For me, "tagging aspects" is hideously metagamey and destroys immersion. But it certainly works great for many gamers.

Quote from: Spinachcat;612513For me, "tagging aspects" is hideously metagamey and destroys immersion. But it certainly works great for many gamers.

Yeah, that.

FATE always feels like I'm playing the system rather than the game.

Love the interplay between metagame and in-game.  Love that the system encourages and rewards playing in-character rather than avoiding your character's flaws.

Don't like the hand-wavey nature of aspects -- you have to be careful about character aspects or it can start to feel trite.  

After talking with someone else, also don't like the differentiation between "discovering" and "declaring" an aspect.

If I'm jonesing for something tactical or granular on a system level, FATE isn't going to be the engine I'm using.

Quote from: Spinachcat;612513For me, "tagging aspects" is hideously metagamey and destroys immersion. But it certainly works great for many gamers.

Yeah, often it does seem that you lose the feel of the game in the mechanics. I was a big fan of FATE when it first came out, but after a while I got so I just felt like there were too many details in a "simple" game.

Still love the concept of FUDGE, however, and love even more Amber Diceless so it's not that I don't like story games.

Different strokes and all that but I don't find much of a difference between:

Make a save vs. paralysis with your dex modifier.

and

I run out of the room using Athletics and since it's Dark in there...

Quote from: Eisenmann;612622Different strokes and all that but I don't find much of a difference between:

Make a save vs. paralysis with your dex modifier.

and

I run out of the room using Athletics and since it's Dark in there...

You may have to take note that saves are GM sided mechanics while aspects are more communal, and that bothers some people.

I generally prefer IC directed actions, but I think it is possible to declare aspects IC and still function as a game. Similar what you said above, but you've got to have the game be clear that this is possible. "I will sneak through the shadows, and since it is dark in here, "drops fate chip" into bucket." As a described and rule correct action.

Quote from: Silverlion;612711You may have to take note that saves are GM sided mechanics while aspects are more communal, and that bothers some people.

I generally prefer IC directed actions, but I think it is possible to declare aspects IC and still function as a game. Similar what you said above, but you've got to have the game be clear that this is possible. "I will sneak through the shadows, and since it is dark in here, "drops fate chip" into bucket." As a described and rule correct action.

So it's not the comms per se...

I'm spoiled by my group. From the get-go, aspect use has been done in-character. Switching to Spirit of the Far Future (Diaspora's working prototype) saved my Traveller campaign. We started out with Mongoose's Traveller that I personally really like but the group just didn't engage. Switched to FATE and it took off.

It's just too abstract for me. I can't suspend my disbelief for ice that's only slippery if someone decides that it's slippery.

Quote from: Dan Davenport;612757It's just too abstract for me. I can't suspend my disbelief for ice that's only slippery if someone decides that it's slippery.

That's bad handling of it. I should always be slippery (Free Tag that anyone can use without cost.)

Quote from: Silverlion;612760That's bad handling of it. I should always be slippery (Free Tag that anyone can use without cost.)

You should always be slippery? O.o

Quote from: Dan Davenport;612762You should always be slippery? O.o

Whoops, IT.

I understand what you're saying Tim, but that's not what Dan really is referring to.  Ice is slippery, everyone knows it's slippery.  In FATE it's not, at least not automatically.  Now I can add a houserule that says "All Ice is Slippery" but in the end, you're still saying the same thing - the Ice isn't slippery unless someone puts a big sign on it saying "This is Slippery" for the purpose of the narrative.  The fact that a good GM should always place that sign, doesn't mean the sign isn't there.

Quote from: CRKrueger;612783I understand what you're saying Tim, but that's not what Dan really is referring to.  Ice is slippery, everyone knows it's slippery.  In FATE it's not, at least not automatically.  Now I can add a houserule that says "All Ice is Slippery" but in the end, you're still saying the same thing - the Ice isn't slippery unless someone puts a big sign on it saying "This is Slippery" for the purpose of the narrative.  The fact that a good GM should always place that sign, doesn't mean the sign isn't there.

Again it depends on the version of Fate. Plus its not saying ice isn't slippery, its saying "the slippery ice isn't having an impact on the situation," which is a different thing all together. It could mean that the person found good footing in spite of the ice, or that they found the one spot that has melted a little or has traction due to salt or whatever.

Quote from: Silverlion;612760That's bad handling of it. I should always be slippery (Free Tag that anyone can use without cost.)

If this is the intent of the designers, they did a poor job of communicating that.

(Which is my criticism of their writing in general. Big bloat, coupled with vast oceans of "thanks for vague-ing that up for me" — your rules were almost clear and concise. Wouldn't want that.)

The rules give the impression that dark shadows, slippery ice, and fire that burns are all optional things with Exactly Proper Names that only hide you/trip you/burn you if someone spends a FATE point.

Again, maybe that isn't their intent. But that's how the rules read.

I like the concept of Aspects, and am adapting (aka "licensing under the OGL") them for use in my own little action-movie RPG. But the game is very quirky, vague about critical concepts (compels: how much trouble should they cause?), and crunchy/abstract in all the wrong places. (Combat zones, as an example.)

The notion that you have to represent environmental conditions like slippery, dark or on fire with Aspects is a popular misconception.

Fate 3.0 has rules for standard situational modifiers for such things. So for instance hiding in a pitch black room gives you +4 to your roll, no Aspects or Fate points required. Fire damage is listed too, at least in some versions. It is perhaps a little unfortunate that these rules tends to be hidden in the skill write ups rather than presented all in on place.

Where environmental Aspect come into their own is when they come as a result of player action as a tactical tool. One of the design goals of Fate is to encourage players in combat to use creative alternatives beyond direct attacks, things that might distract the opponent or give a team mate a better chance at hit him a bit like Savage World's Tricks.  This is what is called a Manoeuvre.

Ice isn't a good example, but let's say  in fight scene on the characters instead of attacking decides to kick a barrel of grease on the ground to hamper the opposition. What the rules try to ensure is that the character is rewarded enough for the clever thinking (hence the "free tag" of the new Aspect "Slippery Floor" ) but not so much that it becomes a cheap exploit, trivialises the actual combat skills the other characters have worked for and does end up with the characters carrying barrels of grease with them wherever they go. As such subsequent tags of the slippery floor Aspect cost a Fate Point.

It is also worth pointing out that is you know you are going to model something with an Aspect then you probably should describe the describe it in terms reflect that it's does not apply uniformly everywhere, every time because that is not how Aspects work. So "Slippery Patches on the Floor" is a better Aspect name than "Slippery Floor".

But if you feel it really should be slippery everywhere for everyone, then just use a situational modifier. Fate isn't just Aspects.