GURPs vs FATE

[Trippy]

Character creation isnt part of the game, and no game of any sense is going to include an entire catalogue of advantages/disadvantages, the GM is going to pick out the few that are appropriate to the game itself. The three different types of rolls all work the same, ust one is made by the player, one by the GM, and one the result is compared to a chart. And the GM is going to handle the modifiers to a roll.

A player can learn all of that stuff, but there's no necessity in any way in order for them to play the game and make meaningful choices.

Character generation is absolutely part of the game, and one of the first interfaces new players have with any RPG. The design of a character generation system sets out the platform for how the game is run from then on and defines the roles they play. Try taking Attribute Auctions out of Amber, and you are no longer playing Amber. Take points spend out of GURPS and you are no longer playing GURPS. The meaningful choices in a game start with character generation - and unless you understand the implementation in gameplay of what you are buying, then you don’t know what you are buying and that takes a learning curve like anything else.

The advantage to a new player when taking up a game like Fate is that there aren’t huge lists of traits, and indeed some of them (Aspects) are self defined. The fate point economy amounts to a few regulated interactions which are easy to learn about and understand as you go - you don’t even have to define everything until you choose to during game play. Compared to GURPS, Fate is an easy game to learn how to play. The same is true of PbtA games where everything is literally written down for you in a Playbook.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I'll just say that as a GM, I'd much rather run a game for a player new to Fate that knows nothing and handle all the rules for them, than to play a game of GURPS where the player knows absolutely nothing and I have to handle all the rules for them.

Handling all the rules for every player in a GURPS game just sounds like a nightmare to me.

 

[TristramEvans]

But, so what? This whole notion of 'player facing’ being some sort of rules overreach that declassifies a game as being a ‘Traditional RPG’ is totally arbitrary.

It's not arbitrary just because its elementary. But as I said at the very beginning, this has nothing to do with Tradiitional vs Narrative games, that's an entirely different subject.

It's no more complex an innovation than points spend at character generation is, or diceless play is, or personality traits, or having a universal table to apply. These are all just different conventions from different RPGs that different participants can grok or not. But it doesn’t mean they are completely unrelated types of game all of a sudden.

"Complex innovation" has nothing to do with anything that I've said, and I have no idea what you mean by "completely unrelated types of games", the only type of games I've talked about are RPGs.

 

[TristramEvans]

I'll just say that as a GM, I'd much rather run a game for a player new to Fate that knows nothing and handle all the rules for them, than to play a game of GURPS where the player knows absolutely nothing and I have to handle all the rules for them.

Handling all the rules for every player in a GURPS game just sounds like a nightmare to me.

I'd rather run some version of Fate (as long as it wasn't published by Fred Hicks) than GURPs as well. Not because of complexity, I just find GURPs boring....completely flavourless.

 

[Trippy]

It's not arbitrary just because its elementary. But as I said at the very beginning, this has nothing to do with Tradiitional vs Narrative games, that's an entirely different subject.


"Complex innovation" has nothing to do with anything that I've said, and I have no idea what you mean by "completely unrelated types of games", the only type of games I've talked about are RPGs.

Is ‘arbitrary’ somehow opposed to the meaning of ‘elementary’? What does this statement mean anyway? By ‘elementary’ do you mean the core mechanic of the game? If so, so what? It doesn’t mean that this element doesn’t lead to arbitrary statements of whether one game is categorically different to another or whether one game is easier to learn than another.

You have chosen to differentiate Fate over a list of other ‘traditional RPGs’ and expressed that it would be more complex for somebody to explain to a new player about how that game operates. The follow on from this is that this qualifies it as another type of game compared to these others.

Fate is a) not more complex to introduce than any other game on your list and b) still fundamentally a role playing game with the same structure (GM + Players + dice to adjudicate outcomes of conflict or task resolution) as the others. Whether a game puts emphasis on player-facing or what-have-you is just one aspect of a game’s design, and not a defining feature that categorises them as fundamentally different to other RPGs.

 

[Trippy]

No,, but they're not synonyms.




What? No. I mean that saying a game system's complexity is "player facing" or "GM facing" are self-evidident distinctions, which isn't arbitrary.




I don't understand what you're saying. You claimed I made an arbitrary distinction, I didn't. I made an obvious statement, to put it simpler:

"A game that requires a player to comprehend more rules to play isn't harder to learn than a game that requires a player to be aware of more rules"

That's an elementary statement, its not an arbitrary one. It doesn't "lead to" arbitrary statements, that doesn't make any sense as a concept. By definition, nothing can lead to an arbitrary statement, or the statement wouldn't be arbitrary.




