PDA

View Full Version : How to make a fate RPG enjoyable?



Temennigru
2019-03-07, 07:05 PM
I will be GMing a fate (type moon) rpg using pathfinder soon. The story will be that of fate/grand order, in which the players will be part of a special mage task force charged with maintaining humanity’s timeline intact.

My plan is to have the masters be lvl 5 and the servants have double the level of the master, while having enemy servants always be lvl 20.

I will be using the spheres of power system for magic, and have some homebrew rules for servants and their connection with their masters.

So my question is, how can I make the campaign enjoyable if the players will have a low level character they created and a high level character they didn’t?

Man_Over_Game
2019-03-07, 07:31 PM
For those that didn't quite understand the request, Fate is an anime in the Type-Moon universe, basically revolving around summoners conjuring powerful Servants (Summons, monsters, people, anything that serves and fights, really) to do their fighting for them in a battle-royale kind of competition that decides the universe. Highlander, with pets.

Could totally be off, just Googled this stuff in the last minute because I had no idea what it was.

Temennigru
2019-03-07, 08:10 PM
For those that didn't quite understand the request, Fate is an anime in the Type-Moon universe, basically revolving around summoners conjuring powerful Servants (Summons, monsters, people, anything that serves and fights, really) to do their fighting for them in a battle-royale kind of competition that decides the universe. Highlander, with pets.

Could totally be off, just Googled this stuff in the last minute because I had no idea what it was.

That was pretty close actually. Fate is a universe where mages summon heroes of the past or even well known ficticious characters to fight for them. These are called servants and are often much more powerful than the mages.

Each mage gets one servant, but I’m thinking of giving one additional servant after each chapter to each player to keep things interesting, and let them choose one to take with them.

The original fate series is a battle royale setting, but in fate GO the characters are part of a time police organization.

Rhedyn
2019-03-07, 08:16 PM
I will be GMing a fate (type moon) rpg using pathfinder soon. The story will be that of fate/grand order, in which the players will be part of a special mage task force charged with maintaining humanity’s timeline intact.

My plan is to have the masters be lvl 5 and the servants have double the level of the master, while having enemy servants always be lvl 20.

I will be using the spheres of power system for magic, and have some homebrew rules for servants and their connection with their masters.

So my question is, how can I make the campaign enjoyable if the players will have a low level character they created and a high level character they didn’t?
Well no you aren't.

APL+4 CR encounters are extra challenging. If you have a 4-6 group size of middling optimization, level 10s cannot fight a fully geared level 20 with any hope of winning. Even if you had 12 highly optimized level 10 servants, they will still get crushed.

My suggestion: Leave the masters at level 5, they will be irrelevant baggage but that is fine. Have the servants be level 12 and enemies CR16-18 (where you start with 16 and the big finally is a level 18). If your party is 7+ players go for CR 17 to 19 enemies. And make sure to follow WBL. If they are PC classed enemies with NPC gear then decrease their CR by 1 (so a level 17 monk with only npc gear is CR 16).

High levels means you need to know a lot about either magic items or magic spells if you want your Wizard Chess mini-games (euphemism for PF combat) to work out. Your players will build some crazy stuff even if they do not know that much about the game. If you want things to be simpler, knock Masters down to level 3, have the Servants be level 8 and the enemies be CR 12.


So my question is, how can I make the campaign enjoyable if the players will have a low level character they created and a high level character they didn’t?That depends on your house-rules. Most of the point of Pathfinder is people making neat builds for themselves and your masters are going to be dead-weight useless. The game could be fun depending on your house-rules, but that will be because your house-rules are fun and you are GMing well. Pathfinder isn't helping you here, it's a really complicated engine used to resolve fights between basically NPCs that you made yourself. You are using a barely manageable beast of game that can kick you off at any moment at some of the wildest level ranges (high levels).

EDIT: Make this WAY easier for yourself and just have everyone play unchained Summoners where the Servants are Eidolons. That way if your "build the eidolon" for them, they still get a character.

Temennigru
2019-03-07, 10:25 PM
I am restricting the material to spheres of power, and encouraging people to use magic creatively. I don't want the masters to be dead weight. I want them to feel like they are actually doing something.
I also want to write custom rules for each servant to represent their abilities better. I don't want to be just building eidolons.

If a lvl 20 is too much for 6 lvl 10s and 6 lvl 5s, I might raise them to 7/14.

I do have some concerns though. What is to stop an enemy from simply attacking the masters?
I'm thinking of giving them an ability that does not let a servant target a non-servant if a servant is closer.

Reversefigure4
2019-03-07, 11:10 PM
Have you played a lot of Pathfinder before? A level disparity, particularly one of 7 or more levels, is a pretty big deal. A gap of 2 to 4 levels might be covered by having sufficient numbers of PCs (Masters + Servants) and outnumbering foes 6 to 1, but not much more. Most things the Masters are able to meaningful interact with will be slaughtered immediately by the servants, and most things that pose a moderate challenge to the servants will simply massacre the Masters.

A simple rule would be to say that all Servants have a special ability that renders them unable to attack, cast spells or, or damage a Master in any way (a Servant fireball simply bends around them). That prevents Servants immediately slaughtering Masters.

To have the Master's contribute, you'll need either to have Masters in the fight for the lower-level Masters to fight, though, because even a Level 5 Master who is immune to being killed isn't going to be able to do anything much more than provide a flanking bonus against a Level 14 Servant.

Alternatively, you could try a more narratively-based system like FATE, where 'power level' is less of a concern, allowing physically weak characters to still meaningfully interact with the story.

Rhedyn
2019-03-08, 08:08 AM
I am restricting the material to spheres of power, and encouraging people to use magic creatively. I don't want the masters to be dead weight. I want them to feel like they are actually doing something.
I also want to write custom rules for each servant to represent their abilities better. I don't want to be just building eidolons.

If a lvl 20 is too much for 6 lvl 10s and 6 lvl 5s, I might raise them to 7/14.

I do have some concerns though. What is to stop an enemy from simply attacking the masters?
I'm thinking of giving them an ability that does not let a servant target a non-servant if a servant is closer.
You could have masters/servants be equal level. It'll double your party size, but if you want them to fight level 20s in "everyone is probably going to die fights" then they would need to be level 13 (assuming 4 players and thus 8 PCs). If your party isn't super good at optimizing then you may want to bump everyone to 15 instead.

Now you seem dead set on level 20 enemies. That means you are playing high level PF. All PCs/NPCs need magic items and it doesn't matter how much christmas trees of magic items conflict with the lore. Sphere's of Power is balanced, but that also means it doesn't drastically change default assumptions about the game.

Really though, you do not have a great system here for what you are trying to do. I've heard decent things about Ars Magica that seem to line up more with what you are doing here, but I cannot confirm that.

Friv
2019-03-08, 02:20 PM
Oof, that is going to be a rough request.

I've played around with Fate games. Even using the Grand Order model, in which noble phantasms are somewhat less BS and mages are somewhat more important, I don't think it can be done effectively in a system in which some players are mages and some players are Servants. You need a system in which you can give the mages a lot of non-combat and narrative weight to represent that they're thematically and symbolically important, while the Servants get to be unstoppable combat gods.

So... why aren't the players allowed to build their own characters? It seems like your best bet for a game of this style, if you're married to Pathfinder, would be to have each player play a mage much of the time, and then have them design and play their own Servant in the tactical portions of the game. The Mages would be modeled as buff-casters, probably.

MoiMagnus
2019-03-08, 03:49 PM
I will be GMing a fate (type moon) rpg using pathfinder soon.
Pathfinder feel like a very odd choice for me. Fate's magic is everything BUT working as D&D's magic (but then, I don't know the spheres of power system you're talking about latter on)
You'd probably have better result with any system design for "superheros" than systems design for "medieval-fantastic", or any system which is more "improvise your own spells" than "here is a list of powers".



The story will be that of fate/grand order, in which the players will be part of a special mage task force charged with maintaining humanity’s timeline intact.

My plan is to have the masters be lvl 5 and the servants have double the level of the master, while having enemy servants always be lvl 20.

The scenario is ok, but it doesn't even require the use of servants.
(Moreover, the use of servants is quite a rare thing in the Fate universe, at least in the main timeline.)
But if the goal is to play with servant, using the Fate universe is indeed a good ca



So my question is, how can I make the campaign enjoyable if the players will have a low level character they created and a high level character they didn’t?

Why? Sure, you don't have any choice on the exact capacities of your servant (even though you have a reasonnable choice on who you summon). But in the fate universe, you don't have any choice on what kind of magic you will do (depends on what you are good at). Why would you let them build one but not the other ones?

