|
TurninTrix posted:Thanks for reminding me about Strands of Power. I picked up Strands of Fate some time back, and though I loved the Power Advantages, I found that certain things (like all the Meta-Powers) just went over my head. Maybe the book dedicated to Powers will help explain it better. Strands of Fate is very cool, and certainly the best "generic" FATE system, but you're better off not understanding most of the meta powers. While some of them (like ritual) serve a good purpose, a lot of them are mostly bandages for holes the creator must have known were in the system. Control's the worst offender of these, as it essentially functions as a "have all the powers, but nebulously worse" ability. Pretty cheap, too, and if you unlock it for your group, it can lead down a road where they don't have much reason to use much else. Strands of Power was a little bit disappointing for the buy, honestly; while it gives a lot of power application ideas that are useful (arcane power source giving a pretty good spellbook, for example), it pretty much ignores everything but power advantages, reprinting word for word every expert/heroic tier advantage from the original strands book with some errata and adding zero new ones. Edit: Gonna open every page with answers to questions no one was asking. Nightskye fucked around with this message at Jan 2, 2012 around 19:44 |
| # ? Jan 2, 2012 19:42 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 08:35 |
|
|
Thanks for answering, anyway.  I'm pretty satisfied with Strands as it is, so if Power's just like that, maybe I'll save up instead for Kerebos or Legends of Anglerre.
|
| # ? Jan 3, 2012 13:47 |
|
|
Nick at Nite posted:it pretty much ignores everything but power advantages, reprinting word for word every expert/heroic tier advantage from the original strands book with some errata and adding zero new ones. Lol, what are you talking about? There's 3 new expert advantages on the first page alone!
|
| # ? Jan 4, 2012 01:33 |
|
|
SavageMessiah posted:Lol, what are you talking about? There's 3 new expert advantages on the first page alone! Unintentional hyperbole; suppose I should have instead said "a disappointing number of new advantages." Certainly I wouldn't call it robust.
|
| # ? Jan 4, 2012 02:49 |
|
|
Well for expert advantages there's only so many you can list before they get a bit pointless, that's what the "what you can do with an expert advantage" list is there for. This is less true for heroic, but still there's a fixed-ish set of game applications, the listing is just examples. On the other hand power advantages are much more fleshed out game mechanics and thus are a lot less trivial for a player/gm to come up with. The focus of the book seems appropriate to me, but to each his own I guess. I'm not arguing here, just providing a counterpoint for those curious about the book. I like Control in concept but it irritates me that it's basically it's own little ruleset on top of strands, like a player with a Control ability is kinda playing a different game then everyone else.
|
| # ? Jan 4, 2012 05:22 |
|
|
SavageMessiah posted:I like Control in concept but it irritates me that it's basically it's own little ruleset on top of strands, like a player with a Control ability is kinda playing a different game then everyone else. I think Control is meant to let people run Mage in Fate. To that end, you're right; it is playing a different game. It's not supposed to be mixed into other SoF games, but used in its own games, in which all of the PC's have it.
|
| # ? Jan 4, 2012 06:36 |
|
|
Having read through this thread, FATE sounds completely awesome. I'll probably get both Legends of Anglerre and the core book (once they release it). I've been wanting to play an old-school fantasy game for a long time now, but so far I haven't found anything that replicates the feel rather than the actual rules. LoA sounds like it could handle what I have in mind perfectly. I've got a question regarding Aspects, though: The OP describes how you can tag aspects belonging to someone else or even aspects of the scene/area itself (which sounds awesome, I might add). But how are players meant to become aware of what aspects are available for tagging? For instance, do you as a GM have to declare NPC aspects as the NPC's enter the scene? If the character's haven't encountered Lord Goonington before, how are they supposed to know that he has (for example) the aspect Proud and thus be able to tag it when they use their Diplomacy skill or whatever? The same goes for scenes - if I'm describing to the players the ruins of a lost temple as creepy and foreboding, does this mean that they by definition have the aspect Creepy and Foreboding? I'm probably just misunderstanding something, but some elaboration on this would be great.
