Hiya folks, haven’t checked out blades since v2 a while back. Read through a fair bit of v7 (not all though). Quite liking the changes I’m seeing. I’ve noticed certain things have been emphasized more or clarified to help get the intent behind the rules and make running the game a lot smoother.
However, I do have a question about the probability spread of the core rules mechanic. I’m not sure if it should go into the game question or discussion subheading, but here goes.
6 or 6+ results are “full successes.”
4/5 are success with complication.
Ignoring the fact that 4/5 are also successes, and just looking at the potential for free and clear “full successes,” the maximum dice a character could have are 4. If they push themselves, they can get up to 5 (I seem to recall you can now push or devil’s bargain. Not both. Could be wrong though.).
Looking at the math of that, at 4 die – free and clear success happens 51% of the time, or ~60% at 5 die. (http://anydice.com/program/91c0)
Ok, good so far. I’ve been thinking about what this probability spread implies for the fiction of the game, and here is where my question lies. Characters with actions rated at 4 have a little over 50% chance for free and clear success. In any other game, I would have said, “how odd, they’re the upper limit of what a human can be in this game.. and they can only get through things without mucking them up 50% of the time?” Well part of this could be explained by the fact that these are action ratings not skill ratings. Since actions are a somewhat nebulous rating that covers not only competence but a level of je ne sais quas, I’m guessing that there is some other factor at work beyond just your skill at Prowling or Skirmishing.
The conclusion I’ve come up with is, perhaps the basic premise is that the world is just this jacked up. In previous editions there was a section talking about how rolling should be done more sparsely than in a traditional RPG like dnd (didnt find that section in v7, assuming it still applies though or I’m just blind). So the characters are only rolling for situations where at best they have a 50/50 shot of making it through unscathed.
If this is the case, this idea would ripple out to affect how different phases of the game are handled. At character creation, if a character has 2 ranks in an action, they’re dealing with situations where a character of that competence has only a 50/50 shot of making it through unscathed. As they progress to be that character with 4 ranks in an action, they just no longer roll for a situation that a 2 rank character might. Does this analysis seem correct?
To be clear, I’m not expressing any dissatisfaction, just trying to use the mechanics to guide how the fiction is to be approached. Get a sense of how the stakes increase as play continues.
It’s fairly easy for players to roll more than four dice in many situations.
Characters can get up to four actions dots.
+1d when you Push yourself.
+1d when another character Assists (can get if Pushing yourself too)
+1d is granted by many Special Abilities (could get multiple)
+1d if you use a friend or ally in Downtime
+1d or +2d in Engagement roll if you’re higher Tier.
So a player could theoretically roll 8d or more if the circumstances were right or they triggered several special ability bonuses. In practice, I find it’s not uncommon to roll 5d or 6d. It’ll probably be stressful, but I think that fits pushing for peak performance.
That’s certainly true. On average, how many die are you or your players rolling when presented with an obstacle? I’m really trying to use this analysis to get a better grip on what kinds of things should qualify as an obstacle. Not just any old person in your way, but how “tough” do they need to be to qualify as an obstacle. thereby necessitating a roll and making the risk reward ratio worth it. By that I mean, be a significant enough challenge that a player feels like, “yeah i’m willing to take on stress to deal with this chump,” knowing that stress accumulation is the road to retirement.
I have been assuming that characters in this setting are more ablative than other settings. You should plan on them using up stress and trauma and burning out before the campaign is over. All to get the extra dice when needed. As you build up a crew of NPCs, it’s easily explained where a replacement PC comes from.
The probability of success is generally in the hands of the player and how they decide to approach the obstacle. The GM determines how threatening an obstacle is by how severe they describe the consequences of acting against the obstacle and the position and effect level of the action roll. See NPC threat levels on page 23 of the quick start.
Keep in mind that one roll in this covers far more than one roll in most systems. In a standard rpg action scenes like combat are split up into chunks of 3,6, maybe on some outside cases like AGE, 15 seconds, usually representing one or a semi short series of specific actions. In Blades one skirmish roll can represent the cutter turning a corner, punching a guard in the neck, then jumping on the table his buddies were playing cards at, pulling his sword and pistol and going to town, downing five guys in a what would normally take at least ten rounds in a “normal” system.