No I didnt. You've introduced that into the conversation. I said this has nothing to do with defining something as a Narrative RPG or Storygame.




Um, no. You said you think Fate would be easier for players to earn coming from D&D than GURPs and I disagreed with that assertion. You haven't actually so far provided an argument to support that assertion. And now you're saying that means that it "qualifies as another type of game"? What? I don't follow that line of reasoning at all.



False. But I've already stated my reasoning why, you haven't made any argument in opposition to that. So...it seems like you are making that declaration arbitrarily.



Doesn't matter since no one has disputed that.

I didn’t say ‘elementary’ and ‘arbitrary’ were symonyns. I am saying that being one of them doesn’t disqualify the other, and indeed it’s an irrelevance.

Having a game being random generation or points-buy are also self evident distinctions, but this doesn’t qualify one as being categorically different to the other. They both remain RPGs. Ditto ‘player facing' vs ‘GM facing’.

Stating "A game that requires a player to comprehend more rules to play isn't harder to learn than a game that requires a player to be aware of more rules” is not only untrue - it is completely arbitrary if made as a statement that is supposedly “obvious”. I’d also say it’s an arbitrary distinction between something a player can ‘comprehend’ as opposed to being ‘aware’ of. What does this mean, really?

You have used the term ’traditional’ to describe other games, including the examples given that are not Fate on this thread. You asked us all to "acknowledge that certain games are significant shifts from the traditional set up of play for RPGs’. So *you* introduced this into the conversation - not me. Are you backing out of this statement? We have an entire thread making reference to ’story games’ and your own posts introducing this thread that very much started to define Narrative RPGs and story games, so you can't claim that these more recent comments are outside of this context. You established the context of everything being debated about in this thread.

And yes, I said Fate is easier for D&D players to adopt than GURPS for reasons given above about points buy character generation, about calculations, about different types of dice rolls, about table referencing, about copious amounts of applied modifiers. Just because you dismiss arguments out of hand (“character generation isn’t part of the game”) doesn’t mean they haven’t been made.

Moreover, could you elaborate on why you think Fate is more complex to introduce than GURPS? Your arguments at this point seem to be pretty much this:

‘Invoking Aspects, Rerolls, Compels, Refusing Compels, Activating Stunts, Narrative Editing’ is really, really complex for any D&D player to comprehend by comparison to GURPS (and other games) which is simply 'roll under with 3D6’ (if we ignore everything else that could be considered complex about it).

Sorry, that doesn’t wash as a conclusive argument because Fate’s ‘complexities’ amount to a few regular and well defined procedures in the game that can be introduced at any rate you like, whereas GURPS' sheer volume of traits, and case specific rules based upon them, can take a long time to absorb and implement.

 

[Stevethulhu]

I just find GURPs boring....completely flavourless.

I've said for decades that GURPS is white rice. By itself, dull and chewy. But with the right meat and sauce, part of a delicious meal.

You just have to learn how to cook with it.

 

[CRKrueger]

Yes, but that is not the whole of the game is it? GURPS is spending hours pouring over a catalogue of traits and then carefully balancing out a limited number of points from a pool, and then calculating a bunch of other traits from that or choosing a template full of TLAs. GURPS is three different types of rolls, including reaction rolls, rolling low (aside from damage and reaction rolls), table referencing, trait specific rules, tactical options and a whole bunch of modifiers. GURPS is plenty complex for a player shifting from D&D for the first time. Don’t even start me on Champions.

The idea that simply because Fate introduces Aspects and a Fate point economy it is somehow an overreach of comprehension compared to learning other games is just not a reality for plenty of gamers out there and, regardless, it is still not a reason to categorize it as an entirely new type of game or experience.

Point me to the post, anywhere, where someone says, try as I might, I just can’t comprehend GURPS or HERO.
Too many options, sure.
Too complex a powers creation system, sure.
Don’t like 3d6, sure.
Don’t like point buy, sure.
Build your own game, sure.
Can’t get my head around it? Nope.

Fate gets so many “Can’t get my head around it” posts and comments, it’s famous for it.

It’s not doing anything differently though, there’s nothing else going on there.

 

[Trippy]

Point me to the post, anywhere, where someone says, try as I might, I just can’t comprehend GURPS or HERO.
Too many options, sure.
Too complex a powers creation system, sure.
Don’t like 3d6, sure.
Don’t like point buy, sure.
Build your own game, sure.
Can’t get my head around it? Nope.

Fate gets so many “Can’t get my head around it” posts and comments, it’s famous for it.

It’s not doing anything differently though, there’s nothing else going on there.

