|
petrol blue posted:Not if you have my dice, you can't. Just think of it as your dice contributing to the narrative. I'm thinking about starting a FATE game with some of my friends soon and I was curious how well the proposed first session - where you figure out your setting and so forth - tends to go. I don't mind inventing things on the fly in general so coming up with a launching off point from level zero sounds right up my alley. But on the other hand I could very easily see it ending up being a complete hash. I know it's going to be group specific but does it go better if you come with a list of possibilities or just let it go freeform?
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Loki_XLII posted:Speaking of sci-fi, I just started gming a game, and its my first time playing. We just had our first session, and it went well enough, aspects came into play, everyone enjoyed themselves. We kind of forgot to compel aspects as much as we should, but that's not the point. For space, if you want it to be moderately realistic, I think all your aspects are going to be something to do with your ship or the opponent's ship. ECM, ECCM, Overloading Shields, Rerouted Power, She Cannae Take Much More Of This, Cap'n. Or even things like Incoming Reinforcements. I should say I don't know much of anything about the Diaspora system.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
So I ran my first Fate session last night, the worldbuilding one. It was amazing. They started with "fantastical fantasy" and from there decided on a world of land fragments floating in a ring, Saturn-like, around the sullen core of The Planet Before. Each fragment has its own inherent magic, its own biome, ecosystem, and dangers. Instead of swords-and-sorcery, the tech and civilization is centered around hacked together magitek based on local magical law. Then one of my players had his character blow up something called the Dorbis Lock with a mad-engineering shovel bazooka and all of a sudden every other bit of the character's backstories hooked onto that, weaving a tale of accident, intrigue, invading monsters, and subsequent heroics. My only real issue is that their Trouble aspects seem a little weak and redundant. For example: One has "I Always Think Someone Is Watching Me" as a paranoia-type Trouble. But, since it's an Aspect the 'always' bit is sort of redunant. Plus, a later aspect from the Phase Trio, "I Have Assassins For Friends And Enemies" seems a bit better as a trouble. Again, one has "He's Always Up To Something" for a shenanigans-type Trouble, but a later aspect "I Leap Before I Look" seems to be a better source of it. The last has "Here One Day, Gone The Next" to reflect that using their special ability will eventually just cause them to drop dead with no warning. I think I should have them retool that into something like "I'm careful about what I do" or "gently caress it, nobody lives forever," especially since they don't have a great deal in other Aspects to cause Trouble. How integral are strong, flexible Troubles? Should I tighten up some of these Aspects or does Trouble take a backseat to regular narrative complications?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
Hokay, that really does help a lot! I just needed a different bit of context to see those Aspects properly it seems. This will require far less poking and prodding than I was worried it might. (Now I get to actually figure out how to kick off their plot.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
So my players have decided to take down the Shadowguild, a thievery/assassiny/shenaniganery sort of organization. Now, since this requires more than knocking down the door and bashing people over the head, they're starting with a humiliation/smear campaign to discredit them, and plan to use contacts on the inside and so forth. This is an awesome idea, but I'm not completely sure how to model it. It seems to me that using the Bronze Rule and modeling the Shadowguild as a character would work fine, and the various bits of the various campaigns would do all the appropriate stress/consquences/advantages type of thing. But how do I set up rolls for it? I don't want only one roll per action, both because I don't want it to be ineffectual or overly effectual, and because I don't want one player to roll once. I've considered toting up the success shifts for every roll within the action they're attempting and...doing something with them, but I'm not sure what. I could give the Guild character a massive number of stress and consequences boxes and just straight add them, but I'm sure there must be a better way. (Also, "attacks" back should be more interesting than "send dudes to kill them," since it should include bribery and sabotage and so forth, and I'm not sure how to exactly model that and those rolls.) The other thing is they're running into social conflict quite a bit, but if it's the three of them arguing with one other person the action economy goes out the window. Should each exchange be fully reciprocal in a social conflict? E.g., one of them "attacks" him, therefore he gets a defense action and an attack action? Or is there a better solution?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
Zandar posted:The System Toolkit has a section about long-term stuff that might help here quote:Not sure about this one. The usual advice from the book is just "make their peak skill two higher than the PCs' cap", but I think players might start complaining if every random guy they come across is way better than them. That said, if you're running a full-on conflict for every random guy, you might be putting too much focus on conflicts. Are the PCs actually trying to inflict serious harm in all these situations, or are they just trying to achieve a specific objective? If it's the latter, you might be better off running these scenes as challenges or contests, which would remove a lot of the problems of many-on-one situations; if the opponent's really unimportant, a single overcome roll could be appropriate. Of course, backing the opponent up with some other characters, even just mooks using teamwork to boost the relevant skills, might also help to make it more challenging. Actually it's been minibosses with minions...that the players have wanted to negotiate with instead of fight (because they've ended up with an actual negotiating position, such as, 'poo poo's on fire, yo. And we have a fire extinguisher"). They just like the idea of social conflict it seems.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
