Sci Fi/Opera Originality

surreality

@apos Basically, what you're describing is a model similar to the tabloid method:

Tantalizing nebulous headline!
Loose, variably interpretable 'facts'.
Let people's imaginations run wild.
Deny more factual data, creating a craving for more factual data.
Make the acquisition of more factual data a reason to keep coming back in hopes of finding another kernel of information about the story.

This is not a new methodology. At all.

Further: all aspects of a game are an ecosystem. All of them. From a methodology like the above to the RPG mechanics it uses to its setting to the OOC policies it employs to the amount of data it has available to players.

If that is not the methodology you want as a part of your game, you're going to have to vary the way you handle all of those other aspects as well.

Similarly, if you want a different setting, you're going to have to vary all of those other things to some extent as well, because all of these pieces are part of the interlocking mechanism that is your game. You cannot simply swap one out and leave the rest as is -- you can't even adjust one without adjusting the others.

This is really not hard to understand. It's not. It is hard for me to understand how it is that you aren't understanding it.

Lotherio

Just more good for thought. Hearing all sides. With sci fi, the detail is more important for v several reasons. One there are a lot of different ways to represent future tech. From how Ai, robots, drones and nanotech (robotic, not just synthetic components for better functionality of every day items) to how plasma (4th state of matter) works as weapon or energy or something inbetween. Is particle entanglement why we communicate across light years in seconds? Teleported? Second, it's not accepting that the work, but hard and even gritty sci fi gets into science. Stranded team needs to McGuyver there tech to live in hostile environment and build makeshift weapons to fight monsters ( or Gorn). So knowing what a phasers components can be turned into affects outcomes. The question needs to be answered to avoid theme conflict; if ammo/fuel source of communicator isn't known, group one may say energy cell that plugs and plays to run a heater on ice world while group two went with radiation recharge from nanotech surface energy collectors.

All is good in my book but I see this point. And this level of detail and variance could be what @faraday gets a with winning the lottery. Everyone who likes sci fi may see tech differently. Particle entanglement communicators that work between galaxies may be jumping the shark for some where not having AI could turn others off.

I do believe in the end good story of sort still be the draw, but folks should be ready to answer tech questions. They better know why they decided on some tech detail because some may disagree. Bacteria on Mars and Titan was a guest question and may have been a turn off to the new place. For me bacteria was either found and studied to be used in current science and medicine, a virus of earth killed off native specimens, it was only fossil evidence, or just no. The important thing is more it's not of relevant use either way and detailing it would detract from focus. But not having it in theme may be a deal breaker for some; maybe guest wanted to focus on medical research related to that (which is deeper in theme, tholin of outer bodies and oort objects is researched studied and advancing science in theme already).

Apos

@surreality No, that's not even close to the methodology I was talking about. There's a huge difference between, 'deny data to create a craving' and 'you want to give that data but you do not have time to do so, and if you try to do so your game will crash because you are neglecting more important things.'

People fail at sci fi because they are like, 'hold up ya'll, I can't tell stories for these 50 people, because I need to tell one person how a transporter works.' Sure, they don't think of it that way, but it is absolutely how it works in practice when they spend 5 hours talking to a single person.

surreality

@apos Except... no. Not even slightly.

That's the model you're extrapolating this advice from, and you've gone so far as to make a lot of incorrect assumptions in the process about why people do or don't do things to the extent that it's starting to become offensive and obnoxious.

You're also making the assumption that the game's intent is to be top-down with staff-led plots, which also is not a given as many games strive to empower players with information their characters do not have in order to enable them to run plots and storylines for themselves.

The above is actually the norm for non-OT games based on existing systems, in which players have vast amounts of information about the way things work than their characters do.

Look, @faraday and I have had a huge argument about this before re: 'what is essential and what's too much and what's too little in a sci-fi setting' and we're still both agreeing wholeheartedly that your suggested approach is not appropriate to this circumstance. That should definitely be telling you something.

What you're describing about 'you have to be able to effectively manage your time' is definitely true; too much of the rest relies on a lot of underlying assumptions that are steering you more than just a little bit wrong in terms of your ultimate conclusions. (Proper time management an essential for any staffer or creator, whether they're running plots or not.)

