Serenity: Why am I GMing this?

[MerricB]

Merric, I'm saddened to hear you don't like the CORTEX system presented in the rules. Me and mine group seemed to really like it a lot.

Can you express what it is about the rules you don't like? I'm just curious if there's something our group has overlooked that you're having issues with.

I don't like the resolution system.

Most systems I play use a die roll + mods; which basically translates to having a basic level of competence and then you exceed that level by some amount. Serenity doesn't have that basic level: instead you gain the potential for greater success, but your poor result doesn't change very much as you become more skilled.

So, this is quite different to how the games I normally use work. This is not, in itself, a problem. Indeed, my first reaction to the Serenity system was "Ooh, cool!"

However, in the two sessions I've played, it turned out that the system was extremely swingy in the rolls you'd make. This turned out to be a big problem in combat, where a good attack roll vs a bad defense roll would turn into a lot of damage. In "Billy", Billy was meant to join the PCs for a short time and help them, but the trigger-happy idiots tried shooting him in the leg rather than talking. So, Billy shot back - 2d12 skill, rolled near a 20. Nash rolls about a 3... oh dear. As the difference adds to the damage (4+8 wounds, 9 shock in this case), even story points are having a hard time keeping Nash alive.

(I'd like to say that the players have learnt their lesson and so won't be bringing out the guns soon, but I don't think they have. Take note, boys and girls: Guns kill PCs in this system!)

However, this swinginess of the system concerns me. I know that people like Cam who are well-versed in the system only roll dice for the important stuff, which is excellent advice. I'm not quite sure if I can prise away the dice from my players - and my reactions. "You're doing that? Cool - roll for it!"

What doesn't help is that I've also recently gotten hold of the new Doctor Who RPG (my review), which is quite similar in a lot of ways to the Cortex system whilst actually being quite distinct.

Resolution is 2d6 + Attribute score (1-6) + Skill score (1-6) vs target number; converting a Cortex character would just involve moving the Attribute or Skill from a die code to a number - so d2 -> 1, d4->2, d12->6, d12+d2->7, etc.

And it has "Story Points" rather than "Plot Points", but the way they work is different: either they give a bonus to the roll (before you know the result) or they change the level of success: so you can spend points to move from Major Failure -> Failure -> Minor Failure -> Minor Success. (The levels of "Success" and "Major Success" can't be reached by story point use after the roll) Or you can go the other way - which helps a lot to survive combat.

(The failure/success levels are based on how well you rolled. Roll 8 under the target, Major Failure. Roll 8 above, Major success).

Of course, I haven't gotten to use the Dr Who system yet, so it might turn out to be as irritating as Serenity's. However, if I felt like it, I could keep the characters we created in Serenity, and just put the Dr Who resolution system in place, and go from there. However, I want to see how Serenity works when I run it as opposed to play it, so next session will be pure Serenity.

Cheers!

 

[Kzach]

One addendum I'd like to add to WizarDru's excellent breakdown of the series, is that you need to inject a sense of humour in there.

Joss being infamous for his witty dialogue, Firefly was the epitome of his style. The humour was a vital element in the series. It was that dynamic mix of action, adventure, drama, sci-fi and humour that made the series so great.

A for instance is the character of Jayne in the series. He's by far my favourite character, played excellently by Adam Baldwin. He always got the best lines and delivered them just right. For example, the ship's companion (basically a high-class prostitute... sortof...) Inara (played by the hot Morena Baccarin) entertained a dignitary on the ship one time and the whole crew were eagerly awaiting his arrival... and when SHE arrived, Jayne had a gob-smacked look on his face and then turned around and said, "I'll be in my bunk..."

Now it's one of the most quoted lines from the series

 

[Wormwood]

Honestly, I'd run Serenity exactly as I would run Eberron.

Bunch of guys (veterans from the losing side of the Last War, a couple of rogues and People-With-Shadowy-Pasts™) ride around in a ship, getting into adventures in places just outside the law's jurisdiction.

Halfway through the campaign, it turns out that they are being manipulated by [insert shadowy bad guy organization] and they seek some payback.

 

[Wik]

Firefly has always struck me as a western version of Shadowrun - only, instead of corporations hiring the PCs, it's criminals and smugglers (and yes, I know those people hire Shadowrunners too, so don't bother mentioning it!).

keep reliance on gear to a minimum, don't be afraid to houserule, and play the game fast and loose. And if you've seen the show, you'll know that the characters get shot pretty often - and it hurts. In the pilot, I think all but three or four of the nine-person crew wound up with a bullet wound or something.

