FASA to Unicorn Star Trek Gaming

[tonyg]

Eric,

The main differences between the FASA and LUG RPGS can be summurized as follows:

TASK RESOLUTION
FASA uses perctilile dice (D100) to resolve tasks. Players typically must roll against thier skill rating or an atteribute (in the case of combat, the average of a skill and an attribute). In some instances rolls are not required due to have a skill greater than the difficulty of the task.
LUG uses a mutiple D6 system. With the player rolling a number of dice equal to an attibure, keeping the highest, and adding in a fixed value for skill level. A drama die adds a bit of randomness with a drama die-a d6 that if it rolls a 6 allows the player to add in the next highest roll.

SKILLS
Are similar from one game to the other. The big differences are the scale (1-100 for FASA and 1-6 for LUG), and the fact that LUGTREK groups skills together into categories with specilizations rather than listing everything as its own skill. For example, in FASA Deflector Shield Operation, Starship Helm Operation, and Starship Weaponry are all separate skills, but in LUGTREK they all are specialities of Shipboard Systems skill. This allows characters to get a basic proficiecy in several FASA skills by taking fewer skills in LUG.

SCOPE
FASA TREK was set in the time of TOS, eventually focusing on the time of the Films. Although two supplements for the TNG era were produced, neither were widely distrubuted, or really gave enough information to run in the TNG era. LUG TREK on the other hand, produced most of it's products for the TNG/DS9/VOYAGER era. An excellent TOS CORE BOOK was produced, and a MOVIE ERA sourcebook was planned but not realeased before LUG lost the rights to Star Trek.

GAME SYTLE
FASA TREK at first tried sor a style of play tohat would mimic the orignal TV series. After TWOK was released, the game becme more and more militaristic/combat orientated. LUGTREK is a more modern game and put greater emphasis on storytelling and cinematic style of play.

[This message has been edited by tonyg (edited 08-29-2001).]

[reimero]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by mike:
Reimero - How do yours players react to the differences in the FASA and ST Canon worlds?
</font>

I'm the real Trek expert, they're more pure role-players. So they just take my word for it

[redwood973]

Hay "Tonyg" thanks for the above post. As you can tell by my posts for this topic I an not familiar with FASA. It was only just recently that I seen my first FASA material (I wish I could remember who sent me the info. so I could thank them propertly !). Your post has cleared up most of my questions about FASA. I do have a few questions still. Could you all help?

#1 I take it there is no conection between FASA and LUG? The one system seem so difrent from the other to have progressed form a common source.

#2 In the ships stats I was given (really which I could thank them!) it lists several items i wondered about. . .

a) "Damage Chart-- C." I take it damage was not universal in the system? How many diffrent charts were there?

b) "Movement Point Ratio-- 6/1." The power it takes to move one space?

c) "Stress Charts-- D/F." Diffrent than the damage chart? What was it for or do?

d) "Firing Chart-- Y." The oposite of the damage chart?

e) "Damage Modifiers-- +3(1-10) +2(11-17) +1(18-24)." No ideas at all what this could be!

f) "Shield Point Ratio-- 1/4." One power for each 4pts protection?

g) "Combat Efficiency: D--179.2 WDF--160.6" Again, no idea!

Like I said before it all seems a bit complicated, but that is probably because all I have are the ship stats and no rules. If you all could provide some insight into the above I would appreciate it!

One thing I have learned is that our game uses some FASA stuff! Computer names (M-8) and warp drive/impulse information (FIWA 48^2/FIG-2 32). Our game started in the mid-80's. None of the original gamers are involved. . .we all joined as original gamers dropped out. None of us even heard of FASA before I joined. The stuff we use we just assumed the first group made up to add a little extra to the game. Now we find out that our game was first a FASA game that included LUG as it came out.

Does anyone else have a FASA/LUG hybred game?

Thanks all for the help!

[Gamethyme]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by redwood973:
So what is a "starship combat simulator?" guys? From this post I know it was a FASA product, but what was it? Rules for combat?</font>

It was rules for starship combat.

Its only flaw was that ships had this annoying tendency to explode with even the slightest provocation.

Gamethyme

[Identity Crisis]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by redwood973:
#1 I take it there is no conection between FASA and LUG? The one system seem so difrent from the other to have progressed form a common source.</font>

No connection at all.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">#2 In the ships stats I was given (really which I could thank them!) it lists several items i wondered about. . .

a) "Damage Chart-- C." I take it damage was not universal in the system? How many diffrent charts were there?</font>

The Damage Charts were sort of like hit location charts - which system did the shot hit. Chart C is for ships with warp engines aft (like most Federation and Klingon ships), B was for ships with warp engines amidships (like the Defiant or the Warbird) and A was for ships with the warp engines forward (like the Galor).

