Meta-rules: Roleplaying within a frame

[Lmns Crn]

I love the idea of Fate points!  I definitely have to adapt that for my own games.

They are also used to invoke Aspects (that is, to use them proactively and positively.) With the earlier examples, Henry can spend a Fate Point for a bonus to any roll where "Brute Force" (or any of his other Aspects) is applicable (here, to assist him in smashing things.) Spider-Man could spend a FP for a bonus to a roll where he is rescuing Mary Jane. Et cetera.

Further, you can use them to "tag" other players' or NPCs' aspects. If I'm in a discussion with Lord Whiffenpoof and my goal is to make him look foolish in front of the assembled aristocracy, and I know that he has an Aspect like "Bad Temper," I can spend a fate point for a bonus on a roll to provoke that temper, causing him to look dreadfully socially maladroit!

Further still, I can place temporary aspects on other players, then tag those aspects. Say I spend a turn aiming a rifle at a thug who hasn't seen me yet. I can give him a temporary Aspect like "In My Sights". Then on my next turn, use the Aspect to put some extra punch behind my opening shot. (This is a fun way for players to get creative with all sorts of tricky combat maneouvers.)

Honestly, forget Fate Points. Aspects are where it's at; FP are just the currency associated with using them.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

I like both concepts. Sounds elegant.

[Xeviat]

That's really cool LC. Now that you've fully explained it, that's really like the complications in M&M except a bit more developed. Would those Traits offer some kind of mechanical bonus too, when you aren't tempting the player? Like that "Brute Force" character might get some kind of attack or damage bonus, or is it all fate points?

I like the idea of players picking personality quirks that reward the character with some kind of game currency for when they follow their quirk to their own disadvantage. It gives characters depth that some RPG characters tend to lack. 2D characters do whatever is most beneficial in a given situation, but realistic people have character defects that often get them into trouble.

I'm opinionated and lazy. I get into very heated debates with good friends over minuscule things. I'm fully aware that there are many times I should just shut up (recently I argued with Nomadic about something over AIM when he was completely agreeing with me). As for my laziness, I procrastinate doing assignments or design work, and my recent worst act of laziness was me not getting my car checked when the check engine light was on; now it's sitting in my parking spot collecting cobwebs.

Obviously I'm getting something out of these little quirks. For the laziness, it's usually because I'd rather play a video game or something instead of doing work. As for being opinionated, I think I get some kind of vindication when someone agrees with me that I'm right. those wouldn't really work well in an RPG, so giving out "action points" or whatever is a good substitute.

Having little meta rules to encourage people to play their character the way they intended to rather than doing the optimal idea makes for more entertaining characters in the end I think. I could go on about my favorite characters in games I've DMed, but long story short it was mostly because they had some quirk that made them stand out (like the passive/aggressive cleric of St. Cuthbert; he was a character).

And thanks for bringing me back into the discussion Llum and Crow. =)

[Nomadic]

I'm opinionated and lazy. I get into very heated debates with good friends over minuscule things. I'm fully aware that there are many times I should just shut up (recently I argued with Nomadic about something over AIM when he was completely agreeing with me).

Hey don't you be taking all the credit for that. An argument takes two people :P . Besides, as several others can attest to I often get into debates where both sides agree but don't realize it.

[Xeviat]

See, I'm saying I have a character flaw and Nomadic's trying to say it's his fault. LOL.

[Lmns Crn]

That's really cool LC. Now that you've fully explained it, that's really like the complications in M&M except a bit more developed. Would those Traits offer some kind of mechanical bonus too, when you aren't tempting the player? Like that "Brute Force" character might get some kind of attack or damage bonus, or is it all fate points?

Henry can spend a Fate Point for a bonus to any roll where "Brute Force" (or any of his other Aspects) is applicable (here, to assist him in smashing things.)[/quote]Remember, two things you do with your Aspects:

- Invoking, which is when you use your Aspects to be better at relevant actions by spending a FP (with Brute Force, perhaps lifting cars or breaking manacles, etc.)

- Compelling, which is when the Narrator offers you a FP to entice you to give into the less advantageous side of an Aspect (with Brute Force, perhaps not thinking clearly, etc.)

[Superfluous Crow]

Really have to sit down and read those rules. Still have the link you posted a month back bookmarked...
I'm wondering how the temporary Aspects work though. They seem quite beneficient, so what keeps you from doing it all the time?
As far as flaws/traits go i have always liked them as they make for more nuanced characters in my opinion, but they fare best when they deal with non-meta-rules. Meta-rules usually require some framework of their own.