"Is it really sci-fi you play?" Topic

This is just a matter of taste regarding analogy. You can tell a story with clones and call it SciFi. If you move the story to Arthurian Britain you need a wizard to make the "copy." If that's different enough to you it changes the story.

To me how you make new people 9clones, Gods, Merlin) does not materially change the story.

Consider:

Romeo & Juliet with Leonardo DiCaprio. Moved it to a modern, gangland urban setting. Is it still Romeo & Juliet (kept most of the same script)?

Versus:

10 Things I Hate About You: Moves Taming of the Shrew to a modern High school. Keeps the story but jettisons the script. Is it still the same story?

To me the answer is yes in both cases.

Clones can be fantasy: Witch demands a lock of hair and makes an evil twin from it. Clone by any other name.

No. I play TSATF re-skinned with retro sci-fi figures.

link

It's not about the details, it's about verisimilitude.

I've had this discussion with real-life sci-fi writers. Their contention is that what makes hard sci-fi, as opposed to science fantasy, is that sci-fi is about the human condition when confronted by new technology.

If we accept that definition, then most war games have a hard time treading the line between sci-fi and fantasy. ("Near future" games tend to be closest to hard sci-fi.)

To paraphrase a great man, any sufficiently advanced technology sufficiently abstracted is indistinguishable from magic.

Most sci-fi games are really WWII or Modern tactics (depending on the rules you use, an argument could be made for ancients with 40k) with sci-trappings. It is difficult to conjecture the effects of far future technologies on warfare. Imagine a person from the time of the American Revolution trying to predict the effects of tanks and aircraft on warfare. How could he have predicted that they would even exist, let alone how it would impact warfare at all command levels.

So we make connections to things we understand like "this laser rifle works just like an M16A2 except it goes pew pew pew instead of bang bang bang." Most starship combat games are either WWI naval combat or WWII naval combat depending on whether or not starfighters are prevalent.

With regards to stories themselves, generally most sci-fi is either taking something controversial today and translating it into something "not us" so it can more comfortably explored or taking what we know now and introducing some sci-fi technobabble that makes the (currently) impossible possible and the effects that creates. Occasionally someone will come up with something unique, but depending on how far from what we currently understand it is that can be difficult to grasp because we don't have a frame of reference.

I'm with CP Belt on this – there are very few storylines, just retold many times, in many different ways.

And if moving stories through time & space was good enough for Shakespeare it's good enough for me!

Most starship combat games are either WWI naval combat or WWII naval combat depending on whether or not starfighters are prevalent.

Being in the middle of designing one, it's harder than it sounds. I think I've got the movement rules as de-cluttered as they can be, but I'm still throwing away extra weapons rules.

Someone (I forget who – Isaac Asimov maybe) said that the first Science Fiction novel was "The Odyssey". It's premise is "to explore strange new worlds, sek out new life and new civilisations" – only it uses a rowed galley instead of a starship, and the "new worlds" are unexplored islands.

Someone else – Arthur Clarke ? – said highly advanced technology was indistinguishable from magic. So the example of a SF trope that isn't replicated in history would be the teleporter – but this works just like a magic so is it SF as such ?

The speculative fiction element is provided by the background setting. A book like Iron Council could not occur on Earth as we know it – but the battles could easily be read across : the Golem traps are just a fancy (magical) form of IED.

Most starship combat games are either WWI naval combat or WWII naval combat depending on whether or not starfighters are prevalent.

They should be 3 dimensional though – space is big and available in 3D. SPI did have some boardgames which had space battles in 3D – they were (almost) unplayable !

Most of mine tread occam's razor between Science Fantasy and Pulp, with due reference to Baroque SF and VSF.

Take last week's game, Giant Mollusk constructs with shark infantry under command of a half-cephalapod take on French pre-revolution French troops somewhere in the new world-.
link

link

I'm with Asimov on this one. He once said (and I'm paraphrasing here) that there were not romance stories, action, murder mysteries and science fiction stories. There are only two sorts of story: fiction (stories set in the time period up until this morning) and science fiction (everything from this afternoon onwards).

Then – within those two categories – all of the other sub categories (romance, action, crime etc) exist.

My games tend to be military and conflict oriented games in an SF setting (as they tend to be set, timewise, from some time this afternoon onwards).

