|
Ronwayne posted:I thought people instinctively cringed when something was "Like X system but Y difference" Yes, if that's all that ever gets done, but the post I quoted was about looking at what you're trying to accomplish and cutting stuff brutally til you get to the 'core' of what you're trying to do. (Then building up and then cutting again) But as a starting point for a project, you can do worse than X meets Y mixed with Z. It's just that that's only step 1. Edit: If you're advertising your (presumably) finished game as "like X, but Y!" Then that's different, and a dumb thing to do. Error 404 fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Dec 24, 2013 |
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
E: pretty much what Error404 said, but a lot less eloquently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted: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. If you've got something written down I'd love to take a look and comment! I've been thinking the same thing myself re: mashing Fate and Dungeon World together - 13th Age, too. I mean like Error404 said there's more to it than that but you get what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
The problem is that DW and FATE run on entirely different paradigms. DW seeks to make failure not sting by rewarding you for it. FATE seeks to give you the tools to decide when a failure is not going to happen and declare in mechanical terms the narrative is going to follow THIS path in THIS moment, with the only cost being in the 'luck control' resource. If you want to mash them up, solve the puzzle of integrating those two paradigms of failure first, THEN think about everything else. Otherwise your mashup will just be an ugly frankenstein.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Transient People posted:The problem is that DW and FATE run on entirely different paradigms. DW seeks to make failure not sting by rewarding you for it. FATE seeks to give you the tools to decide when a failure is not going to happen and declare in mechanical terms the narrative is going to follow THIS path in THIS moment, with the only cost being in the 'luck control' resource. If you want to mash them up, solve the puzzle of integrating those two paradigms of failure first, THEN think about everything else. Otherwise your mashup will just be an ugly frankenstein. On a 10+ succeed with style On a 7-9 succeed, pick something from list On a 6- fail, or spend a FP and pick from (new) list And fuego I totally wanna 
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:And fuego I totally wanna That's if I can write it up. So far half of it's nothing but "I'd like x but y" and general frustration that I am not as good at game design as I thought I was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 12:24
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:That's if I can write it up. So far half of it's nothing but "I'd like x but y". Well then, let me add "help" to the offer of theft. I'll bug you on irc next time I see you, or we can PM or whatevs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 12:26
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Well then, let me add "help" to the offer of theft. I'll bug you on irc next time I see you, or we can PM or whatevs. Fair warning, I may make you watch the Harryhausen Sinbad movies to help explain what exactly it is I am trying to emulate in my system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:Fair warning, I may make you watch the Harryhausen Sinbad movies to help explain what exactly it is I am trying to emulate in my system. You say this like it's a chore, I watched that poo poo with my Dad as kid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:On a 10+ succeed with style And at this point it's not really DW's fail/pass system, is it? Just FATE with new dice. This is what I mean when I say you have to solve the puzzle - integrating two ways to handle a PC not getting what he wants that are so different isn't easy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
I could use some help/suggestions on how to make what I have in mind work. I want to run a game using the Tenra Bansho Zero setting under Fate rules. There's one thing in particular that is important to the setting that I'm trying to emulate under Fate rules. Basically, in TBZ the points you use to improve your character can also be used to get temporary bonuses. For example, you can spend X points on improving one of your stats, or you can spend those X points on rolling that many bonus die for one roll. Every time you use those points, your Karma goes up. If your Karma goes past 108, your character turns insane and becomes an NPC. You can lower your Karma by giving up your fates, which is basically a series of beliefs or goals that your character has, and replacing them with new ones. The first part I'm trying to emulate is the character's Karma track. I'm thinking that in exchange for getting a bigger bonus when invoking a character's aspect, maybe +3 or +4 instead of +2, their Karma should increase. I'm not too sure what the Karma track should be though. An extra aspect everyone has that changes depending on how close the character is to reaching 108 Karma? Or would it be easier to run it as a separate stress track? The second part is the concept of giving up on things you cared about before you turn into a monster. In TBZ generally you'll turn into a monster when you've pushed yourself too far to accomplish what you wanted. I guess what I'm wondering is, how feasible would it be to have a game where a character's aspects are constantly changing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
You'll want to read "No Exit" and "Fight Fire" from the "Worlds of Fate" book. No Exit is about your character progressing emotionally, from a wreck to someone at terms with their past life. "Fight Fire" is unique in that consequences don't go away-- they become part of your aspects. So instead of "Hotshot Fire Captain" you're "Hotshot Fire Captain with a drinking problem" or "Toby's Got My back... before the 7/11 Fire."
