Show Posts
1
DFRPG / I either need help or something's wrong with FATE/DFRPG
« on: May 30, 2015, 01:27:00 AM »
So I've been playing a DFRPG game online for a while, off and on for about 4-6 months. First starting out, it seemed like an awesome concept; free-form character creation, no real limits on classes, etc.
However, when playing the system...that's when I find things to be frustrating. I come from a 13+year background in DnD; mostly 3.x and its derivatives. It's what i'm most used to. There are fine concepts in FATE/DFRPG that I kinda wish that DnD could adopt; the consequence system, for instance (being able to take penalties in exchange for still being alive would've saved many of my characters).
But...Well, it seems that players need to be reactive when they should be proactive and vice versa. For instance, suppose I'm taking cover behind a concrete slab, beyond which are 5 goons with AK-47s trying to gun me down. If the GM is playing it correctly, and I'm understanding the system correctly, I can only "tag" the cover against one of those goons. Or, if I shot a goon, and blew out one of their knees, only one of my allies can use the goon's "Broken Knee" aspect for bonuses. Now, I suppose this does make the game a bit more tactical and challenging, but sort of in the same way that tying a rubber band to your Xbox's control stick and playing Skyrim makes the game more challenging; there's a sense that it doesn't need to be that hard.
In an actual tactical situation, you should be able to use cover against all 5 goons; a goon with a broken knee should not be as maneuverable against anyone, not just the person who says "Hey, his knee's gone!" To take it to the logical conclusion, if you chop a man's arm off (and he doesn't die), each character has to, essentially, notice that the arm's missing/gone to actually gain any sort of tactical advantage of having a one-armed man. And that act of noticing can only be used by one person.
For some reason, this just doesn't make any sense. Am I interpreting things wrong? Or is this artificial difficulty added in for some semblance of balance?
However, when playing the system...that's when I find things to be frustrating. I come from a 13+year background in DnD; mostly 3.x and its derivatives. It's what i'm most used to. There are fine concepts in FATE/DFRPG that I kinda wish that DnD could adopt; the consequence system, for instance (being able to take penalties in exchange for still being alive would've saved many of my characters).
But...Well, it seems that players need to be reactive when they should be proactive and vice versa. For instance, suppose I'm taking cover behind a concrete slab, beyond which are 5 goons with AK-47s trying to gun me down. If the GM is playing it correctly, and I'm understanding the system correctly, I can only "tag" the cover against one of those goons. Or, if I shot a goon, and blew out one of their knees, only one of my allies can use the goon's "Broken Knee" aspect for bonuses. Now, I suppose this does make the game a bit more tactical and challenging, but sort of in the same way that tying a rubber band to your Xbox's control stick and playing Skyrim makes the game more challenging; there's a sense that it doesn't need to be that hard.
In an actual tactical situation, you should be able to use cover against all 5 goons; a goon with a broken knee should not be as maneuverable against anyone, not just the person who says "Hey, his knee's gone!" To take it to the logical conclusion, if you chop a man's arm off (and he doesn't die), each character has to, essentially, notice that the arm's missing/gone to actually gain any sort of tactical advantage of having a one-armed man. And that act of noticing can only be used by one person.
For some reason, this just doesn't make any sense. Am I interpreting things wrong? Or is this artificial difficulty added in for some semblance of balance?