Fate - what is this insanity?

[robiswrong]

So, I promised I'd start a thread about Fate. I'm here to answer questions.

I'm fairly well-known in the online Fate community, have some of my stuff posted on the Evil Hat site, blah blah blah. I'm also a long-term traditional gamer, and while I enjoy Fate, I don't think it (or narrative systems in general) are the One True Way, and I still quite enjoy traditional games (GURPS probably being my favorite - played that since the 80s).

So, got any questions? If so, shoot!

 

[Caesar Slaad]

My question, probably coming from the wrong side of the fence, is this:

Why do so many people struggle with aspects?

I mean it's a simple concept - a generic label that leverages the power of language to decide when it applies.

Unlike some early "story games" that use generic labels, invoking aspects is fairly balanced since they are typically balanced by Fate Points. Contrast this with the likes of Over The Edge, where your character's ability impact "the narrative" or "gameplay" (choose the term you prefer, they mean the same thing) is easily influenced by how clever you are at picking your special skill. So unlike earlier narrative style games like OTE, it's a game I've warmed up to.

 

[robiswrong]

Unlike some early "story games" that use generic labels, invoking aspects is fairly balanced since they are typically balanced by Fate Points. Contrast this with the likes of Over The Edge, where your character's ability impact "the narrative" or "gameplay" (choose the term you prefer, they mean the same thing) is easily influenced by how clever you are at picking your special skill. So unlike earlier narrative style games like OTE, it's a game I've warmed up to.

So, for me, a lot of the "relearning" with Fate is that things don't work the way that they work in, say, GURPS (which Fate is a descendent of). It was really easy for me to look at Aspects and go "oh, Advantages/Disadvantages", but then they don't work that way - it's kind of like driving a different car and the wiper controls work totally differently.

The key for me was understanding that Aspects aren't advantages/feats/edges, but more like a kind of foreshadowing like you might see in a movie. And that invocations aren't just "oh, this helps you", but more like the dramatic moment in a movie or TV show where the thing that was pointed out earlier suddenly generates a dramatic swing at a key moment.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

I think a big problem is that people think that Aspects have no mechanical impact unless one spends a Fate point, and that even then, it's only ever a matter of a +2 modifier. That's just not accurate. It's an understandable mistake, though, because so many Fate games are really bad at explaining Aspects ...
There's also the mistaken view that you have to use Aspects for damn near everything in order to have any mechanical impact, and that's also not true. It's also understandable, because there is that "Just Use Aspects!" part of the Fate fanbase, and they can be very vocal ...

 

[Tommy Brownell]

I can wrap my head around character aspects, it's adding/tagging/compelling stuff like setting aspects that I struggle with for some reason.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

[It's usually situation aspects that cause the biggest problems. If I may, here's a little "essay" I wrote as a post on another site, that I've saved to share when these things come up. Hopefully, some folks here might find it useful as well.]

Situation aspects feature in many discussions, confusions, or downright criticisms of Fate; let’s see what we can do about that. Take the example of a dark room. There’s more than one way to treat this in Fate.

First, and most importantly, we don’t need to make the darkness an aspect. Not everything has to be an aspect to have a narrative or mechanical role in Fate. Instead:

1) It could just be descriptive: “Yep, it’s dark now.”
2) It could grant or deny permission: “Yes, you can attempt to hide, since there’s cover of darkness” or “No, you can’t read your book right now, because it’s too dark in the room.”
3) It could be an obstacle requiring an overcome action: “It’s dark, so you’ll need to get your bearings before you do anything; make an overcome action with your Notice skill against Fair (+2) opposition.”
4) It could guide the GM in assigning passive opposition to skill rolls: “You want to sneak past security? It’s dark, so that shouldn’t be hard: make a Stealth roll against Mediocre (+0) opposition.”

We could also invoke the Bronze Rule (aka, “The Fate Fractal”) and treat the dark room as a character – assigning it skills, stunts, etc. – but that’s a whole other discussion … In any case, items 1-4 are very traditional ways of handling something like a dark room, and Fate can handle it like that too.

