Sci-fi wear swords?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

American firearms fetishism' date=' basically. The US is the only developed country in the world where a discussion about ordinary citizens having access to handguns could be even envisaged. Here you rarely see guns on the street…[/quote']

I hate to disabuse all the popular sterotypes of the Wild West over here but you almost never see guns on the streets of American cities, apart from cops & soldiers. A rifle rack in the pickup is not unheard of in some parts of the country, particularly in rural areas. But try walking down the street with a pistol strapped to your hip, and see how far you get before the police stop and question you – about as far as you'd get if you were wearing a sword. I’ve seen security guards nearly draw down on people (plainclothes cops, mostly) because they spotted a “legal†gun. Displaying any kind of weaponry in modern society is “noticeable, causes extreme reaction†no matter what the laws say.

 

That said, Markdo, I totally agree with your points about the impracticality of swords as primary weapons. Knives will always make great back-up weapons, but “bringing a knife to a gun fight†will likely continue to be shorthand for getting your @## kicked. Unless you specifically add some meta-element to make it otherwise in your campaign. Cuz let's face it: what they lack in practicality, they more than make up for in kewl.

 

Another thing that contributes to the idea is having a "frontier" again...

Any area where psersonal saftey is mostly in the hands of the individual, and or where there are relatively few laws, and the ones that do exist tend to be enforced by the community (communal law) rather than by organized government.

I can think of any number of countries today that this applies to. Even visited a few of them “back in the dayâ€. Never saw (or heard of) one where swordsmanship made a big comeback. Sure saw a lot of AKs, tho.

 

No desire to start an NGD debate on the merits of gun control… I’m just sayin’.

 

also Swords and various blades are dress/court weapons for officers and nobles

Don’t mistake ceremonial swords for actual weapons. Even if you were to sharpen the blade, most ceremonial swords would last maybe one blow before snapping. I've seen deadlier letter-openers. Of course, your future may vary. [single solitary exception: the US Army cavalry saber designed in I think 1913 by General (and Olympic fencer) George Patton. The Army replaced it after a handful of years because it was too heavy for ceremonial use.]

 

 

Anyway, some practical ideas:

 

In one short-lived campaign I ran, based partly on Alien Wars, the Xenovors all had an Enraged limitation that meant they prefered to charge into hand-to-hand combat if given the opportunity. Knowing this, several of the PCs took melee weapon skills. They still hardly ever got used, because it was usually easier to shoot the bugs before they got into melee range than to wait for them to close and trade blows with them. (Kinda like real life...)

 

I played in another game which was set on a huge station. The powers-that-be had sufficient technology to enforce an absolute ban on guns of any kind. (Sophisticated sensor systems tied to teleporters that could beam you straight to prison before the recoil was over.) But swords and other muscle-powered weapons were much harder to detect and therefore harder to enforce. You could do lots of variations on this theme, particularly if your campaign is set in a limited area.

 

I've also seen games where "dueling" with swords was legal, but fighting with guns was not. No real rational reason for it, but hey - since when are humans all rational all the time?

 

From a mechanics standpoint, another option might be to pump up the damage of melee weapons to make them more attractive. You can call this high-tec alloys, or just GM fiat as you like.

 

 

bigdamnhero

“I'll die.â€

“Well, as a courtesy, you might start getting busy on that, cause all this chatter ain't doin' me any kindness.â€

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

I hate to disabuse all the popular sterotypes of the Wild West over here but you almost never see guns on the streets of American cities, apart from cops & soldiers. A rifle rack in the pickup is not unheard of in some parts of the country, particularly in rural areas. But try walking down the street with a pistol strapped to your hip, and see how far you get before the police stop and question you – about as far as you'd get if you were wearing a sword. I’ve seen security guards nearly draw down on people (plainclothes cops, mostly) because they spotted a “legal†gun. Displaying any kind of weaponry in modern society is “noticeable, causes extreme reaction†no matter what the laws say.

The United States is one of the few countries I know of where an ordinary citizen who can afford the license and present a good enough reason can get a legal permit to carry a concealed firearm. with the right kind of weapon and holster, someone could in theory pack heat without getting into trouble.