Most of those comments come from a tiny segment of the gaming population though, and it is usually prefigured on the grounds that they don’t like it either.

If you 'can't get your head around Fate' then it says more about the person than the game system. It is not a complicated game system.

 

[robertsconley]

If you 'can't get your head around Fate' then it says more about the person than the game system. It is not a complicated game system.

From personal experience how to use the Fate point economy is not intuitive to many. The rest of it is straight forward.

 

[Ravenswing]

I've said for decades that GURPS is white rice. By itself, dull and chewy. But with the right meat and sauce, part of a delicious meal.

You just have to learn how to cook with it.

And the "meal" isn't the tool set. It's the setting, and the presentation, and the gameplay.

I've always found the notion that GURPS is "boring" or "colorless" to be not only bizarre, but pointless. What in the merry hell does that have to do with gameplay? It's like building a house. What I want is for the house to look nice. Not only do I not give a damn whether the hammer is chased with gold and inlaid with jade, or the nails are solid silver, or the saw is painted with a motif from Matisse, but that irrelevant claptrap is like to get in the way of my construction. Take World of Darkness, for instance: a system where damn near every game element carries a nearly-impenetrable name, dripping with obscure jargon. I really don't want my game sessions interrupted every few minutes by players muttering "Hang on, what's "Auspex" mean again?"

What makes my game sessions colorful (I hope, anyway) is my ability as a face and voice actor, how nimble I am to react to what the players do, the degree of agency I accord them, how well I put scenarios together. What makes my setting memorable (I hope, anyway) is the density of my preparation, the time I put into it, its fidelity and consistency. GURPS is just the tool kit I use to do that.

How that is in the least degree enhanced just because the game system assigns breezy, funky, flaky names to skills or traits I don't for the life of me understand.

 

[TristramEvans]

And the "meal" isn't the tool set. It's the setting, and the presentation, and the gameplay.

I've always found the notion that GURPS is "boring" or "colorless" to be not only bizarre, but pointless. What in the merry hell does that have to do with gameplay?

Explaining an aesthetic taste to someone else is next to impossible. I find GURP's system "flavourless". I use that term as the closest approximation or analogy, since we're not literally talking abut anything olfactory. I'm afraid though, if it's not an analogy a person grasps from their own aesthetic experience that our language lacks the proper verbage to describe the actual feeling, which is in regards to taste as a personal preference.

 

[David Johansen]

I do build the characters for new GURPS players. I hand out a lot of pre-gens. Sometimes I'll just pass out a list of character descriptions like "Space Hero", "Princess", and "Entertainer" but make the characters interesting, the "Space Hero" is an actor with a high strength score and alcoholism. The "Princess" is a high powered corporate executive. The "Entertainer" is a stripper with wings who's a surgically altered alien spy. That kind of thing. One of the things that killed my GURPS Marvel campaign a couple years ago was the need to churn out characters for new players just about every session.

I would argue that character creation is setup but still part of the game, just as much as shuffling and dealing the cards, deploying units, and picking which Monopoly piece you'll use and getting that first two hundred dollars are part of the game.

GURPS isn't white rice, it's lentils. You have to soak it overnight or get it out of a can but it takes on the flavor of whatever you cook it with.

 

[Stevethulhu]

Most of those comments come from a tiny segment of the gaming population though, and it is usually prefigured on the grounds that they don’t like it either.

If you 'can't get your head around Fate' then it says more about the person than the game system. It is not a complicated game system.

There are no stupid questions, only stupid people.

Explaining an aesthetic taste to someone else is next to impossible. I find GURP's system "flavourless". I use that term as the closest approximation or analogy, since we're not literally talking abut anything olfactory. I'm afraid though, if it's not an analogy a person grasps from their own aesthetic experience that our language lacks the proper verbage to describe the actual feeling, which is in regards to taste as a personal preference.

I totally get not liking GURPS. As much as iime it I find it a terrible system for character advancement.

 

[chuckdee]

but, aside from maybe some Avantage/Disadvantage subsystems (that a GM will curate to fit their specific game), all of that complexity is GM-facing. A player doesn't need to know or understand it. And because GURPs is so dogmatically realworld emulationist, there's no divide between the player making a choice that would be "correct" or optimal in real life and the results of the system (which is actually the main reason GURPs sucks at Supers as a genre).

The distinguishing between the different actions that you can take is totally player facing and affects those die rolls. Step, Ready, Move, etc... combat can get pretty crunchy pretty fast.

This is a great breakdown of combat - there's a lot going on.