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 10:18
|
|
|
Seconding No Exit as being perfect for what you described - I've not gone through it too much, but I think I recall it also includes rapidly changing aspects based on the character's memories.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 13:53
|
|
|
Here are some... thoughts on running FATE, prompted by a post in the chat thread: FATE is much like *World in that it is primarily a fiction-first game. What that means is the collective imagination of the players (including the GM-player) is the first and foremost driving force of the game. If the players have collectively agreed on something, it goes. It is true in the game, period. What you have to do now is translate that into the mechanics of the game. *World has moves, and those are specifically designed to make this translation process as painless as possible. Moves are just helping you translate what is happening in the players' imagination* into the language of the game. * since people aren't telephatic yet, the only way to share what we imagine is by communication; Apocalypse World calls this "The Conversation". With FATE, it's the same, but the language of the game is a lot less intuitive. FATE speaks in terms of fate points, skills, stunts, stress boxes, and aspects. The crucial thing to understand here, and this is where most people get stuck, is that these game elements do not correspond to specific fiction elements. Rather, a fiction element can be translated into any combination of the game elements. This property is usually called the "FATE fractal" or the "bronze rule". So how do you know what game elements to translate fiction elements into? In other words, "how do I represent this thing in the game?" You pick and choose based on what feel you want to give your fiction element. This is entirely the translator's – most times it will be the GM – job. You can do whatever, but you choose to do what feels the best. Since *World-style moves are an extremely intuitive way to translate fiction into game, I've tried my hand at creating "moves" to help ease the transition between fiction and FATE. If any given element of the fiction... ...takes decisive action, give it skills. ...withstands assault, give it stress boxes. ...interferes with the actions of another, give it passive or active resistance, accordingly. ...interacts with the metagame of the fiction, give it aspects. ...is a force capable of actively steering the metagame of the fiction, give it Fate points. ...does any of the above in a special or unique way, give it stunts. Aspects, as usual, are the trickest part. The biggest mistake is trying to define aspects using the fiction. No, aspects are nothing more than ways to interact with "the metagame of the fiction" – simply put, the Fate point economy. What the Fate point economy does is it creates trade-offs between elements in the fiction that would not otherwise be related. The fact that you accepted a compel back then allows you to invoke an aspect now. Because you are a country bumpkin who accidentally disrespected the princess, you can swing from this chandelier. Aspects are a way to interact with this metagame; nothing more, nothing less. They operate strictly on the meta level. Give something aspects only if you want it to be a part of this insane play of "because you did that thing, now this unrelated thing can happen". For an example, let's say you want to have a magical sword. A magical sword that protects you from your enemies: it springs out of its scabbard by its own accord and flies through the air if you're being attacked. That's the fictional element we want to represent in the game: the magical sword. The reasoning would be the same if the element were a spell, a cyber-leg, a soldier, the love of a father for his daughter, a national park, or the evil villain's memories. One way to FATE that up is to think the sword is intended to interfere with another's actions: namely, it interferes with another's actions to attack! And it does so in a special way: only when you are being targeted by that attack. So we make the sword a stunt: "Give +2 passive resistance against attacks on yourself". Or we could have done it differently. Maybe you want to think of the sword as a barrier someone has to go through before being able to attack you. Now your sword is intended to withstand assault. It needs to take decisive action, as well: it has to be able to... well... swordfight itself. So we can give it a skill, Twirl Through the Air, at +2 at something, and some stress boxes. This is not worse than the first way we statted our sword; it's just a different feel. Let's make our sword sentient. It likes to get into heated debates about politics. It takes decisive action to do so, so we give it the skill Heated Politics Debates at +2. Maybe you want to be able to spend your Fate points, earned by having fallen down a chasm or having made a new enemy or whatever, to take advantage of the sword's sentience. Now we give it the aspect, "A Sentient Sword". Maybe we just want a sentient sword, none of the above. We give it nothing. No aspects, no skills, no nothing. We just say it's a sentient sword. If everyone nods and goes, "yup, you have a sentient sword, I can see that", then your sword is goddamn sentient, even if that specific part of the fiction isn't being represented by any part of the rules. It's in the fiction, and what's in the fiction goes. fiction fiction fiction it doesn't sound like a word anymore Cyphoderus fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Cyphoderus posted:
Yeah, it took a surprisingly long time for me to realize that Aspects were, primarily, a way to make spending out-of-game luck points directly equate to something in-game/the storyline/the fiction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Parkreiner posted:Yeah, it took a surprisingly long time for me to realize that Aspects were, primarily, a way to make spending out-of-game luck points directly equate to something in-game/the storyline/the fiction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
It becomes a lot more glaring when you realize that's how Core handles Blocks. Suddenly Aspects' Truthfulness is enormously important because it makes Create Advantage more or less as good as an Attack, since it can give you a bonus and deny the other guy the ability to do what he wants to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
You really can't combine the approaches of Fate and AW*. They both have similar design goals, the biggest of which "make failure interesting." I've played roughly the same amount of both, run both (Dungeon World, Monsterhearts, Fate Core, FAE, a tiny bit of AE*, and hacks of both systems). They cannot be adequately combined. Fate is an empowering system for heroes who succeed more than they fail, but when they fail it's usually because of who they are. You start the game with 3 Do-Overs, and you decide how you're going to fail. [That's why everyone gets a High Concept and a Trouble; you make the trouble I Drink 10 nights a week, your character is an alcoholic. You're signalling to the GM that you want your character's alcoholism to complicate their life. If you make your trouble Foe of the Karusati Ninjas, you're saying "I want some ninja problems." If it's "Leadfoot" or "Adrenaline Junkie", your foilable will land you in hot, exciting water.] In Monsterhearts, your problems largely stem from your weaknesses (low hot or cold means you're socially inadequate, low volatile means you get stomped or trapped in bad situations, low dark means the other side won't help you when you need it). You work towards what you want, and use your Satan given powers to get what you want. That's an intentional design space; sexy teen vampires can turn someone on or shut someone down, but they can't negotiate equal terms or tell a friend to let it out. The problems are universal, really: you're a weird powerful outsider in a world that you can destroy easily. Dungeon World gives you the weaknesses of the dice; at level 1, you're bad at something, good at a few things, great at one thing. But there's also no weakness mechanic; if you're a mage who drinks a lot, you don't get rewarded for not having the relevant potion or conning it down the river. Players are heroes who focus on their strengths and learn something when they fail, but it takes a lot of failure (6-) add up to a level. All these systems are fun. Dungeon World and Monster Hearts have an advantage over fate in their adaptability. All fate characters are going to be using the same core skills*. Monsterhearts has probably has 10 good expansion skins that explore things from being a "nobody understands me" Mad Scientist to an easily enraged, hard to love Minotaur**. Fate is Fate; you get FP, you invoke your aspects, you use your stunts. But the basics approaches to how players define their setbacks means the systems aren't compatible for unification. They don't need to be; they do their job perfectly well. *There ARE some variants; Fight Fire has a 7 skill setlist, where half the skills are fire fighting techniques and the others are things like Cope and Care. No Exit adds amnesia elements, and Court/Ship is heavily about aliens and life at Versailles under the Sun King. **The Minotaur came out last week, along with the Shadow. The Shadow was your childhood friend; he doesn't like you having new friends. Golden Bee fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:
MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Jan 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
The Druid is the only core class you mentioned; you can't compare someone's made up classes to the systems as created. And the druid's "weakness" is only when it uses one of its powers; it doesn't even have the normal restrictions of "No wearing/using metal". Shapechange isn't a mechanically reinforced Trouble, it's a change of method. You don't get a benefit from turning into a housecat then trying to attack an ogre, your GM will just tell you that it isn't possible. It's the same as having an aspect like I've Flown Every Ship in the Fleet or Atlantean Physiology. It allows you to do things you normally wouldn't be able to do (Fly a capital ship and a class Z- escape pod without issue, or breathe underwater and survive crushing pressures). (Shapechange also gives 1 hold even on a 6-, so for weaknesses, it isn't particularly weak).
