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

Thinking about qualities

Expand Messages
  • John McMullen
    Having tried playing the new version of the game, what I noticed was that the new structure for qualities requires a different way of thinking. Before, when
    Message 1 of 7 , Aug 5 11:42 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Having tried playing the new version of the game, what I noticed was that the new structure for qualities requires a different way of thinking.

      Before, when there were qualities and challenges, it was okay to have aspects that were only good in one direction. Now, they pretty much have to be good in both.

      And in both cases, tagging is important: you want a quality that you can tag to make things work. (Which is part of why I wanted to play for someone else, because that tends to be a part I gloss over when I'm GMing. It's good to be reminded of the ways in which I'm deviating from the rules.)

      There are the articles on writing good aspects for Fate, and I remember reading them. But how would you summarize advice on writing qualities for your players or for other players?

      (I'll be posting this to both the ICONS Yahoo Group and to the G+ group.)
       
      John McMullen (Searching for a .sig--drat, it's under the couch)
      jhmcmullen@...  
    • Soylent Green
      I was never fond of the split between good and bad Aspects in classic ICONS and I never really enforced it. Likewise I don t plan to enforce the new limit of
      Message 2 of 7 , Aug 6 1:26 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        I was never fond of the split between good and bad Aspects in classic ICONS and I never really enforced it. Likewise I don't plan to enforce the new limit of three Aspects (I think that's how Assembled works). The character I am currently playing has 9 Aspects. It's more Aspects than I usually have and in fairness and I can see places where I could combine a couple and there may even be one or two that never come up. But I feel they all add nuance to the character definition and synthesizing the 9 Aspect into 3 would be the cinematic equivalent from colour to black and white. 

        I think there will always be a certain a tension with Fate between how much you want personal Aspects to act as descriptors, a quick, punchy way to communicate your character, and how much you want them to act like classic advantages/disadvantages with rigorous definition and the focus on mechanical effectiveness. Clearly they are a bit of both but different implementations of Fate and different groups will display a bias towards one or the other. I am firmly in the Aspects as descriptors camps so when for me right number of Aspects for a character is  as many Aspects as that character needs.

        This is relevant to your initial point because the fewer Aspects you allow the more their mechanical effectiveness is going to matter. If you have a lot of Aspects you have a mix of largely positive, mostly negative, nicely doubled-edged and useless but still fun ones. With fewer slots you have to be more ruthless.

        As for general advice for coming up with Aspects, the two key questions I invite players to think of are "What you make your character go that extra mile" and "What would induce your character to knowingly make a poor decision." That tends to be backed by "Just write down whatever sounds fun and interesting, you can change it later."



        To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
        From: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:42:02 -0700
        Subject: [icons-rpg] Thinking about qualities

         
        Having tried playing the new version of the game, what I noticed was that the new structure for qualities requires a different way of thinking.

        Before, when there were qualities and challenges, it was okay to have aspects that were only good in one direction. Now, they pretty much have to be good in both.

        And in both cases, tagging is important: you want a quality that you can tag to make things work. (Which is part of why I wanted to play for someone else, because that tends to be a part I gloss over when I'm GMing. It's good to be reminded of the ways in which I'm deviating from the rules.)

        There are the articles on writing good aspects for Fate, and I remember reading them. But how would you summarize advice on writing qualities for your players or for other players?

        (I'll be posting this to both the ICONS Yahoo Group and to the G+ group.)
         
        John McMullen (Searching for a .sig--drat, it's under the couch)
        jhmcmullen@...  

      • Jon Lang
        Folding Challenges into Qualities doesn t mean that, in practice, every Quality needs to be envisioned doing both bonuses and drawbacks. If you want to create
        Message 3 of 7 , Aug 6 4:43 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Folding Challenges into Qualities doesn't mean that, in practice, every Quality needs to be envisioned doing both bonuses and drawbacks.  If you want to create a Quality that's designed to fill the role that a Challenge used to fill, you can.  In fact, Fate Core suggests that one of the Aspects should be used to define a Trouble, which is, in effect, a Challenge.  The only difference is that if a player gets creative and comes up with a way that he might benefit from a Quality that was designed to serve as a Challenge, there's no longer anything in the rules saying "you can't do that."  Likewise, if you want to, you can design a Quality that you can't ever envision being used to make things harder for your character: you only ever envision spending Determination on it to activate bonuses, never earning Determination from the trouble it doesn't cause.  But again, there's nothing in the rules that forbids you from using it to earn Determination if you think of a way to do so. 

