review: Serenity

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

reference: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1173

[The Jade Knight]

Re-proofread, to pick up a few things I missed first time around.

FYI:  The blurb has "license" misspelled.  I don't know how to edit that.


I also don't see an Admin section where I can find "approved articles".  I just see a general "Articles" link.


Lastly, the phrase "Anglo or Chinese" bothers me.  Should I change it to "English or Chinese" or "Anglo or Sino"?  Or is it a specific game/show term?

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

it was a game term... but you can change it to anglo or sino if you want...

[The Jade Knight]

If it's a game term I'll leave it.

[Fellfrosch]

Explain this to me: how is replacing one die with six make a game simpler?

[Entsuropi]

It's easier in one way since you merely have to remember 'I roll 1D4 for that stat' rather than 'I roll 1D20 plus 4 for that stat'.

It's not much easier, but there you go. And that bit about being proud of not using a D20 just seems like trying to cultivate indie cred.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

A lot of folks in the game industry feel burned by Wizards. This is their way of getting them back.

[Fellfrosch]

I understand their motivations, I just don't understand how not using a d20 is getting them back. "Take this Wizards! Where's your d20 now?"

[42]

There is the issue that Wizards just doesn't care. They have the Dungeons and Dragons license and thus will control the majority of role-players unless something Earth shatterinng happens. Like every Dungeons and Dragons book ever made suddenly going up in smoke, and even then it probably wouldn't kill them.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I think its more like, if we make a different game, then people who arent happy with D20 might buy it. Its not a bad thought process either, as long as the mechanics work. Is d4-d12 the best way to go... who knows? But the system while basic will do its job.

Are there a lot of folks who dont like d20, well Im one of those people. And its not actually the mechanics I dont like. I love how Modern was implemented for instance. But I also like to experiment with other stuff.
I like the new Gurps for instance, hero's neat, and the Original Call of Cthulu is nice too.

Im just not sold on Dungeons and Drangons 3.5 or 3e

It just seems kind of clunky to me.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

having said that Serenity isnt spectacular.

But then again I didnt think that Decipher did its liscences very well either... both Star Trek and LOTR.
And Neither did Wizards. Star Wars was a mess.
Farscape actually looked good, and Mongoose did a good job with B5, but mainly games based on movies suck.

[Entsuropi]

I still like the LoTR stuff but... the system sucked.  And ultimately I feel that all of these properties suffer from the same problem: they can only show what has already been shown. Nothing new, nothing a die hard fan (ie, someone who is going to buy the book) doesn't already know.

But I did feel LoTR made every location, even isolated little hills, seem like massively interesting locations filled with adventure and danger. Eberron isn't quite managing that for me. The 'locations' chapter just felt a little too mundane. Still, i'd probably run it over LoTR just because of system issues, I do actually like the world, it's easier to think up a plot and i'd feel less guilty when the players assassinate someone important.

[Fellfrosch]

I think that the lack of freedom in a licensed property is one of the biggest problems that movie-based games have. When I play a game in my own world, or a game-specific world like Eberron, I can do whatever I want--I can go anywhere, make any alliances, etc. If I tried to o that in Star Trek, I'd run up against a wall of canon and be forced to either deviate from it or do something else.

(I actually think that's a problem even with game settings, and I've complained about it with Rifts in past articles. Still, though, the only trade-off is to completely make up your own world, which is a lot of work that many GMs don't want to do. You have to sacrifice a level of freedom for the ease and simplicity of playing in a pre-designed world; where the ideal spot is between those two extremes, I don't know.)

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

If the game is generic, or if you let the players contribute then its not horrible. Things get dicey when you want to follow the story closely or not change things but if everyones having fun then no harm or foul. Its why I like a game like Savage worlds where you can make a character in 15 minutes, play a game in a genre and then forget it if you hate it.

Games based on preexisting settings SW, ST, Serenity etc... do have the advantage that they are worth buying for the collector.
but only just barely.

[The Jade Knight]

I think the best thing to do is to take the world up to a certain point, and then add your own spin to it.

I think as a GM, in a well fleshed-out world, it's nearly impossible not to do this.