ICON system - how does it play?

[C5]

My biggest gripe with the ICON system was the dice system as well.
Maybe there was a knack I never got around to get, but on too many occasions, I felt that, as a GM, my options were limited to : "OK, either I set the difficulty of this task to 9, and the player has a 90% probability of success, or I set it to 10, and the player has exactly 1 chance out of 6 to succeed".
This is especially annoying when you want some tasks to be challenging, and you discover that you only have a one or two points margin between ridiculously easy and nigh impossible.

My other gripe was the fact that some characters could become almost unbeatable in combat. For instance, a player once created a Klingon character whom we calculated could single handledly defeat the other three characters, even with the help of phasers (as he could withstand a full phaser shot which would have vaporized any other player).

My final complaint was that I felt there was too narrow a margin in skill numbers, meaning that the difference between a beginner, a professional, and an expert was usually one or two skill points.

Otherwise, the system was rather nice to play. I especially liked the renown and the combat system (minus the part about very strong characters).

[Owen E Oulton]

The problem is with "skill ablation", not addition. If a character has a skill of Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) 1 (2) [costs 3 DP], and he receives Shipboard Systems (Transporter) 1 (2) [costs 3 DP], he winds up with Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) (Transporter 1 (2) (2) [worth 4 DP]. Two Development Points just evapourate. In the Dune version of the game, they attempted to deal with this, but chose a very complex solution which frankly made things even worse, where your Specialisation could wind up lower than the base skill...

[The Tatterdemalion King]

The problem is with "skill ablation", not addition. If a character has a skill of Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) 1 (2) [costs 3 DP], and he receives Shipboard Systems (Transporter) 1 (2) [costs 3 DP], he winds up with Shipboard Systems (Flight Control) (Transporter 1 (2) (2) [worth 4 DP]. Two Development Points just evapourate. In the Dune version of the game, they attempted to deal with this, but chose a very complex solution which frankly made things even worse, where your Specialisation could wind up lower than the base skill...

Exactly! It doesn't make any damn sense. One wonders whether both problems–this and the difficulty numbers–could be solved simply by making skills simply add together.

[JALU3]

My solution to that problem was to increase the base skill to 2 . . . and drop the specializations.

[Phoenix]

Just take the 'evaporated' points and set them off to the side, once all your packages and histories are done you should have some points for hobbies or filling in weak spots in your character.

[simkn]

I must admit I'm a little confused here. If you consult p. 68 of the TNG manual it clearly states the development point (DP) cost of everything:

Attributes: 2 points
Edges: 1 point
Skill: 3 points
Specialization: 1 point

So bumping an attribute from 3 to 4 would cost 2 DP's. Fine.

Also, it makes sense to me that a Skill costs much more than a Specialization. If specializations and skills cost the same, then why in the world would you ever choose a specialization? Why bump up my knowledge of Astronomy for 1 DP when I could just bump up my skill in every Space Science for the same cost?

So this DP pricing system makes sense to me.

And now the part that confuses me:

Using this (sensible) pricing chart for DP's, how do you get any of the Templates to add up to 50 DP's, and the Early Life packages to add up to 5 DPs, and so on? Take the Early Life package "Academic Upbringing" for example:

1) One Academic Skill at 1 (2)... assuming they don't already have an academic skill, then they get the skill itself (worth 3 DP's) plus a specialization of 2 (another 2 DP's)... for a total of 5 DP's.
2) +1 Logic Edge, for 1 DP
3) Patron, for 2 DP's
4) Arrogant, for -1 DP's

For a total of 7 DP's. But the package only costs 5 DP's!

On the other hand, if you assume (unsensibly) that Skills and Specializations both cost 1 DP, then you have:

1) One Academic Skill at 1 (2): 1 DP for the Skill + 2 for the Specializaiton, for a total of 3 DP's
2) +1 Logic Edge, for 1 DP
3) Patron, for 2 DP's
4) Arrogant, for -1 DP's

For a total of 5 DP's, which is consistent with the package cost, but which uses the totally unreasonable system in which an entire category of skills costs the same as a specialization (1 DP each).

What's going on here? What DP method did LUG expect us to use?

