|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:Court of Blades by A Couple of Drakes is about renaissance style dynastic competition, with the players taking on the role of noble retainers of a house. Haven't had a huge look at the mechanics changes, but there might be something in there you can use. Excellent, I’ll have to pick it up. Thank you!
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
There's a bunch of social focused special abilities in Brinkwood: Blood of Tyrants (about building a rebellion against the vampire lords) as well. Not sure if it's what you're looking for but it's at least a direction to look at. The Riot mask (swappable playbooks that you wear for different missions) for example: quote:Language of the Unheard: Gain +Effect when you invoke a known cause or common struggle to stir others to action.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
I started my game with 6 folks. We did a session 0.5 with vignettes for everyone - this went over SUPER well. They were all really brief, but a lot of fun. As predicted, the newer players did take to the system more readily. I pulled a fun one on everyone where they were all supposed to work with “Cricket” Clelland, a mysterious gangster that has rarely been seen but has been a staple of the underworld for years. He needs a crew for One Last Heist but needs each player to complete a small mission to prove their worth. All of the missions were fairly driven toward an obvious “final heist” being some kind of armored carriage heist, or something of the sort. After each the characters were supposed to meet at Cricket’s hideout. I go pretty quiet, only throwing out a line here or there to explain time passing. Some start to idly roleplay, but there’s some confusion. Finally I bring in a man carrying trash to dump in this ruddy basement. I forget exactly if they started the conversation or if I had, but they’re interrogating this man, they look through his garbage they insist that either this man knows Cricket, trying to detect if he’s lying, if he’s fishy, etc. There’s nothing in the trash, either. The main explains “Cricket” Clelland is an old trick of The Hive faction when they want to assemble folks to quietly clean up some mess they’ve made - he doesn’t exist, and seasoned criminals would know this. He makes fun of them for being rank amateurs, etc. I finally had to literally have them stumble onto a note from the hive that literally said “yes you have been had.” Very funny first session, players were really engaged. First session with the group playing a score as a whole went well enough, although with a lot of room for improvement surely. Players are still finding their voices and I unfortunately walked them into kind of a horrible first score setting (a yacht in the bay - very limiting in many ways. I should have thought of this but it seemed interesting until I went “oh no” a few actions into the score.) The investigation and pre-heist went very well. It went a bit long because I had to keep pushing them more to focus at a higher level and not get caught up in minute to minute things. That said, I get the sense maybe they were okay with more of that play, so I might even alternate “score” and “free play/investigation” sessions if the players really just enjoy skulking around being detectives. The hardest part is definitely getting adjusted to Blades as GM. I really enjoy that it’s a lot more prep-light compared to 5e - I don’t have to make encounter maps, monster tables, plan stuff out to try and coax players into my plans, etc. Though it seems to be a lot more pressure on me at any given moment during the game than I remember in 5e. (Though, maybe I just need more time back in the saddle.) I feel like I’m doing a lot more thinking on my feet. I found it hard to have time to take notes myself. I definitely need to push a little more on my players to offer up descriptions and I had some times where I neglected to have them describe an action and they just asked to roll something. I ended up describing it before realizing my error. All that will come with time though! I’m not worried. The players are having a ton of fun as am I, so I think we have a strong base to work together and build a better game even if the start wasn’t totally perfect. We’ve gotten lots of laughs and people seem excited to do things. Six players is definitely too many, as mentioned, but we’re making it work. I’m leaning heavily on splitting them or pairing them and that seems to work very well, where people get enough screen time without feeling like it’s been half an hour since they’ve done anything. I really pushed for us to finish a score in a single session the first time. I may try out a score being more or less planned for two sessions and a third for downtime and set up of the next score. Slow things down so people have more time to breathe and explore their characters… We’ll see! Anyway, the TLDR is I just wanted to post a positive trip report and the game is good, even if it’s going to take a little bit to perfect the “voice” and style of. Thanks again for the tips goons. And if anyone is starting, I really recommend the vignette style. Blades or not I’m going to use that going forward.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 16:43
|
|
|
