|
One of the things I like about the toolkit is replacing the static weapon and armor bonuses in some other FATE games with weapon and armor dice, which substitute in for FATE dice and count double when they come up +. I think you could expand that idea to all kinds of special effects, positive and negative.
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 00:18 |
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:Hey Evil Mastermind you're in both threads - what's the difference between AW's countdown clocks and Fate's stress tracks? I get the feeling they're very similar but I'm not too familiar with Fate. I'm in both threads! ...am I in both threads? Well, I am now. Fate's stress track is roughly equivalent to the first two segments of the AW countdown clock. It's temporary damage that will heal on its own - FATE stress clears out after every scene. Fate's minor, major, and severe consequences are roughly equivalent to the next three segments of the AW countdown clock, in that they take progressively greater amounts of time and effort to undo. And NPC mooks are down without tapping into any of them. Where things differ is that even if you take consequences in FATE, you still clear your stress track, whereas you can only clear the first two segments of your AW countdown clock if it hasn't advanced any farther. Also, FATE Core doesn't have a linear progression of damage to stress/consequences - your stress boxes will take 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. hits of stress, and your consequences will absorb 2, 4, and 6. You have to account for all your incoming stress, even if you have to mark off more than you need.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2013 09:15
|
|
|
So I came up with something interesting for Fate Accelerated, and I think I might actually like it more than Fate Core now if I can work this into it/refine it some. Embedded stakes questions, Apocalypse World style: When you roll +careful, tell everyone why you have to take your time and why you can't take too long. When you roll +clever, tell everyone what you're focusing on and what you don't want to ignore. When you roll +flashy, tell everyone who you want to notice you and what you don't want them to see. When you roll +forceful, tell everyone what you're trying to break and what you hope you don't have to. When you roll +quick, tell everyone what you want to do first, and what you're racing against. When you roll +stealthy, tell everyone what you're trying to keep hidden and who you're hiding it from. I think these are generic enough that they fit any application of the approach, but I'm still enamored with that new idea smell.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 07:37
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Putting on the playtester hat and dropping all niceness for a second, I can shoot down that hope with one question: What am I trying to break when I want to move using Forceful? This is easy enough to justify normally (I tax myself to the limit, straining my muscles as much as I possibly can, or if I'm riding something I spur it onwards), and yet it doesn't work with those questions. It's not like I'm trying to break a speed record, I just want to get from point A to point B. Who says that what you're trying to break and what you don't want to break have to be different things? You're running hard enough to break your heart or fast enough to break your legs, pushing your horse until it breaks, swerving your plane so hard you hear the wings groaning, but baby, hold together. Transient People posted:For that matter, the same thing goes with Flashy: Moving with cartwheels, pirouettes and acrobatics is a perfectly legitimate way to use it to move, but a complete flop with that system because it's not like I am trying to attract someone's attention intentionally, it just happens because of the way I get around. I don't know. Who are you performing for, when no one's there? Possible answer: "Lady luck, be kind!"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 10:32
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:Isn't the answer to that, though, in those situations you don't roll? If there's nothing at stake (or nothing interesting at stake) then there's no need to engage the mechanics? Ultimately, yes? But the goal of these stakes questions is to put reasonable limits around an approach. If there's obvious stuff an approach would do that these stakes questions don't have a frame for, that means I might need to change the questions. Or abandon this whole mad dream entirely.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 10:38
|
|
|
Yeah, this isn't intending to actually make Ms. Forceful break her legs all the time or Mr. Flashy some chump who only skates by on chance. The stakes questions are designed to contextualize what happens after: what the boost feels like, and flavoring the minor and serious costs. I mean, let's say there's an overcome action where a sensible "minor" and "serious" cost for success are a fragile boost against you and a minor consequence. Let's say, y'know, oncoming boulder. And this is a supers-scale game, so "oncoming boulder" isn't that serious. Ms. Forceful jumps straight up, lets the boulder pass under her, and lands. She's calling it forceful, both willing to break her legs and hoping she doesn't have to. "Broken Leg" is not a mild consequence, but "Pulled Muscle"? Sure. The boost against her? "Awkward Landing". The boost for her? "Perfect Landing". Mr. Flashy tosses off a quip - "Lady Luck, be kind!" - and discreetly checks then apparently no-look shoots his grapnel at a nearby vertical surface, pulling himself out of the way with moments to spare. Showoff. Anyway, His boost? "Fortune Smiles". The boost against him? Maybe the boulder actually clips his boot, doing no damage but leaving him with a "Bruised Ego". The mild consequence? Well, he did no-look fire the thing and it actually whiffed, so he had to scramble out of the way. Stuff like that makes a guy think "This Just