FATE Aspects in BRP?

[pansophy]

I recently tried (!) to get my head around the FATE rules. Due to lowered prices at DriveThroughRPG I am now in possession of some shiny FATE PDFs, one is printed (600 pages) and resting next to my table at the moment.

I tried. I really tried it. And I do not quite get it. FATE is different and all, but why is it they need 600 pages to explain the rules over and over again? Jeeeez. I am not complaining, but sheer overwhelmed.

Ok, but now the question: anybody thought about bringing in these FATE Aspects for player characters into the BRP rules system? I hear my players complaining there are no "specialities" a character can have, and only a description in his background story does not grant him a benefit during play.

So I am thinking about including these describing -but usable- aspects into my character creation process. Nothing fancy, but a nice way to sex-up the BRP rules.

Any comments? MAybe Sarah, as I think she was a writer for one of the C7 FATE games?

--

cheers,

pansophy

[Shaira]

Hi Pansophy,

I'm line developer for Starblazer Adventures and Legends of Anglerre, Cubicle 7's two Fate games. Fate's an awesome system once you grok it - not as alien as some more modern rpg rule sets, with plenty of detail and crunch, and capable of some awesome scaling (you can run a combat of a group of PCs attacking a castle, city, or even kingdom, for example, complete with stat blocks). But it's not to everyone's taste - it's less concerned with issues of equipment detail and simulation than BRP, for example, and not as gritty.

Aspects, however, are easy to port over. I'm planning on an article for Nick's Uncounted Worlds, but basically you can preserve the aspect rules wholesale; all you need to do is convert the bonus you get from an invoke or compel. +2 is a sizable bonus in Fate; in BRP I'd convert it to a -10% on your die roll. And of course you can invoke multiple aspects if they're applicable - with enough Fate points to burn, you could get a -30% or -40% mod on your roll.

One other alternative is to use the bonus to increase the skill chance rather than reduce your roll. So, invoking an aspect "Light-fingered as Hell" when trying to pick someone's pocket would up your Sleight skill from, say, 50% to 60%, or allow you to re-roll.

Let us know how you get on!

Cheers,

Sarah

[Atgxtg]

I would be a bit hesitant about porting over FATE/SOTC aspects to BRP. FATE games can often turn into "aspect hunts" with the players trying to wrangle as many aspects as possible into rolls, and trying to tap as many of thier aspects as possible to refresh their fate point pool. At times it can get a bit silly.

That might work out okay with the lighter, short term approach that SotC takes, but could prove disruptive to the mood and tone of a BRP campaign.

[Chaot]

I'm reading Anglerre right now, due to Cubicle 7's solid products and a thread over at RPGNet. It was while reading the foreward that I realized you were involved in the project, Sarah. I've got to say I really like the book and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens when it hits the tabletop.

I hear my players complaining there are no "specialities" a character can have, and only a description in his background story does not grant him a benefit during play.

The stodgy answer would be that their skill choice during character generation represents this. Also, while it's never really been mechanized, Chaosium has a history of 'joke' skills in character write ups. I often let players define their own 'personality' skill which occasionally comes into play. I have no hard and fast rules for it. I just let them use it when I think it would be fun. This is generally dependent on the group though. Some players like it and some players don't, so I try to tailor to them.

FATE games can often turn into "aspect hunts" with the players trying to wrangle as many aspects as possible into rolls, and trying to tap as many of thier aspects as possible to refresh their fate point pool. At times it can get a bit silly.

I'm reminded here of the fabled RuneQuest weapons caddy. Still, I haven't seen FATE in the wild yet though. I do agree that something like Aspects may not be appropriate for some games, but I'm not ready to rule them out altogether. I'm sure some balance could be struck.

[pansophy]

I am currently reading my printed copy of "Starblazer Adventures", a brick of a book. I like what I read so far but I think it will take time for anybody coming from other RPGs to get used to the idea of aspects. Anyway, time will tell and it seems to work.

Initially I thought FATE is more rules light than BRP, but SA proofs me wrong, it has at least as many rules as BRP does.

