Something that occurred to me to ask while I was rereading the Quickstart.

Something that occurred to me to ask while I was rereading the Quickstart.

Something that occurred to me to ask while I was rereading the Quickstart. Now for the most part set-up actions seem pretty simple, you do an action and your effect rating gets added to the person that follows through, so if the Lurk grabs a guard from behind while the hound shanks him it’s clearly force+force. But what about say, the cutter kicking open the door of a drug den to help the slide make a grand entrance to intimidate the people inside, could you add the cutter’s force and the slide’s will together? Or does like only go with like?

Here is a video that one of my players used to get in the mood for Blades in the Dark:

Here is a video that one of my players used to get in the mood for Blades in the Dark:

Here is a video that one of my players used to get in the mood for Blades in the Dark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iokC3djlj_w

And here’s one she made a few years ago that gets my blood pumping. I love it! This is what I want to play. =)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xJH_4_kagQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iokC3djlj_w

I have been reflecting on a recurrent theme I’ve heard today.

I have been reflecting on a recurrent theme I’ve heard today.

I have been reflecting on a recurrent theme I’ve heard today. There is an objection to the game making it too easy for characters to succeed. This is not a concern I share, at least not in the current model.

Just for a thought exercise, what if the current numbers held more or less the same for what happens in each band, but the bands were 1-2, 3-4, 5-6? So 1-2 was terrible, 3-4 success but qualified, and 5-6 success?

I think the result would be emboldening the rogues. They would be less risk-averse, and complications would still arise in play because they would push harder.

So they beat a heist more easily. Then there’s another one, isn’t there? If things seem too easy, hit them with more severe consequences if they do not succeed; tougher foes, more lethal dangers. Threaten them with things that are not easily diced away, like a rival faction gunning for their assets or the danger of becoming a pawn between two powerful rivals.

If the game is too easy and they get bored (an unlikely consequence in my mind), then make it more difficult by giving them tougher missions and more interesting choices to make–not by making it more difficult to succeed in their chosen course of action because DICE.

I guess I’m coming out of a more permissive mind set that wants to see the players do well when they choose to act, so the focus shifts from “Can we do it” to “what do we do.” Dice being what they are, you’ve still got plenty of chances for complications and escalations.

Just a thought. I’m just not grasping the value of using the mechanics to make sure the game is difficult enough, like we risk it being too easy. Especially with the really small dice pools and the inability to spend stress to advance clocks.

Having played a partial session of the game and read the rules a few times, I have a couple of questions about…

Having played a partial session of the game and read the rules a few times, I have a couple of questions about…

Having played a partial session of the game and read the rules a few times, I have a couple of questions about action resolution and the general flow of the game:

First, how do plans work within the context of the game mechanics?  Is there an explicit point wherein the start of the heist has to be agreed upon, and, if so, other than choosing a detail, what specific ramifications does this have for play?  In particular, does the type of plan constrain the type of actions you can do (e.g., when executing an infiltration plan, are you not permitted to use social or occult actions to advance any of the clocks)?

I ask, because the last session ended in a situation where our characters knew what we were doing for our operation (stealing from the Red Sashes, but doublecrossing the Lampblacks in the process), but hadn’t actually officially declared a plan at that point.  My character had gone to check on one of his contacts to gather information on what we’d be up against for the Red Sashes; this got me to know what the relevant clocks were.  At this point, I wanted to work against the first clock–getting past the guards–by getting my contact several different kinds of high and getting detailed info from her on guard patterns and when they changed, so we could slip through effortlessly.  I figured this would manifest in game terms by me rolling consort, with the danger that she’d realize what I was doing and warn the sashes, resulting in increased security or something later.  My GM maintained that this was an attempt to circumvent the rules, since we hadn’t yet formally announced a plan and a plan type, and forbade the action.  Who was in the right here?  I should note that at this point, none of the players, myself included, had read the rules and thus weren’t making our points clearly, which only served to muddle the situation.

Secondly, on a largely unrelated note, in situations where a clock is only partially successful, is it permissible to make the exact same roll to overcome it, or does the skill being rolled have to change?  For instance, if a character uses cipher to analyze a magical device and partially succeeds, filling two segments of a four segment clock, would that character be able to roll cipher again to finish, or would she need to switch to, say, attune or something similar?

Austin, Texas here, but I’d be interested in a hangouts or Roll20 campaign if there’s no one in Austin checking this…

Austin, Texas here, but I’d be interested in a hangouts or Roll20 campaign if there’s no one in Austin checking this…

Austin, Texas here, but I’d be interested in a hangouts or Roll20 campaign if there’s no one in Austin checking this board

One of my players suggested he would be more interested in taking the Devil’s Bargain if it offered +1 effect…

One of my players suggested he would be more interested in taking the Devil’s Bargain if it offered +1 effect…

One of my players suggested he would be more interested in taking the Devil’s Bargain if it offered +1 effect instead of the possibly worthless +1d. That’s still not any kind of guarantee, but it provokes players to bite at future disadvantages more readily. Just a thought.

It might be interesting to have an “ally leakage” sort of determination.

It might be interesting to have an “ally leakage” sort of determination.

It might be interesting to have an “ally leakage” sort of determination. For example, the Lampblacks hire you to take a shot at the Red Sashes. The Red Sashes do not know it was you, no one else knows. But do the Lampblacks let the secret slip? Do all of them know, or do the leaders keep it quiet?

This matters when generating heat and reputation, whether anyone knows you did it. Currently the GM just decides whether the employers exercise enough discretion. It could be interesting to have an optional way to determine whether or not loose lips sink ships. Just a thought! =)

I would find it super-helpful if there was a page that summarized all the ways that experience is gained, and how it…

I would find it super-helpful if there was a page that summarized all the ways that experience is gained, and how it…

I would find it super-helpful if there was a page that summarized all the ways that experience is gained, and how it applies, both for characters and crews. It is kind of spread out and hard to get at.

