Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Frelaras" data-source="post: 558675" data-attributes="member: 9464">While, to me, this conversation appears more about what appeals to the individual than the true merit of the setting for an RPG, I would note that you could easily replace the word &quot;Stargate&quot; with &quot;star ship&quot; (especially if you used one of them minbari cruisers in a Crusade-esque fashion) and come up with the same result. To me, I think B5 makes for the more potential in a RPG setting simply because of the greater freedom one would have creating a character, and the nature of the missions/runs/adventures to be had. I think Stargate, with its single Earth gate (single may = low number, I don't recall) and specific number of SG teams. How many SG teams can you burn through before it seems sort of strange that they're still doing it?I think D&amp;D, and even B5, scale better - if there're a set number of teams, not only does it seem weird that one group may burn through 5 in a year, the entire world of RP'ers are doing the same thing. While each group in another setting may change the history of another setting enough to make them non-compatible, there isn't the seeming incongruity of them all assuming essentially the same 20-30 people.On another note, some people would like the idea of having the GM able to (don't take this the wrong way) control the players by issuing orders, others don't. I don't see many good ways of having SG &quot;opened up&quot; and allowing that kind of player freedom that is enjoyed (if it's desired) in, say, a D&amp;D group of freelance adventurers. Until say the group is stranded on an alien world, isolated from command. But to me, the real core of the game would be a military squad sent out via gate to explore worlds, taking orders (sometimes even real-time) about what to do. The variety just isn't there, imho.Anyhow, I don't want to threadjack too harshly, so I'll leave it there./Frelaras/</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Frelaras, post: 558675, member: 9464"] While, to me, this conversation appears more about what appeals to the individual than the true merit of the setting for an RPG, I would note that you could easily replace the word "Stargate" with "star ship" (especially if you used one of them minbari cruisers in a Crusade-esque fashion) and come up with the same result. To me, I think B5 makes for the more potential in a RPG setting simply because of the greater freedom one would have creating a character, and the nature of the missions/runs/adventures to be had. I think Stargate, with its single Earth gate (single may = low number, I don't recall) and specific number of SG teams. How many SG teams can you burn through before it seems sort of strange that they're still doing it? I think D&D, and even B5, [I]scale[/I] better - if there're a set number of teams, not only does it seem weird that one group may burn through 5 in a year, the entire world of RP'ers are doing the same thing. While each group in another setting may change the history of another setting enough to make them non-compatible, there isn't the seeming incongruity of them all assuming essentially the same 20-30 people. On another note, some people would like the idea of having the GM able to (don't take this the wrong way) control the players by issuing orders, others don't. I don't see many good ways of having SG "opened up" and allowing that kind of player freedom that is enjoyed (if it's desired) in, say, a D&D group of freelance adventurers. Until say the group is stranded on an alien world, isolated from command. But to me, the real core of the game would be a military squad sent out via gate to explore worlds, taking orders (sometimes even real-time) about what to do. The variety just isn't there, imho. Anyhow, I don't want to threadjack too harshly, so I'll leave it there. /Frelaras/ [/QUOTE]

Verification