So the decreased odds of a perfect roll reflect that they are handling a lot, one prowl is slipping past the guard patrols and into the second story window, one hunt is tailing a series of different thugs throughout the day.
Mark Moller That’s actually totally true. A large part of those odds are probably reflective of the sheer scope of an action roll. That helps towards judging when and when not to roll.
I think its REALLY important to not equate success with a 6+ (or multiple 6s).
A 4-5 is most assuredly a success, and if the players are adverse to the AWESOME complications of mixed results, they have many means to thwart the consequences both narratively and mechanically.
Even if they fail, John Harper, has written a whole section of embracing the capability of the characters and suggesting to narratively ‘blaming’ the situation rather than the character’s competence as scoundrels.
I think p33 is one of the best GM advice columns ever written.
Nathan Roberts Naw, I completely agree that a 4/5 is absolutely still a success. But it is also undeniably complicating your life. Whether you accept that complication or buy it off with stress, my only point is that from a perspective of risk/reward (character point of view), it is still a risk.
If a character is attempting a task, they’ll know that there is a legitimate chance to have one of these complications pop-up. When the character is doing the risk/reward analysis, it’s still a less effective choice than pulling an action that more reliably results in a clean, uncomplicated success.
So what I was trying to come to grips with is: what kind of situation is this an acceptable level of risk? When are they willing to take a chance on an action knowing that their odds of a clean break on achieving the action is as reflected by the dice? I feel like if I can answer that question, I can more appropriately adjudicate things like: when to roll, the appropriate scope of actions given a characters action rating, what kinds of obstacles are worth spending our time rolling on and discussing.
Honestly, I don’t give a damn if the players like the complications or not. Because if they don’t there is only one answer: this is not an appropriate game for you. Which is fine, not everything is for everyone. But know what you like, no?
As you said though, from the GM side of things, the complications definitely need to be framed appropriate. Otherwise you end up treating your PCs like clownish fools.
The consequences of failure need to be weighed against how bad they want to achieve their goal. What are they risking? If the threat is too severe, then they must give up their goal. But that seems like a fictional, in-the-moment decision for each player and about the attitude they bring to the table. And if their goal is not dying, then sometimes just have to wear it.
Don’t forget that in Blades NPCs don’t get actions that do the players harm or make complications. All the complications come from the players’ action rolls. Take combat for example. In most other systems the player “rolls to hit” and hits (or not) doing damage (or not). Then the NPC gets a turn to try to hit back. In blades, that’s all covered by a single action roll. A 6 or a crit and the player hits without taking harm in return. 4 or 5 and it’s a hit but the PC is hurt. 1 or 2 and the PC misses and is wounded.
In most systems a PC wouldn’t expect to come out of combat unharmed unless the odds were overwhelming and Blades much the same. I’m using a combat example because combat mechanics in most systems are clear but of course the action roll in Blades is much more flexible and can but used in any way that the player can think of in service to the fiction and it’s up to the GM to decide the difficulty of that action and what the consequences are.
The GM should endeavor to frequently make the consequences of rolling under a 6 external and not a result of failure on the part of the PC. For instance read the reduced effect in the Controlled Finesse example on page 26. The character didn’t make a mistake here, there is just more to be done because the task was harder than originally supposed. This idea is described on Page 33 as “Make the scoundrels awesome even in failure.”
You also need to take into consideration the position of the action, since rolling a 4/5 in a controlled position means you get what you want for a very small price. Controlled position rolls are when you’re attempting a task that is on the easier side, so you’ll much more frequently succeed without sacrificing much. Since the next lower position is called Risky, a 50/50 chance of paying a significant cost makes sense.
As a side note, you can get up to 6 dice if you have an action rating of 4, take a devils bargain (or push yourself) and get help from another PC. This also doesn’t take into account the abilities that PCs have that give them bonus dice when tackling situations they’re good at (like the Slide’s Trust in Me). It also doesn’t take into account teamwork actions, where a group of PCs works together and could be rolling many more dice.