Out of Character

This is where you can talk about stuff related to the game out of character.

What does your username mean, @ireneofunyes?

Hiro should be all set to start. Will add his final stunt and two free aspects in play.

It is a character from a story of Argentinian writer Jorge Louis Borges. In the story Ireneo Funes (yes, I added the y letter) is a man who has an incredible memory. It is said that it takes 24 hours for him to explain his day, meaning he remembers everything. However, as far as I remember the point of the story was that the value of memory lies in its absence, the fact that we forget lots of stuff, because Ireneo was a boring person in the end :D

If you ask why I chose it, not a definite answer. I like Borges but I’m not a fan, I liked the story but also not a fan so it kind of sounded cool I guess :D

Borges was kind of a tool, but his story Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote is one of my all time faves.

Yeah, I like his self-reflecting stories where his younger self and older self meet and talk.

Sooo, has anybody figured out what does the first line of my first post is a reference to? :D

@FluxCapacitor, that stunt works for me. Though fight is usually limited to hand to hand combat, this seems like an appropriate switch. You can use Fight for first aid.

Great, thanks.

Herrigan brought up a good point in the game 1 thread
For my part, I agree with this principle in Fate games in general, but in PBP games we pay a significant penalty in the pace of the game if we discuss at length the exact difficulty, action, success, and failures of every potential roll. But at the same time, some of the magic of fate is lost that way, so I think we should discuss the tradeoff here.

One of the good things about fate is that the dice are always the same no matter what skill you roll. So, if for example, I roll an athletics skill when the GM expected physique, it's simple to retroactively correct, by taking the dice roll and adding the correct skill. And, of course, the GM is free to ignore a roll if they don't think it's necessary. So I don't think that there's a lot of harm, for expediency, to attach a roll to a post you expect will require one, so that the GM can resolve the roll and move the story forward. But, what I think you give up when you do this, is the right to know the potential outcomes ahead of time. Normally in Fate you'd be pretty explicit about what success, success with cost, and failure look like for any given roll. If you pre-roll, you forfeit the right to negotiate the terms and put it in the GM's hands.

I think I neither want to play the game where rolls are frequent, but every roll requires a 3 post negotiation, nor do I want to play the game where the GM resolves every roll without any input, so here are my suggestions (which aren't exhaustive, and this is by no means an ultimatum, I'm happy to play however people like):

Option 1: We are free to add a roll to the post, which the GM may interpret however they like, understanding that we're forfeiting any negotiation for the roll. The GM is still free to propose other rolls and state the consequences, and of course no one is obliged to roll a skill to do anything (with the GM calling for a roll if necessary). In this scenario the rolls are mixed more fluidly with the plot, but at the risk of having some useless rolls

Option 2: the GM proposes all rolls, and we try to make rolls especially meaningful, with strong story altering consequences, so that it's worth taking the time to discuss it. In this scenario, we'd necessarily interrupt the plot a bit any time there's a roll, but that's ok because rolls are rare and consequential.

These are only my suggestions, feel free to make other suggestions.

One thing I agree with unreservedly is we should be clear about which of the 4 actions we're using

Great points. Normally in play by post games I tend to favor the faster option. In a D&D game I'm running right now, for example, I roll initiatives for my players or I roll some skill checks if they want to do something but are not sure which skill would be appropriate. However, for this game I'm closer to option 2. As naelick and Harrigan have pointed out, skill checks are not done frequently in Fate unless we are in combat and even that requires one roll per turn, usually. I would like you to discuss your options in a scene, figuring out what do to next. Also, even though there will be some instances where I'll decide on if its a partial success, success at a minor/major cost or simple failure, I think it's better to present the choice to the player (like "would you prefer a sucess at a major cost here?"). If you're absolutely sure what you would like to do (if you're roleplaying that you'll punch someone, roll Fight without thinking), go for it. I also don't mind if you spend a fate point to change the result of the dice in such cases. However, don't be too quick on defining the results of a roll because depending on context I might describe it in detail or I might say "okay, you've suceeded, now tell us how you succeed exactly". Lastly, our posting frequency has been faster than the usual and I hope it'll continue like that, so this may compensate for some of the slowness that may come up from discussing a roll or a scene.
I thought about the same thing when naelick used Create an Advantage. I'll open a thread about that to keep track of aspects. I'll write down character aspects also. You can keep track of your own character but in case you don't edit your sheet, I'll look at it from my own list.

I'm not married to one approach or the other, but I don't really dig either extreme. (Being 'proactive' to the Nth degree, spamming skill rolls, especially when it comes to Creating Advantages... or breaking every test down into a big negotiation.) Pace helps a ton with transaction-heavy systems, and to be fair to Fate, it's not that laden with them unless there's a Fate Point bidding war in a crucial moment.

