[Artemis Entreri]

Hey!!!

I'm a SH5 enthusiast, but one of my tables is focused on storytelling and while loving SH feel they don' get into the rules.

I recently started GMing FATE and felt like my FATE / Shadowrun hack started to feel like Anarchy with a more traditional approach.

Is there anyone here playing Anarchy using a FATE-ish approach without going much into "round table GMing"?

I like plot points, how everything is streamlined but I know that a more traditional GM/Player approach with narration twists will be much more, appreciated for that table.

Feel free to add experiences!!!

[Carmody]

Hi,

that's more or less how I play and it works fine.
Basically there are no rules in Anarchy linked to the "round table GMing", so there is nothing to remove. It's up to your players and you to define the "role" of players and GM.

I also added new usage for plot points: a player can spend a plot point to gain a +3 die bonus if one of his dispositions or cues is applicable to the test.
Furthemore, if a players voluntary takes a bad decision to comply with its negative quality, one of its disposition or cue, (s)he gains a plot point.

[Tecumseh]

I haven't played FATE so I can't comment on the comparison, nor do I know what a FATE-ish approach is.

I will say that Anarchy is extremely flexible, with large degrees of latitude provided to the table to define the roles of the GM and the players. If you want everyone at the table to be a mini-GM, you definitely can. If you want a more traditional approach of the GM as a centralized authority and the players reacting and responding to the game world, that works wonderfully well too. Or you could find a point anywhere in between on the spectrum of player agency.

I like Anarchy a lot and would recommend it. There are things that I think could be improved, and I have house rules for most of them, but overall I think it's a positive addition to the Shadowrun gaming community.