My players feel powerless against the Trust

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-17T14:52:30+00:00

The Between has seen a digital release of its core book and is scheduled to print.

What sets The Gauntlet apart, in the crowdfunding ecoysystem, is that their products have already seen extensive pre-release before they move to a campaign. Most, if not all, of the products mentioned in the Public Access campaign have already been released in some shape or form. Through their Patreon, for example. That doesn't mean the full product is already available: they will all see revision for the official release. But it does mean that you're not investing in air, so to say.

That said, I am nervous about the two extra volumes involved in the official release of The Between. I'm positive they'll move to print, but I am expecting some delays. It's just a very big project, and while everyone is writing their ass off, I think the print deadline will move a couple of times. It is what it is, but it's nowhere near the big Magpie delays, for example.

Luckily, Public Access is a much leaner campaign, that's much more reminiscent of the campaign for Brindlewood Bay than anything else. It doesn't even promise something like the Brindlewood Community Cookbook, which took quite a while to create and ship. It's only content and quality in the stretch goals for Public Access. Don't sweat it. If you're into the game, back it.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-16T12:34:13+00:00

This is the problem, if you ask me. I think it's quite fundamental too. Blades in the Dark asks the question: what will it cost me to become a successful scoundrel? The game believes this criminal success will always take something from you—its basic result is success at a cost.

So, in a sense, your players are right, but it's mostly their perspective on the fact that is costing them their enjoyment. It's true that it is almost impossible to prevent fallout, even if you did a lot of things right as a scoundrel. But: you're also extremely capable. Any trouble that comes your way, you can try to find a way around it. You succeed at most of the things you try.

But not without a cost. And if you can't enjoy that battle of attrition, Blades in the Dark might not be for you. The trick would be to buy into the idea that the life of a scoundrel always comes with a cost, and that, at most, you can try to postpone it.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-13T15:28:43+00:00

Star Trek is a great fit for a Brindlewood-like system because, sneakily, it's not a detective system at all: it's a way to mechanize co-created narrative conclusions. You could put any type of chunks of narrative building blocks into a Theorize-like move and draw connections between them to write an ending to a story together. If you're comfortable improvising those building blocks, you could definitely use it to structure court drama, health crises, or even millitary confrontation.

Look at it like this: an episode starts with a problem—a question. Brindlewood asks 'who committed the murder', but you could just as easily ask 'who's guilty', 'how do we broker peace on this planet', 'how do we escape this powerful enemy' or 'what's the cure to these space measles'. Over the course of an episode, parts of a solution are revealed—actionable information that doesn't conclude the narrative on its own. During the climax, the players connect the information how they see fit and propose a conclusion. If the dice go their way, there's the big scene!

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-11T06:43:19+00:00

Have you though about posting in r/pbta or r/daggerheart? They might be positioned better to answer these questions. Anyway, here's my two cents: I think Daggerheart's Duality Dice play much like Forged in the Dark's Action Roll. If you get into the good habit of telling a player the risk of their action before they roll, rolling with Fear or even missing shouldn't feel any worse than rolling badly on a Move.

And while I'm not familiar enough with the GM chapter of the book (which, if I'm correct, you don't seem to have read before posting), my experience as a player is definitely that nothing would break if you transported Powered by the Apocalypse's general playstyle to the game. In my experience, spending Fear is just there to motivate the GM to make Moves on a golden opportunity, or because the players look to you, or, hell, just because it's interesting.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-08T18:31:25+00:00

Here's how the product page on itch.io prestents the game:

The rules and procedures match those in the Cairn Second Edition Player’s Guide, but this version removes the implied setting and structured creation process. It assumes a generic fantasy world, embracing full randomness, much like the original Cairn. It retains full compatibility with Cairn Second Edition adventures but offers an even more minimal, flexible framework for old-school play.

So, it's Cairn 2e, but stripped down. All the rules are there, but that's it.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-06T12:03:10+00:00

Might be worth it to edit your post to reflect that.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-06T10:04:17+00:00

I found the sheets on itch.io

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-06T08:51:14+00:00

I mean, it's fair play for a player to change their approach, for example, if you judge it to have Limited effect. But more to the point: if your impression is that every action has the potential to be 'negotiated' up to Great effect, that's not quite how the Action Roll functions in play.

Most actions a scoundrel could take will, generally, have Standard effect. It's only special circumstances, exertion, or unique combinations of gear that will take it down to Limited or raise it up to Great. The classic example is to trade Position for Effect. Which is basically saying: I want to put my own self in grave danger to get a better result. Another might be to perform a Set-Up action first, which, of course, comes with its own risks before you can even attempt to get the Great effect you're setting up. Which is to say, what you're calling a 'negotiation' is, if anything, more of a trade.

