Jump to content

NickEast

Members
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by NickEast


  1. Well, I guess this turned into just another argument about semantics. There's nothing in that essay that outright proves me wrong. The only thing it proves is that sometimes someone may not be getting what I'm saying.

    Anyway, I concede. You win. Without a response from the designers, there's little point in giving feedback anyway. I guess shame on me for trying to provide feedback to make this game great. I don't know what I'm doing that makes people want to argue with me. But I'm tired and really don't want to keep arguing, least of all about the semantics of a piece of feedback on a couple of lines of text.

    I'm probably more pissed than I otherwise would be since I had a terrible day, but I want to get this over with. So I'm not going to keep arguing. It's done. I guess you're right and I'm wrong. We'll part ways here. It's probably for the best. I think it's also better for me to just spend my time, energy, and skills on my own homebrewed Stargate RPG, rather than making a futile attempt to influence someone else's vision.


  2. 56 minutes ago, Bahamut_A6M5 said:

    Seems we are coming to terms, though we are still struggling with some meanings.

    There's the issue. SG teams are designed to handle a range of problems with a common "theme". Basically, it could be said SG teams are "thematic" rather than "specialists". Exploration teams, for example, should be able to handle missions ranging from reconnaisance and scouting to first contacts, etc. Or medical teams should be able to deal with bullet wounds, blunt traumas, diseases, poisoning or lending humanitarian aid.

    Regarding this issue, I've re-read the chapter on SGC and SG teams organization from Stargate SG-1 RPG handbook and found nothing about SG teams having "specializations" at all, neither. Closest thing it mentions is, when discussing scientific teams composition, that a scientific team may swap mission specialists and borrow people from other teams, if possible, to match a mission profile. That has me wondering how it is possible for AEG, back then, and now Wyvern Games to trip into the same pitfall... Unless they haven't and NickEast's statement "Only SG-1 was a team of mixed disciplines, all other teams were more or less specialized (Marines, archaeologists, geologists, diplomats, etc.)." is inaccurate and the "lore error" in itself (because SG-2 or 4, as exploration teams as they are, should be also mixed disciplines. And SG-9 being a diplomatic team doesn't mean it's just diplomats; it also needs a range of disciplines such as Laws, Economics, Political Sciences or International Affairs, making it as multidisciplinar as SG-1 without being an exploration team).

    The reading also recalled a few interesting points. For example, scientific teams are often acompanied either by a combat or engineering team; this could explain SG-11 presence during the "archaeological" survey in P3X-888 without it being a scientific team. Or the fact Base Commander rarely changes a team's assignment, and only when the most dire circunstances happen, such as a team suffering severe casualties or the like. Even then, there's an exception: a team's original assignment is never changed if it's the only team performing that duty. So, unless new teams are added with certain assignments, teams such as SG-6 (search and rescue), SG-9 (diplomacy) or SG-11 (engineering) will keep their assignments even if reformed.

    Read the sections about "Team Assignments" (pages 40 to 45) and "Mission Profiles" (pages 57 to 61) of the original AEG RPG. Those clearly describe that teams have specific assignments, aka, diplomacy, exploration, covert ops, engineering, medical, scientific, and search and rescue, and that they rarely operate outside of those assignments. Mission Profiles are then the type of missions such teams usually undertake, with both chapters clearly stating that a Marine Combat Unit is rarely if ever assigned to perform a scientific research mission, and that such a team will rarely if ever have a civilian anthropologist. For example, the suggested personnel for a Diplomatic Ops team does not include a heavy weapons expert, or an engineer. Each team can have a "mission specialist" though who is described as having a single particular specialty, usually related to, as the term indicates, the missions the team is sent on. The one constant is that team commanders must have a military background, but must also possess skills and experience, and thus a degree, related to the team's assignment. Through all of this, SG-1 is the exception, because despite the fact that O'Neill is not a scientist or an engineer or a diplomat, the team is still sent on a variety of missions due to each of the four members having different specialties and experiences. Recall that there has been numerous discussions throughout the show that Daniel Jackson shouldn't really have been on a team like that, being a civilian and all, but was because of his front-line, first-hand experience dealing with the Goa'uld and any other alien culture a first-response, front-line team SG-1 had been dealing with.

    I'll reiterate that I never said each team can't have overlapping or a varied set of skills, or that there can't or shouldn't be multidisciplinary, or rather multi-assignment teams, for the players. But far out the majority of the actual teams as depicted on the shows have specific assignments except for SG-1. The "spirit" of the section of text I critiqued may not be wrong, and is not what I critique, but the precise wording and its interpretation is.


