Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7714738" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I like Fate a lot, but I don't consider it rules-lite. I would actually argue that the Fate Core engine is significantly more complicated than 5e's core mechanics. Its all the &quot;extras&quot; that come wrapped into 5e that make it appear more complicated.What I mean by that is that Fate Core doesn't specify for you things like Races, Magic/Spells, setting-specific Skills, special Equipment, cybernetics, etc. You can certainly play Fate just fine without specifying those things ahead of time*, but they can be a big part of enforcing a setting during play. Strip those things away from 5e and I think what's left of 5e is simpler than Fate Core. For example, imagine I want to pick a lock. In 5e, its just a roll to pick the lock. In Fate, I might be picking the lock as either an Overcome Obstacle roll or a Create Advantage roll, which resolve differently and have differently mechanical consequences as the game progresses. (I can't figure out a way that it could be an Attack or Defend roll, but hey, maybe those, as well.) Similarly, while Fate's Zones are in some ways simpler than grid movement, they aren't simpler than 5e's default of just plain movement of X feet, to my eyes.&nbsp;Most of what we think of as rules &quot;weight&quot; for D&amp;D appears, to me, to be the added heft of dealing with all those spells, class abilities, special conditions, etc. which serve to create the (more specific than we give it credit for) D&amp;D &quot;setting&quot;. Many people on many threads have noted that D&amp;D has created its own sub-genre of fantasy. If/When you add all that type of material back into Fate, to enforce such a setting, you can get a very hefty rule system indeed. (The heft proportional to the degree of specificity.) My $.02, anyway.*Mostly by wrapping those things into the aspects and the way aspects function, IME.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 7714738, member: 6688937"] I like Fate a lot, but I don't consider it rules-lite. I would actually argue that the Fate Core engine is significantly more complicated than 5e's core mechanics. Its all the "extras" that come wrapped into 5e that make it appear more complicated. What I mean by that is that Fate Core doesn't specify for you things like Races, Magic/Spells, setting-specific Skills, special Equipment, cybernetics, etc. You can certainly play Fate just fine without specifying those things ahead of time*, but they can be a big part of enforcing a setting during play. Strip those things away from 5e and I think what's left of 5e is simpler than Fate Core. For example, imagine I want to pick a lock. In 5e, its just a roll to pick the lock. In Fate, I might be picking the lock as either an [I]Overcome Obstacle[/I] roll or a [I]Create Advantage[/I] roll, which resolve differently and have differently mechanical consequences as the game progresses. (I can't figure out a way that it could be an [I]Attack [/I]or [I]Defend [/I]roll, but hey, maybe those, as well.) Similarly, while Fate's Zones are in some ways simpler than grid movement, they aren't simpler than 5e's default of just plain movement of X feet, to my eyes. Most of what we think of as rules "weight" for D&D appears, to me, to be the added heft of dealing with all those spells, class abilities, special conditions, etc. which serve to create the (more specific than we give it credit for) D&D "setting". Many people on many threads have noted that D&D has created its own sub-genre of fantasy. If/When you add all that type of material back into Fate, to enforce such a setting, you can get a very hefty rule system indeed. (The heft proportional to the degree of specificity.) My $.02, anyway. *Mostly by wrapping those things into the aspects and the way aspects function, IME. [/QUOTE]

Verification