I have some problems with the interactions between Items and the Tier/Quality factor.
Usually, higher Tier factions have better quality stuff: that’s way Quality and Tier are two aspect of the same factor.
Fine Items count as +1 Tier.
It seems that what is considered “Fine” is relative to your Tier: a “Fine” Item for a Tier 1 faction is actually “Standard” Item for a Tier 2 faction.
So, for example, if you’re Tier 0 and you obtain Items from a Tier 2 faction, they should count as “Exceptional” (because they should give you +2 to your Tier: you’re using the same stuff they use).
The problem is: what happens when you then become Tier 1? Do this Items just become “Fine”?
I guess they should, because members of the other faction doesn’t count as Tier 3 when they use them, and now you would.
However, this seems too convoluted.
How have you approached this kind of problem?
Wouldn’t be more simple if Items had just a Quality of their own (example: a Quality 1 sword)?
It sounds to me like you’re saying the same thing two different ways. The “Fine” and “Exceptional” are relative to the Tier mostly because of advancement: if you get a crew or playbook advance that gives you a “fine” thing, then as you increase your crew Tier, your thing remains fine and effectively improves with it, automagically. (E.g., you add better bits to your lockpicks, swap out the chamber on your rifle, acquire better maps of the sewers, or whatever.)
If you loot a specific thing of a specific Tier +/- Quality, then that thing doesn’t advance with you, I don’t think. If I were GMing I might allow a Long-Term Project to keep it maintained, otherwise it degrades in relative quality. Whether you track this as lowing it from “Exceptional” to “Fine” or you just note that this specific thing is Tier 2 (in an otherwise Tier 1 gang), the net result should be the same.
I get what you are saying but don’t you find it confusing/complicated that there are descriptional terms like “fine” and “exceptional” that describe an item quality that are relative to the abstraction of your tier (giving you a +1 or +2), and you have to resort to a different kind of interpretation/mechanic to describe an item quality that is absolute in the fiction (like “a tier 2 sword” )?
Wouldn’t you describe a “tier 4 sword” as “exceptional”?
John Harper can I ask the reason behind this design choice? I feel that maybe I’m missing something…
The way that I view it is that both Tier and Quality are abstractions. The only meaning that they have in the fiction is how ‘badass’ the crew is. So the way that I think of it is that if a crew has Quality items, they have taken the time and effort to improve those items above the usual for a gang of their means. Part of the process of going up a Tier is spending Coin and I feel that part of that money goes towards keeping those items above the level of the new Tier.
Yes, they might have taken better items from a more powerful gang, but do they have the means and knowledge to use and maintain those items, or are they quickly put up for sale (the Coin gained from the score)? Similarly, the Fine items that the character play books have access to are maintained to a higher standard than the Tier in general because the character has the skill and motivation to keep those items better than the average. In fictional terms that could be that they can afford better items or can improve the items that they already have (the rifle that was passed down from my father now has a better sight because I can take it to a Quality arms maker to get an upgrade).
The who philosophy behind the rules is to provide a light framework for decision making without getting in the way of the fiction. The simplest way of interpreting the rules is usually the right way to go.
I see your point: in fact, that’s how I’ve run Blades so far.
However, sometimes this view seems to run against the “fiction-first” nature of Blades.
To follow your example:
Imagine that a Tier 0 band accomplish a score and, in the process, find the amazing sword of a “Tier 4 master swordsman”.
Should I assume that they sell it instead or penalize their Coin reward if they don’t?
Should I just decide that they don’t have the means to “maintain” the quality of that sword (which feels kinda weird, because a good sword isn’t automatically harder to keep in shape)?
Should I ask them to “Acquire the Asset” just to keep that sword around?
I know I could just say “that’s an Exceptional weapon” but then why that same weapon that was giving a Quality/Tier 4 factor to the swordsman suddenly gives them just a Quality/Tier 2?
That’s what I’m struggling with: I get the abstraction, but I don’t get why there are two different kind of abstraction to address the same problem.
If better stuff count as an absolute Quality/Status factor, why not just use that to represent the “fictional quality” of an object?