  3. You do know "science" is a very broad term, right? Astrophysics, archaeology, astronomy, biology, geology, they're all different, and mostly unrelated, sciences. SG-11 for example was an engineering team, until killed by Apophis ("Rules of Engagement"), and was later designated as an archaeological unit ("The First Ones"), and then back to engineering ("Enemy Mine"), each time having a different team composition. SG-9, after its disbandment in "The First Commandment", became a diplomatic team, which was sent to Latona ("The Sentinel") to establish diplomatic relationships in the hope of acquiring their Sentinel technology. The initial 9 teams were more likely to be focused on exploration, but as the program expanded, additional teams seemed to be assembled for more specialized missions, sometimes not even keeping the same team composition depending on mission requirements.

    That list what you have is a broad list, simply because there isn't enough information from the shows to precisely determine each team's goals. But from what we have seen, some teams have been sent on specific specialized missions. But the book's wording is simply not correct, or at the very least just too broad for all 25 teams.


  4. 8 hours ago, Bahamut_A6M5 said:

    SG-2, 4, 10, 14, 15 and 17 are exploration teams, like SG-1. Thus, they are interdisciplinary, as an exploration team is composed at least by a team commander, a heavy weapons expert, a lingual/cultural expert and a technical mission specialist.

    In fact, even other teams aren't as homogeneous as you seem to think they are. A diplomatic team (SG-9, for example) includes a team commander, a negotiator, a lingual/cultural expert and a mission specialist. Also, in this kind of teams, degrees in law, world affairs or economics are expected to be held by members (resulting in a diverse bunch of diplomats, economists and/or lawyers).

    Or take SG-7, a scientific team. It's made of a team commander, a head researcher and four mission specialists. The team commander in this type of team is expected to be military and to have a master degree in a physical or space science field. Researcher and mission specialists are expected to be experts in their fields and to have at least a professional accreditation; military background is preferred but not demanded on them.

    That's not the kind of interdisciplinary nature I was referring to. SG-1 was a mixed team of soldiers, an astrophysicist, an archaeologist/linguist, and an alien, which is also one part of what made it the flagship team. All other SG teams were specialized in one particular field of expertise, you had teams of archaeologists, teams of geologists, teams of linguists, teams of astronomers, teams of diplomats, and at least one team of Marines.

    The book states that "Each team has a military lead, a cultural anthropologist or archaeologist, a scientist, and a soldier. This allows each team to be a truly exploratory group, collaborating (usually!) with each other, and alien civilizations." which implies that every team was like SG-1, which they weren't. Pretty much every team had soldiers, it being a military program and all, but not every team had scientists, archaeologists, linguists, or cultural experts. And unlike Carter and McKay, which were a major exception, not every scientist can have every PhD. You wouldn't send SG-3 on a purely archaeological mission, unless the archaeological team needed additional security. And you wouldn't send scientific teams to unexplored planets without some backup. SG-1 though tackled many missions, whether diplomatic, scientific, military or exploratory, because each team member had the expertise (whether "realistic" or not, in terms of Carter being an engineer, astrophysicist, astronomer, pilot, and soldier).


  5. I've found some additional errors in the lore descriptions. It may not be important at this point, but I feel it should still be noted, the RPG supposedly being canon and all.

    When the stargate was discovered in 1928, no one knew what it was called. Some time later, at least as early as 1945 (or, well, 1938 if Stargate Origins should be believed), it was due to incorrect translations known only as a "Door to Heaven". It was only in 1994/5 that Daniel Jackson discovered it was correctly called a "stargate".

    When the stargate was brought to the United States in 1939, it wasn't stored in the Cheyenne Mountain Complex. The facility wasn't even built until 1961-1966. The producers used the same film set in "Torment of Tantalus", because they obviously couldn't move the whole gate prop somewhere else or completely redesign the set, but it was unlikely to have represented Cheyenne Mountain.

    Only SG-1 was a team of mixed disciplines, all other teams were more or less specialized (Marines, archaeologists, geologists, diplomats, etc.).

    Depending on when "Stargate Phoenix" takes place, the Asgard hadn't given us a lot of technology yet, certainly not any weapons. Some time after the episode "Disclosure", the Asgard installed new shields and transporters on the Prometheus, and replaced the hyperdrive only somewhere in late season 7 (at least after "Grace", since that episode clearly mentions the ship still had an Al'kesh hyperdrive, following the destroyed naquadria hyperdrive as seen in "Memento"). And the Asgard never actually shared any weapons technology until the final episode, when they installed the plasma beam weapons on the Odyssey. The railguns used aboard Prometheus and all its successors were of human design.