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 17:39 |
|
|
As for aspects that an object or person has, they become known when that person or object tags the aspect, or if the aspect is added in the presence of the player. They can also be discovered through investigative or social rolls. Think "I roll Insight to get a read on this person", and a successful roll reveals an aspect. I can't really comment on scene aspects, though, as I'm far too inexperienced. What I can say is this: scene aspects are usually more tangible than "Creepy" or "Foreboding". [edit: Just read the post below. It's more accurate and clear  ]
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 17:47 |
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:I've got a question regarding Aspects, though: The OP describes how you can tag aspects belonging to someone else or even aspects of the scene/area itself (which sounds awesome, I might add). But how are players meant to become aware of what aspects are available for tagging? You can also just tell them if it'll add to things. As always, don't make it an Aspect unless you want it to *influence play*. quote:The same goes for scenes - if I'm describing to the players the ruins of a lost temple as creepy and foreboding, does this mean that they by definition have the aspect Creepy and Foreboding? You can also have "Campaign Aspects", for example, or "story arc aspects", if you want to emphasize certain things.
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 17:47 |
|
|
As I recall, you can do that in three ways: A) You pony up a Fate Point and venture a guess based on the GM's descriptions ('gee, this place is dark? There wouldn't happen to be any Deadly Shadows, would there?'). As a GM, you're highly, highly encouraged to reveal an Aspect if the guess is at all close, because wasting a fate point sucks and player creativity is cool. B) You uncover them. You roll skills to determine any Aspects the character or place might have ('Hm, so this dude is a master swordsman, right? Can I roll Weapons as a supplementary roll to try and read his style?'). In some cases, you can get bluffed into uncovering a useless Aspect if you bomb your rolls! C) The GM reveals them straight up. This shouldn't happen all that often, but if you're setting the scene, you should always *at least* hint at the environmental Aspects, minimum. Remember, YOU are the one who sets the Aspects! If a key part of the temple's atmosphere is being Creepy and Foreboding, then it's totally an aspect. EDIT: Beaten like a minion group. I need to buy some stunts to boost my init. :-/
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 17:48 |
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:Having read through this thread, FATE sounds completely awesome. I'll probably get both Legends of Anglerre and the core book (once they release it). I've been wanting to play an old-school fantasy game for a long time now, but so far I haven't found anything that replicates the feel rather than the actual rules. LoA sounds like it could handle what I have in mind perfectly. quote:I've got a question regarding Aspects, though: The OP describes how you can tag aspects belonging to someone else or even aspects of the scene/area itself (which sounds awesome, I might add). But how are players meant to become aware of what aspects are available for tagging? There are two main ways to learn Aspects: 1) Guessing. Spend a Fate point and say "It seems like Lord Goonington is a good king, so I'll try to tag his Benevolent Ruler Aspect." If Lord Goonington has that Aspect (or one that's close within reason), then the Aspect can be tagged. If that Aspect doesn't exist, then the Fate point isn't spent. Note that just because Lord Goonington doesn't have the Benevolent Ruler Aspect, that doesn't mean he isn't a benevolent ruler. It just means that's not a major part of who he is. 2) Assessments. This is when you use skills like Empathy or Investigation to learn a subject's Aspects through research. By making the skill rolls, you can learn a target's actual Aspects. You investigate Lord Goonington's background, and learn that he really is a Benevolent Ruler. Guessing tends to work better for more general Aspects like you'd tend to find on scenes or targets (it's pretty likely that a giant dragon has a loving Huge-style Aspect), but for specific stuff skills and research play a larger part. Does that clarify things? e: Dammit!  Curse you, LogicNinja and Transient People!
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 17:55 |
|
|
Thanks for the quick replies, guys. I think I've got the hang of it now. Also, I've read some interesting stuff about how Fate/LoA handles organizations. Are you planning to cover that in your LoA writeup, Evil Mastermind? If not, could anyone give me a quick rundown?
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 18:10 |
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:Thanks for the quick replies, guys. I think I've got the hang of it now. Yeah, I'm going to cover Organizations in a few chapters. The next chapter is Powers, then Fate points, How to actually do stuff, Monsters, then we'll get to organizations. Basically, they work the same way as characters do; they have Aspects and their own specific skill and stunt lists, but otherwise use pretty much the same mechanics (only on a larger scale). There are also rules for constructs (castles and war machines) and mass-combat stuff.
