Thoughts on running/playing Doctor Who.

brettmb2 · May 01, 2007, 02:32:42 PM

Quote from: GMSkarkaThe best set-up I ever used for a Doctor Who campaign was a small group of player-characters waking up in the control room of a TARDIS after some unknown event which caused the ship to "crash."

That is a good idea. Very reminiscent of the Sandman game.

GMSkarka · May 01, 2007, 02:36:34 PM

Quote from: pigames.netThat is a good idea. Very reminiscent of the Sandman game.

It also had the effect of removing the "I'm the Timelord, you're the Companion" problem of one player being more important than the others. The group dynamic developed naturally.

The final revelation threw a mind-blowing curve: All three player-characters were actually separate incarnations of the same Timelord.

brettmb2 · May 01, 2007, 02:42:59 PM

Quote from: GMSkarkaThe final revelation threw a mind-blowing curve: All three player-characters were actually separate incarnations of the same Timelord.

That's awesome. Another way to go is to separate the characters from the resident Time Lord, sending them on a quest to find him, perhaps even with Time Lord intervention. While this can also solve the "I'm the Timelord, you're the Companion" problem, it's not quite as elegant as your solution.

J Arcane · May 01, 2007, 02:55:05 PM

Quote from: Blue DevilHaving looked at Time Lord (It's availble free somewhere on the net) the rules seemed a bit wonky and didn't seem to cover everything. I need to read it again.

**Well, my YahooFoo has served me well, for anyone interested in the rules to Time Lord:

http://www.torsononline.com/hobbies/timelord/main.htm

I am going to relook over the rules (Maybe I will run a PBP game of it) because all of this talk has me interested in running a Dr. Who game now.

They also have an expansion which allows for point based character creation. Shiny!

It's a pretty damn good game, honestly, it's just that the writing sounds a bit wierd to an experienced gamer's ear, because it's written more from the point of view of trying to explain it to someone who has absolutely no idea what an RPG even is.

They just seem to have a different way of explaining things.

The die mechanic is a good example, because all it really is is a different way of explaining skill+stat+(0-5) vs. Difficulty. But the way they break it down and describe the math involved in that kind of roll, makes it sound more complicated than it really is in play.

pathfinderap · May 01, 2007, 03:01:02 PM

Quote from: GMSkarkaI call Bullshit.

This entire argument stemmed from you citing the symbiotic relationship between a Timelord and his TARDIS.

That's not from the newer "Who." Hell, that's the "Rassilon Imprimature" from old episodes like "Mawdryn Undead."

But now you're citing the newer "Who" as your model?

Move the goalposts much?

call Bullshit all you like

Thats where I got that infomation, can't talk about the "Rassilon Imprimature" and that may be seen as redundent as it's not seen as canon,
(can say because I've not seen it, but only the new show is considered canon by the writers, (you can call bullshit on that one too if it makes you feel better)

Not moving anything,
again I state "only the new show is seen by the makes of this series to be canon",

signoftheserpent · May 01, 2007, 03:02:49 PM

Given how Tennant seems capable of resolving every plot with a wave of his hand and a zap of the incredibly overused sonic screwdriver (they must be on a clearance sale, they never saw this much use in the glory days), I'd not let pc's be timelords. Mind you they can't now, can they (well maybe one...other

)!

brettmb2 · May 01, 2007, 03:03:13 PM

Quote from: pathfinderapcall Bullshit all you like
Not moving anything,
again I state "only the new show is seen by the makes of this series to be canon",

pathfinderap , please do me a favor. Give me a single paragraph (spell-checked), explaining what your point is. I have no idea what you're trying to say.

brettmb2 · May 01, 2007, 03:05:38 PM

Quote from: signoftheserpentGiven how Tennant seems capable of resolving every plot with a wave of his hand and a zap of the incredibly overused sonic screwdriver (they must be on a clearance sale, they never saw this much use in the glory days), I'd not let pc's be timelords. Mind you they can't now, can they (well maybe one...other )!

That damn screwdriver is overused. I'm starting to hate it. And I'm starting to suspect that there could be two others.

signoftheserpent · May 01, 2007, 03:06:12 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneA newly born TARDIS must be initially bonded with a Time Lord in order for it to survive (and for any of it's non-Time Lrod passengers to survive), but once that bond is made, anyone can use it in theory.

When was this established?

pathfinderap · May 01, 2007, 03:06:18 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneAnd according do John Barrowman, there's a TARDIS growing on Captain Jack's desk at Torchwood.

Doesn't mean I believe it. .

Yeah okay, so what? you think he was lying on national tv do you?

Quote from: J ArcaneThey sure look like Daleks to me. That they've done a better job of explaining visually why bullets seem to disaappear in thin air rather than hitting them (an effect you can see in primitive form in countless older Who stories, Remembrance of the Daleks, for example), doesn't necessarily mean a contradiction. It's also perfectly possible that Dalek technology has advanced since we last saw them. Certainly in their previous old series appearance (Remembrance of the Daleks again), their time travel technology was portrayed as being a wee bit too primitve to actually stand toe to toe with the Time Lords in a Time War.

Again, this, like many other things in the new series, is very much evolution, not contradiction. Nothing has changed, they've just been better explained.

Not if this over laps the previous histoy from the old show it doesn't

Dr Rotwang! · May 01, 2007, 03:08:38 PM

Let's focus a bit.

What's more important - continuity with the TV series, or your own crazy Who-flavored adventures?

Answer that, and you can get started.

J Arcane · May 01, 2007, 03:10:36 PM

Quote from: signoftheserpentWhen was this established?

The Two Doctors.

"Meanwhile, the Sixth Doctor and Jamie are in the cellar, where the Doctor examines the Kartz-Reimer module, a prototype time machine modelled on Time Lord technology. He explains to Jamie that once the briode nebuliser of the module is primed with his symbiotic nuclei — the Rassilon Imprimatur — it will be safe for anyone to use. "

J Arcane · May 01, 2007, 03:12:01 PM

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!Let's focus a bit.

What's more important - continuity with the TV series, or your own crazy Who-flavored adventures?

Answer that, and you can get started.

The latter of course.

Even the various writers over the course of show's 40-year history have stuck with the latter rather than the former, which is why it starts so many silly arguments among fans.

signoftheserpent · May 01, 2007, 03:15:09 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneThe Two Doctors.

"Meanwhile, the Sixth Doctor and Jamie are in the cellar, where the Doctor examines the Kartz-Reimer module, a prototype time machine modelled on Time Lord technology. He explains to Jamie that once the briode nebuliser of the module is primed with his symbiotic nuclei — the Rassilon Imprimatur — it will be safe for anyone to use. "

I'm not sure that answers my question!

pathfinderap · May 01, 2007, 03:15:30 PM

Quote from: GMSkarka1) Psychic translation from the TARDIS was introduced in "The Mask of Mandragora" -- a Tom Baker episode from the mid-1970s. It's not new.

2) What the fuck is a "DARLEK?"

At this point, I think we can safely chuck this entire discussion into the "you don't know what the fuck you're talking about" bin.

LOL, "What the fuck is a "DARLEK?", That would be called a Fucking spelling mistake (get use to it if you want to read my posts lol)
do I really need to explain this? are you that dense? really?
I expect people on your planet don't ever make a spelling mistake?

And don't talk about a "diversion" you hypocrite, when it's you taking part in creating such,