John T

For my part, regarding the OP, I don't think that re-casting aliens as humans is significantly different than re-casting artificial beings as humans, in order to port the narrative to a non sci-fi setting.

The thing is, the "science" part of most good sci-fi is (to paraphrase an earlier poster) speculative science or technology which is employed to create situations in which the author and reader can explore an interesting conflict, dilemma, philosophical situation, etc. A wargame, at least insofar as the actual gameplay goes, is going to focus very heavily on the "situation" end of that set-up, and less on the narrative lead-in, which is why it often feels like a fairly generic narrative with a sci-fi backdrop.

The closest I can think of is something like Heavy Gear or (as I gather, haven't actually played) Infinity, which use electronic warfare in some form or another. If you incorporate signal jamming, hackers, and whatnot into the actual game mechanics then the game itself is less easily converted from sci-fi, but even then (again to paraphrase an earlier poster), suitably advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so a similar game could be made into a fantasy or mythological setting.

They should be 3 dimensional though – space is big and available in 3D.

Space is big, but your table isn't. I went with a system that borrows very heavily from Asteroids (the video game). The trick is to represent that with as few intrusions onto the game surface as possible.

I got it down to the ship and another token to carry over from turn to turn, but it still takes two more markers to do your plot when you actually move.

John

Great Hammers game at Salute, Sadly little time to inspect it closely.

As my player group do not like Sci-Fi I tend to have to introduce some "Sci-Fi" ideas into Historical settings.

Note that in Moon [and another current Sci Fi film] the Clones are identical in every way including memories and personality [and "starting" age]. They are all exact copies in every way.

Human identical twins may have identical DNA but have different memories and personalities and brain development.

This includes conjoined twins as well.

link

No. I play TSATF re-skinned with retro sci-fi figures.

The figures look nice but I have no idea whatsoever what the acronym means…

John T

John

I think this is "The Sword and The Flame" Colonial rules

I sure as Hell don't. I like my sci-fi hard and gritty. Advanc(ing) tech amongst modern battlefields. Advanced combat drones providing fire support to a squad of diggers taking fire from Mujahideen forces amongst the Afghan highlands. Syrian rebels firing from the Golan Heights down onto an Israeli mecha unit. UN intervention forces fighting hunter-killer drones sold to Pakistan by the Chechnyans.
Most importantly, NO LASERS!

I think all of this is SF. As many hav said setting is more important than people give it credit. You can reduce anything, SF or otherwise, to plot and character archetypes.

But perhaps more importantly the idea that the "SF trappings" are just setting details misses the importance of these trappings. In war gaming for example the SF tech changes tactics, the flow of the game, etc. while the PBI may still be made up of character archetypes from WW2 movies the "plot" consists of not just the objective (which, when stated generically, is always genre-less) but also the actions of the game. Those are inevitably changed by the SF nature of the game.

From a more thematic perspective, the very act of taking old archetypes (or rejecting them, which are your only two options really) and puttin them into the future, displaying their interaction and relationship with future events or human technological advances makes a point that is very SF. SF is all about how time and tech will change things… Or not. Doing some combination of the two by, say, showing how Rico is still just a soldier despite how different combat tech is for a Starship Trooper is making a science fictional argument.

Yes, The Sword and the Flame. I am sorry for assuming! Yes they are colonial rules. The proxy British forces are opposed by Starship Trooper bugs as proxy Zulus, Mahdists etc.

Thanks Kabrank – good luck in showing historical gamers the value of non-historical gaming (the terminology I always try to use).

I usualy point out that – unless it's a "walkthrough" of an actual battle, as soon as you introduce a non-factual result in a game (Waterloo and Napoleon gets to win) what you have is a non-historical wargame.

SF versus Napoleon beating Wellington? They're all just points on a continuum…

Thanks everybody for the acronym explanation.

John T

Hi John

Yes I like the idea of a "Continuum" and push as far left/right as I can!!

Sci-Fi/SF for wargaming is just a setting. It's technology and enviroment are different( to various degrees) but it's impact on the story or scenario may vary depending on the storyteller or game. Everything else follows simular human and historical patterns.

The thing is the setting and tech can effect a change in the outcome of game, even a historical one. For instance, play the Battle of Hastings with modern British and French forces. It would be called a modern battle, but it uses a basic historical framework for the terrain & cause. Or play Kursk using SF vehicles, but the Germans get grav tanks, and the Russians get SF tracked machines. The outcomes might turn out differently than the historical battle. The SF tech may make all the difference and all that is left is to rename the Germans and Russians, "Proximans" and "Altarians".