I mean, the only reason why I would ever play pathfinder (over another RPG) is for the joy of building a high level character.

Note that this question isn't a purely rethorical question. There ARE good answers to this. For example: "I want to build plot hooks inside the servants, so I need to create them myself". Of "my players aren't really interested in building high level characters from scratch". But make sure you have a good reason to do so if you chose to not let the player creates their own servant.

"Can you make the campaign enjoyable". Yes, but there is a very important question: How much control do the players have on the servant [outside or fights, you made it clear that they will control the servants during fights]?
+ If the answer is "a lot, they know their full backstory and chose how they react", then maybe the mages are not needed for your campaign, and you could find a way to just have the servants without PC master (so NPC masters, or no masters)
+ If the answer is "not that much, I keep most of their backstory secret for dramatic reveals", then you take the risk of the players having the feeling of you playing with yourself, and them being passive in the overhaul scenario while you play all the interesting characters.
+ If it is an in-between, then I know some players that will have difficulties with essentially playing two different characters, but others will love it, so it depends on your players.

Resileaf
2019-03-08, 04:00 PM
Rather than level 20 enemies, I suggest creating a special template that will make them stronger and tougher, and more meat shieldy, than just straight up giving them the power to wipe out a lvl 10 party instantly. Enemy servants in FGO are remarkable not for being a million times stronger than your own servants, but for having a lot of HP. They generally hit a lot less hard than you do so you can actually have a chance to beat them. In Warcraft RPG, there exists a template that can be given to any enemy that quadruples their HP and increases a few other stats. In essence, the template is excellent for bosses.

Most importantly, you want to give your characters special powers and abilities. The Masters, rather than just being there to observe battles, should have powerful abilities of their own that they can use to enhance their servants for a short time. You should make those abilities custom for each player so they have variety in their abilities and what they do. And the Servants themselves should also have special cooldown abilities unrelated to feats or anything else.

As far as Noble Phantasms go, I would suggest making them recharge at a rate equal to how they recharge in the game for NPCs (as in three, four or five rounds) rather than figuring out percentages.

PF might not be the best system for Fate GO, but don't let that stop you. If it works and you have fun, then it doesn't matter if you could have found better.

Fable Wright
2019-03-08, 06:20 PM
Tell everyone to make three characters: two Test of Spite characters, and one level 5 character.

When the game starts, reserve your favorite ToS characters for enemy NPCs, and randomly assign each player one OTHER player's servant. In this scenario, everyone plays the characters they made. BOTH of them.

1. R's player made an Tome of Battle build designed to have an unstoppable Line attack. She named that build Saber. She also built the Cube. That build is named Gilgamesh and the GM is not letting her play it. She built R as the perfect buffbot for Saber, and made it her character goal to make the perfect combo.
2. E's player was lazy and submitted a level 5 and level 12 version of his build, knowing that the early survivability and high CR of enemy servants and summons would let him power level. He's honestly curious if he can get the level 5 version to win in a fight, and tries to force that confrontation.

Their noble phantasm? The TO gimmick that they use. One it's known, it could be countered; reveal sparingly.

Temennigru
2019-03-08, 09:29 PM
FYI the first chapter will have the group with a single servant, as well as a couple allies. They will be fighting a couple enemy servants individually, although they are not expected to beat them. They will also be fighting several weaker enemies, that the masters should be able to handle.

So perhaps I could raise the starting level for the party to 7/14 and lower the first chapter's servants to lvl 17.
In the beginning I will be building servants using monster rules, and the servants are not PCs, although they are controlled by the players they are paired with. The players are supposed to keep providing mana to activate the abilities of their servants, although I have to decide on the exact numbers.

For those who don't know, SoP is a system similar to psionics, but where there are no fixed spells. Players spend spell points to mix magical effects to produce spells. For instance, to make a fireball they would spend mana on the destruction sphere, and modify it with blast and fire talents. I am also encouraging them to create custom spells with the spellcrafting rules from the system. The mages should be jacks of all trades, while the servants will be the main damage dealers in the group and have limited powerful abilities.

The problem with letting them build their own servants is it does not represent well the lore of fate. Each servant has very specific abilities that are tied to their legend.

For instance:
King arthur has a powerful ability, excalibur, which is a rank A++ anti-fortress noble phantasm.
He has rank A magic resistance and rank A riding.
He has rank B strength, rank A endurance, rank A agility, rank A mana, rank D luck, rank A charisma, rank A instinct and rank A mana burst.

I am working on the exact translations, but the build is pretty strict.

I could just ditch the concept of level for the servants and tie their HD to their individual abilities.

Friv
2019-03-09, 11:45 AM
FYI the first chapter will have the group with a single servant, as well as a couple allies. They will be fighting a couple enemy servants individually, although they are not expected to beat them.

In the beginning I will be building servants using monster rules, and the servants are not PCs, although they are controlled by the players they are paired with. The players are supposed to keep providing mana to activate the abilities of their servants, although I have to decide on the exact numbers.

The problem with letting them build their own servants is it does not represent well the lore of fate. Each servant has very specific abilities that are tied to their legend.

Oh man, friend. Friend. Friend.

No. Don't do this.

I don't know your group, to be fair, but this is not going to go well for you. This sounds like you've kind of already decided exactly how the story is going to go and what you need to do to get it there, and the PCs are mainly along for the ride. You've bypassed the DMPC problem sort of by handing all your DMPCs to the players to control tactically, but you've also decided to have the PCs stand around feeding mana to the real heroes, all of whom you have created to exacting standards.

And as far as each servant having specific abilities tied to their own legend - I've played Fate. A lot of Fate. The ties can be pretty broad, and a lot of Servants have been summoned with different capabilities in different Grail Wars. King Arthur alone, even discounting the goofier FGO stories, exists as three different Sabers already in various media and two different Lancers.

Vlad Tepes from Fate/Apocrypha is wildly different than Vlad Tepes from Fate/Extra, even though they are both Lancers. Gilles de Rais in Fate/Zero is a Caster, and in Fate/Apocrypha is a Saber.

What you're doing here is unnecessarily shackling your game because you want to keep control of all its elements. This is a really bad idea.

NichG
2019-03-09, 12:10 PM
Honestly, Fate seems tailor made for a Mage/Exalted cross-over campaign. The summoner is a Mage - massive utility that can completely change the course of a conflict, but unless they've perfectly prepared their contingencies they have no counter to Exalted's perfect offense/perfect defense shenanigans and will get splatted if they ever actually get into a direct fight. Meanwhile there's all sorts of absurd stuff around the Exalted materials that has at least the intent to feel like the way people in that series talk about servant ability ratings, noble phantasms, and the like. You'd probably have to tweak the mechanics a bit though.

Fable Wright
2019-03-09, 12:38 PM
FYI the first chapter will have the group with a single servant, as well as a couple allies. They will be fighting a couple enemy servants individually, although they are not expected to beat them. They will also be fighting several weaker enemies, that the masters should be able to handle.

[...]

The problem with letting them build their own servants is it does not represent well the lore of fate. Each servant has very specific abilities that are tied to their legend.

You asked about how to make a Fate RPG enjoyable. In other words, how you make a battle royale with teams enjoyable.

This is not how you do that.

The main issues with battle royales are (1) when your character dies, you're out of stuff to do; (2) it can be difficult to get some roleplaying going without instantly devolving to backstabbing and TPKs; and (3) there are a fixed number of enemies and no mooks.

The solution, therefore, is to (respectively) (1) Have players with more than one character, so the incredibly fatal nature doesn't make someone sit around twiddling their thumbs for hours; (2) With enforced alliances, you can easily get far more PCs engaged in scenes; (3) make the combats fun by letting player reveal the full silliness of their build as their 'noble phantasm'.


And as far as each servant having specific abilities tied to their own legend - I've played Fate. A lot of Fate. The ties can be pretty broad, and a lot of Servants have been summoned with different capabilities in different Grail Wars. King Arthur alone, even discounting the goofier FGO stories, exists as three different Sabers already in various media and two different Lancers.

Vlad Tepes from Fate/Apocrypha is wildly different than Vlad Tepes from Fate/Extra, even though they are both Lancers. Gilles de Rais in Fate/Zero is a Caster, and in Fate/Apocrypha is a Saber.

What you're doing here is unnecessarily shackling your game because you want to keep control of all its elements. This is a really bad idea.

So much this. Is Iskander a 7' tall muscleman who rides into melee combat, or a short and clever backlines commander with the cunning to conquer the known world? You could stat him out as his Zero version or as F/GO's Zhuge Liang and both would be valid.

Just tell the players to give you a vague outline of historical heroes they think would fit with their TO build, and massage the fluff to fit.

