|
I've never seen any issues with the trauma system. Some people are scared of the way Harm works until you reframe the game as being more about the gang as a whole than individual characters and players realize they can make way better stories and overall progress if they aren't precious with the characters and become willing to retire and reroll as necessary. I think that's vital to making the game sing.Lemon-Lime posted:The overlap in actions is completely by design so that there are multiple verbs that make sense for any given thing the players want to do. Yeah, and is key to letting players choose which action they're using to do something. A key thing the Critical Role game changes (GM decides which action a roll needs) for the absolute worse for the system. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Jan 9, 2024 |
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
I much prefer the harm system in Wicked Ones being tied to your stats, it's so much easier to both track and conceptualise than the default FitD harm table. Also not a fan of verb overlap when it invariably becomes "oh i'll just pick the one with more dice"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 20:08
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Also not a fan of verb overlap when it invariably becomes "oh i'll just pick the one with more dice" It is never that though, as choosing a different action should always change the narrative in different ways, whether it succeeds or not. Players should be aware of that when choosing their Action. Skirmish vs Wreck in a fight are very different things that should affect the scene differently. Same with trying to break in a door, you may Finesse your way in with a lock pick or Wreck it to bust in. Both get you in, but the Wreck option should leave evidence or make noise, etc. The key to Blades is to always think about the narrative effect of any mechanical choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 20:13
|
|
|
I mean, the FitD system is meant to explicitly be able to cope with players just choosing the ability with most dice. You are meant to dynamically change position and effect to make situations more difficult/dangerous if the players choose something that doesn't fit as well as another attribute.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 20:14
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I mean, the FitD system is meant to explicitly be able to cope with players just choosing the ability with most dice. You are meant to dynamically change position and effect to make situations more difficult/dangerous if the players choose something that doesn't fit as well as another attribute. It also has an ability you can take to sub for the biggest dice pool if you can justify it. So there's a 'tax' for doing it that way. I've never heard of people who 'got' the game who were too afraid of trauma, the only people I've had trouble with are folks who aren't used to narrative games, so try to play to win, or who really want more of a strategic game and get disappointed that the system isn't built to reward player cleverness the way they expect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:01
|
|
|
Part of the thing about the game of Band of Blades we played in was yeah we needed to be more willing to kill characters and have that be harm but then the game would've needed a campaign morale mechanic that wouldn't death spiral if that happened (this is a military unit, some losses should happen). The thing about Band is, it tends toward things where Skirmish is just the best option, so you end up trying to play to the characters' strength which is skirmishing. I imagine in a different situation the DM really needs to punish fishing out your best skill in every situation by playing around with the positioning. Coolness Averted posted:I've never heard of people who 'got' the game who were too afraid of trauma, the only people I've had trouble with are folks who aren't used to narrative games, so try to play to win, or who really want more of a strategic game and get disappointed that the system isn't built to reward player cleverness the way they expect. Yeah, i find the latter is a more common type of player.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:33
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:the system isn't built to reward player cleverness the way they expect. That last bit is key. Once they figure the system out and embrace the mechanics, they realize just how much power FitD gives players and the game opens up in a big way (and in a way PbtA games never really do IME).