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 18:32 |
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:If that Aspect doesn't exist, then the Fate point isn't spent. Note that just because Lord Goonington doesn't have the Benevolent Ruler Aspect, that doesn't mean he isn't a benevolent ruler. It just means that's not a major part of who he is. Some versions of FATE have a rule that at the DM's option the Fate point stays spent if the aspect not being there is a clue to something important rather than the outcome of a simple question-and-answer session. Comrade Koba posted:Thanks for the quick replies, guys. I think I've got the hang of it now. It depends on how you're planning to have the PCs interact with the organization. If it's just a matter of PCs doing something you can model the organization as an opponent based on the Leadership of whoever's running it. I'm going to let Evil Mastermind really dig into things in the FATAL thread, but organizations are kind of a cross-setting thing. This is based mostly on my Starblazer. If it's org-vs-org stuff or you want to spell the organization out more, you can create the organization as a "character" with its own skills like Arms, Security, and Technology and its own stress track. Organizations can stress each other with various opposed contests or get quick pay-it-forward bonuses to these contests with other opposed contests. For example, Lord Goonington's city-state of Bonerton wants to get itself a ritzy new airship, so it sends a delegation to the nearby federation of Dongslandia to set up a trade agreement, a Diplomacy-vs-Diplomacy roll to get a bonus to a Trade-vs-Trade roll to give Bonerton a persistent bonus on the Resources rolls to construct and maintain the airship. But disaster strikes as the Dongslandian thieves' guild attempts to kidnap the chief negotiator and destabilize talks, an Arms-vs-Security roll to weight the Diplo-vs-Diplo roll. If the PCs have a personal stake in the outcome, the GM has a couple of options. An abstract mode, where a PC can spend a Fate point to get a "highlight scene" where they use some skill to sway the outcome of one of the organization rolls (and the GM gets a pool to put the PCs on the spot to prevent the notables in the other organization from doing the same). Or a less abstract mode, where the GM uses each organization's relevant skills to build a pool of allies and enemies. Even if there isn't going to be org-on-org combat, the GM (and the PCs!) can still create organizations, and then in play use the organization skills to come up with the construction of its mook squads.
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 19:13 |
|
|
Glazius posted:For example, Lord Goonington's city-state of Bonerton wants to get itself a ritzy new airship, so it sends a delegation to the nearby federation of Dongslandia to set up a trade agreement, a Diplomacy-vs-Diplomacy roll to get a bonus to a Trade-vs-Trade roll to give Bonerton a persistent bonus on the Resources rolls to construct and maintain the airship. But disaster strikes as the Dongslandian thieves' guild attempts to kidnap the chief negotiator and destabilize talks, an Arms-vs-Security roll to weight the Diplo-vs-Diplo roll. I'm seriously going to run this when my LoA rulebook arrives in the mail. Man, I'm beginning to understand why people are so excited about FATE...
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 19:28 |
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:I'm seriously going to run this when my LoA rulebook arrives in the mail. This is called the "FATE fractal". If you have a mind, you can just scope up and scope down depending on where the story goes.
|
| # ? Jan 5, 2012 19:47 |
|
|
Are there any current FATE books that have rules/guidelines for having stuff like cohorts/companions/pets/etc? (Specifically I plan to try running a couple Pokemon themed adventures to get a couple of friends to try out more tabletop stuff) Zerilan fucked around with this message at Jan 6, 2012 around 01:14 |
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 00:54 |
|
|
True Evil Bob posted:Are there any current FATE books that have rules/guidelines for having stuff like cohorts/companions/pets/etc? Spirit of the Century, Kerberos Club, and the FATE Wiki have some. I think Legends of Anglerre might too. That said, I wouldn't represent Pokemon with minions or cohorts, I'd use Beast Change and maybe Modular Abilities from DFRPG to keep 'em distinct.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 01:51 |
|
|
