Okay, so I figured I've seen some people mention Fate, and I've got a pretty good idea of the system, so I'll answer questions people have.

Just to be clear, my background is playing D&D and other games (GURPS, Vampire, a little Shadowrun, bunch of other stuff) since around '81?  '82?  Can't remember exactly.  When I first heard about Fate, I had a lot of misconceptions about it, mostly around "the players always win, you just roll to see how awesome you are" and "where's the challenge?" and stuff like that.  I've gotten through that curve, and am happy to talk to others about what the game is really like, especially if you think things like I've just described.

I'm not proposing Fate as the be-all, end-all of gaming.  If D&D is a sports car, then Fate is a truck.  Trucks do different things than sports cars.  You might never need or want a truck.  Even if you do, it's not a 'replacement' for a sports car, and you'll use the sports car and the truck for different things.

The games I've spent the most on in the last bit are:

AD&D (1st ed)
GURPS 4e
Fate

I don't want the prior two to become Fate, and I don't want Fate to become the first two.  Again, sport cars and trucks.  So don't take anything I say here as an attempt to convert people away from those "old-fashioned" games - I *like* them, and prefer to play them in a truly old-school way.  If I could find what I call a "paleo" campaign, I'd be all over that in a heartbeat.

Anyway, I'll start with some basics.

Q: Is Fate a story game?
A: Sort of.  It's not something like My Life With Master, or Fiasco, or Primetime Adventures.  It's far closer to a traditional game than that.  The main area where it differs from traditional games is that it attempts to model how things work in "fiction", including story structure to an extent.  But it does so primarily using more traditional mechanics - skills, stunts (which are like feats/advantages).  There's a few things that don't really map well to more "traditional" structures, though.

Q: Is Fate one of those "roll to see how awesome you are" games?
A: Hell, no.  One of the hardest things for new-to-Fate players is getting used to the idea that failure is pretty normal in Fate.  In fact, if there's no chance of failure, you normally don't roll.  The game drives pretty hard to every roll having a reasonable chance of failure.

Q: Is Fate a game where you're on some linear railroad path?
A: Gods, no.  That's considered pretty crappy gaming in Fate circles.  You're supposed to let players tackle the situation how they want, and let them deal with the consequences of what they do.

Q: So the GM just has to do what the players want?
A: Uh, no.  The players, in general, will decide how they respond to a situation, but it's the GM's job to make that difficult and throw up obstacles.  If the players try something that just doesn't make sense in the world, the GM is perfectly free to say "that doesn't make sense".

Q: So, what is Fate good at, then?
A: Games that center around a set of characters, and the challenges they face.  Yeah, that sounds like "an RPG", but Fate shines when the characters *are* the center of the story.  A good example would be a TV show.  Your main characters are protagonists.  The show is *about* them, but that doesn't have to mean that they always win or that bad things never happen to them.  And if there were different characters, it'd be a show/plot in many ways.

Q: You said Fate isn't good at everything.  I don't think you believe that.  What *wouldn't* you use it for, smartass?
A: Well, "paleo" campaigns where each player has a number of characters, and the world really doesn't care about them aren't well done with Fate.  Most games where the point of the game is to overcome a set challenge, and figuring that out is the point - most old-school D&D modules fit in this category.  A game where exercising a heavy tactical combat system is the point - I wouldn't run X-COM: The RPG using Fate.  And any game with a linear plot/story/path isn't a good match for Fate, as the game gives players too many ways to derail things.  And lastly, any game where you want the game to mostly be around "system mastery" and figuring out the ins and outs of the mechanical game systems isn't a match for Fate at all.

Q: Can characters die?
A: Absolutely.  It's not super-common, but the players don't have to "agree" to it, either.  Characters have the option of "conceding" out of fights, but that carries its own set of penalties.  But if a character doesn't concede, it's absolutely possible for them to die.  Additionally, fights have a high likelihood of marking the character with a "consequence" which can last anywhere from just a "scene" to being a permanent change to the character.  So even if you win a fight, or lose without dying, it's unlikely that you'll get away with no harm.  In some ways, it can be more harsh than D&D or many other games where most fights will just end up with easily-cured hit point damage.  Consequences have minimum amounts of time that they'll impact you, and there's no real way around that.

Don't worry Rob, Fate is, according to the party line, an RPG, so it goes into the other forums.

But I see you're picking up quick.