 

But this is not unlimited. Even people with permits can't carry a weapon into certain places (airports, government buildings, and schools come to mind), and there are other places where having a weapon concelaed improperly can get you into a lot of trouble (walking intoa bank with a sunbnose revovler in your pocket isn't a very good idea). And the permit isn't nearly as easy to get as people think it is -- any sort of legal blip can cuase the permit to be denied. And carrying a concealed weapon without the permit is a felony in most jurisdictions -- you can go to prison for it.

 

This does not stop crimianls from carrying concealed weapons -- but it does increase the penalties against them when they are caught.

[Lucius]

Sci-fi wear swords?

 

I've also seen games where "dueling" with swords was legal, but fighting with guns was not. No real rational reason for it, but hey - since when are humans all rational all the time?

 

 

I see a couple of reasons.

 

Primarily, a firearm is more likely to hit an innocent bystander. Dueling with swords is more likely to harm only the direct participants.

 

Secondarily, if dueling is over a matter of honor, I can see a preference for using a higher-status, if less practical, weapon. In fact, in this culture "duels" (although not called that) are usually fought barehanded.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And the inevitable palindromedary tagline.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Primarily' date=' a firearm is more likely to hit an innocent bystander. Dueling with swords is more likely to harm only the direct participants.[/quote']

Well, if you're talking bar-room shootouts, then okay. But historically-speaking, legalized dueling has mostly been a highly formalized affair, with observers kept safely off to one side. Dodging or DFC-ing was generally considered cowardly and against the whole purpose of the duel, and in some cultures could itself earn you a bullet from the "referee." So the odds of bystanders getting shot would seem to be fairly slim. Back when I was reading a lot of history I remember a lot of people getting shot in duels (fatal or not), but I can't recall anyone who got shot watching a duel.

 

So really, it depends on how the culture in question chooses to legitimize dueling. If it's done in such a way that innocents could potentially be harmed, then I can see swords being favored. But if the law is that worried about protecting innocents, I would think they'd be more likely to regulate the time/place/manner in which duels can be conducted to protect innocents in the first place. More importantly, such conventions serve to elevate "civilized" dueling above mere "killing."

 

Secondarily' date=' if dueling is over a matter of honor, I can see a preference for using a higher-status, if less practical, weapon.[/quote']

Absolutely. Whether you consider that a "rational" reason or an emotional one is semantics I guess. And I don't mean to imply that an "irrational" preference is either improbable or somehow invalid. Just that IMO it's not based on the inherant characteristics of the weapons themselves, but on the moral/emotional values we choose to assign to them.

 

The United States is one of the few countries I know of where an ordinary citizen who can afford the license and present a good enough reason can get a legal permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Just to clarify: only about half the States have concealed carry laws.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"See how I’m not punching him? I think I’ve grown."

[Lucius]

Sci-fi wear swords?

 

 

Absolutely. Whether you consider that a "rational" reason or an emotional one is semantics I guess. And I don't mean to imply that an "irrational" preference is either improbable or somehow invalid. Just that IMO it's not based on the inherant characteristics of the weapons themselves, but on the moral/emotional values we choose to assign to them.

 

 

True enough, perhaps I should have been clearer.

 

 

LA

p

[SteelDoom]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

The thing that drives good SF (IMO) is when a technology gives flavour or even causes the story to exist. For example in the Death Stalker universe effective lightweight shielding was developed that made high velocity balistic weapons useless. So lasers were developed but they had an unfortunate re charge time of about two minutes for a pistol. So many fighters carried a high tech melee weapon with them as well. In the Dorsai series it is noted that the military carry lighter more simple weapons than street thugs. The reason being is that high tech weapons could be "gimicked" by EM fields or what ever fields that stop/inhibit the spark in a gun or electronics or a laser pistol. So the miliatary had resorted to compressed gas inert slug throwers. One person in the book commented to another that "I can see the day we will be back to using swords". I thought this was cool. Street thugs didn't have to worry about opponents with expensive military supressing devices and were walking around with as much firepower as they could afford while a military heavy weapons expert used air rifles. This also meant that governments weren't overly concerned with citizens running around with laser pistols. If anything serious happend then the military could simply turn them off!

