IHMN Sci fi?

[Fates Fickle Finger]

Having come from ITEN to IHMN I have begun with a few friends to start using an adapted IHMN for our old school 40k setting.
Does anyone know if there are any Sci fi conversions of IHMN rules out there? All leads and links will be much appreciated!!

FFF

[Van-Helsing]

Erm, thats how it all started LoL

With "In the Emperor's Name" - http://iten-game.org/

[Fates Fickle Finger]

Yes that's where I started, the systems are slightly different D10s to D6s etc. Also third edition of ITEN is not finished and requires a fair bit of work to get up to scratch!! I am looking for a Sci Fi version of IHMN.

FFF

[Diakon]

What kind of things have you done to adapt it? I'd be interested to hear. 

[Trix2K]

I thought IHMN was sci-fi.

You mean "futuristic" sci-fi?

[Craig]

At this time there is not a Generic SF version of IHMN, though it is on the list of genre packs we are considering for future release.

[Modhail]

I like the sound of genre packs! 

Could one of said genre packs perhaps also include the points formula for vehicles?
It's absence is what I feel the major impediment to adapting IHMN to other places and times ourselves...

[Craig]

Points costs for vehicles? 

I expected people to have reverse engineered those already...

[Modhail]

Well, if they have, they've somehow neglected to post them... 
I guess I could reverse engineer them myself, but why duplicate effort?

[Red Orc]

In keeping with the steampunk vibe, what you have to do is come up with your own unique solution to the problem, then rivet it onto the existing structure in a frankly slightly dangerous way, and then roll every turn to see if your rules-bodge can take the strain.

Which is a bit 'meta', as you should really be rolling on whether the roll you made works properly, and then rolling to see if the roll you made about the roll works properly, and then... etc etc until we get into folded dimensions.

I like matrix systems myself, light/medium/heavy (armour) as against slow/medium/fast as against small/medium/large. Assign arbitrary points values to each axis, say 2/4/8. Give each side the same number of vehicle points - keep these separate from the troop points for the time being. So clockwork cycles (light/fast/small) cost 2x8x2 = 32 whereas a steam tank costs 8*2*8 = 164, meaning you can buy 4 clockwork cycles per stream tank. If you think that's too cheap, add another axis for light/medium/heavy (weapons). That makes clockwork cycles 64 points and steam tanks 1024, or 16 times more expensive. If you think that's about right, then, go for it. Otherise, make all those 8s into 6s, and re-run the math(s).

Or you could look at some different games system and see how they do it. Given that IHMN came from ITEN, how about going back to the source of the source, and ada/opting the vehicle creation rules from thr RT book? Definitely, you can then roll to see if the vehicles blow up because the Promethium Tanks have been connected to the Aetheric Oscillator via a Galvanic Grommet that doesn't fit (due to one being Imperial, and the other being the other Imperial).

Or, not...

[Conquistador]

I like the sound of genre packs! 

Could one of said genre packs perhaps also include the points formula for vehicles?
It's absence is what I feel the major impediment to adapting IHMN to other places and times ourselves...

If you used the example of the points building explained in the IHMN Core book plus the examples there and in HVF plus SDRS of vehicles joined with the concept expressed in "weapons" types (KISS, Keep It Simple, Sir,)  I don't see why you need someone else to tell you how to create prototype vehicles (or characters or weapons) but you can always run your designs past the group here - it how I came to a suitable working model of a reata (lariat) for my games.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Craig]

The problems with costing vehicles is that as a small skirmish game we initially didn't even consider them. We even pondered omitting horses as being not really conducive to play on a 3'x3' table 

We added in mounts and vehicles fairly late in the design process, and armoured vehicles at the very last minute because the photo's generously given to us for IHMN by Northstar included Scotland Yard's armoured steam wagon 'Ophelia' (an Ironclad Miniatures vehicle I believe). It was just too lovely to leave out.

Honestly the points costing system for vehicles was a bit wet finger in the air. Charles managed to cobble together something that mostly fit and seemed generally logical at the time so we went with that. You might have realised by now that Charles is the brains of the outfit. I just keep shovelling coal into the internet boiler thingie.

