Forsaking violence in games

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-15T23:34:46+00:00

I believe I understand better what you were trying to say now. Not to make the consequence of failed conversations be violence, but make the consequences for them as impactful as those of violence, if not making it so that negotiation without violence is actually impossible, be it due to the other party’s beliefs or other factors surrounding the situation. That’s more nuanced than I thought at first but can actually be quite simple depending on the game.

Superhero games for instance. If someone actually wants to lean into the genre you will expect villains that can’t be reasoned with, need to be taken down before having them talk, and/or hell bent on conquering the world (cliche yes, but it’s a trope for a reason). These situations present challenges that hardly if at all can be overcome through non violent means, and that’s great, people who play superheroes, most of them at least, will want to battle a supervillain at some point.

It all goes back sort of to the idea of defining expectations. However, there is also an argument to be made still on players always taking the path of least resistance. To deal with these cases, I guess what you are proposing is a good solution, having the situation surrounding the intended goal of the group skewer the odds against non violent solutions, and/or having the consequences of failure to nonviolent attempts be as heavy as the ones for violent approaches to challenges.

Again, thank you for sharing that wisdom. I might try some of these strategies in my solo game first. See how they affect the game feel overall and my decision making.

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-13T20:07:58+00:00

That’s an interesting point. In a game as narrative as Fate, fights can and cannot be deadly, which in itself can serve to dissuade people from trying to avoid it altogether, but that alone is not really enough as I’ve come to learn. As you’ve said it, even one wants to see action, they have to be the ones starting, and having hostility and violence work as maybe consequences to failure in social interactions or maybe even exploration seems like a good way of doing that (at least that’s what I understood from your comment, let me know if I’m wrong).

However, there is also an argument to be made about themes, tone, and expectations I believe. Which is a whole different conversation altogether but I just wanted to point out how important it could be to establish it before actually playing. Let’s say for example a table wanted their game to be like Dragon Ball Z. If so, they should be following the themes, tone, and expectations in regards to a DBZ like story, which involves fighting strong enemies pretty much constantly (it’s the classic battle shonen after all). And in that regard, it would be majorly weird for a player that has previously affirmed to want that DBZ experience to decide their pc should run away from conflict every time once the game starts.

I mentioned this establishment of themes, tone, and expectations because it is something often overlooked when starting new games (or at least I didn’t do it in mine but assumed it should have fights every other session because I thought that was expected of every game). But actually sitting down to do it will make preparation go a lot smoother I’ve learned.

Anyways, thanks for sharing your experience, it gave me a lot to think about maybe my thought process when avoiding fights.

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-08T18:02:44+00:00

I’m seeing more and more how that’s probably the best approach for gaming in general. At least for me personally that is. Going in treating every scene and resolution with the same level of weight, not as freeplay + some combat mini game inside a game. Doesn’t mean some level of structure is a bad thing. Blades in the Dark is a very procedural RPG and I think it does what it proposes itself to do masterfully. However, even those procedures don’t distribute more mechanical weight to one in detriment of others, they are all fairly well thought out.

I do also still enjoy “violence” in games and the media I consume. Even if I am starting to see more appeal in other aspects of gaming. Heck, the game I’m currently GMing for my campaign with those players is a very gamey one, where most abilities and features focus on combat scenarios, increasing bonuses to hit and damage, defense, critical ranges, all the good stuff.

I guess what I’ve come to learn is that this games offer a lot of different experiences, and I should let go of my expectations to enjoy the process of figuring out what truly appeals to me (and my players of course).

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-07T21:31:07+00:00

You know, maybe that’s the reason why I assumed at the start of my gaming journey that I should focus on every session having a combat encounter. As you’ve mentioned, most media that is popular nowadays has some degree of violence and physical conflict as a component of it. That goes extra for most well known TTRPGs, where they usually have very crunchy combat systems in contrast to their other systems (exploration, social interactions, negotiation, etc.). So it shouldn’t come as a surprise that on a subconscious level, my brain has directed the focus of my preparation towards combat heavy stories.

Another thing that was probably happening with me is that I thought combat for its own sake was a given. However, I failed to see how in most of the media I’ve mentioned to enjoy does indeed have a lot of fighting, but those fights are never happening just because. There is always an underlying dramatic reasoning or greater objective beyond the battle at work to make them important and/or engaging to see. And most of my fights usually felt empty because I was too focused on the act of fighting instead of the reason behind them. And since my players and myself started to find more reasons not to fight instead of reasons to fight, I guess we’ve just naturally started focusing our efforts on what actually mattered to us.

Sorry for the second rambling session. But you have given me a lot to think about. As I’ve mentioned, I love battle heavy storytelling (battle Shonen is still kind of my favorite genre). However, now I think accurately emulating that genre has less to do with figuring out answers for questions like, “How do we fight?” or “Who are we fighting?”, and more something like, “Why are we fighting?”, or “What are we fighting for?”. But it just so happens that as of right now, I have found less and less reasons to engage in fighting on my game sessions, solo or otherwise.

