This is the place to discuss general FATE news or anything that doesn't belong in another thread here.
This message was last updated by the GM at 02:00, Tue 24 June 2014.

So, another Fate game came into existence: Aspects of Fate. Is d20 heavy, but Fate elements can be found (and scavenged to other games) and used all over the place. Traits look nice, and probably can be expanded into other things.
Also, hi.

hmm when my head quits acting up I should read the core rule book I guess lol.

Hey folks, Harrigan here.

Thanks for setting this up, Cripple X and anyone else involved. Great collection of threads. A few more you might consider: Starblazers (wish this was still available), Age of Arthur, Awesome Adventures, Venture City Stories, Apotheosis Drive X, Fate Freeport Companion, Agents of Swing, Mindjammer, Nova Praxis. Also, how should we handle the "Worlds Of..." books? Their own threads? Multi-threads per book? Just handle in "Core?"

Could worry about a thread for a specific splat book if people started asking, or make a splat book section?

Hello Harrigan.

We look to have pretty much everything set up at this point and almost a dozen people. If you guys are in any FATE games, make sure to spread the word.

Didn't want to include the Dresden Files variation?

Man...  So many awesome sounding games...so little time...

We did. It was just on page 2. I bumped it.

Yea, Trollsmith, I feel you. FATE is my favorite RPG system, but I can never get a game to take off on RPOL when I'm a player. It's a bummer.

Well I have been converted, still trying to get the aspects of fantasy book. The more I learn of FATE the more I seem to like it though.

I can post a link to the Fate mailing list, if you like, Cripple X.

It's really cool to see how Fate has taken off. I was a giant fan of Fate 2.0, and of Fudge before that. I still prefer the simplicity of the old Fudge adjective ladder, but I've slowly gotten used to the expanded one Fate uses.

Interestingly, Spirit of the Century didn't do much for me. Kind of too busy and messy. Like everything and the kitchen sink was included, and it went a little overboard on the invented for its own sake terminology.

Same here Harrigan. I started with FATE 2.0 myself, though I ran a Spirit of the Century game when it came out. I will say the size of SotC compared to 2.0 was crazy, and, yes, there was some bloat, but SotC was wonderfully enjoyable and ultimately, I feel, improved the ruleset.

Yeah, I should say that SotC is pretty damned cool, all things considered, and really did raise the bar... but I feel like it has quite a few rough spots, and with Bulldogs, Dresden, Fate Core and now Robo, it's really hitting a stride. Fun to see.

Call me ash, because if I had the funds I would have a library of rule books lol.

But till then, anywhere I can get aspects of fantasy for free, preferably legaly?

You would think FATE would work real well with its rule lite setup as well and it's sort of cooperative writing premise.  The tabletop I did with Dresden Files made me a believer.

About playing or gming: i did some one-shots to test FAE and am now gming a game with two players on other site, striving to make more one-shots with one (kinda adult games, if everyone would [not] want to know).

Fantasy is what makes me get the cake, but good rules are also a point: Venture city have those Powers that got me right on the machinations.

Started to kind of tinker with Venture some.  Thinking of making a futuristic/super power version of my own city, New Orleans.

Ask a friend to buy to you. XD


I want to know more how to do the "cooperative" part of Fate.
This message was last edited by the GM at 06:12, Tue 24 June 2014.

A lot of the cooperation in the rule style comes in with aspects being placed on the scene and on the enemies.  So if you have say a big bruiser type, you might have other characters just pile aspects onto the target for the heavy hitter to take them down.  So you might setup the ambush point with "dark and spooky alley" but taking out the lights.  Then you might have, I dunno, someone put itching powder in the target's pants before the meeting so he's "chaffed" and so on.

Then there is the whole, spend a fate point to put something into play.  So you might decide there is something under the table to help you.  Or you might flesh out the aspect, "knows somebody for something."  Or whatever.  The rules lite really let's you combine things and work together as a group.  Problem for us was we had a lot of people that couldn't get out of the hack'n slash mode in my group.

ooooh SMT <3

ooooh SMT <3

Blasted double clicking mouse. Also relation ship rules? noice. I have never really worried about that. But dnd did a very bad job at dealing with people.

Well, what was said above and that world creation is coöperative. Each player is encouraged to add to the world, be it by world aspect, contacts etc, etc.

Besides that there is a matter of GM style. If you like to have everything prepared there will not be much coöperation, but FATE tends more towards the improvisational, coöperative style of play. As such the GM might introduce an NPC and immediately ask questions about it to the characters.

There is a grizzled, one-eyed man sitting at the cantina bar, a bubbling pink drink before him. Your character knows him. Why did you split ways all these years ago?

I've been reading Lady Blackbird again yesterday. It has lists of questions like this, especially if you include the compendium.

You might join the Bundle of Holding mail list.  In March, they resurrected their Bundle of Fate.  I was able to snag Bulldogs, Stargazers, Spirit of the Century, Diaspora, the Worlds books and a handful of more obscure titles for about $12.  It looks like they might resurrect it every year.

Oh wow.

On Player additions to worlds.

I have one game where the world was pretty much a shell so I could do a beginners story before heading to the real game. Yeah... the players liked the world so I used their character backgrounds to flesh it out a good deal more.

In reply to CoyotesGrin (msg # 23):

I definitely agree about the Bundle of Holding being an excellent deal. I don't think it had Starblazers though. I bought the original 2013 version and when the 2014 one came around they actually updated with two new files (The Worlds Books) but Starblazers isn't listed in my downloads page there.

Starblazers was one of the bonus ones; I'm not sure if that had anything to do with it.  It's in my Cabinet of Fate, though.

Ah, that might be it. I don't think I bid high enough for the bonus books because I had the all already.

Hello all! I hope everyone's games are going well.

Just returned to RPOL after an extended absence.

Really missed this place, frustrations and all. ^_^

Lets see, 2 rtjs I am waiting to be admitted. 2 games waiting to start. My zelda game has 2 people interested... and 2/3 of my players for pokemon are on vacation of sorts.

How are you?

Howdy folks! Long time RPoL players/GM here! FATE and Savage Worlds are my games of choice currently.

I'm in a couple of FATE games that are going swimmingly, once you get past the character/world generation the game moves just like any other I find.

Also back to rpol after an absence. Much like Strickland5 (hi Strickland!) Fate and savage worlds are my favorites.

Currently in a Secret Avengers game powered by Atomic Robo.

I'm jealous. The only FATE games I can get to say together are the ones I run.

Well if I had more people interested, then again the time period for zelda is one of the reasons I am not getting so many people.

In reply to Cripple X (msg # 32):

Sorry to hear that.

I'm currently in Freeport: Fate in the City of Adventure, Mission Omega, and Fate Core : Shadow-Hunters which are all going alright

Does anyone have a good character sheet for FATE/FAE?

Been fiddling with the table stuff in RPoL but can't make it look overly good really.

Here's an Atomic Robo one.   Maybe good for ideas if nothing else.



Modes
Soldier (10 points): Athletics, Combat, Contacts, Notice, Physique, Vehicles, Tactics, Will
Fist of Khonshu (8 points): Burglary, Combat, Mystic, Notice, Physique, Provoke, stealth, Will
Banter (9 points): Contacts, deceive, empathy, provoke, rapport, will

Improvement Points (3):
Focus a Trained skill (empathy) 1
Focus a Trained skill (stealth) 1
Focus a Trained skill (Rapport) 1

Totally stole this from the GM of my game.
This message was last edited by the GM at 19:51, Tue 24 June 2014.

oh wow I see what you mean by FAE being simplified.

In reply to shadrack (msg # 36):

Your GM is my hero. I wonder if they would mind us putting that up in a Resources thread here?

Hope not, I put it up in the AR thread already too.   :)

I can't remember if it was GM or other player, when I'm not using a phone I'll try to find out and give appropriate credit.

I will ask/let them know and encourage them to join up over here.

Definitely do that. They deserve credit.

Yea, make sure to let your FATE games know that we're here.

http://toonstore.net/Atmo Is a good place to store sheets, at least for me. Some are private.

Man, trying to make a character in d20 is not only hard but extrenuous and infuriating. I'm trying to make a character with Aspects of Fantasy to a (probable solo) game with a friend and i can't choose a class/background. Actually, i did, but it is Adventurer/Scholar and my rolls gave me Cha 7.

What do?

Yeah, making a character in most RPGs seems to take forever. So many rolls and stats. Fate definitely seems a lot simpler.

I find FATE to be difficult as far as making Aspect and Stunts ... as they're SO fluid and can draw from pretty much anything/where

I have to agree. Making up your own phrases can be a lot more time consuming than just picking from a list. It's more satisfying from a roleplaying perspective, though.

In my last attempt at Fate (I have yet to join a game of it that survives character creation) I was dismayed to learn I had to come up with ten aspects before play began. It's a lot of work coming up with so many phrases that can be used both for and against the character.

I think I would've just walked away from that game ... ten aspects is WAY too many, even Dresden Files only had what 5?

10 is the previous version I think. Diaspora and SOTC use that I think.

I had noticed the big drop off in number of aspects from older editions to the new Core/FAE.  For those who have been playing Fate for a while, do you miss all those Aspects?  Did it really change the game dynamic to have a shorter list?

o.0 how are they so hard? Or do I misunderstand? I plan on reading the core rulebook today.

In reply to Trollsmith (msg # 48):

Truthfully, I think it made it a lot better. When they reduced the number of aspects they also really began to push the idea that Aspects should be double-edged and provide good reasons for both invokes and compels.
This message was last edited by the GM at 13:42, Thu 26 June 2014.

Coming up with ten Aspects can be a chore.

Seven is much easier, and five is easier still.

Five to seven is the ideal, in my experience.

If you don't have a clear idea of your character they can be difficult also making them useful can be tough if you're GM isn't 100% locked in on the style of the game. I still have difficulty with High Concept and Trouble (which are both aspects).

It can be daunting, but I find that they seem to come in bunches for me. I'll go blank for a while and then get a few good ones all at once.

I also have had some good fortune kicking aspect ideas around with the GM and the other players.

I do think that 5 is a good number and 10 is just so hard to keep track of.

At this moment i just played FAE, so 5 is a number i'm used. I don't know what will happen in games of 8 or 10 Aspects, but probably will be very fun. XD

Yo! I've been around here since the beginning, but haven't said much.

Dresden Files, as I recall, used 7. It was still a lot, and you /had/ to come up with everything before play. Along with City Creation, which took our group three sessions to complete. It was not a fun process getting it all together, and it's really where many games I've seen just crumble.

Fully requiring a completed character before game play is kinda silly. That's a suggestion, not a necessity to play. Both Fate Core and FAE can handle players with a High Concept, Trouble, peak skills (one +4 and two +3, or just a +3 Approach), and maybe a Stunt if you have a really good idea for one. You shouldn't have to fill out everything if you aren't ready. Finishing the character organically during play is very rewarding, and really helps players fit together.

Ten aspects is a /lot/, and I've seen a lot of old Fate games where only four or five of those aspects ever see the light of play. Plus it can be really hard to think up neat phrases and such to fill that many spots before really getting to know the character and how they interact with everyone else.

In my games, I just dropped Phases outright and have people bring in concepts and flesh out their history together in play.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:36, Thu 26 June 2014.

I like that idea, reminds me of my old storyteller, he would do just that, give flaws/merits based on game play. One guy got an automatic success to perception rolls involving hearing because he got 4-5 rolls with more successes then dice(Cwod btw)

I think the drop from 10 to 5 Aspects has helped -- not just in character generation, but in play. The GM has to *remember* (or reference) all those aspects once the game is underway, and 10 per PC is pretty daunting. I'd found that many of them just didn't get invoked or compelled that much. Five can be a *little* limiting (I'm in an Atomic Robo game that's starting up, and I've got five -without- any that connect me to other PCs, and those are important... so I'm hoping six or seven will be okay with the GM.)

And I too think they should be able to be defined in-play. That's sort of the whole point if you're going to get going quickly -- Fate *isn't* fast to generate characters if you're going to take the time to define everything up-front, determine every PC-to-PC relationship, etc. I think  we've all seen a lot of PbP games die during chargen as a result.

10 is doable if guided correctly, though I agree that five is better.

SotC handled it well with chopping it up in parts of backstory generation, where you had to pick two aspects per phase. It's like doing the phase trio, but with each connection to another PC there were two aspects.

Hey guys, anyone know of a Cthulhu setting using Fate?

Or better yet, are there any FAE or FATE Core Cthulhu games here on Rpol?

Worlds of Cthulhu, (which I do not think has come yet). Present Day Cthulhu. Cthulhu in Space and a conversion of Achtung! Cthulhu. .All but the first one found by going to RPGNow.com and entering +Fate and +Cthulhu.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:50, Sat 28 June 2014.

So, who here have played an ERP using Fate? Playing or not, how do you see the game being used?

What is an ERP?

In reply to Frili (msg # 62):

It's a RP with Erotic elements. You know, when people need to drive their minds to other places and do things that they find amusing or "kinky" (I don't use this word, is too silly). I was here thinking: all the ERPs I've seen, a few use a game system and increment the erotic scenes into a big and interesting narrative, as others just are two people exchanging actions one at another.
Obviously, I have played and GMed some, but it is always interesting to talk about it to other people; some game ideas spark from random talk.

Feel free to discuss, but do remember this isn't a mature or adult forum so please do keep it PG. Thanks.

In reply to Cripple X (msg # 64):

I know. XD
But when I think that I can get into a good and long game with really imprevisible twists... and playing in a group with more than two people, counting me out.

Ah. You learn something new every day. I'm not into those kinds of games, so I can't help you there.

I'm not sure how play goes in an ERP, but my guess would be that Fate would work pretty well.  Better than systems I've played like D20 or WoD, anyway.

Since Aspects are so flexible, I always imagine Fate aspects working in any setting.  Aspects like Sexy Battle Scar and A True Gentleman seem more useful than Charisma 17, Acrobatics +9.

I would imagine there are systems made for ERP that probably fit better, but things like Aspects always seem great for any system/setting I've played in.

In reply to CoyotesGrin (msg # 67):

A good number of those games give me chills in the spine, as they appears be done by people:
1 - don't have anything but bad ideas of how their game works;
2 - don't take their goal (a ttrpg with sex) seriously.

If you never have played or heard of ERP before: think HBO's Game of Thrones, but with subtle differences regarding what happens onscreen because players and GM input.

---

That aside: how one coul insert Metroid-like weapons and skills in FAE? Extras with Stunts?

"Players should use photo-realistic images for their character portraits. Drawings, cartoons, animation, etc. are not permitted,"

This kind of thing makes my interest die at the same moment.

Well, it tends to break my immersion in a RPOL game if one player uses a photo to represent them and the other a line drawing. Makes it hard for me to imagine them together.

I mostly don't even pay attention to the portraits that much. Mostly because I often describe my characters in such detail that finding a portrait is kind of a lost cause.

Hm. I've yet to find a game system that really does it for me when I wanna play a Metroid-style RPG. Lemme see what I can cook up with FAE. The problem is starting expectations. Let's use Samus herself, maybe using Zero Mission (the current earliest canon we have for her abilities) as a benchmark.

