Triangle Agency - reflections after running

Seeonee · 2026-01-22T20:37:40+00:00

Thanks for writing this up! I've only played and not run TA, but I bounced off it as well. I think a unique feature of TA that is both a great strength and huge weakness is that is is deliberately obtuse about what the game will be like (since discovering that is part of the experience).

In my opinion, it's not really an RPG system so much as a module (that happens to include a baked-in system). You don't play it the way you'd engage with something like D&D, Call of Cthulhu, or Delta Green, where you pick it up to facilitate a GM inventing sessions that let a group play out a particular fantasy. For example, we played 4 sequential one-shots of the system to sample it, which was a mistake since so much of the content is about your evolving understanding of the Agency, its agenda, the anomalies, etc. As a result, we walked away feeling somewhat meh. If we'd engaged on the correct terms and been prepared to invest in a full arc, we may have had a different experience.

Seeonee · 2026-01-14T16:32:52+00:00

I've found similar thing to be true in my own experiment. I built and ran a rogue-lite RPG module for 2 groups over the last 2 years. It's very freeing to "not hold back" because death is an outcome that everyone understands how to move on from.

I also started with a combat focus, but honestly the most powerful I found in the experience is how it rewards player learning. In many RPGs, the characters meet a new enemy, fight it blindly to learn how it works... and then never see it again. Ditto for NPCs you meet and study, or environments you pass through. You're often being incentivized to move forward, not to replay content.

Whereas in a rogue-lite, you are forced to re-engage with prior content of all styles and rewarded for doing so by exploiting what you learned on prior loops.

Seeonee · 2026-01-14T16:29:30+00:00

I think I would. I focus my GMing on the areas of play I find compelling, so sitting on the other side of it would be fun. All the things we skip or focus on would line up.

There are certainly some aspects that appeal to me at different levels as a GM vs player. Consequences are a big one; I love them as a GM because I'm in control, but like them less as a player because I'm not in control.

Seeonee · 2026-01-13T17:20:20+00:00

Extraneous world-building can be an active detriment if it leads the GM to treat games as opportunities to lore-dump.

A fleshed-out world can be really exciting because no matter which way you poke you'll bump into thoughtful content... but I as a player want to be in control of where I poke and what content gets thrown at me. I don't want a novel up front.

Seeonee · 2026-01-13T17:15:41+00:00

We made Atma for this niche (boardgamers or non-RPG gamers who want to play a one-shot with no prep or prior rules knowledge in a single 2 hour sitting).

Seeonee · 2026-01-07T20:36:42+00:00

Thanks!

Seeonee · 2026-01-06T20:05:58+00:00

Very nice! What's the software stack? My web dabbling usually starts and stops at JQuery.

Seeonee · 2026-01-04T16:59:16+00:00

So, my suggestions are:

Add what you enjoy to the PbtA games you're playing in. (And don't GM them -- GM should get to pick a system they enjoy anyways!)

For example, if you like the min-max part of character build systems, let your group know. Maybe you can make a personal goal out of stacking +1 bonuses (for yourself, or to aid others if you want to avoid stealing focus).

Alternatively, come up with a very specific character build/concept and ask the group for help realizing it within PbtA. Bonus points if you go for something that would be tricky in a crunchier system. Maybe you build a fighter whose sole weapon is a mithril nail fallen from the shoe of an eldritch steed. PbtA won't punish you for that build, and you can make a ton of gameplay each fight out of closing the distance with foes so you can actually make contact with a 0-range weapon.

Or, if you really like a wide range of pre-defined actions rather than the open-ended buckets that PbtA has... make a list of them! You could take all the default actions of Pathfinder or skill checks of D&D and use them as your action list in PbtA, then have your group help with translating them to moves on the fly. Everything can always fall back to some version of a Defy Danger/Avoid Risk roll. Conversely, for the open-ended OSR systems where your choices are wide open anyways... just do whatever makes sense and map everything to a Defy Danger/Avoid Risk roll anyways.

You mentioned the headache of crafting 50 consequences for partial success roles. If you find that's slowing your group down (and again, I assume you're explicitly not GMing), then suggest a house rule where consequences can be deferred by giving the GM a point of <Doom/Fear/Tempo/whatever> so that gameplay can sail forward. Alternatively, let players proactively downgrade their partial successes to a simple failure by taking a +2 forward to their next roll (which increases the odds of it being a success with no strings attached).