Awesome to hear it's going well for your group. My own definitely had an adjustment of a few sessions, but in the year or so since we started blades, we've pretty much all agreed that we'll never return to a system like 5E again unless it's for a dungeon crawl or something simple like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
Really awesome write-up and glad it seemed to go so well for you. The vignettes sound really fun and that is a great little idea for getting the group together. It took my group about 3-5 sessions before really hitting their groove with the game as well. One of the ways Blades in particular (especially with your large table) shines to me is that splitting the party isn't a bad thing, it works as long as you're aware of the need to swap the spotlight around pretty frequently and can really ratchet up the tension if both groups are facing complication after complication. I also found it difficult to take notes while running the game for whatever reason and yeah, let players take the lead on as much stuff as they are willing to take the lead on. Hell, see if there is a player that is willing to take roughly sketched notes about what is going on for you. I do think there is value is taking a step back from notetaking to simply focus on the fiction and serve up complications as the fiction demands.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
Hell yeah! BitD good nd it's great when you can make it sing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
My closest friend who’s a player does take notes for me, which is extremely helpful, but it’s still not quite the same “eye” I have. I’d like to take my own, but it certainly at least gives me something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2022 17:14
|
|
|
How does blades play in a play-by-post format? It's been years since I've done pbp but when I compare it to DnD back in the day (or even 5e today) it must work so much better right? The only thing that I think might make it a bit finnicky is the whole conversation around position/effect. Assuming you lay down some ground rules / conditions around an action roll then maybe it would work fine. Has anyone done a FiTD game as a play-by-post before? How did it work if so?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:How does blades play in a play-by-post format? It's been years since I've done pbp but when I compare it to DnD back in the day (or even 5e today) it must work so much better right? The only thing that I think might make it a bit finnicky is the whole conversation around position/effect. Assuming you lay down some ground rules / conditions around an action roll then maybe it would work fine. Better than D&D and Burning Wheel, worse than PbtA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2022 02:00
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:How does blades play in a play-by-post format? It's been years since I've done pbp but when I compare it to DnD back in the day (or even 5e today) it must work so much better right? The only thing that I think might make it a bit finnicky is the whole conversation around position/effect. Assuming you lay down some ground rules / conditions around an action roll then maybe it would work fine. I've played in a fair bit of Blades PbP-games and think it works very well. One of the main things (as you've pointed out), is to keep the fiction flowing by reducing the back and forth concerning mechanical effects. By this, I mean including as much information about things that will have a mechanical effect in as few posts as possible. If the GM has just described an obstacle, you can make one post where you include your character's thoughts and "non-mechanical" actions, as well as your plans on how your character would overcome the obstacle (which action rating you think is suitable, whether or not it's a group action, if you'll push for an extra die etc), and ask the GM for Position and Effect. If the GMs answer indicates that you want to continue, you simply roll and move on. Since Blades is fiction first, cool descriptions of setting, dialogue, characters and the results of actions really adds to the experience. These may often be a bit easier to write, than to improvise in the heat of the moment. PbP also gives you a bit more time for thinking about flashbacks and how you reasonably set them up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 10:38
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:Court of Blades by A Couple of Drakes is about renaissance style dynastic competition, with the players taking on the role of noble retainers of a house. Haven't had a huge look at the mechanics changes, but there might be something in there you can use. I've been running a campaign of this for a while, there's not a whole lot of mechanical changes to social interactions, but the framing of the downtime/broader setting puts the emphasis on the social aspect. I'd say the exceptions would be: a. rules and mechanics for romance (which are a little under-baked, tbh, although good enough that I was able to hack a bit on top of it.) b. a few upgrades/xp triggers (e.g. bonus die AND extra effect for pushing self in social situations if using your good reputation, bonus xp for responding to sleights to your honor) c. 'social' harm that you heal by hanging out with people instead of seeing a doctor. This happens on the same track as normal harm, so theoretically a really cutting insult could take a PC suffering from a stab wound over the edge. d. Scandals instead of Trauma, reflecting your character's reputation in the city. This one is weird because the reputation need not necessarily be accurate. Overall I wouldn't say it has fundamentally changed the way social things run vs. our BiTD campaign, but it does add tools to the toolbox.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
