With the first session in view I wonder …
… how do you handle PvP?
First of all I wonder about “No – I dont participate in this teamwork – or I even work against this?” Lets say the cultists in the cellar, your guys go in, point is all murder – but one player rejects, doesnt participate or even hinders the action?
Second question would be about how PvP conflicts would work?
I guess the question about PvP is quite expected and maybe even some kind of boring – I would expect that it doesnt even come up in a a session. but then – I kind of know my player and not being in unison is usually a thing.
I was wondering the same due the nature of scoundrels and all. From my understanding of the QS rules, the type of PVP that ends with one dead character and the other getting their way does not seem plausible. Just lots of resisting effects and eating stress leading to trauma. Blades in the Dark seems like it handles PVP by making it pretty bad for both parties involved leading to earlier retirement for stress better spent elsewhere. This anticlimactic feel coupled with the emphasis of the teamwork mechanics would make me go as far as saying PVP of this nature is discouraged. The type of PVP it does encourage seems much more subtle. Like a game of chicken to see who blinks first. I would love hear if any of this could be confirmed, denied, or refined with playtest anecdotes of PVP.
Just make action rolls and effect roles as the fiction suggests? If the non-murdering player doesn’t participate – then no biggie. But what are they actually doing instead?
More importantly, what are the fictional ramifications for such abstinenece?
In the hangout game, John offered this ‘player spotlight’ to Stras when he was wondering a little about Oskar’s alligence…. was it to the gang or to his daemon mentor?
The hinder action might award a -1/2D penalty to a given action roll?
Maybe you give the interrupt a clock – say 4 as default – and the hindering player needs to complete the clock to have their hampering intent cause effect?
If the character tries to hinder the action I would think about a -1D penalty for the group. Though the character would likely be subjected to the actions achieved by the group and suffer effects roll / stress accordingly.
I talked about how to do PvP in this thread:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/114493035025354983838/posts/eYBcwWZYPBX
personally, i’d aim for an agreement beforehand that, in this particular game, the PCs wouldn’t seriously try to mess with each other, and would act more or less as a functional team.
i’m just so excited about the teamwork potential with this system that i wouldn’t want to explore yet another pvp wankoff (he said charitably)
Thanks John (and the others too), I have missed that thread. Its much clearer now.
I would very much prefer that the team plays as a team, but its good to know how the system handles disagreement between players 🙂