Topic: On Fate Points & "Hardcore" Rolemaster

[Arioch]

Disclaimer: please don't take the title of this thread too seriously. I use the term "hardcore" (inspired by Diablo hardcore characters  ) here to talk about those RM games that make no use of things like Fate Points, where all dice are rolled in the open (i.e. no "fudging) and where therefore characters' death is relatively easy.
I'm NOT using that term to say that this particular style of playing is better than others or that's the one true way RM is meant to be played. Rolemaster is first of all a game, and if you're having fun playing it, you're doing it right.

As I've said in another topic, I used to use options like Fate Points in my RM campaigns, to make the game a little more predictable and to limit PCs mortality rate, but after a while I stopped, embracing the randomness of RM tables.
We don't use a GM's screen, so all our rolls (players and GM alike) are made in public, where everyone can see them. All critical, attack, spell casting, fumble and maneuver tables are also shared by the players and GM, so each action outcome, not just the rolls, are there for everyone to see.
This makes basically impossible for the GM (or a player!) "fudging" a result or changing the outcome of an action.

It also obviously means that each character (PCs and NPCs alike) can die for a single bad/lucky roll or that they can fail miserably critical actions or succeed when everyone thought they would fail.

For the players, it means they have to be extra-careful when they act or plan their actions and avoid any unnecessary danger (fights, maneuvers, spell casting,...) if they want to survive. It also means that they have to be slightly "fatalistic" and not grow overly attached to their PCs, as they'll probably die a horrible death (and yes, dead is dead most of the times even if you've got access to magic because Lifegiving is a 12th level spell and good luck finding someone who knows it and is willing to cast it).
OTOH, I find this style of play extremely rewarding for players: even just surviving an adventure is a real achievement, and reaching a new level is extremely gratifying, as you know that everything you got, you've gained purely with your own strenghts.

For the GM, it means you cannot prepare plots or scenarios or count too much on your NPCs; since each NPC can be killed (actually, the purpose of almost every NPC is to be killed  ) and the players can just decide they don't want to go somewhere or that they don't want to commit to a specific adventure because it's too dangerous.
It also means that you don't have to grow too attached to your NPCs, locations, worlds, etc. since everything you do can be easily undone by the PCs.
OTOH, you don't have to prepare any plot! You just prepare a number of locations for the PCs to explore, give them some rope and they'll hang themselves  It's quite liberating and leads to really surprising situations.

So, that's basically what I mean when I say "no Fate Points" and why I like playing this way. What about you? Do you prefer to use Fate Points or other ways of avoiding PCs death or would you rather play "harcore" rolemaster? Why?

[Nortti]

In my game we have played very much "hardcore". Means that the life of a PC has always been just an unlucky roll away. Still PC death has been rare as my players have learned the hard way to be careful and plan everything to a detail.

We make rolls in the open to prevent "fudging". I sometimes make detection rolls for characters even if players are not actively searching anything. I may roll some INT/IN/EM rolls etc. for PCs and NPCs without players seeing the rolls. Those are well below 1% of all rolls in a game. All important combat, spell, skill etc rolls are made in the open.

However the recent campaign that I run is different with more dangerous situations. I have done it that way on a purpose. Deadly situations can be surprising and dramatic and players have been understanding the hints of danger only afterwards. There are a lot of tweaks and differences to my earlier campaigns so I decided to start using fate point -system based on deities that grant those to devoted characters that can also make lucky IN-rolls. Everybody have not been getting FPs, so it really highlights the importance of religion and those mental and spiritual characteristics of a character. This religion is polytheistic and has a large pantheon that covers all kinds of deities. Anyone can choose a deity and try to get this benefit. I still keep a limit of max 3 FP for each. (Cats can have seven but nobody plays a cat character )

Current campaign is higher level than before and this fate point system has been suitable for it.

[markc]

  I use fate points because as a GM I tend to roll very very high or low. If I did not use fate points I would wipe out the party quite often.
MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

I make dice rolls in the open.... but I often don't tell the players what I'm rolling for, and sometimes I'm rolling for no other reason than to make them nervous. When the roll does mean something, I also tend not to tell them what the standard of success/failure is or what I'm adding/subtracting.