RnMissionRun

I have to say, not once in more than 20 years of playing on Star Trek MU*s have I ever had to explain to a player how a 'transporter' works, not even to players that have never actually watched Star Trek. All they need to know is what it does (it moves you from one place to another nearly instantaneously) and how to operate it (ie you step on the pad, target a nearby space object and energize). In a sense, it's no different than an ox cart, H2 Hummer, or an Uber taxi. You don't need to know (or care about) the specifics of how it works in order to use it and that's what's important, IMO. If people are hung up on the details then they probably do not fully comprehend the function of the device (in game terms).

surreality

@rnmissionrun Again, though, that's an existing property. Even the people who don't know it have dozens of people who do they can ask, rather than having to rely on staff to answer them.

Few casual players on an OT game can do the same, and as a result, there's a heavier burden on staff in this regard (though from what I understand, @Roz is a special exception and deserves lots of cookies for being awesome this way, more OT games need people like this, and they should be appreciated a lot when they appear).

But, again... there are several solutions to this problem, depending on the kind of game you want to have and what you want people to be able to do within its framework.

ETA: Also, people have really unrealistic expectations re: the time required to create a truly quality game. An OT game is always going to take longer than almost anything based on an existing property, whether it's using an original system as well or not.

RnMissionRun

@surreality said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

@rnmissionrun Again, though, that's an existing property. Even the people who don't know it have dozens of people who do they can ask, rather than having to rely on staff to answer them.

Few casual players on an OT game can do the same, and as a result, there's a heavier burden on staff in this regard (though from what I understand, @Roz is a special exception and deserves lots of cookies for being awesome this way, more OT games need people like this, and they should be appreciated a lot when they appear).

But, again... there are several solutions to this problem, depending on the kind of game you want to have and what you want people to be able to do within its framework.

I think the point I made is apropos to original games also. Focus on explaining what something is, in game terms, and leave the jargon and technical explanations for the wiki for the real nerds

surreality

@rnmissionrun Oh, definitely.

I think that's the thing, though -- it needs to be written down in the first place. Then, all you have to do from there is point to a link with the answers. Then, if someone still has questions, their questions will (ideally, if they bothered to read it, and not everyone does) they will be more specific and much, much easier and faster to answer.

Anybody doing anything OT who isn't either writing everything down where everyone can get to it (in an open setup) or where fellow staff can refer to it as needed (in games with secrets, which almost all do in some respect or another) is making way more work for themselves than necessary.

Apos

@surreality said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

ETA: Also, people have really unrealistic expectations re: the time required to create a truly quality game. An OT game is always going to take longer than almost anything based on an existing property, whether it's using an original system as well or not.

Yeah but that's all I'm getting at. That I think the trap most OT designers fall into is trying to answer every question asked of them, and that's unrealistic and not an effective use of their time. And most want to try to answer every possible thing before they get going, and it really just needs to focus on the broadest strokes or it is not a realistic goal. If someone says, 'I'm going to have a fully fleshed out sci fi setting that answers most questions before I get going', I'd feel the same way about someone saying, 'I'm going to establish my original theme setting with a 10 novel series first'. If someone can do that, I have all the respect in the world for them, but I would not advocate that approach.

I believe that the lack of sci fi games is because of people having unrealistic expectations and standards of what they can reasonably achieve.

surreality

@apos What @faraday and I keep trying to tell you, though, is that the audience for an OT sci-fi game pretty much demands that, and will not even consider play without it.

You can say 'tell them no' and insist that it's the only way you'll get the game done, but it will then fail for one of the following reasons:

You get stuck in the trap of filling in all the gaps you left and have the same problem of not being able to do anything else when people do show up, and when you tell them 'no, that's not important,' they additionally get offended and leave because it was important to them.
There's not enough information for the target audience to show up to participate in the first place, so no one ever shows up and you have all the time in the world to twiddle your fingers watching the tumbleweeds blow.

That's the problem.

RnMissionRun

@apos said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

I believe that the lack of sci fi games is because of people having unrealistic expectations and standards of what they can reasonably achieve.

I think the main reason why people avoid original sci-fi is because historically, such games were code-heavy affairs with simulated space, economy systems and coded combat, which a lot of people simply do not like. Eve Online, STO, E:D and similar MMOs do that so much better, and that's why the players that used to frequent games like Hemlock MUSH, Beyond the Fire and Otherspace (for example), no longer play.

It's not the only reason, of course but I've gotten busy at work and have to cut this short

Apos

@surreality Yeah I understand that's the problem but I just disagree. I don't think that target audience just matters very much, and people only become convinced they matter because of how loud they are. I believe the amount of people that a game would lose is eclipsed by those a game would gain by focusing on story, and if the OT game creator does so then they gain enough time to complete the setting to the satisfaction of those that would be demanding.I think people are distracted by the loudest critics without seeing those that would support the game that do not require that degree of rigor. A game designer trying to appeal to those ultra demanding diehards is imo a terrible idea because it is not an effective use of their time, when they can make their game successful by using their time to focus on other avenues of appeal.

