Modiphius Announces Star Trek Adventures 2nd Edition

[Staffan]

Why? Star Trek as an RPG has been around since the 80s. Just go for Star Trek.

Well, the way I see it is that Star Trek is outside my comfort zone in multiple ways. For one, there's the 2d20 system itself which has a bunch of stuff I find interesting but somewhat alien to both the way I and the rest of my group are used to playing. And in addition to that, there is the whole thing about it being Star Trek, which kind of requires a different kind of adventure than we are used to as well. So the Star Trek RPG is "strange" to me in two different ways. It's an exciting kind of strange, but still strange.

Infinity, on the other hand, can work with fairly traditional adventuring styles. I mean, ideally not dungeon crawls, but more investigatory and/or action-adventure type of things. So that lets me try out the 2d20 system in a more familiar environment to see what makes it tick and how the whole momentum/threat thing flows.

Basically, when doing science you want to change one variable at a time in order to see what effect that particular variable has. If you want to figure out what sort of things affect the current in a wire, you don't want to change both its thickness and its length at the same time. You first keep the thickness constant and try different lengths, and then keep the length constant and try different thicknesses. Changing both at once means you don't know what part of the effect is the result of which change.

 

[Staffan]

Custom dice are expensive to produce - we have to pay for the royalties to Paramount, two different sets of tooling in the factory, shipping from china, packaging, staff who designed it and worked on the range, marketing and so on. It's not cheap to work on a major international IP and do it properly.

First, thanks for hopping in and answering. I did not expect that at all.

Second, I expect that the kickback to Paramount is a bit bigger than the money Evil Hat is paying Jim Butcher for the Dresden license for the Winter Knight dice. But that's why I think it'd be neat to offer generic effect dice, with something like a star or explosion instead of the Starfleet insignia. I figure one should probably be able to get the price down to at least something along the lines of the Troubleshooters dice ($24 for 8 dice), which are also custom-made and which you offer for sale yourselves (even if they're for a game you only distribute). I'd feel a lot better about paying $24 for 8 special effect dice than I would paying $22 for 4 Star Trek-themed effect dice and 2 d20s which don't really do anything the dozens of d20s I already own don't already do.

And yes, that might just be me being a cheapskate, but as seen in other posts in this thread the special dice do create a barrier to entry. And I believe lowering that barrier would likely lead to more sales of the actual games, since fans could spend money on those instead of dice.

 

[Anon Adderlan]

Custom dice are expensive to produce - we have to pay for the royalties to Paramount, two different sets of tooling in the factory, shipping from china, packaging, staff who designed it and worked on the range, marketing and so on. It's not cheap to work on a major international IP and do it properly.

As pointed out though, you absolutely don't need them you can use normal dice.

Or you could just ditch them and save on that second tooling and potential delay

 

[ChoomInCT]

Well, the way I see it is that Star Trek is outside my comfort zone in multiple ways. For one, there's the 2d20 system itself which has a bunch of stuff I find interesting but somewhat alien to both the way I and the rest of my group are used to playing. And in addition to that, there is the whole thing about it being Star Trek, which kind of requires a different kind of adventure than we are used to as well. So the Star Trek RPG is "strange" to me in two different ways. It's an exciting kind of strange, but still strange.

Infinity, on the other hand, can work with fairly traditional adventuring styles. I mean, ideally not dungeon crawls, but more investigatory and/or action-adventure type of things. So that lets me try out the 2d20 system in a more familiar environment to see what makes it tick and how the whole momentum/threat thing flows.

Basically, when doing science you want to change one variable at a time in order to see what effect that particular variable has. If you want to figure out what sort of things affect the current in a wire, you don't want to change both its thickness and its length at the same time. You first keep the thickness constant and try different lengths, and then keep the length constant and try different thicknesses. Changing both at once means you don't know what part of the effect is the result of which change.

I also think that the Klingon campaign can work more towards traditional adventuring- House vs House action, duals, and (of course ) blood feuds...

 

[Doc_Klueless]

Well, I am glad you have all convinced yourselves there is no problem.

For me, it isn't a problem. It's a feature. I like the effects dice and what they do. However, I also like the games that just use d20s like Dune.

I like that they have modified the 2d20 system between the different genres to reflect that genre.

I’m not buying it now - so no problem for me either.

That's actually a very healthy response. You shouldn't buy games that you're not comfortable with or do like the mechanics of.

However, telling the company that "if they don't change it like I want it, I'll [just keep my money!]" isn't really all that compelling for them. Because they have to figure out if keeping the effects dice would result in more sales of the 2nd Edition than ditching them.

I mention that because they're stated that it's to be backwards compatible with 1st edition and the core books for 1st ed use the effects dice. Removing the effects dice may make their core audience react with "I thought you said it'd be backwards compatible and it's NOT! I'm keeping my old stuff and you can stick the new stuff where the sun doesn't shine."

[Edited to be less snippy. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, TrippyHippy. It sounded playful in my head but obviously didn't read that way]

 

[TrippyHippy]

For me, it isn't a problem. It's a feature. I like the effects dice and what they do. However, I also like the games that just use d20s like Dune.

