*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 30, 2014, 03:41:51 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
46709 Posts in 5588 Topics by 13297 Members Latest Member: - Shane786 Most online today: 123 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: [1] 2
Print
Author Topic: Importing Aspects and Fate Points from FATE into Sorcerer?  (Read 7784 times)
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« on: April 23, 2008, 10:56:52 AM »

Hi folks!  I know FATE/Sorcerer crossover discussions have come up before, but I'm specifically interested to hear any thoughts from more veteran Sorcerer players about importing FATE's Aspect/Fate Point concepts into Sorcerer.  At first glance, it would appear that one might use Sorcerer's Descriptors as Aspects, and then invoke/compel them using the Fate Point economy, without too much trouble or damage.  I can even see expanding the use of Descriptors to effectively work just as scene Aspects in FATE, as well.

Has anyone actually done this?  If you have, can you share any thoughts about how it worked, any snafu's or caveats to this hack?

Cheers!
Logged
lachek
Member

Posts: 91


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2008, 11:45:35 AM »

What would players spend the Fate points on? Bonus dice? Rerolls?
It seems to me Descriptors work to provide bonus dice already, without even having to expend a limited currency.

But I am not, as you say, a veteran Sorcerer player.
Logged
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2008, 03:47:44 PM »

What would players spend the Fate points on? Bonus dice? Rerolls?

You tell me!  ;^}

Actually, I'd personally take a look at using Sorcerer's existing currency first, so I'd lean toward bonus dice/victories/etc., without having actually done tried it out yet.

Quote
It seems to me Descriptors work to provide bonus dice already, without even having to expend a limited currency.

Well, they're described as WHY the character's score is what is it, and are certainly positioned to help guide role playing and suggest situations where bonus (or penalty) dice may be appropriate, and this is all up to the GM or play group.  As such, Sorcerer already has this conceptual base sort of covered as it were, but I'm just curious anyway.

Quote
But I am not, as you say, a veteran Sorcerer player.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that "only veteran Sorcerer player's need reply", I should simply rephrase that to "anyone who's thought about or tried this themselves", but I assumed more veteran players would be more likely to have run across this notion and/or tried it out themselves.

Thanks for the reply!

Cheers
Logged
Judd
Member

Posts: 1675

Please call me Judd.


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2008, 06:27:03 AM »

Hey Manveru,

I'm Judd.

I adore both FATE and Sorcerer.  I loves me some Aspects.  I loves me some Descriptors.  Oddly, I wouldn't put them together.  Could be that I'm just a zealot.

That said, Sorcerer is a pretty lean machine.  It is deceptive in that it looks simple in the book and just doesn't play that way.

If you want some FATE in your Sorcerer, I'd do one of two things:

1) I'd play Sorcerer straight up and forget this MADNESS!
-or-

2) I'd fiddle with FATE and make it somehow more Sorcerer-ish.

Sorcerer is absolutely made to be fiddled with but in pretty specific ways and I think tacking on Descriptors wouldn't be doing either game any favors.

Judd
Logged

Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2008, 09:39:13 AM »

Hey Manveru,

I'm Judd.

I adore both FATE and Sorcerer.  I loves me some Aspects.  I loves me some Descriptors.  Oddly, I wouldn't put them together.  Could be that I'm just a zealot.

That said, Sorcerer is a pretty lean machine.  It is deceptive in that it looks simple in the book and just doesn't play that way.

If you want some FATE in your Sorcerer, I'd do one of two things:

1) I'd play Sorcerer straight up and forget this MADNESS!
-or-

2) I'd fiddle with FATE and make it somehow more Sorcerer-ish.

Sorcerer is absolutely made to be fiddled with but in pretty specific ways and I think tacking on Descriptors wouldn't be doing either game any favors.

Judd

Thanks Judd!  Actually, I'm not necessarily wanting some FATE in Sorcerer, just curious about cross-fertilization since some conceptual overlap struck me right away.  I actually came to Sorcerer from FATE.  I like FATE a lot, it took what I liked about FUDGE, Theatrix, Over the Edge and Story Engine, and made a effective mix of it.  A got a lot of 'Aha!'s when I ran into FATE.  Sorcerer changed my entire view on gaming like nothing else ever has, the story/situation concept clicked solid for the first time.  I can't go back now .. ;^}~
Logged
Alan
Member

Posts: 1012


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2008, 02:49:52 PM »

I see a conceptual connection between Sorcerer's rollover dice and FATE's aspects create from rolls. Essentially, when you score victories in Sorcerer you can see this as creating an aspect you can automatically tag for x number of dice for the next roll. I build on that.
Logged

- Alan

A Writer's Blog: http://www.alanbarclay.com
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2008, 04:35:32 PM »

I see a conceptual connection between Sorcerer's rollover dice and FATE's aspects create from rolls. Essentially, when you score victories in Sorcerer you can see this as creating an aspect you can automatically tag for x number of dice for the next roll. I build on that.


That's a really interesting observation!  I'll definitely ponder this.

