Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Sounds like a hell of a campaign. Too bad I can't join in with my Centauri... 
ISD's
- Thread starter Spideredd
- Start date
Just try to explain other players in a campaign that you want to play in 1995 (or something near) because you're minbari ....
(we've got no ancient/shadow or vorlon ...)
Not a real success lol
But we are planning a Earth/Minbari war WITH ISDs to see how it's going.
To answer the question, most of the time it's : no !
(we've got no ancient/shadow or vorlon ...)
Not a real success lol
But we are planning a Earth/Minbari war WITH ISDs to see how it's going.
To answer the question, most of the time it's : no !
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Greg Smith said:If one player only has a Shadow fleet and one only has an ISA fleet, one of them is in trouble.
Actually ISA is ok, you can play with White Stars and allies in 2261, and the Shadows and Vorlons can play up to 2261, so you have enough overlap for games.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Lord David the Denied said:
The special rules for the ISA says while the ships were in existence, you cannot use the fleet before 2262.
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
You'd have to be pretty anal not to allow an ISA fleet in a battle with the Shadows, though...
Greg Smith
Mongoose
True.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
True. But aren't ISDs a little bit anal anyway? And if you are going to use them, shouldn't you be using them correctly?
Sulfurdown
Mongoose
Well, the ISD isn't what's stopping an ISA vs Shadows game, the special rule on the ISA is. Though I'd say you could easily set up an "Army of Light" faction as the ISA's precursor for 2259-2261 or a "Rangers" Minbari subfaction to utilize the ISA ships from their ISDs to 2259, just use the same rules as the ISA sans "ISA doesn't exist prior to 2262." Obviously this is a House Rule and depends on all players agreeing.Greg Smith said:
ISD's are problematic...simply true...the specific reasons are not that important.
They did a nice thing with the Era approach to the EA. That would have been more appropriate to most games. We have said lets play a late game and pulled out Drahk and ISA vs lets play early where we pull out EA and Dilgar. Trying to say in a time of war we're removing all of fighter x and ship y so no more of those for you is strange.
Ripple
They did a nice thing with the Era approach to the EA. That would have been more appropriate to most games. We have said lets play a late game and pulled out Drahk and ISA vs lets play early where we pull out EA and Dilgar. Trying to say in a time of war we're removing all of fighter x and ship y so no more of those for you is strange.
Ripple
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
In service dates aren't strange in VaS, are they? It's no different - if you want to play a game that accurately reflects the setting, you use them. If not, you ignore them.
Greg Smith
Mongoose
In service dates can be wierd because you are trying to replicate an aspect of the show that isn't reflected elsewhere. If a Shadow fleet is fighting the Centauri, ISDs are out of place. Similarly in VaS ISDs are out of place if you are using the US vs the Royal Navy.
Actually it is slightly different in VaS, as often we are using ships from the real world where we know precisely what happens when. Many of the ISD's in book do not reflect the total service time of the ship, only the service dates of that particular version, with no stats for early and late dates. We also find that the base material is very limited from which to draw these dates.
Ripple
Ripple
