|
Transient People posted:What Zandar said is basically why I'm critical of the idea. Just to give examples off the top of my head, these are things that are all forceful, but two of them most certainly cannot really be made to work with the questions without making the player jump through some very awkward hoops, even though they fit perfectly: Hmm. Yeah, I'll admit there isn't the elegance to it I was hoping, but I'm not going to just give up. I mean, the whole "you both want and don't want to break this thing" idea is basically the concept of holding something in tension and hoping it holds together, but other than that-- Oh! "Tell everyone what you're willing to break, and what you hope you don't have to"? Transient People posted:-Coolly and mercilessly deconstructing the motives, means and odds of another person to prove just how pathetic their plans are and why they are fools for thinking they could achieve them, using nothing but truth and facts. Bullying, in other words, but honest bullying. Well, that depends what the end of it is. Are you hoping to get something out of them? Then you're willing to break their will but you're hoping not to break their spirit, otherwise they're just going to start sobbing and asking what the point of it all is. Or maybe you're willing to break their spirit. Then you're probably hoping you don't break your hold on them, so they just clam up, shut up, and flip you off. Transient People posted:-Summoning up force of will when you need it most. Willing to break free/break through your hesitation, hoping not to break down. Transient People posted:-Hefting an enormous two-handed sword and cutting someone in half with it. Willing to break their spine, hoping not to break your arms. Transient People posted:-Lifting a stone far too big for anyone else to move, because you are strong and stubborn enough to not quit. Willing to break your spine, hoping it doesn't come to that. I'll take a look at the rest later, but here's something slightly different for Flashy. "Tell everyone who you're acting out for and what you don't want them to see." "Yourself" is valid there, meaning Mr. Flashy gets "Top Form Today", "My Timing's Off", and "Can't Get Careless" as his boost/antiboost/consequence.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 11:19 |
|
|
Oh! Just got a brainwave for Quick. "Tell everyone what you're racing against and what would make your victory hollow." And maybe one for Stealthy. "Tell everyone what you're trying to hide and what you're willing to show them." The idea is, yeah, to make you think what you'd give up to be stealthy. If you're not willing to show them anything? Then you just freeze up and hope they didn't actually see you. Oh, and the Rule Zero for these ones. "If you're having trouble naming both these things, then name one and ask everybody else if they can help fill in the other. If you can't even think of one, or none of them can fill in the other, maybe the approach isn't the best fit for the situation." Glazius fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Tulul posted:I have no idea if you've tried it already, but Amazon's selling all three for what looks like the normal price.  No joy on Leisure Games, either. Thanks for the suggestions, though - I'll post when I track somewhere down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
Glazius posted:
What about : "Tell everyone what you are trying to hide, and what you would give up to keep it hidden"? The idea being that you might just give up "the element of surprise", or "the high ground", rather than actually showing something specific. thefakenews fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
Hmm, maybe this? "Tell everyone what you have to hide, and who must never find it." The sample situations the rulebook lists for Sneaky are "talking your way out of getting arrested", "picking a pocket", "feinting in a sword fight", and "creeping through a dark room, avoiding the guards". So... my guilt/the cops, the mark's wallet/the mark, the true strike/my target, my presence/the guards. Wait, did I just lap myself on that? Crud. "What you're trying to hide/what you're willing to show them" yields my guilt/a bribe, the wallet/my presence, the true strike/an opening, my presence/NOTHING OH GOD PANIC. Not actual panic, just when you're not willing to show them anything, that just means you freeze up until they go away. "What must stay hidden/what they'll find first"? That makes hiding from the guards my presence/a trace, and the pick pocket the wallet/"it's gone". I like that last one. It could either be the start of the trail or my false front. Glazius fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
Today, in Amazing Breakthroughs in Fate Mindspace, I finally realized some pretty amazing implications of the old Golden Rule of FATE: Anything in the game can be a character. These days it's the Bronze Rule and only shows up in the toolkit, in part because it's a lot to wrap your head around. Anyway. Implications. Anything in the game can be a character. And characters can have High Concepts and Troubles (as aspects). --- Aspect B-Sides Do your character Aspects have High Concepts and Troubles! Sure! You've probably written one of them down already, just as the aspect, but a good Aspect has to go both ways, right? So it's got a B-side you may only be holding in your head. Why not write it down? Landon, one of the sample characters in the book who gets used in a lot of examples, has these as his aspects: "Disciple of the Ivory Shroud", "The Manners of a Goat", "I Owe Old Finn