Okay, so I missed my scheduled update. But, I have a good reason. I'll just chalk it up to medical... well, I wouldn't go as far as to say 'emergency,' but yeah, that. So, with that out of the way, I must also explain that there will be no Saturday post, as scheduled, because I start a six-day shoot on Saturday, and I will not be hosting my game on Friday in order to get enough sleep for my first day on a new show. On to the content!
The Serenity Roleplaying Game was one of the first roleplaying books I picked up, during my early years of high school. Before that, it had mainly been just DragonQuest and home-brew systems. So, having never really picked up another book, I was overwhelmed with new ideas. After playing it for a year or two, I came to find things about the system that were simply not designed well.
First of all, the system progress your skills and attributes by assigning a die value (d6, d8, d10, etc.). Whenever you test a skill, you roll the dice for the associated attribute and the skill (or specialty). Higher ranked character rolls up to four dice at one time, and it makes you feel cool, until you roll all 2's. The problem is that you hardly, if at all, increase your minimum roll. Sure, you're maximum increases by two with every rank, but it only increases your average die result by one. For example, if you have a d6 in Guns and a d8 in Agility (which are the two stats used for shooting a firearm), your minimum roll is 2 and your maximum roll is 14. If you take the average of each die, you get 3.5 for the d6, and 4.5 for the d8. That means your average roll is an 8. If you raise you ability with Guns (which, in this system, requires you to take a Specialty to get past d6, so lets say Assault Rifles at d8) to d8, than your new average is 9 (4.5+4.5), and your minimum roll is the exact same.
The reason it bothers me is that even with maximum ranks in a skill specialty and an attribute, you can still roll depressingly low. There are no flat bonuses, and thus your minimum roll is equal to the number of dice you throw. Mostly, this just sounds like math, but when playing this game you don't ever get the sense that your character is gaining any mastery over a talent, only becoming more lucky.
Another thing that is problematic is the combat system. To this day, I still do not know how to properly gauge how difficult one shot is from another. It has a very "make it up as you go" feel, which is fine in roleplaying games, but I believe that the combat system should be solid and defined, as it is the place where players often get the most ambitious in regards to what they want to do. Your weapon damage is also assigned a die roll. This means you may roll the maximum on your attack dice, and still only do one damage. Its just... frustrating.
Another feature I found bothersome were some of the Assets and Complications. At first glance, they seem like a great way to flesh out a character on paper, instead of just in the imagination. However, some of the Assets and Complications have no rule context, and even say "This is a roleplaying Asset/Complication." I find that silly. If there is no game mechanic behind it, don't only have it available as a game mechanic. Here's an example: Overconfident (a minor Complication) say, under the Penalty section, "You know that you're up for any challenge. You'll run, not walk, into deadly altercations. You'' pick a fight even when you're outnumbered. You'll bet all the credits you habe on a single throw of dice. You'll risk attempting a dangerous action even if you're not the least bit skilled at it." And that's it. Here's my beef with this: if I want to play a cocky, overconfident character, I will play a cocky, overconfident character. I don't need the rulebook to tell me what that is, or how my character is cocky and overconfident. Now, if this imposed some sort of in-game mechanic, then fine, but it doesn't. It simply details and exacts how you must play overconfident. Does this mean, if I don't have this Complication, I can't bet all my credits on a single throw of dice? When these questions arrise, there is something present that can simply be removed.
The eventual reason my group and I decided to drop this system was because game-mastering in the Serenity/Firefly universe is actually really boring if your players are just keen on "keep on flyin'." You go from Heist A to Courier Job A to Heist B, and then occasionally throw in Reavers, because its basically the only villain that you cannot negotiate with. When I tried to steer them towards an overarching plot, they just pulled a Crazy Ivan and searched for Courier Job B. It got repetitive. My group, in particular, insisted on decking out their Firefly-class ship with as much guns as possible - which is a common desire for roleplayers, but that, too, took away from the concept.
Don't get me wrong, I love the universe, and if the show were still on, I'd be watching it consistently. Sadly, unless you have a very specific group, willing to obey the parameters of the world, it makes much better television than weekly game.
In conclusion, I actually found some use for the rank-are-dice idea, but it needs flat bonuses or you never feel like your improving. As for my Star Trek home-brew system, I decided that the Ability will have a die value, and the Specialty adds a flat bonus. It makes the Specialty feel more, well, special. My final thoughts are that this system, and it successor the Battlestar Galactica Roleplaying Game (which improves in some areas), are not that great.
No comments:
Post a Comment