So we're looking at a character with a power suit. We'll say the suit itself is an aspect giving permission to make ranged attacks and survive in harsh environments and such. Nothing special, just allowing actions. Then you set up your Approaches however you feel are appropriate to the character. If you want to include the idea of the Zero Suit, where you go from being powerful to being quick, make a Stunt: "Because I wear a Power Suit, when it gets compelled and lost I can swap my Forceful and Quick approaches."

For the suit steadily getting better, you'd start getting extra Aspects added onto it as you adventure. "High Jump Boots," "Ice Beam," "Varia Suit." They'd give you specific permissions, and you could invoke and possibly compel them like normal aspects for added benefit. But they're always true until they're gone. Just say they stick around until the end of the adventure, when you have to start from scratch again.

How's that look for starters?

The nice thing about the Fate fractal is that you can fully flesh out important game entities.  So, each suit could have its own complete set of aspects, including a Trouble aspect if there are down-sides to each one.

The characters' main concepts would give them access to the suits they could justify.

True, but atmo was asking specifically about Fate Accelerated, and I try to keep FAE as bare bones as possible for ease of use. In a full Fate Core game, I'd probably stat it out like Camelot Trigger's Armours, using Head, Body, Back, Arms, and Legs as spaces to place Systems which provide special bonuses. Maybe leave them blank to start and allow one mod per slot, gained through story. It'd take away some of the versatility of picking them at character creation, since you'd probably be stuck with whatever was available, but it'd add that neat element of exploration.

FAE is the best choice to this kind of game because the action is what people wants, not "power suit micro manageament game". They want to kill aliens, pick power-ups and upgrades and flee from an exploding planet/station to never came back again.

Now to ponder a decent way to do any "dungeons" in a zelda fate game.

There are a few ways to do that. First is to use the Fate Fractal, and just stat up the dungeon like a character. Give it aspects, "skills" (representing the harm its denizens and traps can do to the players), Stunts (special things about that dungeon), and stress/consequences. Then you'd only really have to worry about statting up important things, like the minibosses, primary puzzles, and endboss. Include some neat item that uses the System Toolkit's Gadget rules. Maybe have it cost 1 Refresh, but then once every player's gotten an item, everyone gets 1 Refresh as if they'd hit a Major Milestone.

Another idea is to use the Making Big Changes concept from the System Toolkit. Put together a series of setting aspects between the heroes and their goal, then let them do skill challenges to overcome those aspects. Maybe start with having them uncover what those aspects are before they can actually do something about it. The "Big Door" aspect might require a dungeoneering montage of the heroes going to find the Big Door Key, which ends up requiring them to get a new item from the dungeon (as above) and engage in a puzzle-style miniboss fight designed around using that item. Then they've got the Big Door Key, but now they need to solve another puzzle to get back to the door, like "Around in Circles" or such, and after that they can overcome the Big Door aspect and reach the boss, which is another skill challenge.

Could do a good combination of both. Set up the dungeon like a character, and use some of its aspects as the obstacles in the characters' way. Then do the skill challenge montage to get from major problem to major problem, slowly uncovering what each of the dungeon's hidden aspects is and finding out how to overcome them through wits and items.

Actually, this would work well for Metroid, too, since Metroid's pretty much "Zelda in Spaaaaaace."

fractals @.@

I have read fate core and Accelerated books, did I overlook something? Also System toolkit @.@

The Fate Fractal is also called the Bronze Rule in the games. It basically just states that you can stat up literally anything the same way you stat up characters. Aspects represent narrative distinctions between things, like the difference between a Rugged Combat Veteran and a Brand New Skyscraper. Skills represent the actions things can take, like a stealth bomber's Stealth +4 to remain undetected, or a fire's Fight +3 to damage anyone who gets too close. Then Stunts represent anything extra, like a spaceship's Versatile Deflector Dish, giving it +2 to Overcome actions using the Science skill of the crew as long as energy emissions can be put to use.

The Fate System Toolkit is a neat book that gathers up a whole bunch of alternate rules and mechanics variants, ideas you might not have thought up on your own. It provides inspiration for ways to play with Fate. The book is a Pay What You Want pdf from the Drive Thru (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/.../Fate-System-Toolkit), or you can just use the harder to read SRD (http://www.faterpg.com/wp-cont...3/09/FST-SRD-CC.html). It's full of cool ideas. I've been using it pretty much non-stop for the four or five Fate games I'm involved in right now.

Sigh. Why is it that players seem to drop like flies in a FATE game?

Idk, there are a couple I would love to apply to, but I just do not have the time right now for more games.

In reply to Shadowsmith (msg # 80):

They drop like flies regardless of game system, in my experience.

3 people in one of mine, and 3 or 4 pending... just waiting for em to finish up sheets.... one was told over a week ago, I wonder when was the last time they logged on...

On the flip side I am looking for someone to hand off a game I want to gm but do not have the time for. It already has several people interested and a couple have nearly completed characters.

Ever since I made those posts about how to do Metroid-like power suits and Zelda-like dungeons, I've been having the hankering for one such game. Currently considering starting up a Zelda game, but looking for ways to make it really feel how I want it to. For something like this, I'm trying to decide between using Skills, Approaches, or cutting out both entirely. If I went the latter route, I'd probably start emphasizing gear by assigning skill values to equipment, and you'd get the appropriate bonus for it. Or maybe just giving gear aspects and stunts, so you'd get a +2 to do what it does, and you could invoke or compel the thing. Adventuring could get "better gear", thereby adding an extra stunt onto it and maybe changing the aspect.

I have a purpose for de-emphasizing skills in favor of gear, but I'm having a hard time explaining. The gist is, I'd like characters to be expressed through their personality more than their trained abilities, and I'd like their equipment to have some role in displaying their personalities. I think aspects and stunts can handle that very well, and while I'm considering Approaches, I just can't think of a set of them I'd be happy with.

Anyone have any thoughts on the idea?

I personally think it's a cool angle, a great take on a very specific setting / genre / vibe. It could really work with the 'level-up' and looting mentality. Everyone starts with +1 Sword, +1 Armor, +1 Healing Potion / Recharge, and so on. Then it's all about finding that next piece of kit to bump your abilities. You could emphasize gear with out making Fate a lot crunchier.

Sounds very old school rpg in a way. idk how people will take having only their gear matter. or did I misunderstand?

Then again I do have that story where all classes and skills are from charms... so who am I to complain lol.

Can you give some examples, like a wand gives power over spells and spellcraft? Or a special pair of boots allows faster running?

Hm. I mean to de-emphasize skills to allow for characters to be more versatile, rather than putting all the focus into looting. Something like...



Not particularly happy with this so far, but that's the general idea. So we know he uses Wolfos Claws (look up Tiger Claw as a weapon, and flavor it to Zelda), which are associated with eastern martial arts styles. He also uses loose clothing as his armor, relying on agility rather than toughness. That gives us a good idea of what kind of person he is. The other aspects I extrapolated from his gear. Why does he use a wolfos claw? He made it himself, after being raised in the forest like Tarzan or Mowgli.

Since I decided not to use Skills or Approaches, I'd say each relevant aspect should give a +1 bonus to an action. Keep in mind that each piece of gear not only has Stunts on it (Very Sharp, Good Grip, and Ease of Movement as his three Stunts), but their names are also aspects. They can be invoked and compelled, so the simple act of them coming into play in a roll gives an automatic +1 bonus.

Maybe we have a character who makes use of Bow and Arrows. It might have a couple Stunts:



Or perhaps someone makes use of Water of Life:



Compelling the Water of Life would get you a Fate Point, but most likely mean you're out of medicine until you can make or find more.

With aspects taking the place of skills, and gear counts for both aspects and a character's stunts, we've removed "what are you trained to do" and replaced it with "what are you like" and "what are you equipped to handle". Each of those aforementioned pieces of gear should become an intrinsic part of your character's personality. Rather than the game being completely focused on looting and swapping out your existing gear for the next big score, your equipment should say something about the character. Not so much worried about making the sword go from +1 to +2, so much as worried about trading up from My Uncle's Sword to The Legendary Master Sword.

Looks like Fate won some Ennies.

I seem to have a problem with fate games. I use the setting and such to help create my character, but the few I have seen, well collective world building just makes em draw a blank for some reason.

Any advice? I like the rule set, just, I get nothing.

Like they have been created on a vacuum? Probably just a phase.

I work in inspiration for characters. If I feel uninspired for character creation, my rtj was almost always denied.

With fate, that inspiration does not exist. I will give it another shot. The lack of sleep lately might have something to do with it.

For me, it depends on system, motivation and "need to create a sheet". Back on 2012/2013 I've made a dozen sheets for 3D&T in my blog just for the sake of making characters, nowadays is hard to come with a reason to post it at all.

In reply to atmo (msg # 88):

Yes, apparently they took home a Silver or Gold Ennie in every category they were nominated for.

Congratulations, Evil Hat. You guys deserve it.

In reply to Merevel (msg # 91):

Fate is always a collaboration with your fellow players (this includes the GM of course) and I have noticed that the success of a game and indeed even character creation is dependent on how willing the players are to use their creative freedom to play/build off of each other.

If Fate has an entry obstacle it's that sometimes player who have played other, more rigid, RPGs don't realize the level of narrative control they have as players. That leads to them being very passive and passivity doesn't work in Fate. Once they understand how much narrative freedom they have and become more proactive, it runs like a dream.

So my advice when creating worlds and characters is to be proactive and build off of the ideas of your fellow players. With everyone contributing, people buy in and the ideas just flow.

Well, Fate games can range a lot in just how collaborative the back-building is. It can go from ground-up (where you're right, there's not a lot of framework in place to inspire character ideas) to a completely canned / developed world where the players either have no more input than usual, or just help decide the overall tone, scope, reality level and that sort of thing. And of course there's everything in-between.

Examples: if you find someone running a Freeport game, that background is pretty set is terms of the big building blocks, some NPCs, etc. Bulldogs has a very detailed background, but the GM and players all work together to develop the ship, captain and crew. Diaspora is much more open-ended, and probably plays best with a bunch of 'builders' who all want to work together to define the systems they'll be adventuring in, the major NPCs, etc.

It really ranges -- Merevel, what *types* of Fate games are you struggling with, in terms of setting?

I have only looked at a couple. I wanted to be a player before I tried running one. They started ground up like you said. I drew such a bad blank that I quit talking to the gm about it.

My taste varies, it really depends on how interesting the setting is, which might be part of the problem too. I will know more after trying again.

Drawing character inspiration from the setting is going to be tough indeed in those situations, but I would think it rare that you need to submit a design to get accepted into a game where even the basic premise hasn't been determined (beyond genre, "fantasy," etc.).

Here's the good news -- there's a strong little community we're developing here. You've found the right place to voice that you want to try Fate, but are struggling to find a game for the reasons you state. Keep your eyes peeled in these threads as well as the usual players wanted area to sniff out some games that are better suited to you. A few of us here also know about quite a few ongoing Fate games here on RPOL, some of which are in need of new players. Stating the types of games you're looking for -- Dresden, low fantasy, space opera, gumshoe, supers, etc. -- will help.

(And incidentally, if you get into one of the built-from-the-ground-up games without building a character first, you should find it pretty darned easy to get inspiration for the PC from that process.)

Hello, new kid here ;)

Love the FATE system (mostly). I say mostly because I'm not a huge fan of the basic die mechanic, at least not in PbP games. I really enjoy all of the flexibility the framework of FAE offers. I tend to use Aspects, Stunts and  Approaches in my games, regardless of the other mechanics. Just so you all know where I'm coming from.

Curious -- what bugs you about the dice mechanic?

In general, the dice don't mean much. More often than not they cancel out, leaving the character's ratings to determine the result. Which is fine, but then why go through the bother of the dice? Also, the dice are setup more for character failure than success. There are two (-) dice and to [ ] dice. Essentially that means four of six results per die are set to hinder the roll. D4 with only (+) and (-) would be better (half serious here).

Then every roll requires a GM roll or a preset result to compare the players roll against. Time consuming with no real gain in a PbP. But, those are my only gripes. Personally, I like the mechanics of Apocalypse World for die rolls. I've used The Window rolling mechanics and had success with them as well.

Wait what? Doesn't fate use a d3? + - and neutral?

I understand what you're getting at, but I think they understand what they're getting at, too. It's true the dice have a sharp bell curve peaking at 0, with -4 and +4 the furthest extremes. But each change of 1 is a significant modifier. The idea is for PCs to still have that element of randomness players like while keeping numbers within a manageable range.

In a game of Fate scaled around normal human beings, most bystander type people will have +0 in a skill they're novices at, and +2 in their professionally trained skill. That means a task with difficulty at +1 is going to be challenging unless it's their job, and it can still give them trouble if there are problems (aspects being invoked against them, something increasing the difficulty, etc).

PCs, on the other hand, will peak at +4 in their area of expertise, making them really very good. They'll get challenged only by difficulties starting at +3 and up, without aspects being invoked against them for a -2. Even then they're as good as professionals. The dice then give a little random chance of doing exceptionally well or poorly, representing the millions of little factors that can conspire for or against a hero-type. So they're still meaningful and relevant, but they aren't there purely to add to the skill or subtract from it. Just there to see how far luck is helping you deviate from your training.

In general, I agree completely that there's no real point in having NPCs roll at all. Fate can easily be a player-facing game, just by having NPCs use their skill and aspects and leave dice completely out of it. No point there, really. But the players still get purpose in the dice, letting them risk a -4 for the chance at a +4. If you feel even that's too much trouble to go to for too little benefit, talk to your GM and discuss the possibility of just not rolling. It would come out the same as NPCs can do. You simply compare your skill to the difficulty, plus or minus aspect invokes and compels, and you could still have a perfectly functional game without a single random element. Long as everyone agrees, it should work out great.

Well, sort of. It uses D6: two +, two -, two 0. I'm pretty sure the probabilities work out the same as D3 with one +, one -, and one blank, but haven't actually checked. If they're the same, then it's pretty much irrelevant which one you want to use. But since they sell Fate Dice as D6s with special faces, it's easiest to talk about them like that instead of as D3s. Purely for keeping on the same page.

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 101):

There is a game system where there is no rolling, just skill comparing. I think it dealt with Marvel and x-men. I heard good things about it.

Also your right, my mind just said d3 because only 3 options. Even a 900 sided die with 300 of each is a d3 in my head.

