Okay I'll post again in this thread.  I just got sick of the TREK bashing. If I want that I can go find some Sci-fi fans in the area and get that in spades - but that gets boring fast.

  STAR TREK is possible as an RPG.
 It just takes a flexible GM and players who are casual fans of one of the versions of "Star Trek".  Learned the hard way that Ga-Ga /gung-Ho TREKKIES make the WORST players in an RPG of "STAR TREK".


My most successful mini-campaign was a bunch of characters that were merchants in what FASA called the Triangle back in the early 1980s version of things.  
 I ran one group that was the Bridge crew and officers of a Constitution-class starship in the time period just after the original series. In that group my best players were 2 young women who had played in a Tunnels & Trolls before I met them.  They knew the  conventions of an RPG, they knew how to play a character. The WORST player I had in that group is the leader of a local ST fan club.  She was a supreme headache - she was playing the ship's doctor and we kept telling her to ignore what she had seen McCoy do on the show and just play what was in front of her.  One time I had to tell her : "NO , you are not going to your TV room just to find one  VHS tape to prove a poiint ...you sitting here and making the character's decision jusat based on what you remember. "  

My point is that an anal-retentive STAR TREK fan/player  is the same thing as a  Rules Lawyer in a regulkar role playing game.

 Only reason I really stopped running those games is that I left college and my circle of friends changed.  We also had conflicting work schedules at the time. Then I got into the costuming side of  "star Trek" fandom and I didn't want to overdose on that uninverse.

 Anybody have the copy of STARLOG magazine that focused on TERMINATOR II:JUDGEMENT DAY on the cover ?
 Look in the letters column in there. You will find a letter from an Ed Charlton defending the STAR TREK RPG and giving an example of a successful convention scenario.  Thats me , it was my letter.

- Ed C.

QuoteAn RPG is not a thing to be "broken" by looking for a loophole just because you spewnt too much time watching TV episodes related to the setting.

Yanno, I missed this before because I basically ignore Koltar, but this really nails it for me.

The problem is going into things looking to break them.

Actually, I think that Koltar's comment about a Setting Lawyer being just as destructive to a game session as a Rules Lawyer is a very acute one, and really gives an answer to HinterWelt's original posted questions.

Yes, pedantic and quibbling players will fuck up your game session. Whether that's setting or system ain't that important.

Quote from: KoltarOkay I'll post again in this thread.  I just got sick of the TREK bashing. If I want that I can go find some Sci-fi fans in the area and get that in spades - but that gets boring fast.

  STAR TREK is possible as an RPG.
 It just takes a flexible GM and players who are casual fans of one of the versions of "Star Trek".  Learned the hard way that Ga-Ga /gung-Ho TREKKIES make the WORST players in an RPG of "STAR TREK".


My most successful mini-campaign was a bunch of characters that were merchants in what FASA called the Triangle back in the early 1980s version of things.  
 I ran one group that was the Bridge crew and officers of a Constitution-class starship in the time period just after the original series. In that group my best players were 2 young women who had played in a Tunnels & Trolls before I met them.  They knew the  conventions of an RPG, they knew how to play a character. The WORST player I had in that group is the leader of a local ST fan club.  She was a supreme headache - she was playing the ship's doctor and we kept telling her to ignore what she had seen McCoy do on the show and just play what was in front of her.  One time I had to tell her : "NO , you are not going to your TV room just to find one  VHS tape to prove a poiint ...you sitting here and making the character's decision jusat based on what you remember. "  

My point is that an anal-retentive STAR TREK fan/player  is the same thing as a  Rules Lawyer in a regulkar role playing game.

 Only reason I really stopped running those games is that I left college and my circle of friends changed.  We also had conflicting work schedules at the time. Then I got into the costuming side of  "star Trek" fandom and I didn't want to overdose on that uninverse.

 Anybody have the copy of STARLOG magazine that focused on TERMINATOR II:JUDGEMENT DAY on the cover ?
 Look in the letters column in there. You will find a letter from an Ed Charlton defending the STAR TREK RPG and giving an example of a successful convention scenario.  Thats me , it was my letter.

- Ed C.

Hmm, It was not my intention to ST bash. Really, my point is not about ST but about translating some stories to RPGs and difficulties that arise. ST is the easiest example of this, IMO.

Let me ask some pointed questions then, if you are interested.

