Running RPG games in historical or hard science-fiction settings

[MNblockhead]

I backed the Kickstarter campaign for The Expanse RPG and have the PDF version of the materials and will have the physical books within a few months.

Two things worry me about running games in this setting:

1. Players who are far more familiar with the story and setting

and

2. Players who are far more knowledgeable about the science and technology depicted in the setting

The first issue is one that can challenge a DM running a game in any setting based on popular books, movies, or a TV series. At least The Expanse is science fiction, set in a possible future. So at least I'm not arguing "facts." On the other hand, I've only watch the TV series and read the RPG materials. I have not yet read the original books. While I can certainly just state that my adventures are based on the setting but that the events in the book may not have taken place in the campaign setting. Yet, I worry that uber-fan players would be disappointed. Much of the reason folks would join a game in this setting is because they are fans of the novels and/or TV series.

The second issue is even trickier. I can just hand-waive physics and say "its magic." One of the main draws of the setting is that is based on a hard-science fiction setting. Not as hard-science as, say, The Martian, but much more so than Star Trek, Star Wars, Starfinder, Doctor Who, etc.

I think that there are only two good options for dealing with issue 2. One, which I think many would recommend, is to simply state that we are making assumptions and hand-waving a lot so that we can just play the game. GM-rule trumps physics. Option two is to work arguing the science into the game. Being the geek that I am, I like number two. The idea is that if someone can convince me of the scientific possibility or impossibility of something happening in the game, within a brief window of time, they can change the outcome. The Expanse game already has fortune points built into the system so I would like work with that, buy awarding temporary fortune points. Or, I would would allow them to rule the drama die and get that many stunt point that they have to use for their action related to the test for which they are making a scientific argument about.

In another system, say a D&D 5e game ran in a historical setting, you could give someone inspiration if they make a successful history challenge.

Some of you reading this are thinking, "that sounds interesting", most of you are probably thinking this sounds like an invitation for arm-chair scholars to derail a game.

And this is the real challenge. Getting together 4-6 people who have the same expectations related to the setting.

I think it is easier in games like D&D with settings that are complete fantasy. As soon as you start claiming a setting is historical or is based on real science, you are creating a significant challenge to the non-scholar DM.

Anyone else have experiences with this? How did you handle it and what are your lessons learned?

 

[Nagol]

I'm usually worried about GMs who don't have an understanding of basic science. There was one Traveler GM back in the mists of time who insisted radio was slower than light because nothing is faster than light! Semaphore flashing became our go-to communication simply because it was received faster than radio communication. Or the writers on Orphan Black who thought clones have the same fingerprints.

Tech doesn't become much of an issue for the players so long as it is consistently portrayed and unusual situations are extrapolatable from known conditions. The only exception would be someone who thinks they are knowledgeable about a subject and is trying to McGuyver a custom solution to a problem.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm usually worried about GMs who don't have an understanding of basic science. There was one Traveler GM back in the mists of time who insisted radio was slower than light because nothing is faster than light! Semaphore flashing became our go-to communication simply because it was received faster than radio communication.

Ohhhh, that hurts.

 

[uzirath]

The first issue is one that can challenge a DM running a game in any setting based on popular books, movies, or a TV series. At least The Expanse is science fiction, set in a possible future. So at least I'm not arguing "facts." On the other hand, I've only watch the TV series and read the RPG materials. I have not yet read the original books. While I can certainly just state that my adventures are based on the setting but that the events in the book may not have taken place in the campaign setting. Yet, I worry that uber-fan players would be disappointed. Much of the reason folks would join a game in this setting is because they are fans of the novels and/or TV series.

It's worth talking to the players about what they would expect. Back in the depths of time, I ran a fair number of campaigns relating to Middle Earth. Never, in any of those campaigns, did the fellowship make an appearance. Often we set the game in different ages. After The Return of the King (the fourth age) was a popular one. That way, if you read the books, you'd know the history, and a few of the NPCs were still around, but it's not like anybody could say, "But how could Aragorn be over here because according to my copy of The Two Towers, he was supposed to be over there." We also played a game in the second age. These worked well. The flavor of the setting was there. But we tackled different stories and events. The fourth age story revolved around the clearing and rebuilding of Moria and a trade route between it and Erebor. There were many rich locations from the books—Moria, Mirkwood, the Beornings, the wood elves, Laketown, Dale, the Lonely Mountain, etc.—but the plot and challenges could be entirely new.

