Kagome must be so confused by the events of this story. There he is, minding his own business, being a hermit and eating ratberries, when suddenly Maniac Apprentice shows up and the next thing he knows he's rediscovering lost civilisations, setting Hot Springs on fire, and buying books with Jiraiya's credit card.
Marked for Death: A Rational Naruto Quest
- Thread starter eaglejarl
- Start date
-
- Tags
- naruto rationalist romance armageddon is looking better and better damn you kishimoto explosions everywhere explosives solve everyone if in doubt surrender to the mercy of zabuza it seemed like a good idea at the time looks like a really bad case of being a jōnin my god. where does the lore end? precommitting is the winning plan screaming in kagome screw the rules i have explosives something bad might still happen sometimes you gotta sociopath stabby zabby subsection c of paragraph 9 should include we can weaponize this so hard
Kagome must be so confused by the events of this story. There he is, minding his own business, being a hermit and eating ratberries, when suddenly Maniac Apprentice shows up and the next thing he knows he's rediscovering lost civilisations, setting Hot Springs on fire, and buying books with Jiraiya's credit card.
- Location
- Yes.
Kagome isn't the only one
Ah I definitely get that! Sorry if that came across as banging the "anti FP" drum without offering any constructive alternatives. I'm interested in exploring how you can have aspects without overly-powerful narrative FP, and I think it's definitely feasible.
For example you could say that rather than earning FP via acting according to characterisation, every character gets refreshed to level/5 FP each day (using the same level concept for max skill level). This keeps FP as a mechanic, without tying them to narrativium (any more than XP does, as you point out).
Another option would be to remove FP completely and make aspects free to tag once per scene but maybe harder to generate. This maintains the value of aspects (slightly increases their value actually), which we want, without requiring FP, which we don't.
Actually even if you do end up keeping FP as they are, I'd still suggest making taggable aspects harder to generate. As an example, in the last combat Akane starts by tagging "YOUTH" and Hinata tags "Budding Mistress of the Gentle Fist". The thing is, aside from very rare situations, EVERY combat that Akane will be in she'll get to tag "YOUTH" and the same for Hinata. Giving everyone a bonus like this is the same as giving it to nobody, except that it devalues the bonus itself. For example later in the combat Shino spends his entire combat action (AND spends his FP and free aspect) all in an attempt to give a taggable aspect to Hinata. Since everyone is throwing around aspects for free this action ends up being more or less a waste of Shino's turn (I suppose it saves Hinata one FP though). If the chance to generate an aspect (he still needed to roll for success) is worth the cost of your combat action and your chakra (if using a jutsu), aspects themselves should be more valuable: either rarer or more powerful.
@eaglejarl
Hmm, I do see your point about how they're similar but I think that the argument for XP is MUCH stronger than for FP, for a couple of reasons:
- You've already put in the hard work and pain to get a balanced XP system: Any game-critical system that functions differently for the PC (e.g. being tied to OOC incentives) risks giving the PC unfair benefits or unfair disadvantages, often in subtle ways that won't become obvious until much further down the road. Before the Great Rebalancing, Hazou & Co. had slowly become ludicrously overpowered since we use an XP system whereas the initial design of NPC characters did not. Now that you've built out an XP curve framework that you can apply to NPCs and that, after some trial and error, you're fairly confident matches our XP gains, that problem is mostly solved. Without knowing what our FP gaining and spending patterns will look like though, you have no (tested) way of knowing what reasonable FP totals will look like. It's completely conceivable that Hazou will enter every fight with essentially unlimited FP, considering how infrequently we get into fights and how risk-averse the player base will be about wasting them and not having them for combat. RPGs can get around that by forcing PCs into situations where they have to burn FP's, but in this much-more-simulationist world, that's not as feasible.
