Explain FATE to me

[Halivar]

Correct. Because you know, if you're a "Sucker for a Pretty Face" but you know that hot lady is actually a mantis-alien in disguise and she'll eat your head, you just gotta spend a fate point to keep your head.

For some reason, all I can think of is the time the only girl in our party caught my paladin in a river sans chausses with 3 deadly, evil naiads.

 

[Umbran]

Correct. Because you know, if you're a "Sucker for a Pretty Face" but you know that hot lady is actually a mantis-alien in disguise and she'll eat your head, you just gotta spend a fate point to keep your head.

Well, a compel should add a complication - she'll *try* to eat your head. For most characters, loss of the head is somewhat more than a "complication"

 

[Rechan]

Well, a compel should add a complication - she'll *try* to eat your head. For most characters, loss of the head is somewhat more than a "complication"

True, but usually you don't want to RISK it. I was just using it as an example of a 'Oh, yeah, I wouldn't want to do that.'

 

[Umbran]

Many systems try to emulate the rules of the universe, simulate how the world works. FATE tries to emulate Fiction, and it's about simulating a cool story with big characters. In FATE, characters succeed at things because of WHO and WHAT they are (their Aspects); Batman has just the right gadget for the occasion because he "Has A Gadget For That", Superman can stop a train with his face because he just IS the "Man of Steel".

Yes, but...

Note that the GM should be very careful about how much power is allowed in a single aspect. If a PC has the aspect, "Last Son of Krypton", and that includes super-strength, super-breath, super-speed, flying, heat vision, invulnerability and all the rest, well, that's a lot.

There are several FATE-based games. My understanding is that, in general, a PC's Aspects can be invoked to gain a +2 on a roll, or to reroll a bad roll of the dice. That does not imply auto-successes on things that normal folks can't do. Typically, then, if you're the Last Son of Krypton, and trying to lift an entire cruise ship, that invocation will get you a +2 on the Might roll to do it. Unless you also have a whole boatload of points of Might, maybe that boat ain't moving.

Most of the FATE based games have a separate system for getting more than that out of Aspects. In the Atomic Robo comic, the main character is pretty much immune to bullets - in the FATE game for the comic, there's a separate subsystem for saying that his aspect, "I am the atomic robot!" includes great strength and immunity to bullets.

 

[Halivar]

There are several FATE-based games. My understanding is that, in general, a PC's Aspects can be invoked to gain a +2 on a roll, or to reroll a bad roll of the dice. That does not imply auto-successes on things that normal folks can't do. Typically, then, if you're the Last Son of Krypton, and trying to lift an entire cruise ship, that invocation will get you a +2 on the Might roll to do it. Unless you also have a whole boatload of points of Might, maybe that boat ain't moving.

Most of the FATE based games have a separate system for getting more than that out of Aspects. In the Atomic Robo comic, the main character is pretty much immune to bullets - in the FATE game for the comic, there's a separate subsystem for saying that his aspect, "I am the atomic robot!" includes great strength and immunity to bullets.

In 13th Age, the book suggests you can take an uber-powerful Background or One-Unique-Thing if you trade away another power to do it. In the context of Fate, maybe require extra dump stats, or fewer Stunts before taking Refresh penalties?

 

[Rechan]

Most of the FATE based games have a separate system for getting more than that out of Aspects. In the Atomic Robo comic, the main character is pretty much immune to bullets - in the FATE game for the comic, there's a separate subsystem for saying that his aspect, "I am the atomic robot!" includes great strength and immunity to bullets.

Yeah, pretty sure that would be a Power Stunt. I'm just trying to nutshell Fate here you guys, no need to toss Technicallies at me.

Or more accurately, if I wanted to emulate Superman, I would probably steal one of The Dresden File's powers of giving him Physical Immunity, but with a The Catch - Kryptonite. Granted that would be super expensive.

Still I think Batman always having the gadget he needs for the occasion would be a good example of an Aspect.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I was literally just going to start a topic asking about compels in Fate, and then I saw this topic. No need to start a new one, since it's right in line with the discussion.

I'm looking at the current versions of Fate Core and Fate Accelerated. It's worth noting that they don't use "tag" anymore. You can simply invoke or compel things beyond your own character.

I'm trying to figure out exactly how fate points flow in compels suggested regarding other players.

Now, I get invocations. Fate Accelerated cleared they up handily. If you are invoking another character's aspect against them, essentially PVP, then you hand them the fate point. If you aren't in conflict with them, you hand it to the GM, the same as if you had invoked your own aspect, or an aspect in the situation, etc.

