This was a small addition I made to the Resources rules for Fate of Vimary that I felt was general enough to go here. Note that it uses another slight tweak, namely that characters have fluctuating Resources scores as they use and gain Resources. This Extra allows for the group to have a Larder that they can use to draw resources from.
Typically the group will have a community pool of resources, known as the Larder. These Resources can be used in place of personally rolling against resources when the Larder can be accessed, at the expense of depleting the group’s reserves. Having a Larder is slightly more bookkeeping, so it may not be desirable for all groups, but fortunately most interactions with it would be done either between sessions or during session startup, etc.
The Larder has a Resource rating equal to the median of the group’s Resource rank - in other words, the middle between the minimum and maximum. If the lowest Resources within the group is 0 and the highest is 4, the Larder is Resources 2. The Larder has a stress track with two stress boxes with an additional box added at Resources Average(+1) or Fair (+2), or two more at Good (+3) or greater. In addition, the Larder has three Consequence slots. On the chance that the Larder has Resources of Superb (+5) or higher, it gains an additional mild Consequence slot. The Larder’s Resources do not fluctuate when the individual group member’s Resources fluctuate, although it might increase if members of the group permanently increase their own.
The stress and Consequences for the Larder work slightly differently than a character’s stress and Consequences. Whenever a character needs something that would call for a Resources roll, and they have access to the Larder, they can use the Larder’s Resources instead. This can be used to directly take a specific needed item from the Larder, as well as to create advantages prior to an expedition or journey. The roll is made using the standard difficulty for obtaining the item or creating the advantage. If the roll succeeds, then an amount of stress equal to the value of the item is marked off the Larder’s stress track. Once the stress track is filled, the Larder’s Resource rank drops by 1 and all stress is cleared. If in a single “transaction” the stress would overfill the track, the Larder takes a Consequence equal to or greater than the overflow. Once Resources reaches zero, the Larder is depleted and has to be restocked. Stress can be “soaked” by instead taking a Consequence of equal or greater value than the stress. Consequences represent a specific shortage within the Larder, based on what the characters were trying to do. For example, preparing for a Joanite attack might result in the mild Consequence Running Low on Ammunition or Limited Food and Water.
Restocking the Larder must be done from the Resources of the individuals contributing to it. Typically this is done using teamwork, with the character with the highest Resources rolling and every other character with Resources of Average(+1) or higher contributing +1 to the result. The difficulty of the roll is Fair(+2), and each success restores one rank of Resources. All Larder Consequences must be cleared before the restock attempt can take place. If the roll is successful, each character reduces their Resources by 1 for the remainder of the session.
Showing posts with label FATE Core. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FATE Core. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Metagaming Is Good (There I Said It)
Or, at least, it can be good and is often not only unavoidable but desirable. It just has to be handled correctly.
When discussing issues of "metagaming" I think sometimes people lose sight of the fact that playing role playing games is always, to some degree, about the metagame. Regardless of how hard any particular player tries to avoid it - and I don't see why anyone would - it's still there. It kind of comes with the territory and the reality is that you are a human being portraying a character in a game. At the end of the day, every decision is a player decision no matter how much the player wants to wrap it in "character decision" wrapping paper and put a bow on it.
In the scope of Fate Core, it definitely requires a little more "meta" thought than many other games, at least from the perspective that some of the rules the player is engaging (namely, Fate Points and aspects) aren't directly tied to the character's attributes, abilities, etc. Yet a lot of the complaints I hear about this are tied to a play style that I honestly can't figure out why anybody would engage. In essence, that the players only ever engage the aspects and Fate Points at a purely mechanical level, apparently void of the context that they are being used in. They apparently place them front and center of what the game is about, instead of...well, what the game is actually about. When I see this, I begin to wonder, "Is that actually how they are playing it? Instructions are just being issued with absolutely nothing hooking in to what is going on within the game, with the GM and players just pulling things out of their collective asses with only regard for the mechanical benefits and not what actually makes sense?" Because, even if that's not how they're playing the game, it's the way that most people I've seen who complain describe it.
For me, the flow of any roleplaying game has always been about what makes sense, what would follow from doing this or having that event happen. The system has always been slaved to the imaginary space in our heads, not the other way around. Fate's no different. So in the case of just engaging aspects at a mechanical level and pushing the "Fate point economy" to the forefront of the game, yes it does strike me as "bad" metagaming. I can see why anyone would be put off by it. I'm put off by it - regardless of what game we're talking about. It's detrimental to the game and the story. And to be clear, when I say "story" I am talking about (to use +Robert Hanz's words) "the stuff that the characters do, and how the world changes and reacts" rather than "the preplanned story the GM wants to tell". To me, while it is jarring to hear someone say, "I make a Fight roll" instead of "I punch the guy in his face" - it's not nearly as bad as only ever saying, "I invoke aspect X to get a +2".
Part of the reason for this is because aspects naturally flow with the language of what is happening within the game. To me, they demand to be used as seamlessly as possible. Their influence on the game is about what the characters are actually doing with them, and not how they can be manipulated from a mechanical perspective to do things. From that perspective, that's the good kind of metagaming.
When discussing issues of "metagaming" I think sometimes people lose sight of the fact that playing role playing games is always, to some degree, about the metagame. Regardless of how hard any particular player tries to avoid it - and I don't see why anyone would - it's still there. It kind of comes with the territory and the reality is that you are a human being portraying a character in a game. At the end of the day, every decision is a player decision no matter how much the player wants to wrap it in "character decision" wrapping paper and put a bow on it.
In the scope of Fate Core, it definitely requires a little more "meta" thought than many other games, at least from the perspective that some of the rules the player is engaging (namely, Fate Points and aspects) aren't directly tied to the character's attributes, abilities, etc. Yet a lot of the complaints I hear about this are tied to a play style that I honestly can't figure out why anybody would engage. In essence, that the players only ever engage the aspects and Fate Points at a purely mechanical level, apparently void of the context that they are being used in. They apparently place them front and center of what the game is about, instead of...well, what the game is actually about. When I see this, I begin to wonder, "Is that actually how they are playing it? Instructions are just being issued with absolutely nothing hooking in to what is going on within the game, with the GM and players just pulling things out of their collective asses with only regard for the mechanical benefits and not what actually makes sense?" Because, even if that's not how they're playing the game, it's the way that most people I've seen who complain describe it.
For me, the flow of any roleplaying game has always been about what makes sense, what would follow from doing this or having that event happen. The system has always been slaved to the imaginary space in our heads, not the other way around. Fate's no different. So in the case of just engaging aspects at a mechanical level and pushing the "Fate point economy" to the forefront of the game, yes it does strike me as "bad" metagaming. I can see why anyone would be put off by it. I'm put off by it - regardless of what game we're talking about. It's detrimental to the game and the story. And to be clear, when I say "story" I am talking about (to use +Robert Hanz's words) "the stuff that the characters do, and how the world changes and reacts" rather than "the preplanned story the GM wants to tell". To me, while it is jarring to hear someone say, "I make a Fight roll" instead of "I punch the guy in his face" - it's not nearly as bad as only ever saying, "I invoke aspect X to get a +2".
Part of the reason for this is because aspects naturally flow with the language of what is happening within the game. To me, they demand to be used as seamlessly as possible. Their influence on the game is about what the characters are actually doing with them, and not how they can be manipulated from a mechanical perspective to do things. From that perspective, that's the good kind of metagaming.
Monday, January 27, 2014
Aspect Magic, Part 2
In my last post, I went gave an overview of how aspect magic in my fantasy setting works from a game-perspective. I've since had some time to somewhat solidify how it works from a system perspective. Essentially, anyone can use magic simply by taking a Lore stunt, and Sigils are created by making a Lore roll. The Sigils have to be created somehow, whether they are drawn, etched, painted, built into, etc. an object or character. So far, so good.
 |
| The Mark from Dishonored |
The base difficulty comes from the scope of the Sigil. The scope is essentially what kind of aspect the Sigil is - boost, situation, character, High Concept or even game aspect. It's also possible to use Sigils to grant stunts. Once the scope is determined, the exact aspect or stunt that the Sigil represents has to be determined. From there, how has to be decided - does it add an aspect to the thing that bears it, does it modify or replace an existing aspect, or does it remove or nullify an aspect? These base actions can be summed up simply as addition, alteration and removal (replacement is actually removal and addition combined). There will be some other factors that go toward the difficulty, mainly the quality of the Sigil itself. The more permanent or well-crafted the Sigil, the more potent it has the possibility of being - a Sigil scrawled in charcoal on a piece of paper isn't going to hold up as well as one carved into stone and inlaid with silver. Sigils can be created from nearly anything that can be used to make a pattern, from a bundle of shaped sticks to a tattoo to an engraved amulet to architecture. A well-crafted Sigil is one of the most effective ways to increase the Sigil's Resonance.
 |
| Prototype Addition Sigil - this would have to be modified based on the exact effect |
 |
| Example modified Addition Sigil to add flame to something. While this would be completely functional it's very basic and doesn't account for Resonance modifications. The actual Sigil would likely have embellishments and other more varied elements. For the astute, yes this is inspired by Chaos Magic. |
Resonance is a measure of how the Sigil reacts with other aspects - namely those of the person utilizing it. For Sigils that operate somewhat independently of a character - say, a ward on a door - Resonance applies to that object. The base Resonance is determined by the scope of the Sigil, and can be modified by both how well the Sigil is created and how complex the user is aspect-wise. There are techniques for increasing Resonance, and a failed Lore roll can be turned into a success by decreasing it. Whenever the Sigil is activated, the character (or GM, if the Sigil is static) makes a Resonance roll. Failure means the Sigil works, but there is a side effect. I'm still deciding exactly how that works, but most likely it would be a choice between a compel on an aspect or one of the character's aspects altering the effect of the Sigil in an unexpected way.