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:38
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:The overlap in actions is completely by design so that there are multiple verbs that make sense for any given thing the players want to do. I am sure there are tables where it was never an issue but I'd say functionally all of the negative, out-of-fiction conflict I've had in FITD games was over when something was Finesse vs Prowl, Survey vs Study, and which combat ability to use. WO played much, much smoother with the people I've played narrative games with and 99% of it is because we didn't have people nitpicking over which of those to use. I also think its much easier from a character conception level to roll Survey & Study together into just having a generally observant character as opposed to splitting that concept across two points of investments, and same with Prowl & Finesse for characters that use physicality to avoid conflicts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:52
|
|
|
The one time I’ve actually been able to play Blades I deliberately pushed myself to trauma on our first job because my plan was to be reckless and if I was gonna play that way anyways I should get XP for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 21:54
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I am sure there are tables where it was never an issue but I'd say functionally all of the negative, out-of-fiction conflict I've had in FITD games was over when something was Finesse vs Prowl, Survey vs Study, and which combat ability to use. WO played much, much smoother with the people I've played narrative games with and 99% of it is because we didn't have people nitpicking over which of those to use. I also think its much easier from a character conception level to roll Survey & Study together into just having a generally observant character as opposed to splitting that concept across two points of investments, and same with Prowl & Finesse for characters that use physicality to avoid conflicts. Given that the game spells out pretty specifically what each action is used for, I'm not sure why there would ever be nitpicking or conflict about which one to use, especially since the game encourages players to use the one they want and gives the GM tools to respond accordingly. If you want to roll some together, where does it stop before you just use the base attributes? You seem to have a table that wants to min/max the system and thinks the system works against that, but really it works just as well with that approach as it does with players that think purely narratively.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 22:06
|
|
|
When I am running I go with the one the player thinks fits best, because they know their character and how they go about things better than I do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 22:53
|
|
|
The key thing is to always ask what they're trying to accomplish, and how they're going to accomplish it. The action roll is really just how many dice they can throw at it. If what they've described is egregiously outside how they've described their approach up the consequences, but for the most part just roll with it, or gently steer to what you think is more appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 23:22
|
|
|
Ultimately, you need both a GM that's willing to go "yes, you can use Tinker instead of Finesse to pick this lock, but it's more dangerous because there's a guard on the other side of this door and they're going to hear you clanking away with your tools if you take that approach" and players that are willing to accept that position and keep the game moving. If the GM won't do that, you're going to lose what makes the skill list interesting. If the players won't do that, the game is going to be a complete slog.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 23:29
|
|
|
(tinker is explicitly the action to pick locks) 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 23:44
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:(tinker is explicitly the action to pick locks) Yeah, but Finesse and Wreck are both called out as possibilities you could flex to so meh, it works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 23:52
|
|
|
Your example doesn't follow though. You wouldn't penalize them for choosing the book given Action for a specific goal over an alternative because of the guard on the other side of the door. That would affect the Position no matter the skill (though Wreck would obviously be more risky). Finessing would be like, slipping your arm through an opened window to pop the lock on the other side, or quietly opening an already unlocked door. Tinker would be getting through the lock without smashing it. I'm seeing how people struggle with the system now, but I've honestly not had this kinda thing ever be an issue in a game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2024 23:59
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Your example doesn't follow though. You wouldn't penalize them for choosing the book given Action for a specific goal over an alternative because of the guard on the other side of the door. That would affect the Position no matter the skill (though Wreck would obviously be more risky). Finessing would be like, slipping your arm through an opened window to pop the lock on the other side, or quietly opening an already unlocked door. Tinker would be getting through the lock without smashing it. I'd say the guard on the other side of the door doesn't exist until/unless narratively appropriate. It could also be an issue if the roll went poorly for the more traditional stat, or be a non issue if the roll goes well for the subbed in stat. But yeah just the way we're all approaching this differently I think speaks to where some confusion can happen at a table if folks aren't on the same page.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:05
|
|
|
If you are running the game, you can do whatever you want!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:06
|
|
|
The confusion comes in with the "You can use foo (but bar might be better)" examples. Where actions have semeingly overlapping remits it's often inobvious why one might be better and cases in good faith could be made for several skills. From that point of view compressing the list helps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:16
|
|
|