Ain't My Day". "Lady Luck" may just be Mr. Flashy's conceit - you've got to have a little conceit, to be flashy - but the boosts and consequence can also play into that conceit. It works even without taking a mild consequence, actually. They could both just take stress equal to the margin of failure - Ms. Forceful for the awkward landing, Mr. Flashy because his composure was rattled. Glazius fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Zylen posted:Are there any premade Atomic Robo (or generic sciencey) campaigns or one-offs out there? Here's your one-off. You're in the Tesladyne break room. Suddenly the power goes out! SCIENCE WILL HAVE THE ANSWERS. (so, lead off with a brainstorm and go from there. If there are non-scientists have the door start rattling and/or present a ventilation duct to crawl through)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:So this is kinda neat: Two-Column FAE. My two-column is the approaches and abilities from here, but with the full 3/2/2/1/1/0 for each column. When you roll, look at the value in each column. If they're the same, use that. If they're different, use the lower one +1.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:Or ORE Well, you've got the deduction system to play with. Immediately on arrival you're rushed by spear-throwing lizardmen! Can the merc hold them off for long enough for the ACTION SCIENTISTS to work out why they're attacking and what will stop them?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 08:37
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Lately I've been thinking about how to do Torg in Fate Core. The biggest issue is that I can't think of an easy way to handle axiom levels. I realize I could just use the normal ladders, but I can't figure how to work them into things like disconnecting and transformations. I don't even know what the best way to handle axiom level-to-numerical value stuff. Atomic Robo. Root at least one of your Mode Aspects in your native axiom -- Robot Mode Aspect: Nikola Tesla's Living Legacy (T24). Other rooted aspects give you a point of refresh, and when you're in a more primitive environment the GM will toss Compels at you as appropriate, and may ask you to beat the base mode value on the Fate Dice if your reality gets stormed. If not... Golem Mode Aspect: No Memories, Only Orders (M20). So transformation is not based on how wacked-out your ideas are compared to the native axioms, but how important they are to you. Does that make sense?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Yarrbossa posted:This. I nearly spit out my drink when I read "Long Tetris Block". Or you could play The Man Who Arranges The Blocks. His special moves: That Are Made By The Men In Kazakhstan (Upgrade) - +2 when using Spot to Create Advantage on anything not native to the current game They Come Two Weeks Late And They Don't Tessellate (Unlock) - Unlock Attack for Fix thanks to a wide variety of powerful cutting tools But We're Working To Stalin's Five-Year Plan (Unbeatable) - once per session, create an aspect detailing a hidden cache of useful equipment with two free invokes Glazius fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Feb 3, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:In terms of archetypes I've thought of: The huntsman's son, the blacksmith's daughter, the orphan, the squire to the old night, the apprentice cunning-woman, the mayor's child and simialar. I'm not sure if defning the characters by their parent's/significant adult is interesting or doing the characters a disservice, however. So your personal background is NOT an aspect? That seems like an oversight. Maybe make your backstory multiple-choice so you have the kid who's good in the woods, but that could be because he's the hunter's son, a foundling raised by [pack animal], or secretly part fey.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
Covok posted:
Just keep in mind that it's incredibly odd for a skill not to have Overcome or Create An Advantage applications.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2015 07:47
|
|
|
Serf posted:I'm working on a villain for my upcoming Atomic Robo game, and I could use a little help with the wording for this one stunt. Basically I'm trying to model the character's ability to mess with the party members remotely. Mega-stunt, two picks or more. One stunt to unlock the attack, one stunt to create 3 minions acting at (relevant skill - 2), additional picks to give the minions skills at +1 over their base. This also gives them a justification in the final confrontation for generally aiding/being meatshields for their boss. Or don't make it a mega-stunt and just, you know, stat things as part of the adventure. Helsingard doesn't have a giant stunt tree for having 20 backup robot brains or Nazi bunkers, that's just what the plot demands.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:Anyone have a good suggestion for a nice and easy setting to introduce Fate to people in a one shot? I've never run it before but I played in a session of the...older verison of fate, ages ago, with Evil Mastermind, I believe (air pirate campaign, I signed on as a cook and I think we killed a kraken and had a cooking contest? I remember running naked through town collecting spices and things, I think you had a post about it one of the threads) so I am familiar with the mechanics a bit and I love the core book and the supplements. My group is rabid d20 fans but our best games in my opinion have been playing Fiasco and other non-adversarial things so I really want to try to get us moving elsewhere. Save Game has been my most relatable pitch, it's not quite a full introduction to Fate since compels are pretty rare as a means for getting Fate Points but in terms of letting people engage with the engine it was pretty prime.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Texibus posted:Soooo, do i just by the Dresden Files RPG books our world and your story only or do I need to pick up Fatecore books as well? You'll also want to get The Paranet Papers, which updates the rules to the latest edition of Fate. You don't need a book if you want to reference the Fate Core rules, though, they're available at http://www.fate-srd.com