 

In a nut shell, come up with your concept and then justify it in terms of technology... the beauty of science fiction.

[Old Man]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Just wanted to throw out an idea from SLA Industries--the bullet tax. In that dystopian world, the price of ammunition is kept artificially high to encourage more entertaining news coverage. At ten dollars a pop, you still see snipers and pistoliers--full auto, not so much.

[Just Joe]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

I think many of the points made about knives, machettes, and other "dual use" tools are excellent. As for swords themselves, I am inclined to agree with Marcdoc that if you want to justify their prevalence, one must "make up magitech, legal or cultural" reasons for them. (Though one can also use a combination of reasons, and some of the reasons rejected by Markdoc might help tip the scales slightly toward sword use). As for the legal and cultural reasons, I have nothing to add that others haven't already written, but on the "magitech" subject I have more to add:

 

First of all, consider "far out" ideas like Mister E's (which I love). Consider the liberating effect of an openning like "Long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away . . ." Star Wars' blasters were inferior to 20th century assault rifles in almost every way. But they didn't have the option to use them, because they hadn't been invented yet, and probably couldn't work according to the physics of that galaxy at that time anyway. Arguably, I'm giving Lucas too much credit here, but the point is that if you aren't basing your game on an imagined future for Earthlings, or if you're willing to allow some radical changes in the future of physics, you can have whatever kinds of weapons you want be more effective. (Ironically, I'm currently trying to work out why swords and crossbows aren't more prevalent in my next campaign -- given that nothing like gunpowder exists and one needs psychokinetic powers to use firearms. My current best answer is that psychokinetic powers are actually quite common).

 

For more realistic games, if you want swords to be more prevalent than they are now, but still not as commonly used as firearms, consider an approach along these lines. Kevlar, as I understand it, is not nearly as useful against swords as it is against bullets. It is not too much of a stretch to imagine that common Sci-Fi armor might not be as effective against swords as it is against beams and bullets. Because of all of the limitations of swords, they might be uncommon, and so for engineering and/or economic reasons, it might be inefficient to bother making most armor very effective against swords. Combine this with even modest cultural considerations, and you can end up with some sword-users. Note. however, that there will probably be some people with good anti-sword armor, and if swords became more common, this armor would become more common.

[Just Joe]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

After rereading Mister E's idea, it is less radical than I initially thought (though I still like it). I thought the combat he was discussing took place solely in the Astral plane. As I now read it, his answer to the original question is essesntially a cultural one (albeit a peculiar and interesting one).

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

So, as long as this thread popped up again...

Stepping way from various philsophies and geting into mechanics...

While I haven't read any of the Terran Empire or Alien Wars stuff yet, if you find yourself playing a Star Hero game using the sample tech from the book, it reinforces the "swords don't blow out bulkheads" perspective(aka the Traveller reason).

A grunt level trooper, wearing Battle armor (probably upgrade the LS to cover vaccum & other space conditions) at Def 15, carrying a Gauss rife (2d6 AP AF5 RKA) stands just under a 50% chance of each slug penetrating a similar suit.

 

In space, no one can hear you decompress.

Wooooooooooooshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

*Arrrgh*

***SplOrk***

 

Now, if you wander over to the Spaceships chapter, you'll notice that MOST of the ships are DEF 15 or less. Including the military station. Which means that if Bob the grunt fires his weapon on board the station he's defending, every slug he fires from that 5 round autofire that doesn't come to rest in a targets body will have just under a 50% chance of punching a bulkhead. Which would seem to say, on the average, each burst is probably gonna wind up creating around 1 breach, maybe more. not all of these will be hull breaches, a lot will be internal... but when you multiply that by an actual full scale boarding action, you're going to blow that station to swiss cheese in record time.