Then the GM should make a choice and tell the player which one would be better or not, by stating what position and effect one action would have compared to another. The rules explicitly allow you to back down from the roll once you know the position and effect. But there has to be a narrative reason for everything. If someone just says "I pick the lock using Finesse", the GM should outright say "Sorry, finesse doesn't allow you to do that." The conversation doesn't have to stop there, though, you aren't denying the use of Finesse to solve the locked door problem. An example would be the player saying they see an open window, and want to steal the key using a stick. Then the GM could allow that, but say that the position would be Desperate because you are more likely to get spotted than picking the lock. Or either the GM or the player could propose a flashback where they steal the key. Or any other example. If you are just allowing or disallowing stat substitutions without working through the narrative, then you are going to struggle with the system. I remember when I first GMed Wicked Ones, which was my first FitD, my initial scores were run badly because I was using the system for purely mechanical resolution, and wasn't making full use of the position/effect/flashback/clocks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:33
|
|
|
One addendum to the above is that I did forget that the descriptions themselves in the rules have the “but it might be better” thing going on. But even then you can play with positions and effect even when taking that into consideration. How is picking with tinker better than with finesse? The same lock is normal effect for tinker and reduced for finesse. The narrative reason is that someone using finesse is less trained than someone using tinker.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Your example doesn't follow though. You wouldn't penalize them for choosing the book given Action for a specific goal over an alternative because of the guard on the other side of the door. That would affect the Position no matter the skill (though Wreck would obviously be more risky). Finessing would be like, slipping your arm through an opened window to pop the lock on the other side, or quietly opening an already unlocked door. Tinker would be getting through the lock without smashing it. Fine. The situation that I had in my head when I wrote that example but didn't explain because I was making a quick post was that it was already established that there was a guard on the other side of the door and the GM decided that Finesse or Tinker could fit the way they're picking the lock, but the main threat in this instance is that the guard hears so Finesse's hand-eye coordination fits the check better than Tinker's mechanical knowledge. I have a logic to the decisions I made here. And to the wider point I was making before (because I want a reason for this tangent beyond nitpicking my example), the GM should have a logic they're willing to talk through for these kinds of decisions. And I'm not saying the GM's word is law, players questioning that kind of thing is how you build a group consensus on when which skill should be used in a given situation. But it shouldn't go much further than "This is this skill, because X", "I think it should be that skill, because Y" and then either "you have a good point, we'll go with that" or "I'll go with X for now, but let's talk later" because otherwise the whole game bogs down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:51
|
|
|
to go back to wicked ones imploding - did the undead book ever come out or is that gone forever now?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 00:55
|
|
|
Yeah, there is never confusion about Actions if you just ask players what they're doing (narratively, not the name of the Action) then talk them through the Position/Effect for the appropriate Action. If they want to do a specific Action help them find ways to use it, which will inherently frame the Position, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 01:01
|
|
|
Was there ever a good fantasy fitd game? I’m always looking for something that I can pitch to D&D players as an easy alternative thats already a little familiar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 01:44
|
|
|
I remember seeing maybe an in-progress straight fantasy dungeon crawler FITD game a while back? There's a bunch of stuff tagged on Itch.io: https://itch.io/physical-games/tag-forged-in-the-dark
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 01:48
|
|
|
spectralent posted:to go back to wicked ones imploding - did the undead book ever come out or is that gone forever now? Cass Rea owns the rights to it and is working on an itch.io page of their own to host it on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 02:43
|
|
|
Oh they also put this up with all the newly CC0 stuff: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1z2MzjhdC1AgNPPUobnLSvyFXfizUOzlF?usp=sharing
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 02:44
|
|
|
admanb posted:The one time I’ve actually been able to play Blades I deliberately pushed myself to trauma on our first job because my plan was to be reckless and if I was gonna play that way anyways I should get XP for it. Every game, bro. Every game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2024 06:47
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Your example doesn't follow though. You wouldn't penalize them for choosing the book given Action for a specific goal over an alternative because of the guard on the other side of the door. That would affect the Position no matter the skill (though Wreck would obviously be more risky). Finessing would be like, slipping your arm through an opened window to pop the lock on the other side, or quietly opening an already unlocked door. Tinker would be getting through the lock without smashing it. Yeah so imagine the last 20 posts every time somebody has to roll, and WO removes 15-20 of those posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 05:52
|
|
|
Hi I am finally biting the bullet to actually run a game but I'm perfectly nervous about essentially running my first game. Any advice y'all can give for a newbie GM?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 09:20
|
|
|
From the designer himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5ZQAECcps This is a good primer (and printout) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAl85kYCWro and this is a great look at how and when to use rolls as the GM to keep the game flowing correctly . Maybe the most important aspect of running the game. In short: setup the scene, ask the players what they want to accomplish, establish any threats present, ask them how they want to handle it, set position/effect, resolve the roll. Think more at the scene level than individual tasks. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 09:50 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 09:43
