775
, it absolutely makes logistical and thematical sense.
Safe spots that do for the seas what the crawlers do for the continents.
It adds variety to the setting, keeps the same cramped industrial feel, works based on the same principles of trying to survive in a hostile environment in a small safe mobile thing that's essentially always moving and being the lifeblood of the new world. And it adds a sense of realism with working supply lines and safe harbors (except flipped) while keeping everything just as isolated as it was before, only opening up the big harsh oceans to the game.in addition to the big harsh continents.
File: 1494170785560.jpg (377 KB, 1600x877)
377 KB
377 KB JPG
I can see a few icebreaker cruise ships in the slushy equator zone, but not megacities, imo. That takes away from the whole post-apocalyptic-empty-winter-hell-spooky vibe, I feel.
I would prefer vast ramshackle surface bases or cramped mines/ice caves. Or big megacrawler cities.
In my mind, the comfiness comes from the external threats: they force the people to work together, to create comfy places and comfy times in spite of the dangers. Plus, facing off against adversity creates comfy camaraderie.
I like the idea of comfy safe places; I just don't think they should be TOO safe...

But, at the end of the day, the actual setting details should be up to the individual group. Are the crawlers the leading edge of a regrowing civilization? Or the last gasp of a dying one? That should be open to interpretation.
File: 37166718_303.jpg (28 KB, 700x394)
28 KB
>Or big megacrawler cities.
This is what is impossible and what the icebreakers would replace.
It's simply easier to float a big thing on the ocean than have it crawl over land.

>the actual setting details should be up to the individual group
as i said above i don't think that's a very good idea because if you want it to be both rules lite and engaging you should have a unified setting like World of Darkness.
>Or the last gasp of a dying one?
I thought the whole point was to make things comfy in icy wastes. Human extinction isn't comfy.

You can have an apocalypse where basically everyone survives.
An apocalypse just means the end of the world as we know it, not the end of mankind.

>I just don't think they should be TOO safe
Yeah i agree for everything on land.

And you still need to work together and have a good community even on an icebreaker, because you are still cooped up like chickens and have to keep everything running.

Plus the threats being in a large part supernatural, you could always bring some of them on board....

>cramped mines/ice caves. Or big megacrawler cities.
I exactly agree i just want the setting to still be realistic for immersion and a city crawler is just not feasible. The biggest you could feasibly make is something like this >>79669674, but even that would mean only like 50 or so people.
Also look at these things!


These are mainstays of the new world and they are only possible with a highly industrial civilization surviving.

At the end of the day i'm just laying out ideas for a common setting to try and make it more immersive and realistic.
After all it's hard to feel comfy if you aren't immersed.
>This is what is impossible
I don't care if it's impossible, megacrawlers are cool.
>Human extinction isn't comfy.
Watching over the abandoned ruins of a lost world as you sip hot cocoa with friends from the railing of a crawler is perfectly comfy. Your insistence that most of the world population should survive only to live in slums and toil away in megafarms is anything but.

>(crawlers) are only possible with a highly industrial civilization surviving.
Yes, crawlers require an established industrial base - no one was arguing against that. But the level of industry that you've described so far is vastly more advanced than what seems to have been established for most of the thread - with thousand-ship fleets and built up megacities.
You don't need something that extreme if you're just producing snowcrawlers, especially some of the lower-tech aesthetic ones. What's more, a lot of the industrial base can just be refurbishments from the old world, as can the snowcrawlers - you don't need everything and everyone to survive.

>You can have an apocalypse where basically everyone survives.
Then what's the point? You want to make it such that the post-apoc setting no longer has major human casualties, no longer has to worry about rebuilding an industrial base, no longer has to worry about fuel and supplies; it may be post-apoc as a technicality, but it's no longer the premise that this thread was based upon.

>the actual setting details should be up to the individual group
>as i said above i don't think that's a very good idea
Frankly, it feels as though you just want everyone to roll with your setting. You barge in, ignore pretty much everything else other anons have worldbuilt so far, insist that everyone do things your way and throw out pretty much everything other than the fact that there are snowcrawlers.

If we're gonna decide on any unified setting I sure as hell hope it isn't yours.
File: dralkin1.jpg (100 KB, 900x418)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
>Watching over the abandoned ruins of a lost world as you sip hot cocoa with friends from the railing of a crawler is perfectly comfy.
You can. People just moved away.
Plus you need milk and cocoa.

>to live in slums and toil away
No that wouldn't be necessary. Big cities could exist normally if people survive.
If most people DIED, THEN there would be slums because no industry to repair things with and you would not be able to explore but would have to toil away to survive.

>refurbishments from the old world, as can the snowcrawlers
No because they don't really exist now,

>some of the lower-tech aesthetic ones
Unless it's literally trash bolted together you will need an absolutely massive industrial supply chain.
Despite supposedly liking logistics you seem keen on ignoring the logistics of getting the crawlers in the first place.

>but it's no longer the premise that this thread was based upon
The premise the thread was based upon are specifically made crawlers for a new type of world because the old type of world ended.
Crawlers that could only be made in massive factories and that seem standardized.
Look at the images actually posted.

>ignore pretty much everything else other anons have worldbuilt so far
You seem to be doing that. Look at the pictures.
Only 2 are trash crawlers. Which also could happen if otherwise there's an industry making them.

I'm trying to help with making a thing.

Only 4 ideas i had:
-It isn't good if everything is grimdark and humans are almost extinct because that is against the spirit of cozyness, and the images that were posted in the thread of cool crawlers. Hence it should be the end of the world as we know it not the end of civilization.
-It isnt good if we completely ignore realism, because that reduces immersion and thus cozyness, and it doesn't make sense with a focus on logistics.
-Icebreakers are a cool water based counterpart to land crawlers.
-A unified lore is good for rules-lite immersion.

Don't be mean.

>>79669674 rolls off a massive icebreaker as it makes landfall.
>Families and hydroponic farming equipment stay behind on the ship, while the crawler crew perpare for a journey of thousands of miles towards a small uranium mining settlement. >What passages will be inacessible? What will they encounter on the way? What difficulties will they have with the crawler? How long will it take? No one knows!
>They can't count on anyone but themselves to solve problems. If they break down there's no AAA to call, no other crawler can pull such a behemoth out of a ditch. >>79670684
>After a long journey they arrive at the mining settlement and exchange the supplies for the silicon/uranium/rare earth metals/whatever. >>79679683
>By now the ice at the ocean is too thick, so they are stuck for the winter, so they might as well do a supply run for all the other bases along the route.
-Of course they'd have to avoid the raiders, because with so much salvage and lawless land, there are bound to be plenty. >>79670019
>Maybe they discover a secret bunker city on the way. >>79680373
>Maybe someone tells them about the weird shapes they see at night on the surface.
>But that's impossible this is too far north for anything to survive the cold!
>Some investigation starts with reports from another base of something similar,
>Traveling here and there they might miss the next pickup of the icebreaker and be stuck another year.
>They could encounter different crawler-crews from this or that commune >>79698687
on their way, all either harvesting wood, on trade journeys, or retrieving similarly valuable mining or salvaging things for the equatorial cities.
>Then finally after much hardship they could come back to the icebreaker >>79695299 to sail south to one of the megacities with the uranium and the collected this and that salvage.
>But maybe they shouldn't have brought that strange meteorite on board because people are starting to act weird.....

How does this sound?
File: c0b5wPw.jpg (291 KB, 900x568)
291 KB
291 KB JPG
To more directly address some ideas of others:

>the region was originally quite cold in the first place.
That would quite restrict the range for the apocalypse.
Your Tide idea is absolutely magnificent though, but it could simply be a natural weather pattern caused by the cooling of the atmosphere and the alteration of ocean currents. Open water away from the equator generally moderates weather, if it is frozen over this effect diminishes and weather becomes more extreme.

>Giant wyrm-like siphonophores and other floating predators
This is an absolutely awesome idea, but where would they come from?
Maybe their sudden appearance is connected to the global weather shift.
Could it have been aliens that deliberately released cooling gases?
Was it an alien ship?
Or maybe a portal that opened up and let these weird creatures through.
Or just an aseroid. An impactor could kick up enough dust and trigger enough volcanic activity to have a super ice age.
Maybe the creatures came with the asteroid.

Maybe the creatures were here all along but it was too warm for them and they only come out from the ocean depths during ice ages.

Geothermal hotspots are an obvious choice but coal mines would be absolutely awful. The coal kills you, and you have other options of keeping warm. Just geothermal heat from depth, wind power, gas or nuclear are all better options than coal, require less effort and don't kill you just from living near it.
>the hunt bit
this seems awesome, but would only be intense under the time pressure of external regular predators which would only live in more temperate climates.

I would add that if an icebreaker or a bigger crawler becomes stuck somewhere extraction would be nigh impossible, because they are big enough that no other machine can move them. On the other hand they are full of goodies and strong enough to withstand whatever you throw at them, so even if not a permanent base they could become stopovers naturally. >>79679360
File: 151118965416817620 (2).jpg (119 KB, 1600x1066)
119 KB
119 KB JPG
The stopover emergency shelter thing btw >>79707434 is something that the stuck crawlers in antarctica are currently already used for, so this has a precedent.
If you're looking for a system, Mothership is both lightweight and suited to the survival-tension genre. Really there's not much difference between surviving in outer space and the remote wilderness.
>don't be mean
Then stop ignoring the previous threads that established the setting.
There will be no unified setting because anons can never agree on anything, so stop derailing, thanks.
Icebreaker bases are cool, if that's what people want. But your idea of 'comfy' is pretty particular to you alone: others feel comfy from different things. So stop being mean to people who think differently from you...having safe megacities is not comfy in my book, not by a long shot.
Hell, most people find reality very un-comfy, which is why we have /tg/ in the first place.
Be more inclusive and accepting of others' ideas, anon. ALL ideas are welcome.
>Plus you need milk and cocoa.
That doesn't require the sort of thousand-ship industrial base you've been describing.
>No (slums) wouldn't be necessary.
I mean, I'm just going off your previous posts.

>No because they don't really exist now,
...What? Says who?
>... THEN there would be slums because no industry
At NO point have I ever argued for no industry; this was something I even specifically called out in the previous post. I've only argued in favor of more localized / lower scale industry in comparison to the megaproject scales you talked about in your original posts (megacities, colossal farms etc.) Please don't make that assumption again.

>Despite supposedly liking logistics you seem keen on ignoring the logistics of getting the crawlers in the first place.
Again, see above - I know there are massive supply chains involved in producing machinery. I'm not arguing against that, I'm arguing against megaproject tier industry that can support a thousand atomic icebreakers.

As >>79708115 points out, this thread is a continuation of an existing setting that's been built up for years now by different anons. What you've described outright ignores most of the established ideas. It'd be fine if you were just suggesting stuff, but the way you've been wording things and pushing your ideas gives the impression that you don't give a crap about what anons have already established.

>You seem to be doing that. Look at the pictures.
...Have you considered the possibility that there's a very limited selection of snowcrawler art, and that most of the images would be more for mood than precisely the setting?
>It isn't good if everything is grimdark and humans are almost extinct
Again - no one's said that it should be an extinction level event, just that the apocalypse should have affected populations in some way.
>It isnt good if we completely ignore realism
Again - no one's argued that realism should be thrown out the window. Problems like no industrial base for crawlers or extinction being uncomfy have been strawmen that you set up yourself. Other than one anon's passing mention of "last gasp of a dying (world)", no one's been arguing that civilization should be almost wiped out and near the brink of collapse; just that the apocalypse should have left a significant impact, rather than everyone living happily ever after.
>A unified lore
Here's the thing - there already is one, and you've pretty much been arguing that everyone should use yours instead.
>Don't be mean.
Sure, my previous comment was admittedly kind of mean - but do you know how frustrating it is when some random guy decides to waltz in and push everyone to follow his vastly different setting, despite there already being one that was discussed?
It's one thing to suggest icebreakers - I'm not against that. It's another entirely to go about completely rewriting most of the established ideas in the setting. By all means, use those ideas for your own setting, but don't force them here when they involve such drastic shifts.
I think the pdf in OP is probably the closest thing we have. Last thread I managed to catch was probably somewhere in 2020, so my memory's a bit fuzzy.
File: VWbug.jpg (38 KB, 670x378)
38 KB
So, we can probably agree that there is some base headquarters of comfiness, of some kind.
But the main thrust of this 'setting' is empty snow, mystery, and self-contained vehicles that ply the trackless wastes in search of valuable things and mysteries.
So, then: should we focus on vehicles, travel encounters, resource-management, necessary skills, and valuables waiting to be found?
We've had a lot of neat ideas so far - any more?
well, I'll be damned. this thread got quite a spike of activity since my last reanimation. nice to see it's getting some traction.
and even though there's some conflict going on, I like a lot of the ideas from both sides. It's also... surprisingly civilized for 4chan, so kudos for that.

There's obviously a lot of love for this project from many different sides. We don't need to have all the facts fixed now - maybe never. If there ever will be a finished system to run this in, it will be homebrewn and as such can be adapted.

I think you hit the mark on the mood and kind of adventure we wanna go for here. Personally I'd also make the apocalypse hit harder and have less civilization left (and thus, less icebreaker cities), but those are honestly details that can be left open for each person to decide. We're not brining out a comprehensive lore book anytime soon.

I think the pdf's a good start, but also pretty rough still. there's definitely room for improvement there. It's nice to see these threads popping up every so often. Might even be that I started one of the last ones, but it didn't get very far back then (in contrast to the millionth critroll vs grognard thread, which also led me to leave 4chan for a while). Even though there's some bickering going on in here, at least it's creative and constructive.
I was working out a system for resource tracking and carrying capacity.
What I dislike about many games right now is HP calculation and raising HP by levelling up. I think I'd like a fixed HP per person (with the chance to exchange a point or two for stats, and vice versa) and just as well have a fixed carrying capacity per person (following the same exceptions). No calculation of strength-to-grams carried. That's no fun for me.
I was thinking about a slot-based system.
Small items like pill bottles, keys etc could be one slot, flashlight/handgun would be two etc. Your gear to survive the icy temperatures for a little while should weigh at around 5 slots, and depending on how many slots worth of items you carry, you get different encumberance rules.
>under 7 slots: light. you get a bonus on movement related tasks
>7-15: normal.
>15-30: heavy. movement related tasks are more difficult, as are tasks that take a while and drain stamina
>30+: encumbered. you can carry this burden for a short while, but can't move properly unless you drop most of it.

still pretty rough, I know. But I think it'd be easier to estimate how many slots any given item should take instead of kilograms.
The point is just that similar to the mechanics of crawlers the mechanics of icebreakers should be decided upon.

I was not here for the previous threads.
Safe megacities would not be the focus of the game.
The point is that they have to exist somewhere in the nebulous equatorial regions, because otherwise the whole setting doesn't work.
If all ideas are welcome then mine should be too.

>That doesn't require the sort of thousand-ship industrial base you've been describing.
It requires agriculture and a stable enough society to produce such stuff and package it for the road.
>I'm just going off your previous posts.
That was just an example to counter complaints that it isn't really an apocalypse.
Slums could happen, but they wouldn't be necessary if enough of civilization survives.
>Says who?
Th....they don't actually exist these days anon.
The closest you can get is the mobile Halley 6 base in antarctica. There are like two kharkovchankas left in operation at the time.
No other crawlers exist. They were abandoned as a concept as antarctica lost appeal and the soviet union collapsed.
>to the megaproject scales
OOOOOOH i think we are talking past each other. By megacities i just meant really really big cities since everyone from all latitudes was forced to abandon civilization there and move to the equator. And colossal farms being just.... large stretches of the sahara and such converted to farmland to support the people who moved closer to the equator for warmth.

