Why Do You Hate An RPG System?

[Blue]

No, that was my entire point. It's telling you to take the fate point economy into consideration, because most games don't have that, and you need to be mindful of it when playing this game. But I don't want to take the fate point economy into consideration, because that would be using out-of-character information to make an in-character decision, which goes against the basic tenet of role-playing.

No more than the thought that if you adventure you will get XP and level up, instead of doing a soap opera in the tavern all day. You're setting up a false dichotomy - all games ofter rewards of some sort at a meta level that shapes play. D&D's issue with XP for foes is the cause of the whole murderhobo issue - a much worse one than playing your character like you have describe to want to play them.

It's hypocritical to call out one of them without the other.

 

[Reynard]

No, that was my entire point. It's telling you to take the fate point economy into consideration, because most games don't have that, and you need to be mindful of it when playing this game. But I don't want to take the fate point economy into consideration, because that would be using out-of-character information to make an in-character decision, which goes against the basic tenet of role-playing.

No. That's not the basic tenet of role-playing. The basic tenet of role-playing is playing a role. The key word here is "playing" because a) it's a game, and b) you literally cannot become the character. You absolutely MUST use out of character knowledge in any roleplaying game or situation, because you cannot, by definition, be another person. You cannot know things your character should know and you cannot un-know things your character doesn't. Using a game structure designed to help you play that role, such as Fate's Aspects, makes it easier to roleplay because you define what kind of role you are playing. If you did it perfectly, you would never not accept a compel because you wrote the character to be what role you wanted to play.

 

[Blue]

If I'm playing D&D, I'm expecting to play a character who solves problems, and who advances in level. If I can solve the problem/s without killing things, that's fine. If the GM uses something other than XP, that's also fine.

Am I pulling the other one hard enough?

Yes, you are if you are claiming that the most common mode of play that players do not have their behavior motivated by XP to some degree.

Please see murderhobo, with the whole killing for XP. When suitibly enlightened to how what you described where you personally have a zen-like disreagrd for XP or advancement that is not generally shared, please return.

Fair enough. They are, however, pretty clear about recommending that you not decline compels, and that they're expecting you to need those fate points later on.

Yes, they do take an opportunity to remind you of the Fate point economy, something that most gamers new to Fate may not know about.

Or in the case that the GM thinks one of your aspects means you should. Then you have to stop the game and negotiate, or let the GM screw your character because he can't figure out another way to make a decent story. Same-same, I guess.

It's Fate. Think about the people attracted to that system who will be playing it, that's the audience. If there's an actual misunderstanding about your aspect, just tell your GM. Aspects are subjective, you are the master of your character. Unless you are trying to game the system, in which case you are a bad actor and that's not the system's fault.

The great thing about systems is that we can find ones that fit our own styles. You can say "Fate is not for me at all" and I'll congratulate you on your self knowledge. But if you say "Fate is broken because of X, Y and Z", I'll either agree with you or try to clear up your misconceptions.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

No more than the thought that if you adventure you will get XP and level up, instead of doing a soap opera in the tavern all day. You're setting up a false dichotomy - all games ofter rewards of some sort at a meta level that shapes play. D&D's issue with XP for foes is the cause of the whole murderhobo issue - a much worse one than playing your character like you have describe to want to play them.

Unless D&D world actually works that way, and everyone knows it, which is entirely possible (given a minimal level of abstraction).

Likewise, you can stay in character while playing FATE, as long as the world actually works that way and everyone knows it. The difference is, that's not something I could ever do with a straight face. Narrative causality is significantly less believable than learning through experience.

 

[prabe]

But if a player goes into a game like Paranoia or Toon with that as their attitude, they will not have fun, and therefore "lose".

But I've played Paranoia, and it's fun. It's silly and it's impossible to take seriously, and the writers were pretty clear that while they figured it was possible for PCs to successfully complete and adventure they had no idea how. All of what Paranoia does, it tells you it's going to do, and it works. You know you're screwed going in.

Fate is a game for people who enjoy a good story. Like a novel or movie, the protagonists have a series of ups and down. Those downs can be a huge amount of fun for the player. Captured and need to escape. A twist where a trusted ally betrays you and suddenly past events fall into place.

I think I remember coming to the conclusion that for all that FATE talks about characters, it's really willing to throw them under the bus for the possibility of a slightly better story. I've found that the best stories I've experienced in TTRPGs have emerged from gameplay, and not been particularly written or scripted or otherwise planned.

I've played RPG like a tactical squad to get the right result. I've played RPGs like a soap opera, with more time spent on RP within the team than on combat. I've played silly games. I've played dead serious drama. The idea that a character and a player need or should have the same goals and priorities is false. It can happen, but it need not. And in many types of RPGs, it's a detriment to play.

I find it easier to play a character the more I identify with them. It at least feels from inside my head as though I want what they want (which isn't the same as they want what I want). Compels feel as though they interfere with that. Clearly, others have different experiences.

