The Gaming Den

The title says it all. FATE seems like a rules-lite system sufficient for something like this setting. The question is what changes I should incorporate.

Obviously we would change the name of Composure to Sanity, and Mythos monsters make an attack against a character's Sanity on first encounter. Let's set the starting number of stress boxes for Sanity & Health to 3, increased by the rank in the character's Resolve and Stamina respectively. I don't know whether to incorporate a Wealth stress track atop all this, as it might influence the flavour in the wrong direction.

Depending on whether we use 4dF or 1d6-1d6 should determine whether we consequences reduce the stress of an attack by -2/-4/-8 or -1/-2/-4 (inversely), I would think. And yes, I want Stress boxes to equal HP to make combat faster and more lethal.

Power is not something investigators are known for, so let's set the apex skill at +2 (Good?, FATE messed with the ladder from FUDGE), letting a player only able to choose six skills.

How should magic be handled in this system? Should I handle it like a Rare Artifact stunt that comes with a temporary aspect that can be tagged for free once each time it's used (maybe negatable with a check)?

How many Aspects, Stunts, and FATE points should a character start with? What rulings should be incorporated into the FATE economy to mitigate its flaws?

Honestly, for CoC I'd just start everyone with a bunch of Fate points and not give them back any. Ever.

-Username17

You probably already saw this, but there is Fate of Cthulhu.

FrankTrollman wrote:Honestly, for CoC I'd just start everyone with a bunch of Fate points and not give them back any. Ever.

For an H.P. Lovecraft game, that sounds about right.

For Call of Cthulhu in particular, I'm not so sure. But then again, the idea of an ongoing Call of Cthulhu campaign with PCs surviving from one adventure to the next has always struck me as odd.

I like the idea of non-replenished FATE points. How many should they start with, and should it vary depending on whether it's a one-shot or a multi-adventure?

What about aspects? Excising FATE points from the compel system would discourage players from even having aspects, or have the most beneficial sounding ones possible so it'd be hard to use them for compels never have them be personal flaws. Perhaps set it up so that an aspect can only be compelled once, unless the player invokes it, in which case it's 'refreshed' and can be compelled once more. Or even work it in reverse, such that a character can't invoke their aspect until it's been compelled.

I'm thinking letting the player only start with three stunts, to match the tiers of their skill pyramid.

virgil wrote:I like the idea of non-replenished FATE points. How many should they start with, and should it vary depending on whether it's a one-shot or a multi-adventure?

How about varying how many the players receive based on how "bleak and incomprehensible" versus "horrifying but not inevitable" you want to setting to be?

virgil wrote:Perhaps set it up so that an aspect can only be compelled once, unless the player invokes it, in which case it's 'refreshed' and can be compelled once more. Or even work it in reverse, such that a character can't invoke their aspect until it's been compelled.

Having aspects refresh individually based on invocation seems workable. Although it might feel limiting - adding the ability to take points of madness to auto-refresh them would create a late-game temptation to go just a little more insane to succeed after most of the Fate points have run out.

If you don't get back Fate points, then why would people give their characters personal flaws?

TheWorid wrote:adding the ability to take points of madness to auto-refresh them would create a late-game temptation to go just a little more insane to succeed after most of the Fate points have run out.

So gain FATE points equal to voluntarily earned stress, which can be mitigated with consequences?

virgil wrote:So gain FATE points equal to voluntarily earned stress, which can be mitigated with consequences?

Right, that would be more system-specific wording.