The completeness of the system is much appreciated, you get everything in one book. And I mean everything. It is a big "wow" effect.

@Sarah: I am looking forward to your article in the next Uncounted Worlds issue. The +/-10% seems to be a good idea to me and gives a nice start to play around with.

Currently I'm only planning to use the aspects for the character creation process. So an aspect called "Air of Mystery" or "Ugly as Hell", "The Parrot of Eta Bootes" would really mean something - a 10% bonus to an action that can be activated with two points of "Power". With this rule characters are able to use Power Points in a setting where no magic exists - and more important to me, they start to involve things they usually do not think of.

I have seen many nice character backgrounds, but when it comes to play, mostly all this information seems to be put aside and only the Skill section and the Health track is what counts. With other modern games I have the problem the "Effects" (or "Perks" or "Advantages" or whatever they call it) have a direct impact on skills - boring.

I love these unfathomable effects like "Air of Mystery" or "Guardian Angel", they do not relate to a skill directly, but can be used on some, depending on the situation. The invention of these "fun" skills like "Stamp Collecting" or "Cheerleaders" are ok, but I feel guilty to let a player spend Personal Skill Points on these while they could use them for something better. OK, I could allow them to bring in 1/5 of its rating to skill rolls, as a complementary skill, but is it worth spending points on these kind of things?

On the other side ... now that I think about it ... hmmm. AHHHH! I will try both and see how it works out.

[Simlasa]

FATE games can often turn into "aspect hunts" with the players trying to wrangle as many aspects as possible into rolls, and trying to tap as many of thier aspects as possible to refresh their fate point pool. At times it can get a bit silly.

This would be one of my concerns... not so much a fault of the Fate rules as with certain sorts of players who can't help but focus on mechanical optimization. Like Chaot mentioned.. the same sort of fellow who'd think he get away with the 'weapons caddy' approach in BRP.

I'm not a huge fan of Fate or Aspects (they seem too 'meta' for me) but I've had fun playing in some Fate-based games... with the right group issues work themselves out.

[Skyman]

I like FATE points. I used them in BRP to make setting more pulp and to create more definition of PC's. While I believe folks can be FATE point hoarders I also feel that the GM compelling of FATE points is the twist that kinda makes it more compelling. Such as you could have 'guardian angel' as an aspect. Get in a situation where your team has cornered one of the bad guys. Your team wants to lay down some punishment but the GM compels your aspect saying. 'Its 5 against 1 and despite your goal you know this guy needs help despite whatever he has done. You must protect him to your best of ability....*hold out fate point*." If he does then it adds conflict to the scene. If he doesn't then he loses a FATE point he has been hoarding.

[pansophy]

the thing is, you can simulate this by a -let's say- characteristic skill: A character has the skill : Guardian Angel at 40%

The GM could ask for a skill check in that situation and the result shows how the scene evolves. And if the character makes the roll, although it adds trouble to the situation, he is rewarded because he can tick the box next to the skill.

I am a bit biased to introduce a new concept into the BRP rules, when the existing system could simulate it.

[Skyman]

the thing is, you can simulate this by a -let's say- characteristic skill: A character has the skill : Guardian Angel at 40%

The GM could ask for a skill check in that situation and the result shows how the scene evolves. And if the character makes the roll, although it adds trouble to the situation, he is rewarded because he can tick the box next to the skill.

I am a bit biased to introduce a new concept into the BRP rules, when the existing system could simulate it.

Yes I can see how that can work. The difference in feel would be in that version the player is not put to the decision but letting random chance dictate the outcome of the action while in the FATE system SoTC style inclusion it is still up to the player decision to determine action. I think either will float depending on what you're looking for. I think one of the great perspectives of the recent BRP book was the inclusion of different options into the game system to create different feels to the game mechanics. The base mechanic of BRP is gritty but you throw the option of Sanity and it produces great horror. Like wise the inclusion of FATE points and SoTC style options can create a more pulp feel IMHO. I think this is what makes the game options very robust unlike say GURPs or True D20.

