Printable View
As promised, here are the conversion guidelines that I developed and have been using for awhile. They have been provided to Decipher as well, if they elect to use them.
Permission granted to distribute freely.
Tweak as necessary. Call me an idiot as necessary. :)
Thank you Don. I'm guessing we could use these as guidelines for converting over the racial templates (for those races we don't have in CODA yet) from ICON as well.
Questions now that the conversion guide is in my hands. Are the species in the data bank and the stats on the D's crew in LUG?
Kyle
I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question...Quote:
Originally posted by Tilarium
Questions now that the conversion guide is in my hands. Are the species in the data bank and the stats on the D's crew in LUG?
Here at Trek RPG, using both the Personnel Records and Species Data Banks. Personnel Records lists the crew of the enterprise D and the data bank lists Bajoran through Zalkonian.
Kyle
Hiya Don,
Thanks! All I need now is a copy of the book... :rolleyes:
Cheers,
Bonzai Gopher
Man, is that a thorough conversion guideline!!! I can't wait to try converting my player's characters stats!
Thanksalot, Don :cool:
Just one thing : I view the document with no layout (there are some "Begin/End sidebar" or "Begin/End table" tags in the text). Is this my copy of Acrobat (it's the 5.0 version though) ?
Yes Kyle. the NPC's and Species presented on the main Trek-rpg site arein LUG's ICON system which Don has just given us the conversion from...Quote:
Originally posted by Tilarium
Here at Trek RPG, using both the Personnel Records and Species Data Banks. Personnel Records lists the crew of the enterprise D and the data bank lists Bajoran through Zalkonian.
Kyle
However they are not the official stats, as they are the work of the fans...
Hope that helps...
Verrrry interesting.
I had already recreated my character in Coda so I went back and did the conversion.
When I recreated the character I used the ICON sheet as a guideline for determining how many Advancements to use and so forth. When I had finished the conversion, I was surprised at how close the two characters were.
The major differences were in Species Skills (not high enough) and Attributes (strangely different distribution). Also, I've lost a number of Skill Specialties because the conversion rules don't let you keep single specializations (I think).
BTW, is there any particular reason that 'Sexy' became 'Likeable'? I'm sorry, but 7 of 9 is a bit more than 'Likeable'. I hope that this isn't an attempt to dumb the game down to a more PC level, because Sexy is definitely a part of Star Trek whether you're talking about Yeoman Rand, Lt. Uhura, Tasha Yar, Kira Neris, Seven of Nine, or T'Pol (or Kirk, Picard, Archer, or Riker, for that matter)! What gives?:confused:
Don,
One suggestion: Instead of dropping ICON's Excellent Hearing trait, why not convert it to CODA's Skill Focus (Keen Hearing)?
Another possibility for Sexy is Skill Focus (Seductive). :)Quote:
Originally posted by Cmdr Powers
BTW, is there any particular reason that 'Sexy' became 'Likeable'? I'm sorry, but 7 of 9 is a bit more than 'Likeable'. I hope that this isn't an attempt to dumb the game down to a more PC level, because Sexy is definitely a part of Star Trek whether you're talking about Yeoman Rand, Lt. Uhura, Tasha Yar, Kira Neris, Seven of Nine, or T'Pol (or Kirk, Picard, Archer, or Riker, for that matter)! What gives?:confused:
Indeed. Inquiring Andorian fans want to know. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by tonyg
Don,
One suggestion: Instead of dropping ICON's Excellent Hearing trait, why not convert it to CODA's Skill Focus (Keen Hearing)?
BJ
Have you read the description for Likeable? The name aside, the game effect is very similiar to that of...Sexy. Good grief.Quote:
Originally posted by Cmdr Powers
BTW, is there any particular reason that 'Sexy' became 'Likeable'? I'm sorry, but 7 of 9 is a bit more than 'Likeable'. I hope that this isn't an attempt to dumb the game down to a more PC level, because Sexy is definitely a part of Star Trek whether you're talking about Yeoman Rand, Lt. Uhura, Tasha Yar, Kira Neris, Seven of Nine, or T'Pol (or Kirk, Picard, Archer, or Riker, for that matter)! What gives?:confused:
Change it if you disagree. I honestly don't care.
