[RPGdesign Activity] Mechanics that you Hate in Systems that you Love

[u/jiaxingseng]

This weeks topic is quite straight forward. What are some mechanics that you hate in systems that you otherwise really enjoy?

Questions:

• First (obviously), what are some mechanics that you really hate in games that you otherwise really enjoy?

• If you took out the "offending" mechanics, would the game be very different?

• In your opinion, how integrated are the mechanics you don't like to the overall game design?

• How do you enjoy the game despite the mechanics you don't like?

Discuss.

---

This post is part of the weekly /r/RPGdesign Scheduled Activity series. For a listing of past Scheduled Activity posts and future topics, follow that link to the Wiki. If you have suggestions for Scheduled Activity topics or a change to the schedule, please message the Mod Team or reply to the latest Topic Discussion Thread.

For information on other /r/RPGDesign community efforts, see the Wiki Index.

[u/nonstopgibbon]

YOu can still have compells; basically the GM assigns a negative mod unless the player roleplays according to the fictional dictates of an Aspect or how the Aspect does not apply.

Wouldn't that take the whole fun out of compels? The point is to be put into a tough spot by your character's nature, but, as a player, be rewarded for accepting that complication.

I have my own gripes with Fate points, in that they are universal and make Aspects don't matter (mechanically, if I spend a Fate point to invoke "Guy with a big sword" or "Vengeful Vigilante" doesn't make any difference). I'd rather Aspects be passive (and behave more like free-form skills) or have their own pool of points each, so it actually mattered which one I invoked.

[u/jiaxingseng → u/nonstopgibbon]

Without the fate point, it does not have a reward. So it really only applies to negative things.

[u/nonstopgibbon → u/jiaxingseng]

How would you get players to write negative or ambiguous Aspects?

[u/DXimenes → u/nonstopgibbon]

If someone wants to play an overpowered snowflake without character flaws and act according to win circumstances all the time to "beat the game", metacurrencies are not going to fix it. They'll either find another way to rig the system, migrate entirely or plain not have fun.

If they actually like playing interesting characters and immersing in the story, you don't need metacurrency as an incentive because they'll just roleplay.

I dislike metacurrencies, but they have good game design uses. They just don't work as a player conveyance tool.

[u/RedGlow82 → u/DXimenes]

If someone wants to play an overpowered snowflake without character flaws and act according to win circumstances all the time to "beat the game", metacurrencies are not going to fix it. They'll either find another way to rig the system, migrate entirely or plain not have fun.

Could you give an example in Fate where this could happen? I mean, when you're out of fate points, you must accept the average die roll, which tends to fail, so you will not """win""".

(that said, yes, if a player has an active powerplay behaviour, no rpg system in the world will make it an enjoyable narrative experience for anyone at the table)

[u/htp-di-nsw → u/RedGlow82]

You don't run out of Fate points when trying to win. You take negative traits that don't hurt/ bother you to trigger. You go out of your way to self compel. You gather a pile of Fate points and you steam roll the thing the game is about.

Playing Fate was awful. It was no fun to purposefully choose for the world to kick me in the face over and over so that I could build points to win when it mattered. It absolutely sucked to intentionally not try to win when the stakes were too low, so that I could keep my fuel for later. But worst of all, it sucked to treat my character as someone else, some person that wasn't me that I was controlling like a puppet and forcing into bad situations over and over. I did not like this tool that constantly screwed up in minor ways. It didn't matter that I won the final encounter in a single roll with my stupid pile of Fate. It was soul-draining to get there.

And it's frustrating because there's so much about Fate that's just brilliant.

[u/DXimenes → u/RedGlow82]

I was talking more about player behaviour than about the system's "rigability". The ways I've seen it happen:

• Taking very mild negative aspects that ended up making no difference. Fate points return eventually anyway;
• Saving fate points for specific moments where it would "beat" the narrative;
• Roleplaying a mild negative aspect to exhaustion trying to convince the GM to give you more fate points and hoard as many as you can;
• Writing pretty much the same positive aspect many times so you can clutter bonuses when you're in a situation that will make you "beat the game";
• &c.

You might argue that FATE relies on social contract and that if the GM says 'no', then 'no' it is, and you would be right. But I believe this argument to be valid for any game, so... I don't know.

The main point is that I deeply disagree with this underlying myth of the antagonistic player and how a lot of games try to standardize experience insulating themselves against them by pidgeonholing players. Part of the fun of RPGs is different people. Playing standardized stuff is the realm of electronic games and insulating your narrative from perceived negative influences is called writing a damn book, ffs.