>megaproject tier industry that can support a thousand atomic icebreakers.
Making crawlers is not much more complicated than making an icebreaker. Icebreakers are just bigger.
Nuclear power is pretty..... easy actually. Even fusion power would be pretty simple and require not much.
Heck look at what spaceX did in BocaChica the first version of their Starship: Starhopper was quite literally build by a plumbing business, only the engine was assembled elsewhere, also in house.
>outright ignores most of the established ideas
I think i have been there for some of the original threads and that's why i brought these things up. I don't know what was agreed upon, but the threads seemed to focus around the available art.... so neat looking modern stuff, and that being the mood as well.

>should have affected populations in some way.
I'd say about like the last ice age where anything above 40 degrees cannot support agriculture any more because it turned into a tundra/taiga.

>Other than one anon's passing mention of
I have confused him for you, excuse me.

>follow his vastly different setting
I.... haven't really seen anything of the setting to indicate that it is established and vastly different. In fact the OP was asking for ideas, and people said there was no unified setting.
I don't know what the drastic shifts you're talking about are.
File: 1511190126148463387.jpg (95 KB, 700x1050)
95 KB
File: resistance basics.png (1.05 MB, 848x1221)
1.05 MB
1.05 MB PNG
I've learned that it's called the Resistance System (pic related) For a Snowcrawler hack, I'd say something like:

Body: Physical exhaustion, pain, blood loss and injury
Cold: Bad weather, exposure, frostbite and hypothermia
Luck: Bad luck, incompetence and over-confidence
Supplies: Loss of resources,damaged equipment and debt
Weird: Mental exhaustion, paranormal strangeness

Barter: Make people do what you want via threats, lies, flattery or reasoned argument
Route: Plot a route through dangerous or unknown territory
Gas: Drive your Crawler through dangerous or unknown territory
Grease: Fix damaged or broken machinery, Crawlers or otherwise
Heal: Dressing wounds, administering medication, mending injuries
Fight: Self explanatory
Perceive: Understand the world by drawing on accessible information
Hide: Get away from someone or something that’s trying to track you down
Hunt: Track down someone or something that’s trying to get away from you

Haven: Settlements where people live, work and form communities
Desolate: Wastelands and abandoned towns
Derelict: Abandoned Crawlers, partially stripped tech and machinery
Snowfield: Open flatlands, empty fields of snow and ice
Arbour: Forested areas, woods
Rugged: Rough terrain that can't be easily driven over, even in a Crawler
Spooky/Eerie: Haunted places, paranormal strangeness abounds
Machine: Engines, heaters, heavy machinery

Player characters have different starting resistances based on the season they were born:
Winter: +1 Cold resistance
Spring: +1 Luck resistance
Summer: +1 Body resistance
Autumn: +1 Weird resistance

Then gain Skill(s) and/or Domain(s) of your choice, or based on class if that's a thing we want.
File: 1565432991092.jpg (823 KB, 1500x800)
823 KB
823 KB JPG
Your Crawler can even be considered a minor Haven of sorts to refresh your stresses (drinking hot cocoa while wrapped in a blanket to remove Cold stress? that's comfy af)
Also, I know it's been mentioned in previous threads, but I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Stand Still Stay Silent yet. It's a webcomic, the first arc of which is spent in a Snowcrawler travelling a desolate Iceland in search of books and other valuables while some whack paranormal shit goes down.
that sounds pretty solid. nice work anon!
Just to clarify - >>79708115 is a different anon from me.

>It requires agriculture and a stable enough society to produce such stuff and package it for the road.
Yes, but again - it's a sliding scale. You can still support industry and agriculture without needing such a lar-
>OOOOOOH i think we are talking past each other. By megacities i just meant really really big cities
Right, I think this is where a lot of the conflict has been coming from; if what you really mean is just more or less regular cities with denser populations due to refugees, that's fine. My understanding from your initial posts was that you were pushing for some sort of advanced civilization with ridiculous industrial capacity.

>Th....they don't actually exist these days anon.
I think this was another point of confusion as well - whether or not we'd basically be taking our real world and plunging it into eternal winter, or if it'd be an alt-history or alternative world altogether. Would be good to clarify.

>Making crawlers is not much more complicated than making an icebreaker. Icebreakers are just bigger.
What I meant was that the logistics chains for large icebreakers and the material investments are significantly larger than just crawlers, and so any society capable of producing a thousand-strong fleet probably wouldn't even have to worry about pushing into the north. My main gripe with this was that it'd make things "too comfy", if that makes sense - it detracts from the vision of having lone crawlers braving the cold, makes it feel like they don't even matter.

In either case, this argument seems to have gone on long enough, and I imagine it must be kind of annoying to dig through all the text walls we've been putting up. Wanna just agree to disagree and move on?
>similar to the mechanics of crawlers the mechanics of icebreakers should be decided upon.
well, you've already laid out a pretty good groundwork here. thing is, we didn't actually get to the mechanics of the snowcrawlers in detail, so putting too much focus on the icebreakers, which are an additional idea not supported by all interested anons, isn't what's going to happen now.

>It requires agriculture and a stable enough society to produce such stuff and package it for the road.
I think a lot of this comes down to how large the scale of remaining civilization is supposed to be. If thousands of icebreaker-cities need to be supported, you need an even bigger agricultural industry.
If there are a bunch of disconnected settlements, maybe just having a handful of big cities with expansive greenhouse farms would be enough. That's besides the fact that most of the world went under, so people would regularly find caches of nonperishable supplies. Salvaging and scavenging would become a viable industry.

Your setting has a good, realistic foundation. No one's denying that. But if it doesn't fit with everyone's idea of a frosty, comfy, spoopy apocalypse, then maybe it's just for you.
am I correct in assuming this would result in a sort of Darkest Dungeon like gameplay feel? It seems there are a lot of chances to gain stress, maybe more than would fit this setting.

>Then gain Skill(s) and/or Domain(s) of your choice, or based on class if that's a thing we want.
Yes, I would give characters during creation the chance to choose a set of skills however they want (especially for this setting, I think it's important to have characters have a rich backstory they can tell tales from when stuck in a claustrophobic-yet-cozy snowed in crawler or something of the sort. Past work experiences, people back home, reasons for working this job... should all be at least somewhat defined and earn you some scattered skills.
Apart from that, you choose your job on board, and earn some extra skills for that. If you decide that you're a specialist who already did that job exactly earlier in your career, you get that skill on a higher level.
>Security Captain (+Authority, +Shooting)
>Mechanic (+Fix, +Tinker)
>Doctor/Scientist (+Medicine, +Knowing)
>Cook/Stockmaster (+Adminster, +Cooking)
>Pilot/Navigator (+Driving, +Perception)
>scale of remaining civilization
The supply chain needed to manufacture things like crawlers does not scale with the size of civilization. In fact with a larger civilization LESS people are needed to do farming because more advanced procedures can exist.
>so people would regularly find caches of nonperishable supplies
This is an absolutely insane trope and it needs to die.
We do not have huge reserves of food.
Supermarkets contain about one week worth of supplies.
Warehouses another.week.
Granaries and such could contain more, but those will perish within a year.
The only thing that might last a couple years (none more than ten unless specially preserved) is canned goods. Which is the tiniest fraction of food caches.
The idea that you can scavenge food 200 years after a nuclear holocaust like in fallout is just taking the piss.

>that most of the world went under
This is still not comfy, would undermine the idea that the world can make crawlers, and i haven't seen this supported anywhere.

I'm trying to make a frosty spoopy comfy apocalypse that fits your ideas, but some ideas just flat out don't make sense.
By that logic you might as well have things not on earth, but a different planet.
Then you have an explanation for weird ruins, for weird creatures, for ice everywhere, for few humans, for high tech.
Maybe people were in hypersleep for 200 years sent to colonize the ice world so any help is 200 years away. It would mean absolutely minimal people, but still equipped with enough tech to make things cozy with hot coco.
honestly, let's put a pin in that. For different GMs, different levels of realism might be acceptable, if it means including elements that they'd like to see.
You're right, my points might not have a base in reality, but they might work for a game. You mentioned Fallout. I'm not saying it's a great game, and it certainly lacks realism, but it worked within its own universe well enough to become a huge title and be fun for many players. Personally, that's more important to me than an untouchable explanation for everything.

Next up: in-world theories for how this apocalypse came to be?
>Red did it.
>Blue did it.
>comet pushed Earth out of orbit (or was it something else?)
>side effect of realities colliding
>large hardon collider
>god has abandoned this world
>new kind of power reactor tech wasn't as safe as they thought
>weather controlling satellites
>t it worked within its own universe well enough to become a huge title
And then Fallout 3 came along which was absolutely lambasted for its writing, and complete nonsense like the supermarket shopping 200m from a major settlement 200 years after the war.
Realism is good anon, it means you can immerse yourself more and be more cozy.

Also i literally listed possible explanations above here:

alternative world surely would make for the easiest explanation for most things, but at the same time you'd have to invent a lot of stuff that mirrors our world to a degree in which players can catch the 'feel' of it. thinking mainly of nations (I mean, we need some sort of crazy Russian tropes in there), historical events, political conflicts etc.

So I guess alt-history might be best fitting? I'm reading a book right now, Early Riser by Jasper Fforde, in which the last ice age basically never ended and 99,9% of humanity has to hibernate to survive the winter, while the other 00,1% keep things running. It even has some spoopy stuff like nightwalkers, which are basically zombies (humans who woke up different, without their full mind and going on basic instincts, mainly hunger, are declared dead. they get cannibalistic at times). It works alright, even though the pop culture references are laid on a bit thick (he included an 'extreme hibernator' called, and I shit you not, Gear Brylls).

Point is, with alt history you have enough space to reference actual happenings, while still being able to bullshit your way out of everything you can't or don't want to research in-depth.
>It's another "only realism is acceptable" episode
Anon, have you considered that we're ultimately here to make something fun and interesting?
By your rules and logic - no large landships, no scavenging for resources, everyone must survive in order for any kind of industry - the vast majority of similar fictional work that exists should never come to be. No Dune, no Deserts of Kharak, no Mad Max or Metro.

This is what bothers me. Despite your mantra of "Don't be mean" - you come in, trying to force your very limiting and narrow view of what is "realistic" and "immersive" on everyone. You shoot down anything that doesn't fall within those views and insist on unifying all settings under your banner - forget about all the other fun ideas other anons have, they're not "realistic" enough to be "immersive". At this point you might as well take the snowcrawlers out too - because obviously it's not realistic to have survey or patrol work done by land when you have helicopters and planes, right? And mass freight can just be done by icebreakers.

Yes, realism is nice to have to ground things, but it's fine to have a certain level of suspension of disbelief. It's fiction, after all.
File: th.jpg (37 KB, 474x581)
37 KB
What do you guys think of different 'factions', or rather peoples? They shouldn't be clear-cut, but in the old threads there was some talk of natives, which I thought would fit well in this kinda setting.

A kind of people who were there long before big civilization spread, were disenfranchised in the pre-apocalyptic world and are now finding back to their spiritualistic and nature-connected roots.

I think this could work well especially with the rise of spooky shit: tribal communities living out in the wilds, with their own sprituali explanations for these creatures and happenings. Whether they are right or not - who's to say?
Besides those that went back to the 'olden ways', you'd still have natives who got used to modern life and just shake their heads at shamans, and spirits, and living out in nature. They'd rather drink whiskey and have a warm shower, even if they have to toil in the oil fields or something.

Besides that you could have a vast variation of colonists, basically each settlement creating their own societal system in order to weather the harsh environment. And then opposed to that, 'officials' from Central, trying to establish a sort of network and control over these colonies.
>It seems there are a lot of chances to gain stress, maybe more than would fit this setting.
True, but if your Crawler is a mobile Haven, then it should provide ample opportunity to refresh stress, even out in the field. You could also just reduce the severity of fallout so when it happens it's not as bad
File: penguin & snowsift.webm (2.76 MB, 1280x720)
2.76 MB
2.76 MB WEBM
Nicked this webm from /an/ - first half of the video seems like a really nice visual inspiration, what with the snow particles drifting across the ground and all.
I think a dicepool system would work best for this. It makes it easier to see your resources in front of you - "I have 4 strength instead of my max of 5" is better than "I'm rolling at -4." Persistent conditions (being out in the snow too long, not getting enough sleep, no hot meals) directly take dice out of your pool, which makes it possible to worry about that kind of thing without excessive bookkeeping.

You could even do something where stats get exhausted gradually - say, any dice that come up 1 get removed from your pool going forward. So people with higher stats can also press on longer at a given task, but eventually everyone tires and needs to rest. The comfort of the shelter you rest can limit the maximum number of dice can be returned to you pool. So resting in bare-bones "just enough to not die" leaves you with 1 die max, while somewhere with a full kitchen and small luxuries like coffee lets you rest up to 4. It takes a true haven to restore all the way to full.

Just an idea, mechanically.
Yes out of these i absolutely hate all that are nonsensical.

The point is that you CAN have something fun and interesting while still being realistic.
People dying en-masse does not make things more fun or cozy or interesting.

>forget about all the other fun ideas other anons have,
That's absolutely not true i LOVE most of the ideas other anons have! I have even commented and tried to enhance a lot of them. Some right in the posts that i linked!
Also planes don't work in harsh weather and icebreakers can't reach the places where resources and thus some people are. This is the point, realism ENHANCES this stuff. It makes it so that needing snowcrawlers isn't just "because that's the setting" but because it's necessary and the only way to keep civilization afloat! Realism necessitates crawlers in this setting! Realism is not your enemy.

I fucking ADORE the setting dude.
It is the most awesome concept in fiction that i know of.
I can present a billion awesome ideas for this.
I can work with all awesome ideas people have for this.

There are only TWO points that i don't want to budge on and they concern the same thing:
>I want to prevent grim dark "and most people are dead and you're the last gasp of a dying civilization" taking over the setting, because the OP himself said that some ideas were just too harsh and grim. People are looking for comfy stuff. And so am I.
-I want to prevent "and most people are dead and you're the last gasp of a dying civilization" taking over also because it's not realistic for the proposed setting of mostly snowglobe earth with crawlers. It would thus kill immersion for me and possibly for others in a setting i love.

That's all.
Everything else i said has been attempts to add to the setting.

>tribal communities living out in the wilds
How would you do this though? Surviving isn't as easy as just having shelter and occasionally picking berries and hunting. Hence why we need snowcrawlers...
idea: modern tribal?
Not to join in a fairly long debate here, but I wouldn't work too much about the "top down" setting. Filling in too many of the details too early is kind of a trap: a game isn't just its setting, and it's a lot better to have a good game with a vague setting than a great setting with no game.

I think there should be some sort of Down South that people and resources can come and go from, but it isn't what the game is about. It might be where your character plans to retire to, or where that cute agritech chick shipped up from, but it's not where we're going during this campaign.

Likewise, I think there's no reason to pick a concrete reason why the world got so cold. As long as the players are clear that its cold now, and they aren't going to fix it, that's good enough for me.
I appreciate your effort to keep this amicable anon. Browsing through the old threads shows what happens when people have differing visions of the same setting and start a war over it.

