Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7447712" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, arguing about 'tastes' is a fruitless endeavor. I have never mentioned 'taste' at all...I think, as I just told [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], we need to be explicit and concrete and talk details. I don't know what 'at a high level' means. I know specific situations at tables and categories of similar situations at tables as their generalization. So, I would say, in general, when a player wants to do something like have his character's 'aspect' (generally a qualitative thing) be reflected concretely in the game situation, that is to have some real mechanical and procedural heft, then FATE is more likely to be able to meet that need. This is kind of general though. We cannot say that there is NEVER a case where 5e's Inspiration/Bonds system will deliver this. It could, but since Inspiration isn't actually tied explicitly to PIBFs, which have no defined mechanical impact AFAIK. There's a vague "the GM might give you inspiration if you play in a way that reflects your traits" but it doesn't even say if it is positively or negatively! (IE you would GAIN inspiration for taking actions beneficial to your character if they happen to align with his PIBFs). Again though, I don't really understand what is meant by "at a high level". If you mean sort of in a hand-wavy kind of way that both games have some sort of mechanics that include character traits and some sort of mechanics that can give bonuses to checks, then I guess 5e and FATE are close cousins! I think that's so vague however that it misses the entire essence of what each game is really about.What I'm saying is that I think the two systems are so qualitatively different that 'what' they accomplish is only 'the same' in an extremely superficial way. I've never said 5e can do everything FATE can do or that you seriously argued that, although [MENTION=2486]Al[/MENTION]drac DID quote where you made statements which are EXCEEDINGLY like that statement! You very certainly did attempt to minimize the central nature of aspects/compulsion/invocation in FATE. I didn't set out to prove that you were 'wrong that 5e can do all that FATE can do', I set out to prove that your assertion that FATE is just "FUDGE with a few narrative elements slapped on it". This assertion was, frankly, completely wrong! It gave the whole discussion a character that produced inaccurate conclusions. I simply corrected it, perhaps with zest, but it was simply a correction.You have been somewhat inconsistent, as [MENTION=5142]Aldarc[/MENTION] accurately pointed out in his response to your last post before this one. I am happy to take it that you have clarified your position here. FATE is not simply a skill-based system with some traits tacked on. If this is an accurate assessment of your current position, then we can proceed from there and need not beat expired equines anymore. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Its not necessary for me to recapitulate what I stated above, so I won't. My position is as it has been. 5e has some fairly superficial and minor 'trait' attributes which loosely couple to an Inspiration mechanism. FATE OTOH is a system which is entirely driven by aspects as its universal mechanical underpinning. While FATE does have (potentially at least) skills as well, they are mostly useful to set the success/fail threshold for the various checks, which are then subject to the aspect rules. Skills are not totally unimportant, but it is telling that FATE core doesn't even have a suggested list of them that I can recall, they are entirely setting-specific. I think that FATE is going to likely tend to be more abstract in terms of tactics. That is to say, your character might have an aspect or a skill that bears on his tactical prowess. You would assert your tactical chops by leveraging that aspect in some sort of 'I apply tactics to this situation' check instead of practicing tactical principles yourself as a player. Now, I think it could be possible to make a FATE-based game that WAS tactical in 4e-esque kind of way. I'd have to think carefully about how that would work if I wanted to design it.</blockquote>

Verification