The X-Men games were as follows, for point of order:
Marvel Roleplaying Game by TSR: This system used FASERIP and is similar to ICONS you see today, a percentile based system. Premiered in 1984, last publication 1992. This was my introduction to roleplaying games.
Marvel 1-on-1 Adventures by TSR. This was from 1-on-1, a series of adventures using TSR properties. I can find no information on the system of these adventures from 1986-87, but I did find a transcript that didn't illustrate exactly how they determined action resolution. Here is a summary of the various 1-on-1 mechanics however: "None of the books require the use of dice; most require the players to simultaneously shout out random numbers and then cross-reference them on a chart, while one book instead uses paper-rock-scissors. Some of the books can be adapted to be played by a single person, though the adventures that benefit the most from player interaction really do require two people." There were only two of these adventures, one in 1986 and one in 1987.
Marvel Superheroes Adventure Game ("MSHAG"), using the SAGA system (sometimes called Marvel Saga) by TSR. Premiered in 1998, last publication in 2000. (Still has a huge fan following.)
Marvel Universe Roleplaying Game ("MURPG") by Marvel Studios, using the Action Resolution system. This game had resources defined by colored stones, allowing you to fuel your actions in a sort of bidding mechanism. Unique, interesting, and ultimately determined largely unwieldy. Premiered and finished publication in 2003. Fun side note, I ran this in Iraq to some success.
Marvel Heroic Roleplaying Game ("MHR/MHRPG") by MWP (Margaret Weis Productions), using the Cortex+ system. Used a variety of dice to represent varying levels of strength, as well as dynamic character traits for each character. Premiered in 2012, last publication in 2013.

Not sure if you meant the late-80s "1-on-1" adventures of the MURPG system from 2003, but either way, neither are exactly "compare skills". One of them compares arbitrary methods of resolution (1-on-1) that sound rather underdeveloped per reviews I've found online and the latter was also a little more poker-betting-based than skill-based.

In reply to Bowie (msg # 104):

*shrugs* One of my coworkers told me about it years ago. I borrowed the book, but never got around to reading through it before he wanted it back.

I can look online tomorrow but it sounded fairly recent.

Icons is Fate-based and the GM never rolls at all in that game.

For what it's worth, stats were allotted via red and white stones?

Marvel Universe Roleplaying Game ("MURPG")

Yep thats the one. He loved the system and was trying to convert it for a more traditional rpg setting.
This message was last edited by the player at 02:58, Tue 26 Aug 2014.

I love no-GM-rolling.

I thought Icons had a FASERIP percentile grade, though? Oh well, I was misinformed. I know my Marvel, though!



Awesome. Happy to help narrow it down!

Yeah, that's more of a bidding contest system. It's kinda weird.

Yes, it's the same probability.

That's not been my experience. And in fact, one of the things the Fate guys did differently when they broke it off from Fudge, was the extend the 'ladder' so that the dice mechanic didn't completely trounce Fudge's -3 to +3 scale. I don't like Fate's adjectives as much as Fudge's super-simple set, but the addition of a few extra levels means the dice results don't produce the wild results they sometimes would with Fudge.

I really like the level of variability current baked into the dice mechanics, but to each his (or her) own.



Actually, a dice roll of 0 is *less* likely than a negative or positive result. On 4dF, you'll hit 0 19 out of 81 times. You'll roll a negative number (-4 to -1) 31/81 times, and a positive number (+1 to +4) 31/81 times.

Here's the bell curve: http://rpggeek.com/thread/918941/all-hail-bell-curve

0 is the single most likely number, but at only 19/81, you're hitting that less than a quarter of the time.



Blanks aren't a hindrance -- they mean you're performing 'at level.' As I think others have pointed out, the dice are 1/3 negative, 1/3 neutral, 1/3 positive.



Those 'opposed' rolls are part of the game design -- and they can easily be changed if you don't like them. They're purposeful, though -- in games like Apocalypse World and Barbarians of Lemuria, there's just a success number you're trying to hit. That means it's as easy to punch a skilled boxer as it is grandma as she makes cookies. That bugs some folks, and opposed rolls are one way to handle that. (As are modifiers).

I agree that in PbP games, simpler is often better -- but give the Fate dice mechanic a try. I've found it very simple to use in PbP games.



Say, I recognize that. Same system as Dungeon World, right? Old school with modern sensibilities.



Another personal preference thing -- just FYI, I've seen lots of Fudge and Fate builds where only the players roll. Cripple X mentioned Icons... that's -barely- Fate. :)

Anyway, please don't take this as argumentative -- but I think if you give the dice mechanic (4dF or even d6-d6) a shot you might be happily surprised.

Dungeon World isn't so much "old school with modern sensibilities" as it is Apocalypse World with D&D attributes and traits. I'm actually using an alternate version of it called No Rest for the Wicked for a Borderlands game. Been trying to convert it to Fate for a while, but so far haven't met with much success. To the point where I'm about ready to call the game dead. I just can't stand the Apocalypse/Dungeon World rules. They're really really not what I want out of life. No idea how to get that cracking in Fate, sadly. Plus one of my players doesn't like Fate, which makes me a sad GM.

A Borderlands RPG.

YES PLEASE.

(Love that game. And you totally -could- do it with Fate.)

Heh. My Borderlands game has already been sitting idle for something like two months, in the middle of the first bossfight. I started with five players, and only one of them is still active. Got two new ones and I just can't bring back the steam to keep the game moving.

But for the sake of seeing how it would work, I'd really like to see a Fate Borderlands game. My big problem is that I want to remove Skills entirely, focusing on the characters' personalities, special perks, and their 88 Bazillion Guns. :P (I know there isn't enough granularity to make the different guns really /that/ different, but I'd like there to be some distinction between "pistol that shoots lightning" and "shotgun that fires a group of flaming swords that explode into sprays of acidic daggers that each melt into life-stealing grenades". I wanna keep the weird.)

I imagine what I want would require using tweaked Approaches for style, then representing Action Skills with Stunts and gear with some kind of extra. Maybe let guns and shields and such provide their own little character sheets that maybe modify your basic Approach. But that's too complicated and a lot of bookkeeping. Maybe modifying Systems from CAMELOT Trigger would work. I dunno.

How would you go about it?

"I'd like there to be some distinction between "pistol that shoots lightning" and "shotgun that fires a group of flaming swords that explode into sprays of acidic daggers that each melt into life-stealing grenades". I wanna keep the weird.)"

I am not sure what to say to that other then: @.@

I can give it some serious thought later, but off the top of my head...

Aspects: High Concept or "Class" / Trouble / Connection to Story (e.g. Jack) / Crossed Paths 1 / Crossed Paths 2

Skills: Health, Running, Jumping, Trading / Merchant, Driving, Melee, Grenade, Shotguns, Pistols, Sniper Rifles, SMGs, Rocket Launchers (alternatively, fold all the guns into "Guns" and be done with it -- just depends on whether you're trying to differentiate. I think I would, to let people specialize, though you could also use Stunts for that. And throw in some social or mental skills if you really want. :) )

Perks / Powers: model as Stunts, Mega-Stunts (see Atomic Robo) or Extras.

Loot / Gear: For force fields, weapons, vehicles, class mods and relics -- I would model them as characters, complete with aspects, stunts, skills, and in some cases, stress / consequence tracks. I don't think they'd need separate sheets -- the simplest would be along the line of "Aspect: Revolver, Stunt: Rapid Fire (+1 Stress), Stunt: Caustic (ignore one level of armor)"

Or maybe I'm out to lunch. :)

I have less experience with FATE than other systems, but I love Borderlands, and love generators. So to offer that same enjoyment of wild, infinite un options, I'd probably try to make heavy use of random generators for weapon components. That way you could make hundreds in half a second. For instance, start compiling a list of mix-and-match properties and then combine a number of them based on rarity.

The main thing is that the choice of which weapon to use has to be interesting enough that new options are worth time to weigh while you never stick with one forever. Yet also, in a rpg, just shooting people endlessly gets old without appropriate character/story drama surrounding it.

Maybe the following:
Type: pistol, SMG, sniper, shotgun, launcher (determines which skill is used?)
Brand: Hyperion, Bandit, etc. (with some mechanical effect each)
Tons of extra Aspects: super scope, slow, corrosive, fire, lightning, slag, has melee blades, destroys cover, stabilized, explosive, powerful, knockback, launches grenades, launches swords, steals life, beast slayer, does all kinds of other crazy things. Perhaps these indicate free aspects/invokes that can be created on a hit or with a boost.

Making weapons as characters like Harrigan says is interesting if it doesn't become too unwieldy. If it's anything like the video game, characters may end up carrying around tons of different 'characters.'

Alternatively, weapons could make up most of a PC's normal stats (like skills) and therefore not take up too much extra room. PCs could then have personal/dramatic aspects, stunts related to class maybe, and maybe noncombat skills. Each weapon could then have it's power conveyed by giving its wielder a few skills like the following (maybe providing reason to move around battle zones): Long (2+ zones away), close (same zone or 1 zone away), melee (same zone), etc. I don't think PCs should have combat skills, since those levels (other than health) seem to be more modded by your gear than anything else.

Shields could offer aspects (pulse nova, lifesteal, etc), or varying ways of offering stress boxes or consequence slots. Usually FATE aims for fast combats, but in this game you may want more stress boxes to drag things out more, if there are enough interesting tactical choices to make combat itself fun. I'm thinking somewhat of the semi-tactical use of range bands and varying weapon effectiveness in 3:16 Carnage Among the Stars.

Mmmm. 3:16.

I'm a big fan of this game. Several years ago I ran a game here on RPOL.

It's too bad the spin-offs using the same system never materialized Gregor Hutton just fell off the map or something.

I'm really liking these ideas. If I can bring myself to slink back to my players, I might try pitching Fate Borderlands again. :D (Though if someone else wants to put together a game, I'd totally hop into it. I realized my setting wasn't particularly thought out, since all I have is a villain and what's in the Vault.)

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 119):

I think for an rpg Borderlands, there'd have to be major focus on NPCs and reasons that the PCs care about them or any part of the world. You can't just take a job, do it and come back without motivation. What do the PCs want in the big picture? You may even want to try throwing in some dramatic hooks to the mechanics to refocus on character development over kill this, then that. Maybe encouragement to swing between dramatic poles a la Hillfolk.

Now that I'm thinking more about 3:16, I wonder if the focus on kill count could factor into a FATE Borderlands game. In 3:16 the kill count tally is basically supposed to be both cold/heartless and antagonistically competitive (and largely unfair and ethically uncomfortable), which is not something great for party cohesion, but I could see some FATE twist that could vary weapons between numerous kills (SMGs, explosives, etc) or heavy single target hits.

Another issue with Borderlands is the absurdity of how many times people get hit before dying. FATE assumes getting hit usually means being taken out, unless you have various stalling tactics, like stress, wounds/consequences, or armor, but even those mostly give you one or two more hits.

In fact, if you want a Borderlands game that does focus on inter-party drama, you could perhaps use something more close to 3:16, since the flashbacks to strengths and weaknesses would be a fun way to emergently discover the characters through play. Likewise, most important stats can be isolated to weapons, or other non-combat stuff, and then lots and lots of unceremonious body-dropping veneer over a slowly unraveling, largely uncomfortable meta-plot.

...If you start a game like this, I am totally volunteering to play. Just lettin' ya know right now.

What I had in mind was basically dropping the players into a world and letting them get the idea that basically anyone with a gun is bad, anyone who can't shoot back is probably just trying to go to the store, and any sense of ethics or morality is completely up to the PCs to enforce, should they so choose. I've also conveniently made it so the goal of riches, fame, and all the women you can handle (that is, opening the Vault) requires going through the people who have the guns. If character motivations shift from purely opening the Vault to doing things like helping the oppressed, there's plans for that too.

Keep in mind that Borderlands gameplay is very videogamey, just like D&D and any other system with Hit Points. Borderlands during cutscenes is very narrative, just like Fate and any other game that doesn't use Hit Points. If someone's still in the fight, then their shields are up or they aren't "getting hit". I'd basically deal with shields using Stress, and if the conflict actually affects you beyond that, you start using Consequences. (Of course, there are a few articles about how Consequences don't necessarily mean "damage", so you could use them to represent things like being Out of Ammo or Separated from the Group.) One weird thing to note here is whether you want to consider New-U Stations to be a cute videogame mechanic or an actual thing in the setting. Respawns can be a Consequence, too!

*sighs while reading awesomeness and lots of creative ideas*

I love this community.

I'm in several RPG communities here on RPoL, and so far this is the most active I've ever been in one of them. :P

I just had my first baby 3 weeks ago, so I won't be running a game anytime soon.

Also, I just found the game No Rest For the Wicked based on AW. I'm curious what you didn't like about it. Have you enjoyed any AW-style play? (that may be getting off the FATE topic and belong elsewhere)

Has anybody looked into the game-in-development Wrath of the Autarch? It's based on a variation on Fate Core but is designed specifically to focus on kingdom-building with troupe play and seasonal missions consisting of "mini-games" (skirmish, infiltration, diplomacy, warfare). I'm very interested in its development, and keen to hack it (rather easily) for a number of applications, namely Dwarf Fortress, XCOM, Iron Edda, Matrix, etc.

If anyone actually comes to a point of running a dwarf fortress game on RPOL I want in on it! :D

I don't think discussing why I prefer Fate to a different game system is too off topic.

Let me start at the beginning. No Rest for the Wicked is a hack of Apocalypse World and Dungeon World. Dungeon World itself is a hack of Apocalypse World and D&D. Apocalypse World is where the game system got its start and where it really shines. The basic premise is about attempting actions, and either completing them ridiculously well or having something interesting happen. The GM is totally reactive, and really just along for the ride (and trying to react by making things more difficult/interesting for the main characters).

There's barely a combat system, and damage is rated on a scale of 1-5, 1 being a punch in the face and 5 being having a building collapse on you. NPCs can generally survive however much damage seems reasonable, about a 1, and usually die if they get up to a 2. PCs have what amounts to 6 hit points, with the first three being a narrative buffer and the last three being literal wounds. Armor is really really potent, subtracting 1 or (at the extreme) 2 from damage. If someone attacks you with a pistol (2 damage) and you have 1 Armour, you take 1 damage, the same as a punch in the gut. That's a /huge/ benefit. In general, the idea is to either not get into combat at all or have a lot more guys on your side than against you.

Dungeon World added a lot of D&D concepts, including randomly rolled damage (depending on your class rather than your equipment) and a substantial number of hit points that go up as you get better at things. With all the damage and hit point numbers inflated, my biggest surprise was that Armour /wasn't/ given any boost. It's still rated at 1, 2 if it's really good. So if someone takes a swing at you with their 1d8+2 damage and you have 1 Armour, you're still getting pretty darn hurt.

No Rest for the Wicked kept that idea, so you're dealing around 1d10 damage, you have around 10-12 hit points, 8-10 shield points, and if you have Armour, it only protects 1 point. Electric attacks totally ignore and drop Shields on contact. Burning attacks deal 1 extra damage. Corrosive attacks ignore 1 Armour. And even those only work if you spend a point of ammo to activate them. From the looks of it, it's just flat out better to use nothing but electric weapons all the time, since the only unshielded opponents will be mooks, and they tend to have 6 HP and all go down with a single attack from a weapon with the spray tag (which hits everyone in a Close area, which is "as far as you can yell").

It's also designed for players to be very proactive, but it's a setting designed for players to be more reactive. They're looking for hooks to follow, and if they don't start taking actions, nothing is ever going to happen. But most players are trained to look to the GM and ask "so what happens next?" On top of that, the game intends for the players to help shape the world, but the players I got refuse to do things like name NPCs or describe the place they're in. They say that's entirely my job.

