Fred's supplementary questions (Was: Re: [FateRPG] Lunch is Dangerous)
- Touching on several questions ...
First, as many have mentioned, a damage track should be appropriate
to the genre you're emulating, just like every other aspect of the
In a pulp game, this means mooks go down and PCs stay up. Same with
Hong Kong action games.
In grittier combat games, you can leave the damage as-is, or even
*increase* the lethality of the Death Spiral by increasing the
penalties (though I've not playtested this). The damage system works
well, however--it's by no means broken.
But those penalties can sure add up.
Ultimately, I like the Wound aspect system. This allows the players
and GM to collaboratively make use of wounds to enhance game play
beyond combat or simple penalties. In addition, it makes it easier to
emulate the various genres.
For example, in an HK film, a character can get shot up pretty badly,
beaten to a pulp, etc. However, despite the mass of bandages and
wounds, the character's effectiveness doesn't seem diminished in the
following scenes. Thus, the GM could simply leave the wound aspects
on the character as a reminder, not invoking them or having them
penalize the player unless / until it's dramatically appropriate.
Wound aspects also allow for invocation by players, thus arguably
adding more story potential, as has been noted previously on this
--- In FateRPG@yahoogroups.com, Fred Hicks <iago@i...> wrote:
> There's another part of the question that Rob's asking
> here -- having to do with the *severity* of Death Spirals.
> In Fate, as we currently have it, the Spiral can layer on
> pretty thick --
> Clipped (-1 for the next action)
> Hurt (-1 for the scene)
> Injured x 2 (-1 for the scene, twice)
> Totalling up (deliberately) to a -4 when it's all raining
> down on your head.
> So part of the question that arises here is, is this too
> much of a spiral?
> Would a less severe one (frex, a simple, single 'Wounded'
> penalty, potentially with the short burst of an additional
> 'Clipped' kind of thing showing up) still get you the
> effect you like about it?
> How much of the 'spiral' is about the roll-over of boxes
> getting filled up, versus the penalties, from your
> On Mon, 07 Feb 2005, Mesentery wrote:
> > Here's another vote for Death Spirals. I like the way that
> > they give you two incentives to get out of combat when
> > you're wounded: not only are you closer to death, but
> > you're also less effective. They also allow a way to tell
> > if someone's hurt in addition to descriptions by the GM.
> > I like different kinds of Death Spirals for different
> > genres. For a pulp or Hong Kong action film feel, don't
> > give penalties until the character is badly hurt, while
> > for something more "realistic" and dangerous start giving
> > out penalties once the character has taken any damage at
> > all.
> Fred Hicks * "Curse you iago and your fast fingers!" - Rob Donoghue
> Co-Author of Fate - Author of Pace - Jim-Butcher.Com Webmaster -
> The Dresden Files Roleplaying Game - Coming in 2006
- Sorry missed responding to this earlier.
>From: "Darren Hill" <rpglists@...>resolution. So
>On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 12:22:52 -0600, Mike Holmes
> > I'll take a different tac here entirely. I use conflict
> > theremoot.
> > is no accumulation of penalties in a contest. So the question is
>No. Conflict resolution allows for you to use this simpler method. I
>Is this a requirement for conflict resolution?
don't really care about the "accumulation of penalties" in play. I'd
rather just have the inputs, roll a result, and narrate whatever I
want that matches the mechanical outcome.
>I don't see off-hand whypenalties, as
>you couldn't have conflict resolution without accumulating
>the conflict swings one way.Well, conflict resolution (called scene resolution in FATE) just gets
you past all of that in-between mechanical detail. Personally, I
don't think that such systems that provide these "swings" often
really do provide much, I find that the interesting stuff happens
with the decisions made before or after the die rolls mostly as
opposed to round to round. The round to round stuff is just extra
steps to get to the outcome which is the fun part, for me.
Now, if you wanted to match, say, Hero Quest, and have a method where
you had just rising tension, but no penalties until the outcome? Then
I'd advocate an exchange system like somebody proposed where there is
no "death spiral" and you just measure "Boxes" or something towards
success. Nobody gets any lasting penalties until the actual outcome.
This is the same as the overall conflict resolution, except that it
breaks down the contest into smaller bits for description back and
forth (which seems to be what people are looking for).
No it doesn't allow for lasting injuries to be sustained during a
contest. I think that in dramatic stuff, and even in real life, such
are rare to non-existent. For example, in fights people simply don't
whittle each other down with increasingly worse and worse injuries.
Even in Kung Fu fights, the hits really don't have any lasting
effect, and can totally be considered "situational". In fact that's
the only way I consider to be "accurate" for doing such a fight.