GURPs vs FATE

[robertsconley]

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

Yup, one person fucking ruined GURPS for a game store that I was a regular at a few years back because he botched a campaign badly. I tried to help prior but he wouldn't listen* and it occurred on a day I couldn't make it.

*He was a good friend, asked me for advice and handouts, appeared to listen, and then did none of the things I recommend for managing the flow of play during his session.

 

[hawkeyefan]

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

I can do that, but will that accomplish anything? I don't ask that to be facetious....it's just that the point isn't about explaining GURPS to me.....I don't really have an interest in the game beyond this discussion. Nor do I really doubt that you're familiar with it and can explain it to me.

However, if we could take a few scenarios or examples and then provide a breakdown of how GURPS works, and then someone else could breakdown how FATE would handle the same examples, then I think we may have something to compare and contrast. See how they're different and how they're similar.

Would you be cool with that? Maybe T Trippy or Nobby-W could offer some direction on Fate? If they're willing, I think each of them is familiar with Fate, although perhaps I'm wrong on that.

 

[robertsconley]

However, if we could take a few scenarios or examples and then provide a breakdown of how GURPS works, and then someone else could breakdown how FATE would handle the same examples, then I think we may have something to compare and contrast. See how they're different and how they're similar.

Sure, I can handle GURPS but somebody else will have to do Fate. Yes I ran some sessions but it more than five years ago.

 

[hawkeyefan]

There isn't a list of static results.

Okay, this is where my lack of familiarity clearly shows. I thought there was The Ladder or something like that. Like an 8 is Stupendous, and 6 is Fantastic, and so on. Is that not the case?

Edit to add: I'm totally just going off memory here, so I'm sure the Adjectives are not correct, but I thought I remember that idea. Maybe I'm confusing it with another game.

 

[robertsconley]

I was responding more to hawkeyefan comments about GURPS not whether it easier to learn than Fate.

 

[David Johansen]

One of my friends was a big fan of FATE. I think that's what he ran his Cthulhu game that ended in a fire fight between our PCs while driving in a sedan. UT he had to graft his hyper realistic fire combat rules on because he was also a huge fan of Phoenix Command (I'm not making this up honest!). He wanted story game for most stuff but hyper realistic physics simulation combat. He didn't like GURPS or Rolemaster.

I suspect FATE is a game where the players need to know and understand the rules whereas GURPS is a game where they can just describe what they want to do and the GM can make it work within the rules. FATE could still be relatively simple to learn under that model and could simpler be simpler than GURPS Lite.

 

[AsenRG]

I don’t think there is. If you have limited experience of playing RPGs - basically if you have just played D&D before - and you choose between playing GURPS or Fate, I suspect many gamers will find the Fate system easier to pick up. There is less of it, for a start, and character generation is a more intuitive process as opposed to book referencing over specific calculations or points balancing for particular Traits.

However, the point is that any given player doesn’t literally need to approach Fate with a mindset that they doing something completely and categorically different to what they have previously experienced with D&D. I know, from playing in these games alongside people with all kinds of different experiences in games, that it isn’t the case.

I used to believe the same.
Then I tried explaining systems to freeform players who didn't know any ruleset. Let's just say, FATE had the lowest success rate.

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

In my experience, that's not the most prevalent reason.

There's also that pesky skill cost chart that stops at least 90% of players dead in their tracks.

...WTF?
A chart that's literally "1 point for basic competence, double that for more, double that for more, then +the last number for each new level, regardless of what kind of skill it is"?
Or is it the difficulty levels? Well, 1 point is the training that lets you function at your natural ability level when studying an intuitive skill like Knives". "More points give you a bonus to that - and every increase in difficulty of the skill lowers what you get for the initial point by 1 level".

There, I summarized and explained the dreaded table in a couple of sentences. And it took me all of 15 seconds to notice this when first reading the rules...so I honestly refuse to believe that this would be nuclear physics to anyone else!

 

[hawkeyefan]

We'll see. If anyone is interested, it seemed like it might be worthwhile, but if it's going to be an issue or anything, we certainly don't have to do it.

I suspect FATE is a game where the players need to know and understand the rules whereas GURPS is a game where they can just describe what they want to do and the GM can make it work within the rules. FATE could still be relatively simple to learn under that model and could simpler be simpler than GURPS Lite.

