Jump to content
Sketchpad

Genre Books

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Harlock999 said:

Why would you want to play a Star Trek RPG and NOT play as Starfleet officers?  You know, like in every single Star Trek series?

If you really want to play independent operators, you can always just play another RPG.  Or create your own using a toolkit.

And you're actually wrong...  FASA had The Klingons, The Romulans, The Orions, and Trader Captains and Merchant Princes.  LUG's DS9 core book allowed you to play militia, freedom fighters, merchants, diplomats, pirates, smugglers, etc.  And one of the main criticisms of Decipher's game (although admittedly I've never messed with it) is its focus on civilian characters over Starfleet characters.

Do the Maquis even count as "starfleet"?

I wouldn't mind playing a Klingon on a Klingon vessel.  (Tholians may be a bit of a stretch tough.)

 

 

Ackk harg huck arrr huck agh! - Ancient Klingon proverb: Take out the bones before you eat the fish, or they will get stuck in your throat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Desslok said:

It could be worse. You could be playing Redshirts: The RPG. Like Paranoia, but fewer clones.

You know, I've never played Paranoia.  Always thought that would be fun.

I picked up Red Dwarf years ago and have been dying to get a crazy game of that off the ground.  Whether I'm the GM or a player, there would HAVE to be a wax droid of William Shatner in the mix.  (Not Captain Kirk.  William Shatner.  Ha.)

Edited by Harlock999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Robin Graves said:

I wouldn't mind playing a Klingon on a Klingon vessel.  (Tholians may be a bit of a stretch tough.)

From FASA, all you'd need is the core game and The Klingons supplement.  Although, you'd have to understand FASA's The Klingons was based on John Ford's (excellent!) book "The Final Reflection."  So if you're coming at this from a TNG state-of-mind, you'd be incredibly disappointed.

From LUG, you'd just need the DS9 core book.  (Forgot to add that you could choose to play as Klingon warriors ... and also Cardassian officers and spies.)

Yeah, never seen an option for the Tholians.  Ha.  In fact, I don't think they were even given a physical form until ENT.

Edited by Harlock999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Harlock999 said:

Why would you want to play a Star Trek RPG and NOT play as Starfleet officers?  You know, like in every single Star Trek series?

Because playing members of a military hierarchy is boring and robs players of the ability to make their own choices. In 35 years of role-playing, I've never met anyone who actually enjoyed such a game, and published games that require such PC concepts almost always tank. Its a great concept for scripted storytelling, but it falls radically short for unscripted, collaborative stories like RPGs.

Role-playing games are about the players exploring the setting, and ST has a huge, rich setting that can be explored, but if a game pigeonholes players by assuming they are going to one type of character then it excludes everyone who doesn't want to play that one kind of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Forgottenlore said:

Because playing members of a military hierarchy is boring and robs players of the ability to make their own choices. In 35 years of role-playing, I've never met anyone who actually enjoyed such a game, and published games that require such PC concepts almost always tank. Its a great concept for scripted storytelling, but it falls radically short for unscripted, collaborative stories like RPGs.

Role-playing games are about the players exploring the setting, and ST has a huge, rich setting that can be explored, but if a game pigeonholes players by assuming they are going to one type of character then it excludes everyone who doesn't want to play that one kind of story.

Well, you've met one now.  And I have 5-10 other friends and family members who'd be more than happy to throw their names out there too.  (And that's not counting the multitude of FASA Trek fans who've made their love known all across the World Wide Web.)

However, you're not the only one who I've noted has this criticism.  It's my belief that your GMs were not running the game properly, and instead just wanted everyone to follow orders.  Which, of course, would suck.

The goal of any Trek game is to create an ensemble cast that works together to explore strange environments, solve problems, and fight aliens.  How this did not lead to quality roleplaying for some of you is astounding.