In other words- An OT game with the feel of a babylon 5 game can gain a Star Trek's internal consistency with enough time, but it should start story rich because that's just a stronger way to build a game's base. I think trying to present a full canon of a Star Trek's detail when beginning is not an effective use of resources.

surreality

@apos You're welcome to keep having that opinion, but you're not going to convince me to join you on that hill. After 20+ years of watching such games come and go, and hearing precisely the same thing from everyone else who has watched such games come and go, with you as the sole exception?

Sorry, but no.

This 'story rich' vs. 'data available' thing is also not an either-or prospect... at all, and no one is suggesting anything on the level of '30+ years of fiction's worth of exposition' like Star Trek.

You keep setting up all of these strawmen and they aren't helping make your point in the least beyond the 'you have a limited amount of time like everybody else and you must use it wisely' which is complete 'duh' territory to anybody who has ever even played on a game, let alone staffed on one, or tried to create one, especially create one from scratch.

Scissors

No one is talking about needing to know technical minutiae, but a game needs to provide some basic levels of detail for a huge variety of matters just so players can play without making assumptions in every pose. Take for an example a non Star Trek transporter; it's not the same as "really fast horse or car". I don't need to know its engineering principles, but I sure need to know HOW many people can be transported at once. What's the range limit. Can it be blocked or be interfered with. Can it transport through defenses. Same thing with a weapon; what's the range, does armor help, can it be used as a heater, how concealable it is... these are not things the player can just handwave, nor should you want them to.

The lack of definition in an original SF setting might be advantageous in one application though. Has anyone seen Red Dwarf? An original comedy SF game can end up with all sorts of whacky stories by messing with ill-defined tech. It won't be to everyone's taste, but I personally would love it.

Seraphim73

I think that the debate @Apos is having with @surreality and @faraday comes down to the differences between sci-fi worlds and fantasy worlds (someone already made much of this point, and I apologize for missing who it was): You can tell someone that your world is low-magic feudal fantasy and they can play in it while you hash out the details; you can't tell someone that your world is high-tech meritocratic space exploration and let them play in it while you hash out the details.

Sci-fi tells stories via technology (that's why it's -science- fiction (and why Star Wars isn't sci-fi for the most part)), so you sort of need to have details on what the technology does in order to use it "properly" in RP. Fantasy tells stories via wonder, so all you need to know is "what level of magic do we have, what sort of fantastic creatures do we have, are we knights-in-armor or barbarians-in-furs" and you can start telling stories. Meanwhile, the sci-fi game is telling people if they have power armor, if they use kinetic energy weapons or lasers, how ubiquitous space travel is, how fast space travel is, etc.

Yes, I'm definitely exaggerating how easy it is to set up a fantasy game, Arx in particular has done a fantastic job of creating a coherent world that is easy for people to play in. But the thought behind that exaggeration remains the same: you don't need all the details to play day-to-day in a fantasy world, but you do need a ton of those details to play day-to-day in a sci-fi world.

Apos

@seraphim73 said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

I think that the debate @Apos is having with @surreality an @faraday comes down to the differences between sci-fi worlds and fantasy worlds (someone already made much of this point, and I apologize for missing who it was): You can tell someone that your world is low-magic feudal fantasy and they can play in it while you hash out the details; you can't tell someone that your world is high-tech meritocratic space exploration and let them play in it while you hash out the details.

Like I get that and I'm not trying to diminish the challenges in it, but I just don't think that's true. Star Wars, Dune, Warhammer 40k, Fading Suns, imo all of those could fall under the fantasy umbrella even so. But also take any near future sci fi, cyberpunk and so on, all of those also are also minimized and simple too, so imo you are pretty much just left with sci fi settings trying to define something completely alien.

And even there, I still don't agree. A creator just doesn't have to chase down all the rabbit holes. They could start with a dozen different character broad tropes, define really what they'd need to know in order to pursue the meaningful storylines to them, and then focus only on anything absolutely critical to their experiences as they occur. It just needs immense discipline on what someone is willing to invest time in or not.

I just don't think the genre matters nearly as much as people think it does. You can feel I'm way off the mark or incorrect about that, but I just do not think the underlying principles are that different, just how someone meaningfully invests their time creating it.

