I'm sure there was a thread that was about the popularity of fantasy versus science fiction but for the life of me I can't find it. Can someone with stronger search fu find that for me or if there wasn't one can this be the start? Why is fantasy more popular in seemingly everything than science fiction?
Quote from: Thanos;1011698I'm sure there was a thread that was about the popularity of fantasy versus science fiction but for the life of me I can't find it. Can someone with stronger search fu find that for me or if there wasn't one can this be the start? Why is fantasy more popular in seemingly everything than science fiction?
Actually I'd say its a 40/40/20 split between fantasy, SF, and modern/near future. Theres ALOT of SF games out there. Its REALLY popular. Instead what you see is a division of interests. Few games have ever successfully intigrated them. Shadowrun being the biggest success and merges all three.
Fantasy appeals more to the younger audience (spells, wizards, Dragons etc).
Scifi, in my experience, attracts the more nerdy/geeky type people, usually older males.
It TENDS to be more "serious business" and to be perfectly honest Scifi players TEND to be a bit intellectually snobbish to Fantasy RPGs and fans, which is a turn off, which again pushes people away from scifi towards other genres such as Fantasy.
I find in fantasy style RPGs that are run, they more open, friendly and diverse than Scifi games as a social group.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Scifi RPGs, but I also like Fantasy RPGs (and other Genres).
I have noted when I run SWN, I sometimes get the "disapproving look" from players I have run stuff for who are really into Traveler when I use Psionics, Horror themes etc.
Quite funny really.. lol
Are you talking about books or games or what?
Obviously not the case in movies.
Personally, I often find fantasy to be more believable and relatable than science fiction. Besides, fantasy resembles history, and I like history. Other than that, I have no idea.
I think there are several reasons Fantasy RPGs may attract more people but I can see the balance could shift. Here are the reasons I would consider:
***D&D is still the 400 lb gorilla in the room when it comes to RPG name recognition. When I went to start an RPG club at the library, it got translated as "D&D club" by the library manager and thus advertised as such
***Most children grow up with Fantasy from an early age, especially girls. My 3 and 5 year old girls will tell you everything you need to know about: Merida, Elsa, Rapunzel, Snow White, and Cinderella ( all fantasy genre). They know R2D2 also, but really there is no contest if I ask them if they would rather play My Little Pony RPG or Star Wars.
*** Some people find "technology" boring and or have to stare at a computer all day. Technology is almost a pre-req for sci-fi.
**** Finally scope: it is a lot easier to wrap your head around a campaign world that might be no bigger than a kingdom. Try telling them they are exploring a galaxy...
Science Fiction is a subset of Fantasy, in a literary sense, and it's more technical aspects tend to attract a more specific type of fan. In gaming, the point that most gaming revolves around a single 400lb gorilla, as has been mentioned, does mean that even if a sci-fi game is successful, it's still going to only ever represent a fraction of the sales that D&D will get.
In fiction sf use to be the dominant form of fantastic genre fiction, that's why a lot of classic 40s and 50s fantasy was either science fantasy (Vance, Brackett) or fantasy with a thin sf frame (Three Hearts and Three Lions, The Blue Star). It was only in the 60s that fantasy started to pull out ahead of sf and today it is the bigger form with sf being more niche.
Filmwise though sf and science fantasy are more popular, the huge success of LOTR and Harry Potter obscure that a bit though.
One reason that I prefer fantasy and supernatural horror games to scifi games is because just about every scifi game I've played ends up getting bogged down by Players wanting to argue over the technology and scientific accuracy of the game.
Everyone just seems to go along with stuff better when it's 'magic'.
Tell them it isn't 'hard sf' (which is never really accurate either) before you start.
Quote from: Thanos;1011698I'm sure there was a thread that was about the popularity of fantasy versus science fiction but for the life of me I can't find it. Can someone with stronger search fu find that for me or if there wasn't one can this be the start? Why is fantasy more popular in seemingly everything than science fiction?
Bikini armor. And glowing nerd sticks. Sci-Fi simply means that spacesuits are needed, which is never trending.
Quote from: Simlasa;1011791One reason that I prefer fantasy and supernatural horror games to scifi games is because just about every scifi game I've played ends up getting bogged down by Players wanting to argue over the technology and scientific accuracy of the game.
Everyone just seems to go along with stuff better when it's 'magic'.
I tend to agree, as far as "hard science" games go. On the other hand, Shadowrun is like D&D, in that it's more "kitchen-sink," so less arguments over physics.
