Once gain I recommend Fate 2nd Ed. All the streamlined utility of aspects w/o the "fate point economy" or other storygames detritus added on. It's done as a simple framework that can be added to any system (fudge was just the free default used as an example).

I don't like FATE for a number of reasons:

1. The lightness of the core mechanic is in stark contrast to the crunchiness of the toolkit aspects and Stunts. It is hard to find players who like its aspects, making it difficult to get the group onto the same page.

2. I find the narrative mechanics intrusive in play. They are ever present in every action. I like narrative focus but I like it to get out of the way when I am being in-character.

3. The Fate point economy and dice system forces the game constantly towards mediocrity. It promotes boring game play. This sounds like it relates to the OPs issue.

Quote from: Skywalker;694783I don't like FATE for a number of reasons:

1. The lightness of the core mechanic is in stark contrast to the crunchiness of the toolkit aspects and Stunts. It is hard to find players who like its aspects, making it difficult to get the group onto the same page.

2. I find the narrative mechanics intrusive in play. They are ever present in every action. I like narrative focus but I like it to get out of the way when I am being in-character.

3. The Fate point economy and dice system forces the game constantly towards mediocrity. It promotes boring game play. This sounds like it relates to the OPs issue.

I very much agree with point two. The system really doesn't allow me to get going. We RPd, but every so often it would stop, someone would chime in and pay a Fate Point because "that is what their character would do" and a bonus or change to the scene ensues...  meh. I couldn't explore the character and get him to engage with the game world because their were too many cooks tweaking the recipe.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;694796I very much agree with point two. The system really doesn't allow me to get going. We RPd, but every so often it would stop, someone would chime in and pay a Fate Point because "that is what their character would do" and a bonus or change to the scene ensues...  meh. I couldn't explore the character and get him to engage with the game world because their were too many cooks tweaking the recipe.

I personally prefer something more cyclical, with period in character and others out of character. At the end of each Session/Act/whatever, the players set some clear narrative signposts for their PCs and then this is left untouched during the next session. Rinse and repeat.

This allows for the OOC to feed into the IC more effectively without overbearing it. Tenra Bansho Zero is probably the best example of that sort of narrative approach. FATE too often requires everyone to wear both hats at the same time.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;694796I very much agree with point two. The system really doesn't allow me to get going. We RPd, but every so often it would stop, someone would chime in and pay a Fate Point because "that is what their character would do" and a bonus or change to the scene ensues...  meh. I couldn't explore the character and get him to engage with the game world because their were too many cooks tweaking the recipe.

Mechanically what were they spending the Fate Point on? An invoke for effect? I've played lots of Fate, but not Diaspora.

Spirit of the Century (which I believe is similar to Diaspora in this regard) has the Declaration, which can do this. But, it shouldn't have resulted in ping ponging the scene like that. Here's what the SotC book says: "Usually these things can't be used to drastically change the plot or win a scene...Your GM has veto power over this use, but it has one little dirty secret. If you use it to do something to make the game cooler for everyone, the GM will usually grant far more leeway than she will for something boring or, worse, selfish (Page 13)."

Quote from: TristramEvans;694600Once gain I recommend Fate 2nd Ed. All the streamlined utility of aspects w/o the "fate point economy" or other storygames detritus added on.

Ok, what exactly is the difference between FATE 2 and the later versions?
(How many later variants are there, anyway?)

I had a look at FATE years ago, mainly because I thought it might be easier to digest than straight Fudge. I found the treatment of Aspects and Fate points not appealing.

At the most basic level, Aspects (if memory serves) are a formalization of such sundry notes one might make as that a character is a Knight of the Bungie, in fine amor with Queen Nell, suffering crotch rot from a dalliance with Baron Flamm's daughter, and so on.

Problems arise, I think, from making of the like an abstract resource management sub-game as opposed to letting them arise and pass away naturally in play.

Fate points present a similar problem, compounded by their relation to Aspects, and brought to the pitch of "narrativist" muddling with invocation to declare a fact about the world.

Quote from: Eisenmann;694111I must be playing a different FATE. Where is all this narrative stuff?

A compel is a decision to set aside the dice and focus on the dictates of drama instead. When a character is compelled by an aspect, he gains a fate point.

The incentives are for a story teller, not for someone acting from the character's perspective.