Perhaps this is why blasters are so popular? Because they're all wimpy Normal attacks, and thus don't threaten hull integrity. Of course... pummeling a badguy in 15 PD/ED Armor with a 6d6 EB is an exercise in futility most of the time... but hey...

 

(please, for the love of the gods... somebody tell me that the setting books have more "realistic" tech levels than Star Hero or The Ultimate Vechicle...

please.... the whole "3d6 RKA shipboard weapons" thing has GOT to go.....)

[Mister E]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

I just remembered something interesting about Punisher 2099. In the alternate Marvel future of 2099, energy weapons had become so popular that the defenses for them, (in the form of anti-ray fields, or whatever) also became ridiculously popular; and as a result, defenses for fun things like low-tech bullets ceased to be used. It was like no one even thought to protect themselves agains bullets, the same way I guess soldiers in our modern military don't wear suits of armor, basically.

 

So in comes Punisher 2099 with his .44 Magnum guns, and he blowes everyone... away. Or maybe he fragged them. I don't know.

 

After rereading Mister E's idea' date=' it is less radical than I initially thought (though I still like it). I thought the combat he was discussing took place solely in the Astral plane. As I now read it, his answer to the original question is essesntially a cultural one (albeit a peculiar and interesting one).[/quote']Yeah, it's basically cultural; but with the added incentive that there is much more potential for bad@ss-ness in close combat.

 

I'm glad this came up, because today I revisited the concept of contra for my Planet Ozymandias campaign. So here's the new stuff from my notes:

 

Contra

 

“Nothing is more real. Nothing is more serious.”

~ Zantor the Severer

 

 

Contra is the martial psionic discipline of Planet Ozymandias; also referred to as, “The Place of the Warrior.” Like all psionic disciplines, contra is universal in nature, that is, it is the same for all beings. Specifically, contra is a unique state of awareness, achieved by engaging an in a contest of martial activity, in which the two opponents share communion with each other on the Psychic Plane.

 

Using the HERO System, contra is primarily represented with +1 CSLs for All Combat, with the Limitation "Only While Adhering To Rules Of Contra" (-1/4) (6 character points), which can then be added to the normal combat ability of the Character.

 

For instance:

 

Zantor the Severer is a master of swordsmanship, possessing +2 CSLs with HTH Combat; a number of “Severer” Martial Maneuvers; and +2 Damage Classes, representing years of honing his deadly skill with a blade. On top of this, Zantor is supremely intimate with the state of being known as

contra

, or, “The Place of the Warrior,” and thus gains an extra +3 CSLs for All Combat.

 

Woe is the man who must face Zantor the Severer in single combat.

 

There are five levels of contra:

 

• Adept: +1 CSL w/ All Combat* (6 character points)
  
• Master: +2 CSLs w/ All Combat* (12 character points)
  
• Cutting Edge: +3 CLSs w/ All Combat* (18 character points)
  
• Legendary: +4 CSLs w/ All Combat* (24 character points)
  
• Transcendent “Dinza”: +5 CSLs w/ All Combat* (30 character points)
  

 

*w/ the Limitation "Only While Adhering To Rules Of Contra" (-1/4)

 

 

 

Legendary Feats of Contra

 

“I feel I am close to the edge.”

~ Zantor the Severer

 

 

Stories are told of legendary warriors from the Age of Dreams, who attained a level of contra so perfect, that they were deprived of all voluntary power, becoming incarnations of death, destruction, and the severity of reality, known as Dinza, or, “The Venom of Existence.” In the wake of Dinza, whole civilizations were stripped naked of souls: and it is whispered that in the final days of the Aeil, an army of Dinza raged against itself as a blizzard of suns, shattering the fabric of Continuum.

 

At the legendary level of contra (+4 CSLs w/ All Combat), or beyond, Characters gain access to startling new abilities, reminiscent of the mythic feats of ninja, shaolin monks, and yogi masters here on Earth. Likewise, the very nature of the Character has changed significantly enough, that it is now considered to be possessing of an Alien class of mind for the purpose of dealing with Mental Powers: such as Telepathy or Mind Control.

