Andrew Shields – Page 27 – Blades in the Dark G+ Archives

Here is my first attempt to codify my thoughts on using enterprises instead of the crew sheet structure.

https://fictivefantasies.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/enterprises-for-blades-in-the-dark-6-6-15.pdf

This draft isn’t the finished version, but I am interested in feedback. This is far more in-depth and complex than anything else I’ve proposed, so it took significantly more to get it from an idea to a .pdf. I know this is not the direction John Harper is taking the game, as it focuses on resource management, but I needed to flesh it out because it makes sense to me.

An important advantage of the system is that those who want to use it minimally can use it minimally. Even if the crew has a small base, or no base, and focuses on heists, this still gives the GM great tools for helping the PCs choose targets.

For an example, I’ll stat up how the crew with Jack Shear and Bryan Mullins characters looks with the new version.

They picked “Everyone Steals” which grants people +1 skill point, and “Slippery” to allow rolling 2 results for entanglements and keeping one, and getting +1d to reduce heat. I think Slippery could be repurposed as a special ability to buy, but not Everyone Steals.

They picked Amancio, a fence, as the contact. They also picked having a crew of adepts, a hidden lair, and a library.

For flavor, they decided their lair was in the basement of an occult bookshop, Adeleide’s Phrenological Emporium, with a sewer access to the gondola canals.

How does this look in the enterprise system?

They start with 2 enterprise, one for each of them. One will invest in the fence, Amancio. The other will invest in the bookstore, which is over their lair.

The point of enterprise from the bookstore will be put back into the bookstore to make it legal, to cover fees and expenses and all. As it grows, perhaps it will generate more income than it needs to stay legal, but for now that will do.

The point of enterprise from the fence will go to fund having a crew of 4 adepts.

The default lair has living space, meeting space, and a space for something else; they choose to put a library in there.

One of the characters is close to getting a bead on how one crew is moving leviathan blood into the city illegally, and he is going to make a move to get in on that. This will represent adding an enterprise to the crew.

What do you think? This is still rough, but it’s my best thinking about this at the current time.

https://fictivefantasies.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/enterprises-for-blades-in-the-dark-6-6-15.pdf

I’m running a game on Monday.

I’m running a game on Monday. I guess at this point I’d say the “effect” roll would be “highest rolled result -1” for segments filled, +1 per additional 6. The resist roll would be “6-highest result stress to avoid consequence.”

What do you think? If we don’t get a new integrated draft by Monday, do you think this serves, or what else would you suggest?

I THINK THIS IS A SERIOUSLY GOOD IDEA.

I THINK THIS IS A SERIOUSLY GOOD IDEA. I have a thought about gangs and tier and such. A possible solution is “enterprises.”

What is the crew involved in? What income generators and vice dynamos answer to them? Everything they are involved in that generates money is an enterprise. When the enterprise runs smoothly, it generates funds and takes care of its own problems. When it doesn’t, then it’s problem solving time.

So instead of defining tier by how many PEOPLE are involved, instead it is based on the ENTERPRISES involved. Each enterprise is on a scale of 1-5. Tier 0 is up to 5, Tier 1 is 10, Tier 2 is 20, Tier 3 is 40, etc.

Now you’ve got “turf” measured by income potential. You have (ideally) self-sufficient enterprises kicking money back to the boss. And you’ve got gangs you use to trouble-shoot.

Now you can say that bookie business on Dulvin Street is a 2 enterprise. The bootleg whiskey business in Trevor Square is a 4 enterprise. So your crew has 6 enterprise, and if they can take over the brothel in Times Windfall they’ll get a 5 boost, putting them up to a Tier 1 concern with 11 enterprise.

Business is bad for an enterprise because of bluecoats–Trevor Square goes from 4 to 2, now you’re back down to 9, and risk losing a tier unless you can bolster your enterprise by dealing with the bluecoats, or pick up another one to keep the crew strong.

This seriously appeals to me. It solves the manpower problem, it solves the turf problem, and it keeps the focus squarely on the PCs where it should be.

I’m still figuring a lot of the changes out, but I’ve found a lot to love in the update.

The claims are good–especially since I believe they will be more customizable once we are past the quick start and into the game proper. The concept of nodes that provide advantages and discrete physical and conceptual territory for competition is useful for driving story and competition. It gives players a way to strategize and have ambition, and gives the GM targets for rivals to threaten.

I like the action/attribute rating split. It is a different choice than having separate effect ratings, but for this game and its goals I feel it is a GOOD choice. What you may lose in flexibility is more than paid off in what you gain in a more intuitive system that rewards diversifying. Experience awards are also simplified.

I like the engagement roll because one of the tricky parts of the game is launching directly into a heist. Having a not-totally-random kicker at the beginning to give immediate things to react to and overcome helps both the GM and the players engage more in-media-res.

I LIKE THE NEW ACTION ROLL OUTCOMES. They retain the narrative flexibility, but are FAR less ambiguous. As GM, I want room to maneuver and interpret, and I still have that; however, the boundaries of what’s fair to the players is clearer. Also, the option of escalating and taking multiple turns within a single turn has been turned off, and that’s awesome. I also like that there is the option to take 2 stress for 1d more, if you want to. (I think it should be specified you can do that AFTER you roll the rest of the dice if you choose.)

I’m neutral on the new harm system. It reminds me of FATE. I do like the previous method, relying on narration and specific lasting conditions for injury, I think that’s more true to the heart of the game. But I haven’t tried this, so I don’t have strong feelings on it.

The fortune roll has a good mix of three factors; context, framing the possibilities, and some randomness. I could see using it for many things; it takes the place of rolling on random encounter tables. The table outlines what is likely to happen, the circumstances triggering a roll suggest it is appropriate in that place in the narrative, and there’s an element of chance so even the GM can have a new surprising development in the current events.

I’m not sure how p. 17 “PC Advancement” works in some ways. Under 6 playbook advancements, you can add +1 effect (is this outdated?) or get a special ability or add 2 items to a list of item options. So I guess you would spend 1 advance to get 2 options, then the next advance could buy one of those options? As far as I can tell, you gain no advantage from special abilities in your playbook unless you’ve bought them. I guess this is a way to make other abilities cost 1.5 as much as playbook abilities. How does that interact with “veteran” now?

I want to know more about getting flawed gangs. I’m not sure I understand reputation fully.

I REALLY LIKE THE NEW ENTANGLEMENTS. Simple but flexible. You could get similar results a number of times in a row without duplicating events. Great flavor and escalation.

I feel like the character sheets should include under “Bonus Dice” using a fine item. Is that still advantageous?

I’m a little fuzzy on how the success roll interacts with the clocks.

Well, I’ve rambled enough. TLDR is I think this is a great update, and I look forward to trying it out. Thanks, John Harper!

It occurs to me that Duskwall could be tweaked just a bit to have polar day/night cycles instead of just flat-out…

It occurs to me that Duskwall could be tweaked just a bit to have polar day/night cycles instead of just flat-out darkness. Then there would be short summers, where the sun doesn’t set much, and long dark winters where the sun hardly rises. Keep the weather temperate. Have a short frenetic growing season and time of sun, and start your campaign at the beginning of the long dark.

I think it would be helpful to reflect on how to manage a crew getting bigger when it goes up a tier.

I think it would be helpful to reflect on how to manage a crew getting bigger when it goes up a tier. The game encourages crews to go up a tier, the idea is they are fighting for advancement in size and power.

However, the manageable number of PCs does not go up when the crew tier does. So, what does that mean? Do your gangs join the crew, and you get more gangs? How do you manage leadership in the crew, and does it still make sense to have “crew” and “gangs” as the two categories? Or do you reach a point where you need middle management? “Leaders” and “made men” and “gangs” for example.

There comes a point where your PCs are directing a more broad operation than you can easily manage with PCs and gangs as the two categories.

I think the crew rules need to address actions taken by the crew that are not undertaken by PCs or by gangs.

I also think it would be useful to have something like the “entanglements” possibilities that are “internal politics” that can cause problems for a crew during each down time. There is a “morale” effect; what else is it for? I think it could be used to suppress internal dissent and dissatisfaction and plotting and theft.

Issues of discipline and the like will come up. Underlings will cause problems that they need the leadership to sort out. Gang leaders will aspire to be crew bosses to come to the attention of the guys running a tier 3 crew.

In short, I think there needs to be more granularity for Tier 2 and up.

Here are some reflections on how I used mechanics in the most recent session of Blades in the Dark.

Here are some reflections on how I used mechanics in the most recent session of Blades in the Dark. Maybe some suggestions for clarification too.

I gave myself the freedom to pay less attention to how the mechanical pieces hook together, and to use the ones I wanted when I wanted to use them. Examples! (From this session: https://fictivefantasies.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/more-blades-in-the-dark/)

I used an effect roll without an action roll. One character was struggling with a magical trap, it was in him and growing, and he used Will to resist it without bothering with an action. Meanwhile, his fellow scoundrel finished out the clock, stepping into the challenge and addressing the needed effect roll while the trap victim did a resist roll.

I used one action roll followed by both an effect roll, and a resistance roll, both informed by the action roll. A character was standing on a table fending off a bunch of knife fighters; we rolled his murder, because that’s how he likes to fight, then had an effect roll to reduce the segments in the clock for the will of the attackers to continue. And also a resistance roll because they were trying to pull him down and pin him.

I let fine items add 1d to both the action and the effect roll.

I let an unusual weapon count as a fine weapon because it was more interesting that way.

Because the flashback was to controlled planning, one flashback handled the crew coming up with and discarding five plans, and escalating a sixth out of frustration. So after coming up with lots of ideas for using their adepts (all rolled 3 or less on Command) they abandoned those plans, then ended up deciding to hit up Baz to borrow some really tough Lampblack thugs. They rolled poorly on those, too, and escalated to risky by having the thugs drinking with the guys they were going to distract/beat up. It worked out in the end. I let all that happen in a single 0 stress flashback; of course they knew they’d need to screen the reinforcements somehow.

I let heat 8 stand and not tip over to Wanted 1, because I wasn’t sure what “Wanted” does besides escalate the fiction. And I wasn’t sure if the 9th point was what tipped it over. I didn’t stop to look that stuff up.

Anyway, with this group the heists continue to revolve around 3-5 challenges supported by back story and prep. Straightforward single-location challenges on a very modest scale, more “crime” than “heist.” But, that lets me do two of ’em and two down times in a single three hour session, and that’s SATISFYING. There is also room to escalate to bigger, more dramatic actions in a single session, so that’s good; always have room to grow, right?

I also continued to interpret the “danger manifests” as it “becomes apparent” not “it costs them stress or effects.” So, several times when they overreached they got away with it; other times, they escalated and still didn’t succeed and got hit way harder. Your mileage may vary, but I think it works just fine that way, and they still didn’t succeed all the time. (In fact, escalation got them thrown off a roof.)

I still love running the improv, running the cool setting, and playing with all the shiny toys in the sandbox. I also still have an ambiguous relationship with the rules, and still struggle a bit for the mechanical balance to really make the game shine it’s best lights. This was a fun session, though, and we want to play again.

One final note–the entanglements are GREAT. They usually provide something to base the next heist around, but you can also evade them or buy them off. That is a necessary fuel to keep the group from looking at each other and wondering what heist to do next; it flows, from one to the next.

https://fictivefantasies.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/more-blades-in-the-dark