Regarding the apocalypse, I think less than grimdark death, people want to focus on the freedom that could come some decades after the trauma of such a catastrophe has passed.
The feeling of emptiness and space to explore (due to lack of population) and a vast potential of ruins to salvage, hidden by the pristine ice. As a GM, being able to take any kind of ordinary building complex, and turning it into a place of opportunity and excitement in this arctic landscape.

The idea, that this scenario still needs to be fueled by overcrowded megacities, where most of humanity is cramped together in the small spaces that are still viable to live in... sounds pretty uncomf.

>idea: morern tribal?
that's an absolutely fair point. I can agree with that. Natives could live with a mixture of using what tools and technologies are necessary to survive, but isolating themselves from whoever was the major culture that kept them down, and spiritually returning to a sort of naturalistic religion (especially after things that could be interpreted as spirits return to the world).
>I think there's no reason to pick a concrete reason why the world got so cold. As long as the players are clear that its cold now, and they aren't going to fix it, that's good enough for me.
yeah, that's why I was asking for in-game theories before. As in, theories people tell eachother to explain this evolution.
No way in hell should this become an epic 'saving the world' kind of story. This is the world now.
>Modern tribal
I mean, what you're describing is basically just Alaska today. There are plenty of Natives who live mostly on hunting (and the annual oil royalties check). They use snowmobiles and guns instead of dogsleds and spears.

But it's a good example of why you don't really need to justify "why would people live where it's so cold?" People live there because they were born there, and it's beautiful, and the bad parts aren't bad when you're used to it.
>a good game with a vague setting than a great setting with no game.
Yeah but the task is also too keep it interesting.
And it also should be rules light.
The only system i've seen that is like that is WoD, which has a given setting.

>I think there's no reason to pick a concrete reason why the world got so cold
I dunno. Without a reason why it's so cold it's difficult to have literally anything concrete about the whole setting and game.
Like i don't know what we could actually establish for concrete things about the setting to make this less just fantasizing around and an actual game.

>The feeling of emptiness and space to explore (due to lack of population) and a vast potential of ruins to salvage, hidden by the pristine ice
This is entirely my point. You can still have this despite people surviving. And as an added benefit you wouldn't come across FORZEN CORPSES EVERYWHERE.
People not really being able to live north and south is an established thing.
People surviving would only mean that instead of everyone above 40° dying, they instead moved to the equator.
>still needs to be fueled by overcrowded megacities,[...]sounds pretty uncomf.
I don't know what to tell you anon. That's the only even remotely plausible way you can have big crawlers crisscrossing the frozen wastes.
I presented a possible alternative in a post above, where it's a different planet and we're a colony ship, and turns out the planet was previously inhabited but now abandoned and frozen. Then you have an explanation for everyone living in modern comfy conditions despite there not being many people.
Other than that the idea that you can live in modern luxury without many people is just.... nonsense. Like trying to fit fighterjets into medival fantasy.

>modern tribal
The concept of people living in caves and using torches for light, but RTGs for heat is quite fascinating.
Them eschewing as much of technology as they can while still surviving because of their past, is cool.
Also the icebreaker thing was kinda my attempt to circumvent having to be supported by the equatorial big cities.

Because once such a colossal ships are made they can have whole factories inside, and make everything to support themselves and their fleet of snowcrawlers, because they're specialized to be modern and survive up in the north, because people chose to go live there instead of the equator.
Maybe it was a project started by the equatorial powers to reconquer the poles, but then abandoned. And since they're self sufficient they and their snowcrawlers just kinda continue doing that completely on their own unsupported by anyone.

The result:
>There's a reason why icebreakers with specialized factories for crawlers exist despite not being a megacity
>Most people evacuated, so people are alive and no dead bodies are strewn around in most of the abandoned cities making exploring them comfy and more spooky when you DO come across some
>No one has to deal with the equatorial people directly any more

So ironically enough icebreakers may be the solution to your problem with having to be supported by big cities :P
I'm not sure I follow you. How does being rules-lite (which is a debatable term anyway) have any impact on the setting details? And how does not knowing why it's cold make it hard to have an "actual game"?

It feels like you're conflating gameplay elements with background details. There being ice crawlers, isolated settlements, megafauna and bad weather - those are things that the players will interact with in the game. How big the cities are down south, what caused the new ice age, and how much of the world population has died are background details that it's perfectly acceptable to leave unresolved. Lack of background details isn't what's preventing an "actual game", it's the total lack of mechanics that's to blame for that.
Let me put it this way: unless you want a simulationist universal system that is super bloated (GURPS on ice), you have to make a decision on what exactly you want mechanics for.
That's why a rules-lite system must make some lore choices.

What megafauna you can have, what the settlements are there for, and how the crawlers came to be and are supported are details that are important if you want to actually establish any mechanics.
This is also why we haven't got mechanics yet.
It's difficult to come up with mechanics for some nebulous concepts.

If there are aliens causing the new iceage, you might want to have mechanics for dealing with their abilities. If there are ghosts, those mechanics might be different. If there are eldritch abominations they might yet be different again.
If the megafauna are supernatural, the rules for encountering them are different than if they are alliens, beings from a parallel universe, things from an asteroid, eldritch abominations, etc.
How much of the world population died impacts how much need there is for what sort of supplies, impacting both mechanical sizes of cargo crawlers and mechanics for consuming, finding, and trading for supplies.
Etc etc etc.

This is why i think that a unified setting, NOT WITH EVERY DETAIL SETTLED MIND YOU.
But a rough idea of what actually caused things might be beneficial if this is to become anything concrete.
>Yes out of these i absolutely hate all that are nonsensical.
>The point is that you CAN have something fun and interesting while still being realistic.
>People dying en-masse does not make things more fun or cozy or interesting.
Hi anon, just to reiterate my point for the third time:
No one has pushed for extinction events, just that the winter should have notable consequences on the human population. Doesn't mean that 90% of people are dead, but there should still be a realistic amount of casualties (~20-30% - it's a global weather cataclysm, after all).

I understand that logic and realism is necessary for a setting to make sense - other than the misunderstanding over megaprojects and the somewhat extreme fleet numbers of icebreakers, I have no issues against need for industry.

My primary issue with your adherence to realism comes with your objections against food scavenging and megacrawlers ("insane trope (that) needs to die... etc.").
Are they realistic? Maybe not. But I think some these concepts you've shot down are notable parts of the setting archetype. Is a player going to care that it's not realistic that they've managed to unearth a rare cache of pre-war rations that can be sold or used for their supplies because nonperishables are a statistical minority in agricultural and food processing industries?
Same for megacrawlers - to clarify, crawlers in size range comparable to ships (~100-250m tops, not the retarded multi-km stuff in some sci fi). Are they physically realistic? Maybe not. But they're fun and fit the setting, square-cube laws be slightly damned. Kind of like complaining that dragons should be too heavy to fly or giants should collapse under their own weight - there should be space for a little suspension of disbelief / creative freedom.

It's things like these - where the adherence to realism starts becoming more like nitpicking, rather than logical consistency - that bother me. That's what I take the most issue with.
File: snow-crawler.jpg (53 KB, 450x338)
53 KB
Realism fag go and stay go. We're not interested in you pushing your pet ideas on us. Pet ideas that have nothing to do with the game but are only background fluff. Background fluff should be up to individual groups to decide, not for you to impose from the beginning.
tl;dr - stop being a pedant and move on to a different subject.
Nice ideas.
Yes! Multiple in-world theories is best - that way, each group/GM can decide on their own, if they desire to.
It's obvious from the derailing by just one anon in this thread that this problem is not one that can or should be solved.
>muh realism
Stop. Just stop. You're only making a fool of yourself at this point.
For some inexplicable reason, you just can't make yourself realize that this setting could be 1000 years in the future, and there could be all kinds of hyper-tech buried in the snows being recovered by the dregs of a once-advanced civilization that has devolved to 21st century levels of technology and living.
>modern luxury
No one but you has mentioned this at all. Stop with the strawman argument.
Yes, nailed it.
>No one
The other anon - quite understandably - didn't like the idea of being reliant on a functioning civilization.
I am 100% with you on the point otherwise.
>I have no issues against need for industry.
The other anon here>>79723073 does have issues with relying on big cities. And to be honest it's entirely understandable that's why i pushed for an idea where there are factories specialized for this thing despite having smaller populations. Such as the exoplanet or the icebreaker things.

>food scavenging
scavenge literally anything else. Why does it have to be food. Also if you have to actually scavenge for food the whole idea of just making a cup of warm tea in your cozy crawler goes flying out the window.

it's just.... not particularly sensible. Crawlers like >>79705112 >>79669674 , yeah okay could be done with a bit of suspension of disbelief.
But with city sized crawlers you essentially include magic in your setting. Dragons and such fly because the setting is inherently magic based.
But i LIKE the concept which is why i thought of a way to include them realistically: hence the icebreaker cities.

>Pet ideas that have nothing to do with the game but are only background fluff. Background fluff should be up to individual groups to decide
Anon i explained why you can't have a game without concrete things established.

>Yes! Multiple in-world theories is best
Okay then how the fuck do you want any mechanics?
Or do you just want to fantasize about this stuff and it never becoming anything concrete?

>No one but you has mentioned this at all.
Don't be an asshat, people mentioned hot cocoa, comfy crawlers, warm showers, and most of the images posted are modern crawlers.

Read my posts above, i am literally only trying to help unify people's ideas of what should be done without throwing immersion out of the window completely. Don't be mean.
>>79723917 (cont.)
>There's a reason why icebreakers with specialized factories for crawlers exist despite not being a megacity
I think this would be a good compromise compared to having southern megacities that distract from the main themes of the setting.
Could take a page from Frostpunk's book and have it such that these factory ships are the final efforts of salvation by the large shipyards in the north before the cold forces people to leave. This would avoid the thematic problem of southern megacities making it seem as though you have limitless resources at your back.

>This is entirely my point. You can still (loneliness/emptiness + megacities) despite people surviving.
I think the main problem with megacities isn't that they don't allow ruins - rather, it's that they remove a lot of the concerns and issues that would usually be in the setting. With a practically untouchable southern industrial base resolving all of your food, fuel and raw material needs, you no longer "feel" isolated - things no longer feel like they matter as much. When your crawler outpost runs low on fuel, it's no longer a desperate mission to establish connections with the fuel refinery base on the eastern ice shelf; now it's just a case of "sit tight and wait 2 weeks for *mazon to send their delivery crawlers in".
This is what I - and some other anons, I'd bet - would describe as "too comfy". Comfy can be finding a moment's respite amidst the cold, having just managed to handle a dangerous fuel shortage. It can be gathering around a bonfire to trade tales of your journeys with another crew you happen to pass by. "Comfy" does not necessarily mean full creature comforts in every category.

>scavenge literally anything else. Why does it have to be food. Also if you have to actually scavenge for food...
Why can't it be food? It doesn't have to be a necessity, but happening upon a crate of pristine old-world canned meats amidst a journey can be a welcome addition to your menu.
>>79724360 (Cont.)
>food cont.
Little things like that can add to the comfiness of the setting, even if they're not strictly realistic.

>(megacrawlers)...it's just.... not particularly sensible.
Other than the square cube law and terrain navigation issues - which, mind you, would also affect most of the snowcrawler sizes we've envisioned so far - how are they so glaringly offensive that the setting absolutely cannot have them? They're cool and fit the theming, and there's some logical reasoning behind their utility as depots and repair bases. Why can't that be enough?
> city sized crawlers
Anon, I SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED in the comment that you are DIRECTLY REPLYING TO that I am talking about ship-sized (100-300m at most), not km-long city crawlers.

>people mentioned hot cocoa, comfy crawlers, warm showers
Anon, water heating and comfort has been around for centuries.
Sure, cocoa production does require certain levels of international trade, but that's also been around since at least the 1800s.

>most of the images posted are modern crawlers.
That's because most of the art that currently exists of snowcrawlers is modern, anon. They're not specifically commissioned for the setting, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that they might feature things inconsistent with the worldbuild.
>making it seem as though you have limitless resources at your back.
There being big cities at the equator doesn't mean you have any resources at your back.
The idea was that maybe they wanted to try and reconquer what was lost, but then gave up on that effort when they realized they can get the votes of the populace through other means.
That means you're essentially an abandoned project.
Why would they give you resources? Fuck off you and your ice weirdos.
It would be like you walking into wallstreet asking for some resources.
Anyway the point is that you are well and truly abandoned, the surviving industry is just needed in order to have manufactured the starting point for the polar civilization.
This answers your other points as well.

>desperate mission
not really comfy
I get what you mean though.
You wouldn't get shit from the south and the icebreaker bases sending stuff out to you could take weeks, and good luck trying to survive that long without vital items.
There's a reason antarctic bases are often abandoned in the season when deliveries are not possible.
Except you wouldn't have the luxury of just abandoning whatever it is you're doing, because you're months away from civilization.

>but happening upon a crate of pristine old-world canned meats
I mean i dunno.
Having hot cocoa has been a staple of this setting since the early days iirc, and if you have that then happening on some canned meats is... uuuuh.
Iunno it just seems a bit too grimdark if you have to be happy to find some decades old second rate meat.
By all means have at it, i don't wanna ruin your fun, it just never made sense to me.
But then again neither did people's obsession with old wine so i guess you are right i am wrong.
As for megacrawlers.
The issue is that you would use up whatever source of power you have whether that be nuclear, oil, fusion, or whatever to move that thing around when for the energy to move it a mile you could power an entire settlement for a year. Repair depots and bases don't have to be mobile.

Like think of it in in-setting terms.
You can either support 1000 additional people with the machinery you made and scavenged and have a fleet of 50 more crawlers to go into every possible direction and establish trade routes with other bases.
Ooooor you could use up all that to put your entire base on tracks so it can crawl around at a snails pace, while having trouble navigating because of it's sheer size.

Snowcrawlers make sense in the established setting, because dots of civilization are few and far between, and with the weather it takes months to get anywhere, so you need to take all your supplies for that time with you even for a simple trading trip.
But why would you take literally EVERYTHING and EVERYONE you have on EVERY single trading trip?

Okay let's clarify: Do you mean by megacrawlers the size that i linked? Because if so then we have nothing to discuss i completely agree that's sensible to carry bulk cargo inland.
It's when you get closer to 300m that things start to stop making sense, because with civilization on the ice being relatively small they won't ever produce any goods that require that big a thing.
>at least the 1800s
I consider anything after the invention of electric motors to be pretty modern.

>inconsistent with the worldbuild
But that's what i'm saying anon, there is nothing to indicate that they are inconsistent with the worldbuild.
In fact the worldbuild has from the start been done AROUND the existing images.
Heck even the OP>>79698505
said that some ideas brought up here were much harsher than what the general comfy-level of the setting is.

Even though i personally didn't even think that post to be that harsh.
>while having trouble navigating because of it's sheer size.
Actually now that i reread this.... here's an idea how it could work...
The poles are completely inaccessible. You have massive stretches of land without any thawing and thus no trees or fauna or resources.
At the same time the ice is so thick that you can't break through with an icebreaker.

So if you for whatever reason want to go there you WOULD have to go on top of the ice, and you would have no trouble navigating, precisely because of the aforementioned lack of resources and trees. Just a flat plane of ice.