My entry into the first BRP adventure contest used the FATE option because I wanted to see if I could do it to change from gritty to pulp...and I did with good results in the play test.

[Atgxtg]

This would be one of my concerns... not so much a fault of the Fate rules as with certain sorts of players who can't help but focus on mechanical optimization. Like Chaot mentioned.. the same sort of fellow who'd think he get away with the 'weapons caddy' approach in BRP.

I'm not a huge fan of Fate or Aspects (they seem too 'meta' for me) but I've had fun playing in some Fate-based games... with the right group issues work themselves out.

One of the differences between BRP and SotC is that BRP has a bucnh of "skill enchancers" already built in. Magic and equipment, downplayed in SOTC, are major components o BRP, and will take something of a back seat if Aspects are introduced. Bladesharp, or Steath spells aren't quite as good as the used to be if anyone can tag an aspect for a quick skill boost.

In SotC that isn't a problem becuase all enhancements are basically the same (a bonus to the result), but in BRP, many bonuses work differerntly, and aspects will end up being yet another "power" that competes with magic, sorcery, etc.

Many aspects would also affect things other than skills. In SotC damage/attribute rolls, etc. are all handed the same way, but BRP does use a couple o diferernt game mechanics.

I'm not saying that it couldn't be made to work, just that the inclusion of aspects will result in complications (hey, I got an SotC pun in!).

[pansophy]

wow, I tried the Aspects thing - and it really breaks the system a bit

As Atgxtg said, it came out to be "just an other Powers system" and that's all. It might be different if you include scene aspects,etc. but with only character aspects, it's not gaining anything.

Switched it to 'characteristic skills' - and it was better. Players tried to invoke the complementary rules with these new skills and things went smooth. I don't know, maybe it's our group too satisfied with the BRP system, maybe I just did it wrong, but eventually we found an idea how to incorporate 'odd' skills into play.

So in this regard it was worth buying the FATE books. Printing 600 pages was something I should have thought over twice, but there's lots of interesting stuff in it that can be used in a different way.

[Atgxtg]

Printing 600 pages was something I should have thought over twice, but there's lots of interesting stuff in it that can be used in a different way.

Ouch. It is probably moot now, but just in case someone else wants to get FATE/SotC, they used to sell it as a hardcopy+PDF bundle for only a little more than buying the hardcopy. It would certainly be cheaper than printing the PDF.

[pansophy]

unfortunately the shipping costs are a killer. so it was even cheaper this way.

[Atgxtg]

unfortunately the shipping costs are a killer. so it was even cheaper this way.

Ah! I understand. I've had similar experiences with products from Europe.

[Dredj]

I've been wanting to play a d100 system with aspects for years. I thought that the two together would make an elegant system but coudn't figure out how to do it. Right now I'm looking at Outbreak: Undead http://outbreakundead.com/ http://outbreakundead.com/OU_QuickstartGuide.pdf which seems to be a cross between BRP and Fate 3.0. And you even get to play as yourself, if you wish!

Another game that seems to combine the two is Maschine Zeit--but in a much more cinematic way. Perhaps looking at those games (Outbreak: Undead should be getting the pdf treatment within a few weeks).

I was also thinking of just making the skills loose. Such as Riding: Horse becomes Riding: Animal (any big animal that can be ridden). The Handgun skill also includes pistol whipping, etc. I was inspired by Dogs of War some time ago. That game only has three or four combat skills that everything you can do in combat falls under. Then you just determine what the character can do by the profession(s) he or she is in.

[pansophy]

I like Dogs of W.A.R. and Barbarians of Lemuria. Together with BotAftermath it is a blast of a system - if you want to play a rules light thing from time to time. It is simple, uncomplicated and fun. It combines Story Telling and RPG in on thing and is easy to handle.

But for more crunch I go with BRP, as it doe the gritty stuff better. You can strip down the BRP skill system to a bare minimum and still have a solid rule system, that can feel like BoL or DoW. Adding the PowerPoints-as-Fate-Chips adds a bit of pulp to it and with some Minion rules it really is as much fun as BoL could. But then, why do the hassle when BoL is that simple and already a finished product.

