Thoughts on the Fudge system?

>>49297303
no fudge involved whatsoever

0/10

Too loose. Might as well be freeform.

With a good group, it's passable, but with a group with even a single player who either likes to argue, likes to get their way, or just doesn't really understand what the rest of the group is trying to do, even just a little, than it becomes utter shit.

Just my opinion though.

>>49297303
The system is so dependent on narrative that you might as well freeform.

>>49297303
The dice look really pretty.

>>49297405
How so? Fudge is mostly a toolkit, so you can crunch it up as you desire.

File: carlos.jpg (35KB, 700x514px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 700x514px

>>49297303
Why use it when you can just fudge instead?

>>49297519
If I am to homebrew around what's essentially 4d3 I might as well homebrew around nd6.

>>49297303
Can someone explain this system?

>>49297303
Not really a system and more of a guideline for making an rpg, i know of a system that some spanish guy made but instead of making a loose game like fate he made a realistic one, sort of like gurps if it was fun.

link:http://www.demoniosonriente.com/caceria-de-bichos-cdb/

>>49297890
You roll 4d3-8, getting a result ranging from -4 to +4. Also, for skills and attributes you memorize seven adjectives ranging from Terrible to Superb even though any sane game designer could just use the numbers 1-7. For actions, you add your roll to your skill level, and do okay if you roll 3+.

>>49297303

Fate is better.

>>49299119
Fate is gay SJW poz.

>>49299210

And it's better than Fudge.

>>49299398
How.

>>49299500

Fate essentially uses the Fudge system but adds a systemized version of Player Agency on top of that. It's a bit meh, but it allows mediocre GMs and Players to add a bit more interaction and depth to their playing.

Essentially, on top of the 4d3-8 core mechanic, they add Fate points.

If you do something that is in character, but to the detriment of your character/group (an alcoholic gets drunk before the big fight, a cop dedicated to the law rats out his brother for B&E) you get a Fate Point.

Fate points can be spent on re-rolls, adding a bonus to your roll, or making an in-character declaration about the scene. For example, a cop who was previously frisked could spend a fate point to declare that they had a hidden pistol on them that wasn't found.

Like everything, it's subject to GM approval, but it can give players more control over the story - which can be a simple way to help players and GMs improve their games.

File: 1473602812472.jpg (79KB, 467x688px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 467x688px

>>49297303

File: HQKeF.jpg (18KB, 481x289px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 481x289px

>>49297303

What do people think of the bell curve caused by 4d3-8?

>>49299610
that's not exactly how Fate Points work you know.
fate points run off of aspects, which are probably more core to Fate than FUDGE dice are but that's tangential
Aspects are bullet-point descriptions of things - characters have some, scenes have some, enemies have some, etc.

You don't get to declare "I do something stupid for points", the GM picks a relevant aspect of your character and declares that some negative part of it is *compelling* you to do something stupid, which you get a fate point for if you choose to accept this or lose a fate point for if you deny it.

spending fate points is pretty much what you said it is but ever mention of the Fate system on /tg/ claims that it lets you "make declarations" which isn't true at all. at best you can spend fate points on a Stunt (special ability) that you've custom-built to do that, but second to that you'd have to spend fate points to Compel an enemy aspect in the same way the GM Compels you.

>>49300307
>make declarations

Declarations are certainly present in the Dresden Files RPG system which is based on Fate. They essentially act as one-shot Fate point spends based on skill rolls.

>>49300370
Dresden Files RPG is BASED on Fate yes but declarations are specific to that system and not part of fate core.
They're also a controversial mechanic in the Gamist/Narrativist/Simulationist debate, which is why it's stressed that they are not an integral part of the Fate Core system.

>>49300282
>bell curve centered around zero

Wow, it's fucking nothing

>>49300711
It going into the negatives is part of the system. 0 is not a wall.

>>49300282
>extreme numbers are harder to roll
It looks exactly like I'd expect

>>49297519
>a toolkit
That phrase might as well just be code for "the game doesn't work but I won't admit it"

>>49300778

I find it interesting, given that for more than 60% of the time you'll only be rolling between -1 to +1, and your skills can range up to +4 or 5 for a starting character, depending on the game.

It almost renders dice rolls as pointless.