It's just not a system suited to me or the players I've attracted to my game. With Fate I can come up with these details on the fly, making things like Wrecked Car Barricade an aspect on the scene, or declaring a Challenge to protect a bunch of bystanders from the invading raiders. It's more intuitive to me and my style of play, but I'm also more experienced with Fate as compared to the Powered by Apocalypse engine. And because it's closer to traditional, I think my players can handle it a bit better as well.

https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...mic-horror-anime-rpg

Looks good, but I can't back those things anymore.

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 126):

It's funny that you say there is barley a combat system in AW. Besides the dice you roll, the systems are essentially the same. There's Attack, Defend, Overcome, Aide another and a plethora of specialized versions of those moves. Even the results are similar between the two systems.

What I love about FATE is the customization and equalization of abilities, Aspects as part of character personality and stunts. So, basically everything. Because I don't like the fudge dice, I use all the stuff I do like in my other games. A +1 stunt adds a lot of customization to a  D20 game without really changing the advantages of the character. Having aspects to compel a character with is easy money for game hooks. Forget alignments, "because your a [Money Grubbing Dirt Bag], you know you want to sell out your team, right?"

Anyway, my first post wasn't about how bad FATE was, it was just to say hi, and I don't like fudge dice :)

One thing I pulled from Dungeon World for my FATEd Window zombie game was using tags. Tags are descriptive and prescriptive aspects (essentially) for equipment. In a FATE Borderlands game, you could just add tags to equipment [fire, explosive] etc, then allow an extra fudge die, or a +X bonus when those tags would help the character. Infinite combinations, minimal leg work. One of my favorite stunts I added used the X-ammo tag.

When you have to take a few more shots to hit the target, subtract 1-ammo and add +1 to your roll for each ammo spent.

all weapons had 1-4 ammo. No matter how many magazines the fiction said, when your ammo was out, you had to go scrounge up some more. It essentially let the player invoke and compel themselves in combat. Worked pretty well.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 03:49, Fri 29 Aug 2014.

Hey guys, I have a question concerning the aspects that are put on game worlds during game creation. Do they get used often?

Like, "I will invoke the "Low Gravity" of planet Xegrobnia to make the jump over it's purple plasma lake of doom to the other side, to escape the horde of Stonemunchers that are chasing me." or something else like that?

In reply to Frili (msg # 129):



Sort of depends on the players, really. If they choose to use them, they get used. Since players hate to fail rolls, and Aspects keep them from doing so, probably yes.

Just found this on google+ (linked to by Mr. Hicks)

http://www.geeknative.com/4861...review-secrets-cats/

Also, if someone wants to run it, I'm sooo in. (don't own a copy though)

Secrets of Cats is free (pay what you like). Don't read the sample adventure if you wanna play, though.

Found out already, and didn't read the adventure :P

I'll read the book. Don't know when I'll be ready to run it.

Awesome!

In reply to Tzuppy (msg # 134):

sounds like fun. Give me an rmail if you do get it running please? I will check the book out and see if I am still interested.

Sentient cats, saving the world from demons, aliens and other horrors? What's there not to like?

I've got some character ideas already, but they're all none magically. But they might qualify for shapers too. They're more or less the bruce willis of cats.

Oh, could any Adm/Mod remove me from this Forum/Game? Thanks.

So, I dropped from one fate game and the other fizzled. I guess back to the players wanted forum?

What's with this forum's traffic? Are we bumping our Wanted Players ad?

Yes. I have been bumping the advert once a week in the Players Wanted forum.

Some of us are just busy with our other games.

Not found much interesting content here lately.

Very bad luck with FATE games. The last ones I was interested in fizzled and I refuse to play in a game where the GM plays favorites with their players. That never ends well and it ruined the game within the first few IC posts for me.

Like I said back to the players wanted forum.

And some of us are new, but lurking.

And some of us are old, but lurking...  :)
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 05:15, Thu 02 Oct 2014.

The last game I tried to run pbp was a little too ambitious, I think. I need to focus and maybe do something a little more familiar (and not attempt collaborative world building prior to actually running the game). I might get something up next week, I'm thinking in the vein of Rifts/Shadowrun for setting, sci-fi/post apocalyptic future with all kinds of strange alien types.

I haven't played a FAE game here yet yet, but my experience with FATE and Dresden Files is if the Character/World building is being driven and done quickly things just fizzle/putter out.

Speaking from what little personal experience I have. I am ok with skipping the collaborative world building part. Call me Jaded from the fate and non fate gm's that did that.

Do people typically disappear during the brainstorming process of the full collaborative worldbuilding?

In reply to Taurarius (msg # 150):

It largely depends on whether the players have any interest whatsoever in worldbuilding, or collaboration or any sort. Those with short attention spans typically drift away if it requires any kind of research or takes more than a week or two.

Why not keep a few stock settings and take a vote on world building, or simply ask the players if they want to see anything special in your premade setting?

I've participated in four FATE games on rpol so far.

One of them died because players were anticipating FATE, and the GM wanted to run FAE.

Three died because the GM disappeared, immediately after creation, or a dozen posts into the game. Players were typically highly motivated.

In all fairness, all but one of those games had a player drop, and maybe that affected the GM's plans and made them want to quit, but really, I haven't seen an rpol game yet that doesn't see attrition, often very early in the game. You have to assume you'll lose 1-2 of the starting players, at least.

Well bar personality clash or GM favoratism I tend to stick with games as if glued. Problem is finding something that catches my eye.

Also feeling like I might as well not be in the game will cause me to withdrawal from it.

Player turnover in a Fate game can get frustrating for the GM and the players. If you build relationships between characters to use as a bond between them in game and then lose those due to players dropping out it feels like time wasted.

I'm been a player in several Fate games that died. Some due to GM drop out. Others due to players dropping or going silent.

Currently I'm running an Atomic Robo game. I started with seven PCs and lost four. I was able to add two new PCs. But I admit losing half of my original players hurt my enthusiasm for the game. Fortunately the new players are working out well.

Forum games have some advantages over table top games. But they're slow and players drop out far too often. I learned this when I used to play on the CompuServe RPG forums and it remains true on RPoL.

Fate has a special problem with player turnover. Fate is built with the assumption that the players will shape the setting in-play even if you skip world building. You need engaged players who stick with the game if not, it begins to feel disconnected.

This. In the past I ended several games I had run for years due to a combination of RL issues and losing players. As a GM, nothing can come close to dampening my enthusiasm for a game like losing players, especially when the game is very character-driven. Like you said, when you have the story invested in certain characters and especially characters invested in each other and you lose that character, it can be a real problem.
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:51, Sat 04 Oct 2014.

Maybe the solution then is to run a game that has player turnover built in, so to say.

I run two games on rpol currently, an SR5 game and a Dark Heresy game. Both have had massive player turnovers (10 or more dropouts in each game). I agree that it dampens my enthusiasm to run the game, but the games can (and do) continue despite it all. Both game types are OK with losing characters, though. In DH, characters tend to die, so there is natural turnover, and the SR game is built so that the team assembles again at the beginning of each mission, which makes it easier to bring in new people. Still hurts when someone drops out in the middle of a run. Once players have established a bit more longevity, I start weaving subplots around them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that GMs who start FATE games on rpol and expect them to work like RL games are setting themselves up for frustration. Maybe the solution is to decouple the characters a bit from each other, or just accept that some of the characters that are created in the beginning will end up being nothing more than color for the background. And perhaps standard FATE scenarios with tight connections between the PCs and the plot don't work as well in this medium, at least not to start out.

The problem with this is that Fate mechanics are built around the concept of PCs shaping the world during play. They define Aspects on scenes and characters - sometimes these Aspects become a permanent part of the setting. Fate games are built on the core concept that the PCs are the stars of the show not supporting cast.

Atomic Robo even spells it out more clearly than most versions of Fate. The Brainstorm mechanic allows the players via their characters to define or alter the plot. They get to establish facts that are true and if the Brainstorm succeeds, declare something that could completely alter the campaign.

As a GM this is a terrifying and incredibly inspiring concept. In most games I have to have a rather complete plot before the game begins. In Fate games, at best I have an outline as it will be forced to change and adapt to the players. The plot and story of the campaign is much more a living thing in Fate.

After a time, bringing in a new character becomes difficult. The game molds to the characters and players and changing them is awkward at best.

When I do character creation--when I GM here--I now have only one guest-star with another PC.  If the player drops out, the Aspect and story still stands... it's just part of the remaining character's history.

The second guest-star spot, though...  That gets linked to a central GM-NPC. So, everyone has a tie in to a main supporting-character.

Sadly, I cannot commit to GMing at the moment.  But, boy it -has- been rough trying to actually play in a game.

The funny thing is... That's why I started running Dresden Files games to begin with.  I got frustrated.

By the way, happy 500th post to the FATE Discussion Forum, courtesy of RedAnchorite. :)

I'm glad to see this group is off to a good start. We've had some nice discussions, great insights, and plenty of good questions. I just hope this group is helpful to RPOL's Fate Community.

Feeling like that was the wrong thread, so moving discussion over here.

It isn't necessarily a "good writer" that needs to have 150 words to have a character do something. Sometimes long posts are just walls of unneeded fluff that detract from the story instead of adding to it. Imagine a couple paragraphs describing a character's fluttering cloak and the night wind through leaves. Great atmosphere once in a scene, but getting that stuff every post and people just start skimming instead of reading. I've seen players lose interest from seeing too many posts like that in a short time span. Really, sometimes even just a line or two can make the best possible post. It's all about context. I make sure to avoid games where the GM requires strict minimum post size. I also find it odd that no one I've come across has required maximum post sizes.

Well technically the gm asks for at least one post a week, and awards extra ex for the character,50 ex per 100 words extra in the post. That right there says I would never last...

Honestly in my own game I was happy for 1-2 paragraph posts.

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 162):

Once I got standing ovations for an one-liner (under ten words) plus an invocation. (Actually it was Mage: The Ascension, so it was a spell, but it's close enough.)

I like game setting a minimal posting rate. It makes sure everyone knows who's participating.

Minimal posting length, however, makes me skip the game as if GURPS is in the system field.

Sounds like fun! Do you still remember the one-liner and its context?

Most of the minimum posting length games I've seen required people to say what their character was thinking at any given point, in addition to description, actions, and speech. Some went on about their outfits for paragraphs, others spent more than half their post describing what their character was thinking about everything. Those are little inconvenient, but I can handle them. The worst offenders are the ones who put paragraphs of speech into their posts, as if all the other characters would complacently sit by and let the monologue go uninterrupted for more than 60 seconds.

Minimum post-lengths seem kind of pointless when you have a NPC or another PC asking your character a closed (like, for instance yes or no) question.

I need to write 150 words to say "Yes."?

I've always believed in the spirit of the rules rather than the letter...  the point is to provide enough content to move things forward, right?

Of course I do. But I must admit that under ten words was what my character said. There was about as much description.

My character was tasked with putting down a renegade wizard who was more powerful than my character in every single sphere I had. To cut the long story short, he had me imprisoned in his mind. I knew he would be distracted, so I escaped the prison, but stayed inside his mind. I realized that the GM thought my character's goal was simply to escape, so I knew he would frame a showdown scene in front of the exit from the villain's mind.

Green is what the GM posted.
Blue is what I posted.
Orange is the invocation.

The corridor came to an abrupt halt. There was a large steel door with the word "Exit" emblazoned in large red letters. The cat rubbed up against Andrew's leg and purred. Andrew moved to peak inside the door, but before he could turn the handle, he felt someone grab his shoulder and turn him around.

There was Carder, a murderous look on his face. "I don't know what you are doing here, Andrew, but I hope you weren't thinking about leaving before saying goodbye."

Carder opened the palm of his right hand and a 6" knife materialized in his grip.

Andrew smiled. "Of course, Allan, I'm not leaving." Andrew paused... "You are."

With these words Andrew pressed the handle now behind his back and swung the door wide open.

Three Finger Lobotomy: Mind 3, Prime 2 -- Kill Mind

The effect created a sort of vacuum decompression and throw the villain out of this own mind, as I had planned.

In reply to jait (msg # 166):

The problem is when those making and enforcing the rules simply don't care about the spirit.

So what are people's general experience with Mindjammer? Anyone played it?

I'm a big SF nut and I'm loving the book, there's lots of great ideas here. Though mechanically I much prefer Accelerated to Core.

Ain't much you can do about that.  Their game; their rules.  If the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of the law, you gotta figure whether the annoyances balance the perks of the game...    As somebody else said here... We all see "fun" a little differently.

Considering I love the soul crushing difficulty of rogue likes, you would think I would want to be in games that challenge me.

In reply to jait (msg # 170):

This particular letter of the law gives control freaks perfect excuse to indulge their trips and I simply no longer abide it.

It really is best when GM and players are upfront about how much they want to play with the mechanics of the game,and to what purpose. Disappointing for everyone when we discover a group is incompatible, in terms of what they'll have fun with.

Yeah, I agree on both accounts.

Back when I ran the Dresden Files game here, I put a lot of people through what was probably an exhausting character-development process.  It was exhausting for me!  But I don't think it was overkill, for the most part.

The time taken to develop the characters makes it really clear whether we're on the same page for what we'll enjoy.  It's a week or two (or more) of a sort of mini-audition for players and GM alike.  A chance to see how well that player will mesh with the group.

Sadly, It did result in a lot of potential players who never made it through character-creation.  But at least we knew that we were at odds.  And I kept the game running for over two years.  A record for Dresden Files on RPOL.

I've scrolled through the posts for info about U-Con in Michigan in two weeks, but didn't notice any.

There is a FATE track for the Con, apparently organized and run by Leonard Balsera. There are a number of events, even a luncheon!

Does anyone know or have info about about this?
This message was last edited by the player at 16:17, Wed 22 Oct 2014.

You want https://www.ucon-gaming.org/ for the overall convention website, and for the FATE Track specifically you want https://www.ucon-gaming.org/re...ts/browse.php?tags=8.

4321 Fate: Fate Track GMs Game with Lenny!, GM: Leonard Balsera, 4 players, No XP/Simple, Friday 7p-11p. Lenny will concoct a FAE or Fate Core game for a group of the Fate Track GMs from scratch, using nothing but his formidable psychic powers, a stack of index cards, and some open-ended questions to get the ball rolling. Good times will be had by all! Must be a Fate GM to register/play. Adults Only (18+) $3.00

Well, I was thinking of signing up for this, but who decides who qualifies as a FATE GM?

You need to be running a FATE event at the convention, presumably.

I know I don't post often, but I had to share a thing I found on DriveThru RPG.

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/...enture-for-Fate-Core

It's looking very much like a Captain N Fate setting. This is a thing I've been trying to put together for ages, and here it is in Fate. My day has been made. Thought I'd pass on the awesome. :D

Captain N? Holy cow, come to think of it, I had an old dnd campaign based on a similar concept. I never was happy with dnd rules, and would love to revive it in another rule set one day.

