Space Opera vs Hard Sci-Fi, personal vs realistic

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

I realize that we've drifted pretty far from your original question, which had to do with how to tweak the technology, powers and rules used in a setting to achieve a desired feel. Are there aspects of this that you feel haven't been addressed yet? If so, perhaps you could restate them so we can steer this thread back on track.

We've discussed restrictions, both cultural and technological, but these tend to remove possible technologies, or possibly mitigate them ("We have advanced medicine but no augmentation because of cultural issues.") And people have talked about story-based restrictions ("We could snipe him from a mile away, but we won't because...") but while these will work for a session, they won't work for world-building.

In particular, what I tend to find in Space Opera settings is this: Technology that at least looks advanced compared to modern technology, thus clearly announcing that the setting is "sci-fi," but the capabilities of the technology don't necessarily violate the premise of the space opera in question.

Consider our disintegrators-and-force swords space-pirate game. If we want space-pirates in the sense of cutlasses and blackpowder pistols, then single-shot disintegrators might start to fit the bill (though it wouldn't be clear to me why they wouldn't snipe at one another with their sniper rifles).

There seem to be three ways to do this sort of world-building. First, you counter technology with technology. By creating speed-activated force fields that explode like a nuclear blast when high-powered weapons are used against them, Dune introduces a believable technological counter to ranged UT, and gives us the knife-fights we expect from Dune.

The second is to introduce house-rules or cinematic switches that justify certain tropes. The Mecha Pyramid article introduces a rule that increases the damage inflicted by high levels of strength, better allowing two mecha to punch one another to death, thus justifying the fist-fights you often see mecha get into in anime.

Finally, you can alter the technology directly. Of the three, I like this option the least, because you run the risk of coming across as unrealistic. If we replace M16s with single-shot, short-ranged disintegrators that seem particularly bad at penetrating cover (phaser) or with short-ranged gyrocs that are more expensive but no more likely to kill people, then players might simply choose to get cheaper but as effective TL 8 weapons, if those become an option.

But still: What suggestions or experiences does the Hive Mind have regarding these methods?

[vierasmarius]

For the specific example of Laser Swords and Disintegrators, perhaps the way to handle it is to introduce a technology that counters everything else. For example, a Force Screen that's practically inpenetrable except to the highly-focused destructive power of these energy blades and very-short-ranged beams. This means that a slow and inconvenient weapon is necessary, not because it's just what people happen to have available, but because other weapons can't penetrate the targets' defenses. This is a hard balance to strike, however.

One thing I really appreciate about the beam weapons in 4E, compared to the 3E ones, is that they tend to improve penetration at higher TLs, rather than raw damage. This makes many of them no more lethal than contemporary firearms, but better able to penetrate Ultra-Tech defenses. Of course, this means they are often outclassed by conventional guns, which frequently are more lethal, but can also achieve the same armor penetration by using exotic AP rounds. It's not clear to me how we can prevent solid projectiles being the kings of the battlefield even up through TL12, unless we introduce commonplace Kinetic-only Force Screens.

Okay, sorry, I think I'm rambling now. I really should go to bed...

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

For the specific example of Laser Swords and Disintegrators, perhaps the way to handle it is to introduce a technology that counters everything else. For example, a Force Screen that's practically inpenetrable except to the highly-focused destructive power of these energy blades and very-short-ranged beams. This means that a slow and inconvenient weapon is necessary, not because it's just what people happen to have available, but because other weapons can't penetrate the targets' defenses. This is a hard balance to strike, however.

One thing I really appreciate about the beam weapons in 4E, compared to the 3E ones, is that they tend to improve penetration at higher TLs, rather than raw damage. This makes many of them no more lethal than contemporary firearms, but better able to penetrate Ultra-Tech defenses. Of course, this means they are often outclassed by conventional guns, which frequently are more lethal, but can also achieve the same armor penetration by using exotic AP rounds. It's not clear to me how we can prevent solid projectiles being the kings of the battlefield even up through TL12, unless we introduce commonplace Kinetic-only Force Screens.

Okay, sorry, I think I'm rambling now. I really should go to bed...

And yet I found it one of the most helpful posts yet.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Finally, you can alter the technology directly. Of the three, I like this option the least, because you run the risk of coming across as unrealistic. If we replace M16s with single-shot, short-ranged disintegrators that seem particularly bad at penetrating cover (phaser) or with short-ranged gyrocs that are more expensive but no more likely to kill people, then players might simply choose to get cheaper but as effective TL 8 weapons, if those become an option.

The best option there is to be strict. Anyone who knows a little about guns knows that phasers are much worse weapons than early-20th-century firearms, and have special weaknesses like Borg "adaptive shields" to boot. A GM just has to be direct "you can't get guns in this setting. Its not in genre, so any attempt to get or make them will fail. If you need a pretext, the treaty of X forbids the production of firearms, and your country is very strict about that treaty. No, this isn't realistic; if you want realism, you will have to give up your starship, your laser sword, and your alien girlfriend."

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

The best option there is to be strict. Anyone who knows a little about guns knows that phasers are much worse weapons than early-20th-century firearms, and have special weaknesses like Borg "adaptive shields" to boot. A GM just has to be direct "you can't get guns in this setting. Its not in genre, so any attempt to get or make them will fail. If you need a pretext, the treaty of X forbids the production of firearms, and your country is very strict about that treaty. No, this isn't realistic; if you want realism, you will have to give up your starship, your laser sword, and your alien girlfriend."

That's a fair point. Even if the Space Opera has nods towards actual science (for example, Mass Effect has quite a deep discussion on alternative biologies and a rather famous and surprisingly accurate rant by a gunner), we forgive them for their lapses because, c'mon, SPACE OPERA! Perhaps I should worry about it less. After all, even my hard-science loving friends (Myself included) are perfectly willing to give space opera a pass, and just appreciate what interesting shout-outs it gives to actual science.

[dcarson]

What is true overall isn't true for a specialized group. The big killers in modern warfare is artillery and airpower. Seals still learn and use close combat because that is useful in the circumstances you use a seal team. Although even then the really targeted airstrikes deep in enemy often have seals pointing a lasar designator at it from ways away.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by dcarson

What is true overall isn't true for a specialized group. The big killers in modern warfare is artillery and airpower. Seals still learn and use close combat because that is useful in the circumstances you use a seal team. Although even then the really targeted airstrikes deep in enemy often have seals pointing a lasar designator at it from ways away.

So you're saying that, for example, Laser Swords and Disintegrators may exist in the same setting, but fill different niches and so aren't used side by side?

[Flyndaran]

A gengineered super organism that eats gun powder exclusively. It got out and has made conventional slug throwers all but useless.
How's that for techno-babble?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

So you're saying that, for example, Laser Swords and Disintegrators may exist in the same setting, but fill different niches and so aren't used side by side?

Well...no. Laser swords and disintigrator pistols do have the same niche, short range combat on the man to man level. That in Star Wars you could use lightsabers to deflect attacks, making them a viable weapons choice, is one of the better thought elements of the series. Seals learn hand to hand combat because it offers them the opportunity on rare occasions to take out an opponent quietly, and because it offers some slim options if their gun conks out.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

A gengineered super organism that eats gun powder exclusively. It got out and has made conventional slug throwers all but useless.
How's that for techno-babble?

Pretty bad, since modern and future guns don't and won't actually use gunpowder.

Plus it's a magic nanite-level technology, but Space Opera can get away with injecting those where they make no sense at all.