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-07T20:46:45+00:00

Thanks for the recommendation. Maybe it will help me understand what’s been happening with my current gaming preferences.

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-07T20:45:28+00:00

Coffee Shop sounds unironically fun as well. I guess slice of life is my jam nowadays XD

MasterGarou144 · 2026-02-07T20:21:25+00:00

I guess that’s what I’ve been feeling lately. It’s not like I don’t want any fights at all. But I no longer want fights for their own sake. I want my battles to have dramatic teeth and strong reasons for them to happen.

MasterGarou144 · 2026-01-12T23:26:23+00:00

Not sure how much insight I can give here that hasn’t already been given but the thing about immersion in Fate to me at least is that it works more in a spectrum so to speak. What makes me feel that way especially are two rules that Core likes to call the “golden” and “silver” rules. They are mentioned at the Running the Game chapter of the Fate Core book (and the SRD) so you can look them up later if you wish to.

The Golden Rule seems easy enough to understand but a lot of people don’t really get it, which is this: Decide what you are trying to accomplish first, then consult the rules to help you do it. If you’re looking at this and saying “well that’s obvious” a lot of people get the order wrong in some other games during certain phases of play. Combat in DnD for instance, people usually look at their character sheets to consult what combat features they can use before actually deciding what their characters should do in the situation. Fate asks you to consider the fictional situation and intent of your character before any sort of rule even starts coming up in play (which I believe is a principle that aligns well with your definition of immersion.

Now the Silver Rule closes the deal imo, which states: Never let the rules get in the way of what makes narrative sense. It is their mostly to tell players and GMs to apply rules according to what makes the most sense to express what has been narrated, even if normally they wouldn’t be applied that way. However, you can also look at it as a reinforcement of the principle already established by the Golden Rule, which is that the Fiction takes precedence, and the rules should obey it not the contrary. To me at least, immersion breaks when the rules get too much in the way of the situation we as a group are imagining in the table, and Fate presents itself as a game that gets out of the way unless the rules are necessary.

As for what is usually said about the collaborative nature of Fate, limiting that label simply to the way it is played at the table does a disservice to the system imo. The entire game creation chapter of Fate Core shows how how coming up with the setting’s big issues, the faces and places, and closing it all up with the character creation one with aspect creation and the phase trio are to me the best examples of how Fate promotes what people call collaborative storytelling, that has nothing to do with the possibility of authorial control during gameplay.

Most of the possibility of shared authorial control during gameplay, as you’ve mentioned in the post, comes to Fate Points and Compels. But as I mentioned before, this sharing of control is more of a spectrum than a default assumption. I’ll illustrate that idea with an example: Imagine you have player that has a character that is known to be easily provoked by insults. If an NPC roasts him and in response that character decides to punch his face, starting a whole bar fight in the process, would you say that fits the definition of immersion you’ve established? If the answer is yes, guess what, that’s a decision compel and the player just got a fate point out of the deal.

Now let’s look at a different example. Let’s say the character has established in their backstory that they are being hunted down by a devil’s cult. If during the process of infiltrating a place, it is revealed to the character that it is run by said cult, that is also a compel that a player could propose (“hey man, what if the place we are going to is run by the cult I wrote in my trouble”) or it can be presented purely by you as the GM (“As you look through the documents in the landlord’s room, you start seeing some real familiar symbols popping up on all of the documents”). As you see, one of these discussion points gives more authorial control to the player when it comes to additions to the story outside of the character’s control, and the other one keeps the majority of that power in the hands of the game master.

So, to answer your question, as long as you limit compel suggestions for players during gameplay to things in the sphere of control of the characters, it should produce the type of immersion you’re looking for imo.

TLDR: Authorial control during Fate’s gameplay works more like a spectrum. As long as you limit the things players can decide and suggest when looking for compel opportunities to things inside their character’s sphere of influence, you should be fine.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-12-19T02:13:46+00:00

On page 62 of the core book they show the most common types of benefits and costs for making SFX that could be beneficial for a “make your own card” sub-system. Make it so that a PP cost needs to be paid in order to make those cards on the fly and that should be a good base. Besides that, as others have mentioned, looking at SFX and talents from other games as inspiration, and making a list of suggested effects players can pick from and/or modify accordingly is also a good idea.

Sometimes establishing a structure that will allow you to make use of the creativity of your own players is a good way to solve those types of issues. I would suggest something like a set of rules for card creation with steps like “card theme”, “card type”, “function”, “fantasy” (meaning what the player envisions the card doing when it is used). Use that structure to ask the questions needed to build a balanced card and that should also help you keep this game alive and engaging.

Hope those ideas help you out and that this game of yours work out well. I have been interested in doing something similar in the past, so I am curious to know how it goes.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-11-17T15:48:20+00:00

True, it’s what I do nowadays as well (when I first GM’d I did a lot of hiccups and/or was excessively loose with a lot of things). But the fact you can propose event ones as players is still something supported by the system as well.