However, let’s say we decide to make the darkness an aspect. It’s important to remember that an aspect is always true, whether or not it’s invoked. It makes something a fact, just like any non-aspect fact, and so could work in all the same ways as the above. This is the part that people often seem to miss. All those other things don’t suddenly become unavailable just because something is an aspect, and you don’t need to invoke the aspect, spend a Fate point, etc., for aspects to continue to work this way. However, making it an aspect also adds a layer of narrative and mechanical importance to the fact:

5) It signals your desire to make the fact more important to the story, to make the description more vivid, to make a better narrative. Rather than just “Yep, it’s dark,” it’s now “And then the Cat-like Grey Mouser sneaked through the dimly-lit room, leaping silently from shadow to shadow, concealed from the watchful eyes of the palace guards!”
6) It can now be invoked: a player can spend a Fate point to improve her PC’s roll (“I really want my PC to get by those guards, so I’ll spend a Fate point to say that the shadows are perfectly placed to get her through.”), and the GM can do the same on behalf of an NPC. (There are other things one can do with an invoke, and there are compels too, but I’ll leave the details to the rulebooks – I’m just sticking with this common use for a clear example.) Note that there’s nothing mysterious about this. Many games since the old days have had similar meta-resources (e.g., Marvel FASERIP’s Karma). The difference here is that there must be a narrative justification by way of an aspect in order to spend the meta-resource. This may not be to one’s taste, but that’s hardly an objective flaw of the game design, and it’s arguably more “realistic” (that is, it functions within the game, rather than completely “meta”), and arguably more immersive (that is, it references in-game facts rather than purely out-of-character decisions).

At the end of the day, the core of Fate is just regular old RPG design (1-4 above); aspects add to those (via 5 & 6 above), they don’t negate, replace, or abandon them.

 

[robiswrong]

It can also grant passive opposition to either side - which generally acts as a "floor" to the other side's roll.

"You're sneaking through a Dark area? Okay, the guard will try to spot you, so roll opposed stealth - but, since it's so Dark, even if you flub your roll you'll get a minimum of +1"

I think a big problem is that people think that Aspects have no mechanical impact unless one spends a Fate point, and that even then, it's only ever a matter of a +2 modifier. That's just not accurate. It's an understandable mistake, though, because so many Fate games are really bad at explaining Aspects ...
There's also the mistaken view that you have to use Aspects for damn near everything in order to have any mechanical impact, and that's also not true. It's also understandable, because there is that "Just Use Aspects!" part of the Fate fanbase, and they can be very vocal ...

Both of these. I'd also add that people are used to "mattering" meaning "giving a bonus or penalty". So Aspects matter and are true, just not in the way people are used to seeing... and then the fact that you *can* get the bonus you're expecting, but only if you spend a Fate Point, muddles things even further.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

It can also grant passive opposition to either side - which generally acts as a "floor" to the other side's roll.

"You're sneaking through a Dark area? Okay, the guard will try to spot you, so roll opposed stealth - but, since it's so Dark, even if you flub your roll you'll get a minimum of +1"

Ah yes, the floor / ceiling thing. I just came across that application myself (I'd bet reading one of your posts somewhere else ), so hadn't added that to my little essay ... Is that something in the Fate Core book itself, or the Toolkit, or? Not doubting you, just interested in a reference for future reference. I feel like I remember it in discussions of things like weapons and armor, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

Oh, while I'm at it, and before we get too far ... I just want to make it perfectly clear that I am okay with people not liking Fate! I get it. It's not always what I'm in the mood for either. It's no mystery why my other favorite generic is BRP - it's kinda the polar opposite of Fate in many ways.
I just notice a lot of occasions in which someone says "I don't like Fate because <blank>" when <blank> is simply false. So I try to clarify how the game works, in the hopes that someone might like it once they get it better, but I don't ever mean to come off as arguing that one *should* like Fate, even after one groks it.
That's it. Carry on!

 

[robiswrong]

Ah yes, the floor / ceiling thing. I just came across that application myself (I'd bet reading one of your posts somewhere else ), so hadn't added that to my little essay ... Is that something in the Fate Core book itself, or the Toolkit, or? Not doubting you, just interested in a reference for future reference. I feel like I remember it in discussions of things like weapons and armor, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

It's more of an implied thing, but widely used.