I'm trying to listen to a podcast to solidify the rules and the rhythm of the game in my head, but both podcasts I've tried so far (magpies and harvestmen) seem like they're stuck in D&D-mode. They're not skipping right to the heist, their rolls aren't moving the story forward, etc. Is there another podcast I can try, where the group has more fully embraced the fail-forward, "drive your character like a stolen car" ethos the source book advises? Or, is there an episode on one of these podcasts I shouls skip to? I assume they get better.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 20:58
|
|
|
resting bort face posted:I'm trying to listen to a podcast to solidify the rules and the rhythm of the game in my head, but both podcasts I've tried so far (magpies and harvestmen) seem like they're stuck in D&D-mode. They're not skipping right to the heist, their rolls aren't moving the story forward, etc. Is there another podcast I can try, where the group has more fully embraced the fail-forward, "drive your character like a stolen car" ethos the source book advises? Or, is there an episode on one of these podcasts I shouls skip to? I assume they get better. Friends at the Table's Marielda arc is pretty well-done Blades in the Dark.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 21:48
|
|
|
resting bort face posted:Is there another podcast I can try, where the group has more fully embraced the fail-forward, "drive your character like a stolen car" ethos the source book advises? Haunted City has a podcast version on the "Glass Cannon Network presents" feed and are an entertaining cast to watch. (One of the players is the actor that plays Father in Raised by Wolves for anyone that enjoys that crazy show)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
admanb posted:Friends at the Table's Marielda arc is pretty well-done Blades in the Dark. It looks like the Blades in the Dark playthrough starts on episode 03. Ep 01 is all about a roleplaying system called A Quiet Year, a worldbuilding/mapdrawing RPG — and now I want to play that too! Emanuel Yam posted:Haunted City has a podcast version on the "Glass Cannon Network presents" feed and are an entertaining cast to watch. I'll check this out as well. Thank you both.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2022 01:33
|
|
|
In the interest of the "post more" ethos, I'll contribute my thoughts on these podcasts about an hour at a time (my cumulative commute time). Friends at the Table are talented worldbuilders. I love the names their DM comes up with. However, I'm taking issue with his style almost right away. After the first heist began, he said "no" instead of "yes and" twice within about 10 minutes of play. One player wanted her porcelain cat-robot to hide under a chair in a train car but he replied that since the train was under construction there weren't any seats in it. Shortly after that another player wanted to find out what he could about the porters and ticket takers at each station and the DM was like "Nah that's all automated." I suppose that's not how I would proceed, but it does prompt me to ask myself how I would proceed in those examples.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 02:21
|
|
|
From what I remember, FotT's style is to do a session 0 to do world building, and then Austin runs with it to create a detailed setting. I agree that aspect isn't how I would run things but I guess it works for them, either by preference or production concerns.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 02:37
|
|
|
If you end up liking the GCN campaign, check out Stream of Blood. Same GM and with 2, sort of 3, crews in a shared world. It ended before there was much cross-over between each crew, but the 2nd or 3rd Tin Whistles episode where they methodically take down the Fog Hounds is probably the single best BitD session I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 02:51
|
|
|
I'll also throw my hat into "post moar" - though I don't have any podcast recommendations, but I've been excited enough about my own campaign to want to brag and share and all that about how its gone. The players I have struggled to coalesce at the very early stages. In previous games (on other systems) I gave folks a clear "Here is what you're joining, and there's a house rule that your character has to have a reason/want to participate." In Blades, I didn't, figuring they could sort of figure it out as they went along. They've gone for Smugglers - which is a little weird - but kind of works perfectly. Most of their scores and designs aren't moving goods from A to B, but they're very interested in building the crew's 'infrastructure' - Smuggler makes a great template for a general 'mafia' that moves goods as a primary illicit activity while not preventing violence and all the other petty crimes you can do. I started off with a fun betrayal - I posted about it earlier. After that, we used a newspaper from a template I'd stolen from reddit to figure out the next scores. Initially the players went for the yacht, which is reflected in