Which Game?

Simple question:

Which Star Trek RPG does Star Trek the best?

...

Simple, huh? ;) :D

The LUG version of Trek is pretty solid, but I think CODA is a better system. It's a shame Decipher's likely to can it. They had something good here. I suspect it'll be up to the fans to support it in the long run.

I've only played the FASA version a couple times, and didn't care for it. You should still be able to find some LUG books in stores, but the Decipher version is probably your best option.

MHO, anyhow. :)

Kind of reminds me of Kent Brockman on Smartline: "Join us tomorrow when we look at religion: Which is the one true faith?" :)

Said it before, saying it again: I'll be sayin' it until me dyin' day. Icon is the system for my group and I, because of:

a) Its flexibility: Characters can change from one position, or job description, to another with no need to invest in "Professions", or "Professional Skills";

b) Its adaptability: The game system itself is very open to mutation - indeed, this was one of the advantages that the authors refer to in the Player's Guide Icon link. We've successfully transferred several of the Professional Abilities from Coda over to Icon as high-level skill "perks";

c) The fact that it actually is considerably different from d20 - the feeling of capturing Star Trek (regardless of the incarnation) is just better (for us);

d) Its score in the eveningwear section of the competition. Whoever pulled off that Brazilian wax job knew what they were doing. :)

I cut my teeth on FASA and had a lot of fun what seems like eons ago. :)

Icon was great; had a wonderful time and enjoyed tweaking the system. (BTW, I wrote that Icon Link piece, D.S.) ;)

Coda, IMO, is the best. It's more elegant, has a better skill system, task resolution system, damage, probability bell curve, cooler "stuff" for characters to do ("I can seduce her from three rooms away!"), and a starship combat system that is freaking awesome! :D

However, I am the most biased person you're likely to meet on the subject so I won't be offended if you ignore me on the matter. :)

Funnily enough I was recently torn on this very issue for my Ultimate Star Trek game. I was leaning towards ICON for a bit, but the species abilites, streamlined skills and professional abilities won me over to CODA.

That said I am using tons of FASA source material :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AslanC
That said I am using tons of FASA source material :)

---

I lovvvvvvvvvvvve the FASA maps! (And "A Doomsday Like Any Other.") :)

I've enjoyed them all. I'd probably put LUG and Decipher's versions ahead of FASA's - I think they simulate Trek a little better. (in FASA you tended to get locked into professions, at least in character generation - tough to start off as a security and transfer to navigation using the FASA chargen - though I did really enjoy making characters in FASA - gave your character a lot of history right off the bat).

I probably prefer the Decipher version a little better (I felt the LUG drama die was a little too important and specialization was unclear). That said, I wish the Decipher player's guide was better organized - tough to generate a character using it. I really like you don't keep track of power or need counters for starship combat in Decipher-Trek.

I love FASA, 'cause that's what I grew up with. :) It will always have a special place in my heart, despite its shortcomings.

Star Fleet Battles and the Prime Directive RPG are not really Trek. :p

Icon is okay, but I didn't like the way the skills were presented (too much forced specialization) or the lack of a good bell curve (that Don mentioned as a benefit of Coda).

Coda, for me, took many of the good parts of Icon, mixed in some ideas from the designers' association with WotC, and blended with a nice, cinematic feel to task resolution and (especially) Starship combat.

Right now, Coda has the best Trek "feel" for me. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Don Mappin
I lovvvvvvvvvvvve the FASA maps! (And "A Doomsday Like Any Other.") :)

---

Did you look at my map for my game?

Yeah doomsday found its way into every Prime Directive game I ran as a joint romulan/UFP mission :) Always a big hit with the players. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
I love FASA, 'cause that's what I grew up with. :) It will always have a special place in my heart, despite its shortcomings.

---

Amen brother! Go and tell it on the mountain! Considering FASA ends (if you don't count the two TNG books) at the end of Trek IV, it ends right where my love of Trek starts to fade. So FASA is almost the prefect Star Trek setting to me :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
Star Fleet Battles and the Prime Directive RPG are not really Trek. :p

---

I loved the first PD, even the weird system. The universe was ass, but the concept of the Prime Teams was sound. Got more players with that than any attempt at a bridge crew, ever. Still it does make for a slightly too military game IMHO

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AslanC
Did you look at my map for my game?

Yeah doomsday found its way into every Prime Directive game I ran as a joint romulan/UFP mission :) Always a big hit with the players. :)

---

Me too! I even play the soundtrack from the episode! :D (Thinks about trying to type out the notes and gives up immediately.) ;)

I will always keep FASA Trek on a pedestal, like so many it was my first crack at Trek RPing.

ICON was the breath of fresh air, the system lent more to role playing, at least in my old group we seldom rolled dice in our games. It is a very flexible system. Semper Gumby!:D

CODA, though very close to D20 (though very few admit to the fact) which means it is very roll oriented. It is still a strong system, and as Don said ( I think it was him anyway) it has a kick a$$ ship combat system.

