Too much Science?

[-Daniel-]

If you've got a bunch of 'expert' players then really the best thing to do is ask them what they're expecting before the game. If they can all suspend their disbelief and accept that the GM doesn't know as much as their subjects then things will probably work out.

However, if they're going to keep interjecting with corrections all the time during the game then it's probably not going to be a fun game for anyone because they'll be frustrated that the GM keeps 'getting it wrong' and the GM will be annoyed at being interrupted all the time. It's bad enough when that happens with ordinary rules lawyers after all...

Again though I think that is more to do with the 'social contract' around the table than anything in the games themselves.

This is true for more then just science, I watched a Star Wars RPG game die because one of the players knew more about Star Wars then most folks and after about the 20th time he said "That is odd in X it says Y...." the GM handed him her book and said "You run it, I quit." The group never quite recovered. Players and the GM must agree within the group on quite a few things or the game will not be as fun as it could be.

Daniel

 

[GamerDude]

This is true for more then just science, I watched a Star Wars RPG game die because one of the players knew more about Star Wars then most folks and after about the 20th time he said "That is odd in X it says Y...." the GM handed him her book and said "You run it, I quit." The group never quite recovered. Players and the GM must agree within the group on quite a few things or the game will not be as fun as it could be.

Daniel

It's the same with Forgotten Realms... Over a decade of source books and hundreds of novels, you get people thinking they know the tiniest detail, and expect the game to conform to all this, AND that their character always knows all of this.

It all comes down to how much other sources will affect the game, the 'cannon', the science, the players personal experiences and knowledge... Agree how much it's going to affect what you play then just sit back and enjoy the game...

 

[rust]

It all comes down to how much other sources will affect the game...

This is one of the reasons why I prefer to design and develop my own
homebrew settings.
I really like world building very much, but I also like the fact that I am
and remain the only reliable authority on the settings I created, and that
I can therefore be sure that the players will not start to hit me with quo-
tes from some obscure sources I have never seen, as it could happen
with settings like Star Wars, Forgotten Realms - or the Official Traveller
Universe. :twisted:

 

[-Daniel-]

It all comes down to how much other sources will affect the game...

This is one of the reasons why I prefer to design and develop my own
homebrew settings.

Even when doing your own setting this can happen if you are not careful. Played in a D&D game once that lasted for a year and a half. Toward the end, one guy was pointing out when the GM made errors in his own world based on what he had given us before.

Example:

GM: It will take you five days to ride there....
Know-it-all: Um, last time we went there from here you said it was a two days ride.
GM: I did?
KiA: Yes, see, here in your 'Guide to my World part 10' is says Xenor is two days ride from Gashmak.

Sad to say, the people who are like that are just like that regardless of setting, including your own home baked setting.

Daniel

 

[EDG]

Even when doing your own setting this can happen if you are not careful. Played in a D&D game once that lasted for a year and a half. Toward the end, one guy was pointing out when the GM made errors in his own world based on what he had given us before.

Yeah, but where's the problem there? If the GM said one thing earlier and contradicts it later on then it's fair enough to point out his error. That's the GM's fault for being inconsistent, not the player's fault for pointing that out.

 

[rust]

Yeah, but where's the problem there? If the GM said one thing earlier and contradicts it later on then it's fair enough to point out his error. That's the GM's fault for being inconsistent, not the player's fault for pointing that out.

This is how I see it, too. In fact, my players are welcome to watch out for
such mistakes and correct them, because this also helps me to improve
my setting and my own understanding of it - I just prefer them to do so
after the gaming session, if possible.

 

[-Daniel-]

Even when doing your own setting this can happen if you are not careful. Played in a D&D game once that lasted for a year and a half. Toward the end, one guy was pointing out when the GM made errors in his own world based on what he had given us before.

Yeah, but where's the problem there? If the GM said one thing earlier and contradicts it later on then it's fair enough to point out his error. That's the GM's fault for being inconsistent, not the player's fault for pointing that out.

yes, but I think the point is the degree, number of times, and relevance to the game that make a difference. If it happens once in a while or only when it would have an impact on the game then it might not be so bad. In the Star Wars game I spoke about above it was dozens of times in a single three hour game session and often as not had no material impact on the game.

