Why is science fiction a rarer topic for games than fantasy?
>>44379498
>Cthulhu Mythos
>science fiction
I know this is likely a b8 image, but how is Lovecrafts stuff not fantasy? It's full of magic, deities and other fantastical stuff.
There's no science in it.
>>44379631
The whole point of Lovecraft's monsters is that they AREN'T magic. They're just better at physics and science in ways that our puny monkey-minds literally physically cannot handle. There is no magic, no wonder, no god, only an uncaring and incomprehensible cosmos which we understand 0.0001% of, and are wholly dominated by those who understand even 1% of it (Mi-go, Cthulhu, etc.).
Naked savages dancing around Shub-Niggurath fires in worship doesn't make them fantasy any more than cargo cults make real life fantasy.
>>44381079
Interesting, but it depends on the tone you want. You could aim for the more depressive sci-fi tone, or the more wondrous dreamlands adventures.
>>44379498
As far as I can tell, because Gary Gygax was more into fantasy than science fiction, and he's the guy who invented the modern RPG.
>>44379498
Fantasy lends itself much more to heroic, individualistic adventures.
With sci-fi any piece of technology can be reproduced by others. That's why often sci-fi stuff add fantsy elements (see Jedi/Newtypes).
I guess prototypes can be used as well, but you can't really go overboard with them.
>>44381344
Never thought of that, that's some really interesting insight.
>>44382692
>>44379498
That's interesting but I think the simplest answer is simply 'Cause Gary Did it'.
The genre that kickstart the medium is the one that defines the medium. It's the same reason why superheroes are almost synonymous With comics and mechas with manga. It's just how things ended up.
>>44379498
Because D&D is the most popular system and every single D&D setting is some flavor of fantasy. You can blame most of our problems on D&D, really.
>>44379498
Generic fantasy is a thing. You can create lots of slight variations on generic fantasy worlds that feel "fresh" but don't require a huge infodump to get into.
Generic sci-fi doesn't exist. Sci-fi is much more differentiated, even within sub-genres, the differences can be huge.
Also, sci-fi universes tend to be less tolerant of slight divergences. Star Trek without the Federation will raise a lot of questions on how the Klingons/Romulans/Gorn/etc haven't overrun human space.
Sci-fi does survive downplaying elements very well. Star Wars during the Rebellion (as a campaign) can be perfectly playable without anyone interacting with the Force in any way. Thus sci-fi RPGs don't need to flourish in large numbers. A universe can be played "straight" or can downplay/ignore aspects that the players have little interest in.
>>44382971
Star Wars is really just fantasy with lasers though. I think the big part of science fiction is being able to ask a question and for the author to have an answer for you. While Star Wars and Star Trek both have impossible things that disregard the laws of the universe on a regular basis with Star Trek every question can be answered with either "it's so far into the future that asking that question with a current understanding of physics makes the question irrelevant" or "the writers got lazy", with Star Wars if you ask a question you just get met with "the force" or "who cares" which, too be fair, when you're dealing with fantasy "who cares" is the right answer you should give to physics questions.
>>44379498
I heard somewhere that the distinction between sci-fi and fantasy is that in fantasy, you're the chosen one and in sci-fi, you're not.
Also, I'd say it's because fantasy is timeless. A 20 year old sci-fi where they guessed wrong and your communicator is handheld instead of a Bluetooth/earbud and your backpack computer can hold 3 whole terabytes(!) of data really rips you out of the experience
>>44383095
Star Wars and the Matrix for example are fantasy because if you try hard enough, you can totally bend the rules and win. You just have to BELIEVE! Unfortunately, I can't think of a good example of sci-fi without a 'chosen one' right now
>>44379498
Fantasy was popularized by the early tableto RPGs.
When people create a fantasy world people are probably more willing to buy unrealistic aspects (e.g. simplistic morality systems), which makes game design easier. This is just a hunch though.
Aside from that
>>44381344
>>44382971
>>44383095
are good points.
>>44383213
Dune? Lensman? Half-Life?
>>44381079
>There is no magic
I'm sorry, but there most definitely is. People literally cast spells in some Lovecraft stories. Of course, I've never been fond of that aspect and prefer it when Lovecraft leans more towards science fiction.
>>44379498
>dat continual misuse of the word "trope"
ffs
>>44381344
>Fantasy lends itself much more to heroic, individualistic adventures.
Yeah. Instant communication at a distance, huge organizations, mass communications, technology that's readily available to the public (or at least a big segment of them)... It can be hard to have the believable small-scale adventures that are role-playing's bread and butter. You got into a firefight? Why are the cops all over that shit?
You really have to try hard to justify things. Also, science and technology tend to be more rationally-based and demanding than magic. As I've commented before on multiple occasions, I like future apocalypse (think Gamma World), because you get your cool science fiction tech, but in an environment where old school quests are quite feasible.
>>44379498
fantasy - something that is completely made up and doesn't not need any justification.
Can apply to both medieval and futuristic times.
Sometimes, retard mistaken futuristic settings for sci-fi because lol mechas and space ships.
science fiction - usually futuristic fiction that have to be based on current understanding of science, either physics, biology and others.
It's is pretty obvious which choice is most people favorite since very autistic nerds are too few, don't work and earn good money.
As a DM, I prefer fantasy so my group enjoy themselves and spend most of their time having fun making up bullshit rather than having annoying arguments everytime someone try out something cool.
YMMV
>>44383095
Sci-fi is more concerned with the logical ramifications of whatever Big Idea the story happens to be tackling. Fantasy is more concerned with presenting engaging character drama and conflict against a colourful backdrop.
And this is because genre has a lot less to do with a story's content, and a lot more to do with what audiences want out of the story. If I want an interesting exploration of a particular concept, I turn to sci-fi. If I want tales of adventure and intrigue in a strange land, I turn to fantasy.
That's why Science Fantasy (or "soft sci-fi") exists - it's just stories with the stereotypical trappings of Sci-fi (lasers, robots, spaceships, etc.) but used to serve the goals of a Fantasy story (adventure, drama, intrigue and so forth).
Problems arise because people mistake the form of a genre for its function. Robots, spaceships and lasers do not make a Science Fiction story; it's what the story does with those elements that matters. It's not a matter of what the story's about, but how it's about it.
>>44387007
What's wrong with it?
>>44390390
Only reddit and tumblr read TVTropes, obviously.
