I was wondering how other people feel about the mixture of sci fi and fantasy in various campaign settings. Personally I'm a huge fan, and I know that lots of Old Schoolers think it's the bee's knees.
The Dark Country doesn't really have any Sci Fi stuff, but Uz and IRASS are explicitly designed to include scienc fiction elements.
I voted separate. But it only really bothers me when it's abrupt. If it's a part of the campaign from the beginning-no problem. But if you're going on in a 'standard' fantasy game and suddenly there's blasters & robots (I mean wands with handles and metal golems) it knocks me out of the little world I've made in my head (thinky place).
ReplyDeleteGenerally I prefer separate. One of my pet peeves is that most medieval fantasy games feel neither medieval, nor fantastic. Ever monster, spell and magic item is named, categorized and understood, making them all seem less magical.
ReplyDeleteNow, if I say right from the start, "I think I want the next campaign I run to be a Science Fantasy game", than I'm all for mixing some tech stuff with my mystic stuff but if I've decided to run one or the other I keep them pretty much free of one another.
Flying saucers populated with neogi slavers crashed into my Wilderlands of High Fantasy.
ReplyDeleteMore me, it depends on the design ethos of the world. I don't won't a world that seems to largely historical simulationist, or "high fantasy" to suddenly have spaceships and brains in jars, but I have a great affection for pulpy worlds that are science fantasy. I guess my stance is: choose a stance, and stick to it.
ReplyDelete