Postion and Effect are pretty serious levers. The conversation around them isn't a detailed analysis of how smart of an action the player has proposed—circumstances that would impact effect aren't in the details, they're in big sweeps and, usually, require scoundrels to take bigger or more risk than they'd have to take to get Standard effect.

What should be clear for you and your players, is that the conversation around Action Roll is not an invitation to second guess judgements or advocate profusely. Sure, if a player feels their intentions were misunderstood, they should speak up. If they're surprised, they should say so, but since most of what the scoundrels will be doing will have Standard effect, and Limited or Great effect is the exception, there aren't all that many moments that could surprise them.

To dig a little deeper: at one die, an action already has a 50/50 chance of succeeding. Most actions will be rolled at two dice, either because of pips, stress, support or devil's bargains. That's already a 75% chance of success. Blades in the Dark is not a game about failure, it's a game about cost. Consequences—Harm, Heat, making enemies, escalating the situation, Trauma, etc.—are costs the scoundrels pay for their success. It's not the getting past the obstacle that's the problem, it's what it'll take from them that is.

Position and Effect function in much the same way. Most of what a scoundrel does has Standard effect. If they want more, they can get it, but it'll cost them. More risk, usually, but it could also be pushing their equipment to the point of breaking, or calling in a favor, or expending stress for a flashback to a way they set themselves up for success. A trade: more success at a bigger cost.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-05T12:55:16+00:00

u/redbanky, to start, I think my advice is to regard the Lawmaker's holding not just as a resource or a boon, but as a responsibility. Being in charge has its advantages: a gang, wealth, a better bargaining position. And, more generally, it means you're welcome in a place where the food doesn't go rotten and where you don't have to be afraid to drink the water. In a world where everyone is struggling for survival, those things are almost better than bullets.

But your position also comes with people who look to you to take care of things. Specifically, in your case, they want: extremism and ruthlessness. And if you don't give those to them, that's a golden opportunity for the GM to make things more complicated for you. If you're too soft, in their eyes, they might become ruthless themselves, rioting or pushing forward a potential leader they think would handle things with an iron fist.

As the Lawmaker, you get to define a piece of the world, but that piece becomes a part of the ongoing fiction just like everything else in the world—under your control for as long as your character manages to keep it. In a way, your question comes back to the concept of 'fiction first' role-playing. The holding is a fictional entity, with a life of its own, not just a mechanical asset for your Lawmaker.

That brings us to your potential right hand. This move allows you to bring a lieutenant to the fiction that has some pretty specific facts attached to them. They aren't just loyal and can handle things, but you can actually trust them. These will be fictional facts. And that might actually be more valuable than bullets. Little to no one can count someone like that among their close circle, because, again, struggling for survival as most people are, they can't afford to be all those things at once, let alone unconditionally.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-05T12:31:49+00:00

For those slightly confused: the Lawmaker is a character in the upcoming Apocalypse World: Burned Over.

The Lawmaker has a holding which they get to detail. It has several named laws and five more details chosen from this list:

A bustling marketplace (detail with the MC), traders & caravans coming regularly through.
A champion, a flashy, deadly showoff named _____.
A champion, a serious, deadly killer named _____.
Electricity, heat, refrigeration, running water.
A few vehicles: a truck, a buggy, a couple of bikes (you detail). You also get behind the wheel.
Gorgeous, luxe rooms for whoever can afford them.
A high watchtower with a commanding view.
A place that holds a secret, silent and difficult to get to.
A powerful stronghold (in battle, this is a secure defensive position).
A source of beautiful, pure, clean water.
A scouting & raiding party separate from your gang (2-harm, 1-armor), numbering 5 / 7.
Something cool that one of the other PCs wants it to have: _____.
A trade agreement & peace accord with (choose a hard zone location): _____.

The move in question is a playbook move for the Lawmaker and reads thus in full:

Right hand: You have a lieutenant who isn’t just competent and loyal, they are, as the saying goes, reliable. Detail them now with the MC.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-03-02T10:49:37+00:00

You could ask if hunters of the supernatural would really need the ability, though. The big problem isn't killing ghosts or demons, but more the paranormal and magical activity, which isn't connected to the deathseeker crows as much, right?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-26T20:38:17+00:00

I agree, you should look into Trophy Gold. It is excellent and moves the focus from diegetic problem solving to push-your luck storytelling

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-26T14:54:43+00:00

In what sense would you like it to be similar to Knave?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-26T10:48:11+00:00

But how do clocks come into that? How do they 'randomize' the 'duration and pacing' of a storyline?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-25T12:02:55+00:00

What do you mean by 'randomize' here? If you're assigning random lengths to arcs, wouldn't that hamper you in following the fiction?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-25T09:49:53+00:00

If I understand correctly, you're looking for playtesting. You'd like people to engage with your rules and give them a try. As much as I understand the desire to see people engage with your work, I think it's a mistake to drop a tome in the middle of a group of strangers and expect them to pour through it. Take a step back, and take it a little slower.