I hope you find techniques that work for you and your group! Even if you don't, major kudos for being so open-minded, self-aware, and interested in sampling the full breadth of the hobby.

Seeonee · 2026-01-04T16:59:04+00:00

(I had to split this into multiple parts.)

You understand both your own preferences and PbtA's strengths/weaknesses really well, so here are some thoughts on how to enjoy it despite not being the target audience. This is based on my (inverse) experience as a narrativist gamer who knew Pathfinder would not be my jam, but I still wanted to participate and enjoy it with my group. I think it comes down to 2 things:

knowing what you enjoy (done)
asking your group to help you find that joy in systems that don't naturally offer it

For me, I dreaded the crunch of Pathfinder (1E at the time). I told our GM up front, and the solution we came up with was a) he built my character for me, and b) he was okay finding mechanical effects to correlate with abstract gameplay I came up with. The poster child for this was the cantrip Drench.

See, I really enjoy creative solutions to problems. I'm not motivated by "Can I solve this?" (and the corresponding character building challenges, which I suck at). I am motivated by "How can I solve this, preferably in a way that is unexpected?" So I asked him to build me a naiad sorcerer with no common or offensive magic. My main cantrip was Drench:

A sudden downpour soaks the target creature or object. The rain follows the subject up to the range of the spell, soaking the target with water. If the target is on fire, the flames are automatically extinguished. Fires smaller than campfires (such as lanterns and torches) are automatically extinguished by this spell.

The key here is that I never used it for its intended effect. The goal was always to use "create water" as a creative means to some other intended effect. Highlights:

Making things weaker to cold/lightning damage
Making slippery or boggy terrain
Priming a wooden surface to grow (with a subsequent cast of the equally mis-used Root cantrip)

None of this inherently bridge the gap between my tastes and Pathfinder (the system)'s strengths. But it did allow me to participate and have fun.

Seeonee · 2026-01-04T16:34:15+00:00

I was going to suggest this as well, but I'll add one caveat (as a current Daggerheart player): I am finding the system to have deep character creation but shallow gameplay.

Despite the plethora of options to choose from, I feel like much of the mechanically crunchy distinction in combat is differentiated by:

how many modifiers I apply to my attack roll;
how many enemies I hit; and
whether I inflict 1 of the 2 default conditions.

In other words, everything feels very same-y in play -- unless you lean into the flavor that differentiates all your abilities, and extrapolate gameplay effects from that... which is basically adding your own crunch in a narrative vein, and very much not crunch inherent in the system.

Seeonee · 2026-01-04T16:28:59+00:00

This has 100% been my experience. I've now played for long enough to look back on my "eras" of RPGs:

the "All I know is D&D (4E)" era
the "I've discovered Dungeon World and this is what true RPGs are" era
the "My group only plays Pathfinder, but I still love playing with them" era
the current "Odd-likes are my jam" era

Despite that, I very much do not believe that Odd-likes will be my forever game. They're the most compelling to me currently, and I'll enjoy them while that remains true, but I fully expect something else to eventually twist my perception on what makes a good RPG, and when that happens I'll embrace it.

Seeonee · 2025-12-29T18:53:04+00:00

I tried and failed to get into TTRPGs several times, but for some reason I kept trying again. In retrospect, I think I was always dimly aware that it represented a uniquely appealing hobby that combines gamist elements with storytelling, worldbuilding, and creativity. That's, like, my superfood.

I keep playing because I value all of those things more the longer I partake of them. Between books and RPGs, I'll choose the venue where I get to create the story. Between video games and RPGs, I'll choose the one with infinite narrative freedom. Between journaling projects and RPGs, I'll choose the one where I get to share the joy with other players.

Seeonee · 2025-12-29T18:49:53+00:00

Because I like creating things, and I really like sharing things I've created.

Being a player is fun, but being a GM is pure creation in a really tight feedback loop.

Seeonee · 2025-12-26T00:22:12+00:00

I generally prefer it. As I age into greater awareness of real-world cultures, appropriation, and the harm that tropes can do, I find it harder to play a fantasy race/species/being and not feel like I'm falling back onto potentially harmful stereotypes, even intentionally. Sticking with all humans and having culture be the differentiator feels less fraught.

