Author: Adam Minnie

Hey friends in the dark. I could use some help running a compelling one-shot. I’m running a single 4-hour session of Blades in the Dark at a con this weekend, and I need help thinking about how to tell a compelling story in only 2 scores without much focus on downtime, the crew sheet, or faction relationships. How can I pre-load some PC personal arcs players can choose that allow nice closure within a one-shot plot?

For context, I plan to use the gang rules by Andrew Shields, and in fact I’m running the game with a Shadowrun/cyberpunk skin by having attune cover either hacking or magic, swapping contacts and gear options, and making heritage metatypes like elf, troll, etc. Otherwise most supernatural stuff will instead simply be flavored either matrix/digital stuff or mage/shaman stuff almost one-for-one. Looks like the re-skin should work without too much trouble.

I suspect I should look to the format of great one-shots Sean Nittner and others have produced?

Has anybody tried using BitD to run a cyberpunk or scifi game using the rules mostly as is, but swapping the use of supernatural actions for things like hacking-fu and tech/cyberware (and of course tweaking gear)?

Endgame Ideas?

So BitD is a blast to play to find out what happens to the scoundrels trying to make something of themselves. However, what have you done to provide satisfying closure to a campaign or story arc?

My player group with the cult crew played probably 15-20 sessions and ended the campaign when one of the members moved. We plan to revisit the campaign again with the full rules later this year.

Fortunately, we were able to wrap up that moving player’s character’s main projects and story arc in a way that also instantiated their first use of the Glory Incarnate cult special ability (thus encountering a manifestation of their supernatural leader for the very first time). This coincided with supplanting their campaign-long rivals the Lampblacks in a climactic rise in tier and a big nasty gang fight. Bombs in the PCs’ Lair were involved, mysteries and twists in relationships and origins were revealed, and the leaving player’s character was the first PC on the crew to die (aside from his dad who originally founded the crew).

This was great for closure in our case, but really only centered on that one character’s arc. The others went along with it due to expecting to continue later on.  Nevertheless, I’m curious how others aim to work toward an endgame in BitD, both mechanically and narratively.

To have a satisfying climax, I think you need to first have a big underlying conflict, ideally that weaves in each PC’s personal arc. I love the emergent player-focused nature of the system for regular play, but I’m less confident it naturally produces such an underlying conflict. What have you experienced? Similarly, in heroic games, there can easily be bad situations to thwart, or good situations to bring to be. In a scoundrel game, is there the same satisfaction in bringing about a bad situation (that’s good for the crew) or thwarting good situations for the world (that are bad for the crew)?

Should players work to identify for the GM (or can the GM infer somehow from player pursuits) a whole-crew big picture goal other than “move up”?

Is considering an endgame-style plot structure with rising action to a big climax followed by resolution even appropriate for this game?

Orders of Might/Magnitude in Blades in the Dark?

I really like the Order of Might from Torchbearer/Mouse Guard, which basically constrains what sort of interactions PCs can have with other creatures based on the relative might or epic-ness of the two.

As a loose example, beings far higher than normal humans/elves/dwarves on the scale, like ancient dragons or elder gods can only be interacted with by fleeing. As beings are more comparable in might to the PCs, the PCs can interact with them in additional ways, like driving them off (but not killing), capturing them, eventually killing them, etc.

It’s intriguing because it basically is a dynamic invulnerability that forces players to consider alternative approaches than the classic slay-and-loot default to adventurering.

I’m curious if something like this order of might could enhance or inform Blades in the Dark play. Position already informs what is possible based on relative power of both sides of a conflict. You’re controlled when manipulating gullible masses, but desperate when manipulating immortal masterminds.

Nevertheless, what if an order of might like in Torchbearer enhanced that further. The cutter can fight a crowd of thugs sure, but can he take down a leviathan in a wrestling match? This could especially help with inhuman or supernatural powers. Can you kill a man-sized automaton, capture one? Maybe irrespective of position, a gang of Quality 1 humans can only drive off an equal number of automatons, spirits, or fiends, but can’t even attempt to actually kill them. Maybe that particular fiend can maybe be captured by mortal hands (desperate roll permitted), but not killed (no roll possible)?

Is not even permitting PCs to roll a desperate attempt in a vastly outmatched situation contrary to the spirit of the game? Is this sort of consideration already an assumption in play (due to effect factors that could reduce a “success” to 0 effect)? Could codifying it somewhat with an Order of Might help anything?

Any tips for lazily managing other faction downtime actions?

I’m a lazy GM. I’ve run about 12-15 sessions for my players running the cult crew The Society of Horus, but I’ve been realizing they’ve had it somewhat easy since I have failed to adequately do downtime actions for other factions.

Of course there’s been a bold moves by main enemies and even their closest ally who’s leader they drove mad, but I can’t help but feel there needs to be more repercussions to all the craziness they’re whipping out each session.

How do you manage faction downtime actions for a dynamic-feeling setting without spending too much time on it outside of the game?

I notice Supply is off the Action list now, and now Skirmish is separate from Mayhem (and Murder) while Invoke is separate from Attune. While I’m intrigued to know how Invoke vs Attune will play out, I’m glad there’s a bit more variety in supernatural fields for my group’s Cult.

The addition of the consulates also makes me eager for a political crew type, either politicians, activists, or maybe lawyers. 🙂

Does each claim count as +1 hold and its stated benefit? I see mixed signals.

The last sentence of the “Seizing A Claim” section on pg 7 makes me think that yes, you get 1 hold for every new claim, and some (like turf) grant additional hold on top of that.

However, the description of claims on pg 6 says “some claims are worth hold (1-4)” which might imply that only those claims that specifically list hold are worth any hold.

Still yet, under “Losing a Claim” it says you lose the benefits of that claim, but doesn’t mention losing 1 hold (like it does for the targeted faction when you seize a claim from them).

I am guessing each claim is worth just its stated benefit since (at least as I read it), you only need 8 hold for Tier 2, 12 for Tier 3, and 16 for Tier 4. I would maybe expect more like 6 times the next tier level rather than 4 times, since at 4 times, if the Thieves control every claim that grants hold (which would take a minimum of 10 scores without retaliation), they would have 17 hold, which is enough to be eligible for Tier 4 even without any Rep.

By the way, I made a mock-up claims map for Cult crews. I’ll try to post it after we use it in play tonight.

Question about v3 draft playbook advance ticks. The Cutter has 8 playbook advancement tickboxes but the other playbooks only have 6 (and the advancement page still says 6).

Given that triggers are broader, so more easy to hit, but now cap out at 2 ticks per trigger per session, I’m torn whether I’d think it should be 6 or 8. I’m running tonight and will likely stick with 6 unless I hear differently.

Just a minor squabble with the v3 draft. It may be because I’m a grammar nerd, but I wish the vice Collector was Collecting or Collection or something to better match the other vices.