GM: As you enter the city you see the Troopers in their light blue caps patrolling...
KiA: I am sorry, but in the XYZ obscure reference it says the Troopers in this sector would have orange caps.
GM: Ok, in their Orange caps patrolling the dock area. What do you want to do next?

See, it made no difference to the game, or to the rest of us for that matter. The key was there were troops in the area and we needed to tell the GM what we wanted to do next.

I think this is about the rhythm of the game and if the rhythm is interrupted too much then the game is not as fun as well. Even Rust said he would rather have it after the game.

Daniel

 

[EDG]

See, it made no difference to the game, or to the rest of us for that matter. The key was there were troops in the area and we needed to tell the GM what we wanted to do next.

I think this is about the rhythm of the game and if the rhythm is interrupted too much then the game is not as fun as well. Even Rust said he would rather have it after the game.

But again I think that's the GM shooting himself in the foot. If he's unsure about a detail then he's better of not mentioning it (just say that there's Troopers there and that's it). But if he says something that is inconsistent with what he said before then I'd say the players have every right to point it out and correct it. Not doing so breaks the verisimilitude of the setting, and also can lead to confusion - for example, the blue cap troopers may be a totally different faction to the orange cap ones, that the players don't want to mess with.

 

[-Daniel-]

But again I think that's the GM shooting himself in the foot. If he's unsure about a detail then he's better of not mentioning it (just say that there's Troopers there and that's it). But if he says something that is inconsistent with what he said before then I'd say the players have every right to point it out and correct it. Not doing so breaks the verisimilitude of the setting, and also can lead to confusion - for example, the blue cap troopers may be a totally different faction to the orange cap ones, that the players don't want to mess with.

EDG,

You win.

Daniel

 

[captainjack23]

It's the same with Forgotten Realms... Over a decade of source books and hundreds of novels, you get people thinking they know the tiniest detail, and expect the game to conform to all this, AND that their character always knows all of this.

It all comes down to how much other sources will affect the game, the 'cannon', the science, the players personal experiences and knowledge... Agree how much it's going to affect what you play then just sit back and enjoy the game...

Yeah, when my (excellent) D20 GM finally offered to run a game based on Middle Earth and LOTR, I had to pledge to shut up about setting details during play - which was no problem since he more than allowed me to make comments and questions between sessions.

It also allowed me to play a character with lots of local knowlege - again based on an agreement that mismatches between literary canon and his game reflected error in my knowlege - which could be corrected (by him, or not, sometimes based on character rolls). Actually turned out REALLY fun. Same with his Minaria campaign. If you knew Divine right, you were a local - if not, you were an outsider -

 

[EDG]

EDG,

You win.

I wasn't aware we were in some kind of contest...??

I mean, I agree with you, you shouldn't really break things up during the game. But that doesn't change the fact that the ideal situation is that you shouldn't have to want to break things up in the first place because of things like this.

 

[GamerDude]

EDG,

You win.

I wasn't aware we were in some kind of contest...??

nothing is a contest here with any of us... but with you....

{{goes and agrees with everything anyone who isn't EDG said

 

[GamerDude]

yes, but I think the point is the degree, number of times, and relevance to the game that make a difference. If it happens once in a while or only when it would have an impact on the game then it might not be so bad. In the Star Wars game I spoke about above it was dozens of times in a single three hour game session and often as not had no material impact on the game.

Daniel I agree 100%. Commenting on a diff in travel of 3 days is significant (especially when it means more chances to kill the GM's evil highwaymen), but correcting the color of the helmet's of the guards in a city/area because some outside source says diff... and distracting from the game... is dumb.

Just like always having to poke at what other people say twisting it so they are always wrong.

Personally, I encourage my players to keep me on my toes as much as possible, as long as it makes for a better game... Mistakes with the mechanic, distances, etc yep, point them out... the color of a helmet or how the shoe laces are tied? unless it means something to the game (spy or impostor) who cares.

Oh, here's a good one...
In the Lee Marvin move "The Big Red One", (set in WWII Europe), his patrol pick up what they think is a soldier who got separated from his unit. The German woman whose home they are eating in noticed this one guy is eating continental style. She notices this and whispers to him in German asking if he wants something, when he answers she alerts the Lee Marvin and company...

Now imagine this in a RPG session... Normally how one person is eating differently from the REAL US soldiers is meaningless, but in this specific case it would be a huge clue to the fact that one of them was the enemy!