For me, SF wargaming is a chance to play with really cool toys…ACV combat vehicles, powersuit troops, mecha, monster tanks, etc…along side the usual tanks, AFVs, infantry, artilley, etc…all in various battlefield scenarios. Some of those scenarios are based on historical ones, and others upon basic battlefield objectives like taking high ground, crossing rivers in force, securing passes, etc…

I am coming in late on this discussion, but I feel that the OP really is splitting hairs and in many ways side-stepping his own argument.

He claims that any of these other stories could be played out in history but that Bladerunner is purely scifi because it has AIs, something cannot exist in other time periods.

Well, there were no alien hunters, giant killer bugs, mag-lev train, space-hopping freighters, psychic soldiers, etc etc in history either. I feel the argument fails by assuming that the essential themes and concepts of Bladerunner are tied to the presence of AIs more than those in Predator, Starship Troopers, Firefly, etc are to their scifi elements.

Take Bladerunner into the past and you could have an amnesia story, a story of mistaken identity, brainwashing, blackmail or some other twist that places the characters in a period appropriate analog of the Bladerunner story. What if instead of replicants we were to substitute Russian sleeper agents in the Cold War or immigrants in the 40s. Deckard might be chasing after Soviet terror agents while simultaneously falling for a dame who doesn't know shei s one herself.

-Eli

Aimed at the original poster, and directed at the question of what makes something truly SF versus being pulp fiction with rocket, robots and rayguns?

This to me seems more like a question one would ask if one was debating SF as literary genre versus literature. The argument used reminds me of debates that question whether or not 1984, Brave New World etc are SF or literature?

What makes something SF in literature is not the plot, but how the story is told using the central tenet of how does x change y. This is where x is for example an SF MacGuffin, like for instance FTL drives, stargates, robots and the ubiquitous rayguns etc.

So, a true SF game is probably one where something about the setting changes what can be done. Perspectives will change over time on what this is of course. For example I have lived a lifetime where Star Trek communicators has gone from being SF to something one can buy in a shop. In WW1 the tactics and organization of troops went from 19th century formations to the basis of modern fire and manoeuvre platoons, which to a military person of 1800s would have seemed fantastical.

So to some extent I would opine that the OPs point is rooted in what is called post modernism; history is dead and we live in the world full of future shock. It looks to me like one is getting too caught up trying to define something that is in a constant state of flux. By this I mean just as soon as you have something nailed down as SF, hey presto we are building vehicles that came makes themselves invisible, as an example.

So for me, what makes something SF is not the story, but how the technology effects people and the society they live in in the story that is being told.

By my definition, Ogre/GEV, BattleTech, Heavy gear, Dropzone Commander etc, etc all count as SF games. YMMV, T&CA, E&OE.

What I'd suggest is go read a Sci-fi book "Guns of the South" by Harry Turtledove, where time travelers went back in time and introduced modern firearms to the Confederate Army in the American Civil War. It changed the historical view of how things went down.

If that is not a prefect example of how Sci-fi tech can change things I don't know what can.

So for me, what makes something SF is not the story, but how the technology effects people and the society they live in in the story that is being told.

The introduction of gunpowder weapons, which was at the time a new technology, most certainly effected society.
Does that make ECW games sci-fi?

I just want to make clear, each to their own of course and the name of the game is fun.
If it is fun, then the game is working!

I still feel my own stories/plots/scenarios are simply generic ones in a sci-fi setting though.
I know very few think this is the case, that is fine of course.

Michael.

Q: Does that make ECW games sci-fi?

No, because the games are not about the effect of technology changing society.

Plus, arguably you need to move your argument back to the first introduction of gunpowder that changed a battle, and then the answer might be yes, as in yes, but no.

Thats the good thing about sci-fi, you could take almost take any story and make it sci-fi. Does it make it less sci-fi I don't think so, most stories can be swopped around e.g Lethal Weapon could work easily as a western, 1920's gangster movie, or swop a gun for a bow and its medieval or possibly older, look at Seven Samurai it's been a western and sci-fi (bad sci-fi, but still) and I think the plot from A fist full of dollars, has been samurai, western, gangster and could be placed in the future. Channel 4 introduced Vanilla Sky as sci-fi because of 1 plot device, which I thought after watching it a bit tenuous, but The Prestige a film about magician rivalry could also (and is) sci-fi, again because of 1 piece of tech (that also has a bearing) on Moon. Hope this is clear, because I don't want to give away spoilers.