It's also possible that your model of NPC FP results in the opposite, where they have more FP than us in general. Then you end up with the same problems (but flipped) but with a side order of player whinging over the nerf we will have suffered during the mechanics switch.Set a hard cap on max FP: Won't work if the cap is high enough that most ninja we face are below the cap, since we would still enjoy that PC advantage of always having more FP than our opponents. If it's low enough that most ninja we face ARE at the cap then that significantly nerfs the value of gaining FP (which is the OOC part anyway) and more or less satisfies the problem. Of course at that point if the default is just that ninja start with a certain # of FP in each fight, there's no need for a more complex system of FP assignment and spending; you can just have them be "combat points", or "energy", (or tie it to chakra!) and either reserve FP for non-combat use or make non-combat aspects free to tag. - XP's OOC incentives are a better fit for the quest's requirements: The XP bonus we get is tied to the quality of our plans. This incentivises us the players to write plans that are not only in-character but also easy to read, easy to write, not too long, etc. Contrast this to FP where the OOC incentives are for better roleplaying and characterisation; two problems that due to the format we don't suffer from as much since QMs already play the plans through a layer of characterisation in writing the updates.
- XP maps better to a real in-game concept: Experience is a real thing that ninja would have more or less of. "Fate" or "doing what your character should want to do" isn't really.
Last edited:
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
@eaglejarl @Velorien @OliWhail
I was considering that it might be worthwhile to make a ~5 Bonus XP (from Omake, research papers, etc., not extraordinary things like mechanics help) limit per real-world week or something similarly-standardized. This would allow you to feel less guilty about giving us XP. It might also be worth considering giving Fate Points out for extraordinarily-good works (like, say, the research papers by Mink).
I was considering that it might be worthwhile to make a ~5 Bonus XP (from Omake, research papers, etc., not extraordinary things like mechanics help) limit per real-world week or something similarly-standardized. This would allow you to feel less guilty about giving us XP. It might also be worth considering giving Fate Points out for extraordinarily-good works (like, say, the research papers by Mink).
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Wow, this got long. Hopefully it will put this issue to bed.
Okay, I'm getting really frustrated here. I have explained this in great detail but the message isn't getting through. Let me try again and I'll be really thorough this time.
There is no effective way to farm FP aside from being active and winning.
Attempting to farm FP in any other way DOES NOT WORK and attempting to do so WILL HURT YOU.
@MadScientist, you have been saying "you get FP for making in-character mistakes". As far as I know, the only place that that has ever been said by a QM is when I wrote it in Meanwhile on the Seventh Path, which was a parody episode. Here is a complete list of how to earn FP as per the rules document, which is the thing that actually matters:
In a prior post I explained at great length why taking Consequences solely to gain FP is a losing strategy. Note the important point that there is a rule in the most recent QM version of the rules which has not been sent over to the player doc yet. That rule is, "You cannot take a Consequence except to prevent stress from exceeding your stress track." This prevents saying "Oh, I'm going to win this fight easily, so I'll let him hit me once for a stress or two but, instead of applying it to my stress track, I will take a Mild consequence and that way I get an extra FP when I win!" This was the only viable loophole that allowed farming FP with few consequences (no pun intended), and it has been closed.
Finally, Compels. Just to make sure we're all on the same page, let's start with a definition: The way a Compel works in the DFRPG is that the GM says to the player "You have N possible actions at this point that would be in character for you. (i.e., would line up with your Aspects) I am Compelling you to do <this particular action from that set>; if you do it I'll give you an FP." The player then either says okay and takes the FP or they pay an FP to the GM in order to refuse the Compel and do whatever they want.
The word 'Compel' is not in the rules doc for MfD and therefore is not an official part of the rules at this point. @Velorien used one in an earlier update which presumably is what is causing this whole discussion, but, again, it is not an official part of the rules at this point.
There is some debate over whether and how we are going to use Compels. There's a reasonably good chance that we will not, and will simply occasionally award FP mid-update if we think it's appropriate. Regardless, even if we do use them, Compels are NOT based on "you made a mistake so you get an FP." You may have gotten this idea from the description in 'Meanwhile, On the Seventh Path' in conjunction with this line from the rules: "A plan that has [Hazō] take an action that is exceptionally in character (meaning that it tracks closely with one of Hazō's Aspects) when it's not to his advantage." This is NOT the same as "when he makes a mistake", it simply means that the plan chooses being in character over being perfectly optimal.
A possible example: Hazō is not comfortable with emotionally-charged social situations, but he has a strong sense of duty and loyalty and might well have an Aspect like "Always Tries to Do the Right Thing, Sometimes Succeeds". Making a plan in which you choose to go to tea with Mrs. Minami is the sort of thing that I would have considered awarding FP for since (a) it's active and (b) it carries some risk and (c) it's probably not the perfectly optimal action to spend that time on but (d) it's in character because it tracks closely to that Aspect. These awards are up to the individual QM writing the update; @Velorien might award something that I wouldn't, etc.[1] [NOTE: Now that I have provided this as an example I will not be awarding FP for it if you choose to do it.]
