I cannot seem to post replies to the fate rule topic.  Is there a maximum number of entries before it closes, or is just my machine?

If so, we can continue in this post..

Roy said:

Given that Reply #79 really doesn't seem a sensible post limit, I am guessing something has gone wrong with someone's use of post formatting.

 Hmm... perhaps the thread was closed because somebody got a bit trigger happy when they thought the tone was changing.

If that is the case you would think it would have a CLOSED icon or something though... who knows?

79 replies plus the original post make it 80 posts total. Given how retarded the new forum software is, I've a strong suspicion there might be a limit...

I thank you for your time

Lord Gorthuar de Veris

Cult of Nagash

Gorthuar said:

Nasty! (in  the pleasent sense of the word)  The last one does look interesting, fun to try it out.

Psst! That's not *my* post you're quoting...

Gorthuar said:

Sorry mate, copied and pasted from the original series!  It was BanthaFodder 's post!

If there is a limit, I don't think its 79 or 80 posts. There are topics in other forums on this site with plenty more posts than 79.

Regardless of why we cannot reply in the old Fate Rule discussion I am glad this one has been made because I had something I wanted to add.

With fate although this sounds wrong you can't really think of the possibility of getting toaded or loosing something as a 1 in 36 chance but really need to look at it as STILL a 1 in 6 chance IF you use fate. This is how people will be looking at it when they are making the decision of whether or not to use fate. If I am at the enchantress and I rolled a 2 to loose a craft (or whatever it is) I have a very tough decision to make. I either take the hit or decide to use fate (which I have to think could be more useful later on) and roll again. If I roll again I not only have the 1 in 6 chance of rolling a 2 again I also have ANOTHER chance to roll a 1 and ANOTHER chance to roll a 3 which means that even on my reroll my odds of rolling something bad is 50%. This is what should be going through the roller's head and for this reason I believe people will be reluctant to use up their fate at every given bad roll and in turn the effect fate will have on the game will not be as great as we perceive it to be.

Brando said:

Its a good point, I understand where you are coming from, but still not as good as having to accept the roll in the first place.  I doubt players will use up their fate for every bad roll unless you have a lot of it.  If I was a troll and would hoard my point to protect myself from random or the witch rather than use in combat for instance.  That fact that it protects you at all is what I fear may make the game boring.

The second problem we experienced is that playing with high fate characters can get the "tha's bull****" experience from over use of fate.  Its too easy to regenerate.  As for the example above - keep re-rolling if you have a high fate.  You'll win some, lose some but natural strength and craft beats those gained from adventuring and gaining items, and luck and stats are on your side. (Maybe if you have the most strength/craft on the board or close enough to other players but with more fate you could sell your items so other players can gain the rewards!?!?)

To be fair, I would like to play several games with more players with the raw fate rules (we have been playing 3 players), but if it doesn't work the users on this post have found some good alternatives for house rules.

RiCHiE said:

I agree completely RiCHiE.  I've played a few more games since my comments in the original thread (where I was flamed and misquoted for simply stating I wasn't in love with fate) and I still think it waters down the experience a bit.  Fate erodes the peaks and valleys of positive and negative events in the game to the point where things are just a little bland.  You don't get the up and down rollercoaster feel like you did when you had to accept what you rolled.  With fate you never really run any high risk of having something catastrophic happen to you, nor can you benefit from someone else having a catastrophic event if you can simply use fate to get out of sticky situations.

I think a lot of folks on here have come up with some nice house rules that simply tweak fate, but not eliminate it.  I'm not opposed to still using fate, but it needs to be fleshed out a bit more so we can have a little bit of a more hardcore old-school experience.  I'd love to see FFG come up with some nice modifiers to fate.  For example I think spells or conditions that characters could contract (like leprosy or something) cause you to lose fate each time you roll a certain number to move or make it impossible to regain fate.

We've all got opinions on fate and how it currently works and could work.  I'd love to see this thread be a civil discussion where we are free to discuss our valid opinions of the game mechanic without having fingers pointed or being attacked. :)

HallertauRogue said:

But PvP (player vs player or poster vs poster) is where it's at  .

Dam said:

I'm all for it too...when both sides are rational and actually know what they are talking about.

Well I finally played my first game of the FFG version and it was a huge success.  It was two of my friends first time ever playing the game and the simply loved it.  We played with the Druid, Thief and Warrior.  Fate wasn't as big of a factor as I kept hearing.  Sure no one turned into a toad, but that wasn't because of fate, no one rolled a one on their first roll.  However some people to get an even worse result after rolling fate, and a numbers of times they got the same result.  Naturally some of the times their situation improved, but it never took the fun away for our group. 

Fate encouraged us to take bigger risks, and as I said sometimes those risks didn't pay off.  In the end the game felt like a game of talisman.  People still got smashed up all over the board and had loads of fun.  The winner at the end was the Warrior, and he only starts with 1 fate.  The characters in this version feel more balanced, but the game is still very challenging.  

Now I should stress that I don't feel everyone should feel they have to use fate, and I for one think this is one of the best games to tinker with and adjust the rules as you see fit.  If you hate fate, or if it detracts from your fun, you should most certainly change it.  For me though, it gave the game one more wrinkle, one more choice to make, and that made all the difference. 

HallertauRogue said:

What!?!?! You don't love fate!! *sob* I can find tons of people who never played Talisman or who have always hated it, that now love it due to Fate!  *sob* The game was rubbish was before and now fate has made it perfect! *sob* If you don't like it, it is just simply because you haven't played the game properly - everyone loves fate! Fate is the greatest innovation to the modern man! Fate I love you!

Anyone who critices Fate shall have the whole board pulled down! FLAME ON!

I'm warning you, I will cry!

lol, run for cover!!!