To be sure, it's not all just a PsyOp. As an example, say for the sake of argument that it rained the night before and is foggy this morning. Yes, they know it rained, and yes, they know it's foggy. But I don't have any specifics yet on just how sloppy the roads and trails are, nor how bad the visibility is. So for future reference (it'll matter once they're moving), I'll throw in a random roll to give me an idea of degree. They don't know what I rolled for, what my standards were, what my die roll mods were, and I don't tell them. I just make a roll or two, look and maybe say, "Hmmm..." If they ask what that was for, I look like someone trying to look innocent and say, "Oh, nothing really... you'll find out later," which is perfectly accurate but still makes them paranoid.

The point is that those 'flavor rolls' not only give you data that can add to the detail and depth of your setting, it also gives you a "partial GM screen". Your players see all the rolls, but often as not they have to guess at a given roll's significance. Yes, they saw the roll that told you the dragon saw them from far away in the air, and is now dropping to treetop height to come in unseen on his attack run.... but they only saw the roll, not the dragon, and it was in with several rolls concerning weather, trail conditions, etc. Among other things, the fact that there's a flying dragon incoming means I need to check wind direction and speed.

[intothatdarkness]

I also use flavor rolls and make the majority of my rolls in the open. BUT I also make use of Fate Points in all my RM settings that are not magic-based. My version of Outlaw is one example, as is my modified Top Secret setting. After reworking the firearms attack tables (and developing associated crits), the fatality rate for the party increased dramatically. This is to be expected in a non-magic healing setting, but I balanced this by introducing Fame and Fortune Points based on the original TS concept. Of course, Fame and Fortune are limited on their own (players never know when they might have used their last Fortune Point, and Fame is tied to level, so when it's spent, it's gone until they go up a level), so it holds balance well.

I don't use Fate Points in my fantasy setting because, quite frankly, there are enough ways for players to avoid killing themselves. Between herbs and magic, healing is pretty easy, and combat tends (on the whole) to be less lethal. There are more ways to detect opponents, and so on. The only thing I'd like to do is figure out a way to easily copy the dice system "Behind Enemy Lines" uses to deal with perception and other rolls. It's d6 based, and players make all their own perception-type rolls. The difference is that the GM then rolls and uses his roll to modify the player's result. It works well for combat-type perception, since the players may be convinced that they didn't see any ambush but then walk into one because the perception roll failed when modified with the GM's roll.

And Markc, my GM dice have the same skewing tendency. They also do this when I'm playing, so it works out well.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Between herbs and magic, healing is pretty easy, and combat tends (on the whole) to be less lethal.

I don't look at "herbs" the way most people do, though:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11880.msg150269#msg150269

[intothatdarkness]

Between herbs and magic, healing is pretty easy, and combat tends (on the whole) to be less lethal.

I don't look at "herbs" the way most people do, though:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11880.msg150269#msg150269

I know you don't. But in most games I've experienced, healing is still much easier in a magic environment.

[yammahoper]

some rolls in the open are a riot.

after describing the scene as the party enters a new town. the dualist ask if there are any attractive women out and about.  I declare d10 roll, high the better looking.  I roll in the open and get a 10.  now the dualist is all happy.  so i say I shall determine age and social standing, roll a 40 something and a 60 something, which makes her youngish, around 16-20, and nicely dressed, the daughter of a local merchant.  When the dualist talks to her, I tell him she may or may not be intersted in a strange man in stranger garb talking to her, so I'm rolling a reaction check that will dtermine the dificulty of any skill checks he uses to influence her.  I roll a 00, and it is love at first sight.

The tension during the rolls was suburb, and the results completely random.  She might have hated him at first sight. 

In a simular situation, but involving meeting a pwerdul Lord/Mage, the same player used a fate point to get a reroll on a very low reaction roll (low open end fumble).  I allowed it.  While the party still failed to gain the support they sought, at least they didn't make an enemy.

Fate points help players shape the game, not just for avoiding wounds.  I'm all for em.