Everything", "Smashing Is Always An Option", and "An Eye For An Eye". What's the B-side to his High Concept, "Disciple of the Ivory Shroud"? Probably something like "My Masters Move In Secret" -- the order of the Ivory Shroud does a lot of things Landon doesn't necessarily agree with and even some he might want to oppose openly. What's the B-side to his Trouble, "The Manners of a Goat"? "The Brazenness of a Donkey". Landon has no compunctions about making, well, an rear end of himself in public if the end result works out for him and his friends. Similarly, it's pretty obvious from the examples of play that the B-sides to his next two aspects are something like "I Owe Old Finn Everything (And Boy Does He Collect)" and "Smashing Is Always An Option (At Least That's What I Tell Myself)" The Aspects themselves are more High Concept and the B-sides are more Trouble. "An Eye For An Eye" is less obvious since it doesn't really come up in the example of play. It sounds like it might have a Trouble B-side like "Leaves The Whole World Blind" -- Landon is motivated to exact vengeance and inconsiderate of what the consequences might be. But it also might have a High Concept B-side like "A Warrior's Code of Honor" -- Landon helps himself along socially with devotion to a code of honor that nevertheless demands he do things polite society would frown upon. Or maybe it actually has both and "An Eye For An Eye" came out somewhere in the middle. As with a character, though, you can still get compelled from both ends of an aspect with a B-side, and still spend Fate Points to use either side to your advantage. "My Masters Move In Secret" could be worth spending a Fate point on to boost a Contacts roll - maybe there's another disciple of the Shroud in this town on his own mission that Landon doesn't even know about, and he can help. Or if Grim Khtamun has been fighting the Ivory Shroud for a while, "Disciple of the Ivory Shroud" could get compelled in combat because he can see through the moves of a mere disciple. Maybe not directly through FATE Points, but he can totally spend an action to Create An Advantage like "I Can Read Your Moves, Boy!" -- and if that sticks around as an aspect, it'll get cross-compelled when Landon tries to juice Disciple of the Ivory Shroud, so either he or his friends might have to Overcome that mental block. --- I'm Full Of Tinier Men There's something else on your character sheet that it might be useful to think of as having High Concepts and Troubles - your stunts! Even if it just gives you a static bonus in a particular situation, your stunt has its own high concept and trouble. I mean, let's say you've got Magic Lockpicks that give you +2 to Burglary rolls to open all types of locks. You might never write your High Concept for that down, but maybe it's something like "I See Just Where To Push" - they feel out the inside of a lock so you can open it tactilely. Let's suppose you get into a fight with a big clockwork automaton and you're trying to use Burglary to Create an Advantage against it, disabling it like it was a trap. Could your Magic Lockpicks help with that? If you think they help give you leverage into machines, you think that too, but the stunt's not defined that way -- so pay a Fate Point, and invoke that high concept for effect. Have your Magic Lockpicks got a Trouble? Can it be compelled? Sure! Maybe not directly compelled, but Create an Advantage can be used to try to lock them down. I mean, if you're in the middle of a wizard's tower with an arcane maelstrom that's a Great (+4) Obstacle, and your Magic Lockpicks are "Naught But Magic And Wire", that's an aspect the maelstrom could totally try to create an advantage on if you just took out your lockpicks to open the door to the wizard's treasure vault like it weren't no thing. And, of course, they're Magic Lockpicks, and a physical object in their own right, so one day when you're just standing out in the bazaar, and the GM asks you to oppose a Superb (+5) Burglary roll just out of the blue, and you honk your Notice roll but figure it's worth playing along anyway, and-- Wait, why does your belt feel lighter? Who's that figure in green heckling you? Wait, wait, WHAT'S he waving around? That fucker! Get back here, you-- Zohar The Green Stole Your Magic Lockpicks -- Good (+2) Plot Thread Secrets Stress: [] [] [] , 1 Mild Consequence Aspects: Where Is He Even Hiding, He Couldn't Have Done This Alone, All Thieves Are Cowards Strengths: Great (+4) Deceive, Good (+3) Contacts, Provoke Weaknesses: Mediocre (+0) Will
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
Some of those ideas could be cool (I've certainly had times I wished I could directly compel a stunt), but I'd be really worried about aspect bloat. Remember, not everything has to be an aspect, and introducing your changes would effectively give every starting character 16 aspects, if I'm reading correctly, and that's a lot to deal with. Also, I question the need to codify the Aspect B-sides. Aspects are already supposed to have positives and negatives, that's how they work, and I'm not sure what the benefit is in defining all of that as another step.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
More than 7 aspects is way too many aspects.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
My player characters regularly have 5-8 aspects, usually 8. It works fine. We don't use the "high concept" or "troubles" aspect categories, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