Quertus
2019-03-10, 07:43 PM
The problem with letting them build their own servants is it does not represent well the lore of fate. Each servant has very specific abilities that are tied to their legend.

For instance:
King arthur has a powerful ability, excalibur, which is a rank A++ anti-fortress noble phantasm.
He has rank A magic resistance and rank A riding.
He has rank B strength, rank A endurance, rank A agility, rank A mana, rank D luck, rank A charisma, rank A instinct and rank A mana burst.

I am working on the exact translations, but the build is pretty strict.

I could just ditch the concept of level for the servants and tie their HD to their individual abilities.

Well, that block of stats really doesn't scream "King Arthur" to me.

I'd say you'd get just as good of representations by letting them build their own characters.

MoiMagnus
2019-03-11, 04:47 AM
The problem with letting them build their own servants is it does not represent well the lore of fate. Each servant has very specific abilities that are tied to their legend.

For instance:
King arthur has a powerful ability, excalibur, which is a rank A++ anti-fortress noble phantasm.
He has rank A magic resistance and rank A riding.
He has rank B strength, rank A endurance, rank A agility, rank A mana, rank D luck, rank A charisma, rank A instinct and rank A mana burst.

I am working on the exact translations, but the build is pretty strict.

I could just ditch the concept of level for the servants and tie their HD to their individual abilities.

Hum, I get it, but I wasn't expected you to actually try to translate the official servant.
If you chose servant that are not in the fate lore (which I agree is quite big if you take all the spin-off and other stuffs), you're free.
And to be fair, the servant of Fate are absurdly unbalanced with each others, and a lot of their capacities only exist for story purposes (and their lore was created to make it look logical), so I'm not 100% convince that's a good idea to use them at all cost.

However, yes, if your goal is to translate the official servants, you don't really need to follow the PC rules to build them, and you can build them as a NPC/monster.
From a personnal point of view, I would have no-problems with pre-build servants for a few-session campaign, but if the campaign was expected to be long enoug, I would expect to build my own servant that doesn't exist yet in the official lore (though I would also be ok with starting with a pre-build servant, and at some point the plot kill all our servants and we have to build new servants).

Temennigru
2019-03-11, 04:58 AM
Well, that block of stats really doesn't scream "King Arthur" to me.

I'd say you'd get just as good of representations by letting them build their own characters.

It's not about it being the actual king arthur. It's about it being the king arthur, character from fate. The whole point of this campaign is not to tell the fate go story (which is actually pretty stupid), it is to play a fate campaign, with familiar characters and a familiar system. Fate has a very complex system and I would like to explore it to the maximum of my abilities.

One thing I forgot to mention about fate for those of you who don't know is that the servants are tied to specific class cards. The most common being the seven: saber, lancer, archer, assassin, caster, rider and berserker. Each of those classes have skills and abilities that are common to them. For instance, saber usually has some form of magic resistance while being the strongest fighter overall, lancer has protection from arrows while being the most agile servant, assassin has presence concealment while being weak in combat, etc.

These are things I wish to explore when GMing, and pathfinder alone is not very compatible with that.

One thing I had though of was writing classes for each class card and letting the players use that to build the servants, so they would be the same characters in fate, but with their own personal touch, which would be acceptable, but that would be a lot of work.

That shouldn't matter anyways for the 1st chapter as they won't be getting servants till the 2nd.


Hum, I get it, but I wasn't expected you to actually try to translate the official servant.
If you chose servant that are not in the fate lore (which I agree is quite big if you take all the spin-off and other stuffs), you're free.
And to be fair, the servant of Fate are absurdly unbalanced with each others, and a lot of their capacities only exist for story purposes (and their lore was created to make it look logical), so I'm not 100% convince that's a good idea to use them at all cost.

However, yes, if your goal is to translate the official servants, you don't really need to follow the PC rules to build them, and you can build them as a NPC/monster.
From a personnal point of view, I would have no-problems with pre-build servants for a few-session campaign, but if the campaign was expected to be long enoug, I would expect to build my own servant that doesn't exist yet in the official lore (though I would also be ok with starting with a pre-build servant, and at some point the plot kill all our servants and we have to build new servants).

This is another thing I've thought thoroughly about. my conclusion is that if I am to build the servants myself, I would have to offer some sort of customization and growth options for the servants. One thing I was brainstorming about would be encouraging crafting custom items and spells so the players can grow with their characters and servants during the campaign.

Friv
2019-03-11, 11:40 AM
Well, I tried.

Man_Over_Game
2019-03-12, 12:56 PM
You could try your hand at using DnD 5e as your system. It has a few things that fix the problems you're facing.

Notably:


Each character is a specific class, with an even more specific subclass. Two Barbarians can be very similar in how they Rage, but one generates a storm when he Rages, and the other gains enhanced speed and agility. This fits well with your class cards, in how each Servant is similar to others while also staying unique.
Numbers matter. Because of how the bounded accuracy works in 5e, low level creatures can always stay a threat with ample enough numbers. At level 1, a single kobold might be a threat, and at level 20 you might be able to take on 20 of them.
The game is simple. As long as you don't constantly try to think "It's Pathfinder, but different", you can learn the majority of the game in an hour. However, the people who have the hardest time learning are those who try to adapt their own experience of older systems to 5e, and that just doesn't always work (leads to a lot of 5e players not knowing what's true or false because of misinformation).



A pair of a level 5 and a level 10 couldn't take down a level 20, but a party of them probably could. You'd still want to jack up HP and lower damage on the bosses, but I'd say that a party of 5's and 10's could take down a level 20 boss, as long as they don't get caught by a high level AoE spell right off the bat.

My recommendation would be to have everyone pick from a selection of possible Master classes and subclasses, then have them pick from a list of Servant classes and subclasses. A Mastermind Rogue (master manipulator, enhances the attacks of others) and a Hexblade Warlock (heavy melee damage caster) would be cool for a pair of dark schemers, or a Swashbuckler Rogue (uses high damage hit-and-run attacks with melee weapons) with a Celestial Warlock (uses holy damage and healing) could be on the table.

Both scenarios use the same classes, but they are definitely unique. You may not be able to draw identical parallels between the 5e classes and Fate's classes, but an understanding of the mechanics will get you really close to what you're looking for.

Temennigru
2019-03-13, 02:18 AM
You could try your hand at using DnD 5e as your system. It has a few things that fix the problems you're facing.


Literally everyone in my group dislikes D&D5e because it is way too limited. We are all used to the absolute plethora of material and power gaming experience provided by 3.5/pathfinder. Spheres of power is an excelent approximation of the magic system in fate.

Rhedyn
2019-03-13, 09:34 AM
Literally everyone in my group dislikes D&D5e because it is way too limited. We are all used to the absolute plethora of material and power gaming experience provided by 3.5/pathfinder. Spheres of power is an excelent approximation of the magic system in fate.
This thread actually got me to reading Ars Magica. That really does seem to line up more. Powerful Magi buffing Special Servants fits right in-line with the magi/companion dynamic.

It's a 240 page book for 5th edition, which should be light reading for any 3.5/PF fan.

Red Fel
2019-03-13, 03:08 PM
Hi there. Regular poster in this very forum's FGO thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?579986-Fate-Grand-Order-III-Protecc-those-Smiles) here. Nice t'meetcha.

Several issues with what you're doing. Let me start with your most recent post.


It's not about it being the actual king arthur. It's about it being the king arthur, character from fate. The whole point of this campaign is not to tell the fate go story (which is actually pretty stupid), it is to play a fate campaign, with familiar characters and a familiar system. Fate has a very complex system and I would like to explore it to the maximum of my abilities.

In other words, everyone wants to pick Artoria, Gilgamesh, Iskandar, or Cu.


These are things I wish to explore when GMing, and pathfinder alone is not very compatible with that.

That's because you're not proposing a Pathfinder game. You're proposing a Pokemon RPG, but replacing Pokemon with genderbent historical figures. Fact is, having the Master as a statted character - as opposed to just a character who's sort of there - is a terrible idea. Because with the exception of a truly exceptional Magus, no Master will be able to contribute in any meaningful way to Servant combat. Sure, Command Seals will work, and maybe a Mystic Code that lets you augment your Servant's attack or stun your enemies, but statting Masters is just a waste of time. A Master's damage versus Servants, Phantasmals, or anything else is 0; an enemy Servant's damage versus a Master is DEATH.

Let's back up for a moment. What is Fate? Not FGO, but the actual franchise. It started as a visual novel. (Originally, an eroge, but that's another matter.) What's a visual novel? Well, that's basically text with pictures and a choose-your-own-adventure aspect to it.

