Mothership 1e Ruleset

[crleonhard]

Mothership 1e Ruleset

Description

This is a full ruleset for the Mothership 1e rpg created by Sean McCoy and published by Tuesday Knight Games.

This ruleset can be downloaded for free from the FG Forge here: https://forge.fantasygrounds.com/shop/items/1845/view

The pay-what-you-want rules for Mothership can be downloaded here: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/484222/Mothership-Players-Survival-Guide
The full game can be purchased here: https://www.tuesdayknightgames.com/pages/mothership-rpg

Legal Disclaimer

This ruleset emulates Mothership's game mechanics but does not include any content data or other copyright-protected material. It is not authorized, licensed, endorsed, or sanctioned by Tuesday Knight Games. Some parts of the code in this ruleset derivative of CoreRPG or MoreCore may be copyright SmiteWorks.

Acknowledgements

Big thanks to Ranzarok for the graphic design and art assets, and to SmiteWorks for the CoreRPG framework upon which this ruleset is built.

https://i.imgur.com/ytZrSOX.png (https://i.imgur.com/Cybbh0y.png)

Features


Character Sheet

Automatic stat generation, starting skill selections, and equipment loadouts (requires initial population of reference data)
Double-click fields to roll checks, saves, etc
Weapons panel for rolling attacks and damage, as well as tracking ammo


Combat Tracker

Enables rolling NPC/monster attacks and damage directly from CT
Drag-and-drop damage onto targets
Supports optional Strict Turn Order house rule


Ship Manifest

Double-click fields to roll ship checks


House Rules

Armor Damage [on]: Apply Armor damage
Loadouts [off]: Automatic equipment loadouts
Panic [off]: Automatic Panic checks
Stress [on]: Apply Stress changes
Strict Turn Order [off]: Roll Speed checks for initiative
Trinkets [off]: Automatic trinkets and patches
Wound Effects [off]: Apply Wound and Panic effects
Wound Rolls [off]: Automatic Wound rolls

Important Notes

No data module is provided with this ruleset. Any copyrighted game content such as class descriptions, skill and item lists, and random tables must be entered manually within FG.
Fortunately, this is easy if perhaps tedious -- nearly everything is simply a matter of copy/paste from the PSG into FG (see README attached to this post for full details).

[Ranzarok]

Very cool!

If you ever need some more help with the graphics, just let me know.

[damned]

Well done crleonhard

[WilliamRiddle]

Step-by-step instructions for getting this working would be very appreciated. Not all of us are FG coders.

WR

[crleonhard]

Step-by-step instructions for getting this working would be very appreciated. Not all of us are FG coders.

WR

No coding required! It’s just a matter of data entry through FG, exactly the way you would enter a new item or table for 5e or any other system. There’s just a lot of them to enter.

[crleonhard]

I’ve updated the first post to include the Forge store link. This is my first Forge listing, so let me know if anything’s not clear!

The README.txt file (which you should be able to find in your FG/rulesets/Mothership folder) identifies all of the tables, classes, items, etc you’ll need to create to get the most out of this ruleset, but I can provide a walkthrough here if it’s confusing.

[Camberme]

61303I have the ruleset downloaded, I've updated my Fgu, I can see the two rulesets AROUND it, but I can't see it as a ruleset in my launcher.

[Camberme]

the txt file. is inside the .pak file, which you need someway of opening, it's not just a "text file in a folder" IMO

[wndrngdru]

You are correct. The ruleset is not packaged correctly. It should be a zip file containing everything WITHIN the Mothership folder, not the Mothership folder itself. crleonhard will need to re-package andupdate the Forge file. In the meantime, you can could repackage it yourself until the update happens. The .pak file is just a zip file with the extension changed. Change it to .zip and unpack in somewhere you can work with it.

[crleonhard]

You are correct. The ruleset is not packaged correctly. It should be a zip file containing everything WITHIN the Mothership folder, not the Mothership folder itself. crleonhard will need to re-package andupdate the Forge file. In the meantime, you can could repackage it yourself until the update happens. The .pak file is just a zip file with the extension changed. Change it to .zip and unpack in somewhere you can work with it.

Ah, I’m uploading a corrected build now. And yes, everything including the README is in the .pak file which you’ll just need to unzip.

(I've temporarily disabled the download until the new corrected package is approved.)

[wndrngdru]

I would recommend making the README available somewhere else as well. (attached to the first post, maybe?) Generally, unpacking a ruleset inside the rulesets folder is a "bad idea" because, even if the .pak file gets updated, FG will always use what is in the unzipped folder.

[crleonhard]

I would recommend making the README available somewhere else as well. (attached to the first post, maybe?) Generally, unpacking a ruleset inside the rulesets folder is a "bad idea" because, even if the .pak file gets updated, FG will always use what is in the unzipped folder.
Good suggestion! I've attached the README to the first post.

