The Problems with FKR

I'm a huge fan of the FKR RPG movement - the core of which, to me, is that play takes place primarily within the fiction and the common sense of the genre is applied first and foremost ("play worlds, not rules"). Then the DM can make ad hoc rulings when dice are needed to make a decision that should not be up to an individual. But I have to admit the problems I've encountered.

1. Unbounded choice can be overwhelming

FKR-style play is too open for some players. No, we don't need lots of mechanical crunch to resolve skills, attack rolls, etc. but how do you develop a character who is unique? How do we capture what abilities - magical or not - make this character special? FKR proponents say rely on the clichés of the genre, but that requires those clichés to be well understood and, in my experience, a concrete list of choices to start with ("classes", ancestries, equipment, spells, etc.) goes a long way.

To cling as close to FKR sensibilities as possible, these should be single phrases or ideas with no further explanation. If you start writing out what a cleric is, you're just writing a new ruleset. Instead, negotiate it with the player during creation.

"You want to be a cleric? What abilities do you imagine a cleric having? Ok let's pick 2-3 and start there." 

2. Ad hoc balancing

FKR-style play requires the DM to spin many plates at once - balancing PCs against each other and opponents, inventing mechanics on the fly, controlling the resolution scope (What can a PC do on a turn? What about in combat? What about called shots, combos, or special moves?), all on top of the usual resolution of whatever crazy things the PCs want to try. Some of this is up front as laid out in the previous section, but the point of FKR is not to invent a whole new RPG every time you play, it's to get the rules out of the way and play within the fiction.

Another option is to establish new abilities when the player attempts things and rolls well. But can just anyone try to Sneak Attack? Pick locks? What about Lay on Hands or cast spells? How many times can you try? What if what you're good at doesn't line up with your vision for the PC? What are the boundaries of that ability? Is it fair for the DM to balance these things ad hoc? Is it important that it is fair?

3. It requires an incredible amount of experience and trust

FKR-style play requires the referee to have sufficient experience to gain the trust of the players. The origins of FKR are in Prussian military training exercises where the war games they played were so complex - often leading to absurd outcomes - that some experienced officers began discarding the rules and relied purely on their experience to create a faster, simpler, more realistic experience. They could do this because they had years of actual experience leading and directing soldiers on a battlefield.

FKR-style play tries to capture the same benefits. The lack of rules is lauded as players must rely on and make moves purely within the fiction of the game. They cannot interact with or manipulate complex game mechanics, stats, or abilities on their character sheet if there aren't any. But with fantasy RPG Dungeon Masters - the only relevant experience is Dungeon Mastery in a particular fantasy world. There is no "real world" experience to call on as the Prussian officers did. If you're not an experienced DM - let alone an army general - what do you do?

I fear this style of play not only works best, but requires the mystique of the referee being a true master of both world and rules. The players need to believe that the referee's rulings are not only fair, but consistent and realistic. Even a whiff of arbitrary whim or capriciousness will break the illusion. Maybe I've seen too much behind the screen but this degree of verisimilitude, for me, would be very hard to achieve as much as I desperately want to experience it.

Conclusion

I still love many of the benefits that come with this style of play, but it's definitely not going to be for everyone. I think success with both this and even other OSR-type games will require me to continually bring new players, or players that haven't touched the game in a long time, to my table. It seems the more experience someone has with RPGs, the more resistant they'll likely be to this kind of thing.