Effects Draft Page

Effects Draft Page

Effects Draft Page

Here’s the draft of a new Effects page for the Quick Start.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wo6ib7z8l4tteed/blades_quickstart_v3_draft_effects.pdf?dl=0

As you can see, I’m moving toward a more subjective method, similar to the assessment for position on the action roll. I hope this combination of human judgment of effect level plus the concrete nature of clocks will allow for maximum flexibility in play. Play that guitar. 🙂

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wo6ib7z8l4tteed/blades_quickstart_v3_draft_effects.pdf?dl=0

30 thoughts on “Effects Draft Page”

  1. Twang… I’ll be using this tonight. I like it a lot. The level and questions help define outcomes of simple actions (which I use most) strings along the actions involved in complex obstacles, so you’re not tempted to repeat something again and again until the clock fills.

  2. Is the effect level subjective based on GM judgment to the degree that the action position results will no longer directly dictate which it is? (For instance, a 4/5 achieving a limited effect in a Controlled position, or on the Fortune roll).

    Am I understanding correctly that the 3 factors (quality, scale, potency) don’t add or subtract segments, they only raise or lower the effect level?So getting 4 segments will be rare, and more than 4 impossible.

    I like that this makes 6- or 8-segment long-term projects take longer. If clocks come up in a score, I’ll default to 4, go to 6 for notable complexity situations, and 8 only for seriously convoluted tasks. Complications will add new obstacles that are simple or 4s. The wonderful thing is this stays nicely within the range of clocks that are easy to draw. 🙂

    I also like that “full effect” was clarified to “standard effect.”

  4. Yes, the action results will be tweaked slightly to accommodate this version of effects. For now, treat all successful results as simply “you do it”. Critical results might add potency, or something else. Still pondering that part.

  8. Really liking this John – makes it much simpler than having two rolls (in our limited experience, two rolls has been cumbersome in play-by-post, and I’m sure others have found the same for real play). More narration, discussion and intrigue – what ho!

  11. Josephe Vandel – there’s still reference to Attributes in the Resistance Rolls (page 15). It also seems like Attributes have “rounded out” a bit, since they’re now effectively derived stats (wondered what that first column was for…), so perhaps that’s the desired effect.

  12. I have to say that I love the new effect system, especially the modifiers. Quality, Scale, and Potency are easy ways to apply bonuses/penalties that are clear from both a game and fictional perspective. Potency is especially useful when trying to define special circumstances (How will this random bonus manifest? Eh, we’ll say you have potency)

  14. I like the streamlined nature of this and I like the scale and potency modifiers make sense but the quality modifier I’m decidedly meh about. I mean I do like the simple narrative feel that having a fine item gives you +1 effect, but the tiered system starts making it seem too much like “I have a +2 sword.” This has the potential of leading to too much non-narrative style play with GM fiat like “Your lurk has a fine lock picks tier I but the door has tier II fine locks so you are at -1 effect.” or even narratively worse “you have a +2 sword against an enemy with +3 swords so get -1 effect”

    I mean I get the thought behind having quality tiers so that the GM has a way of indicating that a crew is going up against someone “above their pay grade.” However, I think this can be just as easily done — and more connected with the narrative — by making more it more difficult with larger clocks or more complex with mixes of different clocks.

  16. I must agree with Colin, that it feels a bit stiff to me, if you reduce that to numbers. But I guess the narrative aspects should overlay such concerns.

  17. “Critical results might add potency, or something else.” Very nice. The Quality/Scale/Potency modifiers make it much easier to adjudicate how the established fiction translates into reduced or increased Effect. I love the GM/group judgment balanced by the die result tiers this facilitates.

    I’m still trying to decide what I think about the fact that the Effect of a successful roll can now be reduced to zero under extreme circumstances. I thought that the no-wiff aspect of minimum 1 success on a successful roll was a great feature — I’ll need to ponder more on this.

  18. Colin Fahrion, if numerated modifiers aren’t your style, then, as a GM, you can take a page from Apocalypse World and ‘make a move, but never speak it’s name’. In other words, you tell the player, ‘You confidently employ the special set of lock pics you picked up a few days ago from the shady dealer on Bernard St., when you suddenly realize that the Dimmer Sisters locks have redundant mechanisms!  It should have been a pieces of cake, but you barely manage to get the door open only just barely.” No need to refer to plus or minus effect if that gets in the way of your immersion or whatever.

  19. Vasco Brown yeah as mentioned, all it would take is upping the number of clock segments when dealing with a harder target. Adding effect quality modifiers isn’t needed and just adds fiddliness. I mean sure I could house rule it, but I’m mentioning it here since this seems to be the channel to give feedback to John Harper to the in the works rules 🙂

  20. I feel the same way about zero effect, Vasco Brown.  I include it because there are cases where the situation really is that bad, and you can’t have any effect without changing a factor (trying to destroy a demon in a fistfight, let’s say). I’ll make it clear in the examples that zero effect is for special cases.

    Thanks for the feedback, Colin. Not every situation should have a clock, so tying Quality to a larger clock isn’t an ideal fix. I think the way to go is to better show how the Quality factor is meant to be used so it isn’t about a +1 sword or whatever.

  21. In play last night, my players were benefited when they realized the factors are all about relative advantage. The Slide sported fine clothes and a fancy-pants disguise, but that is par for the course at the Silver Stag Supper Club so that factor was a wash.

    We did once get meta-numeric, but that was when all three factors had business going on both positively and negatively. So it worked out and was a nice way to account for all relevant factors without getting too crunchy. Even then however, it felt less like number crunching and more like the final rounds of tennis, when actual numeric score has been forgotten in lieu of who has advantage and disadvantage.

  23. John Harper Yeah I can see that. My thought however was thinking that you could still with the rules as they are do a spectrum of difficulties without the need to add quality as factor:

    – Advanced Crew Lurk with fine tools against a slop house = no roll needed

    – Advanced Crew Lurk with fine tools against a normal house = “You exploit a dominate position” so controlled roll; no clock

    – Advanced Crew Lurk with fine tools against a another crew’s lair of equal tier = Risky rolll; no clock or use 2/3/4 clock depending.

    – Advanced Crew Lurk with fine tools against a another more advanced crew’s lair = Risky roll; 4 clock or more depending

    I just think it adds unnecessary fiddliness. But hey that’s just my opinion and to be honest I trust your game design instincts more than mine.

  24. Sorry, everybody, but I’m not gonna have the v3 QS ready tonight. I’ve had a migraine for most of the day and have not been productive. Bleh. I’ll try to get it finished tomorrow when I’m feeling better. 

  28. Going slowly right now. I’ve been working on some other projects that have more pressing deadlines. But I’ll get back to full-time Blades work again soon.

  29. Projects like Undying?

    Have you seen White Night? Its a game that looks llike you designed it, but maybe that’s just caused by the same font as Fiasko.

    I am thrilled for anything you might comeup with.

Comments are closed.