[MemiX]

Thank you so much for your work! I'll love to try it once the forge gets listed again.

[WanderingMinstrel]

Count me among the folks who's interested in this! I'd love to be able to run Mothership with my extended family.

[wenceslg]

Commenting to remind myself to check back :D

[crleonhard]

OK, I was having some issues uploading new builds to the Forge but they appear to be resolved now and I've reactivated the store page. Take a look and let me know if you run into any problems. Again, this is my first Forge listing so I'm still feeling my way through the process.

Also, if anyone has any questions about the data entry necessary to populate classes, items, etc beyond what's described in the README attached to the first post above, just let me know.

[FricKtion]

Thanks so much for this, so far it looks awesome. I am having a little trouble though. It looks like I've got Skills/Classes entered correctly but when I apply a Class to a character the skills won't apply. I get "Skill reference '{skill name}' cannot be resolved. As far as I can tell the skills are entered correctly and shared with players.

And another question I had was about the Scientist specifically. Should the Scientist's Master + Expert + Trained chain automatically apply or will that need to be manually added to a Scientist character?

[crleonhard]

So, that skill reference 'name' cannot be resolved is what you'd see if you had a skill listed under a class' skills but no skill of that name was found in your skills menu. Here's a walkthrough I just created in a fresh campaign with no existing data. The first thing I did was to create 3 skill records:
61417

I then created a new character and dragged these 3 skills onto the skills tab, which worked fine:
61423

To demonstrate the scripting of class skills, I then created a new class record with skills defined per the official character sheet in the PSG:
61419

When I dragged my class record onto the main tab of another new character, it prompted me first for which stat to apply my +5 bonus to and then for my Master skill, my bonus Trained skill, and lastly my prerequisite skills:
61420 61421

Can you try both of these methods (drag to skills tab vs auto-add of class skills) and see if you continue to experience the same error? You may want to try it in a fresh new campaign just in case.

ETA: In addition to the steps above, you'd need to share each of the skill and class records above for anyone other than the host to use them.

[FricKtion]

Thanks a ton for that! It must've been campaign related. I followed those instructions and ran into the same issue with my existing campaign. Worked beautifully in a fresh campaign.

If any others do what I did and only realize after you've done all the data entry here's what I did to save myself from doing the work again:
1.) Create a fresh campaign
2.) Open up db.xml in both the old and new
3.) Copy the items and tables from the old db.xml into the new db.xml

I decided to recreate the skills/classes in the new campaign just in case. But so far this has worked for me.

[crleonhard]

Glad that worked out! Definitely let me know if you run into any more glitches. This data entry component is certainly the least-tested part of this ruleset, as when I run games I'm typically using a "personal use" data module I created straight into XML rather than through the UI. I did try to test everything to make sure people would be able to get what they needed in there, but it wouldn't shock me if there were bugs.

[crleonhard]

OK, I've identified a small bug which is probably the cause of the issue FricKtion ran into. In short, clicking the "Skills by Rank" button on the Skills sidebar causes an erroneous <skilldata> reference node to be created in the db.xml which prevents manually-entered skills from being resolved properly. I'll try to get a fix out for this ASAP, but in the meantime the two workarounds for this would be to either 1) not click the "Skills by Rank" button, or 2) if you already did, manually edit your campaign db.xml to remove the <skilldata /> node below:
<reference>

<skilldata />
</reference>

ETA: Actually, the same bug exists with the buttons on the Items sidebar as well (with the same workarounds described above):
<reference>

<armor />
<equipment />
<loadout />
<skilldata />
<weapon />
</reference>

[crleonhard]

OK, I've simply removed those problematic buttons for now, to prevent anyone encountering the issue until the root cause is resolved. The update has been uploaded to the Forge.

[billyorkfellz]

Thanks a lot for that! o/

[The_Dragon_Ladis]

Opening the Combat Tracker with the latest FGU version, using the new Core Dark Theme shows a bunch of errors.

window: Control (label_name) anchoring to an undefined control (rightanchor) in window class (combattracker_host)

[crleonhard]

I do see some new warnings and at least one error trying to load the dark desktop theme, but I see these same errors when loading CoreRPG all by itself, so I don't think any of them are specific to this ruleset.

[billyorkfellz]

So here's what I've seen so far:

1) Combat tracker visual elements are not well aligned.
2) Items records are all messed up.
3) Guess not update related but char sheet tabs should be more easily readable if more like NPC tabs, a white font colour.

Also when we click to open an item record it also pops error messages. I'm uploading the compiled logs.

Hope it helps!

[crleonhard]

Are you using a custom desktop theme? I'm not seeing any issues such as you describe with the default theme (see attached screenshot). While I may look into issues with support for custom themes as time allows, I'm a fan of the work Ranzarok did on the graphic design and I can't say it's high on my priority list.

