Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6733580" data-attributes="member: 4937">What I really didn't get about FATE, and this hopefully is clearer in the context of the above discussion, is that it's a document that goes out of its way to hype about how it is all about dramatic role-play, but in its examples of play there seems to be no expectation that the players are engaging with the game as a drama or in any fashion immersed in the experience at all.&nbsp; As I understood and understand the attraction of an RPG, it's like the attraction of reading a good book, except that instead of being an observer of the characters in the book or even getting to see the world through their eyes, you get to be an actual participant in the book and make choices along the way.&nbsp; It's like a &quot;Choose your Own Adventure&quot; book with millions of endings and where you could crib in new ideas for what you do at the bottom of the page and the new pages would appear.&nbsp; And yet despite seemingly affirming that view of what playing an RPG should be like, when the book provides examples of play, &quot;IT'S JUST NOTHING LIKE THAT!!!&quot;&nbsp; There is no emersion at all.&nbsp; The approach of the players in the game is largely gamist in nature, seemingly completely unconcerned with characterization, describing actions by their characters in a third person pawn stance, with no dramatic dialogue occurring either between PCs and NPCs or between PCs.&nbsp; There is no evidence of improvement in drama at all, and if the examples of play are accurate, then the examples of play show the system isn't adding anything to the game that any very basic system would provide.&nbsp; And what it does seem to bring from Forge is a certain pretentiousness as if they've discovered that RPGs can be stories and no one has ever implemented or experienced that before.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6733580, member: 4937"] What I really didn't get about FATE, and this hopefully is clearer in the context of the above discussion, is that it's a document that goes out of its way to hype about how it is all about dramatic role-play, but in its examples of play there seems to be no expectation that the players are engaging with the game as a drama or in any fashion immersed in the experience at all. As I understood and understand the attraction of an RPG, it's like the attraction of reading a good book, except that instead of being an observer of the characters in the book or even getting to see the world through their eyes, you get to be an actual participant in the book and make choices along the way. It's like a "Choose your Own Adventure" book with millions of endings and where you could crib in new ideas for what you do at the bottom of the page and the new pages would appear. And yet despite seemingly affirming that view of what playing an RPG should be like, when the book provides examples of play, "IT'S JUST NOTHING LIKE THAT!!!" There is no emersion at all. The approach of the players in the game is largely gamist in nature, seemingly completely unconcerned with characterization, describing actions by their characters in a third person pawn stance, with no dramatic dialogue occurring either between PCs and NPCs or between PCs. There is no evidence of improvement in drama at all, and if the examples of play are accurate, then the examples of play show the system isn't adding anything to the game that any very basic system would provide. And what it does seem to bring from Forge is a certain pretentiousness as if they've discovered that RPGs can be stories and no one has ever implemented or experienced that before. [/QUOTE]

Verification