I like that they have modified the 2d20 system between the different genres to reflect that genre.


That's actually a very healthy response. You shouldn't buy games that you're not comfortable with or do like the mechanics of.

However, telling the company that "if they don't change it like I want it, I'll take my toys and go home" isn't really all that compelling for them. Because they have to figure out if keeping the effects dice would result in more sales of the 2nd Edition than ditching them.

I mention that because they're stated that it's to be backwards compatible with 1st edition and the core books for 1st ed use the effects dice. Removing the effects dice may make their core audience react with "I thought you said it'd be backwards compatible and it's NOT! I'm keeping my old stuff and you can stick the new stuff where the sun doesn't shine."

I didn’t bring any ‘toys’ to the party. I am merely informing the company that this is a reason why I won’t be buying their game. They have already produced at least one version of the game that ran solely on D20s without recourse to extra propriety dice needing being purchased. It is not a stretch to consider that they could revise their design in any second edition.

I see no advantage in game design terms whatsoever in requiring these extra dice to play. Considering that no poster here has actually presented any compelling argument for keeping them, beyond dismissing the complaint and/or resorting to ad hominem, or alluding to the point that there is a financial element to their inclusion, one can only assume that nobody really does. It is poor game design AND the surrounding community are intolerant of criticism, evidently.

 

[Staffan]

I see no advantage in game design terms whatsoever in requiring these extra dice to play. Considering that no poster here has actually presented any compelling argument for keeping them, beyond dismissing the complaint and/or resorting to ad hominem, or alluding to the point that there is a financial element to their inclusion, one can only assume that nobody really does. It is poor game design AND the surrounding community are intolerant of criticism, evidently.

There is definitely a benefit to their inclusion: the addition of another axis to certain rolls. Instead of damage (and other) rolls being linear, they can have other effects than "moar damage". Now, one can argue whether this benefit is worth the special dice and additional costs associated with them, but it is definitely a benefit.

 

[Morrus]

Well, it can lose potential customers then. No skin off my nose - I’ll play other games.

Every game loses ‘potential customers’ by virtue of its design decisions because a game that appeals to everybody isn’t feasibly possible or realistic to expect. The only difference is in this instance you are one of those ‘potential customers’.

There’s almost certainly a game out there you love and there are people saying the thing you love about it is a deal breaker for them, telling the company that it is losing potential customers because of it.

We all have our different tastes, deal-breakers, preferences. The beauty of the TTRPG hobby is that it isn’t one size fits all—there are games for everybody! And some of them are for me and some of them are not. I see that as a feature, not a bug.

It is poor game design AND the surrounding community are intolerant of criticism, evidently.

You might get less pushback if you dial back on declaring your personal preferences as being the arbiter of good game design, and that those who disagree with you are intolerant.

Sometimes people have different opinions. Again, feature, not bug.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

You're right. The Toys part was a bit snippy. I'll modify that so it's not so childish. Thanks for bring that to my attention.

Considering that no poster here has actually presented any compelling argument for keeping them,

I gave you an actual, compelling argument: They said 2nd Ed would be backwards compatible with 1st Ed. 1st Ed uses effects dice. I don't see how they can remove them in 2nd Ed and retain the backwards compatibility claim.

Perhaps they could put in a sidebar or something or a variant rule that shows how to play the game without them.

But, really, the only compelling argument for something dealing with entertainment is that the person likes it. Which I said. I like them and how they deal out damage and special effects, the tactile feel of rolling them, how they look, etc.

I also like when the 2d20 games that don't have the effects dice.

It's nice that I can have both!

It is poor game design

It's not poor game design. It's just a design you don't like.

AND the surrounding community are intolerant of criticism, evidently.

I'm not intolerant of criticism of games that I like to play. But I also don't jump into threads about games and start going "I don't like it so it's stupid."

 

[TrippyHippy]

You're right. The Toys part was a bit snippy. I'll modify that so it's not so childish. Thanks for bring that to my attention.


I gave you an actual, compelling argument: They said 2nd Ed would be backwards compatible with 1st Ed. 1st Ed uses effects dice. I don't see how they can remove them in 2nd Ed and retain the backwards compatibility claim.

Perhaps they could put in a sidebar or something or a variant rule that shows how to play the game without them.

But, really, the only compelling argument for something dealing with entertainment is that the person likes it. Which I said. I like them and how they deal out damage and special effects, the tactile feel of rolling them, how they look, etc.

I also like when the 2d20 games that don't have the effects dice.

It's nice that I can have both!


It's not poor game design. It's just a design you don't like.


I'm not intolerant of criticism of games that I like to play. But I also don't jump into threads about games and start going "I don't like it so it's stupid."

Backwards compatible isn’t a compelling argument. It would barely make any difference if the damage dice were removed - as it hasn’t when they were already removed in the solo play books. The impact of removing them is negligable.

It is a poor game design when people in different geographical areas have different accessibility to playing it and there is no compelling reason why the mechanic is still included.

The example of the community in this thread is enough to underline why I shall not be continuing with Star Trek Adventures nor recommending it to others.