Hypertellurians, Part 1/3: “Science” Fiction
Today, The Handbook of Heroes blasts off into uncharted territory! Strap in and enjoy the ride as we set forth to explore that strange new world: Sponsored Content! These next couple of comics are all brought to you by Hypertellurians, a science fantasy RPG set in the future of old.
I’ll be honest with you guys: I love the crap out of this genre. It’s like A Trip to the Moon mashed up with The Barbarians with a sprinkling of Zelazny’s Amber on top. We’re talking gleaming silver rocket ships, space princesses, sword and sandals heroics, and I’m very much here for it.
Now that said, there is a bit of an issue when you sit down to play a science fantasy game. Mostly it has to do with shutting down that part of your brain that wears a lab coat, carries a clipboard, and shouts, “That’s not how it works!” whenever you’re trying to have fun.
You see, part of the charm of reading A Princess of Mars all these years later lies in its ability to produce wonder. When you’re exploring the arid highlands of Barsoom, mixing it up with four-armed white apes thanks to the super strength you earned by being a high-grav earthman, it’s pure pulp fun. The red planet isn’t a lifeless ball of rock. It’s an undiscovered world with fabulous cities and strange peoples, and anything at all may lie beyond the rim of the next crater. If you aren’t careful though, you can lose that sense of wonder when it comes time to sit down at the table. That clipboard-wielding part of your brain begins to protest. Mars doesn’t have a breathable atmosphere! Temperatures can get as low as −143 °C (−225 °F). I looked at those pictures from Opportunity and Curiosity, and I’m pretty sure there weren’t any apes. Ignoring that guy is easier said than done.
When you’re inside of a purely fantastical setting, it’s easy to pull off the old suspension of disbelief trick. There are dragons and fireballs about, so accepting the impossible is the price of admission. When you add in the trappings of sci-fi, however, it becomes a bit harder to deal with. Holding your breath so you can fight in space, opening the rainbow bridge to Asgard, or banking in your X-Wing as if you were dogfighting in atmosphere can all be deal-breakers for some people. My advice in these situations is to make like the Ultranaut in today’s comic: learn to live in the moment. The adventure is the thing, and the science is purely decorative.
So for today’s discussion question, what do you say we explore the milieu? How do you know you’re inside of a science fantasy setting? What distinguishes the genre from its sci-fi / fantasy parentage? Sound off with your favorite examples of “decorative science” and credulity-straining adventure down in the comments!
HYPERTELLURIANS! Travel the length and breadth of the Ultracosm in retro science fantasy style. Take control of one of six archetypes, and choose or create a unique concept by layering on fun, inventive, and story-driving powers. Play as a cursed shapeshifter, the wobbling dead, a pilot from a different time, a galvanic war machine, a sorcerous princess, an excitable half pony, an alien color, or so much more.
Try Hypertellurians if you like:
– quick character generation, with fast and daring gameplay,
– compelling and out of this world character powers,
– natural language rules that put the fun first,
– an expedition to the Viridian moon in a stylish aethercraft,
– and science fantasy adventure in the future of old!
ARE YOU AN IMPATIENT GAMER? If so, you should check out the “Henchman” reward level over on The Handbook of Heroes Patreon. For just one buck a month, you can get each and every Handbook of Heroes comic a day earlier than the rest of your party members. That’s bragging rights right there!
How do I tell I’m in science fiction? Being in space usually does the trick (unless you’re a high-level wizard, in which case being in space is ‘normal’. Or you’re actually in the Astral Plane after you messed up with a Bag of Holding.
I like what they did with Starfinder, for certain. Lots of plasuble tech and magic combined into a decently cohesive whole. More advanced than Spelljammer technologically but could also be played as it’s ‘high fantasy, low sci-fi’ as Spelljammer is.
Are the Ultranaut (and any other Hypertellurian cast) going to stick around for future strips, potentially forming a party with Street Samurai, or spinning off into a Starfinder group?
Also, does this sponsorship mean we’ll be seeing the Hypertellurians in the other handbook?
