What is different in sci-fi gaming? [The Limits of Sci-Fi]

[Christopher Kubasik]

Hi Wayne,

In the game you're proposing, would the new twist in technology be established and fixed at the start, or would the implications of the new technology be allowed to grow.

This is what I was trying to get at with the post above: Can the science of the world change during play.  (Most SF stories depend on the tech changing or the implications changing.)

For me, the GM or players already know everything about the tech at the start of play, it doesn't quite feel like SF -- no matter how wonky the new science.

Does this point of improvised innovation/revelation during play have no value; or is it just impossible to do in RPGs; or what?

Christopher

[Cadriel]

Alan:

What you're talking about has a relationship to something that I used to be very hot on about a year or two ago, with the relationships that humans form to their tools, in essence the fuzzy line between person and technology as extension of person (read Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media for more).  I think that leads into scientific positivism, of which I am skeptical.  That is an interesting issue, though:  a lot of the posts here seem to assume a stance that science, in a science fiction game, can solve problems.  Is this stance necessary for a sci-fi game?  Is it what makes the science fiction elements more than just color?  I think it's worth thinking about.

Blake:

Agreed - I guess I read too much into your earlier post.  The issue of hard and soft sci-fi roleplaying may soon drift to where it demands its own topic, but it isn't there yet.

Christopher:

That's different from what I thought you were getting at; it's also a very interesting topic.  I think Blake's point about scientific extrapolation being difficult without a strong science background is relevant; however, I'm not sure how it'd be best handled in an RPG.  When metaplot is used to introduce tech, it tends to be heavy-handed; I suppose improvisation would have to be the most readily implemented method of tech creation, and probably among the strongest; if a PC is particularly capable at technological innovation, that could be it, or it could be introduced by the GM or even another player in Director Stance (so long as it fits the requirement of not being a sudden unveiling of the "Solution to Our Specific Overall Problem," which seems outlandish to me and I think deprotagonizes the PCs in general).  It could have interesting results if built into a game system, I think.

-Wayne

[Alan]

What you're talking about has a relationship to something that I used to be very hot on about a year or two ago, with the relationships that humans form to their tools,

This is a misunderstanding of my post.  I would in no way restrict my theory to relationship to tools.  I suggested that SF deals with themes of relationship of self to the _outer world_.  Tools are incidental to this.  It  also includes inginuity in the face of difficulty, awe in the face of the nature of the universe and relationship of self to social organization and even new ideas themselves.  

Is this stance necessary for a sci-fi game?  Is it what makes the science fiction elements more than just color?  

The stance that everything can be understood is not required for an SF game - though it would be required for a game that reflects, say 1940s or 50s SF.  No, what I think is required is that some assumption of the setting must set up the characters to face their mortality, limitations, and also their inginuity.  Again, not restricted simply to tools, or even just technology - but including social innovation and ideas.

[talysman]

hi, I've been following the thread for a while, and finally mulled over my thoughts enough that I think I have something worthwhile to add.

Wayne rightly notes that most science fiction rpgs seem to be distinguished primarily by color. it's mostly about tech stuff -- which some may say is not true to the genre. I think part of the problem here is that the literary genre of SF is not uniform in definition: some SF works are SF solely in terms of color, while others are thoughtful stories about turning points in science (Christoper's examples,) or stories about relationship of Self to Other (Alan's examples.)

you could argue that "real SF" must fit into either of the last two cases, but in practice all that matters is the color; "science turning points" and "relationship of Self and Other" stories are classified as science fiction by the marketing gods because they tend to produce "SF color". the crucial proof lies in classifying H G Wells as a writer of science fiction when most of his writings are really social commentary with SF color (The Time Machine is really a critique of the British class system set in the distant future to avoid controversy; The War of the Worlds is about war and human inhumanity.)

Blake raises a point about fantasy elements (fantasy color) being injected into science fiction in order to introduce mystery into the setting. I find the point interesting because I disagree -- at least as far as rpgs go (I think it may be true of written SF.) fantasy color does not inject any mystery into an rpg, any more than ... religious color.

