Thoughts on Aspects

From Tab Wiki

When I first read through Fate, the aspect system struck me as a really awesome, unified way to handle modifiers, and a very poor replacement for a character's basic stats. I assume most people reading this are familiar with Fate, but just in case you're not: The Fate RPG system uses an "aspect" mechanic, where every character has a number of descriptive phrases--aspects--that are supposed to define the character, and which can be used to gain a bonus or penalty to rolls. This replace the usual stats/attributes/ability scores. Additionally, character can undertake actions to place temporary aspects on another character or a scene, and then make use of those aspects to gain a bonus or penalty to actions involving those temporary aspects.

I had a bit of discussion with Zack and Micah after last session about aspects, which is what prompted this babble. I've given some thought to aspects since then, and think I really failed to get at in the conversation what it is I don't like about aspects as a replacement for character stats. So here's a more thought-out and hopefully clear set of thoughts.

"So why don't you just play freeform?" It was asked to me in a different context, but I think it gets at the heart of the issue. So why don't I play freeform? The reason I'm not so keen at playing freeform, is that freeform has this one gaping flaw in action resolution. Take for example the classic childhood "cops and robbers" game. Sure it gets kind of LARP-y, but at its heart "cops and robbers" is a kind of freeform role-playing. You take on a role (a cop or a robber) and you run around playing out that role. My problem with freeform role-playing is a problem that becomes painfully obvious in cops and robbers: "I shot you!" "No, you didn't!" "Yes, I did!" "You missed!" "No, you're dead!" So here it is. The characters' abilities are nebulous and subject to conflicting interpretations in their resolution. You have to argue over the the outcome.

Now concerning game mechanics, I grant that in any game they are sometimes clunky and occasionally get in the way. But I still prefer games with mechanics. And the reason I want a role-playing game to have mechanics is to provide a concrete action resolution that minimizes this capability for conflicting interpretations and the arguing that goes along with it.

The reason I dislike aspects as a replacement for character stats is that they do not provide me with I want from game mechanics at that very fundamental level. Aspects are fundamentally qualitative descriptors; aspects are vague; and aspects are subject to multiple, conflicting interpretations over when they apply. In short, aspects undermine the concrete, not-subject-to-conflicting-interpretation action resolution, which is the whole reason I want to play with game mechanics in the first place. And to make matters worse, Fate sets up bonuses from character aspects in such a way that it is mechanically beneficial to interpret aspects as vaguely and widely-applicable as possible. And the more broad aspect interpretation gets, the more room there is for conflicting interpretations. Players probably already have differing amounts of suspension-of-disbelief that they are willing to swallow. Fate's aspect mechanics provide an incentive for players to push up against this limit, provoking an interpretation conflict whenever it crossing the line for some player. "I've got an 'Alchemy' aspect. I should get an aspect bonus to beating people up with my bag of alchemical goods!" (actual play example.)

There is a second reason why I'm not particularly fond of aspects as a replacement for character stats, but it is less of a fundamental issue and more a matter of personal annoyances. And it is this: I'm annoyed by game mechanics that try to define my character concept. This is the same thing that annoys me about class-level systems. Ideally I want game mechanics to concretely define my capabilities (for use with a concrete action resolution), and leave the concept stuff to me. I want to be able to say "my character has the ability to use wild shape" without all of the concept connotations that taking a level of druid implies. With Fate I might be able to try to describe my character's aspects in terms of specific abilities that are at least concrete in my head (although others may interpret them otherwise), but in doing so I'm going to be screwing myself over as the other characters will probably have more nebulous aspects that can be invoked twice as often.

Finally, as a side note I think I should address why I am fine with aspects as a unified system of modifiers (rather than as a replacement for character stats). And it has to do with function: There are particular functions I want particular game mechanics to perform. For example, I want a character's capabilities to be described mechanically as objectively and clearly as possible. When faced with the aspect system versus the usual stat system, I believe that the stat system performs this function for me significantly better than does the aspect system. It's the best at giving me what I want from the mechanic. On the other hand, when considering aspects as a system of applying modifiers, they must be compared to the usual analog: circumstance bonuses and penalties. Truth be told, in this case both systems being compared are necessarily pretty nebulous and undefined. Where aspects benefit, however, is that they can be conceived of object-orientatedly--as a unified thing that is applied, rather than as a haphazard set of varying bonuses and penalties. And in this they are comparatively better at performing what I want from them (versus circumstance modifiers).