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:The Druid is the only core class you mentioned; you can't compare someone's made up classes to the systems as created.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:If you really want to be pedantic about it then I'll jump to an infinitely better designed core and point out that over a half a dozen of the Apocalypse World classes have similar mechanics. I don't know of a world where you can discuss the reward systems of indie RPGs while parasailing with supermodels. I'll take a look tomorrow - which classes?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 08:47
|
|
|
Talking of Aspects as a way to represent elements of the fiction mechanically, a problem I always kinda have with them is that when you're spending a fate point it doesn't actually matter what you invoke. It makes no difference to the result whether you're invoking your own Fastest Sword in the West aspect or the enemy's Really Slow and Clumsy aspect. If you attack and spend a Fate point to increase the roll, you get the same outcome against the Really Slow and Clumsy enemy that you do against anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:I don't know of a world where you can discuss the reward systems of indie RPGs while parasailing with supermodels. I'll take a look tomorrow - which classes?  I don't have access to the classes right now but I want to say that one of them is the Hardholder which uses the tagging system to form a series of advantages and also forces you to take a disadvantage like having your hold be a massive source of the plague. Though the +disease tag might have been on another class.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Talking of Aspects as a way to represent elements of the fiction mechanically, a problem I always kinda have with them is that when you're spending a fate point it doesn't actually matter what you invoke. It makes no difference to the result whether you're invoking your own Fastest Sword in the West aspect or the enemy's Really Slow and Clumsy aspect. The most interesting Aspects're things that your character feels strongly about. For example, in a magical girl game, I've been playing a villain. Early on, she had to make a retreat from one of the heroic PCs, and she developed an obsession with beating said PC to the point where I ended up picking up a "I Won't Lose to You, Cure Pitch!" Aspect. I got a lot of use out of that one given how frequently she challenged said PC, while said PCs made appeals to her. In the final battle between them, I invoked it three times in a row as she burned herself out (blowing all her Fate Points) on trying to beat said PC in the emotional arena and turn her. In the end, she wound up being the one to defect to the hero side. This was resolved as a social conflict, with the physical violence being just there for color. It was a pretty awesome and emotional fight. Or take my PC's Everyone's Inferior to Me Aspect which she invoked whenever she felt like someone might prove superior to her (after her conversion to the hero side, it turned into Super Competitive). Either way, that's a juicy Aspect that not only gives her a boost but causes her to get into pointless competitions. That is what really makes Aspects hum. When they're things that both entangle and strengthen your character. Fastest Sword in the West doesn't really do that, and as such it's not a very good Aspect in my mind. Unless said character gets into fights just because their status as the fastest sword got challenged or something. Speaking of, FATE works surprisingly well for team-based genres like magical girls--in this game there's been a lot of setting up aspects/advantages for others to exploit. Discovering weaknesses and announcing them to the others or grabbing the Godzilla ripoff by the tail to immobilize them so the others can attack more freely, things like that. In fact, a huge weakness of the villains's been that they don't really do much teamwork, even when they're cooperating. This is pretty true to the genre, really. Kaja Rainbow fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
Kaja Rainbow posted:I noticed that Aspects're more interesting when they have more emotional investment than "Fastest Sword in the West." That's a comparatively dull Aspect that you might as well represent with a high Skill/Approach and a related Stunt. In fact, that approach might satisfy you far more, if you can use your swordsmanship to react quickly and get a higher initiative or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Right, I get that. But she could just as easily have spent the three fate points through her presumably impersonal High Concept while saying the same villainous things and arrived at the exact same result; actually having I Won't Lose to You, Cure Pitch! as an Aspect didn't do anything. You might be interested in the Atomic Robo RPG skill mode system. If I understand it correctly you get three modes, which are just a collection of skills, and each of those gets an aspect. To get a bonus on a skill in a mode you have to be able to invoke the aspect associated with it. I may be completely wrong with how that works though. I haven't seen any of the playtest files yet, just what I've been able to figure out from play videos. Edit: I'm wanting to say I've seen someone ditch the aspect system entirely and use a sort of stunt with an aspect like name system instead. That way you define each one with an exact mechanical benefit. If I run across it again I'll post it here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
