Over at Vulcan Stev's Database, guest columnist Uncle Bear (Berin Kinsman, "Father figure of the RPG bloggers") has written a fine series of posts about Gaming in the Universe of Star Trek, a coolection of "generic, all-eras, any mechanics advice on what I think a good Trek game needs". Very highly recommended reading if you haven't stumbled upon it already.
Part 1 - How I’d Run a Star Trek Game covers the structure he suggests for a ship and a crew, and the way he’d organize adventures.
Part 2 - Starship Combat Made Easy covers how to make ship-to-ship combat involve all the players at the table without having to bust out battle mats and miniatures. (yep!)
Part 3 - Star Trek Worldbuilding discusses culture-building for alien races encountered by the Federation.
And Uncle Bear's favored choices for a system in which to run Star Trek?
1. Primetime Adventures
2. Traveller
3. Savage Worlds
Big thanks to Stev and Uncle bear for sharing!
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
The Wisdom of Uncle Bear (via Vulcan Stev)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting, but kind of idiosyncratic. I agree with the commenter who said it sounds like he's describing a DS9 game.
ReplyDelete...or Traveller.
ReplyDeleteYeah, small ship + base isn't very Star Trek. Rather, I think it's a way to try to avoid some of the problems that some players bring to Trek gaming. There are just some tropes you have to embrace (such as the command crew always being the ones in the center of the action).
Having said that, I still have never played a game revolving around DS9. In some ways, I feel that was the finest show set in the Trek universe (not to be confused with the best Trek show!). I really have to sit down with the ICON edition of DS9 and consider that setting.
I also notice the 3rd reference I've seen in as many weeks to "Swashbucklers of the Seven Skies". I looked at the character sheet last night, but nothing jumped out at me as "perfect for Trek" as some have said. Must be something inherent to the ship combat rules that is making people say it.
My Reactions:
ReplyDeletePart 1: "The Ship"
The reason the Enterprise has hundreds of people is so that someone might turn any corner in the ship and find a new human story (paraphrasing Gene in the original series bible). The logic can still be useful to the gamemaster. For a "small scope" campaign, I'd make the players a functional unit within a ship's crew (see my Contact Team Bravo campaign setting).
Part 1: "The Crew"
Very Traveller thinking here, or perhaps even D&D-ish. The Bear seems a bit bossy with filling roles in his crew, but there's no arguing that if you put experienced gamers with Trek savvy in the leadership roles, the game will go more smoothly. (Nice for the gamemaster, maybe less fulfilling for some players who want to stretch.)
Part 1: "The Base"
BZZZZT! Not me, buddy. I gotta be out on a ship somewhere.
Part 1: "The Patrol and the Missions"
Too military, too routine. These are the best of the best, and they're going to get bored repeating the milk run from Canopus to Denobulan to Xerxes VII. Star Trek is very, very episodic (especially in the original) -- go here, do that story, go do something else.
Part 1: "The Roleplaying"
Common sense. Always design adventures around the strengths AND weaknesses of the characters.
Part 2: "Starship Combat Made Easy"
BZZZZT! Sorry, but in the original series starship combat was rare-ish ... less than 20 stories of the 79. I'm not going to go over to the later series or movies. (On the other hand, fistfights were much more common in the original. :-) )
But all the other points are sound ... so sound I'd incorporated them into EZFudge before I ever saw Uncle Bear's post. :-)
Part 3: "Worldbuilding 101"
Mostly good points all. I wonder what it says about me that I've never, ever put worldbuilding rules into my "Final Frontier" stuff? I think half of it says I was relying on external rules (GURPS) ... but half of it says "Gah! Worldbuilding? Like in Traveller? No way! That's not Trek." An interesting blind spot, and I wonder if I should address it in the current project.
Re S7S: I read the PDQ# rules freebie ... it's an interesting capture of a certain kind of characterization, but I think it would be a much better fit with Star Wars than with Star Trek.
"An interesting blind spot, and I wonder if I should address it in the current project."
ReplyDeleteNoooo. I don't think so. These complex tools for world-building and alien-creation are, I think, bets reserved for Traveller. That's part of that game for GMs. I can't think of one Trek game I've ever played where the drama didn't take place within a single town/city, if not within a single building.
Now, Sector Building for a campaign. That's different. :)
Still. It might be worth a thought or two. I'll ponder it and if I come up with anything useful, I'll toss in (no more than) a paragraph or two.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the link. Uncle Bear's articles have proven to be pretty popular. My own thoughts on gaming in the Trek Universe are scheduled for next week. The basic idea is that one shot games are perfect for playing onboard ship.
ReplyDeleteContinuing campaigns work better set on Voyager or at Deep Space Nine.
You're welcome (and welcome!), Vulcanstev. I'll be looking forward to your posts. Hopefully we gave you some more to think about!
ReplyDeleteTo each their own. My two favorite Trek campaigns were both fairly long-running, and both set aboard Constitution-class ships. So I'd say they "worked" just fine for us.
ReplyDelete