I suppose part of it for me is that I don't think I'd ever run a game without explaining the rules to the players. Nor would I want to play one where I wasn't going to be learning the rules.

I may break things in slowly, adding any complexities a bit at a time, and maybe skipping some elements at first or something, but I don't think I'd ever just run a game where a player had no game knowledge. The idea seems very odd to me.

 

[David Johansen]

...WTF?
A chart that's literally "1 point for basic competence, double that for more, double that for more, then +the last number for each new level, regardless of what kind of skill it is"?
Or is it the difficulty levels? Well, 1 point is the training that lets you function at your natural ability level when studying an intuitive skill like Knives". "More points give you a bonus to that - and every increase in difficulty of the skill lowers what you get for the initial point by 1 level".

There, I summarized and explained the dreaded table in a couple of sentences. And it took me all of 15 seconds to notice this when first reading the rules...so I honestly refuse to believe that this would be nuclear physics to anyone else!

And yet time an time again I see reasonably intelligent adult gaze at it in confusion and get all screwed up by it. I do think it would work better with only two columns and a modifier applied to a skill, so instead of DX Easy you'd have DX - 1. I will note that the default seems to play into it some times because people think the two mechanisms are linked in ways they ain't.

Phil Reed's verified that he's run into the same problem but doesn't understand why either.

 

[Nobby-W]

Okay, this is where my lack of familiarity clearly shows. I thought there was The Ladder or something like that. Like an 8 is Stupendous, and 6 is Fantastic, and so on. Is that not the case?

Edit to add: I'm totally just going off memory here, so I'm sure the Adjectives are not correct, but I thought I remember that idea. Maybe I'm confusing it with another game.

The levels have names but they really just correspond to a range of -4 to +8. More confusing FATE jargon, really.

 

[chuckdee]

Okay, this is where my lack of familiarity clearly shows. I thought there was The Ladder or something like that. Like an 8 is Stupendous, and 6 is Fantastic, and so on. Is that not the case?

Edit to add: I'm totally just going off memory here, so I'm sure the Adjectives are not correct, but I thought I remember that idea. Maybe I'm confusing it with another game.

The adjectives are there, but they aren't really results as much as descriptions.

More confusing FATE jargon, really.

It actually comes from FUDGE, so you can't blame Fate for that.

 

[chuckdee]

There, I summarized and explained the dreaded table in a couple of sentences. And it took me all of 15 seconds to notice this when first reading the rules...so I honestly refuse to believe that this would be nuclear physics to anyone else!

And I'll bet that anything that you couldn't describe about Fate could be described similarly. Even that description you gave would stop a few in their tracks, I'm sure.

 

[chuckdee]

I may break things in slowly, adding any complexities a bit at a time, and maybe skipping some elements at first or something, but I don't think I'd ever just run a game where a player had no game knowledge. The idea seems very odd to me.

In the game where I did, we were playing at work- everyone knew how to play (just not Fate) other than one woman who was new to it all. The others actually grokked it from the rulebook. So we just decided to start and coach her through playing the first couple of sessions.

 

[EmperorNorton]

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.

I mean, I've also never had any real trouble teaching anyone I've played with any system. And I run a lot of systems that skew more towards Fate.

This whole thing of Fate style meta-currencies being "so hard to understand" is completely foreign to me personally. I've found people, even people who come from only playing D&D can grasp it pretty easily as long as they want to.

Or maybe I'm just a really good teacher, who knows.

 

[Ravenswing]

You know I find this to be bullshit ...

Some people handle changes in paradigm more poorly than others. I agree that D&D players (coming from a system, after all, where the corebooks total over 700 pages of material) could learn other systems if they wanted to do so. But like every other hobby, pastime, profession and element in life, people get into their ruts, like it there, often are mightily perplexed that there's any other way of doing things, and see no reason why they ought to bother. They know what they like and they like what they know.

And there's are a couple more factors. I've been GMing GURPS for 36 years now. Hand me the perfect system, convince all my players to agree, and I'd still quail at the effort. I get GURPS. I understand it instinctively at this point. I don't have to fish through rulebooks or charts for the average rule, now ... but when I do, I also pretty much know precisely where I need to look, without reference to an index or TOC.

But what'd be worst is the conversion. In the bookcase at my right shoulder are the binders I use for gaming, most of which are setting information. On a whim, a couple days ago I counted up the pages of the city out of which I'm running my group, all typed up by me: it runs 246 pages, and my recent revision, just completed, took me three months. It's the largest of the setting binders, but I've got EIGHTEEN more like it. Looking to my left, I've got a stack of folders of NPC sheets; the stack is over 9 inches high. Never mind everything I have on the computer. No, no, no no no.