          In short, don't worry too much if some of your Qualities seem biased toward spending Determination and others seem biased toward earning Determination; you should only start getting concerned if all of them seem biased in the same way.  A character who has all of his Qualities biased toward spending Determination will quickly run out of Determination (unless the player gets creative as mentioned before), and a character who has all of his Qualities biased toward earning Determination will constantly be getting in over his head earning Determination with few options for spending Determination to get out of those messes.  Even there, the ability to spend Determination on what Fate Core calls Situational Aspects means that he'll probably have plenty to spend his Determination on. 


          To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
          From: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:42:02 -0700
          Subject: [icons-rpg] Thinking about qualities


           
          Having tried playing the new version of the game, what I noticed was that the new structure for qualities requires a different way of thinking.

          Before, when there were qualities and challenges, it was okay to have aspects that were only good in one direction. Now, they pretty much have to be good in both.

          And in both cases, tagging is important: you want a quality that you can tag to make things work. (Which is part of why I wanted to play for someone else, because that tends to be a part I gloss over when I'm GMing. It's good to be reminded of the ways in which I'm deviating from the rules.)

          There are the articles on writing good aspects for Fate, and I remember reading them. But how would you summarize advice on writing qualities for your players or for other players?

          (I'll be posting this to both the ICONS Yahoo Group and to the G+ group.)
           
          John McMullen (Searching for a .sig--drat, it's under the couch)
          jhmcmullen@...  

          --
          Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
        • Matthew Pulido
          Looking at the weight benchmarks on page 13 of Assembled Edition. I m assuming the jet on 8 is a passenger liner and not a fighter jet. A fighter jet would
          Message 4 of 7 , Aug 7 8:55 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Looking at the weight benchmarks on page 13 of Assembled Edition. I'm assuming the jet on 8 is a passenger liner and not a fighter jet. A fighter jet would probably be more like a 7, am I right?

            Talison
          • Gaston Gosselin
            If it matters that much in your game, then sure. :) From: Matthew Pulido talisonpulido@gmail.com [icons-rpg] Reply-To:
            Message 5 of 7 , Aug 7 9:07 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              If it matters that much in your game, then sure. :)

              From: "Matthew Pulido talisonpulido@... [icons-rpg]" <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
              Reply-To: <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
              Date: Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 11:55 AM
              To: "icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com" <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
              Subject: [icons-rpg] Weight Benchmarks

               

              Looking at the weight benchmarks on page 13 of Assembled Edition. I'm assuming the jet on 8 is a passenger liner and not a fighter jet. A fighter jet would probably be more like a 7, am I right?

              Talison

            • Matthew Pulido
              The other Benchmark at 8 is a train and I just don t see a fighter jet as weighing as much as a train. I have a character who describes herself as being as
              Message 6 of 7 , Aug 7 9:14 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                The other Benchmark at 8 is a train and I just don't see a fighter jet as weighing as much as a train. 

                I have a character who describes herself as being as fast as a fighter jet and strong enough to lift one, so it does matter. 

                Talison

                Sent from my iPhone

                On Aug 7, 2014, at 11:07 AM, "Gaston Gosselin jahnoth@... [icons-rpg]" <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                 

                If it matters that much in your game, then sure. :)

                From: "Matthew Pulido talisonpulido@... [icons-rpg]" <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
                Reply-To: <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
                Date: Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 11:55 AM
                To: "icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com" <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com>
                Subject: [icons-rpg] Weight Benchmarks

                 

                Looking at the weight benchmarks on page 13 of Assembled Edition. I'm assuming the jet on 8 is a passenger liner and not a fighter jet. A fighter jet would probably be more like a 7, am I right?

                Talison

              • Michael Mendoza
                This sounds like a good assessment to me. On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Matthew Pulido talisonpulido@gmail.com ... -- Michael Mendoza mmdozer@gmail.com
                Message 7 of 7 , Aug 7 3:18 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  This sounds like a good assessment to me.


                  On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Matthew Pulido talisonpulido@... [icons-rpg] <icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                   

                  Looking at the weight benchmarks on page 13 of Assembled Edition. I'm assuming the jet on 8 is a passenger liner and not a fighter jet. A fighter jet would probably be more like a 7, am I right?

                  Talison




                  --
                  Michael Mendoza
                  mmdozer@...
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.