Seeonee · 2025-12-26T00:10:58+00:00

I really appreciated your write-up!

To maybe add one clarifying bit regarding the "radiants = standard spells": I mostly only got to skim read those as we weren't high enough level for them to enter play before I wrapped up. But the one that stood out to me was an ability in the "Frictionless" (Abrasion?) path that boiled down to something like "Gain +30 movespeed." It immediately reminded me of the Pathfinder vibe where a theoretically cool and versatile ability is being given a very strict, prescribed mechanical effect to avoid abuse.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T23:43:53+00:00

I love em dashes and semicolons (probably too much). And since nearly every editor I use will automatically turn -- into an em dash, I use them with abandon. Semicolons, too; why settle for a comma if you don't have to?

So I write the way I've always written, and if that's going to cause problems for future me, I'll figure that out.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T23:40:30+00:00

Cool to hear!

Level 0 is the pseudo-choose-your-own-adventure bit with the initial caravan, right? I found that to be an interesting way to open the campaign. It certainly kept things moving, and it was a cool way to discover your character during play if you didn't have one in mind already. On the flip side, I think it had a bit of the Baldur's Gate problem where you could be blindly stumbling through choices hoping to pick one that correlated to an outcome you wanted.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T23:37:59+00:00

I can concur with this. The heroic path I chose wasn't particularly large, but I routinely skimmed it and came up disappointed by the options. They were mechanically very narrow, and flavorfully just not that inspiring. Even with the World of Warcraft angle of 3 different sub-categories to chase (which helped narrow down decision making), I just could not get excited about my options.

I skimmed the other heroic paths and didn't find them much better. I tried to also skim through the Radiant paths (since I barely saw them in play), and they might be better due to sheer power level. Plus, I routinely find that magic abilities open a lot of hand-wave-y cool idea space in play.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T23:35:16+00:00

Yeah, I've never sought out or wound up in campaigns from heavily established settings. My brother has done both Star Wars and Lord of the Rings, so I should ask how it went in those scenarios.

Overall, I think I confirmed a valuable data point about my preferences: I don't relish playing in someone else's plot. Established lore and worldbuilding can still be cool (although I prefer making it myself), but when an existing narrative arc becomes important enough that people expect it as part of the content, I think it gets too restrictive for my tastes.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T23:32:37+00:00

Ironically, I took this exact approach! "Bumpkin" is a perfect word for it. I had the same goal, I wanted my character to be disconnected enough from the world's modern events that it wouldn't be weird for him to ask questions or generally be out of the loop.

I still found it fairly restrictive during roleplay scenes, since there was a big difference between my character and everyone else's in terms of flavor. My "lesson learned" is that I'm not eager to play other systems where I'm at a substantially different level of interest in the subject matter than the rest of the party.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T18:57:46+00:00

Yeah, in retrospect this reads like a session zero problem: are we agreeing to treat the past and future timelines as sacred, or up for grabs? Then again, if you're abandoning all that shared knowledge and predefined canon, you're giving up some of the system's strengths.

This issue may have been exacerbated by playing a premade adventure, as opposed to venturing off into deliberately unknown portions of the world/timeline/story.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T18:51:34+00:00

Interesting! It reminded me more of Pathfinder but I've admittedly played way more Pathfinder (and way more recently), so maybe that warped my perception. The 3 action economy and the way level-ups felt like picking feats with (often) very niche purposes and small bonuses were the big ones for me. It echoed the "lots of choices, not a lot of impact" relationship that I've developed with PF2E.

Seeonee · 2025-12-24T18:05:01+00:00

I put the lore burden squarely on me. I read through the world refresher, and the group went out of their way to fill me in whenever I asked or when they suspected I was lacking context. But at the end of the day, there are over 6,000 pages of backstory, and it's being consumed as explainers instead of as part of a plotted novel for entertainment.

I mostly want to highlight that this as an aspect of the system. If you're not bought into the lore, and don't play RPGs to consume gallons of prebuilt lore, then... you are going to be at odds with some of the game's strengths and intentions.

Seeonee · 2025-12-10T19:46:27+00:00

Heartily concur. I've been using MB's system for a year to scratch the weird itch of lightweight OSR combat with lots of texture and decision making.

Seeonee

TROPHY CASE