[Dredj]

But for more crunch I go with BRP, as it doe the gritty stuff better. You can strip down the BRP skill system to a bare minimum and still have a solid rule system, that can feel like BoL or DoW. Adding the PowerPoints-as-Fate-Chips adds a bit of pulp to it and with some Minion rules it really is as much fun as BoL could. But then, why do the hassle when BoL is that simple and already a finished product.

To make a system that is both gritty and rules lite. Or attempt it, at least.

[Chaot]

I'm disappointed to hear that the attempt to merge Aspects into BRP wasn't a success. I haven't given up hope though. I'm still thinking there could be an interesting angle in which integrating the system could be beneficial.

As far as stripping down BRP, I think it would be great fun. I've a thread someplace buried in these boards about my plan to try it. Never got around to running it though. I was going to reduce all of the skills to some basic categories; Agility, Manipulation, Art/Craft, Knowledge, Perception, Combat, Communication and Magic, or something like that. I think I talked about dropping SIZ and maybe INT and CHA. Tack on a very broad and loose magic system and run with it.

[Dredj]

Zombie Cataclysm, which replaces the d100 with a d20, in the same way that Flashing Blades does, comes the closest to paring down BRP for fast and gritty feel. And the two systems can be switched out for each other.

http://www.zombiecataclysm.com/

I think it would be easy to turn ZC into a d100 game, as well.

[Atgxtg]

I think that aspects could work in BRP, if it were used without and of the "power systems" to compete with it. Either don't use magic, powers, psionics with aspects, or make such powers limited to a few characters.

BRP also "suffers" in this manner by having attributes. Adding aspects is like double dipping. A guy withan 18 STR is supposedly strong in BRP, but if a PC with a 10 STR takes a "strong as an ox" aspect, we have a problem.

And BRps resolution system is very differernt from SotC. In SotC, most rolls are opposed, and tagging aspects is important for winning the conflict. In fact, Aspects can be more important than ability, since taking two or three aspects can throw a conflict in favor of a poorly skilled character. That is completly opposite to how BRP is designed to work. IN BRP if a character with 20% skill beats one with 100% skill, he got very, very lucky. Thus aspects are going to cause a radical change in the importance and operation of skills. In BRP skills are king. Aspects will "deposte" skills in BRP.

Now I think that "it can be done", but to get things to work out well requires some radical adjustments to the BRP rules, and getting the players to accept those changes. A player who has spent months building his character7s sword skill to 117% isn't going to take kindly to a new rul that lets someone with 26% skill beat him by tagging "quick reactions, strong grip, steady hand, and light on hs feet".

I think that to really get aspects to work, you wou have to rebuild a BRP varinat from the ground up. Ditch attributes, and make aspects a core mechanic.

[Dredj]

I think that aspects could work in BRP, if it were used without and of the "power systems" to compete with it. Either don't use magic, powers, psionics with aspects, or make such powers limited to a few characters.

BRP also "suffers" in this manner by having attributes. Adding aspects is like double dipping. A guy withan 18 STR is supposedly strong in BRP, but if a PC with a 10 STR takes a "strong as an ox" aspect, we have a problem.

And BRps resolution system is very differernt from SotC. In SotC, most rolls are opposed, and tagging aspects is important for winning the conflict. In fact, Aspects can be more important than ability, since taking two or three aspects can throw a conflict in favor of a poorly skilled character. That is completly opposite to how BRP is designed to work. IN BRP if a character with 20% skill beats one with 100% skill, he got very, very lucky. Thus aspects are going to cause a radical change in the importance and operation of skills. In BRP skills are king. Aspects will "deposte" skills in BRP.

Now I think that "it can be done", but to get things to work out well requires some radical adjustments to the BRP rules, and getting the players to accept those changes. A player who has spent months building his character7s sword skill to 117% isn't going to take kindly to a new rul that lets someone with 26% skill beat him by tagging "quick reactions, strong grip, steady hand, and light on hs feet".

I think that to really get aspects to work, you wou have to rebuild a BRP varinat from the ground up. Ditch attributes, and make aspects a core mechanic.