GURPS Combat Notes 1: Basics of Maneuvers, Attack, Defense, Injury, and Grappling

Disclaimer. This is a rather simple flow chart. Can you imagine if I added the critical hit, miss, and defense critical success operators?! ...

www.gameinthebrain.com

I love GURPS. But the simulation of combat is heavy.

 

[robertsconley]

GURPS is mallable can it range from lite to extremely detailed. Moreso than most RPGs what GURPS is depends on who refereeing it for you. I tended to focus on culling the various lists to support what I did with the Majestic Wilderlands which echoed the fantasy medieval genre of D&D. A campaign started with those lists and the rulebook was referenced for details for the option.

This write up of a Myrmidon of Set (think Lawful Evil Paladin) is representative of what I am talking about. In practice I didn't have a whole lot of these. What I did most of time is talked to the players who outlined their character. I would then prepare notes like the Myrmidon but tailored to highlight the options for what they wanted to play. The player would then complete most of their character from the notes and the refer to the culled lists for other options.

Using the main rulebooks was and is a recipe for disaster with 90% of the hobbyists out there. When I run GURPS again it will be with stuff that I attached to this post. In essence develop my own GURPS Majestic Wilderlands out of the core rulebooks.

 

[chuckdee]

I do the same- I tailor my GURPS experience to what I want to portray. In fact, I do that with almost 100% of the games that I run. However, when talking about the game, is the complexity or what has to be explained based on what the GM has done? Or is it based on the base vanilla implementation of the rules system?

It's quite similar to the talk about definitions in these threads- if you don't start at the same place, you'll end up talking past each other.

 

[TristramEvans]

I do the same- I tailor my GURPS experience to what I want to portray. In fact, I do that with almost 100% of the games that I run. However, when talking about the game, is the complexity or what has to be explained based on what the GM has done? Or is it based on the base vanilla implementation of the rules system?

GURPs is a Toolkit by design. I think the closest one can reasonably come to a Vanilla Implementation of the system is the GURPs Lite document that powers several stand-alone games (Discworld, Hellboy, etc).

 

[robertsconley]

The distinguishing between the different actions that you can take is totally player facing and affects those die rolls. Step, Ready, Move, etc... combat can get pretty crunchy pretty fast.

This is a great breakdown of combat - there's a lot going on.

GURPS Combat Notes 1: Basics of Maneuvers, Attack, Defense, Injury, and Grappling

Disclaimer. This is a rather simple flow chart. Can you imagine if I added the critical hit, miss, and defense critical success operators?! ...

www.gameinthebrain.com

I love GURPS. But the simulation of combat is heavy.

There are a lite options the simplest of which is to use opposed combat skill rolls. But it not any more complex than D&D 4e or specific D&D 5e options (Fighter:Battlemaster).

As I posted here in Basic GURPS Combat

• You roll 3d6 less than or equal to your skill.
• If you hit, the defender most of the time get to make a defense roll picking either a parry, a block, or a dodge.
• If the defender succeeds that it for the attack.
• If the defender fails you roll damage and subtract the Damage Resistance of the armor the defender is wearing. Any damage that get through may be multiplied if you do cutting (1.5x) or impaling damage (2x)
• The defender has a number of hit points based on his Strength. If he take more than 1/2 HP in one shot he could wind up stunned. If he below 1/3 HP then his dodge and movement are cut. If he below zero then he must roll his Health or below or fall unconscious. If he is below -HP then a failed Health roll could mean death.

The Maneuvers amount to each character being able to do one thing and one thing only. You can move, or take a 3 foot step and do something else. The crucial ones are Move, Chang Posture*, Attack, Ready, Aim and for spell casters Concentrate. The rest our situational.

*It take two second or two turns to stand from a prone position. Lying down -> to crouch -> Standing.

Of course being GURPS there are options galore. With GURPS Martial Arts and other books in play like Technical Grappling. You could deep into the rabbit-hole of details with GURPS. But on the other hand you can stop at any points make a cheat sheet of the things you want to deal with in combat and be done with this. For example you don't have to use hit location. Just consider all attack torso shots and that is that. According you don't have to use armor pieces.

On the flip side the deep details of GURPS combat flow naturally from how things work in life. There very little in the way of abstraction. And while the mass of option is daunting the specific details are usually well-written and quite playable. I was able to create cheat sheets for players who are not into the learning the entire mass of details to allow them play warrior with specific fighting styles.

What throws people off the most is not the combat procedure but the one second combat round. More specifically the fact you can do one thing and one thing only each round. Move or do something and take a step.

 

[Endless Flight]

Is GURPS the TOFU of the RPG universe?

