Unpopular opinions go here

[Lanefan]

I run on the fly because published adventures are too much work. And running on the fly does not mean you don't prep. You prep differently.

I'd interpret "running on the fly" to mean you're winging everything with minimal if any prep other than maybe some setting basics: here's the town, here's the dungeon, but the dungeon isn't pre-written: you're making it up as the PCs explore it.

That isn't "homebrewing an adventure", though. Homebrewing an adventure means prepping it out to module-level detail (though maybe only on scraps of paper, doesn't have to be neatly formatted!) and then running it as written.

 

[Aldarc]

I want FATE as far away from D&D as possible please.

You know that the idea of backgrounds giving advantages to ability checks in skill-less OSR games is not uncommon?

 

[Micah Sweet]

You know that the idea of backgrounds giving advantages to ability checks in skill-less OSR games is not uncommon?

That is not the same thing as aspects, which were what was referenced. Besides, I like skill systems.

 

[Aldarc]

That is not the same thing as aspects, which were what was referenced. Besides, I like skill systems.

It's much the same idea. It's really mostly splitting hairs IMHO.

I would also point out that 13th Age also uses player-ranked backgrounds for its "skill" system. It's probably a result of the Jonathan Tweet influence. Fate and Cortex draw their inspiration for Aspects and Distinctions, respectively, from Jonathan Tweet's Over the Edge.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's much the same idea. It's really mostly splitting hairs IMHO.

I would also point out that 13th Age also uses player-ranked backgrounds for its "skill" system. It's probably a result of the Jonathan Tweet influence. Fate and Cortex draw their inspiration for Aspects and Distinctions, respectively, from Jonathan Tweet's Over the Edge.

I don't like 13th Age either.

 

[Thomas Shey]

There are games that are pretty much skills-only (though there's usually something to serve the purpose of Strength in the skills); I believe all the Third Eye Games work on that principal (though some used D20 rolls, some do die pools).

 

[AnotherGuy]

Claiming earlier versions of the game support more granularity in how attributes are handled is simply counterfactual. There are all kinds of games that do, but no version of D&D proper is one of them (unless you want to count "Comeliness") and if there's any third party products that for D&D and offshoots do, they're thin on the grground.

2e's Skills and Powers, gosh even 2e proper had more granularity

 

[Thomas Shey]

2e's Skills and Powers, gosh even 2e proper had more granularity

Again, in attributes? Remember what we're talking about here.

 

[Pedantic]

Skills vs. attributes is mostly an organizational question. The real design point is what they let you do. It's only relevant if you're organizing abilities/actions into 24 or 6 categories if you're planning to write "use X for Y checks" or bonuses to whole categories.

 

[Fifth Element]

Right. But if you don't trust the people you are playing with, and particularly don't trust the DM, why are you playing?

Because you like.playing the game, and you don't know anyone else to play with? Or because the others on the game are your friends and even if one of them doesn't approach the game the same way you do, you still want to hang with them?

There are so many answers to this question that it's trivial to respond.