Keen Hearing should be Skill Focus: Keen Hearing. That one slipped through (that's also the way it appears in the NG for Andorians).
Very Nicely Done on the Conversions. I will distribute it to my players immediately.
In the Coda System, are the Expanded Psionic Skills in disfavor? For instance, one of my characters Picked up Telekinesis from the old LUG Player's Guide. How would we convert this? Is this something that will be further explored in the Coda NG? If this is not to be used, how would we portray skills of NPCs such as Pah-Wraiths, Prophets, and Q?
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Mappin
Keen Hearing should be Skill Focus: Keen Hearing. That one slipped through (that's also the way it appears in the NG for Andorians).
Funny thing is- I was trying to write up a species template for Andorians and that is what got me thinking about Skill Focus (Keen Hearing). :cool:
Guess you could call that a circular reference! :D
The conversion guidelines only help convert characters/traits/abilities to their Coda counterparts. Where there is no Coda counterpart the Narrator will have to fill in the blanks. I'm not prepared to go through every Icon book and every possible situation and hobble together rules to mimic Icon abilities.Quote:
Originally posted by METH
In the Coda System, are the Expanded Psionic Skills in disfavor? For instance, one of my characters Picked up Telekinesis from the old LUG Player's Guide. How would we convert this?
None of those need/use stats. They are driven by plot and story. The Q doesn't make a test to toss the Enterprise several thousand light-years; he simply does it.Quote:
If this is not to be used, how would we portray skills of NPCs such as Pah-Wraiths, Prophets, and Q?
Damn! How in the world did I miss that?? I'm sorry. I should have known better.Quote:
Originally posted by Doug Burke
Another possibility for Sexy is Skill Focus (Seductive). :)
Don, I apologize (what do you mean, you don't care? Good grief! :p ). Great job on the conversion guidelines. I'm sure they'll get plenty of use.
Thanks Don, Way Cool
Karg
Anyone have an idea on how to get a rough idea of how many advancements a converted character has other than rebuilding the character from the ground up? Something "quick and dirty"?
Allen
Thanks for the convertion rules!
I have a question though.
As CODA has a attribute max +2 on the end of the attribute convertions does not seem to fit.
By page 78 of the PG "You maximum level in any attribute is 12 plus your species bonus"
A human with a 5 attribute and a +2 edge would have a 14 in CODA, which contradicts page 78.
If you drop the +2 off the end of the formula you would have a 12, so you would have max in each system matching up.
Also a 2 in ICON is average, and would convert to 4 in CODA for low average(no negative modifier).
So is this correct or is there something else going on in the formula that I am missing?
Thank you.
Then stop 'em at 12.
If you have humans running around with 5's in attributes and +2 edges you have larger problems then worrying about doing seemless conversions... ;)
I had a character like that :) (or more accurately, one of my players did); had psionics too. It seems that his trip through the Icon-Coda Transporter was not successful and he had one of those transporter accidents....Quote:
Originally posted by Don Mappin
Then stop 'em at 12.
If you have humans running around with 5's in attributes and +2 edges you have larger problems then worrying about doing seemless conversions... ;)
Allen
You know what we need now - Coda/CCG conversion rules :D
How about answering the question in stead of jumping to stupid conclutions!:mad:Quote:
Originally posted by Don Mappin
Then stop 'em at 12.
If you have humans running around with 5's in attributes and +2 edges you have larger problems then worrying about doing seemless conversions... ;)
This was an example. The problem is worse with aliens, and it is impossible to get a one when you convert. So why are you stacking the deck? Why do you want all characters to end up with nothing less than a six? Talk about problems to deal with.
I did. You apparently didn't get the answer you wanted.Quote:
Originally posted by euson1
How about answering the question in stead of jumping to stupid conclutions!:mad:
What about the question asked in the second post?
