So without me reading through the entirety of the FASA rulebook, can anyone give me a point-form summary of the system? It's percentile-based, iirc, but beyond that I have no idea what's up with it.
Printable View
So without me reading through the entirety of the FASA rulebook, can anyone give me a point-form summary of the system? It's percentile-based, iirc, but beyond that I have no idea what's up with it.
It's percentile pretty much. You get a short list of physical attributes ranging from 40-100 more or less, that you get bonus points to adjust them with. Character generation revolves around basic skills that the player can reinforce with extra rolls, which sounds great, but it takes a while. Personal combat revolves around a point system based on dex, which is a bit unweildly. Starship combat (at least as it appeared in the first edition) is a little clumsy and meticulous for rpg purposes IMHO, but is a great tabletop war game. Success or failure in any particular situation rides on a percentile roll, adjusted by the GM based on difficulty. I tend to 'skill lump', allowing players to combine and average any justifiable set of 2 or 3 skills to make it easier for them. I can't attest how it compares to ICON or Dec. The upshot is that 1st ed. is only 125 pages of material and it's fairly complete. The downshot is that it's only TOS.
If you like, follow my link- go to resource page. There are tools there that you might like to run a FASA game.
Hope This Helps!
Joe
As UFC posted. ALL TRUE.
FASA Trek is best run as a fast and loose game, lots of skill checks, following an action plot that you have set up already, with some branches beforehand.
The planet gen and alien rules are there, just a gloosy overview, but more than most groups will need. Basically it's just really simple to use, which is nice. If you need more detail, LUG would be better.
The FASA personal combat system smells like percentile D&D with an action point system, only most phaser hits are kills. I ditched it and use a storytelling style. It could work as a wargame, but then its ***Phhst.*** PC killed. Klingon killed, etc. move, next turn. Instead, I took hints from Star Wars d6, by WEGs style. All stroytelling.
FASA, despite being nearly 20, can still hold a candle to the newer versions by LUG and Decipher. The early next gen books are okay, but it's hard to balance the scenarios, if you have a Galaxy class. a lot of the next gen stuff is missing, since FASA lost the license right after next gen really got rolling.
The FASA starship construction manual has some holes but is fun. The klingon and romulan intel guides are excellent as are the ship recognition manuals, a must have, if you have any serious amount of ship combat. I use the rules from Stardate magazine, doubling structure points, makes battles last longer.
FASA Starship combat boardgame wargame is sexy fun, especially with pewter and / or micromachine ship minis, which I bought cheap, when they were still being made. Forget trying to get them cheap now. Again, the rules should be played fast and loose, or just practice a lot with them, and it moves right along. The shield mechanics lead to changes in tactics, but the whole thing overall feels like wrath of khan. My game group likes that ship combat game a lot.
FASA Trek overall works real well for its TOS based environment. Some of the FASA scenarios are okay.. to Super great. Some require some work. a lot are still in the grid of the environment dungeon in space mold. but with an experienced GM (in gaming, not really in the system) you can make it a lot of fun, if you gloss on the details.
Captures well the beam down to the glittery rocks, LOOK OUT, ENSIGN! Meeep (screams) flavor.
The ship combat, the Star Trek Tactical Simulator boardgame is really a must have. The included ship combat in the core book of the RPG is maybe 20 lines of rules which is a chart which says shields down, engine hit, bridge hit, phasers.
If you can find it, get a copy of ship sim, and read it then adapt as much crunchiness as you like.
Truly, LUG is easier to use, but a bit more gritty, and a lot longer to detail out the PC. Doing a FASA pc is like traveller, takes some time, gives you a good feel for the carrer path, whereas lug is more template-based. sometimes faster, but needs more lookups in rules since there are about 4 times more options in races, and skills are more narrowly defined. I love the lug skill lists though, once a pc is done. It just feels right, a bit more than Fasa, ehich is kind of broad on repair skills, especially.
I'd run LUG (for the ads/disads and story hooks, which are superb, like a GURPS lite, without the math) or FASA (easy as hell to play) or CODA in that order, with coda a distant 3rd, as I really don't like the style of the newer games since 2000.