 

[robertsconley]

I do the same- I tailor my GURPS experience to what I want to portray. In fact, I do that with almost 100% of the games that I run. However, when talking about the game, is the complexity or what has to be explained based on what the GM has done? Or is it based on the base vanilla implementation of the rules system?

The complexity is selectable as with the other details. And it is selectable in different area. For example you can run combat as contest of engineering and then buy GURPS Social Engineering for it details on using social skills.

It's quite similar to the talk about definitions in these threads- if you don't start at the same place, you'll end up talking past each other.

Just remember GURPS is a swiss army knife. There is a one page version, a handful of pages versions, the two core rulebook version with different levels therein, and then there are the supplements. Some of which cover the same subject matter in different ways. For example Martial Arts and/orTechnical Grappling. GURPS Magic and/or GURPS Thaumatology and/or GURPS Ritual Path Magic.

It all GURPS so you always have to start from first principle and explain you specifically used GURPS to help others make sense of the experience. You can't just say I played GURPS, it X, and have it make sense.

TristramEvans said that he felt GURPS was bland and flavorless. Why is that? Did the group sit down with just the two corebook to suss it out. Was the core rulebooks plus some supplements. And so on. I could guess by the feedback I gotten over the years. But it would be just a guess and an assumption with all that entails.

 

[CRKrueger]

...and thread #2 discussion topic shut down through distraction and diverted.

No one was mean though so, whew! Mission Accomplished!

 

[Ladybird]

Point me to the post, anywhere, where someone says, try as I might, I just can’t comprehend GURPS or HERO.
Too many options, sure.
Too complex a powers creation system, sure.
Don’t like 3d6, sure.
Don’t like point buy, sure.
Build your own game, sure.
Can’t get my head around it? Nope.

Fate gets so many “Can’t get my head around it” posts and comments, it’s famous for it.

It’s not doing anything differently though, there’s nothing else going on there.

Fate is also (Relatively) new and being more actively supported / developed for and thus attracting new-to-it players and more general discussion, whereas GURPS and HERO aren't really attracting many new-to-it players any more and their innovations - particularly their open-ness in character generation - have now became almost standard parts of RPG design and their fanbases are quieter and more centralised.

Must be the aspects though, there’s nothing else going on there.

 

[TristramEvans]

...and thread #2 discussion topic shut down through distraction and diverted.

No one was mean though so, whew! Mission Accomplished!

I didn't want to deal with 2 Mod+ threads extant at the same time, but I couldnt find a good justification in the moment to shut it down, so Endless came up with the idea of removing the Mod+ tag.

But this thread was effectively dead in the water a while back.

I mean...not that I had any expectations for an "RPG vs Storygame" thread, it was more an attempt to contain the argument in one place.

At least now you're free to say what you like about it, without having to worry about the thread rules.

 

[CRKrueger]

Fate is also (Relatively) new and being more actively supported / developed for and thus attracting new-to-it players and more general discussion, whereas GURPS and HERO aren't really attracting many new-to-it players any more and their innovations - particularly their open-ness in character generation - have now became almost standard parts of RPG design and their fanbases are quieter and more centralised.

Must be the aspects though, there’s nothing else going on there.

Yeah, it’s all brand new players who just started RPGs that are posting to forums about not growing Fate. Thanks, I needed that one.

S’ok, you represented, that’s good enough. I know your heart’s not in this one.

 

[CRKrueger]

I didn't want to deal with 2 Mod+ threads extant at the same time, but I couldnt find a good justification in the moment to shut it down, so Endless came up with the idea of removing the Mod+ tag.

But this thread was effectively dead in the water a while back.

I mean...not that I had any expectations for an "RPG vs Storygame" thread, it was more an attempt to contain the argument in one place.

At least now you're free to say what you like about it, without having to worry about the thread rules.

What’s there to say? Anything not espousing ridiculous orthodoxy demanding the lack of any qualifiers or definitions in RPGs will be spammed off the board by a concerted block of posters. I’ve completely lost all patience for the bullshit which has made it easy to play the man, not the ball to the point where a discussion with clearly and provably outlandish claims by Justin becomes yet another attempt to kick me off the island.

I mean, come on. Fate has elements about it that make it harder to grok than GURPS (or Traveller or any game not so strongly and abstractly narrative. THIS is controversial. That is where they’re going to the mattresses, the hill they’re gonna die on, despite Fate being famous for the number of people that don’t get it (all new players, god I still can’t even fathom that one). At a local FLGS, Fate’s literally known as ”the game no one gets”. Shit, at this point, it seems like they object no matter how ridiculous because they can, and they know it will stick. Just keep repeating the same lie until it becomes the truth.

