FantasyCraft is one of my favorite fantasy games. I still play it.
You are a glorious pervert!
Ooh-kay, then!
Is there some kind of context I'm missing? I thought the Crafty games were fairly mainstream.
I got into them because my friend Ian Homeyard (RIP) was a big fan of the system. We started out playing Stargate/Spycraft, and when that campaign ended we switched over to FantasyCraft.
Contrary to what we, as Crafty Games fans may think - I don't see them as very popular in actual play. It's like Talislanta, *everyone* says they love it, but no one relatively actually plays it. I think there's probably less than a half-dozen folks around these part aside from myself that have actually run Fantasycraft. Spycraft seems to have a much broader recognition.
But the WEIRD part to me about Fantasycraft is that it is *superior* mechanically on every level compared to anything from 3.x WotC or Pathfinder, yet it has very few fans.
I suspect it's due to the timing of its release and the nature of the system being a true toolkit design. Most new GM's are unaccustomed to designing the rules around their settings in a broad manner. They just wanna pick up and run where anything written down is "canon", like 5e does. Plus 3rd party content for 3.x was pretty plentiful. I see a lot of people saying FC is "confusing" and "dense" when all it really does is re-codify the basic components of the 3.x system and balances them out more thoroughly than Pathfinder or 3.x. MANY if not *all* of the classic weaknesses of those systems are eliminated from the game.
* No Linear Fighter/Quadratic Mage issues
* No Dumpstatting - all stats matter
* No Feat trees longer than 3. ALL Feats are powerful and awesome.
* Classes mechanics are matched to their narrative conceits. And Multi-classing is ROCK SOLID.
* Every level is a big upgrade. Capstone abilities land at 14th level, not 20th.
* Spells are not fire-and-forget. They're skill checks.
* Non-casters are *dangerous* in combat and useful out of combat.
* Multiple-attacks are not headaches
* Armor actually absorbs damage, and skill determines whether or not you get hit.
* HP/Wounds - so no HP-sponge mechanics. Skilled PC's can one-shot your sorry ass.
* Monster dynamic power-scaling. Robust system mechanics tweaks that can be implemented on the fly. Yes, you can slaughter 20th level PC's with Goblins.
* Core book is PHB, DMG, MM all rolled into one.
I could name more features... and I've done this before, had puh-lenty of good discussions, but few people seem really interested in running it. Though a lot of people do seem intrigued by it. I don't think i've ever personally seen it run in the wild, the only other people I know that have run Fantasycraft are the precious few weirdos on this form that either discovered it as I did, by accident, or were enticed by previous discussion threads.
Although many more people know about Spycraft. I think Fantasycraft is like Talislanta - forever shunned for mysterious reasons. And it's weird to me in the inverse, that for some reason I get really enamored with games with really good mechanics/toolkit appeal that all seem to fall into this category. I fully submit it might be due to the fact that more GM's don't really want to pre-tune their mechanics for their settings... which I think is the dealbreaker. Most GM's that are new to the hobby don't get into that mode of thinking for a while, and most either drop out, or stick with what they know.
Only the real lifers and kooks gravitate toward this end of the pool. Hence - you're a pervert like me.