As far as I know, it's never been terribly popular. Any ideas why?
As far as I know, it's never been terribly popular. Any ideas why?
You know I am not really sure although I have tried to run the game a few times
As far as I know, it's never been terribly popular. Any ideas why?
I think, in the right hands, it could work. It would require someone knowing the material VERY well. I'd also like to see it using an existing system (like Star Wars does).
Contributor
|
My initial, gut response is that the setting is too intimidating. It's something that so many of us know that we may unconsciously fear that we won't be able to do it justice. I think that there's also an argument to be made that, after so many years on TV and in film, the story lines have been somewhat played out. Mainly, though, I think that there is an expectation of realism and continuity in Star Trek that is difficult for gamers to recreate at the table.
Those are just my initial thoughts. Probably debatable on many levels, but a decent starting point, I think.
My initial, gut response is that the setting is too intimidating. It's something that so many of us know that we may unconsciously fear that we won't be able to do it justice. I think that there's also an argument to be made that, after so many years on TV and in film, the story lines have been somewhat played out. Mainly, though, I think that there is an expectation of realism and continuity in Star Trek that is difficult for gamers to recreate at the table.
Those are just my initial thoughts. Probably debatable on many levels, but a decent starting point, I think.
There are also a couple of other problems:
- The IP has been handed around between multiple companies, each change reduces the value of the franchise
- Paramount and the Roddenberry estate have been very controlling of the property (and we though Lucas was bad)
- the setting is based on Military command structure, which does not appeal to many players
- Finally, not everyone agrees on "which" Trek is the correct one.
My initial, gut response is that the setting is too intimidating. It's something that so many of us know that we may unconsciously fear that we won't be able to do it justice. I think that there's also an argument to be made that, after so many years on TV and in film, the story lines have been somewhat played out. Mainly, though, I think that there is an expectation of realism and continuity in Star Trek that is difficult for gamers to recreate at the table.
Those are just my initial thoughts. Probably debatable on many levels, but a decent starting point, I think.
I'm (well, I really should say I was since it's almost but dead now, in my opinion) a huge fan of Star Trek and I've tried to start a campaign once or twice in the last couple of years. But, the fact is that you're right, Paris: the setting is intimidating, EVEN for a Star Trek fan. The Star Trek universe is one of the most diverse and deep I've seen and it's quite hard to run a campaign true to this universe while trying to be as imaginative as a D&D campaign (for example).
I faced the same problems back when I was in a play-by-email Star Trek group: it was too easy to disgress from the "canon" Star Trek stuff… In the end, I think we all have an idea of HOW Star Trek should feel like and we're a bit hesitating to swim in this universe.
There's also the fact that the game system, while being all in all innovative, was kind of daunting to learn and use. If Star Trek RPG would have used the D20 system, it would probably have fare better… Probably.
But I have to admit, though, that I sometimes miss those Warp Drives and Romulan ultimatums… I may run a Star Trek campaign in the future, but I think that I'll try to convert the game system to the D20 system (maybe that I'll even use the Pathfinder system as a reference!).
I ran a successful Star Trek RPG back in the mid 1990's which ran for about 3 years. In fact it became so successful that I ran three different groups on three different ships at the same time. I found that most RPGS are a collaborative team effort. Star Trek (especially if it takes place on a Starship) requires a rank structure and a character has to be in charge, That's hard to do. But we made that work. What makes Star Trek so difficult to roleplay (in our experience) was the level of technology and how it dominates the background. Star Trek assumes that the characters understand the technology and know the difference between an ODN Network, a plasma relay, and the LCARS. Other games don't make that sort of demand. Even Star Wars doesn't make that requirement as much as Star Trek does.
Star Trek RPGing rocks! My friend ran a very successful Star Trek FASA campaign (Klingons!) from 1991 to 2000. During that time we had multiple spin off mini-campaigns--Federation, Next Generation, etc.
We had players driving in from Phoenix once a month to play in this campaign, that's how popular it was.
I'm currently running another Klingon campaign that picks up where our old FASA game left off, using the True20 rules. We don't play as much as we used to, but we sure are having fun.
Why it's not caught on with other folks is beyond me....
