Bab-5 Wars and JMT's B5 rules.

In message <199611271738.MAA22035@smtp1.sympatico.ca> Allan Goodall
writes:
> At 05:01 PM 11/26/96 +0000, you wrote:
> >Date sent:  26-NOV-1996 16:59:59 
> >
> >>Sign me up!  I would prefer FT/B5.	
> >
> >Hmmm. Are people trying to tell the B5-wars developers something?
(Like
> >why bother when JT's doing the role playing game combat system)
> 
> Well, this IS an FT mailing list. Still, this is a strange licensing
> arrangement given that both the RPG people and the B5 Wars people will
have
> a starship combat system. I find it hard to believe that B5 Wars will
be as
> fluid and fast paced as FT. Perhaps B5 Wars will aim at smaller but
more
> detailed engagements.

Without actually knowing any of the facts (it never stopped me 
before) I would say that a B5 RPG would need space combat rules for
the exact same reason that the Star Wars RPG does: participation in
spaceship battles by leading characters is a major part of the 
genre. So much for the Greg Porter Doctrine ("SF RPG's need space 
combat rules like modern RPG's need rules for major warships" or 
somesuch).

If RPG rules will naturally lead to small-action combat where the
characters make a major impact on the course of the battle, this
would tend to suggest that the B5Wars only sensible niche is going
to be either a really high-level massive fleet game, or a 
tragically misguided SFB-style game which piles stupid levels of
complexity onto the game in sad attempt at genre-realism.

Is Charles Ryan on the list?

-- 
David Brewer