I'm not sure if advertising is acceptable on this forum, but Bundle of Holding is having another Fate bundle sale.  Seems like a steal, $20 for Fate Freeport, Tianxia and a bunch of other unique sounding settings that I'm not familiar with.

http://bundleofholding.com/index/current
This message was last edited by the player at 02:01, Fri 21 Nov 2014.

Got it.  Reading it.  Recommend it!

Has anyone out there thought or developed basic rules for doing a God-Game in FATE?

It seems to me that it should mix pretty easily, using the Aspects and Declarations structure.  I've never even played in a GodGame, but I'd love to hear if anyone's considered it...

Hey guys. There's a new FATE addition.

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/...e?affiliate_id=24139



Looks awesome!

Hi,

I have been thinking about running a game of FATE, but I don't really know the system, it's more like a test run actually. I've come up with the idea of using an older setting concept of mine, to whom I couldn't find a system to play. Generally it's something like a low sci-fi? I don't know if this word exist.

Anyway, energy is quite scarce, the terrans are just beyond the first steps of colonization, only having 5-7 planets under colonization, plus Earth. Travelling between planets is not easy, only the largest ships can make a run between a colony and Earth in just a few years, with their inner reactor. Since energy is not something common in the colonies, I've thought about making the laser weapons to have battery, for not using their weapons on everything. I think it would make a great addition if they don't shoot randomly at shadows, because they have charges for only 12 shots.

Which brings up the question, is it a good idea to include a bit more inventory and management into FATE rules? Also, what about including multiple types of weapons? Do Laser Pistols/Rifles and Plasma Pistols/Rifles just damage the same? I'm not really confident in adding armour, a simple space suit shouldn't protect against a laser rifle designed to kill.

My setting also includes that gravity generator is not yet invented in an efficient mode. Maybe a huge Terran space station could use one, but I prefer smaller ships (like one I want the players to use) not to have artificial gravity, do you think it causes some problems, if most of the scenes already take up Zero G aspect? Once or twice it might be fun, but I'm afraid it's not good in long run.

How do boosts work exactly? I skimmed through the book, and they write n examples for k aspects, but somehow I can't find what do boosts do exactly, how to get them, and what to use them for.

Thanks!

In reply to korodikrisz (msg # 185):

You may want to look at VSCA's Diaspora, which aims for a crunchier feel than FATE Core.

Diaspora seems tailor-made for what you've described, although you could also do it with STRANDS of FATE which is pretty crunchy for Fate systems, and aims to be setting-agnostic.

There's also that fan-made Mass Effect game using FATE...

I'm not really looking for a crunchy rules addition. Yes, energy is going to be low, but not outright survival, as they have plenty of food an resources once they return to the space station.

Also, as far as I see these books are not free. I'm not sure I want to buy them just to use some ideas from them. Jadepunk looks interesting, I might look more into it, as I'm not familiar with that kind of setting. I'm just looking for ideas and experiences, as I haven't played FATE before.

Which reminds me, I'm planning to divide Lore to Medicine and Engineering, and adding Piloting. Something else what might be useful?

Mass Effect is 100% free.

 ~ http://masseffectrpg.org/wp/?page_id=51

Diaspora and Strands Of Fate are not so much crunchy as feel crunchy. Both were built off Spirit Of The Century rather than FATE Core, but numerous options from the FATE System Toolkit grew out of alternate builds such as these.

Oh, and look at the various Worlds Of Adventure from Evil Hat.

Most tweak FATE Core in interesting ways to suit their settings.

I might check the ME later, 250 pages would be too much for the moment. As I'm still reading the last quarter of the core book.



Aside from FATE Core, I know none of them, so it doesn't help me to evaluate how crunchy they are. :)

However, as I said I don't plan to use these "rules" for long, just as long as they are in that part of the space. Otherwise, a simple "you have enough money/resources to do that".

What about the constant Zero G part? Should it be a third aspect, or just throw it into the 2 aspects/scene?



Heh, they are actually sound pretty nice.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:59, Thu 26 Feb 2015.

Can you start a thread for A Spark in Fate Core, please?

I have been tinkering with the idea of a Warhammer rpg universe game using the FATE rules. Has anyone seen a conversion of the system for Warhammer? I am probably going to end up doing my own, but it would be interesting and inspiring to see what others have come up with, if such a thing exists.

https://fate40k.obsidianportal.com/

It ventures a bit too far into rules-crunchy for me.  It could be done just as easily with vanilla Core.

Enjoy  :)

I agree with Doccus, vanilla Fate Core could do WFRP easily. You wouldn't need to convert anything really.

There are not too many things to covert I agree. Few skills (like Outdoor Survival), and the magic system needs work though. I know that those are more like ordinary tweaking than conversion, but still something that would need to be done. Those of you who know about the magic in Warhammer, how would you do it? How to include the delicious danger and nature of miscasts? New skill for channeling & magic, aspect to buy in? I was thinking about doing mini sheet for every order (a la pg. 291 in FATE core) and perhaps limiting the maximum of that magicking skill compared to some "level" of the magister (apprentice, journeyman wizard etc.). Too crunchy?

I think those ideas would work well. The Survival skill is an easy add. Magic skill would too, and miscasting could just be a failure a result of a failure on your roll.

The thing is, one of the fun parts of the miscasts is that it can happen even when the spell succeeds. How about a miscast whenever at least 3 or the 4 dice show the same face (with or without the notation that the 4th dice needs to be blank)? Or if that is too great a chance, then maybe just the ++++,---- or the empty line (3/81 chance).

Hi! You just hit one of my favorite parts of Fate Core, Thorfred. In the rules as written already, you can have miscasts on a successful spell. It's the Succeed at a Cost rules, explained on page 132. Basically, Failing or Tieing on a roll isn't normally considered a success, but you can still succeed on those outcomes by taking some cost. Either you give your opponent a boost, or you take stress or a consequence, or something non-mechanical but bad for you happens.

That can easily cover magic working but still having backlash. :D

That is true, good point. Maybe I am just not yet used to the idea that a poor roll might still be success. Have to get more experience with the system to be comfortable with that rule. My initial idea of the problem (for me, in my head, so far... not in the system per se) I have is the idea of active opposition. If someone for example dodges my fireball with athletics, how can that roll translate into a miscast? I know that it can, once I get used to this thing. Thanks Nintaku for the... um... assurance =D.

I tried to use that logic and ran into a bump. How would you mechanically handle this: Mage casts a fireball and the Enemy uses athletics to dodge. Is there a way to miscast, but still succeed? The combat is a bit hard, as the damage is per shift you get, but a failed roll gets none. So I can describe miscast, but there is no simple way to get damage done.

The first idea I get, is that mages have stress track/consequences called "Miscast" or "Magic" or some such. Then he can cross those to get more shifts. One could also use the mental track, but then it is usually limited to the mage... And we all know how much more delightful collateral damage is =D.

My head isn't so good right now, but I have an article that might help you out. Ryan Danks wrote an article on how to use Fate Core, straight out of the book, to have Superman as a character. You may be able to take this concept and apply it to the Mental stress/Consequence track to represent collateral damage for magic-user types.

http://ryanmdanks.com/?p=261

Fireball vs Athletics, you could turn the failed attack into a success by simply narrating the target being caught in the blast, but the spell drained too much energy from the caster, or he was caught in the blast, or...wait, weren't you saying this was Warhammer we were talking about?

Miscast: the fireball lands, explodes and hurts the Athletics guy, and reveals that it exploded into a demon that's now trying to eat the soul of the caster! :D

Hahah, good Warhammer-y tone there. The problem was that were do the shifts come to  actually damage the Enemy? Hitting without damage will do no good =D. I have read that article a few days ago, good read, will read it again.

Anyways, thank you guys for the input.

Correct me if I'm wrong since my experience with WH universe comes from 40K, but isn't miscast much worse than simple failed cast? (Like say eternal damnation or demon of Khorne appearing?)

The tables contain all kinds of nastiness separated in minor,major and catastrophic curse of Tzeentch. Milder effects are chilling winds, curdling milk, spasming hand or possibly defecating youself. More severe things are hauntings, demons appearing, caster being sucked into the realm of chaos, everybody in the area taking wounds etc. All in all, most of the effects are not instantly fatal, though the effects tend to raise lynchmobs in the paranoid Old World.

Here's how I'd do it.

When casting a spell, player makes the first spellcasting roll. Depending on the result, player has two options. Either spend Fate point (or take mental stress), to fail second roll or roll for the miscast. If player decides to pay the price, spell succeeds or fails and nothing else happens.

If, however, character can't or won't pay the price (or chooses to succeed at cost), the player makes second "miscast" roll. If miscast roll is worse than initial spellcasting roll, again nothing happens -- the caster manages to keep warp under control. If, however, miscast is better than initial roll, the initial spell uses the miscast result and the GM decides which of the two rolls as a source of miscast narration.

For instance, Vladislav, a Kislev shaman is the only defense left in his village when several khornite wannabes decide to impress their superiors with yet another senseless carnage. Vladislav decides not to abandon his pregnant wife and most of her family, so he decides to blast the cultists a little with fireball. Vladimir has Fair Lore (+2) and rolls -1 on fate dice, resulting in only +1. Vladislav's player, knowing that this woult take out only one cultist at best, decides not to worry about consequences and chooses to make the miscast roll. Rolling +3, for superb result, he sends khornites screaming back to their loving master. Now it's up to GM to decides whether to use average (+1) miscast result to fill the villagers with gratitude and understanding that they've dodged the bullet at meager price of some milk, or to use superb (+5) result to have Slaanesh make Vladislav's matrimonial bliss even more sweet.

Very interesting take on the matter Tzuppy. Yet something I could not have come up with myself. If I got it right, this means about 50/50 to get a miscast if you do not pay a fate point to be safe. Of course it is not really so, as the player can judge from the first roll how likely the Tzeentch curse is. I like your take, though it seems that you have made the magic a bit stronger. The player gets two rolls of which he can choose the best one. It also limits the spell use quite greatly, if the GM enforces the paranoid feeling of the world, where even simple miscasts (should they be noticeable) can cause exaggerated social backlash (cue the torches, pitchforks and some good ol' rope). I also like the idea of mental stress being of use, as that makes high Will preferable for a mage. Whatever the system, Will needs to be a part of the equation.

This idea would bring some other interesting thoughts as well. Especially considering dark magic. Considering a following stunt for example:

DARK MAGIC: the character gets +3 (or even +4)to his miscast roll, if he opts to use Dhar to fuel his spell.

As the Dhar is described to be stronger than just one colour of the magic, I think taking the path should offer some benefits power-wise(and it is of course a sure path to damnation).

Hi there. I'm currently creating the universe behind a Viking mythology space opera game I'm doing and a lot of people on the interest thread have been suggesting Fate Core as a system to run it on. I've had a look at Fate Core and I like what I see so far, but there are a few areas I'm a bit unclear on. First though, is there anything I should expressly know about when creating the game setting that is unique to Fate Core? Currently I'm getting all the universe lore, game world and possible storylines together and I was wondering if I have to take other things into consideration while doing this.

A lot of the world building is usually done collboratively.  You could probably get away with broader strokes, and offload some of the heavy lifting to the players.

You say usually, so could I actually get away with not having collaborative world building? I put a little research into the nature of Fate Core and a complaint that quite a few people seem to have with it is that world building drags on for too long and/or players dropping out can put a stop to things in the world creation stage.

You can definitely get away without the collaborative world building if you already have things worked out ahead of time.

What comes to the world building, I would say that don't overdo it. If you have neat ideas, write them down and give them aspect or two. That is enough. Do not micromanage beforehand, because in this game I get the feeling that the world is forming around the players naturally, even more so than in many other good games. I think the magic system is one of the only things that need to be clear about beforehand, but then again, magic (or the lack of it) is the most important and beloved part of a game system to me.

Yes, you can.  One of the things that many Fate players like about the system is that they have a voice in most of the creation of the environment, however.  I have had only one out of five Fate games I've run flounder in the world building phases.  You just have to have a firm hand with folks.  The bonus is twofold.  First, players that helped create the story are more firmly connected to it.  Second, since you're going to be relying in folks to create a lot of the story as it progresses (that's what Fate points are for, after all), you weed out the folks who are unwilling to do that.

I treat my Fate games much more like a free-form game with some rules to get everyone on the same page.  The crunchier a "hack" gets for Fate, the less likely I am to enjoy it.  I did enough "am I flanking him?" 10 minutes per combat round madness in the good old days of D&D :)

I own both Fate Core, FAE and the Toolkit and have also acquired Aether Sea. The hunger grows while eating as the saying goes around here and I find myself seeking the next Fate thing to read.

If one does not take into account the above-mentioned articles, what is your favorite document? What should I get next? I prefer things that use the newest rules, though older editions are not automatically excluded. It does not have to be free either. I am just interested to hear what others have liked and why.

Camelot Trigger

Never heard of that, have to check it out.

EDIT: Ah, belongs to Worlds in Shadow. Sounds cool!
This message was last edited by the player at 03:17, Fri 10 Apr 2015.

I have a lot of them :)

I enjoyed Fate Freeport (a take on FAE with different approaches and a simple magic system), am kickstarting the Fate Core edition of Bulldogs, have played a single game of The Ministry Initiative, and was in an Atomic Robo campaign until the owner had to bail.  I have a smattering of other books / freely released material as well.

@Doccus: what are the things you like in the list you gave? Does they have some detail that caught your attention? Are they worth getting?

Fate Freeport provided a very nice transition to Fate for D&D players, as the Approaches mimicked the D&D attributes.  The magic system (and especially spending boosts to power your magic) was nice as well.

Atomic Robo had some fantastic character creation hacks.  It took doing it once or twice to get used to it, though.  It provided a nice transition from class-based RPGs to Fate.

Nice to know. I have eyed the Freeport a bit. Even if I have almost consciously avoided D20 games, the description still entices me. I am always interested in magic systems.

Another question to all: have you bought the Fate Codex e-zines? They seem interesting and the prize to subscribe is cheap. Are they good?

I'm a fan of any version of Fate, but I vastly prefer FAE with some Core advice and bits thrown in. The heavier ones just seem needlessly complex, though they've all been fun. Atomic Robo especially. Can't go wrong with high-octane pulp madness.

I have read the FAE through a few times and I have to admit it is elegant. One of the small things that bothers me with FAE is the feeling that it lacks mechanical character growth. The aspects are cool, as are the approaches, but for me the skills and improving them is something so ingrained in my view of roleplaying that the approaches feel... lacking. Also it does feel that almost every aspect can be used almost in every situation, unless the GM truly uses his imagination to craft specific situation to rule some things out. I have the same feeling with Wushu and Risus rpg as well and I like both of those games a lot. I am fully aware that it might change with time as I get more used to FAE, but for now I just crave a bit more game-y mechanics.

I have heard quite a lot of praise for the Atomic Robo, I have to put it on my to-get list.