Couldn’t the rules just say something like: “Normally your equipment has Quality equal to your Tier: you also have automatic access to specific items (different for each playbook) which are better then we would expect and have Quality equal to your Tier+1”?
This way, terms like “Fine” and “Exceptional” would be just narrative things tied to the Quality of the item.
A Quality 0 object could then be described as “worn-out”, “cheap” or “decent”
A Quality 1 object as “standard” or “average”.
A Quality 2 object as “fine” or “expensive”
etc.
MisterTia86 If that works for you then absolutely go ahead and rule it that way. It’s your game now. I find it useful to offload that kind of complexity and just call that a fine item. A tier 4 swordsman gets more out of that nice sword because he’s better than you. If I really want a sword to stand out I’ll make it weird. Give players who use it a weird advance about cutting through the ghost field. Offer players who use it a devils bargain that the sword can read it’s mind, etc.
Mark Griffin I know I could just rule it that way 🙂
But before changing something, I want to understand why it was done that way.
The description for the Quality/Tier factor says:
“Quality considers the effectiveness of tools, weapons or other resources, usually summarized by Tiers. A higher Tier faction has better quality stuff.”
The Quality factor seems to be there to help you determine who’s better equipped or has more resources, not who’s the best swordsman.
Quality and Tier are tied in one factor because you can assume that a faction has access to items and resources of a Quality up to its Tier.
Quality doesn’t seem to represent the skill to use them.
If the swordsman is an expert or a veteran, then I would make a clock or give him the Initiative (as described in NPC thret levels on pag 23) or call for desperate rolls just to land a solid hit.
For example:
There’s duel between a Tier 4 swordsman and a Tier 0 PC.
If the swordsman’s sword was created as part of a set of sword and one of your PC have another sword from the same set, why should the PC have a disadvantage in the Quality factor?
Isn’t it kinda punishing?
A swordsman doesn’t have a quality factor, he has a quality/tier factor and you don’t separate them. A tier 4 swordsman is better than you because his tier is higher. Part of that could be his equipment and part of that is his training, or his Intel, or his connections. Most of the time it doesn’t matter why he’s better than you, it’s all shorthand. Use that short hand when it makes your life easier, and discard it when you want more granularity.
I of course can’t speak for John, but my guess as to why the rules are that way is because Blades does a good job of focusing on its core experience and abstracting out the rest. This isn’t a game of min-maxing, one of a kind equipment and magic items, so it doesn’t waste your time thinking about it.
Mark Griffin I’m aware that this is not a game of min-maxing.
I am trying to understand the concept behind some rules, and I don’t personally think that’s a waste of time.
So, let me ask you something from your experience:
If you one of your Tier 0 PC goes into combat against this Tier 4 swordsman you would give him a clock, maybe initiative, maybe call for desperate rolls and also give the PC the disadvantage in the Quality factor?
You misunderstand me. I’m not saying it’s a waste of time to have this conversation and want to know why the rules are they way they are. Understanding design choices is always good. I’m saying while gming it would usually be a waste of time for you to consider what kind of descriptors are attached to every piece of equipment used by the blue coats when they raid your PCs lair.
So yes, he would be disadvantaged for quality/tier, but there would be no way for the PC to know, and usually I wouldn’t bother thinking about, if that’s because the NPC has a sweet sword, or if he has Intel on the PCs fighting style, or maybe his crew performed a ritual that displaced all his vital organs to the ghost field so they can’t be damaged. I’ll make that decision only when I think it matters a great deal in this instance(rarely). If my player asks how nice that sword is when he picks it off the dead body, I’ll tell him it’s a fine sword, unless there are story reasons to make it extra unique.
Ok I get what are you saying, and I assure you that I don’t waste time considering every piece of equipment attached to the NPCs 🙂
It’s just that this interaction between Fine/Exceptional Items and the Quality/Tier factor is a piece of mechanical abstraction that sometimes I find hard to connect to the fiction.
Maybe I should just use the rule that makes the most sense to me, but I hope to find some argument that makes this whole thing click in to my head.
PS: the organ displacement ritual is gold, consider it stolen (although it sounds more like a Potency factor to me :P)
I consider the ritual to be an asset, but the effect could be potentcy, you’re right.