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
jivjov posted:I'd say just run Dresden using the iteration of Fate in the Your Story book; it still plays fine. Actually, nevermind. I had a look at the book again and it's really more character and setting updates that it is mechanics updates.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Kaja Rainbow posted:I have a few questions regarding stunts. I'm helping with the game I'm running from a different game system and while I won't worry about converting every single ability... Fate doesn't do in-combat healing, really, so boosts are one way you could do this. You might also consider using opposition that creates advantages representing sickness or wounds, which could be dispelled by an arrow or countered by an energy drain. Kaja Rainbow posted:3) someone who can set up magical barriers to defend others (this is something he wants to be able to do) That's pretty stock Create an Advantage, really. Setting up barriers is one possible use of the skill. They can create boosts to other people's defense or serve as passive opposition, which can be interpreted in a lot of ways - guaranteeing a certain minimum role, or present something that has to be overcome. What else are you looking to do? Like, stock Fate Core, is there some setting you're interested in?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:No, don't give her bonus FATE for compels. That's the whole point of having something compelled. Other characters get other personal issues compelled. She gets vampire instincts compelled. Atomic Robo has Signature Aspect as a stunt that basically does that, though? You get one free invoke on it every session and when the GM compels it they start at 2. Nothing about it really seemed that broken.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Yeah, sounds like you could just Signature Aspect that, with a general understanding that one of the things your compulsion can drive you to do is go hunting when you're wounded.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Also, this reuses Modes (called Roles in this) with 6 pre-made stunts per, which is really nice for players new to Fate, although I question whether some of these stunts really needed to be stunts at all: ...yes? You can "attack to inflict stress" without actually shooting, target the mental track if it's a separate thing, and dump psychological consequences instead of injuries.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Good job missing the joke. What was the joke? I think that should be a stunt. You can't just point a gun and use Shoot to scare someone fresh out of chargen, that's what Provoke is for. If you want to attack with Shoot you have to pull the trigger and activate the small explosive charge, sending a lead slug into somebody's body. I mean, I'm assuming physical and mental stress are still separate tracks. If they're not, or if "initimidate" is a rules name for a specific Provoke trapping to create advantage or overcome, it's fairly weak in utility compared to other stunts, though it will still be going up against a different defense.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2018 04:22
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Hey ya'll, long-time FATE GM but I've always done FATE in a sci-fi or modern setting. My new playgroup is leaning towards doing a high-fantasy (D&D style) story, so I'm probably going to need a Magic system. In the early days of Fate Core someone made a system called literally "High Fantasy Magic", which is online at the Fate SRD. The Fate System Toolkit also has an entire chapter on magic subsystems up at the SRD.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2021 13:58
|
|
|
It hasn't really hit CRPGs in a big way, mostly because the care and use of aspects is left up to human judgement, and the computerized equivalent would mean tagging literally every random roll in the game with every possible aspect for whether it can apply or not. There's an isometric RPG called Space Wreck that uses Fudge dice, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 00:18 |
|
|
Fate Core covers a specific type of cinematic action drama that's got a pretty wide strike zone but ultimately might need some tuning in order to fit into stuff out on the periphery of that. Fate Accelerated is something to pick up when you're not in the mood to do that tuning and you're not sure it would really help the game you would create. It's much better suited to one-shots and short campaigns than Core is, and really you can lift a lot of mechanics from Core and stuff tuned to Core just as long as you keep in mind that Accelerated peaks at one less. It sacrifices a lot of rules space and long-term development potential to make something that's easy to pick up and go with, and honestly you'll want to take a look at Fate Core if you want to get at all complicated with Fate Accelerated. Masters of Umdaar is a "planetary romance" setting for Fate Accelerated, basically a He-Man pastiche with some side credit to Flash Gordon and She-Ra and really any 80s action cartoon that sold toys where you hit a slime man with a laser axe. The "cliffhanger" scene type it introduces can be mined for general use in countering the obvious Fate Accelerated strategy of always roll big number, by basically taking the approaches and turning them into a situational defense fractal, where you roll against passive opposition of +1 if you're being Sneaky but +7 if you're being Forceful because you're trying to rescue a kidnapped rhino princess from a bunch of sleeping lion men and how is being Forceful going to make that easy for you? Fate Accelerated works best when there's one main thing all the stars of the show have to do and it might be anyone's time to shine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2023 22:06
|
|