When you try that crap at a table, most of the people on this forum start screaming "railroading," and for good reason - it is railroading.

The characters in Fate - both Servants and Masters - hit particular story beats unique to those characters. It's why they're so compelling. We're not excited by yet another Saberface just because Artoria is genderbent King Arthur and also adorable. We're excited for what it means for the character - a character originally defined by her relationship with Shirou and Rin and her rivalry with a certain Nameless Archer, then later expanded by her relationship with Kiritsugu and her rivalry with a certain pair of Kings, and also redefined by becoming an Alter, and made silly in Carnival Phantasm - this is a character we've explored facets of based on her interactions with others.

Shirou's hero's journey isn't just the story of a Pokemon trainer whose starter happens to be the King of Knights. He's compelling not only because of his strong sense of justice, but because of the transformative impact the Grail War has on him, both during and after (and therefore during, because Grail-related shenanigans). It's the deconstruction and reconstruction of his idealistic desire to be a hero after seeing the true acts of real "heroes" and deciding whether that's the kind of person he wants to be, and the further discovery by the audience of the role that conflict played in making him the person he is (both in that Grail War and the prior one).

The point I'm trying to make is that these characters don't work well as pick-and-mix Pokemon trainers and their starters, chosen randomly. Cu Chulainn would not have worked as Shirou's Servant. Medusa would not have worked as Rin's. Artoria would never have taken orders from Shinji. This is borne out in lore - Servants don't just respond to the call because the right catalyst is used. The Servant who arrives, or even the aspect of the Servant who arrives, is defined in part by the Master. In other words, players have to build their Servants and their Masters, together.

Could you do it like in FGO, where players just get Servants? Sure. But you won't be able to tell the same stories, hit the same beats. And therein lies the rub - you clearly want to tell a story. That's fine, that's what Fate is about. You tell a story, the players interact with your story and react to it, and the narrative beat flows on.

That works great as a visual novel. It's frustrating as a tabletop game. If I were in a tabletop game, going through a fraction of the scenarios in FGO, I'd throw my hands up and walk away. They're unfair. They're contrived. You're deliberately made to feel useless and powerless before a deus ex machina turns the tides for you. It's the game version of a visual novel. But in a tabletop game, I expect to have more of an impact. I expect to play, not to be played.

This has been a long, rambly rant, but the crux is this: Play Fate as a Pokemon game, not a Pathfinder visual novel. Let players pick or design their own Servants, then let them engage in their own adventures, not some overarching story established by you, in which their job is to click the text boxes and win fights.

Temennigru
2019-03-17, 06:12 PM
I don't know if you've noticed, but I basically threw out the gatcha aspect of FGO. I'm making this into an entirely story-driven RPG.

None of the characters in fate got to chose their servants.
Not all servants got well together with their masters in the start. (You really think any servant would want to have shinji as their master? He is a weak and despicable little man.)
I want to give players the opportunity to evolve their relationships with their servants and feel more attached to them as the story progresses.

I've come up with solutions to the 2 problems I noticed I had to solve:

Participation: the masters have to be able to pull their weight and feel like they are doing something. To this end I will be making the servant level closer to the master level, adding non-combat situations, plenty of master-level combat and encouraging them to create new spells and items to help them close the gap between master and servant and offset their own weaknesses.
Progression: There has to be some sort of progression aside from leveling up to make the masters feel attached to their servants. To this end I am adding a separate progression step for "servant bond", where at each level masters can select different abilities for their servants to have. Servants start up with very basic abilities attached to their "spirit origin" but can learn new abilities along the way to maximize their power.

I think this shouldn't be too hard to implement and should keep the campaign pretty fun.

Fable Wright
2019-03-17, 11:34 PM
I don't know if you've noticed, but I basically threw out the gatcha aspect of FGO. I'm making this into an entirely story-driven RPG.

It's still a pokemon RPG from what you've described. You "start out" with one low level servant, and you've implied that more will be gained.

And... actually, I have a question for you. Are the players directly controlling the (apparently ONLY) party servant directly? Taking turns/by committee/whathaveyou? Or is this a situation where you have a bunch of low level tagalong characters following around the overleveled DMPC and providing support while he does all the cool combat? Or a situation where one person gets to be super overpowered compared to the rest of the party?


None of the characters in fate got to chose their servants.
Not all servants got well together with their masters in the start. (You really think any servant would want to have shinji as their master? He is a weak and despicable little man.)

Shinji was not chosen as a master. Medusa, aka Rider, was the perfect match for her chosen master, Sakura, due to their similar natures and Medusa's desire to keep Sakura from following their same route. Their abilities also complemented well, with Sakura's high mana reserves being more than able to fuel extreme uses of Medusa's mana-hungry abilities that Shinji needed to resort to using Blood Fort Andromeda to try and fuel.

Heracles was chosen as Illya's master because of his desire to protect, after he couldn't protect his own kids from his power.
Medusa chose Sakura to keep her from going down a regrettable path.
Shirou was Saber's Sheathe.
True Assassin was a perfect match for Zouken.
Medea was unfortunately attracted to a man who was as callous as her Jason. (I'm talking about her pre-Kuzuki master.)
Lancer had his absolute perfect match in Bazette, as they had perfectly complementing abilities and personalities.
And Rin got the man she'd be grow up and marry in several timelines.

As you can see, all the servants got someone who fit their myth near perfectly, had complementing offensive or defensive abilities, and were generally tailored to their servants to a T. Admittedly, this is because more than a few of them summoned without catalysts; Fate/Zero is a better example if you wanted to show servants and masters not being custom tailored for each other... and that's because the masters specifically picked out their servants without caring about complementing personalities.



Participation: the masters have to be able to pull their weight and feel like they are doing something. To this end I will be making the servant level closer to the master level, adding non-combat situations, plenty of master-level combat and encouraging them to create new spells and items to help them close the gap between master and servant and offset their own weaknesses.

Have you considered... letting the players control the epic spectacle of heroes throughout history fighting each other to the utmost with their entire arsenal as opposed to being allowed to minimally contribute to the spectacle going on around them?


Progression: There has to be some sort of progression aside from leveling up to make the masters feel attached to their servants. To this end I am adding a separate progression step for "servant bond", where at each level masters can select different abilities for their servants to have. Servants start up with very basic abilities attached to their "spirit origin" but can learn new abilities along the way to maximize their power.

But there's only ONE servant at the start of the party. So exactly one person gets to have this special relationship while everyone else twiddles their thumbs and waits for their gacha servant.

That said... if you want players to feel attached to their servants, have you considered roleplaying? Like developing an actual character bond? Of course, managing a number of servants equal to the number of players would be difficult. You could alleviate this by letting players control other peoples' servants, and get, well, a kind of party dynamic that makes people feel attached to each other.

Or you could have the masters give the servants a few bonus feats, I guess. Fate/Extella did the same thing, and... really it did nothing but add some number crunching chore to the game rather than develop my relationship with a character. To the point where the small sound clips characters made while dashing through the map were more engaging. But it'll be much more engaging in your game! Right?

Rhedyn
2019-03-18, 10:53 AM
I'm making this into an entirely story-driven RPG.

OK fair enough, but the system you have selected will not help you. In Pathfinder, the story being fun is a GM thing, the game being a fun aspect is where Pathfinder makes any effort to help you and most here have been telling you what will and will not work. One not-working aspect is building people's main characters for them. Pathfinder's main appeal against other RPGs is making a cool character for yourself.

Without that investment and level of attachment, you are asking your players to put up with a lot of crunch and crap without the main reward.

So if you want to use Pathfinder well, then expect to bend your story to the game more so than bending the game to the story. Can players build their own Servant in-lore? Doesn't matter, you are playing pathfinder and servants will be the vastly higher level character the player controls. They will make it themselves and your story just needs to line up that.

You do not want to do that? Well too bad. Either get over this hang-up or use an RPG system that actually lines up with what you want.

You can either do that or brace yourself for a complete trainwreck only avoidable my massive player buy-in and your GMing being fun regardless of how the "game" is working.

Temennigru
2019-03-18, 06:52 PM
It's still a pokemon RPG from what you've described. You "start out" with one low level servant, and you've implied that more will be gained.

And... actually, I have a question for you. Are the players directly controlling the (apparently ONLY) party servant directly? Taking turns/by committee/whathaveyou? Or is this a situation where you have a bunch of low level tagalong characters following around the overleveled DMPC and providing support while he does all the cool combat? Or a situation where one person gets to be super overpowered compared to the rest of the party?

In the first chapter the players will not have any controllable servants. They will have a demi-servant allied NPC and a full-servant allied NPC.
They will each get a servant @ downtime.

