Worlds of Design: Is There a Default Sci-Fi Setting?

The science fiction default setting is less clear than the “Late Medieval plus some Tolkien” fantasy default, but let’s talk about it.

The science fiction default setting is less clear than the “Late Medieval plus some Tolkien” fantasy default, but let’s talk about it.

futuristic-5930957_1280.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

Months ago I discussed the fantasy default setting in "Baseline Assumptions of Fantasy RPGs.” A default may not exist at all in some of the sci-fi categories below, but I think it’s worth discussing.

The Automation Difference​

Keep in mind the big difference between fantasy and science fiction: automation. Stories are about people, not machines, even though automation is likely to be dominant in the future. We already see this happening today, with robotic explorers on Mars, and unmanned drones fighting terrestrial wars.

It’s also possible that science fiction novel and game authors spend more time describing their settings than fantasy authors do, maybe because there’s so much more deviation from a default than in fantasy. In general, there may be less emphasis on "monsters" and uncivilized "barbarians" than in fantasy worlds.

In no particular order I’ll discuss:
  • Automation
  • Transportation
  • Communication
  • Adventurers
  • Aliens
  • History & Change
  • Technology
  • Warfare & Military
  • Demography & Habitation
  • Longevity

Automation​

Let's start with automation. In sci-fi settings, automation tends to vary immensely. We can see robots as intelligent as humans, and other settings where automation has not reached the level of human intelligence. You rarely see automation dominating the military, again because stories are about people, not machines. In Frank Herbert’s universe (Dune), the Butlerian Jihad has eliminated automation where any kind of intelligence is involved.

Transportation​

Faster-than-light travel is most common; often even very small spaceships, such as shuttles and fighters, can achieve it, sometimes it takes a big ship. If there is no faster-than-light travel, then the setting is usually confined to one star system, or involves “generation ships.” Sometimes the ships have built-in drives, so they can go from anywhere to anywhere; other times they must use fixed links in some kind of natural or man-made network, whether it’s wormholes or something else.

Communication​

Most likely, communication is at light speed, or at travel speed, whichever is faster. Once in a while you get instantaneous speaking communication (as in Star Wars); but that gets hard to believe on the scale of an entire galaxy, if only for the potential interference.

Adventurers​

Are there “adventurers” at all? Maybe we should say, people who go on, or get caught up in, adventures? I don’t see a common thread for how numerous such people are.

Aliens​

There’s no default here, but most common is a human-centric universe, possibly with no aliens, possibly with aliens ignored by or subordinated to humans. We also see humans as subordinate to aliens, in some sub-genres.

History & Change​

Time frame varies from near-future to millennia from now. Rate of change is usually very slow in the latter, so that the setting can still have some familiarity to readers and players. The pace of change in the near future is inevitably quick, as we see things change so quickly in the modern day that we’d be puzzled by slow tech change in anything like our own society.

Technology​

No default here. The paranormal may be important. Much of what goes on is still familiar to contemporary people, because that helps make it easier to willingly suspend disbelief.

Warfare & Military​

This is all over the map. Conflicts are usually between worlds or groups of worlds. What’s notable is that authors are often stuck in some kind of earth-history model where ground forces are very important. Keep in mind, typical SF situations are lots of separate star systems, much like small islands. What really counts is the (space) navy, if anyone is willing to “blast planets back into the stone age.” If they are willing to do that, ground forces don’t matter/are on a suicide mission. If they’re not willing to bombard planets, then ground forces matter, but are at immense disadvantage when the enemy controls the orbital zone of the planet.

Demography & Habitation​

Terra-formed worlds or worlds naturally habitable, versus most people live in habitats to protect them from hostile environment. In the video game Elite: Dangerous, planets are just barren places to explore, space stations are where people live. Again, there’s no default.

Longevity​

I’ve always found it odd that Elves, with vast lifespans, are as willing to risk their long future in potentially lethal adventures as they seem to be in fantasy games. If the technology of the science fiction setting provides long life or even immortality, how does that affect adventuring?

For further reading, see Atomic Rockets. It’s a website describing various SF topics, often baring the fundamentals of what reality might demand. Such as why interstellar trade is likely to be very sparse or non-existent.

Your Turn: Have you devised a campaign setting for science fiction role-playing?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

log in or register to remove this ad

I think Traveller is a great game with a rich setting just pregnant with possibilities. But it's not popular enough to be considered the "default" science fiction role playing game.
That it is still going strong today after nearly 35 years would suggest it is reasonably popular still, even though the release of West End Games’ Star Wars affected its market share from nearly 25 years ago (when it was released).

Moreover, it is way beside the point. The model provided by Traveller is what is being referred to here is the point - the same model is generally used in other science fiction games too - be they Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who or whatever. You have a vessel to travel to different worlds in - and you use this to get the crew into adventures. It’s the default model.

It’s like claiming that Champions isn’t the default model of superhero gaming because Mutant & Masterminds is more popular. They both represent the ‘default’ superhero standard.
 
