FS3


  • Pitcrew

    @faraday said in FS3:

    I don't care if someone wants to be a world-class mountain climber, as long as they understand that's what it means. Most folks lower the level, though, when I point that out.
    So where's the disconnect? Is it documentation? Expectation? I'm just being too nitpicky?

    I think in my case is that I tend not to put too much in the action skills so I end up with a glut in the bg skils and I find myself going 'Well, what's the one thing that my char can do really well that makes him an asset to a special forces group like the Timber Wolves'. I just need to work on getting myself out of that mindset, of really, treating the Timber Wolves like GI Joe, a highly trained special missions force where everyone had that one or two things they did really really well that made them get picked.

    Maybe refocus that a little?


  • Coder

    @DownWithOPP Well I think this is more a question for FS3 on the whole and not BSGU in particular. Currently Expertise is meant to convey a really serious level of training/knowledge - on par with the Expert/Elite level of an Action Skill. If you want to be that good, no problem. Some of the characters actually have been ex-pro pyramid players or whatnot and it totally fits. But there's a weird disconnect when one person thinks Expertise means PhD and the other person thinks it's just "Oh I'm just really good at Math".


  • Admin

    @faraday said in FS3:

    So where's the disconnect? Is it documentation? Expectation? I'm just being too nitpicky?

    The disconnect is in player expectations. When 9/10 games encourage min-maxing then 9/10 people who roll for your own will probably try to do it as well.

    Such is the price of doing things differently. :) But as you said, when you explain and reason it out, most folks will understand and adjust without incident. The ones who don't are probably those you don't want sticking around anyhow.

    Just make sure your approach is uniform and consistent over time. For example if you'd nitpick over $stat being high but the other staff member a month from now handwaves it there's going to be a problem.


  • Coder

    @Arkandel said in FS3:

    Just make sure your approach is uniform and consistent over time. For example if you'd nitpick over $stat being high but the other staff member a month from now handwaves it there's going to be a problem.

    Well on my games that's not a problem since I'm the only staffer :)

    But I do think that gets to what someone said a few pages back about there being vastly different experiences on different FS3 games. I tell someone that a rating means X, and they go play on a different FS3 game where it means something completely different, it throws people. I don't know if that's something you can ever really fix with the system, though.


  • Admin

    @faraday said in FS3:

    I don't know if that's something you can ever really fix with the system, though.

    I don't even think that's a problem let alone something you can 'fix'. It's just a different approach - as long you document your particular game's expectations clearly it's not a big deal.


  • Pitcrew

    @faraday said in FS3:

    So where's the disconnect? Is it documentation? Expectation? I'm just being too nitpicky?

    I think what @Ganymede said -- player understanding. I might suggest something in chargen that lays that out, as well as what's on the wiki. Oh... I also wonder about swapping Proficiency to Professional? It might make it more explicit? Like, the thinking is "I'm proficient in this skill, yeah... oh, wait, you mean, could I do it for my job? Oh no, not anywhere near that good, just... proficient."


  • Politics

    @DownWithOPP said in FS3:

    I just need to work on getting myself out of that mindset, of really, treating the Timber Wolves like GI Joe, a highly trained special missions force where everyone had that one or two things they did really really well that made them get picked.

    It's not really a bad mindset to have. In which case, I want to be the nerdy recon girl that gets distracted by weather patterns from watching troop movements.


  • Reader

    @Thenomain

    I would not trust a stat system made by me either, let's be clear! That's what I have HR for. Don't we marry to shore up our weaknesses? :D

    ES


  • Coder

    @EmmahSue said in FS3:

    @Thenomain

    I would not trust a stat system made by me either, let's be clear! That's what I have HR for. Don't we marry to shore up our weaknesses? :D

    ES

    At this point I'm not sure I'd trust a system made by him, either!


  • Pitcrew

    @faraday (kind of belatedly)

    I think part of the problem is that 'hobbies' can be such a very broad range that if you want to be REALLY GOOD at your hobby (lots of people do), it's kind of hard to show that.

    Also, honestly? I think there's this trend these days where people think that their free-time fiddling with x y or z hobby makes them totally as good as the person doing it for a living. I'm a great writer, I could publish if I wanted to! I could totally sell my knitting on etsy if I had the time! I could start my own bakery and make a fortune if I wanted!

    Etc etc.

    In other words, I think the failing is as much in people's actual point of view as it is in the system.


  • Coder

    @Kanye-Qwest said in NeverwinterMUSH:

    Someone explain to me what is so wrong with FS3 that it ruins rp?

    Now that I have a minute to reply, I figured I'd save you the trouble of mining the old threads for my own TL;DR; answer:

    • Characters don't start on a level playing field. For instance, Bob could come out of chargen with 4 skills at level 3 and Harry with 2 skills at 6. Bob will never be able to catch up to Harry. Some people see that as unfair because they think characters should be evenly balanced.

    • Many games limit the number of starting points for "balance", leading people to min-max. Example: On 100, I wanted to make a badass archer. I didn't have enough points. I deliberately upped her combat stats because they mattered more, figuring I'd buy up the less important "fluff" skills with XP later - even though it was a bit weird for a veteran archer to be lacking in basic things like Riding and Warfare. Some people again see that as unfair, because someone who spreads out their points more realistically / less min-max-y will be at a disadvantage. The intention was to curb this through app review, but of course it's all highly subjective.

    • Outside of combat, which is automated, the mechanics are very 'soft'. The Shadowrun rulebook is 489 pages long, with rules for everything from hacking to climbing. FS3, in contrast, is more like 30 pages if you printed it all out. Everything is resolved as a generic ability roll. While the lightweight rules are a plus for some people, the subjective nature makes them a big turn-off for others.

