Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632097It's funny, the TV genre feels, to me, like an outgrowth of let-me-tell-you-about-my-PC. Ensemble casts, spotlight-rationing, character-arcs. The ones I've seen, though, are fairly weak on unifying narrative.

OK, fair enough. Two questions:

First, this sounds like most TV series to me (although there are exceptions) when TV characters experience X, and by the beginning of the next show X may well as never happened (i.e. we've reset to original series premise). Is that correct?

Second, do you think taking a RPG and basing it upon a TV shows requires one to mirror those same features. Or is it reasonable to simply present a game layer that resolves skill and combat usage, while leaving the rest totally up to the meta-game layers to run a course completely different from the TV show?

1) True of most series, especially up to the late 90s. Nowadays, more and more shows have "continuity", but only some of them have it to the degree that (a) you'll feel at sea if you haven't seen the last few episodes and (b) you feel compelled to watch the next episode more because you need closure than because the substance is all that great. Of course, by that time, they've hooked you on another arc.

My criticism of the geek-opera is that arcs are more for keeping the viewer glued than they are for actually having anything interesting happen with long-term effect.

I think it's partly a product of the way shows are produced. You can tell when a show is plotted from start to finish and when one is basically intended to grind while giving an illusion of development. If you're familiar with the cartoons that made up Robotech, they were largely not guilty of this: episodes either advanced the story, or functioned as satisfying, self-contained units. And of course there are also the classic American miniseries like Roots, Shogun, Centennial--they had their faults, but pointless grind wasn't one of them.

Forgot about question 2...

No, I don't think it's necessary, but if the TV show's substance is drama, and the "other stuff" is either weakly presented or generic (as e.g., "Why not just use Traveller?"), then it makes sense to go with the thing that attracted people to it.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;632087I'm not overly familiar with Cortex though I think I got some Cortex materials in a pdf charity budle once. (I *think* it's Lightspeed and the Serenity RPG). What's the problem with it?

Cortex+ I already heard enough about to not want to know.

There isn't a problem with it.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632120My criticism of the geek-opera is that arcs are more for keeping the viewer glued than they are for actually having anything interesting happen with long-term effect.

It could be a issue of intent, or perhaps just bad pacing. But for Firefly I'd have to say it was likely the former at least for its short run.

However there's a flip side to the question, where 'interesting things happening with long-term effect' is another way of saying that one destroys the original characters and undermines the original theme(s).  This really only becomes a problem when on insists on continuing a story that has ended- but to me this is the worst possible outcome.

How do you view procedurals (such as CSI, NCIS or Law and Order)?

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632123No, I don't think it's necessary, but if the TV show's substance is drama, and the "other stuff" is either weakly presented or generic (as e.g., "Why not just use Traveller?"), then it makes sense to go with the thing that attracted people to it.

Perhaps "Traveller" never appealed to a person or group while the idea of Wild West Sci-Fi does.

Also have you never been hooked by just a single concept of a setting or even a throw away line or scene? I recall groups launching a whole campaigns set in the future after nothing more than one scene of a Terminator stepping on a human skull...

I might be odd, but I find in most of my 'whatever to RGP' conversions that I leave more behind than I take. Generally the original work screwed up what was cool about it at one point or another.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;631902Yeah, but an rpg without dice is a storygame!

That's my thought as well, but RPGPundit would disagree. For me, I do not have any idea where "storygame" begins and where "trad" ends and the various forum wars have led me to believe it's all personal taste and opinion.

Quote from: jeff37923;632054The Cortex system just doesn't turn me on, but considering that in the first ten minutes of the very first episode of Firefly there was a shout out to Traveller gamers - I don't see why you would use any other game system.

Traveller RAW is too lethal for Firefly. Firefly is Space Buffy and the game works best with a more ("cinematic" or "cartoonish") system.

BUT I ran a Traveller Firefly campaign and just added in Luck chips, because Classic Traveller (like OD&D) is perfect for tweaking.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632067Conclusion: overly precious geek-opera.

I am a full dorkarama fan of Firefly and I fully agree with your conclusion.

And by full dorkarama I mean I've paid to play in a Firefly cosplay LARP and I would do so again very happily.

Quote from: gleichman;632131It could be a issue of intent, or perhaps just bad pacing. But for Firefly I'd have to say it was likely the former at least for its short run.

Dunno, didn't watch enough.