At the moment, we’re just set up for a three-strip run. 🙂
Just the simple inclusion of magic does it for me; magic exists to bend the laws of space, time, and physics, and that fantasy can meld in an entertaining way with the science fiction elements of spaceships, aliens, and robots. As a Starfinder GM, having “classic” fantasy races in a sci-fi setting is enough to invoke the fantasy aspect as well.
I think the genre is distinguishable from it’s parentage by creating an equal playing field between the “power level” of gear, tech, an powerful artifacts used by the denizens of the genre. A Pyrobot’s inferno bomb is the Mage’s fireball; An illusionist’s Disguise Spell is the Suave Hacker’s hologram belt. The playing field is leveled when science=magic in terms of the badass powers PCs (and GM’s!) can have fun exploring.
Your first (?) sponsorship! They sello-I mean, grow up so fast! Next step, Paizo, like the Glass Cannon Crew did? 😀
Wasn’t it Clarke who said “Sufficiently advanced technology was indistinguishable from magic” ?
Magic, tech, both operate under their own little laws and rules.
But really, computers tend to be the main thing, rather than space to answer what makes science fiction. Even if arcanotech ones.
A one-off Science Fantasy game that I played was based on Glorantha. Although in normal Glorantha Lore the world is a cube drifting in water under a dome with stars on it, which is the limit of that universe, in this Universe it was possible to travel to other planets. And as most of the things that are done with science in our world can, and are, done with magic, or divine guidance, in Glorantha, it was not far fetched, both within the Gloranta Worldview, and within a scientific worldview, to swap the technical solution for a more divine\magical fueled one. Sort of like Spelljammer, but more grounded in real world science. So you can navigate between stars, and planets, by the web of Arachne Solora, the World spider, because her threads holds the universe together, just like hers do, and did, on Glorantha, and which would be analogous to jumproutes in “harder” SciFi.
I found it a (for me) perfect mix of fantasy tropes (magic and gods and fantasy races and such) and science-fiction tropes (tidal locked planets, space pirates, zero-G and vector combat and such).
And about how you can tell you’re in a science-fantasy setting? I have no idea. And the line is blury as hell. In a way Paranoia is already a Science-Fantasy setting. Every person has a mutation (can you say: Magical Talent?), you have six clones (ressurection anyone?) you’re part of a secret society (did you say thieves guild there?), the world is being ruled by The Computer, who is also slightly mad (God has been a little bit off lately) and there is a tier (caste) of high programmers (arch-wizards\high-priests) who can change(wizards)\interpret(priests) the actions\will of the computer\god. So my take is that it all depends on how you look at it. Star Wars (both movies and RPG) has very little to do with SciFi, and is very much high drama. Star Trek (movies\rpg) is (mostly) far more grounded in science, but most of its themes are not about that science, but about what that science can (and will?) do to our society and/or humanity. Most Fantasy RPG’s have that same theme, but with magic (and the (un)restricted use of it) instead of science and technology.
So in the end I think the problem is more about the percieved tropes in each setting, than a strict difference in settings. You can, with the right group and GM (and some help from the rules), play any kind of game in any kind of setting. But the percieved perceptions or illusions of most people about a setting is what makes them unwilling or unable to contemplate certain kind of stories in certain kind of settings.
Well, this turned out slightly different from where I started, but there it is. Science-Fiction, Science-Fantasy, Fantasy, I think it’s all the same stories, but we’ve been conditioned, by books, movies, tv, comics and such, to only see\think about\play certain stories in certain settings. However, as a lot of those settings are, to some people, sort of limiting, they begin to push the bounderies, and are now even connecting/mixing them in ways that were previously unheard of. Which is liberating for some people (those that did not like the constrains of those settings), and threatening for others (those that need the security that comes from the constrains in a\their setting). So it all comes down to your personal wants and needs I think.
Star Trek is most vertainly not more grounded in science that Star Wars. At least in Star Wars the sith and jedi are kind of rare. Compare that to Star Trek where you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting some kind of a telepath or a seer or even a god (ie. Apollo, Q, Charlie X, Trelane, the Wormhole Aliens, etc.)
Well, yes and no. Star Treks perceived premise is more about the technology, and less about the juju. That it plays out different is in my view not that important. Science and technology is far more a part of the setting, and part of the tools that get used (there’s a strange “scientifical” or technical solution, or explanation for this episodes problem). In that way it is more aware of, and using the possibilities of the scientifical method for plot than in Star Wars, in which tech and science is not part of the plot, just of the toys.