I'm new to Fate and planning to run an nMage-based hack soon in an original setting. I'm wondering about how to handle players creating parts of the setting big and small, which seems like a major part of Fate. I'm completely down with that style of play and use it a lot in my own games, but for this game specifically, I really want to create an atmosphere of feeling like an outsider and not being fully aware of what's going on. I don't want to spoil it since it'll be a PbP here but it's a modern occult conspiracy kind of setting with a little bit of Jorge Luis Borges uncertainty about the reality of what's happening. There's a lot of David Lynch-style uncovering something ugly and completely inexplicable below the surface exterior too. So one of the main things I want the players to be doing is learning about the world they're in and finding that many of their assumptions might not be true, nothing is what it seems, etc. How can I maintain an atmosphere of mystery and discovery while also getting the players invested in the setting? I've run this game before in person with people I knew very well who I knew would basically be on the same wavelength, but I guess my biggest worry (and I know how bad and 'get-your-grubby-hands-off-plebs' this is gonna sound) is that someone is going to suggest something about the setting by invoking an aspect or w/e that wouldn't fit for reasons that haven't been revealed yet. Like if someone goes "oh, how about this John Smith we're looking for was my character's mentor for years?" and John Smith doesn't actually exist and the NPCs who referred to him are lying. Or am I missing something fundamentally unfun about running a game with that kind of lack of initial knowledge?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Some of those ideas could be cool (I've certainly had times I wished I could directly compel a stunt), but I'd be really worried about aspect bloat. Remember, not everything has to be an aspect, and introducing your changes would effectively give every starting character 16 aspects, if I'm reading correctly, and that's a lot to deal with. Piell posted:More than 7 aspects is way too many aspects. Not everything has to be written down as an aspect, no. But anything can be treated as if it were a character and had aspects. The trick is... Well, the trick is to realize that Aspects are not actually there to define the things you can and can't spend Fate Points on. There's never a case where you can get creative and spend Fate Points even if you aren't "supposed to", or desperately need to spend Fate Points but can't. I know that sounds absolutely crazy, but hear me out. Let's say it's the start of a session, you've got a big pile of Fate Points, the GM tosses a check at you, you honk the roll... and not a single thing pops out from your character sheet that you can spend a Fate Point on to get a reroll going. What do you do? Try to get creative? No. You can't think of any Aspects that apply to this roll, so you shouldn't be spending Fate Points on it because it's not that important to the plot yet. Similarly, at the end of the session when you're throwing down with Grim Khtamun, you know his aspects, he's engaged several of your aspects, there are campaign and character and scene aspects that obviously apply, and you could dump like five or six Fate Points into any one roll, easy -- because now everything that happens is important to the plot. The correlary is that if something on your character sheet seems important to the plot, you should be able to bank a Fate Point off of it. But wait! What about those stunts that obviously apply and are giving you a +2? Can you bank a Fate Point off of those? You already are. To get that +2. It's a very narrow circumstance where you're getting a free Fate Point all the time. The reason why it's important to limit the number of Aspects is to limit the hooks you present to the GM and possibly the other players, so they get a decent idea of how you could get involved with the plot. So writing down a High Concept and/or Trouble for an Aspect you already have isn't actually getting you any "new aspects" -- it's just more clearly signaling to everyone how you want the original Aspect to get involved in the plot. I mean, if somebody's got a High Concept of "Rightful Lord of Dobravia", then each of the following indicate a slightly different direction they want to take that:
Glazius fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Nov 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
Kellsterik posted:I'm new to Fate and planning to run an nMage-based hack soon in an original setting. I'm wondering about how to handle players creating parts of the setting big and small, which seems like a major part of Fate. So, wait. You're running a game where nobody can trust anything. A character thinks of a setting NPC they keep hearing about as having been their mentor for years. They then find out that this person is a tissue of lies and never even existed to begin with. Then who was their mentor? Did they even have a mentor? Why do they have such fond, or at least vivid, memories of someone who isn't even real? Basically what I am saying is: that plot development would be completely amazing and you should welcome your PCs creating it for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 04:51
|
|
|
quote:Well, the trick is to realize that Aspects are not actually there to define the things you can and can't spend Fate Points on. There's never a case where you can get creative and spend Fate Points even if you aren't "supposed to", or desperately need to spend Fate Points but can't. I can certainly think of one: In the New Orleans Dresden Files game going on in these very forums, the Warden in a child's body had to pull a fast one on a ghost and could tap into no Aspects to make his lie better, even though it could've been important. It's not that none of them lend themselves to lying, they just didn't fit THIS situation. So he had to bite the bullet and suck at lying even though he didn't really want to. Just because it's not the most key roll ever doesn't change the fact your Aspects constrain you on spending FP sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Transient People posted:I can certainly think of one: In the New Orleans Dresden Files game going on in these very forums, the Warden in a child's body had to pull a fast one on a ghost and could tap into no Aspects to make his lie better, even though it could've been important. It's not that none of them lend themselves to lying, they just didn't fit THIS situation. So he had to bite the bullet and suck at lying even though he didn't really want to. Just because it's not the most key roll ever doesn't change the fact your Aspects constrain you on spending FP sometimes. I invoke the ghost's 'Unliving Memory' Aspect. Since it's an unliving echo of the person it once was (as per Dresden Files canon, assuming that's relevant), it doesn't actually have the instincts that would have cued in a living witness to my deception, making my invoke valid. That's one way it could have been done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
FrozenGoldfishGod posted:I invoke the ghost's 'Unliving Memory' Aspect. Since it's an unliving echo of the person it once was (as per Dresden Files canon, assuming that's relevant), it doesn't actually have the instincts that would have cued in a living witness to my deception, making my invoke valid. ...Which assumes the ghost has that Aspect, which it didn't. I've played FATE for years, and I have never (literally never) seen an opponent-targeted invoke except to Compel them to do something really dumb, and even then only on already revealed Aspects or PC created ones. It's a gamble that can cost you FP for nothing and is supremely not worth it. We can talk hypotheticals all we want but it doesn't change the point I am making: There are situations where an action is something your character would do, but he doesn't have an Aspect he can fall back on to boost the roll if it goes badly. This is not a flaw of the system, but it's dumb to pretend it doesn't exist. That's all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 09:21
|
|
|
Transient People posted:I can certainly think of one: In the New Orleans Dresden Files game going on in these very forums, the Warden in a child's body had to pull a fast one on a ghost and could tap into no Aspects to make his lie better, even though it could've been important. It's not that none of them lend themselves to lying, they just didn't fit THIS situation. So he had to bite the bullet and suck at lying even though he didn't really want to. Just because it's not the most key roll ever doesn't change the fact your Aspects constrain you on spending FP sometimes. And there wasn't anything he could go the other way on, either? Nothing he could say was being compelled, that he found himself in a situation where he had to lie to a ghost but wasn't that good at it? And what was the fallout of him not being able to lie to the ghost? Surely not instant death or anything, right, but maybe some kind of damage? So take a consequence and concede the 'fight' -- that's the kind of self-compel that always works. That's the story: you got into something totally alien to you, trusted in luck, it let you down, and now you bear a scar and have a gift voucher for the next few go-rounds at the carnival of destiny.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
How do you guys do Fate maps? Like, in conflicts and such. I'm having a hard time figuring out how to express all the various situational and temporary aspects in play without just covering the zones in words. Are there any good examples you guys can think of? I checked out the Dresden thread but didn't see any.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
Qwo posted:How do you guys do Fate maps? Like, in conflicts and such. I'm having a hard time figuring out how to express all the various situational and temporary aspects in play without just covering the zones in words. Are there any good examples you guys can think of? I checked out the Dresden thread but didn't see any. A lot of people just slap down post it notes or jot them down on the side of the map space. Then you can take off notes that no longer apply or cross things out from the list. When I play online everyone pretty much just remembers which aspects they're involved with and it seems to work fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