I am exploring the possibility of giving them "summoning catalysts" as the story progresses so they will each get 2 servants total, so they can take on the LITERAL GODS in the final few chapters.

This is very far from being a pokemon-style game.



Shinji was not chosen as a master. Medusa, aka Rider, was the perfect match for her chosen master, Sakura, due to their similar natures and Medusa's desire to keep Sakura from following their same route. Their abilities also complemented well, with Sakura's high mana reserves being more than able to fuel extreme uses of Medusa's mana-hungry abilities that Shinji needed to resort to using Blood Fort Andromeda to try and fuel.

Heracles was chosen as Illya's master because of his desire to protect, after he couldn't protect his own kids from his power.
Medusa chose Sakura to keep her from going down a regrettable path.
Shirou was Saber's Sheathe.
True Assassin was a perfect match for Zouken.
Medea was unfortunately attracted to a man who was as callous as her Jason. (I'm talking about her pre-Kuzuki master.)
Lancer had his absolute perfect match in Bazette, as they had perfectly complementing abilities and personalities.
And Rin got the man she'd be grow up and marry in several timelines.

As you can see, all the servants got someone who fit their myth near perfectly, had complementing offensive or defensive abilities, and were generally tailored to their servants to a T. Admittedly, this is because more than a few of them summoned without catalysts; Fate/Zero is a better example if you wanted to show servants and masters not being custom tailored for each other... and that's because the masters specifically picked out their servants without caring about complementing personalities.




Actually, each of them got their servants because of the catalysts they used. Shinji was also technically a master, since sakura gave him her command seals.
And Rin never really got along with her servant, especially since he betrayed her many times.
If you consider the other fate series (zero and apocrypha), there are plenty of cases of servants that disliked their masters, and vice versa. Even saber was not a big fan of kiritsugu, gilgamesh was not a fan of tohsaka, etc.



Have you considered... letting the players control the epic spectacle of heroes throughout history fighting each other to the utmost with their entire arsenal as opposed to being allowed to minimally contribute to the spectacle going on around them?



But there's only ONE servant at the start of the party. So exactly one person gets to have this special relationship while everyone else twiddles their thumbs and waits for their gacha servant.

That said... if you want players to feel attached to their servants, have you considered roleplaying? Like developing an actual character bond? Of course, managing a number of servants equal to the number of players would be difficult. You could alleviate this by letting players control other peoples' servants, and get, well, a kind of party dynamic that makes people feel attached to each other.

Or you could have the masters give the servants a few bonus feats, I guess. Fate/Extella did the same thing, and... really it did nothing but add some number crunching chore to the game rather than develop my relationship with a character. To the point where the small sound clips characters made while dashing through the map were more engaging. But it'll be much more engaging in your game! Right?

Again, my players are big fate fans, and we want to try something new and similar to fate. I have reached a consensus on how this would work with them (except for 1 player who rage-quit, but he wasn't a big fan of the idea of a fate campaign from the start). If it doesn't work out in the first chapter, we can always change the system later on.

The actual usefulness of their first servant in the first chapter will be very limited, as goes the story, and the final boss fight is having them fight a big scary mean ENEMY SERVANT (wow). As the story progresses and they get their servants, as well as get stronger themselves, they will be able to fight more servants on each chapter.

Finally, my group is a very big fan of number crunching, and not so much of roleplaying (the reason why we dislike 5e). A modified version of pathfinder (which is a system we know inside and out) is more than ideal for our purpose. And if things seem unbalanced, as an experienced GM, I can always make quick adjustments to it.


OK fair enough, but the system you have selected will not help you. In Pathfinder, the story being fun is a GM thing, the game being a fun aspect is where Pathfinder makes any effort to help you and most here have been telling you what will and will not work. One not-working aspect is building people's main characters for them. Pathfinder's main appeal against other RPGs is making a cool character for yourself.

Without that investment and level of attachment, you are asking your players to put up with a lot of crunch and crap without the main reward.

So if you want to use Pathfinder well, then expect to bend your story to the game more so than bending the game to the story. Can players build their own Servant in-lore? Doesn't matter, you are playing pathfinder and servants will be the vastly higher level character the player controls. They will make it themselves and your story just needs to line up that.

You do not want to do that? Well too bad. Either get over this hang-up or use an RPG system that actually lines up with what you want.

You can either do that or brace yourself for a complete trainwreck only avoidable my massive player buy-in and your GMing being fun regardless of how the "game" is working.

What I mean is more story driven than combat driven. Pathfinder provides plenty of rules for that. There will still be plenty of crunch, and there will still be combat. They will just be using their abilities less in combat and more on developing the story and surviving. Like the infantry escorting a company of tanks.

HamsterKun
2019-03-18, 10:05 PM
Saber would definitely be a Paladin (Oath of Devotion)/Sorcerer (Divine Soul) multiclass, but the mentioning of Paladin/Sorcerer alone makes me fear them going into Mary Sue territory.

Quertus
2019-03-18, 11:05 PM
Again, why aren't the players making the servants? :smallconfused:

Also, did you understand the concept that was brought up of summoning without catalysts producing reasonable matches?

That said, I like the idea of telling the story of how these characters work out with these servants. That's a much more engaging story IMO than a paint by the numbers retelling of each servant's "optimal" master.

Temennigru
2019-03-19, 02:21 AM
Again, why aren't the players making the servants? :smallconfused:

Also, did you understand the concept that was brought up of summoning without catalysts producing reasonable matches?

That said, I like the idea of telling the story of how these characters work out with these servants. That's a much more engaging story IMO than a paint by the numbers retelling of each servant's "optimal" master.

Because part of the fun is not knowing what you are getting, and having to deal with the inherent weaknesses. This is not a high level campaign, so players will have room to grow.
The players signed up for this, and if it doesn't work out we can always reboot the system and continue the story.

And like I said, nobody in the original fate series summoned a servant without a catalyst. Even Rin had archer's vial with her.

And even if you do have a catalyst, it doesn't necessarily turn out the way you want. Tokiomi used "the world's most ancient fossil" as a catalyst and got gilgamesh. He wasn't expecting that, and they were most definitely not compatible. Tokiomi didn't have the ambition gilgamesh wanted, and so gilgamesh turned on him in favor of kirei.

And that's not even counting fate apocrypha. There was more betrayal there than a group of people getting in a circle and stabbing each other in the back. All the red masters got betrayed by their servants in favor of shirou, siegfried betrayed his master and sacrificed himself for sieg, astolpho also betrayed his master and became sieg's servant, that yggdmillenia guy forced vlad to become a vampire, even though vlad made him swear not to, the golem guy sacrificed his own master to create the garden of eden, acchiles betrayed shirou in the end, spartacus was completely out of control for the whole series...

I think the only "compatible" master/servant pairs were saber of red (mordred) and berserker of blue (frankenstein).


Saber would definitely be a Paladin (Oath of Devotion)/Sorcerer (Divine Soul) multiclass, but the mentioning of Paladin/Sorcerer alone makes me fear them going into Mary Sue territory.

I'm avoiding PC builds for the servants so I can add custom abilities to them. They will have pretty bland abilities in the beginning and will get new ones of the players' choosing as the game progresses.

Rhedyn
2019-03-19, 10:11 AM
Because part of the fun is not knowing what you are getting This does not sound like a fun way to play Pathfinder.

Temennigru
2019-03-19, 01:55 PM
This does not sound like a fun way to play Pathfinder.

Have none of you ever played with pre-gen characters?

Rhedyn
2019-03-19, 02:34 PM
Have none of you ever played with pre-gen characters?
For one-shots. (You never use the character again after one session)

Recherché
2019-03-19, 06:59 PM
Have none of you ever played with pre-gen characters?

Even for one shots with pre-gen characters there's almost always some choice of characters. Some people don't do well with some play styles and trying to force them into it is just pain.

Quertus
2019-03-20, 06:31 AM
This does not sound like a fun way to play Pathfinder.


Have none of you ever played with pre-gen characters?

Pregenerated characters don't sound like a fun way to play, either. :smallyuk:

Know your group. Would they enjoy pregenerated characters, or would they, like me, maybe barely tolerate it for a 1-shot (and, even then, it's just "I'm here to hang out / I'm fulfilling the obligation of giving you sufficient players", rather than, you know, actually enjoying the game)?

Lemmy
2019-03-20, 07:12 AM
I cast another vote for "let the players build and play the servants and make the master just low-level NPCs they have to protect", because otherwise... Well... To put it bluntly, this campaign sounds like a recipe for disaster.

The way you described how things will be done make it look like a really unfun game. I love PF and I've played and GMed some really unusual campaigns using the system... But this one... Where players are little more than buff-monkey sidekicks to the tagalong DMPC... That's one I'd skip in a heartbeat.

