Help Me Understand Fate Core

[ThirdWizard]

You are correct, I always forget about that part. But it doesn't change the fact that invokes and compels are very different animals. Invokes create mechanical effects, compels create complications.

Yes! That's a really important distinction to make. Compels should never be mechanical effects. You don't compel someone and give them a -2 penalty to shoot. I know it can be tempting. Say if a PC has the consequence of Twisted Ankle a GM might want to compel them to have a -2 penalty to Athletics checks or something like that. But resist this temptation! It isn't interesting. Compels should be interesting.

 

[RivetGeekWil]

And be sure to get your rewards!

Get thee hence to Rafflecopter.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

Yes! That's a really important distinction to make. Compels should never be mechanical effects. You don't compel someone and give them a -2 penalty to shoot. I know it can be tempting. Say if a PC has the consequence of Twisted Ankle a GM might want to compel them to have a -2 penalty to Athletics checks or something like that. But resist this temptation! It isn't interesting. Compels should be interesting.

No, but the GM Can, and depending upon circumstances should, spend a fate point (one of his own) to INVOKE that twisted ankle for a penalty. And when that invoke happens, the fate point just goes away. I think.

-rg

 

[RivetGeekWil]

No, but the GM Can, and depending upon circumstances should, spend a fate point (one of his own) to INVOKE that twisted ankle for a penalty. And when that invoke happens, the fate point just goes away. I think.

-rg

Close, but not the way I would do it. A GM should spend a Fate Point on an NPC's invoke of the Twisted Ankle aspect. This is to do any of the things that invokes can do: get a bonus to the NPC's roll, a reroll, bonus to another character's roll, or increase passive resistance. In this case, the PC gets the Fate Point. But in general invokes don't incur penalties to rolls (seriously...look in Fate Core and tell me where there's a penalty anywhere). If the goal is to introduce a complication, as opposed to some mechanical benefit, the GM should compel the aspect.

 

[Ratskinner]

Yes! That's a really important distinction to make. Compels should never be mechanical effects. You don't compel someone and give them a -2 penalty to shoot. I know it can be tempting. Say if a PC has the consequence of Twisted Ankle a GM might want to compel them to have a -2 penalty to Athletics checks or something like that. But resist this temptation! It isn't interesting. Compels should be interesting.

Yup. At least per FATE Core.

No, but the GM Can, and depending upon circumstances should, spend a fate point (one of his own) to INVOKE that twisted ankle for a penalty. And when that invoke happens, the fate point just goes away. I think.

I think you're playing a little loose, at least as per FATE Core. Then again there's like 20 FATE variants running around with slight differences here.

As per FATE Core, Invocations cannot produce a penalty. The closest they come are: (a) for a bonus on a Defend roll and (b) to increase passive opposition to an Overcome Obstacles attempt. Which, in many ways, are the functional equivalents of a -2, since they create a 2-shift differential in the roll results. So, honestly, I don't think that's going to break anyone's game.

However, as per p. 69.

If the aspect you invoke is on someone else’s character sheet, including situation aspects attached to them, you give them the fate point you spent. They don’t actually get to use it until after the end of the scene, though.

Why the fate point earned this way stays in limbo until after the scene is a bit of a mystery to me, though.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Why the fate point earned this way stays in limbo until after the scene is a bit of a mystery to me, though.

It's so you don't have a scene where characters are "trading" Fate Points exchange after exchange.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

As per FATE Core, Invocations cannot produce a penalty. The closest they come are: (a) for a bonus on a Defend roll and (b) to increase passive opposition to an Overcome Obstacles attempt. Which, in many ways, are the functional equivalents of a -2, since they create a 2-shift differential in the roll results. So, honestly, I don't think that's going to break anyone's game.

No, it won't break the game, but it's a distinction I was missing, and I think it'll change the way things play slightly. And, actually, I'd bet the game plays better/faster that way.

-rg

 

[Vael]

Why the fate point earned this way stays in limbo until after the scene is a bit of a mystery to me, though.

Because now FATE points can run out. Otherwise, you might run into the following:

Fighter Bob: I attack and invoke your twisted ankle.
- Fate point passed over
Roguish Sally: I'll counter attack and invoke your Distracted by shiny things.
- Fate point passed back.
Fighter Bob: I attack again and invoke your twisted ankle.
- Fate point passed over
Roguish Sally: I'll counter again with Distracted by shiny things.
- Fate point passed back.

So, it's more to prevent fate point ping pong.