Last edited:

Traveler is a really fun game, and I've spent endless hours in it designing ships and systems. It is a great that it endured, just like it's great that that Glorantha has endured.

But it is clearly just one of many SF games at the moment, likely to be mentioned if someone asks about a SciFi game,but almost always mentioned or upvoted less frequently than Stars Without Numbers, or Scum and Villainy, or Starfinder. And Traveller's status as "just one SF game among many" is typical of its history. Overshadowed time and again by whoever had the Star Wars license, by Star Frontiers, by Shadowrun, by generic systems sci-fi source books, by Mechwarrior. If it was ever the most important SF game, it was in the late 70s, and only if you squint to avoid looking at Gamma World.

The notion that Traveler set some of "model" for science fiction games staggers belief. The model for sci fi games is sci fi media and sci fi books. A Doctor Who game is inspired by Doctor Who, and secondarily by decades of sci fi stories. It is hard to imagine anyone, with a moments reflection, seriously believing that "going places in a vessel" is a debt that is owed to Traveler. Traveler isn't George Bailey, Sci Fi RPGs would almost certainly be the same if it never existed.

Traveller is a fun game, It is an early game. It is great that it still exists. It is not a significant game.
 

Traveler is a really fun game, and I've spent endless hours in it designing ships and systems. It is a great that it endured, just like it's great that that Glorantha has endured.

But it is clearly just one of many SF games at the moment, likely to be mentioned if someone asks about a SciFi game,but almost always mentioned or upvoted less frequently than Stars Without Numbers, or Scum and Villainy, or Starfinder. And Traveller's status as "just one SF game among many" is typical of its history. Overshadowed time and again by whoever had the Star Wars license, by Star Frontiers, by Shadowrun, by generic systems sci-fi source books, by Mechwarrior. If it was ever the most important SF game, it was in the late 70s, and only if you squint to avoid looking at Gamma World.

The notion that Traveler set some of "model" for science fiction games staggers belief. The model for sci fi games is sci fi media and sci fi books. A Doctor Who game is inspired by Doctor Who, and secondarily by decades of sci fi stories. It is hard to imagine anyone, with a moments reflection, seriously believing that "going places in a vessel" is a debt that is owed to Traveler. Traveler isn't George Bailey, Sci Fi RPGs would almost certainly be the same if it never existed.

Traveller is a fun game, It is an early game. It is great that it still exists. It is not a significant game.
I’ll refer you to the Traveller entree in Green Ronin’s authoritative Hobby Games: The 100 Best from industry professionals to refute everything you say here. You are merely conflating the points being raised with the question of who is a current market leader. That is not the question being discussed which is asking about whether you can have a ‘default sci fi setting’.

Traveller is, most certainly, a significant and seminal RPG, that inspired all sorts of other games that followed. In its early years it had sales that eclipses most new games released today too. You’ll note that Traveller’s nomination to the all time 100 Best Hobby Games list came from Mike Pondsmith, who accredits Traveller as an influence on Cyberpunk. Star Wars didn’t get a license till 10 years after Traveller came out, and it was released at that point because the Star Wars brand was considered at the time to be fading. Even then, you can see Traveller’s influence in WEG’s Star Wars, Cubicle 7s Doctor Who and other games, including all the ones that you mentioned.

Claiming Traveller isn’t an influential game is like claiming that Joy Division isn’t an influential rock band. They may not have sold more than other bands but their influence is immeasurable.

But again, all this is irrelevant and a diversion:

We are talking about whether there can be a ‘default sci-fi setting’. Traveller showed that you could make such a RPG nearly 35 years ago, and that is the point. Sadly, this never happened to follow up:

174752585_10158862127650923_5474623402259384306_n.jpg


....but it illustrates that if you replicated Traveller’s design the other way, it could capture the default sci-fi and fantasy setting tropes. Traveller’s 'default' is to science fiction what D&D is to fantasy.
 
Last edited:

MattW

Explorer
There is a difference between "default setting" and "default rules system". Yes, Traveller could be used as a rules system for lots of sub-genres. It's versatile, because it's a simple system. I can see it being a good choice for "Lost in Space", "Sliders", "The Expanse", or "Dollhouse". You could even do something like "The Handmaid's Tale" or "Dark Angel"

BUT

Those are all Science Fiction, but they are very different settings. Sometimes, the rules system can be less important than the world that we play in.
 
Last edited:

Dire Bare

Legend
Traveler is a really fun game, and I've spent endless hours in it designing ships and systems. It is a great that it endured, just like it's great that that Glorantha has endured.

But it is clearly just one of many SF games at the moment, likely to be mentioned if someone asks about a SciFi game,but almost always mentioned or upvoted less frequently than Stars Without Numbers, or Scum and Villainy, or Starfinder. And Traveller's status as "just one SF game among many" is typical of its history. Overshadowed time and again by whoever had the Star Wars license, by Star Frontiers, by Shadowrun, by generic systems sci-fi source books, by Mechwarrior. If it was ever the most important SF game, it was in the late 70s, and only if you squint to avoid looking at Gamma World.

