Serenity Roleplaying Game

[ghettognome]

I've played it. I thought some of the ideas were good, but I wasn't too impressed with how it was executed. I also don't think the GM I had to run it was really into it. I met him on the Browncoats site before it closed down. Point aside, the game relies heavily on a well thought out campaign, something that seriously needs a very good GM. It also seems hard to balance in game.

I have played a LOT of different systems. I wouldn't even rank Serenity in the top half of those. And considering how much I love Firefly, and Serenity, it is kind of sad.

 

[DaveyJones]

I'm not a big fan of the system but the material in the RPG is good for running an RPG based in that Universe. I'd be tempted though to use different mechanics.

qft

i think Synnibar makes more sense than Serenity

 

[Belen]

The system sucks, but the source material is not bad. I recommend using Savage Worlds, True20, or d20 future to run a game. The rules for Serenity are just bad.

 

[Belen]

As an RPG, I think Serenity is terrible. The rules are kind of a half-baked '90s-era design that really don't reflect the show at all, IMO. The rulebook is also pretty shoddily organized, and the writing varies from okay to confusing to cringeworthy. It saddens me that MWP is doing so well with the product. I have a feeling that a lot of Browncoats new to RPG'ing are buying the book out of fan loyalty, unaware that it's a poor representation of what the hobby has to offer.

Agreed. No one is buying the book for the system or rules. We have a lot of fans buying it because it is Firefly. I find it very sad that MWP got Battestar Galactica (probably based on the sales of Serenity.) The system is just awful and I will not pick up BSG because of it. I do not need an RPG book with useless rules. I like Firefly enough to buy the book for fluff, but not BSG.

I am not sure if the designers of the system were on crack or not, but they sure did not design good rules. I cannot imagine that those rules were playtested by any real number of people either.

 

[eyebeams]

The real problem is that Firefly (and BSG) are some of the least game-friendly series around. They're not worldbuilder friendly and do not associate character importance with the kinds of competencies familiar to gamers in any way, shape or form. That means traditional RPGs are mostly a bust. D20 Future classes aren't a great idea. Piloting skills are either utterly irrelevant or the center of attention, based on the episode, making such skills the ultimate example of GMs controlling character importance. And of course, somebody like Geata's got pretty much nothing unless you have very robust and specific social skills -- and this interferes' with some fans desire to be immersed in the role. For everyone's talk of trading and Traveller, it's at best background detail in Firefly.

At this point, someone will talk about using Dogs in the Vineyard or some other story-control system, but that's a pretty stupid idea too, because both franchises emphasize the sense of alienation and struggle characters have with forces beyond their control. Using a narrative game to approach this is an aesthetically dishonest approach to the material. Characterizing, say, Walsh's or Starbuck's fates as some kind of "fallout" puts the player in the driver's seat, when the whole bloody point is about *not* being in the narrative driver's seat at all. I'm sure you could have some humdrum, non-surprising phony version of Walsh's death, which is kind of like seeing the movie with detailed spoilers, pausing the DVD player every three minutes to have smug discussions about the writing.

So the best approach in terms of source emulation is probably:

1) Eventful -- in the system, things don't always go according to plan. BSG and Firefly both rely on lots of "fickle finger of fate" moments.
2) Used with discretion -- which means you don't roll to land on a featureless plain on a clear day. (I mean, does anyone think that was a good idea, with any system at all?)
3) Unobtrusive when it comes to characters' emotional lives. That means that the system takes a backseat when the PCs have a conversation, and the GM must be willing to pull back the action to let it happen.

Cortex does a decent enough job of this, but the issue is, of course, that I doubt that most people really want to play BSG and Firefly games. They want to play games with an attendant sense of narrative self-importance and the security blanket of story control, which is not what either property is really about.

Really, the best "system" is probably moderated freeform chat and forum play, where IC conversation is the heart of the game -- just like each series.

 

[buzz]

The real problem is that Firefly (and BSG) are some of the least game-friendly series around.

I would generally agree with you w/r/t BSG. I think you could make a pretty cool RPG out of it, but I doubt it would look anything like what most people expect when they think of RPGs. I definitely feel that what MWP is planning to do with BSG, based on what I've seen in various fora, is just incredibly off the mark. Then again, I've also seen some MWP fans looking forward to playing Jane Hairdresser on refugee ship #12, which would probably fit great with what MWP is doing. I don't get it, personally.

I disagree about Firefly, though. The series is so rooted in Traveller that I think it's very game-able. I mean, in the sessions we've played so far, the game-ability of the 'Verse has not been in question. The big roadblock has been the crappy system.

Granted, the play we've had so far hasn't really resembled the show very much. It's been very "loot n' shoot," dungeon-crawl-in-space, which may be our group's default habits coming through. Of course, I've seen Mearls and others make the same comment, and IMO it's the type of game the system encourages. Fightin' Type asset + Twinked Agility and Gun Skill + called shots to the head = all you need to get things done in this RPG.

As for hippie Nar games being ill-fitted as well, I still think they'd do a far better job.

 

[diaglo]

Serenity is so bad i couldn't give it away.

edit: i did in the end at Gen Con. but it took some doing. i'm still not sure if the guy i gave it to will ever talk to me again.

