Jim Radebaugh

I deliberated for a long time before opting to incorporate this in the Corps of Space Monkeys. My reason for doing so is that this stands as a good example of how one can run into troubles with Chrome's ethos.
It ought to go without saying, of course, but whenever I think that someone leaps from the Shadows of Twatland to prove me wrong. The ships presented on Colonial Chrome are those ships that, at least notionally, I have created for use in my own games. I make them available to the public because I feel they may prove useful to other gamers. If I do a ship, whether as a request, or for my own amusement, it will have to fit in that universe, otherwise I'm spending hours doing work for something I would never use. This is the reason there are no munchkin ships on Chrome.
It may also prove pertinent to mention, again, that Chrome, whilst presenting few stats with the ships, is a D6 site. Why D6? One one level because D6 was written by lovers of the game, whilst D20 is written by people answering to a corporate drive to sell baubles to children. Any RPG system can be used by any competent Gamesmaster to tell a good story, so the choice of system depends on it's ability to provide probability math and how well, or poorly, it fades into the background of storytelling. D6 uses the only RPG system with a completely smooth probability arc. It has one simple mechanic that after two or three minutes learning never needs to be looked up - it fades so completely as to be invisible. In contrast, D20's probability arc is horribly stepped, and there are myriad rules and procedures that are distributed between two separate systems and dozens of books. D6 is a roleplayers system. D20 is a rollplayers system.
Lastly, the following exchange brings to light the simple fact that Chrome considers the movies, all six of them, to be the single viable source of information on the functioning of the universe, the sole Canon. Chrome only grudgingly accepts certain aspects of the expanded universe where it manages to avoid clashing with Canon, this is very rare indeed.
That said, here is Jim Radebaugh.

 

Hello,
First of all I'd like to compliment you on the level of detail and accuracy your deckplans have for Star Wars ships.  You clearly do some of the best, if not the best work I've ever seen!  OK, sure that some unabashed ass kissing, but hey....where’s the harm in that right?
Down to brass tax.  I was wondering if you would be open to doing some fairly slight modification of the Loronar E9 Scout?  My current Star Wars group uses a ship in game and we have been searching for a while for deckplans for it and the E9 are the closest to what we feel is appropriate.  I won't bury you in details now, if you feel open to a potential modification, fantastic. If not, well that's cool too, we'll use the deckplan you have provided as is and "imagine" the modifications.
Thanks for your consideration!
Jim Radebaugh

 

> wheres the harm in that right? =)
Always cheers me up. :-)
> Down to brass tax.  I was wondering if you would be open to doing some fairly slight modification of the Loronar E9 Scout?
Its difficult to say if I'd take it on without knowing what you're after. Best thing to do is give me a run down on what changes you're thinking of and I'll let you know then.
Having said that the E9 is a V2.2 standard, and any upgrade would be as a V3. Essentially meaning I'd be redoing the entire ship to that standard, and then converting it. It may also be worth noting that my next intended step for the ship was to rebuild it almost entirely in 6.5 as the chap who requested it in the first place neglected to mention the intended size, and so it was constructed originally to the scale I calculated based on the exterior design, which made it a lot smaller.
Anyhoo, though, let me know what you're wanting and I'll see if it's practical within my current workload timeframe.
Regards
Admiral

 

Thanks for taking the time to respond!!  I'm happy to hear you may be open to doing a redesign on the E9.
Here is list of what I was looking at for the ship:
1.         The current lounge area to be split in half and made into 2 more rooms.
2.         The forward main lab would be changed to a lounge/meeting area.
3.         One of the 2 forward labs would be changed to droid docking stations.
4.         The Library would be expanded into the space of the med/sci bay.
5.         The 2 labs opposite the library and med/sci bay would be made into the med/sci area.
6.         The sensor globes are fine as is, in our use of the ship they wouldn't actually be sensor globes, instead they are retractable lasers.
How big was the ship supposed to be?  For what its worth, for our needs the scale of the ship is perfect as is. =)
If your interested at all in the why for all the modifications I'd be happy to share the in game details of whats going on.  Just not sure if you want or need that level of geekie detail. =)
Also, I am using my work email.  I am copying my home email on this correspondance.  Feel free to reply to all so I can be sure to respond in a timely manner.
Again, thank you for your interest!

 

> Here is list of what I was looking at for the ship:
First off, you might like to have a read through of Tech 101
There are full entries on a few pertinent issues raised by your proposed redesign, especially covering such issues as efficiency of engineering.
> 1.    The current lounge area to be split in half and made into 2 more rooms.
That do what? Bear in mind also Tech112 which covers bulkheads and doors.
> 2.     The forward main lab would be changed to a lounge/meeting area.
This seems redundant, why not simply turn the main lab into the two rooms you want? That reduces the engineering from a two stage change to a single change.
> 3.    One of the 2 forward labs would be changed to droid docking stations.
NP
> 4.    The Library would be expanded into the space of the med/sci bay.
> 5.    The 2 labs opposite the library and med/sci bay would be made into the med/sci area.