Science Fiction pretends to be more realistic. Often it isn't, given trimmings like FTL, aliens, galactic civilizations, artificial gravity, etc.
Fantasy is a more broadly encompasing genre. At the extreme Wuthering Heights could be considered a fantasy. We, still, grow up with fairy tales and fantasy stories. Science fiction usually waits until we start learning science.
But I think a lot of it is due to the Tolkien Mania of the late 60's and the popularity of D&D that followed. Those two forces together made fantasy mainstream, on the edges of mainstream perhaps, but still in the mainstream popular culture.
Quote from: Robyo;1011884I tend to agree, as far as "hard science" games go. On the other hand, Shadowrun is like D&D, in that it's more "kitchen-sink," so less arguments over physics.
Are you classifying
Shadowrun as fantasy or sci fi? To me it's urban fantasy in cyberpunk dress. Cyberpunk after the Movement having become more fantastic any way. Compare
Neuromancer to
The Matrix.
Fantasy is escapist, in the best, worst, and all other senses of the term. Sci/Fi can be, but often isn't. And the more escapist Sci/Fi tends to be so because of fantastical elements blended in.
As a starting point, their parameters provide different routes to explore a "what if" about humanity. You can explore humanity any way you want in either, but it's easier and more accessible to use a particular one for many such explorations. For example, I've seen the idea of "human nature is constant" done well in Sci/Fi, but not as often as in fantasy.
I have a hard time suspending my disbelief when it comes to SF technology. I have enough of a scientific background to have a knee-jerk reaction to explanations about FTL, teleportation or whatever. I'm always asking myself "well how does that work?" and I find myself laughing at the silliness of it all. SF is always trying to plausibly explain things that don't work according what we know and understand, and it just comes off as BS. Whereas fantasy just says: its magic, which by definition has no explanation and doesn't ask for one.
Madprofessor: exactly why I said sci fi pretends to be more realistic. I have less problem with Classic Star Trek and Star Wars than I do with TNG and after Star Trek because the former readily admits it isn't science but rather science flavored fantasy or adventure.
Quote from: Madprofessor;1011909I have a hard time suspending my disbelief when it comes to SF technology. I have enough of a scientific background to have a knee-jerk reaction to explanations about FTL, teleportation or whatever. I'm always asking myself "well how does that work?" and I find myself laughing at the silliness of it all. SF is always trying to plausibly explain things that don't work according what we know and understand, and it just comes off as BS. Whereas fantasy just says: its magic, which by definition has no explanation and doesn't ask for one.
Technology is an issue that fantasy rarely has to deal with, but it can quickly date futuristic settings.
We didn't get flying cars, but the internet, tablets and cell phones are so far beyond anything people imagined in the 1960s. Computers stick out like a sore thumb in almost every sci-fi setting more than 20 years old even when allowances are made for durability and redundancy. "Mother" in Alien takes up a whole room and has less capability than my sons Leapfrog toddler tablet.
Quote from: Robyo;1011884I tend to agree, as far as "hard science" games go. On the other hand, Shadowrun is like D&D, in that it's more "kitchen-sink," so less arguments over physics.
Last time I tried playing Shadowrun, one of the other Players (who works in IT) felt the need to regale us with all the reasons that the hacker technology in the setting would not function as depicted.
Same guy never felt the need to go on about how the magic in our Earthdawn campaign wasn't accurate...
From a specifically RPG-oriented perspective, the greatest difference to me is that fantasy has a clear common ground and sci-fi doesn't.
If you create your own fantasy campaign setting and each of your players has a basic grounding in at least one of Tolkien, Sword & Sorcery or classic D&D, they'll all get your setting after the first session. Why? Because all (or almost all) fantasy is fundamentally similar. Sure, the Hyborian Age doesn't have elves and dwarves and Middle Earth doesn't have so many evil scheming demon-summoning sorcerers, but you could still take any element from one and transplant it into the other without too much chafing.
Sci-fi is not like that. Individual sci-fi works can be so different that each only really works as stand-alone entity. If all your players know is that you'll be starting "a sci-fi campaign" and one brings a brash Han-Solo lookalike with expectations of Start Wars technology, one a scheming Reverend Mother-ripoff from Dune, the third a down-to-earth twentieth century scientist from an Arthur C. Clarke hard sci-fi novel and the fourth Robocop, they're going to make an unworkable mess both with each other and with your actual campaign setting.