And while no one with a factory would be insane enough to manufacture something that big for land transport.... you could maybe get away with putting massive tracks on an icebreaker on your own.

So disregard my previous stance you're right with some restrictions megacrawlers could work.
If I were to run this tomorrow, here's what I'd do:

1) The meat and potatoes of the world is a hexcrawl. I'd take a map of some region, paintbucket it shades of white/gray, and overlay a hexgrid with a scale of about 10 miles per hex. Place the group's main town somewhere near the middle, two-thirds down, with a dotted line to the south labeled "to Central."

2) Make a terrain table, d6 terrain types. Each terrain has an assigned Ruggedness. Each time they enter a new hex, roll terrain type for adjacent hexes. Make a d10 table for each terrain type of things they might find in there, obstacles etc. Mostly minor stuff, major interesting ideas on 10s. Roll when they enter each. Cross off "interesting" ideas as they get used up. Mark anything they find on the map (or let them do it, even better.)

3) Given them a crawler with some stats. Speed = hexs per day, Off-Road Capability = maximum ruggedness transitable, Communications = max range of radio (*5), Comfort = maximum exhaustion restored on resting, Cargo = max cargo, Fuel = number of days of fuel, Supplies = man-days of food, etc.

4) Pick 4-8 subsystems (Drivetrain, Radio, Power, Heat, etc) that will require regular maintenance. Start with a d10 in each. Each day, roll for each system - on a 0, that system breaks and needs repairs. On a 1, add another die for that system going forward. Maintenance checks during downtime can remove the degradation, but only in one system at a time.

5) First mission: there's a town to the east (either put it on the map or just add a circled region where it might be). Find a route to it.
See i do try to unify ideas to make everyone happy!
-We can have megacrawlers, on the icesheets.
-There will be people who scavenge for old world food preserved in the ice, because there are also people who like vintage wine.
-There is no support from the equatorial people, because their attempts at recolonizing have been abandoned focusing instead on infighting or something as per usual.
-The only thing you can rely on are the factories left over from that effort allowing you to make ice specific equipment.
-Because of their remote locations bigger settlements are hard to reach: icebreakers (only where the ocean ice is thin enough), megacrawlers (only on ice sheets where they can navigate), bunkercities (only at preexisting huge bunkers), other bigger settlements (only in places with lots of concentrated resources)
-Several indigenous people have gone back to a semi tribal lifestyle, living in caves with torches, hunting with snowmobiles and guns.
-The icesheet produces incredibly awful weather events where humans can barely survive outdoors, these could be seasonal or unpredictable making flight impossible during them.
-Regular crawlers are trailer sized, but bigger ones about ship sized with multiple levels exist for transporting bulk cargo like crawler parts.
-Crawlers are generally purpose built just like all the arctic gear for everyone, but some people have attempted to make their own crawlers from particular parts they consider better. Possibly raiders.

Now on to more ideas!
These are great ideas IMO.
A few tweaks:
-communications... radio range doesn't make a lot of sense, AM ham radios can go literally halfway across the globe.

-regular maintenance is an absolute bitch and would be more annoying than engaging. instead i would suggest a random encounter table.
You roll on it not daily, but by GM fiat, or when you have spent X days on a terrain of X ruggedness above the norm for the crawler.

Do a roll on which system will be affected.

Then that subsystem starts with the stats that you mentioned, depending on how good the quality of the crawler is. If it's chinese made the subsystems would have less points than if it is russian made.
Each [time interval] from then on the stats of that subsystem decrease by one point. On each point decrease have the crew roll whether they notice it with a dice modifier of their mechanics skills.
If you notice the weird sound from the transmission as indicative of a problem, it should be easier to repair than if you only notice it when your gears are all gone.
Then they roll their mechanics skill again for attempting to repair it, and they can either fail,
repair X statpoints, or repair it completely.
This would necessitate a basic skill system but that will be necessary for other things like investigating supernatural stuff, bartering, making equipment, survivalist stuff, navigation, etc.

The hexcrawl world idea is absolutely amazing
Thanks! Good feedback, too. The radio = range thing is definitely not realistic. Maybe it's more like a reliability issue/likelihood of successfully making contact with base. Weather conditions might make communications more difficult, and so on.
Finding the right balance for maintenance is also tough. GM fiat is alright, but I think it's better as something that's a known risk - the players have to weigh the risk of a breakdown with the rewards of pushing on. I think subsystems gradually, visabley wearing down as they drive is the right feel. You're definitely right that we don't want it to be more annoying than engaging. Rolling only on days you went off established routes, or maybe under different circumstances for different systems, etc. I think if we're doing it as part of a random encounter, it shouldn't be the only way those occur, but maybe it forces another check at some kind of penalty.
>a known risk
The known risk part is the terrain requirments thing i mentioend.
If you climb mountains all the time you're gonna break stuff sooner than if you go over a smooth plane of ice.
It ties in perfectly into this.

As for the radio i think designing the crawler would be immensely cozy, and also a good way to get people actually interested in it and make them treat it like a home instead of just something to get around in.
Electricity management. So we go for the more powerful radio transmitter, or the more powerful heater, and how do we have enough remaining for the stove?
Fuel management. Do we want to sacrifice precious place for a secondary generator, or do we have to keep the fuel guzzling main engine running for heat all the time? How much inventory space do we sacrifice for storing fuel.
Space management. Do we take on a shitton of cargo but live in a tincan and poop in a bucket, or do we take less cargo and fuel but have a comfy RV setup inside?
Very nice! Keep the ideas coming, anon.
Radio range, speed, vehicle range, cargo capacity (food, loot, spare parts/tools), life support (heat/protection from cold), maintenance, mental/physical health - what else would be important to keep track of?
-electricity as i mentioned
-the ratings of each subsystem was also something to keep track of
-how much time was spent on rough terrain
-the skills of the party
-the comfort levels of the party
-the comfort levels of the equipment

As for a new idea: why not have a layout for the crawler.
Then the players can visually arrange what goes where, how much space they have for food preparation, water storage, sleeping quarters, comms equipment, generators, heating, spare parts, access to the engine, fuel, medical gear, etc.
Traveller has something similar with their ship layouts. And that's pretty comfy.
Designing your own crawler is definitely comfy. There's a few different sci-fi type games that have vehicle creation rules, we could definitely modify something to make it fit this.
Yeah, design your own should be a feature, but there should also be many ready to run out of the box, and to serve as examples. We could do a lot just by emulating the work in the Tractors and You! pdf>>79669577

And you mention Traveller - perhaps a career-based chargen system? Character types like in >>79717801 Any more character types?
>There being big cities at the equator doesn't mean you have any resources at your back.
>That means you're essentially an abandoned project.
...So if the megacities don't even matter other than as an offhand piece of very background lore, why did you place so much emphasis and focus on them in the first place?

>desperate mission
>not really comfy
If you're constantly "comfy" all the time, it quickly goes from being comfy to being boring and complacent. You need hard times to make the good times shine. Lights and darks, you know?
If the southern cities are effectively irrelevant, then this does start to more closely resemble what people were talking about initially - and that's fair enough.

>Iunno it just seems a bit too grimdark if you have to be happy to find some decades old second rate meat.
Couple of things here.
First thing - comfy does not necessarily mean comfort. I know that sounds weird and self-conflicting, but as an analogy - you can be comfy just chilling and joking around the campfire with friends, even if all you have to eat is hardtack and tasteless gruel. Material comforts do help with comfiness, but you can certainly still have a comfy setting without having luxurious conditions. Linking back to my earlier example - contrast is important. Having some trials and tribulations makes those moments of triumph all the more memorable, whereas having everything already presented on a silver platter dampens that impact.
Not saying that players should be starving, but some old world rations can be a nice change of pace from a diet that might be slightly less palatable.
Alternatively, such foods can also just be novelty items like your wine example - not necessarily the best, but good enough to spice things up a bit and warrant some celebration.
>The issue is that you would use up whatever source of power
Just make it atomic and handwave the numbers a bit. Look, if you really want to get into realistic fuel economy and energy consumption, most of the crawlers we've seen in thread would probably need to expend most of their storage space on fuel - or haul ungainly fuel sleds behind them. Being this particular about fuel economy realism would just render most of the opportunities of the settings untenable.

>Repair depots and bases don't have to be mobile.
Probably the biggest reason for a mobile base is that you're not going to have the infrastructure to set up factories and workshops every time the frontier of exploration moves up, especially not in this weather. Consider the megacrawler a more technlogically advanced equivalent to a boomtown or your factory icebreaker; higher-capacity support for crawlers that can follow them into the frontier, without needing months of reconstruction or forcing players to take month-long detours to find repairs.
Yes, realistically you would probably just split those functionalities over a series of highly compact and standardized specialist platforms, but the visual imagery of a larger mothership crawler is going to be far more impactful than your realistic decentralized FOB. It's not THE most realistic, but it's more fun.

>But why would you take literally EVERYTHING and EVERYONE you have on EVERY single trading trip?
You wouldn't. You're just moving critical facilities like repair shops and refineries closer to areas that need them the most without needing constant reconstruction. They're not the main cargo carriers, they're the support vessels that allow smaller crawlers to actually reach further out and come back alive.

300m would be the absolute upper limit, mostly for things like refinery/factory ships. For the most part, they'd only move when the hotspot of crawler activity shifts. They're bases that CAN move, but not unecessarily.
>I consider anything after the invention of electric motors to be pretty modern.
Modern history, perhaps - but they're as much "modern luxuries" as electric lighting or shoes. Technically they may be luxuries to our medieval ancestors; but I feel that modern people today tend to refer to such things as "basic amenities". In the context of the previous discussion, it's kind of weird when you start wording hot water and powdered drink as if they required the same investment as full climate control or steak and lobster.

>worldbuild inconsistency
The images we've seen here and in other threads range from pretty much 30s dieselpunk, to real world examples, to post apoc kitbashes and sci-fi concept vehicles.
Point being that just because some of images that have been posted may be on the higher end of the tech scale, doesn't necessarily mean that the setting is bumped up to the same level unless explicitly agreed upon by multiple people.

>And while no one with a factory would be insane enough to manufacture something that big for land transport
My understanding with specialist machinery like this (ie. heavy construction and mining equipment) is that they tend to be built in disassembled modules. Alternatively, it could be built in specialist facilities as you would a ship.
>On comfiness
It's a totally arbitrary choice of terms, but in my own head I make a distinction between "comfy" and "cozy." Comfy is your absolute level of comfort, while cozy is the difference between your comfort and the environment around you. So for example, a plush 5-star hotel in the Caribbean would be very comfy, but not very cozy. Huddled in a log cabin wrapped in a wool blanket sipping cocoa while a blizzard rages outside is less comfy than the resort (the blankets are a bit scratchy, the wood walls a bit rough, etc.) but much more cozy, because of how miserable it is outside.
So in my thinking, ice crawlers are extremely cozy. They're not ideal living conditions by any means, but they carry that little ember of comfort into the worst sort of environment.
Yeah, that seems like a nice way of distinguishing between the two ideas. Feels like a big draw of a snowcrawler would be the coziness of it all, not technical luxury / standards of living.
>very background lore
Because it's not very background. It's important where all this stuff ultimately originated. It's important to know that not everyone is dead. Even though as you said they are effectively irrelevant in actual gameplay.

Yeah but i thought the whole point of the system was to have the contrast with the harsh environment, and not the harsh conditions.
But yeah the wine example works.
Old wine sells for thousands of dollars meanwhile wine from last year sells for like 10 dollars a bottle, even if it's super duper tasty.

>wool blanket
Have you ever actually tried wrapping yourself in wool? It's.... not comfy or cozy.
It's literal torture.

>or haul ungainly fuel sleds behind them
I thought that's what we were going for.
The whole fuel economy thing seems to be a big part of what the other anons want from the mechanics. The opportunities of the setting are still tenable.

>the frontier of exploration moves up
There isn't really a frontier in the setting everyone so far has been describing.
There are a few spots of civilized space on otherwise completely untamed continents. No line that "up to here is explored". Especially since it wouldn't be difficult to just go to any location within a year and set up shop there without exploring anything in between.

>as if they required the same investment as full climate control or steak and lobster.
They kinda do...
Chuck some lobsters in a tank with food and boom more lobsters. Or go fish for them. Get a cow, feed it with whatever organic scraps you have, boom, steak.
Meanwhile cocoa needs not only the conditions to grow, but also roasting and processing the beans, extracting cocoa butter, mixing in as much as is needed, having a source of sugar, powderizing it, getting the milk from your steak cow, and having the amenities to make it warm.
The images i have seen in this thread are all that i could find... and they are all 60s+
There are only literally two images that look like dieselpunk and a single post apoc kitbash, that wouldn't actually be very viable as a crawler:

and >>79690203

All the others even elsewhere online are modern things.

>specialist facilities
That's the point literally no one would be insane enough to have a specialized facility for something that insane.

But as i said they could work in some locations like ice sheets and by retrofitting existing factory ships with home made mega-threads.

Also see>>79725538
for my summary.
As for a bit more of things to do... with comms not being an issue and a single normal crawler no matter the size only being able to carry limited amounts of supplies....
There would probably be ice markets every now and then at this or that settlement.
Crawlers swarming up, and parking everywhere, people looking for stuff they need and people who need the stuff they have.
>Trade ya an RTG for a barrel of transmission fluid.
Such events would be the major way for crawler crews to meet people outside of their homebase, because people would come from far and wide. It would also be the prime opportunity to discover news about salvageable sites or weird happenings.
>Have you heard what they're saying about sector 34 6F? No one claimed the fuel from the powerplant because a massive shadow scares everyone off. If you ask me it's just a localized weather pattern.
If the weather is right, maybe a big bonfire. But as such events would be the equivalent of cons and festivals, some of the crew would also stay in their bunks / cabins. However not all crawlers would be manned at all times, and with everyone busy with their own thing, break-ins would be frequent. Hence possibly doorbells with cameras on crawlers and doors that open only on command or from the inside.
>Hey you. I see you there. The fuck you think you're doing? .... Oh you were invited by him? Ah that's okay, let me buzz you in then. Just get the snow off your boots first.
But generally even the raider crews would stick to being civil, because they too need the occasional opportunity to get supplies. IF someone is willing to trade with them.
>Yesss this is enriched uranium of prime purity, up to 60%. You got the goods? Let me see those track bolts and no sudden moves!
You know what?

I think it's safe to say at this point that there's just far too many creative differences and different visions as to how crawlers should be worldbuilt to enforce a single, authoritative setting.
It's probably for the best to instead focus on designing some sort of mechanical framework that can then be adapted to fit the settings different anons prefer - with scenarios, rather than making so that everything has to follow a specific worldbuild.

I think this would probably be the best outcome, currently. Provide options that can be adapted or mix/matched according to preference and leave it at that.
Chances are that a snowcrawler setting is going to work with a fair bit of mystery and the unknown, anyways - just leave the finer details up to GM jurisdiction.
I think we pretty much agreed on everything?
Like we reached a pretty good compromise, the only thing we don't quite agree on is how dire things should be.
Like again, everything you said is entirely possible, the only thing i fixed up to be more realistic is the how. Again, read >>79725538
it's everything people said they wanted!
I disagree pretty strongly on the wool blankets thing. I mean, a little bit scratchy maybe, but not torture. Much better than being chilly at least. Maybe you're just allergic?
What I'm seeing so far is that you're mostly compromising other people's ideas so that they fit into your setting; that's not necessarily bad per se, but it's not necessarily for everyone. Do what you will, but some people are just going to prefer other ways of doing things.
Haven't seen anyone other than yourself voice support for that compromise, by the way.
Making a framework of modules that people can pick and choose will just be more versatile. This way everyone gets their say in what they keep in their setting, while still allowing cross-pollination of ideas simply through discussing scenarios - rather than bickering over core setting elements that everyone has differing views over.
Been looking into some alternative transport / power systems that could bring some interesting options onto the table for crawlers.