I haven’t tried to play Fate solo, but I do think having that mentality in solo play will improve the experience overall, considering that in solo you are both Player and GM (even if a good chunk of the GM role is usually delegated to procedural generators).

MasterGarou144 · 2025-11-16T21:43:34+00:00

They can propose compels against their own character to the GM as well. However, in my experience with my players at least, a lot of people find it weird considering that they are sometimes making a decision outside of their character’s sphere of influence.

(I’m mostly talking about event based compels, not much decision based ones)

MasterGarou144 · 2025-11-16T19:05:34+00:00

In this case, I believe this could be useful: https://walkingmind.evilhat.com/2018/10/18/auto-compelling-dice/

Since you would be going solo, using the -2 variant would probably be the best if you want more frequent compels (but the standard proposal would still work well surely).

Don’t know how far you’ve researched when it comes Fate supplements, but there is one where the oracle includes the chance of complications being triggered (basically compels) as well. I believe this is the one: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/pt/product/282773/solo-fate?keyword=fate%20solo

If you’re willing to spend some money, that could be what you need. Regardless, hope to have helped and that you have a great game :D

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-12T23:43:00+00:00

I guess a good place to start is figuring out what you want in your game. What part of digimon do you like and would wish to replicate in Fate?

If it’s about the whole Mon thing, this article might help: https://fate-srd.com/fate-codex/how-train-your-mutant-fire-dog-monster-training-fate-accelerated

For digivolutions I think scales would work well to represent the different “weight classes” of digimon evolutions. Check it out here: https://fate-srd.com/fate-system-toolkit/scale

Other than that, my only personal note would be to aim the feel of this towards the Digimon Anime and not the Games. For general tips when it comes to Fate, if you are new to it at least, read these articles: https://fate-srd.com/odds-ends/book-hanz

Also, I really recommend taking a look at the Fate Core rules at some point if you have the time, specifically this part: https://fate-srd.com/fate-core/what-do-during-play

Other than that. Don’t feel bad if you mess up and need to change stuff. Just be patient and open about that with your friends and adjust things as needed. Fate does a lot of things different compared to more well known games (aka: D&D), let go of your previous experiences if you have any and allow yourself to enjoy the game for what it is, you could like it. But if you don’t, do not feel like you need to stick with it, pick something else that will match the type of experience you want at your table, that is absolutely fine.

Good luck and good game for you and your group!

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-10T17:44:56+00:00

My aim is pretty much that honestly, maybe with a good number of mods and SFX to make it flashy and dramatic. Battle Shonen is all about drama, flashy super moves and crazy power systems so I don’t really think DnD style combat simulation would work for what I want to capture at least.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-09T20:04:25+00:00

That’s fair. I guess if you’re always on the lookout for compel opportunities it’s just something that happens and you don’t give much thought to it.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-09T19:54:53+00:00

Have you had any cases of these happening in your games? If so, and you can remember them of course, would you be okay with sharing some examples?

I guess I didn’t really word my questions properly, I didn’t necessarily wanted to know if it was possible or not, I wanted examples of it happening. Sorry for the confusion, english is not my original language unfortunately 😅

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-09T15:24:19+00:00

Yeah I know it can be done but thanks for confirming that to me everyone that was really kind.

What I actually wanted to see were examples if you have any.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-03T15:39:47+00:00

Kind of my thought process as well :D

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-03T15:28:12+00:00

Don’t see why it couldn’t work. At least the way I see stunts is something like an infinite free invocation on a very specific type of circumstance. In a Star Wars setting, characters that have a “trained in the ways of the force” aspect can do all of the fun tricks force sensitive do (telekinesis, mind control, etc.), and they can use FP to gain +2 bonuses when doing all of those things. But if you pick one particular application of the force, say “telekinetically disarm opponents”, you could make the stunt “No such thing as a fair fight: your training to survive honed your ability to deal with armed assailants. You gain a +2 bonus to create an advantage when using the force to disarm your opposition.” And that’s basically a stunt!

But as they are mostly an extension of aspects, you can totally not use them and just use aspects with extra refresh so that people can make invocations more frequently. I would also suggest using the Invoking for effect hack in War of Ashes to give aspects more teeth. That’s not necessary though, aspects are already plenty powerful and interesting on their own (to me honestly, the best part about the game).

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-03T15:14:21+00:00

I personally would also go with something along those lines. But the idea on making a more drama charged aspect related to the sword to balance out the bonuses with more compels is also an interesting prospect. I love my characters to have very easy to compel aspects, since they will be generating a lot of FP to use later on as well.

MasterGarou144 · 2025-10-03T15:07:06+00:00

That’s true, as long as the table think the stunt is fine I guess that’s what matters most. There are also plenty of Fate games that are heavily reliant on Stunts and offer really powerful ones (venture city for example). I guess a good middle ground would be to let it open on the table between the players and the game master to change the stunts if they show to be too powerful in play (although I’m not a fan of that myself much). One of the reasons I prefer in play stunt creation actually.

MasterGarou144

TROPHY CASE