Remember: Things that are awesome in a book or TV show aren't necessarily very fun or even at all enjoyable in a game.

Rhedyn
2019-03-20, 08:00 AM
Or he could do something crazy like use a different RPG system. Even D&D 5e would work better for his concept, but he might even want to try running Fate with the Fate rpg if he really wants to be way more story focused.

Fable Wright
2019-03-20, 03:45 PM
That said, I like the idea of telling the story of how these characters work out with these servants. That's a much more engaging story IMO than a paint by the numbers retelling of each servant's "optimal" master.

This is why I initially proposed letting each player bring a Servant character sheet AND a Master character sheet... with the caveat that your Servant was summoned by a different player's Master. Chemistry naturally flows from the dynamics, there's a surprising/ randomizing element from the DM decided pairings that doesn't come with the headaches of giving someone a pregen.

Temennigru
2019-04-03, 02:28 PM
I think we are almost ready to start.

Here is what I came up with for the first chapter:
Mash Kyrelight, their one demi-servant will be a lvl 10 shielder-class servant that uses a tower shield and has several defensive buff abilities, as well as being able to shield bash for 2d6 and share her shield's armor bonus and cover with anyone within 5 feet of her.
I'm still thinking of something for her noble phantasm, which should be a magical wall of sorts. Maybe a wall that only blocks enemy attacks from passing through.

I have created several conversions for different parameters and skills, for each rank.
Str, Agi and Endurance are pretty straightforward
Luck gives a small bonus to all d20 rolls
Mana acts as the main casting stat for the servant
All mental attributes default to 12 (at least for now)

For parameters:
Ex is 28, A+++ is 26, all the way down to E (12)

Skills follow a similar progression, like magic resistance becomes spell resistance from 30 down to 5.

The way I worked out the mana sharing is servants will not have base spellpoints based on level. Instead, their base spellpoints will be their master's spell point pool, with a bonus based on their casting ability (mana). This way masters won't have to keep wasting spellpoints on their servants so they can actually do something with them.

The enemies will be several lvl 3-7 skeletons and other small monsters, 5 lvl 10 shadow servants (who can't use their more powerful skills) and a lvl 12 (or 15, I haven't decided) servant.
Please note that this is a whole chapter, so the fights will be very spread out.

Rhedyn
2019-04-03, 03:16 PM
Here is what I came up with for the first chapter:
Mash Kyrelight, their one demi-servant will be a lvl 10 shielder-class servant that uses a tower shield and has several defensive buff abilities, as well as being able to shield bash for 2d6 and share her shield's armor bonus and cover with anyone within 5 feet of her.
I'm still thinking of something for her noble phantasm, which should be a magical wall of sorts. Maybe a wall that only blocks enemy attacks from passing through.

You really shouldn't be building PCs for them. Not all options in Pathfinder are equal. Tower shield specialist is especially weak.

Friv
2019-04-03, 03:39 PM
I think we are almost ready to start.

Here is what I came up with for the first chapter:

You asked for advice, twelve people gave you advice, and you announced your intention to ignore that advice. So... are you asking for advice? Or are you just trying to share your game?

Temennigru
2019-04-03, 03:57 PM
You asked for advice, twelve people gave you advice, and you announced your intention to ignore that advice. So... are you asking for advice? Or are you just trying to share your game?

I've made it clear from the start that I had no intention of not making the servants. I was asking for advice on other things, and no one has given it to me, so I am sharing what I did.

And I did not ignore the advice. I took into consideration the concerns and addressed them. For instance, I am no longer making them fight lvl 20 enemies as lvl 5s, since a lvl 20 could instantly wipe out the party.

A lot of the comments are also repetitive and were already addressed:
- I do not know the fate system well enough to make custom rules and we do not like D&D5 because it is weak on mechanics
- The first chapter has no servants for the players anyways, only NPCs. This is a good test for the overall system, and if we decide to keep it I will build the servants.
- My group is a big fan of fate and would like to see familiar characters. I am not even building the servants. I am doing a direct conversion of their stats and skills as best I can, almost bypassing pathfinder entirely. That requires GM powers to do.


You really shouldn't be building PCs for them. Not all options in Pathfinder are equal. Tower shield specialist is especially weak.

I am not building PCs. I am building the equivalent of intelligent weapons.
Servants are fairly limited in what they can do and I will give them customization options later on.

Mash is also one of the 3 main friendly NPCs in the story. I most definitely can't have the players building her. In chapter one the players will have no servants made by me or otherwise, except for mash.

Rhedyn
2019-04-03, 05:19 PM
I am not building PCs. I am building the equivalent of intelligent weapons.
Servants are fairly limited in what they can do and I will give them customization options later on.

Mash is also one of the 3 main friendly NPCs in the story. I most definitely can't have the players building her. In chapter one the players will have no servants made by me or otherwise, except for mash.

You still have the servants with a vastly higher level? Then you are making the PCs.

I personally would not have consented to play in such a campaign (and I like playing Pathfinder). You do you and your group though.

Temennigru
2019-04-03, 06:13 PM
You still have the servants with a vastly higher level? Then you are making the PCs.

I personally would not have consented to play in such a campaign (and I like playing Pathfinder). You do you and your group though.

If this was a generic campaign I would agree with you. But the point of this is to have fate characters.

And once again, let's see how the introductory chapter goes. There will be no servants till the 2nd chapter. If it turns out the servants are outshining the PCs, I might let the players build them.

At least in the jojos campaign we played with similar rules, this was not the case.

Since they will be locked in a limited area (the singularities usually encompass a single city), I will try to make the campaign as "open world" as possible, rewarding creative thinking and well rounded parties, rather than overly optimized one trick ponys (which is the servants' job).

That should give the PCs a place to really shine.

Lemmy
2019-04-03, 09:01 PM
I'll give another vote for "let players build & play the servants and have the masters be low-level NPCs they gotta protect".

I understand that's not exactly the type advice you asked for, but it's the appropriate advice, IMHO.

If you create a thread saying "Guys, it'cold! How do I burn my house to warm myself up?" you should probably listen to the dozens of people replying "Dude! Don't burn your house! Use a blanket or an electrical heater!" instead of being upset that they aren't telling you how to best set fire to your home...

"I asked you how to burn my house, not for alternative sources of heat!" ia technically true, but short-sighted.

Friv
2019-04-03, 10:54 PM
Alright, fine.


The enemies will be several lvl 3-7 skeletons and other small monsters, 5 lvl 10 shadow servants (who can't use their more powerful skills) and a lvl 12 (or 15, I haven't decided) servant.
Please note that this is a whole chapter, so the fights will be very spread out.

Assuming that the various servants are fighting the entire party plus Mash individually, and you never have the group fight them all at once, there are two possibilities:

#1 - Your players will get to sit and watch Mash fight a series of slow freaking duels, because she is defense-specced and has no good attacks but the enemy shadow servant can't get past her, and then she'll get overwhelmed by the final servant who will then murder the party.

#2 - Your players are going to die.

A CR 10 enemy is an Overpowering threat to a team of Level 5 characters. A CR 12 enemy is the same, but more so. For example, a fairly standard CR 10 enemy is a Guardian Naga. She can throw a lightning bolt that deals 9d6 damage (DC 17 Reflex to resist for half damage.) That's an average of 31-32 damage on a hit, and about 16 on a save. A Level 5 character has anywhere from 20-50 HP. If a stray lightning bolt hits most characters, they will be dropped to below half health, or possibly killed.

Another simple CR 10 enemy is a Clay Golem, which attacks twice at +14 for 2d10+7 damage and curses the wound to prevent healing. It also casts Haste on itself after the first turn of combat and has AC 22 and DR 10 and 90 HP. If it gets into melee range against a PC, they'll die.

So your choices are - Mash does everything while the PCs watch your fancy DMPC, or someone gets targeted and killed.

NichG
2019-04-03, 11:28 PM
A CR 10 enemy is an Overpowering threat to a team of Level 5 characters. A CR 12 enemy is the same, but more so. For example, a fairly standard CR 10 enemy is a Guardian Naga. She can throw a lightning bolt that deals 9d6 damage (DC 17 Reflex to resist for half damage.) That's an average of 31-32 damage on a hit, and about 16 on a save. A Level 5 character has anywhere from 20-50 HP. If a stray lightning bolt hits most characters, they will be dropped to below half health, or possibly killed.