It would be MUCH easier to move the library. Medical stations have all sorts of plumbing that's tricky to move, plus as built they're sterile environments which are much easier to maintain than to create.
It seems your intention is to double the size of the library and the medbay. There's no real need to expand the library - its physical size doesn't correlate to its storage capacity - most of the data is located in the ship's substructure anyway. On the medbay, these are really very tricky things to play around with. As an alternative, it's pretty easy to put in a less capable annex, able to handle non-critical patients. Doing so would not require opening up the bulkheads, which is always preferable.
> 6.    The sensor globes are fine as is, in our use of the ship they wouldn't actually be sensor globes, instead they are retractable lasers.
There's something wrong with the turrets?
> How big was the ship supposed to be?  For what its worth, for our needs the scale of the ship is perfect as is. =)
Apparently 65 meters, which is annoying because that's the exact size to accommodate a scale shift wherein the scanner doors shift to airlocks.
> If your interested at all in the why for all the modifications I'd be happy to share the in game details of whats going on.  Just not sure if you want or need that level of geekie detail. =)
Not really, actually that can get in the way. I approach these things from the standpoint of an engineer, working out the easiest ways to get X done. Going from the perspective of what a player wants often ends up with people making decisions that aren't really practical.
Regards
Admiral

 

My apologies.  I should have been a bit clearer with my initial design explainations.
1.         There are 5 individuals in the group that have this ship.  As is, there is only berthing for 4 people.  The redesign of the lounge would allow for 2 more sleeping quarters.  However your point made from item 2 makes perfect sense and I'm a bit embarrassed I didn't catch that one immediately. Your idea of keeping the existing lounge and refitting the main lab to 2 crew quarters makes perfect sense!
5.         Point well received.  I agree the library really doesn't need to be expanded given the technology involved with data storage and what not.  The small redesign of the medbay makes perfect sense although an area for a bacta tank would be much appreciated.  No, we don't have one yet...but its one of our big goals.
6.         Nope, nothing wrong with them at ALL!!  In fact those turrets have to be one of the coolest features of the ship!
So in all it really seems the list of proposed changes has shrunk considerably which is fantastic!!  For our usage all those labs seem superfluous, although understood and accepted as the original intent of the ship is a deep space explorer/science vessel.

 

1.         There are actually eight berths, as a general rule of thumb most bunks are doubles - conservation of space.
5.         The trouble with bacta tanks is that they occupy two decks, one for the tank itself, and one above is needed for access. It would be possible to graft one in in place of one of the turbo lifts, but there's not a huge amount of area in the E9 where there are two decks.
6.         I meant the two stonking big weapons turrets rather than the globe turrets.

 

Looks like we have it narrowed down to just a few points here which is a
good thing!!
1.         OK, here's where pure engineering differs from the desires of an rpg group.  The party members want their own quarters and don't wish to share. I'm sure a huge debate can be launched on this one and I can see both sides of the argument.  The end state is the group, while committed to working together, still needs their own personal quarters and personal space.
5.         I can see with the Med Labs location there isn't a ton of room for access above deck.  In order to accommodate a bacta tank and its requisite access potentially the lab would have to be relocated which I'm not sure either of us wants to have happen.  The trouble is I'm perplexed by the fact that theres no bacta tank to begin with.  With this being a deep space exploration ship, I would have thought it would be equipped with a bacta tank to begin with.  If you agree that one should have been included, or feel comfortable with adding one we need to find a suitable location for a new Med Bay as I'm not certain its current location has adequate space as you have noted already.  Perhaps the Fore port or Starboard storage areas would be a suitable relocation point?
6.         Nope, nothing wrong with those two big turrets at the top of the ship. We just want more weapons turrets and the retractable sensor globes give us just that.

 

