Friday, June 23, 2006
RPG brainstorming, part two
While I was reading through the Star Wars core book from WEG and skimming through the Star Wars: Game Master's Handbook, I started to think a bit about breaking out that old game and giving it a whirl. Of course, talking to a friend in TABS who is a huge Star Wars fanatic and who is keen on trying out an RPG helped to get me a little excited about running Star Wars. When I mentioned the idea to Jacquie, she even said she might be interested in playing if I ran it.
There are certainly a lot of reasons to run Star Wars. I even briefly considered the idea of running the Darkstryder campaign, but once I started leafing through the books, I realized the campaign is far too massive in scope (imagine every player running three characters -- not simultaneously, of course, but it sill seems like a lot).
Reasons against running it would include the rules. The dice pool, as I recall, seemed to slow things down a fair bit back in the old days. And back then, we were using the simpler 1st Edition rules instead of the Revised 2nd Edition rules (which is what I was reading and which has many more rules and options).
Still, I really like the idea of some cinematic space opera action. I almost think that the upcoming Star Wars: Legacy comic might be good fodder for a very different type of Star Wars game. Since Legacy is set a long time after the movies, the galaxy has changed drastically, but it also opens up character options that aren't there in the traditional Star Wars campaign eras. For instance, apparently the Sith are much more common (read: there's more than two) in Legacy. There are also Jedi, the remnants of the Imperials and some other things, as well.
I've yet to pick up the #0 issue, but from what I've read about the comic, it sounds inspiring. :)
There are certainly a lot of reasons to run Star Wars. I even briefly considered the idea of running the Darkstryder campaign, but once I started leafing through the books, I realized the campaign is far too massive in scope (imagine every player running three characters -- not simultaneously, of course, but it sill seems like a lot).
Reasons against running it would include the rules. The dice pool, as I recall, seemed to slow things down a fair bit back in the old days. And back then, we were using the simpler 1st Edition rules instead of the Revised 2nd Edition rules (which is what I was reading and which has many more rules and options).
Still, I really like the idea of some cinematic space opera action. I almost think that the upcoming Star Wars: Legacy comic might be good fodder for a very different type of Star Wars game. Since Legacy is set a long time after the movies, the galaxy has changed drastically, but it also opens up character options that aren't there in the traditional Star Wars campaign eras. For instance, apparently the Sith are much more common (read: there's more than two) in Legacy. There are also Jedi, the remnants of the Imperials and some other things, as well.
I've yet to pick up the #0 issue, but from what I've read about the comic, it sounds inspiring. :)
// posted by Chris @ 11:49 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Hey,
Commenting on your Brainstorming Pt. 1, I think that the Angels vs. Demons is a good idea. In fact, wouldn't a Buffy the Vampire Slayer be a good kinda idea, except that there could be like 'the slayer' and some 'demon' hunters, and maybe the 'watcher'...
I'm kinda makin' my own game here, but why not?
But, do you want to start a short game, or another campaign? That's the question.
Commenting on your Brainstorming Pt. 1, I think that the Angels vs. Demons is a good idea. In fact, wouldn't a Buffy the Vampire Slayer be a good kinda idea, except that there could be like 'the slayer' and some 'demon' hunters, and maybe the 'watcher'...
I'm kinda makin' my own game here, but why not?
But, do you want to start a short game, or another campaign? That's the question.
Heheh. My guess is that with some rules tweaking (and, of course, the acquisition of said rules), the B:tVS RPG could probably be used for this. Strip out the Slayer fluff and I think it could certainly work.
If we actually run with any of these ideas, I think it would be best to start with a small story arc and go from there. If the game turns out only to be worth a handful of sessions, no big deal -- we play maybe four to six sessions and it's over with. If people really like it, we could continue it after the story is finished.
If we actually run with any of these ideas, I think it would be best to start with a small story arc and go from there. If the game turns out only to be worth a handful of sessions, no big deal -- we play maybe four to six sessions and it's over with. If people really like it, we could continue it after the story is finished.
Honestly, what I think has killed our previous Star Wars games was a lack of focus amongst the characters.
Everyone had their own goals, ideals and codes which is all well and good but they always seemed to conflict. The Jedi seeking enlightenment, the Smuggler seeking to line his pockets and everyone else just off doing their own thing.
If you're going to run a game that involves Jedi then everyone should either be a Jedi or have some sort of reason to associate with the Jedi. Otherwise their code pretty much puts them at odds with the various other scoundrel and nere-do-wells that people insist on playing in these games.
If you're going to run a Smuggler based game then everyone should have some reason to be involved in the smuggling trade. Think Firefly for a good example of how that could play out.
God forbid, if you're running a Rebellion campaign then everyone should either start as part of the Rebellion or have very good reason to want to join them. And no that does not mean force the players to join because they'll be wiped out by the Empire if they don't. We've tried that in the past, twice so far. It hasn't worked.
Otherwise I see no reason that this game can't work.
Everyone had their own goals, ideals and codes which is all well and good but they always seemed to conflict. The Jedi seeking enlightenment, the Smuggler seeking to line his pockets and everyone else just off doing their own thing.
If you're going to run a game that involves Jedi then everyone should either be a Jedi or have some sort of reason to associate with the Jedi. Otherwise their code pretty much puts them at odds with the various other scoundrel and nere-do-wells that people insist on playing in these games.
If you're going to run a Smuggler based game then everyone should have some reason to be involved in the smuggling trade. Think Firefly for a good example of how that could play out.
God forbid, if you're running a Rebellion campaign then everyone should either start as part of the Rebellion or have very good reason to want to join them. And no that does not mean force the players to join because they'll be wiped out by the Empire if they don't. We've tried that in the past, twice so far. It hasn't worked.
Otherwise I see no reason that this game can't work.
# posted by 
: 6/26/2006 10:07 AM
: 6/26/2006 10:07 AM
LoS... Granted. I don't think that's something limited to our SW games, though. The players need to have a reason to work together, and too often they end up making conflicting character types. I think the original Greyhawk campaign troupe was a good example of this. We had a paladin on one end of the spectrum and a barely-Chaotic Neutral thief on the other end.
Hmm... Now that I think about it, I think a good portion of the unnecessary conflicts in our games have revolved around Steve. :P
While some character conflicts can bring some nice drama to a story, having absolutely no reason to want to work together isn't good. Part of our problem in the past is that characters have been made in a vaccuum, whereas the players and the GM should sit down to discuss what types of characters are needed and how everyone can make characters that will fit in with the rest of the group.
Doing that should eliminate the types of groups that don't make any sense.
Hmm... Now that I think about it, I think a good portion of the unnecessary conflicts in our games have revolved around Steve. :P
While some character conflicts can bring some nice drama to a story, having absolutely no reason to want to work together isn't good. Part of our problem in the past is that characters have been made in a vaccuum, whereas the players and the GM should sit down to discuss what types of characters are needed and how everyone can make characters that will fit in with the rest of the group.
Doing that should eliminate the types of groups that don't make any sense.
Yeah, explain to me how I always managed to end up playing the honour bound good-guy when Steve played the chaotic, self serving rogue?
# posted by : 6/26/2006 11:00 AM
: 6/26/2006 11:00 AM
I think we both know the answer to that one. Steve likes loners who hate authority and are rather anarchistic. When the Greyhawk campaign started and I said it would have a focus on "heroes," he still made his typical character and you actually did what I asked.
Post a Comment
<< Home
Number of visitors since Jan. 7, 2004:
