Why Do You Hate An RPG System?

[macd21]

Amusingly to me... the thing that people here are decrying about FATE-- the idea that players don't really "play their characters" and instead go fishing for every opportunity to activate their Aspects (even when they make no sense either for how their character behaves or the story at large)-- is actually my answer to this original question...

...which is that I don't "hate" any game systems... I only "hate" the players who use them.

If a person who doesn't like FATE and the like find their reason to be that this supposedly Narrative game incentivizes players to ignore the story and just Aspect-fish... I'd contend that's the fault of the players who are playing FATE, not the system itself. If you are playing FATE because you actually like the story and narrative aspect of gaming that the system is providing... you won't actually DO the things that the people who dislike it think occurs. You WON'T go Aspect-fishing, because you realize that the story is meant to come first, and you'll only use the mechanics to enhance it, not to override it. Which of course feeds right into some of my other posts on the D&D forum about players who can't help but try to "win" in RPGs. Which to me, Aspect-fishing is one of those things-- deliberately going against the game (in spirit if nothing else) because the rules "allow" you to, and thus make you try and "win" the game. If you care more about "winning" every roll and Aspect-fish in all manner of ridiculous ways to get bonuses to help you "win" every roll... that tells me you don't really want to play FATE in the first place and you probably shouldn't be.

Thus for me... I find it's almost always the other players not buying in to the game being played that is the cause of my "hate". The right players who wish to use a system as it is meant to be used to produce the results it is meant to evoke can usually make any system work... but the wrong players will destroy the game from within.

I don’t think that’s a fair analysis of their problem with FATE. Whether they’re trying to win or not is irrelevant, either way the system inherently disrupts their roleplaying. Whether you’re Aspect-fishing, or just roleplaying your character, there’s a required awareness of how the system interacts with your roleplaying. Which just rubs some people the wrong way.

 

[macd21]

I'm only mildly familiar with FATE (the jargon drives me nuts so I haven't been able to get into it), but Dungeon World as another example of narrative game, does give you an experience point when you completely fail a roll. However, you are deep doo-doo if that happens. I don't see that as being an issue for DW- players trying to fail in order to get more XP and level up. Not to mention, some traditional skill based games also work off of a failure being an experience builder.

I don’t think that’s really the kind of thing prabe was referring to. That’s really just a bit compensation for a failed test. You didn’t choose to fail, or be suboptimal, or naughty word up - the dice just didn’t roll your way. But in some Nar systems you are rewarding for choosing to fail (to act in a way that is detrimental to your character because doing so would be in-character).

 

[prabe]

But in some Nar systems you are rewarding for choosing to fail (to act in a way that is detrimental to your character because doing so would be in-character).

I'd say it's more about whether you and/or the GM can justify it than rather it's actually in-character, but that might be a quibble.

 

[JeffB]

I don’t think that’s really the kind of thing prabe was referring to. That’s really just a bit compensation for a failed test. You didn’t choose to fail, or be suboptimal, or naughty word up - the dice just didn’t roll your way. But in some Nar systems you are rewarding for choosing to fail (to act in a way that is detrimental to your character because doing so would be in-character).

Understood.Thanks for the clarification.

So the game is rewarding you for acting in character-which many systems do- but people abuse that to "power up" ? If so, I guess I'm still seeing it mainly as a player issue. Though the game should definitely have some GM advice about people who would abuse it, and maybe a hard rule to deal with abusers. Player...errrr….Character death.... is always an option for rules abusers

 

[Derren]

What I hate are systems that start good but then dumb everything down to please people who are not invested enough to read the rules of the game they are playing.

What I dislike are system with a very narrow focus on what you can play like assuming all characters belong to a specific organization and systems which horribly butcher real world languages (7th Sea)

 

[DEFCON 1]

So I get where you are coming from, but at the same time I also think that you are handwaving away a powerful observation about flaws in a game.

No, you are right, I'm not suggesting there aren't flaws in the game itself. FATE has rules and mechanics that can compel players to do things that are antithetical to what I think the game is trying to embody. Just like as you say, 3.5 has rules that run counter to what itself is trying to accomplish, or even "break" it. That is something that I suspect almost every game is going to suffer from in one manner or another. Which isn't really surprising, seeing as how you are trying to combine a game and a story together-- two things that often run counter to each other.

That being said... players all have what they think RPGs are "supposed" to be, and what playing a character in one is "supposed" to be. And if that belief isn't flexible enough to adapt to all the different "types" of RPGs, then certain types will in no way work for you. And at that point, we would hope that each of us could recognize that in ourselves and in these games, and just politely nod and say "thanks but no thanks" when the offer came to play in one.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don’t think that’s a fair analysis of their problem with FATE. Whether they’re trying to win or not is irrelevant, either way the system inherently disrupts their roleplaying. Whether you’re Aspect-fishing, or just roleplaying your character, there’s a required awareness of how the system interacts with your roleplaying. Which just rubs some people the wrong way.