> The end state is the group, while committed to working together, still needs their own personal quarters and personal space.
This is circulating back around to the big question of 'why'?
Everyone has space to stow their gear on any starship, there are dozens of lockers and stowage points usually with locks on.
I seem to spend about half my time trying to extract Star Trek from the minds of Star Wars gamers, it's a tiring process. Here's how it roughly breaks down -
Travel times in Star wars are very short, you can go from one side of the disc to the other in less than a day. This means most people on a working ship such as the E9 will spend little or no time actually sleeping in it. The general modus operandi for a small ship is to go from A to B, when you get to B you do the equivalent of checking in to a motel. Sleeping on your ship is possible but its about as desirable as sleeping in your car.
With the E9 and scouts in general, the first stage of arrival is to deploy your camp, everyone gets a nice heated weatherproof tent to themselves.
Even if you do stay on the ship, you only sleep about a third of the time, if that. You'd generally share one of the rooms with someone who was on a different shift than you, so you hop into your bunk, and seal the shutters on it, when inside you're in a little environment all your own, there's access to the entertainment systems, your own lights, stowage areas, all sound proofed. If you need to you can simply lock the door - the being you share with will just have to put up with it if you're, for example, getting changed.
I would suspect you're running into the trek syndrome of thinking of the ship as transport AND home. In Star Wars these ships aren't home, they're a way to get places. Personal space in these circumstances is naturally limited. Any given starship does the best it can with the space available.
> I can see with the Med Labs location there isn't a ton of room for access above deck.
Yes. None in fact, otherwise there'd be another deck there...
> In order to accommodate a bacta tank and its requisite access potentially the lab would have to be relocated which I'm not sure either of us wants to have happen.
Only if you see it as essential that the tank is in the same room as other medical gear. Handy if possible, but not really necessary.
> The trouble is I'm perplexed by the fact that theres no bacta tank to begin with.
Why would there be? Bacta tanks are VERY large, and VERY expensive. Whilst they're very handy if you get injured, they're not the only form of medical care. To be frank, the only times you'd carry one is if you had a high expectation of having serious medical cases on a regular basis. The E9 is a scout ship, not a warship. I suspect you're metagaming here - you're seeing that for your party one would be very useful, and so wonder why it doesn't come with one, and not accounting for the ships intended role, which doesn't need one at all.
> If you agree that one should have been included
If I thought that there would have been one to start with.
> feel comfortable with adding one we need to find a suitable location for a new Med Bay as I'm not certain its current location has adequate space as you have noted already.
Again, I don't seen a need to have the two in the same place.
> We just want more weapons turrets and the retractable sensor globes give us just that.
Hmm. Have you considered how much power they take? Also, I'm curious, who operates them? You have a crew of five, that'd break down in combat situations as Pilot/Captain, shield/comms, upper turret gunner and a lower turret gunner. That leaves one crew being spare, by my count. If each scanner globe were replaced by a weapons system, that'd leave five of them unmanned.
Regards
Admiral

 

Well, a significant number of items to address here.  First of all, I apologize for not getting back in touch with you yesterday.  I game on Tuesday evening and didn't get back home until quite late.  That being said, lets get to it, shall we?
I certainly understand your point of view on time spent on the ship. However, in the Saga rule set, which we are operating under, it does take a significant amount of time to travel through hyperspace, much more than you allude to on your website.  I'd like to debate that with you but I'm not sure that's the focus of our current conversation at this time.
Our group is very nomadic and spends a great deal of time on the ship, it is essentially home.  The biggest reason for this nomadic lifestyle is that the group is hunted by both the Jedi and Sith.  The reasons for that are varied and I won't bore you with the details as I'm not 100% sure you'd be interested to find out why.  I can assure you were are not "Meta-Gamers". Quite the opposite, the group is made up of individuals older (I'm 40 myself) than or the same age as yourself and we outgrew that style of gaming 10-15 years ago.
I have read through your website quite thoroughly and I do understand, to an extent, your point of view on things such as starship design and hyperspace travel.  I just don't agree with you on a few levels and as a result it seems we have an idealogic difference of opinion here on whether personal quarters and other modifications are necessary.
I'm not sure it is necessary to continue any sort of conversation regarding a potential redesign of the E9 any longer.  To me it seems you are interested to entertain ideas of modifications but you are not inclined to make any actual changes that differ from your original ideas surrounding ship design.
If you are interested in redesigning the deckplan for the E9, I look forward to continuing to share ideas with you on how the deckplans can be altered. If not, thank you very much for your time and I appreciate you at least debating a few issues.

 

> I certainly understand your point of view on time spent on the ship. However, in the Saga rule set, which we are operating under
Going to stop you there, I will never condone the D20 system. Chrome operates a D6 only policy.
> allude to on your website.  I'd like to debate that with you but I'm not sure that's the focus of our current conversation at this time.
Well, I'm always up for a debate, but the clincher is simple - name just one single instance in the films where hyperspace travels takes any significant time.
> Our group is very nomadic and spends a great deal of time on the ship, it is essentially home. I can assure you were are not "Meta-Gamers".
My point about meta was quite specific to the issue with the ship, you seem to be arguing that the ship ought to be equipped to handle the mission profile you've adopted for it off the showroom floor, rather than being equipped for its intended mission profile.
> I'm not sure it is necessary to continue any sort of conversation regarding a potential redesign of the E9 any longer.  To me it seems you are interested to entertain ideas of modifications but you are not inclined to make any actual changes that differ from your original ideas surrounding ship design.
It is certainly true that I don't put in hours of work on a piece I would think of as fundamentally flawed. Doing work you don't want to do is usually compensated for in another fashion. I'll do any ship anyway anyone wanted on a commission basis.
> If you are interested in redesigning the deckplan for the E9, I look forward to continuing to share ideas with you on how the deckplans can be altered.
I'm certainly not opposed to the design concept per se. I raise issues for the purposes of debate, I have strong reasons for the positions I take on certain things and have generally found that when presented with those arguments, people tend to come around. As an example, those principle are the same ones that noted swapping the location of the lounge around would be wasteful of time and resources.
But in the end it's up to you.
Regards
Admiral