Star Trek has the same inherit problem any major media (ie TV movies) RPG Product has. I call it the Dune effect because I tried to do a D20 Dune game once upon a time. In short the problem was in order to do it right, you can't go to Dune and meet major characters, but if you don't go to Dune and meet say Paul then is it really Dune?
Why don't you want to meet the major characters, because you'll end up killing them, and collectively players know how to do it so you can't come up with a logical "yeah I was dead but I got better". In Star Trek somebody will kill Kirk or Data or Dax or whoever. Star Wars lets kill Skywalker before he takes out the Death Star. Lets blow up the Firefly ship thats smuggling stuff before they get to Meranda. B5 last best hope, not after us Centari get through with it.
So the rule holds true, played in a B5 game once, lord I love what Mongoose did with Modern in that, and we never once went to B5, we were part of the Free Mars movement. It was great, but seemed to lack something, it just wasn't B5.
Star Wars, B5, Dune, Star Trek, Firefly, even old school BattleStar Galatica (not that new crap) are all great and very expansive universes, but if the players know about it they want to be where the movie action is. Fewer know or care about the expanded universe, when they meet somebody imporatant it never ends well.
Like the song says
"yeah Vaders a real pain the neck but remeber if you kill him you'll be unemployed......Oh my Yoda!"
TTFN Dre
I think I agree with Paris: with a very well-established universe (like Star Trek or Middle Earth or James Bond), you're sort of constrained into telling a very specific type of story. Otherwise it just doesn't "feel" right.
I'd rather play a generic game where there are fewer preconceived notions that I have to follow. So if I want to add some Tolkienesque elements to my (generic) D&D game, I can, but then I can add other elements I like without feeling I'm being untrue to Middle Earth.
|
|
My friends and I played a LOT of the FASA game and really liked it. I was (and still am) probably the big Star Trek fan of the group so I ran the games. The rest of the guys were fans as well, although they certainly had more of a casual knowledge of the series.
I agree that if the game was out today under the D20 rules, it could be successful (especially now that the big budget JJ Abrams reboot of the movie series is on the way!)
As a slight side note ... although I never actually played it, I was friends with (and was part of for a short time) the company that went on to produce the Star Trek RPG after FASA. I believe it was pretty successful for them ...
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
In short the problem was in order to do it right, you can't go to Dune and meet major characters, but if you don't go to Dune and meet say Paul then is it really Dune?
Star Wars, B5, Dune, Star Trek, Firefly, even old school BattleStar Galatica are all great and very expansive universes, but if the players know about it they want to be where the movie action is. Fewer know or care about the expanded universe, when they meet somebody imporatant it never ends well.
That's a really good point. (I suppose it also holds true for settings like DragonLance and the Forgotten Realms.) I think it's least a problem in Star Trek, because there have been so many diffeent series, based on different premises, that a campaign could be seen as just "another series".
If I were going to run a Star Trek campaign, I'd set it "aside" somewhere. Starfleet Academy. Earth's Home Defense Force. Section 13 (secret Gray Ops).
I'd reference the Big Guys. The PC's might have a teleconference with Riker, or accidentally activate an archival captain's log from Sulu. I'd be more concerned with introducing the iconic NPC's and having them steal the PCs' thunder.
But I'd draw opponents from the series: Romulans, the Borg, a Changeling, the parasitic aliens from "Conspiracy" (TNG Season 1), Section 13, etc.
|
|
Back in the FASA days our group tried it several times but it never took. The main problem was the hierarchy in command. All of the PC were department heads plus the captain and XO. There was a big burden on the captain and everyone else ended up playing second fiddle. We gave up and went back to Traveller.
Back in the FASA days our group tried it several times but it never took. The main problem was the hierarchy in command. All of the PC were department heads plus the captain and XO. There was a big burden on the captain and everyone else ended up playing second fiddle. We gave up and went back to Traveller.
Do you think the captain could an NPC? Sort of like the Inquisitor in Dark Heresy? Would that help put the characters on more even footing?
Back when I was in the International Federation of Trekkers, we LARPed it, completely systemless. It worked just fine.
|
|
Back in the FASA days our group tried it several times but it never took. The main problem was the hierarchy in command. All of the PC were department heads plus the captain and XO. There was a big burden on the captain and everyone else ended up playing second fiddle. We gave up and went back to Traveller.Do you think the captain could an NPC? Sort of like the Inquisitor in Dark Heresy? Would that help put the characters on more even footing?
