I heard great things about Fudge. I was also told the flaw of it was that the higher your ability, the more dF you rolled, therefore the more chances you had of rolling negative numbers and getting a lower result than if you rolled less dFs. Is that right? It sounds a bit goofy.
Note: I have not played Fudge, just something I heard from a critic of the system at one point. I thought I'd ask since this thread popped up.

Quote from: finarvyn;902341I'd like to see a nice Fudge Amber rules set as a way to put some randomness in my diceless combats. I did a search long ago for something like this, but was troubled to find one by the guy who developed FATE that said [...]

FATE was developed precisely because the developers were dissatisfied with Amber Diceless' mechanics.  So you've come full circle.

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;902389I heard great things about Fudge. I was also told the flaw of it was that the higher your ability, the more dF you rolled, therefore the more chances you had of rolling negative numbers and getting a lower result than if you rolled less dFs. Is that right? It sounds a bit goofy.
Note: I have not played Fudge, just something I heard from a critic of the system at one point. I thought I'd ask since this thread popped up.

Now Fudge is a toolkit so there may be some variant involving adding dice. But the main rules focus on just using 4dFs with a number range of -4 to +4.  Skills and attribute are rated also numerically and the two are added together.  It is also descriptive in that each level of number is assign an adjective like average, mediocre, or amazing. But Fudge (or Fate) are not a dice pool system.

Quote from: estar;902419But Fudge (or Fate) is a dice pool system.

Do you consider GURPS a "Dice Pool System"?

Quote from: daniel_ream;902475Do you consider GURPS a "Dice Pool System"?

I mistyped they are not dice pool systems.

Quote from: daniel_ream;902412FATE was developed precisely because the developers were dissatisfied with Amber Diceless' mechanics.  So you've come full circle.

I was aware of the history of FATE. I would like to have something in between instead of going all the way into FATE. And I haven't come full circle because I don't enjoy FATE so much; I don't think it has an Amber "feel" to it at all.

I do appreciate the irony of your post, however. ;-)

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;902389I heard great things about Fudge. I was also told the flaw of it was that the higher your ability, the more dF you rolled, therefore the more chances you had of rolling negative numbers and getting a lower result than if you rolled less dFs. Is that right? It sounds a bit goofy.
Note: I have not played Fudge, just something I heard from a critic of the system at one point. I thought I'd ask since this thread popped up.

I thought in Fudge you generally rolled four dice (4d3-8, effectively) and that the number of dice rolled did not change with skill.

(Since each die averages 0 (equal chance of +1 or -1), adding more dice wouldn't bias the result but would expand the possible range of results. If you could choose the number of dice, you could only reach for far above your ability level if you risked abject failure far below your ability level. That seems more feature than bug; the difference between playing it safe or going for it all, like rolling versus "taking 10" in a d20 game. If you couldn't choose, then it does sound a bit goofy.)

Quote from: finarvyn;902487I was aware of the history of FATE. I would like to have something in between instead of going all the way into FATE. And I haven't come full circle because I don't enjoy FATE so much; I don't think it has an Amber "feel" to it at all.

I do appreciate the irony of your post, however. ;-)

IIRC, FATE was actually created with Zelazni's "Lord of Light" in mind;).

Quote from: daniel_ream;902412So you've come full circle.

Quote from: finarvyn;902487And I haven't come full circle because I don't enjoy FATE so much; I don't think it has an Amber "feel" to it at all.

Now THIS would be the "proper" full circle.

Quote from: AsenRG;902532IIRC, FATE was actually created with Zelazni's "Lord of Light" in mind;).

You sure about "Lord..."?

BTW, does Zelazny translates to "Iron" in Bulgarian too?

Quote from: JesterRaiin;902534You sure about "Lord..."?

No, I read it on Internet:). But it makes sense when you consider what Invoking Aspects would have been in Lord of Light, no?

QuoteBTW, does Zelazny translates to "Iron" in Bulgarian too?

Depending on how you pronounce the first "z" and the "a", yes, or at least the association is rather strong;).

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;902389I was also told the flaw of it was that the higher your ability, the more dF you rolled, therefore the more chances you had of rolling negative numbers and getting a lower result than if you rolled less dFs. Is that right? It sounds a bit goofy.

It's totally incorrect, but interesting that you have heard this because it's exactly the way I tried to play it the first time. As you suggested, rolling more dF's doesn't make you "better" at all but screws with the probability curve so that you have the potential for higher extremes (both ways) but more probability of being near the center.

Each dF has six sides, marked with two negative and two neutral and two positive. Essentially they are d3's only centered around zero instead of 2. If you only roll 1dF you have a 33% chance of -1, 33% of zero, 33% of +1. If you roll 2dF you get probabilities of 11% for -2, 22% for -1 33% for zero, 22% for +1 and 11% for +2, so you can go both higher and lower but it starts to stretch out the bell shape. 3dF gives 1 way to roll a -3, 3 ways to get -2, 6 ways to get -1, 7 ways to get zero, 6 to get +1, 3 to get +2, and 1 to get +3. We continue to see the same effect where the graph gets stretched out more as more dF's are added in.

Anyway, you roll 4dF for everything.

Quote from: AsenRG;902539No, I read it on Internet:). But it makes sense when you consider what Invoking Aspects would have been in Lord of Light, no?

I dunno. Since pretty much anything might be an Aspect, it kind of removes their "easily recognizable" As... I mean status.
It wouldn't be that hard to describe pretty much every work of fiction, or real-life events from the perspective of Aspects, so I don't think that "Lord..." is that easily recognizable choice for Aspect-based mechanics... Still, it's not that it's important, just curiosity & stuff.

QuoteDepending on how you pronounce the first "z" and the "a", yes, or at least the association is rather strong;).

I see. I wonder whether the Anglosphere realizes about this - "the Iron Roger" sounds damn awesome. :cool:

Quote from: JesterRaiin;902542I dunno. Since pretty much anything might be an Aspect, it kind of removes their "easily recognizable" As... I mean status.
It wouldn't be that hard to describe pretty much every work of fiction, or real-life events from the perspective of Aspects, so I don't think that "Lord..." is that easily recognizable choice for Aspect-based mechanics... Still, it's not that it's important, just curiosity & stuff.

The difference is, "invoking an Aspect" is a purely in-character action in Lord of the Light;).

QuoteI see. I wonder whether the Anglosphere realizes about this - "the Iron Roger" sounds damn awesome. :cool:

Some Russian editions of his books actually "correct the spelling" making him "Roger Zhelyazny", which means exactly "the Iron Roger".
And in what concerns the Anglosphere, I don't know, but you're in the right place to ask.

Quote from: AsenRG;902545The difference is, "invoking an Aspect" is a purely in-character action in Lord of the Light;).

I get it, but it doesn't convince me - I;m thinking about what Aspects are, rather than how are they named. As such, they are relevant to, like, any work of fiction, ever.

QuoteSome Russian editions of his books actually "correct the spelling" making him "Roger Zhelyazny", which means exactly "the Iron Roger".
And in what concerns the Anglosphere, I don't know, but you're in the right place to ask.

Naaaah, let that be a little secret of ours. You know, each time people will invoke Roger's surname, we're gonna look at each other and send "heh, they don't know", "ya, they don't know" super-sikret-message.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;902547I get it, but it doesn't convince me - I;m thinking about what Aspects are, rather than how are they named. As such, they are relevant to, like, any work of fiction, ever.

I can't point you to a primary source, but I recall (and Wikipedia concurs) that Fate was developed with the long term aspiration of making the Dresden Files RPG.