That sums up the basics of what I have so far, and I'm definitely a lot closer to a workable system with a few tweaks.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Aspect Magic, Part 1
This is a very short overview of the magic system that I'm developing for my Fate Core fantasy world. I don't have a lot of the mechanics down, and actually have a much longer description that I'm not going to go into (yet).
Basically, magic use ties directly into Fate Core aspects. Not just that when you cast spells you can declare aspects, but the very act of using aspects is magic. Aspects are a fungible thing that actually exists in the metaphysics of the game world. For the time being they are called Aspects (with a Capital A) within the game world, but I'm leaning toward something like "Virtues". It's kind of similar to the concept of Plato's Forms, but not quite - an individual's aspects are their own independent metaphysical thingies, and not shadows or copies of some higher form. All of the aspects that make up a thing, whether it's an object or a character, are interconnected to one another - and those aspects are connected, indirectly, to others around them. I've described it as My Little Relationship Map: Aspects Are Magic (or, alternately, Magic Is Aspects). Normal aspect use and using magic to manipulate aspects comes from the same source - the difference is that using magic, you can bend or break the rules.This may sound a bit like metagaming the metagame, and in some ways it totally is.
I've been revisiting my write-up on Sigils for this. This is leading me toward this style of magic (called Evocation as a working name, but may change because that doesn't quite fit) being worked by inscribing Sigils on to things. The Sigils take common forms, that are customized when they are inscribed for the exact effect and the nature of the aspects involved. That takes it kind of full circle, because this whole exercise is to create a magic system for the fantasy setting I'm working on that supports my inspirations in the Thief video game series, Dishonored and other similar worlds.
I've already gotten a number of really great suggestions for setting it up, but for the time being I don't have a lot of details. Right now it's moving toward something similar to Tolkien's magic or the True Names of LeGuin's Earthsea novels (but with a slight difference, because here we're actually changing the aspects instead of trying to compel them - no pun intended - into doing something).
The bucket list for the fiddly bits so far is:
Basically, magic use ties directly into Fate Core aspects. Not just that when you cast spells you can declare aspects, but the very act of using aspects is magic. Aspects are a fungible thing that actually exists in the metaphysics of the game world. For the time being they are called Aspects (with a Capital A) within the game world, but I'm leaning toward something like "Virtues". It's kind of similar to the concept of Plato's Forms, but not quite - an individual's aspects are their own independent metaphysical thingies, and not shadows or copies of some higher form. All of the aspects that make up a thing, whether it's an object or a character, are interconnected to one another - and those aspects are connected, indirectly, to others around them. I've described it as My Little Relationship Map: Aspects Are Magic (or, alternately, Magic Is Aspects). Normal aspect use and using magic to manipulate aspects comes from the same source - the difference is that using magic, you can bend or break the rules.This may sound a bit like metagaming the metagame, and in some ways it totally is.
I've been revisiting my write-up on Sigils for this. This is leading me toward this style of magic (called Evocation as a working name, but may change because that doesn't quite fit) being worked by inscribing Sigils on to things. The Sigils take common forms, that are customized when they are inscribed for the exact effect and the nature of the aspects involved. That takes it kind of full circle, because this whole exercise is to create a magic system for the fantasy setting I'm working on that supports my inspirations in the Thief video game series, Dishonored and other similar worlds.
 |
| Thief Glyphs, from Thief: The Dark Wiki |
The bucket list for the fiddly bits so far is:
- You can't create something from nothing.
- "Deeper" aspects (possibly those things that affect the core aspect, or high concept) result in more powerful magic. Thanks to +Teo Tayobobayo's post on "flat" vs. "round" aspects, I kind of have an angle on this.
- There is possibly an indirect, metaphorical element to how magic is done. Not sure how far I'd go into concepts of contagion and similarity (as I was initially kind of avoiding them) but in the end it might look something like that. Thanks to +Nick Pilon for suggesting that.
- Powerful magic resonates more strongly among any connected aspects. In the end, it's not that much risk to light up a magic crystal at the end of a staff. But creating The One McGuffin Artifact is something that can result in really big changes. Similarly, the more complex something is (i.e., the more aspects it has) the better the potential to do "great works", and the more risk there is of resonance among the connected aspects.
- Any side effect from this resonance is taken on somehow (more than likely, as a Consequence) by the caster.
- Part of magic use is understanding the connections between various aspects. In this way, magic is predictable and repeatable. It's the potential for failure that leads to unforeseen side effects. It also leads to cool scenes with scholars who keep constellation charts - but instead of stars, it charts aspects.
I'll be posting more design-type ramblings as I continue to develop the concept.
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Building a Mystery
I've started futzing around with how I want magic to work in my Fate Core fantasy setting, so I've been thinking a lot about the role that magic will play, and what it can be used for. What problem or challenge is it intended to solve within the setting?
To this end I'm running down a couple of paths. The first thing is that the magic "system" isn't going to be something that fully explains how magic works, or all of what it can do. The second is that the players still need to still be able to meaningfully engage with the magic.
In the end, it will mean that magic is knowledge. Like all knowledge, some of it will be widely known. Some of it will be a well-kept secret. Some of it will be unknown, for now - or completely unknowable. That's going to take a lot of consideration and doodling around to get the mix right because I also want to eschew spell levels, spell points, conservation of magical energy (which will mean reevaluating another setting element that I wanted) and a whole host of fantasy magic tropes. It means that for all intents and purposes, binding and packing a wound and using some "magical" method are along the same axis of knowledge and effectiveness and not considered (in the setting) to be separate - a chiurgeon will know how to do both and won't think of one method as "magical" over the other, but rather in terms of which one is the most effective for the situation. This leads me strongly toward the embryonic magic system being (in Fate Core terms) indistinguishable from Lore. You either know how to do it, or you don't. There's no special thing that makes someone a "mage" aside from a lot of the right kind of knowledge.
Even then, magic being knowledge doesn't keep it from being a mystery. Characters may use it, they might know what they need to do in order to achieve some effect, but they can't ever really understand it. In addition, it's visceral. Exposing yourself to it changes you. It's not necessarily that it damages you or hurts your sanity (although it may), but at some fundamental level some part of you is different afterward. It leaves a pit in your stomach, the taste of iron in your mouth, and you just know that now something feels wrong. Think of The Heart from Dishonored. Without spoiling too much about who it belongs to, that realization puts an entirely new spin on The Heart. It's a little more than some McGuffin that you can use to find things - it's actually in a way both wondrous and horrifying. And, you don't have any idea how it works or need to know how to use it. Similarly, in Thief Garrett has no idea how magic works at all - it's just something that he needs to avoid pretty much at all costs (despite that most of it seems fairly mundane with waving of arms and casting of spells). When it does impact him, it's a potentially life-changing event.
My next step is going to be fleshing out exactly how this all fits together in the context of rules, what the limitations are, and how to make it something that is both playable and atmospheric.
To this end I'm running down a couple of paths. The first thing is that the magic "system" isn't going to be something that fully explains how magic works, or all of what it can do. The second is that the players still need to still be able to meaningfully engage with the magic.
My next step is going to be fleshing out exactly how this all fits together in the context of rules, what the limitations are, and how to make it something that is both playable and atmospheric.
Friday, December 27, 2013
Design Journal: Steampunk, Gaslamp, Victoriania...How To Not Be Any Of Them?