Quote from: Rincewind1;680497Don't worry Rob, Fate is, according to the party line, an RPG, so it goes into the other forums.

But I see you're picking up quick.

I can actually understand a lot of it, coming from the background I came from.  Most of the Q/A stuff I've put up there are based on opinions I've held at one point.

What I've found most interesting in having read both FATE Core and FAE is that the players do have input on the type of game and some game details to play, but that it's pretty explicit in the book that the GM is given leeway to come up with all the details.  Yes, the encouragement in the game is for the players to look awesome, but you do that by spending those FATE tokens (bennies, whatever).  But you accumulate them by playing to your flaws.

In some respects FATE is closer to Savage Worlds than the traditional d20 and old school games I've played.

No questions yet.

I just got the free version online recently, and I've been reading through when time allows. Overall I have to say the system seems interesting. I would qualify myself as more of an old school gamer.

When I do come up with some questions I'll post.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;680523What I've found most interesting in having read both FATE Core and FAE is that the players do have input on the type of game and some game details to play, but that it's pretty explicit in the book that the GM is given leeway to come up with all the details.

Yeah, it looks something like this in practice:

GM:  "Let's have a game about FBI agents investigating weird shit!"
Players:  "Awesome!"... they make the cast of Fringe
GM:  Takes the characters and adds all of the other elements of Fringe.

So it's definitely encouraged that players have input into the setting, but the GM responsibility is still there pretty strongly.  And it could have gone differently, too.  If the players had come up with characters more like Mulder/Scully, then the game could have easily gone more X-Files than Fringe.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;680523Yes, the encouragement in the game is for the players to look awesome, but you do that by spending those FATE tokens (bennies, whatever).  But you accumulate them by playing to your flaws.

Not only playing to your flaws, but actively getting harmed by them.  Part of the Compel "template" is "and this goes wrong when...".  So if nothing goes wrong, it's not a Compel, and you don't get the Fate point.  So sad.

But you kind of touch on something interesting there.  In Fate, characters can (within reason) succeed at just about anything.  But they can't succeed at *everything*.  A good Fate GM forces those decisions, and forces players to make those tradeoffs.  That idea of "how badly do you want this?" is pretty core to the game.  I've described combat as a combination of playing chicken and a bidding war, and I've heard it said that rolls in Fate don't really determine success or failure, but rather set the cost of success/failure.  I think those are accurate.

And of course, none of that matters if you don't put out more things for players to succeed/fail at than they can "buy" their way into success over.  More than most other games, if your players aren't failing frequently in Fate, you're really not doing the game justice.  Think Harry Dresden:  Does awesome things?  Check.  Gets his ass handed to him on a regular basis?  Check.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;680523In some respects FATE is closer to Savage Worlds than the traditional d20 and old school games I've played.

Yeah, I can kinda see that, though I'd still use Savage Worlds for different things than Fate.  Though I said X-COM = GURPS above, Savage Worlds would also be a contender just for speed of play.  I see SW and GURPS as being more in the same family than Fate - Fate has a *relationship* to those games, definitely, but it's more of the weird distant cousin.

Quote from: robiswrong;680541Yeah, it looks something like this in practice:

GM:  "Let's have a game about FBI agents investigating weird shit!"
Players:  "Awesome!"... they make the cast of Fringe
GM:  Takes the characters and adds all of the other elements of Fringe.

So it's definitely encouraged that players have input into the setting, but the GM responsibility is still there pretty strongly.  And it could have gone differently, too.  If the players had come up with characters more like Mulder/Scully, then the game could have easily gone more X-Files than Fringe.



Not only playing to your flaws, but actively getting harmed by them.  Part of the Compel "template" is "and this goes wrong when...".  So if nothing goes wrong, it's not a Compel, and you don't get the Fate point.  So sad.

But you kind of touch on something interesting there.  In Fate, characters can (within reason) succeed at just about anything.  But they can't succeed at *everything*.  A good Fate GM forces those decisions, and forces players to make those tradeoffs.  That idea of "how badly do you want this?" is pretty core to the game.  I've described combat as a combination of playing chicken and a bidding war, and I've heard it said that rolls in Fate don't really determine success or failure, but rather set the cost of success/failure.  I think those are accurate.

