Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7901124" data-attributes="member: 16814">[USER=20564]@Blue[/USER], [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER], others,On the nature of how  compels work in FATE vs D&D, I think a salient point is how the game itself structures narrative.  Your typical D&D game structures narrative as either engage in the GM created content, which will usually be fixed fictional points (monsters, lairs, dungeons, this NPC, etc.) while FATE and similar games develop what the objects of play are during play (this player action leads the fiction in a new direction, which, in turn, leads to that new direction, etc.).  These very different structures of how content is generated (before vs during) really go directly to how the behavior reinforcement mechanics work and how closely coupled to the action they need to be.In D&D, experience and treasure can be somewhat decoupled from the immediate action because there's really only a limited set of immediate actions -- either engage with the DM's material or meander around until you do.  Even in "sandbox" games, where there's no overarching plot being pushed by the DM, play still focuses on what the DM has created, just in a looser order.  And this is fine, and good, and fun (underlined because I love D&D and this isn't a knock on D&D).  Because of this, the reward mechanism (XP, lewt) is more a general reward for overcoming the DM's obstacles and don't need to be tightly coupled to actions because there's no need to drive specific actions when the game is already about engaging the DM's material.  Play will happen with or without the reward mechanism.   Here, the mechanism is to promote return play, not action in the moment.FATE, on the other hand, plays much more loosely with content.  DM content is usually just some location notes or a scene frame, maybe with a loose outline of anticipated plot to help with framing.  Here, there's much less DM material to engage with, and play is more about following what happens rather than overcoming DM created obstacles.  In other words, there may be a dungeon, like in D&D, but it's not mapped out and populated past the first room because the dungeon needs to follow play.  In this framework, the game really needs to generate complication in play in order to fulfill it's promise.  Hence, the game incentivizes play where the character's flaws cause complications.  The reward mechanic must tightly couple with the action because the action is necessary to continue play.  There's isn't play, or there is lackluster and unfun play, if actions do not generate more problems.  Here, the mechanic is to promote action, not return play.Both systems use reward mechanics to get players to do the thing the game's about.  D&D can afford less tightly coupled rewards because it has less to no need to drive play as play revolves around DM created content anyway.  FATE does need to drive play, because it doesn't exist without that drive.  So, it tightly couples rewards to the play that's needed.Now, all that said, I totally get how FATE isn't a system that appeals to people because of how it plays.  That's cool.  I'm not a huge fan of FATE myself, even though I enjoy games that have many similar attributes (Powered by the Apocalypse games, for instance, Blades in the Dark in specific).  But, it's a mistake to assume objectives from a different style of play or game and then judge FATE as incoherent or broken or not doing what it says on the tin because it doesn't meet those objectives.  FATE works awesomely, if you play it as FATE and not partially as a different game it's not.  That doesn't mean it's the game for you.</blockquote>

Verification