Skip Navigation
rpg @ttrpg.network
JackbyDev @programming.dev

Has anyone played Fate Accelerated Edition?

www.faterpg.com /wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Fate-Accelerated-SRD-CC.html

I had been wanting to try it for a while and saw it at a local game store. I picked it and some fudge dice up and want to try it soon. It seems like it will provide the sort of flexibility and less specific focus on combat that I want out of D&D. It also is simple enough that I read the entirety of the rules in one day (and I'm a slow reader).

I'm curious what your experience is with this system.

5 comments

  • It's my go-to system both for new to role-playing players and for "I didn't know I was game mastering anything five minutes ago, but here we are".

    It's fast, simple and easy to learn as you go, generally the only problems I run into with Fate Accelerated are one of three kinds:

    1. Have to deprogram D&D players from "I attack" into "Well, I want to save the prince but the ugly elf is in the way, so I guess I'll try and shove hime away with my shield to get to him"
    2. Too simple for long-term campaigns (solved by using Fate Core instead)
    3. Sometimes there is a more specific game that does what you want but better (Blades in the Dark for heists, for example). Not a huge issue, though.

    Particularly, Fate (be it Core, Condensed or Accelerated) works very well for my style of gming, which has two particularities:

    1. I improvise heavily, building the world as I go.
    2. I like weird and interesting settings. My latest campaign has a bunch of office workers stopping a Cthulhu Cult by time- traveling to prehistoric hunter-gatherer times.

    As far as I'm concerned Fate is firmly in my top three RPGs that I like and recommend (the other two being Pathfinder 2e and Genesys).

    Hope this helps!

  • Bottom line, Fate RPG is a fantastic way to unleash your imagination, tell incredible stories, and have an absolute blast with your friends. So, if you're looking for a flexible and fun roleplaying game, give Fate a shot! You won't regret it.

    I like it alot.

  • I ran FAE for maybe 6 sessions before throwing in the towel. The system is good, but I feel like it just doesn't have enough game to satisfy me on a personal level. The feel of running FAE is more collaborative story time than playing a game together. This is a feature and a bug of the game. How much it bothers you is very subjective. What I found to be the case with FAE is that my players defaulted to asking permission to do anything out of unfamiliarity and discomfort. After they got their footing and were able to move past this point, they still wanted to engage in discussions about the fiction for extended periods of time. To me, this lowered my enjoyment of the sessions a lot. For such a rules light system, we sure ended up talking about rules and what was possible a lot.

    • Can you give an example of what you mean by permission? I can definitely see how that might be a problem. In D&D you have very specific things you can do. Yes, you have leeway but generally it's pretty rigid. So like, what can't you do? Anything? Like if I'm a spell caster can I just cast any spell? I can understand trying to see where the proper balance is. Because you don't want to power game and just say you do stupid crazy over the top stuff.

      • Sure thing. Lets say we've got a player who is playing a priest. They have a character aspect: "Priest with six guns. On a mission from God." One of the foundational things about Fate is that a character is more likely to succeed to more involved that character's fiction is in whatever they are attempting to do, but the book doesn't do a good job laying this out to the reader. The players look at their sheets. They see a number of listed actions and approaches. Feeling a little lost, they say "Can I attack in a flashy way?" I think we can both agree that this kind of classic "Mother may I" just isn't interesting during play. We want our players to embrace the fiction and act in accordance with established aspects. But the above is fine, right? It's just the players feeling a little lost and generally being new, right?

        I'd be ok with the above if that's where it ended for me. However, during play, I often felt like players would want to involve aspects (as they should). So they'll ask things like: "I would like to try to shoot the chandelier that's swinging on the ceiling down, hitting General Holtz and his men. I'm a priest with six guns. Do you think that this is ok? Oh, and I know it's swinging because Otto just used it to swing from one balcony to another, so could I use the Swinging aspect here somehow? Maybe God could come into picture here somehow." And now you've got to have a full conversation about the act of shooting down a chandelier whereas in other systems you could have just called for an attack roll against object AC with a harness value based on metal or something.

        This is kinda what I mean by asking permission. There is a need to have a constant, evolving conversation about the fiction to make sure everyone understands what is happening. When there's uncertainty, the players default to asking clarifying questions and mostly ask permission to do things. I have personally found the need to constantly update this conversation to be a little annoying.