Members | Sign In
Modiphius > Star Trek Playtest Feedback (CLOSED)
avatar

Star Trek Alpha Discussion

posted Nov 24, 2016 18:24:53 by ChrisBirch
Please discuss the first Alpha release here
[Last edited Oct 10, 2017 23:52:16]
Founder & Publisher
page   first prev 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 next last
817 replies
avatar
SteveHanson said Jan 09, 2017 04:19:11
@Blizzard & John, there isn't a pre-determined number of rounds, more like we're testing until the game is right. Unfortunately with any lisence, you have to make the IP owner happy throughout the whole process.

My friends and mead fans, the diversion was enjoyable, but can we please get back on topic. I don't think they ever used the replicators to make Mead nor do I think we would want it if they did.
[Last edited Jan 09, 2017 11:40:11]
Forum Moderator

To his friend a man
a friend shall prove,
To him and the friend of his friend;
But never a man
shall friendship make
With one of his foeman's friends.
--Havamal
avatar
Zorbane said Jan 09, 2017 07:41:19
Scheduling prevented my friends and I from completing the play test until today, I only just submitted the survey I hope that's ok
avatar
SteveHanson said Jan 09, 2017 11:41:26
You'll be ok Zorbane. Keep your eye out for the next round of tests.
Forum Moderator

To his friend a man
a friend shall prove,
To him and the friend of his friend;
But never a man
shall friendship make
With one of his foeman's friends.
--Havamal
avatar
JoshuaNuttall said Jan 09, 2017 11:56:53
I ended a session with a tpk yesterday. The command officer ran away and left the group to die in the first scene and set a precedent of look out for yourself, which lead to everyone using all the momentum gained each turn and burning through determination every time they had any. LOL I love killing player characters.
"There is no try. There are do and do not." Captain Picard of the Battlestar Galactica
avatar
aramis_erak said Jan 09, 2017 13:11:24
Every time I call for a Conn roll, almost everyone chants "Khan!"...

This is why I want the Conn skill changed to Ops skill.
Just because my shirt is red
does not mean I'll soon be dead.

http://aramis.hostman.us/trek/sta/
avatar
SteveHanson said Jan 09, 2017 17:00:39
@Joshua, how very un-federation. That captain needs to be relieved of his command. Actually I guess he was.

@Aramis, Nathan did state that he is changing the names of some of the stats. That is funny, though I can see where that would wear thin quickly.
Forum Moderator

To his friend a man
a friend shall prove,
To him and the friend of his friend;
But never a man
shall friendship make
With one of his foeman's friends.
--Havamal
avatar
LibrariaNPC said Jan 09, 2017 17:04:50
I ran my first live-group session yesterday (late, I know). The group consisted of four players, all coming in from Pathfinder.

By the end of the 4.5 hour session, they all knew the rules and LOVED them. Sure, there were some concerns, but nothing too bad. Here's a few general notes/questions/impressions:

1) The Extended Tasks/Challenges weren't very well explained in the rules, but after a number of read-throughs and actually implementing it (especially after reading up on Combat) it wasn't too horribly hard.
The Extended Tasks in the playtest did prove to be easier than expected. A player had Sevek, and as a number of these tasks were Science based, they were often completed in 2-3 rolls, tops (even with Complications). Even the poisonous plants event ended quickly with Sevek's list of talents and well-timed usage of Determination (he scored 10 points against the progress track, so one Breakthrough and only 6 progress left), and recovering samples was an absolute cakewalk.

2) The group ABSOLUTELY loved the idea of being able to pitch alternative Attribute+Skill for tasks and explained how they would work. Once they found out how creative they could be, they began to set out to try to find creative ways of handling situations in new ways. Please, don't ever change this element of the game.

3) I did have to make a ruling on something during the session that had me scratching my head. A player wanted to fire at an opponent in the treeline (cover). He used charges for Area, and announced that his goal was to not only hit the target, but to use the Area effect to knock the tree down onto the target.

As the player spent a Momentum for the task (solely to create the "problem") and rolled 4 Effects (the only effect possible being "Area"), I announced that part of the tree fell onto the target (1[CD]) as well as destroyed the cover. The rules didn't have anything for this (or against it), so I'm not sure if it's an issue or just a method of narration.