To sum up the above:
Compels probably are not a thing, and therefore are not a way to farm FP.
Consequences are a net loss of FP and therefore not a viable way to farm them.
Getting 'just because' awards from the QM is not a reliable way to farm FP any more than being funny and writing omake is a reliable way to farm OOC XP.
Winning conflicts IS a valid way to farm both XP and FP. It always has been.
Finally, since I've already got a massive wall of text here, let me paste in one more bit. This is taken from the QM version of the rules doc and not yet copied over to players. I wrote it and it hasn't been officially signed off on but I believe that neither @OliWhail nor @Velorien has objected. Guys, if you disagree with this assessment then I take the blame and will walk it back.
Fate Points: How Are These Simulationist?
MfD prides itself on being a simulationist quest. We even have a Golden Rule to specify that if the rules don't match the simulation then it's the rules that change. For the most part our rules are pretty clearly simulationist, but Fate Points seem to be an exception. They aren't a quantification of an in-universe thing like chakra (CP) or experience (XP), so what are they simulating?
Answer: The ability to usefully exploit one's environment.
Characters should be able to gain advantage by identifying and exploiting important elements of their surroundings and/or opponents. For example, it should be easier to win a chess game if you can identify your opponent's psychological weaknesses in order to anger him into making bad moves. That's not your chess skill at work, that's a bonus to your chess skill based on an environmental factor.
Okay, how many such factors should exist? How many should you be able to use at once? How much advantage should each one supply? How do the players identify them in advance so that they can use them in the plan?
Either the QMs adjudicate each of these items individually (thereby draining their spoon drawers and will to live) or there is a mechanic for it. That mechanic is Fate Points. They specify how much a given advantage is worth and provide a gating mechanism for how many such advantages you can use in a particular time frame. In the same way that XP don't perfectly model the real world, Fate Points do not perfectly model the real world. For XP it's things like "Why can't I level up just by practicing?" and "Why did killing that orc suddenly let me get better at picking locks?" For Fate Points it's things like "Why can't I gain advantage from every available Aspect instead of only the ones I have Fate Points to pay for?" and "Why do I get the same amount of advantage regardless of what I'm exploiting?" Neither XP nor FP is perfect, but the system is better for having them.
In summary: Fate Points are a mechanism for simulating environmental advantage -- how many advantages, how often, how helpful. They enhance the simulation by providing the players opportunities to analyze, identify, and exploit the details of the world around them.
@MadScientist, I really hope that this has finally settled the issue for you. Do you still feel that there is an incentive to do stupid things and/or not advance your socials in order to gain FP?
[1] This is mostly because we usually don't have time to coordinate on the details of an update.
I agree! For tabletop games, compels are brilliant. I'm not sure they work for a quest, though. For one thing, the players don't have the opportunity to buy it off unless we break the episode when the compel happens and that usually won't be practical.
Okay, I'm getting really frustrated here. I have explained this in great detail but the message isn't getting through. Let me try again and I'll be really thorough this time.
There is no effective way to farm FP aside from being active and winning.
Attempting to farm FP in any other way DOES NOT WORK and attempting to do so WILL HURT YOU.
@MadScientist, you have been saying "you get FP for making in-character mistakes". As far as I know, the only place that that has ever been said by a QM is when I wrote it in Meanwhile on the Seventh Path, which was a parody episode. Here is a complete list of how to earn FP as per the rules document, which is the thing that actually matters:
- Win a conflict. Doesn't matter if it's social, physical, or mental. You will get 1 FP for winning.
- Take Consequences during a conflict. You will receive 1 FP for each Consequence you take.
- QM 'just-because' award. These are not guaranteed. Examples:
- A plan that's really fun to write for, a trick that's really clever, etc.
- Surviving to the end of the episode.