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">b) "Movement Point Ratio-- 6/1." The power it takes to move one space?</font>

Nearly. 6 power points to creat 1 movement point. 1 movement point could move you so many hexes.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">c) "Stress Charts-- D/F." Diffrent than the damage chart? What was it for or do?</font>

Which columns of a chart you rolled on for damage when performing violent manoruvers. Not used very much in my experience.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">d) "Firing Chart-- Y." The oposite of the damage chart?</font>

Each weapon had a firing chart which was basically the to hit probabilities at certain ranges. Y was the best (longest ranged and most accurate) firing chart.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">e) "Damage Modifiers-- +3(1-10) +2(11-17) +1(18-24)." No ideas at all what this could be!</font>

At ranges 1-10 the phaser does 3 more points of damage than were used to power it. So if you put in 5 points of power you could deliver 8 points of damage at those ranges.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">f) "Shield Point Ratio-- 1/4." One power for each 4pts protection?</font>

Yup.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">g) "Combat Efficiency: D--179.2 WDF--160.6" Again, no idea!</font>

Defence and Weapon Damage Factor. Ratings that allowed you to compare vessels to make 'fair fight' scenarios.

[reimero]

As I understand it, there was a "misunderstanding" between FASA and Paramount around the time Paramount released Star Trek: TNG. FASA had the RPG license and released a TNG First Season update. I don't know what happened, but Paramount didn't like it at all and revoked the license altogether.

As far as the charts are concerned, the way combat was supposed to work was that each ship's engines generated a certain amount of power. The captain (a PC) would give the order for the ship to do something fairly specific. The chief engineer would then allocate the power as he best saw fit according to the available power. A successful Engineering roll would enable him to eke out another point or 2 of power, a failure would cause the engines to become stressed, losing a point or 2 of power.

The helmsman and weapons/nav officer would then apply the points toward weapons and shields. Helm would pilot the ship and fire phasers, Weapons/Nav would control the shields and fire torpedoes. The science officer would control sensor locks (a to-hit bonus, I think) and the communications officer kept track of damage.

It's a pretty complicated way of doing things, but it also gave all the players something to do during combat, most of which involved making rolls.

It's also important to remember that this system was designed to mirror the way things often worked on the Enterprise:
(Kirk: Scotty, we need more power! Sulu, go to warp!
Scott: I kinna give 'er any more, Cap'n!
Spock: Sensors indicate another Klingon approaching, Captain.
Chekhov: Shields up, Kiptin?
Sulu: Aye, Captain, warp factor 3
Uhura: I'm receiving reports of casualties on deck 22)

[redwood973]

Thanks guys! I think I have a good idea of FASA now. Hum. . .kind of wish I had a chance to be part of a FASA session, to see how it compares to a LUG one.

FASA must have P/O'ed someone big time at P to have ST taken away! It sounds like FASA didn't have much to do with St:NG, so was it centered more on the Movies or TOS?

Thanks again guys (and a big Oh Thank-you! to Identity Crisis )!

[Eric R.]

Where to start where to start, while since you seem determined to get the long and short of it here goes

First off when talking about FASA and events you have to understand that it used a drasticlly differant method of dating than what we in the post-TNG era are use to. FASA had what was called the Refernce Stardate System, this had nothing to do with with the stardates mentioned in the TV/Movie Series but was a coherently applied method of dating. January 1, 2000 was expressed as 0/0001.1 the number to the left of the slash was the century 0 for 21st, 1 for 22nd, 2 for 23rd and 3 for 24th. The next two numbers was the year of the century, 1/20 would be read as 2120. The next two the month and the decimal as the date of the month.

This allowed a very strong timeline to be built with specific dates, problem now is that it is roughly 40 to 50 years out of sinque with the official dates. example TOS occured between refernce stardates 2/0704 and 2/1204. There is also only a 5 year gap between ST:TMP and ST:TOW. The backstory and founding of the Federation occured much more rapidly than what we have been accustomed too.

Another Improtant facet is that the Klingons and the Romulans both were portrayed very differantly than what we now know of them. Both were based on the various novels from the time mainly The Romulan Way by Diane Carry and The Final Reflection by John Ford.