As we move into the new year, I'm going to be posting roughly weekly design journals as I craft a new, as-of-yet-unnamed fantasy setting for Fate Core. My goal is to have all of the pieces in place by summer, so I can actually get to running it.
I'm a huge fan of the Thief franchise of PC games, as well as Dishonored. I'm currently playing Thief Gold, with the goal of getting through The Metal Age and Deadly Shadows before the end of February. If I finish before the new Thief game consumes my time, I'll probably replay Dishonored with the DLC that I didn't have before (and my new surround headphones). I am also a fan of a lot of older fantasy, particularly Fritz Leiber and other offerings in the vein of Amazing Tales (and, of course, Lovecraft), and devoured every Thieves' World book. Pulp, noir, and sword and sorcery are more my cup of tea than high fantasy.
I want my setting to incorporate a number of elements from these seemingly disjointed influences. I'm deliberately avoiding "medieval fantasy" as the setting's basis, but otherwise all I have so far is a few embryonic ideas, and a reasonably good looking map (which I will post at some point). But the one thing I'm completely unsure of is how to steer clear of the whole thing getting slapped with a "steampunk" or "gaslamp" label. Because my intention isn't for it to be any of those things (I don't even particularly like steampunk, at least as any kind of cohesive "genre"). I suppose that I should just build the setting I want and damn the torpedoes. Comparisons to this or that are going to inevitable and there's nothing I can do about it. For sure, there's not going to be any gears in my setting. Or gas masks. Or goggles.
Ironically, even though I'm trying to steer clear of those genre labels, I think it's best in these situations to actually learn something about them. As I said, I'm not a steampunk fan. I don't know it beyond pictures I see of people's costumes or when I see a steampunk RPG title cross some news feed or in a post. So I figure at the very least I should familiarize myself with what's already out there. Luckily Age of Ravens has a great rundown on the history of steampunk rpgs. That looks like as good of a place for insight as any.
I'm a huge fan of the Thief franchise of PC games, as well as Dishonored. I'm currently playing Thief Gold, with the goal of getting through The Metal Age and Deadly Shadows before the end of February. If I finish before the new Thief game consumes my time, I'll probably replay Dishonored with the DLC that I didn't have before (and my new surround headphones). I am also a fan of a lot of older fantasy, particularly Fritz Leiber and other offerings in the vein of Amazing Tales (and, of course, Lovecraft), and devoured every Thieves' World book. Pulp, noir, and sword and sorcery are more my cup of tea than high fantasy.
I want my setting to incorporate a number of elements from these seemingly disjointed influences. I'm deliberately avoiding "medieval fantasy" as the setting's basis, but otherwise all I have so far is a few embryonic ideas, and a reasonably good looking map (which I will post at some point). But the one thing I'm completely unsure of is how to steer clear of the whole thing getting slapped with a "steampunk" or "gaslamp" label. Because my intention isn't for it to be any of those things (I don't even particularly like steampunk, at least as any kind of cohesive "genre"). I suppose that I should just build the setting I want and damn the torpedoes. Comparisons to this or that are going to inevitable and there's nothing I can do about it. For sure, there's not going to be any gears in my setting. Or gas masks. Or goggles.
Ironically, even though I'm trying to steer clear of those genre labels, I think it's best in these situations to actually learn something about them. As I said, I'm not a steampunk fan. I don't know it beyond pictures I see of people's costumes or when I see a steampunk RPG title cross some news feed or in a post. So I figure at the very least I should familiarize myself with what's already out there. Luckily Age of Ravens has a great rundown on the history of steampunk rpgs. That looks like as good of a place for insight as any.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Language In Fate Core
No, not the language skill (the most useless kinds of skills in any rpg, IMHO, at least the way most game handle it). No, I'm talking about the use of language in Fate Core and how it affects the theme and mood of any particular game.
There are a lot of questions that I see related to how to make Fate Core more "this" or "that". They usually revolve around mechanical concerns, probably because in most games that's how you handle enforcing certain things. If you want to make a game more comical, you exaggerate certain elements or restrict things (like removing lethal damage). If you want to make a game more "realistic", you do x, y and z. A lot of this has to do with most games not having other tools to make those kinds of adjustments.
With Fate Core, though, we have aspects - and aspects are at their core language. How aspects are worded, and thus interpreted, can have a huge impact on the game. Humorous aspects reduce how serious the game is, while dour (or even darker) tinged aspects can change the atmosphere dramatically. For example, consider Shaun of the Dead compared to most other zombie apocalypse fiction. Shaun might have the aspect:
While in a more serious game, a character might have the aspect:
The wording sets the tone, and this is true for any of the aspects in the game - character, situation, boosts, campaign, all of them. This isn't to say that there aren't mechanical means to deal with bringing about a particular mood - only that aspects are going to be the linchpin of that effort (and in a lot of cases, not much more will be needed). This extends to how aspects are invoked and compelled. Hostile invokes and cutthroat compels have been suggested as a means of creating a "grittier" (or at least more unfriendly) game. The same goes for any other theme, especially since the wording of the aspects are going to speak to how they are invoked and compelled.
So I guess my point here is when hunting around for ways to tweak out Fate Core, look toward how aspects are worded and what the table wants them to evoke. If that doesn't quite do it then maybe look at other adjustments to the game system. This doesn't necessarily apply just to Fate Core either - how players around the table talk during any game is going to have a major impact on the mood of the game. That's really kind of pointing out the obvious. The difference is that Fate Core (and games that are similar) have the language baked right in.
There are a lot of questions that I see related to how to make Fate Core more "this" or "that". They usually revolve around mechanical concerns, probably because in most games that's how you handle enforcing certain things. If you want to make a game more comical, you exaggerate certain elements or restrict things (like removing lethal damage). If you want to make a game more "realistic", you do x, y and z. A lot of this has to do with most games not having other tools to make those kinds of adjustments.
With Fate Core, though, we have aspects - and aspects are at their core language. How aspects are worded, and thus interpreted, can have a huge impact on the game. Humorous aspects reduce how serious the game is, while dour (or even darker) tinged aspects can change the atmosphere dramatically. For example, consider Shaun of the Dead compared to most other zombie apocalypse fiction. Shaun might have the aspect:
Buy Milk. Ring Mum. Dodge Zombies (lifted from one of the taglines of the film)
While in a more serious game, a character might have the aspect:
Survival At Any Cost
The wording sets the tone, and this is true for any of the aspects in the game - character, situation, boosts, campaign, all of them. This isn't to say that there aren't mechanical means to deal with bringing about a particular mood - only that aspects are going to be the linchpin of that effort (and in a lot of cases, not much more will be needed). This extends to how aspects are invoked and compelled. Hostile invokes and cutthroat compels have been suggested as a means of creating a "grittier" (or at least more unfriendly) game. The same goes for any other theme, especially since the wording of the aspects are going to speak to how they are invoked and compelled.
So I guess my point here is when hunting around for ways to tweak out Fate Core, look toward how aspects are worded and what the table wants them to evoke. If that doesn't quite do it then maybe look at other adjustments to the game system. This doesn't necessarily apply just to Fate Core either - how players around the table talk during any game is going to have a major impact on the mood of the game. That's really kind of pointing out the obvious. The difference is that Fate Core (and games that are similar) have the language baked right in.
Friday, November 29, 2013
FATE SF - Zones
This post is for the From The Zones community blog project, hosted over at Fate SF. I've never read the book in question, Roadside Picnic (which I'm going to rectify), but I think that I have a handle on the subject. So without further adieu, I give you the artifact known as the Tetragrammaton, in Fate Core terms.
Dr. Saar,
In reference to your request to begin experiments using the artifact code named Tetragrammaton, we regret that we will be forced to deny it. While your research record has been stellar, it is highly doubtful that anything more than disaster will come from studying it. The device has resisted all attempts to interpret its function and use, and there have already been multiple incidents resulting from trying to do so. Namely, the appearance of several anomalous new stars in the constellation Lepus and the disappearance of the entire population of bluefin tuna from the planet. Current theory holds that many unexplained Zone phenomena may be the result of interaction with this device or devices like it. As a result, the device has been secured and isolated from any and all possible stimulation and will remain so for the indefinite future.
Dr. Hind Ali
Director of Visitation Artifact Research
International Institute
The artifact known as the Tetragrammaton was retrieved by an unnamed stalker from one of the Visitation Zones. The stalker was eventually apprehended trying to sell the artifact on the black market and, once the Tetragrammaton's danger was realized it was locked away. It was found that the disappearance of the population of an entire town was likely triggered by the stalker passing through with the artifact. A mysterious rain of organic material nearly 3,000km away was later identified to have come from that population. Once under observation, the artifact exhibited the ability to fundamentally change reality in unexpected ways. One researcher's skin was turned completely translucent, and during this period new stars appeared in the constellation Lepus and the entirety of the world's population of bluefin tuna vanishing (with the attendant ecological and economical disaster that would be expected). Following these events, the Tetragrammaton was completely isolated, and all interaction with it forbidden.