Politics is a de jur ban, but there are other emerging, effective, de facto topic bans here. If they were in the open, that would be one thing. That they’re hidden, however, is increasingly hard to take. Outnumbered, eh no worries. Outnumbered and outgunned, that’s Tuesday. Tilt the Rules of Engagement to favor those...maybe I’m getting too old.

Too much other bad shit going on in meatspace for me to deal with any other frustration. Maybe I’ll catch up on some videogames for a while.

Don’t worry, I’m not ragequitting, anyone who ragequits gets Powers Boothe, even me.

To all those about to unload...go fuck yourselves.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Isn't there some level of appeal or attraction or connection to a rules system that's a big factor here? What I mean is that I have no doubt that I could learn and either play or run GURPS. I've never properly done so, though, because the few times I've played it, there was nothing about it that appealed to me. Anytime I've tried to read a GURPS book, anything with the mechanics just makes my eyes cross. I simply don't care enough to learn it.

If someone were to try and help me learn it, they may have their work cut out for them because I already have a negative take, so they'd be starting at a disadvantage.

So far, the same is true of FATE.....I haven't actually played it, I've only perused the rules. I have no doubt that I can understand it, but there's nothing about it that has hooked me and makes me do more than peruse it, let alone consider running it. There's nothing about it that makes me think "okay, that would be a cool way to do such and such" or anything like that.

Some folks may find something about GURPS that appeals to them. Others will find stuff about FATE that hooks them. For those folks, understanding the game won't feel like effort because they're already into it on some level. They actively want to understand it and learn more about it.

There are probably a lot of factors that would also influence this. Like the GM or other players and their enthusiasm for a system, the setting or theme or concept of the game itself, and so on.

 

[CRKrueger]

Isn't there some level of appeal or attraction or connection to a rules system that's a big factor here? What I mean is that I have no doubt that I could learn and either play or run GURPS. I've never properly done so, though, because the few times I've played it, there was nothing about it that appealed to me. Anytime I've tried to read a GURPS book, anything with the mechanics just makes my eyes cross. I simply don't care enough to learn it.

If someone were to try and help me learn it, they may have their work cut out for them because I already have a negative take, so they'd be starting at a disadvantage.

So far, the same is true of FATE.....I haven't actually played it, I've only perused the rules. I have no doubt that I can understand it, but there's nothing about it that has hooked me and makes me do more than peruse it, let alone consider running it. There's nothing about it that makes me think "okay, that would be a cool way to do such and such" or anything like that.

Some folks may find something about GURPS that appeals to them. Others will find stuff about FATE that hooks them. For those folks, understanding the game won't feel like effort because they're already into it on some level. They actively want to understand it and learn more about it.

There are probably a lot of factors that would also influence this. Like the GM or other players and their enthusiasm for a system, the setting or theme or concept of the game itself, and so on.

Of course, there’s dozens of reasons why a game system doesn’t click with someone. However, by and far, the one people complain about most with Fate are the metacurrencies, not just How they work, but Why. There’s an entire subsystem laid over the old Fudge RPG to make Fate. That subsystem is the additional conceptual leap people have to make beyond a game like D&D, Traveller, GURPS, etc. Hell, it’s a leap past PbtA, which is straightforward by comparison.

 

[robertsconley]

Isn't there some level of appeal or attraction or connection to a rules system that's a big factor here? What I mean is that I have no doubt that I could learn and either play or run GURPS. I've never properly done so, though, because the few times I've played it, there was nothing about it that appealed to me. Anytime I've tried to read a GURPS book, anything with the mechanics just makes my eyes cross. I simply don't care enough to learn it.

If someone were to try and help me learn it, they may have their work cut out for them because I already have a negative take, so they'd be starting at a disadvantage.

Pick something you would do as if you there within the fantasy genre (the area I focused most) and I will walk you through the different levels of details. Pick something mundane (like combat or social). And/or pick something fantastic (magic, powers, etc).

 

[robertsconley]

Of course, there’s dozens of reasons why a game system doesn’t click with someone. However, by and far, the one people complain about most with Fate are the metacurrencies, not just How they work, but Why. There’s an entire subsystem laid over the old Fudge RPG to make Fate. That subsystem is the additional conceptual leap people have to make beyond a game like D&D, Traveller, GURPS, etc. Hell, it’s a leap past PbtA, which is straightforward by comparison.

This has been my experience as well. Which is why I ignored it when I did the playtest for my own take.