There are just a few things that I think are genuinely problematic:

-If the GM doesn't set the difficulty first and someone rolls, now it's on them (the GM), if they spied the result, to basically 'decide' whether the roll was a success or not. Sometimes this isn't a big deal at all, but I've seen some games nose-dive because of it. As long as ireneofunyes is ready to make the call it should be fine, but I know from experience it can be ginchy when you're trying to decide is this a 2, a 3, or a 4, and then the player rolls a 3 proactively.

-In a narrative first / heavy system like Fate, where the players generally have so much agency, people can get carried away with what they believe is possible in a scene. The GM being involved on the front end of rolls is generally a really good thing, tempering expectations, course correcting and such. We just have to keep an eye on this one.

-I think we need clear definition in OCC comments around what action was attempted and what the initial outcome was... because this is where you get into invoking aspects, deciding to succeed at cost instead of failing, etc. I know it's slow, but it's what Fate is.

Two more farthings!

Yes, that can be tricky. I agree with you and I'll give the target difficulty for an action after the player declares what are they attempting to do. As you pointed out, the quality of success or failure of a roll can depend highly on what you try to do and what your character is capable of (whether it be their skills or tools they have access to). So, an Academics roll in a hospital for treatment will have different consequences from an Academics roll on a deserted place with nothing to use at hand.

Fate can be a bit too "allowing", I agree but these kind of extermities are usually only possible if a player or a whole group is eager to abuse them. A D&D 5e druid can change into a wild bear and tear down a town, for example, that would be permissible in terms of rules. Players usually don't do that, though. Dealing with these kind of extremities are either up to OOC gaming where we discuss like adults what can and can't be permissible or it can be dealt with in-game (I think about Assassin's Creed Odyssey here, in the game when you enter a new territory and just jump into melee combat without considering stealth, bounty hunters start hunting you wherever you go in that territory, making your life harder). In the end, I think we can discuss such things here. If that would make our game a bit slower in the beginning, let it be. We'll gain pace once we go along or it can even help with your future PbP Fate games.

I can commit to one post a day but I would ask that players wait for everyone to post before posting again in situations that advance the plot. If it's just RP between a few PC's, it's harmless and I say post away in that case.

Please remember that I have never played Fate before and it's definitely a new way of approaching a game for me. Having said that I veer toward option 2 and it's ok if anyone wants to spell something out for me as I won't be offended. 🙂

I'll usually wait two days if one player was not able to post regarding the previous events before advancing the story. Even if we get carried away, we can always retcon the story and include the last person :D So don't worry about that.

Don't worry about being new to the system also. If you do something that doesn't exactly match with Fate me or any other player can explain the situation to you and you would edit your post, there is nothing wrong with that.

As an idea for a second stunt for TBD: Always Armed - based on "Allowing a character to declare a minor fact is always true. For instance, a survivalist always has survival items like matches on their person, even under unlikely circumstances" from Condensed p. 11.

Stunt: Always Armed - Whether a holdout weapon stashed in some concealed location or an item at hand in his immediate vicinty, TBD is always considered armed, even under unlikely circumstances.

Thoughts?

It's good. I like your way of thinking, good job converting those standard stunt ideas for your character's features. But, unfortunately we have started the game already and progressed a bit so you can add this stunt after the first session ends. For what's on your characters when you found yourselves in the room, any reasonoble object you carry while you were on the ship is okay by me. So, for example, I would be okay with it if TBD was practicing his shooting skills when the incident happened, thus carrying a gun. It's not logical for him to be using an AK-47 (or its futuristic equivalent) for a standard shooting practice, but it would make sense if he uses a simple pistol.

So, I want you to do something while you have the time. I want all of you to create a loved one for your characters and sketch out a brief backstory regarding your PCs' relationship with them. It can be a dead person, somebody your character have parted ways long ago, a lover, a sibling, a dear friend, a parent, anybody. Just make it so that this person is very dear and valuable to your PC. Also this will be a rather personal, the other PCs won't probably know about your loved ones (if you want to make it a secret you can even DM me the character idea). Don't ask why you're doing it, the time will come :D

Also, for the sake of the Session 1, forgive me if I seem a bit too limiting somtimes instead of letting you freely alter the story. As you might've already guessed, this is a special occasion instead of the usual open world game, so there will be some unusual stuff happening.

@Ireneofunyes: Gotcha. I was assuming that since we were leaving our starting allotment of free stunts to be developed in play, we could add them accordingly. I'll keep a mental list for after the first session.

So Hiro has this:

Trouble
Inia Klovis

That's his on-again off-again girlfriend, partner, nemesis, sparring partner and bedmate. He can't avoid getting tangled up with her, and his running from the underworld is partly trying to escape how bad they are for one another. Do you want another loved one, or will nutso psycho hot chick he can't so no to work? Happy either way, here.