Doing science

[Janx]

This is a major question. From the player's point of view, this is "roll four (possibly more) dice to determine time spent". They don't seem to have any choices to make in this process, and that makes the process uninteresting. It seems a prime candidate for being condensed down to a single roll to determine if/when they find a solution.

yeah, that would be bad.

As a Trek fan and engineer kind of guy, I can make up plausible technobabble for what my PC would do that "could" solve the problem if it was on TV (or it'd be one of the things we already tried that didn't work, Captain)

The key to that isn't random lists. It's knowing what nouns apply to the topic at hand. The "warp core" does not apply to the security door. However, "Panel", "conduit", "power" does. Removing the panel, and rerouting the EPM conduit into the door actuator to overload it and force it open is plausible and sure as heck wasn't random buzzword bingo.

Much like a survivalist inventory moment, I'd rather the scene be set, given a list of system and parts nouns and see what I can come up with.

Perhaps from that, for a given "problem" you could roll up 1-4 valid combinations, and if I come up with one of them, the problem is solved. If it's close, you might give me a result that fails, but indicates I'm close (like the door actuator twitches, but it seems the EPM conduit doesn't have enough juice to force an override.)

This would help me feel like I'm actually solving the problem in Trek.

 

[Umbran]

The key to that isn't random lists. It's knowing what nouns apply to the topic at hand.

The thing is, with Trek, fans have a list of appropriate nouns handed to us. But, imagine a non-engineer person trying to play a sci-fi engineer - how do you communicate what nouns work? Trek has "power conduits". Does your GURPS Space game have them? Have you, as a GM, even thought about the lexicon of technology? Do you want your players to have to try to manage a lexicon?

The Atomic Robo game has an interesting take on it. The GM does not decide how a science problem will be solved. The players do it, through a skill-challengey kind of system for Brainstorming. Every one rolls an appropriate skill - it is probably a science skill, but if you can explain how it might apply, other skills are allowed. The characer who exceeds the target number by the most, gets to stipulate one Fact about the situation (it cannot contradict anything you've already seen). Repeat twice more, and you have three facts. Then, the final roll determines who gets to link those facts together, into some sort of conclusion - in FATE terms, that conclusion becomes an Aspect on the target that the players may then exploit in whatever way they see fit.

So, the GM can throw a giant monster at them, and have *no idea* what its secret vulnerability is. The players will make it up, and then exploit it as best they can.

Another approach might be similar to GUMSHOE, in which the game assumes that finding the clues to a puzzle is not the interesting bit - *interpreting* the clues, and figuring out what action to take as a result, is where the fun lies.

So, Gumshoe style, the GM would hand the players the list of elements they have to work with, and let the players hash out which of them seem most reasonable (or least risky, or what have you) to work with based on your description. But, this does require the GM to actually have a model for the tech/science in mind.

 

[Morrus]

Yeah, that latter aspect puts the prep work on the GM. Given time, anyone can devise unique solutions to unique problems and narrate them wonderfully; and that is certainly an optimal solution: craft each encounter meticulously and individually. That's very much outside the scope of what I was trying to do here, though - I was after an easily-used generic system that the GM can use on a whim.

And, obviously, I'm trying to develop a new system rather than copy someone else's. Even if it only ends up being a thought experiment. It's a fun exercise.

 

[Janx]

So, Gumshoe style, the GM would hand the players the list of elements they have to work with, and let the players hash out which of them seem most reasonable (or least risky, or what have you) to work with based on your description. But, this does require the GM to actually have a model for the tech/science in mind.

This latter bit is what I meant for the GM to frame the scene. If you put me in the security cell (perhaps there should be a standard set of tech in location lists), give me the list:
panels
data conduit
power conduit
field generator
door actuator (for mechanical doors)

with the extra secret of the EPS conduit running along the back wall (maybe I have to roll to "know" that from the ship's spec)

 

[Janx]

I just had another idea. Imagine you've got these printed tiles with a pic/name of part/noun or verbs. They perhaps have colored edges on them. You'd also have ending point cards like the security force field.

We'd arrange the cards into a solution that connects and make sense to the security force field (which connects to the field generator, which connects to the security mini-computer, which connects to the power conduit and data conduit to the main computer and the Keypad which is on the other side of the wall.