And of course, none of that matters if you don't put out more things for players to succeed/fail at than they can "buy" their way into success over.  More than most other games, if your players aren't failing frequently in Fate, you're really not doing the game justice.  Think Harry Dresden:  Does awesome things?  Check.  Gets his ass handed to him on a regular basis?  Check.

Well, you're also a slave to the dice, no matter what happens, and that random element can still give you a bad day, just like how you trip over the same sidewalk that you've run across for years and break an arm.  FATE hasn't removed the random element, and I don't think it should.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;680563Well, you're also a slave to the dice, no matter what happens, and that random element can still give you a bad day, just like how you trip over the same sidewalk that you've run across for years and break an arm.  FATE hasn't removed the random element, and I don't think it should.

Absolutely.  And that's what I meant by the dice "setting the cost of success".  *If* you've got appropriate aspects, you can still buy your way into a success, but you have to ask yourself if it's worth it.

A string of bad dice rolls can really mess up your day, of course.

When I talk about it being more about what price you're willing to pay, I mean that not in contrast to "what the dice say" so much as in contrast to "my ability to manipulate the mechanics of the game".

I've had a long fascination for FATE/Savage Worlds/FUDGE (and I'm an old-school gamer) - never played any of them. They're like a family of RPG systems that never seemed to make it to my table for some reason.

I picked up FATE Core (and Savage Worlds Explorer ed.) as a jump-on point to see if they'll fly with my group (a bunch of old bastards). So we'll see. Glad you started this thread - I'll post questions if I have any as I go. I'm still in the poring-over-process...

Thus far - it looks pretty interesting.

Quote from: tenbones;683555I've had a long fascination for FATE/Savage Worlds/FUDGE (and I'm an old-school gamer) - never played any of them. They're like a family of RPG systems that never seemed to make it to my table for some reason.

I picked up FATE Core (and Savage Worlds Explorer ed.) as a jump-on point to see if they'll fly with my group (a bunch of old bastards). So we'll see. Glad you started this thread - I'll post questions if I have any as I go. I'm still in the poring-over-process...

Thus far - it looks pretty interesting.

Awesome.  I'd consider SW to be closer to a traditional game than Fate, really - there's more of an emphasis on tactical combat, positioning, etc.  I really think of SW as "GURPS-Lite", myself.

I wrote a bunch of stuff on G+ about my coming to understand Fate from a mostly traditional game perspective - if you hit up the Fate Core community and search for "Thought of the Day" there's a bunch of stuff there that may be of value.

I had some exposure to Fate and liked parts of it and other parts hit me upside the head like a brick. I think I could embrace it if I removed some of the parts I don't see a need for.

I like the customized skills quite a lot as a tool to fit the system to a specific setting.

So, a question: Do you use Fate RAW? or do you have any house rules?

On tactical gameplay in FATE:

Say you're running a modern SF (special forces) game and the players themselves understand even the basics of shoot, move, communicate, fire and maneuver, working corners, the perils of flagging, assault through, far ambush, and so on, you'll have one heck of a game that ticks all of the tactical boxes.

Sprinkle in a few tac-stunts, take some weapon and gear aspects into consideration and you're ready to rock 'n roll.

Is it a perfectly straight forward approach to "traditional" tactical gameplay? Nope. But it works really well without requiring a specific type of scaffolding.

Quote from: Bill;683613I had some exposure to Fate and liked parts of it and other parts hit me upside the head like a brick. I think I could embrace it if I removed some of the parts I don't see a need for.

My recommendation (having gone through the same thing) is to try and work your head around the parts that hit you upside the head like a brick.  It's not the things Fate does like other games that make it interesting to me, so much as the things that it does *differently*.  There's a consistent internal logic to it, but it's not always the same logic that has traditionally driven game design.

Believe me, I totally get the "huh, how does *this* make sense?" bit.  But really, Fate Core is pretty damn stripped down to the essentials of what makes Fate "Fate".  Apart from the extras chapter in Core, I don't think there's a whole ton that I'd recommend getting rid of before you get a good feel for how the system works as-is.

If you have specific questions about some of those "hit like a brick" bits, I'd be happy to try and explain the logic of how they work.

Quote from: Bill;683613I like the customized skills quite a lot as a tool to fit the system to a specific setting.

Yeah, that's a fantastic bit of the system, especially with the way that it forces you to say not only what's available in the game world, but what's actually *important* to the game.  It's a great way to communicate expectations and genre.