One thing that trek of all games, more so than D&D is PLOT. If you can't write a plot beyond The Klingonsd attack, don't run trek of any rules set.
All of the LUG books and narrator's guides have excellent plot setup and arcs writing suggestions, and Decipher's Narrator's guide is the best in the industry for setting up a series, arcs, and plots, most Trek GMs will agree.
Good luck with it.
Compared to other board games like Starfleet Battles, its a breeze to go through. I think I would use the rules to double structure points to make the game last longer. Shields do very little to stop damage and are expensive to maintain. Another alternate rule that can be used is to give base shields for one point which are an integer of the shield efficiency rating and the max shields and then have the strenthening to one side. The way the rules are written, its near impossible to have shield strength to full on all facings, whereas in the movies and show it seemed to be standard. In a fleet battle with ships on all sides, it was easy to hit an unshielded side.
SFB was hard because it had soooooooo many rules and was difficult to maneuver in for a high percentage shot. It was difficult to arm weapons and maintain speed and a defensive posture.
If anything, the FASA Starship Combat Simulator was the antithesis of SFB when it came to rules in that for many cases, the GM has to ADD rules to cover common situations the published rules omit. I have always loved the FASA starship rules and stopped playing SFB once I got my hands on the simpler FASA system.Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69
Also, ships have much longer range in FASA typically solid hit chances out to 10 to 15 hexes. in SFB, most shoting occurs in the 1 to 5 hex range.
If anything, the FASA Starship Combat Simulator was the antithesis of SFB when it came to rules in that for many cases, the GM has to ADD rules to cover common situations the published rules omit. I have always loved the FASA starship rules and stopped playing SFB once I got my hands on the simpler FASA system.Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69
Also, ships have much longer range in FASA typically solid hit chances out to 10 to 15 hexes. In SFB, most shooting occurs in the 1 to 5 hex range.
FASA has it's unwieldly elements- character creation, for example- but, once the game starts, it runs pretty smooth. The Action Point system seems a bit sluggish, I personally trim down the system a little there. The starship combat system was always too much for me, only for rpg purposes. Multiple ship encounters were hard to do in a short gaming session. I was tempted to plunge into SFB just to see if it was easier- I never did, and I guess I woud have been disappointed because my understanding is that it's way more complicated.
Man, after the 2nd post, this got pretty vague...
LOL! I guess we did drift a little!
Whenever FASA is discussed, the topic tends to drift toward the starship combat rules. The rpg itself is not bad. A little numbers intensive, but not bad. Mind you it's 23 years old, and a lot of things have changed in the rpg world, so it may seem a little on the primitive side.
I personally use the 1st ed, there's a 2nd ed which has a few differences, but not many. Both are...'available'...online, without much effort. There's quite a bit of expansion material for the game, mostly for updating it for the TMP era.
There's a lot of FASA resources on the web, a lot of Yahoo! groups to help with your game, if you decide to try it. I guess ultimately you need to snatch a copy and look it over, and see if it works for you. After lookin it over, and you have questions, we'll be here!
The biggest weaknesses of the FASA system are the lack of advantages/disadvantages and the Action Point based tactical combat rules. The first is largely due to the age of the system and it predating the now common ad/disads for character customizing. The second was just an idea that looked good on paper, but doesn't play that well, the AP rules are not hopeless, they just do not flow well.
Character creation is long, but I personally think it is interesting as it nearly writes your character's background for you since you are essentially rolling up the PC's entire Starfleet career.
I am in total agreement with Pericles on all points he just posted. That essentially is FASA Trek.
It's good, and is still a viable game (but hardly anyone plays it, anymore).
I am also in total agreement with Pericles. Fasa Trek was one of the first RPG's I tried and I still enjoy the system and thier supplements.
I still use FASA Trek.tried recently to start a CODA game,but between my players not wanting to switch systems & the way the books(CODA) are arranged we decided to keep FASA pc rules & are working on a mix of Starship write-up/combat system.I've always found FASA rules to be very easy to use(I still use the ap rules:o I kind of like them.).I currenly use 2nd ed. rules,but I started w/1st ed.(till have my original book,even though its not in the greatest shape;) ).