Author Topic: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?  (Read 5922 times)

Offline furashgf

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« on: July 15, 2011, 05:30:57 PM »
So, stunts seem pretty straightforward - e.g., many people can fight, but you're a "Brillaint Boxer" or something, which gives you a bonus in certain situations. This fits with fairly traditional games like Ron Edwards Sorcerer, oWoD specialties, etc.

However, aspects come off to people like me, at least, as kind of silly and potentially involving all sorts of wierd arguments about how/whether it applies. e.g., "I'll Always Be There for my Sister" - is a perfectly fine aspect, but seems kind of silly/wierd.

So, what would be wrong (what is wrong) with having people build aspects like the former rather than the latter. They seem less silly and Risus-like and less conflictual - it's more likely that everyone agrees what the aspect can/can't do, etc.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Offline devonapple

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2165
  • Parkour to YOU!
    • View Profile
    • LiveJournal Account
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2011, 05:46:51 PM »
Because Aspects are intended to not only be meta-skills, but also plot hooks. There's a whole section on Aspects in the book that explains this. A "cool all the time" Aspect is good for Invoking to gain a bonus, but it is difficult to Compel to give Fate Points and plot complications.

Even a "cool all the time" Aspect can be Compelled with some work by the GM - i.e., you were so cool that you underestimated a risk and now you must make your way out of the mess (but when you do, you do it cool).
"Like a voice, like a crack, like a whispering shriek
That echoes on like it’s carpet-bombing feverish white jungles of thought
That I’m positive are not even mine"

Blackout, The Darkest of the Hillside Thickets

Offline Roskey

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2011, 05:49:31 PM »
I'm pretty sure the POINT is that it's ambiguous and wide-encompassing, your aspects define the core being of your character, and can be used in anything where who or what they are (or things about them, depending on the aspect) could affect a given situation. And don't forget, those core parts of the character can work AGAINST them in compels, and that's how they earn fate points. It's a lot harder to work in compels for "Brilliant Boxer" than "Burning Desire To Punch Things". Basically, aspects aren't the same as powers, powers are what you can do, and aspects are who you are and why, and if who you are and why are relevant to a situation, you can get a mechanical bonus or detriment for being that person.

Offline EdgeOfDreams

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2011, 06:00:10 PM »
This is exactly why the book suggests that for every aspect your character has, you come up with three situations in which that aspect would apply. Generally, at least one of those should be a positive invoke situation and at least one should be a compel situation.  By sharing these with your GM and the other players, you establish an understanding of what the aspect means and what kinds of situations it applies to.

Figuring out ways to apply your aspects to a situation is part of the fun of the game, too.  A good GM will help you find justifications for invoking or compelling your aspects, but will also reject explanations that are too much of a stretch.  This back-and-forth between players and GM helps keep the story rolling and entertaining.

Offline Set Abominae

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 125
  • Give us a kiss.
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2011, 06:41:44 PM »
This is exactly why the book suggests that for every aspect your character has, you come up with three situations in which that aspect would apply. Generally, at least one of those should be a positive invoke situation and at least one should be a compel situation.  By sharing these with your GM and the other players, you establish an understanding of what the aspect means and what kinds of situations it applies to.

Figuring out ways to apply your aspects to a situation is part of the fun of the game, too.  A good GM will help you find justifications for invoking or compelling your aspects, but will also reject explanations that are too much of a stretch.  This back-and-forth between players and GM helps keep the story rolling and entertaining.

And by presenting a mechanical benefit to using aspects, it allows the role-playing to pay off in "tangible" ways. Thus encouraging further use of the role-playing element. Thus improving the story. The RPG equivalent of the carrot and the stick. Only some times you give the player the carrot...and sometimes hit them with the stick...
No, ma'am. We at the FBI do not have a sense of humor we're aware of. May we come in?


Offline furashgf

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2011, 07:05:25 PM »
Thank you all for your comments, except for the person with the very scary mouth icon picture.

Let me try this a different way. Imagine a player selects "best gunfighter in the west," and selects a poor gunfighting skill. So, they can spend a fate point to shoot (slightly) better, and I can compell them by having them take all challengers. However, coming from outside FATE, this sounds silly - he/she isn't the "best gunfighter in the west." I'm a fan of the idea that constraints encourage creativity, but since aspects like this can be completely fake or overly broad, you can get people doing silly things with them just to get their 2+ bonus.

Offline TitaniumMan

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2011, 07:09:10 PM »
That's why the GM's there, to shut it down if things get too wacky.

Offline furashgf

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2011, 07:15:42 PM »
K, that's the part I was missing ;-)

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2011, 07:18:41 PM »
Actually I can think of a situation where that could work really well. Think of all the situations where someone's reputation is much greater than their actual skill. Happens a lot, and I'm sure it happened all the time in the old west when communication was sporadic and a lot of things were word of mouth.

Aspects can also represent past things. Perhaps they were the "Best gunslinger in the west" before age and arthritis set in.

Additionally stunts have a very narrow focus. They give a moderate bonus to one thing or a slight bonus to two things. Aspects can be broad, representing whole swaths of a life, and interacting with the game in many different ways. Take an aspect like "Military Background" (I know it's not a great aspect, but whatever). It would take many stunts to adequately represent what that aspect can do. Bonus to survival skills, bonus to guns, bonus to para-military contacts, bonus to athletics, bonus to discipline, and I'm sure there are many others.

Secondly they actually fill different roles thematically (and that sort-of reflects in the mechanics). A stunt represents a way in which I am extraordinary. An aspect represents normal day-to-day circumstances that might come in handy. Taking the above example, if I have a Para-military contacts stunt then I always get a +2 to contacts rolls involving military. I have clearly spent a lot of effort developing this huge web of contacts that are always useful. If I have the "Military Background" aspect I also get a +2 to contacts rolls involving military, but only when it so happens that this guy in my squad was an expert in so-and-so (I.E. when I spend a fate point to make it relevant to the story). Aspects represent lucky happenstance, Stunts represent time and effort made to make something continuously better.

