d20 Prime Directive

[TerraDave]

I guess the question is, will this really require the PHB, or will it be virtual OGL, with pretty much everything in there except some details on XPs and advancement

 

[JimAde]

My guess would be the latter. They'll need all new classes, races, equipment, etc. I assume pretty much the only thing missing will be the XP/Level chart and an explanation of how to award XP for an encounter.

 

[Stormborn]

I agree with the guesses that it will be nearlly OGL. That's fine with me.

What will be interesting to see, as has been mentioned, is the ship to ship combat. I know fans will be interested, but honestly, OTS has little of it. That wasn't the focus of the show. Really only DS9 has shows that heavily focused on tactical combat (yes, a few NG ones but more so on DS9).

My only familiarity with that particular timeline is the StarFleet video games based on the SFB world. Was very interesting.


BPIJonathan, best of luck to you. This is going to be a difficult product to handle. To much backstory, too many fans, too high an interest. All of which will work both for you and against you. Not to mention that Sci-Fi games seem to have trouble catching hold in the current market.

I will eagerlly be awaiting the first reviews.

 

[JimAde]

TOS may not have had much ship combat, but Star Flee Battles is all about it. That militaristic sentiment, I think, carried over into Prime Directive, which is the same universe. But Prime Directive is mostly about "action teams" that do boarding and ground actions. So while I hope for good d20 ship to ship combat rules that are like an "SFB-Lite", I'm not betting on it. It seems like the focus is elsewhere.

 

[Ranger REG]

I guess the question is, will this really require the PHB, or will it be virtual OGL, with pretty much everything in there except some details on XPs and advancement

If they want the public to know that this is a d20 product, it will have to carry the requirement label along with the d20 System trademark logo.

I mean, if I were one of their marketing suits, I'd go with the logo.

After all, past history have shown companies have gain credibility by first making d20 products and once they're known, they can make OGL-based products. While we know about ADB and their wargame, we have yet to see if they can make it in RPG publishing.

 

[Ranger REG]

Depends on what you like. My credits are as follows Cityscape (d20) with B.L. Sisemore (which is long out of print), Luftwaffe 1946 RPG (Action! System) with Michael Scott, Eric Flint's 1632 RPG (Action! System), Open Core with Christopher Helton and I have contributed to the Sean K. Reynolds Project Hungry Little Monsters and Eden Studios Wayfarers Guide to Inns and Taverns. Also in the process of being written are Pulp Fantasy OGL and Fantastic World OGL, along with a rewrite of Cityscape.

If I can get my FLGS to order the "Inns and Taverns" book, then I can check it out.

Are you able to disclose at this time that the d20 version of PD will be carrying the d20 logo or not?

P.S. I'm surprised ADB didn't ask you to do an Action! version.

 

[Ranger REG]

As I seem to recall, you can fulfill this particular part of the d20 System License Agreement with one of three lines:

1) Requires the use of the Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

2) Requires the use of of the d20 Modern Core Rulebook published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

3) Requires the use of a Roleplaying Game Core Book published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

I have seen books that mention either the PHB or d20M core books specifically, and ones that use the third option. One of these three lines must be present on the cover of any book that also uses the d20 System logo.

Your recollection is correct.

 

[Wombat]

TOS may not have had much ship combat, but Star Flee Battles is all about it. That militaristic sentiment, I think, carried over into Prime Directive, which is the same universe. But Prime Directive is mostly about "action teams" that do boarding and ground actions. So while I hope for good d20 ship to ship combat rules that are like an "SFB-Lite", I'm not betting on it. It seems like the focus is elsewhere.

Yep, this is pretty much the case -- SFB (and therefore PD) are all about combat.

Which is exactly why I would never want to pick up the game.

To my mind, this was never what Star Trek was about. Star Fleet was not meant to be a militaristic organization, but primarily explorative. The shows and the movies had military actions, but the heart and soul of the series was never about the grim tide of war, except on the level of human consequences.

I know a lot of people who really like SFB and, as long as they don't call it Star Trek, I am find with it. Most of the people who like SFB and PD also love the Honor Harrington books. Personally, I would wish for a Honor Harrington rpg, thus preserving Star Trek as Star Trek.

 

[trancejeremy]

I know a lot of people who really like SFB and, as long as they don't call it Star Trek, I am find with it. Most of the people who like SFB and PD also love the Honor Harrington books. Personally, I would wish for a Honor Harrington rpg, thus preserving Star Trek as Star Trek.

I would disagree with this. In the original Star Trek, Star Fleet is most definitely a military ogranization. Yeah, the Enterprise was mostly used for exploration, but it was a Heavy Cruiser. Other ships in its class were the Yorktown and the Lexington, both named after very famous warships.

Also, while combat wasn't the focus of the show, they were definitely not on good terms with either the Klingons or Romulans. In fact, there was that one episode with the Romulans which literally was almost a war movie - very much like a WW2 sub movie.

I also remember on the episode with the Gorns, Spock broke out a Phaser-Mortar.

 

[solomoncane]

Most of the people who like SFB and PD also love the Honor Harrington books. Personally, I would wish for a Honor Harrington rpg, thus preserving Star Trek as Star Trek.

QLI is developing Honor Harrington with their Traveller T20 rules.