[RPG Theory] Accumulating Aspects in FATE

[stevekenson]

One concept discussed over our Thrilling Tales of the Midnight Society Game last night was that of using the addition of aspects as a means of “advancement” for FATE characters. It often seems like players come up with better aspects during the course of the game (an oft-heard comment is “Hey, that should so be one of your aspects!”).

Seems like one way to make a “pick-up” FATE game like Spirit of the Century more suited for long-term play might be to limit a character’s starting number of aspects to half (or even less) and have the character acquire or accumulate aspects, much as RPG characters tend to acquire (or accrete) history, personality, and depth as they are played. The acquired aspects might be more “rooted” (the other players were “there” when it “happened”) and their addition more organic, growing out of “actual” events.

The extreme example would be to start a character out with just one or two aspects (say, “elf” and “wizard” for example...) and add others on like “the legendary bow of Brindenwood” and “Goblinslayer” as the character adventures and improves. It could be as many as one aspect per adventure or just one per “significant” moment in the overall series arc. It’s a method of character advancement that its widely free-form but does actually add “abilities” to the character sheet, since it widens options for Fate Point usage (and even “stunts” if you’re using some sort of stunt system based on what aspects a character has).

Edit: One additional idea would be the potential of shedding or losing aspects as well. A "use it or lose it" rule that says any aspect that isn't activated or tagged for X number of sessions is scratched off the character sheet would be an interesting way of ensuring the removal of "dead wood," possibly freeing up space for newer, more interesting aspects (assuming characters have a reasonable limit of how many permanent aspects they can have at once). As it is, I'm allowing players to drop aspects they started with but have found less interesting or useful in play to acquire newer ones.

Comments

[codrus.livejournal.com]

We had similar experiences where we'd say "that should be an aspect."

I've already decided that if I run a FATE game, I'll start the players with significantly less aspects anyway, because I want them also looking for tags on other player's aspects. IMO, SOTC doesn't force you to stretch past your own personal abilities often enough.

In any case, I do think that more 'organic' character creation is worth it.

[xomec.livejournal.com]

Seems like one of the key elements of the superspy genre would be the "arming sequence" – the teaser at the start of the story that establishes certain aspects of the character relevant to the plot later on. Often it's the assigned gadgetry, but it can also be interpersonal relationships ("didn't you used to read law with him at Cambridge?" etc.) or other aspects.

So perhaps the typical FATE assignment of aspects might take place that the start of every story, with some aspects "fixed" and others fluid. You can even break it out into fixed, assigned (during the "arming" phase), and fluid, which can be assigned during play, perhaps by spending Fate Points (and with a suitable flashback about how the character got that much-needed aspect).

[rob-donoghue.livejournal.com]

My brother pretty much insists on playing with fast character creation whenever he plays because his groups enjoys the act of adding aspects in play so much. One way or another, I definitely like aspects changing aggressively in play.

[ptevis.livejournal.com]

This makes me think of an idea that floated to the top of my brain a while back when people were complaining about players always using the same Aspects over and over again: The third time you use an Aspect, you must change it in some way or replace it. So "The Magic Ring of the Ancients" could become "I am a slave to the Magic Ring of the Ancients." It gives you organic character refinement, and uses it uses the Dramatic Rule of Three.

[freeport-pirate.livejournal.com]

In campaign play we found 10 aspects was really too many. I would have preferred starting with five and gaining more in play.

[xomec.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's turning out to be our experience as well: ten aspects tends to result in about a third to half of the characters' aspects being forgotten or overlooked, as players were often reaching to come up with the last few during character creation.

[wordwill.livejournal.com]

The in-play revelation of abilities is so much fun—just as it is fun to watch characters in movies reveal their abilities—that I'm renovating Tomorrow War (http://wordstudio.net/tomorrow/?p=14) so that the "What do I know how to do?" mechanic persists through the first two phases of play, and not merely the first. (The endgame, then, is about making those decisions stick.)

How much fun is it to watch characters reveal their abilities? So much fun that Indiana Jones makes a joke on it in his underdog-over-his-head way in TEMPLE OF DOOM:

WILLY: You know how to fly a plane don't you?
INDY: Uh, no. Do you?

[wyldelf.livejournal.com]

That's totally how I plan to do non-pulp genres (or even semi-pulp like Eberron, which I want to run with SotC/Fate). Start out with a smaller number of aspects and grow them (in addition to a smaller skill pyramid, or perhaps even no pyramid, but simply skills at different levels).

On story games a few weeks ago, there was some talk about the forced shedding, or changing, of aspects as well. My favorite was inspired by The Shadow of Yesterday, where Aspects work like Keys. Some people took this in various directions, but my favorite idea that came of that (and I was thinking of this recently, so I'm not sure if it's in the thread, should you look for it) is that you can only refuse a compel so many times. Maybe once, maybe three. But once you refuse the compel that final time, that Aspect goes away (and possibly even gives you a Fate point or a few of them). Another change is that it doesn't cost Fate points to resist the compel. Just the ticking clock until the Aspect goes away. You can even play with how core the aspects are by making one have more or less ticks than the default assumption.

[oakthorne.livejournal.com]

Definitely. The whole idea of losing some aspects while you gain others that seem better suited is an excellent thing. I've always wanted character advancement to be less about becoming more power and more of a process of refinement of concept.

[wordwill.livejournal.com]

Amen. Your character should more resemble what he or she has done and experienced, over time, in this kind of system. I appreciate the purpose of mechanisms and games that unlock things you want to do in the future, but we have plenty of those already.

[ogier30.livejournal.com]

Not only that, I'd expect that things that are important to you as a player would change as the game developed - and since Aspects are supposed to reflect that, I'd be expecting to see the 'overwriting' of them as things developed. They're a reflection of your past, but also an indicator of the future, right?

[xomec.livejournal.com]

I've always wanted character advancement to be less about becoming more power and more of a process of refinement of concept.

Very well put indeed.