What is your opinion of this system? have you ever played it?
Played Dresden files. Honestly, FATE is just a ridiculous boring system. It encourages you to improvise as a player and use your player's stories as hooks as a DM, but nothing amounts to much more than a +2 here or a -2 there.
I think the 2nd edition CofD games have hit the right formula for story informing mechanics and play.
>>46333974
I've played it.
I like it.
A lot of people don't seem to enjoy it, though. There is a bit more emphasis on the players creating content for the game, through choosing interesting aspects to creating interesting situations with activating aspects. A large number of players seem to be playing RPGs like D&D with a Killer DM, and so remain cautious all the time and avoid taking initiative; Fate is far better at letting players have the chance to run around and do their own thing (mostly).
I've enjoyed the ability to craft my own aspects (and skills, in previous versions) and to make a character that really can do what I'd like to see, as opposed to working out what the most effective character the system will generate around a particular idea.
I like it.
The combat really does have something to be desired but Ive always preferred games that were RP and Investigation heavy.
As for FATE Accelerated. The "stats" are vague and can be made to mean anything.
.
But ive found tweaking the names a bit into a "homebrew" version works wonders for one shot games of various genres.
I once ran a pretty successful Heist one shot game using FATE Acc.
>>46333974
I like it, and our groups runs it for a couple of our combat-light games. For the others though, the way it handles combat leaves it feeling weightless.
I've switched my dnd games to Strands of Fate and the party is really enjoying it. We've always been fairly RP heavy and we no longer get bogged down in nearly as long of combat sessions.
>>46333974
It's my favorite system, but grognards hate it and so every discussion about it on /tg/ devolves into shitposting immediately.
>>46333974
Literally everything interesting that happens in the game is about how the players can narratively justify their plans to work together and get cool bonuses. The math just facilitates this, and the system itself is super straightforward, so it takes a lot of imagination for it to work.
Example: "Alright, DM, so this a room with the aspects 'faulty lighting' and 'full of crates.' So I'm going to try and create a distraction by breaking one of those sparking lights and setting the crates on fire."
"That's a little tricky, Player, the ceiling's pretty high up. You'd have to make a +5 athletics check to clamber up the shelves and do that."
"Alright. I've got a +2 athletics, so that's a pretty tall order, but how about I give Other Player a boost up there to do it?"
Nice, sounds good. That'd just be a +2 physique check to give the other player a boost. Roll it."
"Alright, That's a +3 total, so a regular old success. The aspect 'helping hand' is now in play."
"Okay, I'm up next and I've got a pretty great athletics skill, so I'm going to use that helping hand for a +2 which adds up to a +6, and roll it."
"Oh man, you rolled a +3! Total of +9, that's success with style and then some. How does setting some of these mooks on fire as a bonus sound?"
"Sounds excellent. So they get the aspect 'on fire,' and then, say, dealt 2 stress every turn?"
"Yeah, that seems about right. Alright, now their turn's come up, so lets see what they can still do..."
If this level of improvization sounds too freeform/confusing/easy to abuse for your group, you're going to have a bad time. However, if you're all fairly creative and comfortable with this sort of thing, it can be absolutely fantastic.
>>46333974
I think it has some decent ideas but it takes them way too far. You could make a light and flexible game with the aspect system and some clever rolling.
Like >>46340092 has a good example, though it also highlights some of the weaknesses of the system. You can't just have a thing be a thing. A bunch of crates can't just be a bunch of crates. It has to be made an aspect, its properties negotiated, then acted upon, possibly with another layer of helper aspects and such, resulting in another set of aspect changes for the end result, and converted back to plain english again.
That's a lot of overhead involved in ways that aren't, at least to me, terribly intuitive. It's just as crunchy as GURPS, even if the nature of the crunch is entirely different.
I enjoy it a lot but it requires a shift in mindset, for GM and player.
Your tools aren't always sitting on your character sheet and the players must be proactive.
In other words, less rules, more flexibility, but more consistent player input to achieve the "fun" it deserves.
Working on a modification where the combat is more involved than rolling one kind of Attack or Advantage.
...has anyone ever done Fate with horror elements?
Someone needs to fuse G.U.R.P.S. with F.A.T.E.
