Starting a new campaign and looking for some tips.

[Enrious]

Hello,

After our current Pathfinder Kingmaker campaign concludes, I'm going to be running a FASA Trek game. I gave the players a choice of FASA or CODA and I think since they wanted to run TOS, they wanted to really go old school.

That said, I have both 1e and 2e and frankly, I'm not sure which we should use. I've never run or played in either, although I have quite a bit of experience with ST:TCS. Any suggestions?

The players want to use the Command & Control rules, which I know TCS has, but I don't know if it'd have any bearing on which ruleset to use.

My plan is to have it kick off 1 year after the Enterprise has returned, probably in a Larson or Locknar, but I'm still thinking that one.

So in a nutshell, any advice for a first-time FASATrek GM?

[Pericles]

Locknars are great first ships, Larsons less so. Regardless of which you choose, you have to make sure your players know how 'soft' these ships are. Neither has enough power to move, shoot and raise all shields and can not take much of a punch in ship to ship actions.

I'm not sure how well your players know the TOS setting, but most of the cool things done in the new series have not been invented yet. No point to point beaming, no holodecks, no replicators, etc. Also many of the races taken for granted like Trill, Betazoids, Ferengi, and Klingons in Starfleet are not available either.

One good aspect of the TOS era is there is more of a 'Cowboy' mentality, you don't have to talk something to death or consult with your Ship's Counselor. If you feel something is a threat to the Federation or your crew, as long as you can prove that for a board of inquiry, go ahead and bloody shoot the thing.

Good luck with your campaign.

[Fugazi Grrl]

I would suggest going with Second Edition for the basic rules. FASA could really have used a Third Edition, using the system they published for their Doctor Who game, but I think of their two Treks, 2nd is best.

And try to find some old-fashioned dice; you know, a pair of d20 marked for use as d10s. Not the modern d20s that give the numbers from 1-20, but an old pair that have the numbers from 1-10 twice.

These are the kinds of dice the game was built on, and play-tested on.

We tried playing with modern d10s, and found we were rolling between 98-00 most of the time with everyone failing their skill rolls. I'm going to sound like something straight out of a calculus textbook, but the probability curve generated by rolling 2d20, counting them as 2d10 with one die for tens and one for digits is a totally different probability curve than doing the same thing with 2d10.

So, if you can try to get some old d20s. Then you'll have the same results on Skill Rolls, etc., as intended by the FASA game designers. I don't think they'd even invented the modern 10-sided d10s yet in 1982.

[TFVanguard]

Er.. sorry, but no..

A 1d10 will give the same exact odds as a 1d20 with only 1-10 as digits. Your probabilty per digit is exactly the same 1:10...

[Enrious]

Locknars are great first ships, Larsons less so. Regardless of which you choose, you have to make sure your players know how 'soft' these ships are. Neither has enough power to move, shoot and raise all shields and can not take much of a punch in ship to ship actions.

That's a great point about them - I'll be sure to keep it in mind when throwing ships at them to fight.

What I'll probably do is use a Larson for our intro session of the combat section and then put them into a Locknar for the campaign.

I'm not sure how well your players know the TOS setting, but most of the cool things done in the new series have not been invented yet. No point to point beaming, no holodecks, no replicators, etc. Also many of the races taken for granted like Trill, Betazoids, Ferengi, and Klingons in Starfleet are not available either.

Most only know TNG+, so it'll be fun. Although one of the reasons they prefered a TOS game was that there wasn't so many decades of canon - everyone could start out at basically the same knowledge point, easily.

To aid to that, I've already said that the only canon was the TOS and TAS episodes. No movies and no TNG+ (nor Enterprise)

As it is, I'll likely be throwing in stuff from SFB anyway.

The fact that all episodes of TOS are available at startrek.com for free also helps.

One good aspect of the TOS era is there is more of a 'Cowboy' mentality, you don't have to talk something to death or consult with your Ship's Counselor. If you feel something is a threat to the Federation or your crew, as long as you can prove that for a board of inquiry, go ahead and bloody shoot the thing.

Good luck with your campaign.

