Re: [FateRPG] My review of DFRPG
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Paul Weimer <jvstin@...> wrote:
My name is Paul Weimer, longtime follower of the stuff that the Evil Hat crew does, and also a
columnist and reviewer at one of the major SF blogs out there, SF Signal.
As it so happens, a couple of months ago, I started a column there to introduce SF Signal readers
to the opaque world of role playing games.
Anyway, I wrote a review of the DFRPG there and thought you all would be interested in reading my thoughts:
http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2011/06/roll-perception-plus-awareness-the-dresden-files-rpg/Meant to reply to this a couple of days ago... where does the time go?
Overall, a nice review. The one thing I wanted to talk about / poke at was this:
"The only real criticism I have of the FATE system is that players who like to develop their characters as they go along, rather than at the start, are somewhat handicapped by this system. With the Aspects system, you are making a lot of decisions about your character at the start."
As you go on to point out, the game does give rules for starting with less than a complete character. While this means you may have fewer Aspects, someone who's having to do that likely isn't spending all their Refresh either, and so has less need of Compels at the start. And, of course, you can create Aspects as you go, then work them into background later.
I've just started running the game about six weeks ago, initially with five players, then with three more joining three weeks in. All of them have been new to the system, and none of them started with a fully-worked-out character, but we haven't had any major problems from it. Heck, two of the players still don't have fully worked-out backgrounds -- since they were among the later additions, I simply told them how many Aspects they could have, and that normally those would tie into their backstory, but we weren't going to worry about that in the interests of time.
I tend to develop my characters through play as a player myself, so I was fairly worried about it as a problem to start with, but it seems to be less of one than I thought it would be.
(Also, the fact that you can change an Aspect after each session helps out here -- even if everyone does the "official" thing and creates all their Aspects from their background, six sessions later, it's quite possible that none of the background Aspects are still there on the sheet! So I wouldn't get too worked up over the fact that they're supposed to be linked, since nothing forces them to stay that way anyway.)