...and, again, leads me to believe your GM was a bit too Picard and not enough Kirk.  Or he/she and your fellow players were just a bunch of tight-@$$ed jerkoffs that reveled a bit too much in the "power" that their "ranks" entailed.  *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Harlock999 said:

Well, you've met one now.  And I have 5-10 other friends and family members who'd be more than happy to throw their names out there too.  (And that's not counting the multitude of FASA Trek fans who've made their love known all across the World Wide Web.)

However, you're not the only one who I've noted has this criticism.  It's my belief that your GMs were not running the game properly, and instead just wanted everyone to follow orders.  Which, of course, would suck.

The goal of any Trek game is to create an ensemble cast that works together to explore strange environments, solve problems, and fight aliens.  How this did not lead to quality roleplaying for some of you is astounding.

...and, again, leads me to believe your GM was a bit too Picard and not enough Kirk.  Or he/she and your fellow players were just a bunch of tight-@$$ed jerkoffs that reveled a bit too much in the "power" that their "ranks" entailed.  *shrug*

So what happens when a Federation crew is down on planet X, exploring strange new worlds outside Federation space, ie in the cantina, and things go south which in turn leads to being tossed in the local jail, then, the pirate squadron arrives and decides they hate Starfleet and evaporate the USS What/Whoever?  Seems like there is a story or two there to tell....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to the point there are stories to tell in every universe.  I do recognize things can get stale in one or the other though.   I had thought of a Trek retcon myself with more emphasis on the reality of the distances in Trek and a reboot of the races appearances,  but instead  I had actually begun to plan and type out a sorta sci fi setting of my own, including a rework on career/spec organization a couple weeks prior to this announcement.  Saves me a buncha work, and honestly now I am intrigued and want to see how magic is handled given there is no Force die.  I am assuming some sort of mechanic like WHRP3 with checks for spells that are bought or something, but we shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gods please not a Trek based setting!  Can't you just imagine the nerd-rage as people compare ship stats between Trek and SW?!?  The forums would implode!

For me as a wishing on a star type of pick, I would want Fading Suns done.  Love the setting to bits but the rules system is just so 80's. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hygric said:

Oh gods please not a Trek based setting!  Can't you just imagine the nerd-rage as people compare ship stats between Trek and SW?!?  The forums would implode!

For me as a wishing on a star type of pick, I would want Fading Suns done.  Love the setting to bits but the rules system is just so 80's. :-)

You don't want Borg troopers? :) Actually Vulcans make great Jedi.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Forgottenlore said:

Because playing members of a military hierarchy is boring and robs players of the ability to make their own choices. In 35 years of role-playing, I've never met anyone who actually enjoyed such a game, and published games that require such PC concepts almost always tank. Its a great concept for scripted storytelling, but it falls radically short for unscripted, collaborative stories like RPGs.

Role-playing games are about the players exploring the setting, and ST has a huge, rich setting that can be explored, but if a game pigeonholes players by assuming they are going to one type of character then it excludes everyone who doesn't want to play that one kind of story.

From what I've seen the Captains who are on their search and explore missions into "where no man has gone before" are fairly autonomous. Yes they have standing orders and regulations, but it's not like Starfleet high command is looking over their shoulders. (this might be different if you are a systhem defense ship protecting a Starfleet base for example.)

Starfleet is not the Tremere (That's the vampire clan where you have to obey your elders from Vampire the Masquerade.)

Edited by Robin Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29.6.2017 at 1:16 AM, Scott Bot said:

The new STAR TREK RPG from Modiphius looks very inspired by the narrative dice idea.  Looks to be an awesome game in it's own right, but I wish it covered the new Kelvin timeline.   I can't think of a good reason why it doesn't. 

Yep, Jay Little originally designed the system for Mutant Chronicles by Modiphius.

On 29.6.2017 at 8:53 PM, Harlock999 said:

I like the FFG system, but the 2D20 system seems more complicated than it needs to be...

Sorry, but based on everything I've seen and read about the new Star Trek Adventures game, I'm not really looking forward to it.  Not a fan of zones, not a fan of overly complex mechanics (just to be overly complex, it seems), and not a fan of Momentum.  However, I'm following this guy's blog posts with serious interest and may still give the core book a look.