I think you're onto something but a lot of pulp sf of the 50s did have a kind of assumed common background but by the 70s those stories were less fashionable. A lot of the great, even popular sf of the 60s and 70s were playing against that 50s common sf background assumptions. Even most of the writers of the 50s moved away from that common background in the 60s and 70s (Brunner, Pohl, even Heinlein).
But in fantasy there is Tolkien first and foremost, then everyone else. I can't see D&D taking off without LOTR to popularize it. The fantasy genre itself may have remained merely a niche of sf and fantastic writing in general without the Tolkien supernova. And I say that as someone who had a lukewarm reaction to LOTR.
Quote from: Premier;1012100From a specifically RPG-oriented perspective, the greatest difference to me is that fantasy has a clear common ground and sci-fi doesn't.
If you create your own fantasy campaign setting and each of your players has a basic grounding in at least one of Tolkien, Sword & Sorcery or classic D&D, they'll all get your setting after the first session. Why? Because all (or almost all) fantasy is fundamentally similar. Sure, the Hyborian Age doesn't have elves and dwarves and Middle Earth doesn't have so many evil scheming demon-summoning sorcerers, but you could still take any element from one and transplant it into the other without too much chafing.
Sci-fi is not like that. Individual sci-fi works can be so different that each only really works as stand-alone entity. If all your players know is that you'll be starting "a sci-fi campaign" and one brings a brash Han-Solo lookalike with expectations of Start Wars technology, one a scheming Reverend Mother-ripoff from Dune, the third a down-to-earth twentieth century scientist from an Arthur C. Clarke hard sci-fi novel and the fourth Robocop, they're going to make an unworkable mess both with each other and with your actual campaign setting.
I think this is spot on. In fantasy fiction and RPGs, all you have to do is mention an elf or dwarf and everyone knows what it is and what it looks like and how it should act. In scifi every alien is different so you don't get the common knowledge advantage.
Quote from: Thanos;1011698I'm sure there was a thread that was about the popularity of fantasy versus science fiction but for the life of me I can't find it. Can someone with stronger search fu find that for me or if there wasn't one can this be the start? Why is fantasy more popular in seemingly everything than science fiction?
In my classification, fantasy is about how we react to inner phenomena, like temptation to do the wrong thing for power, superstitious fear, and the like. It requires thinking about yourselves and your reactions, which we do in RPGs anyway:).
SF is about how the conditions we live in, when they change through technology, change us, and what new questions arise due to it. It requires thinking about the setting we're in and accepting its premises as possibly
genuinely different from our world's. Some players totally suck at doing that, or just default to "their premises are wrong anyway, because they're not like our world's, and I won't allow myself be changed by them", which defeats the whole point;).
I suspect, without proof, that this is why Traveller uses a lifepath, in order to show how the PC's experiences were markedly different.
There's no other reason why one of the genres should be more popular than the other, AFAICT.
Quote from: Premier;1012100From a specifically RPG-oriented perspective, the greatest difference to me is that fantasy has a clear common ground and sci-fi doesn't.
I dunno. I think fantasy is much more diverse than that. The Twilight Zone, Gormenghast, superheroes, Wind In The Willows, a lot of horror stories, Hollywood musicals... IMO those are all 'fantasy', and except for musicals (AFAIK) have some presence as RPGs.
Quote from: Toadmaster;1012048Technology is an issue that fantasy rarely has to deal with, but it can quickly date futuristic settings.
We didn't get flying cars, but the internet, tablets and cell phones are so far beyond anything people imagined in the 1960s. Computers stick out like a sore thumb in almost every sci-fi setting more than 20 years old even when allowances are made for durability and redundancy. "Mother" in Alien takes up a whole room and has less capability than my sons Leapfrog toddler tablet.
This was one of the biggest stumbling blocks to my enjoyment of the Star Trek prequel
Enterprise and the
Alien prequel
Covenant. in both cases technology had to do a retrograde to get from the prequel to the next chronological bit in the story. This is, in reality, because they were filmed decades apart and modern sensibilities demand a different look for something to be "futuristic" than was accepted when the originals were done. But it is a glaring inconsistency. The fact that our current technology in some areas is ahead of the "future" doesn't help either.
Quote from: MonsterSlayer;1011732I think there are several reasons Fantasy RPGs may attract more people but I can see the balance could shift. Here are the reasons I would consider:
I'm currently running two campaigns with the system I wrote: a fantasy campaign and a sci-fi campaign.