But finally, consider this: my post about GURPS-as-tool kit applies here as well. We all know the people who really don't care all that much about the system. They just want to play the game and have fun. Even knowing the system is a bit of a drag. They may have stirred themselves to learn D&D in the first place, but why bother with another one? (Especially that, given gamers' ADD, it might turn out to be the latest ephemeral one-shot.)

 

[EmperorNorton]

You know, my opinion on this:

1. Yes, Fate is structurally different from GURPS.
2. Yes, those structurally differences can definitely matter to people who don't like those kind of differences.

But, I can understand why people rebel against the kind of thought, because honestly, I've found with 99% of casual players who aren't hanging out on forums all day, the differences kind of don't really matter that much.

It's like, yes there are differences and yes you what you are doing is different, but the attitude that always seems to pop up that it is "totally different" and that there is this massive gulf between different kinds of RPGs just doesn't ring true from my experiences. In general, I've not found that games I run with "narrative" systems resemble anything like what the people on this forum who don't like those type of mechanics make them out to play like. Yes, it is different, but there isn't this overconcern with "narrative" most people play from the perspective of their characters, not from a third party perspective. Even something like compels in Fate they go "would my character do this" not "would this make things interesting". Honestly most of the time with compels I find they are more just a reminder to make your character traits affect you negatively. Or with BitD flashbacks, yes the ability to use them is meta, but generally people think "well what would my character do if he had known this was going to happen", not "how can I make this narratively interesting".

Also, it is kind of like this xkcd comic. Like, to us heavily in the hobby, the differences can be very important to individual tables, but at the same time... I often find that we are arguing over small differences.

 

[AsenRG]

And I'll bet that anything that you couldn't describe about Fate could be described similarly. Even that description you gave would stop a few in their tracks, I'm sure.

I never said it couldn't be described using everyday language. No RPG system I know of would be unexplainable in everyday terms, so that's not an achievement either way.

What I said is that FATE has more basic, underlying concepts that need to be explained, whether to someone who's new to the hobby or to someone whose only reference point for rules is D&D.
Also, where for GURPS you simply have to explain new rules, for FATE you have to explain new concepts. And those concepts don't necessarily match well with everyday reality...not to mention that some of them (like the FATE points economy) defeat the reason* some people play.

And I stand by those words. They're still true. And yes, I've explained both systems to both kinds of people. At some point I was told I've become known as "that FATE guy". (It was a relatively brief period, and I was playing other systems as well, at the time, but at this time I was actively visiting the local mini-con, so it probably impacted my image in the RPG community).

Also, yes, FATE has a dismal "getting it" rate among RPG players, I can confirm that. Like, it's got the biggest number of people who can't or refuse to "get it". And I'm not talking grognards, here, because remember where I live?
Yeah, I'm the closest thing to a grognard here! Everybody who refused to "get FATE" was a newer player than me. All the grognards had no issues with understanding it, even if some of them ended up disliking it.
Nobody ever has had issues conceptualizing GURPS, however. And I've taught GURPS to more people, because my "that GURPS guy" stage spanned at least double the time the FATE stage spanned - and during it I didn't play any other systems.

*Have you ever encountered a "What's an RPG?" section that goes something like this?
"You think no character should go to the basement of the haunted house without a flashlight? Now's your chance to fix that! In an RPG, you can play a character and show them how it's done!"
Yeah, FATE doesn't help with that, because not taking the flashlight is basically a Compel.

 

[chuckdee]

I think we have differing opinions on this, and it seems "never the twain shall meet." And that's Ok as far as I'm concerned. I see what you're saying, and I disagree with both the premise that it's even more than a mere few words and that it's a hard concept to grasp. In my experience, it's more expanding the realms of what is possible than grasping the concept. But each has our own experiences and biases, and so I shrug and lay this topic down.

 

[chuckdee]

We're simply living in different realities, it's that simple!

I think that counts for this thread too

 

[hawkeyefan]

I feel like most games have like a core mechanic or set of mechanics, and then there are layers of rules beyond that which somehow modify the core mechanic.

So things like spells or powers or maneuvers or aspects or stress or bennies....all those kinds of things are those secondary rules.