[Evan van Eyk]

Whenever you get a skill for the first time, you get the specialization for free, because every skill a character has, always has a specialization, unless it is one of the few exceptions, that do not have specializations, e.g. like "dodge".

So when you first get the academic skill Life Science 1(2) you may choose any Spec. for it, e.g. Biology.
This makes the Early Life package worth 5 DPs.

However when you get Life Science again in another Package, once more with 1(2), you only may increase either the Spec. or choose another Spec, but do not raise the skill - which actually is inconsistent with the DP System, since you would essentially loose 2 points. therefore me and my players just spend the 3 DPs then as we see fit.

[simkn]

I believe I'm beginning to understand....

So you get a specialization of level (2) for free? This makes sense, since a specialization of (1) for a skill in which you already have 1 does you nothing, right? So when you get for ex Academic Skill 1 (2), the skill costs 3 and the specialization is free.

OK, so now... if you want to increase your skill in Academic Skill but not the specialization ( ie - from 1 (2) to 2 (2) ), that costs an additional 3 DP's, right? But increasing the specialization only ( from 1 (2) to 1 (3) ) costs just 1 DP.

Is all of that correct?

Thanks for the help!

[Phoenix]

All most, when you spend 3 DP on a skill of 1[2], you end up with a 2[3]. Alternately you could spend 1 DP on just the specialization for a 1[3], or have a 1[2] with another specialization at [2] also.

Example: (this lost me the first time)
You start with -
[i]Space Science: Astrophysics 1[2]

Add 3 DP to the skill you end up with-
Space Science: Astrophysics 2[3] (everything gets improved)

Add 1 DP to the specialization you end up with-
Space Science: Astrophysics 1[3] (all other space sciences do not get better)

Add 1 DP to get a new specialization you end up with-
Space Science: Astrophysics 1[2]
Space Science: Astrogation [2] (no need to repeat the number one from above).

That's the basics, just keep in mind your specializations are always one above your base skill.

[marty4286]

I love this system... It's too bad I lost most of my house rules.

I completely rewrote the ship combat system to get rid of power management and made other systems more abstract.

I think in the end all it had were sensor bonuses, hull and shield HP, weapons, personnel and cargo capacity, and a few other statistics. Ran smoothly.

It was to streamline fleet actions, because I would have each PC command seperate ships.

[LUGTrekGM]

It's easy and fun to play.

The most difficult part about it is when you are doing character generation, the different options for adding 1(2) to 1(2) or 1(2) plus, say 2(3).

Careful reading of the chart for that, and some practice will yield great results.

In the end, I love these characters.

I've been roleplaying for over 25 years, and it's one of the most fun, intiutive and dramatic character generation systems out there, without getting too bogged down into a few hundred options, like you'd get with GURPS 4th ed or Star Hero 5th ed.

[Chabit Rane]

It's easy and fun to play.

The most difficult part about it is when you are doing character generation, the different options for adding 1(2) to 1(2) or 1(2) plus, say 2(3).

Careful reading of the chart for that, and some practice will yield great results.

In the end, I love these characters.

I've been roleplaying for over 25 years, and it's one of the most fun, intiutive and dramatic character generation systems out there, without getting too bogged down into a few hundred options, like you'd get with GURPS 4th ed or Star Hero 5th ed.

Right on

[LUGTrekGM]

I just wanted to add, that the Academy Boxed Set gives you some extra bits to develop the personality, and is well worth the price, just for getting a handle on the PC's motivations, if players have not developed them already.

The striped Player's guide is good, too. From it, I developed a medals / awards / ribbons system, to add even more to a Starfleet character's history.

Plus, the Academy material is okay as a setting for a flashback episode, or as background info, if one of your characters in your series has ever taught at the Academy, or if you want to run a Pre-game game, starting cadets out as civilians, before they enter the "Real" Game.

[Chabit Rane]

Great. want to post some of them. I'm interested in anything at can give ideas or improve my games.

[LUGTrekGM]

http://www.geocities.com/renegadegamer/SFAwards.html

Is a link to the old campaign page awards. I am in the process of updating it, and greatly revising it. There are a few other pages out there with similar pages, Anomaly Trek Mux is one, and a few sim ships, that I can't recall.