As a former chemist I’m particularly grateful for that vinegar/water squirt tip; yours is compassion above and beyond the call of duty

Share on, bro,
m

Noodles and sumo when the sun hits the horizon.

To answer why dragons don’t have massive teats, look at female dogs. Some (like English bulldogs) have massive, pendulous teats that swing when they walk. Funniest damn thing in the world. But in the wild, wild dogs and wolves (and dingoes) all keep a slim figure despite having mammary glands, because nature selected for the dog/dragon who could both nurse and fight, rather than just one of the two. As Dragonborn are both intelligent (read: capable of using a brassiere) and similar in biology, it stands to reason that female dragonborn would have moderate boobs- think A-C cup, maybe. D would be rare, and DD would be freaky.

In all other regards, I do agree.

I am hardly a fan of 4E, the system or the art.

If we’re considering realistic ships you’ve also got to consider their propulsion systems, because if you’re using any sort of mass-reaction to generate thrust you’re going to eat up most of your space with fuel to have any ‘reasonable’ sort of delta-v.

Including ‘magical technology’ doesn’t make it pointless if its well explained. Matter transmitters and artificial gravity generators aren’t the only possibility, indeed the exercise was about opening the creative landscape as to what kinds of possibilities we see in fantasy sci-fi media.

If someone can come up with a great justification for why their design works a certain way I’ll probably be the first on board. But when I see clumsy systems like the slow ass elevators in a big ship as the primary way of getting from point a to point b I start thinking that there might be a better way to do it. I’m a firm believer that increasing the believability increases the immersion and believability is not the same as realism. Realism is boring.

If you want to logically design a starship, you have to consider questions like: Will it need to travel in atmosphere? Does it need to land on the surface of planets? In oceans perhaps? What size/shape optimizes the tremendous amount of resources it would take to build something like that? What are the physical implications of a spinning/moving body that is much more massive at one end then another?

The best shape for a large spaceship seems like it would be a sphere. A sphere is the strongest shape for managing pressure differences, you get maximum volume for outer surface area, and you minimize lateral forces when the ship changes direction. However, there is still the problem of finding furniture for all those rounded edge rooms.

Spencer has a point, the Borg cube does have terrific appeal for internal passenger transit efficiency as well as external navigation and defense opportunities.

Cool vid.
http://www.thefutureschannel.com/dockets/hands-on_math/space_architecture/