That was another selling point, although it makes the Captain slightly more important IMO than in TNG, although I think it'll make it more fun with my group of players.

Thanks for the feedback.

[TFVanguard]

What I'll probably do is use a Larson for our intro session of the combat section and then put them into a Locknar for the campaign.

Larsons, like Saladins, won't be out 'exploring strange new worlds' much. They're destroyers, usually assigned to patrol duties and will typically be called in for skirmish protection and the like. I would start the campaign with the players losing their old ship (a Larson class), and having to deal with being transferred over to a Loknar class frigate, right after the forced treaty of Organia.

The Loknar is a good light ship, still very capable and multi-role, but not nearly as 'all powerful' as the Constitution class. It won't always make sense to hunt down that Orion suicide-ship, and Va'al is even more of a threat... but she's good enough to stand toe-to-toe with a D-7 if the need arises.

[Owen E Oulton]

If you want to make your campaign a couple of years after STTMP, I've just completed deckplans for the Loknar Mk IV USS Phobos. See the Utopia Planitia thread Post Your Deckplans Here...

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Also many of the races taken for granted like Trill, Betazoids, Ferengi, and Klingons in Starfleet are not available either.

Trill have been known to the Federation since at least the 22nd century (since... Dax met a famous Cardassian on Vulcan then) and we have no on-screen information on when Betazoids showed up.

One good aspect of the TOS era is there is more of a 'Cowboy' mentality, you don't have to talk something to death

I'm not sure which TOS you were watching, but...

[Pericles]

Trill have been known to the Federation since at least the 22nd century (since... Dax met a famous Cardassian on Vulcan then) and we have no on-screen information on when Betazoids showed up.

However, since Trill weren't mentioned in the original series, in my view, there are no Trill.

I'm not sure which TOS you were watching, but...

I mean the Picard talk them to death maneuver. In TOS it was perfectly okay for the captain to just shut up and shoot already.

[Fugazi Grrl]

Er.. sorry, but no..

A 1d10 will give the same exact odds as a 1d20 with only 1-10 as digits. Your probabilty per digit is exactly the same 1:10...

I had a FASA character - DEX 96, Unarmed Combat 96 - who failed her attack rolls 43 times straight. I always rolled 98-00. At the same time, the bad guys - with skills in the 20s succeeded to hit every single time they rolled. I don't think a skill of 24 should trump a 96 every time. I don't think that kind of PC failure at high skill levels was the intention of the FASA game's original design.

That's why I stopped playing FASA. Having studied martial arts myself, it really bugs me when a character rated high in unarmed fighting arts get's their butt kicked because of an unlucky dice-roll on the part of the player. Things like that make the character's skill virtually irrelevant. One or two 98s, yes, but over 40 in a row ?

I tried to figure it out mathematically, and apply some kind of logic.

Since the game was designed before d10s were actually produced I theorized that the designers had to play-test the system on d20s used as d10s. I took 2 old d20s, and rolled them 100 times. Then 2d10s, and did the same thing.

And finally 2 d%.

The results - I still have the page in a little purple notebook close at hand.

2d20 - 1 roll over 96
2d10 - 31 rolls over 96
2d% - 14 rolls over 96

The odd thing here ? 2d% are essentially 2d10, marked differently and yet the results were that using 2d% yielded close to half as many failures for what the FASA system considers an "expert" in a skill. 96+.

The single failure for the 2d20 in my test is why I developed the theory that because the original FASA designers only had those kind of dice to work with they were able to design a system where a 96 skill level really functioned in game as an expert skill level.

If a character has been studying fighting arts like Muay Thai, or Klingon Mok'bara for 17 years she is not going to be unable to land a punch in over 40 tries. That's from a real-world perspective wherein Mok'bara would be easily as deadly an art as Krav Maga. And when I did my tests I was not rolling for any particular character - just trying to see how many times I'd fail a roll based on FASA's 96 = Expert skill level.

That's where I get my figures from. In any case I don't think a character should fail that many times in a row with that high a rating. It makes more sense to say the geometric shape of the dice play a part, than to just say player-luck is more important than character attributes and skill levels in a FASA game.

