Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bahamut_A6M5 last won the day on September 14

Bahamut_A6M5 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Glad to hear about that choice. I don't know how you've structured the races but, perhaps, tau'ri could be the base template for humans (as the goa'uld took slaves from Earth to populate their domains beyond the stars) and create other near-humans* from that point. Also, as we are talking about races, is some thought in the team about including reetou or reol? * It's the term used in Stargate SG-1 RPG for those humans evolved in other planets but with different social, scientific, technological and/or biological evolution.
  2. I am into the "need tau'ri" side too. We are talking about the Fifth Race, the "second advent" of the alterans. Its hard to imagine Stargate without having Earthlings messing galaxies around, bringing bad guys down and acting as the "glue" for unlikely alliances (jaffas - Tok'ra, for example). 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.
  3. With a fairly generic class design, there wouldn't be the need for classes for non-humans, at least basic classes. For example, soldier could be used for fighting elements regardless race (or there could be a fighter/warrior sort of difference, like in 3.x, to distinguish between people like earthlings, satedans or genii from more "primitive" soldiers like jaffas or cimmerians). I would also advocate for a balance combat/non-combat in each class, rather than having combat and non-combat classes. For example, scientists with limited combat abilities but wide range of features/skills versus soldiers with high combat abilities but limited features/skills. That way, every class could provide support in either situation. The option for multiclassing seems fine to me, as that lets players choose between versatility or specialization for their characters. On a more tongue-in-cheek sidenote, according to Stargate SG-1 RPG handbook, Jackson isn't multiclass (he's "pure" scientist from low to high levels) and Carter multiclasses as pointman/scientist at mid levels and as pointman/scientist/officer at high levels
  4. Players and/or game masters. I know it may seem stupid asking this in a Stargate RPG forum, but I am curious about how many people here knew about SG-1 RPG and how many played (or still play) it. In my case, I couldn't convince my group to play SG-1 (most group fellows were reluctant to learn about new systems and settings) so I ended playing SG-1 in occasional "missions" via Internet, jumping from character to character as masters/players came and went. But I always hoped to have played it on a more regular basis. How about you, folks?
  5. It's not like we are suggesting an exactly canon zat; I don't recall many people in the show resisting neither effect. Also, if you just go by giving the zat damage and a stun chance, then it isn't different than an intar.
  6. Considering they are building the game upon D&D 5 SRD, I'd bet for a class system similar to that edition. Classes probably will be more focused on a modern setting, very much like those used in AEG's Stargate SG-1 (built upon D&D 3 SRD): soldiers, scientifists,...
  7. Keep in mind it's a wraith super hiveship, not a regular one, we are talking about. I'd say it's a closed match; the ZPM fueled hiveship would be a challenge for Ori ships, which aren't as advanced as the Aurora class ships alterans used during the Wraith War. Also, in space combat, Prior abilities aren't as useful in ship-to-ship engagements. They could be moderately helpful if managed to board the hiveship and yet wraith regenerative powers might be able to withstand the Ori disease. And there's a chance the Prior might end being wraith snack
  8. Welcome. As already pointed out, Roll20 is a good place to check if you have no other people or you suffer from availability issues. There are also commercial platforms (such as Fantasy Grounds) or good, ol' forums where people still gather for some roleplaying. Sadly, roleplaying still seems like a very niche hobby and society frowns upon it because it's not mainstream entertainment (no matter which country you are).
