Space Adventure RPGs
Thomas Shey
Legend
I think that requires ignoring a pretty fair chunk of lit-SF; some is, of course, just space opera, but its far less true than with visual media SF (and with that, its been true largely since day one; I'm a big fan of 50's SF movies but its not like most them gave much of a damn about science, either).
gamerprinter
Mapper/Publisher
As I mentioned in any earlier post, I publish Starfinder third party compatible products, and Starfinder is "science fantasy" with great amounts of magic. The Pact Worlds setting is kind of an impossible system of dozens of planets all inside it's habitable zone, and if measuring distances from worlds to the imagined speeds of Drift drives, I can only guess that Drift is sublight speed, so not FTL. As third party, I cannot use the Pact Worlds (I wouldn't want to anyway), and cannot even use Drift drives with the accepted alternate of the same thing being Hyperspace drives. However, I mention that I lean harder sci-fi, much harder than the default Starfinder setting. Magic is still fully incorporated, but the setting isn't as gonzo. To some degree I grasp the "science" part slightly more.
Last December, I published a 39 page supplement called The Planet Builder. It began with me creating one-shots, and not satisfied with Starfinder's default planet stat block, and wanting something more for my own publications. I was visiting a Discord community called Derwood's Starfinder Combat League, where some of it's members are decent designers. I posed the question, how should I develop a better planet stat block and/or rules to create custom planets. Because that community features starship combat training exercises, someone suggested emulating the starship building rules doing so for planets. And I began development of that in that Discord community, somebody on their boards (Carey Dunn), turns out to be an astrophysicist lab technician suggested because among the factors of world building, is determinig it's moons and their influence on the planets gravity and tides, which habitable zone and where within it exists matters too - why not build rules for custom entire star systems. So I recruited Carey to create the tables for generating scientifically viable star systems. I coupled this with a planet point system allowing you to adjust your table rolls to further customize to your needs, then spending planet points you could purchase Resource Stations (orbiting mine processors, for example) which manifest annual planet points to your pool, as well as other extra-planetary structures (orbiting rings, space stations, weapons platforms, Oniell cylinders, etc.) to grow your system over time.
A major development consideration, is Paizo published a deck of Planets, but under it's default premise you can have worlds that are entirely water, no solid matter at all, and other impossible possibilities. While my rules doesn't preclude such integrations, you'd have to replace a planet or moon created in the tables to accommodate more fanciful results. I designed my Planet Builder rules to be fully compatible with Starfinder, yet as a subsystem only, it's versatile and scientific enough to be useful in any other Sci-Fi game system that lacks rules to generate entire star systems. In a way, it goes against the Starfinder default grain, but I don't care - it's what I needed, so it's what I created. Thus it cannot possibly fit every Starfinder GM's default, it does fit some, and for referees of other game systems than Starfinder, possibly. It was a design choice.
Last December, I published a 39 page supplement called The Planet Builder. It began with me creating one-shots, and not satisfied with Starfinder's default planet stat block, and wanting something more for my own publications. I was visiting a Discord community called Derwood's Starfinder Combat League, where some of it's members are decent designers. I posed the question, how should I develop a better planet stat block and/or rules to create custom planets. Because that community features starship combat training exercises, someone suggested emulating the starship building rules doing so for planets. And I began development of that in that Discord community, somebody on their boards (Carey Dunn), turns out to be an astrophysicist lab technician suggested because among the factors of world building, is determinig it's moons and their influence on the planets gravity and tides, which habitable zone and where within it exists matters too - why not build rules for custom entire star systems. So I recruited Carey to create the tables for generating scientifically viable star systems. I coupled this with a planet point system allowing you to adjust your table rolls to further customize to your needs, then spending planet points you could purchase Resource Stations (orbiting mine processors, for example) which manifest annual planet points to your pool, as well as other extra-planetary structures (orbiting rings, space stations, weapons platforms, Oniell cylinders, etc.) to grow your system over time.
A major development consideration, is Paizo published a deck of Planets, but under it's default premise you can have worlds that are entirely water, no solid matter at all, and other impossible possibilities. While my rules doesn't preclude such integrations, you'd have to replace a planet or moon created in the tables to accommodate more fanciful results. I designed my Planet Builder rules to be fully compatible with Starfinder, yet as a subsystem only, it's versatile and scientific enough to be useful in any other Sci-Fi game system that lacks rules to generate entire star systems. In a way, it goes against the Starfinder default grain, but I don't care - it's what I needed, so it's what I created. Thus it cannot possibly fit every Starfinder GM's default, it does fit some, and for referees of other game systems than Starfinder, possibly. It was a design choice.
Last edited:
dragoner
KosmicRPG.com
I find while I have and interest in games, role playing games, and science fiction role playing games in general; when one looks at what I am usually reading, as well as posting in my discord, twitter, facebook, etc.. It is usually science, and engineering articles, many of them technical, which in turn circles back on to why I made my own sfrpg, as a teaching tool, it allows one to experience, and interact with the science fiction concepts, such as transhumanism, or solarpunk, as well as science, and technology.
Myrdin Potter
Hero
I find another thing about SF games is that many recent ones have been tied to movies/tv show IP.
Meanwhile, interesting releases like this struggle to get as noticed:
www.kickstarter.com
Meanwhile, interesting releases like this struggle to get as noticed:
Reign of Discordia for 5e/White Star (Canceled)
Space Opera for two systems -- White Star (the Old School Renaissance game) and 5e.
dragoner
KosmicRPG.com
I know of Reign of Discordia, and it promises new space combat rules, something that is often brought up in discussions of SFRPG's is how they handle space combat. It is sort of the "magic rules" for sci-fi vs fantasy.
Promotion by designers, publishers is important, and with that, reading the room. I mean, for a lot of the licensed big name RPG's, they have a lot of promotion going on
Promotion by designers, publishers is important, and with that, reading the room. I mean, for a lot of the licensed big name RPG's, they have a lot of promotion going on
payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
I think the generic sci-fi has just never took off like the fantasy genre has. SW has had some luck getting a little traction.I find another thing about SF games is that many recent ones have been tied to movies/tv show IP.
Meanwhile, interesting releases like this struggle to get as noticed:
Reign of Discordia for 5e/White Star (Canceled)
Space Opera for two systems -- White Star (the Old School Renaissance game) and 5e.
How is the white star system? 5E reskins are no go for me. They all end up feeling like D&D.
Myrdin Potter
Hero
I think White Star is an amazing example of how to do a pretty rules light SF system. Space combat, for example, just treats the ships as monsters and you run the combat using the same rules as you generally do.
Rules light does not mean that there is not a lot of content in the rulebook, just that it is built on top of 0e D&D and does not add so much complexity that you could not drop a dragon into your world and then fight it with powered armor and lasers.
Rules light does not mean that there is not a lot of content in the rulebook, just that it is built on top of 0e D&D and does not add so much complexity that you could not drop a dragon into your world and then fight it with powered armor and lasers.
dragoner
KosmicRPG.com
I saw an at the barrier peaks style 5e module coming out that is power armor and lasers vs a dragon on the cover. Definitely games have a built up fandom around them that help give them impetus, mothership is one. At the same time, one has to ask why is say there is going to be another sfrpg horror or dystopia, why? What makes it different than the ton of others? There are a lot in that category, and maybe it is to capitalize on another success without jumping on their bandwagon or something.