  6. I found out that West End Games were originally working on a Stargate SG-1 RPG using their D6 system in 1998, just before their bankruptcy. Needless to say, it was never finished. But the lead designer published what he had in 1999, and it's still accessible (here). It seems to be quite playable, especially when filling in missing bits using the other D6 material. What is missing are mostly the background lore, examples, and appendices (equipment lists, etc). It's quite an interesting read, and a nice piece of history.


  7. This is not a "hack" of D&D. It's a game designed entirely around the 5e SRD just like several others, so it can't just be ported over to other systems. It would also drastically increase the necessary work and playtesting, as no two systems are the same. And I have never heard of any (licensed) game being developed on multiple systems unless it was a separate iteration made by different designers.

    I'm not a huge fan of 5e either, and especially now I prefer it used Modiphius' 2d20 system (as used by Star Trek Adventures), but that's not possible as it's an in-house system without a public SRD.

    • Like 2

  8. The game follows canon (season 6), so will likely not feature anything that wasn't confirmed to be part of the Stargate Program (Rangers and dogs) on the shows, at least not as part of the core game. You can always homebrew those features, wait for someone else to homebrew and share it, or perhaps in time it will be added officially. Not a bad idea though, I kinda like it.

    • Like 1

  9. I too would like to see source books about the different parts of the franchise. However, as it stands now the RPG seems to focus on a specific new setting called "Stargate Phoenix" and serve as a "spin off" of the series. Originally, though I'm sure they're already changing some elements after feedback, the "Tau'ri" weren't even going to be included as a playable "race"/species it seems.

    So I guess how much of the franchise will be included depends on the success of the Kickstarter campaign, because more books/material means more work, which means more costs. Based on my experience with Kickstarter campaigns, I'm quite confident these things could become stretch goals.


  10. 1 hour ago, Bahamut_A6M5 said:

    On other topic, adventures around the SG-7? Wouldn't that be pretty boring? I mean, it's a scientific team. They are deployed to study alien devices or weird phenomena, while people at SG-1, 2, 4 or 10 gets all the fun: exploration.

    The original team is dead, there is nothing that says the new team has to have the exact same specialty. In my setting, SG-7 has just been newly assembled as a secondary to SG-1 (that is, a multi-focus team), hence why they are sent on the missions that my story centers around. That was also the point of me picking that team designation, as it was never seen nor heard from again throughout the rest of the series, so it contradicts nothing (though my plot may be very slightly contradictory)

    • Like 1

  11. The thing is, is this meant to be a "Stargate: Phoenix" RPG, a spinoff of the series, or an actual "Stargate" RPG? That should clarify things. Because usually when a TTRPG is developed based on an IP, it is meant to allow players to play within that IP's universe, with little restrictions other than what can fit in the books. The core rulebook usually explains the rules and provides character and adventure creation rules for the core elements of the series. Star Trek Adventures allows you to create Starfleet characters and ships to create stories like the shows, with supplements adding rules for other species. Star Wars allows you to play as Jedi, Sith, smugglers, soldiers, bounty hunters, etc. Everything you're used to in the shows/movies. The original Stargate RPG did the same, providing a breakdown of the story as it existed back then, describing the SGC, Goa'uld Empire, etc. Then it provided rules for all major species, Tau'ri, Jaffa, Tok'ra, Asgard, etc. It didn't restrict the kind of stories you could tell. It also provided character sheets based on all major characters, with supplements adding more NPCs based on each season that existed at that point.

    Based on what I read about "Phoenix", it's not something I'd be interested in. I want to create SG/AR teams, as cliche as that sounds but I imagine a lot of fans would want that too. I already have my own story that I wanted to write fan-fiction for, which is centered around SG-7 (since that team was neither seen nor heard from again after the original team was killed by Nirrti in "Singularity"), and it's also set during season 6. As SG teams, and Stargate Command, are such important aspects of the Stargate universe, I would think that and other canon material would have a higher priority than non-canon material designed just for the RPG. For example, Star Trek Adventures has a Living Campaign with a series of episodic stories taking place party in the TOS era and mainly in 2171 (S3/4 of DS9), based around four pre-designed starships and is set in a region of space designed specifically for the game. Yet the rules are not restricted just to those stories, everyone can still create any other kind of Star Trek story, even including canon material like the Enterprise or DS9 and their crew, set in any of the main eras.

