The Soloist
Hero
With the beta, visual design has improved. They went with earth tones. I like it better than the previous blue-basic. From the looks of it, it will be a nice 4-colour book, with plenty of illustrations of various emotional tone.
New Tunnels & Trolls first look at UK Games Expo. Update: Beta releaseed.
- Thread starter darjr
- Start date
aramis erak
Legend
A new edition of Star Frontiers is NOT a stupid idea.
It could very well benefit from a revised edition with a few more skills, not gating ship skills to high-experience characters, and all the races from SFAD and ZG in the core...
Which is not anything like what LaNassa and Gygax seem to have had in mind.
Separate the concept from the execution.
which brings back to T&T:ANA - the goal is to keep the tone and key innovations of T&T while modernizing and streamlining.
Whether Malthouse, et al, have succeeded at that is arguable - I find it hits the major points for me... but many of the T&T grogs aren't even taking the time to read it before going off about it not being worthy of the name.
It is different; there are good reasons for the mechanical and setting changes.
the setting has enough of the same issues of 70's to 90's D&D settings that it's really not viable to just reprint it; it would be more work to clean it up than to write new.
the mechanics: given that Rebellion has decided (at least for now) to leave the PDFs for sale for older editions, they need to have a modern
Keep in mind, the racism element is strongest seen in those speaking American dialectical english. Zappathingum isn't that silly...
Yassa Massa is dialectical for the US... if one's not familiar with the US South, it's racism is not as obvious. It raises some questions now that you mention it, but no one's ever mentioned that aspect to me before; just didn't occur to me, since the dialect I grew up with didn't use it.
As for what they were thinking? They're white folk from Arizona, writing in the 1970's... offending people 40+ years on certainly wasn't on their mind, and nothing on the list would be problematic on 1970's TV.
Political Correctness of the era was totally different...
I only got 4th and 1st last year. I literally only looked at the maps, MR, and Casting rules.
I started with 5th, specifically the black box inset color cover 5th.
No, I get that... it's never been a distinctive part of T&T for me. I don't think it's a viable distinction, and I don't think it's supported by the rules as written.
No clear cut good vs evil? Reread the Charisma rules (2.41 and 3.5. And the distinction in 2.41 that "Charisma for monsters is negative."
PCs as heroic? in the rules? never specified either way. But their foes as monsters is explicit, and implies heroic for PCs.
The Soloist
Hero
Under NuTSR is was. They only owned the logo and could not leverage anything except grit. It was stupid.
Yes, a new Star Frontiers edition by WoTC, could be interesting. But that is a discussion for another thread.
Some Dude
AKA Gringnr/Broda
I had expected one when Wizards pulled the plug on those Star Frontiers fan sites...
This isn't "modernizing" or "streamlining," this is completely replacing. Leaving aside the entirely subjective question of whether ANA is good or not, these rules are seemingly not descended from any iteration of T&T's rules in any meaningful sense. To pretend otherwise is just silly. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I'm just saying it's a thing.
They "key innovations" of 1E T&T were simplicity (kind of - those missile rules, ugh) and lack of redundancy. ANA clearly fares no better than OG (OK, maybe 5E) T&T on either count. It's more complex up front (tbf T&T's complexity could be sneaky, often buried in rules minutiae), and does things like separating CON and Hit Points (Stamina in ANA). You may disagree, and that's fine. From what I've seen those who have played ANA seem to think that overall, it plays quick, but is slowed by tracking things.
Now, ANA is definitely more modern in its design and overall "feel." Which is fine. All I'm saying is, it seems like Rebellion is attempting to reach a new audience with this. Also fine. It's their IP, they can do whatever they want. No one is saying they can't.
I... don't know about that. Most of the T&T grogs I've seen have absolutely read and/or played ANA before going off about it "not being worthy of the name." And even they aren't in the majority from what I've seen. There have been just as many, like myself, who've said, "Hey wish 'em luck, but it ain't for me." I have a couple of polls up in different places, and the spread seems to be almost evenly split between "Don't Like" and "Undecided " with a small fraction in the "like" column. Those aren't the numbers I'd wanna see if I were Rebellion.