To us (my players and me), the biggest difference and what drives fantasy RPGs to the top is that the published fantasy modules (which, unlike the most vocal folks on this site, is what most groups out there use) are the types of modules that players and GMs want. While, sci-fi modules tend to have a smaller audience because of the type of adventures.
I spent a lot of time and money looking for sci-fi modules my group would like.
I can run BFRPG modules or older D&D modules (we're using the B series) and my players have fun, regardless of their plans. Same thing with DwD Studios' BareBones Fantasy modules. While, trying to use classic Traveller or some of the other sci-fi modules, I might as well write my own from scratch, in order to get something interesting.
The sci-fi modules seem more exploration based, while my players like dealing with intelligent and semi-intelligent dungeon denizens. I ended up taking BFRPG modules and changing them into "steampunk sci-fi", which seems like it will work for my players.
Quote from: Tod13;1012134I'm currently running two campaigns with the system I wrote: a fantasy campaign and a sci-fi campaign.
To us (my players and me), the biggest difference and what drives fantasy RPGs to the top is that the published fantasy modules (which, unlike the most vocal folks on this site, is what most groups out there use) are the types of modules that players and GMs want. While, sci-fi modules tend to have a smaller audience because of the type of adventures.
I spent a lot of time and money looking for sci-fi modules my group would like.
I can run BFRPG modules or older D&D modules (we're using the B series) and my players have fun, regardless of their plans. Same thing with DwD Studios' BareBones Fantasy modules. While, trying to use classic Traveller or some of the other sci-fi modules, I might as well write my own from scratch, in order to get something interesting.
The sci-fi modules seem more exploration based, while my players like dealing with intelligent and semi-intelligent dungeon denizens. I ended up taking BFRPG modules and changing them into "steampunk sci-fi", which seems like it will work for my players.
Or you can just take Preferred Edition Of Traveller, roll up a sophont species, and make reasonable conclusions stemming from their physiology. Then add a few customs that contradict them, and make up explanations for the above.
Then add a few holidays they observe. One of them should be soon. (Borrow one from ancient Indian or Chinese practices if you must).
Then have the players meet them during the exploration in one of the modules;). As a bonus, they might be talking a version of a language their computer can translate. Why? Well, who says they are natives of the planet, even if they're at a primitive level of development:)?
Work for a couple hours at most, I'd think. And you can have a series of adventures related to that species, especially if the reason the players are there is to carry out a job that would endanger their natural habitat:p!
That's how I get to 15 minutes preparation average: Change one element in a setting sharply, like throwing stone in a pond. Watch the waves flow from there across the setting. Let the players deal with said waves threatening to change things in ways they'd find unacceptable:D!
It seems to me like the same approach would work by adding an element in a module, too.
Besides, some Michael Brown (http://www.rpgnow.com/browse/pub/9030/Michael-Brown) guy has been writing mini-adventures for Cepheus Engine. Many of them seem to fit your criteria.
FSpace also seem to have a few worlds for Cepheus Engine, including Serkur (http://www.rpgnow.com/product/153262/Far-Frontiers-Serkur) and Feraerfon (http://www.rpgnow.com/product/189280/Far-Frontiers-Feraerfon) which seems it would fit well with your group;). Never bought them, but they say they include ideas to base adventures on. Don't know if it's enough for your tastes, but it's an option.
All of the above was brought to you by virtue of a search for stuff for Cepheus Engine;).
Quote from: AsenRG;1012150Or you can just take Preferred Edition Of Traveller, roll up a sophont species, and make reasonable conclusions stemming from their physiology. Then add a few customs that contradict them, and make up explanations for the above.
The comments were in regards to published modules, which is what I think drives a lot of the popularity of systems.
Quote from: AsenRG;1012150Besides, some Michael Brown (http://www.rpgnow.com/browse/pub/9030/Michael-Brown) guy has been writing mini-adventures for Cepheus Engine. Many of them seem to fit your criteria.
FSpace also seem to have a few worlds for Cepheus Engine, including Serkur (http://www.rpgnow.com/product/153262/Far-Frontiers-Serkur) and Feraerfon (http://www.rpgnow.com/product/189280/Far-Frontiers-Feraerfon) which seems it would fit well with your group;). Never bought them, but they say they include ideas to base adventures on. Don't know if it's enough for your tastes, but it's an option.
All of the above was brought to you by virtue of a search for stuff for Cepheus Engine;).