I mean if we’re going for believable Scifi, you really have to go Firefly/Serenity. People made fun of the Wild West dichotomy, but when you realize they were suppositing a world where hyperlight travel and instant teleporters don’t exist, it makes a lot more sense that fringe settlements would have to develop their tech from the ground up.
Smart phone factories don’t just magically appear or get delivered by shuttle. Infrastructure and the groundwork for those technologies have to be developed first, and in the meantime, society still needs to eat, so in the meantime you go low tech because low tech is what’s available.
Oh my! I love hypertellurians… although the first time we played it the clipboard-wielding men in my (scientist) friends’ heads went a little apoplectic. I just enjoyed the break from their critiques of realism as we raced a beam of light across the galaxy in order to prevent the reawakening of Cthulhu. As for how I know I’m in a science fantasy… Well, as soon as somebody is dual-wielding a gun and a sword, ideally whilst riding some sort of oversized lizard, I begin to get suspicious.
Although let’s be fair… an awful lot of “sci-fi” is really science fantasy. I can forgive unrealistic aliens, maybe even warp-space (after all, it might really exist in a wormhole-y sense) but psionics are definitely a form of magic with the serial numbers filed off…
Once again, I love this game so much. Didn’t realize it’d survived the release period, but since it evidently has – seriously, people – go turn off your rational minds for a while and buy it!
Yeah, I was going to mention psionics too… it’s probably the strongest sign that something is basically just fantasy with SF trappings. Star Wars, or Warhammer 40K, for example.
On that note, a fondness for melee weapons like swords and polearms is another strong sign. It’s not impossible to justify them in hard SF, but their presence is usually representative of fantasy tropes…
Dune manages them fairly well, but in general I very much agree. I love 40k, but come on, Commissars… you’re meant to kill the troopers, not get killed yourselves.
And that’s how you can tell 40k is a fantasy setting… despite the setting possessing a huge overabundance of devastating ranged weapons, it always seems to come down to a hero like Ciaphas Cain battling the enemies of humanity armed only with a chainsword and an overabundance of good fortune.
I always liked Larry Niven’s variable swords for sci-fi cutlery:
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=58
Ooh, that’s an interesting thing. Not sure how I’d use it, but that’s being saved in my memory somewhere.
Ah yes, defining the line between science fiction and fantasy and the fuzzy genre in between – is there a meaningful distinction?
I think there is a distinction, but it isn’t where mpst people see it. I don’t look at the cosmetic elements of the setting really. (i.e. if it is in space or not). And I don’t think you can even draw the distinction at whether it is “plausible”, since most of what is considered science fiction has concepts that most serious physicists consider to be close enough to impossible to discard them (e.g. time travel, psyonics, even FTL)
And then some of what is usually classed as sci-fi seems to actively avoid any kind of consitency or scientific plausibility, much more than most iron-age setting fantasy. (Star Trek I’m looking at you!), which muddies things even more.
The distinction is certainly not one of Plot. Star Wars and Dune are every bit fantasy epics, mining the same vein as the Lord of the Rings or A Song of Fire and Ice.
So is it just aesthetic? Is it the space setting that makes all the difference? But there’s a wealth of stories that are aesthetically fantasy but which is as conceptually “tight” as hard sci-fi (e.g. Elfquest, Earthsea, and pretty much the entire “Pern” opus of Anne McCaffrey). And Elfquest and Pern both have scifi cconcepts underlying their otherwise high-fantasy settings!
So after all that, I still can’t find a useful distinction. Maybe it is one of conceptual maximalism vs minimalism (or at least, not-maximalism). Science Fantasy could be fantasy that tries to apply consistent (fictional) “scientific” principles to its fantastical concepts. I like that one.
Meanwhile, the beauty of unrestrained maximalist fantasy is that you can do literally anything and don’t have to explain it. Right, lads! Hoist the solar sails and off across the Empyrean we will sail!
should have said “we will go” at the end there. Bad writing otherwise!