But when it comes to compels the texts get weird. One the one hand they are telling you that anyone should feel free to suggest compels--with the implication that it is just a cool part of the shared storytelling.

But then they say that if you propose a compel on another player it always costs you a fate point. No distinction is made about whether you are using the compel against the player, or simply saying, "Hey Rob, maybe you could accept a compel on your Cranky Old Drunk aspect in this situation?" So, as written, it appears to say that if you ever open your mouth regarding what might be a cool compel on another character you have to dish out a fate point and the formal compel system, where the target must accept or reject the compel (by spending a point) turns on. It doesn't mention what happens to the fate point if they refuse the compel, but the implication would be that both points go to the GM. Regardless of where the points go, it seems to discourage collaborative storytelling.

It seems like how the rule should work, is that you can talk all you want, and you only have to spend a fate point if you are trying to use a compel against the other player (like an invocation), or trying to get him to do something that you think is really cool and he disagrees on.

Can anyone clear up the official rule on this? Again, I'm going with current Fate Core and Accelerated.

 

[Umbran]

In 13th Age, the book suggests you can take an uber-powerful Background or One-Unique-Thing if you trade away another power to do it. In the context of Fate, maybe require extra dump stats, or fewer Stunts before taking Refresh penalties?

Well, in the Atomic Robo game (not yet published), you have Skills and Stunts, and you also have Extras.

Characters have 5 Stunt slots.

An Extra takes up a Stunt slot (and there are a couple other prerequisites). Where a Stunt gives only one benefit, an Extra can give multiple benefits. Some Extra benefits also require you take a weakness.

Plus, if a character has more than 5 benefits from Stunts and Extras, the GM gets more Fate points for the bad guys to spend!

So, yes, Atomic Robo is immune to bullets and normal melee weapons. He's also stronger than any mere human. But, he pays for it in that he's vulnerable to electromagnetic attacks (being, you know, made of metal), and the Bad Guys get more Fate points whenever Robo is in play.

Other games have other ways to handle some special abilities. For example, in Spirit of the Century you can make a character like Batman, who can always have just the thing on hand, by taking a stunt, "Universal Gadget". It doesn't give the character *infinite* gadgets that have exactly the powers you need, but if you're pulling them out only once a session or so, you're golden.

You could just ignore all that, and put *everything* in Aspects. But that means the Aspect needs a whole card to define it - "Last Son of Krypton" means *nothing* on it's own, you need a separate listing of what being Kryptonian means, which kind of flies in the face of the intent to make it simple and narrative. Also, the more outright power you pack into Aspects, the more the GM needs to think to make sure everyone's getting a chance to shine, and nobody's abusing the narrative.

I've found it best to have character Aspects that are intended to *modify* results, not to produce results outright.

 

[Halivar]

It doesn't mention what happens to the fate point if they refuse the compel, but the implication would be that both points go to the GM. Regardless of where the points go, it seems to discourage collaborative storytelling.

I don't have my books in front of me, but I thought I read that players actually trade Fate points in this manner. Like, if Bob runs out of Fate points, I can Compel his Aspect and feed him a poker chip.

If that's not how it works, then I agree it could discourage collaboration.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I don't have my books in front of me, but I thought I read that players actually trade Fate points in this manner. Like, if Bob runs out of Fate points, I can Compel his Aspect and feed him a poker chip.

If that's not how it works, then I agree it could discourage collaboration.

As I understand it, that is how it works if Bob accepts the compel. But from my reading, it seems to be saying that if you open your mouth, even just to offer a suggestion, then you have spent a fate point. If Bob accepts, hand it to him. If Bob doesn't accept, hand it to the GM, and poor Bob has to hand one to the GM too.

I'm not sure why they would do that though. Just like Bob can ask the GM if he can have a compel on his own character for X action he is contemplating (and if the GM says, "no," no fate points change hands--it's just a suggestion!) I don't know why other players would be forbidden from making a free suggestion. Maybe they are trying to avoid other players bringing up possible ideas that Bob might not like, and then the GM turning them into compels. "Yeah, I like it. Bob, take the compel or spend a point." But it seems to me that would be jerkdom, and a game like Fate doesn't need extra rules to punish people into not being jerks. Making a compel suggestion to the GM should never cost anyone a fate point. That should only happen if the GM formally proposes the compel, or another player attempts to use a compel against you (and you want to resist).

So yeah, I'm not sure if they are just misphrasing what they mean, if there is some hidden reasoning I'm not catching, or if it just a bad design decision in a good game.