I realize, I'm personally passionate about the Martial Arts thing. And other players might not see it as so important. Others might be more concerned with realism in ship combat, or something along those lines. For me it is when a skilled hand-to-hand fighter looses because of (bad) player-luck that a system starts feeling broken.

Since in my own tests I had consistently better results with the 2d20 than the 2d10, that is why I recommended using them. The only reason I could hypothesize for the differing results in a virtually blind test (no game being played, or character being rolled for) was the different shapes of the dice, and which dice-types were available when the game's system was built.

I might suggest the OP, and anyone interested in doing so perform their own tests - roll 2d20 several times (reading them as 2d10) then roll 2d10 the same number of times and see how many times you roll over 96. Then use which ever dice-type yields results most desirable for your game.

I obviously prefer my Muay Thai practitioners, Capoierists, and Karatekas to win their fights if their skills would normally yield a victory vs the opponent at hand. But don't take my word for it - test it out.

Is there a Myth that needs Busting here ? Do 2d20 actually yield a different result than 2d10 ? If this is consistently the case I'd be very interested in knowing it.

And now, my apologies for derailing the thread discussing dice-rolls, probabilities, and my own fondness for Martial Arts. That's not the subject of the topic. But, in the spirit of the original topic, I'd suggest making a few dice-roll tests with different dice types to yield the best results for play in the FASA system.

It'll go a long way towards a more enjoyable game.

[Enrious]

Larsons, like Saladins, won't be out 'exploring strange new worlds' much. They're destroyers, usually assigned to patrol duties and will typically be called in for skirmish protection and the like.

That's true in the FASAverse and the STverse in general, but not necessarily in my 'verse.

I have no problem saying destroyers are pressed into fullfilling exploration duties if I end up wanting them on a Larson.

I would start the campaign with the players losing their old ship (a Larson class), and having to deal with being transferred over to a Loknar class frigate, right after the forced treaty of Organia.

That's a great idea, although the campaign will start after the Organian treaty. However, I sort of like the idea of starting off the campaign with a bang.

The Loknar is a good light ship, still very capable and multi-role, but not nearly as 'all powerful' as the Constitution class. It won't always make sense to hunt down that Orion suicide-ship, and Va'al is even more of a threat... but she's good enough to stand toe-to-toe with a D-7 if the need arises.

To be sure, this is along the lines of what I'm looking to do.

[Enrious]

If you want to make your campaign a couple of years after STTMP, I've just completed deckplans for the Loknar Mk IV USS Phobos. See the Utopia Planitia thread Post Your Deckplans Here...

Very nice!

I'm extremely tempted to set it right after STTMP now.

[Enrious]

However, since Trill weren't mentioned in the original series, in my view, there are no Trill.

Pretty much how I'm handling it. Humans, Vulcans, Alpha-Centaurians (although I liked the LUG/Decipher treatment of them), Andorians, Tellerites, Edoans, and Caitans are the only PC races allowed.

[Enrious]

I had a FASA character - DEX 96, Unarmed Combat 96 - who failed her attack rolls 43 times straight. I always rolled 98-00. At the same time, the bad guys - with skills in the 20s succeeded to hit every single time they rolled. I don't think a skill of 24 should trump a 96 every time. I don't think that kind of PC failure at high skill levels was the intention of the FASA game's original design.

The odds of doing that are greater than rolling a "1" on a d20 43 times in a row. I'm no math whiz, but assuming that the die in question is not loaded or whatnot, I'd say one has a greater chance of being struck by lightning while buying a winning lottery ticket.

I don't discount your experience, but percentage odds are percentage odds. If one has a 98% of success, then 98 times out of 100, they will succeed. There's nothing magical about any rule system that employs chance, as they all utliize this method of success determination.

That's why I stopped playing FASA. Having studied martial arts myself, it really bugs me when a character rated high in unarmed fighting arts get's their butt kicked because of an unlucky dice-roll on the part of the player. Things like that make the character's skill virtually irrelevant. One or two 98s, yes, but over 40 in a row ?