All right, I need some help for my Fate game. It's time for my characters to hit a midboss, and I don't know how to turn this idea into a reasonable combat encounter. I have a sneaky, a thinky, and a smashy character. The 'boss' I'm thinking of is a sniper. Now, the universe we're in has a whole bunch of floating rocks with different magical laws orbiting a planet. No overt magic, only innate. So the sniper's innate talent is that he can shoot between fragments. The characters do have an interfragmentary ship, and since one is an armored fungus that punches buildings to death, one has psychic steel for eyes, and the last one can phase between dimensions, I'm not worried about necessarily overmatching them with such a boss. I just don't know how to contextualize this so it can be run as a good combat encounter.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:I think Zones are your friend here. Draw a big map, with loads of little zones, and lots of little obstacles in the various zones to overcome. Then stick Sniperman on the farthest zone away from them. Make the challenge getting to him - they need to Overcome the various obstacles in the way, while Defending from his sniper fire, and obviously the sniper will be Creating Advantages by blasting appropriate things and making life generally difficult all around. It seems so obvious when you put it that way! Awesome, thanks, that's exactly what I wanted. Not sure if I can manage having him an entire Fragment away with that setup (I mean that's like eight hundred miles) but that's what zooming out is for. And I can always use the fragment they're in, which is made of living metal with rivers of molten steel so.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Squidster posted:I ran a game of medieval Camelot Trigger yesterday, and run into some issues. Specifically, I had three players who, completely unarmed, bludgeoned the absolute poo poo out of a lone Mecha. They didn't even take a consequence! With FATE, character creation doesn't result in a squirrelly pigfarmer; FATE assumes all PCs are competent and skilled. There are ways to 'fix' it though - just as Consequences mean that if you have a broken leg you have no narrative permission to sprint (or perhaps even walk) without at the very least spending at Fate point, similarly an Aspect such as Iron Hide or whatever would mean there's no narrative permission for anything less than a real weapon or super-strength to damage a mecha. Or you could make it more explicit with a Stunt. That said, it sounds like a pretty badass moment to me, like something out of Samurai Jack.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
In my campaign, my players are collecting allies and gearing up for a Final Assault On The Fortress sort of dealio. Sure it'll be a big setpiece battle but I'm curious as to the best way to represent the allies. As Aspects with a number of free invokes? As powerful Stunts based on what the allies are? Obviously I could make them entire characters, but I still want it to focus around the PC's characters who are leading this assault. Some allies are bigger than others so it could vary. I have Fantasy Quarians and a group of trading-mogul-duke type dudes, but also a bioengineering specialist so far. They also have their own flying ship (of course) that they've been upgrading by tacking on the magics of the different areas they run across.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Covok posted:Since my attempt to get people down for Atomic Robo at my local gaming club failed, I'm thinking of running the system in a generic fantasy setting (even though fighting for Telsadyne against Undead Edision would probably be cooler) since all the generic fantasy campaigns immediately filled up with people. I know there is a FATE toolkit and some standalone games in FATE made for fantasy, but I'm curious which one is the best for emulating that genre? Sorry if this has already been discussed. I would say just go with FAE. Not only is it a lower barrier to learn rules for, but it's easier to have sneaky characters be diplomatically sneaky or combat sneaky or economically sneaky or whatever (and so not punish a group for not having a "face" or anything) than actually breaking things into skills.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
My players love to pun. They've gone on for over an hour after the session wraps punning at each other. So I've been promising/threatening my players with an area where puns do physical damage (or more specifically, tie in with the local magical field to give them real-world impact). Since we're coming up on the holidays I'm going to make good on that promise for a lighthearted session or two. I just...actually don't know how to mesh that into FAE. Since it's at least in part based on the player rather than the character there's clearly going to be more fudging than usual, but I would like to have a semi-workable system. (One of the Aspects of the environment is going to be something about weaponized puns, maybe they can get free invokes off that?)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
SageNytell posted:New rule: spending a FATE point on any Attack action requires a relevant one-liner. Any action I think. These are local laws of physics. Might combine it with Lemon Curdistan posted:Give them a free invoke if they make a pun you think is good/not overly-hackneyed. Maybe have a (good) pun give you a free invoke of the setting Aspect, plus needing to pun to spend a Fate point. petrol blue posted:That's gotta be an action-hero setting. Possibly you need a pun one-liner to finish off anyone bigger than a minion? In the Notable Experiences thread someone referred to the setting as Space One Piece. I have had one of my players get the gunship they were on fly closer to something so the character could stand on the ship's prow and hit it. And it worked.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Transient People posted:One of these days I need to try and just make a stunt list myself. I went looking for those and...honestly? SA has probably the best group of stuntmakers in the whole internet. Elsewhere 90% of stunts are just '+2 to hit/CA/defend'. So hell with it. Gimme as many prompts for stunt material as you can manage. I'll see if I can't invent enough new stunts and steal old ones to create a satisfactory sample list. One of my players has a character with a stunt that lets them contact the local black market for supplies whenever they make port (one per session), giving them a bonus on any appropriate rolls. Another of mine gets bonuses to Careful approaches if there's bystanders around.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Elderbean posted:I've been tossing an idea for a setting around for awhile, just wanted to know if I'm on the right track and if this would work with FATE. It gives you an excuse to come up with Aspects, that's for sure. My own setting has each fragment operate under its own laws of magic/physics, and they all get Aspects (such as, "all metal is a little bit alive here" or "shells float" or "plants are sentient."). Works great. Sounds like yours would be pretty similar so I don't see any issues.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2015 22:07
|
|