[Arioch]

@ Nortti: great idea for handling fate points, I really like it!

@ Yamma: IMHO, rather than helping them shape the game, I think they let the players shape it in a different way.
I mean: players already shape the game (through their choices, their PC's skills, their rolls...), Fate Points give them the opportunity of influencing the flow of the game in a completely different way.  In this sense, they're a really strong tool, and they give the game a very different feel.
I'm not saying that's bad (as I said, I used them myself and even now I enjoy playing games that give a lot of control to the players, like the Burning Wheel or On Mighty Thews), it's just different.

[Ecthelion]

  I use fate points because as a GM I tend to roll very very high or low. If I did not use fate points I would wipe out the party quite often.
MDC

We use Fate Points for similar reasons.

[KaBurr]

I do not use fate points.  I've tried them and I find they really dumb down the game.  But I say that knowing it is purely my oppinion and perhaps if I were running a different type of game I'd need them more.  What I have found as a neat little additive are dopey things like "a lucky rabbit foot" or "my lucky pendant" that my characters carry.  I let them use it to reroll ONE die roll once per month.  I have one player who's character is superstitious and carries a rabbit's foot, his lucky rock, lucky dice, his lucky shirt...it's funny.  And it keeps him alive.  It's just another form of fate points I suppose but it has more character =)


KaBurr

[Arioch]

What I have found as a neat little additive are dopey things like "a lucky rabbit foot" or "my lucky pendant" that my characters carry.  I let them use it to reroll ONE die roll once per month.  I have one player who's character is superstitious and carries a rabbit's foot, his lucky rock, lucky dice, his lucky shirt...it's funny.  And it keeps him alive.  It's just another form of fate points I suppose but it has more character =)

Pure genius! 
We once found a magical pendant (shaped like a traditional south-italian lucky charm http://orogioielli.it/converted/Orogioielli/Super_Corno_portafortuna_vendita_oro_gioielli_bigiotteria_a_prezzi_imbattibili_27121594_Large.png)
that increased your high open-ended range, but that's even better!

[rdanhenry]

If you accept that Fate Points are a metagame device, based on the player's reluctance to replacing the character (understandable in games where character generation is non-trivial), you can recognize that it doesn't make sense to refresh them based on character actions or ever quasi-game constructs like "a gaming session" or game mechanical marks like leveling up. No, the source of Fate Points should, like the motivation for them, come from outside the game itself. Supply food for the game? Get a Fate Point. Drive the GM to his dental appointment? Get a Fate Point. Draw portraits of the PCs? Get a Fate Point or several.

[jolt]

I once ran The Great Pendragon Campaign using (somewhat obviously) the Pendragon ruleset; a game that also has a very high level of lethality.  As the rules and campaign themselves suggest making all rolls in the open, that's what I did.  It was a complete disaster.  There are dozens of reasons why (too long to list all of the problems over a 2.5 year game) and, as the GM, I was the only from the start of the campaign to finish it.

Part of the problem is that all of those deaths eventually just slowed down the game.  Gaming time is already at a premium to make constant pauses and restarts a viable option.  Careful planning means nothing.  At some point you have to roll dice and at some point those dice are going to kill you.  For a one-shot that's fine but I find it terrible for a campaign.  For me (YMMV), high lethality doesn't make players appreciate living more, it does the exact opposite.  Few people have time to become emotionally invested in their characters and Sir Bleoboric the Red is replaced by Sir Bleoboric the Blue because the players have just stopped caring.

For those of you that it works for I think that's great.  But I will never again do 'all rolls in the open'.  Possibly the worst gaming experience I ever went through.

All that being said, I don't typically care for Fate Point style mechanics.  My experience has been that players horde them until they get to what they think is a "boss" type monster and then blow them all at once.  The end result is that, what should have been the most interesting encounter, becomes the most bland.

When running campaigns, for us the most important thing is that the story keeps moving and that the game doesn't get bogged down in minutia.  Character death can make a story very interesting but just having a player switch from character sheet #12 to character sheet #13 is not very interesting to us.

