Fate Core Thought of the Day: Fate's Big Question
This is something that's been poking around my head for a bit, and I think I've finally figured out how to express it.
I think that all RPGs have a "Big Question" - that is, a fundamental decision-making exercise that's really the point of the game. To a great extent, competence with this question is what separates a "good" player from a "bad" player in a given game, so that's a useful metric to figure out what this Big Question is.
For early D&D, the Big Question was "can I use the resources at my disposal, and those I get on the way, to get as much treasure as possible out of the dungeon without dying?" And by looking at that Big Question, we can kind of see the choices that drive the game - resource management, the risk of death, and a desire to gain treasure. It's all there, spelled out in front of us.
The vast majority of RPGs today have variations on the same Big Question: "Is my ability to build a character, and my ability to manipulate the mechanics of the game, sufficient to overcome these obstacles?" And that's how most games are played - the first two factors, in various proportions, are put up against a set of obstacles to see if the player is skillful enough to beat them.
(BTW, I understand that most games aren't "just" that. I'm not talking about the totality, just the primary emphasis).
And because a lot of elements in Fate look like those systems, it's pretty common to assume that Fate has the same Big Question.
But it doesn't.
Fate Core doesn't really allow for optimization in a way that makes charop an interesting exercise. Character building, sure. Character op? Not so much. If you're halfway proficient in the system, it's hard to make a character that's really incompetent, or super-competent. (As an aside, I find the biggest issue with charop in Fate is, ironically enough, people that over-specialize, which is the best strategy in most games).
And Fate Core's mechanical systems don't really support a deep game of mechanical fiddling. Again, yeah, there's some basics, but once you've got the general hang of using Create Advantage, the mechanics of Stress/Consequences, and how to get good skill matchups, you're pretty much good to go.
So, those can't be Fate's Big Question. But what is?
One thing that I've been saying a lot more recently about Fate is that a Fate Character can do anything, but they can't do everything.
Now, that's obviously an exaggeration. There are some things that character just can't do in a given setting. But that's not really what I'm talking about.
What I'm talking about here is the fact that, given sufficient Fate Points to spend, and sufficient willingness to take on Consequences, a character can accomplish just about any reasonable goal. If the character wants to sneak into the castle, he will. It's almost inevitable. Almost anything can be accomplished.
But doing so will deplete those resources. You'll end up out of Fate Points, and with your Consequences all consumed. And then you'll find yourself at the whims of the dice next time around - which is exactly why you can't accomplish everything.
And to me this leads right to Fate's Big Question. And that question is simple:
"How much do you want this?" Or, since cost is really only interesting in terms of opportunity cost, "Which of these do you want more?"
And to me, that's the Big Question of Fate. And just like every encounter in a "typical" RPG has to drive towards being a challenging exercise of build/tactics, every scene in Fate should drive towards making the players make those tough choices. The choice of which thing they care about they can have, and which one they don't get to have.
That's why failure is important in Fate - if you never fail, then that means that you've gotten everything you want - and you've never had to make that hard choice. That's why we drive plots off of character aspects - because otherwise, it's likely that the players/characters won't really care enough about anything to make the choice a tough one. And that's why we let the characters be proactive - to ensure that they get to make the decisions, that they set up the hard choices for themselves by conveniently telling the GM what they care about, and what they're invested in.
So what a GM really needs to think about in Fate is not "how do I make this encounter mechanically interesting" (at least, primarily - though that's a great secondary concern). It's "how much am I going to charge them to get their way on this?" It's fundamentally a costing exercise, and the cost should be high. Every time they buy something, it should be painful, knowing that getting this means that there's something else that they care about that they'll have to forego, or a painful cost that they'll have to bear.
(spoiler alert)
Want an example of this? Harry Dresden. He refused to sign up with the bad guys for years, until his GM (aka Jim Butcher) made him choose between his daughter's life and signing on with one of the bad guys.
He had to make that hard choice. That's great drama. That's great gameplay. That's the point of Fate.
So drive that cost. Figure out what the players want, and make them pay for it. Make them give you the "you're a dick" look on Concessions or Compels. Let their priorities get them in deeper and deeper.
They'll thank you for it.
20130814 Fate Core Thought of the Day Fate’s B...
Shared to the community Fate Core - Public
+1'd by: Nadia san, Nicola Urbinati, Jamie Frost, Diamond B, Burn Everything Gaming, Johannes Oppermann, Juanma Barranquero, Jon Smejkal, Jasper Griffiana, T.J. King, Liralen Li, JP Sugarbroad, Dandier Steel (DD Ra), Jacob Zimmerman, Aaron Feild, Michael Lake, Dan Hall, Glenn Berry, Ville Makkonen, der migepatschen, Bill Collins, Noble Bear, Sean Smith, Mark Lewis, Angela Robertson, Michael VanStrander, Jacob Possin, Stephen Chast, Jon Tate, James Dillane, Fred Hicks, Wil Hutton, David Messer, Parker Emerson, Corwyn Pendragon, Mark Kowalizzinn, Todd Grotenhuis, Will Collins, Travis DuBose, Mike Thompson, Paul Kießhauer, J Matlock Hargrove, Jake Linford, Alex Hall, Jack Gulick
Reshared by: Johannes Oppermann, T.J. King, Liralen Li, Ada Lerner, Simon White, Devon Apple, Paul Vencill, Parker Emerson, Stephen Chast, Wil Hutton, Robert Calfee
From invocation to succeed at a cost to taking consequences, making or accepting concessions, and navigating the minefield of compels, Fate is very much about "How much are you willing to pay to succeed?".