Given how strong the wind can be in cold climates, landsailing / landyachting could be an interesting inspiration for certain crawler types, especially since it doesn't consume fuel like conventional locomotion does.
Apparently they were used in the late 1800s/early 1900s in the US for cargo transport over lakes - so there's clearly some precedent to go of off.

Pic related was a game that used wind-power as an interesting mechanic; it doesn't cost fuel and is really nice for cruising in open areas, but the tall sail also attracts lightning strikes in inclement weather and can be problematic when passing through urban ruins (hitting bridges or outcrops, etc).
You could also use it in conjunction with conventional power for an extra speed boost over flatter surfaces.
Not-OP-but-almost here. It's a real pleasure to keep coming back to this thread and see it active. Strongly in favor of someone archiving this (mainly because I have absolutely no clue how to do this)
I love this idea and am writing it down.
I think I would use some ideas. I mean, for all the things I might disagree on, realismanon has supplied pretty solid worldbuilding and good explanations for things I do want in the setting. Not going into details, because I think we've been through all of it at length, but still.
In this regard, I agree with you as well. Focusing on some mechanics or simply different parts of worldbuilding than industry/state of civilization seems a good direction to head in now.

Some things I'd still love some input for:
>factions? nations? politics? is there a cold war in this cold world?
>natural encounters. crazy weather patterns, maybe even in connection with spookies
File: maxresdefault.jpg (116 KB, 1280x720)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
>factions? nations? politics? is there a cold war in this cold world?
So my take so far would be this:
>there is a city that is the base of operations for the snowcrawler teams ('Central' for now).
>It is the biggest hub of civilization with most population density, access to tech, and generally the core of what could be called the government, if it was possible to effectively govern all the scattered colonies and settlements in the frostlands.
>Snowcrawlers and their crews get their jobs there, and head out to where they're needed.
>They also have access to some military. Obviously not a lot of human resources can be spent on keeping up military, so it's not exactly impressive, but with loads of oldworld weaponry lying unused, they could be well stocked.
>Central's government is obviously interested in asserting control over nearby colonies, and strives to create some semblance of a nation even over long distances of unusable wilderness. This they do with all the tricks at their disposal:
>trade, economic dependancy, political influence, and by offering the services Snowcrawlers and their crews provide.

What do you think so far? It would certainly create a lot of opportunities for interesting conflict and different opinions on this government (colonies not wanting to become part of this network but being pressured to do so for their important resources for example).

Depending on whether this is something a GM would want in their game, it could also give the option of having another government striving for the same thing, with a blurry 'border' being patrolled by Snowcrawlers of another nation. Not necessarily hostile, but locked in a cold war where no one can afford to spend the resources necessary to really attack, but also strives to limit the other's influence.
obviously the whole cold war part should remain open to however tense a GM would want the situation, and whether or not there even should be a conflict in the first place. Therefore I wouldn't argue for or against it too much here.

I think having one or more factions, in this case Central, with clear goals could be a worthwhile element in this setting. They'd function as the resource suppliers for most jobs, have interests in scientific explorations (sending experts to and fro whenever a new thing to investigate pops up), and could have this unifying ideology, which can also become really sinister in places. Some colonies would benefit from their support, while others could be effectively milked for their resources, bound into service by necessities they cannot obtain otherwise.
Personally, I'd envision Central's (mobile) military as being close to a mix of coastguard / navy in term of its responsibilities. Roles such as search and rescue, intercepting rogue crawlers/monsters, escorting merchant vessels etc. Without a human peer adversary, Central's standing military would probably shift to cover more peacetime-type roles the same way how modern militaries often participate in disaster relief or humanitarian aid.

Having this organization contract out work to snowcrawler crews would work, especially for potentially risky jobs far away from the city like clearing out dangerous nests or such.
The colony dynamics are certainly going to be important. I think that potential indigenous or splinter factions like tribes or self-governed colonies might also be an interesting pathway to explore, kind of like the interactions between Britain/Russia and local groups in the Great Game. This could also be another potential source of conflict without outright having a national-level competitor.
Can you be allergic to wool?
To me it always felt like literal torture.

Or maybe i'm just sensitive to physical sensations.

I am trying to make the ideas that other anons have workable.
Like it's fine to throw in all sorts of ideas, but at the end of the day it has to fit together into a setting.

And again i don't think there are any differing views at this point.

Like name one thing that we didn't end up agreeing upon?
What compromise do you personally not like anon? Maybe i can make it better while still fitting not into MY setting but into the setting that contains everyone's ideas.

I could expand on this a bit...

With the colonization effort having ultimately originated from the equator there could be many that still keep their allegiance to those powers there, despite having been well and truly abandoned by them.
Think colonies on mars by the US and china still duking it out amongst themselves despite them no longer being supported by the governments on earth.

I would also add that Central should not be ONE place.
That makes absolutely no sense for what is essentially an entire planet.
There should be a central for all snowcrawler teams. These would be the big bases that people keep talking about. Megacrawlers, bunker cities, icebreakers, or just giant bases.

This would make the whole setting more untamed, more grand and disjoint and less centralized.
>Broadcasts from Tatar Central went quiet yesterday. Does anyone know what happened to them? Last i heard they were weathering a storm, but i thought Tatar Central was underground? Why would it have affected them?
Each and every big settlement has the means to create and maintain crawlers, and support a basic population. But not all might have all the resources available all the time. Especially the megacrawlers and icebreakers.
Conversely aboveground centrals would be founded precisely because someone found lots of resources in one place.
>I am trying to make the ideas that other anons have workable.
in YOUR setting.
Plenty of them were workable in the first place - perhaps not realistic, but they didn't have to be. There were plenty of other anons other than me that had objections you dismissed or forced your way through, such as keeping the reasons behind the winter vague or thematic choices such as opting for less survivors of the event.
It's not that those options are objectively wrong - they just don't fit your specific setting logic. That doesn't mean you should stop others from enjoying what they like. Some people are just fine with more suspension of disbelief or more fanstastical elements, even if you personally "hate all that are nonsensical" and think these tropes "need to die".

It's this fundamental disagreement on rules of settings that leads me to believe that a modular system without a single canon would be better. You can keep what you have, just don't force it such that everyone's ideas must abide by your rules to be considered "workable".

>Like name one thing that we didn't end up agreeing upon?
There's a lot of things I still don't agree upon thematically - southern cities, the level of material comforts, tech level, no specialist facilities, food scavenging, survival rates and so on - but I respect that you have your own vision for the setting and I have mine. Let's just focus on the common elements like snowcrawlers and potential scenarios rather than trying to force the other party to conform to your setting's rules.
File: snowmap.png (319 KB, 1209x566)
319 KB
319 KB PNG
>I think that potential indigenous or splinter factions like tribes or self-governed colonies might also be an interesting pathway to explore,
This is easiest to accomplish with what i suggested above that there would be a central of each faction. And some factions might not have a central hub.
Think of these like the capitals of nations.
Not in my setting.
Don't be an asshole. I have no idea why you're being hostile.
There's plenty of anons who had objections to other ideas.
I tried to make them work together.
I also NEVER ONCE dismissed any objections. I always tried to address every single one. Not once did i force anything .

The reasons behind the winter can be kept vague, it's just that i don't think they SHOULD be because you can't fucking make mechanics for something you don't know what it will be.
I explained this.
And thematic choices such as less survivors simply do not align with what the majority want here. And that is being comfy.
The OP himself called something that i personally would have been okay with TOO HARSH and dark.

Some options are objectively wrong. My setting logic is basic worldbuilding logic.

>some people are fine
Yes but most won't be. That's exactly what i'm saying, i'm trying to pull things away from "i just pulled this out of my ass" and towards it making rational sense, because most people do not like settings that feel like a drug trip where things don't make sense.

>I still don't agree upon thematically - southern cities, the level of material comforts, tech level, no specialist facilities, food scavenging, survival rates
Anon i think YOU're the one being alone with your view here. Another anon specifically thought no one here was saying that many need to die. The OP specifically called out things for being too dark, and no one but you insisted on trash crawlers existing.
And you know that's fine to a degree and i personally am trying to make as much of that fit with the more cozy setting as i can, but when you're uncompromisingly want to make things grim when no one else wants to we have a problem.

The whole let's just focus on common elements thing doesn't frikkin work because your idea of a totally destroyed world simply doesn't have much in common with any other idea in this thread.
Like let's address the specific things you still have an issues with.

>Southern cities.
They can be kept entirely vague, and disconnected but they need to exist, because if they don't then that means that over 90% of the population got wiped out. And no one here wants that.

>the level of material comforts
Everyone agreed that food should not be a big issue, and you should have warm showers available. There isn't much in terms of novel material comforts that anyone is pushing for.

>tech level
You do need to have pretty good tech, because anything else, especially when you're doing logistics being snowtruckers essentially leads to a broken suspension of disbelief.
You can't make things that are massive and crawl over the snow and allow you to not freeze with a welding tool and some scrap. Or i guess you could, but if you are in that dire a situation your focus wouldn't be on exploring but on trying to survive and get away from the cold moving south.
Like if you don't have enough of a techlevel there's literally zero reason for people to stay up north instead of moving to the warmer equator.
And most importantly since their inception these threads have been based on the available artwork.
And that artwork is mostly modern. Some includes planes and drones.
You wanting to move it back to a trashy early dieselpunk is in conflict with the previously established feel of the threads. (at least from the ones i've seen i've not been here for a lot)
>no specialist facilities
You simply can not have a fleet of crawlers without any specialized facilities to make them.
Like... in order to actually have this be a snowcrawler based setting you'd need a lot of snowcrawlers, and you can't just wish them into existence.
Where do they come from? Where do you get tracks like that? There aren't enough MBTs in the world for all these. How come everyone has winter gear? Where did you get the super insulation for the crawlers? It's one thing to say that a couple of people have been able to jury rig some tanks and truck engines and RVs to make crawlers, but to say that apart from the 2 functional ones we have today every other one was just handcrafted by people.... especially people who you want to worry more about their day to day survival.....that's absolute nonsense.

>food scavenging,
Everyone wants food to be not too big of an issue. One reason for this is that a setting where you are always on the verge of starving to death isn't particularly comfy.
I even explained that you could still scavenge food because some people will just prefer that.
What more do you want?
If everyone was busy trying to not starve no one would move up north to explore.

>survival rates
I addressed this above but i don't think anyone here (apart from you maybe) wants to have almost everyone wiped out. It would neither be comfy nor realistic.

I don't know what to tell you anon. If this game is to be about essentially exploration and logistics in a new world, you can't just ignore basic logistics. Everyone would ask where the crawlers came from.
No one would go explore if basic day to day survival needs weren't met. If you make things too dire in the cold, people wouldn't be comfy, and all player parties would just drive south to find a warmer spot where they might not immediately die if heating breaks, and they might actually grow food so they don't have to worry about starving day to day.
To finish up:
Your ideas are interesting, and dare i say good individually.
But you need too compromise on them if you want them to make sense together and especially with the other ideas.

Please don't think that i'm trying to disparage you or ignore your ideas i'm just trying to make them fit all the ideas together in a way that makes at least a lick of sense.
Alright, I think there's a lot of miscommunication and assumptions going on between us right now.
I'll try to clarify some of the issues on my end first - a more in-depth response will have to wait, since it's pretty late here right now.

>drug trip where things don't make sense.
The drug trip is one extreme end of the scale, just as how full realism would be on the other. I'm talking about a moderate or slight shift towards the fantastical, not full abandonment of logic.
For instance, take Deserts of Kharak - realistically, 400m landship carriers that can refine and manufacture advanced vehicles just from desert scrap metal aren't realistic at all. But the creative liberties that the designers took with the setting make it uniquely interesting in ways that wouldn't be possible had they fully stuck to the realities of physics or practicality.

>Southern cities
I don't disagree with the need for cities and infrastructure to build and support crawlers. What I personally disagree with is placing such a large and supposedly important part of the setting so far away from where things actually happen. IMO, it gives the impression that the snow and crawler aspect is a very localized event, and that you can just escape south if you don't like things; it distracts from the whole "frozen icescape exploration" aspect.
Personally, I'd prefer having most - if not all - of this infrastructure much closer to the area where the game takes place, such that it feels a lot more interconnected and "real" in the game world, rather than a distant throwaway detail.
> less survivors simply do not align with what the majority want here. And that is being comfy.
I think it's possible to have a cozy/comfy setting set in the aftermath of a disaster. Like a bit of bittersweet to give that comfiness something to compare to, like a wistful nostalgia or wonder as to what life in the old world might've been like.
This is one of the things I meant when I talked about you rejecting ideas; I don't agree that comfiness should mean that sad or unfortunate events should be avoided altogether. I think they can coexist, especially when the deaths are part of a setting's history rather than a current event.
To use an analogy - when archaeologists discover the remains of an old city, does it necessarily mean that it has to be doom and gloom? It can just as well be a humble acknowledgement to history or a celebration of culture, even if the original events may have been very sad.
Since your stance focuses on realism as well, I also think that having most of the population escape such a world-changing effect would also be rather unrealistic; a lot of people would likely die in the panic surrounding the event, or wouldn't afford or choose to travel south.
As such, I think there are a lot of options you end up excluding because you don't personally consider them able to work in a comfy setting.

>Material comforts
I think this ties directly into the food scavenging argument. I agree that food availability should not be a big issue - but food availability does not necessarily mean food quality (in terms of taste or palate, not nutrition problems).
>Material comforts (cont.)
I think food is a huge opportunity for cozy/comfy experiences. My logic goes something like this: if your food is always nice and pleasant due to basic supplies just being that good, food becomes a sort of afterthought. But if your regular food is a bit on the blander side - soup and biscuits or rice, for instance - then you have a sort of motivator to seek out better things, like hunting for wild meat or bringing back old supply crates you've found. It makes those moments more special and memorable. Food availability / nutrition shouldn't be an issue, yes, but I think there should be space left for improvement - and that's where things like scavenging can come in. I've never argued that people should starve, just that they shouldn't be too well-off by default.

>survival rates
Just to iterate for the fourth time >>79723917
Not pushing for extinction events, but I do think that the consequences of the weather change should be allowed to be reflected in the world. If you think that's too "grimdark" that's fine - you can keep them out. But if I want to have those kinds of details for plot hooks or atmospherics, it should be fine too.

>no specialist facilities
I think this was some miscommunication - I was responding to your comment here >>79732477 where you claimed that no one would be insane enough to build specialized facilities for megacrawlers. At the 100-300m range, they'd obviously have to be rarer than regular crawler factories - but specialist facilities here just means something more like a shipyard than a truck/tank factory, not some sort of massive superfactory.
That's what I meant when I said that I didn't agree with you on "no specialist facilities".
>400m landship carriers that can refine and manufacture advanced vehicles just from desert scrap metal aren't realistic at all.
They are .... not that unrealistic. Hence why i budged on the megacrawlers eventually.
The only thing that is a bit unrealistic is the scale and weight issue, but that is easier to handwave than some other stuff. Factories that are mobile are very much a possibility there just hasn't been any need in the normal world for them. But as soon as we start colonizing mars you'll see some of them.