Nicely said. I was running into those issues when I was seriously contemplating trimming BRP down to something that was what I was really looking for. The best I could come up with was using very loosely based attributes as percentages with percentile additions for loosely based skills. Like a percentile version of Big Eyes Small Mouth (any version including 3rd)/Tri Stat DX (though I haven't looked at that system for awhile, so I could be wrong). But that would've amounted to a good deal of reworking that I didn't have the patience to go through with. And with the systems I mentioned above, I don't have to.

[pansophy]

I agree. It is simply more easy to modify the current rule system of BRP than adding a whole new thing like Aspects to BRP. I think Aspects can work out of the box for things like "Keen Eyes", "Enhanced Hearing", "Lightning Calculator" and such sort of things, but it is very ease to 'emulate' these things via using Super Powers and/or Mutations. It is faster, easier and does not bring in a new set of rules.

In our game something like Situational Aspects would not make sense, as the players already make good use of the environment and I as a GM grant them bonuses for that. If a player takes an action to throw sand into his enemy's eyes (minor action, so it can happen in addition to his attack), I will grant him a bonus of 10-20%. If he narrates the thing well enough, he even does not need to roll. If he 'just wants to do it' without narrating, then he needs to make a Throw skill test.

I think this is nearly the same what the FATE system wants to archive: more storytelling, providing Aspects as 'handholds' for the players. But once you get your group to the point where they see how rewarding it can be to do some story telling, I bet they learn fast and pay more attention to the scene and its description.

The key is to reward story telling by waiving dice rolls. Sure, only in situations and settings where this will be an enhancement of the game. In a gritty setting waiving dice rolls might sooner or later end in frustration. And it strongly depends on the players as well.

I think the less rules you need during play, the more rewarding the game is. Not that I am saying 'The less rules a game system has, the more rewarding the game is'. I think a game system needs a solid set of rules, but good story telling should be rewarded by throwing less rolls.

It was possible in our group once, to play out a complete gunfight without rolling dice. The players were so committed to the scene, that they took small amounts of wounds voluntarily. Sure, the fight was nothing major in the adventure, and it happened only once, but it was an amazing experience.

Edited February 18, 2011 by pansophy

[Skyman]

I think this is nearly the same what the FATE system wants to archive: more storytelling, providing Aspects as 'handholds' for the players. But once you get your group to the point where they see how rewarding it can be to do some story telling, I bet they learn fast and pay more attention to the scene and its description.

The key is to reward story telling by waiving dice rolls. Sure, only in situations and settings where this will be an enhancement of the game. In a gritty setting waiving dice rolls might sooner or later end in frustration. And it strongly depends on the players as well.

The players were so committed to the scene, that they took small amounts of wounds voluntarily. Sure, the fight was nothing major in the adventure, and it happened only once, but it was an amazing experience.

Yes this was similar to my experience with using aspect to BRP. I think it might take some willingness of the GM to feel comfortable with its inclusion because BRP is pretty self contained as we all know. Feng Shui RPG had the idea of the players entertaining the GM with the aspects/FATE. The people I played with would call it 'no GM" because the players end up doing all the work unfolding the story to the GM.

[Atgxtg]

Another thing is that modfiying dice rolls is a new addtion to BRP and an optional one at that, while the concet is central to Fate and SotC.

Even when a character doesn't invoke an aspct, he can always spend a Fate Point to adjust a die roll. It is commonplace. In BRP is a a rarity. Heck, for years there was debate o just what a GM should allow with a Luck roll.

No matter how ood a game systemis, no one system does everything well. Some games have featurs that make them better suited for certain tasks, and often those features don't port over easily to other RPGs. IMO Aspects are a bad fir for BRP. In factBRP is probably one of the worst choices for such a mechanicsnce the BRP rules are radically differernt from SotC.

[Chaot]

Some recent discussion about this over at RPGNet [url=http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=539589]. I'm still thinking there's a balance to be found that incorporates the more free form aspects of Fate and such within the stricture of BRP.