I think you should use the FAE approaches like you use dungeon world moves. Let them describe how they react and then figure out what approach it was. Also approaches can have consequences. (I've been thinking about this lately)

Let's take us to a situation where there is a locked wooden door. Every approach will have different consequences.
A forceful approach will make a lot of noise and will destroy the door (or at least the lock) as the door is rammed down.
A clever approach tries to pick the lock or lift the door out of it's hinges, not drawing much audible attention, and with the option of closing the door again if needed. (to block out the horde of rats, zombies, robot laser chickens in the next room for example)
-> If you succeeded at picking the lock like this you also have the option to take a sneaky approach to opening the door.
A flashy approach basically burns down the door and is even more likely to draw attention than the forceful approach.

Those are all good examples and I will most likely use them. The system is elegant IMO as stated before. FAE would be my go to for a one shot or when luring in new people.

Do that. It's amazing, even if you aren't a fan of the comic, but especially if you are. If you haven't read it, it has recently become available for free online: http://www.atomic-robo.com/atomicrobo/v1ch1-cover
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:26, Tue 29 Dec 2015.

I've been a Fate Codex supporter since the beginning.  Lots of good tidbits in that magazine :)

As stated above, Atomic Robo is complex, until you figure out that most of the character creation crunchiness is just picking broad concepts which drive your skill pyramid.

As for FAE character growth, it's somewhat subtle.  Raising an approach provides a lot of mechanical advantage, as they're often used more frequently than the narrower skills in Core.  If a lot of the activities your character does are Flashy, adding one to Flashy is a big deal :)  Adding a stunt or refresh point can be a major boost, as well.

Hi,

I'm reading through the Fate Toolkit SRD and seeing lots of cool stuff. Some things pretty radical.

For example the 'aspects only' version that does away with skills completely and relies on the aspects to drive play (using them as skills of a sort with a passive +1 when not invoked). Has anybody tried this and if so, did it work?

This seems like a delightfully extra-light option for Fate, if it works.

Tried this once way, way back. Found it lacking when the first PC tried to punch a bad guy in the face. Duh, anybody has any punching aspect? Punching aspect?! Pfffffff... all our characters have cool magical aspects. Do snakemen have any punching aspects? Of course not. They were not supposed to be too tough. So what do we do now?


We filed it eventually under too weird to work.

I'd rule that they'd punch at average (+0) than, as you would with skills that you don't have in the standard core game.

To me that screams being far, far too literal. When doing aspect-only Fate you need to accept that not everything will be covered by an aspect, but not everything needs to be. Further, aspects aren't generally laser-focused like skills. Strong as an Ox would work just as well for punching someone, and no need for an 'I can punch' aspect. If you're familiar with HeroQuest, they're an umbrella keyword rather than individual listed skills. Or Risus.

I thought immediately about RISUS when I read it. Should be fun to try out some time.

IMO, one needs either more aspects or broader ones, to cover what skills or approaches would. We were doing regular aspects in no skill game and that didn't work. In the end the only aspect remotely applicable to physical conflict was being a zombie. (One of the characters was a sentient magical medallion, which would attach itself to a dead body to animate it for a while.)


I did try RISUS once. The point is that cliches in Risus have at least two or three useful things to do per individual cliche. I recall playing a swashbuckler and using it for everything, from participating in swordfights, shooting those early pistols, to swinging from ropes and seducing barmaids.


I think that's why our Aspect-alone Fate didn't work.

This is the advice they give themselves.
Seeing as it has sparked at least some discussion, would anyone be willing to test it out with me? It would probably be slow paced though, I don't think I can post every day.

I don't mean to be rude, but if the players were magical trinkets and you're trying to run straight-up fights, then the problem wasn't the system.

Yeah, but with skills, someone is bound to take Fighting. We simply were not thinking that far ahead.

I came across Numenera when it was still on Kickstarter and have been thinking abobout it since. I figured I'd try it sooner or later, but I never found time even to read it. I know it's beautiful, but never got beyond the illustration. So quick question, how Numenera (and upcoming Cypher system in general) measure to Fate Core?

I am a big fan of Agents of S.W.I.N.G. and have collected almost everything that has been written for it.

But it is not of Fate Core and should probably have an update, also it is extremely stylized for the swinging '60s, more Austin Powers and Avengers than M:I or James Bond.

Is there a game for more contemporary espionage for Fate Core?

Has anyone bought War of Ashes the new grimical fantasy setting for Fate accelerated based on the zombiesmith war-game rules

I picked it up yesterday and really like what I've read so far

No, but I did read the preview info  Evil Hat posted a while back. What it had me wondering was what exactly is the focus of gameplay? What is the default assumption of what PCs are supposed to do in that setting?

Not having read too far into it I'm not too sure. It does have a Hellfrost feel to it though, with the cold north infringing on the warmer climates and resources becoming scares but apart from that haven't got into the meat of it yet

In reply to jamat (msg # 239):

I acquired it and am reading the setting materials at the moment. Have yet to delve into its particular take on FAE.
This message was last updated by the player at 20:14, Wed 04 Nov 2015.

I thought we had a Camelot Trigger thread on here, but it appears not. Given the volume of traffic through here (not much), I figure rather than create a brand new thread I'll just ask my Camelot Trigger questions here and hope someone who knows the setting / system better than I do responds.

Two Questions:

​1. Can an armour be one-shotted?

Given how systems substitute for complications in absorbing stress, I'm curious about what folks do when there are serious amounts of stress delivered -- in keeping with the genre, where a "FORM BLAZING SWORD" moment (a bunch of piled up Boosts / Advantages) should be able to cleave an armour fully in two. The rules cover up to six points of stress being absorbed by taken two systems offline... but what happens above that? The character has their own stress boxes, yes, but beyond that... is that a Taken Out result despite there being potentially a number of undamaged systems remaining? Meaning a 10-shift result on a character with three available stress boxes results in a Taken Out. That's how I'd play it, but I'm curious if others interpret this the same way.

2. Medusa Moon, and other siege armour... do the +2 armour stunts stack?

Siege armours are made up of segments which are essentially armours in and of themselves... when engaging one of the segments, is the siege armour allowed to bring stunts and skills from other segments to bear? Take Medusa Moon as an example: Great(+4) Armour from the Brain Core, and three different +2 Armour vs. Melee stunts, one each in quadrants A, B, and C. Does that mean that attacking the Face segment would be vs. Armour +4, while going after A, B, or C would be vs. a +6? Or do they all stack, making a total of +10? Crazy high, but this -is- the setting's ultimate boss...
This message was last edited by the GM at 05:39, Sun 22 Nov 2015.

Sorry it took me so long to answer. I've been away from my books for a few days and I wanted to double check before I replied.

There's a Worlds on Fire/Worlds in Shadow thread for the setting that appear in those books. CT would best fit in that thread, but here works too.

1. An Armour/Pilot could theoretically be one-shotted, yes, but it'd take a crazy amount of stress and is realistically not going to happen. Armour Systems could potentially absorb up to 6. The Pilot could take a consequence as well of up to 6. Plus check off a stress box. Pilots and Armours do NOT have a separate stress track. They share a stress track. The Armour might even make the track better while the pilot is in it, but it's still the same track. But if you could do something like 17 unmitigated stress you could take out an unharmed Armour/pilot in one blow. Good Luck with that though.

2. I'd say yes they absolutely stack. Why? Because the Armour still only has one stress track total. If you decided to treat each segment of the Siege Armour as an enemy in-and-of-itself then I would say no, but as long as it's only got one stress track, then, yes, those stunts would stack. Siege armour is supposed to be crazy powerful.
This message was last updated by the GM at 03:17, Fri 04 Dec 2015.

Didn't know where else to put this but I've been thinking about those one hit battles Samurai have and came up with an idea of a rule set. I was wondering if anything strikes anyone as just wrong.

Extra: Bushido Honor
Permissions: Everyone in a Samurai game should have the "Strict Follower of Bushido" or "Dirtiest Duelist in the Shogunate" or equivalent troubles to represent their Samurai or Ronin status.
Costs: Skill Ranks

At creation, followers of Bushido gain a special Stress track based on the higher of their Deceive, Provoke, Rapport, or Will (and has either 2, 3, or 4 point stress boxes as appropriate for their level in said skill). These skills, along with Fight (and in some games, Shoot) compose the "Iaido Battle". The Iaido Battle is a special kind of Challenge between two people reflecting a duel that ends with a one hit conflict.

In the Challenge, both participants take up to 3 exchanges creating advantages with Deceive, Provoke, Rapport, or Will. They must use a different skill each of the three exchanges, attack, or concede. If both make all three rolls, they may use Fight (or Shoot if appropriate) with all the Advantages they created on the previous three exchanges. The winner freely invokes every Advantage they created on the loser while they suffer no ill effects. They may choose whether these shifts apply to Honor Stress or physical stress. If one party attacks early, the best they can hope for is not allowing the other party to get any more Advantages. If the loser concedes, they may revert physical stress to honor stress.
This message was last updated by the player at 19:51, Sat 12 Dec 2015.

I might recommend something similar to steelsmiter, but I don't think the rules need any Extras to cover it. You'd simply start a Conflict off with combatants using mental skills and the Mental stress track rather than Fight. Once you've softened up the enemy sufficiently, make your Fight roll.

The Extra does provide a good structure to keep the feel and tone of the game, but my suggestion is when you want to stick as close to Core as possible and still do all the things Extras often provide.

Been thinking about how to respond, because I'm not quite sure I got what you've said right. Just letting it out there that I am not ignoring the fact that you responded. What I'm getting is either that you would use something without the extra honor track for something like a modern gunfight, and only use the honor track when it fits, like Samurai?

I posted here a few months ago after buying war of ashes fate of agaptus but not many people seemed to know anything about it or not bought it.

So I thought I'd ask again if anyone now has it / played it or will be playing it and what people's impressions were?

More or less, yeah! Personally, I don't like using Extras when existing mechanics will do the job just as well, so unless I really wanted to put the idea into the players' heads that this is how it works, I'd simply have a duel be a regular combat that uses Provoke, Will, finally Shoot/Fight skills. The first couple rolls would be against Mental Stress, aiming to deal Consequences. Treat it like a Challenge, against an actual opponent instead of several separate problems.

Still, that's the kind of thing I do to avoid needing Extras in the first place. Most of my players do not dig it, so keep in mind that everyone but me likes Extras. Your Honor stress track idea is perfect and sets the tone for a Samurai style game. If we were talking gunslingers, I'd probably instead call it Grit and attach it to a Reputation skill.



Sadly, I've no idea what this is. Just wanted to quote it and mention it here because I commented on something completely different and don't want your questions getting lost.

Hey guys, I just found out about House of Bards. It looks intruiging reading the blurb. Has anyone here tried it out? And if so, what's the verdict?

I see there is a new book out called Deep Dark Blue, which places the action into the waters instead the space. IRL they are like heaven and earth (or to be more precise, space and deep waters), but gameplaywise I expect them to be similar. Breach is deadly, you need suit up to go outside, and there are stations to refuel.

I'm reading it atm. but don't know when will I finish. My personal favourite is Psychademia so far.

I was wondering how much you'd have to tinker with fate before it ditinctly becomes 'no faith'.

Mainly because I was thinking about how to make it more pbp friendly by dumping the fate point economy and treat every aspect as a free aspect to invoke or compel without cost, making fate points unneeded.

I kept thinking, and my little seed of a system kept growing more and more away from fate. I still have the idea of aspects, which I love, and a sort of ladder for success. I'm thinking of eliminating skills and approaches (rather letting the narrative guide that) and stress and concequences to avoid play that revolves around trying to get the best for your character, and rather try to find something that rewards storytelling in general, kind of like "The Fall of Magic", which is pretty sweet! I like it if the focus is more on the story than on the characters. And being diceless makes it easier for forum play too I think. Or even at the table.

But I guess my question is: What makes Fate, Fate? Are it aspects, is it the fate point economy? Something else? Thoughts?

I think it's somewhat the aspect to each other. All of the games I played in it has stuck on the last aspect, as it is quite hard to have people together for that long on a pbp game. If I were to GM one, I would cut that one out, and replace it with an individual aspect instead. Like in the Psychademia mentioned before.

What really makes Fate Fatey is the Fate Point Economy. It's how Aspects relate the mechanics to the narrative and give players and GMs more control over how to shape things, making it more a group storytelling session rather than a tactical competition. The FP economy is at the heart of how aspects work in a way that makes it Fate.

What Frili's described sounds almost exactly like HeroQuest, with exclusively aspects, no FP, and focusing entirely on how the story flows because of the character rather than how the story affects the character (which is what Consequences are about). I'd take a look into HeroQuest and see if you can take anything from that to apply to what you're doing, but it honestly sounds like you accidentally completed that transition yourself.

Any thoughts on posting what you've written up, once you've got enough to be comfortable?

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 254):

Once I have time to work it out (probably only in the summer) I might start a testing game on here. I actually really don't have time to type it out right now between study and work. I'll see if I can check out HeroQuest in the meantime. Thanks for the tips!

I'm currently reading Mindjammer. It's setting really clicks with me. Its like Ian M Bank's Culture trying to (forcibly) spread their utopian civilization among the lost human colonies spread throughout the galaxy with their major rival being WH40K's Imperium. Has anyone read it or tried running a game?

I haven't read it, but your description sounds amazing.

got it but never got round to more than a quick flick through looks good though

For me, all it comes down to is the ability of players to contribute to the reality of the game.

I make all games I play, under any system, as Fate-like as I can, without fate points or explicit aspects. I'm not certain, but I assume a lot of Fate arose out of the designers, in their own games, getting tired of exchanges like

Player: "I'm a dwarf and we all know that dwarves are hardy, and mine comes from the Carbine Mountains which are super rough. So, can I do [thing that requires extreme hardiness]?"
GM: "Uh, I guess so, makes sense." (Best case. Worst case being an argument or a debate or a pointless series of rolls.)

In Fate, it would be much more acceptable for the player simply to say "I have the aspect 'Hardy Dwarf from the Carbide Mountains' so [thing that requires extreme hardiness] is a cinch. What next?"

Whether or not that was the actual sort of thing that spurred the development of Fate, it's the approach Fate has inspired me to take in my games. If a player tells me that something about their character means that they should get some advantage, then they do. If it makes sense to them, then it makes sense to me and we go with it. I was surprised to find that they'd actually bring down bad things on themselves for no real advantage, based on what they'd established before.

I guess what it comes down to is letting flavor text (including what players invent, or what the table commonly understands to be true) matter as much or more than the mechanics. The fate point economy, I feel, just keeps the highly creative people from running away with the game, but it's not strictly necessary, and from what I hear some veterans of the game don't even really move points around when they play, they just tend to go with what feels right, in terms of both good and bad things for the characters and the pacing.

I'm just curious if anyone's run into any issues long-term with running Fate. Specifically, any instances of actions not falling squarely into one of the four actions. I know the general consensus is to just create an advantage for anything that's not explicitly one of the other three, but I'm wondering if there's been any situations that have come up where the four actions aren't enough.

I would say that the difficulties I've had (other than my own health) involve character creation taking too long in a forum setting. Other than that, I haven't seen any.

