Prime Directive hand Phaser damage: canon vs book

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tiger Maggot

Even if Star Trek 2 isn't considered canon by PD/SFU, the series most definitely is,

Not exactly, until very recently (as a result of the negotiations concerning the Starfleet Command computer liscense, IIRC) ADB only had the rights to the Technical Manual.

Personally, I don't really like a lot of what ADB has done with their license.

I think you can cut ADB some slack, they were developing the SFU for decades while Trek was dead. When Paramount started doing Trek again, ADB did not get a liscense, so they continued to develop the SFU as a alternate universe. Meanwhile Paramount was very difficult with the actual license holders (FASA, LAG, and Decipher), so maybe ADB got the better end of the deal.

[Tiger Maggot]

Originally Posted by Professor Tanhauser

The dematerialize setting was used to circumvent TV violence regs, so you could kill people without it seeming violent.

Yeah, I remember something about that. But regardless, you still have disintegrations. Since what happened on screen (and then backed up in the tech manual) is considered canon, we're stuck with it.

Kind of like how in Return of the Jedi, you see stormtrooper armor crack when someone falls down -- everyone with a functioning brain realizes it was just a cheap prop, but the canon mentality kicks in and you end up with ultra-tech armor being as flimsy as light plastic or fiberglass.

Originally Posted by Professor Tanhauser

It was certainly somehwat inconsistent, especially in trek 2 where a phaser vaporizes two people, then a minute later is fired at a small slug and ONLY vaporizes it, not a big hole in the floor or the people it was near.

That could be explained off as a low-powered setting, especially since it left a burning puddle. Of course, that's kind of a cheap explanation and you're still stuck trying to explain why all four emitters fired on such a low setting.

Originally Posted by Professor Tanhauser

As to excessive use of the vaporize setting, you can say it uses up the powerpack too fast and that setting has a limited range. Making it only good for, say, 4-5 shots on demat at a range of 20 meters would limit it's usefulness a lot.

Oh, definitely. I'm a HUGE believer in distributing LAW rockets rather than antivehicle lasers or the like.

That's one huge problem with rayguns in general. Unless you have a good excuse for why they aren't easily rechargeable, they get out of hand too easily. I once made the mistake of letting a player have a "civilian" Dinosaur Laser. It turned out I should have given him the military version -- he had less shots in his "civilian" one, but C cells were cheap and easy to get.

[Tiger Maggot]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Not exactly

How so? They state explicitly in their FAQ that SFU is based on the series.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tiger Maggot

Yeah, I remember something about that. But regardless, you still have disintegrations. Since what happened on screen (and then backed up in the tech manual) is considered canon, we're stuck with it.

Is it backed up in the Technical Manual? pyratejohn seems to indicate that it isn't (I think my parents have my copy on the other side of the country).

[Brandy]

If you're trying to do canon Trek, then don't worry about crunchy bits like "dice of damage" and "armor divisors". Phasers set to kill become "poof you're dead"...unless the plot demands otherwise.

Only half serious, but honestly, why worry about it?

[Tiger Maggot]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Is it backed up in the Technical Manual? pyratejohn seems to indicate that it isn't (I think my parents have my copy).

I'm going by Mister Scott's Guide to the Enterprise, a big black TNG tech manual (I don't remember the title off the top of my head -- it was 8x11, about an inch thick, and had all kinds of stuff like the Articles of Federation and patterns to make your own Starfleet uniforms) and TNG Tech Manuals. It could be we're talking about completely different books.

Scott's Guide and the TNG one both mention disintegrate settings, and I believe the other one did as well. If I can remember where I put it, I'll look it up for sure.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tiger Maggot

How so? They state explicitly in their FAQ that SFU is based on the series.

Originally ADB licensed the Star Trek Technical Manual by Franz Joeseph. At that time (and until fairly recently) they did not have any kind of license agreement with either Desilu or Paramount. Most of the SFU was developed during this time, and only recently has anything changed. Furthermore, I believe that their current agreement with Paramount only allows them to basically continue as they have been, they are still not allowed to use any Trek material that's not in that Technical Manual. Bobzilla might know, perhaps he can comment.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tiger Maggot

I'm going by Mister Scott's Guide to the Enterprise, a big black TNG tech manual (I don't remember the title off the top of my head -- it was 8x11, about an inch thick, and had all kinds of stuff like the Articles of Federation and patterns to make your own Starfleet uniforms) and TNG Tech Manuals. It could be we're talking about completely different books.

Only the Franz Joeseph Designs Technical Manual is relevant to the SFU.

[Tiger Maggot]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Originally ADB licensed the Star Trek Technical Manual by Franz Joeseph. At that time (and until fairly recently) they did not have any kind of license agreement with either Desilu or Paramount. Most of the SFU was developed during this time, and only recently has anything changed. Furthermore, I believe that their current agreement with Paramount only allows them to basically continue as they have been, they are still not allowed to use any Trek material that's not in that Technical Manual. Bobzilla might know, perhaps he can comment.

According to the Captain's Edition of SFB (1990), they had an arrangement with Paramount back then.

[Tiger Maggot]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Only the Franz Joeseph Designs Technical Manual is relevant to the SFU.

Then why do they mention the show itself in their FAQ?

Regardless, that's a pretty cheap workaround, to claim they're doing Star Trek, then weaseling on what's actually seen.