the newspapers: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/951708354772877352/954648161610252298/The_Doskvol_Echo_kalivet_17_847.pdf https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/951708354772877352/963904983890272266/The_Doskvol_Echo_-_Kalivet_26_847.pdf That was kind of a one-off, though. What I'm really excited about is what's become the 'thread' for our campaign. The "Emerald Glowbean" story in the second paper grabbed them. The players saw dollar signs with a hard to come by luxury item that had a fishy source. They started scouting cafes and eventually trailed some couriers - posing as government agents of the agricultural persuasion and insisted that they had to confiscate their goods, you're dealing in poison, etc, etc. Instead of just pawning their score, though, they tracked it back to the factory and found a weird scientist who had perfected a specific method of production. They leveraged their position - we don't want to steal from you, but you have a distribution problem. Your couriers suck, and we want to help you. "Sure," he says, but I have a lovely grad-student party boy who worked for me and stole some equipment and is threatening my monopoly. Stop him and we can work together. Oh, by the way, he's the nephew of a councilman. The players - now several sessions deep - expect a pretty usual smash up score. I make the investigation easy, I make the set up easy. Everything just flows. Which is sort of why they walked totally into the trap. One player got sniffs of it early, but it was still pretty late and kept with the group motive to keep pushing into the jaws of the trap. They ended up fighting their way out - murdering a bunch of people and blowing a hole through a rowhouse wall to escape. They ended that score with nothing to show for it, several new harms, and even one new trauma. (A great one - the player who sniffed out the trap slightly too late took 'Paranoia' and is now constantly worried about being double crossed.) I'm cutting out a lot of fun details for the sake of brevity, but our last score was them kidnapping the lovely Councilman's Nephew by invading his rowdy college party and pushing him off of a balcony into an open stand-up piano that they wheeled out the front door. The system rules. I had no real 'big plot' plans going into it. I now have some broad arcs, but I still get to mostly improvise on the spot, but the system just works so well for it. I do think I'm blessed with a group built for it and it being pretty close to the ideal system for my style of DMing. It might not work for everyone, but if it appeals, give it a shot.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2022 05:59
|
|
|
Augh I can't listen to the Friends at the Table podcast anymore. The DM won't stop setting the action for the players ("Gimme a Skirmish roll."); the rules are very clear that the players set the action and the GM sets the position and the effect. The narrative is so thuddingly slow, as well. There was one exciting moment when a PC's rival shows up and that was immediately followed by 20 minutes of "Hmm I want to grab him from behind." "No you can't do that because he came into the train car this way so you can't get behind him." I'll try Haunted City next. Anime Store Adventure posted:The system rules. I had no real 'big plot' plans going into it. I now have some broad arcs, but I still get to mostly improvise on the spot, but the system just works so well for it. I do think I'm blessed with a group built for it and it being pretty close to the ideal system for my style of DMing. It might not work for everyone, but if it appeals, give it a shot. God, that sounds so great. I really hope it gels with my group. EDIT: Listening to Haunted City. Their first roll was 40 minutes into the first gameplay sesh. Maybe I've got the wrong idea about this game. resting bort face fucked around with this message at 04:41 on May 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 03:42
|
|
|
resting bort face posted:Augh I can't listen to the Friends at the Table podcast anymore. The DM won't stop setting the action for the players ("Gimme a Skirmish roll."); the rules are very clear that the players set the action and the GM sets the position and the effect. The narrative is so thuddingly slow, as well. There was one exciting moment when a PC's rival shows up and that was immediately followed by 20 minutes of "Hmm I want to grab him from behind." "No you can't do that because he came into the train car this way so you can't get behind him." I like FatT a lot, but you're definitely not wrong about Austin not handing over the reins to the players, or about the pace. There are things about that campaign I remember fondly, but Austin repeatedly telling people to roll skills they didn't have instead of letting them try to tackle things in other ways got pretty old.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
The RollPlay series run by John Harper himself for Blades is a pretty good overview of the whole thing and you get more into John's mind about how he visualizes certain parts of the game and setting, too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNzpg-qdZ0g
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:The RollPlay series run by John Harper himself for Blades is a pretty good overview of the whole thing and you get more into John's mind about how he visualizes certain parts of the game and setting, too: Thanks, I'll take this one for a spin.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 04:45
