I really like Anglekite and Cold Ruins (haven’t read the last one yet) — but, aside from Mark Diaz Truman’s notes, on the pure consumer side — I sort of wish they’d been games of their own.

Like, I do not want to diminish Brendan’s work in any way, it’s all awesome stuff. But I sort of feel like he pushed DW to the edge of what it could do (and maybe past) in a way that I feel might have better supported his vision had it been it’s own thing.

Meanwhile, I’m over here noodling on how Uncharted Worlds turned combat into the one-and-done model that most other PtbA games use for social engagement/human interaction, while giving a greater potential for the later type of moves to snowball.

And now, because I’m just covering all the topics in one post — Paul Beakley I sometimes feel like I have an issue with FATE, but I don’t think I do. I think FATE works fine, I just think it works fine for something I don’t always like. When I watch folks playing, and enjoying FATE, and then critically analyze my own reactions in response to the games of it I’ve played I feel that FATE is about celebrating tropes. Where as PtbA games tend to be about tying tropes to a chair and inquisiting them until they scream. Not, you know, actually in any critically or ethically constructive way, but still, there’s a “oh so you think that being a hard ass bad mother fucker with a castle is cool, well did you consider the murder torture you have to do to keep it and how that’s going to fuck you in the end no matter what you do?” where as in FATE its like “You are a badass, you did badass, get a chip and high-five each other.”

It’s easy to judge that, and call FATE shallow or PtbA deep or some shit, but I think that’s a false moralization as a lot of PtbA games “questioning” of tropes is cheap and shallow, and several FATE games I’ve seen (though not played myself) seem to make some actual ethical meat out of embracing and celebrating some tropes and not others.