While they may not be trying to "win" the game as I put it... it sounded as though they were trying to play FATE in their own particular style of what they think roleplaying is supposed to be. And FATE obviously does not in any way work for them with that style. Which shouldn't be surprising, and I don't begrudge them for having their own style or beliefs in what roleplaying is.

The idea of trying to "win" is just an example of what I thought the idea of Aspecting-fishing was trying to accomplish. The game certainly can allow for that to occur, and players could certainly try and do it (and can accomplish it if the GM goes along with it)... but I do think it goes against what the game itself is trying to help the players produce-- a certain type of narrative gaming experience. And I find that my less than enjoyable RPG experiences almost always result from the players and how they are engaging with the game, rather than the rules of the game itself. But to each their own.

 

[Arilyn]

There is a mischaracterization made by Fate detractors that players are choosing to fail, that in fact they have to fail, in order to have enough power to succeed later. This is not at all how the game works. Accepting a fate point is not failing, just letting one of your aspects add a complication to the scene. And you do not need to accept that complication. Fate points flow steadily back and forth. Refusing them occasionally will not destroy your character's power base.

As for aspect fishing? The GM, and probably the other players are going to just say, "Nice try, not going to work." It's no different from players trying to stretch their abilities to absurd lengths in any other game.

Players choose their own aspects and are role playing throughout the whole session, not just when they need that point. Game sessions feel like a tv episode or comic book issue. You can just have fun romps or get into deep role playing with painful decisions leading to dire consequences. Fate can encompass a wide variety of tones and genres. The game is very stretchy that way and manages to work as a generic system/toolbox which can be difficult for games to accomplish.

I have played a lot of Fate. It's elegant, a ton of fun and intuitive. I especially find it the easiest game to introduce to new players to the hobby, because it allows them to engage in stories that feel like their favourite shows, which is often what draws them to the hobby in the first place.

Now if you don't like Fate points or like more crunch, or don't like the toolbox nature of the game, these are perfectly valid reasons for disliking Fate. But you can't claim it discourages role play, or is an incoherent mess (the Wil Wheton episode, unfortunately did Fate no favours... ) The bookmark which came with my copy has all the rules you need on it, so definitely not hard to learn. It comes at roleplaying from a very different angle than more traditional games like D&D, although these days Fate is fairly mainstream.

 

[prabe]

There is a mischaracterization made by Fate detractors that players are choosing to fail, that in fact they have to fail, in order to have enough power to succeed later. This is not at all how the game works. Accepting a fate point is not failing, just letting one of your aspects add a complication to the scene. And you do not need to accept that complication. Fate points flow steadily back and forth. Refusing them occasionally will not destroy your character's power base.

As for aspect fishing? The GM, and probably the other players are going to just say, "Nice try, not going to work." It's no different from players trying to stretch their abilities to absurd lengths in any other game.

Players choose their own aspects and are role playing throughout the whole session, not just when they need that point. Game sessions feel like a tv episode or comic book issue. You can just have fun romps or get into deep role playing with painful decisions leading to dire consequences. Fate can encompass a wide variety of tones and genres. The game is very stretchy that way and manages to work as a generic system/toolbox which can be difficult for games to accomplish.

I have played a lot of Fate. It's elegant, a ton of fun and intuitive. I especially find it the easiest game to introduce to new players to the hobby, because it allows them to engage in stories that feel like their favourite shows, which is often what draws them to the hobby in the first place.

Now if you don't like Fate points or like more crunch, or don't like the toolbox nature of the game, these are perfectly valid reasons for disliking Fate. But you can't claim it discourages role play, or is an incoherent mess (the Wil Wheton episode, unfortunately did Fate no favours... ) The bookmark which came with my copy has all the rules you need on it, so definitely not hard to learn. It comes at roleplaying from a very different angle than more traditional games like D&D, although these days Fate is fairly mainstream.

Almost none of your description of gameplay matches my experience of the game, and I went into it wanting and expecting to like it (which may make my disappointment more acute). I have no problem with metagame currencies, but at the tables I've played with them they never seemed to move anything like as much as the theorists believe they will or should. "Adding a complication" is not radically different from "My character is penalized," and choosing to be penalized to you can get that precious Fate Point isn't all that different from intentionally failing.

I ran a campaign for ... maybe a year, and we had fun moments, but the system really didn't work for me or the other people at my table.

 

[Arilyn]

Almost none of your description of gameplay matches my experience of the game, and I went into it wanting and expecting to like it (which may make my disappointment more acute). I have no problem with metagame currencies, but at the tables I've played with them they never seemed to move anything like as much as the theorists believe they will or should. "Adding a complication" is not radically different from "My character is penalized," and choosing to be penalized to you can get that precious Fate Point isn't all that different from intentionally failing.

I ran a campaign for ... maybe a year, and we had fun moments, but the system really didn't work for me or the other people at my table.

It just doesn't match your play style then. You tried it for a year and it wasn't working for your table. For my group, it sings, with the Fate points working exactly as the theorists claim. Different tastes.

Savage Worlds is a much loved system that our table has tried, leaves us cold, even though we really wanted to like it. There isn't anything majorly wrong with the game, just not for us. Other players? Wouldn't want to play anything else.