tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4790218378017626142.post5175120708157765464..comments2013-04-17T21:35:35.210-04:00Comments on Dangerous Games: Setting at WarRoss A. Isaacshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03130248059505536194noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4790218378017626142.post-85213762575047037832011-02-16T14:20:40.100-05:002011-02-16T14:20:40.100-05:00While true, you can play Star Wars and have nothin...While true, you can play Star Wars and have nothing to do with the Rebellion. You can play smugglers having to deal with increased Imperial patrols and supervision. What do you do when you're smuggling something for Jabba, and a Rebellion agent tells you that you're carrying something the Rebellion really, really needs? Or when it's a Rebel blockade runner that tries to stop your smuggling run?<br /><br />You don't have to be involved in the central struggle. In fact, what I'm trying to get at is that setting dischord actually gives your player characters something to hold on to. Either in support of or negation to the central conflict. <br /><br />Cascade Failure has the perfect Setting in Distress I'm talking about. There isn't really a "central conflict", but there is. Or rather, there can be. That central conflict can be any number of things that lead out of the Setting in Distress. See what I mean?Ross A. Isaacshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03130248059505536194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4790218378017626142.post-9903699740558304252011-02-14T12:51:26.803-05:002011-02-14T12:51:26.803-05:00I find that if the central conflict is too large, ...I find that if the central conflict is too large, it may dominate the gameplay. EVERYTHING is about the Rebellion vs the Empire. EVERYTHING is about the Alliance vs the Independents. EVERYTHING is about wars between the vampire clans. etc etc etc<br /><br />As such, I tend to enjoy settings like Forgotten Realms where there is a lot of white space between data points.Pontifexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01761338487255048337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4790218378017626142.post-11964818518438641452011-02-12T22:03:37.413-05:002011-02-12T22:03:37.413-05:00I was thinking about that very question after post...I was thinking about that very question after posting. I think Trek is a horrible setting. There is no central conflict. The closest they came to that was Deep Space 9, which was arguably the best of the shows. <br /><br />If Trek had as its background some terrible war they were fighting, or they struggled against a black hole, then it would be interesting. Unfortunately, they'd come up with a technobabble solution to the problem and be done with it. Imagine Trek with a central conflict like X-Files, or Battlestar Galactica. Or even Babylon 5. That would have been a much better series. <br /><br />Let's face it, we all wanted to see a series like the one depicted in Yesterday's Enterprise. You saw that episode, with the war with the Klingons, and you said "hell yes!" Imagine a series like that.Ross A. Isaacshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03130248059505536194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4790218378017626142.post-41974636918644739922011-02-12T20:55:13.385-05:002011-02-12T20:55:13.385-05:00So...do you consider Trek a good setting or not? I...So...do you consider Trek a good setting or not? I ask because everyone seems to approach Trek differently, both in fiction and in roleplaying, and I'm curious as to your take.PEGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07553942824114221725noreply@blogger.com