  9. Your feedback is also welcome, Sirwalkman. I understand what you were trying to do but, from a design viewpoint, the job is making things accesible and/or easier to use rather than engaging in a wits battle trying to outsmart exploiters. With all this talk about zats, I remembered a stereotypical spell from D&D: Disintegrate. In 3.x, that spell was handled through a ranged touch attack, a save against a death effect if the attack roll was successful and, even in the case of saving, target still suffered damage. It was quite balanced, first requiring for a successful attack (subject to standard to-hit modifiers) to land on target, then having a resistible deadly effect and a possible damaging effect on passing the save. With zats, we have a similar situation. A successful attack roll, subject to usual modifiers, is required first; the weapon has a resistible effect (stun/unconsciousness from the first shot) that could act as a requisite for the effect on a second shot, that should also be resistible. The issue here should be to determine how the effects may be delivered; if by damage which modifies the save DC or having a fixed DC for just being hit by the discharge or even modify the DC based on range (lesser DC the farther the target is to the shooter). Being stunned first by a zat discharge acting as a trigger for the death effect from second shots, how long that susceptibility state should last,... These kind of things. Those situations you suggest are possibilities that might happen, regardless how you make a zat gun work. But we can't go into trying to solve such issues rules-side. Such happenings should be dealt by gaming groups as circunstances arise ("GM, we want to discuss something. We are getting bored from having our characters being killed by zat wielding parties"). Let's remember the "spirit" of a zat gun isn't being a battlefield-ready killing weapon. Jaffas already have Ma'Toks for that; zats are provided as sidearms and ways for jaffas to deal with people using non-lethal force. A full party of jaffas armed with zats should be viewed by players as an attempt on capturing their characters alive, not as some poor way of killing them through stun-death combos. Still, zats utility could be controlled through the use of energy cells with limited amount of shots before running out. That way, players arming their characters with zats should manage the available number of shots; limited number of shots might deter a player from using too many "two shots to kill" attempts. Or even a third shot for disintegrating a corpse. Not to mention wasting a combat round on firing a "third" zat discharge to disintegrate a dead body isn't a very sound tactical decission
  10. I don't see the zat as "unwieldly"; it's a sidearm no bigger than a handgun. I'd rather suggest zat being treated as a ranged weapon with a very short basic range, so it couldn't be fired at same distances as other weapons but still share standard to-hit modifiers for ranged attacks. Also, attacking with a zat should be just an action; it's not like you are using a sniper rifle. Regarding zats overloading control pads, keyboards, or the like, it could also be handled giving it electric type damage so zats could be used as a standard weapon for breaking items. For the disintegration effect, as target is already dead, it's just a matter of having available a body for "resurrecting" her (a goa'uld sarcophagus or other technologies). Thus, making the disintegrating shot more powerful makes no sense. Supposedly, zat effects are cumulative as target gets her atoms more excited with each successive shot. Also, this effect is just a plot device for not having actors lying around posing as corpses XD Stun and death effects are the key elements here and they should be "handled with care".
  11. Tal ma'te, fellow explorers. I'll try to keep it short. Long time RPG player (both in consoles/PC and tabletop), I started into this hobby with MERP (Middle Earth Role Play), although the discovery of Cyberpunk 2020 sent me into the scifi "deviant" path of roleplaying. However, as those two games influenced me, I alterned both fantasy and scifi: D&D, Stormbringer, Shadowrun, Star Wars,... Stargate SG-1 (yes, AEG's roleplaying game based on d20 System). Okay, I must admit I spent most of my roleplaying time game mastering, but don't keep that in mind I am happy to help other Stargate fans to develop this project, be it as a tester or by providing suggestions. PS: I excuse myself if, some times, I might seem too assertive in my posts. I don't mean to be forceful but I can be quite eager when talking about topics I am interested in.
  12. First, shots should be made in succession in order for the stun, death and disintegration effects to happen. So, if there's more than 1 round between shots, the chain is restarted. Example: Round 1: O'Neill fires a zat against a Serpent Guard. The jaffa fails the save and is stunned. Round 2: A new Serpent Guard appears. O'Neill fires at the new target, who must save against stun. Round 3: O'Neill shoots again at the first target. Because the first jaffa hasn't been shot in consecutive rounds, he must save against stun again, rather than death. Round 4: O'Neill fires again at the first Serpent Guard. Now, he must save against death. Round 5: Having killed the first jaffa, O'Neill shoots the second jaffa, who must save against stun because more than 1 round has passed since being shot for first time. Regarding mechanics, a zat target should made Constitution saves with a DC 10+damage dealt (giving just an idea) when shot and damaged.
  • Create New...