Is any secondary rule more difficult to explain than another? Generally speaking, I would think that’d depend on the specific rule and the specific person, so it’s a subjective thing.

Now, if a game has more of these kinds if secondary systems, then that’s when I’d say that a game may be harder to explain simply based on the amount of elements, and then how they all interact and hang on the core rules.

 

[TristramEvans]

I feel like most games have like a core mechanic or set of mechanics, and then there are layers of rules beyond that which somehow modify the core mechanic.

So things like spells or powers or maneuvers or aspects or stress or bennies....all those kinds of things are those secondary rules.

There's a specific name for that: Exception-Based system design.

 

[TJS]

I can't really understand what is supposed to make Fate difficult.

Perhaps it's more of a case of "I can't understand how to use Fate to do what I want to do", to which I would tend to think "Is what you want to do Melodrama? No? Then that's why?".

 

[Voros]

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.

I was really only using D&D because it is the best known and related to the RL example I presented of Raggi being confused by PbtA.

I think anyone who have only played one system exclusively, whether D&D or something else, for a long time is likely to have issues groking something different.

D&D itself can be quite a recondite system, something that so many of us who grew up with it forget. During a recent campaign of 2e with rpg newbies, things like levels (spells and class), fire it and forget it spellcasting, ThaC0 and much more led to all kinds of quizzical responses.

Certainly a GM can handle the rules for the players at the beginning but I found as the game progresses the players want to know the rules themselves, I don't think that is a long term solution. Dripfeeding the players the rules over time can work but it can also lead to a lack of comprehension. The failure of the DM to explain the core mechanics has left two of the players still confused about the rules even as we're entering level 6 and 7.

 

[David Johansen]

I feel like most games have like a core mechanic or set of mechanics, and then there are layers of rules beyond that which somehow modify the core mechanic.

So things like spells or powers or maneuvers or aspects or stress or bennies....all those kinds of things are those secondary rules.

Is any secondary rule more difficult to explain than another? Generally speaking, I would think that’d depend on the specific rule and the specific person, so it’s a subjective thing.

Now, if a game has more of these kinds if secondary systems, then that’s when I’d say that a game may be harder to explain simply based on the amount of elements, and then how they all interact and hang on the core rules.

But there are also built in playstyle considerations. I had a player who, having played D&D thought he understood how to play rpgs, kill everything, loot the bodies, pick up whores and kill them instead of paying them. Same guy was in the no women at the table camp. It's an extreme example but when it comes down to it, there are these unspoken expectations built into game play sometimes. The rules didn't make him play that way but there were things in the way the game was written that made him think that's how you play it.

 

[Trippy]

I can do that, but will that accomplish anything? I don't ask that to be facetious....it's just that the point isn't about explaining GURPS to me.....I don't really have an interest in the game beyond this discussion. Nor do I really doubt that you're familiar with it and can explain it to me.

However, if we could take a few scenarios or examples and then provide a breakdown of how GURPS works, and then someone else could breakdown how FATE would handle the same examples, then I think we may have something to compare and contrast. See how they're different and how they're similar.

Would you be cool with that? Maybe T Trippy or Nobby-W could offer some direction on Fate? If they're willing, I think each of them is familiar with Fate, although perhaps I'm wrong on that.

The idea that Fate needs direction seems to be ignoring the facts of its success, somewhat.

In terms of my own experience, I don’t run Fate but I play in Fate games frequently. This is largely because it is considered a major game system in the gaming communities I know. Most other players I game with play Fate or PbtA games. Most game shops sell Fate or PbtA games. Every game con I have been to in over the last several years have been dominated by D&D5E, Fate and variations of PbtA games - as in 90% of games on offer to participate in have been one of these. The Fate line is currently a Top 5 ICv2 seller, and it is not the first time.

The idea that somehow gamers "don't get” Fate or PbtA games is not supported by the evidence.

 

[Ravenswing]

The idea that somehow gamers "don't get” Fate or PbtA games is not supported by the evidence.

Ummmm ... except for the evidence presented by posters above? You might not like it, you might not agree with it, but unless you're ready to call them liars ...

That being said ...

I can't really understand what is supposed to make Fate difficult.