True Evil Bob posted:Are there any current FATE books that have rules/guidelines for having stuff like cohorts/companions/pets/etc? Yes! Pretty much all the FATE books have some kind of rules for both minions (lesser mooks who die in droves) and companions (more than mooks, less than characters). With what I have on me right now, I'd suggest looking at the rules for magical allies in Legends of Anglerre, which basically let you build a companion with a combination of the companion and magical item rules. Transient People posted:Spirit of the Century, Kerberos Club, and the FATE Wiki have some. I think Legends of Anglerre might too. That said, I wouldn't represent Pokemon with minions or cohorts, I'd use Beast Change and maybe Modular Abilities from DFRPG to keep 'em distinct. Well, it depends on what kind of story you want to run. General FATE companion rules aren't well-suited to following the plots of the main games, but in the background it's more than hinted at that there are huge ranks of normal people who just have one Pokemon that helps them do their job or unwind, who don't make a career just out of fighting or showing off with the Pokemon. If you wanted to do like a police procedural about Officer Jenny, Field Investigator Jenny, Ace Pursuit Driver Jenny, and Field Technician Joy, or maybe a flashback to the Aura Knights of Ye Olde Dayyes, or a story about some kids and their pets who get swept up into a wild adventure, they'd be much more suitable. Glazius fucked around with this message at Jan 6, 2012 around 02:20 |
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 01:57 |
|
|
Glazius posted:Well, it depends on what kind of story you want to run. General FATE companion rules aren't well-suited to following the plots of the main games, but in the background it's more than hinted at that there are huge ranks of normal people who just have one Pokemon that helps them do their job or unwind, who don't make a career just out of fighting or showing off with the Pokemon. I was planning on letting the players be pokemon trainers, but probably limit their pokemon to 1-3 at most (although probably just one pokemon acting during a player's turn) so combat wouldn't be bogged down with too many entities involved.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 02:32 |
|
|
Definitely use Beast Change and Modular Abilities then, maybe applying a rebate so it isn't so costly. Unless you want the trainers to act alongside the Pokes, a la Pokémon Special, that should do the trick easily (and even that problem can be solved without much difficulty).
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 03:07 |
|
|
Transient People posted:Unless you want the trainers to act alongside the Pokes, a la Pokémon Special One of the players reads the manga and wants to play a Bruno-style martial artist, so that will probably be the case.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 03:48 |
|
|
True Evil Bob posted:One of the players reads the manga and wants to play a Bruno-style martial artist, so that will probably be the case. FATE often suggests having a cinematic camera that snaps between multiple scenes of interest - a brawler and a sharpshooter holding off a horde of Nazis while an archaeologist inches his way through the ruins to the treasure. If you're going to go Special I'd recommend going all the ghost-slicing lava-surfing fake-arm-ice-juju-fooling way and just have everybody build two characters, one to represent the trainer and one to represent their Pokemon (or collective Pokemon). Just pick who's "active" on a per-scene basis and when you have to split the scene, pick who goes where.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 04:04 |
|
|
I just got the LoA book today, and won't have DFRPG until probably Saturday, but just going off how the names of stuff like Beast Change/Modular Abilities sound, would having the collective pokemon be one character that effectively "transforms" between the active pokemon work?
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 04:18 |
|
|
I'd make that the actual trainer, myself, but yes, that could work. But yeah, if you're curious about how you make a trainer-and-pokemon combo work? Just make them pay a Fate Point when they want their Pokémon and Trainer to both act in a turn. If they do, let them use stunts, skills, and whatever for both. If they don't, either the trainer is too shocked to act, the Pocket Monster is too wounded, or whatever. This is similar to what the FATE wiki suggests for minions IIRC, and it should work if your players aren't dicks and try to break the action economy.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 04:38 |
|
|
True Evil Bob posted:I just got the LoA book today, and won't have DFRPG until probably Saturday, but just going off how the names of stuff like Beast Change/Modular Abilities sound, would having the collective pokemon be one character that effectively "transforms" between the active pokemon work? If you're looking at LoA then look at the "power skills" chapter and some of the creature stunts. Taking Beast Change as a stunt lets you rearrange your skills, so if somebody's got a Charizard and an Alakazam they could swap out Elemental Fire (great), Fists (good), and Athletics (good) for Domination (great), Telekinesis (good), and Dimensions (good). You take it once per alternate form you want. Taking Modular Abilities lets you swap out supernatural stunts, so swap out, say, Glide, Tail, and Create Fire for Create Portal, Levitate, and Command. You only take it once. Dresden Files costs it as two stunts, but I say cost it as a stunt with a rider that each alternate form has to have a minor weakness. Because what's Pokemon without Super Effective? In general, I'd look at Dresden Files for inspiration but not to necessarily cost for a Pokemon game, because it's based on modern urban fantasy noir and makes specific assumptions to further that feel. Transient People posted:I'd make that the actual trainer, myself, but yes, that could work. Yeah, if they're both in the same scene this seems about right. I'd also say you could use specific stunts like Dittoguise (use Deceit to defend against attacks) or FastPokeBall Special (use your trainer's Melee Weapons skill instead of Athletics to cross gaps/catch up to things) to represent the specific trainer/Pokemon synergy you see now and again in Special. Glazius fucked around with this message at Jan 6, 2012 around 05:02 |