Having played now several sessions with this system in Conan - Adventures in an age undreamed of, its not at all complicated compared to FFGs Star Wars RPG... or 5E ... or Coriolis... it's got the same moving parts, but concentrated on fewer elements. There is arguably no failure with something good happening, but there is successes with advantages (Momentum), success with threats (complications and/or Doom points - called something else in Star Trek) and also potential Despairs. It's a somewhat more predictable system, with even more narrative control given to everyone around the table. Recently I've had a lot more fun with this than Star Wars - but a change of pace is always enjoyable :ph34r:

On 29.6.2017 at 9:14 PM, coyote6 said:

I didn't get a chance to play (a close friend and group member passed away unexpectedly, which derailed me and us for quite a while), but I did read the playtest files; it didn't seem overly complex to me. It is a bit different, so one has to wrap one's mind around that; but the same goes for FFG's narrative dice system, Fate, Powered by the Apocalypse, or even D&D - if that's not what you're used to.

My main issue with the 2d20 - at least Conan - is the bloated character creation process. Creating a character is somewhat tedious - yet you can do it all by rolling 9d20 and just assign some points and pick some skills and talents. It's not as quick as, say, Mutant: Year Zero, Coriolis or Symbaroum - and I guess Star Wars is somewhat quick too. Of course, after a few runs, it shouldn't be too hard - and what they have added that I do appreciate, are a lot of stories and suggestion for background, family, education, stuff like that. Stuff that can (and will) easily inspire a player to get to know his character and his or her motivation in the game world.

2d20, as I experience it, is very much about player epic heroes, like Conan, Red Sonja, Belit and all his other companions. You're massive heroes. The game is tilted in the players advantage (more so than Star Wars,) there is no rolling of initiative (yet a GM may spend Doom points to "seize the initiative.") This makes the game easier in some ways, you can play nice, you can play dirty, it's easier to "fudge" without fudging, players feel like big **** heroes as there are similar minion rules, including toughened minions (rivals) and nemeses. All in all it's a more predictable game than Star Wars, but this also means that the crazies fun bits in Star Wars (and Genesys) will not happen, or very rarely happen. It's very much about cooperative storytelling and crazy heroics against unnameable horrors from the outer dark...

Generally, I think it may be easier for people coming from (more) tactical roleplaying games of the middle ages (2000s) with games like 3rd ed, 4th ed, Pathfinder and/or even 5th ed, to convert to 2d20 than to Genesys. And the step from 2d20 to Genesys should then be blissfully easy. :ph34r: win-win. :D

--

As for what I'd like to see, I'm looking for a system to use for my own world - not convinced Genesys is perfect for it, but Genesys, Cypher system (Numenera) and now 2d20 are good alternatives... now which one can I release stuff to without having to ask for permission :ph34r:

I'm all for Elder Scrolls, that could be fun. That's a good setting, and Genesys may actually work quite well with it.

John Carter could be cool, but Modiphius is doing that... so maybe a Tarzan game? Narnia? His Dark Materials ... could be fun. If you're into that sort of thing.

Valerian and the city of a thousand planets or whatever its called, now a major motion picture... some of those old European comic books of the 70s and 80s are rich universes that have yet to be explored in roleplaying games. The Metabarons series had a game version (by WEG actually) at some point, I think, perhaps this system could do it justice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2017 at 9:08 AM, Jegergryte said:

Having played now several sessions with this system in Conan - Adventures in an age undreamed of, its not at all complicated compared to FFGs Star Wars RPG... or 5E ... or Coriolis... it's got the same moving parts, but concentrated on fewer elements. There is arguably no failure with something good happening, but there is successes with advantages (Momentum), success with threats (complications and/or Doom points - called something else in Star Trek) and also potential Despairs. It's a somewhat more predictable system, with even more narrative control given to everyone around the table. Recently I've had a lot more fun with this than Star Wars - but a change of pace is always enjoyable :ph34r:

It's been a month since you posted this, and I'm now curious to see if you've had a chance to review the Star Trek Adventures RPG.