Add in some more tiles and I can rearrange them until I come up with a different valid chain that would tell the generator to deactivate.

 

[Morrus]

So here's an idea. This doesn't add choices (still need that) but it does add other stuff.

Some of the entries - not all - could be marked with an asterisk or something. Say a quarter of each column (making it likely you'll get one in total, but maybe a couple).

The asterisks are complications. When these checks are failed, the complication happens, rather than just time being wasted. Some might be marked as explosions, some as coolant leaks, some as electrocution - basically I'd need 36 complications in total (9 for each column), preferable somehow matched to the keywords.

That doesn't get us our player choices yet, but it does make the process a little more interesting.

 

[Janx]

So here's an idea. This doesn't add choices (still need that) but it does add other stuff.

Some of the entries - not all - could be marked with an asterisk or something. Say a quarter of each column (making it likely you'll get one in total, but maybe a couple).

The asterisks are complications. When these checks are failed, the complication happens, rather than just time being wasted. Some might be marked as explosions, some as coolant leaks, some as electrocution - basically I'd need 36 complications in total (9 for each column), preferable somehow matched to the keywords.

That doesn't get us our player choices yet, but it does make the process a little more interesting.

let's try a variation of your idea.

Let's say you got your table printed on paper (multiple copies). Problem comes up that I need to science the crap out of. Hand me the sheet, but before you do, cross out all the "invalid" words that don't apply (to cover trying to use the deflector dish when it's totally not near or relevant). You also secretly choose a number of valid combinations. The more valid combinations, the easier the problem to solve.

Now, instead of randomly rolling, I am the the random element. I pick a combination and test it, which you tell me the results (implying if I am close or not). Failing to choose well (or being too far off, has a chance of random mishap like you described). Maybe taking a "wrong" element out of the mix is what fixes the mishap.

 

[Morrus]

let's try a variation of your idea.

Let's say you got your table printed on paper (multiple copies). Problem comes up that I need to science the crap out of. Hand me the sheet, but before you do, cross out all the "invalid" words that don't apply (to cover trying to use the deflector dish when it's totally not near or relevant). You also secretly choose a number of valid combinations. The more valid combinations, the easier the problem to solve.

My table doesn't have a deflector dish on it. I've (tried) to make it all generic fictional sounding technobabble components which could work in any futuristic tech. My intention is to make it generically applicable.

Now, instead of randomly rolling, I am the the random element. I pick a combination and test it, which you tell me the results (implying if I am close or not). Failing to choose well (or being too far off, has a chance of random mishap like you described). Maybe taking a "wrong" element out of the mix is what fixes the mishap.

That's a thought. Though I'm struggling to work out how that would work. So I randomly roll the correct solution; the easier a problem, the more correct solutions. You choose a combination. I give you some information somehow (what feedback? higher or lower? hot or cold?); when I eventually tell you you've guessed correctly in a column, you make the LOGIC check. If you succeed, that's one part of the solution unlocked; if you fail, you lose the time or, if it has a complication marked, suffer the complication.

Hmmm. I wonder how fiddly that would be in play?

Incidentally, I played with the idea last night of having multiple sheets. One was marked "engineering", and the other was marked "medical". Both had different flavours of technobabble on it; you'd use the appropriate one. GMs could then devise their own generic sheets - a steampunky one, for example, or a magitech one, or a ... err... botanical one! Then you'd have a small collection of sheets, and just grab one which was appropriate to the type of science you're doing.

 

[Umbran]

That's a thought. Though I'm struggling to work out how that would work. So I randomly roll the correct solution; the easier a problem, the more correct solutions. You choose a combination. I give you some information somehow (what feedback? higher or lower? hot or cold?); when I eventually tell you you've guessed correctly in a column, you make the LOGIC check. If you succeed, that's one part of the solution unlocked; if you fail, you lose the time or, if it has a complication marked, suffer the complication.

Hmmm. I wonder how fiddly that would be in play?

Basically, you are playing Mastermind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastermind_(board_game)

 

[Morrus]

Basically, you are playing Mastermind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastermind_(board_game)

I remember that from when I was a kid.

Hmmm. I think that's too much for this; it'd take too long.