Odds of Fate (OOF) Review

Disclaimer:

This post is a playtest and system review of Odds of Fate (OoF), written from my perspective and my specific playstyle. It is not an objective review AT ALL or a universal recommendation or teardown it is a reflection on how the system felt at the table for me during this specific playtest. The review covers what it enabled, where it frictioned against my preferences, where it excelled, and where it really hit the mark.

Introduction

It’s not very often that I get the opportunity to take part of systems testing for a new table top roleplaying game. In fact I’ve only ever done it a handful of times. Once in college with a couple of friends and other times with different tables playing D&D UA and Pathfinder 2e playtest sessions. So when my homie and current Dungeon Master in a previous campaign encouraged our table to try and test out a new system he had been developing with a freind, I was genuinely excited.

I’ve played a number of TTRPG systems (Shadowrun, Pathfinder 1e, Pathfinder 2e, D&D 3.0, D&D 5e, a very odd session of Starfinder, etc). The systems that I have the most experience with though are Pathfinder 1e and D&D 5e, mainly because those systems have the most players available in my area and online. So when it comes to reviewing a Table Top system, I don’t consider myself an expert in playing table top games and I definitely am not an expert when it comes to game design.

However I do have enough experience that I think I could give at least a half-decent review of their game and at least speak to the game design aspects of this new system that I interacted with and give it a fair review from my particular playstyle and biases.

With that being said…

My Particular Playstyle and Biases

Before talking about this system(or “any” gaming system for that matter) it’s important to describe ones playstyle and biases. A lot of what I’m about to list would be pretty apparent for anyone that talks to me about games for more than a couple minutes. I’m sure the other players at the table during this playtest, our GM, and the OOF game designer is VERY aware of my playstyle.

So this is more for anyone who happens to stumble upon this review or is looking for a testimonial about OOF and hasn’t read anything else on this personal site.

I am a:

High-crunch system enjoyer
Theory-crafter and build planner
Rules-lawyer (I like to think constructively)
Moderate role player who prefers mechanics to support narrative.
- If there was a scale for game mechanic specificity from “Why do we even have dice at the table” to “I need a dexterity saving throw for your character every time they pick their nose”. I’m probably more comfortable than most rolling that dice to mine for some green gold.
Long-time Pathfinder 1e player
Experienced D&D 5e player who often pushes the limit of what the system offers mechanically.
I’ve played campaigns, one-shots and have dabbled in GMing for both systems(Pf1e & D&D5e).

When I sit down for a new TTRPG, I am very quickly the one who opens the rules and looks for:

Systems that reward mastery and planning
Consistent rules with clear boundaries
Mechanical levers I can pull and interact with.

Odds of Fate (OOF)

In our last session and the few introductory sessions we had before our table switched over to OoF we had been given some general ideas on the motivations and the reasons for some of the design decisions that the developers (The Game Founder and my GM) had made. Most of the players at the table had never played Table Top gaming or had only played D&D 5e. Based off these conversations here’s what I came away with as far their intentions:

OoF is not trying to:

Compete with deep mechanical TTRPGs like Pathfinder.
Replace D&D’s combat engine
Offer an extensive optimization space
- At least at this point in the game’s development and at the time of the playtest.
- This could easily be updated with expanded character build options and game mechanics.

What OoF is trying to do:

Remove all the weird, finnicky, and sometimes downright frustrating aspects of these other systems that players and GM’s alike frequently complain about.
Provide a unique and thrilling combat experience where the “roll of a dice” really “feels” more impactful than other games.
Provide a system for players of different TTRPG experience.
Provide a system that can work in many different types of settings (Steampunk, Low Fantasy, High Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Modern RPG, Western, Historical, AfroFuturism, AfroMythology, etc. )

What worked well

1. The System is intentionally and impressively coherent and tight.

Given my understanding of the intentions of the game design, OoF is a lighter(rules) game than many of the TTRPGs I’ve played with any depth.

The rules are minimal and easy to read(outside of a few typos or mistakenly missed sections), and most importantly they are coherent. Reading through the primer, the character options, and the rules documents they gave us for the playtest, I was able to quickly jump into the game.

After reading everything I also noted that there was definitely a noticeable lack of:

Contradictory mechanics
Completely confusing subsystems
Ambiguous ways to resolve things that happen in game.
Too “constrained” and “specific” way to resolve things in the game (ZERO NOSE PICKING ROLLS)

After I stopped searching for hidden ways to optimize(consequently “break” the balance of) my character, I really appreciated how restrained the system generally is. It felt deliberate, and well tuned for the most part.

2. Archetypes

Initially I was pretty confused on what and how archetypes were supposed to work into our character designs, but after some explanation and further I found them pretty interesting.

Archetypes set clear identity markers for characters. They provide some narrative instruction for