We tried that but it simply did not work. The GM ended up being the captain by default and that took way too much effort on his part.
The closest we got was running a small trouble shooting team on a tiny ship where everyone was roughly the same rank but it never felt like Star Trek.
|
I always liked the Last Unicorn version of the Star Trek RPG, though I agree that there are significant problems with making it work as an enjoyable game and a Star Trek story at the same time.
Where you have one player as the captain, that player does tend to become the star of the show - the person running the game needs to understand that and work to give the other players storylines in order to keep them central, just as if they were actors on the show.
The other option, which the game recommends, is to make everyone an ensign with an NPC captain or department head assigning them missions. The problem here is that many players are not used to having to work within a military-style hierarchy - people used to a D&D-style game of killing badguys and looting their steaming corpses who bring that attitude over are either going to be told they can't perform certain actions or they're going to disrupt the game.
That said, it can be a great time if everyone is on the same page. If I can find the time and some interested players, I'm going to try to run an Original Trek campaign using the Last Unicorn rules in addition to my SCAP game.
Well, I recently ran a little Star Trek RPG game and I'll share the experience and why I think it never really caught on.
I created a simple little campaign and it took us about five sessions to get through it. It was fun and entertaining but didn't hold the same thrill that other games hold. All four of us were massive fans of Star trek and knew the universe inside and out. There was no need to try and wrap our heads around some of the difficult concepts of the setting. The system is solid though it borrows quite heavily from d20. It's smooth and runs well, however, so that was not where the problem arose.
The game I wrote was a Starfleet game and thus the characters were outfitted with typical Starfleet away team gear. This included phasers. When they clashed with Klingon terrorists, the main villains of the story,they whipped out their phasers and clashed in pure cinematic fashion. This was just like scenes I have seen in many episodes and movies. It was the Star trek version of the conflicts I have thrown parties into several times. Battle.
And this is where the problems began. Phasers are one hit kill weapons. Even when the weapons are set to stun they are still instant knockouts. Where's the drama in a gunfight when every single conflict comes down to whoever hits first. It was lame and unexciting. The excitement in other situations ground to a halt as soon as the guns came out.
This is why Star Trek RPG didn't work for me.
|
I always liked the Last Unicorn version of the Star Trek RPG, though I agree that there are significant problems with making it work as an enjoyable game and a Star Trek story at the same time.
I ran a Last Unicorn Star Trek game for a little while.
We tried running a "everyone" is an ensign game and it just didn't work.The player's wanted to do stuff that was important.
So I wrote a new game where the players were the crew of an Akira class battleship during the Dominion War. The player's were allowed some freedom and there was plenty of action. The best part of the campaign was when one of the players who was a lower ranking red shirt sacrificed himself by overloading a few phaser rifles and take out a squad of Jem'Hadar. I don't think he had planned that it would kill him too... but that's Ensign Jones for you.
Trent
Infinet Media & Design
|
|
I played this for a while in 1988-90. I concur, the hierarchy required everyone at the table learn to play a supporting role, following commands. I still remember my character... Captain Hunter. I had a great engineer named D'Mitri that could give Scotty a run for his money, and a fast ship named the U.S.S. Asimov.
Maybe now, that the whole world is geeked-out, it could catch on if shiny new rule books came out ;)
I guess one of the big problem with Star Trek RPG is the defined role of each character in the starship and it's pretty hard to involve everyone in each typical game session if you want to be true to star trek episode. For instance, a lot of star trek adventure involve away team... If one of your character want to play a Transporter Ops, Helmsman or Navigator you will find it pretty hard to explain why this character should go on each away team mission...
Also, a lot of star trek adventures main plot involve technological, scientific or medical problem to resolve... It's a lot of fun to watch a Tv episode where Jordi La Forge is working on a warpdrive anomaly ... but in a RPG session if only one or two character can be involve in the story, it's boring for the other players. And if the main plot involve something else, the character that is require to repair the Warp Drive or find a cure for a disease do nothing else than extended skills tests during most of the game session...
And last but not the least... All the player need to known (and like) the star trek universe to really enjoy it... And it's very hard to find such a group of players.