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:Hi I am finally biting the bullet to actually run a game but I'm perfectly nervous about essentially running my first game. Any advice y'all can give for a newbie GM? Are you new to GMing in total or new to blades in specific? GMing in general advice: it is in fact ok to kick something to your players or admit you don't have an idea, that's fine. Planning is a lot less important reading the room, and make sure your Out Of Character problems have Out Of Character solutions: like 99% of horrible GM stories are that the GM decided that things a player did can only be corrected by punishing their character. If a character does something tactically stupid or betrays a friend or something, the character suffers, but if the player is hogging table time or being mean to another player or being overly metagamey, you talk to the player. For Blades in specific: the system genuinely gives you a lot of support, I'd say trust it. The biggest mind-bender for people from outside of blades coming in is the flashback system, which is an incredibly simple fix for the problem of "spending 8 hours pre-planning a heist." It isn't hard to implement, but it is a MASSIVE shift in how you play a game. You really want to spend a few minutes (mostly just a matter of what the tone at your table is like) and then zoom straight to "you're in trouble." Try to keep things moving. There's a bit of a seeming paradox where a default blades character is actually pretty competent (they can scrounge up +2 to anything, so even a 0 in a skill is pretty surmountable), but the consequences of failure can be quite nasty, so always try to think before you ask somebody to roll: "What can actually go wrong here." Its very explicit in the rules when it talks about establishing position & effect, but I think its just worth really keeping that as probably the main rule of GMing blades. My experience with blades is that most people try to do an entire heist, from initiation through downtime, in one sitting. This isn't necessary but from a GMing perspective its rather uncomplicated, and pushes you into a pretty brisk (and, IMO, good) pace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 09:50
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Are you new to GMing in total or new to blades in specific? Honestly, both. I have some small amount of games under my belt but they're so far apart and done so shoddily that I have absolutely no faith in myself. Negative, probably. Bottom Liner posted:In short: Thanks! I have the videos in other tabs, I'll watch them when I'm much less tired.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 09:54
|
|
|
Biggest thing is that you should just let things happen a lot of the time and not make your players roll. The characters are larger than life and can be expected to do anything they're good at if they're not under intense pressure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 10:11
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:Honestly, both. I have some small amount of games under my belt but they're so far apart and done so shoddily that I have absolutely no faith in myself. Negative, probably. So, assuming you are GMing for friends you can talk to: talk to them. You can very much say, as a GM, "I want this to be a good experience and I would appreciate feedback about what works and doesn't." You can very much say "what kind of tone do you want for the character and the campaign." And this is just me and my personal style but I prefer as a GM to think of it more like facilitating than "running." Less leading and more mediating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 10:12
|
|
|
From my own experience of GMing a FitD game for the first time, one of the pitfalls I fell into was not using clocks enough, which meant that I was struggling to come up with interesting consequences for my players, since I didn't want to just wound them every time and I was struggling with coming up with narrative consequences for their actions. Clocks help to alleviate this problem because they give meaningful feedback to the players in terms of much they hosed up and how close they are to bad things happening. It's also important to use clocks in inventive ways: although you can have clocks that are basic "bad things happen when it fills" or "good things happen/you complete your objective", you can use clocks in a less absolute, more progressive way as well: they can be used to track the level of response, for example, or, in one memorable negotiation my character took part in, they can be used to track seperate parts of an agreement (we had three clocks for the negotation: percentage cut of sales, how much our "stuff" would get cut, and the price point for the stuff, for example). See-saw clocks are also great, and can be used to represent stuff like battles/etc. Basically, use clocks as much as possible. Another thing that's good to remind the players is that any consequence can be resisted, no matter what, even narrative ones, as long as it makes sense in the fiction. Did a roll fail and some guards were alerted? Resisting that might be that the character throws down some boxes to block the guards, for example. Resistance rolls can almost be thought as "extra actions" by the players, since they allow characters to immediately react to new threats. Sometimes players will think of resistance rolls too much in the context of "I shrug off that wound" rather than an extra bit of narrative that adds and elaborates on the scene.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 10:50
|
|
|
When you prep a Forged game, the key aspect of prep is coming up with details, names, etc. It's not really about carefully defining every aspect of the situation, but making sure you have names of everything, you know the context of what's going on, etc. You can improv a lot, but focus your prep on things that aren't easy to make up on the spot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 11:05
|
|
|
Also on clocks, remember that they're describing the narrative and not defining the narrative. If the crew has a long term goal and they do something clever and unexpected to achieve it very quickly, don't be bound by the clock system into making them fill however many pieces are remaining with busywork. Similarly if there's like a, 'the other crew realise you're betraying them' clock or something that's not filled, but they do something that would be an obvious betrayal, even if successful, just fill the clock.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 12:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Panzeh posted:When you prep a Forged game, the key aspect of prep is coming up with details, names, etc. It's not really about carefully defining every aspect of the situation, but making sure you have names of everything, you know the context of what's going on, etc. You can improv a lot, but focus your prep on things that aren't easy to make up on the spot. On a similar note, doing some basic plans for what your party's opponents are going to do is a good idea. There's no need to do anything complicated, especially if you don't have a super-clear idea of where specifically your party is going to rob. But just doing a basic "if left alone the guards are going to do this, if they try to talk their way in they'll do ABC, if things go loud they'll do XYZ" for the two most-likely next targets is going to make running things in the moment a lot easier. If nothing else, if things go completely sideways from what you planned for they'll give you something to repurpose for whatever is happening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 16:39
|
|