[SotC/FATE] Player interaction

[sabbatregent]

Premise

This is are small AP snippets of a Spirit of the Century game that happened a month ago.  I've been playing SotC / FATE 3.0 games with this specific gaming group for about six months. The group is nine people strong. Before you panic at that big number, let me state one of the main reasons we use SotC is because we're exactly the target audience: people with many occupations, unable to meet regularly. So, most of the time, four to six people gather to play every Sunday. As a curious tidbit, we switch the GM seat every session. It allows for us to be ready for the eventuality that the appointed GM can't make it.

As I stated from the beginning, this is are small portion of a session, centered at what happens on the table. There were four of us, plus the GM (me). Including myself, there were three "old guard" players, and two very new to the hobby ones.

The AP sample

a) the first exchange

The characters are fighting on a rooftop against assorted mooks and a very fearsome martial artist. It seems natural to skip initiative and just go clockwise around the table. This means the opposition will go last.

I simply ask Old Guard Player 1 "What are you going to do?". He tries a maneuver to place an "Unbalanced" Aspect on the group of mooks he's targeting.

I then ask the same question to New Player 1. He looks confused, and can't provide an answer. OGP1 throws some suggestions at him, the other two players chime in. In the end, he decides on simply attacking a group of mooks.

Old Guard Player 2 declares he's going for the martial artist. He has three mooks attached to him, and takes all of them out. Some confusion ensues, as the idea of taking out the mooks instead of hitting the martial artist seem strange to him. OGP1 finds the idea strange too. Both the NPs don't understand what's the problem. After a reminder of what the roll means, it gets cleared out.

New Player 2 describes his action. He says he raises his sword (one of his aspects), and shouts his Battle Cry (another aspect), launching to battle. NP1 suggests that the martial artist might decide to target him specially, because of that. I like that idea, and start a compel. We never specify what aspect I'm compelling, but the player takes the fate point. I describe how the martial artist looks at him intently.Then I translate his action to the game system. "You'll place an "Intimidated" aspect on a group of mooks. Is that what you want?" He agrees, and also succeeds in his maneuver.

The groups of mooks attack and deal some stress. The martial artist keeps staring intently (he's assessing his rival). I roll his maneuver, and succeeds, but don't tell NP2 his character has a "Weak point in his defense" temporal aspect.

b) the second exchange.

OGP1: He attacks the group of mooks with the "unbalanced" aspects, tagging it for bonus, and takes out every single one. I describe how he achieves that, by a series of blows, kicks, stumbles and some structural damage to the floor.

NP1: He says he takes out a gun that throws nets. Wait, better yet, a gun that throws sticky glue, and fires at the mooks he's attacking. OGP2 says, "Wait, you have no such weapon, where did you get it?" I ask him, "Do you have it?", extending my hand to signal that I want a fate point for it. "Yes, I do" he says, and pays. He has a "Weird powerful weapons" aspect, so I figure it is an OK declaration, though I don't state it openly. He fires, placing an "Sticky" aspect on a group of mooks.

OGP2: He attacks the martial artist again, and misses. OGP2 suggests that the martial artist walks over OGP2's sword when he avoids the attack. We go with that.

NP2 goes after the martial artist, also, and also misses. He describes how the martial artists makes a somersault and lands on OGP2's sword again.

The mooks with the "Sticky" aspect try and fail to remove said aspect. The rest attack again. Poor rolls mean no stress inflicted. The martial artist capitalize on his free tag, add some more punch to it via invokes, and inflicts an 8 stress hit on OGP2. OGP2 remembers some scene from Matrix and, surprisingly (for me) describes how the martial artist jumps from his sword in slow motion and kicks him in the face. He dwells a little on what consequence to take. Everyone else but me suggest some ideas. He goes for "Humiliated". This sounds more social than physical, but seems reasonable to everyone.

c)After the fight

The martial artist escapes with a Matrix-like jump, while the mooks get up and crawl out of the scene. OGP1 stops one for questioning. NP2 politely asks to speak out of turn to question him first. OGP2 explains to him we're not taking turns anymore...

Some conclusions

A year ago, I would have gone crazy if people threw suggestions or description over a combat scene. After reading DitV, this has changed a lot. SotC, it seems, takes no side on the player/character knowledge division issue, but it can accommodate both approaches perfectly. It also allows for various levels of shared narrative. I'm thinking, for tomorrow's session, to suggest the players to describe every action that involves their characters, hits, misses, defenses, etc., even consequences

The fate point mechanic settles a lot of issues quickly. Taking note of which specific aspects are invoked is quite sketchy in the group, but this doesn't create a problem. The fact that you're giving out one of your "resource points" seems like balance enough for everyone involved. Also, it becomes like a shorthand at times. You don't need to come up with a name for the aspect, but everyone is on the same page about potential invokes and compels, even if they don't use the terminology.

NP2 has a lot of problems getting into and out of "play by turn" mechanisms. It's weird, and I have no idea why this keeps happening, although it causes no problems. NP1 has a lot of problems coming up with his own actions at times, but he enjoys the outcome if its cool, no matter who suggested the action in the first place. OGP2, on the other side, is too invested on classical definitions of game actions, but it also bears no significant problems. What does it all mean? I'm still trying to figure that out, but since everyone is enjoying themselves, I think there's no need to fix anything. The thing about SotC is that in many other games all of this things could be a real issue, but SotC accommodates so that they are not (Could it be the GM advice?).

Last, everyone seems to have a different account of what actually happened in the fight. In an after the game cafe, another member of the group joined us, and received two, very different, accounts about the fight. Both were pretty cool, but clearly incompatible. Is this a feature of the rules or is it caused by our playing style? I have no idea, but it makes for pretty interesting conversations.

So, how does this compare to your own experience with SotC or FATE?
How does this compare with player interaction in your games?

[RPL]

Hi,

I completly relate to your experience, I haven't played much of SOTC (never played FATE) but what I have it's just like you said.

I've had fights on air-plane wings (with the air-plane flying), ninjas in ballrooms, wizards and hordes of jetpack-flying minions agains the R.A.F., and everyone of those fights went smooth as silk, just adjucating the right skills and going with the minions rules makes it all so simple it's ridiculous (not really hehe).

Also, using Fate Points for compels and declarations has been a juicy source for player-player interaction, for instance I saw a player using a Fate Point to declare that a woman his "rival"-player was hiting on was promissed to a high noble and asking me to compel his "first on the scene" aspect so that he gets FP back and at the same time hit on the other player "Jet's in trouble" aspect, all good stuff and the mechanics really push that kind of things to the front row of the story action and at the _same time_ insane pulp combats.

So yeah I read you clear as crystal.


Diogo Curado

[boswok]

I've been interested in SotC for a little while now, but have never been able to play it so far.  From the looks of it, it sounds like you're doing the right thing.  Also, I think any hang-ups your players may have about games formerly played will ebb with persistence in the system.  As for the fight... it sounds like they're all really invested in the action, leading to differing perspectives; and really, isn't that exactly what you'd expect in a real-world upheaval?  Twenty different stories for one event.  Sounds like great times to me.