Talk:Serenity Role Playing Game

Playtester

As one of the playtesters, I have to say that the game looks very impressive, and that a lot of work has gone into making it a great way to capture the feel of both the movie and the tv show. Nearside 01:34, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

I was also a playtester, and I completely agree. If you enjoy sci-fi RPGs and/or Firefly, you owe it to yourself to check it out at the very least. Popadopolis 22:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Question

Is the game officially out yet or just the prereleases from GenCon? Because I used to work for a RPG game store and related game distributor and we haven't received our copies of the game yet!  :( I'm just wondering if it's available everywhere or my distributor is just slow?--Shirley Ku 21:52, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

They were on sale at Dragon*Con. And the official website is supposed to be up in the next few days, and they'll be onsale there. Wynler 22:25:05, 2005-09-10 (UTC)

I believe that the official mass release is supposed to be next Monday. Popadopolis 21:36, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

That is what my friends told me. They got it in the warehouse Friday and are shipping it out Monday. I asked my friend to hold me a copy! --Shirley Ku 05:20, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I got mine by now, so they should be on sale just about everywhere that ordered them. Keep flying! Popadopolis 18:15, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

DM screen year

Jamie Chambers, writer of the Serenity RPG has mentioned on the RPGRadio site that a DM screen and first adventure will be released soon, hopefully before the end of the year.

Which year? --Calair 22:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I posted the following to 81.178.240.18, who added the cited paragraph:

There are two major problems with this information (other than the use of "rumor", which has since been corrected):

1. The RPGRadio link does not provide the cited information. It is a general website URL to a message board, which only presents the current state. Wikipedia articles need permalinks to cited sources, which this website does make available.
2. The phrase "end of the year" gives no indication of which year. Wiki editors often fail to realize that their text may remain in place for years, so such ambiguous statements must be made precise.

I attempted to correct these problems, but I couldn't find the cited interview on the site, and without it, I couldn't confirm what year was meant. Please provide the requested information to avoid the removal of this paragraph as unverifiable. Thank you for your assistance.

The year is likely 2005 (given the original edit date), but we need the source to make this claim more than rumor, so I've deferred adding my own speculation until we can get some hard data. ~ Jeffq 02:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

GM Screen

The GM Screen has been released. --Wynler | Talk 15:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Index

A PDF file containg the index is now available from the Serenity RPG's Bonus Page. Here is a direct link to the file. --Manzabar 04:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sticking it to Fox

I've heard that the decision not to use material from the TV show was made specicifally to deny Fox royalties as payback for screwing the show. Someone even mentioned that Whedon came up with this idea. Normally, stuff overheard in the gaming store and mentioned in passing on forums isn't put on Wikipedia pages, but I've heard this a couple different times from different people, so I'm wondering if there's anyone here who can either verify or disprove it. Stilgar135 18:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

That's highly unlikely - the truth of the matter is that the rights to the Firefly series were tied up by Fox - which is one of the reasons why Eden Studios passed on it (excepting their Spacefarers and Prarie Folk article in Eden Studios Presents). Too many crossover issues. Not that it stopped MWP from creating "serial numbers filed off" versions of characters from the TV series and inserting them into the Core Rules as 'generic' NPCS. Nor did it stop them from making use of YoSaffBridge in the supplements, or from having a picture of Vera in the core book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.26.166 (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Obsessionality

This is a general editorial comment. In my opinion, this article tells very little about the topic and the nature of the game to a general encyclopedia reader. Instead, it is mostly devoted to obsessional details about point systems and booklets that mean little to the general reader and probably are only going to matter to an extremely specialized audience. It would be helpful to include an introductory paragraph that summarizes what the game looks like and what its goals is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.251.18 (talk • contribs) 2006-06-28t16:36:21z

I do agree with this. Role-playing is more about feeling the background and contributing to it than just rolling dies and playing statistics with them.

