[CODA] Star Trek RPG 2nd Edition (done by us :))

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Not trying to urinate on everyone's Frosted Flakes and saying we *shouldn't* do a new edition of the game, I'm just thinking using a proprietary system without the publisher's permission may be an idea worth some thought. There's other open-source RPG systems (Tri-Stat, FUDGE, Fuzion) if we don't want to create a new system from scratch.

Like this?

There's not much, if anything, mechanically original in CODA* compared dozens of other game systems. We could, theoretically, take the d20 OGL SRD and mutate it until it's virtually CODA (no levels, 2d6 instead of 1d20, four saves, etc...).

*The starship combat rules are a possible exception. Who wants to weigh in on this?

[Mac417]

Like this?

There's not much, if anything, mechanically original in CODA* compared dozens of other game systems. We could, theoretically, take the d20 OGL SRD and mutate it until it's virtually CODA (no levels, 2d6 instead of 1d20, four saves, etc...).

*The starship combat rules are a possible exception. Who wants to weigh in on this?

Also a good point. I remember when we were jumping all over CodaTrek due to its glaring similarities to d20.

[IKI]

I would like to offer my help as well.
I made some home made stuff over the years, and I'm starting again as a Narrator for a new sesean of our group. This is what I have made so far (its not completely finished).

Combat Skill: I've made a different approuch of the Combat skills.
Expanded Combat System: I've made several new combat moves, and made new combat related edges. Martial arts can now be represented by taking several edges (and not a seperate skill and edges, see Combat skill).
Libra Medica: We have a doctor in our group, so I've made some extras for the Medic.
Probes: I made also a small file about the use of probes.
Tranfering Power: I made my own version of the rule.

Tell me what you think of the Files.

[IKI]

One of the things that need to change is the construction system for the Starships. The system as it appeared in the NG was great.
It offered one system table for each different systems (not by race as in the Starship guide).
You could make a table (like the availibilty table in the Starship guide) that changes the space cost of different systems (should aslo take in acount the access to special tech like the cloak, transwap) by individual race and rules to do so with other races. Examples: Federation = lower cost for sensors and shields. Klingons = lower cost for weapons.
You could make a special table for unique systems (like the MAM, Cloak, regenerative shields, transwarp drive...).
The Beam weapon table should inculde a sort of system where you add a special feature to it, so that you can create different beam weapon . For example: Phasers = Stun and remodulation. Disruptors = More damage.
Also we should include a rule for tech level and advances of technology in the future, so that you can bring new and exiting tech in your game (think about the Voyagers special shield system).

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Things like cheaper sensors for the Federation for all ships seems kind of miniatures-gamey, and begs some meta-mechanical questions. For instance, is that because they simply have a certain technological advantages? Would it differ by era? At what point do the Romulans steal the technology and close the gap? Who would get better weapons, Klingons or Andorian Imperial Guard? What counts as a "Federation ship," anyway?

Not saying it's a bad idea, but it would fit in a faction-oriented space combat game where balance matters more than an RPG.

[IKI]

The Tatterdemalion King Wrote:

Things like cheaper sensors for the Federation for all ships seems kind of miniatures-gamey, and begs some meta-mechanical questions. For instance, is that because they simply have a certain technological advantages? Would it differ by era? At what point do the Romulans steal the technology and close the gap? Who would get better weapons, Klingons or Andorian Imperial Guard? What counts as a "Federation ship," anyway?

I understand what you are saying, the availibily table arlready offers advantages into that area. But I still like the Construction system in the NG a lot more than that of the Starship guide. It is a lot more streamlined, and creation of starships was alot easier (not so much tables for all those different racial systems). There has got to be a sort of system or a lot more components for future systems to allow palying in a new era (lets say 10 or 20 years past Insurection). My group is currently playing in 2382 and I find it difficult in using the Starship book for creating new systems. The only thing I use is the Prototype edge, which I think is the best next thing to the rule I'm suggesting.

By the way, I love the idea of constructing a 2nd edition. And I hope that by combining all of our efforts together, we can accomplish some great things.

[tonyg]

THe legal problem I see aren't from the game system. As has been pointed out elsewhere, you can't copywrite a set of rules. Just terminology.

The big problem is that Star Trek is a an own property. So any legal hassels sucha s they might be, would coe from that quarter.

THere are some good open game systems. FATE springs to mind, and EABA has it's mertis too, but assuming we get a system, the big issue will be Paramount.

[Mac417]

THe legal problem I see aren't from the game system. As has been pointed out elsewhere, you can't copywrite a set of rules. Just terminology.

The big problem is that Star Trek is a an own property. So any legal hassels sucha s they might be, would coe from that quarter.

THere are some good open game systems. FATE springs to mind, and EABA has it's mertis too, but assuming we get a system, the big issue will be Paramount.