I've try Fasa, Prime Directive, Last Unicorn Game and Decipher Game star trek rpg and none ever goes for more than one or two game session before the group decided to play something else...
I will try to adapt some of my Last Unicorn Star Trek adventures for my Dark Heresy game sessions...
|
|
One solution for the captain's chair could be to have him/her be an NPC at first. Then when the PC's have gained enough levels, have the current captain get promoted, retire, married, or vaporized into red dust on the floor. Then choose one of the characters who've shown leadership potential. As for different people in different specialties, you could always assign them to a special permanent away team. Either they're all security (A-Team anyone?) or it's a well rounded team with varied skills. Giving you a reason why they have to always work together.
|
|
I always liked the Last Unicorn version of the Star Trek RPG, though I agree that there are significant problems with making it work as an enjoyable game and a Star Trek story at the same time.
Last Unicorn was the company I worked with back in the day. The irony, at least for me, was that I was probably by far the biggest Star Trek fan, but I never had the chance to be involved at all with the Star Trek game (they had to move the company all the way across the country to California in order to do the Star Trek game ... I stayed behind)
I also tend to agree that the command structure makes Star Trek interesting to watch but really tough to make work in a game. You can do it, but it's not easy ...
Um. I didn't even know it existed.. :(
Is there a download?
|
|
Um. I didn't even know it existed.. :(
Star Fleet Battles is an awesome game if you are into strategic tactical games, (energy management is key). I have quite a few SFB books from back in the day but only because my uncle loves the game and growing up I played it with him. I played Commander's Edition so I can't speak for other editions. I'm pretty sure that you can still find Commander's Edition stuff but more commonly available stuff would be from Amarillo Design Bureau. Check out the official Star Fleet Battles website.
Keep in mind from what I know, this isn't a RPG but a Tactical Wargame.
They may have released some RPG stuff though.
Trent
Infinet Media & Design
Hiya.
I played in a Star Trek (FASA) campaign that lasted about a year and a half or so. Our game was set in the time of TOS, at the same time as Kirk and the boys. Our ship, "The Phoenix", iirc, was basically a duplicate of the Enterprise. My character, Cptn. Jacob T. Kaplowski, came from a medical background. He was a "health nut"; a gigantic behemoth of a man at about 6'5", maybe 300 lb, and a Strength score of 102. (in a system where the range is 1-100, that's pretty good!). He was constantly disappointed (and annoyed) with technology and how sucky it was. So much so that while he had a phazer, he kept his 'lucky stalagmite' at his side at all times...just for those situations where technology fails (which was, oddly enough, rather often). He could club the crap outta whatever was trying to chew on his head. :)
Anyway, we played in the GM's basement. We had the rec room arranged to have the same layout as the bridge of the ship; tables and chairs, etc. With the FASA system, each 'station' has a fold-out map that resembles the toggle switches and whatnot that you see on the show. You move chits around on the fold-outs as if you were pushing and flipping buttons and toggle switches. The ship had a certain number of 'energy points' that had to be distributed between the various sub-systems (shields, navigation, guns, etc.). So...everyone had to talk to each other so they could give/take energy and flip their toggle switches and sliders. It was VERY VERY cool and *really* evoked the feel of being on an actual Star Trek bridge.
Loved it! Everyone had stuff to do (I think there were about 6 or 7 of us, plus the GM). The only reason I can see other's not having a 'successful' game it they are expecting it to be "D&D in space". Star Trek is best done as a "well-oiled machine" type group of characters, and not as a "rag-tag bunch" type group of characters.
The hierarchy of command worked out well in the Klingon campaigns we ran using the FASA rules because the captain was under constant threat of being assassinated or challenged to a duel by another PC is he did not perform honorably.
Plus, the GM was really good at making sure every player got involved. The captain player was always under the gun (or dagger!) because failure to perform honorably usually meant someone challenged him.
The good thing was that all of us were mature gamers and no one took it personally if a player stabbed the captain to death and took over. The old captain player just rolled up another character.
It was a blast!
|
|
Um. I didn't even know it existed.. :(
Is there a download?
The RPG associated with Star Fleet Battles (or Federation Commander) is "Prime Directive", and the link is here
I hope this helps.
