Why no one plays sci-fi RPGs

[Humanophile]

D4, I'm pretty sure he's still around and kicking. IIRC, I've seen a few interviews/commentaries with him that were put out quite recently.

And I think that the reason sci-fi (or whatever you want to call it) hasn't taken off as a gaming phenonema came up briefly and then dropped under the surface. Gaming is an overwhelmingly escapist activity, and most sci-fi games prefer to keep characters "realistic"; in other words, never really letting them get away with superhuman, ego-tripping feats.

Popular sci-fi tends to do one of two things; either it wraps up another, more larger-than-life genre in technobabble, or else it tells a nice human-level story with varying degrees of fictional-tech intrusion. The first has been done before, and has produced some far from forgettable games (not quite a D&D or a WW, but we want our superhuman magic, dangit!), the latter is obscenely hard to do in any gaming setting, simply because a multiplayer RPG can't really develop the intensive single-character focus needed for it. The other players have a tendency to get bored, after all.

 

[Agback]

D4, I'm pretty sure he's still around and kicking. IIRC, I've seen a few interviews/commentaries with him that were put out quite recently.

He died on the 6th of April 1992. Check the Encyclopedia Britannica if you doubt me.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Ranger REG]

So what would those Star Trek-convention-attending wussies do?

I dunno. Never been to one in a very long time. It's probably like what those GenCon wussies do?

 

[Dark Psion]

I have played lots of Sci-Fi games in the past and I am warming up to GURPS: Transhuman Space at the moment.

The biggest problem for I see is that the most popular Sci-Fi RPGs are the licensed products and they have a bad habit of changing licenses.

FASA Star Trek was OK , LUGStar Trek was great , but Decipher Star Trek, no thank you .

Once the license has moved you are on your own in creating new stuff to keep the game going and there is that line when it become more of a chore than fun.

Problem two is that Sci-Fi is an everchanging art and some people are more likely to want to play the flavor of the month (FIREFLY ) and unlike D&D, the new flavor may be an entirely different system.

 

[mmadsen]

Why do you think it's intended as a troll?

Because you're aggressively pushing a ludicrous position.

Fahrenheit 451 is not science-fiction, and never was. It's a dystopian fantasy. Setting a novel in the future does not make it science-fiction.

Dystopian fantasy? Riiiigggghhhht...

 

[Desdichado]

Why do you think it's intended as a troll? Believe me, if I wanted to troll, I could better than this. Fahrenheit 451 is not science-fiction, and never was. It's a dystopian fantasy. Setting a novel in the future does not make it science-fiction.

I think your definition of science fiction differs from everyone else here. Therefore, the question of why "no one" plays science fiction RPGs probably has little common ground between us.

 

[Shadowdancer]

There are lots of hard-core science fiction fans who do not consider Bradbury to be a science fiction writer. There was even a joke about it in a "Simpsons" episode, one of the early seasons.

 

[Laslo Tremaine]

My gaming group has found anything on the hard side of science fiction to be completely unplayable.

Pretty much all of us are avid amatuer science buffs (some more than others). So when we are playing an SF game any faults that might lie in the science of the game come glaringly to the forefront (and trust me, you DO NOT want to watch an SF movie or series with any of us).

I have three examples of how this causes problems for us.

1) Way back in the late 80's we were doing a campaign based on Larry Niven's Known Space books. The GM was the one member of our group who had a lesser science background than the rest of us. In one scenario we came into a system that had an asteroid belt that when investigated turned out to be quite interesting. All of the "asteroids" were various geometric solids in very unusual orbital patterns. We spent a significant ammount of time investigating the "asteroid belt", asking questions about whether the "asteroids" emited any energy, wether we could detect and outside power source somewhere else in the system, etc, etc. The GM couldn't figure out why we were asking all these questions and why we were spending so much time on what he had intended as just some window dressing. What he did not realize is that the orbits of the asteroids were completely unnatural, and could not be sustained without some kind of internal or external force acting on them to maintain their unusual orbits. Our willing-suspension-of-disbelief was completely shattered and he was frustrated because we were (in his opinion) wasting time with trivial crap.

2) In a later campaign that was a near-future Mars exploration and pre-colonization campaign. One player was spending an innordinate ammount of time asking the GM (a different one this time) very detailed geological questions. He wanted precise information on rock types, strata, etc, etc. The GM (who was more of a physics nut and not a geology buff) was answering questions to the best of his ability, but the geologist player was getting frustrated because the GM was unwittingly giving him conflicting answers. The main problem here was that in this case the GM had made the geology an intergral part of the scenario, but had screwed it up...

3) The last example was with a separate group that I was a part of. It was a WWII superheroes game. We had been given a dirigible that was filled with a gas that was "better" than helium. I took that to mean that it was some pseudo-science gas that was somehow more bouyant than helium or something (I knew better than to ask questions). At one point were were chasing a villian through the interior of the dirigible, and my character went running directly in to the interior of the super-structure. Everyone in the group was horrified that I had not put on my anti-static booties. I boggled back at them. "Why the hell would I need antistatic booties, this thing wasn't filled with hydrogen". "Yes but I could still set off a spark" they warned. "So what," I countered, "the gas this thing is filled with is 'better' than helium." "That's correct," they said. "So," I continued, "that means it should be inert." Blank stares all around. With patience I went on, "Helium is inert, non-flamable, won't catch on fire, therefore I don't need little booties". The GM just looked at me and said with a straight face, "well this gas is still somewhat flamable, but less so than hydrogen." Now it was my turn for the blank stare, "So how the hell is it 'better' than helium, and why the hell aren't we using helium?!" I finally agreed to let it go, but once again my willing-suspension-of-disbelief was completely shattered...

Our group has pretty much agreed that we are incapable of anything approaching hard SF. We seem to be OK with space-opera, and science-fantasy. And, super-heroes are fine as long as no one is playing a Super-Scientist. But other than that, hard SF is off limits.

Oh, and by the way, SF elitists (of which I know many), will tell you that sci-fi is the plural of scum-fum...

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Well, I prefer Science Fantasy, as opposed to Hard SF. Most of the stuff in my games would be extremely pulpy. Like swords made of Uranium that gave you POWERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Ranger REG]

I have played lots of Sci-Fi games in the past and I am warming up to GURPS: Transhuman Space at the moment.

The biggest problem for I see is that the most popular Sci-Fi RPGs are the licensed products and they have a bad habit of changing licenses.

FASA Star Trek was OK , LUGStar Trek was great , but Decipher Star Trek, no thank you .

Once the license has moved you are on your own in creating new stuff to keep the game going and there is that line when it become more of a chore than fun.

Perhaps, but as you are warming up to a game that is not a licensed property, there are science-fiction RPGs out there that are not officially based on media, but can be served as a platform for a certain setting. I have seen group that uses the GURP system to play a Star Trek universe. Other science-fiction/fantasy RPG brand are owned by the creator of the game, such as Dragonstar or Traveller.

Problem two is that Sci-Fi is an everchanging art and some people are more likely to want to play the flavor of the month (FIREFLY ) and unlike D&D, the new flavor may be an entirely different system.

Ehhh. D&D is merely a platform, but from that ruleset we have a lot of different fantasy genres, from Asian to Persian, from Epic to Dark, from Horror to Political, from Island to Desert.

It is possible to use one rules platform that can branch off to different categories of science fiction/fantasy, that way it tailors to individual group's flavor.

But as you say, it is an everchanging art, especially with high-tech gears and new sciences.