Some of it might be the rhetorical approach by which the story reaches its absurd elements.
For example, I think in the classic argument of Star Trek being sci-fi and Star Wars being science fantasy is that while Star Trek is not terribly consistent, it usually comes up with an unusual scenario and says “what would happen if this were the case?” and writes the story around that. While Star Wars comes up with a cool story and then makes up elements needed for it to work.
Put another way, science fiction asks “What if?” and science fantasy asks “Why not?”. (There’s not really a genre divide between self consistent “hard magic” fantasy and whatever you want “soft magic” fantasy, though sufficiently low-magic medieval fantasy turns into the historical fiction genre.)
“Stop trying to make it make sense. It’s scientifically impossible, and it makes you sound more wrong later”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3sEHu_wQjk
I love Science Fiction. I love Fantasy. I do not think the word Science can coexist with the word Fantasy as a genre descriptor. This is why George Lucas called his work of fiction Space Opera. I think that term is a much better pairing of words for what the War in the Stars should be called, because that is what it is.
For my part, I prefer the term Space Fantasy when mixing the genres of classic fantasy with dragons and dungeons, laser swords and laser blasters, space ships that actually look like sea ships and giant space living creatures that swim in the vast oceans of vacuum.
And I love the genre, no matter what you call it. Whether it is closer to Star Trek or Star Wars, Buck Rogers of Flash Gordon, or anything around, between, or far afield, I think the genre that allows you to just let go and accept that literally anything is possible, rather than limiting your brain to what “should” be possible is one of the best things you can let your brain do.
“How” you let yourself accept any possibility is with the game mechanics. You accept that while technically anything is possible in this weird world and setting, there are still some basic restrictions to what you can do within the limits of the mechanicals of the rules. It is often said in most rule sets, that the rules are just a guideline, but they are more than that. The rules of whatever game you are playing are there to free up your mind to allow for the possibilities that other things are possible. With one set of constraints provided, your brain can stop worrying about how or why things work like they do in the setting, and worry about which dice do what, how many arcanotech items you can have equipped on your character, and how fast your jetpack can travel through space time. And don’t forget, how much damage does that laser sword do if it can get past that force shield armor.
The key is the rules themselves and if you can’t accept it, well, maybe play something else with someone else, because some of us want a teleporting cyber space cat as a psionic pet!
For the record, I also much prefer the term “space fantasy” to “science fantasy”. For pretty much the exact same reasons.
Space opera is a very broad category, though… it includes some quite hard SF, and it also includes the likes of Star Wars. Between the two, you’ve got various degrees of handwavium…
But I agree the word “science” is inappropriate for a lot of SF — the word we’re really meaning is “technology”, because that’s what really characterises these settings… the existence of marvels like starships and energy weapons, rather than any interest in the principals by which they function.
Well, at first I wanted to say that science fantasy either doesn’t bother to explain the inner workings of its universes, or does so only to set up a joke (Hitchhiker’s Guide, Futurama).
But then I remembered Star Wars, which is undeniably science fantasy with its space paladins hitting each other with hard-light swords. SW does try to explain the workings of its -verse (datapads, durasteel, cortosis blades, kyber crystals) and it’s not treated as prelude to a joke (except for midi-chlorians I guess…). Same thing with Monte Cook’s Numenera. Definitely science fantasy, but there is a non-humorous explanation for the functions of the artifacts one finds (belt-like attire found in a mountainous zone, that produces a rock-proof shield and blinks the wearer 30ft back? Safe to assume that it’s some sort of safety harness).
So I’d say it’s about convenience. In *science fantasy” things just work and you’re there for the ride (“Foodpills that turbocharge your nutrient power! Fight galactic evil today with power of extraordinary nutrition”).
The ‘harder’ the sci-fi gets, the more explanations get added to lull you into a suspension of disbelief (“Cola-nut extract, syntho-guaranin, diluted adrenochrome and a capsaicine crystal to taste. I call it a Strawberry Surprise. Surprise, it don’t taste like strawberry. But it does keep you awake for about a week. And comatose for 3 thereafter”).
How do I know I’m in a science fantasy setting?