I'm unfamiliar with FATE, so my opinion on that's not worth much. But I think back to college days, when the UMass-Boston SF club was heavily into board games. There used to be a tacit favorite game per semester where there were games going on three or four days a week: Car Wars one semester, Nuclear War another, Cosmic Encounters another, Trivial Pursuit another. Somewhat improbably, Avalon Hill's Civilization, despite its game length, was one of those one-semester wonders.

And I just got that game. I could look at the board, and see all the patterns, and know where everything was going, and what'd happen a few turns down the road. Like magic.

I expect most games are like that: there are just people who see them with exceptional clarity, get the concepts, make all the smooth mental leaps, all shiny and good. And by the same token, there are those who don't get them and never will, be the explanations ever so patient and repeated.

The problem isn't in the situation, but in how we react to it. Too often we react with angry incomprehension -- the "My Game Is Great, Your Game Sucks" syndrome, #4 in my Gaming Geek Fallacies. You don't have to understand why that is, any more than I understand why I saw things in AH Civilization that others just as smart as I was, just as experienced with strategy games, didn't. Just have to accept it.

 

[AsenRG]

The idea that Fate needs direction seems to be ignoring the facts of its success, somewhat.

In terms of my own experience, I don’t run Fate but I play in Fate games frequently. This is largely because it is considered a major game system in the gaming communities I know. Most other players I game with play Fate or PbtA games. Most game shops sell Fate or PbtA games. Every game con I have been to in over the last several years have been dominated by D&D5E, Fate and variations of PbtA games - as in 90% of games on offer to participate in have been one of these. The Fate line is currently a Top 5 ICv2 seller, and it is not the first time.

The idea that somehow gamers "don't get” Fate or PbtA games is not supported by the evidence.

Except it's not "gamers", it's "a lot of gamers". A game can become popular even of it'stotally impenetrable for a portion of the gaming population, as Fate evidenced.

Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant to the facts.

 

[Trippy]

Except it's not "gamers", it's "a lot of gamers". A game can become popular even of it'stotally impenetrable for a portion of the gaming population, as Fate evidenced.

Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant to the facts.

Like....bollocks.

Fate is popular because it is played.

You ‘facts’ ignore the facts.

 

[AsenRG]

Like....bollocks.

Fate is popular because it is played.

...did anything lead you to assume that I'm using a different measure of "popularity"?
Doesn't change what I said one bit. Or are you,as Ravenswing suggested, calling me a liar?

 

[Trippy]

Ummmm ... except for the evidence presented by posters above? You might not like it, you might not agree with it, but unless you're ready to call them liars ...

That being said ...



I'm unfamiliar with FATE, so my opinion on that's not worth much. But I think back to college days, when the UMass-Boston SF club was heavily into board games. There used to be a tacit favorite game per semester where there were games going on three or four days a week: Car Wars one semester, Nuclear War another, Cosmic Encounters another, Trivial Pursuit another. Somewhat improbably, Avalon Hill's Civilization, despite its game length, was one of those one-semester wonders.

And I just got that game. I could look at the board, and see all the patterns, and know where everything was going, and what'd happen a few turns down the road. Like magic.

I expect most games are like that: there are just people who see them with exceptional clarity, get the concepts, make all the smooth mental leaps, all shiny and good. And by the same token, there are those who don't get them and never will, be the explanations ever so patient and repeated.

The problem isn't in the situation, but in how we react to it. Too often we react with angry incomprehension -- the "My Game Is Great, Your Game Sucks" syndrome, #4 in my Gaming Geek Fallacies. You don't have to understand why that is, any more than I understand why I saw things in AH Civilization that others just as smart as I was, just as experienced with strategy games, didn't. Just have to accept it.

The evidence amounts to an actuality of a couple of posters who claim that Fate is impenetrable, with anecdotal evidence, and a few other posters going along with that . It amounts to nothing of note, in reality.

The reality is this game is selling, has a following and has had an undeniable impact upon the roleplaying hobby and community. A handful of posters who repeat their own attitudes online whenever the opportunity arises does not change the hard facts of the success of this game in the wider community.

 

[Trippy]

...did anything lead you to assume that I'm using a different measure of "popularity"?
Doesn't change what I said one bit. Or are you,as Ravenswing suggested, calling me a liar

The measure of popularity is the hard fact that it sells, and is widely played.

It is, in both cases. Any claim to the contrary is in denial of reality.

 

[AsenRG]

The evidence amounts to an actuality of a couple of posters who claim that Fate is impenetrable, with anecdotal evidence, and a few other posters going along with that . It amounts to nothing of note, in reality.