It's directly stated in the rules that you get either active or passive opposition, and that aspects can increase passive opposition. That is all very clearly RAW.

The interpretation is that "if your roll sucks, you can still get your passive opposition". Which makes sense in most, if not all situations, but is not explicitly stated.

At least that's where floors come from. Ceilings are really just an addition, and harder to justify from a RAW standpoint.

Oh, while I'm at it, and before we get too far ... I just want to make it perfectly clear that I am okay with people not liking Fate! I get it. It's not always what I'm in the mood for either. It's no mystery why my other favorite generic is BRP - it's kinda the polar opposite of Fate in many ways.
I just notice a lot of occasions in which someone says "I don't like Fate because <blank>" when <blank> is simply false. So I try to clarify how the game works, in the hopes that someone might like it once they get it better, but I don't ever mean to come off as arguing that one *should* like Fate, even after one groks it.
That's it. Carry on!

100%. If you don't like Fate, cool! But if you don't like it for stated reasons which are false/don't match my experience, that's where I jump in.

I don't like D&D 3.x, but I recognize it's a great game for a bunch of people.

 

[TheophilusCarter]

The interpretation is that "if your roll sucks, you can still get your passive opposition". Which makes sense in most, if not all situations.

Ah! I got it. Makes sense, thanks!

 

[robiswrong]

My favorite example of situation aspects is still Spider-Man. Let's say he shoots webs at someone, trying to get them stuck in a web.

That's probably a Create Advantage action, and if successful, the target is now Stuck In A Web

The target can try to break out of the web. That's an Overcome.

The target can't move anywhere. Because he's in a web. That's action denial.

The target might try some things, like shooting at Spidey. If that's a reasonable thing to do, it's still probably tougher because of being stuck in a web, and we'd handle that with Passive Opposition.

Similarly, the target might try to dodge a punch, which will also be difficult - we'd likely model that as a floor (slightly less supported) on the attacker's roll, or even a ceiling on the defense (even less supported, but reasonable).

The attacker could also Invoke the web for a +2 on a relevant roll, while describing how being stuck in a web helps (though that one's usually pretty obvious).

Lastly, you could come up with a complication for the stuck person, like their gun being out of reach... "Because you're stuck in a web, wouldn't it make sense that your gun <or other thing you need> is just out of reach?" That's a Compel.

(If you really wanted the person to be REALLY REALLY stuck and not able to get out or do anything, that'd require they be Taken Out, and it's now an Attack, not a Create Advantage. One of the weird things in Fate is that it's not just the action that determines what rules you use, but your intended result).

 

[Spinachcat]

I like FATE from a design perspective and I respect it as a system, but it never works in actual play FOR ME even when the rest of the group enjoys it. FOR ME (because of whatever) tagging aspects feels artificial and anti-immersive, almost akin to button mashing.

 

[robiswrong]

I like FATE from a design perspective and I respect it as a system, but it never works in actual play FOR ME even when the rest of the group enjoys it. FOR ME (because of whatever) tagging aspects feels artificial and anti-immersive, almost akin to button mashing.

That's cool.

I try to avoid that by avoiding system-speak. So in my games, you don't say "I invoke my Love For Rhonda aspect". You say "while the thugs get in my way, my love for Rhonda fuels me to push past them" or whatever.

If you're just saying "I invoke Love For Rhonda" I totally see how that'd be very mechanical, abstract, and like button-mashing.

 

[PolarBlues]

I've kind of cooled on Fate. I'd summarise it as , she's a fine lady but a little too high maintenance for me.

What I mean is this. Fate tends formalise in the rules things which tended to happen already in game. For a while that felt a vindication, my style of playing gets official approval. Now, it's lost some of its luster and feels more like an overhead; extra steps to go where I was going anyway.

I still play it a lot, it's as close a lingua franca in my group. But it's not my game of choice for tinkering anymore and the days I'd buy a new game specifically because it was powered by Fate are gone.

 

[The Butcher]

One of the weird things in Fate is that it's not just the action that determines what rules you use, but your intended result).

This bit right there, that's my dealbreaker.