I've played in a PBeM "shared fiction" type of setting. Quite fun, but never an actual RPG. FASA's planet creation rules were utterly fascinating to me when I was 12, and somehow those rules got combined with Spelljammer.
Good times. :)
|
|
Star Fleet Battles eventually spawned an RPG known as Prime Directive set firmly in an alternate version of the TOS world which was limited by what Justman could not use, mainly many of the ship names and people from the mainline Trek universe but put in some neat things like the Kzinthi, Lyrans, in addition to the Gorn, Klingons, and Romulans as rival powers to the Federation.
There is also a GURPS version of the same setting. I was actually a playtester for that game. But to answer the OP question I think it can be summed up by saying everyone wants to be Captain Kirk, nobody wants to be Mr. Spock.
|
|
Star Trek takes a problem with online party formation, and jacks it up to the next level, the problem being that 'somebody's gotta play the Cleric.' While a D&D party can function just fine with 4 Bards and a Warlock (which sounds like a band, or perhaps the setup to a bad joke), if everybody wants to play the big, burly fighter, that's not going to work for a Star Trek group, unless you are playing a Klingon landing party... Command structure is a problem (as players generally loathe playing with bossy fellow players, hence the cold quiet death of the 1e Cavalier) as well.
The setting issue would best be handled by stating up front that is a variant universe, where Kirk/Spock/etc. didn't exist and *your* team is the one on the five-year mission (same as most FR enthusiasts recommend for dealing with Elminster, *by not using him*).
Alternately, one could 'do a Voyager' and utterly remove the Star Fleet crew from their stomping grounds, eliminating any chance they could call for help or get overruled by the Admiralty or whatever.
Ideally, the party would be the same rank, as in Prime Directive, with nobody playing the Captain (who is the NPC 'Baron' or 'Hooded Guy in the Bar' who sends them on missions), but the premise of the game would be entirely centered around mission success and experience and, perhaps, rank and promotion, as the world of Star Trek doesn't lend itself to stuff like loot, a staple of fantasy games. That's hardly unique, most superhero games function without loot as well, as Spiderman doesn't generally swipe the Vulture's jetpack or Doc Ock's bionic limbs or the Shocker's vibro-gloves after beating them (although that could be a neat character in it's own right...) and most superhero games handwave how the character makes money, just as Star Fleet members get paid and don't have to shake down the Romulans they phasered for pocket change.
It's got a few steps against it, and Prime Directive, IMO, managed to address many of them, but was a niche product at best. We've played a lot of massive SFB campaigns, with homebrewed rules for resource management and exploitation (giving reason to explore, or conquer, neighbouring space), as well as quite a bit of role-playing and diplomacy, but that's *nothing* like SFB, which is just thousands of pages of rules for ship combat. Just the thought of filling out Energy Allocation forms and worrying about how much reserve to keep for ECM/ECCM, High-Energy Turns, etc. is making my lip wibble.
Oh, how I hated Energy Allocation forms, my ancient enemy! No wonder we added all the Sims-style Star Fleet resource management / diplomacy / RP stuff...
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
During the ramp-up to Star Trek: The Next Generation's debut, there was an alternative "theme song", a little more martial than the orchestral one that was eventually green-lit. It ended up as a track on a "music of Star Trek" CD.
About fifteen years ago, a friend of mine ran a Star Trek RPG (I couldn't tell you what system, but those allocation points sound familiar). After beginning each session with a quick "teaser" scene, he would require the guy playing the ship's captain to recite the "Space, the Final Frontier..." speech to that alternate theme music.
I'm not entirely sure why Star Trek gaming rarely catches on, but I think there are probably 2 factors to consider.
1) Publisher support. FASA and other corps have had their hands full dealing with Paramount. I think this has a tendency to keep any media-based setting in relatively niche gamer markets unless the IP-holder is exceptionally friendly to game reinterpretation.
2) Resurgence of the show with Next Gen. Once there is a new source of material, people often tend to feel their jones is being satisfied or they become wary of using their own imaginations to generate campaigns for fear of feeling out of canon (and trying to deal with even geekier canon-obsessed players).
I think both of these factors suggest that Star Wars, as an RPG, is similarly doomed. Or at least it would be if there wasn't some additional magic to it. Star Trek is hard core sci-fi compared to Star Wars and is rooted in a familiar future. The fantasy elements of Star Wars have a certain mysticism to them and it's pretty hard to deny their appeal.