 

Sorry that you don't "condone" the D20 ruleset.  Your choice I guess. I've played all versions of the SW game system starting with the WEG version to the current D20 Saga ruleset and the current is the best I've seen to date.  Again, my opinion, not any more or less right than your opinion, just different.
Regarding the time spent in hyperspace.  I would challenge your line of thinking by stating that in the films if you were to actually film the "real" amount of time spent traveling in hyperspace you'd waste film and bore the audience.  It's the same principal why you don't see movie characters going to the bathroom.  The time spent traveling, or going to the bathroom, is not worth filming, its not critical to the story and therefore not worth filming.
"I'm certainly not opposed to the design concept per se. I raise issues for the purposes of debate, I have strong reasons for the positions I take on certain things and have generally found that when presented with those arguments, people tend to come around. As an example, those principle are the same ones that noted swapping the location of the lounge around would be wasteful of time and resources."
As I said in my previous email it seems we have an idealogic difference here and I'm not sure you will ever agree with my point of view to actually make the changes requested.

 

Occasionally I do get people who decide to try and justify their positions and leave the Corps. This always amuses me. James Radebaugh did just this.

 

Admiral,

I was looking over your website today and was rather disappointed to see that I have earned a spot as a "Space Monkey".
Now I understand we differ on a number of items and that's fine, what I have issue with is that you seem to refer that I have appeared from the "Shadows of Twatland".
This is very insulting at the very least. Be that as it may I'd like to request you remove our conversation form your website. I never became argumentative or abusive. Clearly I presented my point clearly and replied sensibly and without typical gamer gibberish.
I appreciate your view and your intended use of the ships you design and the fact that you design them for the D6 rule set. I have no issue with that and as you noticed dropped the issue upon reaching an impasse.
I certainly do not appreciate your posting either our conversation or my name on your website. Please remove both from your website.

Thank you.
Jim Radebaugh

 

> This is very insulting at the very least. Be that as it may I'd like to request you remove our conversation form your website. I never became argumentative or abusive.
Not abusive, no, but certainly argumentative.
> Clearly I presented my point clearly and replied sensibly and without typical gamer gibberish.
That's not why you got Space Monkied.
> I certainly do not appreciate your posting either our conversation or my name on your website. Please remove both from your website.
If you weren't willing to have your mail made public, you ought not to have sent it in the first place. The Requests link on the contact page takes you to a list of guidelines specifically there to give people a chance to think through whether or not they really want to send me a request. That emails that annoy me sufficiently get made public is explicit, and so, no, your CSM entry will remain as an object lesson to others, which is what the CSM is for in the first place.
If you're convinced your emails do not warrant an entry in the Corps, then you ought to feel comfortable that others will see this. Your request for its removal therefore suggests that either you know that my decision was indeed warranted, or, failing that, you're simply peeved at my low opinion of you. In the former case, res ipsa loquitor. In the latter, were I in your place I'd consider spending sometime musing on what insecurities lurk in your mind that you'd be even vaguely bothered that one man thinks you a munchkin meta-gamer with no respect for other people's time and hard work.

Admiral

With all due respect what I really object to is having my complete name listed there.
My request for the removal of our conversation has nothing to do with whether or not I feel your decision was warranted, nor did it have anything to do with your opinion of me.
I value some semblance of privacy and therefore I request if you feel hell bent on keeping my post up there, so be it, at the very least just use my first name and remove my last.

> With all due respect what I really object to is having my complete name listed there.
> My request for the removal of our conversation has nothing to do with whether or not I feel your decision was warranted, nor did it have anything to do with your opinion of me. I value some semblance of privacy and therefore I request if you feel hell bent on keeping my post up there, so be it, at the very least just use my first name and remove my last.
I see, you've been inundated with emails for people ridiculing you, people stop you in the street and throw eggs at you, children use your name as a by-word for idiocy "Oh look, Keith's stuck his face in the blast furnace again, what a complete James Radebaugh!". I did see an item on the news that other day, 'James Radebaugh - Complete Muppet' I didn't realise that was all my fault for outing you in such a devastating fashion.

I hate to think what will happen when I make your email public, that's bound to really annoy you.