Yes, some are disappointed about its not being "like" old T&T. But I'm not seeing a lot of intellectual dishonesty, most old heads just don't seem to like it. To accuse everyone who doesn't like nu-T&T of simply being close-minded and reactionary not only isn't true, but it's also not gonna help a game that, let's face it, is already struggling to attract the old fans (if that's even what Rebellion is trying to do at this point, I'm not really so sure).
Yeah, I've been gaming since 1981 or so, I remember. The Jeffersons, All In The Family, Alice, Benny Hill, etc., etc. My high school had a smoking section... for students.
When I said I wondered about the thought process. I was referring to Corgi keeping some silly spells and jettisoning others. I would absolutely consider "Zappathingum" to be silly, especially when compared to other FRPGs of the day. All of the spells I listed were. T&T has a reputation for silly spell names. Always has. You may not consider them silly, but that's anecdotal, and you're likely in the minority there. Reviewers have been calling T&T's spells names "silly," or even "tacky," almost since the game was first published.
It could be a matter of "dialect," as you say. But I would wager that at the very least plenty of UK gamers understood full well the racial implications of the word, "massa." It has appeared in literature and film, from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to Gone With the Wind.
I think you may be conflating your own experience and perspective with those of gamers as a whole, as relates to old-school T&T. This is not intended as an insult or an argument.
I have read the Charisma rules, which make it quite clear that in T&T, Charisma is not a matter of good or evil:
"Monsters with a negative Charismas do not inspire positively-rated beings to riot and berserkly attack - as noted earlier, a griffin with a CHR of -30 is just as stunning as an elf with a CHR of +30. It's all a matter of perspective, and how close a character's rating is to 0. Slaves and other social outcasts have CHR's of 0."
The rules do refer to players as "the good guys" and Monsters as "the bad guys" a time or two. But there are also rules for PCs who wish to buy and own slaves, so the game's morality is obviously highly relative. Ken himself has also said that there are no clerics, gods, or alignment in T&T largely because of his generally irreligious outlook at the time he first wrote it.
In closing, I'll say this: I understand why Rebellion would want to distance itself from racist, misogynist "jokes" and slavery rules. I understand why Rebellion would distance themselves from some of the game's old creative team. But, speaking just from my perspective, it seems as though Rebellion, almost from the beginning, has shown little interest in fostering, or even being part of, a T&T community. There was no real outreach to the existing fans, and I know for a fact that many folks suggested to Rebellion that they chat with folks at the Trollbridge. Heck, even Webbed Sphere did that! There was a resurgence of hope and enthusiasm when Rebellion bought T&T after the Webbed Sphere fiasco. And Rebellion, frankly, seems to have squandered it. Between the standoffish nature Rebellion prior to the release of the alpha, and the vastly different rules set, some see it as a bit of a rug pull.
I'm of the following opinions (just opinions, take with BIG grain of salt):
1. ANA as a rules engine likely existed as one of Scott Malthouse's designs prior to being used or adapted for ANA. I'm not saying T&T wasn't influential, at least conceptually. But the feeling that I get is that this began life as its own thing. I fully admit that I may be talking out of my hat here, this is just a hunch.
2. The die has largely been cast, and any changes to ANA going forward are not likely to be of the kind that will change the game significantly from its present form. Refine, yes, rewrite, no. Both Rebellion and Malthouse seem pretty locked into this overall design. So I'm not gonna bitch and moan about what Rebellion is doing here, but I'm also not gonna pretend it's something it's not.
3. T&T is very much a community. As a longtime member and contributor, Malthouse has friends in it. There are some, including but not limited to fellow authors, who want to see him be successful. Totally understandable. I want him to be successful. I don't know Scott personally, but he seems like good people. When he had his tiff with Ken years ago, I was firmly on Team Malthouse. And the years since have reaffirmed that Scott was absolutely correct in the position he took. There are some in the community who were/are on the other team, and, well, I'd best not say anything about that, except that I still agree with Scott 100%.
4. There will be some kind of OG T&T books/reprints attached to the ANA Kickstarter, in an attempt to get some interest from the old guard.
Last edited:
