TheRPGSite

I'm considering doing a Fate-powered post-apocalyptic game. Since Fate seems capable of doing what I wanted for the setting.

Tell me what you like about Fate? What do you hate about it? What could it use?

Quote from: Silverlion;612168I'm considering doing a Fate-powered post-apocalyptic game. Since Fate seems capable of doing what I wanted for the setting.

Tell me what you like about Fate? What do you hate about it? What could it use?

Don't like: everything boils down to +2.

Like: the ladder

Don't like: aspects

Like: ....

Don't like: stunts

Like....

Don't like: 30,000 page rulebooks.

Like: everything about it that was Fudge.
Absolutely despise: anything added for Fate.

Quote from: Piestrio;612170Don't like: everything boils down to +2.

Only if you have an unimaginative GM who's bought into the "Aspects for Everything!!!11!!1!!!!" meme.

Fate requires players to not only be keyed into and participating into the setting, but also understanding and participating in the system.  You can have a player immersed in the environment, totally engaged with his character but if he can't figure out how to interact with the Fate Point economy its a waste of a session.  In the right hands it can absolutely sing, if the players or GM falter it flounders big time.

It seems to me like Fate 2.0 was more succinct and universal than the current iteration - there feels like a lot of bloat to it.  It takes Fate Core 304 pages to do what Risus does in 6, for instance.

I say this as someone prepping to start a Fate campaign eight days from now.  For this setting and these players, I can see it working.  If there was a better alternative, I'd probably take it.

Quote from: Piestrio;612170>snip<

Quote from: CRKrueger;612188Like: everything about it that was Fudge.
Absolutely despise: anything added for Fate.

I concur with all of this. I've listened to some actual play recordings of Fate games and got the impression all the non-Fudge elements to it only serve to make the game more needlessly fiddly.

Just use Fudge instead and you will have a nice post-apoc game!

I found the game horribly, horribly abstract. I think it's a storygame by any sane definition of storygame (i.e. a game calibrated to crank out a session which feels like a written story, with literary formalisms taking a backseat to the emulation of a consistent world), which is no indictment in my book, but as I hinted above, I don't usually warm up to very abstract systems.

Quote from: Kiero;612197Only if you have an unimaginative GM who's bought into the "Aspects for Everything!!!11!!1!!!!" meme.

But isn't this what the book all but tells you to do? I'm interested in hearing how you decide when to use, and more importantly, when not to use Aspects.

I honestly think for a system based off a pretty abstract, rules-light system like FUDGE, there's been a lot of bloat. I suppose if I were to use FATE again, I'd actually probably start with FUDGE, and throw in any ideas I really liked.

I like pretty much everything about FATE 3.

• I like that it's a short trip to a good setting conversion.
• The system itself is extremely hackable.
• Players can work together through the system in ways that impact the in-game environment expressed as system bits.
• Aspects. They're a great way to reinforce the setting, characters, and scenes.
• Tactical Gameplay. I don't mean system mastery as that gets you only so far in FATE. Game play can feel tactical (if you know the subject matter) without too much reliance on system. If you and the group, for example, have some understanding of small unit tactics in real life it's trivial to translate that into gameplay. Can that be accomplished with other systems? Sure. But I've found that FATE does it extremely well with a very low threshold.

FATE 3 has been put on a diet. You don't have to sift through Spirit of the Century or Dresden Files to discern system from setting. FATE Core is available now through Kickstarter. Pledge a buck and get the current draft.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/evilhat/fate-core

Quote from: CRKrueger;612188Like: everything about it that was Fudge.
Absolutely despise: anything added for Fate.

Seconded.

Aspects are the ultimate "Mother May I" mechanic.

Quote from: FASERIP;612325Seconded.

Aspects are the ultimate "Mother May I" mechanic.

I don't even understand what that means. Aspects aren't for asking permission. They are for info sharing.

Quote from: Silverlion;612168Tell me what you like about Fate?