Quote from: Bill;683613So, a question: Do you use Fate RAW? or do you have any house rules?

Mostly RAW.  There are certain parts of Core that are *intended* to be tweaked on a per-game/setting basis, though, and so I'll tweak those happily.  Things like default refresh/stunt counts, the skills available, and the like.  They're generally called "dials".

Changing the character creation stuff is something I'll do on occasion, but usually only by *adding* to it, not getting rid of the Phase Trio (which is what I see a lot of people default to doing).

Of course, if something's needed in the game (like magic), I'll add it.

My overall philosophy (not just with Fate) is not to tweak for the sake of tweaking.  I'll figure out how I'd do something in the game as-is, see if I think it will work, and then think about tweaking it, and what the minimal tweak required would be.  In most cases with Fate, I've found that no tweaking or minimal tweaking is required.

Quote from: Eisenmann;683616Is it a perfectly straight forward approach to "traditional" tactical gameplay? Nope. But it works really well without requiring a specific type of scaffolding.

Absolutely - but it approaches tactical gameplay in a very different way than most games do, and probably isn't what most RPG players mean when they say "tactical".  You can get relatively close with a detailed enough zone map, and sufficient general tactics knowledge, absolutely.

I only don't push that explanation more because I'd rather be honest about the system's strengths and weaknesses than try to even *imply* that it does things that it doesn't.  And tactical grid (or miniature, in SW's case) combat isn't something that Fate does super-well.

Quote from: robiswrong;683692Absolutely - but it approaches tactical gameplay in a very different way than most games do, and probably isn't what most RPG players mean when they say "tactical".  You can get relatively close with a detailed enough zone map, and sufficient general tactics knowledge, absolutely.

I only don't push that explanation more because I'd rather be honest about the system's strengths and weaknesses than try to even *imply* that it does things that it doesn't.  And tactical grid (or miniature, in SW's case) combat isn't something that Fate does super-well.

As noted. But if we flip things over to a more traditional tactical game approach, we can scale out to one heck of a wargame. The key is to really be comfortable with zones.


Edit:

Throwing out a few extra cents to kinda talk about how flexible the game is.

Quote from: robiswrong;683692My recommendation (having gone through the same thing) is to try and work your head around the parts that hit you upside the head like a brick.  It's not the things Fate does like other games that make it interesting to me, so much as the things that it does *differently*.  There's a consistent internal logic to it, but it's not always the same logic that has traditionally driven game design.

Believe me, I totally get the "huh, how does *this* make sense?" bit.  But really, Fate Core is pretty damn stripped down to the essentials of what makes Fate "Fate".  Apart from the extras chapter in Core, I don't think there's a whole ton that I'd recommend getting rid of before you get a good feel for how the system works as-is.

If you have specific questions about some of those "hit like a brick" bits, I'd be happy to try and explain the logic of how they work.



Yeah, that's a fantastic bit of the system, especially with the way that it forces you to say not only what's available in the game world, but what's actually *important* to the game.  It's a great way to communicate expectations and genre.



Mostly RAW.  There are certain parts of Core that are *intended* to be tweaked on a per-game/setting basis, though, and so I'll tweak those happily.  Things like default refresh/stunt counts, the skills available, and the like.  They're generally called "dials".

Changing the character creation stuff is something I'll do on occasion, but usually only by *adding* to it, not getting rid of the Phase Trio (which is what I see a lot of people default to doing).

Of course, if something's needed in the game (like magic), I'll add it.

My overall philosophy (not just with Fate) is not to tweak for the sake of tweaking.  I'll figure out how I'd do something in the game as-is, see if I think it will work, and then think about tweaking it, and what the minimal tweak required would be.  In most cases with Fate, I've found that no tweaking or minimal tweaking is required.



Absolutely - but it approaches tactical gameplay in a very different way than most games do, and probably isn't what most RPG players mean when they say "tactical".  You can get relatively close with a detailed enough zone map, and sufficient general tactics knowledge, absolutely.

I only don't push that explanation more because I'd rather be honest about the system's strengths and weaknesses than try to even *imply* that it does things that it doesn't.  And tactical grid (or miniature, in SW's case) combat isn't something that Fate does super-well.

Well thing that I have trouble with is a character removing himself from the scenario; forget what it is called.


I think I understand the logic of Fate; its a very logical system.

It's possible I am just reacting to it being different in a few ways from all the other games I have played.