Custom Universes: Getting On The Same Page

[Beetle]

Every time I've played in a sci-fi campaign where the universe was entirely GM created, it has been a big disaster. The main reason for that was that everybody brought there own assumptions to the game, and acted as if that was the tech level.

 

One GM and I had a disagreement about whether my pilot's evasive maneuvers would send people hurtling around the bridge of our small ship. He said yes (Star Trek fan), I thought not (Babylon 5 fan). Sure he was the GM, and it's his campaign, but he never said we didn't have seatbelts. He assumed we'd all just figure there were no seat restraints and we all figured there would be restraints, so nobody thought to discuss it. Numerous other small dustups and misconceptions about things such as sensors, shields, weapons, communications, just about anything you could name.

 

The only sci-fi campaigns I've played in that have worked was one where we were told "the tech is same as in the Honor Harrington books" and the current campaign I'm in which is actually set in the "Firefly" universe. That set a baseline for the campaigns that everybody could understand.

 

So how do those of you in GM-made universes get everybody on the same page?

[Xavier]

Re: Custom Universes: Getting On The Same Page

 

Well, I'm a gm and I generally only use custom universes. I handle situations like the one you describe by telling them what the tech level is. The scenario you describe with the whole seatbelt thing, I would typically handle it in the following way.

 

Hm...this maneuver will send the crew members flying about in the cabin. Hm...is it possible that if such a thing is possible then maybe there are seatbelts built-in? Did the pilot mention to the crew that he was about to do something...unpleasant. If common sense would suggest that certain things make sense then I go with that. If you live in a universe where the the ships routinely get shaken around like Shakira's ass, and there are no seat belts, then IMO that's just dumb. I know it's a for instance, but that's how I approach almost everything in terms of setting differences in perception.

 

I know it's kinda fast and loose for some purists out there, but this keeps things like dustups to a minimum. And to be honest sometimes I completely snarf up a ruling on something. My players will protest and if they are right I rescind the ruling apolgized for being dumb and keep on playing.

 

It works for us.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Custom Universes: Getting On The Same Page

 

One GM and I had a disagreement about whether my pilot's evasive maneuvers would send people hurtling around the bridge of our small ship. ... He assumed we'd all just figure there were no seat restraints and we all figured there would be restraints' date=' so nobody thought to discuss it.[/quote']

 

If you have one (people getting tossed around by turbulence), you have the other (seatbelts of some sort).

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Custom Universes: Getting On The Same Page

 

... everybody brought there own assumptions to the game' date=' and acted as if that was the tech level.[/quote']

 

The core assumptions of a SF setting go way beyond simply the tech level. How easy and/or expensive is interplanetary communication? Is it instantaneous, nearly so, or not even close? Same questions apply for travel. Is there an overarching agreement between worlds defining how matters of jurisdiction are handled? Who enforces it? How strictly is this agreement enforced? How broad is the agreement: does it apply to nearly everything, or only to very specific, very important matters? How does the ease of interplanetary communication and/or travel affect such agreements and their enforcement?

 

Some of this is influenced by the level of technology, but even then, the type of technological advancement possible in the setting is at least as important as the level of the advancement.

 

In my own experience, it's much easier to say "the Star Wars universe", or "the Star Trek Next Generation universe", or whatever, than it is to define the whole setting from scratch. It's far less satisfying to me as a GM, though.