Rank heresy, I know, but I like the character-driven mechanics-- the idea that a character's values and essential nature are often more important than his skills or his powers.

I like the simple math involved. Bell curves with a center of 0.

I like the way the Aspects system encourages roleplay by making characters stronger when they're played in-character.

Quote from: Silverlion;612168What do you hate about it? What could it use?

Lack of advancement systems. There isn't enough of a range between starting characters and experienced characters and it doesn't handle the D&D "zero to hero" model-- where characters can literally advance from peasants to demigods-- very well at all.

I would also prefer a more tactical, crunchier approach to combat.

Quote from: Eisenmann;612331I don't even understand what that means. Aspects aren't for asking permission. They are for info sharing.

Indeed, however, he may be referring to the nature of "guessing" aspects in certain situations, in general I solve this by including aspect information in descriptions, and or allowing skill rolls to perceive aspect elements.  

"He seems haughty" or 'The room is filled with shadows."  After all the observations of the player are not the observations of the character.

It shouldn't be a guessing game, yes it should require some effort. But that effort should be character focused, not player focused (or at least more character focused than player focused.)

Quote from: Silverlion;612438Indeed, however, he may be referring to the nature of "guessing" aspects in certain situations, in general I solve this by including aspect information in descriptions, and or allowing skill rolls to perceive aspect elements.  

"He seems haughty" or 'The room is filled with shadows."  After all the observations of the player are not the observations of the character.

It shouldn't be a guessing game, yes it should require some effort. But that effort should be character focused, not player focused (or at least more character focused than player focused.)

Ah, yeah. That's a GM problem. And, yep. I totally agree on your assessment.

A lot of the time I'll actually put scene aspects on cards and lay them out on the table.

http://platonicsolid.blogspot.com/2009/06/chronica-feudalis-aspect-cards.html

This approach has become "official" in FATE Core.

Sometimes I'll still keep an aspect or two secret but clues leading up to that scene will be pointing in their direction. Heck, if a PC maneuver creates something close I'll roll with it.

Quote from: Silverlion;612168I'm considering doing a Fate-powered post-apocalyptic game. Since Fate seems capable of doing what I wanted for the setting.

Tell me what you like about Fate? What do you hate about it? What could it use?

Love FATE 2nd edition.

Fate 3rd edition is a rules-glutted piece of storygame wankery.

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 (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=24581). 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.

I like the Fudge legacy of Fate, the ladder, the Fudge dice and attitude.

I like Aspects in their role of character descriptor.

I like that is it a character driven system.

I like that is Margin of Success based system and the interesting things you can do with that.

I dislike the rule bloat. LoA has over 50 pages for skills. Come on!

I dislike the traditional skill Pyramid though it can be fixed.

I dislike the various character generation mini-games or gimmicks.

I like Compels but dislike paying to refuse Compel and I am disappointed in that despite so many versions of Fate the whole area around Compels remains murky feels unfinished to me.

I dislike the emphasis that has been placed on the Fate Point economy in some quarters; nothing wrong with Fate Points going back and forth but should not be the purpose of the game.

Soylent Green, have you had a chance to check out FATE Core?

It has streamlined a few things while giving pretty good advice on how to handle things like equipment. It has also pared back the number of starting character aspects which makes creating characters more straight forward. In the past I'd let players who couldn't come up with all of their aspects to leave slots open to be filled in later. Now that's no longer an issue.

I hear you on LoA. I was hoping that it'd be a strong candidate for my FATE fantasy go-to game but it was just too much.

I've not checked out Core Fate, I'm not really big on kickstarters. I'll probably grab it when it's done.

I don't mind the large number of Aspect found in older version of Fate as it means you can be more relaxed about it. I like the "character generation on the fly option" from SotC and I encourage players to choose Aspects during play. The way I see it if your vested enough in the situation to feel like spending point there is probably an Aspect of your character involved which as player you'd not considered before let written it down yet. Likewise even if a player has a Aspect that isn't getting much use, as longs as it means something to him I'm happy with it.

Quote from: Soylent Green;612836I've not checked out Core Fate, I'm not really big on kickstarters. I'll probably grab it when it's done.

A buck gets you instant access to the draft so it's a pretty good deal.

QuoteI don't mind the large number of Aspect found in older version of Fate as it means you can be more relaxed about it. I like the "character generation on the fly option" from SotC and I encourage players to choose Aspects during play. The way I see it if your vested enough in the situation to feel like spending point there is probably an Aspect of your character involved which as player you'd not considered before let written it down yet. Likewise even if a player has a Aspect that isn't getting much use, as longs as it means something to him I'm happy with it.

In one of our Spirit of the Century/Middle Earth sessions one PC said several times, "Hey, I'm not dumb!" Right on the spot I suggested that become one of his aspects. Everyone laughed including the PC's player and it stuck. Just one of those spontaneous great moments.

Quote from: Eisenmann;612875A buck gets you instant access to the draft so it's a pretty good deal.

And Fred even points out on the Kickstarter page that you can pledge, download the draft, and cancel your pledge.

But, I'd recommend the $10 pledge. For a minimal fee, you get PDF copies of  Core Rules, 3 other rulebooks of the same size, and 8 (I think) settings for FATE.

That's a pretty sweet haul for very little money, any way you slice it.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;612918And Fred even points out on the Kickstarter page that you can pledge, download the draft, and cancel your pledge.

But, I'd recommend the $10 pledge. For a minimal fee, you get PDF copies of  Core Rules, 3 other rulebooks of the same size, and 8 (I think) settings for FATE.

That's a pretty sweet haul for very little money, any way you slice it.

It really is. After pledging a dollar and seeing the draft I went back and upped it to ten.

The thing about FATE is that its absolutely a toolkit; you have to model your version of FATE to the type of emulation that you're trying to accomplish.  Games that do so (Starblazer Adventures and ICONS are two excellent examples) end up being amazing games.  If you don't do this, however, or do it badly, you're going to end up with something mediocre at best.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;613266The thing about FATE is that its absolutely a toolkit; you have to model your version of FATE to the type of emulation that you're trying to accomplish.  Games that do so (Starblazer Adventures and ICONS are two excellent examples) end up being amazing games.  If you don't do this, however, or do it badly, you're going to end up with something mediocre at best.

RPGPundit

Very well said.

Quote from: RPGPundit;613266The thing about FATE is that its absolutely a toolkit; you have to model your version of FATE to the type of emulation that you're trying to accomplish.  Games that do so (Starblazer Adventures and ICONS are two excellent examples) end up being amazing games.  If you don't do this, however, or do it badly, you're going to end up with something mediocre at best.

Most definitely. That's part of its appeal for me. I gotta note though, you don't have to go as big as Starblazer or even ICONS to assemble an effective model for gameplay. I've had some really good experience running Star Wars with Spirit of the Century and Macross with a small subset of Starblazer. Admittedly staying light (with clarity) can take some deliberate effort. Tweaks throughout FATE Core, I think, will help GMs do more with just a thin veneer than with previous variants.

Quote from: Silverlion;612168I'm considering doing a Fate-powered post-apocalyptic game. Since Fate seems capable of doing what I wanted for the setting.

Tell me what you like about Fate? What do you hate about it? What could it use?

Like:

I'll get to naming specific rules in a second and phrase it a bit less mechanically. I like that FATE encourages player buy-in to the setting and encourages more nuanced, believable behavior by characters.

The mechanics that do this are:
1) The setting builders (vary widely from FATE game to FATE game)
2) The wailing point some folks have above: aspects.

Don't like:

Some iterations of FATE, and some FATE backers want to use aspects as a replacement for more concrete mechanics. AFAIAC, they aren't made for that and aren't good at that. Fortunately, FATE games like SBA, Bulldogs, and Diaspora show that the game works really well with concrete mechanics alongside aspects.

Quote from: Eisenmann;613324Most definitely. That's part of its appeal for me. I gotta note though, you don't have to go as big as Starblazer or even ICONS to assemble an effective model for gameplay. I've had some really good experience running Star Wars with Spirit of the Century and Macross with a small subset of Starblazer. Admittedly staying light (with clarity) can take some deliberate effort. Tweaks throughout FATE Core, I think, will help GMs do more with just a thin veneer than with previous variants.

No, you don't need to go as far as that, but you are well-served by looking at games like Starblazer, Anglerre, or ICONS to provide examples of the way you can modify the basic core of FATE for your own game.

RPGPundit

How storygamey is FATE in play?

Quote from: Piestrio;613645How storygamey is FATE in play?

I've found it very abstract and gimmicky. It's a conflict-resolution system (as opposed to more traditional task-resolution) and conflict is resolved using hit point-like Stress Tracks; when you "take a hit" you have the option of taking a negative Aspect called a Consequence instead of ticking a box. Tick all box and you've "lost" (though what "losing" means isn't always clear and is supposed to be determined by the context).

I think it's a storygame. Pundy swears it's not a storygame but he modifies or outright ignores a decent chunk of the rules as written.

I wouldn't say it's a bad game but it's not my cup of tea.

I've got a friend who calls Fate 3 a "tell me how you win" game.

Pretty much as long as you have '+2 tokens' AKA "fate chips" you will win your conflict.

On paper it seems like I should like Fate quite a bit and, in fact, I've used it quite a bit.  But damn, each and ever ytime it really does end up with the players pretty much being able to win every conflict with the sheer amount of fate chips they can bring to bear.

I will say, I like Fate better when I mandate Fate point expenditure *before* a roll (so the dice actually feel like they have some impact as opposed to a simple speed bump) plus I use the D6-D6 method which gives a wider spread.

In some ways, Marvel Heroic Roleplaying is my better version of Fate where 'aspects' actually differ in value (die size) as opposed to everything being worth a +2.

Quote from: Ian Noble;613668On paper it seems like I should like Fate quite a bit and, in fact, I've used it quite a bit.  But damn, each and ever ytime it really does end up with the players pretty much being able to win every conflict with the sheer amount of fate chips they can bring to bear.

If pacing hasn't depleted the PC's Fate points then minions are pretty handy here.

Quote from: The Butcher;613652Pundy swears it's not a storygame but he modifies or outright ignores a decent chunk of the rules as written.

Which is kind of the point of a toolbox system. Hence all the new players who don't understand how to play AD&D or even GURPs.

Quote from: TristramEvans;613861Which is kind of the point of a toolbox system. Hence all the new players who don't understand how to play AD&D or even GURPs.

I've read and played my share of toolbox games, but FATE (at least as presented in SBA) is horribly, horribly written and laid out.

Quote from: The Butcher;613892I've read and played my share of toolbox games, but FATE (at least as presented in SBA) is horribly, horribly written and laid out.

+++

I suspect that a lot of the core mechanics are assumed by the authors and they've never really broken them down and groked their own creation enough to crystallize it in concrete statements. Hence, the utter lack of such statements when talking about, for example, details of how Compels work.

(To be fair, that's hard to do, for anyone. The quote I most remember, about a mathematician, is "I don't understand this concept well enough to explain it in plain language." That's where Evil Hat is stuck.)

Fred has been complaining (in connection with FATE Core) about having to rewrite the Compel rules again and again. People just don't get it.

It's Evil Hat's fault. They haven't explained it clearly. They need to take a step back, identify which parts of the rules are vague or incomplete, and work on expressing and explaining those parts clearly.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;613908Fred has been complaining (in connection with FATE Core) about having to rewrite the Compel rules again and again. People just don't get it.

It's Evil Hat's fault. They haven't explained it clearly. They need to take a step back, identify which parts of the rules are vague or incomplete, and work on expressing and explaining those parts clearly.

To be fair, it isn't Compels that get me.

I have a hard time with grading Consequences.

I think they should offer a more concise description of the basics, and use lots and lots of examples. Oh, and better editing too, the system's all over the place.