Three-Eyed Crow

@rnmissionrun said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

I have to say, not once in more than 20 years of playing on Star Trek MU*s have I ever had to explain to a player how a 'transporter' works, not even to players that have never actually watched Star Trek.

Same. I feel like there's a lot of over-complication going on in this thread. Maybe that's what players actually do on MU*s and should be accounted for by game-runners, but it's a still over-complication.

Also, I feel like there are a LOT of specifics in fantasy in terms of weapons, armor, economics, and social mores that are far more alien than what you normally encounter on a sci-fi game. Like, a phaser is a gun with a stun setting. That's, imo, all you need to say, go about your business. It's a matter of how much you're willing to hand-wave them and tolerate minor missteps, and I'm skeptical that fantasy players are more hand-wavey than sci-fi ones.

surreality

@apos said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

A creator just doesn't have to chase down all the rabbit holes.

...and again, no one has suggested they must.

Have you ever staffed on a game set in even in the modern day to see the kind of tech crafting requests that come in? Because they are often meaty and dense as hell.

Any old TR staff may recall the ancient lore of Job #1, the job so full of technical jargon and debates about hacking mechanics that it went on long past the time at which the characters who opened it had been frozen for more than a year while this was debated and kicked around.

This absolutely happened. And that's modern day.

Take someone from the early 1980s and drop them into today through a woo woo time vortex of woozy-woo. Tell them to drive the brand new car that has a fob/dongle instead of a key, relying only on navigation from the GPS service on their smartphone, and to let EZpass handle their tolls for the express lanes. "You must get from NYC to D.C. in five hours. Good luck."

Most of us could do this... that guy? Is fucked.

Seraphim73

@apos said in Sci Fi/Opera Originality:

But also take any near future sci fi, cyberpunk and so on, all of those also are also minimized and simple too, so imo you are pretty much just left with sci fi settings trying to define something completely alien.

I would disagree that Dune or Warhammer 40K is fantasy (I don't know enough about Fading Suns to comment on that), but that's neither here nor there. Let me put it this way, in most fantasy games, you can say, "Tech level is generally 14th century, magic is scarce and feared, there's an orc army gathering to attack you, and a dragon lives in a cave on the mountain south of the city," and people can RP day-to-day life in the city. Yes, that's a slight exaggeration again, but not much of one. I'm pretty sure I could RP a character in that city for a couple of months without anything more than that to go on. But for a sci-fi game, technology is day-to-day. Do you have replicators to feed you, or do you go to greasy spoon diners? Do you take a flying car to work, teleport there, or telecommute?

And even there, I still don't agree. A creator just doesn't have to chase down all the rabbit holes.

These aren't rabbit holes, this is straight-forward day-to-day stuff that will come up in 2/3 of scenes. Is there a person behind the counter at the local coffee shop, or a droid, or an alien? Do I have a smartphone or a telecom implant to call my friends to come join me? How do I pay for my coffee? Yes, some of it can be handwaved, but the point is, a lot of it is simply default information that you can get across in 2-3 sentences for a fantasy game, but not for a sci-fi game. And while most people are willing to read 2-3 sentences to get them ready to play a game, a lot fewer are willing to read the 2-3 wiki pages necessary to lay out the basics of daily life in a sci-fi game.

Hell, for The Fifth World, we had a wiki page for economics, one for culture, one for fashion, one for general tech, and one for entertainment (that doesn't even count military, magic, nobility, the Hostiles, the various locations...), and we still couldn't nail down the feel that we were going for. Was some of that our fault for not writing the right things? Probably. But it was also a bare minimum required to get across some semblance of the feel we were going for.

Miss Demeanor

And God forbid you do a game where people can either inhabit planets, space stations, or ships. Now you have to flesh out all three. And I cannot stress enough how important fleshing out ships are for a sci-fi game. You can't just go 'here is a basic starship, go RP'. What is 'basic'? How big is it? How many crew does it require? What sort of weaponry does it have equipped, if any? Does it use teleporters or drop ships or shuttles for getting from orbit to planet? Can you safely land it on a planet? Does it have hyperdrive? What about warp? Can it 'space jump'? If so, do any of those parts need regular replacing, like a battery? If yes, where do they come from? This isn't stuff you can just leave for later, and expect players to be cool with it. This is how most folk will potentially live or make their living. They need to know if they'll have to spend time and/or resources on keeping the ship running or if it just runs until damaged from an outside source. They need to know what types of ships are available. Is it a battle ship? A smuggler's ship? Are there freighter ships? This isn't stuff to just handwave.