Sensors - Technology behind the term

[rgrove0172]

To expand the discussion in my thread on RADAR, what are your thoughts on the actual technology (real or imagined) behind the various sensor types?

Deep System Scans - Telescopic Viewing, IR, UV etc.?

Gravitational Scan - Pulsar Timing Waves? Some development of Interferometry? Handwavium with a Weber Bar?

Radar/Lidar - obvious but to what intensity, what range? Biostatic/passive and Monostatic/Active.. maybe even Mutistatic effects with more than one ship working together?

Cartographic Sensors-Telescopic photography? An upgraded photogrammetry process? Radar Ranging? Some special penetrating radiation that can be used to interpret soil contents, water etc.?

Life Sensors - IR sensors? Analyte detection using some sort of tranducer that inteprets the interaction of the detection agent (radiation of some sort) and the object?

2300AD is close enough to our tech that using a sci-fi abstract term like "Life Sensors" just doesnt seem enough. My players ask almost immediately - "My character has Sensor 2, so ... how do the life sensors work?"

 

[BytePro]

...
2300AD is close enough to our tech that using a sci-fi abstract term like "Life Sensors" just doesnt seem enough. My players ask almost immediately - "My character has Sensor 2, so ... how do the life sensors work?"

In less than 300 years humanity went from horse drawn catapults to ballistic missile submarines and SR-71 Blackbirds...

Its fun to speculate about fictional tech and I don't want to curb your enthusiasms meta-game, but when practically talking about a science fiction game - 'how does <whateverthethingie> work?' - is generally best answered by prose and rule mechanics, not any actual specific methods of implementation. The later simply opens the opportunity for disruptive meta-gaming and eventually unanswerable questions - since the whateverthethingie is, at root, a fantasy. It only takes a player 2 seconds to ask such a silly* question - they have next to no effort invested in doing so (though perhaps a power-gaming interest...). How much time and effort are you willing to spend planning for such a contingency - and what is it worth? Regardless of how much you actually invest - all the player has to do is drill down with more of the same effortless queries - 'how does that work?'.

The rules should provide the relevant details for game play - 'life sensors' use tech (at level T) to detect life within range X with Y chances of success, using skill Z, and with so-and-so restrictions/counter tech. Any other non-specific 'how' is really not relevant as the tech actually doesn't exist, so in truth there can be no answer.

I'm not saying it isn't useful to have some narrative fluff for RP support. Descriptively, you might ad-lib 'using various advanced chemical, photonic and EM emission and reflection analysis (reflected, refracted, absorbed and subsurface back-scatter)' - without being any more specific. Mixing 'technical details' that are not supported by the mechanics easily opens a big can of smelly worms...

When it comes to a relevant question during play - ex: can my Sensor-2 PC modify the Life Sensor Suite to emit a directional X-ray S.O.S.; or, use it to detect if the atmo outside the ship is toxic given damage to more traditional equipment - then the rule mechanics and your judgement should answer the question at hand.

This also opens the opportunity for your players to contribute ideas - and limits. IME, players facing a challenge and looking for solutions will evaluate - and self-create - the cons better when I don't provide pros on a silver platter... YMMV.

[*silly - because they are intentionally ignoring, or forgetting, the fact they are playing a science fiction game. ]

 

[rgrove0172]

Wow, eloquently said but I couldnt disagree with you more!

Technology is the 'meat and potatoes' of sci-fi gaming and even a little pseudo-scientific background and explanation is required "seasoning" in my opinion.

Your right of course, there is no "right" or "real" way to explain anything, but one can generate just enough color to make it at least seem real, and in doing so add immensely to the enjoyment of the game. (once again IMO)

The technical details may not fit perfectly, or hell fit at all to an expert in the related field but since none of us are, well if it at least sounds plausible... Mission Accomplished! An absolutely boring event is given some depth and made interesting.

Take StarTrek for example. How effective would it be if Geordi reported to the Captain that - "Sorry Sir, the engines just dont work."? As Trek fans we would be insulted. But when LaForge waxes eloquent on some technical mumbo jumbo we are not only entertained but our level of belief is hieghtened just a bit.

Reporting to my players that their Grav Scan picked up a small anomoly about 30AU out is fine sure. But when I can explain that "the Pulsar wave detector is showing a distortion out along the Pulsar PSR B1937+21 bearing but a Gromyko scan (using advanced resonant bar technology) will take an hour or so to correlate." the players are sucked in, they are there, commanding the ship, pearing at their screens wondering what the heck is it.... or so I would like to believe

As to 'smelly worms' I believe most players wouldnt take advantage of some coincidental or sought after knowledge they had to manipulate the GM's description. And even if they did, its easy enough to pass it off with whatever 'handwavium' you care to at that point.