Glazius posted:And there wasn't anything he could go the other way on, either? Nothing he could say was being compelled, that he found himself in a situation where he had to lie to a ghost but wasn't that good at it? Conceding the 'fight' would have meant death, see, because we were in the middle of an encampment with hundreds of ghosts. So instead his lie failed and another PC had to cover for him with a better, higher roll. You're missing the point though: There wasn't need to compel anything there, or make the situation worse intentionally. It's not what the player wanted. He just had an obstacle he wanted to overcome, failed, and his Aspects weren't there to back him up and that's all. You're trying to do the same thing as with the 'stakes' for approaches before and trying to apply a one-size-fits-all approach to FATE and...it doesn't really work that way. Not everything is an Aspect, you don't always have Aspects to compel, and there's no need to go four layers deep into the fractal every time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Conceding the 'fight' would have meant death, see, because we were in the middle of an encampment with hundreds of ghosts. So instead his lie failed and another PC had to cover for him with a better, higher roll. You're missing the point though: There wasn't need to compel anything there, or make the situation worse intentionally. It's not what the player wanted. He just had an obstacle he wanted to overcome, failed, and his Aspects weren't there to back him up and that's all. You're trying to do the same thing as with the 'stakes' for approaches before and trying to apply a one-size-fits-all approach to FATE and...it doesn't really work that way. Not everything is an Aspect, you don't always have Aspects to compel, and there's no need to go four layers deep into the fractal every time. Is it wrong that I think your GM was bein' kind of a dick, then? Sticking you in the middle of a life-and-death situation where your character had literally nothing at stake? Not even some immediate part of his life as represented by conceding with consequences? Just "be lucky or die"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
You would be, since other players were there and could make rolls as well. It wasn't a one-and-done affair. The other player COULD invoke his Aspects too, because they fit the situation. A bunch of angry ghosts getting on our tail was the worst case scenario situation if everybody botched their rolls badly (and didn't opt to succeed at a cost)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
Hi again FATE thread. I found this little abilities/approaches hack and realized I had everything I needed to write a FATE of the Ninth World hack for Monte Cook's Numenera, with a couple of caveats: 1) You actually have a full 3/2 2/1 1/0 tree for both your FAE approaches and your abilities; however, they don't add together. 2) If the scenario demands an equal approach and ability, roll that number. If they're unequal, the higher value "complements" the lower value; roll the lower value +1. 3) After the pattern of class templates in the toolkit, your character descriptor is an "approach template" which predefines certain approach values and may contain unique stunts; your character type is an "ability template" with the same caveat; your focus is the weird sixth skill, which may have unique stunts associated with it. There's like 20 focuses and descriptors but only three character types, so I thought I'd start with those. Is this breakdown too restrictive, not restrictive enough? Glaive: Good (+3) Combative, Fair (+2) Athletic, pick one, Average (+1) pick two, Mediocre (+0) pick one Nano: Good (+3) Skilled, Fair (+2) pick two, Average (+1) pick two, Mediocre (+0) Social Nanos also get a template stunt that lets them attack with Skilled. I figured I'd tank Social for a nano because the description emphasizes how alien they are to most people. Jack: Good (+3) Focus, Fair (+2) Combative or Skilled, and pick one, Average (+1) pick two, Mediocre (+0) pick one It makes sense to me that Jacks would be the one to really play to their Focus; the other two character types can have it as one of their Fair (+2) skills, but Jacks are the best at it. My "stakes questions" for the abilities go about like so. Combative: Tell me who you're trying to hurt and what you want to protect. Athletic: Tell me why you could do this all day and why you really don't want to. Skilled: Tell me what fact your plan hinges on, and why you can't possibly be wrong. Social: Tell me whose sympathies you're playing to and why they should even care. Influential: Tell me who's going to buy into you and what price you hope you don't pay. Focus: (question varies depending on the focus) Glazius fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
So we just had a rather noteworthy session today, and it highlights something about Fate I rather like a lot. First off, we're going for a Final Fantasy style JRPG feeling for this game, so high fantasy with a little technology tossed about. We stumbled upon the Rebellion for the increasingly-evil-looking Empire, who were going to place a raid on a facility that just discovered a strange artifact left behind by one of the Storm Dragons we've been trying to figure out. The GM has been giving him a consistant pool of Fate Points, one for each player per scene, occasionally one over or below as needed. We started this session with four players, but one had to back out early from college finals fatigue. So he has four FP, and the players have a couple FP above their refresh. We start the raid and bust down the front door. Out comes a miniboss character with his Melee at +5 vs our +4s. But, he's the rival Powered Ranger rival to one of the Players, and takes a Compel to take him on 1v1. We pass a few Good Luck advantages to him and move on. Then another miniboss character comes up, the lady Knight Templar we stumbled on earlier who had a romantic encounter with another one of the PCs earlier, so then they also do a 1v1 with another last minute Good Luck advantage. Finally there's me who charges deep in the facility, dragging along our NPC buddy leading the raid and finds an airship deep in the facility being powered by the dragon artifact. Inside the airship is an assassin