This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs
Rules (wip):
it's not particularly new but i've always found it interesting when games mechanize metagaming.
fate's point economy allows players to actively change the game by putting themselves at an immediate disadvantage. when you play to your character's weakness, you get a point which you can cash in later to modify a story beat or situation. but you can also pay other players with them to suggest actions for them.
Interesting, GURPS has a couple mechanics kinda like this. You build characters with point buy, and you can "buy" Disadvantages like Cowardice or Alcoholism which have a negative point cost, giving you extra points to spend on other attributes.
There's also a way to spend points that you earn (you earn points by adventuring like exp) to change things in the world slightly, though I don't really use it.
Also, there's a fun attribute called Common Sense, where the GM warns you if you're about to do something particularly stupid.
i was into gurps before i started with fate and i think i gave the wrong impression because they're not really similar. fate points are not used during character creation, but are an actual physical token that is actively used during sessions. you can collect them by playing into your characters weaknesses, and pay others to play into theirs, including npcs and the world itself. they're metagaming coins basically.
the central conceit of fate is that characters are very free-form. there are no fixed skills, quirks, or features. instead, your character aspects, the short descriptions of who your character is and can do, are mechanically relevant. if your character concept is a "brash, handsome rogue with a heart of gold", you will be able to easily talk your way through situations, but you are also impulsive and prone to selfless heroics. if you're trying to save yourself escaping a sinking ship, the gm can go "actually i don't think you're the kind of guy to leave a beautiful lady behind" and toss you a coin and you either have to go back for that npc without thinking of the consequences, or make a counter offer that costs you points. other players can also compel you to do things by paying you points, and you can compel them, or npcs with known aspects.
this tying of the rp to actual game boons, as contrasted to the vague "you sure roled that play, so you got +1" stuff you tend to get in more crunchy systems. this also results in points trading hands constantly, as the players learn about eachothers characters and lean into the failures.
Oh I know, I was just commenting on conceptual similarity, not mechanical. It does strike me how conceptually similar GURPS and Fate are, despite being mechanically at opposite ends of the crunch spectrum.
i think that's why i gravitated toward them both. i ultimately didn't gel with gurps due to that crunch, because even though you can pick and choose what parts you want there's still a lot of stuff that you really can't remove or the game feels hollow. FAE still feels meaty even though it's super stripped down.
I like reality simulation, so the crunch is fun for me. I think it's modular enough to focus on just the aspects of crunch that you like
Yeah fate points are a killer idea. I think Slugblaster's Nope mechanic is somewhat similar, in that it lets you skip some unwanted bad outcome, but you take on Trouble, which causes consequences later. Fate's implementation seems more flexible and broadly useful though.
yeah the big thing is how fate points tie into the characterisation of the pcs. they anchor role playing decisions in the rules in a way i've not seen many systems do.
Dune: Adventures in the Imperium does a version of this. Extra successes on a challenge give the players Momentum points which they can use to generally make things better for them. But the GM has Threat points which make things harder for the players. Points can also be used to buy off bad outcomes or improve good ones.
But the most fun bit is that the GM can cash in a bunch of Threat to introduce a rival to the players into a scene. So their nemesis can drop in on the party where they're trying to gather allies to confront the nemesis.
Lighthearted has an interesting emotion mechanic.
At the start of a scene, you describe your current emotion. Then, when rolling you choose an emotion based on how you describe the action and the closer it is from your current emotions, the higher dice you roll. However, it'll make your emotional state shift. And if you roll your current emotion you gain stress.
While it's pretty interesting, it let a lot of room for negotiation between PC and GM which isn't always great compared to games with tighter rules
which isn’t always great compared to games with tighter rules
I'm slowly forming the opinion that there's no best way of gaming, but that mechanics can strongly influence player and story behaviours, and so whether a mechanic is good or not depends entirely on your aims in gaming.
Not sure if negotiating outcomes is something I want (though I like it in the Slugblaster actual plays I've listened to). But that emotion mechanic definitely sounds interesting!
I really love Mouse Guards simple skill progression where skills advance when you have succeeded AND failed with them enough times.
Yeah, makes sense. I think Dungeon World mainly gives you XP if you fail, which makes sense to me, because making mistakes is often where you learn the most
I like the fighting mechanics of Honor+Intrigue
In a gist, you have Health Point and Stances, you can « dodge » an attack by decreasing your Stance (which give you penalties) or accept the blow. When you’re out of Stances or HP you have lost
In Trail of Cthulhu, if you suffer madness you must leave the room while the other players and DM debate the most appropriate manner in which to gaslight you. They may, for example, pass notes to each other and exchange meaningful glances. Or, they could all agree that some important recent event didnt happen and will react with confusion when you bring it up. Or they could come up with any number of other thjngs.
Its a lot of work to deal with it, but in theory I'm a huge fan of Avatar Legends' Principles system. Basically, every playbook has an internal struggle between to extremes - compared to an Yin/Yang - and work to find their own Balance in that. The Center of this Balance starts on 0, but over the course of the game players will move towards one side or the other, to a max of +3/-3 (moving positively towards one side means you're moving negatively towards the other)
The Guardian, for example, struggles between Self-Reliance Vs. Trust; They want to protect others not just to keep them safe, but also because they don't believe they're capable of doing so. A Guardian shifting towards Self-Reliance is more cynical, while a Guardian shifting towards Trust will rely on their companions more often.
Aside from the narrative meaning, the Balance can be used for rolls; if a PC performs an action in accord to their Principles - say, the Guardian attempting to Comfort someone not out of sympathy, but because they believe they're the only ones capable of doing it - they would roll with that Principle instead of the Attribute that the Move requires. That way, if your Self-Reliance is higher than the Attribute, it might be a good idea to pitch the scene in that way.
Characters can also be called out on acting/not acting according to their Principles, or Lose their Balance (basically have a mental breakdown) if it goes past one of the extremes.
In oWoD’s Hunter: The Reckoning, you can’t advance your Edges (supernatural abilities) with XP.
To do so, you have to gamble Conviction during the session, while using said Edges (those Conviction points gambled add dice to your pool, ideally improving your odds).
If you succeed at the task, you gain Virtues (with which you can later buy points in Edges).
if you fail the task, you lose Conviction points. If you run out of Conviction, you lose your ability to use Edges at all until you rest/meditate/recover for a full week.
Not sure if it qualifies as “conceptual” or non-mechanical to you. But I love it.
How does it affect the feel of the game?
I suppose YMMV, but to me it’s central. You see, the Hunter becomes a hunter because she heard a higher calling, and believing in it is what keeps it going.
You can rename Conviction to Faith, and it probably shows what I’m hinting at. That faith can get you out of trouble (supernaturally so) but it’s also precious. You’re still human, flimsy and prone to errors, susceptible to doubt.
And you’re way out of your league. All the time.
So basically higher stakes, and higher tension? And maybe more believable motivations?
Yeah. Very well summarized.
Perhaps I’d also add that the advancement is earned with blood and sweat. 😅
How to jump over planning with Blades in the Dark. It's not the first gale with this mechanics but It's the most known.