The Tetragrammaton resembles a fleshy starfish with a body about the size of a large dinner plate. It is completely inert and nonreactive to any stimuli, although it has been known to change colors. One recorded incident involving the aforementioned researcher was after it secreted an oil-like substance - contact with the substance turned the researcher's skin translucent, but otherwise it did not react with anything else. A small number of individuals that have spent time around it have reported hearing a voice speaking indistinct words. These words have become to be associated with the unexplained events, and are known as The Utterance.
To date, only the effects of three of the five known instances of The Utterance have been discovered. It is assumed that the initial event when the stalker recovered the artifact was a sixth instance. A small number of religious sects have become convinced that The Utterance and its results are the work of the divine, and that should a seventh Utterance occur, it will be a major divine revelation. Even though the Tetragrammaton has been isolated, it is monitored through a double-blind system (to prevent it from receiving any feedback) and no more Utterances have been observed.
The Tetragrammaton
Permissions: Being in physical possession of the Tetragrammaton
The Tetragrammaton possesses an aspect known as The Utterance, which can be invoked or compelled to make changes to reality. These changes cannot be controlled, and the scope of how wide-reaching they can be are not known. To date they have been relatively limited in scope, and have not been beneficial (either from being outright harmful or just simply not helpful). The Tetragrammaton may possess other abilities, but they are unknown at this time.
Monday, November 25, 2013
Mecha In Fate Core
One of the things in my bucket list is to do a Mekton-style mecha build treatment for Fate Core. I realize we already have build systems in settings like Camelot Trigger and Apotheosis Drive Exodus, but I have some slightly different ideas in mind than how they've handled mecha (which are, by the way, great) mostly inspired by changes I've want to make to Mekton or the Silhouette Vehicle Construction System. While I've only got a few prototype ideas, I want to put them out there so they can germinate.
What Are Mecha?
For my rather generic purposes, "mecha" are defined as any vehicle that's intended to act as an extension of the pilot. I know this is different than the Japanese definition of mecha. Real life examples include excavators, forklifts, cranes, combat vehicles like tanks and aircraft, etc. They have nonstandard control schemes and systems or structures that given them more versatility than just getting from Point A to Point B. They can manipulate things, project force, etc.
The Pilot
The divide between Mecha Piloting and just Piloting is how well you can utilize the mecha as an extension of your own body. Both Camelot Trigger and Apotheosis Drive X handle this fairly well. I particularly like the use of the pilot's stress track but the mecha has its own consequences.
The Mecha
There tends to be a divide between representations of mecha that falls either on the mecha is only an extension of the pilot or the mecha is completely separate. I want my mecha to be extensions, but also stand on their own (one idea I had was a double-sided character sheet - one for the pilot and one for the mecha). Mecha have their own things that they are poor or good at independent of the pilot, and there are some things that the pilot can excel at regardless of the mecha design. Finding the sweet spot of how the two relate would be one of my primary goals.
The way I see it, there are a number of basic characteristics that mecha typically have. These are:
What Are Mecha?
For my rather generic purposes, "mecha" are defined as any vehicle that's intended to act as an extension of the pilot. I know this is different than the Japanese definition of mecha. Real life examples include excavators, forklifts, cranes, combat vehicles like tanks and aircraft, etc. They have nonstandard control schemes and systems or structures that given them more versatility than just getting from Point A to Point B. They can manipulate things, project force, etc.
The Pilot
The divide between Mecha Piloting and just Piloting is how well you can utilize the mecha as an extension of your own body. Both Camelot Trigger and Apotheosis Drive X handle this fairly well. I particularly like the use of the pilot's stress track but the mecha has its own consequences.
The Mecha
There tends to be a divide between representations of mecha that falls either on the mecha is only an extension of the pilot or the mecha is completely separate. I want my mecha to be extensions, but also stand on their own (one idea I had was a double-sided character sheet - one for the pilot and one for the mecha). Mecha have their own things that they are poor or good at independent of the pilot, and there are some things that the pilot can excel at regardless of the mecha design. Finding the sweet spot of how the two relate would be one of my primary goals.
The way I see it, there are a number of basic characteristics that mecha typically have. These are:
- Size/tonnage/classification
- Power/Energy
- Offensive capability
- Defensive capability (whether it's through armor, active systems, maneuverability, etc)
- Sensory capability
- Movement
- Special abilities and systems
Out of those, size or classification sounds like how big of a container you have to put things in. I personally like classification with size or tonnage ranges. It would serve as an indicator for how many gizmos the mecha can have, possibly with the designer having a pool of "mecha refresh" that is used to spend on the frame, which in turn gives a base level of slots. The idea of slots and internal/external systems is nice in Camelot Trigger, but I don't particularly care for the skill bonuses for my purposes. I like the idea of the mecha using the pilot's stress track, but the mecha having its own consequences
Power/Energy looks a lot like a stress track, but it might be useful as a skill ala Endurance. It's an expendable resource, and one that I've found lacking in a lot of games. Mekton and Silhouette assume that, at the minimum, a vehicle has enough power to do what it was designed to do (barring some modifiers that can be added on to indicate over or under powered designs). Yet they also take into consideration operational range as a separate measure. That makes a lot of sense. But I know that I want to see something where the mecha can overextend itself on an exchange-level basis, but without tracking energy costs for every single little thing it does. So the Power concept is something that I definitely want to examine further as a potential mechanic.
Offense, defense, and sensory capability are things that mecha do so they are probably best represented by skills. This is where I'm likely to split with existing systems like in Camelot Trigger- while the pilot's skill in certain areas is used, the mecha has its own things that it is good at or bad at. I'm not 100% sure yet how I'd handle it, because I don't want to lose the idea that the mecha is and extension of the pilot yet still distinct. It would wind up being the core of the pilot/mecha interaction.
Specific abilities and systems would be Extras, most likely modeled after stunts, that would use slots very similar to Camelot Trigger. I still might come up with a simplified classification system for the stunts that would allow for them to fall into general modifiers and abilities.
There's a whole of lot of details I need to hammer out, but that's at least the foundation of how I would like to tackle mecha in Fate Core. My next step is actually going to be finding a setting to tie it into...
Offense, defense, and sensory capability are things that mecha do so they are probably best represented by skills. This is where I'm likely to split with existing systems like in Camelot Trigger- while the pilot's skill in certain areas is used, the mecha has its own things that it is good at or bad at. I'm not 100% sure yet how I'd handle it, because I don't want to lose the idea that the mecha is and extension of the pilot yet still distinct. It would wind up being the core of the pilot/mecha interaction.
Specific abilities and systems would be Extras, most likely modeled after stunts, that would use slots very similar to Camelot Trigger. I still might come up with a simplified classification system for the stunts that would allow for them to fall into general modifiers and abilities.
There's a whole of lot of details I need to hammer out, but that's at least the foundation of how I would like to tackle mecha in Fate Core. My next step is actually going to be finding a setting to tie it into...
Monday, November 18, 2013
Collaborative Campaigns
One of the things that is featured in Fate Core is collaborative setting building. It's a clever device for a toolkit-like game with no predefined setting, and fits into the Fate philosophy rather well. From discussions I've seen about collaborative setting building from scratch, pretty cool stuff comes out of those initial sessions. But most of my interest in games comes from already established settings or campaigns. Tribe 8, Exalted, The Laundry, Mekton...the list goes on. It's assumed that if I ask a bunch of people, "Hey, do you want to play Exalted?", there's not a whole lot to be done in terms of coming up with setting elements. My MO in running games in the past has been precisely, "I want to play X" and then dumping the players into character creation without any real input into the setting.
Obviously there are a number of obvious things that need to be worked out when using an existing setting - mostly regarding tone, the exact themes, and what the campaign will actually be about. Fate Core talks about this to some degree. Creating player investment is a pretty big deal to me now (I have to admit, I'm relatively late to the bandwagon on these topics), and that's really what the collaborative methods are all about (at least to me). When players aren't invested in a setting, and really in the game overall, they just aren't going to be as interested in it. They aren't motivated to try to stay within the bounds of the setting's tropes, tone, theme, mood, whatever. When they're not hooked and interested, they get bored. When a player gets bored, sometimes they get frustrated or start kicking down figurative sandcastles. I've experienced it multiple times, and I've always chalked it up to the player just not wanting to play nicely.
