kalyr.com

Game WISH 27: SF RPGs

Turn of a Friendly Die: WISH 27: Science Fiction RPGs

The RPG market is dominated by fantasy (with horror coming in second). Why have most attempts at creating a science fiction RPG failed (commercially or artistically), and what would a hypothetical SFRPG need to catch on the way fantasy has?

It depends a bit on your definition of "failed". While Traveller has never had the runaway success of Dungeons and Dragons, it's still around (in two different versions).

I think the main reason is that 'Generic Fantasy' has a widely-known set of tropes that DnD has managed to capitalise on, while science-fiction is a much more varied genre, and lacks such a standard set of conventions. Every literary or cinematic SF universe works a different way; Trek is different from Star Wars which is different from the SF universes of Robert Heinlein which is different from those of Iain Banks, and so on. A setting-free system that encompasses all of those would end up looking much like a totally generic one - perhaps a lot of SF gamers with original settings use GURPS?

Of course, many published SF games have been licenced games, and they've suffered from the whims of the media companies with licences - both of the 'household name' SF settings have bounced from company to company, in the case of Star Trek more than once.

To sum up, I think it's all down to the fact that there's no such thing as 'generic SF' in the same way that there's a 'generic fantasy'. Perhaps there could have been. If someone had come up with a game resembling Star Trek but with the serial numbers filed off in the primeval days of gaming, might it have done better than Traveller? On the other hand, was Traveller really that much of a failure? And on the third tentacle, what about RIFTS? This was apparently the third-biggest game on the market (after DnD and Storyteller) for many years.

Posted by TimHall at December 28, 2002 05:09 PM | TrackBack
Comments

In my opinion, the main problem of sf-rpgs is their complexity. In contrast to sf, fantasy scenes are easy to describe: You see a room, 40' by 60' and there's a dragon inside. Anyone can make something of these terse words.
SF adventures on the other hand must take account of the sensory technology the characters have. IR, thermograph, radar, each gives a different view of the surroundings. And don't forget the killer sensor, the TL-15 Densitometer!
In addition, sf usually can't explain things away by way of magic. Technology sometimes works as a substitute but depending on the game there are limits to this.
And lastly, sf games need a lot more preparation than fantasy games do. I don't know about you, but I can't just create half a dozen planets or starships on the fly. At least not for Traveller. ;)

Posted by: Flow on April 29, 2004 08:41 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?



Links of the day
Today in Fudge Factor

Spontaneous Joint Gamemastering. Sounds interesting, but it seesm to me that it would take a lot of trust within the group to make it work.

How to write a best selling fantasy novel.

It's easy! Just don't say 'and the venerable wizard raised the orb and muttered the Arnic words "Hastalavista".' (via)

Not just for boring computer systems.

Written by John Kirk, Design Patterns of Successful Roleplaying Games is a free .pdf download. Railway modelling has had stuff like this from the likes of Iain Rice and Cyril Freezer for years.

Klingon Fairy Tales

Thanks to **Dave for the link to Klingon Fairy Tales. An example:

"The Hare Foolishly Lowers His Guard and Is Devastated by the Tortoise, Whose Prowess in Battle Attracts Many Desirable Mates"

Doggone!

Carl Cravens is disillusioned with the current flavour of the month RPG.