I know the PDF has been out for a while, yet every single review I can find (and there aren't that many) seem to be focused on "ooohhhh, bright, shiny new thng!" as opposed to comparing the system to that of FASA, LUG, or Decipher ... or even other science fiction RPGs.  Objectivity seems to have been replaced with Christmastime glee.

About the only serious criticism I've seen is the insane amount of typos.

Anyway, if you've had a chance to look at STA?  And don't mind taking the time to jot down your thoughts?  I'd certainly be interested in reading them.

Admittedly, I'm still skeptical, as the previews made things seem unnecessarily complicated and every YouTube playthrough/playtest has seemed ... well, not all that fun.  However, I'm still open to having a change of mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Modiphius 2D20 Conan, Mutant Chronicles is a blast as well, as is Infinity (well, the bits they provided so far). But the John Carter playtest material already departed from the 2D20 Core ideas which is cinematic and dynamic fast action and so did STA.  It's more like they tried to mimick Dr Who and cannibalize parts of Fate. And Fate is not a system I am particularly fond of. STA playtesting was a bit too clunky for my tastes and had been rather less fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2017 at 1:40 PM, 2P51 said:

A super hero game would be fun, dunno if they want to bother with Disney and do Marvel or just go generic, but it would fun.

FFG already deals with Disney for Star Wars, and it's been going rather well. I don't know who owns the rights to tabletop publishing, but with the current Marvel RPG system being a bit defunct, it might be the perfect time to scoop up the franchise.  The only trick would be balancing characters, so someone playing an "normal human" (Mockingbird, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Agent Coulson) would feel like they can play with the same narrative significance as Ironman, Thor, Hulk, Wolverine. Perhaps they could balance it by doing it like force powers which need significant XP investments, where there's "build a power" trees.

Either way, there would need to be a way to make up your own super powers so people could play their own characters instead of established heroes or frankensteins of already existing heroes.

I'm hopeful, even for a generic system because super powers can be ported into so many other things. With a re-flavor super powers can be cybernetics, bionics, psyonics, certain types of magic, The Force(TM), really anything that goes even a bit beyond baseline performance. So in essence, unless you're playing a strictly "no powers or enhanced abilities" setting, it would be an essential core expansion book to get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dresdinseven said:

I'm hopeful, even for a generic system because super powers can be ported into so many other things. With a re-flavor super powers can be cybernetics, bionics, psyonics, certain types of magic, The Force(TM), really anything that goes even a bit beyond baseline performance. So in essence, unless you're playing a strictly "no powers or enhanced abilities" setting, it would be an essential core expansion book to get.

This would be the ideal take on this topic. Instead of trying to distinguish magic, from super powers and other supernatural powers, a common base on which everything supernatural builds on would be gold for any system that pretend to be generic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus it gives an alternative to Vancian Magic, which isn't necessarily bad, but isn't very narrative. The nice thing about FFG's wording is the "up to" or "per" wording allowing smaller uses of an ability if for whatever reason you needed to pull a punch.

Plus with the "always on" abilities, you could more thematically use, for example, pyromancy to do cool stuff like starting fires, lighting your pipe weed (because non-fantasy actual tobacco is bad, kiddies), and light a small flame in your hand to use instead of a torch.

Plus if it's generic enough, you could start out with damage elemental type, move to range and type of attack, then put on secondary abilities. No need for separate trees for shooting fire, or ice, or lighting bolts, or sonic blasts, or..  or... and so on. Reduces clutter while increases versatility. And that is just one tiny example!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3.8.2017 at 5:11 PM, Harlock999 said:

It's been a month since you posted this, and I'm now curious to see if you've had a chance to review the Star Trek Adventures RPG.

I know the PDF has been out for a while, yet every single review I can find (and there aren't that many) seem to be focused on "ooohhhh, bright, shiny new thng!" as opposed to comparing the system to that of FASA, LUG, or Decipher ... or even other science fiction RPGs.  Objectivity seems to have been replaced with Christmastime glee.