Spending Fate points is also very often not at all something a character does in its frame of reference.

I tried to work up a "storytelling" game along RPG lines way back in the 1980s, when I was not aware of any examples. In all the years since, the same problems I ran into have kept rearing their heads in one published offering after another. Different decade, same story!

Quote from: Phillip;694856A compel is a decision to set aside the dice and focus on the dictates of drama instead. When a character is compelled by an aspect, he gains a fate point.

The incentives are for a story teller, not for someone acting from the character's perspective.

Spending Fate points is also very often not at all something a character does in its frame of reference.

Yeah, the kind of things that I saw home brewed into Mentzer D&D back in Jr. High.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;694091Firstly Aspects. This is the second time we have used a Fate derived system and the second time that Aspects are used simply as a way of tacking bonuses onto dice rolls, or justifying players re-rolling within the 'Fate Point Economy'. There is scant evidence to show that the Aspects system supports any Roleplaying as I wish to engage with it, and a wealth of evidence to show that Aspects and Fate Points are a mask drawn over "Special Snowflake" decisions that cannot be seen to ever fail.

The Fate Point Economy fails without incredibly tight management. The idea (drawn out from my reading of the Dresden Files system books) that players are compelled to take negative consequences to an action and earn Fate Points for later use in the game (thus allowing them to 'pull through against all odds') fails to address the large amount of points (and therefore the large amount of re-rolls and narrative 'ret-conning') floating round the table. The upshot of this is virtually all player rolls are bumped, re-rolled or adjusted to avoid failure at all costs. This leads to a not too surprising result. The games played so far have lacked any sense of danger or consequence.

There is never a sense of loss, urgency, danger or threat. Aspects can be pulled out for each roll 'at-will' giving the players a constant edge over anything that is thrown at them. An analogy might be "A group of 1st level D&D characters set loose with a Bag-of-Holding packed full of Relics and Artifacts". This leaves me feeling that the games I have played thus far using a Fate-system to power them hark back to D&D gaming I did when I was 13. The style of game that naive 'wet behind the ears' newbs might engage with that has every character maxed out on amazing, game and world breaking magical items laying waste to anything in their path.

The solution is rather simple. Make all rolls two to three steps harder.

Quote from: 1of3;694866The solution is rather simple. Make all rolls two to three steps harder.

Yeah, some people play Fate without any teeth. That doesn't mean the game doesn't have any teeth.

Quote from: Phillip;694856The incentives are for a story teller, not for someone acting from the character's perspective.

Spending Fate points is also very often not at all something a character does in its frame of reference.

Quote from: Eisenmann;694865Yeah, the kind of things that I saw home brewed into Mentzer D&D back in Jr. High.

Which makes them in-character how?  Oh you were doing a non-sequitur thing, nevermind.

Quote from: CRKrueger;694941Which makes them in-character how?  Oh you were doing a non-sequitur thing, nevermind.

No, dude. I just said that I saw that kind of thing hacked into old style D&D. It was clear to us that the game was to challenge both the player and the in-game player character. Today, the retro-gaming scene talks about challenging the player with puzzles. I guess that's ZOMG! Pulls me out of the immersion!

Oh, boy. Now I'm fretting that this post isn't up to your standards.

(I wandered round the site last night and the original post of this thread is probably on the wrong forum. If that is the case, can someone with a finger on a button move it to 'other' games? Seems appropriate.)

Okay. Example of play. Character is getting assaulted by other player for whatever reason. Contested roll. Seems legit. Both players roll "good" (or whatever the applicable adjective is!) Now because one player REALLY wants to win he pays a Fate Point to reroll, and on that reroll spends another point to bump the result via an applicable Aspect. He is successful and play continues (insert comment about social contracts in play here).

All seems a bit railroady to me. The narrative was not thrust forward in a meaningful way it was just a method employed to strong-arm a positive result in the short-term. In fact it served not real purpose as later, the winning character undid his action through other means resulting in unnecessary point spending, dice rolling and PvP around the table. Bizarre.

In fact, play is hilariously short-sighted: party find a ship with distress beacon. Break in, hold character on board hostage, then chill out a bit after assaulting said character. Suddenly, external threat appears.  Party split across two ships and deal with external threat. Can anyone see a wonderful retaliatory hostage situation evolving? I can.