Jump to content

Trinity Universe: Trinity game anyone?


Mr_Grimm

Recommended Posts

To the 'no Chips, no 'porters' list I guess I should have added: no Superiors, no Daredevils, no Edenite Novas, no Vampires, no Kinfolk-Ghoul-Skindancer-Sorcerer-Mage-Wraiths, etc., etc..

He didn't say Psiads! He didn't say Psiads! Can I play one, huh, can I, pretty pretty please? ::halo ::sarcasm

Seriously..

I'll allow Psion characters to buy a sixth dot in an Attribute for 8 Bonus points (or later in play for 30 XP) - if they already have the standard 5 dots, obviously. This reflects the genetic potential unlocked by being 'dunked'

Does this mean you're tossing the ban on starting characters with abilities over 3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply
... you start to see too many people taking 4's and 5's to start with in a single mode...

The starting limit of a maximum of three dots in any one Mode is still used (Trinity p.166).

... Another gripe I have which is quite small but I think worth mentioning is that it makes the lower level powers alittle expensive to use anywhere near as much as you would under main rules...

Buying a Mastered effect (for the cost of two bonus points) or two helps to reduce that problem. Powers that don't cost Psi to activate still don't cost Psi to activate, they can just be made more effective by investing extra Psi. Even the lowest level powers get the basic 'free' dot in each relevant parameter. So, a basic level 1 effect just needs a single success to activate, & any extra successes make it a more potent effect. I guess the trade-off with the normal rules is that you have vastly increased scope & power potential - if you're willing to blow a lot of temporary Psi on the effect - but slighty less potent effects if you're not willing to blow Psi.

Does this mean you're tossing the ban on starting characters with abilities over 3?

No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
To the 'no Chips, no 'porters' list I guess I should have added: no Superiors, no Daredevils, no Edenite Novas, no Vampires, no Kinfolk-Ghoul-Skindancer-Sorcerer-Mage-Wraiths, etc., etc.. Just Psions & neutrals please (pretty please...  ). I have my reasons.

Are they good reasons?

Just curious, especially on the daredevils. In my opinion there's no game in any system where the daredevil concept doesn't fit. If you take away all the ingame quantifiable z-wave stuff and call their knacks just that, you're left with awesome characters for any heroic game setting.

Not that it matters now, since I have a character anyway, but I just thought of another concept that would be cool to be play (some other time, I guess... ::confused ), and the question popped up in my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they good reasons?

For me, yes.

It's not really a case of what would fit in or not - being role-players I'd hope that we'd all be able to have a good whack at fitting pretty much any character into any setting. I have quite a few reasons for my ST choices actually, most of which are the results of experience.

In this case one of the basic reasons was that I just wanted to run a Trinity game - my first - as a Trinity game, not as 'Adventure! in space' or anything else (not that such a game wouldn't be cool or anything - it'd just be a different sort of a game).

Sometimes sticking to the basic game concepts is a good thing. When you've had the sixth guy come up with a Werewolf character concept that's 'the last of the White Howlers', & the fifteenth Vampire player who wants to be a 'True Brujah', it all gets a little far-fetched. By sticking to basic character types you hopefully have a greater chance of exploring the unique game universe than you do if your character is 'unique'.

To be honest, I love to run WW games with only normal human characters - where all the weirdness is explored & discovered in-character, & all the 'kewl powers' are experienced from a narrative, not a game mechanics, point of view.

I also believe that most character types have much greater depth than many players are willing to bother exploring. Allow unusual character types detracts from players exploring the basic character types.

Allowing, for example, a Daredevil in the game would change the whole feel of the particular game setting. Daredevils are wonderful characters, don't get me wrong, but they encourage a style of play that is different from the style of a basic Trinity game. Also, any Daredevil (in particular) character concept could easily be created as a normal, non-powered, neutral character - just with the bonus points spent in the right places. No bells & whistles game-mechanics-wise, granted, but if it's the concept you're after, then that shouldn't be an issue. A fully powered Daredevil that could (for example) out-shoot a Clairsentient gun-combat-specialist cheapens the uniqueness that Psions are supposed to bring to the setting. A neutral who is an expert gun-fighter is still an expert, but doesn't overshadow the whole focus of the game, instead acting as subtle shading & contrast that actually enhances the whole concept of Psions.

Again, this isn't to say that I'd never run a game with other character types - it's just not what I wanted to run this time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...