I think that's the important point; the "why can't there be more `real SF' rpgs?" question is another version of the "why can't there be more `real religion' rpgs?" question... as well as the question about the lack of good fabulist rpgs. there don't seem to be many rpgs that handle mystery or wonder well, at least as written.

I think a hard SF "turning point" game is possible. the problem is twofold: few players have expressed a desire to play that sort of game, and most SF color games are not truly adequate to handle the task.

I will make a daring suggestion, here: this kind of SF game is best handled as Narrativism, not Simulation.

[M. J. Young]

Obviously this is an interesting topic--see how it has exploded even before I had a chance to see it.

why is it that the games are not as successful overall as their fantasy and modern-occult counterparts?

Let me hazard a guess here that's a bit off the beaten track of this thread.

A lot of people are attracted to role playing by the idea that they can be something that they couldn't possibly be in reality. Magic-using characters in fantasy are very popular for this very reason: because most of us believe we can't have access to magic in reality, but it's a lot of fun to pretend we can. I note that among the more successful science fiction games, there are generally at least one of 1) pseudo-fantasy powers; 2) cybertech; or 3) mutant powers. Even in Star Wars, the most popular characters are those who use The Force, that "ancient religion", as one of the incidental characters labeled it in A New Hope. In most science fiction, it's about ordinary people using fancy gadgets to do extraordinary things. Unless you have a way for the ordinary people to be inherently different, you've lost a critical attraction, particularly a critical initial attraction, to role playing. Fantasy offers this. Even if within the game world magic is ordinary and routine, from the real world perspective it looks like being special and having powers no one else has. Once the player starts with fantasy, shifting to science fiction is going to be limited by the twin facts 1) that their desire for this specialness has been satisfied to some degree by fantasy and 2) that since fantasy was the original attraction there will be a disproportionate ratio of fantasy over sci fi fans in the hobby.

Note to Clehrich: "Pervy" is the opposite of "Vanilla". There was a thread on it not too long ago that made some good points, but I'm not really in a position to hunt it down right now. Do a search for pervy and vanilla and you should find it pretty quick--it's recent, and on one of the main forums.

There really is no way a GM or game author can make up enough detail to cover the amount of ground that a science fiction game can very easily come into contact with; even basic planning becomes repetetive and tedious with such vistas present. How can a sci-fi game get past that difficulty?

Sure there are ways.

Given the size of the universe you've just described, it should be patently obvious that no character knows more than a smattering about more than a few planets. The computer database on their ship can't have complete information about all those worlds--and if it did, they couldn't access it all very easily without search limiters.

The referee thus really only has to have detailed a half dozen different kinds of planets when he starts play, and only in a sketchy sense. Sure, he'll have to expand his world as he goes, but everyone does this.

How does this work? Well, your players are on Giminee, which is the home base planet you've created for them. They decide they want to go to an agricultural planet, to get food supplies to deal with shortages on Giminee.  So they do a search, and the nearest agricultural planet is Krikit; but there's also Jepeto, a bit further. The fact is, there's only one agricultural planet designed at this point. Whichever the players choose, that's what they get. They don't know there's only one; they think their choice makes a difference. It doesn't matter that it doesn't make a difference--this isn't one of the choices that have to make a difference in play. What matters is whether they can do what they wish when they get where they're going.

You don't need to have fifty million planets detailed. You only need to have a couple of stock ones ready, and be able to create new ones as the old ones are used. Create the planet; put the name at the top of the page later, when you need it.

That's only one way to do it. You could, if you prefer, just improvise most of the planets when the characters start looking. You can require them to do searches for planets they want, you know:

Search Criteria?
Agricutural planets
Preliminary estimation returns thirty-seven million three-hundred twenty-nine thousand two hundred six examples.
Please narrow search parameters.
Within three sectors.
Nine thousand three hundred forty-seven examples.
Please narrow search parameters.

In the end, when they've list four or five elements, the computer should return one or maybe two planets--the ones the referee has already detailed.

So there are ways to do it. You have to start by getting away from the idea that the entire universe has to be preplanned. I somehow don't think that Lucas knew all about the Moon of Endor when he wrote the first Star Wars movie. I know as a fact that he did not know there were Ewoks there--he was originally planning on having Wookies in that fight (hence the name). The fact that you can't control where your players go--well, that's not a fact, it's an illusion. They can't go anywhere you haven't created. If they land on a random planet, they get a random planet you've designed. If they try to choose a place to go, they get places you've created. The referee still has a tremendous amount of control over where the players actually find themselves, even when it seems they can go anywhere at all.

