Distinct Game Modes: Combat vs Social vs Exploration etc...

[Reynard]

FATE is my favorite whipping boy when I want to talk about badly designed systems that fail to achieve their declared objective.

You can just say you don't understand Fate. We can help get you there.

 

[Reynard]

I'm pretty sure that's Shadowdark at the mo.

I kind of feel like there isn't a "new hotness" right now. There are a bunch of 5E games, and a bunch of 5E-response games, and a bunch of Shadowdark, and a bunch of new licensed games. We are in a pretty diverse period.

 

[Parmandur]

I kind of feel like there isn't a "new hotness" right now. There are a bunch of 5E games, and a bunch of 5E-response games, and a bunch of Shadowdark, and a bunch of new licensed games. We are in a pretty diverse period.

In terms of fresh game design that people are playing and talking about, Daggerheart seems to be the Hotness.

 

[Reynard]

In terms of fresh game design that people are playing and talking about, Daggerheart seems to be the Hotness.

It is among those 5E-response games. But it is hardly the only one.

For the record, I really like Daggerheart, and it is A hawtness, but it isn't dominating the conversation.

 

[Umbran]

FATE is my favorite whipping boy when I want to talk about badly designed systems that fail to achieve their declared objective.

Guess what - I don't care!

You holding forth as an arbiter of success or failure is more about your discussion style than about the games.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You can just say you don't understand Fate. We can help get you there.

I just really don't like Aspects as a concept.

 

[Celebrim]

I just really don't like Aspects as a concept.

Aspects are actually one of my favorite things about it. Also the discussion of Fronts and how to organize and plan for long term play is pretty good. The fundamental problem is the core mechanics don't fit with its desire to be a game that produces a series of dramatic situations that are resolved by competent characters interacting with the fiction.

Thinking about this preference, I don't mind a gamist game being meta first and fiction second, but it feels very strange to me to build a narrative game that is meta first and fiction second. If the story matters, then the narrative should be primary and the system just helps us adjudicate the narrative. If the game matters more than the narrative, like say chess, then it makes sense that we would focus on the mechanic first and then only afterwards care what narrative we are creating. But I don't think that's what FATE thought it was making, nor how it bills itself. Yet I do feel it is how it plays.

 

[Reynard]

I just really don't like Aspects as a concept.

That's fair, but that isn't the same thing as the design failing in its intent.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Aspects are actually one of my favorite things about it. Also the discussion of Fronts and how to organize and plan for long term play is pretty good. The fundamental problem is the core mechanics don't fit with its desire to be a game that produces a series of dramatic situations that are resolved by competent characters interacting with the fiction.

Well, I'm also not interested in a game designed specifically to generate any kind of narrative. I prefer that sort of thing to be emergent.

 

[Fenris-77]

Well, I'm also not interested in a game designed specifically to generate any kind of narrative. I prefer that sort of thing to be emergent.

Well, you're certainly interested enough to talk about them rather a lot, so there's that. Was there a point there about game modes? I'm not sure, but I don;t want to assume.