Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: “Old School” in RPGs and other Games – Part 1 Failure and Story
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7768868" data-attributes="member: 5142"><p>"Oh yeah? Well, my anecdotal evidence could beat up your anecdotal evidence..." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>(1) Simply reducing the nature of the Fate Point (and Trouble Compels) economy to a metagame bargain seems overly reductionistic, almost done for the sake of being able to dismiss the system on the sole basis of the taboo "metagame" word. It seems orthogonal to any actual debate of substance regarding the merits of the system. </p><p></p><p>As a roleplaying game, which Fate most definitely is, Fate wants to push the characters (and players) during play to make choices and lean into the drama of the fiction. The game is not only interested in what in-game complications you accept, but also the complications during play that you pay to reject. It's interested in what moments you find important enough to spend Fate points on in-game to push your character to succeed. When do you reroll? When do you push yourself a bit more (+2)? As such, Fate points are meant to highlight moments of heightened dramatic play. </p><p></p><p>(2) Fate's Troubles are not strictly speaking "flaws," though they can be written as such. A Trouble like "Manners of a Goat" will likely behave more like a behavioral flaw of a character that the GM may compel during a moment of tense negotiations. But if this players is indicating that they have "Manners of a Goat," then they are telling the GM that they want this character aspect to arise in play and complicate their character's story. They also have the option of leaning into that flaw of their own volition without the GM. However, the Trouble "Gotta Look Out for My Little Brother" would likely not operate as one would expect a character flaw. Or a Trouble may even link to a NPC: "Foiled Again by Doktor von Greed!", which would likewise not be a character flaw. </p><p></p><p>Furthermore, part of the problem with pre-bought "flaws" in other systems is that players often pick maginally significant flaws or drawbacks without guarantee in play to rack up points for better benefits. Your character's arachnophobia may never show up in-game, but you were after the Super Strength perk you bought with that flaw anyway. The nature of Fate is that Troubles are dramatic complications that players are indicating that they <em>want</em> to see play in-game. And players <em>want</em> them to see play because they are a good way of generating Fate points, which players will spend to push their characters further. Characters can have other character flaws that are not writtens as Troubles or aspects. Nothing is stopping them. Troubles are simply the ones the player has indicated they want the GM (or others players) to engage as a dramatically character-defining one. And it can change as the story progresses. You want to solve your brother's murder. Then you find out who did it, but now your Trouble changes to reflect that you want vengeance against them. </p><p></p><p>(3) It's easy to play Fate points in ways that don't force the player to drop out of character, even for behavioral situations. The GM looks at the player with the Trouble, "Manners of a Goat," and asks them, "Bronan the Barbarian. How are you feeling right now? These negotations have dragged on, and the priest clearly is being dismissive of you, refusing to talk to you in favor of your companions. Are you getting irritated at this point in the negotiations with this priest of the tribe?" Bronan the Barbarian: "You know what? Yes, I am." And then Bronan the Barbarian insults the head priest during negotiations. The GM slips Bronan's player a Fate point. OR Bronan the Barbarian: "No. I know the negotiation is too important for the region. I remain silent but bredugingly grit my teeth and curse under my breath." And Bronan's PC slips the GM a Fate point. </p><p></p><p>It is much as I believe [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] once said in another conversation on the subject. The more experience you have with the system, the more that this becomes second nature and you seemlessly remain in the headspace of your character while engaging the Fate point mechanic. Familiarity breeds ease of use. What breakes RP immersion for one person will not necessarily break immersion for another.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7768868, member: 5142"] "Oh yeah? Well, my anecdotal evidence could beat up your anecdotal evidence..." ;) (1) Simply reducing the nature of the Fate Point (and Trouble Compels) economy to a metagame bargain seems overly reductionistic, almost done for the sake of being able to dismiss the system on the sole basis of the taboo "metagame" word. It seems orthogonal to any actual debate of substance regarding the merits of the system. As a roleplaying game, which Fate most definitely is, Fate wants to push the characters (and players) during play to make choices and lean into the drama of the fiction. The game is not only interested in what in-game complications you accept, but also the complications during play that you pay to reject. It's interested in what moments you find important enough to spend Fate points on in-game to push your character to succeed. When do you reroll? When do you push yourself a bit more (+2)? As such, Fate points are meant to highlight moments of heightened dramatic play. (2) Fate's Troubles are not strictly speaking "flaws," though they can be written as such. A Trouble like "Manners of a Goat" will likely behave more like a behavioral flaw of a character that the GM may compel during a moment of tense negotiations. But if this players is indicating that they have "Manners of a Goat," then they are telling the GM that they want this character aspect to arise in play and complicate their character's story. They also have the option of leaning into that flaw of their own volition without the GM. However, the Trouble "Gotta Look Out for My Little Brother" would likely not operate as one would expect a character flaw. Or a Trouble may even link to a NPC: "Foiled Again by Doktor von Greed!", which would likewise not be a character flaw. Furthermore, part of the problem with pre-bought "flaws" in other systems is that players often pick maginally significant flaws or drawbacks without guarantee in play to rack up points for better benefits. Your character's arachnophobia may never show up in-game, but you were after the Super Strength perk you bought with that flaw anyway. The nature of Fate is that Troubles are dramatic complications that players are indicating that they [I]want[/I] to see play in-game. And players [I]want[/I] them to see play because they are a good way of generating Fate points, which players will spend to push their characters further. Characters can have other character flaws that are not writtens as Troubles or aspects. Nothing is stopping them. Troubles are simply the ones the player has indicated they want the GM (or others players) to engage as a dramatically character-defining one. And it can change as the story progresses. You want to solve your brother's murder. Then you find out who did it, but now your Trouble changes to reflect that you want vengeance against them. (3) It's easy to play Fate points in ways that don't force the player to drop out of character, even for behavioral situations. The GM looks at the player with the Trouble, "Manners of a Goat," and asks them, "Bronan the Barbarian. How are you feeling right now? These negotations have dragged on, and the priest clearly is being dismissive of you, refusing to talk to you in favor of your companions. Are you getting irritated at this point in the negotiations with this priest of the tribe?" Bronan the Barbarian: "You know what? Yes, I am." And then Bronan the Barbarian insults the head priest during negotiations. The GM slips Bronan's player a Fate point. OR Bronan the Barbarian: "No. I know the negotiation is too important for the region. I remain silent but bredugingly grit my teeth and curse under my breath." And Bronan's PC slips the GM a Fate point. It is much as I believe [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] once said in another conversation on the subject. The more experience you have with the system, the more that this becomes second nature and you seemlessly remain in the headspace of your character while engaging the Fate point mechanic. Familiarity breeds ease of use. What breakes RP immersion for one person will not necessarily break immersion for another. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: “Old School” in RPGs and other Games – Part 1 Failure and Story
Top