Fate Point Cap

I know at the last BI I heard at least one guy bragging about dropping 20-30 fate without running out. Generally speaking though, I agree that it sounds like a non-issue.

Let me try to explain to the best of my poor ability.

First a correction:

Fate already “recycles” between Teirs (ie “you can’t take it with you”) and you can’t spend more in one round of play than your Fate score.

Actually, this isn’t the case. The actual text reads: “[T]he Hero gains a number of Fate Points equal to his Fate Score at the start of each Tier of Hero advancement.” (A:RPG, pg. 320) Fate points to do not reset. Rather, you get an additional amount equal to your Fate Score when you reach a new Tier. It’s intended to top you up and let you do more cool things, instead of being a reset button.

For the people who are using Fate as it is intended (spending and receiving a couple points each mod, the net gain or loss never more than -2 to +2) this is a non-issue as you have already pointed out. You will likely never reach the cap, nor will you ever run out.

That said, then there are the other cases: As acurrier and Nierite both mentioned, there are those in the campaign who end up with not just 10s but 100s of Fate Points. There are GMs who just give 5 away at the end of every module to every player, just for being there. And in an average module, with the limit on how much Fate can actually be spent, it’s also a non-problem. But when it comes to big events, where we will often remove the limit on points being spent, and some people have 100+ Fate to spend (and yes, some people did), it can be a game breaker. We don’t want to have to counter that by Fate-locking climactic battles every time.

To your specific suggestions: We considered guidelines in modules, but rejected it for a couple reasons. First, it puts more effort in for writers and editors, and we’re already having trouble getting both. Trying to anticipate not only what the players will do, but how they will do it adds a lot of complications and makes modules sizeably larger since each case would have to be handled individually (i.e. something that is Heroic in one module might not necessarily be in another depending on circumstances). Second, putting guidelines in modules would have a lot of Chroniclers thinking “Oh, I can *only* give Fate out if they accomplish exactly this”. It’s similar to the problem we’re having with experience points, where some GMs feel they have to accomplish the letter of what we put in, and some just give all the experience regardless of whether the players actually followed the plot or just blundered around it ignoring the story hooks.

In regards to PCs running them the way they want to, absolutely we want that: But a quiet bookish investigator can use Fate points just as effectively as a flamboyant duelist (Fate point: Do the Impossible to randomly select the exact right book off the shelf while researching in a library? Boost an attribute to easily make a logical leap that would otherwise have been a very difficult roll? I can think of other examples if you like).

I can understand the proposal somehow, may I make the suggestions to say it is the highest plus the lowest attribute? With this, most people, who want to have a low attribute (and maybe not for minmaxing) get a double hit. Feeble attribute, or just staying at 2 isn’t worth it at all, as the penalties get too high. Just my thoughts when I read about the fatepoint cap.

I have to agree with Cody, low stats and flaws are supposed to hurt. I play a shaman with an avoidance of 14. Trust me it hurts every time the mobs swing in my direction. But I knew that going in. I surely don’t expect fate to save me

I know at the last BI I heard at least one guy bragging about dropping 20-30 fate without running out. Generally speaking though, I agree that it sounds like a non-issue.

This is easily addressed by saying “Fate Spending Caps are in place for the BI”.

John

I would also recommend this be based on a different number than your “lowest attribute”. The “Lowest Attribute” is already a good limit on how much Fate you can spend. It makes sense from a story perspective: A hero might have a lot of fate on his side but his limitations mean he is only able to call on it a limited time.

However, a hero’s “Total Fate” should be based on the things they are ‘great at’. If you’ve taken the time to ‘train’ and improve yourself, Fate should more apt to smile on you. Fate helps those that help themselves.

While choices should have consequences, trust me, low attributes already have so many consequences that another one isn’t really doing anything other than encouraging no one to have a low stat for any reason, which seems to go against the ‘intent’ of the game’s attribute system of realistic heroes. If everyone has a minimum of 3 or 4 now just so they can have 3-6 more fate points, I think we will see a dilution of ‘flawed’ characters going forward.

John

I guess I’m just trying to understand how this change affects anything other than BI’s? And if it’s the amount of fate being spent in BI’s, the limit would help.

In normal adventures, with a Fate Limit, players with 20 Fate or players with 5 Fate have the same cap limit (Lowest Attribute). Assuming that GM’s are giving out Fate according to guidelines set out by the books, PCI staff, and campaign GM’s who frequent the boards, the only change is that players at their Cap may lose out on earned fate during an adventure.

Let’s look at both current and proposed with a cap limit of 3 (for simplicity)

Current System:
Player A: Starts with 20 Fate. Spends 3 Fate in the adventure. They earn 4 (due to great RP and a tough adventure). Net: +1
Player B: Starts with 4 Fate. Spends 3 Fate in the adventure. They earn 4 (same reasons). Net: +1

Proposed System:
Player A: Starts with 9 Fate (Low Stat of 3). Spends 3 Fate in the Adventure. Earns 4 (same reasons). Net: 0 (1 Fate is ‘lost’)
Player B: Starts with 4 Fate. Spends 3 Fate in the Adventure. Earns 4 (same reasons). Net: +1 (under cap)

Are there really that many players out there with such low Fate due to GM’s not giving them enough in every game they play to cause a potential loss of Fate for others? Is the goal just that everyone has the same amount of fate when it comes to a BI? (Eventually everyone will get to their Fate Max during adventures since it’s pretty low).

If the reason is wholly in-game, that’s fine and I can’t really ‘debate’ those reasons. I’m just trying to understand the sudden change for out-of-game reasons better.

John