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

Re: [FateRPG] FATE and The Force

Expand Messages
  • John Rudd
    ... That s the one! But the mechanics seem a bit different from current incarnations of FATE (boxes associated with your aspects?)
    Message 1 of 25 , Jan 21, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Kurt Rauscher <krauscher@...> wrote:

      Is that what you were thinking of?


      That's the one!

      But the mechanics seem a bit different from current incarnations of FATE (boxes associated with your aspects?)

    • dinkster8
      ... I like this approach. In fact I m inspired to add something like this to one of my games. Alternatively if you wanted a character specific approach (and
      Message 2 of 25 , Jan 22, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        > Hey, this is a great response, and I think it suggests a simple solution
        > that doesn't require much hacking. In Fate terms, it sounds like "The Call
        > of the Dark Side . . . " would be a pretty great story/campaign/scene
        > aspect. The GM can use it to compel players, especially in situations where
        > they're hard up on FP, and players can invoke it whenever they'd like.
        >
        > The slippery slope comes through character advancement and the story that
        > the group is telling. If I was handling it this way, I'd probably rule that
        > the PC who used the dark side the most must change one aspect to reflect
        > that.

        I like this approach. In fact I'm inspired to add something like this to one of my games. Alternatively if you wanted a character specific approach (and the player was agreeable) you could give them a character aspect that functions in this way. If I may borrow an example: The character has the aspects "Crown Prince of Lordaeron" and "Frostmourne hungers". The more the "Frostmourne hungers" aspect is used to make mr. crown prince behave contrary to being the crown prince, he would need to change that aspect. To "death knight" perhaps, or eventually...
      • Jeff
        Awesome! I think reflecting the insidious influence of some outside force in the mechanics of a game is really compelling. It s not a new idea, but I don t
        Message 3 of 25 , Jan 22, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Awesome! 

          I think reflecting the insidious influence of some outside force in the mechanics of a game is really compelling. It's not a new idea, but I don't think I've ever found (before Fate) a system that could handle it very well.

          Makes me want to run a small game in the format of a Shakespearean tragedy.


          On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:57 AM, dinkster8 <dinkster8@...> wrote:
           

          > Hey, this is a great response, and I think it suggests a simple solution
          > that doesn't require much hacking. In Fate terms, it sounds like "The Call
          > of the Dark Side . . . " would be a pretty great story/campaign/scene
          > aspect. The GM can use it to compel players, especially in situations where
          > they're hard up on FP, and players can invoke it whenever they'd like.
          >
          > The slippery slope comes through character advancement and the story that
          > the group is telling. If I was handling it this way, I'd probably rule that
          > the PC who used the dark side the most must change one aspect to reflect
          > that.

          I like this approach. In fact I'm inspired to add something like this to one of my games. Alternatively if you wanted a character specific approach (and the player was agreeable) you could give them a character aspect that functions in this way. If I may borrow an example: The character has the aspects "Crown Prince of Lordaeron" and "Frostmourne hungers". The more the "Frostmourne hungers" aspect is used to make mr. crown prince behave contrary to being the crown prince, he would need to change that aspect. To "death knight" perhaps, or eventually...


        • Kurt Rauscher
          Yeah, it would require some updating. Boxes on Aspects was back in Fate 2.0. You could check off a box to use an Aspect, and spend a Fate point to uncheck a
          Message 4 of 25 , Jan 22, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Yeah, it would require some updating.  Boxes on Aspects was back in Fate 2.0.  You could check off a box to use an Aspect, and spend a Fate point to uncheck a box.  SotC / Fate 3.x just got rid of that extra interaction step and gave you more Fate points to start with.

            --
            Kurt Rauscher -:- krauscher@...

            "There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature.  Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness." 
             - George Washington, address to Congress, January 8, 1790


            On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:33 PM, John Rudd <johnkzin@...> wrote:



            On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Kurt Rauscher <krauscher@...> wrote:

            Is that what you were thinking of?


            That's the one!

            But the mechanics seem a bit different from current incarnations of FATE (boxes associated with your aspects?)




