Why does fantasy dominate RPGs?

[aramis erak]

The dearth of real sci-fi (at least that which meets the old SFWA guideline of no more than 3 intentional deviations from physics as known at time of writing, which I read about on Jim Baen's blog many years ago) and its replacement with futuristic fantasies goes again to the strength of fantasy as a supergenre - handwavium rules supreme.

That the biggest names in "Science Fiction" in film/television are all pretty much futuristic fantasy (Star Wars, Star Trek, and Dr. Who)...
Trek at times tries to be more science fiction than others, but often is space fantasy. Kling-orks and all.

Good Sci-Fi is hard to write, harder still to shoot for visual media.

I don't say this to denigrate the futuristic fantasies, but to point out that their popularity is self-reinforcing in reducing the available real sci-fi.

So much so that even Morrus has mistaken them for real sci-fi. Even Jim Baen, not long before his death, was lamenting the paucity of real sci-fi in his slushpile.

 

[discosoc]

I personally think sci-fi combat just doesn't translate to pen-and-paper games very well. For one, the common weapons have ranges that are simply too large for good fights where everyone (melee and ranged) can get into the action. For two, those weapons tend to be harder to rationalize multiple hits with than something like a sword cut or getting knocked back from a fireball. These aren't insurmountable problems, but they do require certain lore concepts to exist within the specific setting (usually something that makes long-range combat dicey or ineffective in the first place, resulting in a sci-fi setting dominated by melee combat and short-range "old west" style gun fights).

Keep in mind that this is in direct contrast to video games, where guns and sci-fi are way more dominant while only a small handful of fantasy titles have a real foothold. It's just the nature of the game medium for each genre.

 

[Lwaxy]

Ergh, don't ever compare Klingons with orcs, seriously.

 

[Sunseeker]

People expect something, and I think somewhat unfairly, more from sci-fi RPGs than from sci-fi TV shows. You can't really argue with CBS if the hyper-beryllium-motivator can't be transconfabulated into wave particles. You can argue with the DM.

 

[Lwaxy]

Only if it has been different before - but then, inconsistencies happen in shows as well.

 

[DragonMan]

And, conversely, why does this not translate to RPGs? Why is fantasy the largest genre there?

Any thoughts on the reasons why? Simply because D&D was first?

I think fantasy is easier to play than sci-fi merely because understanding magic & swords is easier than understanding futuristic technology. I played a sci-fi RPG a long time ago. My character was a xeno-biologist with some other high tech skills. I found it difficult to formulate concepts on what the character could actually do as it involved scientific concepts that I personally don't know. However, I've never had trouble with fantasy RPGs. The books are clear about magical effects and what they will actually accomplish. Swinging swords and casting spells are easier to comprehend than actions that are available in scientific and technical disciplines.

 

[Lylandra]

I think fantasy is easier to play than sci-fi merely because understanding magic & swords is easier than understanding futuristic technology. I played a sci-fi RPG a long time ago. My character was a xeno-biologist with some other high tech skills. I found it difficult to formulate concepts on what the character could actually do as it involved scientific concepts that I personally don't know. However, I've never had trouble with fantasy RPGs. The books are clear about magical effects and what they will actually accomplish. Swinging swords and casting spells are easier to comprehend than actions that are available in scientific and technical disciplines.

Mhm, maybe because sci-fi systems are seldom written by people who 100% know how certain fields of science work. And because popular media tend to over-simplify or just plainly display them wrong which also gives some authors the wrong ideas on science (or often used tech skills, like hacking or CSI). On magic, we can all agree that it doesn't exist in real life and therefore accept the author's description on how magic works and interacts with the world.

Perhaps, science in sci-fi would be easier to grasp if each "skill" or "class" write-up is written by someone who can explain the basics of a given field. So maybe for Xeno-biology you'd have an entry with a definition for what a xeno-biologist does (hey, we have xeno- astro- and exobiologists in real life! Although in a SF setting, I'd mash them all together), like "this is a person who studies alien life and tries to manipulate and create new living organisms via various means, like DNA fragment exchange" or "Because this person has studied classic biological taxonomies, and has a great knowledge of biological chemistry he/she can easily identify and classify unknown entities, including strengths and weaknesses". And then you'd add tables or examples for what you can effectively do with the skill. And how difficult it would be to do so.

Only if it has been different before - but then, inconsistencies happen in shows as well.

Oh don't get me started on TV shows. I hated the scientific "inaccuracy" (aka complete wrongness) of Flash and Legends of Tomorrow. Tracing a cryo-signature via UV radiation... ugh!

 

[Derren]

I think fantasy is easier to play than sci-fi merely because understanding magic & swords is easier than understanding futuristic technology.

As if most fantasy RPG players and designers understand swordfighting.

Perhaps, science in sci-fi would be easier to grasp if each "skill" or "class" write-up is written by someone who can explain the basics of a given field.

How would that help? Most things in Sci Fi RPGs are as real as magic and have no basis in real world science.

 

[Lylandra]

As if most fantasy RPG players and designers understand swordfighting.

That's true. But to be honest, only a very few people really do understand medieval combat and therefore we all live in a widely accepted cloud of combat tropes. Like... how many RPGs use the false assumption that two handed weapons are better for people with great strength or that bows or rapiers are perfect for those who are physically weaker?

 

[Derren]

That's true. But to be honest, only a very few people really do understand medieval combat and therefore we all live in a widely accepted cloud of combat tropes. Like... how many RPGs use the false assumption that two handed weapons are better for people with great strength or that bows or rapiers are perfect for those who are physically weaker?

The same applies to Science Fiction (stealth in space......).
The difference is that people are much more likely to recognize the false tropes in sci fi games than in fantasy games, simply because we live in a technological world. This also raises the expectation that technology in games actually work while no one will argue that druid magic in D&D doesnt conform to what actual druids believed.