I don't think narrative mechanics per se are necessarily antithetical to immersion. What breaks my immersion is having to get out of your character's headspace, be it to set the stakes of a narrative conflict like FATE, or to take an eagle's eye view of the grid and look up two or three Feats to determine just how many attacks of opportunity your D&D3 or Pathfinder PC gets.

I loved AW/PbtA because it hastily disposes of conflict resolution, and the game felt very immersive as a result, as I got to spend most of the time in my PC's headspace.

I can see how a more FATE-proficient group of gamers can make short work of FATE's approach but the one time we ran it, it felt gritting.

 

[robiswrong]

Huh. I don't really see that as being out of the character's headspace, at least in the vast majority of cases. I mean, most of the time when we do a thing, we do it because we're trying to achieve some kind of result. (To be clear, I'm not disputing that you felt that way). If I'm wrestling someone though, there's a difference in how I approach things based on whether I'm trying to choke them out, or throw them to the ground, or move them, or any of a dozen other possible goals.

I'm kind of curious how the dialog at your table went around that. Again, not saying you did it wrong or anything, but just that that was one of the areas where I didn't really feel that disconnect while learning Fate, and am curious about how y'all ran it compared to how I've seen it run.

I'll accept that the Spidey case does that to some extent. But there's other mechanics in Fate (Concessions, certainly some invokes, Compels, Declarations) that are far more player-facing.

 

[natty bodak]

Before I jump in and start asking questions, what "Fate" are we talking about here by default? As I mentioned in the other thread my Fate experience started with SotC and ended with Dresden.

 

[TristramEvans]

Here's a question regarding the Spidey example and the Fate point economy...

In the system you reccieve Fate points for the GM tagging one of your aspects, correct?
And in order to apply an aspect in a scene ("Stuck in Web") this would cost a Fate point?
So if Spider-man's player is out of Fate points, and shoots his web at someone, what happens?

 

[Ladybird]

Here's a question regarding the Spidey example and the Fate point economy...

In the system you reccieve Fate points for the GM tagging one of your aspects, correct?
And in order to apply an aspect in a scene ("Stuck in Web") this would cost a Fate point?
So if Spider-man's player is out of Fate points, and shoots his web at someone, what happens?

He's still shot his web, so can attempt to accomplish his goal (Attack / defend / create an advantage / overcome an obstacle). A lack of fate points doesn't mean his "Webshooters" aspect has gone away. He can't spend fate points on his roll to get a bonus from his aspect though.

If he succeeds well enough and is trying to create an advantage, he can still tag someone with "Stuck in Web" with that just because he has rolled well, and that's good for one free use without spending a point (And as many paid uses as people want, or until the victim struggles out).

Here's a link to the SRD.

 

[TristramEvans]

He's still shot his web, so can attempt to accomplish his goal (Attack / defend / create an advantage / overcome an obstacle). A lack of fate points doesn't mean his "Webshooters" aspect has gone away. He can't spend fate points on his roll to get a bonus from his aspect though.

If he succeeds well enough and is trying to create an advantage, he can still tag someone with "Stuck in Web" with that just because he has rolled well, and that's good for one free use without spending a point (And as many paid uses as people want, or until the victim struggles out)

Does that mean that Fate points could be eliminated from the game entirely?

 

[The Butcher]

Huh. I don't really see that as being out of the character's headspace, at least in the vast majority of cases. I mean, most of the time when we do a thing, we do it because we're trying to achieve some kind of result. (To be clear, I'm not disputing that you felt that way). If I'm wrestling someone though, there's a difference in how I approach things based on whether I'm trying to choke them out, or throw them to the ground, or move them, or any of a dozen other possible goals.

If I'm grappling I might throw, mount, take the gack, choke or joint lock in any one of several ways — depending on my exact position relative to my opponent, which can change with a second's notice. (God, I miss BJJ.)

Say you started a fistfight intending to knock your opponent out, but things escalate — soneone pulls a knife, or confesses to killing a loved one, or tags a "Killer" Aspect — and now you're both fighting to the death. How does FATE handle shifts in intended result in the middle of a conflict?

And how does FATE interpret a failure by excess? You intended to knock him out but you end up killing or grievously injuring your adversary.

 

[natty bodak]

Here's a question regarding the Spidey example and the Fate point economy...