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 04:53 |
|
|
I just have to say that you guys have some awesome ideas. This Pokemon RPG stuff is pure gold.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 05:05 |
|
|
Glazius posted:You only take it once. Dresden Files costs it as two stunts, but I say cost it as a stunt with a rider that each alternate form has to have a minor weakness. Because what's Pokemon without Super Effective? Didn't even notice the Weaknesses at first flipping through stuff, but I guess most forms could have minor weaknesses to types the pokemon is weak against, while pokemon with 4x weaknesses in game (like Geodude and Water) could have a major weakness against Water or Grass related Stunts/Maneuvers. Zerilan fucked around with this message at Jan 6, 2012 around 05:34 |
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 05:31 |
|
|
Transient People posted:I'd make that the actual trainer, myself, but yes, that could work. What do you mean by breaking the action economy?
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 14:25 |
|
|
I don't know anything specific about FATE; but 'Action econcomy' ususally refers to actions per turn: Players should have an equal amount of 'stuff' to do per turn. A fighter might get one sword-swing per turn, but a wizard might pull a haste/gate/wish and summon a million solars to enact a million turns, all within the span of his turn. The wizard is now breaking the action economy.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 17:39 |
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:I don't know anything specific about FATE; but 'Action econcomy' ususally refers to actions per turn: Players should have an equal amount of 'stuff' to do per turn. Yeah, FATE works much the same way. Action scenes can ultimately zoom in to "exchanges", where everybody gets to do one thing and then the next exchange starts. You can't really do multiple things quite as much as do one thing (and make one roll) that gets more complicated due to circumstances that your other skills may apply to. If you're swordfighting on a tightrope you don't make a roll to take a swing and a roll to catch your balance, you just take a penalty to the attack if you're worse at balancing than swording.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 18:01 |
|
|
Pretty much what the others said: What I'm suggesting up there is "let a player take two actions if he burns a fate point, one for the trainer and one for the pocket monster", like a sort of cheaper version of the old SotC Snap Shot stunt. This is powerful, as it means you act twice as much as other people, but it does burn through Fate Points quick. I'd only use this rule if I know my players aren't going to go mad with power with it, but it can work for representing independent monsters working with their trainer.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 19:58 |
|
|
Just a head's up since I'm posting it everywhere: the PDF of Legends of Anglerre is on sale for $12 as part of RPGNow's New Year, New Game sale.
|
| # ? Jan 6, 2012 20:02 |
|
|
I finally pulled the trigger on Legends on Anglerre, wheeeee.
|
| # ? Jan 8, 2012 01:37 |
|
|
A question for Goons wiser than myself in the ways of FATE: if you were the sort of person who used to love the Amber Diceless RPG, but would rather use a different system to run PCs in that milieu, which iteration of FATE would be best suited? I'd like something a bit less awkward than the competitive auction, the wildly unbalanced point costs, and I think Aspects, Stunts, and the overall FATE system would be a good way to allow the flexibility of an Amber game while also adding some randomness. I have Diaspora (read through and played cluster and character creation, but nothing more) and Starblazer Adventures (I've skimmed through; frankly, the sheer size intimidates me!). Neither of those two seem quite right, though. Would Strands of Fate be the right move? Can I seriously tinker around with Legends of Anglerre or the Dresden Files? ibntumart fucked around with this message at Jan 9, 2012 around 10:50 |
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 10:47 |
|
|
Totally Dresden, I would think, as it straddles the contempory and fantasy stuff. A lot of the stunts and powers would fit in really well - you could probably package them as templates (Amberites have big refresh costs and inhuman strength / endurance, chaosites have shapeshifting, thaumatirgic rituals and items of power would fit right in, etc) That said I'm most familiar with Dresden.
