Starfleet Occupations in d20 Future

[jeffers]

So I'm bashing together a thing for d20 Future to break this writer's block I have going.

I'm thinking that "Starfleet Officer" or "Starship Crewman" is an Occupation in d20 Modern/Future. Then you take a Basic class, then an AdC (CMO, Science Officer, Engineer, yada yada yada...) there are PrC's here too... Starship Commander (that all Captains have to have), Or some such... .

Now, about Rank.. two thoughts...

1) Rank is a Talent. Available to all classes, that runs from Rank 1: Ensign to Rank 7 (Grand Admiral or somesuch) I don't think that Rank is so important that folks should spent Feats on it...

2) "Officer" is a class with 1 Rank at each level. You get your normal Hit Die, skill points and such, but no BAB or save bonuses. Just another Rank Level. You take it upon leveling, and add a little gold dot to your uniform. Clearly, this is like a Mega-Feat, but really it's an adaptation of an Unearthed Arcana Bloodline.

Thoughts?

(I'm writing a thinkg called Star Trek 2200 as a break from my other writings. any thoughts of any kind (Like PLEASE DON'T DO THIS) are appreciated. )

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

So I'm bashing together a thing for d20 Future to break this writer's block I have going.

I'm thinking that "Starfleet Officer" or "Starship Crewman" is an Occupation in d20 Modern/Future. Then you take a Basic class, then an AdC (CMO, Science Officer, Engineer, yada yada yada...)

Ewww.... AdCs are fine, sometimes, but there shouldn't be an AdC called Science Officer. I mean, really, is that necessary when the Field Scientist class already exists? Is the Engineer necessary when Future already has an Engineer AdC and D20 Modern already has the Techie?

there are PrC's here too... Starship Commander (that all Captains have to have), Or some such... .

Even worse, IMO! I wouldn't want all Captains to start looking alike.

Now, about Rank.. two thoughts...

1) Rank is a Talent. Available to all classes, that runs from Rank 1: Ensign to Rank 7 (Grand Admiral or somesuch) I don't think that Rank is so important that folks should spent Feats on it...

Talents are only available to heroic classes, and talents are even more valuable than feats.

Alternity had a system based on your class, level, occupation and allegiance to determine your starting rank. A 1st-level "Combat Spec" would have +4, +2 for occupation and +2 for allegiance to a military unit, giving him a rank of Warrant Officer. A Non-Professional (equivalent to a 1st-level Ordinary) would have a rank of +2 for occupation and +2 for allegiance, which is, I think, Private First Class.

The system would give you ranks too quickly in Modern terms, however; you might want to use Profession or Reputation instead. Yes, this does Charismatics the edge, but then again, how many Admirals aren't natural leaders?

2) "Officer" is a class with 1 Rank at each level. You get your normal Hit Die, skill points and such, but no BAB or save bonuses. Just another Rank Level. You take it upon leveling, and add a little gold dot to your uniform. Clearly, this is like a Mega-Feat, but really it's an adaptation of an Unearthed Arcana Bloodline.

Huh?

 

[Dark Psion]

I agree that rank should be an aspect of Character Level, maybe like +1 Spellcaster level? Certain classes would grant rank, while others would not. That would also allow for Non-coms, (go O'Brian) and rogues (Harcort Fenton Mudd!!).

One thing I would add would be a 5 level Specialist Classe that could be used for all the advanced training. My biggest problem with Decipher Trek, is the inability to multiclass when many characters have so many different options for training.

Look to the old LUG Trek Player's Guide for lots of examples; Advanced Tactical training, Officer Exchange program, Vulcan Science Accadamy, First Contact Specialist, Daystrom Institute, and Strategic Operations Specialist (Fleet Combat).

Also, if you haven't yet, check out RPGObjects Blood & Guts for a base line for "military classes" and an entire section on Rank and Medals. In this book, Rank is treated like a Skill and you have to meet the DC of the new rank to qualify and medals & citations provide bonuses to the check.

 

[Olive]

Ewww.... AdCs are fine, sometimes, but there shouldn't be an AdC called Science Officer. I mean, really, is that necessary when the Field Scientist class already exists? Is the Engineer necessary when Future already has an Engineer AdC and D20 Modern already has the Techie?

These are the SarFleet versions. The training will be different, but they will have been trained along the same lines. An AdC is perfect. regardless, these will eb campaign specific. Maybe the other versios won't be availaible. Anyway,a ren't you the one who complains that there are to many AdCs named after things anyone can be? Well, not everyone could be these, and they should be specific, not general. I'd rather see three different specialised AdCs with similar roles than one generic one.

Even worse, IMO! I wouldn't want all Captains to start looking alike.

Well then give it a bonus feat list with a wide ranging list. But a group like starfleet will have standard training, and the AdC or PrC will reflect that. Regardless they won't all look the same. They'll all have different ways of getting to the PrC. Make the pre-reqs difficult but structure them so that there isn't a single path to it an it'll be fine.