I want full-length modules, not mini-adventures. I sometimes use mini-adventures to add an area to an existing module. I've found Creation's Edge mini-adventures useful for this, and they have a full-size preview. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/152050/Peril-at-the-Pod-Auction-A-SciFi-RPG-MiniAdventure (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/152050/Peril-at-the-Pod-Auction-A-SciFi-RPG-MiniAdventure)
Maybe once I'm done writing and testing my system I can play with modules.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;1011737Science Fiction is a subset of Fantasy, in a literary sense, and it's more technical aspects tend to attract a more specific type of fan. In gaming, the point that most gaming revolves around a single 400lb gorilla, as has been mentioned, does mean that even if a sci-fi game is successful, it's still going to only ever represent a fraction of the sales that D&D will get.
Yes and no it's kind of complicated my favorite group of robots took A stab at the idea and it's worth pointing out that fantasy ans sci-fi are very close so the have A natural tendency to overlap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syMa8uAsfN0
Quote from: Premier;1012100From a specifically RPG-oriented perspective, the greatest difference to me is that fantasy has a clear common ground and sci-fi doesn't.
If you create your own fantasy campaign setting and each of your players has a basic grounding in at least one of Tolkien, Sword & Sorcery or classic D&D, they'll all get your setting after the first session. Why? Because all (or almost all) fantasy is fundamentally similar. Sure, the Hyborian Age doesn't have elves and dwarves and Middle Earth doesn't have so many evil scheming demon-summoning sorcerers, but you could still take any element from one and transplant it into the other without too much chafing.
Sci-fi is not like that. Individual sci-fi works can be so different that each only really works as stand-alone entity. If all your players know is that you'll be starting "a sci-fi campaign" and one brings a brash Han-Solo lookalike with expectations of Start Wars technology, one a scheming Reverend Mother-ripoff from Dune, the third a down-to-earth twentieth century scientist from an Arthur C. Clarke hard sci-fi novel and the fourth Robocop, they're going to make an unworkable mess both with each other and with your actual campaign setting.
Actually I think you can simplify all of this down to one thing fantasy has A much lower buy in then sci-fi.
Quote from: Voros;1012102I think you're onto something but a lot of pulp sf of the 50s did have a kind of assumed common background but by the 70s those stories were less fashionable.
Good point. I think this is why TV and comic book SF generally works better for SF RPGs - it does use that common background grounded in pulp space opera that goes back to the Lensman series.
If not using that background, an SF RPG needs to define a different clear background, like Cyberpunk (eg Cyberpunk 2020, a game which annoyingly seeks to trademark a genre), or possibly Dune-style gothic space opera (eg Fading Suns, WH:40K).
Quote from: Tod13;1012134I spent a lot of time and money looking for sci-fi modules my group would like.
I find the lack of good support material for SF gaming is a huge problem. I ran into this running White Star recently. D&D fantasy has near-infinite support available online. Where's my plug & play SF sandbox campaign setting/adventure? All that's out there seems to be (a) linear railroads or (b) so under-developed I could more easily do it myself, as you say. The effort required to keep even a pulp space opera game running is orders of magnitude greater than what I need to do for a sandbox dungeon fantasy campaign.
Ironically a kind of very high tech or even transhuman version of space opera did have a revival (Vinge, Brin, Banks and eventually many others). Not sure how many sf rpgs draw on that modern style.
Quote from: Premier;1012100From a specifically RPG-oriented perspective, the greatest difference to me is that fantasy has a clear common ground and sci-fi doesn't.
If you create your own fantasy campaign setting and each of your players has a basic grounding in at least one of Tolkien, Sword & Sorcery or classic D&D, they'll all get your setting after the first session. Why? Because all (or almost all) fantasy is fundamentally similar. Sure, the Hyborian Age doesn't have elves and dwarves and Middle Earth doesn't have so many evil scheming demon-summoning sorcerers, but you could still take any element from one and transplant it into the other without too much chafing.
Sci-fi is not like that. Individual sci-fi works can be so different that each only really works as stand-alone entity. If all your players know is that you'll be starting "a sci-fi campaign" and one brings a brash Han-Solo lookalike with expectations of Start Wars technology, one a scheming Reverend Mother-ripoff from Dune, the third a down-to-earth twentieth century scientist from an Arthur C. Clarke hard sci-fi novel and the fourth Robocop, they're going to make an unworkable mess both with each other and with your actual campaign setting.