Quote from: The Butcher;613892I've read and played my share of toolbox games, but FATE (at least as presented in SBA) is horribly, horribly written and laid out.

SBA is... not a good presentation of Fate 3.  It's kind of fucking ridiculous, actually, with a phone directory-sized rulebook and super-ugly layout.

If you ever get your hands on Diaspora, you might be pleasantly surprised.  Very concise and layout is great.

Quote from: Ian Noble;613952SBA is... not a good presentation of Fate 3.  It's kind of fucking ridiculous, actually, with a phone directory-sized rulebook and super-ugly layout.

If you ever get your hands on Diaspora, you might be pleasantly surprised.  Very concise and layout is great.

I found Diaspora harder to understand, because of its order of information. I'd recommend Bulldogs! Fate edition myself. Its the most concise version I've seen attached to a published game.

Quote from: Piestrio;613645How storygamey is FATE in play?

The only thing I might really consider story gamey is that some (maybe 20%) compels might have the player making decisions that the PC is not aware of or cannot influence.

A normal compel might be a player whose pc is "always itchin' for a fight" to get in an inconvenient brawl, which is their choice. But a PC with "really big" might have a fragile bridge crumble under them; in that case, the player is making a choice that the PC cannot.

I personally don't consider this a big deal, as it's a much better way to handle disadvantage type mechanisms than traditional point buy mechanisms, which are much more prone to min/maxing, and accordingly much more likely to break my immersion the having to make an occasional choice from an ooc perspective.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;613960The only thing I might really consider story gamey is that some (maybe 20%) compels might have the player making decisions that the PC is not aware of or cannot influence.

A normal compel might be a player whose pc is "always itchin' for a fight" to get in an inconvenient brawl, which is their choice. But a PC with "really big" might have a fragile bridge crumble under them; in that case, the player is making a choice that the PC cannot.

I personally don't consider this a big deal, as it's a much better way to handle disadvantage type mechanisms than traditional point buy mechanisms, which are much more prone to min/maxing, and accordingly much more likely to break my immersion the having to make an occasional choice from an ooc perspective.

Well for me, the general concept of an aspect is something you are willing to have come up--good or ill, so the player made the character who they expect to have those problems.

Quote from: The Butcher;613892I've read and played my share of toolbox games, but FATE (at least as presented in SBA) is horribly, horribly written and laid out.

I agree, as far as the 3rd edition books go. I don't think they explain the system properly for new players (or old-school players), provide way too many options without indicating they are options, and don't really distinguish between standard mechanics and narrative based mechanics.

Of them all, Icons, despite not technically being a FATE product, does the best streamlined presentation of the system. 2nd edition, OTOH, was quite tightly streamlined and well-presented.

Quote from: The Butcher;613892I've read and played my share of toolbox games, but FATE (at least as presented in SBA) is horribly, horribly written and laid out.

Quote from: Ian Noble;613952SBA is... not a good presentation of Fate 3.

Indeed. SotC is a little bit messy, in ways that seem logical but sort of make navigation difficult (skills, then a stunt list sorted by skill, which makes it harder to know at a glance if you spot the word "athletics", you don't know right off if you are looking at stunts or skill uses.) But SBA is more or less taking SotC, adding "space stuff", and then throwing in subsystem after subsystem after subsystem... some more valuable than others (I don't see ever using the plot stress rules, for example.)

Diaspora and Bulldogs are quite a bit cleaner in their presentation.

Quote from: Piestrio;613645How storygamey is FATE in play?

The basic answer is that it depends how you play it.  I think the essence of FATE, its absolute skeleton, isn't storygamey at all.

But a storygamer could certainly take the rules and infuse into them a considerable storygame element; I don't know if this makes the game a decent storygame, but it does usually make it a poor RPG.

Likewise, a regular roleplayer will set up and run FATE in such a way that it will play as a completely regular RPG.   Otherwise, I certainly would never have run two lengthy campaigns with it (so far).

RPGPundit