But like a lot of nuggets of wisdom in Fate Core, there are things that I have done - sometimes without a conscious realization of what I was doing. One of those things is taking cues from the player about what to do next. It's an often repeated piece of GMing advice. So if helping to create the setting gets players involved, by extension creating things within a setting, and the campaign at hand, should do the same thing.
So I've been thinking a lot about the types of things that Fate Core suggests for collaborative setting creation, as well as other games like The Dresden Files and the Spark rpg (or even games like Microscope or Kingdom, which I don't have yet but have peaked my interest). I've come to the conclusion that all of the types of things that one might define in a new setting - locations, NPCs, factions, issues, goals - should be things the players have a hand in even in defined settings.
On a final note, I completely discount the idea that the players might balk at having to do "the GM's job" in creating setting elements. I've never once met a player who's attitude was, "I'm just here to play a character, I don't want to have to design the setting". Every game I've run where there has been some element the players can create - whether it be mecha, or a military unit, or NPCs that are related to the character - they've jumped at the idea. Before my change of heart on these issues (because I used to be the "It's my setting, your characters" type), I had plenty of players wanting to give input on setting-details.
Obviously there are a number of obvious things that need to be worked out when using an existing setting - mostly regarding tone, the exact themes, and what the campaign will actually be about. Fate Core talks about this to some degree. Creating player investment is a pretty big deal to me now (I have to admit, I'm relatively late to the bandwagon on these topics), and that's really what the collaborative methods are all about (at least to me). When players aren't invested in a setting, and really in the game overall, they just aren't going to be as interested in it. They aren't motivated to try to stay within the bounds of the setting's tropes, tone, theme, mood, whatever. When they're not hooked and interested, they get bored. When a player gets bored, sometimes they get frustrated or start kicking down figurative sandcastles. I've experienced it multiple times, and I've always chalked it up to the player just not wanting to play nicely.
 |
| There's always that one guy |
So I've been thinking a lot about the types of things that Fate Core suggests for collaborative setting creation, as well as other games like The Dresden Files and the Spark rpg (or even games like Microscope or Kingdom, which I don't have yet but have peaked my interest). I've come to the conclusion that all of the types of things that one might define in a new setting - locations, NPCs, factions, issues, goals - should be things the players have a hand in even in defined settings.
On a final note, I completely discount the idea that the players might balk at having to do "the GM's job" in creating setting elements. I've never once met a player who's attitude was, "I'm just here to play a character, I don't want to have to design the setting". Every game I've run where there has been some element the players can create - whether it be mecha, or a military unit, or NPCs that are related to the character - they've jumped at the idea. Before my change of heart on these issues (because I used to be the "It's my setting, your characters" type), I had plenty of players wanting to give input on setting-details.
Monday, November 11, 2013
How I Adapted Tribe 8 to Fate Core
I was reading an RPG.Net thread and thought it might be helpful if I outlined the method that I used to adapt Tribe 8 to Fate Core.
Of course a lot of this is in hindsight, because the adaptation was an iterative process starting several years ago with Spirit of the Century, moving to Strands of Fate, and finally settling on Fate Core where it's going to sit for a while. It's taught me a number of valuable lessons, most prominently one that you hear a lot:
It's a concise little saying, but not without landlines. For me, when coming into it from a highly detailed setting with tightly integrated mechanical bits that work just so, it's hard to divorce preconceived notions of how things should work from how they already work in the parent system. So something I prepare myself for now is tearing everything apart and putting it back together - I make no plans or have no expectations that anything mechanical will be ported to the new system. Concepts, yes. How those concepts work, no.
Getting Organized
One thing that helped tremendously when adapting Tribe 8 was sitting down and figuring out exactly where I needed to put my effort. There's no need to re-examine and tweak the entire system to fit the setting. At a high level, I'd say that there are four areas that need to be considered:
The reason why I put setting-related things last is because they can often derail an adaptation. Depending on the game, there are things that can be hard to quantify. Plus, it might be beneficial to save them for when the players actually get involved - in essence, saving a bit of the collaborative world building for them.
What Do You Want To Do Today?
The reason why I choose skills first is because exactly what you want characters to do in the setting is pretty important. Tweaking the skill list and making any additions, merges, or removing skills does a lot to reinforce the feel of the game and make it "feel" like the setting.
For Tribe 8, I left the base skill list alone for the most part. I tweaked Contacts, Crafts, Investigate and Resources to better match the setting. I knew that I was going to be further tweaking Resources with an Extra and tying it to a new skill, Survival, so I simply created a placeholder for the Barter mechanics. I removed Drive and added a Ride skill, and added Survival. Finally, I knew that I would need placeholders for Dreaming, Sundering, Synthesis and Technosmithing - basically, the magic of the Tribe 8 world.
Extra or Extraneous?
Once the skill list was fleshed out, I set out about defining various Extras. The key was to not pump too much into it for the sake of novelty. For example, in an early draft I created a new method for defining Contacts that I ultimately decided was too much and removed.
For Tribe 8, I knew I had four major areas I needed to create Extras for:
Dealing with porting over things like magic or other special abilities benefited the most from completely ignoring everything but the fiction regarding the powers. I've talked about ludonarrative dissonance a bit, and this is typically where it worms its way in to tabletop rpgs - the description of how something works doesn't line up with the mechanical implementation. I didn't necessarily want to balance the abilities against one another (balance, to me, is a knob on my stereo) but I did want the various abilities to snap together properly. I went through multiple iterations, each stripping away some assumption I had that I thought was based in the setting - but only turned out to be limitations of the Silhouette system.
For a different setting, winnowing through the extras might mean divorcing a mechanical assumption completely. Essence in Exalted comes to mind - there's a strong urge to retain it because of how embedded it is in the setting. Thinking outside of the box may not actually lead to not having Essence at all, but the process of trying to do it without mirroring the original mechanics can lead to a better implementation.
Just Hit It Till It Works
The next to last thing I tackled was specific mechanical tweaks that I wanted. In general, I'd say that unless there are overwhelming reasons to change the basics, leave well enough alone. That includes aspects and their use, stress, consequences, etc.
However, when the Fate System Toolkit draft was released and I got around to looking at it, I did find some changes that I wanted: namely scaled invocations for use with Synthesis and conditions instead of Consequences. These changes weren't made lightly, but fortunately I had just come back to the document because of another thing I've found helpful...
Shelve It For A While
After working on in-depth writing, such as a new adaptation, I find it's useful to set it aside for at least a few weeks and come back to it with a fresher set of eyes. It helps snap things into perspective and identify rough spots. Typically this is the time that I start to remove extraneous elements and generally tighten things up. Depending on the size and complexity of the project, it might get shelved more than once. Even though I consider Fate of Vimary to be "done", I'm planning on looking it back over in the near future as I get closer to starting to play.
Play It, Revise It, Retcon It (If Need Be)
Speaking of which, actually playtesting the hack in some fashion works wonders. I have to admit I haven't had the chance to do it with Fate of Vimary, but some of the decisions I made were based on prior playtests of similar components. In the past I've learned a lot more from letting my hacks into the wild by playing them. Even if it's just one component in isolation, with only one other person, it's well worth doing. A lot of harder to quantify elements like setting aspects or other larger scale bits can be hashed out either just prior to or during play.
Even after (or in lieu of) playtesting expect revisions. Some concepts that look good on paper don't work quite as well in actual play. I usually find that I already knew which ones were going to need to be tweaked or dropped. They'll typically be the parts that I fiddled with a lot or couldn't quite wrap my head around the implementation. How I've implemented conditions in Fate of Vimary is a good example. There are a couple spots that I don't feel are ironed out yet, so I'm letting those concerns rest until we actually play it out. It might also mean outright retconning an implementation if it proves to not work correctly. The important takeaway is that it's really difficult, especially for an involved adaptation, to get everything nailed down ahead of time.
Of course a lot of this is in hindsight, because the adaptation was an iterative process starting several years ago with Spirit of the Century, moving to Strands of Fate, and finally settling on Fate Core where it's going to sit for a while. It's taught me a number of valuable lessons, most prominently one that you hear a lot:
Adapt the setting, not the mechanics
It's a concise little saying, but not without landlines. For me, when coming into it from a highly detailed setting with tightly integrated mechanical bits that work just so, it's hard to divorce preconceived notions of how things should work from how they already work in the parent system. So something I prepare myself for now is tearing everything apart and putting it back together - I make no plans or have no expectations that anything mechanical will be ported to the new system. Concepts, yes. How those concepts work, no.
