Re: [GZG] First Sci-Fi Game

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tom B <kaladorn@gmail.com> wrote:
> TomB: And they don't strain credibility more than FTL? My point about
the
> hard-ass sci fi games is that so much is rules out or suspect that it
leaves
> you very little to work with. You can choose ONE thing and throw it
out and
> keep the rest, but that's not applying the same standard. If you're
going to
> gripe about plasma guns, about FTL drives, and about the starmap not
being
> 3D or being 3D and being wrong (2300, I'm looking at you!), then you
also
> have to get out the same lens to fry: Wormholes that are passable by
humans,
> Hyperspace, human genetic modifications beyond the most basic,
practicality
> of colonizing or trying to run a polity across interstellar space with
no
> FTL, cyber modification of humans, etc.

I enjoy each of these things (okay, not plasma guns, because since I
found out they're just silly, my willing suspension of disbelief was
dispelled). They result in interesting stories and fun "what ifs".
Besides, Spec Fic was never intended to _predict_ the future, but to
ask, "What if..." and answer that specific question.

A lot of time in scifi circles is spent arguing over what is "better"
science fiction, with "better" often being equated to "more realistic"
or "more plausible". My point is that a lot of "hard" science fiction
isn't any more realistic than "lesser" space fantasy.

To my mind, if you enjoy the setting and the game, and so do your
players/GM, there's no such thing as badwrongfun, it's all just fun.
Hell, if someone would run Traveller I'd even happily wield a plasma
gun, silliness not withstanding.

-- 
Allan Goodall		 http://www.hyperbear.com
agoodall@hyperbear.com
awgoodall@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l