Title says it much all. Its something thats been brewing in the lore discussion group for a while now and to me it has become clear that there is no proper way forward without putting it out with the community. Both sides will post their feelings and views on the matter, but please. Keep it tidy, no flameposting. My view on both things might be wrong but here's a short summary on both options. (Feel free to post better sumarries yourself on it.) Science-Fact : This is to use scientific and logical reasoning to explain technology, biology etc in a way it fits with what is known. For example, more in the lines of Star-Trek and that direction to keep things sensible. Science-Fantasy : Science-Fantasy is more towards the direction of Star Wars, using semi-science and varying degrees of logic and reasoning to make things 'work' like Avian power crystals. Thats a classic example of science-fantasy. Nobody really knows how they work exactly but they just 'work' in their described ways. Since this /IS/ a pretty important crossroad on how the lore should be handled further. This poll will run for TWO MONTHS to ensure EVERYONE gets a piece of their say on this matter. The end vote will decide which path will be taken.
Argument for SCIENCE-FANTASY, with emphasis on the SCIENCE: Spoiler: Long-ass argument for Science-Fantasy, Emphasis on the science. Starbound community poll results: I tend to agree with the majority of the Starbound community on this topic and I'll try to explain why. First off let me explain that I do not think of Starbound as Space Fantasy in the sense that there will be magic involved, because Tiyuri himself has in the past declared that there will not be magic in Starbound, or rather that it wouldn't be called such. I'd like to think he meant this: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." (- Arthur C. Clarke). "Tech, not magic." Very often in the past has RP been hindered by those who would want to see a "reasonable"/"understandable" explanation for it, in a scientific fashion. While I do agree that generally we should strive for consistency and things that make some form of sense, sometimes it is impossible to do so, as our own perspective of what is actually possible is not only limited by humankind's current understanding of science, but also because we ourselves are stuck in our own way of doing things. For example: we all know that the Apex, Hylotl and Humans tend to have generally similar technology and perhaps even the Novakid. But the Avians, Glitch and Florans tend to be a bit different in that regard. I'm referring ofcourse to Avian crystal tech, which hasn't been used all that much in the past because it was decided that it is too rare, as there's only a limited amount that can be smuggled out of Avos by Avian pirates, there's also the concept of Floran plant manipulation; There's plant-doors, plant-furniture, which apparantly can grow larger depending on the need of the Florans (ergo, more guests requires a large table) and a plant-control panel or a plant-desk lamp... Same goes for the Glitch, for a race that's supposedly stuck in a medieval simulation, they somehow have armour that is surprisingly tough, combined with some other things that are quite ridiculous (multiple brains in the armour) and they have working spaceships. I would think that the Glitch smiths and mages do possess some technological expertise and are somehow able to produce these things, albeit that the quality of these items depends on the advancement of the Glitch settlement it is in and their wealth. ((Doomlord vs Dark Knight armours etc) A /LOT/ of these things can be attributed to the fact that it's all about game mechanics and that it doesn't make logical sense. I would argue however that some of these things /do/ make sense, if you're able to look at the game as a Science Fantasy setting, which doesn't make a lot of sense when we relate it to our sense of reality, however, Starbound is its own reality. When there are things that we as a community disagree with, or things in the lore that are really vague, we could change them accordingly. For example: we've also generallly come to accept that Starbound's wiring, matter manipulation, inventory system and tech system don't work within our RP setting, as putting things in some kind of pocket dimension for storage would be rather broken in RP. You can hide your giant batch of explosives way too easily and just randomly pull a rocket launcher on someone. In a game like AION that sort of thing is okay, because the RP aspect doesn't really matter there. However, I do feel that we would be unable to do so properly if we only see Starbound as a hyper realistic science fiction setting, because that is /NOT/ what it was meant to be. This kind of view would make Florans, Glitch, Avians and Novakid pretty dull in the large scheme of things. We're talking about a setting where somehow an invasion of Florans was able to drive off the Hylotls, who have a rather high tech level and had underwater ocean cities, from their own homeworld. This implies that the Florans for example have some form of threat or might to them which we can hardly explain with a hyper realistic view. I'm a rather big fan of the Florans and Glitch races, but I do try not to treat them with favouritism, as I don't really care much for the Avians but discounting Avian crystal tech would be rather stupid. I compare Florans to Zerg/Orks and Avians to Eldar/Protoss to explain why their tech is so fundamentally weird and just different from the Humans' tech to explain why Science Fantasy would best to interpret these races. Same goes for armour and weapons, people have used "modern" armour and weapons, claiming them to be superior to (for example) Glitch plate armour, whilst the human armours in the game also predominantly use metals. I've always thougt that it's the XCOM logic, where these special new metal alloys are lighter, yet tougher than any other material humans have used thusfar, and the 40K logic that close combat weapons have become more effective because of technological upgrades, making them better at close range than standard firearms, and while it is certainly more "realistic" that ranged weaponry is WAY MORE effective and that armour can't be expected to block that much damage, it does make the whole concept of combat a lot more "MUNDANE", where the most effective form of combat is like you're RPing a military army shooter. If you're looking for something like that, you'd be better of RPing in Arma3. ((I don't think you should be allowed to block a plasma grenade on your chest without horribly dying/getting severly wounded, but standard weaponry should have some form of difficulty in penetrating "high tiered sci-fi/sci-fantasy" armour.)) I do hope my rant makes at least some form of sense, for me Starbound's lore is interesting because it does lean towards Science fiction, but there are a few rather undeniable aspects within the game which can only be described as fantasy and that is alright with me. I hope you guys see it my way.
