Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GX.Sigma" data-source="post: 6209230" data-attributes="member: 6690511">My next question is, can Fate support a sandbox scenario? I ask because it seems there are mechanics that exist just to facilitate railroading. I'm mostly talking about compels here.I don't even really understand compels. An event-based compel is proposed when the GM decides something would make sense to happen, based on a character's aspects... but why do you need a fate point economy and shared narrative control to make that happen? Won't a good GM do that anyway? Why give the player a reward for something that would happen anyway?A decision-based compel seems to just exist so the GM can make whatever scenes he wanted to happen, happen. I mean, I can understand a system that gives players a reward for doing something they wouldn't normally do, but that only makes sense to me if the players can opt into it. So why the heck does it cost a fate point to refuse a compel? Refusing to be railroaded actually costs you resources? And if you have no fate points left, you can't make any decisions at all?I'm not saying I (or any sensible GM) would run it that way, I'm just trying to make sense of it. I'm imagining the following scenario:[sblock]GM: Okay, you come aboard Terok Nor. Your goal is to find out everything you can about Capt. Maxwell before going down to the planet to catch him.Player 1: Well, let's talk to the station commander first. GM: Uh, I'm compelling all of you with the [pre-established] situation aspect Everyone's Afraid of Dukat. You don't want to talk to him yet.Player 2: ...Um, okay, let's ingratiate ourselves with the slaves first?GM: I'm compelling you all with the situation aspect Uneasy Ceasefire. You don't want to break station protocol for fear of jeopardizing the peace talks.Player 3: ...So let's go to the bar first?GM: Good choice! A short, large-eared humanoid greets you from behind the bar...[/sblock]That doesn't make sense to me, but how else are you supposed to use compels?Also, "getting taken out" of a conflict. What happens if you get taken out? Supposedly, "the person who took you out gets to decide what your loss looks like and what happens to you after the conflict" (168). So, if an intrepid adventurer gets taken out by a bloodthirsty orc, presumably that means he dies? But then there's a whole section about not having PCs die. So what happens instead? The GM has to make something up on the spot? And how do you decide what's a concession and what's a failure?</blockquote>

Verification