This may be why it is so hard to get non-D&D style fantasy gaming established. Just like sci-fi players don't really have a clear handle to grasp. Look at Tekumel, it is not really any more complicated than Vanilla D&D, it just seems that way because elves, orcs, wizards and the rest have so permiated popular culture, where as the Ssu have not.
Star Wars and Star Trek are easy to use as gaming backgrounds, everybody knows Wookiees and Vulcans, and Klingons, but try telling most players they meet a Kzin or a Thranx.
Quote from: Tod13;1012909The comments were in regards to published modules, which is what I think drives a lot of the popularity of systems.
Yes, that was the DIY option, which I always include:).
QuoteI want full-length modules, not mini-adventures. I sometimes use mini-adventures to add an area to an existing module. I've found Creation's Edge mini-adventures useful for this, and they have a full-size preview. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/152050/Peril-at-the-Pod-Auction-A-SciFi-RPG-MiniAdventure (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/152050/Peril-at-the-Pod-Auction-A-SciFi-RPG-MiniAdventure)
What is a full-length module for you;)? I'm really not "in the know", but I thought there's no standard length for modules.
Here's a 76-page one, A Life Worth Living (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/220755/A-Life-Worth-Living) which also promises to give you a follow-up.
This one seems to be (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/218046/The-Pirates-of-Drinax) the Traveller's analogue of the Great Pendragon Campaign. It's got 592 pages.
The Fall of Tinath (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/210689/The-Fall-of-Tinath) has a non-3I Traveller with over 100 pages.
This one (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/227745/See-How-They-Run) is just 44 pages. There's longer adventures in PWYW format.
French Arm Adventures (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/108389/2300AD-French-Arm-Adventures) is 178 pages, for the harder-SF-version of Traveller: 2300 AD.
And then there's all the adventures for the previous several editions of Traveller;).
And then, if you want a more transhumanist approach, there's the adventures for Eclipse Phase 1st edition.
Here's the link to all of the electronic books (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/182299/Eclipse-Phase-All-Electronic-Books-BUNDLE) for said edition. The names of the adventures are Bump in the Night, Continuity, Ego Hunter, Glory, Million Year Echo, and The Devotees.
And there's adventures for Stars Without Numbers, as well, like Hard Light (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/86468/Hard-Light) and Polychrome (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/91490/Polychrome-Cyberpunk-Adventure-for-Stars-Without-Number) for example.
Have you run all of these? Because that's what I found with a quick search on Drivethru;). And I'm not exactly the biggest fan of adventures.
And if you tell me you had run all of the above, after I stop chewing on my hat, I'm going to write an adventure, too, publish it, and sell you a coupon to get it on an 80% reduced price:D!
QuoteMaybe once I'm done writing and testing my system I can play with modules.
Go ahead!
Quote from: Voros;1013225Ironically a kind of very high tech or even transhuman version of space opera did have a revival (Vinge, Brin, Banks and eventually many others). Not sure how many sf rpgs draw on that modern style.
Eclipse Phase and Mindjammer come to mind. Kuro and Fates Worse Than Death are halfway there, showing more the moment of transition to transhumanism.
Is Mindjammer like Spelljammer? Or not related at all?
Not related in the slightest. Think of less-dystopian Eclipse Phase.
Quote from: Celestial;1013355Not related in the slightest. Think of less-dystopian Eclipse Phase.
Yeah, this - I admit I only got it because I wanted to see "transhumanist Traveller":).
Quote from: S'mon;1013224I find the lack of good support material for SF gaming is a huge problem. I ran into this running White Star recently. D&D fantasy has near-infinite support available online. Where's my plug & play SF sandbox campaign setting/adventure? All that's out there seems to be (a) linear railroads or (b) so under-developed I could more easily do it myself, as you say. The effort required to keep even a pulp space opera game running is orders of magnitude greater than what I need to do for a sandbox dungeon fantasy campaign.
I find a fair bit for Traveller, although the community isn't actually all that good at promoting itself really. Traveller is the biggest sleeper hit in RPG history, I think.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;1013431I find a fair bit for Traveller, although the community isn't actually all that good at promoting itself really. Traveller is the biggest sleeper hit in RPG history, I think.
Yes, took me ages to get the game and appreciate it. Since then, I've been joking that there's no skills in Traveller that deal with advertising your product;)!
Quote from: TrippyHippy;1013431I find a fair bit for Traveller, although the community isn't actually all that good at promoting itself really. Traveller is the biggest sleeper hit in RPG history, I think.