>>49299610
>allows mediocre GMs and Players to add a bit more interaction and depth to their playing.
That's pretty misleading. FATE really only works with very good players and GMs. That's its primary weakness. Everyone involved needs to be a skilled and selfless storyteller. One average player who just likes to roll dice, or one powergamer who hates failure, and the game unravels rapidly.

>>49300912
>FATE really only works with very good players and GMs.

Huh. I've had a different experience playing the Fate system. Almost universally it's taken meh groups and made them extremely enjoyable. The one outlier was a GM who wanted to play a rules-heavy dungeon crawl and thought Fate was the system to do it with.

>>49300282
I like it more than the a flat line, like d20 or d100, but it leads to a feeling of mediocrity after a while. Big successes are rare. Conflict is all slow and attrition based. And when you add in FATE points, failure is encouraged, while at the same time, defeat is virtually impossible.

So it's sort of a game where you are constantly failing, but know you can never lose, and success is usually slow and incremental. You can tweak your way out of that, but it isn't an ideal setup in my opinion.

>>49300948
You must have played with very different people than I have. I've seen two common reactions to DATE, among the handful of players who got it and excelled.

1) the player cannot understand role play as a concept. They cannot separate themselves from their character and cannot play a part in a larger story. The system confuses and frustrates them, and they check out entirely.

2) the player tries to munchkin by making all their aspects positive or meaningless, thinking they are power gaming their way to success. They never get any FATE points, and their optimized character ends up useless. They fail to understand their mistake even when it is explained to them, and repeat the process on their next character, until they aggressively hate the game.

Now, I've had players who really excelled in FATE as well. But never enough at a time to form a whole group on their own.

>>49301068
>the player cannot understand role play as a concept.
>the player tries to munchkin

Why do people play with people like that?

File: FateTacticalCombatOverhaul.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49300847
not really. what it means is "this is a set of core mechanics to build a system with"
Fate Core at least has a decently functioning base system for a fudge dice based system, but even that generally requires a few modifications to work as a universal system. PFD related, it's a good thing to take pieces from to buff up combat in fate

File: idgi.png (23KB, 212x172px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 212x172px

>>49297370
>>49297405
What these guys said. Maybe it was because we were all still learning how it works, but I really wasn't impressed when I played it, or when I played Fate.

>>49300975
what's your rational for this? Compels in Fate are most heavily used out of combat, since combat compels tend to be a minor penalty.
If it's from the "concede to recieve fate points" thing then I guess? but you're still losing the fight and still losing objectives and once you hit a certain point you're going to lose everything if you try to "game the system" by perpetually surrendering.

I'm also not sure where you're getting the "success is slow and incremental" thing from. The system actively encourages you to give enemies high stats but low stress and wounds, so they are strong and hit hard but die quickly, and if anything Fate's tendency to go Rocket Tag is a FLAW; stacking aspects and invokes can easily have you break the usual scale and absolutely obliterate enemies.

>>49301068
the first case is one of those things that's just hopeless in almost any system, but you can certainly munchkin up in fate without having a ton of flaw aspects (though you're REQUIRED one by default in Core). Just have a major combat (or whatever you want to spec in) skill as your +4, and then build your default stunts so that they're largely complementary and stacking in one way or another. It easily puts you toward the end of the default success ladder, and really only necessitates some tactical thinking to make sure you're always able to exploit your stunts.
and if he can't factor keeping power conditions active into his build, then he's a pretty shitty munchkin.

>>49301068
I actually had a really bizarre experience introducing my group to Fate Accelerated.

They fucking loved it, got super into it, and now want to play it almost exclusively.

What's so bizarre about that? Well my group consists of me the forever GM and two noobies who just got into the hobby, one was a burgeoning That Guy, and the other just liked to roll dice and kill things. When we played FAE they were like completely different people.

I'm well aware that my experience may be unique, but I wouldn't write off Fate as something your group could never possibly like until you try it, it might just turn out like mine and that FAE was actually the kind of game they wanted to play the whole time and didn't know it.

>>49297543
Was Carlos the one that always made shitty puns?

>Another bad roll? Oh fudge!

>>49297303
I'm a fan, though lots of people don't like things that fluffy, instead of crunchy.