The reality is this game is selling, has a following and has had an undeniable impact upon the roleplaying hobby and community. A handful of posters who repeat their own attitudes online whenever the opportunity arises does not change the hard facts of the success of this game in the wider community.

And who da fuck has contradicted that said game is successful?
No matter how successful a game might be, it is going to be impenetrable for some people - including D&D. My anecdotal evidence simply points out that FATE has a higher rate of such "comprehension failures".
If that idea gives you fits...well, then fits are what you get.

 

[AsenRG]

The measure of popularity is the hard fact that it sells, and is widely played.

It is, in both cases. Any claim to the contrary is in denial of reality.

Repeating the same thing that the other side has agreed with already doesn't disprove the exception said side is talking about, you know? It just leads said side to question the assumption of good faith that was extended to you until now.

 

[Trippy]

And who da fuck has contradicted that said game is successful?
No matter how successful a game might be, it is going to be impenetrable for some people - including D&D. My anecdotal evidence simply points out that FATE has a higher rate of such "comprehension failures".
If that idea gives you fits...well, then fits are what you get.

If a game is impenetrable it would not be widely played, regardless of who chatted about it online. Go and check out Nobilis, if you think this is not the case.

Indeed, if we are going to continue to make a direct comparison between Fate and GURPS, which seems to be the flavor of the month for a given title on this thread, then when was the last time GURPS sold or was played to anything like the extent that Fate is sold or played currently? Fate is a game that is successful in that is sells and is played more than most other RPGs.

The objections about Fate’s ‘complications’, held by a handful of posters on this thread, represents a tiny minority of gamers. You guys are the people repeating this shit - I’m just pointing out the obvious.

 

[AsenRG]

You know, my opinion on this:

1. Yes, Fate is structurally different from GURPS.
2. Yes, those structurally differences can definitely matter to people who don't like those kind of differences.

But, I can understand why people rebel against the kind of thought, because honestly, I've found with 99% of casual players who aren't hanging out on forums all day, the differences kind of don't really matter that much.

Again, I used to think like that as well...
Except that most players I've seen experiencing issues with making FATE work for them don't have accounts on any RPG forums (except in some cases freeform forums with narrative bent). On the contrary, old hands got it easily.
So these days I just consider the idea that only experienced players don't get Fate to be mistaken. Willfully or not.

 

[AsenRG]

If a game is impenetrable it would not be widely played, regardless of who chatted about it online. Go and check out Nobilis, if you think this is not the case.

Indeed, if we are going to continue to make a direct comparison between Fate and GURPS, which seems to be the flavor of the month for a give title on this thread, then when was the last time GURPS sold or was played to anything like the extent that Fate is sold or played currently? Fate is a game that is successful in that is sells and is played.

The objections about Fate’s ‘complications’, held by a handful of posters on this thread, represents a tiny minority of gamers. You guys are the people repeating this shit - I’m just pointing out the obvious.

... which amounts to misrepresting the argument and not reading what I actually wrote.
If this was still a Mod+ thread,I'd be pinging TristramEvans now. As it is, I'm simply not going to engage your "argument" until you engage mine in good faith.

Oh, and I've played Nobilis. IlDense yes, misleadingly written indeed, but impenetrable it ain't.
Alas, neither was it much fun to actually use in play, unlike say Tianxia or GURPS.

 

[Trippy]

Again, I used to think like that as well...
Except that most players I've seen experiencing issues with making FATE work for them don't have accounts on any RPG forums (except in some cases freeform forums with narrative bent). On the contrary, old hands got it easily.
So these days I just consider the idea that only experienced players don't get Fate to be mistaken. Willfully or not.

Your experience is not universal.

 

[Trippy]

... which amounts to misrepresting the argument and not reading what I actually wrote.
If this was still a Mod+ thread,I'd be pinging TristramEvans now. As it is, I'm simply not going to engage your "argument" until you engage mine in good faith.

Stating facts and pointing out reality is not arguing in bad faith. How dare you claim otherwise. You chose to engage with me - your problem, not mine.

 

[AsenRG]

Your experience is not universal.

No, but neither is yours, either.

 

[AsenRG]

Stating facts and pointing out reality is not arguing in bad faith. How dare you claim otherwise.

Yeah, that's what I've been doing all along. My experience is as much part of reality as yours.
So, to return the question: how dare you claim otherwise?