Sci-Fi, space battles and multiple PCs in a single ship

[Jhaelen]

It seems unlikely. Orbital mechanics are *really* complicated. Rocket science ain’t for the faint-hearted.

Maybe there's no RPG that uses orbital mechanics, but there's definitely a board game that does: High Frontier
It's a thing of beauty, but I agree it's not for the faint of heart:

 

[Spookykid]

Maybe there's no RPG that uses orbital mechanics, but there's definitely a board game that does: High Frontier
It's a thing of beauty, but I agree it's not for the faint of heart:

Thats pretty badass but I was thinking of just zooming around in space, 2dish. Possibly using a 4 sided ruler to plot vectors and you wouldn't have to actually calculate anything.

 

[Morrus]

I think, for me, I'm happy with having a maximum amount you can accelerate and decelerate per turn based on the ship's engines and size, and minimum turning circles based on size and speed. Anything more complex than that is probably outside of what I'd personally want in a tabletop RPG.

That baordgame does look stunning, though. I'm seriously considering picking that up now!

 

[Laurefindel]

I think people don't expect more realism in a sci-fi RPG that they expect realism in a medieval-fantasy RPG. By "realism" people usually mean "something I can relate to my experience (first-hand or second-hand) of the world we live in". In a medieval fantasy game, this usually means "nobody in its right mind should expect to jump down a 30-foot cliff and keep on running at full pace". In sci-fi it usually means that some basic principles of Newtonian physics will be applied.

Obviously, there's always going to be a part of fiction in science-fiction, but those who enjoy hard sci-fi will look for a game with mechanics a bit closer to what we know of space exploration (or what we think we know of space exploration) than a space-opera RPG with concepts that no-longer have anything to do with science.

Personally, I like the fact that my X-wing needs to bank when turning, or stops moving if let go of the gas pedal. Perhaps the inertia-dampeners are more effective on the z-axis than the y-axis due to propulsion systems? But at that point, whatever techno-babbling explanation I'll come with has little to do with science.

But as much as I like my space-opera, that boardgame looks magnificent...

 

[MarkB]

To me, things like orbital dynamics have such an elegance to them that it seems like a shame not to use them, even with the added complexities they bring. I love settings like The Expanse, where navigating the solar system is a matter of making best use of planets' orbital paths and gravity wells, much like plotting a naval voyage to take advantage of the prevailing winds and currents. I fully understand that not many people are looking for that level of detail in a game, but I'm still sad not to be able to experience it.

 

[Morrus]

I guess if somebody wants actual realistic space travel rules, it doesn't really need to be a "rule" -- at that point it's just physics. You could totally just use physics and calculate orbits and payloads and stuff, assuming you know how to. I suppose the rulebook would just say "use physics to determine how long the journey from the moon to Titan would take".

I expect there's a subset of gamers who'd enjoy that.

 

[aramis erak]

I can only think of two with seriously realistic space combat: T&I's/Chessex's Albedo RPG, and BTRC's SpaceTime.

In both cases, all the rolls are essentially programming the firing systems, which resolve in a single pass and there's no time for player input during the exchange...

It basically leaves the space battle for a single intense interpersonal scene while things go to hell for a single screaming minute or two.