In the system you reccieve Fate points for the GM tagging one of your aspects, correct?
And in order to apply an aspect in a scene ("Stuck in Web") this would cost a Fate point?
So if Spider-man's player is out of Fate points, and shoots his web at someone, what happens?

I'm probably using outdated terminology and rules, but in the context of what I've played, here are my comments. Also, it's been a while.

In the system you reccieve Fate points for the GM tagging one of your aspects, correct?

The GM could offer a compel against one of your aspects, and if you accepted, you got a fate point. If you declined you paid a fate point. If you had zero fate points left, you had to accept.

And in order to apply an aspect in a scene ("Stuck in Web") this would cost a Fate point?

This depends on the ruleset. In Dresden if you could cast the "Spidey Web" spell successfully (based on how many "shifts" you rolled versus the spells difficulty), then it happens without the expenditure of a fate point. Magic guys can do magic without the fate economy. Like any other thing you might try, fate points can come into it to affect rolls, etc.

So if Spider-man's player is out of Fate points, and shoots his web at someone, what happens?

I don't know how supers work post SotC (which is way back and barely recognizably related to what we are probably discussing now), but if it's like Dresden, then Spidey can crawl on walls and shoot webs until the cows come home.

 

[Ladybird]

Does that mean that Fate points could be eliminated from the game entirely?

Probably not, because then there's nothing to stop Spiderman getting endless bonuses / rerolls from his webshooters, or alternatively preventing him getting any bonuses / rerolls from, depending on how you run it.

Say you started a fistfight intending to knock your opponent out, but things escalate — soneone pulls a knife, or confesses to killing a loved one, or tags a "Killer" Aspect — and now you're both fighting to the death. How does FATE handle shifts in intended result in the middle of a conflict?

In the case of a fight, the final result wouldn't be fixed until it happens. If you take out your opponent (Knock out all their stress and consequences) you get to decide what you do to them, and if that's different between the start and end of the conflict then so be it. Kill, KO, embarrass, whatever's appropriate for your game. Failure by excess isn't really a thing.

If they concede, then they definitely lose, but it's mostly on their terms - you'd heavily kick their ass, quite probably put them in the hospital, but it's up to them if they survive or not. Oh, and they get some fate points for conceding. This is your "supervillain exit".

 

[robiswrong]

Before I jump in and start asking questions, what "Fate" are we talking about here by default? As I mentioned in the other thread my Fate experience started with SotC and ended with Dresden.

Mostly Core, but that's 90% the same as 3.0 (SotC, Dresden) just a bit more streamlined.

Here's a question regarding the Spidey example and the Fate point economy...

In the system you reccieve Fate points for the GM tagging one of your aspects, correct?
And in order to apply an aspect in a scene ("Stuck in Web") this would cost a Fate point?
So if Spider-man's player is out of Fate points, and shoots his web at someone, what happens?

He shoots his web-shooters. He can still do that, and it's resolved as a "Create Advantage". If it succeeds, the target is stuck in a web, which we make a note of with the "Stuck In A Web" aspect.

(I'm being very specific here with the ordering of stuff. You *do* things, and then we figure out what mechanics to use, and aspects *reflect* the game. If you do it in a mechanics-first way, the game gets kind of abstract and sucky. "I Create Advantage with Shoot to create a 'STuck In A Web' aspect" is not a game I want to play)

Does that mean that Fate points could be eliminated from the game entirely?

Not really. They're just not usually used (outside of some very specific stunts) for allowing you to do things.

Say you started a fistfight intending to knock your opponent out, but things escalate — soneone pulls a knife, or confesses to killing a loved one, or tags a "Killer" Aspect — and now you're both fighting to the death. How does FATE handle shifts in intended result in the middle of a conflict?

It's not a thing. You don't have to declare your explicit goals at the beginning of the scene or anything like that. But that type of change doesn't require anything rules at all - you just change what happens when you Take Them Out.

I mean, it's a good idea to know what's at stake, because otherwise why are people fighting and not running away, right? And you know what "winning" means in case of a Concession. But it's not like some "true" conflict resolution systems where the absolute stakes are set at the beginning of the conflict, and then you narrate how it resolves. It's much more traditional in the regard.