Getting Organized
One thing that helped tremendously when adapting Tribe 8 was sitting down and figuring out exactly where I needed to put my effort. There's no need to re-examine and tweak the entire system to fit the setting. At a high level, I'd say that there are four areas that need to be considered:
- Skills (or Approaches for FAE)
- Extras
- Mechanical tweaks (including stunts)
- Setting-specific considerations, such as setting aspects, genre-enforcement, etc.
The reason why I put setting-related things last is because they can often derail an adaptation. Depending on the game, there are things that can be hard to quantify. Plus, it might be beneficial to save them for when the players actually get involved - in essence, saving a bit of the collaborative world building for them.
What Do You Want To Do Today?
The reason why I choose skills first is because exactly what you want characters to do in the setting is pretty important. Tweaking the skill list and making any additions, merges, or removing skills does a lot to reinforce the feel of the game and make it "feel" like the setting.
For Tribe 8, I left the base skill list alone for the most part. I tweaked Contacts, Crafts, Investigate and Resources to better match the setting. I knew that I was going to be further tweaking Resources with an Extra and tying it to a new skill, Survival, so I simply created a placeholder for the Barter mechanics. I removed Drive and added a Ride skill, and added Survival. Finally, I knew that I would need placeholders for Dreaming, Sundering, Synthesis and Technosmithing - basically, the magic of the Tribe 8 world.
Extra or Extraneous?
Once the skill list was fleshed out, I set out about defining various Extras. The key was to not pump too much into it for the sake of novelty. For example, in an early draft I created a new method for defining Contacts that I ultimately decided was too much and removed.
For Tribe 8, I knew I had four major areas I needed to create Extras for:
- Social groups
- Bartering
- Equipment
- Magical abilities
Dealing with porting over things like magic or other special abilities benefited the most from completely ignoring everything but the fiction regarding the powers. I've talked about ludonarrative dissonance a bit, and this is typically where it worms its way in to tabletop rpgs - the description of how something works doesn't line up with the mechanical implementation. I didn't necessarily want to balance the abilities against one another (balance, to me, is a knob on my stereo) but I did want the various abilities to snap together properly. I went through multiple iterations, each stripping away some assumption I had that I thought was based in the setting - but only turned out to be limitations of the Silhouette system.
For a different setting, winnowing through the extras might mean divorcing a mechanical assumption completely. Essence in Exalted comes to mind - there's a strong urge to retain it because of how embedded it is in the setting. Thinking outside of the box may not actually lead to not having Essence at all, but the process of trying to do it without mirroring the original mechanics can lead to a better implementation.
Just Hit It Till It Works
The next to last thing I tackled was specific mechanical tweaks that I wanted. In general, I'd say that unless there are overwhelming reasons to change the basics, leave well enough alone. That includes aspects and their use, stress, consequences, etc.
However, when the Fate System Toolkit draft was released and I got around to looking at it, I did find some changes that I wanted: namely scaled invocations for use with Synthesis and conditions instead of Consequences. These changes weren't made lightly, but fortunately I had just come back to the document because of another thing I've found helpful...
Shelve It For A While
After working on in-depth writing, such as a new adaptation, I find it's useful to set it aside for at least a few weeks and come back to it with a fresher set of eyes. It helps snap things into perspective and identify rough spots. Typically this is the time that I start to remove extraneous elements and generally tighten things up. Depending on the size and complexity of the project, it might get shelved more than once. Even though I consider Fate of Vimary to be "done", I'm planning on looking it back over in the near future as I get closer to starting to play.
Play It, Revise It, Retcon It (If Need Be)
Speaking of which, actually playtesting the hack in some fashion works wonders. I have to admit I haven't had the chance to do it with Fate of Vimary, but some of the decisions I made were based on prior playtests of similar components. In the past I've learned a lot more from letting my hacks into the wild by playing them. Even if it's just one component in isolation, with only one other person, it's well worth doing. A lot of harder to quantify elements like setting aspects or other larger scale bits can be hashed out either just prior to or during play.
Even after (or in lieu of) playtesting expect revisions. Some concepts that look good on paper don't work quite as well in actual play. I usually find that I already knew which ones were going to need to be tweaked or dropped. They'll typically be the parts that I fiddled with a lot or couldn't quite wrap my head around the implementation. How I've implemented conditions in Fate of Vimary is a good example. There are a couple spots that I don't feel are ironed out yet, so I'm letting those concerns rest until we actually play it out. It might also mean outright retconning an implementation if it proves to not work correctly. The important takeaway is that it's really difficult, especially for an involved adaptation, to get everything nailed down ahead of time.
Monday, November 4, 2013
"Beneficial" Compels
It's probably due to crosstalk, but a few different communities have had similar Fate Core discussions lately. Some of them featured rather generous interpretations of compels that look more like invocations, that I'm calling "beneficial" compels. I figured I'd string together a few thoughts I have about them.
First, a little drawing I made:
Where does the Fate Point go?
Character aspects are probably the most likely suspect for a "beneficial" compel, but it applies to any aspect. The idea is that the compel might have the same basic effect as an invoke. For example, doing a self-compel on a Consequence to make an attack miss, versus invoking the Consequence as a bonus to a defense roll. The crazy thing about this method is that not only does the character not get hit, but since they compelled their own aspect they'd get a Fate point. Win-win, right?
It doesn't wind up being quite that simple.
To illustrate this I'll be using an example from Revolution (warning: potential spoilers if you haven't been keeping up with the show and plan to). Charlie, the spunky Action Girl, is tracking down Monroe, the Evil Former Friend of her uncle. She's set up to give him a complementary trepanning with a crossbow bolt when two guys shanghai him, causing her shot to miss and hit the tree next to his head.
Under the "beneficial self-compel" scenario, it would appear that Monroe self-compelled his Most Wanted Man In North America trouble aspect to avoid getting skewered. If they work the way I've seen it described, the conversation leading up to it looks like this:
Charlie's Player: I take the shot. Rolls Shoot. I got a 6.
GM: Some guys knock him down and put a bag over his head, because Monroe is Most Wanted Man In North America. Your shot automatically misses. [Monroe gets a Fate Point].
There's a huge problem with this. Charlie actually made a Shoot roll only to have it invalidated by the character compelling his own aspect. It obviously doesn't work, on multiple levels. First, if she actually made the roll it means a thing happened. She took her shot, and he needs to defend against it. Second, compels mean complication. Getting clonked on the head and taken away is definitely a complication, but it's actually secondary to the intent of the compel (which was to avoid the attack). The complication of the compel should never be secondary.
A far better arrangement would look something like this:
Charlie's Player: I'm lining up the shot on Monroe.
GM: Because Monroe is Most Wanted Man In North America, it's likely others are looking for him too. How about some guys knock him down and put a bag over his head. They take him away before you can shoot him. [holds up a Fate Point]
Charlie's Player: Damn [takes the Fate Point]. Well, at least can we say the bolt hits the tree where his head would have been, so Monroe knows someone took a shot at him at the same time?
GM: Sure, that's a really cool touch.
Do you see what happened there? Charlie had a narrative stake in the outcome of the compel. Charlie gets the Fate Point, not Monroe. This is kind of like a "hostile" invoke - the GM compelled Monroe's aspect to screw up Charlie's action. When that happens, they receive the Fate Point instead of the character who was compelled. Alternately, Charlie could have compelled Monroe's aspect to get him captured - then she would have paid the Fate Point and he would have received it. But my focus here is defusing the idea that the compel can be used to get out of something that would otherwise be a given within the narrative.
As an aside, and hopefully not to detract from the topic hand too much, there are a couple more options here. Monroe's player (or the GM) could concede the conflict, and it's decided Monroe gets captured by someone else. He could also actually have been Taken Out by the attack, and Charlie decides it means he's captured by the bounty hunters. Both of them don't seem as satisfying as the compel of his aspect to me though.
The narrative circumstances to allow a compel to have even a glimmer of a beneficial aspect should be pretty narrow - and this goes for any party affected by it. In the end, compels should always have strings attached, and narrative bite, unless you want your game to start looking like a Chevy Chase movie or an episode of Jackass.
First, a little drawing I made:
 |
| This is not the new Evil Hat mascot |
Where does the Fate Point go?
Character aspects are probably the most likely suspect for a "beneficial" compel, but it applies to any aspect. The idea is that the compel might have the same basic effect as an invoke. For example, doing a self-compel on a Consequence to make an attack miss, versus invoking the Consequence as a bonus to a defense roll. The crazy thing about this method is that not only does the character not get hit, but since they compelled their own aspect they'd get a Fate point. Win-win, right?
It doesn't wind up being quite that simple.