Early FASA adventures focused on the TV era with a concentration on the Orions and follow ups to popular Trek original episodes later Adventure were Movie era and concentrated on mainly Covert Intelligence and Military themes, featuring even a Mutiny aboard a Starfleet vessel and how to run it as a narrator. Some of the best Adventures included; Denial of Destiny, Mines of Silka, Return to Axanar and Decision at Midnight.

Not to be left out is the Tiangle supplement and the Triangle Campiagn both dealing with an area of space were the interest of the ROmulans, Klingon and Feds came together amidest several Independant worlds and local powers. Many of incorporated this area in their LUG series as it is just to good to pass up for story potential.

The end came with the Next Generation first was the nearly useless Officiers manual which went way to far way to early. this was followed by the first season source book which IMHO is not that bad for such a work and showed promise what FASA could have done with the whole era if given a chance, even though it would have drasticaly needed to change its universe to do so.

[redwood973]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Eric R.:
First off when talking about FASA and events you have to understand that it used a drasticlly differant method of dating than what we in the post-TNG era are use to. FASA had what was called the Refernce Stardate System, this had nothing to do with with the stardates mentioned in the TV/Movie Series but was a coherently applied method of dating. January 1, 2000 was expressed as 0/0001.1 the number to the left of the slash was the century 0 for 21st, 1 for 22nd, 2 for 23rd and 3 for 24th. The next two numbers was the year of the century, 1/20 would be read as 2120. The next two the month and the decimal as the date of the month.

The end came with the Next Generation first was the nearly useless Officiers manual which went way to far way to early. this was followed by the first season source book. . .</font>

Hay! I like the date thing! Our game don't deal too much with stardates because none of us really understand it. But this could be used! Thanks!

I wondered what the "Officers Manual" was (see Franz Joseph in Star Trek Chat). I take it from the last part of the quote that FASA didn't make ST stuff past the first year of the Next Generation?

[Dan Stack]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Eric R.:

Another Improtant facet is that the Klingons and the Romulans both were portrayed very differantly than what we now know of them. Both were based on the various novels from the time mainly The Romulan Way by Diane Carry and The Final Reflection by John Ford.
</font>

One minor correction - the Romulans from FASA are actually quite different from The Romulan Way Romulans.

[Eric R.]

Yep, Dan your right but having seen both I still see some influences in both IMHO. There was a alot of "Inspiring" going on in them long lost days of the Wild Final Frontier before like any frontier the lawyers moved in and closed it down!

I like the stardate Referencing system myself and use it when ever I can. Roddenberry used a similur based system in the Next Generation dates with first number being 4 for the 24th century, followed by the season number and then the episode number but it showed its limits during the 6th (?) season of DS9 and is as far as I am concern worthless now.

Nothing followed the First season sourcebook but a 2nd and 3rd was planned (also a Star Trek V sourcebook) as while as Enterprise D deck planes (What part of these that were developed were used in the TNG officers Manual and are to some extent the best part of that work, though they were quite "interesting".)

[tonyg]

What will make things even more interesting will be the addtion of a new Star Trek RPG from Decipher. It will be written by the ex-LUG staff, and will incorporate much of the background material from LUG Trek, although with new game mechanics.

[mike]

A little off topic of this thread.

Dan - Did you have a FASA Trek Web site on ziplink? Is it back up.

Thanks

Mike

------------------
"Only Nixon can go to China" Spock

[Dan Stack]

Hmmm.. The FASA-Trek website. Yes, I did run one. I cancelled my ziplink account ages ago but the ISP apparently didn't get around to tearing down the website until a few weeks ago.

I still have all the files, but I hadn't bothered updating the website in ages - I pretty much lost interest in it after the LUG game came out - the website started before LUG even announced securing the Trek license, it was designed mainly as a resource for Grimjack's FASA-Trek list.

I suppose I could put it up in an "archive/never-to-be-updated" state as a subsite of my Icarus webpage. I'll have to see how much space it'll take up.

[tonyg]

redwood,

Actually the FASA-Paramount confict was much more that FASA upsetting PAramount. It was more of a two-way PO.

Roddenberry & Paramount were not pleased with the direction that the RPG had been going: FASA had been maiking the game more and more militartitic.

FASA was upset about liscening fees. Espeically since thier major competitor in the Trek field, Task Force Games, wasn't paying Paramount a dime for Star Fleet Battles and had thier own RPG planned-"Star Fleet Marines".

Thing came to a head over TNG. Since up until that point, FASA liscence covered all Star Trek. When TNG became a hit, Paramount decided to market it as a separate liscence-something that caught FASA off-guard.