Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bert1000" data-source="post: 6284976" data-attributes="member: 29013">Just got 13th Age.&nbsp;&nbsp; Took a quick read but haven't played yet.&nbsp;&nbsp; Overall looks pretty awesome with lots of nice additions.&nbsp; &nbsp; As usual, from just I read I can't get a good feel for how some things will pan out in actually play.&nbsp;&nbsp; For those of you with play experience, I had a few questions:1) Backgrounds are a great idea and remind me a lot of FATE aspects with their flexibility.&nbsp; &nbsp; The reason I think FATE aspects work so well, however, is the link to the meta currency of fate points.&nbsp; &nbsp; In particular, the expenditure of a FATE point in order for the aspect to contribute mechanically allows for aspects of all shape and size to exist without effecting game play balance.&nbsp; &nbsp; Since backgrounds are 'always on', it seems like it greatly benefits a character to pick big sweeping backgrounds that can be used in a ton of situations instead of a mix of backgrounds of more specific usefulness (in FATE this really doesn't matter as much).&nbsp; &nbsp; It also seems like there could be the potential for a lot of 'DM may I' type interactions.&nbsp;&nbsp; Not necessarily a bad thing but will not work for some tables.&nbsp;&nbsp; 13th Age seems to assume DMs and players are not being dcks which is pretty refreshing.&nbsp;&nbsp; At the least, backgrounds encourage table dialogue.&nbsp; &nbsp; Do you find that when players create whatever backgrounds they want, it pretty easily shakes out to balance between &quot;backgrounds create cool roleplaying&quot; and &quot;players are always stretching credibility to try and get their best backgrounds to apply&quot;?&nbsp;&nbsp; Or do you find you have to put significant time up front in the character building&nbsp; for things to run smooth (e.g., frequently ask someone to rework a background, etc.)?2) The monsters look pretty simple compared to 3e (spells, adding classes, and weird supernatural abilities) and 4e.&nbsp;&nbsp; In general, I think simple is good.&nbsp; &nbsp; But do they play dynamically enough?&nbsp; &nbsp; I guess if combats are much quicker and the monster won't be around for more than 2-3 rounds they don't need that many &quot;tricks&quot;.3)&nbsp; People have commented that 13th Age still retains a good amount of &quot;tactical'' play.&nbsp;&nbsp; Can you give me a couple examples of this from play?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bert1000, post: 6284976, member: 29013"] Just got 13th Age. Took a quick read but haven't played yet. Overall looks pretty awesome with lots of nice additions. As usual, from just I read I can't get a good feel for how some things will pan out in actually play. For those of you with play experience, I had a few questions: 1) Backgrounds are a great idea and remind me a lot of FATE aspects with their flexibility. The reason I think FATE aspects work so well, however, is the link to the meta currency of fate points. In particular, the expenditure of a FATE point in order for the aspect to contribute mechanically allows for aspects of all shape and size to exist without effecting game play balance. Since backgrounds are 'always on', it seems like it greatly benefits a character to pick big sweeping backgrounds that can be used in a ton of situations instead of a mix of backgrounds of more specific usefulness (in FATE this really doesn't matter as much). It also seems like there could be the potential for a lot of 'DM may I' type interactions. Not necessarily a bad thing but will not work for some tables. 13th Age seems to assume DMs and players are not being dcks which is pretty refreshing. At the least, backgrounds encourage table dialogue. Do you find that when players create whatever backgrounds they want, it pretty easily shakes out to balance between "backgrounds create cool roleplaying" and "players are always stretching credibility to try and get their best backgrounds to apply"? Or do you find you have to put significant time up front in the character building for things to run smooth (e.g., frequently ask someone to rework a background, etc.)? 2) The monsters look pretty simple compared to 3e (spells, adding classes, and weird supernatural abilities) and 4e. In general, I think simple is good. But do they play dynamically enough? I guess if combats are much quicker and the monster won't be around for more than 2-3 rounds they don't need that many "tricks". 3) People have commented that 13th Age still retains a good amount of "tactical'' play. Can you give me a couple examples of this from play? [/QUOTE]

Verification