[intothatdarkness]

If you accept that Fate Points are a metagame device, based on the player's reluctance to replacing the character (understandable in games where character generation is non-trivial), you can recognize that it doesn't make sense to refresh them based on character actions or ever quasi-game constructs like "a gaming session" or game mechanical marks like leveling up. No, the source of Fate Points should, like the motivation for them, come from outside the game itself. Supply food for the game? Get a Fate Point. Drive the GM to his dental appointment? Get a Fate Point. Draw portraits of the PCs? Get a Fate Point or several.

My mechanism is simple, although not original to me (I lifted it from the original Top Secret rules). Fortune points are determined by the GM are the point a character's created by a d10 roll. The player never knows how many they have, and they can never be replaced. Fame points are tied directly to character level. Each PC starts with one and gains another when she goes up a level. I also limited my players to using them ONLY to avoid a fatal blow/action, so they couldn't use them to take down a "boss" character buy they could use them to avoid being killed by said boss. And when you further consider that the average total number of points a third level PC would have is in the 6-8 range (likely less if they've used Fortune Points at any point), they tended to be careful with them.

Also, I didn't use these with fantasy settings. Only the more modern stuff. If I used them with fantasy, I suspect I'd cut the Fame portion in half (one point every two levels or something like that).

I also don't like the idea of tying such points to out-of-game actions. But that's just me.

[markc]

 O Boy, Fame points from 007 James Bond. After that game it brought up a whole new level of crazy outside the game so as we could aquire Fame Points ourselves.
MDC

[providence13]

O Boy, Fame points from 007 James Bond. After that game it brought up a whole new level of crazy outside the game so as we could aquire Fame Points ourselves.
MDC

Maybe Top Secret (the game, not the movie) had those too.

Mythus used a similar system; Joss (Luck) Points.
IIRC,
In Mythus, you could buy a wound severity down 1 level (levels were x1, x2, x3, x4). Or make a skill an auto success or make someone else fail a skill.
This would translate to RM as 1 step crit reduction, success or failure on a skill without rolling. There was also anti-joss which was kinda like negative experience. If you trashed someone's temple, the Power might make your next important roll auto-fail or increase damage (crit) from a follower in retaliation.
These aren't total game changers, but might be fun. Hhmm.. I'll talk the the players. Maybe Divine/Corruption Points can be used in a similar manor.

I don't always show players my rolls. For info/divination rolls, they don't need to know. But when I roll a 00, I lift the screen as they hold their breath.

[intothatdarkness]

Maybe Top Secret (the game, not the movie) had those too.

Mythus used a similar system; Joss (Luck) Points.
IIRC,
In Mythus, you could buy a wound severity down 1 level (levels were x1, x2, x3, x4). Or make a skill an auto success or make someone else fail a skill.
This would translate to RM as 1 step crit reduction, success or failure on a skill without rolling. There was also anti-joss which was kinda like negative experience. If you trashed someone's temple, the Power might make your next important roll auto-fail or increase damage (crit) from a follower in retaliation.
These aren't total game changers, but might be fun. Hhmm.. I'll talk the the players. Maybe Divine/Corruption Points can be used in a similar manor.

I don't always show players my rolls. For info/divination rolls, they don't need to know. But when I roll a 00, I lift the screen as they hold their breath.

TS had Fame and Fortune points. Used the same way, but gained differently. JB007's system was a bit different, and was driven by gameplay (rather like that in Muthus). I liked the TS version, honestly, and tended to use it in a similar way. Again, though, I didn't use it with fantasy settings.

[JimiSue]

... Stuff ...

Agree with absolutely every word.

[Arioch]

When running campaigns, for us the most important thing is that the story keeps moving and that the game doesn't get bogged down in minutia.  Character death can make a story very interesting but just having a player switch from character sheet #12 to character sheet #13 is not very interesting to us.

Of course if what you want from your game is a story, then you need something to prevent the protagonists from dying (unless your name is George RR Martin  ).
As I said above, if you play RM "hardcore" you literally cannot prepare any of plot or story, the game is more focused on exploration/survival rather than on creating a story.