My assertion/"value criterion" for games based on fiction (like Star Wars) or legend (Arthurian myth, etc.)

1) Such games should always have sample statistics for the key heroic figures in the topic being emulated.
2) PCs should be able to, at the start, or within credible reach of the advancement rules, be able to play a character approximating the star characters.

That's pretty much the point of such games in the first place. Playing a game based on the Ring Cycle in which you could never hope to ever be as good as Siegfried (for example) would not really be emulating it's topic.

Under this criterion, the first 'successful' fiction-based game that jumps to mind is Farscape d20 (man, did ANYONE buy that?). Not otherwise a particularly great example of either Farscape or a d20 book, but the stats for the canon crew (early seasons anyway) are included and attainable. John's 9th level, as I recall, with the rest being within +/- 2 levels.

Was it the first one printed that meets this value? Probably not. But I've never seen a licensed property I liked.

Quote from: Christmas ApeUnder this criterion, the first 'successful' fiction-based game that jumps to mind is Farscape d20 (man, did ANYONE buy that?).

I did. Yeah, not the best iteration of d20. Had some okay ideas, but sort of clumsily put together.

I did just pull it out recently, with a SC 2.0 conversion in mind.


It also occurs to me that another compelling reason along this lines is that newbs might actually want to PLAY one of the star characters. So it behooves you to make the characters playable.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadIt also occurs to me that another compelling reason along this lines is that newbs might actually want to PLAY one of the star characters. So it behooves you to make the characters playable.

As a business decision, certainly.

Personally, that's one of the two reasons I don't like licensed material, the other being the urge in anyone running it to have you run across the star characters and have them show you up.

That's reasonable.  Ideally, they should playtest or at least run through a few battles using the stars when designing the game to see if things play out in the ballpark as in the book/movie.  

If the star character is insanely powerful, they're useless as NPCs or cameos.  Some times the stars seem to break the creation rules, which is confusing when you're looking at the stats to understand the chargen.  

I used to get mildly annoyed when Dragon used to run articles on fictional characters and give them charsheets that weren't even vaguely legal - often multiclass with the classes unequal.  But that was as much a sign that the multiclass rules were inadequate.

Quote from: Christmas Apethe other being the urge in anyone running it to have you run across the star characters and have them show you up.

That's incredibly annoying whether or not the NPCs are from a license.  "Oh my DMPCs are so much better than you.  Sit back and watch while they rescue you."  Beating characters up is fine, but turning them into useless observers is not.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadMy assertion/"value criterion" for games based on fiction (like Star Wars) or legend (Arthurian myth, etc.)

1) Such games should always have sample statistics for the key heroic figures in the topic being emulated.

Yes, absolutely. I think there should be, as much as is possible, a sampling of characters from varying power levels. That's why the Lord of the Rings is actually a good example - you have the Hobbits at the low end, Gimli and Legolas in the mid levels, and Aragorn and Gandalf at the high end. I'd also say a good sampling of "generic" characters is useful, to show how characters that aren't the "stars" can look.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad2) PCs should be able to, at the start, or within credible reach of the advancement rules, be able to play a character approximating the star characters.

That's pretty much the point of such games in the first place. Playing a game based on the Ring Cycle in which you could never hope to ever be as good as Siegfried (for example) would not really be emulating it's topic.

I think I agree. The only place I differ (maybe) is that when a character is clearly top dog in the setting (before the PCs come along), his stats should reflect that. For example, Aragorn is called by Tolkien the wisest and hardiest Man of his time, so, in my own adaptation, he's a 20th level character. I'd put him up to epic levels after the War of the Ring. That's not within reach of beginning PCs, but it can be attainable after a campaign's worth of adventuring. He'd be an example of just how tough the PCs can become.

Quote from: NicephorusThat's reasonable.  Ideally, they should playtest or at least run through a few battles using the stars when designing the game to see if things play out in the ballpark as in the book/movie.

That's a good idea. See if the fictional or legendary heroes can actually do in the game what they did in the book. If they can't, then something needs retooling.

Quote from: NicephorusIf the star character is insanely powerful, they're useless as NPCs or cameos.  Some times the stars seem to break the creation rules, which is confusing when you're looking at the stats to understand the chargen.

Yeah, the "stars" should work by the rules of whatever game they're being used in. If they don't, then the game should be retooled.

Quote from: NicephorusI used to get mildly annoyed when Dragon used to run articles on fictional characters and give them charsheets that weren't even vaguely legal - often multiclass with the classes unequal.  But that was as much a sign that the multiclass rules were inadequate.

Yeah, I loved the concept behind Giants in the Earth, but the execution often left a lot to be desired.

The James Bond 007 game meets these criteria, I think.

I agree completely.  There are a lot of games which do this -- probably starting with one of the first licensed RPGs, Call of Cthulhu (1981).  Let's face it, the signature characters are the monsters who are given stats, and it's easy for PCs to live up to Lovecraft's protagonists.  Other games include:

James Bond 007  (1983)
Marvel Superheroes  (1984)
Ghostbusters  (1986)
Timelord  (1991)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2002)

Most of these include the option of playing the signature characters as PCs.  

Bad examples: Amber DRPG, where you get to play the vastly inferior children of Elder Amberites.  Most Star Trek adaptations have postulated PCs as junior officers or even redshirts sent on missions, making it impossible to play characters like Kirk, Spock, or Data.  Similarly with the Lord of the Rings RPG.

Quote from: Christmas ApeAs a business decision, certainly.

Personally, that's one of the two reasons I don't like licensed material, the other being the urge in anyone running it to have you run across the star characters and have them show you up.

Damn right.

If the characters from the license are intended to be used as PCs, that ought to be a serious focus of the game, to the extent of anything else. See TSR's Indiana Jones.

If they're not intended to be used as PCs, adding stats for them is only an active encouragement to have them show-up and upstage the actual PCs. They don't even have to be unreasonably powerful to do it, either. Chalk it up to the sheer fame of canon characters and the fact that, let's face it, the creators of the licensed property probably did a better job making them interesting and likable than than RPG players are generally capable of doing with their own unique PCs.

So either go whole-hog or leave them out altogether. A half-ass approach only facilitates wasted rulebook pages and unsatisfying, spotlight-stealing cameos.

Quote from: NicephorusThat's incredibly annoying whether or not the NPCs are from a license.  "Oh my DMPCs are so much better than you.  Sit back and watch while they rescue you."  Beating characters up is fine, but turning them into useless observers is not.

Oh, I don't think you need canon characters to be shown up by NPCs run by bad GMs. But I think the presence of canon NPCs in a book may push some mediocre GMs over the line into being shitty GMs.

Quote from: YamoIf they're not intended to be used as PCs, adding stats for them is only an active encouragement to have them show-up and upstage the actual PCs. They don't even have to be unreasonably powerful to do it, either. Chalk it up to the sheer fame of canon characters and the fact that, let's face it, the creators of the licensed property probably did a better job making them interesting and likable than than RPG players are generally capable of doing with their own unique PCs.

Well, I think there are uses for canon characters besides as PCs.  At least, most of my games in licensed settings have featured at least some of the canon characters.  By giving hard stats to the canon characters, you're setting benchmarks to relate the game to what happens in the source material.  So, if you want to make up an NPC who's a Vulcan, you can look at Spock for comparison.  

If the canon characters have hard stats which do not upstage the PCs, then it is possible for the PCs to outdo and/or threaten the canon characters.  And that can be cool.  By contrast, say, you have games like Aberrant where there are canon characters who are not given stats.  Not giving them stats can be read as license for the GM to play them as deus ex machina.