Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Grumpy RPG Reviews" data-source="post: 6075034" data-attributes="member: 6678305">[h=5]What follows are questions both philosophical and mechanical for the gamers designers among us.&nbsp;&nbsp;I am rereading Fate - I backed it's Kickstarter program - and have been&nbsp; considering what it offers in terms of game design. It presents some&nbsp; ideas and terminology I am considering employing once it is really&nbsp; designated &quot;Open.&quot; This includes such things as the Fate Points, Aspects&nbsp; and the system for building conflicts and combat. These appear to&nbsp; nicely resolve some issues I have been grappling with as I build my&nbsp; system.&nbsp;&nbsp;However, the adjudicating mechanic I am developing is&nbsp; different from the one employed in the Fate rules set. Hicks and company&nbsp; employ a novel variation on dice rolling while the system I am&nbsp; developing uses card games. As such my game will be more different than&nbsp; similar to Fate. &nbsp;&nbsp;Which raises&nbsp; the question, will using terms like Fate Points, Aspects and the system&nbsp; for building conflicts and combat be useful or be a problem? Those terms&nbsp; are carefully used in Fate and my use of them would only &quot;sorta&quot; match&nbsp; their definition and use in Fate. People familiar with Fate will have&nbsp; certain expectations for the use Fate Points, Aspects and the system for&nbsp; building conflicts and combat while my use of these terms will be&nbsp; different because my game is using card games, not dice rolls.&nbsp;&nbsp;So they might be confusing and distracting rather than clarifying and useful?[/h]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Grumpy RPG Reviews, post: 6075034, member: 6678305"] [h=5]What follows are questions both philosophical and mechanical for the gamers designers among us. I am rereading Fate - I backed it's Kickstarter program - and have been considering what it offers in terms of game design. It presents some ideas and terminology I am considering employing once it is really designated "Open." This includes such things as the Fate Points, Aspects and the system for building conflicts and combat. These appear to nicely resolve some issues I have been grappling with as I build my system. However, the adjudicating mechanic I am developing is different from the one employed in the Fate rules set. Hicks and company employ a novel variation on dice rolling while the system I am developing uses card games. As such my game will be more different than similar to Fate. Which raises the question, will using terms like Fate Points, Aspects and the system for building conflicts and combat be useful or be a problem? Those terms are carefully used in Fate and my use of them would only "sorta" match their definition and use in Fate. People familiar with Fate will have certain expectations for the use Fate Points, Aspects and the system for building conflicts and combat while my use of these terms will be different because my game is using card games, not dice rolls. So they might be confusing and distracting rather than clarifying and useful?[/h] [/QUOTE]

Verification