You mention that your greatest difficulty is with ST fans. Would you say that inexperienced RPGers are less problematic? The reason I ask is that experienced RPGers are going to game the system and, possibly, the setting a bit more than someone who is inexperienced and relying ont he GM for guidance. In other words, experienced RPGers will look at mechanic/tool/piece of equipment and ask themselves how they can use it and still be within character.

Second, do you think there are stories that make great stories but not so good RPGs? I am not asking about ST nor will I take an affirmative as an admission that ST is in this category. I am interested on your take on the difficulties or lack there of when translating a long running story with inconsistencies to an RPG.

Finally, you played FASATrek? Have you looked over or played LUGTrek or DecipherTrek? Do you see any difficulties with Next Gen/DS9/Voyager settings as RPGs? Again, this is really just my own curiosity as I have played all three and found FASATrek by far more sustainable than the others.

Thanks for posting again and sorry if you took this thread as merely a bashfest on ST.

Bill

Bill,
 You're alright.

 The difficulties that might arise translating stories to an RPG, ST in particular.

 Well, an ongoing TV show is pretty close to an ongoing RPG campaign - especially these days with so many Telewvision series trying to do the continuing story arc style of things.  They've have also discovered that shows with "arcs" sell better on DVD collections. When STAR TREK and STAR TREK:THE NEXT GENERATION were being produced , the "arc-style" of storytelling was not yet the fashion.  Thats one difficulty you are going to have right there.
 The original ST was being produced during a time when shows were supposed to be re-set to status quo after each episode.  that doesn't work so good for an RPG campaign - people expect an ongoing storyline.

 Your best model for a STAR TREK RPG is going to be either  DS9 or ENTERPRISE. Both shows had stories that carried over whole seasons in their consequences.

 As for RPGers , experienced ones vs. beginners. I can game with anyone who is well behaved and not a snot.  When you say they are going to want game the system or setting . Isn't just another way of saying they are looking for a loophole ? (like I  phrased it in my earlier post?)

I think I have avoided that issue in the past by asking experienced players to assist me in acclimating the new players. That seems to work out no matter what setting I am running.  Also, my group of players TRUST that I am not out to screw them...and they let new players in on that fact. There is no reason to jimmy with the fictional equipment or seting if you know that the GM isn't an adversary.

 As to inconsistencies in a long running story ?
 If you have spotted that TREK writers made mistakes - than you can correct that in an RPG campaign ...if you feel like doing that.  Or create friendly retcon explanation for an inconsistency  or work some way that your players solved the small issue . (whatever it is)

I played an GMed the FASA version of  Star Trek in the mid '80s to early '90s. At the time there was only one version of STAR TREK around.  I stopped gaming TREK around 1992. I did buy some of the LUG and DECIPHER books. (mainly for the maps and some were gifts)

The biggest problen with the later settings in the timeline is that they made the Federation TOO Utopia-like and the humans got  boring. There is even  dialogue on a DS9 episode stating that.

 Here are some situations/scenarios that might be doable :

A group of Bajoran resistance fighters in combat with the Cardassians BEFORE the Federation shows up to help them out. They have limited access to high-tech weapons and the ones they have aren't always reliable.

 A group of 5 top 6 MACOs - these were the Ground Troops Starfleet types that were put onboard the first ENTERPRISE just after the Xindi attack on Earth.  This group is stationed onboard the Intrepid and many times are fighting the Klingons and other races.

DS9/During the Dominion war  : The players are a mixed group, 2 Klingons, 2 romulans, 1 Bajoran, and 1 Starfleet officer human assigned on an intelligence gathering mission behind enemy lines. They have to pretend to be smugglers or pirates and get info on the Vorta and the Jem Hadar in the area ....and make it back to a Starbase alive.  

 Well those are just a few ideas.


- Ed C.

Bill, by-the-way I was born in your city. Dupage County Hospital  in the 1960s, middle of winter.

Koltar, you have indeed proven my point:

Star Trek is bullshit as an RPG. Now there might be a good game to be had within the Star Trek Universe, like yours.

But it will not be anything like the TV shows.


Which is exactly what I said, and what you now gave proof too.

Oh , quite the OPPOSITE , Sett.

 There has been SO MUCH "Star Trek" stories over the years  - that a lot more qualifies as being "Star Trek" than used to in the 1970s or 1980s.
 Even the TV SHOWS  aren't "like the TV Shows".