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2011, 07:48:34 PM »
I think the main difference between aspects and stunts is, that stunts represent WHAT you can do, while aspects explain WHY you do something. The latter is, from a story point of view, the more interesting.

In you examples above, the stunt "Brilliant Boxer" would give you a bonus any time you are boxing, plain and simple. If you are having a fight to free you sister, or even if your sister is just cheering you on, you canuse a fate point to invoke "I'll Always Be There for my Sister" to turn a fight around, if need be. You are activating every last bit of strength you have left, only because your sister is involved. But this would not only work on boxing, of course.

On the other hand, you are a "Brilliant Boxer", nothing is going to change that. But if your sister is held hostage and the bad guys tell you to throw the fight, you are going to throw the fight (and receive a fate point for the compell), because although you are one of the best, you wouldn't dare win this fight out of fear for your sister.

Mechanically, the main difference is, that stunts do not cost fate to activate, but they can't be compelled to gain fate points either like aspects can.

And lastly, aspects are telling something about your character. In this case, "I'll Always Be There for my Sister" is telling me your character has a sister that is very important to him. No mention of parents could indicate, that she is the only family left. What happened? Great Aspect to cover the characters entire past and what he learned from that, what makes him tick.
If another PC has the matching aspect "I'll Always Be There for my Brother", this would essentially become a fate point perpetuum mobile.

You should give the other players, especially the GM, an idea of what your aspects mean, what they should mostly be compelled for and where you most likely will invoke them. That way, there is going to be a lot less fuss about them.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline EdgeOfDreams

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2011, 08:49:27 PM »
Let me try this a different way. Imagine a player selects "best gunfighter in the west," and selects a poor gunfighting skill. So, they can spend a fate point to shoot (slightly) better, and I can compell them by having them take all challengers. However, coming from outside FATE, this sounds silly - he/she isn't the "best gunfighter in the west." I'm a fan of the idea that constraints encourage creativity, but since aspects like this can be completely fake or overly broad, you can get people doing silly things with them just to get their 2+ bonus.

It is up to the players and GM to make sure the aspects on the sheet match up to the way the character is actually built and played.  For example, I've got a character with the aspect "All Brains, No Brawn", and I back that up mechanically by not taking any physical skills above +1.  This is also why many powers have the restriction "Must have an aspect that justifies this power".

Now, it's true there are no specific rules that enforce the connection between aspects and the rest of your build.  However, I think as a matter of common sense and group consensus, it shouldn't be too hard to weed out the abusive, absurd, or merely inappropriate examples.

Offline Set Abominae

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 125
  • Give us a kiss.
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2011, 08:55:25 PM »
Thank you all for your comments, except for the person with the very scary mouth icon picture.

Let me try this a different way. Imagine a player selects "best gunfighter in the west," and selects a poor gunfighting skill. So, they can spend a fate point to shoot (slightly) better, and I can compell them by having them take all challengers. However, coming from outside FATE, this sounds silly - he/she isn't the "best gunfighter in the west." I'm a fan of the idea that constraints encourage creativity, but since aspects like this can be completely fake or overly broad, you can get people doing silly things with them just to get their 2+ bonus.

Awwww  :'(

I'm a sensitive eyeless mouth...
No, ma'am. We at the FBI do not have a sense of humor we're aware of. May we come in?


Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #12 on: July 15, 2011, 08:56:50 PM »
Something else to consider is that it's not like picking an aspect for a specific bonus is bad. If my character sucks at gunplay and I want an aspect to boost it occaisionally, that's not a bad motive to pick up an aspect. But "Best gunslinger in the west" probably isn't that aspect, and there are others that would probably do the same thing without conflicting with my concept (Like "Daddy was a gunslinger" or "The gang taught me how to shoot").

Offline EdgeOfDreams

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2011, 09:01:00 PM »
Something else to consider is that it's not like picking an aspect for a specific bonus is bad. If my character sucks at gunplay and I want an aspect to boost it occaisionally, that's not a bad motive to pick up an aspect. But "Best gunslinger in the west" probably isn't that aspect, and there are others that would probably do the same thing without conflicting with my concept (Like "Daddy was a gunslinger" or "The gang taught me how to shoot").

That's a very good point, Sinker.  I often build my characters (and recommend this to others) with at least 1-2 aspects that can clearly be tagged for combat bonuses, and another 1-2 for social conflict.  If done well, these usually say something about how that character approaches those kinds of conflicts as well, which adds to character and plot.

Offline bibliophile20

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 426
  • Mmmm.... BBQ.
    • View Profile
    • Gaming Group Wiki: UR-Talarius
Re: For "Standard" Gamers, Why Aren't Aspects Stunts?
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2011, 09:42:30 PM »
Something else to consider is that it's not like picking an aspect for a specific bonus is bad. If my character sucks at gunplay and I want an aspect to boost it occaisionally, that's not a bad motive to pick up an aspect. But "Best gunslinger in the west" probably isn't that aspect, and there are others that would probably do the same thing without conflicting with my concept (Like "Daddy was a gunslinger" or "The gang taught me how to shoot").
Or "All Thumbs--Except When The Heat Is Down"; character's only really good at something when they're riding the adrenaline.
Tips for the Evil Henchman:
#12. If the seemingly helpless person you have just cornered is confident and unafraid despite being outnumbered and surrounded, you have encountered a Hero in disguise. Run while you still can.

DFRPG Resources Wiki