I'm actually running monthly sessions of CODA Trek for four different Trek clubs (Starfleet Command's Seventh Fleet out of Utah) with two, perhaps three more clubs waiting in the wings.
When we set up our standardized rules for the Fleet, we calculated advancements based on time in the club and actual ages (part of the pitch was playing "yourself as a Starfleet officer"- which means that many of our players have 20+ years worth of experience.
Even using the suggested rules of one advancement per 2 years of "civilian" life and 1 per year of Starfleet service, this means that I'm dealing with some
VERY experienced characters- even if the players themselves are not experiences roleplayers.
The core ship (the guinea pig) for our games, U.S.S.
Retributor, is the worst of the lot, because when you factor in Professional Abilities, affinities, edges and the rest, I'm
routinely seeing skills in the 12/25 range or higher.
Worse, the
Retributor crew (far more than the rest of the fleet) are all experienced D&D gamers with a minimum of 15 years experience.
This has forced a number of changes in how I run my games, and in the "standard" rules set for the Fleet as a whole.
Primarily the rules changes are that :
No skill LEVEl can be higher than 12.
No attributes can be higher than twelve before Species modifiers and to ensure a level playing field, we use the pick system for generating attributes.
No reactions can be bumped more than three points using Advancement picks (had to nip that one in the bud when our Klingon player wanted to buy a +8 to his Quickness and thus Initiative).
I've also had to carefully review Professional Abilities, but even so, I've got some seriously broken characters to contend with.
One of our Marine/Security Officers has maxed out his
Quickness (his
Agility was already maxed out) and taken has taken the
Physically Fit and
Responsive Professional Abilities, the
Alert,
Ambidexterous,
Fit, and
Two-Handed Fighting edges, and the
Double Tap key trait.
This gives him four actions- potentially eight shots when dual-weilding Type II phasers at up to four separate targets in a single round. And this is BEFORE multiple-action penalties begin kicking in.
Needless to say, he's likely to win any phaser fight thrown at him- especially if he's played smart (as he generally is).
And this sort of rules lawyering min/maxing isn't uncommon among my players- though they've been very careful to avoid munchkinism within my earshot (and throwing range).
From a story/script point of view, the experience level of both the characters and players, this has forced me to "up the ante" on my stories and to become quite a bit sneakier (and more Machiavellian) than normal- and to tailor the missions on a ship-by-ship basis.
While I can run any ship in the fleet through a standard Trek adventure (and we've had some real lulu's), I've been forced to get especially creative with
Retributor and adopted four basic rules.
1) If my players can shoot their way out of their problems, I've screwed up.
Instead of straight-out phaser fights and toe-to-toe combat, I've pushed Retributor through a series of cloak-and-dagger missions where stealth and thoughtful planning are the key rather than mere offensive firepower.
2) The best stories for my crews are those where personal integrity, overall story, and in-character roleplay matter more than the die rolls and stats.
3) I know what my players/characters are good at and work hard to force them out of their comfort zones and to expand their horizons.
4) My antagonists (if not necessarily their lackeys) are played smart. If they were dumb, they'd have appeared on Voyager.
While I try hard not to deprive my players of the exciting action scenes and satisfaction of combat and fisticuffs, I do my best to make sure these scenes are the rewards for their hard work and not a way to avoid the tough decisions.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by selek