To illustrate this I'll be using an example from Revolution (warning: potential spoilers if you haven't been keeping up with the show and plan to). Charlie, the spunky Action Girl, is tracking down Monroe, the Evil Former Friend of her uncle. She's set up to give him a complementary trepanning with a crossbow bolt when two guys shanghai him, causing her shot to miss and hit the tree next to his head.
Under the "beneficial self-compel" scenario, it would appear that Monroe self-compelled his Most Wanted Man In North America trouble aspect to avoid getting skewered. If they work the way I've seen it described, the conversation leading up to it looks like this:
Charlie's Player: I take the shot. Rolls Shoot. I got a 6.
GM: Some guys knock him down and put a bag over his head, because Monroe is Most Wanted Man In North America. Your shot automatically misses. [Monroe gets a Fate Point].
There's a huge problem with this. Charlie actually made a Shoot roll only to have it invalidated by the character compelling his own aspect. It obviously doesn't work, on multiple levels. First, if she actually made the roll it means a thing happened. She took her shot, and he needs to defend against it. Second, compels mean complication. Getting clonked on the head and taken away is definitely a complication, but it's actually secondary to the intent of the compel (which was to avoid the attack). The complication of the compel should never be secondary.
A far better arrangement would look something like this:
Charlie's Player: I'm lining up the shot on Monroe.
GM: Because Monroe is Most Wanted Man In North America, it's likely others are looking for him too. How about some guys knock him down and put a bag over his head. They take him away before you can shoot him. [holds up a Fate Point]
Charlie's Player: Damn [takes the Fate Point]. Well, at least can we say the bolt hits the tree where his head would have been, so Monroe knows someone took a shot at him at the same time?
GM: Sure, that's a really cool touch.
Do you see what happened there? Charlie had a narrative stake in the outcome of the compel. Charlie gets the Fate Point, not Monroe. This is kind of like a "hostile" invoke - the GM compelled Monroe's aspect to screw up Charlie's action. When that happens, they receive the Fate Point instead of the character who was compelled. Alternately, Charlie could have compelled Monroe's aspect to get him captured - then she would have paid the Fate Point and he would have received it. But my focus here is defusing the idea that the compel can be used to get out of something that would otherwise be a given within the narrative.
As an aside, and hopefully not to detract from the topic hand too much, there are a couple more options here. Monroe's player (or the GM) could concede the conflict, and it's decided Monroe gets captured by someone else. He could also actually have been Taken Out by the attack, and Charlie decides it means he's captured by the bounty hunters. Both of them don't seem as satisfying as the compel of his aspect to me though.
The narrative circumstances to allow a compel to have even a glimmer of a beneficial aspect should be pretty narrow - and this goes for any party affected by it. In the end, compels should always have strings attached, and narrative bite, unless you want your game to start looking like a Chevy Chase movie or an episode of Jackass.
Friday, October 11, 2013
Managing Campaigns With A Large Cast of NPCs
I'm shooting for starting Children of Lilith using Fate Core around the beginning of the year. This allows me enough time to get my physical Fate Core books, my Evil Hat Fate Dice (although I have enough now between the Thematic Fudge dice and the Fudge dice I picked up earlier in the year) and get some solid campaign prep going. There are a lot of things that I want to organize and plan for before attempting CoL for the third time.
For those of my readers that aren't familiar with Tribe 8, Children of Lilith is a "cycle" book, the first book in a longer campaign arc. It was originally published in 1999 and while it's a great introductory campaign for Tribe 8 (and drives the entire metaplot), it has some rough spots that I'd like to polish out.
One thing that can be hard to manage in Children of Lilith are the NPCs. They range from single mentions in the narrative to major players in the world of Tribe 8. Once you include these minor supporting NPCs and characters that are only mentioned once, CoL has a cast of at least 60. Since Tribe 8 eschewed the "chess piece" system used in Heavy Gear, it's likewise difficult to know which NPC may play a role in a later cycle book without actually reading that book.
The task of keeping track of all of these NPCs, as well as who is related to who and why, can be a daunting one. Luckily, someone somewhere invented the relationship map and I (non-sarcastically) love flowcharts and diagrams. I have multiple mapping programs and I've done some mapping in the past with various games, but the scope wasn't nearly as broad as CoL. Also since I'm using Fate Core I have some other considerations (such as aspects) that I can leverage to pack more usable information into the map.
Luckily, there are a number of good articles and documents that have been written in the past couple years. Gnome Stew has a couple good ones, as well as the Entanglements system from Yaruki Zero. Gnome Stew actually turned me on to CmapTools, which was a great replacement for the plethora of other diagramming tools I've been mucking around with (it's free).
(pedantic note: liberties have been taken with the NPC relationships shown, as two of the three are one-off mentions in narrative sections of the actual book)
My structure is inspired by the Entanglements system that I linked to above. Basically, squares with dotted lines are "extras". They count as a nameless NPC in Fate Core terms - for all intents and purposes, they are an aspect and little else. Thus, all extras must be directly or indirectly linked to either a minor or major NPC. Two of them are linked to Kyrt through group membership and the third directly. Ovals with dotted lines will represent social groups - the lines coming from each NPC denotes membership in the group. In this manner, I can map relationships between groups. Boxes with dashed and dotted lines represent locations. The three extras could also, obviously, have a relationship with one another beyond cell membership (let's say if Skot and Andrue were lovers). You'll also notice that the line around Lilith's box is bolder (I'm actually going to increase the thickness more). This is to help with visual recognition of a character's importance - dashed lines are the least important, while increasingly thicker lines are more important. Any useful aspects will be included in the boxes as well, to reduce the need to reference other documents.
I think this is a really good start, and with CmapTools I think I can get a complete relationship map of all of the NPCs in Children of Lilith done efficiently with a high degree of usability. Once I'm done with the entire thing I'll be sure to post a link to the document.
Update: Someone on G+ pointed out Vue, which I am playing with. I think I might like it better than CmapTools, but so far CmapTools has been fantastic.
For those of my readers that aren't familiar with Tribe 8, Children of Lilith is a "cycle" book, the first book in a longer campaign arc. It was originally published in 1999 and while it's a great introductory campaign for Tribe 8 (and drives the entire metaplot), it has some rough spots that I'd like to polish out.
One thing that can be hard to manage in Children of Lilith are the NPCs. They range from single mentions in the narrative to major players in the world of Tribe 8. Once you include these minor supporting NPCs and characters that are only mentioned once, CoL has a cast of at least 60. Since Tribe 8 eschewed the "chess piece" system used in Heavy Gear, it's likewise difficult to know which NPC may play a role in a later cycle book without actually reading that book.
The task of keeping track of all of these NPCs, as well as who is related to who and why, can be a daunting one. Luckily, someone somewhere invented the relationship map and I (non-sarcastically) love flowcharts and diagrams. I have multiple mapping programs and I've done some mapping in the past with various games, but the scope wasn't nearly as broad as CoL. Also since I'm using Fate Core I have some other considerations (such as aspects) that I can leverage to pack more usable information into the map.
Luckily, there are a number of good articles and documents that have been written in the past couple years. Gnome Stew has a couple good ones, as well as the Entanglements system from Yaruki Zero. Gnome Stew actually turned me on to CmapTools, which was a great replacement for the plethora of other diagramming tools I've been mucking around with (it's free).
 |
| Maybe DP9 could have had Mykal Lakim name their NPCs. Also, DJ Skot did a great remix of "Once In a Lifetime" by Wolfsheim |
My structure is inspired by the Entanglements system that I linked to above. Basically, squares with dotted lines are "extras". They count as a nameless NPC in Fate Core terms - for all intents and purposes, they are an aspect and little else. Thus, all extras must be directly or indirectly linked to either a minor or major NPC. Two of them are linked to Kyrt through group membership and the third directly. Ovals with dotted lines will represent social groups - the lines coming from each NPC denotes membership in the group. In this manner, I can map relationships between groups. Boxes with dashed and dotted lines represent locations. The three extras could also, obviously, have a relationship with one another beyond cell membership (let's say if Skot and Andrue were lovers). You'll also notice that the line around Lilith's box is bolder (I'm actually going to increase the thickness more). This is to help with visual recognition of a character's importance - dashed lines are the least important, while increasingly thicker lines are more important. Any useful aspects will be included in the boxes as well, to reduce the need to reference other documents.
I think this is a really good start, and with CmapTools I think I can get a complete relationship map of all of the NPCs in Children of Lilith done efficiently with a high degree of usability. Once I'm done with the entire thing I'll be sure to post a link to the document.
Update: Someone on G+ pointed out Vue, which I am playing with. I think I might like it better than CmapTools, but so far CmapTools has been fantastic.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Is Fate Unchallenging?