          • John Rudd
            ... Could probably be done with a stress track. 0) The setting/scene has an aspect related to the temptation of corruption. Anyone can invoke it at any time,
            Message 5 of 25 , Jan 22, 2013
            • 0 Attachment

              On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Kurt Rauscher <krauscher@...> wrote:
              Yeah, it would require some updating.  Boxes on Aspects was back in Fate 2.0.  You could check off a box to use an Aspect, and spend a Fate point to uncheck a box.  SotC / Fate 3.x just got rid of that extra interaction step and gave you more Fate points to start with.


              Could probably be done with a stress track.

              0) The setting/scene has an aspect related to the temptation of corruption.  Anyone can invoke it at any time, for a FP.  The first time you invoke it (no corruption stress, no corruption consequences), you get the doubling effect.
              1) You have a corruption stress track with N boxes to begin with.  It doesn't clear at the end of a scene/milestone/etc.  See #3.
              2) Every time you invoke corruption (including the first time), you gain a corruption stress.
              3) When you fill the highest corruption stress box, you get the double-effect, you gain a corruption consequence (separate from other types of consequence, and only "heals" in special ways, not necessarily at milestones), and then the track immediately clears.  The length of the track also goes up by 1.
              4) Corruption Consequences have the same types as others:  Minor, Major, etc.   They're just separate/extra and are only filled by corruption.
              5) Your number of Corruption Consequences reduces your effective Refresh.  If your effective Refresh < 0, you're "Fallen".  Among other things, when you're Fallen, you no longer get the doubling effect.


              Does that factor in the worry about having extra stress tracks:  it says how/when the track clears, and how/when it increases.  Just have to decide what N is.

            • John Rudd
              Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a
              Message 6 of 25 , Jan 23, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a fate point (a +2, etc.).  What if Darkside/Corruption, even Insanity or Cyber-Psychosis, are just that:

                in a moment of desperation, you take a consequence related to whichever type of corruption is in your setting, in exchange for the "instant Fate Point" you desperately need right then.  And now you've got something that can be compelled.  The more you do it, the more of these consequences you have (and bigger magnitudes), the more you're vulnerable to being further compelled.  Which leads me to a question:

                With invoking, you can only invoke a given Aspect once per roll (round/exchange?  is there a difference there?), but multiple Aspects can be invoked on a single roll.


                What about with compelling?  If someone accumulates multiple corruption consequences, can you sort of "wear down their resistance to temptation" by compelling one after the other ... making them run down on FP as they try to resist temptation?  It may seem dramatically "cheap", but I think it actually fits -- the more consequence you took, the more vulnerable you are to temptation, and the multiple compels embodies that -- multiple consequences means multiple paths to temptation, and the corruption is just running through them all at once.  And, if played out well (by the GM as the voice of temptation), it could actually be dramatically rich, instead of dramatically cheap.


                On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:21 PM, John Rudd <john@...> wrote:

                On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Kurt Rauscher <krauscher@...> wrote:
                Yeah, it would require some updating.  Boxes on Aspects was back in Fate 2.0.  You could check off a box to use an Aspect, and spend a Fate point to uncheck a box.  SotC / Fate 3.x just got rid of that extra interaction step and gave you more Fate points to start with.


                Could probably be done with a stress track.

                0) The setting/scene has an aspect related to the temptation of corruption.  Anyone can invoke it at any time, for a FP.  The first time you invoke it (no corruption stress, no corruption consequences), you get the doubling effect.
                1) You have a corruption stress track with N boxes to begin with.  It doesn't clear at the end of a scene/milestone/etc.  See #3.
                2) Every time you invoke corruption (including the first time), you gain a corruption stress.
                3) When you fill the highest corruption stress box, you get the double-effect, you gain a corruption consequence (separate from other types of consequence, and only "heals" in special ways, not necessarily at milestones), and then the track immediately clears.  The length of the track also goes up by 1.
                4) Corruption Consequences have the same types as others:  Minor, Major, etc.   They're just separate/extra and are only filled by corruption.
                5) Your number of Corruption Consequences reduces your effective Refresh.  If your effective Refresh < 0, you're "Fallen".  Among other things, when you're Fallen, you no longer get the doubling effect.