And how does FATE interpret a failure by excess? You intended to knock him out but you end up killing or grievously injuring your adversary.

That's not really a thing. For something like that to happen, it's not a result of a random roll. That would happen, in Fate, typically as a result of a Compel. "Since you're Out For Vengeance, wouldn't it make sense that you lose control and kill the guy instead of subduing him, resulting in not getting the info?"

If they concede, then they definitely lose, but it's mostly on their terms - you'd heavily kick their ass, quite probably put them in the hospital, but it's up to them if they survive or not. Oh, and they get some fate points for conceding. This is your "supervillain exit".

The main things on a Concession are that a) you lose the stakes of the conflict, and b) you get a good amount of say over what happens. The kind of default concession is "running away", though getting captured is a close second.

 

[TristramEvans]

Not really. They're just not usually used (outside of some very specific stunts) for allowing you to do things.

Thats interesting. What would you say is their primary purpose in the game?

 

[TristramEvans]

Probably not, because then there's nothing to stop Spiderman getting endless bonuses / rerolls from his webshooters, or alternatively preventing him getting any bonuses / rerolls from, depending on how you run it.

Sure, but thats kind of what I mean. I'm reading the SRD, and I'm struggling to see what Fate points provide for the game other than giving players some narrative control (reisisting a GM's compel), whereas in a traditional game, Spidey's webshooters would provide a standard bonus or effect in each situation they were used.

 

[robiswrong]

Thats interesting. What would you say is their primary purpose in the game?

The uses are:
1) Invoking for a +2 or a reroll
2) Refusing Compels
3) Suggesting Compels
4) Making Declarations

Mostly it's for invokes. If you're doin' it right, player will need more than they have, so choosing to invoke or not allows them to decide which things are really important, and which aren't.

The order of the other three is going to be dependent on the situation and the game. But invokes, in my experience, are probably about 90% of the Fate Point usage.

Sure, but thats kind of what I mean. I'm reading the SRD, and I'm struggling to see what Fate points provide for the game other than giving players some narrative control (reisisting a GM's compel), whereas in a traditional game, Spidey's webshooters would provide a standard bonus or effect in each situation they were used.

So the kind of "constant bonus" stuff is usually either just rolled into your skill, or for more situational things, handled with stunts. You could still totally have a situational bonus without Fate Points - that's exactly what stunts do (though "+1 when using the weapon I always use" is pretty much the canonical example of a bad stunt.

So that's the mechanics you'd use to get those types of effects.

Invokes are more for the occasional dramatic shift on a closeup shot or something like that.

 

[TristramEvans]

Maybe I could make this a more general question and ask, for those here who play and enjoy Fate, what is it you would say that they system provides that traditional RPGs do not for the gameplay experience?

 

[natty bodak]

How do aspects such as "broken arm" or "twisted ankle" work in the game? Let's say the aspect was introduced during combat, whether through a consequence or some other reason.

A murky area for me is that while the aspects are always true and in effect, sometimes it takes invocation of that aspect to "make it matter." The initial tag of the aspect (a free invocation available for the first person to use the aspect after it was created/discovered) but further use of it would require fate points, iirc.

 

[TristramEvans]

The uses are:
1) Invoking for a +2 or a reroll
2) Refusing Compels
3) Suggesting Compels
4) Making Declarations

Maybe its that the SRD is organized badly, but what does "suggesting compels" and "making declarations" entail?

Mostly it's for invokes. If you're doin' it right, player will need more than they have, so choosing to invoke or not allows them to decide which things are really important, and which aren't.

The order of the other three is going to be dependent on the situation and the game. But invokes, in my experience, are probably about 90% of the Fate Point usage.

Lets see if I understand the invoke thing:

In any given situation, a player decides on one of four courses of actions based on their desired intent:
Overcome, Create Advantage, Attack, or Defend

Its seems like "Create Advantage" is the one that makes the most use of Aspects/Fate points.
So, saying they then roll the Fate dice, if they roll well enough to get one or two free invocations, meaning they get to use the bonus from an aspect they either have or make up to suit the situation without spending a Fate point. Or, if they don't roll well enough, they can spend a Fate point to activate an Aspect that either gives them a bonus or allows them to re-roll.

