Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [FateRPG] Compelling with free tags, and the FATE point economy

Expand Messages
  • Fred Hicks
    ... I seem to recall talking about this explicitly in one of our rulesets at least (under tagging for effect , maybe?) -- the idea is that compels are between
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:28 AM, daveleaman <fated@...> wrote:
      How have people handled compels on free tags in their own games? What is the right balance of FP flow?

      I seem to recall talking about this explicitly in one of our rulesets at least (under "tagging for effect", maybe?) -- the idea is that compels are between a GM as compeller, and a character target. So when tagging to trigger a compel, you tag, using up your free allocation if there was any. Then you step aside and the GM takes over the transaction, which runs like any compel would.

      --
      Fred Hicks
      Evil Hat Productions, LLC
      www.evilhat.com
    • Brad Murray
      It s kind of elegant to think of a free tag as a new fate point that is attached (bound, perhaps) to an aspect. Then the question disappears. -- Brad Murray
      Message 2 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        It's kind of elegant to think of a free tag as a new fate point that is attached (bound, perhaps) to an aspect. Then the question disappears.

        --
        Brad Murray (halfjack)
        VSCA Publishing
      • Merc
        ... Well-put; I think this idea was floating around in my brain but I hadn t figured out any eloquent way to express it. Cheers, Roger
        Message 3 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          > It's kind of elegant to think of a free tag as a new fate point that is
          > attached (bound, perhaps) to an aspect. Then the question disappears.

          Well-put; I think this idea was floating around in my brain but I hadn't figured out any eloquent way to express it.



          Cheers,
          Roger
        • Brad Murray
          ... Uh oh, maybe fate points have scopes.... -- Brad Murray (halfjack) VSCA Publishing
          Message 4 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Merc <merc_hg_80@...> wrote:
             

            > It's kind of elegant to think of a free tag as a new fate point that is
            > attached (bound, perhaps) to an aspect. Then the question disappears.

            Well-put; I think this idea was floating around in my brain but I hadn't figured out any eloquent way to express it.

            Uh oh, maybe fate points have scopes....

            --
            Brad Murray (halfjack)
            VSCA Publishing
          • daveleaman
            ... ...and the FATE fractal marches on :) -D
            Message 5 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, Brad Murray <bjmurray.halfjack@...> wrote:
              > Uh oh, maybe fate points have scopes....

              ...and the FATE fractal marches on :)

              -D
            • ezra_n_bradford
              Spirit of the Century, under To Catch a King: Tagging for Effect. http://www.faterpg.com/dl/sotc-srd.html#to-catch-a-king-tagging-for-effect Dave, your
              Message 6 of 7 , Mar 24, 2011
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Spirit of the Century, under "To Catch a King: Tagging for Effect."
                http://www.faterpg.com/dl/sotc-srd.html#to-catch-a-king-tagging-for-effect

                Dave, your "normal" case differs from the one presented there. SotC's looks like this:
                Player P compels "Has an Aspect" on Player Q.
                If Q accepts: Q gains an FP and a disadvantage; P loses an FP.
                If Q rejects: Q loses an FP; P _loses_ an FP.

                Similarly for free tags (in SotC):
                Player P compels "Tagged" on Player Q.
                If Q accepts: Q gains an FP and a disadvantage; P loses the free tag.
                If Q rejects: Q loses an FP; P loses the free tag.

                So in SotC, the free tag tidily replaces the Fate Point. But the economy isn't closed: if your target buys off the compel, you've spent an FP to get rid of one of your target's FP, reducing the world FP by two.


                Ezra

                --- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, Fred Hicks <evilhat@...> wrote:
                >
                > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:28 AM, daveleaman <fated@...> wrote:
                >
                > > How have people handled compels on free tags in their own games? What is
                > > the right balance of FP flow?
                > >
                >
                > I seem to recall talking about this explicitly in one of our rulesets at
                > least (under "tagging for effect", maybe?) -- the idea is that compels are
                > between a GM as compeller, and a character target. So when tagging to
                > trigger a compel, you tag, using up your free allocation if there was any.
                > Then you step aside and the GM takes over the transaction, which runs like
                > any compel would.
                >
                > --
                > Fred Hicks
                > Evil Hat Productions, LLC
                > www.evilhat.com
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.