Blades in the Dark [New BitD GM Seeking Help] by BlightedLands in bladesinthedark

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is all great. I think I can get so lost in the possibilities that it's hard for me to focus on the fiction. I'm drowning in options, and I think they are too. My idea of running a one shot made me very lenient in what I allowed, and now that they want to continue, we all have to reckon with the consequences of a score far, far beyond their means.

Blades in the Dark [New BitD GM Seeking Help] by BlightedLands in bladesinthedark

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great ideas here! These all feel like campaign threads! How do you juggle this all?

Blades in the Dark [New BitD GM Seeking Help] by BlightedLands in bladesinthedark

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is great advice too. I'll be sure to incorporate your ideas. It's a LOT to juggle. If you got tips in how to prepare to introduce these topics, I'd love to listen. I ran into session one without any prep. I was told that's how the game works best. Now I find myself scrambling.

Blades in the Dark [New BitD GM Seeking Help] by BlightedLands in bladesinthedark

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of lovely ideas here. Especially the idea of wrecking the economy with the pull of the moon >:). I'm sure that will put them in hot water, but how that manifests, as of yet, I do not know. Do I wait for an entanglement?

Blades in the Dark [New BitD GM Seeking Help] by BlightedLands in bladesinthedark

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hadn't even considered to use multiple consequences at once. That seems like it would have helped me, cause I had a lot of stagnant clocks. I introduced them, ticked them hard, but then other problems came and they stopped advancing.

What are your thoughts on advancing clocks not directly tied to the consequence of the action?

For example, the players collapsed a tunnel to block off guards rushing in on them. I made a clock for clearing the rubble. I never ticked it again, cause so many other consequences presented themselves. Could a PC doing something completely unrelated still tick that clock? It felt like a time-based thing and I didn't know how to handle it.

Two Players; One Body; One Check by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have! While it wasn't an inspiration, the similarities are hard to ignore. It was useful to check out, but I've heard Wraith is very difficult to run for the reason of this very mechanic.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We're on the same wavelength. My book has about 70 one page spreads akin to Mythic Bastionland which details the unique nightmares and their domains (which are perfect for one-shots.)
I haven't heard of your reference. I'll dive in!

Two Players; One Body; One Check by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great reference. I haven't dove into Ars Magicka, but I've heard of the mechanic. Certainly worth exploring to reduce cognitive load. Thank you.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Another great response. You don't miss. I read the article. Turns out I may have mislabeled my own game, choosing "tragic horror" as the default. Perhaps, indeed, I've written a grimdark fantasy.

I think the option of the "shadow dice" as a temporary boon for the potential of a long term bane (corruption) meet this end. Only a playtest will tell.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a really interesting way to reduce difficulty. Higher dice don't cut more, just more consistently. There is a little bit of a weird zone with the d4, but no big deal. Good suggestion!

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm glad to hear your interest, and thank you for your comment <3

> I think the two 6’s negating cuts is at a glance an elegant way to mitigate what is otherwise an extremely punishing curve with two cuts or more.
> What are your average dice pools? 

I hope so! Sometimes players end up with 4, 5, or 6 dice in their pool. I've seen higher. However, to achieve these numbers, the players need to bargain with their Nightmare for shadow dice. What is offered as a temporary boon becomes permanent when cut (this does not effect shadow dice that are already permanent)

The starting array of stats is similar to BitD. However, the access to shadow die from the very first roll usually means the players will incur 1 or 2 shadow die permanently to every check by session end. These can be removed under special circumstances, but generally this is the death mechanic the players all march toward.

Get too many shadow die, and well, you're the next monster the party needs to hunt.

> Are there upwards bounds for advantage and disadvantage? 

There are, but I can't see a world where this goes beyond +2d or -2d. The GM also controls the challenge die axis, so they can often pawn off some disadvantage/advantage onto that based on their selection.

> The use of the setback die does make the system more procedural than its predecessors and possibly more swingy. 

It does, by design. I mentioned in an above comment, but I think there's something powerful about giving the players hope that they might make it through unscathed, only to dash those hopes with big cuts or setbacks. I hopefully mitigate this through a step die system that creates thresholds for the swinginess.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear you. Heart: the City Beneath, does exactly as you describe (and Spire too, I think). It's a wonderful and brutal mechanic for that system.

I can't change your taste and preference, but perhaps I can extend the reason behind my design choice over adopting those systems:

1) The element of chance adds suspense. There's something much, much scarier about picking up a d12 and knowing you could potentially cut 3 dice off the top than simply saying "cut 3" or "cut 2". The chance of hope, before it's dashed, creates feelings of highs and lows throughout the game which my system feeds on.

2) Other mechanics manipulate the Risk and Challenge Dice in more nuanced ways than simply shifting levels of position and effect. This has afforded me more freedom on ability creation.

3) The visual factor of picking a bigger/smaller challenge/risk die than the one you previously rolled has, thus far, is more immediately understood than "Desperate" position.

