System Vs. System

[Xguild]

Hey Guys

In the last few days I have been in search for a new RPG system and setting. I had a fairly good run with Alternity, however once my players dealt deep into the game mechanics we found that they were unbalanced and did not represent what skills and stats a particular character had. In fact it was voted out Unanmously by my group who meets 4 times a month rotating 4 different games. Currently we play Vampire: The Masquarade, 3rd Edition D&D, Aberrant and my fourth spot I hope will be filled with a Star Trek Setting.

I have the following three questions I would like players or Narrators to answer

1.) Do you feel that the d6 die system rolls you make during play represent what your characters skills are. For example in the D20 system you always roll a D20 + Skill and you must beat a DC appointed by the DM. This I feel does not represent well because the player has a chance of rolling a 1-20 which is too wide of roll and has more to do with luck than with the character the player is roleplaying. Does Star Trek: The Next Generation have the same problem?

2.) Rate the learning curve for Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1-10 and describe why you gave it the score you did

3.) Do you find that during play you must stop to look up rules often? Do you feel that the players loose interest as a result of the rules complexity?

Bonus Question for those who like to give their opinions. Of all the RPG rules you have player do you feel Star Trek: The Next Generation caught your interest because of the rules or the setting?

Answer some or all the questions, I'm just trying to get an idea of what this game runs like. I found out the hardway when I brought the Alternity game into my groups line up that poorly balanced rules really do mess up even the greatest story. My group loved the Alternity world I created but because of the poor rule system they could not stand to play it. I really don't want to repeat that.

[Paul]

Well, I'll go first...

1.) I feel that the ICON system is one of the smoother systems for skill and task resolution that I have come across. I like the D20 system, as it is a lot less complex than its predecessors (for DnD); the Storyteller system (Vampire, Mage, etc...) is OK, but a little unweildy IMO...ICON works quite well. The focus is more on roleplaying, anyway, so dice rolling is a perfunctory feature. The dice roll range of the d6 system is not too great, and the Drama Dice rule allows for the spectacular feats you see on-screen.

2.) I wold give t LUGTrek a learnability rating of 8 out of 10. Why? The character generation system is quite simple to start with, and then you can explore the rules and regulations at your own pace...the combat system is not as great as some others, but then, combat is not the primary focus of the game. Combat is more of a players expect to fight sometimes, so we'll make some rules for it system...but you don't really need combat rules if you're well prepared as Narrator...

3.) I don't find that I need to look up the rules too often. If you know your Trek universe well enough, then the rule book almost becomes an optional extra. All you really need are the Rewards tables once the game is commenced...everything else can be treated like an episode you might see on-screen - it happens because that's the way the scene was written.

Bonus.) I went for LUGTrek firstly because it's Star Trek...I grew into ICON not much after.

------------------
"Just think of it - a blind man, teaching an android how to paint? That's gotta be worth a couple of pages in somebody's book." - Riker to La Forge.

[REG]

1. No, it's your skill's level. That is shown in both Icon and in D20 (sorry, I have to discount WEG's D6).

2. Define "learning curve". Character advancement? It's more of a gradual improvement, not exponential. Granted the cost of improve a skill's level is increased by a margin but not so much. But with such a short level range (1-6), and most character can start off with a maximum skill level of 4 (specialization level at 5), they can begin with a professional veteran character (or just one who specializes in certain area of his career interest).

3. Only if you yourself need rules verification or definition of rarely-used skills. Other than that, a narrator basically should at least have some prior knowledge of the rules itself (a sweet bonus if you also have prior knowledge regarding the Star Trek universe), and use his own common sense judgment. In the superscience world of Star Trek, it helps to know what certain gadgets do, but most of the time they are simply technobabble so saying to make it sound like Star Trek tech is just enough to keep the game going.

Bonus Question: Both. Granted, the rulebook grab my attention for one reason: we haven't had any new Star Trek RPG since Paramount yanked the license from FASA nearly a decade ago. But I bought it with worries that the rules may be incompatible with the setting or complex (I have never liked d6-based system due to my experience with WEG's Star Wars). Thankfully, the LUG version made free of my worries. In fact, it makes it easier to immerse myself into the universe than I have with FASA version. And it's the only d6-based rule system I like.

------------------
Anyhoo, just some random thoughts...

[This message has been edited by REG (edited 01-21-2001).]

[Liquidator Queeg]

Originally posted by Xguild:
I have the following three questions I would like players or Narrators to answer

1.) Do you feel that the d6 die system rolls you make during play represent what your characters skills are. For example in the D20 system you always roll a D20 + Skill and you must beat a DC appointed by the DM. This I feel does not represent well because the player has a chance of rolling a 1-20 which is too wide of roll and has more to do with luck than with the character the player is roleplaying. Does Star Trek: The Next Generation have the same problem?

In ICON, a character's skill levels are just as important as a random die roll, IMHO. You can only roll from 1 to 6 on a d6 (obviously), and your skills range from 1 to 6--which seems prohibitive at first glance. I wouldn't even attempt to calculate any detailed "random chance/skill factor" success ratios--I'm pretty lousy with figures--but it seems pretty fair to me considering the Difficulty Number range of 3 to 15+. Also, as Paul mentioned, the Drama Die adds a nice element to help achieve the great feats shown in the television shows and films.

2.) Rate the learning curve for Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1-10 and describe why you gave it the score you did

If 1 is "Good" (easy to learn) and 10 is "Bad" (difficult to learn), I'd rate the LUG Trek game at a 2. Character creation is a breeze and you can develop unique, wide-ranging characters, or pinpoint specialists--it all depends on your "vision" of the character. The game rules themsleves are simple and don't interefere with the role-playing too much--in my opinion that is a good thing. Starship combat has frequently been maligned as "poorly detailed", but it's a perfect set of rules if you just want to highlight the actions of the characters, not play out intricate starship battles--that's what SPACEDOCK is for!