QuoteHowever there's a flip side to the question, where 'interesting things happening with long-term effect' is another way of saying that one destroys the original characters and undermines the original theme(s).  This really only becomes a problem when on insists on continuing a story that has ended- but to me this is the worst possible outcome.

How do you view procedurals (such as CSI, NCIS or Law and Order)?

I think I've seen maybe one episode of those three combined. I think I remember watching a crossover episode of L&O with Homicide, because I was a fan of the latter (until it started becoming too much of a G-O). What I seemed to see was a very straight--and, sorry to say, boring--exposition of a case from start to finish. Give me Streets of San Francisco any day. If that's a reasonable substitute, then basically each episode is a self-contained drama, often with a then-topical element, sometimes with a little character hook to "make it personal" for one of the two cops, but nothing that carries over from episode to episode. As I think Zak S. put it regarding a lot of episodic entertainment (including most James Bond): the point of the show isn't the characters grappling with their issues, certainly not over time, but of seeing them approach new situations and solve each one in a cool way that's characteristic of the main character(s). See also: Star Trek TOS, Wild Wild West, Maverick, Mission: Impossible, $6 Million Man, etc. Mostly true of Hustle as well, and probably Dr. Who although I haven't seen too many episodes.

About destroying the initial premise of a fictional work: I don't know if I have the machinery to describe it, but there's a way to have development and evolution without losing the unity of the work. In Macross, Rick/Hikaru deals with his attitude toward the military & fighting, assuming responsibility, being caught between two women (who in a sense represent opposite sides of the preceding two issues), and the overall point of the show, namely, a giant space war. Things move forward on all these tracks, though it is true that none of the issues is fully resolved until the end. And in a way, to prove the overall thesis, the show has a weird hiccup because it was so successful they had to tack on some more episodes, which does sort of force the main character to revisit all the issues when they could have been done a little earlier. But there's also a nice way that the tracks advance at different paces--some are obvious early on, others pick up later, there are twists, etc.

Quote from: gleichman;632136Perhaps "Traveller" never appealed to a person or group while the idea of Wild West Sci-Fi does.

Yeah, if that's the main angle--the politics and the color of the setting--then I could see a more nuts-and-bolts approach.

QuoteAlso have you never been hooked by just a single concept of a setting or even a throw away line or scene? I recall groups launching a whole campaigns set in the future after nothing more than one scene of a Terminator stepping on a human skull...

I might be odd, but I find in most of my 'whatever to RGP' conversions that I leave more behind than I take. Generally the original work screwed up what was cool about it at one point or another.

I guess--come to think of it, both Centennial and Shogun have bits that have percolated in my mind for [strike]years[/strike] decades RPG-wise. But...if you're just going to save that little bit, I'm not sure a whole game would be worth it. Let's just chalk this up to, "I don't have enough interest in that particular setting to say." OTOH, I'm now idly curious about what has been done unofficially--like, has anyone done a FF with the serial numbers filed off?

This thread is rapidly becoming a sterling example of how theRPGsite is in no way immune to pretentious bollocks.

J, sorry, that's not my intention.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632190I think I've seen maybe one episode of those three combined. I think I remember watching a crossover episode of L&O with Homicide, because I was a fan of the latter (until it started becoming too much of a G-O).

OK, I think I understand where you're coming from.

My only comment is that G-O is likely a poor term. The style appeals to far more than geeks (and is indeed very mainstream).

Yeah, not a great term. The book Everything Bad Is Good For You refers to "multiple threading". But I'm not sure I'm talking about a structure, or a common style or quirk of execution that I just don't like much. Again, I think one of the big problems in production is trying to reconcile a desire for development and continuity with a hope that the show will continue indefinitely.

It seems to be common among current SF&F shows, but you've also got Dawson, 7th Heaven, and probably a bunch of other teen and non-teen dramas.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;632124There isn't a problem with it.

I agree.

To me it's just kind of "meh".

It's an altogether normal, serviceable system that has suffered from idiots hyping it until the end of time as the one system to rule them all and save role-playing.*


*see also; Savage Worlds, Unisystem, FATE, Adventure!, etc...

Quote from: J Arcane;632196This thread is rapidly becoming a sterling example of how theRPGsite is in no way immune to pretentious bollocks.

Was that ever a question?

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;632201J, sorry, that's not my intention.

It just strikes me as an awful lot more words than necessary to say you didn't like a show, especially one you yourself admit to having seen all of three episodes of.