Does the Expanse RPG have any recommendations about this? Without knowing anything about the product, but having read the books and seen the show, I would want to keep any characters from the books as background material. I would definitely avoid having much interaction with the key protagonists of the series (Holden, Naomi, etc.). I could imagine having the PCs be plucky explorers on their way through the gate to a new world. Or, asteroid miners trying to get by. Or spies from Earth or Mars. Regardless, I would set things after the most recent season or book and then make it clear that the setting history is forking from the point at which the game starts. If a new book or season can fit nicely into the background, great, but if not, it doesn't count.

2. Players who are far more knowledgeable about the science and technology depicted in the setting.

I'm intrigued by your ideas of having "science challenges" at the table. My first instinct is to keep such things for after the game. I wouldn't want to bog things down at the table most of the time, and I like to have time to consider the implications of a change. If it were me, I'd say that I'm sticking with the game's assumptions. When in doubt, the rulebook is how it works (even if someone thinks it should work differently). If a question comes up in-game that isn't in the rules, I would make a call (usually with player input, or just put it up for a vote) but any debate would be postponed until after the game. If we later agree on a different solution, I would just say so and go with it. The previous call was just a fluke or an anomaly. It's helpful if any players with expertise know that you value them as resources in this regard.

 

[MNblockhead]

I'm usually worried about GMs who don't have an understanding of basic science. There was one Traveler GM back in the mists of time who insisted radio was slower than light because nothing is faster than light! Semaphore flashing became our go-to communication simply because it was received faster than radio communication. Or the writers on Orphan Black who thought clones have the same fingerprints.

Tech doesn't become much of an issue for the players so long as it is consistently portrayed and unusual situations are extrapolatable from known conditions. The only exception would be someone who thinks they are knowledgeable about a subject and is trying to McGuyver a custom solution to a problem.

Well, you exhibit what I'm worried about. I fear that the examples you mention would not be considered "basic science" to many. I got your first reference, but had to google your second. I would guess that many people would mistake radio waves for sound waves. I knew that environmental factors could affect finger prints but did not know that the [FONT=&quot]intrauterine environment would have enough of an effect to give them different fingerprints at birth.




[/FONT]

 

[MNblockhead]

It's worth talking to the players about what they would expect. Back in the depths of time, I ran a fair number of campaigns relating to Middle Earth. Never, in any of those campaigns, did the fellowship make an appearance. Often we set the game in different ages. After The Return of the King (the fourth age) was a popular one. That way, if you read the books, you'd know the history, and a few of the NPCs were still around, but it's not like anybody could say, "But how could Aragorn be over here because according to my copy of The Two Towers, he was supposed to be over there." We also played a game in the second age. These worked well. The flavor of the setting was there. But we tackled different stories and events. The fourth age story revolved around the clearing and rebuilding of Moria and a trade route between it and Erebor. There were many rich locations from the books—Moria, Mirkwood, the Beornings, the wood elves, Laketown, Dale, the Lonely Mountain, etc.—but the plot and challenges could be entirely new.

Does the Expanse RPG have any recommendations about this? Without knowing anything about the product, but having read the books and seen the show, I would want to keep any characters from the books as background material. I would definitely avoid having much interaction with the key protagonists of the series (Holden, Naomi, etc.). I could imagine having the PCs be plucky explorers on their way through the gate to a new world. Or, asteroid miners trying to get by. Or spies from Earth or Mars. Regardless, I would set things after the most recent season or book and then make it clear that the setting history is forking from the point at which the game starts. If a new book or season can fit nicely into the background, great, but if not, it doesn't count.

I've mainly skimmed through it. But what I love AND what scares me is they have a section on space flight that goes into velocity; thrust and mass; mass, spin, and thrust gravity; Rocketry and the Epstein Drive; Apoapsis and Periapsis; Circularizing Orbit; Hohmann Transfers; Brachistochrone Trajectories and Hard Burns; thrust to weight ratio; system communication and travel times.

Now, they are hardly going into deep dives on any of these subjects. Also, the actual game mechanics are easy and travel and comm times just need a table reference. But I play with engineers and military guys who'll catch misuse of terms, which is why I'd rather bake challenges of the science into the game, as long as they don't become too disruptive.

The rules do not specifically address issues related to understanding the setting or science beyond a couple paragraphs in the "The Final Call" section, which addresses how the GM's decision is the final call and this is mostly regarding not worrying about getting every rule right all the time.