Really, though, the key is plot points. Remember that PCs get disadvantages, which give them advantages (oo! Fun stuff!). However, the neat thing to Serenity is that those disadvantages can also be invoked by the player or GM to get more plot points! So, really, disadvantages actually wind up being a good thing to have - plus, they make the game more fun. I think a good rule of thumb is to invoke one PC's disadvantage per scene/encounter (and really, I think it's better to think of things as "Scenes" in Serenity, as opposed to "encounters").

Also, those failing rolls can make the game seem kind of swingy.... but coupled with plot points and the fact that a group is usually present, and it should be okay. Provided the PCs aren't seriously flubbing rolls all the time. But I think it's a good idea to try to avoid hinging your scene's success on one or two rolls - just like in D&D.

And it's also probably a good idea to avoid describing all the failed die rolls as "failures", lest you cause the heroes to look like the three stooges. Instead, I'd describe them as "near successes", or "You would have succeeded, but...". For example, in one episode, Wash is trying to escape an alliance craft, and does some tricky flying to evade the pursuing ship by diving down into a series of canyons. After nearly avoiding smashing into the walls of the canyon, he is thrilled because NO ONE could POSSIBLY have followed him... only to realize that the other ship never bothered going into the canyon, and instead stayed above, watching the Firefly's crazy acrobatics. In game terms, I'd say it was a failed piloting roll - without resorting to the ship smashing into the wall and killing everyone.

And, like the series, Serenity isn't all about action. There should be maybe one or two high action scenes per "episode". If you run a serenity game like a D&D game, you'll just wind up with a lot of dead PCs. A bank heist, for example, might involve a shootout, but it should also involve NPC interrogation, skullduggery, backroom contacts, banter between PCs, and thrillin' heroics.

Don't be afraid to go into TV talk, either. Much like the old d6 star wars game, you will actually enhance the game if you start dealing in cinematic terms. Rather than describing a character, tell them which actor is playing him. Use terms like "Fade to black" and "pan to left". "Zoom in" on objects in the villain's hands. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with using flashbacks or cutting to a scene in which no PC is present (the PCs' ship lands in a field, and then we flash to some backwoods type skinning a rabbit making ominous comments). And then.... "Cut to credits".

If you really want, you could even schedule in "commercial breaks", but that might be taking it a bit far. But you could definitely try to arrange your game so that it follows a TV act structure. This will take some time to get down, but it will really help the tone of the setting if you're able to tackle it.

Finally, try to end each "episode" with at least something unresolved, while tying up the majority of the plot - this will really help keep the flavour of the setting.

 

[WizarDru]

Ahh! Oy, SPOILER ALERT MUCH? Geez, why not just tell him who Kaiser Sose is?! Or, wait, who Luke Skywalker's daddy is? Or that Bruce Willis was dead the whole time!!!!

I've added spoiler tags for what I'm assuming you're referring to, which is plot details on the first episode that was shown on TV (and which is actually the second episode). I left most of the salient details out...and we are talking about the first episode of an 8 year old TV show...but I didn't intentionally mean to put spoilers in there. If I've missed something else, just mention and I'll tag those, as well.

) The Alliance is like the Yankees. We're talking about the show being post-Civil War. How this can be missed is baffling. That may be one of the reasons the show got canceled, because the hero Mal is a Brown Coat. This means he would have supported the South. While in the show this isn't a problem, for real people it means he would be supporting slavery and modern day racism (on top of the States' Rights over Centralized powers, which was the other big struggle, and why the Civil War is so complex and interesting). The issue of he show is freedom vs. control.

From wikipedia's article about the Alliance: "Generally, the Alliance is rather authoritarian, although Joss Whedon, the series' creator, has said this is at least partly because the show is seen from the viewpoint of those hostile to the Alliance. Whedon himself admits that sometimes, the Alliance is like the predominant view of the USA in World War II: doing very good things, helping people, spreading democracy. At other times the Alliance can tend towards black ops and power-grabbing, although rarely more so than any real-world democracy."

Whedon has stated that he was influenced both by a book about people on the losing side of the American Civil War during the Reconstruction and also from a book about Jewish Partisans fighting against the Nazis during World War II, particularly in Eastern Europe. I wouldn't try drawing too direct a parallel between the brown-coats and the Confederacy.