that tried to attack us before and got us in a lot of trouble with the Templar earlier. It starts off rather nicely. Since the GM bounced back and forth between us as we took our turn, the two Powered Rangers hold each other at a standstill, and the Templar in her heavy armor holds off pretty well. We're burning our FP pretty much every round, and so is the GM in response. By the time I encounter the assassin the GM is now out of Fate Points, and a couple good rolls means I practically two-shot the madman and hijack the airship. The other two just completely burn through their FP to get a bonus over the minibosses and make some pretty heroic struggles ultimately coming on top. In any other RPG, what we just did would be suicide. These guys had better stats than us. But for the sake of making the game more dramatic and increasing the stakes, we split these individually tricky but not difficult fights when handled in a group into three simultaneous near impossible 1v1 fights. Because, rather than in spite of, we stacked the odds against us we had the Fate Points to initially hold them off then overcome. We took the risky dramatic way of handling this, and the game rewarded us. We were having the time of our lives, and the GM was having a blast as well. And now the GMs looking through the Camelot Trigger rules to figure out how to handle this airship we just stole from him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Leisure Games has the FATE toolkit and worlds books listed for UK!  They're not in stock yet, expected to arrive on the 10th.e: They arrived today! I've only read Worlds in Shadow so far. If people have interest, I can write up a Fatal & Friends style look at it? In short, it's awesome. The First section is Crime World. It's one of the best-written articles I've read for GMing - rather than a setting for fate, it's actually an extended look at running heists and cons. I think it's written by one of the writers for Leverage, and it shows - hell, this section alone is more than worth the  . It's not too fate-specific, it'd be a good read for any GM, but it does cover statting security as a character-ish, and what sort of aspects are appropriate for marks and so on. There's a small section on replacing 'Lore' with 'Specialty', but it's a tweak more than a mod.For me, pretty much every session turns into 'how do we get X off of Y', so it's definitely going to see a lot of use. It's not going to radically change my games, but it's all drat useful (and interesting) advice. Honestly, if I could buy a book of just articles like this, I'd do it in a second. petrol blue fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Dec 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
In another forum I am a member of we are talking about starting a play-by-post game, and I suggested FAE (the alternative and original idea was AD&D). I haven't actually played FAE (or FATE, for that matter) before, but they seem to lend themselves better to the play-by-post format than DnD, but I still have some questions, like when it's appropriate to refresh your fate points when "session" is not really a thing (every page? every other page? every milestone?), or how do you structure your actions/reactions when you can't immediately respond to the GM. Are there any guidelines for that type of play anywhere? Do you have any links to SA play-by-post games that you considered to be good examples?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 11:24
|
|
|
Rexides posted:In another forum I am a member of we are talking about starting a play-by-post game, and I suggested FAE (the alternative and original idea was AD&D). I haven't actually played FAE (or FATE, for that matter) before, but they seem to lend themselves better to the play-by-post format than DnD, but I still have some questions, like when it's appropriate to refresh your fate points when "session" is not really a thing (every page? every other page? every milestone?), or how do you structure your actions/reactions when you can't immediately respond to the GM. Are there any guidelines for that type of play anywhere? Do you have any links to SA play-by-post games that you considered to be good examples? A session IS a milestone, so yes, this one. As for actions and reactions, the way the games I'm in have done that is have people be on IRC so they can do things more or less in realtime, but if that's not an option, another game I'm in just used preemptive conditional declarations, e. g. 'If my opponent beats this Fight roll by 2 or less, invoke Master Fightguy. If he FPs to counter me, invoke The Bone Of My Sword'. This kind of setup tends to work pretty well, I feel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 11:32
|
|
|
Rexides posted:In another forum I am a member of we are talking about starting a play-by-post game, and I suggested FAE (the alternative and original idea was AD&D). I haven't actually played FAE (or FATE, for that matter) before, but they seem to lend themselves better to the play-by-post format than DnD, but I still have some questions, like when it's appropriate to refresh your fate points when "session" is not really a thing (every page? every other page? every milestone?), or how do you structure your actions/reactions when you can't immediately respond to the GM. Are there any guidelines for that type of play anywhere? Do you have any links to SA play-by-post games that you considered to be good examples? You can probably do it "every milestone" without losing too much. It seems like you're supposed to hit at least a minor milestone every session.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