3.) Do you find that during play you must stop to look up rules often? Do you feel that the players loose interest as a result of the rules complexity?

I've only ever had to look up rules for starship combat (one time) and to re-familiarize myself with a few skills. My players have never complained about that.

Bonus Question for those who like to give their opinions. Of all the RPG rules you have player do you feel Star Trek: The Next Generation caught your interest because of the rules or the setting?

Well, the first book I ever came across for LUG Trek was The Price of Freedom sourcebook. I snagged it right away. So, I would have to say it was the setting that captured my interest. I had to wait for a week or so until my game shop re-stocked to snag the TNG core book. I must admit that it was fun trying to figure out the game mechanics just reading a sourcebook.

LQ


------------------
"No one controls me. I'm uncontrollable. The only one who can control me is me... and that's just barely possible!" -John Lennon

[qerlin]

I think the ICON system's pretty solid, compared to a lot of the others out there. I like that the characters don't advance super-quick, the rules are pretty straight forward. The only real complaint I had with the original core book was the layout was a little unweildy; something they fixed in the DS9 & TOS books.

One a scale from 1-10 (10 being the best/easiest), I'd put it around 7-8.

I purchased it more for the high production values; I like to see game books -- like the LUG Trek or the old WEG Star Wars -- that pul out the stops and give the players something nice for their $35. The system also seemed pretty solid. The Trek universe (sorry, guys) isn't a huge draw for me (though I've always like the ship designs.)

[Roxby]

I'll take a crack at that; but I'm sure there will be differing and perhaps better articulated opinons.

Originally posted by Xguild:

1.) Do you feel that the d6 die system rolls you make during play represent what your characters skills are. For example in the D20 system you always roll a D20 + Skill and you must beat a DC appointed by the DM. This I feel does not represent well because the player has a chance of rolling a 1-20 which is too wide of roll and has more to do with luck than with the character the player is roleplaying. Does Star Trek: The Next Generation have the same problem?

As I am sure you are already aware, 1-in-6 potential for success for tasks that are only moderately difficult, the drama die, asside. The d20 system attempts to compensate for this occaisionally with ranges of success; but I feel that the d6 system streamlines this to what is meant to be.

Do I think that the ROLLS represent my skills? Only in that you have a better chance the higher your base attributes are. The skills are represented by the number you get to ADD to the roll: the higher your skill the more likely you are to succeed. I think this is a very natural system, very representative of real life.

2.) Rate the learning curve for Star Trek: The Next Generation from 1-10 and describe why you gave it the score you did

With the exception of some of the more apocryphal rules that one runs into, I'd rate it a 4. The hardest part in the begining, for me, was character generation! I find the system very intuitive and flexible.

3.) Do you find that during play you must stop to look up rules often? Do you feel that the players loose interest as a result of the rules complexity?

As I said above, I found the system to be very intuitive and adaptable to your needs. When the action is too mundane, or alternately, too fast paced, you can eschew rolls as needed. The system allows you to tell your story; it doesn't constrain you.

Bonus Question for those who like to give their opinions. Of all the RPG rules you have player do you feel Star Trek: The Next Generation caught your interest because of the rules or the setting?

I became interested because of the setting, to be frank. (or Alice); but I must admit that since then I have fallen quite in love with the Icon system.


[QUTOE]
Answer some or all the questions, I'm just trying to get an idea of what this game runs like. I found out the hardway when I brought the Alternity game into my groups line up that poorly balanced rules really do mess up even the greatest story. My group loved the Alternity world I created but because of the poor rule system they could not stand to play it. I really don't want to repeat that.[/QUOTE]

I think that the Icon system, from a rules standpoint, allows you to balance your games as you see fit. You can assign appropriately high or low difficulty numbers, or rationalize many reasons for bonuses and penalties to the roll.

Now, I can't guarantee that your players won't mess up the best laid plans of mice and men. The one thing I can't control is their choices.

(see the Narrator woes thread in the Narrator's Ready Room)

Hope that helps.

[Sho-sa Kurita]

Originally posted by Xguild:


1.) Do you feel that the d6 die system rolls you make during play represent what your characters skills are?

2.) Rate the learning curve...

3.) Do you find that during play you must stop to look up rules often?

Bonus Question: Star Trek: The Next Generation caught your interest because of the rules or the setting?

Hi there. I'll take a quick stab here...

1) The d6 range is adequate. I would prefer a system with d10 and wider ranging skill values because I like more wiggle room for modifiers, but I do think the system is fairly representative of PC abilites.

2) With "10" being "easy to learn," I would give the game an "8." Any game with a basically universal task resolution system is pretty easy to learn. A downside for me is the starship combat section -- it's not difficult, but I don't feel it's very well fleshed out or explained. The character generation section isn't all that well organized, but it's pretty easy anyway, plus I love games with advantages/disadvantages (perks/flaws, etc...) for characters.

3) Look up rules during play? People do that? Rarely, and generally for the effects of various ads/disads (though hopefully the players will know this stuff).

Bonus) The setting was the draw IN THE STORE, but I'd have never bought it if the initial rules perusal didn't catch my interest. OK, I admit I'm a gaming AND Trek junkie, but the game IS worth having and playing.

Daniel -- out...

[This message has been edited by Sho-sa Kurita (edited 01-27-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Sho-sa Kurita (edited 01-27-2001).]