 

[lastbesthope]

"big rocket shooty thing, right ? Make tank go boom ?"

I work for a weapons company, and when talking to my friends I simply refer to them as "Whoosh-bangs" :lol:

(Sometimes I add a relative modifer, e.g. BIG whoosh bang)

LBH

 

[-Daniel-]

EDG,

You win.

I wasn't aware we were in some kind of contest...??

It should not have been, that is true. But sometimes it sure starts to feel like one.

So I have found it is better to just let the other person "win" and it gets better. 8)

Daniel

 

[Jeff Hopper]

"big rocket shooty thing, right ? Make tank go boom ?"

I work for a weapons company, and when talking to my friends I simply refer to them as "Whoosh-bangs" :lol:

(Sometimes I add a relative modifer, e.g. BIG whoosh bang)

LBH

When I was working with Navy Nuclear, we referred to all types of emitted radiation as "Zoomies" regardless of type. :lol:

 

[Leo Knight]

One of my favorite resources is the "Hard- Soft Sci Fi Gradational Scale" http://www.kheper.net/topics/scifi/grading.html, whose author puts the default Traveller universe at Medium Hard. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned above, most of my players get their SF from Star Wars, Star Trek, et al, which the author places at Very Soft. Acceleration? Coasting without thrust? Weightlessness? De-celeration? What are those? It seems for them, the "science" is just window dressing, starships= sailing vessels, air rafts= horses, lasers= six- shooters, again a la Star Wars.

For myself, I'm torn. I grew up on a steady diet of TV/ bad movie SF. One of my earliest memories was watching Lost in Space on the old black- and- white tv. So that stuff has an emotional pull, probably an attack of nostalgia. Intellectually, I know it's silly, but the 3 year old in me wants his ray guns. The challenge for me is to maintain that feel of adventure, romance even, while still making it plausible enough for my adult mind.

 

[rust]

Thank you for the link !

According to this gradational scale, the settings I prefer are somewhere
between plausible and medium hard science fiction, with much of the
space technology (FTL drives, etc.) more in the medium category and
most of the planetary technology (marine technoloy, etc.) more in the
plausible category.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

One of my favorite resources is the "Hard- Soft Sci Fi Gradational Scale" http://www.kheper.net/topics/scifi/grading.html, whose author puts the default Traveller universe at Medium Hard. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned above, most of my players get their SF from Star Wars, Star Trek, et al, which the author places at Very Soft. Acceleration? Coasting without thrust? Weightlessness? De-celeration? What are those? It seems for them, the "science" is just window dressing, starships= sailing vessels, air rafts= horses, lasers= six- shooters, again a la Star Wars.

For myself, I'm torn. I grew up on a steady diet of TV/ bad movie SF. One of my earliest memories was watching Lost in Space on the old black- and- white tv. So that stuff has an emotional pull, probably an attack of nostalgia. Intellectually, I know it's silly, but the 3 year old in me wants his ray guns. The challenge for me is to maintain that feel of adventure, romance even, while still making it plausible enough for my adult mind.

It would be good for us all to read this link as it provides a very good grounding in this debate, and if we can use it as a baseline then we do not need to cover the ground this already covers.

However, it does get a little confused in the case of Traveller, putting medium hard in the summary but soft/soft in the detailed bit (with caveats).

I think this debate does bear out that Traveller straddles the divide between hard and soft sci-fi. I think it does this in a specific way, but it should mean both science-freaks and science-who-cares-folk are both catered for and accepted.

It has been mentioned that if the science is embedded within the system and does not require a player to actually understand it then no one minds. This probably what should be aimed for: correct(ish) science made invisible, and get out clauses for the cool stuff we want (FTL, lots of playable aliens, psionics, etc).

 

[-Daniel-]

For myself, I'm torn. I grew up on a steady diet of TV/ bad movie SF. One of my earliest memories was watching Lost in Space on the old black- and- white tv. So that stuff has an emotional pull, probably an attack of nostalgia. Intellectually, I know it's silly, but the 3 year old in me wants his ray guns. The challenge for me is to maintain that feel of adventure, romance even, while still making it plausible enough for my adult mind.

I think this is true for most of us. I KNOW it is true for me. :wink:

I enjoy just letting go and being the three year old once in a while. Then I remind myself I have a four year old to deal with and I come right back down to "Adulthood".

:lol:

Daniel