 

(details of Legendary Contra Feats pending... I think I'd like to do stuff like Desolidification, Find Weakness, Teleportation, Damage Fields... maybe even Duplication. I need to brainstorm a little more. )

[Tom Carman]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Consider the liberating effect of an openning like "Long' date=' long ago, in a galaxy far, far away . . ." Star Wars' blasters were inferior to 20th century assault rifles in almost every way. But they didn't have the option to use them, because they hadn't been invented yet, and probably couldn't work according to the physics of that galaxy at that time anyway. Arguably, I'm giving Lucas too much credit here, but the point is that if you aren't basing your game on an imagined future for Earthlings, or if you're willing to allow some radical changes in the future of physics, you can have whatever kinds of weapons you want be more effective.[/quote']

According to the d6 rules Star Wars RPG, armor was generally much more effective against kinetic attacks than energy weapons. After playing d20 Star Wars a while, those d6 rules were a revelation. It wasn't quite a one-hit-kill situation, but you had a serious incentive to dodge a lot in combat. One hit from a pistol, never mind a rifle, would more than likely leave you unconscious and injured.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

In space, no one can hear you decompress.

Wooooooooooooshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

*Arrrgh*

***SplOrk***

 

(please, for the love of the gods... somebody tell me that the setting books have more "realistic" tech levels than Star Hero or The Ultimate Vechicle...please.... the whole "3d6 RKA shipboard weapons" thing has GOT to go.....)

Yeah, makes about as much sense as a battlesuit with the same armor as a battlestation.

 

I've always treated ship weapons & defenses as being unofficially megascaled in terms of damage as well as range. In other words, I assume that 3d6K from a starship weapon is not the same as 3d6k from an assault rifle; ditto for defenses. (It's heroic, so I don't sweat the points too closely anyway.)

 

If you think about it, if your battleship's hull can't even stop ordinary bullets, it's not going to last long against ship-size phasers/railguns/whatever. So the whole "swords don't pierce the hull" argument never made sense to me either. Even if I was concerned that my high-tech AP bullets might pierce the hull, I'd still be more likely to switch to normal or RP bullets (or some kind of non-penetrating energy weapon) before I'd reach for a sword.

 

Don't get me wrong: I love swords, both in reality and in game. I'm just playing logic-guy. If you want to have swords in a sci-fi setting, you either need to come up with a plausible tech-or-social reason, or just swallow your suspension-of-disbelief in the name of a cool game.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"I've never seen anyone work so hard to get someone else laid in my entire life. You're like the total mack daddy bird pimp."

[Just Joe]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

According to the d6 rules Star Wars RPG' date=' armor was generally much more effective against kinetic attacks than energy weapons.[/quote']Not a bad idea, but it doesn't explain the effectiveness of the Ewok's small, blunt-tipped, low velocity arrows (though I personally would much rather have a sensible answer that goes against the source material than a silly one that tries to justify that little travesty).

 

Edit: But my Star Wars example was meant to make a broader point. I am not trying to say that emulating the details of the game or movie give one good reasons for having swords in a game. I am just saying that if a GM is not trying to describe a plausible future for Earthlings of even denizens of the Milky Way, then she has a much broader range of possible ways to bring swords into the picture.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Not a bad idea' date=' but it doesn't explain the effectiveness of the Ewok's small, blunt-tipped, low velocity arrows (though I personally would much rather have a sensible answer that goes against the source material than a silly one that tries to justify that little travesty).[/quote']

thats easy...

Ewoks weild a power greater than the Force...

 

Narrative Causality

[The Mad GM]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

thats easy...

Ewoks weild a power greater than the Force...

 

Narrative Causality

I thought it was

Toy Sales

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Couple more possibilities:

 

"Rational" reason - close-quarters weapons like knives/axes enable group A to engage enemy group B at close range with 1) less chance of accidentally harming another member of group A and 2) making enemy group C less likely to shoot at group A out of fear of hitting group B.