Seems like you're blaming the system instead of lady luck. I've never seen anyone roll 3 1's in a row (on a d20) in 20 years of gaming, so 43 in a row is so staggering a situation that frankly no rules system could ever account for it. Nor, I think, should they.

I tried to figure it out mathematically, and apply some kind of logic.

Since the game was designed before d10s were actually produced I theorized that the designers had to play-test the system on d20s used as d10s. I took 2 old d20s, and rolled them 100 times. Then 2d10s, and did the same thing.

And finally 2 d%.

The results - I still have the page in a little purple notebook close at hand.

2d20 - 1 roll over 96
2d10 - 31 rolls over 96
2d% - 14 rolls over 96

The odd thing here ? 2d% are essentially 2d10, marked differently and yet the results were that using 2d% yielded close to half as many failures for what the FASA system considers an "expert" in a skill. 96+.

I suspect a statistician would point out that your sample size is too small to be viable.

As was pointed out, a d20 with 0-9 repeated twice generates the same odds as a d10. The odds are unchanged when used to create percentages.

The single failure for the 2d20 in my test is why I developed the theory that because the original FASA designers only had those kind of dice to work with they were able to design a system where a 96 skill level really functioned in game as an expert skill level.

I'd say that based on the other games around at the time, designers were looking at the math of the system and not the dice used for them.

If a character has been studying fighting arts like Muay Thai, or Klingon Mok'bara for 17 years she is not going to be unable to land a punch in over 40 tries. That's from a real-world perspective wherein Mok'bara would be easily as deadly an art as Krav Maga. And when I did my tests I was not rolling for any particular character - just trying to see how many times I'd fail a roll based on FASA's 96 = Expert skill level.

That's where I get my figures from. In any case I don't think a character should fail that many times in a row with that high a rating. It makes more sense to say the geometric shape of the dice play a part, than to just say player-luck is more important than character attributes and skill levels in a FASA game.

I realize, I'm personally passionate about the Martial Arts thing. And other players might not see it as so important. Others might be more concerned with realism in ship combat, or something along those lines. For me it is when a skilled hand-to-hand fighter looses because of (bad) player-luck that a system starts feeling broken.

Since in my own tests I had consistently better results with the 2d20 than the 2d10, that is why I recommended using them. The only reason I could hypothesize for the differing results in a virtually blind test (no game being played, or character being rolled for) was the different shapes of the dice, and which dice-types were available when the game's system was built.

I might suggest the OP, and anyone interested in doing so perform their own tests - roll 2d20 several times (reading them as 2d10) then roll 2d10 the same number of times and see how many times you roll over 96. Then use which ever dice-type yields results most desirable for your game.

I obviously prefer my Muay Thai practitioners, Capoierists, and Karatekas to win their fights if their skills would normally yield a victory vs the opponent at hand. But don't take my word for it - test it out.

I think you're getting too caught up on the specifics of the discussion. It honestly doesn't matter if it's martial arts, shooting a gun, researching something, etc. - 98% is 98%.

And that says that assuming all factors to be "fair", then its odds of success are 98 times out of 100. And the way probability works, you'll see this to be true the more times you generate a result. (If I may, I'd like to point out the Gambler's Fallacy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy as it seems to catch a lot of people)

It doesn't matter what system you use, if they involve random chance to generate success, they will all be at the mercy of that equation.

Is there a Myth that needs Busting here ? Do 2d20 actually yield a different result than 2d10 ? If this is consistently the case I'd be very interested in knowing it.

And now, my apologies for derailing the thread discussing dice-rolls, probabilities, and my own fondness for Martial Arts. That's not the subject of the topic. But, in the spirit of the original topic, I'd suggest making a few dice-roll tests with different dice types to yield the best results for play in the FASA system.

It'll go a long way towards a more enjoyable game.

No worries and I can get the same way about something I passionately think. Let's never forget sight of the fact that we're gamers talking to other gamers about games in a friendly atmosphere.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

I mean the Picard talk them to death maneuver. In TOS it was perfectly okay for the captain to just shut up and shoot already.

It ususally didn't get him anywhere, though...