    • Like 1

  12. According to the interview, all playable species will be alien and not Tau'ri. Why have you chosen this exactly? Because I find that kind of limiting, especially considering the Stargate franchise is about us Earthlings getting out there. Having variation by being able to play as different alien species is of course very good, but why remove the most important human race from the franchise? Granted, if you can play as a non-Earth human and if there are rules for Earth equipment like weapons and gadgets, then there shouldn't be a problem to create Tau'ri characters, but it still seems very odd for a Stargate game. That's almost like saying you can't play a human in Star Wars or as Starfleet in Star Trek.

    • Like 2

  13. The thing is, Stargate is going to use the 5e system. If that's the case, then the only way to support those kinds of roles like Carter is to use multiclassing. If any of the class, skill, and ability mechanics change, then it's not 5e anymore, but a different system. Does that mean they have to stick to the 5e mechanics 100%, I don't know. Maybe not. But it was probably a conscious choice to use 5e. And I for one think they should. Otherwise why use it in the first place and not just create a new system, or just create a setting supplement for universal systems like FATE or Savage Worlds? I backed The Spy Game on Kickstarter, which also uses 5e, and they explicitly stated that they chose 5e and they will stick to it. They're not going to change the mechanics, because otherwise choosing 5e would be pointless and would require more work.

    But of course that's just my opinion 😄

    • Like 1
    • Indeed 1

  14. 2 hours ago, GreatLordD said:

    Have you taken the time to consider for small companies having someone just to work on the hype train is taking the cost of at least one employee that could be making the game and diverting it, to post all the time. Whereas having the playtester post positive reviews that are genuine is probably better marketing, then the million of posts from the company that just feel like they are shouting look at us.

    I rather the company devote the resources needed to making the game and getting the rules and the final product worked out. I mean I rather have a book in the end that has good production quality, than good marketing pitch but get a product that has spelling mistakes, rules that are difficult to follow or understand.

    Many small indie companies/teams still have (at least) 8 hours/day communication with the community, without it hurting their work. I'm part of a several of such communities (some which only have one or two-man teams) and the level of transparency helps in fostering a helpful and excited community.

    In general I myself am quite forgiving. However, this isn't just a small team working on their own game. They are using the Stargate IP. And based on MGM's track record, the lack of any sort of communication about anything Stargate-related makes me very suspicious and very uncertain whether I would want to spend my hard-earned money on supporting them. Now, I know MGM is not directly involved, but that has happened before and the history of Stargate in (video) gaming speaks for itself.

    But, maybe they're keeping it under wraps until the Kickstarter campaign, so that's why I didn't specifically mention anything.


  15. 3 hours ago, GreatLordD said:

    Well D&D does race and class. So race would be self evident for what that would do in a stargate game. But classes are not clear cut in stargate. I mean Sam Carter is a scientist but is also a soldier so is that going to be multitasking. 

    Or do  have you class as the basic role you fulfil in the team, which give you basic abilities in line with that role. But then you have additional points to spend on buying secondary abilities. So you could play as the archaeologist of the group but because of some of the more treacherous areas you been doing digs in, you pointed out to be able to handle guns for your own defense and thus become more rounded out.

    Or do you double down on being uber geek?

    D&D supports multiclassing. The original Spycraft-based Stargate RPG from Alderac used that to represent Carter.


  16. 2 hours ago, GreatLordD said:

    The series was never consistent in its handling of Zat depiction. Like the disintegration act was really only seen if they needed in the episode to disappear bodies and that from the first episode you saw them be used afterwards it barely mentioned. The kill shot is barely used, they are used primarily for their stun effect but it never established is getting hit a second time while stunned is what kills you.

    Or is there a duration effect, so after 5 minutes, another shot  just stuns the person in question? 

    But that is based on the show.

    How do you translate that into a game.

    To make it fair even those things could fire off shots like mad. One shot per turn. I think it should be a roll to see if you hit. Cause in D&D armour class takes into account  weather the opponent is potentially dodging the blow or can twist in such a way the blow doesn't land true. 

    I think after being hit. It should be a con save to see if you can recover from the effects of the shot, unless there a tech or race immunity. 

    The Zat was pretty consistent throughout the show. They eventually just dropped the "third shot disintegrates" feature because they felt it was too cheesy and/or OP. But it has been used very frequently to kill, it's just that it wasn't ever necessary to actually show that the people shot by it were actually dead, the story just moved on. Later in the show, most action shots happen very quickly, but you can hear Zats firing twice in rapid succession on many occasions.