  The Tribbles episode classic STAR TREK is a LONG way from the Deep Space Nine episode  "In the Pale Moonlight" in both tone and style.

 There is a lot more variety to what qualifies as "STAR TREK" these days. There are book series set completely in the klinhon Empire, there is one series that just focuses on the Starfleet Corps of Engineers. I haven't read either one of those - because I burned out on TREK a few years ago ...but they just prove there is more than is dreamt of in  your TREK philosophy.

- Ed C.

Did you actually think it through?

You weren´t accepting the actual show as a source for common understanding of the Universe. You bitched and moaned about that "setting-lawyer". But that´s the point: you didn´t play Star Trek in that sense. And the one player who actually cared about Star Trek saw that. Now don´t tell me how succesful your Star Trek was, when you yourself provide the proof that it wasn´t really Star Trek.

It doesn´t get much clearer than this, that you can´t have a decent game and also emulate the genre at the same time.


So Star Trek remains bullshit as an RPG.

QuoteMy most successful mini-campaign was a bunch of characters that were merchants in what FASA called the Triangle back in the early 1980s version of things.

See. Merchants. Not Star Fleet Officers. I wonder why.

QuoteThe WORST player I had in that group is the leader of a local ST fan club. She was a supreme headache - she was playing the ship's doctor

So the person desperately wanting emulation of their show was the worst fit?

Quoteand we kept telling her to ignore what she had seen McCoy do on the show and just play what was in front of her.

...because Star Trek is bullshit as an RPG. That´s why you did that.

So if you don't play a Star Trek doctor as McCoy you're not being true to the Star Trek genre?

Does that mean that if I don't play Drizzt I'm not being true to the D&D genre?

QuoteSo if you don't play a Star Trek doctor as McCoy you're not being true to the Star Trek genre?

No, but in a Star Trek emulation, I should be able to do stuff that McCoy did. Elsewise it´s not Star Trek, but some RPGes derivate.

Now with Drizzt, he´s derived from an actual character. D&D purposefully is not emulating fantasy literature. That´s why it´s succesful.

You got it backwards, JimBob.

And if you would actually think things true, you would see that I´m right.

Quote from: KoltarBill,
 You're alright.

Good. I did not want you to feel this is all about ST. It has been something I have struggled with for some time, had discussions with a lot of folks who own games they feel do not work for the story and such. My goal was not to go after ST, just explore the problem one might face taking a story and applying it to an RPG rules set.

Quote from: KoltarThe difficulties that might arise translating stories to an RPG, ST in particular.

 Well, an ongoing TV show is pretty close to an ongoing RPG campaign - especially these days with so many Telewvision series trying to do the continuing story arc style of things.  They've have also discovered that shows with "arcs" sell better on DVD collections. When STAR TREK and STAR TREK:THE NEXT GENERATION were being produced , the "arc-style" of storytelling was not yet the fashion.  Thats one difficulty you are going to have right there.
 The original ST was being produced during a time when shows were supposed to be re-set to status quo after each episode.  that doesn't work so good for an RPG campaign - people expect an ongoing storyline.

 Your best model for a STAR TREK RPG is going to be either  DS9 or ENTERPRISE. Both shows had stories that carried over whole seasons in their consequences.

I agree very strongly. DS9 even more so. I am not sure what the root of that is but it may be as you describe that they had long story arcs. I do not know if they had the same writers for many of their episodes but that would be another factor.

Quote from: KoltarAs for RPGers , experienced ones vs. beginners. I can game with anyone who is well behaved and not a snot.  When you say they are going to want game the system or setting . Isn't just another way of saying they are looking for a loophole ? (like I  phrased it in my earlier post?)

Hmm, I may not have been clear on this. My point was merely an experienced player would have a better knowledge overall of how /RPGs work in general and thus know to look for certain advantages. For instance, a new player may not immediately understand that you need to know how to heal up and if you can come back from the dead. They may just assume you die and it is done (and that may be so with some settings). An experienced player is going to, most likely, pick their weapons based on damage potential instead of how it looks or "I want a phaser like Picard". Not always. I fully admit that I tend to think in terms of my character as opposed to the system but I have to admit, I do not always take the dagger as a thief.

So, yeah, someone gunnign for your game, either from system or setting side, is going to trash the campaign. I really am not talking about them. The opposite can be said about a group that does not care if a phaser can level buildings or transporters can bring you back from the dead, they just want to play ST the way they know it. Not rabid fans but just players who like the setting. I will always say, group trumps system and even setting every time.