My interpretation of the Aspect is that it's a definition of a way in which a given character (in the Fate Fractal sense) is relevant to the story. The difference between "I Won't Lose To You" and "Badass Motherfucker" is when they can be invoked - if she has the latter, it means that she can get a +2 bonus in any sort of fight situation, meaning that she's going to be effective in combat in general. If she has the former, then she can get a +2 bonus only when facing her rival, meaning that she's only going to get that effectiveness boost when she's fighting that person. If she has both, then she's always going to be effective in a fight, but has the potential to be even more so in a fight against her sworn enemy, because each Aspect can only be invoked once per roll, so the two together can give her a +4. This is important because it encourages her to seek out and fight Cure Pitch, because that's her role in the story as dictated by her Aspects. Aspects guide the flow of the story. Unrelated question as long as I'm here: In a Fate Core campaign/setting where the party won't have ready access to vehicles, what would be a good skill to replace Drive?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Right, I get that. But she could just as easily have spent the three fate points through her (presumably) completely impersonal High Concept while saying the same villainous things and arrived at the exact same result. Yeah, Aspects're all equal in effect, but that doesn't matter. What makes them interesting is the context they represent. When you invoke an Aspect, you're saying, "This is important right now." It's like how some of Apocalypse World's stat substitution moves do exactly the same thing but have different names and thus different feels. EDIT: And what Prof said above about Aspects defining what you'll be doing in the story. Really, he put that better than I did and gave me a clearer insight into that. After all, it's not like you can't use "Fastest Sword in the West" as a perfectly valid Aspect. It does drive you to use your sword. I just have a personal preference for Aspects with emotional investment. Of course, you can try changing how things work, like with what Lallander suggested. That's cool. MadScientistWorking posted:I don't get the joke or what I said wrong there. Or take acting out your character flaws. In AW, there's no reward for that and you're doing it because it's what your character would do. In FATE, you get rewarded if said flaw's recorded on your sheet as an Aspect. Both ways make for a more interesting story, the latter just interfaces with the metagame factors and lets you sway what happens later on. That isn't to say that you can't change that aspect of Apocalypse World, but it creates a different feeling, and it's best to be aware of just what you're doing when you do that. It's not really a bad idea per se, but it changes the game on a pretty fundamental level. You're basically rewriting a basic principle of either game. Nothing wrong with that, but it's still not a trival change to insert mechanisms from the one into the other. Kaja Rainbow fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
This is what I was talking about when I said FATE is "fiction first". It's pointless to complain that aspects all do the same thing because they're all aspects! And that same thing is just what aspects do! If you choose to represent two things as the same game element is because you want them to have the same effect in the game. If you want them to have different effects, represent them as other things. It is your choice. Rules-first thought would be "Best Swordsman in the Land is an aspect that I want. Hmm, what can I do with it?" Fiction-first thought would be "I am the best swordsman in the land. Now will that work better as an aspect, skill, stunt, or something else?" The latter is what FATE is designed to do, the former is D&D thinking. 90% of people's problems with aspects can be solved by not doing the first approach. Jack the Lad posted:If you attack and spend a Fate point to increase the roll, you get the same outcome against the Really Slow and Clumsy enemy that you do against anyone else. ProfessorProf posted:Unrelated question as long as I'm here: In a Fate Core campaign/setting where the party won't have ready access to vehicles, what would be a good skill to replace Drive? Cyphoderus fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Cyphoderus posted:Why does it need a replacement in the first place? If there's no vehicles or anything to drive, just get rid of the thing. Ride is the obvious answer if it's gonna be a setting where horses/chocobos/oliphants/riding war dogs are readily available. I think