--M. J. Young

[Alan]

"science turning points" and "relationship of Self and Other" stories .... the crucial proof lies in classifying H G Wells as a writer of science fiction when most of his writings are really social commentary with SF color (The Time Machine is really a critique of the British class system set in the distant future to avoid controversy; The War of the Worlds is about war and human inhumanity.)

I've had a revelation!  Themes of relationship of self to other cover all of these: science turning points are a result of realizations an individual has about the nature of the outer world.  H. G, Well's social stories are definitive SF - fiction where some element of our common experience is changed to place the relationship of self to the other world in highlight.  All of these are themes of self to other.  

Certainly, superficial color is easiest for marketers to tag, but I think this fundimental idea is a litmus test.  For example, people often comment that Star Wars, is fantasy in disguise.  With my theory, we see that Luke's journey is about coming to terms with himself, as is Aniken's.  Internal journeys.  Meanwhile, we have the space opera of Miles Vorkosigan, which is about coming to terms with the world outside, typified by Miles own deformities. SF.  LOTR: how does an individual control themselves?  Fantasy.   Lovecraft: how do we face the greater reality of the universe? SF.  REH: how does a man control his passions?  Fantasy.  Cool, this works.

[Cadriel]

I've had a revelation!  Themes of relationship of self to other cover all of these: science turning points are a result of realizations an individual has about the nature of the outer world.  H. G, Well's social stories are definitive SF - fiction where some element of our common experience is changed to place the relationship of self to the other world in highlight.  All of these are themes of self to other.

Themes of self to other, as opposed to themes of self to self?  Interesting concept.  I think that if you're going for Narrativist games, it certainly is an interesting distinction, and worthwhile at run time. It certainly fits with my own idea (I keep trying to find the right wording - perhaps the closest is "How do you hold on to your humanity in a society where technology advances faster than morality?"), and I'm sure with a lot of other sci-fi ideas that people have.

Certainly, superficial color is easiest for marketers to tag, but I think this fundimental idea is a litmus test.  For example, people often comment that Star Wars, is fantasy in disguise.  With my theory, we see that Luke's journey is about coming to terms with himself, as is Aniken's.  Internal journeys.  Meanwhile, we have the space opera of Miles Vorkosigan, which is about coming to terms with the world outside, typified by Miles own deformities. SF.  LOTR: how does an individual control themselves?  Fantasy.   Lovecraft: how do we face the greater reality of the universe? SF.  REH: how does a man control his passions?  Fantasy.  Cool, this works.

Yes, a very interesting distinction, at the very root of things as well.  I like it; I'm interested in seeing what can be done about it in terms of gaming.  This may relate back to what Christopher Kubasik has been saying about dynamic technology - essentially, in the science-fiction context, the world becomes a character after its own fashion.  (This should not be confused or automatically correlated with exploration of setting.)  If science - one of the primary mechanisms of expressing "the world" - does not advance, it is a static character and we get a feeling that something is wrong.  It's not exact, but I think the metaphor works fairly well.  This is going in a good direction.  :-)

-Wayne

[Christopher Kubasik]

Hi Wayne,

About the SF setting being a character in its own fashion.  Yes -- but a very loose fashion.

For a while I toyed with a Sorcerer setting where a group of astronauts land on a planet with high tech weaponry that is in fact their demons -- needs for destruction and so forth, providing a Man Who Would Be King kind of setting.

I couldn't go anywhere with it.  But this new take: The SF revelations provide new powers and what not, but takes a toll as well in Needs and Desires.  (The ability to be invisible, for example, form Wells work; or the AMB satellites from Millineum).  This might be an interesting way to approach a changing and demanding understanding of new laws of nature.

Christopher

[b_bankhead]

The idea of sci-fi metaphors for demons made me think of the whole alien abduction 'thing'.