|
|
|
I've played in this style of Blades, where the GM has a firm hand on everything FatT style with a firm GM hand, and something closer to the book version and I think both have their plusses and minuses. Like "by the book" sometimes had scores feel insubstantial and it was often too easy to just roll over the score in a few rolls and it often felt like our squad was either spinning our wheels or drifting apart because there wasn't a firm storyline reason for us to stick together; also coming up with ideas for scores got a bit old. But it was also really cool actually that you could sometimes roll over a score in a few rolls, and being able to use nearly any skill with very little pushback was fun and I did some cool poo poo. The firm hand thing was much more focused, it was nice having someone driving the story and I never asked "why is my character even hanging out with these people?" It was also much easier to get experience with someone making sure opportunities for experience were there instead of me needing to remember to generate them. But there were times it felt like we were playing the wrong game, because it was just too hard to fit basic elements like downtime and pre-mission leg work in with the story and it was pretty common to be nearly stressed out before the score even started, and everything took a ton of rolls and we were pretty much consistently asked to roll certain things even if we didn't have them which isn't always fun. Rick fucked around with this message at 07:03 on May 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 07:01
|
|
|
The way I see it, the players say what they want to do narratively and the GM works with them to see what attribute would fit. If the player wants their character to engage in a gunfight, then unless they narratively describe it in another way, that’ll be a skirmish roll. If in the narrative, the guy is walking towards you, odds are you can’t just teleport behind them. It’s the GM’s role to make sure everyone’s on the same page as to the physics of the scene.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 12:27
|
|
|
I have my players explain their action and then I say “that sounds like you’re swaying him.” And give them an opportunity to correct me as in, “No, I’m actually trying to puff myself up and come in with a gruff approach. It’s more of an order, not a question.” And then I’ll give them command. I like this style for a lot of things. For example when we do experience I’ll let them talk me into extra points for some of the “I used my heritage/Vice/etc.” This has slowly encouraged them to think more about how they’re playing their character and has given a bit more uniqueness to each player. I think in the end I like my style to be “appear firm, be soft.” I tried even letting my players describe more of the world that you would in like a 5E and it really threw them so I gave up on giving them those opportunities. For example, a player asked “is there a building next to this one that’s the same height or higher [to try some sneaky stuff]?” I offered to let them say “yes there is.” And other similar things. After a few of these rolls I could tell they didn’t like this, even for minor, pretty inconsequential decisions. Might vary by group but my players definitely want to feel like they’re “versus” me (as the world) and don’t want to be given any cheat codes to short circuit that interaction. Letting them convince me of an action or something like that, though, still gives them the satisfaction of having earned whatever they’re trying to do.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
^ a good post The GM's role should align with the Creative Agenda of the group. If your group is doing wish fulfillment / stress relief for blue collar people on a Friday night, then just get out of the way and let people blow off steam. If your group is super creative and looking to build super meaningful narratives, a firmer approach may be needed (as the above posted hinted at). If your group wants to "beat" the GMs challenges, then stack those up and let them feel like bad asses. "Appear firm, be soft" is a really great default position for GMs in general though. I'm going to steal that phrase.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 17:10
|
|
|
Anime Store Adventure posted:I have my players explain their action and then I say “that sounds like you’re swaying him.” And give them an opportunity to correct me as in, “No, I’m actually trying to puff myself up and come in with a gruff approach. It’s more of an order, not a question.” And then I’ll give them command. Yeah, exactly. In a Beam Saber game I run, one of my players (whose vehicle is a sentient Green Goblin glider) wanted to take out a pair of fighter jets taking off from a mountaintop runway and couldn't think of how they'd do it. I said, "sure, take a moment, let's fill out the scene while you think" and asked the other players what kind of stuff would be on a runway. So anyway they ended up jousting the fighter jets using ladders they'd ripped off of fire trucks. You have to say no sometimes, or things have to be harsh occasionally, but it's gotta be a conversation between the players and the GM. "No, but" is perfectly valid.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