1. They have magic but call it something else (ex. psychic energy, nanites, the Force, etc.).
2. Spaceships can land and leave the planet with no difficulty. They also dogfight in space.
3. A trip from one planet to another takes no longer than a trip to the local grocery store.
4. Electronically sealed doors can be opened by blasting the control panel with a laser gun.
5. Laser guns.
Also…
6. Melee weapons are still commonly used, but they have tech sounding adjectives assigned to them (ex. laser, energy, monofilament, chain, etc.).
To me, the dividing line between science fiction and space/science fantasy is if the science matters to the story. If you take away the “space” and “science” elements, does the story fall apart or is no longer able to be told. Using the ultimate example, you can rip out all of the “space” and “science” from Star Wars you want to, and the story does not change. (The planets just become places all on/in the same world. This is even driven home since all planets in Star Wars are mono-climate and mono-culture.)
The dividing line between space/science fantasy and fantasy is pretty much just the space/science part. Starfinder is space/science fantasy because it is done “in space” and that is the main point of the setting. Pathfinder is “plain” fantasy because, while space is there and exists, it is not the point and can be (and usually is) ignored entirely.
“metadimensional intelligences taken from their home by a series of complex mathematical equations and calculations” sounds like an NPC trying to conceptually understand the game and the player characters from within the confines of the game world
Shit. That was supposed to be a response to Schattensturm’s post, not Daryen’s
Before now I don’t think I’ve seen Science Fantasy used to describe an otherwise Sci Fi setting, I’m more used to seeing “Science Fantasy” used to describe a setting that exemplifies the old adage “sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. in an otherwise fantasy setting, all the magic is actually highly advanced technology that no one really understands (and people often believe that it IS magic). This includes games/settings like Numenera, Fragged Kingdom, and Endless Legend.
In the setting i made for our games there is a group of people called the First People. They form part of a, mostly, fantasy setting, yet their cities and ruins are choke full of science-fiction level magitech. They got artificial intelligences to take care and control their cities, one that appear in the game they are first mentioned is like a magical stargate’s Atlantis. They have airships made out of rock, metal and crystal, with command bridges that look take out of a science-fiction setting. They also got colonies on several worlds and portals to connect them. Yet they are on the same setting that mages, gods and other magical things. What distinguish then science fantasy of science fiction? The fantasy part and how it’s presented. In Warframe the Tenno got powers that defy the laws of physics and nature. They also got a explanation. Frost is warframe with ice based power who use the humidity of the air to create and manipulate ice. Except he can use his powers no matter if he is in Europe, ice planet, or on Mars, desert planet. Nekros, necromancer based warframe, supposedly use nanotech to conjure copies of defeated enemies making it appear he is summoning the dead. Yet all the warframes got their powers from The Void, a physics defying place. So any explanation may be just a place holder. The game appears like a sci-gy setting but when you look deeper it either isn’t or have an element that permits it to bend the rules. There is also a Stars Without Number a science-fiction game that has a book called: “Codex of the Black Sun” it adds magic. One of the things it adds are the shadows. Either they are metadimensional intelligences taken from their home “By a series of complex mathematical equations and calculations [through which] a spell could be designed to channel metadimensional energy into a static, material form”, shadows. Which may or may not be true intelligences. The book presents some reasons form them to being actual beings separated from the arcanist that summons them but also presents some reasons they might just be faux-intelligences only mold by the expectations of their creators. And while i don’t want to make this too long, but is already too long for that, i will allow myself to quote the book:
“Space Fantasy games have all the trappings of conventional sci-fi, with starships, laser pistols, flying vehicles, and assorted alien lifeforms. Yet at least some widespread ability in the campaign world is nothing short of magical, with abilities and effects that can hardly be entertained by even the most speculative sci-fi. Many people would include any campaign world with psionic powers under this heading, while others give psychic abilities a sci-fi pass out of genre tradition.
Space Fantasy campaigns related to this book, however, will have at least one major group of people in the setting who are able to use magical powers. The specific scope and nature of these abilities may vary from game to game, but the authorities of such a setting are almost certainly aware of these abilities and their societies have made some accommodation to their existence. Space Fantasy spellcasters may have their own organizations and groups recognized by others.”
