Why are sci-fi scenarios so thin on the ground?

Fantasy, at least in gaming, is largely standardized through the influence of D&D. We've got pretty standard assumptions about what magic is, what it can do, about what monsters are out there, about society and generally how the world works.

Even if it's a "generic" adventure, the assumptions and legacy of D&D will be stamped firmly on it.

With sci-fi, there's no such single standardization of anything.

Basic assumptions about how the game world works don't hold, and plots that would be next to impossible in challenge in one could be trivially easy in another. For example, Star Trek type transporters and replicators could break a lot of plotlines. . .and Star Wars ships being able to cross the galaxy in a few days at most could break others.

Let's compare some of those assumptions, using some popular "franchises" as examples, since you mentioned Star Wars and Star Trek:

FTL travel. It could be like Star Trek's warp drive, where ships go FTL at a speed where they can get to nearby stars in days (or hours at best), and it takes decades to cross the galaxy. It could be like Star Wars's hyperdrive, where ships generally take only a few minutes or hours to travel from star to star, and crossing the galaxy takes a few days at most. It could be like Babylon 5 (or WH40k), where hyperspace is an alternate dimension with mysterious alien threats lurking in it that's treacherous to travel and requires great caution.

Psychics. It could be like Star Trek, where it's a natural thing that some non-human species have, but it tends to not be very powerful (at least for any species that regularly interacts with the rest of the universe). It could be like the Force in Star Wars, where the talent for it is very rare and warring factions of psychics, with a religious aspect to their beliefs and practices, are a major factor in the setting. It could be like Babylon 5 where they are licensed and registered by the government. It could be like WH40k, where it's licensed and registered by the government, but it also has some strong religious aspects that drive society.

Government. The prevailing government could be a totalitarian Empire with shades of theocracy (like WH40K and the Imperial-era in Star Wars), or it could be a peaceful, democratic society (like Star Trek or Republic-eras in Star Wars), or a contentious, warmongering democracy with shades of oppression and (like the Earth Alliance in Babylon 5)

Economics. You could have a post-singularity economy where money plays no part, or only a very small part of society, like most of Star Trek. You could have a very capitalist economy full of megacorporations and organized crime, like Star Wars.

Transhumanism. You could have a setting that has a strict limits or bans on transhumanism, like Star Trek. You could have one where cyborgs are relatively common, if only subject to a slight societal prejudice (like Star Wars). You could have a setting where cyborgs exist, but are rare and almost unheard of, like Babylon 5. Or you could have a setting where transhuman soldiers are a basic tenet of the setting, like WH40k

Try making adventures that can accommodate those various options and you'll find it's very, very hard to do so, especially to make more than just a few of them.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

dragoner

KosmicRPG.com
Is no one running long-term campaigns in sci-fi anymore?

I am. I have a tendency to "homebrew" my settings, though I have run since SF the late 2000's, Traveller and M-Space. Nevertheless both are sort of soft SF and I like it a little harder. A Gift from Shamash is one of the more recent adventures I have run, though it is getting a little old. I helped do some read-through on SF for m-space, and turned down another publishers offer of helping them on spacecraft, recently. I think there are cross currents of issues with sci-fi, such as publishers that don't even care about the science, vs toxic fans, things like that. However, there is plenty of SF out there, I run a SFRPG group on facebook with thousands of members, so I get a birds eye view of it all.
 

I'm writing (and commissioning) adventures for my space opera RPG, because I think adventures are important part of the genre. But I suspect the more sensible thing for an niche indie creator to do is publish more games, not adventures.

Also, to build off of the point about SF settings and assumptions about technology and capabilities, the popularity of licensed IPs helps create shared assumptions for players about tech, the licencing solves a real problem at the table for SF, in a way that isn't true for other genres. Certainly licenced games consistently thrive in this space throughout the history of the hobby (then die, when their licence runs out), in a way doesn't seem to be true for other genres.
 

Derren

Hero
Imo because many people want power fantasies from their RPGs and its kinda hard to have power fantasies when you have laws, police, investigations, etc. which restrict the characters.
Its easier to be top dog in a fantasy setting.
 

Imo because many people want power fantasies from their RPGs and its kinda hard to have power fantasies when you have laws, police, investigations, etc. which restrict the characters.
Its easier to be top dog in a fantasy setting.

Thankfully I've never had to deal with that sort in any campaign I've run. At least, not for long.
 

Derren

Hero
Thankfully I've never had to deal with that sort in any campaign I've run. At least, not for long.
Sadly I had several groups in fantasy games who scoffed at the very notion that there are laws to be followed. Sure, they did not actively cause mayhem, but still didn't acknowledge that they were in any form restricted by some authority.
 

My thoughts are that sci fi is much harder to run. Unless you're just running fantasy reskinned as sci fi, you've got vehicle travel, star ship combat, power armor, computers, scanners, big laser rifles, etc. Massive number inflation, super powerful characters that can negate most traditional challenges you can imagine. With the speed of travel, your localized world building is pointless.
For it to work like most traditional games, you have to take away the character's powers. In which case, is it even sci-fi?

Nah, its far easier than fantasy. No spells to keep track of, no special powers.

Vehicle travel? Every one of my players owns a vehicle. Not hard to explain how they work. Ship combat? Why would governments allow ships to be armed? They don't today, so why would they in the future? Computers? same as vehicles. Scanners? All artificial sensory devices are based on user assumptions.

Powered armor? OK. They have armor in fantasy games. History proves that armor lags behind weapon development, so no problems there.

Space travel? It's just different locations.
 


Derren

Hero
Vehicle travel? Every one of my players owns a vehicle. Not hard to explain how they work. Ship combat? Why would governments allow ships to be armed? They don't today, so why would they in the future? Computers? same as vehicles. Scanners? All artificial sensory devices are based on user assumptions.

That reminds me, SciFi is also much harder to run if the PCs go off the railroad (or if there is no railroad to begin with). While in fantasy the PCs can travel to the next town to two, in SciFi they can instantly hop continents or planets. And with access to instant communication, internet (or equivalent) and many other tools they can try to solve obstacles in many more ways than a typical fantasy party can.
 

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
I run low-power campaigns, and PCs hang just as easily as anyone else.

Even if you run a not-low-power campaign, there can still be something or someone who'll step in if the characters persist in being actively destructive. Same way the PCs would if they were being more typically heroic ...
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top