TrippyHippy, do you have a YouTube channel with Traveller videos? That seems to be where the game is headed promotion-wise, people filming Traveller events at cons, etc.
Quote from: Tod13;1012134The sci-fi modules seem more exploration based, while my players like dealing with intelligent and semi-intelligent dungeon denizens. I ended up taking BFRPG modules and changing them into "steampunk sci-fi", which seems like it will work for my players.
I'm not a fan of modules. But I did like Two Days on Carsten for Mongoose Traveller http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/225723/Two-Days-on-Carsten as a setting between other worlds.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;1013431I find a fair bit for Traveller, although the community isn't actually all that good at promoting itself really. Traveller is the biggest sleeper hit in RPG history, I think.
Is there a Babylon-5/Deep Space 9/Deadwood city/station/starport type setting for Traveller or other SF game? I'm thinking something like that might work well for a plug & play SF sandbox. It could have civilised zone, slum zone, and dungeon-delve ruin zone all in the same habitation.
Quote from: S'mon;1013497Is there a Babylon-5/Deep Space 9/Deadwood city/station/starport type setting for Traveller or other SF game? I'm thinking something like that might work well for a plug & play SF sandbox. It could have civilised zone, slum zone, and dungeon-delve ruin zone all in the same habitation.
For Babylon 5 Traveller, check out Warehouse23 or ebay. I don't know about the others.
Quote from: S'mon;1013497Is there a Babylon-5/Deep Space 9/Deadwood city/station/starport type setting for Traveller or other SF game? I'm thinking something like that might work well for a plug & play SF sandbox. It could have civilised zone, slum zone, and dungeon-delve ruin zone all in the same habitation.
They did have a Traveller version of Babylon 5 for a while. In terms of that style of setting for Traveller's Third Imperium setting, there must be some place, somewhere, where such a place could exist but I'm not sure of published material.
Quote from: S'mon;1013497Is there a Babylon-5/Deep Space 9/Deadwood city/station/starport type setting for Traveller or other SF game? I'm thinking something like that might work well for a plug & play SF sandbox. It could have civilised zone, slum zone, and dungeon-delve ruin zone all in the same habitation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon_5_Roleplaying_Game
https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/9/9578.phtml
I know of it, but never played it.
I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1014090I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
GMs develop their fantasy worlds more than their sci-fi worlds, especially when plots require characters to planet hop. There's almost none of that in fantasy.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1014090I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
I disagree.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1014090I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
If you invoke Clarke's Law then Sci Fi has the same possible range as fantasy. Hard Sci Fi has a narrower range, but that is just one subgenre.
Quote from: DavetheLost;1014240If you invoke Clarke's Law then Sci Fi has the same possible range as fantasy. Hard Sci Fi has a narrower range, but that is just one subgenre.
Hard sci-fi just means that characters need to wear spacesuits is all.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1014090I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
I agree. I think the line between sci-fi and fantasy is blurred anyway. Basically the main difference is that sci-fi is fantasy that is about things which are more likely to happen/exist in the future than not. Like comparing space travel
(sci-fi from before the space race) to pixie dust that makes ships fly
(obvious fantasy).
Real hoverboards exist today too, although not like in Back to the Future (yet?)
Spoiler
[video=youtube;do03rEG0Ex8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do03rEG0Ex8[/youtube]
[video=youtube;RCmQnM_iFhQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCmQnM_iFhQ[/youtube]
[video=youtube;bvYUq6Ox0Hc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvYUq6Ox0Hc[/youtube]
Then you got things like Star Wars which is both, balancing on the edge between.
You can also easily have a futuristic, post-apocalyptic setting where the level of civilization fell back to that of the dark ages or ancient era, where you have different species/races that are results of gene engineering from the fallen hi-tech Eart nations, where treasure vaults are guarded by 'golems'
(ancient robots) and villages are terrorized by creatures like dinos and dragons
(also failed(?) experiments and weapons of 'old' Earth). Even magic might be explained as awakened psionic powers or maybe commands to a still working sattelite network which analyzes enemies/minerals or shoots 'holy beams' from above.
Thus, you got your typical fantasy setting
(with elves, dwarves, trolls, dragons and occasional asian catgirls and remnant androids) which if you look deeper into turns out to be just the far future of Earth.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1014195GMs develop their fantasy worlds more than their sci-fi worlds, especially when plots require characters to planet hop. There's almost none of that in fantasy.