I think some of the ST problems involve two things:
1. Rank.
2. Loot.
1. Rank.
No one likes being ordered around. Not by other PC's, and not by the DM.
If one PC gets rank on the others, unless you have a very odd group, things tend to go down hill. "You'll do what I say or else!".
Or, the DM is Captain and ST is the new ultimate Railroad. You do what the DM says. Doesn't feel much like an RPG when you don't really have a choice in the matter.
(a "rebellion" model, or a fringe campaign could limit that problem, however, as could the "lost in space" scenario).
2. Loot.
You basically get two things for "succeeding" in startrek. One is rank.
The second, is also rank. While you could get XP, leveling up is really just a matter of getting the next rank. And since everyone is ranking up at once to prevent #1 above, everything just seems.. to me, very stale. What people really need is loot. Most RPG's revolve around some method of power acquisition as you attain higher levels. In some games you actually get new "powers". In others its loot, in others its both.
In ST there are few powers to hand out. There is no magic. Everything is technology. The PC's are mostly human (or so-close-to-human-as-to-be-human). There is no loot. Everything you get is issued by the Cap'n for the mission at hand. the ST universe itself is relatively moneless, except when dealing with non-federation people. You don't even get paid.
Those tend to be the two big problems from what I've seen. That having been said, ST would be an *awesome* campaign for 1-3 people. (GM + 1-2 others) assuming the 2 in question got along very well.
(one would be better.. Who cares if the PC is a captain? he's just ordering around NPC's..)
Just me .02.
or, .03 as I tended to ramble abit.
-S
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
It sounds to me like the problem isn't playing in the Federation. The problem is playing in Star Fleet.
Perhaps the campaign should with the party's ship going rogue. (Throw in some gray-ops plot or changeling / "conspiracy" critters / evil Betazoid plot corrupting a cadre of admirals...)
And, voila, Blake's 7.
Actually, the problems always seem to come down to who is playing. Christopher McGlotholin (GR freelancer) used to always have a consistent Trek game that never lost player interest. As time passed, everyone moved away and we couldn't get together to play.
Most recently, the problem with many gamers I have tried to run in Trek is they don't know how to be part of a crew trying to figure things out without collecting stuff (as the previous poster has mentioned). I tried to run a game a year ago, and I found those to be the main problems.
Also, fewer gamers today know the setting as well as many of us old guys. When DS9 is "the old trek show", it's hard to maitain consistency or any semblence of story continuity.
It sounds to me like the problem isn't playing in the Federation. the problem is playing in Star Fleet.
Perhaps the campaign should with the party's ship going rogue. (Throw in some gray-ops plot or changeling / "conspiracy" critters / evil Betazoid plot corrupting a cadre of admirals...)
And, voila, Blake's 7.
This is the problem. If you have a ship go rogue in Trek, you're no longer playing Trek. Trek games only work if the players are willing to ignore the modern expectations of "the game" (loot, powergaming, "kill/takestuff") and give themselves over entirely to the story. Effective Trek games are 95% story/role-play and a mere 5% (at best) rules.
You're playing a game in which you can 1)put your weapon on wide-beam and stun everything in the room and 2)put a phaser on overload and kill everyone on the ship. You can't think "combat" and have a successful game.
EDIT: Also, if you don't impliceitly like and trust the people you are playing with, you will not have fun.
|
|
It sounds to me like the problem isn't playing in the Federation. the problem is playing in Star Fleet.
And there's the rub. What the heck do non-Starfleet members of the Federation do?
A campaign set in the Star Trek universe based around some archaelogists (and students, who may have an assortment of disciplines / interests, but gone on this trip for school credit), who discover some Thing Man Was Not Meant To Know could get all Aliens or whatever, just set in a universe where that sort of thing is totally unexpected!
For fans of the Traveller merchant class or Star Wars smuggler class, a team of Federation merchants plying the space lanes while trying to compete with extremely unethical Ferengi, suspicious Klingons, etc. as well as the occasional derelict that contains something could be interesting.
But since we've never seen a focus on non Starfleet Federation life, it's not as natural to visualize a Star Trek game that *isn't* based on a starship.