there's also potential on separating the ability to run and move from Athletics into a skill of its own, like Move or Parkour or something, for a given style of modern game where it matters. In the fantasy game I'm currently co-GMing we just left it as Drive. Getting a cow to go where you want, riding a horse, steering a carriage. Seems to be working just fine so far. If they aren't going to be doing anything like that though just ditch the skill yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Only thing I think I'd want in FATE from dungeon world is A) the nice 2d6 roll added up instead of fudge dice (giving 2-12), and B) there being no initiative/the Gm just making moves as a reaction to player failures. But I think the distribution is off by 10-15% going from 4dF to 2d6.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
I know at least one Fate variant replaced 4dF with d6-d6. e: If I just drop the skill, then there are only 14 skills, and if I adhere to Skill Columns then 15 skills means a character can eventually get exactly one skill up to +5. Parkour might work, though, or maybe I could just compress the skill list enough to bring it down to 10 skills. The default list feels a bit big to me, anyway. ee: So apparently there are 18 skills, not 15. That makes this much simpler. Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I know at least one Fate variant replaced 4dF with d6-d6. That's how an old group did with Legends of Anglerre, but it's a lot more fiddly than just adding the d6's up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Fenarisk posted:That's how an old group did with Legends of Anglerre, but it's a lot more fiddly than just adding the d6's up. d6-d6 = 2d6-7.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Fenarisk: I don't like 2d6*, even though it's bell-curved. The reason Fate dice rule is that their swingyness is minor. If your peak skill is Great (+4) Burglary, 63.0% of the time you gonna get that +3, +4 or +5. D6-d6 is more swingy. Fate is absolutely wonderful as a GM to predict how a PC will do. I create a situation where they'll use a talent, set a difficulty (at the level, below, above, or way above), and let'em do it. I know based on their FP what they'll likely get. The reason why it's good for the GM to roll is that it continues the fate fractal. Remember, the GM gets a FP for every PC in every scene, and PCs can spend FP to compel villain's weaknesses. A good amount of Star Wars was spent making investigate checks on the Death Star, so the rebels could create the aspect "Open exhaust port." Danny Ocean and his team spent a film creating advantages on the casinos. And Fate damage is based on rolls. If you made it 2d6, you'd have to redo how stress and consequences work! When is a roll of a 6 in a fight worth 1 stress, 2 stress, 3 stress, or a moderate consequence? How does one tag a consequence? The harm clock works differently. You'd have to combine the harm clock and Fate's concession rules (which give you storytelling juice for giving up when the odds are against you). Jack the Lad: Differing aspects are vital when you're spending more than one FP. You can't invoke the same thing twice on one roll. Say you're a Blood Clan Ogre Slayer who really needs to kill StoneDick the Strong. He rolled a +10 to your +5... Well, you're gonna need Azalath's Battleplan, the Horrifying Temple Architecture and maybe even Stonedick's Slashed up Ankles to take him down once and for all. It'd be neat to be more granular about what your +2 represents, but that's where stunts come in. The +2 from any aspect is the flexibility that lets you be the First Black WW1 Pilot or the Last of the Clone X-Wing Fighters in the same basic system. *For Fate! Golden Bee fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:The reason why it's good for the GM to roll is that it continues the fate fractal. Remember, the GM gets a FP for every PC in every scene, and PCs can spend FP to compel villain's weaknesses. A good amount of Star Wars was spent making investigate checks on the Death Star, so the rebels could create the aspect "Open exhaust port." Danny Ocean and his team spent a film creating advantages on the casinos. My go-to example for explaining this element of the system to people is the duel between the Dread Pirate Roberts and Inigo Montoya, but yes, this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
Thanks Golden Bee, that's all really good stuff I hadn't thought of. The reason I ask is that once summer hates my Dungeon World game will be over, and there's talk of wanting to do Shadowrun or Eclipse Phase in something else. Given the EP conversion may not be done by then I might be trying my hand at making it work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
FATE-powered mecha game, Apotheosis Drive X, is now on sale for five bucks in RPGNow. I'm definitely going to pick it up, though I'd like to know if anyone's had experience with the game yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:17 |
|
|
Looks like Evil Hat is doing the Patreon thing now for a series of adventures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 15:59
|
|
