Submitted by robosnake on Wed, 03/03/2010 - 19:48.
I'm not sure about a hard sell, but I've run FATE a number of times and have a good idea of it's strengths and weaknesses for this setting.
FATE is a rules-lite system with the exception of Stunts which take up most of the various FATE books and add a layer of complexity to the system. What FATE does well is resolve conflicts creatively and quickly with a few die-rolls. It is also very easy to make an incredible variety of character types with only a few simple tools.
Without re-writing the FATE system here, I can say that I enjoy it as a system. It is simple, open-source (a huge plus), easy to teach and to learn, and very adaptable. It is not 'gritty' in my opinion, but lends itself to a fast-and-loose style of play driven by action and conflict at every turn, and I think that is it's biggest weakness with regard to being a system for ADGA.
A big strength that it has is that it is open-source, meaning we can take it and tinker with it as much as we want and still be able to potentially draw upon a fan-base of FATE that has been around for a long time. I'm confident that we can find ways to "grit it up" if we need to, but the changes would still have to be made I think to make FATE favor another style of play.
I would say that of the four options, FATE is the easiest to adopt. We can start with the basic FATE rules right now and don't have to talk to anyone about permission (as far as I know). It isn't immediately suited to the setting as I've read it, though, so it'll still take significant work.
To me, Pathfiner and FATE are the best choices (with Pathfinder above FATE), followed by BW and then SW at the bottom.
I will playtest the game tomorow evening, I think I will have a more differentiated opinion on it, but my current feeling is that it could use a bit more heavy-weight rules.
I would probably get into it anyway when the Harry Dresden RPG is published. I really like that series.
I was actually positively surprised of the system after we played it yesterday. It is easy to understand, and to adpat and actually makes quite fun, but as with most extra rule-light games, I had a bit the impression that it lacks a certain depth, and xould need a bit more substance to its bones, because otherwise it tends to become repetitive comparatively fast.
But it was actually quite fun, and I think it is a very good base to build a system on; nonetheless a variation of the rules is mandataory, and while we are at it, a bit more crunch would do the system some good.
I can't say too much on this one, since I have never played it (and very crunch-light systems like Fate or Fudge usually getting past my radar). My first impression is, that it is a cool game for people who like this kind of very simple, narrative-oriented game, but I can neither assess if this is a remarkably large group or if this fits well to the system or can be adjusted to it.
Would someone else please make the hard sell for Fate, starting with the system's strengths and weaknesses?
FATE
I'm not sure about a hard sell, but I've run FATE a number of times and have a good idea of it's strengths and weaknesses for this setting.
FATE is a rules-lite system with the exception of Stunts which take up most of the various FATE books and add a layer of complexity to the system. What FATE does well is resolve conflicts creatively and quickly with a few die-rolls. It is also very easy to make an incredible variety of character types with only a few simple tools.
Without re-writing the FATE system here, I can say that I enjoy it as a system. It is simple, open-source (a huge plus), easy to teach and to learn, and very adaptable. It is not 'gritty' in my opinion, but lends itself to a fast-and-loose style of play driven by action and conflict at every turn, and I think that is it's biggest weakness with regard to being a system for ADGA.
A big strength that it has is that it is open-source, meaning we can take it and tinker with it as much as we want and still be able to potentially draw upon a fan-base of FATE that has been around for a long time. I'm confident that we can find ways to "grit it up" if we need to, but the changes would still have to be made I think to make FATE favor another style of play.
I would say that of the four options, FATE is the easiest to adopt. We can start with the basic FATE rules right now and don't have to talk to anyone about permission (as far as I know). It isn't immediately suited to the setting as I've read it, though, so it'll still take significant work.
To me, Pathfiner and FATE are the best choices (with Pathfinder above FATE), followed by BW and then SW at the bottom.
I'll give it a try tomorow
I will playtest the game tomorow evening, I think I will have a more differentiated opinion on it, but my current feeling is that it could use a bit more heavy-weight rules.
I would probably get into it anyway when the Harry Dresden RPG is published. I really like that series.
Playtest Results.
I was actually positively surprised of the system after we played it yesterday. It is easy to understand, and to adpat and actually makes quite fun, but as with most extra rule-light games, I had a bit the impression that it lacks a certain depth, and xould need a bit more substance to its bones, because otherwise it tends to become repetitive comparatively fast.
But it was actually quite fun, and I think it is a very good base to build a system on; nonetheless a variation of the rules is mandataory, and while we are at it, a bit more crunch would do the system some good.
Fate
I can't say too much on this one, since I have never played it (and very crunch-light systems like Fate or Fudge usually getting past my radar). My first impression is, that it is a cool game for people who like this kind of very simple, narrative-oriented game, but I can neither assess if this is a remarkably large group or if this fits well to the system or can be adjusted to it.
Would someone else please make the hard sell for Fate, starting with the system's strengths and weaknesses?