-Codex of The Black Sun, By Kevin Crawford, Sine Nomine Publishing, 2018, page 4.
So all in all, how you show things, how you present them, and maybe with just an small remind that the setting may be bigger than character or players think and hold space for things few know but that they are out side there 🙂
“metadimensional intelligences taken from their home by a series of complex mathematical equations and calculations” sounds like an NPC trying to conceptually understand the game and the player characters from within the confines of the game world
Nice idea XD
But haven’t you read what i write about the Players and pcs from inside the game view point?
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/consequences
Check my second comment 🙂
https://comb.io/XGXgXH
A lot of people think that Star Wars is the big science fantasy setting, but I would argur that it’s really Star Trek. In the original Star Wars trilogy the number of people with supernatural abilities can be counted on one hand and they had basically the same powerset. Conversely, in Star Trek we meet a new character with a new kind of woowoo powers in pretty much every episode.
Star Wars isn’t even number 2 on the list. Number two in the list is Dr.Who, because not only is coming back from the dead part of his schtick, but he’s also got a magic wand. Oh. Excuse me. “sonic screwdriver”
Hmmmm. I guess I feel the difference between a science fiction game and a science fantasy game lies in the tone and themes the game is trying to explore. Are we aiming to be realistic as well as able and expanding outward only based on what we know is true or plausibly true? Or are we looking at what is fantastical and/or implausibly true?
I guess there’s also an element of how much it’s meant to be based on the real world or a universe with a somewhat different set of rules. After all, as soon as you introduce alternate realities then the two genres are indistinguishable in any meaningful way other than how it feels to people.
I have mentioned this before, but all three proper Pathfinder campaigns I have DM’d had sci-fi like elements in them despite being set in sword-and-sorcery worlds.
The Dark Island used magic to go over a number of sci-fi tropes. A laboratory where nefarious experiments occurred and monsters were made. The people running the laboratory writing documents and memos about their progress and problems. Mysterious, deadly accidents that probably aren’t accidents. The experiments getting out of control and seizing control of the facility. Mutated scientists and even a functioning elevator (and elevator fight.)
Grayshot has an explicit sciencey faction, the Argent Order. They eschew religion and wizardry and invest in alchemy, constructs, gunpowder weapons and nanites. The nanites are controlled by magic (usually psychic in nature, but sometimes other types), but are made and function in orderly ways. The Argent Order lacks the magic power that some of the heavyweights of other factions have, but their base-level minions are the best in the business. They believe this is why they are the wave of the future – they may not be able to match a Level 20 wizard, but they can train and equip thousands of decent low-level warriors.
Black Stars draws heavily from the Iron Gods adventure path, and features aliens with little magic but highly advanced technology. In fact, the aliens are largely ignorant of extraplanar matters, because the planar boundaries are much stronger away from the protagonists’ sword-and-sorcery planet. Some groups have secretly acquired and developed these technologies but kept them hidden from the rest of the world, leading to elves with robots and laser guns but also wizards and clerics. There are alien ghosts, who function like regular ghosts. The monstrous aliens from between the stars are weird, but not that much different from regular fantasy monsters.
Are any of these science fantasy? I’m not sure. My go-to definition is about the approach the work took to getting its unusual elements. If the author asked “what if this were true?” and then wrote a story based on that, it is science fiction. If they wrote a cool story and added fantastical elements to make it work, that would be science fantasy.
In other words, science fiction asks “What if?” and science fantasy asks “Why not?”. (That’s my thought, anyway. Maybe I was just really affected by first encountering the term “science fantasy” in reference to the Spy Kids movies.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pzKArTR8A7Q
I used to be a lot worse about the “Science doesn’t work like that!” issue, but these days I’m chill with it as long as the author doesn’t bastardize actual scientific terminology along the way.
(“Quantum” and anything to do with evolution are the most common offenders. Darwin’s doghouse, people don’t understand what evolution is! It’s not a directed process, people!)
this seems more pertinent now that Spelljammer has been rereleased.
For scale, a cubic meter:
At 1 atmosphere: 6 septillion molecules.
Interplanetary space: 1 billion molecules.
Interstellar space: 1 million molecules.
Void holes in the universe: 500,000 molecules.