If we were to approach the subject anew the costing method would be different and most vehicles would be a darn sight more expensive as a result. This would result in a new errata release and howls of dismay across the globe...

I'm not convincing any of you am I?  I'll talk to Charles... 

[Conquistador]

The problems with costing vehicles is that as a small skirmish game we initially didn't even consider them. We even pondered omitting horses as being not really conducive to play on a 3'x3' table 

We added in mounts and vehicles fairly late in the design process, and armoured vehicles at the very last minute because the photo's generously given to us for IHMN by Northstar included Scotland Yard's armoured steam wagon 'Ophelia' (an Ironclad Miniatures vehicle I believe). It was just too lovely to leave out.

Honestly the points costing system for vehicles was a bit wet finger in the air. Charles managed to cobble together something that mostly fit and seemed generally logical at the time so we went with that. You might have realised by now that Charles is the brains of the outfit. I just keep shovelling coal into the internet boiler thingie.

If we were to approach the subject anew the costing method would be different and most vehicles would be a darn sight more expensive as a result. This would result in a new errata release and howls of dismay across the globe...

I'm not convincing any of you am I?  I'll talk to Charles... 

As professional iconoclast I can see the value in dropping vehicles/horses, (but then, for those worshiping at the shrine of 'transparency,'  whose games are almost 100% swamp/jungle based - mine,) entirely but as you imply the torches and pitchforks would be visible today for such a change.

Besides, shooting the opposition's horses on a 3' x 3' table has some satisfaction...

Gracias,

Glenn

[Modhail]

The problems with costing vehicles is that as a small skirmish game we initially didn't even consider them. We even pondered omitting horses as being not really conducive to play on a 3'x3' table 

<Snip! For brevity...>

Honestly the points costing system for vehicles was a bit wet finger in the air. Charles managed to cobble together something that mostly fit and seemed generally logical at the time so we went with that.

Ah, that explains why I couldn't make sens of the Personal Transportation points costs...
Having the day off (Wife's at work, son's got summer holidays, someone has to make sure he burns down the house safely...), I tried reverse engineering the points costs.
Walkers were easy, it seems it's 10 points base cost for light walkers, 12 points for medium* and heavy walkers. Costs for weapons, speed bonus, armour, etc.  are the same as for infantry. Light walkers seem to be limited at Armour 11, Medium at 12, with civilian versions at 2 points of armour below that?
Trying to reverse engineer Personal Transportation, however, left me with a fair bit of abilities and rules that have no similes/points elsewhere in the rules and varying numbers of points unaccounted for.
Maybe I could type out my notes in a new thread and see if we can crack this as a group?

Personally, I wouldn't mind if vehicles got more expensive if that meant we end up with a formula that is as clear as the infantry points formula. For me one of the great features of IHMN is the fact you can create and stat out your own stuff so easily.

*: Though if I'm correct in this, the Bulldog, being a Medium walker, is undercosted by 2 points? And the Jackal pays 3 extra points for some reason?

[Conquistador]

Ah, that explains why I couldn't make sens of the Personal Transportation points costs...
Having the day off (Wife's at work, son's got summer holidays, someone has to make sure he burns down the house safely...), I tried reverse engineering the points costs.
Walkers were easy, it seems it's 10 points base cost for light walkers, 12 points for medium* and heavy walkers. Costs for weapons, speed bonus, armour, etc.  are the same as for infantry. Light walkers seem to be limited at Armour 11, Medium at 12, with civilian versions at 2 points of armour below that?
Trying to reverse engineer Personal Transportation, however, left me with a fair bit of abilities and rules that have no similes/points elsewhere in the rules and varying numbers of points unaccounted for.
Maybe I could type out my notes in a new thread and see if we can crack this as a group?

Personally, I wouldn't mind if vehicles got more expensive if that meant we end up with a formula that is as clear as the infantry points formula. For me one of the great features of IHMN is the fact you can create and stat out your own stuff so easily.

*: Though if I'm correct in this, the Bulldog, being a Medium walker, is undercosted by 2 points? And the Jackal pays 3 extra points for some reason?

Go for it.  I won't contribute most likely (be like a blind man telling a portrait artist that the skin tones were the wrong hue) but if you come up with something useful then it would be applauded by many I am sure.

Gracias,

Glenn