 

[eyebeams]

I would generally agree with you w/r/t BSG. I think you could make a pretty cool RPG out of it, but I doubt it would look anything like what most people expect when they think of RPGs. I definitely feel that what MWP is planning to do with BSG, based on what I've seen in various fora, is just incredibly off the mark. Then again, I've also seen some MWP fans looking forward to playing Jane Hairdresser on refugee ship #12, which would probably fit great with what MWP is doing. I don't get it, personally.

I disagree about Firefly, though. The series is so rooted in Traveller that I think it's very game-able. I mean, in the sessions we've played so far, the game-ability of the 'Verse has not been in question. The big roadblock has been the crappy system.

I think about the only resemblance between it and Traveller is that there are some guys in a ship hauling cargo. In Traveller, the cargo and associated bean counting is important. In Firefly? It's fluff. One of the main differences between the series and any game is that the background stuff in Firefly is nakedly designed to create pseudo-Western situations. Outside of that, the economics mean very little. And of course, there are inbuilt limits that keep Browncoats from being rich, influential guys, skewing the whole capitalist-advancement thing in RPGs.

Granted, the play we've had so far hasn't really resembled the show very much. It's been very "loot n' shoot," dungeon-crawl-in-space, which may be our group's default habits coming through. Of course, I've seen Mearls and others make the same comment, and IMO it's the type of game the system encourages. Fightin' Type asset + Twinked Agility and Gun Skill + called shots to the head = all you need to get things done in this RPG.

This is confusing "is" and "ought." It's pretty clear in Firefly that if Malcolm Reynolds shoots you, you probably die. This does not mean that it's "all you need" in any way, shape or form. Power really lies with the player who takes the social pole position and sets the agenda when the GM constructs some kind of conflict. Cortex isn't great for encouraging this kind of team workflow but then again, Firefly doesn't exactly feature well-coordinated teams.

As for hippie Nar games being ill-fitted as well, I still think they'd do a far better job.

In Serenity, Walsh's death is a tragic blindside. In a narrative game, it means nothing at all. It's a totally arbitrary player decision. You are *supposed* to be "deprotagonized" by some things, and insisting that deprotagonization is bad is an infantile approach to story -- literally. The idea that stories are about dominating a narrative universe is probably the biggest thing one can do to make stories meaningless.

For that reason alone, pseudo-narrative games are probably one of the worst choices. That, and tactical gaming, since a tactical focus damages the interpersonal focus.

 

[timbannock]

Played in a campaign, and it's been very fun.

The system is okay, but yes, it's a system where a GM simply CANNOT call for a roll when the task is easy. The chances for failure seem awfully high in the system, as written. Unless you are generous with Plot Points.

Personally, I'm planning a campaign for it, and am using the Silhouette sytems (Dream Pod 9, makers of Heavy Gear, Jovian Chronicles and Tribe 8). Much better look to it, I must say, and the space stuff is more scientifically minded in Silhouette, without being ridiculously complicated. YMMV

 

[buzz]

I think about the only resemblance between it and Traveller is that there are some guys in a ship hauling cargo. In Traveller, the cargo and associated bean counting is important. In Firefly? It's fluff. One of the main differences between the series and any game is that the background stuff in Firefly is nakedly designed to create pseudo-Western situations. Outside of that, the economics mean very little. And of course, there are inbuilt limits that keep Browncoats from being rich, influential guys, skewing the whole capitalist-advancement thing in RPGs.

In both Traveller's Far Trader campaign model and Firefly, you have an ensemble cast of characters who crew a merchant ship in a hardish-SF setting. Each "adventure" begins with their need to find work and haul cargo from planet A to planet B. Any profit they make then tends to get eaten up by maintenance costs, salaries, and the mortgage on their starship... which then starts the job-hunting cycle once again.

I'm not saying they're identical, but the parallels are pretty obvious, I think.

Sure, no Firefly RPG should be about the bean-counting. It's about the situations you fall into during the job-hunt. Of course, a lot of Traveller merchant campaigns are about this, too.

This is confusing "is" and "ought." It's pretty clear in Firefly that if Malcolm Reynolds shoots you, you probably die. This does not mean that it's "all you need" in any way, shape or form.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. I was just making a comment on the game's mechanics. Fightin' Type is an Asset so good that there's no reason not to take it. The skill system is vague enough that the only specialties worth taking are ones specifically called out in the rulebook, which is mostly combat skills. Called shots are easy-peasy if you've taken the above skill advice, and are very effective. Ergo, it's great formula for success. Certainly a more useful option than putting points into Persuasion specialties.

In Serenity, Walsh's death is a tragic blindside. In a narrative game, it means nothing at all.

FYI, it's "Wash," not "Walsh."

I guess I'd want to know what specific system(s) you're talking about. I don't think that Nar-focus has to mean that a PC death can't be unexpected or meaningless. Something more detached like Universalils, sure. Taking your example of DitV, I could see a big conflict ending with fallout that the player describes as, "Wash... Wash dies," and the other players going "Woah!"

I don't think DitV would even be on my list of Nar options, though.

Also, if we really want to stretch the game-analysis of the film, Serenity is essentially the wrap-up to Joss' campaign. One could easily imagine Wash's player taking the GM aside at some point and saying he'd like to see his PC get a cool death and leave the execution (no pun intended) to the GM.

For that reason alone, pseudo-narrative games are probably one of the worst choices. That, and tactical gaming, since a tactical focus damages the interpersonal focus.

You make some general recommendations in your other post. Would you be able to give some examples of existing systems you think might be a good fit?