 What if you had a demon that represented the powers gained by alien contact/abduction/implants.  Humanity would simply enough reflect how 'alien' you were becoming, with 0 meaning you translate into something quite non-human. UFO cult leaders, Men in Black,government conspiracies, the whole X-files 'thang' are available for your campaign as well.

[clehrich]

Just a note on demons and aliens:

Jonathan Z. Smith, a distinguished historian of religions at University of Chicago, wrote an essay published a couple years ago entitled "Nothing Human is Alien to Me," in which he talks about alien abductions as a religious phenomenon not particularly unlike earlier discussions of possession.  If you're into that sort of academic discourse, it's worth a look.  Not Smith's best essay by any means, but hey --- he does alien abductions!

[Gordon C. Landis]

In the game you're proposing, would the new twist in technology be established and fixed at the start, or would the implications of the new technology be allowed to grow.

This is what I was trying to get at with the post above: Can the science of the world change during play.  (Most SF stories depend on the tech changing or the implications changing.)

For me, the GM or players already know everything about the tech at the start of play, it doesn't quite feel like SF -- no matter how wonky the new science.

Does this point of improvised innovation/revelation during play have no value; or is it just impossible to do in RPGs; or what?

Christopher (and everyone),

Let me speak from personal experience and an actual game design - Mekton.  Giant Robots are arguably as much fantasy as they are SF, but various editions of Mekton went out of their way to try and fit the "science" of mechs into a standard progression of technology model.  The "tech level" model and the implied economics of the mech-build system provided raw materials for playing out stories of the type you describe here - what happens when a change in tech makes one powerful weapon (previoulsy too fragile/expensive) suddenly viable in a small/cheap mech design?  PC's can help "trigger" the tech advance with research points and etc.

What's missing is the improvisation/unexpected nature you describe - though the mech build system is complex enough that it's not always obvious just what's going to happen as the tech level changes, so at least first time through, you can get that feel of unknown implications.

But taking that further, I can imagine a tech advancement system where the participants somehow "make up" the next level of tech when the advance is triggered.  In a military-modeled situation like mech combat, the implications and consequences are perhaps easier to see than if we're interested in societal effects of, say, increased life span via medical enhancements, but the principle might work.

I guess I'm also saying that, within the military tech environment, Mekton is capable of producing some quite SF-like (as outlined in your post) play - and maybe limiting the scope in a similar way (medical, commerce, something) would make it easier for other SF games to do the same.

Gordon

[b_bankhead]

Just a note on demons and aliens:

Jonathan Z. Smith, a distinguished historian of religions at University of Chicago, wrote an essay published a couple years ago entitled "Nothing Human is Alien to Me," in which he talks about alien abductions as a religious phenomenon not particularly unlike earlier discussions of possession

 The idea is pretty old hat with me. Check out Jacque Valee's 'Passport to Magonia' or John Keel's 'The Mothman Prophecies' (ten times wierder than the movie and surprisingly funny). Both these authors deal extensively with the contactee phenomenon and both believe it is basically similar to a wide range of visionary phenomena with long history.  The phenomenon is evasive, deceptive employs delusion and madness as a standard tool. A fitting demon for a game like Sorcerer.

It seems to be worth a supplement. How about 'Flying Sorcerers :an Alien Abduction and Conspiracy supplement for Sorcerer"?

[talysman]

It seems to be worth a supplement. How about 'Flying Sorcerers :an Alien Abduction and Conspiracy supplement for Sorcerer"?

off topic: I've considered a similar Sorcerer adaptation, based on ideas of Humanity in '50s sci-fi films. some (Immanent) demons are aliens, other (standard) demons represent the products of mad science (Passers for robots, Parasites for mutants, Object Demons for technological marvels.)

on topic: I'm twiddling around with a game idea now to directly reflect the kind of science fiction being discussed; I already worked out a way (while I was trying to get to sleep...) to adapt Ron's Trollbabe to handle the theme of innovation and change, but now I'm trying to develop my own ruleset. same setting in either case: it's the '50s, you're all scientists, engineers, or anyone else devoted to progress, and you get involved with Werner Von Braun's vision of conquering space.

bad side effect: I've been hankering after '50s space sci-fi for the last several days and I ain't finding any... grrr. I may need to buy some for "research".