>that you can just escape south if you don't like things
But ... you can.
That's the point.
You don't need earth to be destroyed for people to want to go to mars even though life there is harsher.
And many who were born on mars won't be able to just come back too easily.
But if something really absolutely necessitated it it would be possible. That doesn't make staying on mars any less remote.
And this isn't just because i WANT it to be this way, it's the only way things CAN happen. If you want vegetation to exist, which... you kinda do i think, then you need to have seasons even in the more northern latitudes. It's okay if it's like a taiga where you have only a few days of the year above freezing. But if that is the case up north, then around the equator where things are always a lot warmer, you will have an easier chance of surviving.
You physically can't have a setup where you have seasons and at the same time the equator isn't frost free. Because you can reduce the latitude where you have thawing, but you won't ever have seasons only at the equator because the equator doesn't really have seasons. I guess you could technically have the equator have two thawing seasons and that's that, but that would mean that most of mankind dies.
>you can't just ignore basic logistics
I am not, and never have argued that crawlers should just come from nowhere - my point was that the way that said logistics was approached should have some leeway for creativity. Southern cities, for example, shouldn't be the only worldbuilding solution to the logistics chain. It could also be fortress city / arcology projects in the north, or offshore manufacturing platforms off the coast.

>tech level
Yes, high-tech solutions are necessarily to uphold suspension of disbelief according to the more grounded and realistic rules that you're currently following. Realistically, a high tech level is the only way to achieve the sort of performance and range necessary to make such a setting function in a fun way.
But this is what I mean by creative differences in terms of setting. You want something that's more grounded in the rules of reality in order to satisfy your criteria for immersion. On the other hand, I'm okay with fudging some numbers or tweaking bits of reality if that allows me the creative freedom to have fun things like 30s-inspired coal crawlers or radials instead of turboprops. They're both valid philosophies of worldbuilding, even though they lie in direct contrast with each other.

That's why I suggested a modular system focusing on shared elements, rather than trying to cram everything into one setting. This way everyone gets a framework they can build off of to suit their own needs, rather than limiting it to any certain time period or design philosophy.

>at least from the ones i've seen i've not been here for a lot
This is part of the reason why I've been so stubbornly arguing with some of the things you've tried to present as without option - there are so many cool ideas from the threads I've seen, from bittersweet stories of survivors before the winter to the idea of a defiant last city that spreads warmth in spite of the frost. They're all amazing possibilities that present really interesting stories - but they wouldn't work or would have to be drastically changed in order to fit the more realistic rules you prefer.

There should be space for both options, not just realism.

>And this isn't just because i WANT it to be this way, it's the only way things CAN happen.
Case in point - it's the only way things CAN happen in real life.
This is not real life.
It's a place for us to tell stories and come up with interesting ideas. Some of us prefer worlds grounded in reality. Some of us us prefer worlds that offer something different, even if it breaks the laws of reality a little.

What if whatever caused the weather changes and monsters also lead to the rise of winter-resistant vegetation?
What if the cities and arcologies have expansive greenhouse systems that harness geothermal power?
What if certain natural formations hide bountiful forests and fertile lands, sheltered from the wind?

These are all fun possibilities to ponder, even if they're not strictly realistic.
That's what I meant when I said you dismiss things too readily.
File: maxresdefault.jpg (184 KB, 1280x720)
184 KB
184 KB JPG
Nice map, anon!
Multiple factions means multiple types of scenarios can be mashed together: small pop high tech Central, primitive tribal Central, big pop low tech 'barbarian' Central, many small independent Centrals, etc. Cool!
>muh pedantic autism, mixed with hostility
Get some fresh air - you've been cooped up inside the crawler sucking exhaust fumes for too long, friendo.
>more autistic pedantism
>totally making up fake 'consensus'
>repeats tired talking points ad nauseum
Y-you're ill. Get help.
>repeats his lies...
>finishes his rant with a deliberate trollpost
Huh, have you finished your spergout, my dude?
You have to stop responding to him, friend. He's being deliberately disingenuous and is maintaining this spat over setting details, instead of moving on to cool encounters and weirdness
He won't listen to reason, anon - move on.
>to give that comfiness something to compare to, like a wistful nostalgia
And THAT's precisely what's not comfy.
Being comfy relies precisely on the feeling that things are great. If you always have to think "but it will never be as great as before" that's not comfy. That just trying to come to terms with awfulness. Comfy cozy is not coming to terms with awfulness it's having a genuinely enjoyable time without reservations.

>does it necessarily mean that it has to be doom and gloom?
Yes. I .... honestly don't want to make hostile assessments of you, but if you don't feel gloomy when looking at the dead people of pompeii entombed in ash, but feel celebratory... then you should seek counceling.

>a lot of people would likely die in the panic surrounding the event
I entirely agree which is why i subscribe to the idea another anon said here that 10-30% would die.
>wouldn't afford or choose to travel south.
Everyone would try to survive and if it meant that they had to arrive as refugees. Those who deliberately stayed behind would form the backbone of the land based bases of the new ice society.

Also this isn't just me speaking. As i said the OP personally shot down an idea much less grim than this because it was too harsh. Another anon explicitly said that he doesn't believe anyone wants the majority of people to die.

>in terms of taste or palate
This is the thing though... canned food that's over a year old does not taste very good. Even if it's the literally best sort it won't taste better than freshly cooked elk or rat or whatever survives with bland rice..
Of course people would still want it. Everyone wants variety, heck i got canned food from the store yesterday even though i'm at home. But to say that that's unequivocally better is too much.

>there should be space left for improvement - and that's where things like scavenging can come in
i 100% agree
Cool encounters:
>crevasse with warm air billowing out of it
>moaning ice cave
>blinking whispy lights in the distance
>crawler tracks heading in a dangerous direction
>unidentifiable crawler tracks heading toward 'Central'
>frozen corpse, still standing, arm raised and pointing into the distance
>blood covered snow
>blinking machine lights in the distance, moving either purposefully in one direction or seemingly randomly
>abandoned base, ruined
>abandoned base, intact
>parts/food cache (with booby traps)
>ambush by hostile crawler crew (foreign? criminal? rebel? political?)
>still trolling
Fuck off, shithead.
>like a shipyard than a truck/tank factory,
That's exactly what i meant. No one would build a shipyard for a slightly unhinged project like that. Like.... no one builds a shipyard just to make like two ships, and supertanker sized megacrawlers would be rare enough for this.
I don't know why you want them built in a shipyard either, people retrofitting existing vessels as i suggested is perfectly feasible, if a big undertaking.
>the logistics chain
The issue is that the logistics chain has to start somewhere. Hence the equator surviving.
Because all the things you said fortress cities and arcologies are awesome but they have to have appeared after the apocalypse to be specialized enough to survive and that's why there needs to be some sort of industry that first made the machines to make ice breakers with factories, mega crawlers with factories, arcologies with factories....

>fudging some numbers
I am more than okay with fudging some number, the kinda stuff i'm not okay with is just outright "because i said so". Like you need to have a plausible source for the handful of megacrawlers (retrofitting), and the shitton of normal crawlers (factories).
And my issue with coal and other low tech is that at that point you're basically steampunk, and that's fine and dandy, hell Frostpunk is literally based on this idea, but my impression from the suggestions of other anons here was that this should be a bit more realistic than Frostpunk.
>to the idea of a defiant last city that spreads warmth in spite of the frost
This for example is literally just frostpunk and that's cool but that's a totally different universe and a totally different setup.
There are amazing possibilities everywhere i agree even the ideas that i don't personally like are super interesting. But at the end of the day if you actually want this to coalesce into something real then we at least have to agree on a rough setting. A single city trying to survive with steampunk tech is just a radically different game to survivors of the apocalypse trucking and exploring the abandoned world living in bigger and smaller mobile bases.

If you want we could make a system that encompasses both, but that would have to be a nigh universal system and thus more complex.

>These are all fun possibilities to ponder, even if they're not strictly realistic.
They are though. I could realistically justify all of those and i love them :D
This is more like what we need. Cool stuff that can show up in an actual game. Throw the numbers 1-10 next to that, and you've got an encounter table.
>thin ice (what's underneath?????)
>something's moving under the snow
>unidentified drone is following your crawler
>sabotage! (or was it...)
>traitor! (or is he...)
>mission done, heading home: but something is following the crawler in the distance...
>something just smashed the crawler's windshield!!
>parked for night, all are asleep: something knocks on the door...
File: McMurdo-ObHill.jpg (476 KB, 1200x650)
476 KB
476 KB JPG
>Nice map, anon!
Thanks i made it with my pedantic autism :P

>primitive tribal Central
I didn't draw a tribal central because tribes tend to be tribes precisely to abandon the default lifestyle.
But yeah that's the idea! Totally different settlements under the control of totally different Centrals.

I didn't lie about anything anon and i wasn't trolling.
I am also listening to reason. I have a reasonable explanation for everything i said.
The consensus isn't made up it's genuinely what i saw. And i tried to incorporate everyone's ideas into it.
Look here.
>No one has pushed for extinction events
or the OP himself
>the challenge should 90% of the time be your task at hand and not survival.
>your setting has a lot of neat ideas to add, but seems much less cozy and much harsher than most folks here tend to favor.
And others
>Then give them incentives for spending valuable money and cargo space on enough food to take detours to explore this or that interesting little blip on the map that might hold some kind of treasure or something
>Yes, this is good. Give the players rope so they have the option of hanging themselves - this would give the players control over their 'comfiness level', as it were.
>and most of the time have plenty, so they move around in the 70-100% and feel safe, cozy and prepared in their little trucking home.

I'm literally just going by what i see friend.

And finally i suggested some encounters the OP said are definitely worth incorporating. I'm just trying to keep the whole setting together lest we diverge so much that we need a universal system to account for all the different playstyles.
More encounter ideas!
>A plane not crashed but landed safely in the middle of nowhere, supplies still inside, but no tracks or corpses. Several years old.
>"You hear that scratching noise in the night? Like something scratching the armor of the crawler.... Thing is, there were no tracks in the morning."
>A large swath of a forest completely burt down like as if from a natural forestfire.
>A large swath of forest destroyed by a meteorite impact. Meteorite might still be in the crater.
>A dense forest with something desirable in the middle. No paths in. Trees too dense to drive through, too thick to run over.
>Your literal bog standard raiders. Just simply raiders trying to shoot you and take your stuff. You have to be faster, drive better, or be cleverer, or negotiate something to survive. Unless of course you want actual combat.
>Ghosts. In the distance at first so they just appear to be unidentifiable human shapes disappearing if you blink, but closer every day the crew spend traveling towards a particular point.
>Uh oh that weird trinket you took aboard the crawler, megacrawler, icebreaker, arcology is making people act all weird.
>A ritual circle. Stones smeared with blood. Tracks lead away in all directions.
>That tribal guy we just encountered? Looks a lot like the tribal we met a week days ago 1000km from here.... an awful lot. Same clothes too.
>A local tribe has run out of [resource] and have issued an emergency broadcast. They don't seem to speak your language so you can't ask them for a reward. Will you help even though the rewards are uncertain or let them die?
>Multi level crawler tipped over and abandoned in a icefield. The thing is quarter the size of a megacrawler and is the icefield is completely flat. The crew, supplies, and motor sleds are missing, but their personal items are still there and might indicate where they went.
I'm genuinely trying to be helpful and reaching a comprimise that would allow most ideas of everyone to work.
Hi there. Thanks for basically giving me the crown of OP. I'm not, I'm just the guy who got here after reading through the archives, found a snowcrawler thread (or at least the hint of one) randomly the same day, years after the last of its kind, and decided then and there to start working on this thing.

Besides reanimating this thread from its deathbed a couple of times (happy I did, because it's beginning to truck along on its own and is giving me lots of ideas to work with), and throwing in a few of my own half-baked concepts (most of which were met with differing opinions from mine and which I've changed since then) I have absolutely no more authority over this setting than you or anyone else here.

So please don't use me as a point in your favor, cause I'm just some dude. What I found potentially too harsh was the feeling of survival at the edge of extinction and the pretty real threat of giant flying monstrosities everyone seems to not only know about but actively harvest.

>What I found potentially too harsh was the feeling of survival at the edge of extinction and the pretty real threat of giant flying monstrosities everyone seems to not only know about but actively harvest.
But even those are some cool ideas, as long as they are somewhere in the 10% ratio of spoopy/dangerous stuff.

That being said, I do like SOME of your ideas, but wish you guys could finally stop bickering about logistics so much. At this point everything has been said. Thing is, to make a real tangible system out of this, someone - and I mean ONE person, or a connected team of people - has to take all this in, decide for themselves what they like, and write it down. I'm going to attempt to do that, and am willing to share when and if it ever becomes a thing that's worthwhile - don't worry guys, you'll be the first to know - but I'm also in the end going to do my own thing with it.

For the sake of this thread: let's focus on generating ideas that make it worthwhile. This isn't the place to define everything down to its last detail, and you - polite as you're trying to stay, which I appreciate - also have some fixed ideas that you keep coming back to. Just let them go for now, and we can all brainstorm other cool shit again, until the next debate comes along.

I'm not even against debate. I really want this thread archived in part because both sides had some good points. But it's also really swamping the thread and taking energy and attention away from more worthwhile directions like
>ONE person, or a connected team of people
and before anyone misunderstands me: by this I mean that ANYONE who wants to make this a playable game will have to decide some things for themselves. Me, I probably won't include an iceless equator full of cities. Why? I don't know, I don't like the feel of it. If you want it, you include it in your game. Maybe it'll be better than mine. I don't give a shit.

This is why I'm arguing for a more general idea smithy in here. Instead of narrowing down, let's spread out. People will decide what they like and what they don't for themselves.

And if you want a complex, realistic frostworld setting, write it. Take this thread as inspiration, take all the shit you like, ignore all the shit you think is stupid, and roll with that.

If you want, we can compare notes further down the line, and decide who won. And if you did, I'll do some original art for you.

But for now, let's please come back to NEW ideas.
Yet more encounters!
>A secluded small town of not particularly fortified or insulated houses, with modern amenities, but no radios. Curiously everyone seems to insist that there was no apocalypse and it's just winter.
>Tribals seem afraid of a huge moose, "bigger than your crawler". Silly exaggerating tribals.
>The party is hunting in a forest and discover moosetracks. By having someone fall into the massive depression left by one hoof.
>Wow this rock seems continuously warm to the touch! How curious. Let's hope someone in the party knows what corium is.
>Listening in on the airwaves someone mentions that the crawler crew that said they were gonna explore something three weeks ago hasn't been heard from since. You're somewhat close to their intended destination.
>Coming back to your crawler after a day out hunting or mingling with tribals, you find yourself locked out....The doors only lock from the inside.
>You see a human shape in the distance in the direction you're heading. But it's the middle of an icefield weeks away from civilization. And they seem to be on foot. They appear to be walking towards you and yet make no attempt at getting your attention with waving. Do you approach?
>You begin to hear a humming. Shutting down the engine it is revealed that it is coming from outside the crawler. No wind is blowing.
>You find a crashed delivery drone used for light supplies delivery and medical rescue. It appears to have crashed recently. Do you attempt to turn it in, repair it, salvage it?
>"Hey uhh.... i know this is odd but.... is anyone else suddenly feeling like they should just get out naked into the snow?"
>You pick up a numbers station broadcasting weakly. Curiously it still has power, and is still broadcasting despite no one having lived close to here for decades.
>A research facility with people in suspended animation. Do you attempt to use the experimental tech to wake them?
>You find a bunker with people but no comms equipment. What's it like in there?
I just brought you up not because you have authority, but because you seem to have been trying to compile something.
Also it's still one more person who said extinction shouldn't be around the corner.