Fist Full of Dollars was based on Yojimbo [by Akira Kurosawa]

link

Same director as Seven Samurai.

Also 13th Warrior owes a lot to seven Samurai

The same Directors "The Hidden Fortress" also influenced Lucas and Star Wars [R2D2 and C3PO and the Princess being based on Charactures from Hidden Fortress]

So – in the end – the answer must be….

It doesn't matter!

Use whatever scenarios you can squirt into whatever chosen background you fancy.

John T

I do think Firefly is a real sci-fi setting.
I however do not think all the stories/plotlines are.

As Castle's daughter says when he wore a Holloween costume of a space cowboy (like he wore in Firefly). "There are no cows in space."

Kabrank, thanks for that, I thought Fist full of dollars was originally samurai era just couldn't remember the name and I'd totally forgotten the Star Wars influences and there are no cows in space now, but one day…

and there are no cows in space now,

There is too:

Napoleonics is just sci-fi with tricorns.

and bricoles!

Sharpe in space…I like that idea

Actually kabrank, the 13th Warrior story was known in the west and Europe long before the Seven Samurai story. It was originally known as the Norse epic Beowulf.

And the Seven Samurai was done as a good sci-fi under a similar name as an anime. Samurai 7, it includes giant robots that the Japanese love so much. Even the Samurai wanna-be is a full body cyborg. Certainly much better than Battle Beyond the Stars.

HI Sargonarhes

Interesting to see how stories loop and how Chrichton wrote "eaters of The Dead" that became 13 Warrior.

The introduction of gunpowder weapons, which was at the time a new technology, most certainly effected society.
Does that make ECW games sci-fi?

Yes – Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen (by H. Beam Piper) is an example of this.

FGU even did some rules for it – Down Styphon : link

Fist Full of Dollars was based on Yojimbo [by Akira Kurosawa]

And Yojimbo was based on Red Harvest, by Dashiell Hammett.

Speaking of stories that loop.

To add some more fuel to this fire…even things which the OP would argue are quintessentially "only" Sci-Fi…would all be plausible in a fantasy setting using any form of magic.

Instead of building androids/drones…what if a magician created some identical automatons through some form of sorcery etc.

Obviously stories will never change. As technology develops, perhaps certain scenarios would be unique, but only if you keep your definitions very limited.

I can say that a game involving aliens and big fighting robots is "only" sci-fi, but if I take the core concept of that idea…all of a sudden gods and monsters against titans and mythical creatures becomes the same thing.

Meiczyslaw

Interesting, though WiKi indicates that this is disputed.

Other interesting links to other films shown here as well.

Interesting, though WiKi indicates that this is disputed.

Legally, it had to be, because Hammett didn't get a writing credit.

Thing is, Kurosawa was known to be a big Hammett fan, so claiming he was unaware of Red Harvest stretches credulity.

"I play TSATF re-skinned with retro sci-fi figures"

Retro Sci Fi is proper Sci Fi because we know the past future wont be the future future :-)

I do look at stuff that looks almost exactly like modern gear and think that's not really Sci Fi though, its just moderns without the ethical worries.

But overall, most storylines are timeless. Get some spacefarers, put them in a spaceship called Argo, invent some weird and wonderful enemies to fight (giants with one eye and heat rays, gorgeous alien women with seductive psy-powers that wreck spaceships on asteroids etc), job done.

"I've had this discussion with real-life sci-fi writers. Their contention is that what makes hard sci-fi, as opposed to science fantasy, is that sci-fi is about the human condition when confronted by new technology."

If Alice fires a laser at Bob and Bob fails his saving throw, Bob's condition deteriorates. This may mean that it's not technically sci-fi if Alice & Bob team up to shoot ray beams at aliens, though.

(yes, I know what they actually meant)

Edit: It may also not be science fiction if laser guns are old, but we're not quite there yet. I think. I played the documentary Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon this morning though, and it claims Mark IV Military Cyborgs were using them 2007, so I may be wrong about this.