Is it always like this?

[Len]

Invariably regardless of the game I run, the players ask for information I didn't prepare, and quite often they'll ask for information that matters that I didn't prepare. I find it pretty much impossible to deal with that flood of information requests in a Sci-Fi campaign that isn't post apocalyptic.

I guess I'll find out how that works out.

2) Plausibility of survival given the lethality of weapons involved is strained unless the PC's are playing some sort of super-human being.

I feel just the opposite about this. In D&D, a character can take a bunch of sword hits that should turn them into butcher's scraps, walk away, and be healed in a few seconds. In most sci-fi games I've played, guns can kill in one or two shots and it takes days or weeks to recover - not quite realistic but much closer to reality than D&D is.

 

[Celebrim]

I feel just the opposite about this. In D&D, a character can take a bunch of sword hits that should turn them into butcher's scraps...

No? I think we are going to get into an argument about what a hit point is again, but this has in my opinion never been true. Regardless of your view on the "meat spectrum", D&D has always maintained that no Player Character ever takes the full force of a blow except when they are reduced to less than zero hit points. A PC with 80 hit points that takes 20 points of damage just take a bad scratch or bruise, and not something that should "turn them into butcher's scraps", because they largely avoided the blow through heroic skill (or some sort) where a lesser figure would have taken the full force of the blow.

...walk away, and be healed in a few seconds.

Barring some recent innovations, only with magic?

In most sci-fi games I've played, guns can kill in one or two shots and it takes days or weeks to recover - not quite realistic but much closer to reality than D&D is.

It's not the "guns" that are the problem. You can use a variety of techniques to mitigate bullets the way you mitigate battle axe blows, from being really dodgy to declaring it was only a flesh wound. It sort of works if you squint.

No, the problem is the M2 Brownings and the 155mm artillery shells and their high tech equivalents. Sooner or later you have to deal with the "elephant gun" problem, which is, if a handgun can kill a humanoid in a few shots, then there exists some weapon that can kill an elephant or a tank or Godzilla in a few shots. How do you model that in such a way that PC's aren't just randomly squashed?

 

[Len]

No? I think we are going to get into an argument about what a hit point is again, but this has in my opinion never been true. Regardless of your view on the "meat spectrum", D&D has always maintained that no Player Character ever takes the full force of a blow except when they are reduced to less than zero hit points.

("Again"? Have you & I argued about this before?)

Last night, a PC in our party was mauled by giants and a dragon until he was unconscious and dying, he fell from a height that would kill anyone (but took no further damage), then he was magically revived, got hit in the face by the dragon's fire breath, and ended the fight on his feet. For plausibility of survival, I'd rate that about a zero.

On the other hand, I've had a Shadowrun character get killed in the first round of combat because he (and I) carelessly put him in a position to get shot at. In Traveller, it took us days or weeks to recover from injuries. To me, these games feel a lot less survivable than D&D.

Barring some recent innovations, only with magic?

Yes, in fantasy games we pretty much always have a cleric or other magic healer in the party. That has a huge effect on survivability compared to games with no on-demand healing.

It's not the "guns" that are the problem. You can use a variety of techniques to mitigate bullets the way you mitigate battle axe blows, from being really dodgy to declaring it was only a flesh wound. It sort of works if you squint.

No, the problem is the M2 Brownings and the 155mm artillery shells and their high tech equivalents. Sooner or later you have to deal with the "elephant gun" problem, which is, if a handgun can kill a humanoid in a few shots, then there exists some weapon that can kill an elephant or a tank or Godzilla in a few shots. How do you model that in such a way that PC's aren't just randomly squashed?

I don't see that as any different from the problem of why low-level D&D parties aren't insta-killed by dragons. The game is arranged so that doesn't usually happen.

In the campaign I'm working on, there are BFGs that could annihilate the players. (@Woundweaver you watching?) Some of them, I expect the players to avoid. Others, I don't know what will happen; but my friends are smart, they'll probably figure it out.

 

[Woundweaver]

(@Woundweaver you watching?)

I am a GM. I know all and see all (or at least have an incredibly high bluff skill).

In Len's case 3 of his 4 players are GMs. Two of them are the group's regular GMs. So going down the rabbit hole is a fairly common affair for two of us.

Honestly, I've found when I'm doing a good job as GM, you players tend to go down your own rabbit holes.

No, the problem is the M2 Brownings and the 155mm artillery shells and their high tech equivalents. Sooner or later you have to deal with the "elephant gun" problem, which is, if a handgun can kill a humanoid in a few shots, then there exists some weapon that can kill an elephant or a tank or Godzilla in a few shots. How do you model that in such a way that PC's aren't just randomly squashed?

Depends on the setting, but the legality and how concealable those weapons are can play a large factor. If the game system doesn't have legality of various weapons it can sometimes be a problem if the system is trying to model weapons 'accurately'. Most systems do not try and create the elephant gun too much or they build in armour that is equal to the task or simply the cost of the weapon is prohibative. In other sci-fi games, returning from death is really only a matter of credits. Spin up that backup of your consciousness, pay the fee for a new body and you are good to go more or less (minus any errors that might occur between your consciousness' backup and the mostly compatible new body).

In the case of Len's campaign, I believe we are either on a space ship or a space station so the legality of weapons could be controlled somewhat. Combine that with the fact that certain weapons you may not necessarily want to fire in a space ship or station and we now have some built in limiting factors on the 'elephant gun' problem.

 

[Len]

Honestly, I've found when I'm doing a good job as GM, you players tend to go down your own rabbit holes.

Cannot deny.