I tend to disagree concering CODA. I think it is a step backwards from ICON, cause all the good things I liked form that former system are gone now. I especially liked the DEV Point system and the packages idea, which very well simulated training without being too restrictive. CODA speaking of character rules is too near to D20 for my taste - which I strongly dislike. The whole "level" idea does not suit Star Trek too well.

However were I completely agree is on the way better Starship system of CODA. It is to speak humbel BRILLIANT! It simulates battle exactly like it is depicted in the shows, e.g. you can get damage although your shields are still up, etc. That is the reason why we now use the CODA starship system and ICON for character rules - the perfect combination if you ask me.

I prefer CODA myself. It has the felxibiloity I need to do anything I want with it. I've converted ICON and FASA adventures, I've written my own, and in general we've all had a great time.

As to the "levels" thing, that's a non-issue. My PCs have 16, 12, 8, 7, and 36 advancements. Each has things they are better at than the others and the highest-advancement character doesn't steal the show in any way. In fact, the 36 advancement character has the lowest rank out of all of them... :)

I too prefer CODA. From a Gamemasters point of View, the system flows much more smoothly. Under Icon, My players always had the instinct to add all the dice up instead of taking the highest roll. Plus Coda Starships Rock!:D

*Stupid question from someone ignorant of Star Trek RPGs*

Is CODA the Decipher RPG? And is it true they're not going to develop it anymore? If not, is someone else going to make a new Trek RPG? Who?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Megamanfan
Is CODA the Decipher RPG? And is it true they're not going to develop it anymore? If not, is someone else going to make a new Trek RPG? Who?

---

Yes, Decipher, Inc. is responsible for the CODA RPG system, which is used for their Star Trek and LOTR games.

Are they going to develop it any further? They haven't given official word yet, but my guess is no.

Will someone else make a new Trek RPG? If Decipher doesn't do any more, I would think there's still a little blood left in the Star Trek stone that could be squeezed out by another RPG company.

I also cut my TREK RPG teeth on FASA, and to me it will always be the most complete RPG because of all the content created for it. The percentile system made the most sense of the gaming systems out at the time (early D&D rules, SFB, etc.). IMHO, the starship combat system combined the best of SFB with FASA's 'ease of use'.

I didn't play ICON, though I thought that having separate RPGs for the different TREKs was odd. Combining them seemed to make more sense.

I like CODA (Decipher) because it's similar to the d20 system, and I use CODA today. Creating characters can be tedious, though the char. generators speed that up. And both the PG and NG could use more concise character generation and combat summaries.

Bottom line: CODA works for me, though FASA will always be special. I use FASA's content in my current series where possible.

None of the above.

I abhor the CODA system, mostly because it's a half-assed attempt at being D20 without actually being D20. It tries to hit the same simplicty-with-customizability mark as D20, but falls down flat. Frankly, I would have prefered it as D20 than CODA.

I have played, and enjoyed, the Icon version of the game. If I had to choose one of the three published systems, I could would be it.

I have never played the FASA system, but I have read it. FASA is pretty well know for complex systems. Some of them work, like Shadowrun, others don't. With only reading, I think FASA's Trek system probably falls into the "don't" category.

I'm not currently running it, mostly because it isn't finished, but I'm working on a set of Fuzion-based rules for Star Trek. Fuzion is a free metasystem, a system intended to be used to create your own system. It has elements of R. Talsorian's Interlock system (CP2020) and Hero Game's Champions system. Bubblegum Crisis, Victoriana, and Segoku are three other games that are Fuzion-based, if anybody cares to take a look at the underlying mechanics.

Having played ICON and FASA versions I can only comment on those two.

FASA:
Possibly just about the easiest game I have ever played. It probably helped that it was a ROLE playing game as opposed to ROLL playing, but hey, I can only go on what I see. Skill rolls, combat, and everything else go on d%. No drama die, no dramatic failure (but failures possible), just easy fun. Damage was sorted out on d10s or multiples thereoff, and you were either injured, or unconcious. No quibbling, and 'resistance' to damage. A smack in the teeth was a smack in the teeth! The Starship Combat Simulator was fun too. I have always been a sucker for props, so, short of everyone having real sliders or touchscreen controls, this was the next best thing! I cut my SciFi RPG teeth on this game, and loved it.

ICON:
Only played this a few times. Whilst it is more flexible that FASA, I did not like it quite so much. I didn't like the skill rolls, with one die being a drama die, even if you only had one die to roll etc etc. I quite liked the combat resolution in it, and the wound levels etc. Wound resistance whilst good for a role playing perspective doesn't seem too realistic to me. I mean, a Klingon smacking ya with a Bat'Leth is gonna hurt ANY human. More muscles doesn't mean more resistance to damage, at least that's the way I see it. But, I understand it being there and why. We never played any ship-to-ship rules, so cant comment on that.

(As a gaming group we have been on a retro kick recently, starting with original AD&D: DMG, PH and MM. Our next one is gonna be FASA Trek. Maybe I am just missing my youth?) :)

Cheers

Tas