Cheers
Logged
angelfromanotherpin
Member

Posts: 135


« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2008, 06:47:05 PM »

For a cross-pollination experiment, I'd use FATE, but replace the FUDGE elements with Sorcerer's die-mechanic and action resolution. 
Logged

-My real name is Jules

"Now that we know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, how do we determine how many angels are dancing, at a given time, on the head of a given pin?"
"What if angels from another pin engaged them in melee combat?"
lachek
Member

Posts: 91


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2008, 05:23:17 AM »

Manveru, this is an interesting idea to ponder, but I'm really wondering what it is you're going for. You know, what are you looking to achieve with this cross-over? Is it just an experiment?

It sounds to me like the cool parts you're itching to use from FATE are already in Sorcerer, in some form or another. Bonus dice (Fate point expenditure) and rollover dice (free tags) have already been identified. Do you not like the way the Sorcerer equivalents work?

It would be easier for me to offer suggestions if I knew your motivation for mucking with things. Otherwise, I fear the end result will be like:

"You got Sorcerer in my FATE!"
"You got FATE in my Sorcerer!"
Logged
Alan
Member

Posts: 1012


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2008, 06:16:09 AM »

For a cross-pollination experiment, I'd use FATE, but replace the FUDGE elements with Sorcerer's die-mechanic and action resolution. 

I've considered this. However, the Sorcerer initiative system is hard to maintain with FATE dice and rerolls. Too many ties and the option to reroll confuses IIEE process that Sorcerer handles so well.

Logged

- Alan

A Writer's Blog: http://www.alanbarclay.com
Per Fischer
Member

Posts: 212


WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 25, 2008, 07:36:48 AM »

Sorcerer is a pretty tight package - I don't think it would add anything you can't do already. Have you played it straight-up? Any of the dozens of cool settings for it?

I'd like to hear what you are missing in Sorcerer that you think FATE can contribute, and why.

Per
Logged

Per
--------
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2008, 09:53:50 AM »

Sorcerer is a pretty tight package - I don't think it would add anything you can't do already. Have you played it straight-up? Any of the dozens of cool settings for it?

I'd like to hear what you are missing in Sorcerer that you think FATE can contribute, and why.

Per

LOL!  Ok, guys ... I'M ... JUST ... CURIOUS!   Seriously, I have played Sorcerer straight up, I have nearly all of the supplements, it changed my world, etc. etc.

But .. golly, I guess this topic ends at "Just play Sorcerer as Sorcerer or FATE with a dash of Sorcerer" and there's nothing new to explore or learn here?  OK ..

:^P
Logged
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2008, 09:57:32 AM »

FYI, I'm one of those people who grew up on American German and Lebanese food, and I married a south Asian woman, so I like to see what taking this from Mediterranean cuisine and that from Nepali cuisine tastes like .. in fact, it's one of the most natural things to do in the world, for me ..

So, please consider my query here along those lines .. ;^P
Logged
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 25, 2008, 09:59:55 AM »

For a cross-pollination experiment, I'd use FATE, but replace the FUDGE elements with Sorcerer's die-mechanic and action resolution. 

I've considered this. However, the Sorcerer initiative system is hard to maintain with FATE dice and rerolls. Too many ties and the option to reroll confuses IIEE process that Sorcerer handles so well.


That's a good point.  I actually wouldn't want to do the FATE re-roll thing, no sense in adding a new mechanic when Sorcerer's currency cover this well a la rolling over victories and all the rest.

Cheers
Logged
Manveru
Member

Posts: 26


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 25, 2008, 10:10:48 AM »

Manveru, this is an interesting idea to ponder, but I'm really wondering what it is you're going for. You know, what are you looking to achieve with this cross-over? Is it just an experiment?

It sounds to me like the cool parts you're itching to use from FATE are already in Sorcerer, in some form or another. Bonus dice (Fate point expenditure) and rollover dice (free tags) have already been identified. Do you not like the way the Sorcerer equivalents work?

It would be easier for me to offer suggestions if I knew your motivation for mucking with things. Otherwise, I fear the end result will be like:

"You got Sorcerer in my FATE!"
"You got FATE in my Sorcerer!"

lachek, sure thing.  My initial post was entirely exploratory, just see what thoughts and experiences other folks had with the idea.  The replies are good, they make me think. >:^)

I think it came from seeing a conceptual overlap, to some degree - all currency aside, between what Descriptors appeared to represent and what Aspects (re-rolls and particular mechanical applications aside) appeared to represent.  So the conceptual overlap implied, to me, that there might be (NOT necessarily) _interesting_ ways to cross-pollinate.  I'm more interested in playing Sorcerer than FATE for the time being (also feel more like playing drums than guitar right now, but I know that will naturally oscilate) and so the first place I went to sniff out is what could be imported from FATE into Sorcerer, NOT to make any game "better" or to get "more" out of it, but just to see what the ride was like, so to speak. 

And because I might actually try this ride out, I was hoping to garner the sort of caveats, suggestions and observations popping up here.  Thank you!  :^)

I have some more comments I'd like to add on what priorities I may be specifically thinking to address here, when I'm not at lunch and trying to eat while thinking and typing and fending off more work ..

Cheers!



Logged
Pages: [1] 2
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!