 

[robiswrong]

Maybe I could make this a more general question and ask, for those here who play and enjoy Fate, what is it you would say that they system provides that traditional RPGs do not for the gameplay experience?

So first, I still like traditional RPGs, to be clear.

What I like about Fate:

1) The mechanics are very clearly about who a character is, rather than just what they can do. This helps tailor the game around the characters, as they basically tell me what they want a game about by developing their characters.
2) It's a very lightweight system. It's also a very "rulings over rules" system, which makes it quite easy to handle damn near any action the players come up with.
3) The use of Compels and even declarations really helps create emergent stories naturally, and the fact that players *want* to be Compelled gives me story hooks to use on them.
4) The ability of the system to handle just about any type of scene reasonably quickly, without devolving into long combats, is a huge plus. It's a very "productive" system in terms of how much game you can get done per hour.
5) The way I run it, "how much do you want this?" is a question that's front and center, which I think is quite interesting.
6) The use of Fate Points allows me, as a GM, to play very hard while still being fair. Whether it's setting hard difficulties, or even thinking of horrible (but cool) coincidences and throwing them out as Compels, I've actually had to learn to be more of a "dick" GM to run Fate effectively, which is a fun break from the more "neutral arbiter" mode of traditional games.
7) Players talking through how their aspects come into play has made some of the cooler moments I've seen in gaming.

None of this should be taken as a criticism of "traditional" games. I'm sure there are trad games that do many of these things, but I think Fate is, overall, a pretty good package. I also think that most of the things I like about it aren't really the "narrative" bits (world editing, etc.) that people call out.

How do aspects such as "broken arm" or "twisted ankle" work in the game? Let's say the aspect was introduced during combat, whether through a consequence or some other reason.

A murky area for me is that while the aspects are always true and in effect, sometimes it takes invocation of that aspect to "make it matter." The initial tag of the aspect (a free invocation available for the first person to use the aspect after it was created/discovered) but further use of it would require fate points, iirc.

So, aspects come into play in a few ways:

1) Permissions, either granting or denying.
2) Providing passive opposition
3) Being Invoked
4) Being Compelled

So, let's say you've got a Broken Arm.

You can't swing on a rope with a Broken Arm. That's just true. So that's the first point (permissions)

Aiming a gun is probably harder with a broken arm, but still possible. So that's passive opposition - no matter how your opponent does, you still have to beat the inherent difficulty of doing whatever you're doing.

If you're doing something, your broken arm could screw with you at an appropriate point. That's an invoke - think of trying to move out of the way or something, and then you lean against the broken arm and scream. That's an Invoke, and takes a Fate Point.

Now, if the thing you need happens to be on the other side of that rope swing, that's a Compel, and takes a Fate Point.

There's also the ability to make Declarations based on that, but it's fairly minor.

 

[natty bodak]

Maybe I could make this a more general question and ask, for those here who play and enjoy Fate, what is it you would say that they system provides that traditional RPGs do not for the gameplay experience?

With the caveat that I gave up on Fate, for me, the free form High Concept, Complication, etc. aspects were a really refreshing way to build a character. You didn't have to have a "build." You just decided what unique snowflake you wanted and went from there.

 

[TristramEvans]

With the caveat that I gave up on Fate, for me, the free form High Concept, Complication, etc. aspects were a really refreshing way to build a character. You didn't have to have a "build." You just decided what unique snowflake you wanted and went from there.

In that regard, though, isn't Fate comparable to Risus, The Window, Fable, or Over the Edge?

 

[robiswrong]

In that regard, though, isn't Fate comparable to Risus, The Window, Fable, or Over the Edge?

Not really. In addition to aspects (which are used for the things above), you have a (mostly) standardized list of skills/approaches/skill equivalents in Fate implementations, as well as Stunts, which are Feat/Advantage/Edge equivalents.

In Risus, your freeform tag things have ratings assigned to them, right? And are basically arbitrary skills?

With the caveat that I gave up on Fate, for me, the free form High Concept, Complication, etc. aspects were a really refreshing way to build a character. You didn't have to have a "build." You just decided what unique snowflake you wanted and went from there.