Why the skew toward the high end of the chart?
Well, since the conversion is 2xICON+2, a 2 in ICON would be a 6 (2x2=4+2=6) in CODA. Not quite a 7, but failry close.
Quote:
Originally posted by euson1
How about answering the question in stead of jumping to stupid conclutions
Why do some people have to be rude and nasty to someone who, for no recompense, has taken the time to do so many nice things for the Star Trek RPG community? Please don't do this again.
Allen
Personnally, I'm OK with these conversions. The thing is, CODA attributes are much more widespread in values than ICON ones, so having a perfect conversion could imply mathematical formulas as simple as the one for calulating warp factor TNG scale ;).
So, OK, it may not be entirely satisfying for a Fit 5 Str+2 human (CODA Str 14), or a Fit 1 Str-1 Ferengi (CODA Str 3). Well my view in that case is, if you really want to have a very very low attribute (or don't want it to be too high), is simply remove the exceeding points and ask the player to put them elsewhere (if a human has 14 in an attribute, top it at 12 and spend the two points on other attributes, related if possible). Such tweakings will be necessary in the conversion anyway (like the specialities, for instance, since two specialities in ICON convert as one in CODA, making a choice necessary).
On one other point, it seems to me the average for an attribute in CODA is 6, isn't it ? 4 being the low average, and below are the exceptionnally weak values. So the average human in ICON will have 6 in most attributes in CODA... works for me.
Thanks C5. Maybe my question wasn't clear earlier. Is a ICON 2 equal to a CODA 6? At first glance that seems skewed. ICONx2 seems like simple fit. Yeah a normal human would average at 4, but are not Starfleet officers suppose to be above average? In CODA they seem to be. But in ICON template based character creation thier attibutes start out as just average. So is the +2 designed to pump them up some? I am just curious as to why the formula was set up as it is. I think you probably hit the answer on the head with the 6 being the average.Quote:
Originally posted by C5
Personnally, I'm OK with these conversions. The thing is, CODA attributes are much more widespread in values than ICON ones, so having a perfect conversion could imply mathematical formulas as simple as the one for calulating warp factor TNG scale ;).
So, OK, it may not be entirely satisfying for a Fit 5 Str+2 human (CODA Str 14), or a Fit 1 Str-1 Ferengi (CODA Str 3). Well my view in that case is, if you really want to have a very very low attribute (or don't want it to be too high), is simply remove the exceeding points and ask the player to put them elsewhere (if a human has 14 in an attribute, top it at 12 and spend the two points on other attributes, related if possible). Such tweakings will be necessary in the conversion anyway (like the specialities, for instance, since two specialities in ICON convert as one in CODA, making a choice necessary).
On one other point, it seems to me the average for an attribute in CODA is 6, isn't it ? 4 being the low average, and below are the exceptionnally weak values. So the average human in ICON will have 6 in most attributes in CODA... works for me.
euroson1,
The reason for the add on is the difference between the two game scales. ICON usd a 1-5 scale with 2 average, where as CODA uses 2d6 with a mathematical average of 7 (although the method of attribute generation tends to push the CODA stats up a little).
If you don't like the 2xICON ATTRIBUTE +ICON EDGE+2 you can try something different. It just any conversion isn't going to be perfect. For instance:
ICON STAT+EDGE CODA STAT
-1 2
0 3
1 4
2 7
3 8
4 9
5 10
6 11
7 12
(8) 13
The mathematical difficultues rise from the fact that 2 is average in ICON rather than 3, resulting in a "bowed" curve. For instance a human's Strength score in ICON can range from an effective score of -1 to +7 with 2 as average. In CODA it is a 2-12 range with 7 average. For a mathematical conversion you'd have to compress values below 2 and expand values above 2.
But for a game you'd probably want to switch the values a bit so as to spread out the attrubite bonuses.
That's the thing about conversions. You can't reall match up abilities exactly in two different systems. That why the GM and players need to focus on try to maintain the spirit of the character, and fudge the conversion to fit.
