I do like M-Space! That's a supplement for RQ Mythras. But they have also included barebones mechanics for combat and star ship combat (so you don't have to get bogged down in the crunch if you don't want to).

I found Mythras itself to be too crunchy for my liking. So, I tend to stick to OpenQuest - a very slick rendered down version of the RQ system.

When I started playing Traveller Third Imperium setting material was just begining to trickle out. We played some of the adventures, got a lot of use out of traders 7 Gunboats for deckplans, and made u an awful lot of shit on our own.

We used Traveller as the base to play the sort of Science-Fi games we were interested in playing, and we weren't afraid to tweak the rules here and there to do it.

Those early days have convinced me that lighter rules provide more freedom for choosing your own style of game play. Also, if gaming isn't providing you with teh sort of "story" you want either you suck at telling that sort of story or you and/or the group don't really want the sort of story you think you do.

I have a beef with the original post.

QuoteWell, I think a good sci-fi work is one that has the changing of humanity through technology in the center of the story. Black Mirror does it. Arrival does it. SOMA does it. And no RPG I've seen does it. What sci-fi RPGs they do is have sci-fi as a veneer, or coat of paint, for stories or situations mostly about action and combat.

You declare a personal, subjective area of interest, note that RPGs in general can't do it, and declare that Sci-fi RPGs suck (meaning ALL of them, OBJECTIVELY). But this is ill-considered at best.

Following the same logic, I could declare that my own, highly subjective interest in the spy novel genre focuses on the technically accurate details of information gathering; note that no espionage RPG does that well because they all concentrate on James Bond-style heroics; and declare that ALL espionage RPGs objectively suck.

Or I could say that my personal interest in fantasy is all about the slight biochemical and neurological differences that makes humans, elves, dwarves, hobbits and whatnot so similar yet different; but no fantasy RPG deals with this particular issue, therefore ALL fantasy RPGs suck.

You're making a highly subjective demand, measuring any and all sci-fi RPG by that metric, and damning the entire (RPG) genre for not meeting it. That's not very reasonable.

Quote from: Premier;985422I have a beef with the original post.

yeah I meant to make that point too but sort of forgot about it.  I'd argue that the whole idea that "good" sci-fi has the changing of humanity through technology in the center of it's story is certainly not a given by any means.  I mean there's whole reams of sci fi that is primarily about action and combat and has little at all to do with Black Mirror type explorations of the impact of technology on humanity.  One may not feel that that is good sci fi, but there's no denying it's popular sci fi and it's what a lot of rpg players are looking for.

Quote from: Itachi;985066That's exactly the kind of premise I'm talking about. But how to create a game that natively goes for it by default? Aka each time the group sits down to play, the game rules/framework/instructions enforce exactly that?

Why would you want to do that?

Seriously. If the group wants to do that they can and if they don't want to you can't force them to. This is turning into one of those posts where someone asks, "How can I get my group to play the game that I like and they hate?"

Quote from: Spike;985072I'm not sure what you're trying to say about Runequest. I've used the Runequest rules to run long campaigns in my own setting, and I like them because they are both mathematically simple enough and match up, at least in part, with how observable reality works... at least better than, say, D&D's demi-god levelling and infinite Hit Point Inflation.  I could care less about anthropological versimilitude, unless you're trying to mean 'it tries to create a realistic model of stabbing people in the face', which... it does.

I find myself in complete agreement with Spike. I used Runequest to run Mythic Greece with the players running actual Demi-gods. Not really an accurate anthropological anything. Well I did use oxen as the basic measure of value, which, I guess is a bit anthropologically versimilitudinous. But that had nothing to do with Runequest.

Maybe Itachi meant Cults of Prax especially the cultures and religions for the Glorantha setting for Runequest. If so Itachi is still wrong about Runequest since religion and culture are not the system, but the setting which to a large extent is system independent.

Quote from: Premier;985422I have a beef with the original post.
...
You declare a personal, subjective area of interest, note that RPGs in general can't do it, and declare that Sci-fi RPGs suck (meaning ALL of them, OBJECTIVELY). But this is ill-considered at best.
....highly subjective interest in the spy novel genre focuses on the technically accurate details of information gathering; note that no espionage RPG does that well because they all concentrate on James Bond-style heroics; and declare that ALL espionage RPGs objectively suck.

The OP never used the term objectively, which you've convienently inserted to strengthen your argument.

Quote from: Voros;985504The OP never used the term objectively, which you've convienently inserted to strengthen your argument.

He did title the thread "Sci Fi rpgs suck" though...

I am astonished that this thread managed 10 pages with the flimsy premise of the OP post.

You can emulate nearly anything (story, adventure, premise, theme) with any of the sci-fi rulesets out there. Sure, something more generic may be easier to focus on specific themes, while others are built for a specific sci-fi theme. You may have some work depending on what ruleset you go with. But saying all sci-fi RPGs suck because you can't imagine how you can play The Arrival in one is pure absurdity. Hence my original reply of absurdity.

I would love to have a meaningful discussion if perhaps the OP could draw up some actual points on HOW sci-fi RPGs fail to work IN THEIR OPINION. Like actual points of discussion vs. the wide-open statement the OP made with such a factual-assumed tone.

Quote from: trechriron;985696I would love to have a meaningful discussion if perhaps the OP could draw up some actual points on HOW sci-fi RPGs fail to work IN THEIR OPINION. Like actual points of discussion vs. the wide-open statement the OP made with such a factual-assumed tone.

Oh you dreamer. I'm bet you were distracted by the solar eclipse and forgot you were on an Internet forum, right?

How about some examples from actual play? Oh, wait, this is an internet gaming forum. People don't actually play games.

I'll repost Vargold and my's responses on this, which had some more concrete examples.

Quote from: Vargold;985007I personally always admired the old Traveller 2300 adventure, Energy Curve--the one where the PCs get stuck on a cold planet only to discover that it's home to a race of sentient plants. It's not a great module, but it's a great set-up. You get to do first contact, and then, assuming the PCs arrange their rescue, you get to deal with the fallout: do the PCs have a duty to the aliens? or are they going to cash in on them?

The aliens are slow due to the weakness of their sun, so they're not *really* a physical threat. The game then becomes a story of discovery and diplomacy, with an open-ended structure.

Quote from: jhkim;985010That's a great example, Vargold.

To take another one from my old Star Trek campaign, the PCs contacted a planet that had overcome aging - where the age of majority was 50. They were in conflict with the government, and from there became embroiled with a youth rebellion who took a hard-line stance against any age discrimination. It meant a tricky alliance with some difficult choices.

I think it would be a good basis to go from.

My experience of scifi RPGs over the years hasn not been good... but I think the main issue has been with the GM/Players.
Either it's been people getting obsessed with collecting the tech... to where I feel like I'm on some extended trip to Ikea to buy knivar... or it's guys trying to avoid any sort of tech/'sciency fictiony' stuff altogether and run it like it's WWII spy comedy.
Or... in the case of Star Wars... not being able to think of much to do but just re-enact the movies, "AT-ST? Check!... speeder bikes? Check!... Death Star? Check!"

If it's not the gun porn guy obsessing over minutia, it's the guy who works in IT wanting to lecture us on how Shadowrun got the details wrong.
There's just something about modern/high-tech/scifi games that seems to bring out the pedantic dork in people... at least the people I've played with. They seem able to relax into fantasy just fine... but not scifi.

I DID kinda enjoy the Eclipse Phase games I played in... in spite of a gun nut who just had to go on about 'clip' vs. 'magazine' and other non-issues... and fret over his PC's 'competency'.
I also kinda enjoyed the last Traveller campaign I played in, at first... but the GM had us on a really tight leash and just seemed unable to let go. At every turn we'd find ourselves drugged, imprisoned, lied to... anything to corral us and get us back on the railroad. Mind you, I've played a lot of fantasy with the same group and he's never been controlling like that (I kept trying to escape fate and eventually he just gave up and went back to D&D).

At the moment I'm in an online game of FASA Trek that feels a lot more like a gritty Cyberpunk game... but that might be OK, maybe.

And yet I STILL want to play these things...

Quote from: Itachi;984772... Are there genres the tabletop medium can't really do? If so, should we accept this fact and move on, or is worth trying to find a way to do it?

Quote from: jhkim;985780... I think it would be a good basis to go from.

OK. Based on those posts you are clearly demonstrating how a sci-fi RPG could emulate diplomacy and social conflict outside action/adventure. So my answer to question #1 is; all genres? It would depend on how the GM applies consequences to choices, how the GM describes the situation, what challenges the GM introduces and the choices of the players make, but I'm inclined to say no. Sci-fi specifically? no (as clearly proven in this thread).

The 2nd question is absurd because a "fact" is assumed where no "fact" exists. The hypothesis in the first sentence was never proven. If Itachi believes there is some missing "thing" in emulating technology transforming humanity in current RPGs, then it would be great if Itachi could clarify the specifics of their "fact" and demonstrate how "there is no way this medium can translate in an effective manner the kind of experiences those works provide"...

Now, if Itachi could outline these details, we could further discuss the "find a way to do it" part with suggestions that might actually apply to "the problem".

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;985513He did title the thread "Sci Fi rpgs suck" though...

A strong opinion on aesthetic matters is not a claim of objectivity. A simple idea so often ignored on the net.

Quote from: Voros;985840A strong opinion on aesthetic matters is not a claim of objectivity. A simple idea so often ignored on the net.

Lol oh fine then.  Jeez...