Even for the skill stuff, I find it nice. You want to be good at shooting stuff? Just assign your highest skill to Shoot. No trying to min-max, look up various Feats/Edges/Advantages, etc. Just "Shoot is my top skill" and you're done. Character creation is so straightforward.

 

[natty bodak]

In that regard, though, isn't Fate comparable to Risus, The Window, Fable, or Over the Edge?

Dunno. Never played any of those.

 

[robiswrong]

In that regard, though, isn't Fate comparable to Risus, The Window, Fable, or Over the Edge?

But there's a general truth here. Fate mostly pulls in various bits of tech from other games, but packages them together in a way, that to me, runs pretty damn smoothly and cleanly, and lets me do the things I want to do without too much effort.

I certainly don't think there's a lot of really groundbreaking stuff. It's just a neat package that's pretty clean, reasonably balanced, and ends up promoting a lot of stuff that I like.

 

[natty bodak]

With the caveat that I gave up on Fate, for me, the free form High Concept, Complication, etc. aspects were a really refreshing way to build a character. You didn't have to have a "build." You just decided what unique snowflake you wanted and went from there.

Also, my group got SUPER into the collaborative world building for the Dresden campaign. The staged chargen for bonds between characters was mostly well received but a couple of players didn’t really get into that part.

 

[TristramEvans]

What I like about Fate:

1) The mechanics are very clearly about who a character is, rather than just what they can do. This helps tailor the game around the characters, as they basically tell me what they want a game about by developing their characters.

3) The use of Compels and even declarations really helps create emergent stories naturally, and the fact that players *want* to be Compelled gives me story hooks to use on them.

5) The way I run it, "how much do you want this?" is a question that's front and center, which I think is quite interesting.
6) The use of Fate Points allows me, as a GM, to play very hard while still being fair. Whether it's setting hard difficulties, or even thinking of horrible (but cool) coincidences and throwing them out as Compels, I've actually had to learn to be more of a "dick" GM to run Fate effectively, which is a fun break from the more "neutral arbiter" mode of traditional games.
7) Players talking through how their aspects come into play has made some of the cooler moments I've seen in gaming.

Ok, I removed a couple points that weren't specific to Fate, but I'm interested in whats left. Trying to see if I can isolate this in a way that breaks the barrier between Fate and a traditional RPG, as it were. Or rather, I guess what I'm trying to evaluate is if what the system provides makes up for the crunch (which, granted, is probably entirely based on personal tastes). But I think what I'm seeing is that the Fate system, by its nature, engenders players deciding what aspects (using that term generically) of the game/fiction they want to engage in and provides a structured means for the GM to put player characters "to the test" that is intrinsically balanced by the system?

 

[TristramEvans]

Not really. In addition to aspects (which are used for the things above), you have a (mostly) standardized list of skills/approaches/skill equivalents in Fate implementations, as well as Stunts, which are Feat/Advantage/Edge equivalents.

In Risus, your freeform tag things have ratings assigned to them, right? And are basically arbitrary skills?

I'm not sure how you mean "arbitrary skills", but the way I would describe Risus would be "Fate with only Aspects" (I'm referencing here Fate 2nd, which I do know quite well, but is significantly less involved that Fate 3rd's system). But yeah, Risus has ratings while all Aspects in Fate have the same rating, effectively.

For example, taking what I understand would commonly be an Aspect in Fate and a Cliche in Risus, the Incredible Hulk having "Strongest One there Is", Spidey having "Spider-powers", and The Six Million Dollar Man having "Bionic Limbs", each would only recieve a +2 bonus in Fate (or re-roll), whereas in Risus these character elements would be assigned dice to indicate potency/importance. I guess the main difference being that in Risus, a Cliche's implications covers skills while in Fate a player always has a standardized Skill list to fall back on? But that being the case, couldn't Fate just ditch the skill system and run solely on Aspects?

Even for the skill stuff, I find it nice. You want to be good at shooting stuff? Just assign your highest skill to Shoot. No trying to min-max, look up various Feats/Edges/Advantages, etc. Just "Shoot is my top skill" and you're done. Character creation is so straightforward.

Fair enough, it was just I guess that I'm personally trying to identify what makes Fate unique as opposed to just in general what people like about it.