(Which is the way I phrase the question... not markedly different from your phrasings here.)
Recognizing that, we understand how this isn't a game about challenging the player's cleverness and creativity (though both of those remain useful, even vital, attributes). It's about pressing the characters between rocks and hard places and making them decide what is more important, and if the players (GM included) all understand that, it'll work even better!
With the right players, Fate could work in any genre of literature. You could even do a tragedy using it. How about MacBeth done in three Fate Arcs?
Even if we like certain things (or may like them), when we're expecting something else it often triggers dislike. My constant example is Coke and iced tea - I like both, but if I think I'm getting a sip of one, and I get the other instead, it's just gross.
In any game, there's going to be mechanics, right? These mechanics will engage certain types of decisions, and certain factors will be more important than others in determining the outcome of the game (however you define that). That's just the nature of the beast.
Like I discussed the build/tactics split in the article - if a game gives enough variation in character power due to charop shenanigans, then that will become the dominant factor in gameplay. Tactics won't matter if you can't get hit, and can't miss the opposition. If the opposition is then scaled to match, then anyone that doesn't charop will be left in the dust.
If tactical considerations will outweigh the differential in power of charop building, then the opposite will occur.
Whether this is intended or not is irrelevant. It happens. It's inevitable.
Now, I think good design of anything is an iterative process - not just a "once and done". We've seen Fate Core evolve over the years, and I'm willing to bet that this idea of "what's important" became more and more prominent over that time period. And I absolutely believe that for each "official" iteration of the design (SotC, DFRPG, FC), there were probably at least a hundred that us folks in the public never saw.
So some emergent behavior, especially early in the process, is a good thing - it gives you the seeds to drive your design, and to go "hey, that's awesome, I never anticipated that!"
But at some point you have to take a look at what's actually happening in your game, and make decisions to prioritize certain things and make sure the things you care about, or find interesting, don't get sidelined by unintended side effects. If you really want to make an awesome tactical game, then it sucks to have all of that work made mostly irrelevant because charop is more important. If you want to make "what's important to you" important, then tactical considerations can't outweigh those decisions. So you tweak, test, get feedback, evaluate what you've got and whether it does what you're trying to accomplish, and sometimes evaluate your end goals to see if they still make sense.
And that's a lot of what design is - not just some grand idea you have, but growing and refining what you've got, making sure you stay on the targets you've set while keeping yourself open to things you didn't anticipate. It's less architecture, and more gardening.
But that said, it is even more complicated than that, because the best choices are almost never simple. Or more specifically, the choices are the easy part - its making them matter that takes work.
It is easy to look at aspects and think that they are a frame for choices, since there are compels and all that jazz, but the reality is that that's just a building block. See, the game can push as hard as you like towards hard choices - it can even open the door with them, easy peasy - but in and of themselves they're not very interesting. If Harry Dresden had made that choice in book #1, then would anyone really give a crap? No. The choice was not just hard, but also meaningful because it was built on top of a history of choices, large and small.
And that is what Fate does. Mechanically, it creates an environment to help build toward meaningful choices.
Specifically, it does a few things:
1) Provides clear pointers (aspects) to the things that matter to the player (because for resonance, the player must care) about the character in a way that makes it easy for the GM to incorporate and engage them.
2) It offers the opportunity for many, many small choices that relate directly to those priorities (mechanically - that is, in addition to normal play). Every time an aspect is invoked or compelled it says something about what that aspect means, and that meaning accrues so that you build towards the opportunity for big, meaningful choices.
3) Because the action which more clearly articulates what aspects mean is ALSO the reward cycle, it incentivizes hitting it hard and often.
This is, of course, a simplification - nuance is what you play after all. While it would be nice if the whole process unfolded in a way where eventually you could just create a choice between two strongly invested aspects, and it all works, it's rarely that simple. Often the aspect can give you one choice, but the other choice is shaped more by urgency, situation and player taste. And, in fact, if the big choices were always aspect vs aspect, then they whole system would just feel like a big mechanical trap, so it's probably just as well they're not. But where it explicitly matters is that when you, the GM, get to the point where a heavy choice would be right, your game probably makes one option obvious to you (Kill the demon Lord, save the king, whatever) and Fate makes it easy for you to pick the thing to balance that choice against (Your true love's life, your honor) that you can be confident the character is sufficiently invested in to make this choice the kind of thing your players think about 10+ years later.