I would agree with steelsmiter, any Fate game that's gotten past the initial creation has worked really well for me. Seems like the biggest stall out point.

One game I'm in is wheel of time based and we figured the aspects out a lot in play, just left them blank until it felt like a moment where my character could be fleshed out. Then we'd hammer out another aspect.

People focus far too much on the core rules and not enough on the platform. Due to the nature of the beast, we don't have much of a choice other than to focus on strengths rather than weaknesses.

Building characters in a form setting is a weakness. So I usually opt for a more optimal route of building a character using the basic rules and leaving it at that. I don't delve into a bunch of who know's who bs because most people don't care, they have a set character they want to play let them play them. Use KISS to keep it simple stupid and play on.

Another thing I do to keep the gaming running I inform players the game has a beginning, middle, and end. Fate points and experience is awarded from good posting habits as well as gameplay to spur better posting rates.

Going back to liblarva's question, I haven't encountered any cases where the four actions weren't enough. In some cases, I even think about them in terms of just three actions (combining Attack and Overcome in my head, since an Attack is just Overcome against active opposition). Did you have a specific instance in mind? That might make it easier to see where there might be a problem.

As to the problems of making characters on forums, I think any instance of character creation on RPoL is incredibly difficult, not just Fate. It takes a lot of time and energy, and you need to make sure everyone's starting on the same page. It's possible for a game to stall out at that point, but it's no more likely with Fate than with D&D, Shadowrun, or freeform games.

My own experience differs from rabideldar's, I think. Most players in games I've been in are very interested in their PC's connections with other PCs, which is where Fate comes in handy. Having connecting Aspects gives some solid mechanical oomph to those relationships that would otherwise be discussed at length during game creation, then mentioned briefly and forgotten in play (again, these things aren't just Fatey).

On top of that, I think creating characters in a forum is actually a strength when it comes to Fate in particular. You get more opportunity to see what everyone's thinking and doing, and how the ideas have progressed, since they're all written down. Around a tabletop it's easy to miss a more quiet player's ideas, and you need to really remember what people said they wrote down on their sheet.

It might just be my players being better suited for Fate and better suited for forum play, but just letting you know that these elements aren't troublesome for everyone. No more so than any other system, anyway.

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 264):

I had nothing specific in mind, I was just wondering if players / GMs with more time invested in the system had found any flaw or oversight with the four actions. I'm considering running FAE for a game in the "love the setting, not sure about the system" vein and was curious.

For PBP, are people finding that fate point bargaining slows things down? In most games I've played and run (Fate or otherwise), each interaction or back and forth adds a lot of time (hours to days) to the handling time of the game. I haven't run a long-term Fate game via PBP, so I'm not sure if that's going to add up enough over time to bother me or not.

I find that a Discover action can be very useful to add.

There is one: Create an Advantage. It can be used to either make a new aspect or discover one already on a target. In FATE editions, it used to be called Discover, Reveal, or Assess. Now that's all wrapped up in the Create an Advantage maneuver.



That's partially a function of the game's natural posting rate (which is about the players, not the system) and the way your group is handling those FP bargains. There's actually two areas where that might happen, so not sure if you're talking about one or both.

With negotiating compels, so far in my experience the GM simply suggests "what if Terrible Thing X happens because of This Aspect You've Got?" Players tend to get all excited and take the compel if it's properly awesome. It might slow down if the compel is truly going to wreck the player's day instead of making it more fun, or if a player suggests a compel that just isn't worth a Fate Point.

With negotiating roll boosts, so far I haven't seen it be that much of an issue, but there are considerations to be made. With static opposition, players may or may not get to know the difficulty, but will often say in the post where they made their roll whether or not they're willing to spend FP on it or succeed at a cost. This is usually easiest if they /do/ know the difficulty, cuts out a whole step. With contested opposition, it's usually against the GM, who will only really be spending FP to boost NPC rolls if it's a major NPC who should be tough enough to be kicking PCs around. It might slow the game down a bit during those scenes, but those are big a dramatic things where the focus should be, anyway. Also, so long as you're playing up the aspect being invoked for each roll boost, then everything's working as intended. Feature, not a bug.

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 267):

Yes, and no on the posting rate. Sure, it's a function of the players to a point, but shit happens and you can get a few days between player responses, especially with fixed initiative order (ugh). That's normal and not about system. But it becomes about system when you have to interact more (ie have more posts) to accomplish things. Something like say Apocalypse World that has fixed difficulties and generally lacks modifiers other than the base stats, you can resolve an action with one roll, basically... which is one back-and-forth. "I do X, here's my roll." "Okay, so that means...".

My concern is that with Fate, especially when you're bidding up a result, you're exponentially increasing the handling time.

P1:"I do X, here's my roll."
GM: "Okay, the bad guy's roll is Y."
P1: "But I'm going to spend a fate point to invoke..."
GM: "And the bad guy's going to invoke..."

On and on till the bidding war stops and a final result is reached. So you go from resolution in one back-and-forth, you're adding in however many more just to resolve that one roll.

My concern is that there's generally several hours to 1-2 days between each poster being able to post. You roll at noon. I respond the first time around 8pm. You're Johnny on the spot and respond by 10pm. I don't see that till 8 the next morning... in Apocalypse World that one roll was resolved in my first response and the story's moved on. In a Fate bidding war we're likely still resolving that one roll for another few posts... which pushes the other players' actions back, and their actions take several posts each way to resolve, pushing the next player back, it seems like that would cause a lot of people to drop simply from waiting to get to act.

That's the system interacting poorly with the format (pbp). Sure, you can have an alignment of stars where the one player and GM are online at the same time and tear ass through that in an hour, but in the few years I've been here, I've never seen that happen with any game or system.

I'm not knocking Fate, not at all, just wondering how others handle this peculiarity of the system in the pbp environment. That the system does this isn't really the problem, that it adds several days to the resolution of a given roll in PBP is the problem. I for one would like to know of some solutions so I won't have players waiting a week before they can post because Bob's got a sweet chain of invokes lines up.

Yeah, that's exactly the issue I was talking about that shouldn't even really happen. :P

Like I said, the easiest solution is for the GM to tell the players the difficulties for things before they roll. They then get to decide how much FP they'll spend when they roll, and you get that Apocalypse World one-exchange action. It means the players are more likely to succeed, but then again, they may choose to succeed at a cost rather than fail regardless of the difficulty. You're just cutting out a step and giving them more agency in the process.

When it comes to opposition that can actively use Fate Points themselves, then simply spend your FP ahead of time and then give them /that/ difficulty. Or, better yet, just spend the one FP to have a thing happen. "Because you're standing on a Rickety Bridge, Jerkface the Not Very Nice *spends a Fate Point* cuts the rope suspending it! This Conflict just became a Challenge: climb the brand new Rickety Wooden Ladder!" I suppose that's a bad example. Still, there shouldn't be that bidding war unless you really want there to be. It requires the GM to orchestrate it, it isn't built into the system on its own, far as I'm aware.

In all my time on RPoL, I have never seen it come up. Honestly, I've seen that situation of a player and GM having a flurry of posts, like ten in an hour, far more often.

In reply to liblarva (msg # 268):

My experience aligns with Nintaku's. This situation just doesn't come up like you think it would. Probably because, like you, the players and GM anticipate it.

In my experience as a GM I try give my players the difficulties they are trying to hit when I have their opponents or obstacles do something before them. When I don't or when a player is being proactive they usually post something along the lines of:

"Here's my roll. I'd be willing a spend a fate point to succeed if necessary by invoking "Aspect X" on the roll. If I tie could I succeed at a cost, please?"

Even when I offer Fate points to compel my players they tend to gobble them up rather than counter-offer fate points, so that's never been a issue either.

Why are Fight and Shoot not used as themselves for anything other than Conflicts? The rules imagine using them to show off or impress people, or in competitions, but not as actually combating something.

I understand that there are separate rules for Conflicts, and that if Fight or Shoot get used the game is supposed to shift to that (though why a Conflict can't be happening at the same time as a Contest or Challenge is something I don't understand - happens all the time in movies and books).

What I'm thinking are uses of Fight and Shoot so minor that they don't count as full Conflicts, but fit better in, say, a Challenge. The example challenge in the book involves protecting a house full of people from horde of zombies, by boarding it up, keeping people calm, and performing a ritual. To my mind, Fight and Shoot could fit right in, with the character having to chop back grasping hands so a window can be boarded, or take shots from the roof to thin out the horde (which probably isn't modeled as actual enemies that could normally be fought).

Those could be handled as "Create an Advantage" where Fight/Shoot is just taking the heat off the people doing the actual work. That's a good mirror for other skills being used to Create an Advantage during a Conflict, where Fight/Shoot is doing the actual work of generating stress. Perhaps that was intentional, though not every Challenge will lend itself to Fight/Shoot advantages nor every Conflict lend itself to advantages from any particular skill, so I don't exactly see a mirroring.

(And, come to that, a thoughtful GM could look for ways to make Fight/Shoot necessary to Overcome in most Challenges. Most scenes involving Indiana Jones involve Fight and Shoot in some way, even sometimes other than causing stress. Fight to obtain a uniform, Shoot to open a lock.)

My main reason for thinking along these lines is that I'd like to run a Fate game in which all characters can take part in every type of exchange. I don't want the game to be focused on Conflicts, nor on Challenges and Contests, and I want to treat Fight/Shoot as much like any other "support" skill as possible, so that someone could take it as a pinnacle skill and not feel sidelined like a D&D fighter once initiative isn't tracked anymore.

Long post short: What am I risking by making Fight/Shoot more about Overcoming?
This message was last edited by the player at 19:52, Mon 26 Sept 2016.

Shoot can easily be used to Create an Advantage like "providing cover", "bullets in the air" or "suppressive fire". To use Fight or Shoot to Overcome, make the opposition passive instead of active. That hoarde of zombies in your example is not trying to dodge. I can see that being more Overcome than Attack.

In reply to jollygrin (msg # 272):

Thanks for the reply.

The rules give examples of Fight/Shoot for Create an Advantage, but I'm looking at how we go from "providing advantage for a necessary part of a challenge" to an actual "necessary part of a challenge."

Given that I'm talking about a challenge, I'd generally make the opposition passive, yes. I'm sure one could find a way to apply a Fight or Athletics score to a horde of zombies, but they're more of a force of nature. Arguably, Fight/Shoot would have zero effect on the horde, but I'd frame it as the Fighter/Shooter managing to stem or reroute the main tide, to keep them from busting through.

There really isn't anything stopping you from using Fight or Shoot in a Challenge. The rules as written are totally fine with using them that way, since the very first example of a Challenge, even before the long one with Zird and the zombie horde, includes using Fight as the very first skill.

And besides relatively combat-like options, there's also things like using Shoot to hit the track switch while you're on top of a train so it doesn't go barreling off a cliff (because everyone knows every train has a normal track and the dead end leading to a cliff), or using Fight to pass through a bladed deathtrap room (might be Athletics, but Fight should serve just as well for that one).

Use Shoot to paint the laser on the target long enough for the drones to attach themselves.

Use Fight to arm wrestle the biker so they'll like you enough to get you a meeting with the boss.

Use Shoot to throw your sword at the door to bar it shut from across the room (totally happens in fiction, it's ridiculous and awesome).

Use Fight to hold on to that enraged bear monster for dear life while it tries to throw you off, ultimately running straight back to its master who has the MacGuffin.

Lots of potential Overcome actions.

Yep, I was too focused on the skill descriptions, the example challenge with Zird and the oil-and-water nature of Conflicts and Challenges.

This is the kind of thing I'd want to keep to a relative minimum, mainly because it smacks of "Flex your muscles to impress/intimidate" which I grew to despise after too many years of my fellow D&D players arguing that Athletics can be used to impress and that Intimidate should be Strength-based.

Thanks again.

Oh right! You asked about why can't you use a Conflict in a Challenge, and I had an answer but never gave it.

The main reason is what the purpose of a scene is. In a Challenge, you're basically doing something like darting the camera around to a bunch of tasks being completed at once to resolve the overall situation. It's generally one roll for each task, and the outcome of the whole thing is determined by how the sub-problems were dealt with. It's quick and then it's done. A Conflict is a much more zoomed-in situation that takes much longer to resolve, mechanically speaking. Rather than a signle roll to determine the outcome of the conflict, you have a number of rolls, defenses, stress and consequences as pacing mechanisms, and it generally isn't going to happen in the same span of time around the table.

If you put a Conflict into a Challenge, you'd be removing one of the major benefits of using a Challenge to begin with, that being the speed of resolution. On the other hand, there's no reason that a conflict can't be framed as a Challenge. Maybe your heavy combatant type is using Fight against a relatively high difficulty, while your other types find their own ways to help the situation that don't get framed as Create an Advantage so much as Overcome outright. Superhero battles work great this way: one hero holds off her nemesis to buy time, another goes to deactivate the doomsday machine, a third has to free the hostages.

There are reasons the two aren't quite as connected as they could be, but also ways to intertwine the ideas of them, so long as you know what each is mechanically distinct for.



I would have been one of those suggesting Intimidate have an option to be Str-based for the low-Charisma types who happen to be hulking brutes. One of the things I don't much like about D20 is how rigid the skills are with the stats. Then again, I never understood how a hulking brute could actually have a low Charisma in the first place, considering they're hard to ignore. I guess people assume Charisma means "politeness".

But yeah, using Fight to impress people who are impressed by fighting prowess is exactly why Fight is allowed as an Overcome action in the first place. It's built right into Fate.

I thought that was only one use for them. For instance, the party might be disarming or dealing with a complex trap, the operation of which takes a few moments. Or trying to open a portal quickly. Or conduct refugees onto a rocking ship.

I can readily imagine any of those as taking place while an epic fight is underway. Now, one could just make Fight part of the challenge, but that would seem to trivialize it. There should be at least a few good exchanges before the trap chomps down, the portal opens, or the last little waif is onboard.

Has anyone done that? Run a Challenge of maybe a couple of rolls for each participating character (or making one Challenge check for every couple of Conflict exchanges)? Once the challenge is done or failed, the Conflict might have a clear end, with the PC withdrawing, or maybe the stakes are higher than just bought time.

I've done it with skill challenges in D&D, which is what makes me think about doing it here. Also, it's just very cinematic. Most fights in fiction aren't usually about the fight itself, but about some other goal.

I hear you. Still learning.

Yeah, it just rubs me the wrong way. Like, Robin impresses Little John, but it's an actual "fight" not just flexing and posturing. But, hey, in most Robin Hood stories, there's a Shooting contest at some point. Oh, well.

I could explain my take on Intimidation and Charisma, but I won't ruin this fine thread with that.

Has anyone else been looking at Loose Threads? Seems like it could be a really interesting adventure world. Looking for ideas and thoughts from others.

Nope, but I am game. I would be willing to join and make a character if you want to run the intro adventure?

Not sure I'd have time till after Christmas to run. Was more spitballing and looking for ideas

I've written a game using an adaptation of the FATE Core rules. The main change is of the four actions, and the skill list. My four actions are Attack, Bypass, Create (Aspect), and Discover (Aspect). I have one skill for each of these actions in either a Physical, Social, or Intellectual context.