One of the things I see on occasion in discussions about Fate is how the game comes across as unchallenging. Throw a whole bunch of stacked modifiers at a roll and wablam! you just got a total of +8 and wind up blowing away that measly 2 passive resistance. It's sometimes described as taking the tension or suspense out of the game.
Usually when I read these, for some reason I think of the one guy who spends all of his time combing through the rules and sourcebooks to create a perfect build. I had one of these once - he could zero in on the exact combination of ability, skill and modifiers that essentially made his character unbeatable when he had a sword in his hand. In the right hands, it's great. In the wrong hands (or with the wrong intent) it can really bork up a game.
But in a game like Fate I can see how it would deflate that kind of player. At first glance, there's not a lot of fiddly bits that can be used to tweak a character out. They can just put down an aspect, Master Swordsman of the Wablam School, take Fighting +4, pick some stunts and they're done. It doesn't feel mechanically beefy to simply state that you're a master swordsman. The mechanical bonuses are the same as someone who has the aspect Deadly With a Butterknife. On top of that, the PC may not even be in danger of dying once the dice do come out. So everything is lollipops and unicorns, and everyone lives happily ever after, right?
Well, not exactly. Because oftentimes what's missing from this mix (and their arguments against the game feeling unchallenging or bland) are compels. On occasion, I've seen compels actively dismissed. Yet compels are the GM's way of throwing a wrench in the gears. They serve the role of critical misses, fumbles, whiffs, tactical errors, and all manner of other "challenging" things that happen in "those other games". Sure, the player gets a Fate Point in return - but as the GM you shouldn't worry about that so much. What you should worry about is if the players are feeling sufficiently challenged throughout the game. How to time a compel to ratchet things up a bit. When not to compel.
It feels like a completely different paradigm than running in a system where the modifiers are stacked against the players instead of for them, or it's completely on a bad roll or lack of modifiers which creates a bad situation the PCs have to deal with. But it's not - most seasoned GMs have a good feel for when a hornet's nest needs to be kicked (and not a small number probably fudge things around to make it happen, whether they'd admit it or not). Even people that don't have as much experience likely have some sense of pacing from books, television shows and movies are timed to know when to put the screws to the players.
In the end, it isn't so much that Fate Core lacks certain things that other rpgs have, or is fundamentally different in some magical way from other rpgs. It's just that sometimes it takes looking at it from a skewed angle to realize how to get the same end result from a slightly different toolset.
Usually when I read these, for some reason I think of the one guy who spends all of his time combing through the rules and sourcebooks to create a perfect build. I had one of these once - he could zero in on the exact combination of ability, skill and modifiers that essentially made his character unbeatable when he had a sword in his hand. In the right hands, it's great. In the wrong hands (or with the wrong intent) it can really bork up a game.
But in a game like Fate I can see how it would deflate that kind of player. At first glance, there's not a lot of fiddly bits that can be used to tweak a character out. They can just put down an aspect, Master Swordsman of the Wablam School, take Fighting +4, pick some stunts and they're done. It doesn't feel mechanically beefy to simply state that you're a master swordsman. The mechanical bonuses are the same as someone who has the aspect Deadly With a Butterknife. On top of that, the PC may not even be in danger of dying once the dice do come out. So everything is lollipops and unicorns, and everyone lives happily ever after, right?
Well, not exactly. Because oftentimes what's missing from this mix (and their arguments against the game feeling unchallenging or bland) are compels. On occasion, I've seen compels actively dismissed. Yet compels are the GM's way of throwing a wrench in the gears. They serve the role of critical misses, fumbles, whiffs, tactical errors, and all manner of other "challenging" things that happen in "those other games". Sure, the player gets a Fate Point in return - but as the GM you shouldn't worry about that so much. What you should worry about is if the players are feeling sufficiently challenged throughout the game. How to time a compel to ratchet things up a bit. When not to compel.
It feels like a completely different paradigm than running in a system where the modifiers are stacked against the players instead of for them, or it's completely on a bad roll or lack of modifiers which creates a bad situation the PCs have to deal with. But it's not - most seasoned GMs have a good feel for when a hornet's nest needs to be kicked (and not a small number probably fudge things around to make it happen, whether they'd admit it or not). Even people that don't have as much experience likely have some sense of pacing from books, television shows and movies are timed to know when to put the screws to the players.
In the end, it isn't so much that Fate Core lacks certain things that other rpgs have, or is fundamentally different in some magical way from other rpgs. It's just that sometimes it takes looking at it from a skewed angle to realize how to get the same end result from a slightly different toolset.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Blue Planet Fate: Biomods and Augmentations
+Jacob Poss has taken up the challenge of adapting Blue Planet to Fate Core and asked for some input on how to handle biotech and cybernetics.
There are basically two routes to go with this. The first is to just have the biotech represented by aspects and, when not appropriate stunts. Characters might lose some granularity of picking through a shopping list of mods, particularly the minor ones - they are mostly flavor using this method. The aspects would serve as permissions for doing things covered by the modifications.
The second route is what is seen in Nova Praxis, where essentially each modification does it's own thing. They aren't stunts per se, but as Extras each with their own specific effects. Given the nature of Blue Planet, this is the route that I'd go for. Since modifications are so ubiquitous in Blue Planet, I'd give each character a number of modification slots above and beyond the normal freebie stunt slots or refresh. 3 is probably a good starting number. At its most basic, each modification takes a slot. More potent augmentations can cost more than one slot. Additionally, certain biomods (such as Transhumans or Shock Troopers) might lose slots to required modifications.
The Full Monty here is to lift Nova Praxis' augmentation system wholesale (and possibly the underlying method for how sleeves work, as least with biomods). This requires assessing an Augmentation Value for each modification from Blue Planet (a number of the existing ones in Nova Praxis would probably work just fine). Characters could start with 3 augmentations, and would use Physique x 2 as the maximum number of augmentations that the character can support.
Whichever method used (straight aspects versus more developed Extras with their own guidelines) depends on the depth that you want the game to have with regards to modifications.
There are basically two routes to go with this. The first is to just have the biotech represented by aspects and, when not appropriate stunts. Characters might lose some granularity of picking through a shopping list of mods, particularly the minor ones - they are mostly flavor using this method. The aspects would serve as permissions for doing things covered by the modifications.
The second route is what is seen in Nova Praxis, where essentially each modification does it's own thing. They aren't stunts per se, but as Extras each with their own specific effects. Given the nature of Blue Planet, this is the route that I'd go for. Since modifications are so ubiquitous in Blue Planet, I'd give each character a number of modification slots above and beyond the normal freebie stunt slots or refresh. 3 is probably a good starting number. At its most basic, each modification takes a slot. More potent augmentations can cost more than one slot. Additionally, certain biomods (such as Transhumans or Shock Troopers) might lose slots to required modifications.
The Full Monty here is to lift Nova Praxis' augmentation system wholesale (and possibly the underlying method for how sleeves work, as least with biomods). This requires assessing an Augmentation Value for each modification from Blue Planet (a number of the existing ones in Nova Praxis would probably work just fine). Characters could start with 3 augmentations, and would use Physique x 2 as the maximum number of augmentations that the character can support.
Whichever method used (straight aspects versus more developed Extras with their own guidelines) depends on the depth that you want the game to have with regards to modifications.
Friday, September 20, 2013
Milestone Worksheet
First things first, I cooked up a milestone worksheet to go along with my milestone fractal post. You can grab it from Google Docs. Also, I had a couple of comments after finding a great discussion on fractal adventure design on ENWorld.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
A Milestone Fractal Example
Someone mentioned that they do a lot better grokking these kind of things with examples, so I thought I'd try to cook one up.
First, I have some slight refinements of what I posted yesterday (I swear I'm not trying to copy how +Ryan M. Danks posted his adventure fractal, I'm really not).
First, I have some slight refinements of what I posted yesterday (I swear I'm not trying to copy how +Ryan M. Danks posted his adventure fractal, I'm really not).
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
The Milestone Fractal
I was originally going to write about adventure planning in the same spirit as what +Ryan M. Danks posted about Adventure Fractals. Instead it's taken a turn toward campaigns and not just adventures. I've actually written previously about this subject on Dreams of Flesh and Spirit, and some of those concepts are going to be making a reappearance.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Locations, Fate Core Style: Part II
In my last post I went over some of the guidelines I use when creating a location for a game. Today I'm going to step through the process with an actual location that fits in with Fate of Vimary: the desecrated Shrine of C'nawa.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Locations, Fate Core Style: Part I
If one were to ask me what things are critical to bringing an rpg "to life", I'd say: characters and locations. Nearly everything else is secondary, including the greater world. You need the characters to have roles to play, and the locations to interact with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)