4) A few general complaints about the rulebook revolved around layout/font (it's an Alpha, but people still complained about it), the text being "dry," and examples were not frequent enough to help explain issues (especially with Extended Tasks or using [CD]). I would love to see this better explained whenever we get the beta (or later documents).

5) On that note, I remember seeing notes about some people not getting e-mails. Has this issue been resolved? I know the documents are still pending (unless that's changed), but don't want to miss getting the next ruleset (my groups are really excited for it).


I hope to be able to still be on board for the next set even though I'm late to the show, and we are really looking forward to seeing what happens next!
"Smilies exist because no one's bothered to make a sarcasm font." Lost_Heretic
avatar
SteveHanson said Jan 09, 2017 17:11:55
Indeed, Librarian PC, you are still in the test. Watch out for the next playtest packet, wherein we will get to generate our own characters.
Forum Moderator

To his friend a man
a friend shall prove,
To him and the friend of his friend;
But never a man
shall friendship make
With one of his foeman's friends.
--Havamal
avatar
OneShot said Jan 09, 2017 17:12:53
Every time I call for a Conn roll, almost everyone chants "Khan!"...

This is why I want the Conn skill changed to Ops skill.


Aramis, I can sympathize with you, as that would get annoying, but...Ops is a very different set of skills than Conn. I don't think they're interchangeable. Maybe change it instead to "piloting" or "helm" instead?
[Last edited Jan 09, 2017 17:14:19]
avatar
LibrariaNPC said Jan 09, 2017 17:13:59
@SteveHanson:
"Indeed, Librarian PC, you are still in the test. Watch out for the next playtest packet, wherein we will get to generate our own characters."

You have just made the day of BOTH of my playtest groups with that news. If the new packet also includes ship combat (and some ship stats), you may just cause someone at my table to have a heart attack. *laughs*
"Smilies exist because no one's bothered to make a sarcasm font." Lost_Heretic
avatar
JohnBrentMacek said Jan 09, 2017 18:19:26
"Watch out for the next playtest packet, wherein we will get to generate our own characters."
Steve! Really?!?! That's spectacular news! As much as my group has liked the game thus far, they've been lamenting the fact repeatedly that they don't have their own characters. I'm sure they will have an even better time once they can make their own PCs.
[Last edited Jan 09, 2017 19:11:56]
Risk... risk is our business! That's what this starship is all about... that's why we're aboard her!
avatar
LukeStyer said Jan 09, 2017 20:10:34
I was one of the players in LibrariaNPC's playtest group on Sunday, and let me reiterate that we had a great time.

The big thought I have is that Extended Tasks seemed a little more complicated than it needed to be. I think putting aside the "damage" element entirely and simply accumulating X successes over multiple attempts would be simpler. In that case a complicating roll could remove Y successes, and the GM spending a point of Threat could remove Z successes from what the PCs have accumulated.
avatar
Nathan.Dowdell said Jan 10, 2017 00:05:49
Steve, you shouldn't make promises like that...

I'm working on character creation now. Starships are in the next pack for certain, but it's unlikely that character creation will be in the next pack given how much work needs to be done for that section (plus approvals).
Game Development - 2D20 System
System Design - Star Trek Adventures

Rules questions and playtest feedback to nathan@modiphius.com
avatar
JohnBrentMacek said Jan 10, 2017 01:39:14
It's a playtest with a requirement for approvals from the IP holder, so I think the order of the day is "have no expectations." We'll all be happy with getting a new pack one way or another.

Will this next section be another TNG era set, or will it be suitable for any era?
Risk... risk is our business! That's what this starship is all about... that's why we're aboard her!
avatar
ChrisFougere said Jan 10, 2017 03:07:33
I'm happy to know that the IP holder is involved. So many times an licensed game is just...well...shitty. Trek can be hard to get right (insert Into Darkness jab here) so even if we have to wait for packets or the final product when it's released, I'm happy to know that the IP holder had a hand in things.
This topic has been locked by a moderator, you can no longer reply.