I would also really appreciate it if there was a page that listed how each class and crew gains experience, so the GM can help prod players into noting when their characters get experience. You know, summarize the “playbook advancement” information.

After a session of actual play, here are the main complaints my group shared.

After a session of actual play, here are the main complaints my group shared.

After a session of actual play, here are the main complaints my group shared. Their conclusion was that they would only play this again if we house-ruled the hell out of the “Action, Effect, & Resistance Rolls” page. Even then, some elements left them cold. Here is what they had to say, summarized. First, a link to the play report:

https://fictivefantasies.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/blades-in-the-dark-adventure-summary/

TO BE CLEAR, I don’t want this to come across as me saying the game is terrible. Instead, my goal here is to share the feedback of my group. They do not want to play the game again, and these are their reasons why. Every game is not for every player, and I’m not suggesting this game is “broken.” I do feel it may be helpful to share their perspectives. I understand and accept that these problems may stem from me misunderstanding the rules, or “doing it wrong.” Still, I want to share what my players shared with me during and after the session (sometimes with heated enthusiasm.) I’m really not sure which category is best for a discussion like this, so we’ll go with “Rules (Official.)” On to the feedback!

SIX IS TOO MUCH TO ASK. They felt that being punished for anything but a six, which could fail to materialize with any number of rolled dice, made their characters feel incompetent and vulnerable. In a sneaksy game, once you are detected, once things escalate, de-escalating them is really difficult if it is even possible. Having dangers manifest on anything but a six means if you’re around people and alarms and traps, escalation is pretty damn likely. They disliked this. In play, this worked predictably; a danger manifests, now the DM thinks up more dangers, and they manifest, and the situation gets more and more difficult with very limited tools to de-escalate. After all, on anything but a 6, more dangers will manifest.

YOU NEED SIX TWICE IN A ROW. Even if you get a 6 on the action roll, if you don’t get ANOTHER 6 on the Effect roll, you are still much less effective. Even a critical success can be reduced to a partial success for effectiveness. They found this demoralizing.

DICE POOLS WILL NOT BE BIG ENOUGH. Tied into the issue of needing a six, your maximum dice pool for an experienced character is 4 for an action, +1 for background, +1 for a tool, maybe +1 for having them overmatched; that’s still 7 dice, and incomplete success if none of them turn up a 6. They compared that to, for example, Arkham Horror. There a 5 or 6 is a success, and dice pools can get higher than 10. And you STILL get screwed by the dice sometime. With the combination of the tiny (often 1 or 2) dice pools and the need for a 6, they were pretty demoralized.

TRIPLE JEOPARDY. For a flashback, you can take triple jeopardy. FIRST, you take stress for a bad situation, avoiding consequences. SECOND, you take stress to have a flashback, no matter whether it turns out to be helpful or not. THIRD, you can be asked to make rolls and accept consequences DURING the flashback. The fact that the characters could actually be in a worse situation because they triggered a flashback made the players leery of using them often.

For example, one character used a flashback to trail an important NPC, then she got challenged to a duel, and she used her armor up to defend against an injury in the flashback. In the present mission, the armor is still used up. And, of course, lots of other bad things could happen.

In another example, one character used a flashback to bribe a bluecoat, who did not take well to the offer; he didn’t push, but he did snap back to the present down 2 stress from making the attempt. His already desperate situation was that much worse.

BIGGER GROUPS ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY PUNISHED. I had two players. However, when I explained how the group actions worked, they were appalled by the levels of stress that would flow to the leader, or to the party, if EVERYONE was rolling and needed to not roll 1-3, or if the leader didn’t roll a 6 and all those people would absorb stress. 

The main objection there was that you could have a group getting stressed out by not doing much. Ideally you want stress to be connected to awesome flashbacks or derring-do; but after two not-perfect lock picking sessions and a not-perfect climbing session the group could have racked up a lot of stress for not-particularly-stressful activity. Is that wrong? They didn’t care so much about that, but as PLAYERS, they didn’t like the idea at all for how they play.

ROLE PLAYING NOT INTUITIVE. This may be my fault; when they wanted to do things, I called for rolls. However, this led for a session where the players did not portray the characters talking to each other or NPCs. Things were handled in an abstract way. It was definitely a roll-play focus; which action to use? What effect? The dice then determined how it worked.

There was definitely game fiction going on; I relayed to them the situation, but in terms of whether it was controlled, risky, or desperate, and what actions might be most appropriate to use. They never got into the skins of the characters. Their decisions were driven by what was on the sheets, not what was in the character’s minds. I’m not sure how I would pull them from that mindset, considering the abstraction requests a GM keep the game moving by setting the scene and resolving it and keeping things from bogging down. 

The characters were still distinct, and had goals and such, but they were much more marionettes dandled by the players and less masks the players wore. Your mileage may vary, that was just an observation from the experience.

IN CONCLUSION. I think this is a really interesting game! I am not saying it is bad, or broken. I AM saying that I will not be able to run it with my group again unless I roll up my sleeves and tinker with some of its internal mechanics.

Why bother sharing this at all? My intent is not to be abusive, but to share specific “ouch” points from my group, and their insights in playing it. Maybe the community will chime in a chorus of how I was doing it wrong and these things should not apply, or maybe there is a flash of insight that knocks half these things out of consideration. In any case, I hope this report serves as food for thought for the game designers, and others who are preparing their own games. 

https://fictivefantasies.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/blades-in-the-dark-adventure-summary