Yes, that's largely true also.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1014090I think fantasy as a genre has a broader possible range.
I disagree. I think more fantasy games/settings/modules
use a broader range of genre, but sci-fi can span the same range. People just don't use them.
If that's true, then it means that de facto, I'm still right.
Quote from: danskmacabre;1011706... and to be perfectly honest Scifi players TEND to be a bit intellectually snobbish to Fantasy RPGs and fans ...
... and the fantasy players sneer at the LARPers, or at people playing a different style of fantasy, or a different game setting, or a different version of D&D ... Pretty much everywhere in the speculative fiction subculture are those who take positive glee in abusing and persecuting Those Who Are Different. SF gamers are no more at fault than anyone else.
Quote from: Voros;1012102But in fantasy there is Tolkien first and foremost, then everyone else. I can't see D&D taking off without LOTR to popularize it.
I think it would've done so quite readily, especially since Moorcock and Howard were at least just as influential both in the origins of D&D and in fantasy circles at the time. If LotR wasn't the cock of the fantasy walk, some other work would've been. If the likes of Aragorn and Gandalf weren't around as models for PC play, the likes of Conan, Elric, Fafhrd and the Mouser, and Ged were.
Quote from: DavetheLost;1013273This may be why it is so hard to get non-D&D style fantasy gaming established. Just like sci-fi players don't really have a clear handle to grasp. Look at Tekumel, it is not really any more complicated than Vanilla D&D, it just seems that way because elves, orcs, wizards and the rest have so permiated popular culture, where as the Ssu have not. Star Wars and Star Trek are easy to use as gaming backgrounds, everybody knows Wookiees and Vulcans, and Klingons, but try telling most players they meet a Kzin or a Thranx.
Mm, but I think it's less that there's no traction in non-"traditional" settings than that there's not the name recognition of mass pop culture icons. My game setting is loosely based on Kenneth Bulmer's
Scorpio series, and however much I've had approaching 200 players over the course of decades, I don't think a single one came into my campaign being familiar with the series: they all needed educating as to what zorcas, paktuns and Chuliks are. Even with that, even with GMing GURPS rather than D&D, I've never had trouble filling slots.
Quote from: Ravenswing;1015387
I think it would've done so quite readily, especially since Moorcock and Howard were at least just as influential both in the origins of D&D and in fantasy circles at the time. If LotR wasn't the cock of the fantasy walk, some other work would've been. If the likes of Aragorn and Gandalf weren't around as models for PC play, the likes of Conan, Elric, Fafhrd and the Mouser, and Ged were.
I'd have to respectfully disagree, I prefer fantasy writers like Moorcock, Howard and Leiber and consider Leiber and Moorcock better writers than Tolkien but they simply didn't have the impact beyond the sf/fantasy fandom that Tolkien had. And the first to admit that would be Moorcock and Leiber, both of whom had their reservations about Tolkien as a writer. But that is pretty OT, there's a thread about Tolkien and Howard, Leiber, etc in the Media and Inspiration forum if you'd like to discuss that further.
Quote from: Voros;1015412I'd have to respectfully disagree, I prefer fantasy writers like Moorcock, Howard and Leiber and consider Leiber and Moorcock better writers than Tolkien but they simply didn't have the impact beyond the sf/fantasy fandom that Tolkien had. And the first to admit that would be Moorcock and Leiber, both of whom had their reservations about Tolkien as a writer. But that is pretty OT, there's a thread about Tolkien and Howard, Leiber, etc in the Media and Inspiration forum if you'd like to discuss that further.
I'm with Voros here, except that I think Tolkien is a better writer than Leiber and Moorcock.
Without Tolkien D&D never moves out of being a niche game. It never goes mainstream. Bare in mind that Voros isn't talking about the influence of the people that created D&D but the influence in the market. After Tolkien hit it big the fantasy genre because a thing that was marketable in and of itself. Publishers wanted more fiction like the Lord of the Rings. Leiber, Howard, Moorcock, and the other pulp writers that influenced the creators of D&D never had the broad cultural impact that Tolkien had and still has.
The Lord of the Rings also set the table for what people expect in fantasy and the conventions in Tolkien's secondary world are now implanted in the broader cultural DNA.
Fantasy gaming is easier because the tropes are things we do as children and have been involved with humanity for a lot longer than scifi. The Knight on the quest to save the Princess is a story that crosses many cultures and has been told for much longer period of time than scifi.