Two thoughts on this from a bit more than a year running a game of Blades: One, let the player have the final say about what skill they're using but push back if you think it's wrong, and don't be afraid to set effect/positioning as necessary. If the player isn't sure what skill they're using you can suggest one, or you can open it up to the table with a "what do we think this is?" sort of question. This also involves more players than just you and the one acting and helps keep the action moving. Two, even though the player picks the skill, do try to discourage language like "I'm going to try to Sway the guard". I have one player in particular who does that a lot, and every time that I've interjected "ok but how are you Swaying him" that has made the fiction much more interesting and richer and given a lot more options for moving the story forward. Always always always make the continuation of the narrative your utmost priority, nothing is worse in a TTRPG than the GM saying "you failed" and providing no follow-up.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 18:17
|
|
|
also, their blades game happened literally during the development of blades and those things are something Austin's gotten better about in future blades-hack seasons. So, yanno, don't let it put you off the whole podcast, they recognized it as a flaw and got better about it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 19:25
|
|
|
Rick posted:Like "by the book" sometimes had scores feel insubstantial and it was often too easy to just roll over the score in a few rolls and it often felt like our squad was either spinning our wheels or drifting apart because there wasn't a firm storyline reason for us to stick together; also coming up with ideas for scores got a bit old. But it was also really cool actually that you could sometimes roll over a score in a few rolls, and being able to use nearly any skill with very little pushback was fun and I did some cool poo poo. I've had 3 different GMs and they've all approached it differently, and I do agree that the closer the group is to playing this part of the book the easier it was to just march from victory to victory. TBH the thing I view as kind of a problem is that there's too many skills and I don't think they're the best defined, and it ends up being too simple to just never roll skills your bad at even in bad situation and I think its fun and funny to push a player to have to try and lie when they've got no Sway or whatever. I think even just Wicked Ones removing 3 skills is a huge improvement. Oddly none of my GMs have done what I think is an interesting/good move to do, which is "OK it's risky-standard if you use X but if you use Y it's desperate-standard." The book uses the example that a swordfight can be Skirmish or Finesse or Wreck, and which one of those gives you the best position/effect is going to depend on the peculiarities of the situation e.g. swashbuckling on a narrow bridge is going to make Finesse more favorable and Wreck less favorable, fighting with a hammer or against somebody who just throws a molotov cocktail at you will make Finesse less favorable, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I've had 3 different GMs and they've all approached it differently, and I do agree that the closer the group is to playing this part of the book the easier it was to just march from victory to victory. TBH the thing I view as kind of a problem is that there's too many skills and I don't think they're the best defined, and it ends up being too simple to just never roll skills your bad at even in bad situation and I think its fun and funny to push a player to have to try and lie when they've got no Sway or whatever. I think even just Wicked Ones removing 3 skills is a huge improvement. That's core to the "the player chooses the action they're using" element, imo. If you just let your players roll what they want then yeah, you'll get the "breeze through everything" version of Blades. But you're well within the rules to set Reduced or even No effect on an unusual action choice.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 20:26
|
|
|
Thank you for this discussion. It has been very enlightening.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2022 05:54
|
|
|
quiggy posted:Two, even though the player picks the skill, do try to discourage language like "I'm going to try to Sway the guard". I have one player in particular who does that a lot, and every time that I've interjected "ok but how are you Swaying him" I really think you're asking the wrong question here. The most important thing you need to know is their intent. "What do you want to get out of them? What do you want them to do, or feel?" Those questions lets you build consequences and a satisfying success or failure while getting your player explaining their character's motivations. If someone doesn't feel like roleplaying a whole argument I'd go with it, and keep the spotlight on them after the results to see if you get more out of them in their reaction.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2022 10:24
|
|
|
Since it's Blades in the Dark derived: Looks like my group is going to playtest the new Tribe 8 edition, Tribes in the Dark, this weekend. I'll report back on how it goes if we go through with it. Anyone else giving/given it a shot?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 14:47
|
|
|