The notion that Traveler set some of "model" for science fiction games staggers belief. The model for sci fi games is sci fi media and sci fi books. A Doctor Who game is inspired by Doctor Who, and secondarily by decades of sci fi stories. It is hard to imagine anyone, with a moments reflection, seriously believing that "going places in a vessel" is a debt that is owed to Traveler. Traveler isn't George Bailey, Sci Fi RPGs would almost certainly be the same if it never existed.

Traveller is a fun game, It is an early game. It is great that it still exists. It is not a significant game.
Yup, well said.

I would say that Traveller is a significant game, but not a "default" sci-fi setting, or a "default" sci-fi RPG game or rules system.
 

Yup, well said.

I would say that Traveller is a significant game, but not a "default" sci-fi setting, or a "default" sci-fi RPG game or rules system.
Great, but until you actually provide any argument then I’ll have to dismiss your claims too.

Traveller’s model of science fiction - that of a crew traveling from one planet to another via a spacecraft and getting into encounters - is the default model of science fiction gaming. It is as much a default model as D&D’s adventuring party in a pseudo-medieval setting is. The point still stands, because you’ve not countered it. I’m not entirely sure that these few last posts even understand what the argument is.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
I look at it like this. The iconic Fantasy is Tolkien. Yes, there are other fantastic works of fantasy, but, when you boil it down, if you say, "I want to watch a Fantasy movie", by and large you're thinking swords, horses, castles and wizards, not The Dresden Files. Because, well, Tolkien is THE icon of fantasy.

SF, though, doesn't really have that. Take the three most well known SF properties - Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who. Yup, there are some similarities between them, but, far, far more differences.
Godzilla- and his antecedents and homages- would like a word.

Yeah, it’s out there as a pretty divergent branch, but the “kaijuverse“ is clearly a genre of scifi, and a pretty big and famous one. (Pun intended.)
 

I look at it like this. The iconic Fantasy is Tolkien. Yes, there are other fantastic works of fantasy, but, when you boil it down, if you say, "I want to watch a Fantasy movie", by and large you're thinking swords, horses, castles and wizards, not The Dresden Files. Because, well, Tolkien is THE icon of fantasy.

SF, though, doesn't really have that. Take the three most well known SF properties - Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who. Yup, there are some similarities between them, but, far, far more differences.
Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who all clearly have the same science fiction tropes in common: that of a crew of a space traveling vessel going from location to location - each with diverse geographies, creatures, cultures and societies - getting in adventures. So do things like Serenity, Flash Gordon, Farscape, The Expanse, Traveller and all the other science fiction games and settings that all do exactly the same thing. That is the default. It is just as much a regular trope as a Tolkienesque or D&D fantasy, and there are far more variations in fantasy than in science fiction when you consider things like Harry Potter, The Sandman or His Dark Materials.
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
Great, but until you actually provide any argument then I’ll have to dismiss your claims too.

Traveller’s model of science fiction - that of a crew traveling from one planet to another via a spacecraft and getting into encounters - is the default model of science fiction gaming. It is as much a default model as D&D’s adventuring party in a pseudo-medieval setting is. The point still stands, because you’ve not countered it. I’m not entirely sure that these few last posts even understand what the argument is.
But, Traveller hardly invented that model. That's called, well, fiction. A group of protagonists go around and have encounters describes fiction. As in, nearly all fiction. By that token, Ocean's 11 is the model of Science Fiction and Fantasy.
Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who all clearly have the same science fiction tropes in common: that of a crew of a space traveling vessel going from location to location - each with diverse geographies, creatures, cultures and societies - getting in adventures. So do things like Serenity, Flash Gordon, Farscape, The Expanse, Traveller and all the other science fiction games and settings that all do exactly the same thing. That is the default. It is just as much a regular trope as a Tolkienesque or D&D fantasy, and there are far more variations in fantasy than in science fiction when you consider things like Harry Potter, The Sandman or His Dark Materials.

Umm, nope. Well, maybe tropes, but, who cares about tropes. Those tropes exist in all sort of fiction. What differentiates Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who is theme. That's why Star Wars is probably closer, thematically, to fantasy than SF. Standard Hero's Journey stuff. Whereas Trek and Doctor Who actually make social commentary, which, at it's heart, is what SF is all about.

Your model of Traveller is simply fantasy written into a SF trope setting. It's not SF at all. Space ships and robots don't make SF. Again, I point to Flowers for Algernon, Quest for Fire and 1984 for examples of SF that contains virtually none of the tropes you talk about.

There's a reason that SF doesn't really have a single, big, iconic work. SF isn't about the tropes. The tropes don't matter. It's the themes that make a story an SF story. Which, frankly, don't translate well into an RPG.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top