In a prior post I explained at great length why taking Consequences solely to gain FP is a losing strategy. Note the important point that there is a rule in the most recent QM version of the rules which has not been sent over to the player doc yet. That rule is, "You cannot take a Consequence except to prevent stress from exceeding your stress track." This prevents saying "Oh, I'm going to win this fight easily, so I'll let him hit me once for a stress or two but, instead of applying it to my stress track, I will take a Mild consequence and that way I get an extra FP when I win!" This was the only viable loophole that allowed farming FP with few consequences (no pun intended), and it has been closed.
Finally, Compels. Just to make sure we're all on the same page, let's start with a definition: The way a Compel works in the DFRPG is that the GM says to the player "You have N possible actions at this point that would be in character for you. (i.e., would line up with your Aspects) I am Compelling you to do <this particular action from that set>; if you do it I'll give you an FP." The player then either says okay and takes the FP or they pay an FP to the GM in order to refuse the Compel and do whatever they want.
The word 'Compel' is not in the rules doc for MfD and therefore is not an official part of the rules at this point. @Velorien used one in an earlier update which presumably is what is causing this whole discussion, but, again, it is not an official part of the rules at this point.
There is some debate over whether and how we are going to use Compels. There's a reasonably good chance that we will not, and will simply occasionally award FP mid-update if we think it's appropriate. Regardless, even if we do use them, Compels are NOT based on "you made a mistake so you get an FP." You may have gotten this idea from the description in 'Meanwhile, On the Seventh Path' in conjunction with this line from the rules: "A plan that has [Hazō] take an action that is exceptionally in character (meaning that it tracks closely with one of Hazō's Aspects) when it's not to his advantage." This is NOT the same as "when he makes a mistake", it simply means that the plan chooses being in character over being perfectly optimal.
A possible example: Hazō is not comfortable with emotionally-charged social situations, but he has a strong sense of duty and loyalty and might well have an Aspect like "Always Tries to Do the Right Thing, Sometimes Succeeds". Making a plan in which you choose to go to tea with Mrs. Minami is the sort of thing that I would have considered awarding FP for since (a) it's active and (b) it carries some risk and (c) it's probably not the perfectly optimal action to spend that time on but (d) it's in character because it tracks closely to that Aspect. These awards are up to the individual QM writing the update; @Velorien might award something that I wouldn't, etc.[1] [NOTE: Now that I have provided this as an example I will not be awarding FP for it if you choose to do it.]
To sum up the above:
Compels probably are not a thing, and therefore are not a way to farm FP.
Consequences are a net loss of FP and therefore not a viable way to farm them.
Getting 'just because' awards from the QM is not a reliable way to farm FP any more than being funny and writing omake is a reliable way to farm OOC XP.
Winning conflicts IS a valid way to farm both XP and FP. It always has been.
Finally, since I've already got a massive wall of text here, let me paste in one more bit. This is taken from the QM version of the rules doc and not yet copied over to players. I wrote it and it hasn't been officially signed off on but I believe that neither @OliWhail nor @Velorien has objected. Guys, if you disagree with this assessment then I take the blame and will walk it back.
Fate Points: How Are These Simulationist?
MfD prides itself on being a simulationist quest. We even have a Golden Rule to specify that if the rules don't match the simulation then it's the rules that change. For the most part our rules are pretty clearly simulationist, but Fate Points seem to be an exception. They aren't a quantification of an in-universe thing like chakra (CP) or experience (XP), so what are they simulating?
Answer: The ability to usefully exploit one's environment.
Characters should be able to gain advantage by identifying and exploiting important elements of their surroundings and/or opponents. For example, it should be easier to win a chess game if you can identify your opponent's psychological weaknesses in order to anger him into making bad moves. That's not your chess skill at work, that's a bonus to your chess skill based on an environmental factor.
Okay, how many such factors should exist? How many should you be able to use at once? How much advantage should each one supply? How do the players identify them in advance so that they can use them in the plan?
Either the QMs adjudicate each of these items individually (thereby draining their spoon drawers and will to live) or there is a mechanic for it. That mechanic is Fate Points. They specify how much a given advantage is worth and provide a gating mechanism for how many such advantages you can use in a particular time frame. In the same way that XP don't perfectly model the real world, Fate Points do not perfectly model the real world. For XP it's things like "Why can't I level up just by practicing?" and "Why did killing that orc suddenly let me get better at picking locks?" For Fate Points it's things like "Why can't I gain advantage from every available Aspect instead of only the ones I have Fate Points to pay for?" and "Why do I get the same amount of advantage regardless of what I'm exploiting?" Neither XP nor FP is perfect, but the system is better for having them.