ETA: Why is there a pictures tab on the item sheet in your screenshot? The item record in this ruleset doesn't even use a tabbed layout... do you have any other extensions active which could be creating that?

61566

[billyorkfellz]

I have no extensions on and the "picture" tab, as far as I know, is a feature of the new version of Fantasy Grounds, 4.5.10.

[crleonhard]

Ah, you're right -- I had unzipped a copy of CoreRPG from a few days ago, so my local host was still loading that version rather than the latest update. When I load the 8/13 update to CoreRPG I see all the things that broke. Sigh. It's probably going to take me some time to to track down and fix everything that got broken on Tuesday, but I'll try to get to it ASAP.

ETA: Actually, while I am seeing a lot of problems with undefined anchors with the new CoreRPG update, and tabs/icons are no longer respecting the colors in the ruleset, I'm still not seeing picture tabs on anything as in billyorkfellz's screenshot... Is anyone else seeing a picture tab on everything?

[billyorkfellz]

Glad you're on it, good luck!

[Micco52]

Yes, I am seeing the pictures tab on all of the items I created a few days ago in an older version of FGU. 61618

[crleonhard]

I've uploaded a new build to the Forge which rebuilds all of the broken layouts I could find, as well as fixing some functional problems created by changes to the structure of some of the framework layouts. Everything appears to be working now more or less as it was, although for some reason the edit button on a loadout's subitems list is not enabling the delete buttons as it should (you can still delete subitems using the radial menu though).

Please let me know if you spot anything else that's still broken!

[Micco52]

I've just gone in and checked the scenario I had prepped and there don't appear to be any issues with the new build. Thanks so much for the quick fix on this, I really appreciate it. We're having a session tomorrow, so the timing could not have been better. :-)

[TeamRodriguez]

I love the dot-matrix printer paper backgrounds for the character creation windows. The whole vibe is awesome. Thank you for the work you put into this!

I have a very minor suggestion please - the contrast for the icons in the main menu is pretty light, and I find it difficult to discern the inner portion of the icons.

Thanks again - I picked up the system yesterday and I was wondering how I could use it with FGU.

[crleonhard]

I love the dot-matrix printer paper backgrounds for the character creation windows. The whole vibe is awesome. Thank you for the work you put into this!

I have a very minor suggestion please - the contrast for the icons in the main menu is pretty light, and I find it difficult to discern the inner portion of the icons.

Thanks again - I picked up the system yesterday and I was wondering how I could use it with FGU.
Thanks for the suggestion! As you can see from the original screenshot in this thread, the icons used to be a different color but it looks like a CoreRPG update somewhere along the way changed them (since I wasn't setting them explicitly). I've now hardcoded them to a color pretty close to what they were originally, which should give you better contrast. Let me know if that's still not working for you.

And all credit for the awesome character sheet background goes to Ranzarok!

[billyorkfellz]

Hello!

So I've been noticing some inconsistencies in the advantage/disadvantage system. A print is attached. As you can see in the first check, it was rolled a Combat at Advantage and the highest result was picked, the opposite of what should occur. A similar result in the second roll, only now at Disadvantage. The low value being chosen for the result. Third and fourth checks went correctly, but the error came up again in the fifth one, the high result being chosen over the low one in a check at Advantage. I have no mods installed and the same happened in other character sheets.

[crleonhard]

Hello!

So I've been noticing some inconsistencies in the advantage/disadvantage system. A print is attached. As you can see in the first check, it was rolled a Combat at Advantage and the highest result was picked, the opposite of what should occur. A similar result in the second roll, only now at Disadvantage. The low value being chosen for the result. Third and fourth checks went correctly, but the error came up again in the fifth one, the high result being chosen over the low one in a check at Advantage. I have no mods installed and the same happened in other character sheets.

It's designed to support opposed checks, which were part of the original rules (when most of this ruleset was written), in that it picks the highest number that's still a success (or a critical, if you rolled one):


OPPOSED CHECKS: Roll equal to or under the relevant Stat or Save on while your opponent rolls under their relevant Stat or Save. Whoever rolls higher, while still rolling under their relevant Stat/Save, wins the Opposed Check.

This logic won't cause a crit to become a non-crit, or a success to become a failure, it just gives you the highest result within the success/failure level you rolled. (Obviously, reverse this logic for disadvantage.)

[billyorkfellz]

So is it going to remain this way?

[crleonhard]

Is there a downside to it? It seems silly to spend time removing a feature that some players still use (opposed rolls) that isn’t hurting anything, but if leaving it in is causing a problem I’m happy to consider it.

[billyorkfellz]

Well, you're quite right. If people are still using it, there's no point in taking it down. Perhaps defaulting to the current 1e way of roll results and making the previous support to opposed checks an option? I don't know how difficult would it be to code that, or even if it's possible at all, but I guess it would be more in line with the recent edition.

Thanks for considering!