In point of fact, the topic of slavery is broached more than once in Firefly, and it's made very clear on which side of that particular fence our heroes stand. In the episode "Shindig", Mal gets angry having to socialize with some slave-traders. In the Firefly universe, slavery (or some form of indentured servitude) is still practiced and legal. So the relationship between the Confederate South and the Union of Allied Planets is actually inverse.

"Mal's politics are very reactionary and 'Big government is bad' and 'Don't interfere with my life,'" Whedon told the New York Times. "And sometimes he's wrong–because sometimes the Alliance is America, this beautiful shining light of democracy. But sometimes the Alliance is America in Vietnam: we have a lot of petty politics, we are way out of our league and we have no right to control these people. And yet! Sometimes the Alliance is America in Nazi Germany. And Mal can't see that, because he was a Vietnamese."

Also, Kzach speaks great wisdom. Firefly was filled with humor. Sometimes fatalist, gallows humor...but humor nonetheless. And it's definitely true that Firefly's plots rarely focused on combat, but more on interaction and the art of the heist. Wik's suggestion that it's like Shadowrun in space (or a variant of classic Traveller) is a pretty good suggestion.

 

[theRogueRooster]

Take note, boys and girls: Guns kill PCs in this system!

Now, now. Guns don't kill PCs, NPCs kill PCs.

I'll just throw another "Stop whatever you're doing and go watch the series" log on the pile.

-tRR

 

[Cam Banks]

Even though it's my job to sell our games to folks, I will say that if the Cortex System in Serenity really isn't doing it for you, I think you can have just as much fun playing a Firefly game with other rules. I have the utmost respect for the guys at Cubicle 7 who designed Dr Who, and I agree the two systems are similar (mapping over fairly easily). You may need to re-jigger how initiative order works, though (in Who, people who want to talk go before people who want to run away, who go before people who want to shoot, etc) since Firefly operates on different genre tropes.

I know people who have used our books as source material for running Savage Worlds, Fate/Spirit of the Century, d20 Modern, Cinematic Unisystem (from Buffy & Angel), Traveler, Basic Roleplaying, Dogs in the Vineyard, even 4E (which was a real treat to read about!). So long as you're getting what you want, it's cool with me.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[MerricB]

Hey Merrick. No dnd for a while...eeek.

Wish you well with Serenity. I never got into it when it was on TV but friend gave me Firefly DVDs and got around to watching them. They were very good.

Thank you.

In fact said friend lives in Ballarat and his current DnD campaign is based heavily upon the story line of Firefly.

I was interested when you said 'local store'. Which would that be...and where is it?

Good Games Ballarat; in the main street of town (Sturt St) next to the Commonwealth Bank - well, sort of next to. Also "under". I'm there most Saturdays playing boardgames.

How do your players feel about the system? If they haven't played much then maybe you should present them with their PCs redone for DW or whatever you are comfortable with. Maybe even Saga?

Most of the players haven't played RPGs before, so they don't have much to compare it to - although they've also commented on the swinginess of the skill checks.

I doubt I'd use Saga, for two reasons: the main one being that I'm unconvinced by its skill system. Saga requires the skill system to be properly integrated with its combat system (as both attack rolls and skill checks often target defenses), but the numbers vary too much, especially at low levels. A character might have an attack of +3 but a skill of +13 or thereabouts. That's too big a difference. The other reason is that its advancement scheme doesn't work with how I envision the campaign going.

It's actually very interesting to prepare to run this campaign. It's been a very long time since I've run any system on a sustained basis apart from D&D, and I'm a long way from the youth who used to play those other systems.

The requirements of D&D - which is built for combat (something that I consider a good thing) - and Serenity - which isn't - are very different when you look at the systems...

Cheers!

 

[Turtlejay]

The Firefly universe has a pretty defined 'style', while at the same time kind of retaining a lot of looseness that makes it really attractive for storytelling. It sounds like a storyteller's dream, really. Watch the shows, learn the style, use a different system.

I played in a firefly-inspired d20 modern/future campaign that was very excellent. We were all pretty defined by our roles on ship (captain, doctor, mechanic, cargo ), and had a pretty good time just doing our thing.

Fate would be good for this kind of thing too, IMO, especially the Spirit of the Century flavor. Tweak it to taste, of course.

I saw someone mention shadowrun. . .I see where that comes from, and I think I could agree with that, but at the same time I think it might require a lot of hacking to get the Shadowrun default setting to fit in the Firefly world. A lot of assumptions about how things work carry over to the rules.

In all, I'm kind of jealous. I have a soft spot for this kind of game. Have fun. . .

Jay