>even those are some cool ideas,
I agree in fact i said before that i don't even think they're too grim. I just don't want mass human extinction.
>write it down
it seemed like you were doing that.

>we can all brainstorm other cool shit again
This is what i've been trying to tell you guys for days. Brainstorming cool ideas won't coalesce into a system. I was hoping to try and contribute to these things actually becoming something concrete instead of just endless fantasizing about cool stuff....
And you know i like cool stuff because half of the "worthwhile directions" posts were mine :P
If you leave the work to me there's also no real reason to argue this long about something. I understand other anons have questioned you and you tried to explain/defend your ideas, but there have been more than a few calls to move on now.
I'll do my best to make the system suitable for all levels of mass extinction :p

The point others have been trying to make, and I agree with, is that system does not necessarily depend on worldbuilding. I know your position on this as you've argued it before, so there's no need to rehash it, but mechanics like the hexcrawl idea, tracking of resources, mental and physical fatigue, and building your own crawler etc. - basically simulating the actual EXPERIENCE of playing the game - can be made apart from the bigger worldbuilding. They don't depend on questions like 'where do snowcrawlers come from', because there is already a strong enough consensus on where we want to go when snowcrawlers are a given. Not saying worldbuilding isn't worthwhile for it, but in this case I feel it's holding us back on some fronts.

So, okay. Just posting random plot hooks might not get us a system down the line, you're right. But after elaborating on some points for this long, it's better to move the attention to completely new questions that still beg an answer. If this goes well, we can have many more comfy spooky snowcrawler threads in the future and come back to pressing questions.

Personally I think you did contribute a lot. But the point is, there is no one to convince here, because even if there will be a final product, you could still change out the things you don't like. That's the cool thing about this hobby.
Orange transparent chainsaw
Okay, onwards to other topics then:

I kinda like the idea of some pulp here and there. For example,
>crazy alt-history tech like Tesla rifles
>mech suits
>orange transparent chainsaws for all I care

Would you guys stay strictly with more gritty 'real world' technology plus larger vehicles, or is that a thing we are open to? Because in a world with mysterious happenings, science could also tap into strange new technologies.
I feel like especially the science department would create an atmosphere of progress still obtainable in what could be seen as a ruined world. Could bring back some comf, to know that even though living is harsh, new technologies can uplift all of humanity, so "just keep truckin' till then".
Yet more worthwhile directions:
>You have transgressed upon the sacred burial site of Ahanu Beararms. If you bear arms, they are now jammed for the next encounter. Of course you don't realize this until you try to actually use them.
>There is a massive migration of snowrabbits happening. Do you try to hunt one or take one as a pet? If you hunt or trap one, as soon as you ready any weapon to kill the rabbit with, the entire field of rabbits immediately turns towards you, eyeing you motionlessly. If you bring the knife closer they seem to ready themselves...
>There is a massive migration of elk happening. If you kill one, there's a one in ten chance that the megamoose will appear on the horizon, migrating with the elk.
>Near a settlement you find a person running stumbling in the snow. If you approach with a crawler they will try to get away. Once you catch up to them it is revealed that they are in a snowsuit that has full fist mitts, and no eye opening. If it is opened it is revealed that they are an albino, escaped from raiders/a cult, and mute.
>A distress signal from a massive settlement is received. Their fuel depot blew up taking their hydroponics facility with it. They have fuel and food reserves for a month, but after that they will freeze and starve. The colony could be vulnerable to attack, or you could attempt to organize the ferrying in of new equipment or the rescuing of hundred and hundreds of people.
>You find the telltale tracks of a megacrawler on the ice. If you follow it in one direction, they go on for days, but then abruptly end. You discovered where they came from having stayed there before, and went the wrong way.
>"You guys ever heard of the cult of the dying light? They are some loons that believe that the ice age should have been an extinction event and are trying to use a chemical plant to pump the atmosphere full of freezing compounds."
>See that dead volcano over there? It has become active unbeknownst to everyone. Run.
I would rather have a good final product that fits compromises than to have to homebrew everything.

Also it's certainly not holding me back from working on all other fronts as you can see lol.

Some of these are great.
>Tesla rifles sure.
>Mech suits, well.. okay as long as they're just used for better logistics, cuz otherwise they'd detract from crawlers.
>Orange transparent chainsaws were literally just because that picture is lego. It's a lego thing.
>psionics sure i can see that happening with the other paranormal awakening.

And this is me realismanon talkink
File: ab8.jpg (46 KB, 640x337)
46 KB
also apparently it's an ancient meme
File: C2c6UhAXcAA9QIw.jpg (44 KB, 600x315)
44 KB
More other topics:
How mundane would you want snowcrawling to be?

>And these are the best of the best. Selected and trained from birth to survive the harsh environments of the frozen tundra, they make death defying journeys to supply us all with the things we require and bind together our frigid world. They are... THE CRAWLERCREWS™!

>The tundra is a harsh mistress. You never know what she will throw at you. I've seen men go mad from the endless white on some postings. But if you're resourceful and tough as a nail, she does provide for your needs. ~Andrew Deacon, 54, crawler captain.

>"Sorry honey, we had to make a detour to assist the chinese. You know how they are with supplies, and Central wanted to improve relations with them. No... no i promise i'll be back before the icebreaker leaves shore so you won't have to wait a year. Yes, i know ham radio is not a replacement for personal contact. But i'll try and pick up a sattelite phone so i can video call you when we're near an industrial base."

>Dear diary, Mikey wanted to go on the next crawler run to the Westural Central, apparently he has a friend there. I for one love seeing my son making connections with others, John on the other hand was livid. But for once he resolved it with a great idea.... we're all going on the trip together. The cabins on the big crawler will be cramped and i have no idea how we will last a year like that, but it's gotta be better than this glorified hole in the ground. Love, Carol

>And remember, the trip to the Boston Bonfire is next week. Whoever doesn't have their permission slips signed by tomorrow is. not. coming. Also i want none of that crap from last year, their drinking age is 21, so no smuggling booze aboard and getting wasted in the engine room, or i'll leave your butt out right there out in the cold. Class dismissed.
I've been thinking of a cozy two player campaign in a similar setting.
Wanted to make it survival but not heavy, the players have a moving safespot but venture out to explore some weird ancient places that are truly deadly.

So I got to thinking about player deaths and came up with several points that I'd like to share:
1) players can die easily but it doesn't end the game
2) they get revived (their memories get reuploaded to cloned bodies, for example) and generally lose time and myabe some resources
3) what make death costly is the "plot timer", the world goes forward, crucial npc die, towns perish, basically, the more you die the more grimdark the world becomes and the more negative ending you get. Maybe something like world tendency in Demons Souls?

What do you guys think?
I'd say something like travelling to the New World around 1500s-1600s.
Dangerous but people still do it.
Your middle option, I guess?
I mean it's kinda illogical for the players to be snow-crawlers if it's the job for supermen only, as is implied in your first option. Too intense to be cozy?
It's a great idea in theory but with others not being cloned and things progressing downward, things will go from cozy to super grimdark really quick.

Fair enough. I wonder what others think.
Yeah, that's a matter of careful balancing. I'm figuring out how to make it work mechanic-wise.
Maybe some "narrative" currency for the players to use when in danger? I don't like it, honestly, because too meta.

Maybe the "snow crawler" community is based on helping each other and you bascially always tell somebody (or some agency) that you're going to explore place x that's at coodinates x,y and if you're not back in time, somebody gets dispatched but is legally able to claim rescue fee if successful?
So mechaically GM makes a roll whether somebody comes (success depends on how remote the place is), then who comes (basically what you'll owe).
Yeah but if no one comes then you die.
I honestly don't know.
I think a semi transhuman society would kinda work for what you're trying to do.
Cortical stacks in everyone where your brain gets downloaded if you die. Of course they'd have to be retrieved by someone and cloned, but eventually someone fill find your frozen corpse.
And then you might have missed a day if you sent out an emergency broadcast, or a couple of decades.
No major genetic alterations, maybe just basic stuff like looks, aging, and something necessary for the new world like cold tolerance.
This way no one can be killed truly permanently easily, but you will miss out on opportunities, lose resources, and be indebted to whoever cloned your body, and your reputation with the people you failed to do your task for will suffer.
I think it can range between 2-4. Like, finding a new route should be about a 2, most work-a-day crawling is a 3, and travel between well-established communities is a 4. I definitely think it's something that could be a family business, with a small family making runs over the safest routes. The really risky assignments would be only for the best, though.

That could be a good hook, even: "We picked up this strange reading a few weeks back, but our resupply crawler isn't really up for checking it out. Not to mention Old Dave's vision isn't what it used to be..."
He's still fucking trolling...
...and you're still fucking responding - you new? Smarten up!
ALL tech levels should be represented, so players can decide for themselves how they want to play it.
Narrative currency, in my opinion, is cancer and only works to take players out of their immersion. Would not recommend. A big feature of this is the spoopy mysteriousness of it all, which is lost when players have narrative control.
No death means no threat means no player investment. Terrible idea.
Dude stop being a cunt. I'm not trolling, we were discussing that we agreed and how who should be writing what down.
I've contributed a lot to this thread. Do the same instead of shitting on my arguments.
Then we will have stuff to discuss! c:

>A big feature of this is the spoopy mysteriousness of it all, which is lost when players have narrative control
I 100% agree. Narrative currency should at most be something the GM keeps track of and applies when necessary. Having the players control it is nonsense.

>death means no threat means no player investment.
The threat would be exactly as was described above from missing resources and time. You could lose a crawler you spent ages on making just right for you, and you could lose favor with the clients who get you access to the world. It works in multiple systems.
Also if your players need the threat of death to be invested you should look for better players.

>ALL tech levels should be represented, so players can decide for themselves how they want to play it.
How do you mean? Within the world? That's kinda what we were attempting with the different communities having different central bases or none at all and those bases being different types as well.
Or do you mean within the rules of the system.
I'm generally not a fan of the cloning/resleeving idea. It undermines the survival aspect of it, for me. As much as you might make losing equipment and time might be a penalty, it's never as big a problem as true death. And if equipment is all that's at stake, there are lots of situations where they might take risks they otherwise wouldn't. It's hard to tell an epic tale of survival against the elements when players have "opps, guess I'll just die" as a reasonable option. Finally, equipment loss may be effectively punitive, but it isn't actually fun to play - you're basically being sent back a few sessions, rather than just accepting that one character's story has ended and starting a new one.

I think a good system is one where risks are mostly transparent, so if players are careful death should be quite rare. It should still be quite unforgiving if players aren't risk-sensitive, but death should always basically boil down to a risk they didn't needs to take.

Actually, here's an idea: since a lot of the threats are environmental, there's a much larger chance that what kills one crewman will probably kill them all. If the GM sees that they're in that kind of situation (crawler's stuck, storm rolling in, supplies running low), when all hope is lost, you should stop the session right there. Next time, they're playing as the rescue mission dispatched to their previous crawler's last known location. So there's a chance, if they play it just right, that they'll save themselves.
>It undermines the survival aspect of it, for me
That much is true.
But we were starting from the supposition said here >>79746343
>2) they get revived (their memories get reuploaded to cloned bodies, for example) and generally lose time and myabe some resources

And i was trying to find alternatives for that.

>So there's a chance, if they play it just right, that they'll save themselves.
This would work if the aim of the system wasn't to be cozy. Because a chance at TPK isn't cozy. I'd say it's the opposite.

Just throwing ideas out there.... would the survival aspect still be impacted if you could end up lost for a hundred years or forever stuck in your cortical stack? Because i don't know of anyone who would want to be in cold storage that long just to take some risks.
It would just be the knowledge that you might live again if you die. Not a necessity.
Although even that could undermine the threat of the elements, especially with you being able to activate emergency beacons.... hm
I quite like the reinstantiation thing and EclipsePhase pulled it off pretty well.

And it adds a sort of... more fundamental deeper comfort.
Nothing can harm you. Not truly.
You may suffer, you may live in agony, you may be enslaved, you may have everything be awful, but at the end of the day you can at least always know that you *will* always get out on the other side alive.
To me, and apparently that other anon, that's worth trying to incorporate somehow.
File: 1565601315263.jpg (86 KB, 1673x478)
86 KB
It just seems like a weird direction to take things in. The first guy who brought it up seemed to have specific reasons for wanting it in the kind of game he wanted to run: small party, very deadly, not too heavy. But as a general part of the system, I just don't get it. I don't get what it adds, and I don't think it's serving the main appeal of the game.
Well i tried describing what it adds to the main appeal of the game.
You can't really get that sort of deeper calm with anything else.
Hence why i'm even thinking about it.
You gave me some food for thought. Didn't exactly think of it that way. Thanks!

I just thought i'd share this idea since it seemed pertinent enough to the theme of the thread and my homebrew setting was basically ice wastes with crawlers crawling between permanent human habitats (based on fertile soil "mining" and geothermal availability).
Can provide some background, if anyone cares.
Me and player death go back to the games my group's been having. None of those ended in a tpk. There was one player death, iirc, and even that produced heated arguments.
Call it autistic candyland but that's the way things were and I wasn't exactly happy with that.

On the other hand, when you spend months or even a year, sometimes more, playing a single campaign, developing your character, going from zero to hero and all that save the universe stuff, there IS an argument against the necessity of player death.
That got me thinking about how I could introduce the idea of pc mortality to the players who were averse to it.
That got me to the original post itt.

Basically, you've got high enough stakes story (saving your town, loved ones, whatever) and can not truly die, but can fuck up enough times for the plot to follow in a completely different direction to the one players were intending to go in.

There were a lot of arguments inbetween, but this is the gist of my thought process.
This book is a fairly famous quick kids sci-fun read from 1964. From what I remember they use sailing ships on skis.
>halfway home carrying a valuable cargo and it is discovered that the cargo containers are empty
>arrive at a small outpost only to learn a mysterious crawler has been there ahead of you and already taken your cargo
>while working a tight schedule, radio picks up another crawler nearby reporting a valuable find
>two days after leaving a settlement smoke is seen rising from its direction and no radio contact can be made
>Being comfy relies precisely on the feeling that things are great
Things don't have to ALWAYS be great. If things are always comfy, the word loses its meaning. You can still wonder about what the world was like before without being unhappy with your current situation.

>if you don't feel gloomy when looking at the dead people of pompeii entombed in ash, but feel celebratory... then you should seek counceling.
By that reasoning, every archaeologist out there would be constantly depressed by the scale of human death that has existed throughout history. Death is natural, anon. It's part of the world's history the same as anything else, and I don't agree with your philosophy of censoring of it because it's "sad" and "uncomfy". Unless this is meant to be a children's show, it's fine to acknowledge that sometimes sad things happen. That doesn't immediately nullify the comfiness of the setting.