In answer to your question on how much time is it worth and what is the gain from such labor... I would say a great deal to both. I cant possibly detail every technology in the game, nor would I try.. and if a player requested something I didnt ahve prepared, I might ask them to help me after the session and figure it out! The major items though, drive systems, communication, detection, computers, weaponry etc... these things are detailed in some cases in the rules themselves yet left very vague elsewhere. Im just filling in the holes.

 

[aramis]

In less than 300 years humanity went from horse drawn catapults to ballistic missile submarines and SR-71 Blackbirds...

Horse Drawn Catapaults were on the way out the door in the 1400's... bombards (primitive cannon) put them out of the running following the siege of Byzantium. By 1600, cannon had almost entirely replaced catapaults.

The use of catapaults to deliver drugs across borders notwithstanding...

 

[BytePro]

Wow, eloquently said but I couldnt disagree with you more!

Your original post started with 'thoughts on the actual technology (real or imagined) behind the various sensor types?' and then mentioned several RW items. I gather you are more looking for 'how can I describe sensor technology in the setting so we can colorfully roleplay in my games...'.

Techno-babble is intentionally gibberish so that it is not subject to RW analysis other than on a literary basis. My father loves ST - he also spent most of his life building instruments that go into space. I've known a good number of people who do the same who also love ST (one even wrote an ST:NG episode). As with myself, its because the 'science fiction' generally keeps a good distance from reality (transporters) and tries to stay within theoretical physics without being detailed (Tachyon based FTL; AM systems). In other words, it minimizes challenges to 'suspension of disbelief' by not counting on one suspending RW knowledge for things that already exist. We can 'believably' handwave such things as gravity manipulation and FTL because there are no known tech related to them in the RW. Start talking RW tech, however, such as IR, UV, radar, etc. and there are tons of info available to throw a monkey wrench at believability for anyone who cares.

Not having the 2300AD rules myself...

A 'Deep Scan' would provide a full EM spectrum workup (within reference frame), at the least - with greatest detail (resolution) in the non-visible portion (gamma/x-ray) and worst in the thermal and radio. You can use the RW class abbreviations for RP color - ex: HX for hard x-ray; EUV for extreme UV; ELF for extremely low frequency. I would also differentiate between full, targeted and ecliptic scans for time and resolution. Doppler shift - especially if setting allows for fractional c - will push resolution and scan time. (Again, this speaks to rule mechanics...)

Supporting techno-babble: Gamma-ELF array; EM matrix; Doppler compensation; LPF factor (plasma frequency of the local ionized interstellar medium); sub-Planck refinement...

A 'Gravitational Scan' might be based on perturbations of gravitational waves (probably low resolution) or direct graviton detection. Nano-tech would be best for extrapolating existing techniques for the former (which really is looking at the most massive structures - i.e. stellar level masses) - while the latter are currently pure fiction (theoretical and incomplete). Assuming this scan can be used in the game for objects smaller than planets at any reasonable distance, I would be inclined to go with the graviton route... which means aside from 'spin-2 massless tensor boson', the techno-babel field is wide open.

Techno-babel: Graviton Array; Spin-2 detector; Tensor Field Calibration; Boson Purge.

Horse Drawn Catapaults were on the way out the door in the 1400's... bombards (primitive cannon) put them out of the running following the siege of Byzantium. By 1600, cannon had almost entirely replaced catapaults.

The use of catapaults to deliver drugs across borders notwithstanding...

Quite true!

My bad - from brain to keyboard 'Horse Drawn Cannon' became 'Horse Drawn Catapults'!

(IIRC, the French, rather poorly I suspect, used catapults in WWI but that wasn't what I had in mind when posting...)

In the context of this thread - though I'm no expert in any sense, if I was playing a Civil War game and the Ref started talking about horse drawn catapults my suspension of disbelief would be shattered...

 

[rgrove0172]

Of course, one should know one's players and avoid such technical babble in a field they claim more experience in. Im no expert either but catapults in the Civil War would throw up some flares obviously, but if I was presented with a regiment of Confederates using repeating rifles, copied from the winchester model and funded by a delivery of prime slaves to a Spanish buyer... well I could probably buy it. A learned historian might have all kinds of reasons that would not be possible but at my gaming table? It would fly.

Your commentary on Deep Scans and Grav Scans are exactly what I was talking about - just familiar enough to the lay-person to lend an air of realism.

Im 20 year firefighter/paramedic veteran. I tend to decribe my character's injuries and their medical treatment in a bit more detail than most I imagine. When my characters make a "first aid" roll I provide details on stopping blood flow, splinting fractures, decompressing air or fluid build up in the chest cavity etc. My players arent medically trained so they accept it without question, no more so than my admittedly 'bullshit' explanations for their radar operations etc.