Given, also as said elsewhere, that fans have been producing online informational archives, screencap galleries, and entire Star Trek episodes (all not for profit) on their own without Paramount going after them, I don't think they'll come after anyone for this.

Also notable is the fact that there is already a complete Trek supplement for Hero Games' Hero System online.

[Tobian]

Hmm, this is a tall order, because in a way you have opened a can of worms.. what do people actually... want

Personally, I think we should look at the strengths and weaknesses of all the present systems, and come up with the best compromise between complexity and simplicity. Coda is an excellent place to start, but it has issues, such as the reactions, which are mentioned in other threads, etc. Of course getting everyone to agree on what all that is is the hardest part!

Coda is meant to be an ICON 2, yet some things got dropped which people liked. But that said they are both largely compatible with each other, so I think it's something we should aim to do, so that people can have added value from the existing books.

Create a core rules set and mechanics
create a simple character creation process/tree
redesign all the alien templates for the new rules

That way we retain maximum compatibility, but don't create issues down the line with Decipher.

With regard to Paramount, well that's going to be an issue no matter what. But personally I can't see it being any different than these Forums existing. So long as we are not making money from it, Paramount is unlikely to bother us! But it's down to Magnus as site owner to do what he feels is best, as it's his site!

I'll help out if you need me too, I'm fairly good at DTP, Photoshop, and I dabble in 3D too. I play and write a lot of my own games, and i can probably organise a play test group with my players too

[tonyg]

Given, also as said elsewhere, that fans have been producing online informational archives, screencap galleries, and entire Star Trek episodes (all not for profit) on their own without Paramount going after them, I don't think they'll come after anyone for this.

Very true. I doubt Paramount would come after people unless money started to change hands OR it started to get a lot of attention, and even then we'd probably get a warner or even an offer to do something official rather than a lawsuit. Paramount seems to have figured out a few years back that going after your own fanbase hurts you far worse than a few sceencaps will.

Just wanted to pint out that we are more likey to get problems there as from anywhere else. Even passing around copies of the PDFs, while a no-no is probably going to get by unnoticed, or with little response. After all, if the game isn't profitable, then they can't be loosing profits.

Also notable is the fact that there is already a complete Trek supplement for Hero Games' Hero System online.

And that is for stars. I've seen Trek stuff for a least a half dozen games. Hero, GURPS, Timelords, Traveller....

[tonyg]

Hmm, this is a tall order, because in a way you have opened a can of worms.. what do people actually... want

Personally, I think we should look at the strengths and weaknesses of all the present systems, and come up with the best compromise between complexity and simplicity. Coda is an excellent place to start, but it has issues, such as the reactions, which are mentioned in other threads, etc. Of course getting everyone to agree on what all that is is the hardest part!

Coda is meant to be an ICON 2, yet some things got dropped which people liked. But that said they are both largely compatible with each other, so I think it's something we should aim to do, so that people can have added value from the existing books.

Create a core rules set and mechanics
create a simple character creation process/tree
redesign all the alien templates for the new rules

That way we retain maximum compatibility, but don't create issues down the line with Decipher.

With regard to Paramount, well that's going to be an issue no matter what. But personally I can't see it being any different than these Forums existing. So long as we are not making money from it, Paramount is unlikely to bother us! But it's down to Magnus as site owner to do what he feels is best, as it's his site!

I'll help out if you need me too, I'm fairly good at DTP, Photoshop, and I dabble in 3D too. I play and write a lot of my own games, and i can probably organise a play test group with my players too

I think you are spot on for what we should do. I suspect that if we change systems there will be a long debate on which system to use. And I also think that there are things in CODA that could be improved. Overall I prefer ICON to CODA, but believe that CODA did fixz most of ICON's flaws. Just that CODA had it's own flaws.

Probably someone should take notes/compile a list of options and we can vote/argue them out.

I for one don't like the "doubled wound points" thing. In ICON fights were fast a vicious. In CODA it was more like chipping away at hit points. Phasers excepted.

One idea that I'd like to see is the elimination of wound points for a wounding system. For instance maybe give each character a wound threshold rating, and maybe the character looses an additional wound level per 3 points the damage exceeds the threshold.

[Tobian]

Sounds like a plan.. let the wailing and gnashing of teeth commence

[tonyg]

Sounds like a plan.. let the wailing and gnashing of teeth commence

Tooth-gnashing is okay, but "wailing' is no longer permitted. We might kill the last two humpbacks.

[Mac417]

Sounds like a plan.. let the wailing and gnashing of teeth commence

One thing I'd like to see change, and this is purely on a personal level, is having to have two numbers to denote attributes. Having both ability scores AND modifiers just seems a bit redundant to me.

[Tobian]

Yep a bit like True 20 does it - you just have the modifier as a stat. Plus in Coda the way it was done was a bit.. odd, every other number was +1, except the middle 3, for 0