Kerzoro posted:So I've been considering a Persona/SMT-style game using FATE. Strange Journeys in particular strikes me as interesting, in the whole "people go to a MYSTERIOUS NEW ZONE and find world-changing things in there". Persona interests me because, well, they can resonate with the character's Aspects. This is a page late and a dollar short, but did you ever get this off the ground? Missed out on PixelZero's PBP, and it is my mission in life to get good at GMing so I can run a Persona RPG. Or just play in one. I'm not picky at all. My advice would be to stick with Persona specifically so you don't have to deal with that demon negotiation stuff. I would honestly shy away from crunch, modelling Personas with just an Aspect (invoke: use special ability; compel: get hit with a magical weakness or whatever) and a couple stunts for magic. If you use Social Links (you should) have them be mostly between PCs. Maybe granting stuff like Follow-Up Attacks (further bonus to utilize PC-created Advantages or Boosts) or Fusion Spells (deal damage equal to both PC's normal damage plus the Link's level)? I have little experience with FATE or the Fractal, so this is all untested and completely off the top of my head. Use at your own risk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
How would you represent the following scene in your preferred flavor of FATE? http://vimeo.com/80117014 In Strange FATE, I see two PCs using the Empathy and Presence skills to invoke and tag new Aspects on the clown until he gives up in frustration. A 'Sadistic Torturer' can't torture victims who don't show fear, after all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
That's a combat, to my mind - they're using empathy to attack, the clown is failing badly at provoke. You could do it with a contest, I guess, but it seems pretty clear-cut to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
I've been thinking of combining parts of Dungeon World with Fate - how stupid is this plan? (I legitimately think that making stunts more like moves would be a good thing, and I'm also planning on stealing the "7-9, 10+" style of success/great success.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 07:52
|
|
|
Well, core already has success-with-cost/normal/with-style, so that change should be pretty reasonable. I agree on making stunts more like moves, it's much more interesting that way, but you couldn't have them as direct move-analogues, without breaking the skill system. Off the top of my head, maybe you could use re-tooled approaches (a la FAE) for hack'n'slash, etc, and then stunts-as-moves for class-specific ones?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 08:07
|
|
|
I was thinking along the lines of "when you use this approach/skill to do a particular thing then this other thing". So as a more concrete example, "When you make a Sneaky attack against someone, add an additional shift of damage. If you succeed with style, you can instead choose to create an advantage on your target." Representing some sort of backstab/sneak attack kind of deal, although mainly to demonstrate the language than my capacity for game design in the space of 60 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:I was thinking along the lines of "when you use this approach/skill to do a particular thing then this other thing". So basically it's making the boost you'd get from a success with style a permanent advantage? I know, I know, language rather than game design, but it's an interesting approach and I'd like to see where it takes you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
At this point I think I'm creating a monster. I'm veering away from Fate Core so much that I'm starting to co-opt other games' mechanics and design. My major problem is that I'm never happy with how it is, I have to keep tinkering and altering things. Right now I've made so many changes and jotted down so many design notes I haven't got a Goddamn clue where to start rewriting from.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Try stripping it down to a skeleton and then rebuilding it from there, you'll probably have a new system on your hands at this point. If you do you can give it a snazzy new name too 
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
Hey! I like the name I've got  I've really come to like a lot of the Fate mechanics but the more I try and adapt the subsystems I like, the more I am coming to think that sooner or later I'm going to have to start from scratch and build a system rather than adapting Fate. Probably gonna steal so many mechanics from Fate, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Tollymain posted:Try stripping it down to a skeleton and then rebuilding it from there, you'll probably have a new system on your hands at this point. If you do you can give it a snazzy new name too Gamedesign.txt
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:I've been thinking of combining parts of Dungeon World with Fate - how stupid is this plan? Edit Look at triggered effects in the toolkit because they are essentially two thirds of the way there to a traditional Dungeon World move. The only part missing is what happens on a failure. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Dec 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 11:19 |
|
|
Error 404 posted:Gamedesign.txt I thought people instinctively cringed when something was "Like X system but Y difference"
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 19:18
|
|
