Countdown clocks are your friends
So, between GMing and playing this game, I had the chance to play it five times already. During the first sessions, I found something hard to figure out : how to come up with interesting dangers. Since dangers cannot prevent a PC to succeed in her action, finding a good danger to face is not always easy, in my opinion.
But something occurred to me: the danger doesn’t need to be obvious, offscreen is good too. Let me explain.
Last session, a PC was trying to circumvent a locked door in a mansion by jumping from a balcony to the one of the room he was trying to gain access to. So, a risky position, given that he had no rope and was not willing to spend stress on it. As a danger, I could not say that he’d fall, since that would entirely prevent him from passing the obstacle. I first told him that he could twist his ankle, but both my players and I found it kinda lame. So one of my players came up with that a patrol of guards, passing nearby, would notice something is afoot and would eventually barge in to investigate. We all agreed and I gave their arrival a 4-segments clock. For the next actions the PC would have to make, I told them that they could take too much time: the danger would be me ticking one of the segment. It clearly accelerated the game and put the pression on all of us.
Whatcha all think ?
Sounds awesome! I can picture the guards outside. “Didya see something?” “Nah. There’s nobody there.” “No, there was something moving. I think we oughta check it out.”
…for maximum dramatic tension, maybe play out a line or two of their argument (overheard by characters, or just for the benefit of the players) whenever the clock advances…
Linda Larsson That tip of yours is awesome ! I will definitely do that next time !
Other possibilities; he could accept the consequence of an injury as he hit the balcony and scrabbled to hold on, and it could have 4 segments to heal during down time. Or, he could hit but drop some equipment.
Or, he could fall. Take an injury or stress. Figure out how to get back up. If the problem is that the fall would be lethal, then that’s what taking stress is for–to prevent an unacceptable outcome. =)
Andrew Shields I did think of an injury (twisted ankle), but I realized that most of the dangers I had come up so far with were about injuries. I find that diversity would be a plus.
Antoine Pempie True. I think it’s cool that you’ve played five times, I haven’t gotten a game together yet. As I think of a site based intrusion, I’m still mulling how best to handle it.
Like, having a clock for each defensive layer, and let them confront one at a time? Maybe 3 clocks for locks, that need to be defeated one by one. Another 2 for patrols each way (in and out.) Then some other “wandering challenges” that might crop up, like magical scrying or a predator loose on the grounds.
So, they would choose when to face some and others would be sprung on them or be ticking away in the background towards confrontation.
I feel like I need to play it to really understand. =)
It is something I am still wondering about. How to classify obstacles : by type or by steps.
For that score, I went with the latter. My clocks were :
security in the garden,
security in the mansion,
the vault itself.
Yeah, that’s good stuff.
You can also say the danger is he gets hurt in the attempt. Then, on a 4/5, he makes the jump, but lands badly. On a 1-3, he misses the jump and falls. A less specific danger can be good sometimes, to better adapt to the roll.
But, anyway, bringing the patrol into the scene is good, too!
Another possible danger–is he carrying something breakable? Shattering glass bottles in the pack, crushing candles, cracking lamps, etc.
Btw, the full game has pages of example dangers for all sixteen actions.
John Harper That will be really useful ! To me anyway… I fall kinda short with dangers concerning social interactions.
I would really like to see a sample heist, too. Not detailed maps and all that, but what the GM would generate in a hybrid kind of way with some initial notes and other challenges added in play. Like:
HIT THE EVIDENCE ROOM
The local bluecoats have taken a big shipment of bristlebliss from your smuggler buddies, and you have agreed to get it back.
If they go in or out through the sewers, there are three clocks with 4 segments each for locks on the route. There are ten guards, which provide three clocks with 4 segments each to evade, or in a fight are 3 segments per guard that shows up. (Four guards, 9 segments to clear them.)
If they go by roof, there are glyphs of warding that are 3 clocks of 4 segments each to avoid, or 1 clock of 6 segments to counterspell. Also, the locks are 6 segments to get through by cutting or picking.
Etc.