I see what your saying.
Humans have 1-5, but many alien have one or more attributes that range 1-6. This doesn't covert over as well. Well we'll just have to pound some square pegs into round holes.
There is no law that says you have to use this system. Design your own if this one doesn't suit you. As long as all your characters are converted with the same system, they'll be balanced against each other.
A conversion system is not a scientific process. It is not the law of the land. It is one person's opinion, ultimately, on how to convert characters from one system to another. If you have a different opinion, use yours. And write it up and post it so others who might agree with you can use it to.
Allen
AllenS is right. Conversion is more of an art that a science.
Wow! That's a good conversion system!
Maybe isn't perfect, but conversion isn't an exact science. A least, it's better than any FASA/LUG conversion system I've found...
and it's many times better than WEG -> d20 Star Wars or Chaosium -> d20 Cthulhu.
I think I will use it often soon, when my PG arrives...
Thanks!
I have converted my primary character. It went over well. His skills seem a little weaker than what he had before. I recommend one change. I understand that there seem to be fewer specializations, but for those LUG skill specializations that are two or more over the base skill level, the converted CODA character should get those specializations as they had prior in LUG despite the half modification. Otherwise the half modification should apply since the base level is being raised. Thoughts anyone? :confused:
That actually makes sense, Meth. I'll have to try that with some of the conversions I've doen and see how it comes out.
I mean, I could see someone having (for example) Energy Weapon Phaser at 1 (4) and being reduced to Ranged Combat: Energy Weapons 2. So much for being a crack shot...
I'll let you know how it turns out...
UPDATE: Well, I tried it with a couple of converted characters, and while it works with Skills that have only one Specialization in Icon, it adds a little too many Specialties for my tastes to the Coda-fied version if there are multiple Specializations. While a good idea in theory, IMO, it doesn't really work in practice. At least, not for me. :)
Relax Allen, all I have tried to do was find out why the convertion formula was set up as it is. What is the reasoning behind it. All you and Don seemed to think was that I was complaining that I had some Monty Hall character who was screwed in the convertion. I was offended by that (Maybe you could tell by my reply). Others understood my questions and gave their opinions about why it was set up the way it was (Thanks Guys). A forum is about discussion, and should not be one sided or used to mock the others.Quote:
Originally posted by AllenS
There is no law that says you have to use this system. Design your own if this one doesn't suit you. As long as all your characters are converted with the same system, they'll be balanced against each other.
A conversion system is not a scientific process. It is not the law of the land. It is one person's opinion, ultimately, on how to convert characters from one system to another. If you have a different opinion, use yours. And write it up and post it so others who might agree with you can use it to.
Allen
Well that my 2 cents worth.
Just wondering, not to dis the conversion system but do we know when there'll be more races published?
My game is set on a Federation/Romulan outpost owned originally by Ktarians and I have a load of odd races from LUG:
Plenty of Romulans
Plenty of Ktarians
A Human ex-borg
A Jem'hadar ex-borg
A Zaldan engineer
And a few others. Are the more adversarial races going to be in the Narrator's Guide or perhaps even rules on being half-breeds with them or something? One of my players is gagging to be a Brikar as that's how he is in real life.
El Queso Diablo
el queso
Some species are expected in the Narrator's Guide (I believe Romulans, Andorians and Orions).
After that it sort of depends on what Decipher prints. There might be a Species Book. It is also likely that various Species will be written up in sourcebooks designed to cover each series/era. So Tellarites might appear in a TOS book, while Bolians and Zakdorn might be in a TNG book.
In the meantime, people have begun converting species over as a temporarly fix (check the various threads). TREKRPG had a bunch of fan stuff for ICON, and will probably wind up with just as much stuff for CODA.
Rules for "mixed species" character exist on page 29 of the CODA TREK Player's Guide.
Since you have a lot of Ktarrians in your campaign, I've written up a "home-made" Ktarrian species template for you (check the threads). It should hold you over until Decipher prints official Ktarrian stats (probably not a high priorty).