    • People change the system in weird ways. Like, I wouldn't expect to log onto a WoD game and find that someone had completely re-defined what the dot levels mean, or onto a D20 game where they said "actually you can't start with any attribute higher than 12" for some reason, yet people do this kind of stuff all the time with FS3. I'm not mad about it - the system is open so people are free to adapt it however they want. But this strange variance leads to sort of a "FS3 is like a box of chocolates... you never know what you're going to get" mentality.

    At the end of the day, no system is going to please everyone. I made FS3 for myself, for my games. Most of the issues people take exception to are either by design (I like it that way) or outside of my control (like how people use it on other games). But some things were genuinely bad, which I've tried to make better in 3rd edition.


  • Admin

    To get back to a D&D-themed game though, is a system that important as long as it's not primarily aimed at going into dungeons to kill things and loot their corpses for gear?

    What could get me excited about a MU* on Faerun for example is the chance to play in the setting; as long as the mechanics don't get in the way of doing that, should we not be more concerned about whether the system matches the game's goals rather than what the system is in a vacuum?


  • Coder

    @Arkandel That's a question I think everyone has to answer for themselves. The D20 system, for instance, is just a general turn-off for me personally. A game would have to be pretty dang awesome to get me to grit my teeth and make up a D20 character.

    I would say, though, that some of the aspects of FS3 I mentioned (level playing field, min/maxing) can lead to definite friction in a PvP type of game. When everyone's on the same side killing Cylons, it really doesn't matter too much if Bob skated through cg with a couple more dots in Gunnery. But if Bob is fighting Harry? Is it really fair to start them off unevenly - especially if Bob knows how to "game" the system more?


  • Admin

    @faraday said in FS3:

    When everyone's on the same side killing Cylons, it really doesn't matter too much if Bob skated through cg with a couple more dots in Gunnery. But if Bob is fighting Harry? Is it really fair to start them off unevenly - especially if Bob knows how to "game" the system more?

    It's still important that a system tries to prevent people from screwing themselves over. Not only does that usually happen to newbies which is a bad sign, but it has various effects in cooperative games as well. Having a niche to occupy is pretty important - think "we already have a combat/medic type in the group" - so you want to be on the right side of a skill distribution even if no other PC is gunning for your head.

    It's also though about being able to do cool shit. This might be a completely personal nit to pick but for example I've never been into Changeling even though I like the theme in general because no mechanic or power really gets me excited; even if everyone else has access to the same toys I like being able to work towards getting something that's really awesome.


  • Coder

    @Arkandel said in FS3:

    It's still important that a system tries to prevent people from screwing themselves over.

    I don't disagree. But for perspective: The delta between minimum junior professional (Fair+Average) and maximum starting level (Expert+Exceptional) in FS3 is only about 20% (give or take, depending on what kind of roll you're doing). There's a difference, sure, but I seriously don't think anybody's getting "screwed over" here even if they don't absolutely maximize their point expenditures.


  • Pitcrew

    I don't think FS3 'ruins RP' at all. I think the only reason people ever notice is that in more majorly sheeted games, so many people min-max their sheets and then never actually RP to their sheet at all.

    So other games, due to min-maxing, have a total disconnect between sheet and PC. The sheet only 'exists' when dice rolling comes out. On FS3, the sheet 'exists' more consistently. I suppose that's where it may seem like perhaps (to some) it ruins RP.

    To me, however, it more specializes PCs. Instead of everyone becoming 'the same' in the end, you end up with people who are more representative of their parts. A huge tough guy with points dumped in brawn, but fewer in reflexes is going to show that. He might get hit more often, but he'll weather it better and do greater damage when he hits.

    And like Fara has said, it only really comes down to rolling a couple more dice. You'll still see someone with 8 dice roll "Good" while someone with 5 dice rolls a "Great." So it's not like the people with less on their sheets are always doing worse while those with more are always doing better.

    My pilot, who has lower stats (due to being a LTJG as compared to a whole bunch of Captains with Great/Expert scores) had a good weekend this past. She actually did better than almost every other pilot in the combat. However, it was her first good combat in... quite a while! It can happen!



  • In fairness to at least some of the 'zomg this ruined my RP' (tho not a lot of fairness), the level of customization you can do with the FS3 system (and the spotty way some game-runners document it and what they're doing with it), has led to some wonky shit in implementation (BS Pegasus and its billion non-sensical action skills always LEAPS to mind). I hate the player/staffer, not the game, as it were, but if Wonky Game is all you've played, that's all you've seen.


  • Pitcrew

    @Three-Eyed-Crow said in FS3:

    In fairness to at least some of the 'zomg this ruined my RP' (tho not a lot of fairness), the level of customization you can do with the FS3 system (and the spotty way some game-runners document it and what they're doing with it), has led to some wonky shit in implementation (BS Pegasus and its billion non-sensical action skills always LEAPS to mind). I hate the player/staffer, not the game, as it were, but if Wonky Game is all you've played, that's all you've seen.

    This is why alpha/beta periods are always a good idea. Shut off XP gain, get a few good people in, take feedback. Figure out what works, what doesn't. Usually some of those Action skills can be condensed and go away.



  • The only problem I really have with FS3 is that people pigeonhole it into every fucking thing.

    Like IIRC, even Faraday's FAQ for FS3 says "not really meant for medieval/fantasy games, dude, it's meant for modern stuff" and yet I've seen half a dozen different generic Lord & Ladies game that use it, Game of Thrones games that use it, fucking Harry Potter games that use it.



  • @Tempest
    Yeah, this is legit, and I presume it's due to a lack of other plug-and-play alternatives. It's like how that Kushiel's Debut game was running on a modified WoD system, which I always assumed was in part because it's fairly easy to get the pieces to slap together a WoD chargen.


 

Looks like your connection to MU Soapbox was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.