    I always imagined that Zats work like tasers. When shot, they, at the very least, electrocute the target, which could have a stun effect and obviously be quite painful. When shot they leave a kind of residual energy (marked by the electrical discharge you see when someone or something is shot). That energy dissipates over a relatively short period of time. As long as that residual energy is present, a second shot could "overload" the target's nervous system and brain, and kill them instantly. With the "third shot" it could potentially be that the energy discharges so that the target's molecules, or rather atoms, are pulled apart, which disintegrates the target completely (like a Star Trek phaser at full power). If too much time passes, the energy dissipates and a shot would just "tase" the target again.


  17. Welcome!

    While not done for RPGs, I did once made a 3D Stargate simply by printing it out on paper, cutting it out and gluing layers together, using what is known as "3D foam pads", a kind of foam with adhesive on both sides, to add thickness. Then I just used LEGO to build the ramp and put it upright. It's very cheap, but still looks pretty good. I also included an iris and the event horizon that I could fit inside easily enough.


  18. On 10/4/2019 at 9:50 PM, Kilrex said:

    I would like to see classes having a limited effect on the types of characters created. I don't like systems where certain classes are needed to have a balanced group. I would prefer classes to grant bonuses for certain things rather than having exclusive uses of certain skills. Like scientists getting better checks at figuring out Goa'uld tech, linguists getting better checks to figure out new languages, fighters at fighting, etc.

    If this is just another d20 Modern clone, I will be saddened but still play it. The old AEG version was an okay game. There was nothing special to really set it apart. 

    AFAIK, 5e is very different from its predecessors. This version of a Stargate RPG simply cannot be a d20 Modern clone, because d20 Modern is based on 3e. In vanilla 5e, every character has the same fixed list of skills. The skill level depends on the abilities, which in turn can have racial (species) bonuses. Classes determine which skills someone is "proficient" in, which adds an additional bonus.


  19. I've made my server somewhat ready. Though I'm a little apprehensive to just put the invite here, depending on what the rules are. Maybe an Admin can give their blessing, just to be on the safe side.

    EDIT: Well, as long as it's not going to cause a problem, here's the invite: https://discord.gg/GdnWurv

    Feel free to join me, but obviously there isn't much to do yet without having the rules. I'm at present working on Star Trek Adventures at the moment, implementing it in a VTT. But there's room for discussing Stargate, Star Trek, or RPGs in general.


  20. Perhaps a Strength save rather than Dex, because the sheer force of the impact would knock someone down, so having a stronger footing (like a Jaffa) would allow them to remain standing. Standard kevlar is not worse than no armor, but it doesn't help much either. And later on, it is assumed that standard kevlar was replaced with a new type of material that does protect against a staff weapon's damage (but as demonstrated by Sgt. Siler, the blast still knocks you across the room).

    Armor degrading does happen IRL, but I believe it could add more complexity to tracking armor and health if not handled well. Perhaps a kind of "resistance" against damage (e.g. amount reduced from total damage) that decreases with certain hits, until 0 or a base AC bonus or something. But that's beyond the scope of the topic on staff weapons. I think weapons and armor should be balanced between screen accuracy and game balance. I agree that both staffs and zats are rather difficult to balance for a game, due to how different they can work between scenes/episodes, and how OP they can be.


  21. Based on what I know from D&D 5e, I think staff weapons should have a relatively short-medium effective range, with penalties beyond that (don't know if disadvantage is enough though, but maybe it is). A hit should definitely cause a knockdown, damage depends on how weapons overall do damage and how it can be mitigated with armor and dodging. As a melee weapon it has also proven to be effective, so in close range/within reach it should be usable as such. In either case, it's obviously a two-handed weapon. I think there's a good balance between being inaccurate and causing a lot of damage, and the ability to dodge at medium to long range.


  22. I'm not sure if people already are in Discord servers, or if they are at all interested, but I have a proposition:

    Some time ago I got together with a few people in a Discord server about creating a world collaboratively and create RPG adventures for us to play in that world. Not much has come from that (yet), but based on recent developments there may still be use for the server as a whole. So now I had the idea of reorganizing the server for games I'd like to play, and anyone interested in joining me. This includes Stargate, Star Trek, and perhaps D&D 5e (in addition to the collaborative world).

    So my question to everyone here, especially those that are new to RPGs or still just an early beginner, if you're interested in joining me, feel free to ask. Right now I'm only gauging interest from here and on GateWorld to try and get more Stargate (and perhaps Star Trek) fans together.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...