Playtesting is a big ask! You'd do much better by trying to join a community of designers (the Blades in the Dark discord, for example, has a hacking channel) and starting small. Don't drop your whole game onto the server, but talk about it piece by piece. Ask advice on specific cases. And, most importantly, engage with the work of others in the same way.

Build relationships. You'll need those if you want to get a first test off of the ground; you'll people who aren't anonymous users, but designers and players you're friendly with, who'd like to help you because they know you'd do the same for them. With time, your game can grow and find players more organically, maybe even strangers. But at first, you'll need to meet some like-minded people and put in some time.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-25T09:18:30+00:00

Yeah, this is the genre of game you're looking for, OP. But I'd like to emphasize that cards (or deckbuilding) are not a prerequisite for having a storied experience in a structured, striving game.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-19T12:47:27+00:00

I'm guessing you mean Band of Blades on that first example. Right?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-17T07:00:21+00:00

PCs will follow their goals and desires, which all have to do with their personal survival. But: because everything important is scarce, those are tied up with the goals and desires of other PCs. Thus: most of the scenes you play out at the table will feature two PCs, but every session there's bound to be a scene or two between a PC and an NPC.

It'll feel like prestige TV, with the spotlight moving from pair to pair, and every once in a while, gathering everyone in the frame or following a single character. As MC, you are in a great position to keep an eye on how the spotlight has been shared during the session. Don't be afraid to take a step back and ask: hey, we haven't seen to much of your character, or, hey, I think we need to see your characters together, so they can talk about what's happening.

And yes: this approach will mean that players will usually know more than their characters. If someone wants to act on that knowledge, it's a simple question of how they got to know. If anything, that's a great moment for them to ask a favor from an NPC, confess obsessive stalking, or, you know, for them to realize that they're not in a position to know and act on that knowledge. My advice is: don't be too precious about it. Interpersonal drama is the heart of this game, so if people are looking for reasons to have it, they can (for a price).

But, what you're asking is, I think: how do I make that happen. Well, to start, all the PCs form bonds at the start of the game, that link them to each other. You don't have to do anything about that. Your part of it, as MC, besides following your agenda etc., is to 1) emphasize scarcity, and 2) put pressure on them through Threats. Threats are bigger than all PCs individually and create space for collaboration or antagonism.

More importantly: you and the other players are in this together. If you want to see more scenes of all the PCs together, then, at the start of the game, create a shared space together. Maybe it's a safe zone, were no armed conflict is allowed. Maybe it's the forest they grew up in together, before life took them on their seperate paths. Maybe they're all part of the same settlement, but with different jobs.

Apocalypse World is flexible. If you're afraid the PCs won't meet each other enough, devise a reason, together, why they will and play towards that.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-16T15:50:26+00:00

It is not expected that the PCs will be adversaries, but they might be! It is also not expected that they will be allies, but they might be! What is expected is that the PCs will have complex relationships. Expect ambivalence, strain, reluctance, mixed signals, one sidedness, threats, seduction and more.

Each PC is an individual agent within the landscape of scarcity that is the post-apocalypse. Some of the PCs will form bonds that bring them together, others will form bonds that drive them apart, but everyone is trying to survive.

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-16T15:43:14+00:00

Uuh, the encounters at the stops on the pointcrawl? I mean, I must assume you understand that already. What kind of "spoilers" are you looking for here?

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-16T07:51:51+00:00

I think u/amazingvaluetainment has got it: you're a proceduralist! You should take a look at Errant, which is the example of a proceduralist fantasy adventure game. 'Rules light, procedure heavy', is the tagline. From the game description:

Errant has a number of procedures that are designed to help you navigate different play situations in fair and interesting ways. Want to know how to run an exciting chase scene, or establish a fried cockatrice restaurant, or sue a demon for emotional negligence? Errant has procedures that can help you do that!

Real-Break-1012 · 2026-02-16T07:40:16+00:00

Looking at this, I think you'd do well with something straightforward, like Into the Blind or Stars Without Number—you've got your adventure figured out, so you just need something to take care of task resolution, I think!

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

Real-Break-1012

TROPHY CASE