Someone mentioned that on Reddit yesterday and, yup, it’s a bug. Totally my fault. I’ll get a fix as soon as I can.
If you’ve ever used GitHub and/or are keen to have an official place to put bugs, I opened up the issue board on GitHub. But if that’s not really your speed, that’s okay too: drop a report here and I’ll do my best to resolve it.
BC
Fix has been pushed to the server.
BTW is the Luna SUPPOSED to have a Nebula mission pod? I know the fluff referances a mission pod but didn’t know the rules reflected that
Cf. p. 67 of the Command Supplement: The Luna class does have “a modular equipment pod much like the Nebula class.” Yet, this is indeed not reflected in the stats (yet?) as there is (by the time of 2371) only one such pod in development. So, I’d consider, rules as written in mind, a Nebula class mission pod to be a house rule – yet one well-founded in lore.
For reasons of balancing, one should reduce systems, departments and talents, before adding a mission pod, though.
yeah if so then that’s a bug as the char gen allows for a nebula mission po in a Luna
Ooh, the Luna has mission pods as well as the Nebula and Springfield? I’ve updated my fanmade Mission Pods write-up accordingly. You can find it here.
Ans since I make reference to my write-up of the Springfield class in my Mission Pods write-up, you can find that here. (Future Note: the Springfield, Freedom, Niagara, Cheyenne, and Challenger classes have all been fan-statted by me and will be available in a future “Five at Wolf 359” article at Continuing Mission. I’ll announce it in this forum when it’s published.
Granted, I don’t know the STA rules as well as I’d like, so if there are rules discrepancies in any of my write-ups, please feel free to point them out and I’ll adjust as necessary. Note what MisterX said above: adjusting the systems, departments and Talents of the Luna will be needed if you use my Mission Pods. While the Luna’s description says it uses a mission pod similar to the Nebula, its actual scores in the Command Division book don’t reflect this: for one thing, the Luna has +3 to its Department scores to the Nebula’s (and Springfield’s) +1. Make sure to adjust your scores and stats as necessary to keep everything balanced.
Hm. Should “Cloaking Device” be considered a talent? (The ship write-ups seem to plonk cloaking device under talents, but it’s not included in the list of talents in the Klingon Core book; instead it’s under “Special Rule”)
My guts say: Make it a talent.
I think a talent makes the most sense as it’s essentially a “built in, non-selectable talent”
Unless you select a cloaking device to upgrade a Constitution (cf. TOS 3x04 “The Enterprise Incident”), Galaxy (cf. TNG 7x12 “The Pegasus”), or Defiant class (cf. DS 9 3x01 “The Search”) vessel with.
For whatever my opinion is worth, my instincts also say to make “Cloaking Device” a Talent. All the Klingon Corebook starship entries with a cloaking device list it as a talent, so that would seem to settle the matter. Though MisterX makes a good point that a cloaking device should NOT count as a Talent under the certain special circumstances noted above.
Well, that depends on the situation, I think. In the cases of “The Enterprise Incident” and “The Pegasus”, I’d say they’re simply a trait present on a scene, maybe even an advantage. In the case of the Defiant, I think it’s rather a talent.
Anyway: For the sake of the generator, a Cloaking Device should be handled as a talent, because that’s a category already existing. Adding a whole “special rules” section to something that, in the ship write-up, mechanically works as a talent, seems pointless to me. Just making it a talent seems the more pragmatic thing to do. 
Thanks for the input, folks. I’ve added a first pass at Klingon spaceframes.
BC
Yes, I do recall this being talked about a few months ago and it was stated by Modiphius that it was supposed to have those pods.
Now, while not using the exact same pods that the Nebula uses, the pods function in the same way.
Yeah, while the pods on the Nebula, Springfield, and Luna are all going to have different shapes/designs, their functions (and game stats) are going to work the same. (Here’s hoping I designed my Mission Pods correctly. 
)
BUG report
SO, I found a bug, when I have my Character with Fitness 7 and Sec 4 (stress 11) with the Resolute talent, the exported (TNG) output only checks 13 boxes for Stress instead of the proper 14 (7+4+3)…
THis bug is repeatable with each instance of these circumstances.
Charles
Psssssssst. Bug spray.
Should be fixed, now.
BC
Quick response!
However, I’m sorry to report: When I go through the same generation process now, for this example that should show 13 Stress boxes checked, it only checks 10 boxes in the exported TNG pdf created.
In addition, two other issues I neglected to mention earlier:
1- Under “Environment” at the top of the TNG sheet created for export at the end, it is left BLANK.
2- With a Phaser type-2 (that has 3 damage), for this character with SEC 4, the Damage rating is given as 6 (instead of 7 from 3+4)
I think maybe you’re reading it backwards. The empty boxes (reading from the top) are the stress available. The checked boxes are not available. (Admittedly, the old mechanism used an ‘x’ in the lower boxes which might have been a touch clearer. They were using a different approach to composing the PDFs, and the approach I’m using doesn’t give me that option.)
Good catch. This only happens when you specify “Homeworld” as the environment.
Yup. Bug.
I’ve fixed the latter two items.
BC
So caught what could be seen as an issue with the Klingon ships. the D-7 class Battlecruiser isn’t avaliable as a spaceframe past 2350 problem is that we see the D-7 in active service as late as 2375 (ref DS9) while the D-7 itself is described as retired in voyager, there’s a lot of evidance to the contrary.
(that image is from “what you leave behind” the series finalle of DS9)