Quote from: KoltarI think I have avoided that issue in the past by asking experienced players to assist me in acclimating the new players. That seems to work out no matter what setting I am running.  Also, my group of players TRUST that I am not out to screw them...and they let new players in on that fact. There is no reason to jimmy with the fictional equipment or seting if you know that the GM isn't an adversary.

 As to inconsistencies in a long running story ?
 If you have spotted that TREK writers made mistakes - than you can correct that in an RPG campaign ...if you feel like doing that.  Or create friendly retcon explanation for an inconsistency  or work some way that your players solved the small issue . (whatever it is)

I played an GMed the FASA version of  Star Trek in the mid '80s to early '90s. At the time there was only one version of STAR TREK around.  I stopped gaming TREK around 1992. I did buy some of the LUG and DECIPHER books. (mainly for the maps and some were gifts)

The biggest problen with the later settings in the timeline is that they made the Federation TOO Utopia-like and the humans got  boring. There is even  dialogue on a DS9 episode stating that.

I wont argue too hard on this. I have issues with the perfect society and the troubles it seems to cause, even for the writers of the shows. They desperately want the dashing rogue but what is he being rogue-y about? Meh.

I think the later series also suffer from a much higher reliance on tech and an over all political correctness. Yeah, you had racial tolerance with TOS but that was cool. It was during a period of history(when the shows were filmed and written) when you had serious racial violence. Next Gen always struck me as too polite. Kirk got in there and did some nasty (as nasty as ST gets) business. If you have not guessed, I am more of a TOS fan.

Quote from: KoltarHere are some situations/scenarios that might be doable :

A group of Bajoran resistance fighters in combat with the Cardassians BEFORE the Federation shows up to help them out. They have limited access to high-tech weapons and the ones they have aren't always reliable.

 A group of 5 top 6 MACOs - these were the Ground Troops Starfleet types that were put onboard the first ENTERPRISE just after the Xindi attack on Earth.  This group is stationed onboard the Intrepid and many times are fighting the Klingons and other races.

DS9/During the Dominion war  : The players are a mixed group, 2 Klingons, 2 romulans, 1 Bajoran, and 1 Starfleet officer human assigned on an intelligence gathering mission behind enemy lines. They have to pretend to be smugglers or pirates and get info on the Vorta and the Jem Hadar in the area ....and make it back to a Starbase alive.  

 Well those are just a few ideas.

Good ideas but I worry when ever i introduce combat into the ST and remove the Star Fleet moral structure. Not to focus on ST but it is the topic at hand. The issue with Bjoran rebels is that they were all about improvising ways to kill Cardassians. That gets nasty with the tech available. Still, it would be an interesting campaign to run. Some ideas would be:
- A run to get antimatter to make some suitcase MAM bombs.
- A run on a biowarfare lab to liberate some elements for a cardaissian viral agent.
- Building a network of programmed sleeper agents made up of cardaissian soldiers. Manchurean candidate stuff.

Possible but I think again, mostly from a "limit their resources a lot" point of view.

Quote from: Koltar- Ed C.

Bill, by-the-way I was born in your city. Dupage County Hospital  in the 1960s, middle of winter.

I was born in Maywood but at 7 I moved to the upper peninsula of Michigan. Beautiful country up there.

Bill

Look,
 I  "emulated the genre" (gods I hate that phase!) BETTER than some of the writers of the TREK Novels did.  My players and some friends told me so.

  As for that one player. Her only frame of reference was what he smal narrow mind saw on VHS videotapes or LaserDisc circa 1983.
 Since then we've had Dr. Crusher, Dr. Pulaski, Dr. Bashir, Hologram Doctor, and Dr. Phlox. Different ways have been  shown of doing that type of character now.

 The fact that there have been FOUR more ST series since the first one actually makes doing an RPG of that universe easier.


 - Ed C.

Y'know, I want to ignore ST almost entirely and play in a game based on the aliens in Assignment: Earth.

Yeah, sorry that's so tangential.

Oh, and mrlost has told me some horror stories about running ST in the past.  From the Vulcan first officer who went completely insane and took over the ship to the engineer who decided to put a hand-held phaser on wide-array overload setting and "accidentally" cut the ship in half.