Some posts I mage

The Fate (rpg) of the Majestic Wilderlands
Note Rachel Ghoul's comment.
All my Fate related posts

 

[hawkeyefan]

Of course, there’s dozens of reasons why a game system doesn’t click with someone. However, by and far, the one people complain about most with Fate are the metacurrencies, not just How they work, but Why. There’s an entire subsystem laid over the old Fudge RPG to make Fate. That subsystem is the additional conceptual leap people have to make beyond a game like D&D, Traveller, GURPS, etc. Hell, it’s a leap past PbtA, which is straightforward by comparison.

Sure, I hear such complaints all the time online. I don't doubt that for some people it's true and aspects and other Fate mechanics are hard to grasp for them. I don't know if they are an order of magnitude different.....it's hard for me to say for sure since I'm only passing familiar with the elements of Fate. It does seem to have a pretty easy core system of rolling dice for a number and then adding a skill, and a list of static results. As a core mechanic, it's a little fiddly, but pretty easy to get.

The challenge seems to be related to aspects and how they work, which allows you to muck with the results of rolls, or add fictional elements to a scene. While this is certainly more involved, I don't know if I'd say it requires some kind of paradigm shift.

It's honestly hard to say. Do I think that some folks can be so familiar and kind of ingrained in one rule system that another may be hard to grasp? Sure. But is that more about that person or the game?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Pick something you would do as if you there within the fantasy genre (the area I focused most) and I will walk you through the different levels of details. Pick something mundane (like combat or social). And/or pick something fantastic (magic, powers, etc).

Are we talking about a GM basically running the character for the player? I mean, then it's about the GM's comfort with the system more than anything.

Couldn't a GM of Fate make the same offer to a player?

 

[robertsconley]

Are we talking about a GM basically running the character for the player? I mean, then it's about the GM's comfort with the system more than anything.

Nothing complex abut it. Just pick a situation or two and I will run through the mechanics of how it handled in GURPS.

 

[Voros]

Sure, I hear such complaints all the time online. I don't doubt that for some people it's true and aspects and other Fate mechanics are hard to grasp for them. I don't know if they are an order of magnitude different.....it's hard for me to say for sure since I'm only passing familiar with the elements of Fate. It does seem to have a pretty easy core system of rolling dice for a number and then adding a skill, and a list of static results. As a core mechanic, it's a little fiddly, but pretty easy to get.

The challenge seems to be related to aspects and how they work, which allows you to muck with the results of rolls, or add fictional elements to a scene. While this is certainly more involved, I don't know if I'd say it requires some kind of paradigm shift.

It's honestly hard to say. Do I think that some folks can be so familiar and kind of ingrained in one rule system that another may be hard to grasp? Sure. But is that more about that person or the game?

Also I find those who have only ever played D&D for a long time can find almost any other system confusing. I recall Raggi saying he couldn't understand PbtA games, which I think is a fairly simple ruleset compared to even BX for example.

 

[robertsconley]

Also I find those who have only ever played D&D for a long time can find almost any other system confusing. I recall Raggi saying he couldn't understand PbtA games, which I think is a fairly simple ruleset compared to even BX for example.

You know I find this to be bullshit. I lived in a rural area all my life and until recently always played RPGs other than D&D. GURPS, Harnmaster, Traveller, Hero System, Fantasy Age, and so on. Nearly always the referee and having to build the group up from scratch from a region without a lot of gamers and those who are there played D&D and for most the only RPG they played.

It was not a struggle to teach anybody any of the systems I used even GURPS. What it required to pull it off was explaining clearly, concisely, and zero expectation they ought to understand any particular point at any time. Some folks it took a few times before they understood a section or two. Some people did well with some sections and not others.

In short if a player doesn't "get" a system then the odds are they had a bad teacher. And note this is separate from liking a system. I know plenty who like my GURPS campaigns but would not play it otherwise. We all tell stories about how X was an obstinate idiot but most hobbyists who sit down at a table are there to have fun and with a good teacher and coach are able to do so and learn a new system.

 

[Ladybird]

Yeah, it’s all brand new players who just started RPGs that are posting to forums about not growing Fate. Thanks, I needed that one.

S’ok, you represented, that’s good enough. I know your heart’s not in this one.

Thanks, I just wanted to feel included.

TBH I like all the individual bits of Fate but stick them all together and it's... hmm. Less than the sum of it's parts. Something is missing for me, especially some of the newer books like Uprising frex which try to be Fate-by-the-Apocalypse and it doesn't quite work.

I think it might be that a PbtA game or a custom system is designed to do one thing and one thing well, whereas Fate games always seem like a bit of a compromise and show their toolkit roots.