This is an exaggeration. I'd actually bet on the team of 4 level 5 characters to win against the guardian naga if they knew ahead of time that they would be fighting it. See Invisibility and Resist Elements neutralize most of the things that make it actually threatening, and are available to a Lv5 party. Which, I hate to say it, is very much in line with the Fate franchise where at least the way people talk about it, knowing the legend of a particular enemy servant gives you a major advantage and can turn defeat to victory (even if the actual servant fights feel a bit like they're just comparing raw numbers).

The Clay Golem is more problematic. Immunity to magic + DR + construct traits means that it's going to be hard for a low level party to maintain an effective damage output, which in turn means they would have to survive against it even longer. With the naga, there are aspects of the fight that can be anticipated and planned for to give the low level characters a good chance. With the golem, there's not much you can do.

So if you're going to do this kind of thing with a very high CR enemy against low level groups, make it like the naga rather than like the golem: don't build it for defense.

Temennigru
2019-04-03, 11:41 PM
Alright, fine.
Assuming that the various servants are fighting the entire party plus Mash individually, and you never have the group fight them all at once, there are two possibilities:

#1 - Your players will get to sit and watch Mash fight a series of slow freaking duels, because she is defense-specced and has no good attacks but the enemy shadow servant can't get past her

I very much expect my players to actively participate in the battles and beat the lvl 10 (not CR10) shadow servants. My group is big on preparing for a fight and giving them room to do stuff on their own will very much give them space for that.



and then she'll get overwhelmed by the final servant who will then murder the party.


That's pretty much how the story goes.
Mash's weakness leads the party to almost be defeated, only to be saved at the last second by caster. That introduces her motivation to become stronger and leads the party to summoning their own servants.



"I asked you how to burn my house, not for alternative sources of heat!" ia technically true, but short-sighted.

That's pretty dramatic. More like "what milkshake should I put on my french fries". It might seem like a bad idea to you, but it has the potential to be delicious, and it won't be the end of the world if it isn't. And a bunch of people keep telling me to put ketchup on them instead.

RifleAvenger
2019-04-04, 12:13 AM
That's pretty much how the story goes.
Mash's weakness leads the party to almost be defeated, only to be saved at the last second by caster. That introduces her motivation to become stronger and leads the party to summoning their own servants.Oh no... no, no. An NPC more powerful than the party, having to be saved by another NPC more powerful than the party? This is not a route you want to go down. This is carrying Elminster's luggage. This is Midnight becoming a goddess while your characters sit back and watch the NPC's have fun, because the module HAS to follow the plot of the novel.

Unless your players have been told in explicit terms that this is a (very) low-agency game, and bought-in to the idea of being along for the ride, do not run the game this way. That is, do not have a hard-coded story in mind that MUST happen and you will MAKE happen by fiat or by weighting the math so hard against the players they must obey. Many people play TTRPG's because they want to play the main characters, and that means having real agency and an ability to shape the plot. They cannot have this if you've already written a novel to be recited at the table.

If you have players who haven't bought in to the idea of a game this scripted, they're going to walk out at best and actively try to sabotage the game at worst the moment the rails become obvious (which won't be long by what you've described).

I'm far from the type of person who encourages no NPC party members, but this seems to be an entire CAST of people who are far more mechanically powerful and narratively important than the PC's.

Temennigru
2019-04-04, 03:20 AM
Oh no... no, no. An NPC more powerful than the party, having to be saved by another NPC more powerful than the party? This is not a route you want to go down. This is carrying Elminster's luggage. This is Midnight becoming a goddess while your characters sit back and watch the NPC's have fun, because the module HAS to follow the plot of the novel.

Unless your players have been told in explicit terms that this is a (very) low-agency game, and bought-in to the idea of being along for the ride, do not run the game this way. That is, do not have a hard-coded story in mind that MUST happen and you will MAKE happen by fiat or by weighting the math so hard against the players they must obey. Many people play TTRPG's because they want to play the main characters, and that means having real agency and an ability to shape the plot. They cannot have this if you've already written a novel to be recited at the table.

If you have players who haven't bought in to the idea of a game this scripted, they're going to walk out at best and actively try to sabotage the game at worst the moment the rails become obvious (which won't be long by what you've described).

I'm far from the type of person who encourages no NPC party members, but this seems to be an entire CAST of people who are far more mechanically powerful and narratively important than the PC's.

I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is.
I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.

"You can take this quest of shaving sheep for 1 silver, or explore the mysterious tower for 1000 gold, or explore this totally different mysterious tower also for 1000 gold"

I'm going with the game's story with very little variation. And in the game's story that's what happens. This fight is supposed to teach them to fear full fledged servants and prepare better for these encounters.

NichG
2019-04-04, 03:34 AM
I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is.
I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.

"You can take this quest of shaving sheep for 1 silver, or explore the mysterious tower for 1000 gold, or explore this totally different mysterious tower also for 1000 gold"

I'm going with the game's story with very little variation. And in the game's story that's what happens. This fight is supposed to teach them to fear full fledged servants and prepare better for these encounters.

If you've had the experience of playing in a game that isn't just hard-coded story points and which actually responds dynamically not just to microscopic decisions but to macroscopic decisions on character motivation, the hard-coded stuff is pretty boring by comparison. That view isn't universal, but if I were encountering a player I had never played with before I would find it significantly more probable that they would fall that way as opposed to wanting a predetermined storyline - maybe something like an 80/20 split. So if you're doing this for players you know are in the 20%, fine. But if its unknown players, you have a high chance of pissing them off.

Temennigru
2019-04-04, 03:50 AM
If you've had the experience of playing in a game that isn't just hard-coded story points and which actually responds dynamically not just to microscopic decisions but to macroscopic decisions on character motivation, the hard-coded stuff is pretty boring by comparison. That view isn't universal, but if I were encountering a player I had never played with before I would find it significantly more probable that they would fall that way as opposed to wanting a predetermined storyline - maybe something like an 80/20 split. So if you're doing this for players you know are in the 20%, fine. But if its unknown players, you have a high chance of pissing them off.

Our group has been almost exclusively using modules for the last couple of years. Most of the made-up campaigns went nowhere because it takes way too much time to prepare stuff. All the modules I've read are scripted and don't respond dynamically as you've said.

I'm trying to do the best I can with the time I have, which isn't a lot.

Quertus
2019-04-04, 06:21 AM
I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is.
I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.

"You can take this quest of shaving sheep for 1 silver, or explore the mysterious tower for 1000 gold, or explore this totally different mysterious tower also for 1000 gold"

I'm going with the game's story with very little variation. And in the game's story that's what happens. This fight is supposed to teach them to fear full fledged servants and prepare better for these encounters.


Our group has been almost exclusively using modules for the last couple of years. Most of the made-up campaigns went nowhere because it takes way too much time to prepare stuff. All the modules I've read are scripted and don't respond dynamically as you've said.

I'm trying to do the best I can with the time I have, which isn't a lot.

I was going to write something more in defense of your idea, and then you posted this.

So, "illusion of choice" may be one valid way to play the game (or it may not), but it certainly is not the only way to play.

I'll post more later, once you've had a chance to digest that.

Quertus
2019-04-04, 09:53 AM
I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is.
I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.

"You can take this quest of shaving sheep for 1 silver, or explore the mysterious tower for 1000 gold, or explore this totally different mysterious tower also for 1000 gold"

I'm going with the game's story with very little variation. And in the game's story that's what happens. This fight is supposed to teach them to fear full fledged servants and prepare better for these encounters.


Our group has been almost exclusively using modules for the last couple of years. Most of the made-up campaigns went nowhere because it takes way too much time to prepare stuff. All the modules I've read are scripted and don't respond dynamically as you've said.

I'm trying to do the best I can with the time I have, which isn't a lot.


I was going to write something more in defense of your idea, and then you posted this.

So, "illusion of choice" may be one valid way to play the game (or it may not), but it certainly is not the only way to play.

I'll post more later, once you've had a chance to digest that.


So my question is, how can I make the campaign enjoyable if the players will have a low level character they created and a high level character they didn’t?

Depends on your players.

But an illusionist GM is much less likely to give the players what they want, and much more likely to give himself what he wants, then try to pretend it's what the players want.

So, drop the illusion, and ask honestly, what do your players want? You say that they've bought into the idea of a Fate style game - what does that actually mean, to them?

Your players are accustomed to playing through modules, so you've got a high level of Participationism. That's the good.

The bad is, you're accustomed to illusionism, and you're looking to embark on a game style that sounds all but optimal at pulling back the curtain, and letting the players see that they're being (and, therefore, have always been) hoodwinked.

My recommendation on making the game fun (and not horrific)? Don't do that.

Ideally, that would involve not using illusions, and designing a game that works, no matter what the players choose / no matter what happens.