Perhaps the campaign should with the party's ship going rogue. (Throw in some gray-ops plot or changeling / "conspiracy" critters / evil Betazoid plot corrupting a cadre of admirals...)
And, voila, Blake's 7.
Neat. The world is *so* wide open. You could just as easily squeeze many other options into the setting, such as Aliens or Farscape. Firefly might be a bit more of a stretch, but I'm sure it could be done, since the Federation is established as having non-member worlds within it's territories that have differing levels of technology (or none at all, like the pseudo-Amish Irish settlers from the Next Gen ep who had to be relocated to a different planet).
Probably the best place to look for non-star fleet ideas is DS:9. I mean, heck who wouldn't want to play a special class called: Morn (smuggler, trader, thief, and socialite).
|
|
It sounds to me like the problem isn't playing in the Federation. The problem is playing in Star Fleet.
Perhaps the campaign should with the party's ship going rogue. (Throw in some gray-ops plot or changeling / "conspiracy" critters / evil Betazoid plot corrupting a cadre of admirals...)
And, voila, Blake's 7.
Yeah - but then you may as well play Traveller.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Yeah - but then you may as well play Traveller.
Wow. That's brilliant, Crosswiredmind.
In most iterations of Traveller, you're playing former military officers who've mustered out.
Make that former Star Fleet officers, familiar with the military but now outside the command structure, and that may, in fact, be a way to run a Star Trek game. ("Star Trek: The Previous Generation")
Again, the starting adventure needs to give them some "hidden" enemy to motivate them. (Something blatant, like another Borg invasion, would be handled by active military.)
Woo hoo. Make sure one of the PC's has enough engineering savvy to refurbish a private ship, and they're off.
Our problem with getting it to work as a campaign came down to two words.
Prime. Directive.
Sure, you can work around that when setting up scenarios, but it makes the GMs task that much harder. In the end we went for another background that wasnt so much hard work on that aspect.
|
|
There are also a couple of other problems:
- The IP has been handed around between multiple companies, each change reduces the value of the franchise
- Finally, not everyone agrees on "which" Trek is the correct one.
I used to play the FASA system with my friend a long time ago and had fun with that system. I got the other rule books too.
I agree with these. The rules go out of print so fast that its hard for the company to market the rules to new players and get the books out. I think Star Trek like other science fiction games to be successful needs books other than the core rule books to make it easy for a DM to develop a campaign. One of my biggest gripes was that a Klingon sourcebook never came out for any rules set.
I think Mongoose might have done Star Trek well. Not sure if d20 is the best rule system however.
There's a lot of good stuff here for Trek RPGing:
http://forum.trek-rpg.net/
Mike
Star Trek combines two of the GM's worst enemies: technology that is almost magical and a pre-existing canon that is so loosely defined it might as well not exist sometimes.
A Star Trek GM has to be constantly on his toes against 'The Engineer' player, the guy that can logically extropolate the known facts of, say, the Transporter, and consistantly turn them into a deadly tool of 'I Win'. The show's authors had the luxury of characters in Episode 34 simply not remembering that in Episode 8 we saved everyone in this exact situation by using Maneuver X. The GM seldom has that luxury. It gets worse if you're drawing from later shows that don't even have the restrictions that the original show had (inter-ship beaming, for example). (Another big problem is the ship AI; I honestly think that 90%+ of the positions on a starship are there simply to give human beings something to do).
I'm not sure that the military structure really is a problem in Star Trek. It's more of a way to seperate out people than a hard and fast command and control structure; it's certainly nothing like the military that we have today though it employs some of the same trappings, probably simply through tradition. People constantly question their orders on Star Trek or deliberately break them and get away with it if their idea worked. It's usually never a problem anyway because I think most Star Trek games assume you're not going to be playing Ensign Jack. In the later shows, you also have ships with a significant amount of non-Star Fleet personnel on board.
A somewhat larger problem in a sense is that we are only ever given broad fuzzy hints about what people in the Star Trek universe do when they are NOT on mission or 'in an adventure'. The only big thing we do know is that money is obsolete, so presumably class is obsolete. They've eliminated poverty, hunger and most social ills including prejudice. The mere idea of 'scarcity' is laughable with the matter replicator. About the only 'bad' thing left is political corruption.