About the only serious criticism I've seen is the insane amount of typos.

Anyway, if you've had a chance to look at STA?  And don't mind taking the time to jot down your thoughts?  I'd certainly be interested in reading them.

Admittedly, I'm still skeptical, as the previews made things seem unnecessarily complicated and every YouTube playthrough/playtest has seemed ... well, not all that fun.  However, I'm still open to having a change of mind.

Hi!

I've not had a chance to do a proper review or read through of the Star Trek CRB no, sorry. Summer holidays and a travelling vacation over the last few weeks took me away from books, shelves and library. Neither am I a big Star Trek fan (although I am trying to understand the big fascination a lot of people have with it because of this game, so I'm watching Enterprise now... I tried DS9 and Voyager and that didn't work out so well), so it's not at the top of my reading list.

I can't compare it to any of the systems you mention, as I don't know those systems. Comparing it to Star Wars (if that's scifi) I would say this system is more geared towards hard-ish sci-fi, compared to HARP SF (or Spacemaster), I'd say the 2d20 system is more fun-time-heroics. 2d20 is binary (pass-fail) as opposed to the narrative system, but it has some nice narrative elements and moving parts that are placed more directly in the hands of the players, giving the players in some ways more agency, or more direct effect on the immediate narrative, and less random and confusing (difficult) results. The system is also slightly more "collectivist"in its orientation, by which I mean that some of the narrative resources are shared between the players for a collective gain - so one players good roll can affect everyone else in a good way. To put it in a simple way: Momentum (i.e. Advantages in Star Wars) are generated by individual players, but unspent momentum can be placed in a shared pool, so all the players can benefit during play.

The game utilises a variation of the 2d20 system, a bit more dynamic than Conan it seems. There are six attributes and six disciplines (i.e. skills,) and the interaction between disciplines and attributes can vary depending on situation and how the skill applies and/or is applied in the situation. There are also Focuses, that modifies or adds successes/momentum/effects if you roll well. There is also a good list of talents, which as I understand it is not as directly tied to disciplines and talents are linked to skills in Conan - but I may be wrong.

The starship itself is also a kind of character with six systems (attributes) and six departments (disciplines), and also has a Trait and can be refitted and modified, all this should be covered in the core book if my understanding is correct.

The game has guidelines for NPCs and crew generation, missions and a lot of information about the various eras you can play in. The players can also make supporting characters that the players control during missions, so as not to sit and wait if their main character isn't involved in some or several scenes.

Character creation is like in Conan, seemingly pretty complicated and fiddly, but I would suspect it goes quite quickly once you've wrapped your head around the numerous steps. This is perhaps the "weakest" part of the system, by which I mean you apply talents, and/or attributes values and/or discipline values several times in different steps based on background, species, education, career events, and what branch of Starfleet you belong to - science, command or operations, etc. It's not a fast character creation system, but it is detailed and gives you an idea of who your character is, where it is from and potentially answers a few question about motivations, values and demeanour. Personally I really like this aspect of the 2d20 system, as it provides guidelines and depth to your character that is ready as you start the game, but I'm sure some will find this too constricting. There is a faster method presented too, that is less fiddly.

I would suspect the game runs pretty smoothly, but as with Star Wars, Genesys and most other games, you need some time to get into it by actually playing it. It is similar enough to FFG's Star Wars RPG in some respects, which means you'll wrap your head quite quickly around some of the logics and ideas, but it is also different enough that you should read the rules carefully and not make too many assumptions coming from Star Wars.

As someone who is not a big Star Trek fan, I must say that the shinieness of the book and the amount of information makes me interested in trying to run a game, and I would think that the book provides enough information to let even someone like me - a rookie when it comes to Trek lore and knowledge - run a good genre game in any of the eras the book provides information about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Jegergryte said:

I would suspect the game runs pretty smoothly, but as with Star Wars, Genesys and most other games, you need some time to get into it by actually playing it. It is similar enough to FFG's Star Wars RPG in some respects, which means you'll wrap your head quite quickly around some of the logics and ideas, but it is also different enough that you should read the rules carefully and not make too many assumptions coming from Star Wars.

even someone like me - a rookie when it comes to Trek lore and knowledge - run a good genre game in any of the eras the book provides information about.