RifleAvenger
2019-04-04, 12:32 PM
I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is. And a lot of players I've met, myself included, are skeptical of modules for that exact reason. Beyond that, when I do use modules, I treat them as a baseline to be customized and altered to the party and their actions. Nor am I the only one that does that; I've seen an Actual Play of Dragon Heist that focuses entirely on running a tavern sim, and I've seen one where all three antagonists are actively involved instead of just the one the module recommends.

I'm also up front when pitching the game that this is a module, and it expects to be played a certain way. Ex. "I'm thinking of running Curse of Strahd. This is a game with horror and thriller elements, and I'd expect PC's and their actions to fit those genres. You will be stuck in Barovia unable to leave. Everyone ok with that?"


I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.No, it isn't. That can be a choice, but Illusionism is actually one of the most discouraged, and often reviled, GM'ing philosophies.

Here's a personal example of how I ready a campaign. I have a game coming up set in Final Fantasy 14's 5th era. I've combined official lore with my own takes where there's gaps or I just felt like changing details. The PC's are essentially part of an NGO trying to get the nations to work together, because a Great Flood has been prophesied. I asked for player buy in that their characters had to work for this NGO, and left the details to them (3 are actual believers in the cause, 2 are mercenaries).

My broad scale preparation is this: NPC profiles/goals, organization&nation profiles/goals, and what would happen if the PC's didn't exist. Which is roughly a conspiracy to disable Nym's anti-teleport defenses -> Diabolos summoned and Ozma created by Mhach -> Fall of Nym -> Battle of Amdapor -> The Great Flood.

However, the PC's can change those events. If they do, I make a new outline of what occurs if they don't change anything else. This isn't time consuming because I just do big picture stuff and improvise the small scale when we get there. Even if they don't avert an event, what they do prior to it affects their readiness for what happens next. Even if the Flood still occurs at the end, what they've done and who they've saved will influence what happens to civilization when the waters recede.

I never prepare anything that the players can affect (so, everything that isn't the setting & the NPC's at the beginning) more than a session or two in advance, and even then that material is just my best guesses. If the players do something else, I improvise. In this way, the players can and will affect the plot on a macro level, because I haven't developed any preconceived notions of what MUST happen that I didn't clear with them in session 0.


I'm going with the game's story with very little variation. And in the game's story that's what happens. This fight is supposed to teach them to fear full fledged servants and prepare better for these encounters.Then let the players know that you're telling them a story, and ask them to play along. Participationism is, imo, miles better than Illusionism. Some players DO just like being given a plot, but no one likes being lied to about the value of their choices.

Temennigru
2019-04-04, 02:58 PM
Then let the players know that you're telling them a story, and ask them to play along. Participationism is, imo, miles better than Illusionism. Some players DO just like being given a plot, but no one likes being lied to about the value of their choices.

You think I didn't? They know they are playing the story of fate: go. I've made it clear to them what they are getting into.

And I do plan on improvising. If players choose the "shave the sheep for 1 silver" quest I have to give them a "shave the sheep for 1 silver" quest, and maybe even add a last-minute improvised secret dungeon "easter egg" to keep it interesting.
But having background stuff going on makes no difference to the players' experience if they can't see it happening.

Friv
2019-04-04, 03:24 PM
I've seen many (if not all) official modules that had scripted battles and storylines. I don't get what the big deal is.
I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with because nobody can prepare hundreds of possible arcs.

Okay, I think I understand where you're coming from a bit better now. Maybe we need to rewind a bit from Fate Grand/Order and discuss GMing for a moment.

The goal of being the GM is to provide an enjoyable time for your players. Now, that can unfold in a variety of different ways. Your suggested approach is not one of them, because it requires you to juggle your intended plot with a shell game, constantly manipulating the players' actions and intentions to make a story unfold the way that you want it to.

The problem with this approach is that the first time that you slip, the players get a look behind the curtain, and when they do, they realize that their choices don't matter. Once that happens, you can't put the curtain back up. The players are alert for someone tricking them, and they will either start trying to break the game, or get frustrated that you're giving them false choices.

There are a lot of ways around this. One way is to not plan too far ahead - to just sketch an outline of the villain's goals, and to give yourself a few notes about how the villain might respond to their goals being thwarted, and run from there. Another way is to set up a scenario in such a way that it's clear that there aren't a lot of choices, and then make the few choices that the players have important enough to still matter to them, while not derailing your plot. A third way is to let the players know that the early game will involve things going wrong, so that they can step in.

The best game modules are the ones that have "If the players do this, this other thing will happen, but if they don't, something different happens." Dungeon crawls are often popular modules specifically because they're hard to derail; the players can explore them from a lot of angles, meet NPCs, and interact with the environment and there's no plot to get messed up by a cunning action. The worst game modules have systems to force the players back onto the rails as hard as possible if things go wrong.

The key to being a good GM is the following three things:

1. The players have to be having fun
2. The players have to be able to make decisions
3. The players' decisions have to matter

There is a good shorthand for this - run through an entire scene in your mind. Does it matter that the PCs are there for that scene, or will it be totally identical no matter what they do? If it'll be identical, you either need to revise that scene, or fast-forward it.

So, in your game, what happens if things go wrong? Let's do a quick breakdown of ways that your system could mess up.

1. A PC decides to get involved in the first shadow servant fight directly, and gets killed. How do you deal with it?
2. Mash gets killed by a shadow servant. What happens next?
3. The PCs manage, through a combination of clever actions and lucky rolls, to kill the final boss without them overwhelming Mash. What happens next?

If the answer to these questions is, "I don't know because it's not what happened in the game," you need to restructure the game.

RifleAvenger
2019-04-04, 03:30 PM
You think I didn't? They know they are playing the story of fate: go. I've made it clear to them what they are getting into.

And I do plan on improvising. If players choose the "shave the sheep for 1 silver" quest I have to give them a "shave the sheep for 1 silver" quest, and maybe even add a last-minute improvised secret dungeon "easter egg" to keep it interesting.
But having background stuff going on makes no difference to the players' experience if they can't see it happening. When you've said things like "I thought the whole point of being a GM was to give players the illusion of choice while hiding that they never had it to begin with," then yes, I would start with the assumption you haven't told them you're running a railroad.

As Quertus has asked, are you sure that playing the story of Fate: Grand Order means the same thing to your players as it means to you? Do they know that you have specific story events that must happen to not derail the game? Are you honest with them about when they really don't have a choice?

If the answer to all those questions is "yes," then you have an extremely Participationist game. Which is fine, because all your players have accepted the pitch with full knowledge of what is expected. Users here on the forum might not like that type of game, but we aren't your group.

On the other hand, if the answer to any of those questions is "no," then you're running an extremely Illusionist game with the intent of fooling your players. Which is both dishonest and runs the risk someone will out the lie and be upset.

Temennigru
2019-04-04, 04:32 PM
So, in your game, what happens if things go wrong? Let's do a quick breakdown of ways that your system could mess up.

1. A PC decides to get involved in the first shadow servant fight directly, and gets killed. How do you deal with it?
2. Mash gets killed by a shadow servant. What happens next?
3. The PCs manage, through a combination of clever actions and lucky rolls, to kill the final boss without them overwhelming Mash. What happens next?

If the answer to these questions is, "I don't know because it's not what happened in the game," you need to restructure the game.

They won't get to encounter the shadow servants right away. I will introduce them at the appropriate time. First I will give them a few introductory encounters to get them used to their characters.
My players are cautious enough that they won't be going around doing stupid stuff (they spend hours discussing whether they should fight something or not). If they try something stupid I will use mash to hint at them that they probably shouldn't do that ("this enemy looks awful powerful. We should probably keep our distance for now"), and if they insist (which I doubt they will) then they pretty much deserve to die, although I will give them a chance to redeem themselves and escape.
My group has been in D&D for over 10 years and they know how to keep themselves alive. I also have caster (a good npc) hidden away for a good part of act 1 and I can use him if I have to.

My group has done things like this before (both as GMs and players) and they know to take hints.

I've also watched a puffin forest video recently where he describes a similar situation when he was GMing a module. The players would come across a monolith they were not supposed to interact with. If they cast identify on it it would hint to them not to mess with it. If they broke the monolith, it would set them up with an impossible encounter that was very likely to kill them.

As for mash, she is a shielder with defensive buffs. It is very hard for her to die (especially since she has much more life and defenses than the PCs). If she does die by accident (which I will try my best not to let that happen), I will have to go off-script a bit and maybe give them a chance to revive her in the next arc.


Also, there's something you should know about my group:
One of our GMs once gave us a 20 HD constrictor snake with quadruple HP to fight at lvl 7. One of our players killed it with 1 full attack.

Friv
2019-04-04, 05:30 PM
And I'm out. Have fun.