 

[tenbones]

I would like to agree with you - but I suspect there is a difference between Players and GM's, especially casual vs. hardcore in either role.

My group has had an empty chair or two we've been filling with new players the majority of which are players that started playing D&D at 3.x or later. They've come into my group with varying levels of *actual* interest vs. what they believed were their actual interest/engagement levels.

Only to find that they were in very deep waters with us in terms of what we play, how we play, and what we allow. It's not that they don't understand the concepts of FASERIP, or classless systems. They play D&D and "something isn't right" when they don't see the tic-tac 20-level dot-to-dot progression they expect to be laid out in front of them as linear as the games they're used to playing.

For me and my group personally, we have to deconstruct those assumptions in-play (which means *I* have to do it) and since I'm more a show-don't-tell kinda person, it has definitely caused players to eat-shit in the various games I've run.

Which to your credit may have turned them off to those systems, but lets face it, everyone here has their big warm fuzzy comfort-system they started with and that kinda inertia is hard to let go of.

This leads me to the bifurcation of "casual" to "hardcore" (yes there is probably something inbetween) - where there are people that want to play LOTS of different things deeply, and those that just want to socialize over the game they started with and stick with that. There is a lot of social cache among folks relatively new to the hobby - and that reinforces brand tribalism.

I think there is a lot of that going on, plus with people being "more sensitive" these days and wearing their tribal markers as part of their identity, discussions both on forums and in-game find themselves running headlong against the topic of what we're really talking about here.

In honest discussion - trying to codify what these things are, runs against the feelings of those that feel threatened to 1) be codified as "the other" in their parlance (even if it's not meant to be an aspersion, it's taken that way) 2) feel discomfort in trying new things in ways that challenge the very reasons why they're uncomfortable in the first place. 3) Are in this for performative reasons on many levels. Sad as that is.

I've seen all of these elements at play when it comes to teaching new players how to get into "non-D&D" games. And I'm about 50/50 in terms of success. I'm pretty confident I'm a good teacher. I've noticed the older the player, the sensibilities seem to kick in without an issue. The younger the player? It's a minefield.

One thing I have noticed - if they started playing something OTHER than D&D, it's almost always easier. I've seen players that never played D&D look at D&D as "odd". But these folks are rare, for obvious reasons.

Edit: Let's not ignore the reality that videogames (especially MMO's) reinforce many of the D&Disms in the minds of people already inside, and coming into the hobby.

 

[Endless Flight]

What’s there to say? Anything not espousing ridiculous orthodoxy demanding the lack of any qualifiers or definitions in RPGs will be spammed off the board by a concerted block of posters. I’ve completely lost all patience for the bullshit which has made it easy to play the man, not the ball to the point where a discussion with clearly and provably outlandish claims by Justin becomes yet another attempt to kick me off the island.

I mean, come on. Fate has elements about it that make it harder to grok than GURPS (or Traveller or any game not so strongly and abstractly narrative. THIS is controversial. That is where they’re going to the mattresses, the hill they’re gonna die on, despite Fate being famous for the number of people that don’t get it (all new players, god I still can’t even fathom that one). At a local FLGS, Fate’s literally known as ”the game no one gets”. Shit, at this point, it seems like they object no matter how ridiculous because they can, and they know it will stick. Just keep repeating the same lie until it becomes the truth.

Politics is a de jur ban, but there are other emerging, effective, de facto topic bans here. If they were in the open, that would be one thing. That they’re hidden, however, is increasingly hard to take. Outnumbered, eh no worries. Outnumbered and outgunned, that’s Tuesday. Tilt the Rules of Engagement to favor those...maybe I’m getting too old.

Too much other bad shit going on in meatspace for me to deal with any other frustration. Maybe I’ll catch up on some videogames for a while.

Don’t worry, I’m not ragequitting, anyone who ragequits gets Powers Boothe, even me.

To all those about to unload...go fuck yourselves.

This is the kind of post that needs to be in the Site Discussion forum.

 

[TristramEvans]

This is the kind of post that needs to be in the Site Discussion forum.

I actually just started a thread there in response to it...

Well...Let's Talk About This

I'm not here to call for his banning, either temporarily or permanently-- I am only here to support Justin's argument that refusing to address trolls personally, censuring people for responding to their bullshit, and closing down discussions they've disrupted is rewarding their behavior...

www.rpgpub.com

 

[chuckdee]

and a list of static results.

There isn't a list of static results.

Couldn't a GM of Fate make the same offer to a player?

I think so, personally.

In short if a player doesn't "get" a system then the odds are they had a bad teacher.

Got it in one. And that bad experience with the teacher can color all other interactions with the system