What's happening with Prime Directive

[Qoltar]

What in the *bleep* does "Reich-2" or Reich-5" have to do with Star Trek?

- Ed C.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I don't see that. The actual historical events that are shown as taking place may require Watsonian explanation. But the statements characters in the show make in dialogue need not. Of course you can play the game that Dorothy Sayers played when she explained that Dr. Watson's wife called him "James" rather than "John" not because she had forgotten his first name, or because Dr. Watson had forgotten his own name when he wrote an account of that adventure, but because it was her affectionate nickname for him, from his Scots middle name "Hamish," or that the Hulk's alter ego was called "Bob Banner" rather than "Bruce Banner" because his actual name was "Robert Bruce Banner"; but you can also just recognize that Arthur Conan Doyle and Stan Lee occasionally slipped up and that, for example, Mrs. Watson actually said "John" or "Jack" or "Johnny" and Doyle's story misreported it. Sometimes it's simpler just to write something off in Doylist terms as author error and not bother to contrive a Watsonian account.

Sometime though the Watsonian view rules supreme - just look at the 114 realities that were actually noted in Crisis on Infinite Earths: Absolute Edition

As for doing a better adaption of Star Trek, I would say tone the Federation's TL down to (6+3)^ and (7+2)^ rather than shooting for 11. I just don't understand why people want to high ball Star Trek and Star Wars TLs when superscience allows one to tone down the TL.

[dataweaver]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

My own suggestion would be to create a setting that fits GURPS but is close enough to Star Trek, though I do admit that not everyone would find that version 'close enough.'

That's what I've been saying, too; only, my main point is that Prime Directive is “a setting that fits GURPS but it's close enough to Star Trek” — provided that by “Star Trek”, you mean “the original series”.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by maximara

Sometime though the Watsonian view rules supreme - just look at the 114 realities that were actually noted in Crisis on Infinite Earths: Absolute Edition

I would rather not, as I consider all those comic book multiverses to be horrible examples.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

That's what I've been saying, too; only, my main point is that Prime Directive is “a setting that fits GURPS but it's close enough to Star Trek” — provided that by “Star Trek”, you mean “the original series”.

This is a matter of opinion and every time you state your opinion as a fact it's not helping.

In my opinion Prime Directive was not particularly close to Star Trek and was disappointing in general quality. But I never played SFB.

If I decided I needed to do Gurps Star Trek I'd start from scratch and run it on a higher point total than PD. Probably at least 250 pts. Star Trek is definitely a cinematic setting and its' focus characters have extremely broad levels of competence. Like Sulu being able to pilot a Huey when he needed to. Characters could have significant levels of applicable talents or even just Jack of All Trades.

You start at TL12^. Early in that TL for TOS, late for TNG and after.

If you don't want to literally disintegrate people you can make "phasers" Omniblasters. If you are willing to deal with disintegration then phasers are Disintegrators with Omniblaster capability and partial damage settings to conserve power.

The (5) divisor of the omniblaster or the complete ignoring of armor for the disintegrators helps explain why you see so little real armor.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

This is a matter of opinion and every time you state your opinion as a fact it's not helping.

In my opinion Prime Directive was not particularly close to Star Trek and was disappointing in general quality. But I never played SFB.

I have...a long time ago. It had much the same problem as plane vs plane warfare game of the period - ie had major problems with 3d battles. IIRC when models appeared there were these little plastic stands of different heights so you could at least get some 3d aspect to the battles.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

If I decided I needed to do Gurps Star Trek I'd start from scratch and run it on a higher point total than PD. Probably at least 250 pts. Star Trek is definitely a cinematic setting and its' focus characters have extremely broad levels of competence. Like Sulu being able to pilot a Huey when he needed to. Characters could have significant levels of applicable talents or even just Jack of All Trades.

"Piece of the Action"

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

You start at TL12^. Early in that TL for TOS, late for TNG and after.

Why have the TL that high? The easiest way to implement GURPS Adaptation is to "plot" a reasonable amount of the non-superscience TL using the lowest TL possible and work up from there.

Non SuperScience Federation Tech:

Domed Cities: TL9
Hibernation Chamber:TL9
Pneumohypo: TL9
Diagnostic Bed: TL9
Brainscanner: TL9

Non SuperScience Non Federation Tech

These are examples of non superscience tech that is not possessed by the TOS/TAS Federation:

Androids: TL9
Bioroids and Biofab: TL10; the civilization that built the Shore Leave planet whose last member is now dead.
Brain Transplants, normal: TL9
Brain Transplants, nanosurgery based: TL10
Destructive Uploading: TL10
Non-Destructive Uploading: TL10
Mind Emulation: TL10

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by maximara

I have...a long time ago. It had much the same problem as plane vs plane warfare game of the period - ie had major problems with 3d battles. IIRC when models appeared there were these little plastic stands of different heights so you could at least get some 3d aspect to the battles.

LoL IIRC there are optional rules for trying Battles in 3D. Never tried them.

Between keeping track of the Impulse Chart, the Sequence of Play, the DAC, Energy Allocation; my lil' pea brain was burning up.

Add trying to remember the 600+ pages of rules so my tactical plan would not fall apart 'because you did that 3 impulses ago you can't do this now...you need to wait 5 more impulses'. In my early days of playing 'this' was often the escape component of my plan and not being able to do it 'now' meant BOOM!

Nope trying the 3D rules would have burned out the pea powered motherboard.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Qoltar

What in the *bleep* does "Reich-2" or Reich-5" have to do with Star Trek?

Because Star Trek loves its alternate universe Nazis?

[Qoltar]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Because Star Trek loves its alternate universe Nazis?

Uh, NO it really doesn't. If you were trying to make a joke, it doesn't read as 'funny'.

Most regular or average gaming campaigns of either 'Prime Directive' or 'Star Trek' will never bump into an alternate reality or a group that looks like that.

- Ed C.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Because Star Trek loves its alternate universe Nazis?

Never mind that there are heavy hints (In a Mirror, Darkly's intro) that in the Mirror Mirror universe a Nazi like group won WWII. Though I prefer the Mirror like universe in Star Trek: Of Gods and Men as it is more logical and less backstabby to the point of stupid than the canonical Mirror Universe.