                Does that factor in the worry about having extra stress tracks:  it says how/when the track clears, and how/when it increases.  Just have to decide what N is.


              • Jeff
                You re thinking of Consequences as Positive Currency, one of my favorite articles from faterpg.com.
                Message 7 of 25 , Jan 24, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  You're thinking of "Consequences as Positive Currency," one of my favorite articles from faterpg.com.


                  That could definitely work well, especially if you differentiate "corruption" consequences in terms of how they get cleared. One interesting side effect is that someone who dips into the dark side could end up as easier to Take Out (long term) because they have less Consequences at their disposal. 


                  On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:04 PM, John Rudd <johnkzin@...> wrote:
                   

                  Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a fate point (a +2, etc.).  What if Darkside/Corruption, even Insanity or Cyber-Psychosis, are just that:
                • Kurt Rauscher
                  That article is very interesting. I rather like some of the implications of it. Thank you for linking it! (And now I have more archives to search!) -- Kurt
                  Message 8 of 25 , Jan 24, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    That article is very interesting.  I rather like some of the implications of it.  Thank you for linking it! (And now I have more archives to search!)

                    --
                    Kurt Rauscher -:- krauscher@...

                    "There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature.  Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness." 
                     - George Washington, address to Congress, January 8, 1790


                    On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jeff <jbradley05@...> wrote:


                    You're thinking of "Consequences as Positive Currency," one of my favorite articles from faterpg.com.


                    That could definitely work well, especially if you differentiate "corruption" consequences in terms of how they get cleared. One interesting side effect is that someone who dips into the dark side could end up as easier to Take Out (long term) because they have less Consequences at their disposal. 


                    On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:04 PM, John Rudd <johnkzin@...> wrote:
                     

                    Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a fate point (a +2, etc.).  What if Darkside/Corruption, even Insanity or Cyber-Psychosis, are just that:



                  • John Sussenberger
                    I really like this idea and I m going to try it in my Dresden game next week. Sent from my iPhone
                    Message 9 of 25 , Jan 24, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I really like this idea and I'm going to try it in my Dresden game next week.

                      Sent from my iPhone

                      On Jan 24, 2013, at 5:21 PM, Kurt Rauscher <krauscher@...> wrote:

                       

                      That article is very interesting.  I rather like some of the implications of it.  Thank you for linking it! (And now I have more archives to search!)

                      --
                      Kurt Rauscher -:- krauscher@...

                      "There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature.  Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness." 
                       - George Washington, address to Congress, January 8, 1790


                      On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jeff <jbradley05@...> wrote:


                      You're thinking of "Consequences as Positive Currency," one of my favorite articles from faterpg.com.


                      That could definitely work well, especially if you differentiate "corruption" consequences in terms of how they get cleared. One interesting side effect is that someone who dips into the dark side could end up as easier to Take Out (long term) because they have less Consequences at their disposal. 


                      On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:04 PM, John Rudd <johnkzin@...> wrote:
                       

                      Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a fate point (a +2, etc.).  What if Darkside/Corruption, even Insanity or Cyber-Psychosis, are just that:



                    • John Rudd
                      That s the one! Thank you for the link!
                      Message 10 of 25 , Jan 24, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        That's the one!  Thank you for the link!



                        On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Jeff <jbradley05@...> wrote:
                         

                        You're thinking of "Consequences as Positive Currency," one of my favorite articles from faterpg.com.


                        That could definitely work well, especially if you differentiate "corruption" consequences in terms of how they get cleared. One interesting side effect is that someone who dips into the dark side could end up as easier to Take Out (long term) because they have less Consequences at their disposal. 


                        On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:04 PM, John Rudd <johnkzin@...> wrote:
                         

                        Someone said something at one point (on the list, in a different thread) about taking consequences instead of spending fate points, to get the benefit of a fate point (a +2, etc.).  What if Darkside/Corruption, even Insanity or Cyber-Psychosis, are just that:


                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.