I played it actually since the playtesting and it was clunky compared to Conan. Ship combat did not feel like Star Trek, it felt rather half done. Conan is great, Star Trek Adventures took a turn into the wrong direction. They should've taken Infinity and MC3 as a model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, that's sad to hear.

If I ever run it myself, I'll let you know what I get out of the starship combat stuff. I haven't even glanced at it yet.

Starship combat systems seem to be difficult to get right. So far most games that include a starship combat system either makes it too abstract or too detailed and boardgamey. I've yet to run a Coriolis space combat, but apparently that one is pretty good, but is more akin to submarine and naval combat than swishy dogfighty space opera combat. I dunno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses, Jegergryte and DarthDude.  Looks like I'll just continue to stick with FASA and LUG.  (Or get ready for a Genesys homebrew.)

As for this?

6 hours ago, Jegergryte said:

I'm watching Enterprise now... I tried DS9 and Voyager and that didn't work out so well

Yikes.

As someone who's been a fan of Trek since the early 80s?  The popular opinion is that the only Trek series truly worth a look are the first three:  TOS (the original series), TNG (The Next Generation), and DS9 (Deep Space Nine).  VOY (Voyager) and ENT (Enterprise) are both considered to be much weaker and, quite frankly, unnecessary.

If you're looking for some of the better episodes of those first three series to watch, just let me know.  I would be happy to provide you a list of, say, 5-10 quality episodes from each show that would give you a taste of Trek without the need to truly invest a ton of your time.

Interestingly enough, DS9 is often considered the best of the bunch.  Once you clear the first three seasons, DS9 takes off like a roller coaster ride and consists of some of (if not the) best writing, acting, and ACTION in the entire franchise.  Plus, it's the only series that's truly serialized (although presented in the guise of an episodic series); things matter in DS9!  And BIG things happen in that series as well.  Only downside is the fact that, yes, again it's a slow burn until you get to Season 4.

Edited by Harlock999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harlock999 said:

Thanks for the responses, Jegergryte and DarthDude.  Looks like I'll just continue to stick with FASA and LUG.  (Or get ready for a Genesys homebrew.)

As for this?

Yikes.

As someone who's been a fan of Trek since the early 80s?  The popular opinion is that the only Trek series truly worth a look are the first three:  TOS (the original series), TNG (The Next Generation), and DS9 (Deep Space Nine).  VOY (Voyager) and ENT (Enterprise) are both considered to be much weaker and, quite frankly, unnecessary.

If you're looking for some of the better episodes of those first three series to watch, just let me know.  I would be happy to provide you a list of, say, 5-10 quality episodes that would give you a taste of Trek without the need to truly invest a ton of your time.

Interestingly enough, DS9 is often considered the best of the bunch.  Once you clear the first three seasons, DS9 takes off like a roller coaster ride and consists of some of (if not the) best writing, acting, and ACTION in the entire franchise.  Plus, it's the only series that's truly serialized (although presented in the guise of an episodic series); things matter in DS9!  And BIG things happen in that series as well.  Only downside is the fact that, yes, again it's a slow burn until you get to Season 4.

As a huge Trek fan from TOS onward, I could not disagree more concerning Enterprise.  As with any Trek show, it had its weak points, but its lack of reliance on technology (a weakness of TNG) was wonderful and placed the success of any given situation squarely on the shoulders of the heroes and not a random technobabble.  I do agree that DS9 is pretty much just made of awesome and that Voyager was beyond painful.  But I have to defend Archer, T'Pol, Trip, Malcom, Phlox, Hoshi, and Travis.  It was a solid show, especially as it neared the end of its run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...