> Those who deliberately stayed behind would form the backbone
Yes, but some people wouldn't make it - bad luck, interpersonal conflicts or otherwise. Discovering what happened can be a major source of plot hooks.

>OP personally shot down
I have nothing against OP, but he's not an authority figure here - there have been tens of previous threads. OP's just someone who decided to start another discussion about it.

> canned food that's over a year old does not taste very good.
Realistically, yes.
There could be improved sealing techniques or certain food types that just aren't common anymore. It's not necessarily better overall, but it can be nice to have as a supplement in terms of flavor and choice. I think that should still be an option.

>No one would build a shipyard for a slightly unhinged project like that.
Even our real world history would prove you wrong - and besides, you're going to need a facility that can maintain and service those larger crawlers, even just for cargo unloading.
>Mech suits, well.. okay as long as they're just used for better logistics, cuz otherwise they'd detract from crawlers.
I agree, should be used for labor, but generally be a tech level that is around
>Orange transparent chainsaws were literally just because that picture is lego. It's a lego thing.
Yeah, and if people want it in, they should be able to have it in. I see the coolness in it, even if it's mostly visual. But player nostalgy can help create a comfy setting.
>psionics sure i can see that happening with the other paranormal awakening.
cool, cool.
I'd like psionics to be equally mysterious as the other supernatural stuff going on. Like, if I were to decide on a few ideas:
>you can gain psionics by exposure to the supernatural. GM rolls a few die; the chance to gain something should be low, but always possible.
>in the setting, it's seen as something dangerous and unpredictable by those who even know it exists. There are records of people setting buildings aflame with just an unchecked thought, and apparently a wife accidentally even killed their husband during an argument. Details of this are undisclosed, but it was quite a mess.
>mechanically, powers can be useful, or not so much. Maybe GM rolls on a random table.
>could be boiling an egg with your mind, could be telepathy. definitely needs practice to control, or even just to suppress.
>players don't immediately know that they've gained something if the GM rolls a power. instead, they have to find out by chance, or in tense situations. generally up to the GM how to introduce it. Could be tied to low sanity?
>if a player has obtained psionics and actively practices it (with all the accidents it creates), they eventually get the chance to treat it as a controllable skill, and even potentially learn more.
>logistics chain has to start somewhere.
If you read my comment you were referring to, you'd see that I was arguing that the southern city should not be the only solution for a logistics chain. The logistics chain can also just begin within the northern area or elsewhere. There should be options, not a one and done answer because other solutions aren't "realistic" enough.
>they have to have appeared after the apocalypse
You mentioned Frostpunk.
Let's take a page from Frostpunk's book - their coal generators were built as the winter gradually set in, hence why they exist even though there are no surviving southern cities within the setting at the time of play. Why can't we do something like that?
>And my issue with coal and other low tech is that at that point you're basically steampunk
My point with using coal / boiler power is that some people want different tech levels in their snowcrawler settings, or different rules to play by. These threads originally were a place of discussion for these various different possibilities, where anons could tweak the ideas that were shared according to their own rules. By trying to make it such that things HAVE to be realistic to be considered "workable", you are excluding many of those ideas from the discussion.

>but that would have to be a nigh universal system
No - what we need is to figure out frameworks like how snowcrawlers work or how some scenarios can pan out. That doesn't necessitate a unified setting.

Please listen to >>79744951.
The system doesn't necessarily have to be tied to one specific setting. It should be open enough to accommodate different settings and styles of play.
By insisting certain things be set in stone (southern cities are a must, megacrawlers must be limited, there can only be very limited death), you are ruling out many interesting settings or ideas that other anons have had in regards to their snowcrawler settings.
That's why me and several other anons have been so vocal against you.
good question! I'm with >>79746838 on this. Somewhere between 2-4.

cool, that really ties in well with the thread.
I agree that player death shouldn't end the game. But reviving for me is a bit too much on the scifi side. Comfy or not, it should stay a dangerous world for everyone, and death is part of that.
Death should be invited by the players, not by the GM. If they take a risk in the frostlands, they should understand things can go bad fast.

Usually a way out of a full on TPK will present themselves to a GM. Maybe there is even a company law to investigate signals and distress beacons (like in Alien). And even supernatural things can actually be friendly, so there's chances to get saved even in the worst of situations.

I like the system of 'owing' someone. Maybe in the frostlands, this is an actual currency? Depending on whether it's a 'favor' or a 'debt' you'd either have to do a small thing, or a big thing in return, no questions asked.

>And it adds a sort of... more fundamental deeper comfort.
>Nothing can harm you. Not truly.
Yeah, that sounds terrible to me. Comfy shouldn't mean there's no danger of life here imo. And it should be up to the players to decide how comfy they WANT to be. If they care more about the spooky or survivalist aspect of things, they should be able to go look for it. Heck, a snowcrawler team could become professional ghost hunters if they so desire.

I think if you make it clear to the players that it's the kind of setting where death can happen fast if they invite it, and make character creation easy, it should be fine with most people, no?

noooo-hohoho. don't bring up that shit again anon. at this point we've made an effort to move on, so if you keep coming back to the discussion points, I'm going to assume you are the one who's trolling.
Yeah, fair enough. I don't think he's interested in allowing other settings anyways.
Sorry mate. I just read 'logistics' and got triggered.
I agree with most if not all of your points there. But what goes for realismanon goes for you too: if we keep circling back to these things, we can never get more done than what we have now.
Reading through the archives, debates like this are exactly what killed the first threads. Back then it was 'ice raiders' VS. 'no ice raiders'.

so back to
>how to build your crawler
>orange fucking transparent chainsaws because at this point, I'm all in
once more into the breach.

how about some FRIENDLY supernatural hooks? we didn't have many of those.
>people sometimes get lost if they wander too far from town, but in a few instances they have reported seeing a flickering light, as if from a candle, in the distance. following this light they were able to find back to civilization, but never were able to see their rescuer. in the morning they always find a second pair of bootprints next to their own, always from the same shoes
>along a popular road crossing there is a small abandoned church. it has been fenced off by Central's government for 'unpredictable phenomena', but the kids from nearby settlements often go there anyway. apparently if you leave a little gift of sweets, or something close to your heart there for a night, it will be replaced with a little trinket. this can be anything from a puppet the kid in question has lost years ago, to whatever they wished for christmas that year but didn't get, and sometimes it is said to be something that seems random at first, but will be useful later. Once a kid got a small whistle. Upon returnint home, they got buried by a local avalanche and were able to get rescuers to their position in time only because they had that whistle in their pocket.
Bump while I finish up crawler generation rules. Hope you guys like them~
I'll offer another bump. Curious to see what you've come up with.
Spooky doesn't always mean terrifying or dangerous.
Godspeed, anon.
Nice ideas.
I feel that, if there are to be psionics, they should be mysterious and somewhat impractical. No fireballs or mind control, but eerie and unreliable.
And they would make the character perhaps less susceptible to psionic phenomena, but more susceptible to mental fatigue and breakdown? Or vice versa?
Being a psionic shouldn't be too bad; but it should carry some weight. Spooky weight, if you understand me.
Maybe they're considered lucky...or unlucky......
File: 1589498396953.jpg (935 KB, 1920x1080)
935 KB
935 KB JPG
File: 1589479202017.jpg (83 KB, 720x557)
83 KB
>You can still wonder about what the world was like before without being unhappy with your current situation.
I actually agree i just don't want it to be a trashworld where people are preoccupied with how before everything was great.
>out there would be constantly depressed by the scale of human death that has existed throughout history.
They aren't depressed per se but they do treat human remains with a solemn reverence. And they definitely don't feel comfy unearthing graves.
>Discovering what happened can be a major source of plot hooks.
I 100% agree i dunno why you think we disagree.

> It's not necessarily better overall, but it can be nice to have as a supplement in terms of flavor and choice. I think that should still be an option.
I agree i even said so myself!

See we don't disagree on much at all!

>you're going to need a facility that can maintain and service those larger crawlers,
Isn't that the point of the megacrawlers? That they maintain themselves because they are almost a city on wheels?

but like....
it's like including lego studs on characters and equipment just for the nostalgy value.

some of the things you mentioned are a bit too powerful. like at that point you run the risk of having it be a major focus and it devolving into a supers game.

>begin within the northern area or elsewhere.
But how?
That was my point if the north has been abandoned and the settlements are kinda low tech just barely able to not struggle with basic survival.....then who the heck can suddenly build up massive factories to build the equipment you need in?
Like the first factories will have to have been built after the apocalypse because before no one would've known that ice equipment would be needed.
But who after the apocalypse in the north had such resources available.
Implying that the northern settlements have just resources to build massive factories takes away a lot more from the survival aspect.
>Why can't we do something like that?
Because frostpunk is generally absolutely trash. Specifically the generator thing seemed absolutely nonsensical. It's also a vasly unrealistic setting because it is steampunk with mechanical AI.
Also because of the gradual winter thing there there are no well preserved ruins in the north.
The apocalypse needs to have been sudden enough to make people die or abandon their stuff, for you to have ruins to explore.

>By trying to make it such that things HAVE to be realistic to be considered "workable",
I was under the impression that we were trying to coalesce the ideas into one system, so the ideas would have to fit together.

>That doesn't necessitate a unified setting.
Again read the post you replied to. The very things you said change based on what level of realism and lore you want.
>The system doesn't necessarily have to be tied to one specific setting. It should be open enough to accommodate different settings and styles of play.
I explained that this doesn't work. Please actually read what i wrote. Unless you have a universal system the choices of lore and realism massively influence precisely the sort of thing you are trying to have frameworks for.

>you are ruling out many interesting settings or ideas that other anons have had in regards to their snowcrawler settings.
I am trying to go with the option that rules out the least ideas. And whenever someone brings up a pet idea they specifically like i try to think of a way to integrate that so that it works with the other ideas and you don't need a whole new framework for it.
For example if megacrawlers were unlimited their usefulness would be diminishing, because you cannot maneuver something that big around any other place but a flat plane. Like it literally doesn't physically fit. And if they were common there would be no need for any other type of settlement because megacrawlers are objectively better than the same thing just immobile.
I am trying to HELP.
File: u7djskwyhyd21.jpg (30 KB, 750x503)
30 KB
>Somewhere between 2-4.

>Comfy shouldn't mean there's no danger of life here imo
I don't know.
What sort of setting are we building then.
By the way not permanently dying doesn't mean the players don't get to decide their level of comfort. It's just that having mechanics for that at least has the option open for that deeper level of comfort that even though everything might be shit you will most likely live to come out the other side.
It's important whether to have mechanics for this, and the general idea of how comfy vs deadly you want the system to be influences literally everything else from the crawler systems to logistics.
Exactly like i said for the realism thing you can't have a system that's both realistic, and unrealistic, and harsh and violent, and comfy and safe, and at the same time isn't universal.

>and make character creation easy, it should be fine with most people, no?
I heavily disagree, because that would make things not immersive. If characters are just throwaway things, then immersion is practically non existent, because you are playing more a strategy game with pawns than the roles of your characters.

I offered animal related neutral supernatural phenomena.
Here's some more:
>Local legend has it that people lost during snowstorms often see a polar bear appear, feasting on some animal carcass. Once the person runs off in the opposite direction, if they keep running, they will eventually find help that way.
>It sometimes rains fish. While this used to be an explained phenomenon it is happening even far inland and the fish are of sorts thought to be extinct during the apocalypse.
>People keep disappearing in snowstorms and reappearing during the next in the same spot, thinking no time has passed.
I agree, psionics should not start off as really useful powers. If anything, they should be either obscure and mystifying or downright dangerous to the user and their surroundings. Since even in the world around them, supernatural things are hardly understood and often feared, learning to control any abilities should take immense work - maybe more than they might be worth in the end. But IF a character decides to work on it, they should be able to gain a Stranger Thing's Eleven's level of control eventually (disclaimer: I really haven't seen much of Stranger Things).

You're challenging me anon. How about this: chainsaws are a useful tool for the frostland survivalist. You can use them to cut ice blocks for shelter, trees for firewood, and remove some blockages whole scavenging ruins.
Bright orange is a color that is easy to spot in snow. Perhaps these orange chainsaws are such a standardized piece of snowcrawler equipment (made by that especially reliable of tools, Ogel) that they have become a sort of symbol for the whole profession.
I haven't seen any of stranger things so i have no idea what you mean lol.

That's perfectly fine it's the TRANSPARENT part i'm having issues with lmao!
Also as an aside the coal generators in frostpunk were also built by expeditions from the south, after the place had been abandoned.
So they are doing close to what i've been suggesting except because of the slow apocalpse there you wouldn't have much ruins to explore in that setting.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you - the realismfag,
Here, have some rules. Based on the ship generation rules in Mothership RPG.

I tried not to weigh in too exactly on mechanical effects, but some of what I put in here is based on my 'hexcrawl' post further up the thread. My main conceit is that icecrawler modules are used like equipment (to make checks), and that the things I've included modules for are the sorts of things that an icecrawler crew ought to be doing. Obviously, open to modifications, but I thought it's better to have a place to start from. Let me know if there's anything that doesn't make sense, it's possible I made some assumptions mentally without writing them out clearly.

I didn't put anything about the mechanics of, well, mechanics - I posted some ideas about that earlier but there were questions about finding the right balance of issues cropping up so that breakdowns are engaging rather than enraging.
awesome work anon. between this and the hexcrawl setup, these are much needed mechanical explorations that go a long way. I won't have time to read through it today, but if the thread survives another night I'd like to get into it tomorrow. If not here - I'll see ya in the next one.
File: eiscat_sgo.jpg (80 KB, 640x480)
80 KB
How do you guys think a combat system for this should look like?
And what amount of crawling should there be?

I'm considering running a test oneshot. Not sure what system to pick for combat and crawling.
I can tell you what it is in my head, right now, but that's entirely made up by me:

System is dice pools, d10s, simple 6+ is success. Pool is attribute (4ish total) + skill (12ish?), nothing else. Number of successes is important, and drives most skill check results. Successes are capped by your equipment.* Any 1s you roll are Exhaustion, crossed off from your skill/attribute until you rest somewhere comfy.

I think combat should be a fairly rare occurrence, and one that PCs usually try to avoid. Hunting is a separate thing, more a survival skill test with a bit of shooting at the end. And of course, a lot of the supernatural stuff is probably not the sort of thing you shoot at. But, backs to the wall, raiders got them cornered: roll it like a skill, always opposed, most successes wins. Every hit is an injury (randomized table, more successes = more serious), most fight-ending even if not immediately fatal. Don't get in combat, it's not comfy.
*This thing about equipment limiting number of successes is a key point and is weird, admittedly (I don't know of other games that do that), but I think it reflects something important about the setting - great gear with no skills is garbage, but great skills with no gear is too, and if your gear is rubbish then even a very skilled person is just barely getting by. There are games where the hulking brute does more damage with his fists than normal people do with their swords, and a brilliant talent can expect to whip up a solution with just the clothes on their back, but I don't think this game should work that way. Survival here is about taking care of your resources, knowing what you can and can't do. It's perfectly reasonable for Survivorman to say "I'm not going out in that, not without a parka. I'll freeze before I make it 2 clicks," or for the genius mechanic to tell her skipper "it's not the kind of 'broke' that I can jury-rig, we need the actual parts." And that's something that can develop organically, rather than by GM fiat, if you let some problems require a gear solution.

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.