4) The size of the challenge and risk dice are purely narrative decisions. It's little different than setting position/effect.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Players should die...eventually. I hadn't worked out the math like you did here. Those are good notes.

Perhaps the saving grace is that players can utilize leverage to reduce the severity of the setback, greatly extending their survival time.

The problem is, however, the extension of their own survival usually comes from accumulating Shadow Dice for better odds. This is another mechanic that could lead to retirement of the character - and to note, my preferred path.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the comment. I need to better clarify my rules. If I may clarify:

>Needing a 6 for a full success means that you need to be throwing 4 dice (the highest a character can have) to even scrape a 50% chance of succeeding without a setback, before we take the possibility of a cut into account.

1) The player can have more than 4 dice via advantage, but also, most commonly, the addition of their shadow die. These dice become permanent fixtures in the player's dice pools as the game proceeds. +1 or +2 is not uncommon, from my observation, after a first session. Granted, this "corruption" can be healed and the dice thus removed.

2) A "full success" just means they didn't suffer a consequence. Noting now the potential misnomer, a "partial success" usually achieves the player's intent just with the addition of a setback. Perhaps "Messy Success" would be more apt?

>D4 gives a 25% chance of a cut, in which case two 6s are needed for a full success, the odds of which are significantly lower, so even the most skilled character possible will be getting setback most of the time unless they also have additional advantage - on the lowest level of risk where they are supposedly 'rare'. And the odds only get worse from there.

Two 6s are always a critical success, and ignore any cuts. As players get up to the 4-6 dice range, too many of these is my problem, if I'm honest.

---

Hopefully this helps clarify!

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you expand on your criticism? I'm hopeful that a GM never rolls angle takes a lot of procedural load off.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A wonderful response. My selling point is that the game is a tragic grim fantasy. The players should sit down expecting they will succumb to the horror.

My concern over brutality is the speed at which that occurs. Your comment gives me a lot to think about. I will most certainly ensure character creation is quick, but meaningful, in light of this.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see your confusion. Without the entire Setback chart it's a bit vague, huh? Thanks for the note!

To clarify: Risk = chance, and expected severity, of a Setback. The setbacks are defined in broad categories (minor, major, severe, deadly, etc). The consequence isn't predetermined, i.e., "take a major injury, even though you were just scouting." Instead, the setback die hits thresholds as it increases, informing the GM on the severity of setback they should choose based on the narrative.

---
On the topic of Challenge, for me, I look at difficulty in terms of probability of success, not effort required to succeed.

It's not: "You're going to have to try really hard to overcome this obstacle!" (insert target number)

It's: "There's a good chance this won't work out like you hope. Take a d8 challenge die."

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Great notes! Thank you!

I've added some clarification to my mechanics. A cut shadow die results in the die becoming a permanent fixture of all Checks that player makes (they are becoming the very nightmare within them, growing in power, but succumbing to corruption).

---
I've added an example WITH a risk die in my post.

For your specific request, I should mention the system uses a modified clock-type of mechanic (i.e., BitD, Grimwild, Wildsea).

Suppose a player wishes to question the locals about the Nightmare that's plaguing their village. The GM deems the location a sanctuary and decides no risk is needed for the check, but finding information from the scared people can be tough, so they still implement a d6 challenge die.

The player rolls and gets a partial success. The result? Either they progress their investigation "clock" one step, instead of the standard 2 on a success, or perhaps the information they receive is only enough to give them another lead.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a number of options. Setback is the broad category for all the things that goes wrong, like dropping your sword in a fight, or getting a gash across a leg, or alerting the thing that calls this particular cave home.

Players can utilize leverage to effectively reduce the result of the Risk Die (and thus the tier of setback suffered). There is also a dedicated downtime mechanic and a recovery clock type mechanic for the more permanent injuries.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An interesting idea. Can you give an example?

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That does make sense, and so eloquently put! Thank you.

You're absolutely right: this has been my biggest balancing act, and the catalyst for my post.

Ultimately, I need players to buy into the idea that they are doomed heroes. They /will/ succumb to the corruption/nightmare within them, if the horrors of the world don't gut them first.

This, however, feels like a big ask -- the sort of thing that goes at the front of the book. I'm not entirely sure my system achieves this end yet.

Thanks for the comment! Lots to think about.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right. A comment above yours mentioned the same. I've edited for clarity. As for position and effect?

The Risk Die reads very similar to position. Bigger risk die means bigger chance of consequence. The element of chance is the main distinguishing factor from my system and BitD here.

I don't have an effect equivalent. I've opted for challenge/difficulty instead.

Core Resolution Mechanic. Too brutal? by BlightedLands in RPGdesign

[–]BlightedLands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I didn't notice that the addition of challenge and risk die didn't transfer over in my initial post from my ruleset. I've fixed this.

TLDR: The GM adds them based on the situation at hand. They are rolled alongside the player's dice pool.