The setting is one where your worldview (faith or philosophy) comes with an ability to shape or embody at least one of the eight elements (air, cloud, earth, fire, glass, lightning, metal, or water), which makes arguments about which worldview is "right" that much more exciting.

While I've written the book, I'm trying to raise funds to have it designed and illustrated. Like so many before me, I've turned to Kickstarter for help.

https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...ignty-powered-by-fat

I'd appreciate any support: financial and moral. Thanks!

Could we get a thread to discuss Wearing the Cape?

I have a need some help with planting the clues so that my players can find them, strictly speaking in narrative terms (not in dice roll sense). The situation is this:

Main villain (Handsome Jack) has kidnapped and reprogrammed a robot (Loader Bot). Player characters (vault hunters) have mounted a rescue (infiltration) mission. The main problem is that Jack has not only reprogrammed the robot to fight for him (vault hunters can handle that), but has also rigged him to explode should he lose the fight. Now I'd like to place two or three clues along the way so that player characters can discover that the robot's gonna explode, so that they can can try to save him. If it's of any significance the setting is a corporate city (city of Opportunity) withing a post-apocalyptic setting (Borderlands games). System is Eridium Fate, my own Fate Core hack (about which I'm more than glad to talk).

Your players know best how they like clues planted: what seems fair, what seems too obvious, where they like to look. Have you talked to them?

Surprise isn't necessarily ruined by revealing information to players out of game, it just means the surprise doesn't happen at the same time it happens to the characters. And there are advantages to that.

I've been reading this blog since I asked this question elsewhere and for the most part it concurs with what you're saying (as far as I can understand it).

http://thealexandrian.net/word...ames/three-clue-rule

I've only played a little Fate, and I'd like to play more, but I'm a little leery of it because I have yet to see the fate point economy really work.

I haven't ever really seen players feel the need to spend many points. I tend to see them create an advantage, usually using the best skill they have for the situation, which usually gives them at least a boost, but often results in one or two free invocations. Two more advantages are created, each benefitting from a free invocation, which means they're likely to get two more free invocations each. It becomes something of a chain reaction, and means that the players never have to spend more than a fate point or two, to get the ball rolling, and maybe give it the occasional kick.

I can try to slow this down by having the opposition remove a PC advantage before anyone uses the free invocations. In a conflict, I might try piling attacks on them, but if they use a free invocation to defend with style, they get a boost, which they can probably use for free to make another advantage with two more free invocations.

One clear way to deal with this would be to make it harder to create advantages, so that they're often having to spend a fate point just to succeed, which means that their free invocation effectively wasn't free, or (if they managed to succeed with style), they really only got one net free invocation. I'd rather not just hike up the difficulty arbitrarily, though.

It could be that I haven't played long enough scenarios, and that the opposition is supposed to concede and take consequences when that wave of free invocations looms over them, so that in the next scene I have enough fate points to really hit the PCs hard.

Even if I get that part figured out, and the players are spending fate points regularly enough to run low and want more of them, I'm still not sure how to keep the economy from crashing or soaring too high. The players should earn fate points by getting into some trouble due to personal or situational aspects being compelled to their disadvantage. A given disadvantage should, it seems, be cause for higher difficulty and more rolls, which would necessitate spending the fate point they just received for it, or more than that - so what was the point of the compel, other than, one hopes an entertaining scene.

So, is my assumption that a difficulty that earned a fate point should cause about a fate point's worth of trouble off the mark. It is more that a "fate point's worth of trouble" might be worth leaving in place, and that it's a balancing act. Take one kind of trouble here, to relieve another kind here? Risk taking a fate point in the hope of dealing with the bad luck without having to spend it, and slowly building up a stockpile?

I've not had a massive amount of experience playing the Fate system, but if I understand right compels can also be used to introduce dramatic twists in story, or introduce non-roll based complications.

Eg. A character has "A Lover in Every Port". As the GM, you feel the players are having too smooth a run of it in their present locale. Assuming the player here is willing (I would be, but I play for drama more than power) you compel this feature - An ex from a different city/planet/universe has gotten tired of this characters nonsense, and has tracked them down to settle the matter - A shotgun wedding maybe? or possibly just a shotgun.

This give the player a Fate point that they wont be immediately spending to just cancel the trouble, and a chance to play out some back story and maybe some other related compels.

And if you've seen players focussing on their best skills, consider looking at situations where they can't or shouldn't use them. If all their skills are in fighting, direct the story towards a social event where throwing a punch will cause them huge grief with an ally or an important neutral party. Then they should be looking to Fate points to bolster lesser used skills, or at least create advantages that don't just steamroll those poor NPCs.

Anyway, just my two cents.

I think you're right, it's just that dramatic twists and non-roll based complications can, due to the nature of Fate and the way in which it's common for players to prefer smooth sailing, turn into attempts to return to the status quo.


Maybe that's part of it: Fate players have to be prepared to play for the drama, rather than safe and easy situations. The rules definitely appear to assume that it's not necessary for the player to be "willing." It's assumed that they'll either accept the compel or buy it off. Though the rules do also mention "negotiation," so I guess it's assumed that sometimes neither the offered point nor the option to buy off will seem appropriate to some people.

Ideally, yeah, they won't just try to negate the new complication, but that's where the tricky balance comes in. The player might judge that the complication isn't just dramatic and interesting, but could foul up the overall goal. Maybe they're trying to keep a low profile and tail someone, and now this NPC is making a racket or getting in the line of fire, or something. In other words, the complication might represent a stack of new situational aspects that the referee could further compel. I guess I'm thinking in terms of players who work hard not to give the GM any kind of leverage, and maybe I should just try not to play with such people.


Thanks.

Have you guys considered asking the moderators if this discussion group is worthy of being a Discussion Board?

It's a forum that exists to provide opinion and discussion when people might want it.  I don't see that this comes with an obligation on anyone's part to ensure that there is always discussion going on.   Better for it to be here and not be used, than for it to not be here when someone could use it....  Wouldn't you agree?

You clearly have no idea what it actually entails to be an RPoL sanctioned discussion board. Turns out RPOL says you are, but for whatever reason they don't put you in my Discussion Board section. Maybe because I didn't create it?

In any case a more direct answer is "Equivalent for it to be here and not be used than to be there and not be used." Neither one of us knows when any game or discussion board is going to be deleted, but this two days of activity has already put the board in safe territory for another year either way.

If discussion boards require activity, they've been really bad at enforcing mine.
This message was last edited by the player at 14:13, Sat 02 Sept 2017.

Now, now.  There's no need to try to be incendiary with your response.  Sure, I misunderstood your question, but I also never claimed this was a rpol sanctioned discussion board.

Actually, RPOL doesn't actually say we are, either.  Despite the word "discussion" in the title, we are simply a forum in the Discussion category. This means we have a cast list and the right to advertise in Wanted-Players or in response to Wanted-GMs threads.

Simplest reason for why this group isn't a rpol sanctioned Discussion board?

The owner of the board hasn't pursued the option.
This message was last edited by the GM at 00:28, Sun 03 Sept 2017.

What I was trying to do was cheekily admit to a mistake. Take it as incendiary or not as you like. It is what it is, and it isn't what it isn't.


No, but mine are listed in the Heaven section entitled RPOL Discussion Forums link to a message in another game as is this one. How you got listed there without them saying you are an RPOL Discussion Forum is beyond me, but it would explain why the forum isn't on that section of my page.


I do still have cast lists on both of mine, so it's either a rule they're bad at enforcing, or it never was. And I don't want to test the fact that they have not removed my Discussion Boards from the games I can advertise for.
This message was last edited by the player at 03:13, Sun 03 Sept 2017.

As a newbie to Fate, are the many Worlds of Adventure a good starting point as a GM? I was thinking of trying to GM Morts http://drivethrurpg.com/produc...enture-for-Fate-Core if/when I have the time here on rpol someday.

In reply to MalaeDezeld (msg # 294):

They are meant to be, yes. The core system books (Core, FAE, and the toolkits) give you everything you need to run, tweak, and expand upon any of the individual Worlds.

Personally, I never really found most of the Worlds interested me themselves, but I collected them all anyway. Each one has some fascinating special rules in them that can absolutely be used for other things. I put together a Star Wars game using Kriegszeppelin Valkyrie, Legend of Zelda game using Masters of Umdaar, and another friend of mine was putting together an original creation with bits from Frontier Spirit and Psychedemia.

And, naturally, each one is a setting, with plenty of ideas on how to run games using it, so should be excellent resources for a GM who wants to pick up and run something with as little system mastery as possible beforehand. Sadly I haven't gotten a chance to take a closer look at Morts, but I expect it's much the same.

I'd actually recommend running something like a one-shot or short campaign if it's your first time out, and I would stick to pretty vanilla Fate Core or Fate Accelerated. Strangely, even those it's meant to be simpler, FAE can more a harder switch for some folks used to more traditional systems.

Anyway -- I would pick the genre you all like best, or are currently most interested in trying, and cooperatively build the setting if you're talking about a face to face group. If you're talking PBP play here or elsewhere, to avoid bogging down it's often good to have the GM lay the setting out, at least initially. IMO.

Hi all

Just wondering if anyone has uprising RPG my brother got it for me as an extra Christmas present which only turned up last week :(

What are people doing with it? and what's it like to play ?

Hey all, a friend of mine is trying to kickstart a FATE Core adventure book called 'In Thoth's Wake'. Address is below if you have any interest:

https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...e-zine-quest-edition

I may also be able to get some information on the business side of things in case others on RPOL would like to do something similar - if there's interest from others in following his lead, I can post what I am able to learn about his experience.

So I've a question or two.

Which version of Fate, or which specific Fate game, would work for a superhero game with 'modern' superheroes?  And the same question(s) for which would work for a superhero-lite vigilante game (basically the Batman universe)?

There are a number of FATE games that will work for Modern Superheroes. Daring Comics, Venture City, and Wearing the Cape are the three I've read over. Daring Comics and Wearing the Cape have various tools built in to set the power level and tone of the game. Venture City is probably the simplest of the three.

Venture City is also part of the FATE SRD. https://fate-srd.com/venture-c...character-and-powers

Atomic Robo is intended to replicate the Atomic Robo comic books. But it could easily be used for a superhero game.

Alright, thank you for the suggestions.

I'm also a fan of Base Raiders. It's essentially a world that's had Superheroes for some time now, and as such, abandoned lairs and bases are obviously a thing. Your super science base or magical sanctum doesn't disappear when you go missing/get defeated/fly off into space for years at a time.

So a culture of "base raiding" has started to pop up. In the game, you play (at first) mundane characters, who are searching for, and trying to survive, these abandoned bases, in an attempt to gain superpowers. After all, if you can breach the defenses, left behind mutant test subjects, etc., surely there's still some useful technology, artifacts, chemicals, or more?

You essentially have a core gameplay loop of "search for a base, dungeon crawl, potentially gain a power, repeat."

Ah, that sounds like a neat game.

Okay, another question or two.

Which Fate games/system would work well for Cyberpunk? Or Shadowrun?

Most of my Fate experience has been Dresden Files.  And I don't think the magic will easily translate over to Shadowrun all that well.

My group used Fate Accelerated for Shadowrun, and it ran pretty smoothly. Aspects determined our metatypes, along with use of magic and cyberware. Approaches simply informed how our runners handled situations, as normal. We didn't get too fancy with extras or anything.

I vouch for the Venture City rules. I have been using them to run an Exalted game (it is Fantasy + Superheroes to me) and it's been a blast.

They are easy to explain/learn and have been working very well for the game.

Alright, another question for you fine folks.  Where would I find some vehicle rules, for combat and other things?

Wouldn't that be handled just like anything else? There's already a Drive skill. The vehicle would have Aspects, and one could place other aspects on it as a result of exchanges in the conflict. Vehicles could also have stress boxes, but that strikes me as overcomplicating it.

In reply to engine (msg # 308):

Sure, but what about things like space ships, or battleships during WWII, or tank battles, and things like that?  Where it might be a bit more than a few aspects being used with a skill?

I'm not sure why it would be a bit more than that, no matter the scale or the elements involved. Spaceships, battleships and tanks can all be represented by aspects and interacted with via skills.

I assume you can see how, and I assume that you still would rather have more rules, which I am sure someone can suggest. I think I'm just interested in why someone would add such rules, since I myself am very conservative about adding rules and would always prefer to find a way to keep things within the Core rules. I'm that way with magic, too: I don't want more rules, I want something that uses the Core rules. So, magical energy beams are just Shoot, possibly coupled to some related aspects, for example.

Perhaps so.  I'm looking at it more like the vehicles are almost characters, or in fact, replacements for characters.  Mecha, tanks, space ships and so on.

Ah, I see. Or, I see better. I would still think the rules would work without changes or additions. Not that changes and additions couldn't still be fun. Not everyone has my kind of conservatism and inertia to overcome.

In reply to engine (msg # 312):

Nah, I totally get it. :)  You're more of a RAW (rules as written) kind of guy, you seek to find solutions in the rules.  And that's me, usually.  But I like the ability to play with the rules in games like Fate and Powered by the Apocalypse.

I just thought I would check-in and see how everyone is doing. I'm on week three of working from home and it is harder than I expected. But at least I still have a job for now.

How are you all doing?

About the same.

On good days, I got some brain juice left to think about my project of doing a homebrew port of Orpheus (from White-Wolf).

So...  This group has largely been quiet for a long time...

WOuld anybody mind if I did some serious reorganization?

• I'd like to get rid of the threads for games that have never seen any entries, perhaps drop some of the threads with minimal entries.
• I'd like to see a thread for reviews, particularly if you've played one a Fate game or world.
• I'd also like to see a thread for system add-ons...  discussion to help develop.
• A FAQ thread with posts linking to various resources.  Or at the very least linking to Evil Hat's resource of the same nature.

I'm not the owner here, so I don't wanna go off the rails.   I'm not gonna make these changes unless there's no complaint in a weeks time or so.

Your thoughts?
This message was last updated by the GM at 04:01, Sun 07 June 2020.

I think some spring cleaning wouldn't be a bad idea at all, Jait.  Might inspire some chatter.

In reply to jait (msg # 316):

Go for it.

I think it's a great idea, and the forum creator has stepped away from gaming in general for a while, and it doesn't look like he's gonna come back anytime soon. Though I hope he does. Games with him are fun.

In reply to jait (msg # 316):

Some housecleaning would certainly help keep things timely. What were you thinking in terms of reorganization?

Well, I think that I've actually put too many expectations here.   I'm sure everyone would love a thriving community, but it just doesn't seem like there's much desire to actually get there.  I'm not looking to do a one-man show to revive this group.  I think the group is simply dead.     Hopefully, everyone's just busy gaming...

What's the group's policy to advertising offsite games?

RPoL really doesn't like it when you do that. It makes the admins grumpy.

In reply to jait (msg # 322):

Well, for a while, I was dealing with other things and had no time for RPOL.

In reply to jait (msg # 316):

sorry for the late reply - i wouldn't mind