|
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 12:17 |
|
|
I'm 13 pages into Legends of Anglarre ($12 right now on Drivethrurpg). My first Fate book and I think I love it. Can Fate work well in play-by-post or is it optimal in a real time atmosphere to hash out all the aspect compelling and stuff?
|
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 14:21 |
|
|
Just to update anyone who might have been curious about my success in switching my group from D&D4e to LoA, I've gotten all the characters in and good god, I'm really proud of these people, because the backgrounds are a lot more than I expected. I can't remember who said it, but I repeated what someone on these forums said about how your Aspects are basically saying "this is the kind of thing I want to happen to my character" and it seems they all took it to heart in a huge way and applied it to their backgrounds. For those interested at all, our party consists of; Kendra Taylor: A young girl of "noble" birth (her parents actually faked their way into nobility and aren't really noble at all, but good at pretending. She is unaware of any of this) who, upon being told of her arranged marriage to a young lord's son, ran away from her family and decided to live on the streets, using her courtly talents to make a living as a bard. Now twenty years old, she has been wandering the world for seven years, making a modest living with her musical and academic knowledge and running away from the occasional bounty hunter attempting to force her back to her family. Arturius: A 25 year old ex-squire on the run from the law. Born into a poor family, his parents sold him into a Knights servitude to work as a squire and hopefully become a knight himself. After years of faithful service, his Master burst in to his room in a town they were staying at while being pursued by the local guards after raping and murdering a tavern whore and demanded Arturius take the blame for the crime. He refused, denounced his knightly vows and escaped. He now travels from town to town, avoiding the authorities and making ends meet as a fencing instructor using what little training he remembers from his days being trained in the knighthood. Sect Harana: A shy sorceress, abandoned to a convent as a baby and raised as a novice nun and missionary. After a small incident involving a bandit raid on the church, a meteor and a very confused young Sect, she now devotes her time to the church library and archives, her nose pretty much constantly in a book as she attempts to figure out the origin or source of her innate and often uncontrollable magic powers. Maybe these aren't the best or most original backgrounds but I'm really impressed by these. The last time we ran a game, the most background I could get out of most people was "I like rocks!" for our Goliath or "I sold my soul to the devil and now I'm going insane" for our Drow assassin. Plenty of plot hooks in there, and I'm really looking forward to throwing some things Kendra's way about her parents, I think her player would really really enjoy it, especially since she's playing her as a petulant, spoiled brat instead of a "woe is me" damsel. Now for a question. I have plot hooks and events in mind for everybody about a thousand times and all of it sounds so cool in my head but obviously I don't want to overwhelm the party or turn the campaign into one LOOK AT THIS COOL THING HAPPENING OVER HERE thing after another. Aside from the character plot stuff I'm running it pretty sandboxy but how do you as a GM avoid wanting to just throw in all your cool ideas? I want there to be downtime of course (at some point I'm hoping to throw in a bit of management, like having the party own a business) but that temptation will always be there just because there's so much to work with. How do you resist when the pull is so strong?
|
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 17:13 |
|
|
Faerie Fortune posted:Now for a question. I have plot hooks and events in mind for everybody about a thousand times and all of it sounds so cool in my head but obviously I don't want to overwhelm the party or turn the campaign into one LOOK AT THIS COOL THING HAPPENING OVER HERE thing after another. Aside from the character plot stuff I'm running it pretty sandboxy but how do you as a GM avoid wanting to just throw in all your cool ideas? I want there to be downtime of course (at some point I'm hoping to throw in a bit of management, like having the party own a business) but that temptation will always be there just because there's so much to work with. How do you resist when the pull is so strong? Skyrim serves as a pretty good model. Try to build a "map" of adventures, that flow either causally or geographically. Start by giving a couple of simple hooks to towns A, B, and C. When they roll into town A, they see that there's other stuff going on, as well. The various plot hooks branch out from here, but never throw the entire tree at them. The human mind shuts down when the possibilities become too numerous.
|
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 17:32 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 08:35 |
|
|
Can players spend fate points on compels for NPCs? I've read a couple times in different books that the storyteller asks the table for compels and while I suppose players could compel each other it seems like they'd derive the greatest benefit from being able to compel an antagonist.
|
| # ? Jan 9, 2012 19:21 |
|
