11
\$\begingroup\$

The rules given in the books, whether in the Narrator's Guide or the Creatures supplement, are a mess. But, as far as I can tell, creatures created with the rules from the Narrator's Guide look ridiculously feeble, and require tens of thousands of XP to become equivalent to the creatures depicted in the eponymous supplement in terms of stats.

I've looked online, including on Beyond the Final Frontier, but I couldn't find anything about the creatures: no errata or even someone doing an homebrew system.

Did I miss something in the original rules or in Creatures?

This question is not about the card game but the RPG that Decipher created after they got the license.

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Since folks are marking this for closure as off-topic, I suspect you need to create a tag for Star Trek Role-playing Game or whatever system this question is asking about. I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure which one you're using, and I'm unfamiliar with Star Trek RPGs anyway. (I think the close folks may think this is about Decipher's Star Trek trading card game!) Also… you may be shopping! (You can ask which book has official resources for more challenging monsters, though.) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 7:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ I added a precision that I'm looking for resources for the RPG, not the card game. And I'm not shopping, already got the books, but looking for some sort of homebrew system for creature creation, if one exist, else I'll keep on winging them. \$\endgroup\$
    – Sava
    Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 7:45
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The problem is this phrase: "So I'm a taker for any homebrew creation system for creatures that makes a little bit more sense than the original rules. Or a way to fix the rules if that's even possible." That's going to—fairly or unfairly—strike folks as a shopping question because it implies anything is acceptable so voting's impossible. Narrow that! I suggest making this into an actual question like Creatures in published supplements seem incredibly weak. [Provide an example.] Am I misreading these entries? then leaving it to answers to propose solutions. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 7:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That is, you may be getting ahead of the problem. You have already evaluated all the creatures, found them lacking, and need a solution. However, other folks may have evaluated all the creatures, found them acceptable, and don't need a solution. Why not let those folks tell you what—if anything—you may have missed? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 7:55
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Good comment, I changed it following your advice. \$\endgroup\$
    – Sava
    Commented Oct 17, 2018 at 15:22

1 Answer 1

1
\$\begingroup\$

You're not crazy. Simply put, the Creatures supplement came out the following year. Between experience, feedback, and possibly a different designer at the helm, perspectives changed and the ruleset was amended.

You should use the Creatures book, you'll have a better time with it.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please edit to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center. \$\endgroup\$
    – Community Bot
    Commented Apr 23 at 1:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .