Quote from: J Arcane;520140My approach is always to look at the science, try to understand the science as best you can, then you can make an informed decision on what to change to suit your purposes.  

I've spent some amount of time researching the physics of FTL, for instance, for Project 1701, even though in nature it's not intended to be a super hard SF game or setting.  In the past I've discussed at great length the physics of plasma with actual physicists when trying to design a plasma weapon for a post-apocalyptic game.

I think that knowing the actual science enriches the fiction, even if in the end you've taken a step back from that science for the sake of doing what you want anyway.  Sometimes though, you find things you didn't know that actually strengthen the fiction or offer additional consequences to how you're manhandling it, and those things would never be found if you didn't do your homework to begin with.

On the other hand, sometimes you really do just want to blast some 5 legged aliens with a laser pistol, and there's nothing wrong with that either.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;518971This can come up with anything, not just math and science. You might be running a modern crime game, you throw in some drug dealers and one of your players is a lawyer who knows drug laws or drug trade better than you. My players are generally pretty good about not disrupting game flow unless i make a major error that everybody notices. Generally i appreciate being corrected when i am wrong so long as the game itself doesn't get derailed (if a player makes a soft suggestion between major events or after the game that can be very helpful). I have also learned to identify what peoples' strengths are and ask for details on subjects that I am personally hazy about.

Quote from: Soylent Green;519145Yup, yup. And when Vipers in Battlestar Galactica run out of gas they come to a dead stop.