In summary: Fate Points are a mechanism for simulating environmental advantage -- how many advantages, how often, how helpful. They enhance the simulation by providing the players opportunities to analyze, identify, and exploit the details of the world around them.
@MadScientist, I really hope that this has finally settled the issue for you. Do you still feel that there is an incentive to do stupid things and/or not advance your socials in order to gain FP?
[1] This is mostly because we usually don't have time to coordinate on the details of an update.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
Yessssss, delicious rules doc.
Winged_One
Head Engineer of ATHENA
- Location
- Low Earth Orbit
I feel wary of a 5xp/week limit, but it doesn't seem like we are going over it, so estabilishing it as a standard could be good. That might change when updates resume moving the plot forwards though.
I feel like most of these problems have to do with you knowing how the new rules work and us not knowing.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
The idea is that it would get us more XP, tbqh, by taking the impetus off of them to think "well, I dunno, I've already given 3 XP for the last research paper..." kinda thing.
So character flaws can't actually earn FP then? Alright. I retract my objection.
- Location
- UK
Most of your post made a lot of sense, but I'm not entirely following here. If there was a character that cared a lot about social, but was both terrible at it and wrong about how important it was to them (maybe it's all orchestrated by some mastermind), why couldn't they could take seemingly arbitrary penalties in Social to magically be better at combat?
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
glances in the direction of Lee and Gai
- Location
- UK
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I'm finding it hard to visualise this. Are you saying that this character has an Aspect that regularly undermines them in social interactions (e.g. "Forthright to a Fault"), which then gives them more FP for use in combat as they continue to fail at said interactions?
If so, this is no different to deliberately pouring all your XP into combat skills to the detriment of social ones. Which is to say, you will come to deeply regret it if your objectives or survival ever depend on success in social interaction (you know, like if you were trying to get the movers and shakers of Leaf on your side for an uplift project, or if you were facing an enemy too strong to beat in physical combat).
- Location
- UK
I guess, yeah, but it doesn't feel the same.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Any thoughts on what would make it feel better for you?
Winged_One
Head Engineer of ATHENA
- Location
- Low Earth Orbit
It isn't the same. XP investment is "permanent" and can't be changed on the spot, whereas strategy of FP use-wherever you avoid social conflicts or deliberately go into them to gain FP for an uncoming physical fight can.
- Location
- UK
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Given that only meaningful conflicts can grant you FP, if you base your social strategy on whether it will earn you one-off numerical bonuses in combat, you're going to have a bad time.
- Location
- The Void
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Ultimately I don't think the player base can make any meaningful judgments on how to best maximize fate points till we have some experience in how they are awarded. Just going to have to give the QMS the benefit of the doubt for now
- Location
- UK
- Pronouns
- He/Him
By the same token, we don't know how it'll play out either, so there'll be plenty of room to negotiate going forward.
- Location
- UK
It might just be the lack of a real-world analogy. I could decide tomorrow to quit my job and spend all my time learning to wrestle, but I couldn't sacrifice my computer science skill through a series of in-character failures to spend on make a few specific punches stronger.
I'm not sure I see a particularly clean solution, but making FP stick to the same class (physical, mental, social) might work. Given you've demonstrated that these are only compensatory within a given class, it's really only the arbitrage that seems odd. The downside is that it's more work over a presumably purely theoretical concern.
Last edited:
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
I have a concern, actually: I'm not sure fate points will come in quickly enough without a "default" level that they return to after a day. The FATE system has this in refresh points, and it'd obviously be a little awkward with regard to Sealing, etc., but it seems kind of important for, for instance, the upcoming tournament, for people to be able to have a minimum of fate points.
- Location
- United States
Finally caught up on this story. I've been mostly reading updates and skipping discussions. Can someone explain why there's going to be a rollback? Did the team get killed in the Chunin exam or something?
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
Misunderstandings between players and QMs as to what's going on mostly. Also the last few months have been spent reworking the system rules, should be wrapping up Soon(tm).
e: Also, welcome! Always glad to see a new reader!
Winged_One
Head Engineer of ATHENA
- Location
- Low Earth Orbit
Which hivemind faction do you favor so far? Idealists or realists?