6th Edition: FATE?

I've never used the FAT system or the FUDGE system (but have occasionally encountered the WTF system).
This thread started me thinking: what would happen if you kept everything the same and replaced the d10 with the d6?

A d6 has a more limited range, meaning that Ability scores mean more. It also only bridges 2 magnitudes of EF, not 3.

That is a good idea, as others have said.

I think an exploding d6 is a neat idea. On a 1 it's a potential botch, on a 6 you roll it again and add 6, etc. For simple dice and stress dice, a 1 is not so good (maybe bad) and a 6 is good.

I wish we played more to mess with rules like this. I think it's a fun experiment.

MR

1 Like

You almost double the risk of botching and for getting a multiplied endroll...
It actually makes the system be more extreme rather than less.

But yes, making the dieroll result less wide might be interesting. How about retain the d10 and divide end result by 2?

You could make '1' on the D6 both the critical result and the botch - that will reduce the randomness to something akin to the current mechanics,

i.e.: Roll a 2-6, treat the roll as it stands,

Roll a 1 and make a secondary roll to determine whether it's a botch or a critical, and its magnitude,

I'm not personally a fan of dice exploding ala shadowrun - the probability curves are weird,

I'm up for using D6. D10 has a strong nostalgia for me, given that's what we've always used. But I prefer the letting the Ability scores do the work rather than the die and I see more scope for that with D6. D10 just feels too broad for my tastes. I might mess around with some D6 action in the next couple of sessions. I'll report back in and let you guys know how it went (and crucially, how the suggestion is received by an ambushed troupe).

1 Like

Which is why i like them.

besides, youb get used to them

It's little things that bother me - like 7's being no harder than 6's to roll, that creates weird little breakpoints in the system.

Indeed - one of the things one get's used to, I feel

Hi,

Did you finalize some rules, or even tried them? I'd be very interested in a FATE-like system for Ars Magica that would be lightweight in action scenes, even when using magic, but still offer some crunchiness during laboratory activities.

Thanks!

1 Like

here is the 6th edition of Ars Magica

(second link might fail, so first link and click FateOfArsMagica.pdf)

4 Likes

Thanks a LOT for sharing the material. I immediately downloaded and skimmed it through, and I found it very interesting. And what matters even more, as usable content.

Agreed. This needs testing. Game, anyone?

2 Likes

I'd like to add that Magonomia, which, IIRC, I might describe as "renaissance Ars Magica, without the Arts" uses Fate.

3 Likes

Just because I haven't seen it mentioned yet: have you looked at Magonomia? It's a really great implementation of the FATE system to run narrative heavy games about wizards in Mythic Elizabethan England. Lots of writers for the ArM5 line were behind it, so you may enjoy it.

When it comes to dice mattering more than stats:
(A) I'm not sure that is a real problem in Ars when it comes to the stuff your character is specialised in (your combos get quite high, especially for magic)
(B) I'm not sure FATE solves it, because the range of dice results is greater than most pf your skills in FATE (a range of +/- 4 on the dice vs skills going up to 4 or 5).
(C) a good way to resolve this, inspired by Kevin Crawford's Worlds Without Number, would be to say that a simple roll uses 2d6 and 1d10 is reserved for "swingier" stress rolls. This makes your outcome in non-stressful situations more stable, and higher, on average.

3 Likes

Also worth noting: some of these problems can come down to SG philosophy. I only ask people to roll when failure is likely or particularly interesting, so I very rarely ask for simple rolls, and typically will allow people to assume success in non stressful if they have a decent enough score in an Ability. So these problems are less relevant in my games than in a game where you roll more often.

3 Likes

The Amber school of Gmastering :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes

The Amber school of Gmastering

It just makes sense to me! If having a higher skill roll is modeling the fact that, all things being equal, you will do better at whatever it is, then we can just say that! The only time to roll is when all things are not equal, and there are complicating factors.

2 Likes

Interested in playing, eg. Forum play as a player. Shall we?