 

[Blue]

Likewise, you can stay in character while playing FATE, as long as the world actually works that way and everyone knows it. The difference is, that's not something I could ever do with a straight face. Narrative causality is significantly less believable than learning through experience. getting better only via means of killing foes, including skills and other abilities that were not used.

Fixed that for you. And sorry, that's the less realistic one. No amount of practice in D&D can increase your level. You only get it via XP, which with the default system is killing.
“Fixing” others’s posts is rude if you‘re not a mod. Please don’t be rude.

 

[prabe]

Yes, you are if you are claiming that the most common mode of play that players do not have their behavior motivated by XP to some degree.

But you weren't talking about most D&D players. You were talking about me.

The great thing about systems is that we can find ones that fit our own styles. You can say "Fate is not for me at all" and I'll congratulate you on your self knowledge. But if you say "Fate is broken because of X, Y and Z", I'll either agree with you or try to clear up your misconceptions.

Indeed. It's an excellent thing there are a variety of games so people can try them on and find what works. I don't think I said FATE is broken anywhere, though. It didn't work at my table the way it purports to work in the books, but that doesn't mean other people don't have different experiences, and it doesn't mean the game is broken.

 

[Ratskinner]

I'm struggling to understand why you don't characterize this mechanic as "counting successes". Yes, the dice are somewhat more complicated than coins (though right off the top of my head, I'm not sure how radically different the expected number of successes would be if they were coins), and yes you are actually adding up the number of successes that modify your base degree of success based on what you are testing, but it's still very much a dice pool mechanic that involves counting the number of successes and comparing it to a target number.

Technically you're summing them and adding a base modifier, not counting "successes". Not quite the same. You still only get one success/fail dimension of result. Then again the Cortex+ system doesn't count successes, but you sure do build a pool of dice and take (usually) the best two. So, y'know pool, no pool, tomato tomahto.

Oh, and the mathy difference between coins and Fate dice is just the "curve" part of bell curve. 4 coins is like 4d2, whereas Fate dice are 4d3-8. So, whatever difference you would infer from that...its the same.

 

[Arilyn]

No, that was my entire point. It's telling you to take the fate point economy into consideration, because most games don't have that, and you need to be mindful of it when playing this game. But I don't want to take the fate point economy into consideration, because that would be using out-of-character information to make an in-character decision, which goes against the basic tenet of role-playing.

All RPGs have systems that are pure game, and require players to think outside their characters heads. In D&D I'll rush the orc pointing a bow at me because I know I have enough hp to survive. There is no way that an arrow shot by that orc is going to kill me, or hit a vital spot or even make me feel any pain. That's pretty darn meta. If I was really truly role playing as that character, so would never run straight at someone with a bow. That's crazy. But I know as a player that I'll be fine.

 

[Ratskinner]

ONLY in the case where you have intentionally created your character that one of the five major aspects of their personality is that they WOULD PICK THAT LOCK. So let's break that down. In the corner case where you are out of Fate points, your GM can, if they wish, require you to act on a character's flaw that you have said is one of their defining characteristics.

Just to chime in here. To be out of Fate points means either:
a) you've been spamming invokes of aspects too much....unless the GM has been setting difficulties too high or completely ignoring compels, this likely means that you aren't playing to your stated strengths.
b) you've been buying off compels, so not playing to your chosen aspects.
c) your character is totally uninteresting to the GM and other players, and thus "un-compellable" (can you hear the English language groaning?).

Additionally...re: picking the lock.

Why? I mean, a compel isn't there to boss you around, its there to make the story more interesting. A Fate GM who has any sense of what they are supposed to be doing doesn't just say "HA! You're an inveterate thief you pick the lock! Like it or not!"

If the GM is going to compel such an aspect, it has to move the story forward in an interesting way...that is, it has to complicate the situation. That's why you can use compels to start in media res! So, if the GM is going to compel you to steal something...heck, that can happen totally "offscreen":
GM: So you're leaving the Duke's woodland house after successfully returning his favorite horse.
Player 1: Thank heavens that's over. Never saw a grown man weep over his horse, before.
GM: (Holds up a Fate point) Y'know, Player 2, you've got Sticky Fingers right?
Player 2: umm....yeah (looks skeptically at the GM)
GM: There was a lot of shiny cool stuff in that office, the Duke probably won't miss it if you just took one little thing...
Player 2: Like what?
GM: I'll let you tell me..(wags Fate point in the air)
Player 2: Deal....I got oh....ummm....A little wooden box with gold inlays, haven't opened it yet.
GM: great! (tosses the Fate point over) The alarms start ringing just as you step into the street.

Its kinda like the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy 2, when Rocket takes those battery thingamajigs. That's what a good compel is about.

Naturally, not all compels will be equally exciting, but that's what you're shooting for. Can the GM use compels to beat up on the PCs...yup. But that's not a problem if he's doing it in an interesting way. If he's not, then he's not doing his job.