Spoiler: Long-ass discussion ending up in an eventual kinda agreement [16:26:00] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: well i'm not saying glitch and floran armor is like medieval armor [16:26:07] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it's probably more advanced than people think [16:26:35] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: with xcom logic combined that the special alloys + modern weapon technology make for pretty stronk armor [16:26:41] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: not power armor, but still [17:00:18] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: Britton i think we just agree but we don't agree on where the boundaries lie in terms of what is considered fact and what is fantasy [17:00:42] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i think FTL travel using erchius as per the wormhole theory is science fantasy, with emphasis on science [17:00:46] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: you think it's science fact [17:00:56] Britton: it's nowhere near science fantasy [17:01:09] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it uses a fictional matter [17:01:10] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: to function [17:01:14] Britton: it's scientific fact with a small amount of fantasy [17:01:14] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: how is it not fantasy [17:01:24] Britton: the wormhole theory could function [17:01:38] Britton: we just have no means of creating the exotic matter [17:01:47] Britton: however it has been theorized that it can be found [17:01:51] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: if you say: in theory I could blow up a planet with super advanced future tech [17:01:51] Britton: among the stars [17:01:58] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: that can count as science fact [17:02:06] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: cuz you can't discredit the fact that MAYBE in the future [17:02:10] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: there will be tech [17:02:11] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: for that [17:02:18] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: but then again [17:02:24] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it's also kinda fiction [17:02:27] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: thus a fantasy [17:02:28] Britton: theories are proven scientific concepts that have formed from hypothesis [17:02:49] Britton: Wormhole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [17:02:56] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: yes but the practical use of the wormhole theory to actually get wormhole ftl working [17:03:00] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: doesn't exist yet [17:03:09] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: the theory is not complete enough [17:03:50] Britton: however after undergoing testing it is nearly proven it can work, but we do not have exotic matter to do so IRL [17:04:42] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: you're claiming science fact when using an incomplete theory, using a fictive matter to fill in the blanks somewhat, while staying vague [17:04:49] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: sounds more like science fantasy to me [17:04:56] Britton: it isn't science fantasy [17:05:04] Britton: it is fact with an element of fantasy [17:05:21] Britton: the wormhole theory and generation being the fact, the erchius being the fantasy [17:05:37] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: an uncomplete theory [17:05:43] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: is not a fact [17:06:10] Britton: theories become theories only after the hypothesis is tested time and time again [17:06:35] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: yes, difference is that this theory hasn't even been able to have been tested in practice [17:07:11] Britton: yes, however the fact that it became a theory rather than staying a hypothesis draws it closer to fact than fantasy [17:07:58] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: the theory that wormhole ftl travel /could/ be possible is a fact [17:08:12] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: the fantasy is actually getting a practical, safe and working application [17:08:14] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: of the theory [17:08:19] Britton: indeed [17:08:19] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: using a fictional matter and fuel [17:08:31] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: imho that is fantasy [17:08:35] Britton: in a way it is equally fact and fantasy [17:08:45] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: well no because there's no such thing as [17:08:51] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: 50% fact [17:08:53] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it's either fact [17:08:54] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: or not [17:08:56] Britton: using a factual theory with fantasy technology [17:09:02] Britton: it can be both [17:09:06] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: dunno [17:09:09] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: semantics, really [17:09:12] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: and opinions [17:09:21] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i think it's more accurate to say [17:09:27] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: fantasy with a lot of science behind it [17:09:35] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: than science with a lot of fantasy behind it [17:09:43] Britton: honestly if we could find a way to perfectly fuse fact and fantasy, i'd be fine with that [17:10:03] Britton: sort've a fantasy with science for some things, and science with fantasy for others [17:10:10] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: saying science-fantasy with emphasis on science gives us the freedom not to have to explain everything in minute detail [17:10:19] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: and keep the things that are indeed fantasy but not a problem [17:10:20] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: ok [17:10:25] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it's more assuring [17:10:49] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: even if we want to strive for as much fact and logic and science as possible [17:10:54] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: we have to face the facts that starbound [17:10:57] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: has tech that's so far ahead [17:11:06 | 17:10:52 bewerkt] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: and we're not physicist either [17:11:21] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: or not all of us [17:11:28] Britton: like, for example, i'd prefer when we decide metallic alloys we use metals that exist or in theory could exist [17:12:25] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i prefer using alloys that are represented in the game, thus fictional, and apply rules to them as to what they could be compared to in /our/ reality, because the sb universe is obviously different from our own [17:12:33] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: so those metals /could/ exist [17:13:11 | 17:13:24 bewerkt] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: if you /really/ wanna stretch it you could say the way how light and plasma and projectiles interact with the world is different from our own, we could do that [17:13:13 | 17:12:56 bewerkt] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: but that's dub [17:13:37] Britton: the metals that CF came up with are rather vague and unfinished [17:13:43] Britton: if we could elaborate on them [17:13:48] Britton: i'd be fien with keeping them [17:13:51] Britton: fine* [17:13:55] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i'd prefer that [17:14:01] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it adds starbound flair [17:14:12] Britton: also going into reworking the entire principles of light a physics jsut to suit the lore would be overdoing it [17:14:16] Britton: and* [17:14:23] Britton: just* [17:14:24] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: which is why i said it was a dumb idea [17:15:09] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i don't understand how clem thinks star trek isn't science fantasy [17:15:11] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: but ok [17:15:12] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: [17:15:21] Britton: yeah [17:15:41] Britton: honestly there's little to no representation in any media of perfect science fact [17:17:44] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: so why should we try that [17:17:50] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: honestly science fantasy is the safest bet [17:18:06] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: with a clear emphasis on facts [17:18:21] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: kinda like how i try to write the floran, glitch and apex physiology things [17:18:34] Britton: make no mistake, science fact can be achieved, it just hasn't been attempted [17:18:36] Britton: like, ever [17:18:43] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: not with starbound [17:18:50] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: unless you rebuild it [17:18:53] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: from the ground up [17:18:57] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: and delete [17:18:58] Britton: exactly [17:19:00] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: 80% [17:19:10] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: which people wouldn't like [17:19:12] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i wouldn't like it [17:19:18] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: i mean starbound lore sucks in places [17:19:29] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: but it also has a bit of flair which is the reason any of us got interested in it [17:19:39] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: it's been dissapointing for sure because it hasn't been updated for ages [17:19:46] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: but it had some flair, some hook which got us interested [17:19:57] Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren: that's how it was for me at least Khaltor = Pieter-Jan Van Der Schueren
I'm coming down on the side of fact mostly because of principle. My issue with tossing in with the "science-fantasy" idea is the unrestrained invention that it invites. I'd rather that people inventing new items to bring into the RP actually spend the time to research their scientific basis, and form an idea on how technology could develop to this point. Being able to explain how a device works is paramount to integrating it into a community. Reason and fact keeps these things tame, but that said there is a whole realm of possibility for someone willing to put in the research. The frontier of sciences today are hardly mundane, and many fantastic theories are only stopped by our lack of power supply or material limitations. I think what may be the best is for the lore branch to establish a range of base technologies, or rather define what we have available to us. Do we now have 3D printers able to whip up just about anything from our Pixels? Do we need specific blueprints, which intergalactic law holds as intellectual properties (otherwise, why buy something if I can just print it myself cheaper)? Most problems with application of technology are going to come from either new people who have yet to learn what sort of boundaries we have, and from colonies trying to excuse the improbabilities of their sustainability. I think some sort of guideline should be in place as somewhere to learn, so we at the very least have a common understanding of what is and isn't possible.
Problem is that with science-fact the existence of Florans, Novakid and Glitch itself doesn't add up. Science-Fantasy with an emphasis on science can still do what you described, just leaves a little more space open for silly stuff like that.
We have to take the setting for what it is, so yes some of the races are quite a bit of stretch in the science department. That said, anything newly introduced in terms of tech should be subject to higher scrutiny. The canon has its own validity, which is why I think it's proper to establish some extra, possibly inexplicable technologies (cold fusion, the 3D printing I mentioned) as canon. Essentially introduce some fabricated fact or standard that we all understand and can work from.
I'd like to add my input on this topic, and since I've already stated my point in a private discussion, I'll just copy/paste what I had there to reiterate my point in this thread. The plain and simple fact of the matter is that science fantasy is, in my opinion, a poor merging of two separate, interesting genres into some sort of odd conglomeration that serves neither genre any justice. Science fantasy is based entirely around a lack of sensibility; Yes, it is, in a way, science, but this is only because certain levels are technology are used to supplement the fantasy elements involved in the setting. Science fiction is, as the title implies, fiction; This means that, while yes, it is mostly based around real scientific concepts, it is still entirely fictional. Thus, players still have plenty to work with in the setting without resorting to pure fantasy or having to follow these stark, unyielding rules to maintain some semblance of realism. Antares has always been science fiction. Despite this, there have been some wacky occurrences on the server that you could argue fall into the science fantasy genre. Despite that, I stand by Antares remaining science fiction because this encourages less fantasy and more science. That doesn't mean we can't have extraordinary stuff happen on the server, it just means that the mod team will have to deal with fewer situations involving characters using magic because their players saw the science fantasy tag and decided to emphasize on the fantasy part. Now, to clarify, this is only my opinion on the matter. I would like everyone to consider the fact that, even if Antares is a science fiction setting, this does not exclude it from any extraordinary, fun, interesting events. It only means that fantasy elements, such as magic, cannot and will not be allowed on the server. That's all I have to say for this topic, so if ya managed to read through my ranting over the semantics of science fantasy and science fiction, kudos to you.