Very nice.

Regarding Virtues & Flaws (p. 2): I'd suggest considering a Minor Virtue as an Aspect (+1 to roll), and a Major one as two Aspects (+2 to roll). A grog character may have one virtue, plus another if a flaw is taken. A companion or magus character two virtues, plus up to another two if flaws are taken. Not precisely balanced, but close.

2 Likes

The key difficulty with simplifying ArM are the spell guidelines. So - I suggest a unified spell guideline list - and I eliminated Rego, so now the game's even simpler!

General Spell Guidelines

Magnitude 0: Minor effect.

Creo: Make a minor improvement to an item, such as an artisan might make by maintaining it.

Intellego: Discern a single (one word) piece information that can easily be found by cursory inspection.

Muto: Change a minor aspect of the target, such as changing its appearance or color.

Perdo: Do superficial damage, such as a Scar.

Magnitude 1: Small effect.

Creo: Create loose parts, such as dirt or feathers. Fix a broken item.

Intellego: Discern a single piece information that can normally be found by a short examination using an Ability, or basic information (a few words) that can easily be found by cursory inspection.

Muto: Make a small natural change to the target, such as moving it slowly.

Perdo: Inflict a Light Wound.

Magnitude 2: Semi-natural effect.

Creo: Create a basic Individual of Form, such as a bird or fish.

Intellego: Discern a single piece information that can normally only be found by an extensive skilled examination, basic information that can normally be found by a short inspection using an Ability, or brief (a sentence) information that can easily be found by cursory inspection.

Muto: Make a natural change to the target, such as controlling its motions.

Perdo: Inflict a Medium Wound.

Magnitude 3: Basic magical effect.

Creo: Create a major example of the Form, such as a mammal.

Intellego: Discern basic information that can normally only be found by extensive skilled examination, or brief information that can be found by a short use of an Ability, or thorough information (all relevant information) that can be found by cursory inspection.

Muto: Make a slightly unnatural change to a target, such as moving it quickly, teleporting a short distance, making its body resistant to damage (Soak +3), giving it a different creature's natural ability, or changing its Size (+1).

Perdo: Inflict a Heavy Wound.

Magnitude 4: Major magical effect.

Creo: Bring the target to perfection unnaturally, such as making an animal grow to maturity in a short while.

Intellego: Discern brief information that can normally only be found by extensive skilled examination, or thorough information that can be found by a short use of an Ability.

Muto: Turn a target to a different but somewhat-related Form, such as a man into another animal (with Requisites).

Perdo: Inflict an Incapacitating Wound.

Magnitude 6: Great magical effect.

Creo: Create a supernatural exemplar of the Form, such as a Beast of Virtue.

Intellego: Discern thorough information that can normally be found only by extensive skilled examination.

Muto: Turn a target into a completely different Form (with Requisite), such as turning a man into air.

Perdo: Kill a person.

Higher magnitudes are possible, to represent even more supernatural effects.

Add extra magnitudes in spell design as desired. Most commonly: +1 for violent (often - causing +5 more damage than the base effect), +2 for extra-violent, +1 for fine control or intricacy, +1 for more unnatural than base effect, +1 for allowing extra effects (with or without Requisite).

One can use guidelines from another Technique when appropriate. For example, spells should not do more damage than the Perdo guidelines indicate.

Use the standard Individual per Form as in the core book. And of course add magnitudes to affect greater size.

All this does not re-create the core game's spells precisely, but is often close and is simpler than having numerous lists. Individual TeFo lists are still strictly-speaking needed, to give examples of the general ideas (for example - perhaps "a basic Individual of Mentem" is an emotion, whereas a "major example" is a thought or memory). Which I'm sure why this kind of approach wasn't ever used in ArM - if TeFo lists are needed anyway, you might as well just have them. But for this game - well, it's simpler to have one spell guideline list rather that 50.

1 Like

Neat!

Art 5 = 16p is a little weird and doesn't fit the examples.
Maguses should be magi.

1 Like