 

[Falkus]

1) Rank is a Talent. Available to all classes, that runs from Rank 1: Ensign to Rank 7 (Grand Admiral or somesuch) I don't think that Rank is so important that folks should spent Feats on it...

2) "Officer" is a class with 1 Rank at each level. You get your normal Hit Die, skill points and such, but no BAB or save bonuses. Just another Rank Level. You take it upon leveling, and add a little gold dot to your uniform. Clearly, this is like a Mega-Feat, but really it's an adaptation of an Unearthed Arcana Bloodline.

Why not let rank and promotions be an aspect of character background and character development as the campaign progresses? Why stick a rule system on it?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

These are the SarFleet versions. The training will be different, but they will have been trained along the same lines. An AdC is perfect. regardless, these will eb campaign specific. Maybe the other versios won't be availaible. Anyway,a ren't you the one who complains that there are to many AdCs named after things anyone can be?

Yes. Annoying names notwithstanding, those AdCs are pretty flexible.

Well then give it a bonus feat list with a wide ranging list. But a group like starfleet will have standard training, and the AdC or PrC will reflect that. Regardless they won't all look the same. They'll all have different ways of getting to the PrC. Make the pre-reqs difficult but structure them so that there isn't a single path to it an it'll be fine.

What will you do about Cardassian captains? Klingon captains? If you go down that route, soon you will have more classes than you know what to do with.

You could probably write a new AdC for captain candidates without too much trouble (note, not suggesting not creating an AdC if you want to), but I'm not really seeing why one captain couldn't be a Soldier, another be a Techie (hey, Geordi became a captain in Voyager!), another be a Dedicated Hero (trying to remember that captain's name from DS9, I think it was Charlie Reynolds), or a multi-faceted Smart/Charismatic (Picard) or Strong/Charismatic/Smart (not sure about the last one) for Riker, and so forth.

 

[Olive]

some stuff...

Hi Falkus, not sure why your post says you're quoting me when you're actually quoting jeffers?

What will you do about Cardassian captains? Klingon captains? If you go down that route, soon you will have more classes than you know what to do with.

You could probably write a new AdC for captain candidates without too much trouble (note, not suggesting not creating an AdC if you want to), but I'm not really seeing why one captain couldn't be a Soldier, another be a Techie (hey, Geordi became a captain in Voyager!), another be a Dedicated Hero (trying to remember that captain's name from DS9, I think it was Charlie Reynolds), or a multi-faceted Smart/Charismatic (Picard) or Strong/Charismatic/Smart (not sure about the last one) for Riker, and so forth.

I'd have seperate classes for seperate trainings myself.

Anyway, the reason you should have a class for captain is because an institution such as starfleet would have a fairly uniform captain traning programme. Having different ways to get into that porgramme is appropriate, but that's what I was suggesting earlier.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Anyway, the reason you should have a class for captain is because an institution such as starfleet would have a fairly uniform captain traning programme. Having different ways to get into that porgramme is appropriate, but that's what I was suggesting earlier.

There seems to be no training camp for Captains, except maybe the "real" world.
All Captains go to the Starfleet Academy, but when they leave it, they aren`t Captain, they`re Ensign, maybe Lieutenant. And then they have to work their grounds up.
Still, there seems to be a difference between Officer and ... well, something else - Crewman, or something like that. In DS9 it is indicated that Chief O´Brien isn`t an Officer. (There is an episode where he doesn´t want a young lieutenant to call him "Sir", because he isn`t an Officer).
But even O´Brien was on the Academy.

For Ranks, I would try to use the Reputation or maybe a variant of the Wealth/Profession system. You could make it feats or talents, but then you should come up with a good benefit from the talent/feat besides the rank, because otherwise, noone would want to take it.

 

[jeffers]

Interesting Replies!

I have a lot to think about. I'll post the results this afternoon.

 

[Lizard]

You may want to look at Mongoose's B5 game. While B5<>Trek, there are enough conceptual similarities (most main characters are in service to a larger organization and have military-style skills and training) that you could make it work. The officer, soldier, and scientist classes could build most Star Trek characters, and they were designed to work for any governmental organization, not just the human one, so, you don't need a "Klingon officer" class and a "Vulcan scientist" class or what not.

Anyone with command/authority will have some levels in officer, while specializations can be built by multiclassing. McCoy, Scotty, and Spock are Scientist/Officers, for example. Kirk is a Soldier/Officer/Diplomat. The redshirts are mostly Workers, with Security having one level of Soldier (if that!). Vulcans and Betazed may have a level or two of Telepath.

The B5 game actually maps to ST very well, come to think of it. I'd recommend kicking up the hit points slightly, as Trek is less lethal than B5, and you'd need to stat out the races, but, otherwise...