 

Game reason - the GM will allow martial arts with HTH weapons but not ranged ones, and the GM also forbids levels lower than General Combat levels having any affect on DCV when using ranged weapons.

[Zeropoint]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

I would definitely not expect any personal weapons to be able to breach a warship's armor. That's just plain silly. However, I could see a personal weapon being able to breach the pressure hull from the inside. I could also see a personal weapon damaging airtight integrity of the internal compartmentalization--my .308 rifle would definitely put a hole in a standard watertight door aboard the Carl Vinson, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that it could penetrate a standard non-armored bulkhead. You could put a hole in a watertight door with a fire axe, actually.

 

Regarding Ewoks vs. Stormtroopers: don't let the cute appearance fool you, Ewoks are badasses. They're short Wookiees. They live in a hunting-based economy, and all of them are familiar with weapons made to take down prey larger than they are.

 

Also, the Stormtroopers have some disadvantages: their armor has gaps, which the Ewoks are shown exploiting, and the Empire's rabid human-supremacist philosophy has left them unable to recognize cute, fuzzy little aliens as a credible threat.

 

Even so, Ewoks were dropping like flies in that battle. Their assistance was vital in the Alliance victory, but they didn't totally own the Stormtroopers.

 

Zeropoint

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Not to mention Ewoks as a culture are master low-tech engineers. Anyone invading the Forest of Endor is in for some nasty surprises, as Rebel and Imperial alike discovered.

 

Which brings up an interesting logic hole in RotJ, which is why the Imperials hadn't even seemed to have noticed the Ewoks' very existence. If you're trying to build an advanced technologhical weapon base while surrounded by xenophobic natives, that is bound to affect your plans somewhat even if you do have a massive technolgical advantage. It was as if the Imperials didn't even know the Ewoks were there, or that they were even sentient. They're usually better planners than that.

 

(On the other hand, the Gungans -- not just the infamous Jar Jar Binks but the race as a whole -- were clearly a miostake on Lucas' part. They didn't add anything to the story, their culture such as it was made no sense, and their technology was absurd and rather ineffective.)

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

This has sort of been addressed...

 

...but if you do have kinetic shielding, and shielding against the laser blaster equivalent weapons, then it might make sense to have something that is essentially a big cutting tool that can break through. Doesn't save the good old fashioned sword, but at least you get to have something that works like a a sword....

 

...actually, that's the ticket. Swords aren't terribly good as weapons, objectively speaking, because guns and blasters just pwn them... but training with a sword is the safe way to get good with a "lightsabre", and so people know how to use them and are allowed to carry them.

 

In actual military situations, you then haul out energy swords and enjoy the SFX.

 

Oh... and I'm sure there's a vehicle mountable weapon that can punch through, if you want that to happen (alternatively, we suddenly have a reason for mecha - they can effectively wield the only weapons that can punch through a standard force field).

[Mister E]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Endor should have been the homeworld of the Wookies. I will say no more on the subject.

 

 

~ Mister E

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

But the Imperials would have known better than to build a vital installation on the Wookie homeworld without compltely securing it first -- by which i mean getting the bulk of the population on their side and dealing with the ones who wouldn't cooperate.

 

Even given the Imperial mindset of using the hammer on every problem (because, well, to them every problem looked like a nail) they would have known enough about the Wookies to know that subduing them would take time, effort and resources they couldn't spare.

 

Which is why it is a curious lapse that they didn't even seem to notice that the Ewoks were there....

[The Mad GM]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Actually the idea of a primitive society invaded by a high-tech opponent coudl make for a good game setting where swords (or in this case spears) are prevalent.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Endor should have been the homeworld of the Wookies. I will say no more on the subject.

My understanding is that was Lucas' original intent. But somehow by the time he got to RotJ, he had convinced himself that the Wookies weren't "primitive" enough anymore. So instead we got "Attack of the Killer Teddy Bears."

 

 

bigdamnhero

“Will someone get this walking carpet out of my way?â€

[ross_winn]

Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Why do I constantly see this headline as Re: Sci-fi Swear Words? and not Re: Sci-fi wear swords?

 

Damn these eyes...