Or, have some boilerplate challenges. Like you could write on an index card (and show in a callout box) “Tough patrols. 3 clocks of 4 segments each to evade, each soldier is 3 segments to defeat with violence.” And, “Hidden Glyphs. Anyone trying to defeat a lock is cursed to be visible to all bluecoats with a green aura, marking them as thieves. 4 segments to use various magic to break the curse during downtime.”
Then make a flow chart of a mission, and number the various challenges in a stage, so the numbers can match up to cards.
Does that make sense with the game’s style?
Andrew Shields I feel that clocks should not be about something as zoomed-in as a particular lock. Because if the effect roll fall short, I don’t find it really interesting to say that the PC has almost picked the lock, and should reroll to see if she can eventually do it.
To my mind, a clock represents a larger span of possible actions. I would go for a clock representing the entire sewer passage, giving it a clock with more segment if need be.
“Ok, you picked the lock. But the next room is completely immersed. What do you do ?
When preparing a score, I go with several clocks, a brief description of the places and the people involved, letting room for the players to improvise.
“Is there a room with a balcony next to this one ?
– There sure is !”
But I may be wrong.
Antoine Pempie Right, for most cases I would say the clock would be for locks, more than one they could encounter while going through. The reason it matters whether they get it in one, two, or three tries is if you have other things like patrols and loose predators or a time limit before the tide comes back in, etc.
Still it has to be a kind of challenge rather than an area, to know what action to use to counter it. That’s why for something like magic protections, I’d have one set of clocks to evade and another to counterspell.
I think players can still improvise, but I also see how a score could play out in ten minutes of abstract rolling, which is against the tension and fun. I would think it would be good to be able to do multiple scores in a night, but not to be so quick and abstract that eight rolls finish it off.
The example in the quick start pulls down to a single door and lock with a single magical protection. I agree that in normal play it’s probably a little more abstracted; if there are four segments, they may be spread across four doors, for example.
This system is about doing what makes sense to you plus what people are interested in. Be specific when you want to be specific. Be abstract when you want to be abstract.
Don’t worry about adhering to some notion of a “right way” to do it.
John Harper Agreed, different groups will likely have different styles. I’m just trying to think through best practices, and since I haven’t played yet, I don’t trust that I grok the rhythm. I want the first experience to be a good one for my players.
I’m currently leaning towards the cards of challenges and flowcharts of obstacles (with a sidebar for other challenges that are timed or roving.)
Part of my problem is when I’m in full-on improv mode making up answers and encounters and such, I have trouble remembering all the wild stuff I came up with at the time. Having some structure helps me with consistency. (By the way, I like the “fail gracefully” advice!)
Have you guys had heists that were over in 15 minutes?
Sure. The final book will hopefully help with lots of examples showing various approaches.
We usually do two scores per 4-hour session, including two downtime phases.
But, last session, for instance, we did a score in about 30 minutes, I think. It was a pretty simple one.
The last session was about a heist with three clocks (6, 6, 8). The session took a little less than four hours (including the scene with the client, the downtime which took thirty minutes and advancement).
John, for those just starting as GMs, would you suggest a clock per challenge type or a clock for each individual obstacle?
The difference is in play time and focus. One isn’t easier to GM than the other.
But I tend toward using clocks per obstacle type, not for each individual obstacle. That’s my style.
John Harper Clocks per obstacle type? Not per individual obstacle? So like, all the guards here are a 6 piece clock, all the locks are a 4 piece clock, and the magic stuff is also a 4 piece clock? And then each player gets to take a shot at the one they want to when they like and it fits in with the fiction? All that instead of: guard encounter with a clock, lock with a clock, another guard with a clock? Dan Hall , that sounds like a good idea, no?
Yeah, that’s how the example of play does it.
Also, see the text about “layers” of obstacles, on page 9 of the quick start (left column). So you might have an outer layer of Patrols (6 clock) and an inner layer (8-clock).
I personally think ‘make a clock when you want to add tension’ is a good rule of thumb. You can narrow or broaden the narrative focus of said clock depending on the story needs.
I also like using it as in the QS example, for different obstacle types. It is more fun this way. Also: keeping some obstacles intentionally vague (“s.th. ghosty”) gives you flexibility as GM and keeps the players curious.