>>46341320
This sounds like an alarmingly unholy marriage
Curious about this too. Been on the fence choosing between running a game in FATE and Savage Worlds. The appeal of FATE is that it feels like you could run just about anything with the rules as the exist, but that everything would feel the exact same since there's basically only two rules. Skills/how they work, and reasons to give yourself +2/-2 to them. Savage Worlds on the other hand feels somewhat less free. You can do anything with the system as a base but it feels like more work needs to be put in to get the game to suit a specific setting.
FATE may leave too much up to players to 'make their own fun' out of the game. Which, on the other hand, I suppose is the appeal of the system. Just so long as you have players who are going to be proactive instead of going "I attack X" and leaving it at that.
>>46341320
Isn't that savage worlds?
>>46341320
>>46334048
>CofD?
>>46333974
Aspects are brilliant but FATE is the most boring possible system that could be built on top of them.
My group quickly switched to Risus + Aspects (invoke for +2 dice) and that's pretty much what we use now.
>>46343591
Chronicles of Darkness, the renamed New World of Darkness 2e that started with The God Machine Chronicle.
>>46344457
But that's a sack of shit anon, just look at how combat works
Ran FATE once, it was pretty fucking fun, I dunno what the hell is wrong with you guys
>>46341170
Aspects, like much of Fate, should only be used if they can yield a purpose.
Scene details don't need individual Aspects, naturally. Things/details can become Aspects if someone brings attention to them or even invents/suggests them by extension of other details.
A detail doesn't need to be an Aspect, but it can become one. The granularity of what can be an Aspect is very flexible.
I've played and run it, it was alright. It ran relatively smoothly despite the core rulebook being a bloated shit with a terrible layout.
FAE is way better at not being a bloated shit.
Still prefer Spirit of the Century's take on the Fate system.
The end.
Just play Risus instead.
I'm a pretty traditional GM who enjoys immersing my players in a believable world. I don't require immersion 100% of the time, but it is a valued feature of gaming for me.
Is Fate a game that would serve me well in play? Curious about other "traditional" GM experiences with Fate.
![fae-book-feat[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/xUfak4W.jpg "fae-book-feat[1].jpg")
I am on the hook to run a Fate Accelerated game in 4 weeks, what am I in for?
I read the rules and character sheets, so the players just write their aspects on their sheets, does the DM write a whole bunch of cards in the middle?
It seems like the aspects don't matter unless they have a fate point to spend. How do the players get Fate Points back?
Do the players take turns making up new cards?
Whoever has played this, do you have any advice or tips?
The setting is going to be Arabian Nights fantasy adventure, in case that matters.
>>46342792
Yes
>>46348709
I think Atomic Robo is my favorite implementation of Fate, the modes system does a pretty good job of streamlining skills and guiding aspect design, and keeps characters from getting too many aspects to handle.
>>46349719
Hmm, k
I'll try to answer your direct questions, at least.
1.) Player Aspects go on their sheets, all the setting/scene/NPC Aspects can go on cards.
2.) Aspects provide facts. They matter because they can provide narrative justification (and denial) for some events. They also can provide opportunities for players to Compel, creating a complication for the player but also granting them a Fate point.
3.) I let my players make up scene details ("hey, can there be a X" or "would there be a Y") provided they fit the narrative, even turning them into Aspects if needed. You will be the arbiter of Aspects suggested, created (like through Creating and Advantage), etc.
>>46349663
Immersion is the main thing that gets sacrificed in FATE. The game rules focus on the narrative, so you wind up thinking about the story rather than the world most of the time, and players are encouraged to play their characters as would be "dramatically interesting" rather than what the character would actually do in a given situation. And since everything's so abstracted, you'll hit things like a guy with superspeed and a guy with a handgun being mechanically identical.
FATE isn't unique in these problems, it's just the nature of narrativist RPGs in general. FATE is a really solid game, but probably not what you're looking for.
>>46353509
Thanks for the info, I appreciate the honesty. Sounds like it's back to GURPS for me, then.
I've played it a few times and it never really clicked with me. All too often it became the teamwork circle jerk. Of one player wanting to do something fairly difficult. And then, the whole rest of the group figuring out ways to assist and add in bonuses. Until you get a group Kamehameha going and somebody blows their load all over the obstacle/enemy with the rest of the group stroking him/her off.