The rule do, however, address dealing with canon:

Dealing with Canon
The Expanse series details major characters and events that establish the setting where your story happens. Much of this
is described in The Guide to the System. But when you’re writing an adventure, how much of the canon should affect what
you’re writing and, if it does, does it matter if you change it? When designing your game, you’ll be faced with deciding how
much the existing setting affects your story. The following are some techniques to use when dealing with it.

INSPIRATION
You can use the existing canon as a springboard for your storyline. Use of existing characters and events gives you a healthy
pool of stories, personalities, and ideas from which to create a foundation for a great campaign. This also creates an immediate
level of recognition for you and players familiar with The Expanse series. The trade-off is that you are bound to those
portions of the canon you incorporate into your game. For example, if you decide to use Miller as a major NPC in your game,
you are limited to a certain period of time where that would be possible, and you have to be aware of Miller’s ultimate fate
(and the fact that your players may know it as well).

FLEXIBLE CANON
You can use canonic elements in your game, such as the setting or past events, but choose to change some things that would
conflict with your planned storyline. All of the major components can remain prevalent, such as the major factions and locations,
but with tweaks in the events that follow. What if there were more survivors of the Canterbury? What if the Player Characters
were the ones hired to track down Julie Mao? What if your story involved the crew of the Rocinante as major NPCs?

IGNORE CANON
You can bypass canon altogether, or base your story around events with little to no effect on existing canon. The Expanse
setting is vast and you could tailor stories and events that barely even touch the established canon outlined in the fiction.
An entire campaign could focus on a crisis on one of the many different stations, or on an exploration crew traversing the
outer planets.

Communicate Changes
Whatever you decide, make sure if your players are aware of existing canon, they are also aware of any changes you make
to avoid confusion. In addition, if you do alter major events, be aware of the chain reaction it may have on other events and
characters down the road.

Pretty obvious advice. I think I would take the middle route. If I ignore canon all together, am I really running a game that the players will think of as "The Expanse." On the other hand, I'm not great at remembering character names and other details from the shows. My preference is to acknowledge them, but set the game so that these characters and events are separated in time and space and that the PCs would only have heard some details of the most well known and reported events.

I'm intrigued by your ideas of having "science challenges" at the table. My first instinct is to keep such things for after the game. I wouldn't want to bog things down at the table most of the time, and I like to have time to consider the implications of a change. If it were me, I'd say that I'm sticking with the game's assumptions. When in doubt, the rulebook is how it works (even if someone thinks it should work differently. If a question comes up in-game that isn't in the rules, I would make a call (usually with player input, or just put it up for a vote) but any debate would be postponed until after the game. If we later agree on a different solution, I would just say so and go with it. The previous call was just a fluke or an anomaly. It's helpful if any players with expertise know that you value them as resources in this regard.

If I'm doing a one shot, or playing a long game, keeping until after the game is basically the same as GM fiat. I would rather give the players a very short period of time to prove their point or at least convince the table. If they do, they will get fortune or stunt points sufficient to change things.

 

[Nagol]

Well, you exhibit what I'm worried about. I fear that the examples you mention would not be considered "basic science" to many. I got your first reference, but had to google your second. I would guess that many people would mistake radio waves for sound waves. I knew that environmental factors could affect finger prints but did not know that the [FONT="]intrauterine environment would have enough of an effect to give them different fingerprints at birth. [/FONT]

Identical twins are clones. They don't have the same fingerprints. Many a murder mystery has relied on that.

 

[uzirath]

If I'm doing a one shot, or playing a long game, keeping until after the game is basically the same as GM fiat. I would rather give the players a very short period of time to prove their point or at least convince the table. If they do, they will get fortune or stunt points sufficient to change things.

Yeah, this makes good sense. I'd love to hear an after-action report after you try this out!

 

[Bagpuss]

I backed the Kickstarter campaign for The Expanse RPG and have the PDF version of the materials and will have the physical books within a few months.

Two things worry me about running games in this setting:

1. Players who are far more familiar with the story and setting

and

2. Players who are far more knowledgeable about the science and technology depicted in the setting

Don't worry, use them as a resource. It is okay to give up some narrative control, and be informed by the players.

 

[Jonathan Tweet]

You're right to be concerned. I've done a lot of game design work in historical settings especially ancient Egypt, 1920s Egypt, medieval Europe, and now the 17th century Mediterranean. It can be hard going. I encourage people to be flexible and not try too hard to make everything right. That said, Ken Hite says the the best thing to do with an RPG campaign is to set it in the real world, and I think he might be right. Tapping into historical things that people recognize can help make the world seem vast and real.

Science fiction is the hardest because it's so hard for people to agree on what future technology can or cannot do.