admanb posted:That's core to the "the player chooses the action they're using" element, imo. If you just let your players roll what they want then yeah, you'll get the "breeze through everything" version of Blades. But you're well within the rules to set Reduced or even No effect on an unusual action choice. I've found this to be key. And don't be afraid to say to the player, 'yeah, this guard is paid well and came running in because she heard gunshots, I don't care how sexy you are, it'll be Limited effect' or 'well, if you're going to square up to Command this guy, yeah he might flinch, but the risks are Desperate because he's going to call your bluff by shiving you'. Mostly the trick isn't to push players to failure, it's to push them to burn resources.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
the JJ posted:I've found this to be key. And don't be afraid to say to the player, 'yeah, this guard is paid well and came running in because she heard gunshots, I don't care how sexy you are, it'll be Limited effect' or 'well, if you're going to square up to Command this guy, yeah he might flinch, but the risks are Desperate because he's going to call your bluff by shiving you'. Yah and it's really easy to ignore the dials that are built into the game already. Like your example about the guard makes sense in the fiction, but it's also built into the mechanics that you get reduced effect when dealing with an enemy at a higher tier than you, because your resources just don't match up.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 22:19
|
|
|
Got to meet with my group tonight for a session zero. It looks like they're going to run as a group of Hawkers who have worked for a local casino and decided to start an MLM together (selling electroplasm-infused essential oil). They paid coin to the Circle of Flame to get a foothold in Brightstone. Their first score will be to increase their standing with the Circle by inviting Madame Tessryn and her associates to the casino where they all bartend, and show them a good time. I have a few good ideas for obstacles, the primary one being that the Ink Rakes are on their bad side already so obviously a reporter will worm his way into the party and start taking notes, interviewing, making an unpleasant nuisance of himself. And the Madame will have her own agenda, which I haven't figured out yet.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2022 07:08
|
|
|
I'll chime in and say I also usually say "that sounds like a <Action> roll, is that right?" when players describe what they're doing. Most of the time I'm right and if it makes the most sense than it won't affect my setting of position/effect. But if they're trying to use their better abilities just for extra dice when it doesn't make much sense then I'll just say that'll lower your position/effect, unless of course they explain why it should work fine or they narrate a different approach. I feel like the whole point of the convo is to tease out narrative details that are otherwise only in one person's head. We're getting close to the wrap up point in our Scum and Villainy campaign and I've been having a blast running it. The finale is coming close where our Star Dancer Smuggling crew has aligned themselves with Conclave 01, a faction of sentient urbots who are now looking to use the Aleph key they got from them in their first job to escape the Hegemony and create their own utopia through the inactive gate they now have the key to. The next few jobs are essentially trying to acquire backup and resources to make the trip and potentially deal with the Hegemonic factions trying to stop them. One involves getting the Cobalt Syndicate to lend them some ships for transport, another involves rescuing The One True Hegemon, captured by The Church of Stellar Flame in order to secure help from the Lost Legion who own a Dreadnought. All the while this is happening the faction rolls in the background give me tons of inspiration when it comes to figuring out what's going on in the sector. Like for instance in the same system as the inactive gate there is a possibly sentient planet that has currently moved itself into close orbit with an ocean planet and has begun siphoning it's oceans and raining down monstrosities keeping the Legion busy with trying to contain it. I'm excited to see how it'll all play out but I could use some help. I'm having trouble trying to figure out how the true final act will look like. In my head it'll just be them flying with the Conclave in a fleet towards the inactive gate, but I'm struggling to think of some obstacles ahead of time that could be dealt with by a single small smuggling crew. Presumably the system authorities (The 51st Legion) will probably try to stop them at the system gates, The Church might show up to stop these "sentient abominations" from escaping, etc. I can probably tie in a few player rivals in here as well. It's hard to not make the finale a big grand event but also keep it at a scope where the crew can make a meaningful difference.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Is the expectation in BITD that heists/scores are completely freestyled? Like you roll the various options and bam you're doing it? Or would a more typical approach be to think of a few in broad terms, based on the party's position and history, and present a selection?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 01:55
|
|