Edits

I've restructured the page so its a little more in line with wiki guidelines and breaks down into more destinct catagories. Also did some rewrites to have a more neutral POV and be more explanatory.209.159.98.1 15:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw the cleanups you did Cyberia and appreciate them, I missed a few things with my huge edit, I know. As far as The Cortex System and Criticisms, I had those as sub-headings of Contents because they were directly related. I'll let you decide whether to change them back, but that's up to you. MrCrim 20:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You're refering to edits made by somebody else Crim. I'm not "209.159.98.1" All I did was delete the HTML tag for an image that was already deleted. Cyberia23 03:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality

I've re-read the Serenity RPG rulebook recently, and noticed a great many mistakes in spelling, formatting and grammar. Not being a Wikipedia contributor, I don't know if this is worthy of being included in the article. I'll go back through my bookmarks to see if I can find the criticism of the poor quality editing on a number of RPG websites. 124.184.179.247 (talk) 05:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Main Site

The main site link to www.serenityrpg.com no longer leads to a webpage. Whether the site was deleted or simply moved, I do not know. I did find the appropriate page in the Wayback Machine. Juranas (talk) 18:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Cortex and Cortex+ page?

Since this page goes into every use of the system in every other product and the Serenity Roleplaying Game is one of their retired supplments, perhaps this page should be changed into a generic page for the Cortex and Cortex+ game and instead turn Serenity into a section. Broad page into more specific categories; not a specific page into broader categories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.88.248.59 (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

That makes sense to me, and there should also be new sections covering the other Cortex/Cortex+ games. (I would probably leave Marvel Heroic Roleplaying as an article of its own, however, due to its specialized rules and its greater notability as a standalone product.) JEB215 (talk) 05:32, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Cortex and Cortex+ are actually fairly different systems and should be kept separate. On the other hand all the Classic Cortex games could possibly be merged. Neonchameleon (talk) 12:11, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Firefly RPG and Serenity RPG

As MWP are producing a Firefly RPG under Cortex+ Rules do we want that on this page or on its own page? Neonchameleon (talk) 12:25, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

87.114.48.252 (talk) 07:11, 7 May 2014 (UTC) Given the reality of the Firefly RPG, the different licences and the very different play styles of the two games. I suggest we split this entry into two, and give Firefly it's own entry

Wrong title

User Neonchameleon was wrong to move Serenity (role-playing game) to Serenity Role Playing Game. The title of the game is Serenity... just and simply. I don't own the book but very likely, in the cover, the term Role Playing Game is not a part of the title, it only specifies what kind of document is: a role-playing game... thus, I think that we should send the article back to its former title, seriously. Kintaro (talk) 06:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The Amazon listing displays the cover and the name of the book is certainly Serenity Role Playing Game. I would also provide a link to an archive of the Margaret Weis website but I'm mobile and cannot provide it at this time. However, there is a good point to be had in this: the Serenity Role Playing Game and the current Firefly RPG are under different licenses granted to Margarest Weis and are considered by the company as separate lines, if I recall correctly? So, is there a better way to name the article so it better addresses both lines? ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 10:41, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Respectfully, Parasol, but Amazon is not an official source, just a commerce website, and I guess that the full title "Serenity Role Playing Game" is simply used to distinguish the product from other types of product. Anyway, if you prefer the article's current title I will cede to your preferences... no problem. Cheers! Kintaro (talk) 00:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I linked to Amazon to refer to the image it provides of the cover, not to refer to the title of the listing. I wouldn't want this to be based on my preferences, because that's really not what it's about. But Margaret Weis referred to it in a news posting on their website as Serenity Role Playing Game and it was listed that way on their close partner retailer DriveThruRPG, which I expect it to get right out of all retailers. The official website Margaret Weis also maintained for the game also listed it as Serenity Role Playing Game. Regardless, my last point still stands: if the article, which is really outdated, remains as is, tying in the new and old lines, should the article be renamed to reflect both Serenity Role Playing Game and Firefly Role-Playing Game? ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 03:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)