Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Golden Bee
Dec 24, 2009

I came here to chew bubblegum and quote 'They Live', and I'm... at an impasse.

Kai Tave posted:

On the one hand having a skill called "Murder" was kind of cute, but on the other hand I was never fully satisfied trying to differentiate between three different skills for hurting other people and where one skill left off and another began, so I can't say I'm too sorry to see the skill list consolidated.

Agreedo

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cyphoderus
Apr 21, 2010

I'll have you know, foxes have the finest call in nature

QuantumNinja posted:

Every time I see this game, I get a little more convinced that John Harper doesn't know what game he wants to make. The system doesn't seem to be strictly improving, just getting increasingly dissimilar from where he started. (I typed out a long list of what I meant, but posting them here where John can't see them probably isn't very effective other than just complaining. So I posted several of them on the G+ group instead.)

I kind of agree with you. Would you mind posting a link to the G+ thread? I'm interested in seeing where it goes.

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.

SilverMike posted:

Check the descriptions for those; Attune seems spirit-oriented, Invoke is more general purpose occult-oriented. Given that spirits are prevalent in the setting, I'm alright with the split. But I wouldn't cry over them being consolidated if room's needed for another skill.

That doesn't seem like a good validation, because the other attributes don't seem to be laid out in the same way. Being a criminal empire is prevalent in the setting, but locks, alarms, misdirection, and sleight of hand all got lumped into Finesse. Getting into fights and doing murders are prevalent in the setting, but murder, brawling, and generally wrecking poo poo are all lumped into Battle. Being sneaky and stealthy got lumped with following someone in Prowl, but for some reason Observe got its own attribute as well.

I'm not saying I want more attributes back! Like everyone else here, I'm happy to see them go. But now the attribute list is pretty wonky. There's one attribute that managed how well you fight (Battle), two that handle your thieving (Prowl and Finesse), two for spellcasting (Attune and Invoke), and two for social interactions (Sway and Command). That's 7 'core' attributes, and then the other five attributes read like skills you'd take: Cipher for codes, Tinker for mechanisms and chemistry (and for some reason safecracking, instead of Finesse), Stitch for first aid, Observe for observation, and Handle for driving. The first seven attributes are way more important for making a character good at a thing. Oh, and for some reason, if you want to be a good brawler, you need Battle and some mix of Attune/Command/Invoke/Stitch in order to have good Resolve.

It seems like Harper is angling for a few core attributes and a small skill system, but avoid the actual separation to avoid introducing perceived complexity. It would be really easy to replace the core attributes with 4-5 core stats and then add in a few skills that give you +Xd when you roll the relevant thing, and it would get rid of this general goofiness. As it stands, it mechanically makes no sense to, say, fill out Stitch instead of one of the core attributes unless I'm really trying to play up my character's being a doctor.

The other issue here is that he's using this number of attributes to compute your resistance dice, and paring it down to a smaller set will mean changing the source of that derivation. But he's already changed how effect dice are computed once, so I don't see why he wouldn't a second time.

Cyphoderus posted:

I kind of agree with you. Would you mind posting a link to the G+ thread? I'm interested in seeing where it goes.

https://plus.google.com/communities/112767357581554417629

DemonMage
Oct 14, 2004



What happens in the course of duty is up to you...
They're doing a stream of Blades on Adam's Twitch channel. He'll probably put it up on John's Youtube after or maybe his own.

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


My crew of thieves finally got to do some genuine thievery this session (first session in 3 weeks, drat busy schedules). The highlight was us laterally stealing a gilded baby crib out from under a sleeping baby thanks to a three 6 crit.

We also stole a briefcase and locked tome from a VIP visiting the noble home we were burglarizing. No idea what is in them yet, but they were important enough for the VIP to leave his bodyguard watching them instead of himself as he discussed uncertain plots in the study with the man if the house (our attempts to eavesdrop weren't very successful).

Thankfully(?) A rogue spirit caused a ruckus to draw the bodyguard away from his post (the ruckus also covered our own botch). Based on the arcane paraphernalia with the book/briefcase, I'm guessing the VIP was a warden or other whisper. Especially since the rogue spirit's rampage went quiet awfully fast...

Very fun session.

DemonMage
Oct 14, 2004



What happens in the course of duty is up to you...
Version 3F of the Quickstart is up if you're a backer. Haven't had time to really look it over.

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


Actions got changed and reorganized again.

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.
This set of actions and organization is quite good IMO.

Cyphoderus
Apr 21, 2010

I'll have you know, foxes have the finest call in nature
Is anyone aware of the official stance on PbPing the quickstart rules? I'd love to run the v3 draft and see how it plays. I'd imagine it'd be okay because the official AP out there is very open about the rules.

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

A question now that I've poured over v3 (which is shaping up awesome). If I'm reading it right when defending/resisting, the base is always 6 harm, and the roll reduces that. That seems like a lot to me when maybe tackling less than outright deadly dangers, since you could roll a decent 5 on a daring roll but still end up taking a massive 5 harm consequence that takes multiple downtimes to recover from (or a shitload of stress).

Excited for this game to come to fruition though, and much more excited for the cyberpunk hack for it. Only thing I'd really want changed is maybe slightly more evocative advanced moves for the playbooks, but the format is designed so well I don't know where there would be room.

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


New version of the Quickstart, v4. Also, the game is definitely "behind schedule" and not going to make the original November 2015 estimate. No big deal, IMO, its progressing very well.

Changelog:

quote:

1. Vice. The mechanic for vice and stress recovery has changed. Vice is more of an issue now and can be fraught with trouble. Players now have a reason to let stress build up a bit higher (so they don't overindulge) but also, ignoring your vice has a bad consequence. It's a tough line to walk, better reflecting the problematic nature of vices. See page 19.

2. Coin value.The scale of value for coin has been tweaked slightly. Each character can now hold 4 coin instead of just 2. See page 20.

3. Engagement Roll. I've rewritten the outcomes of this roll to make it more interesting in play.

4. Tier, Rep, and Hold. I've revised these systems a bit to make them clearer, more strongly connected to fictional positioning, and a bit simpler to track.

5. Resistance.When you decide to resist a consequence and roll the dice, you must suffer the stress indicated. You can't roll first and see how much stress you'll take, then decide whether or not to resist. You decide to either accept the consequence or roll to resist and then suffer the stress.

6. Trauma.When a character suffers trauma, you choose a permanent trauma condition to add to your character. These conditions affect how your character thinks and behaves, reflecting how they've changed because of the traumatic experiences they've had. When you roleplay your trauma conditions, you earn xp for your character.

7. Bonus Die.There is only one available bonus die for rolls now. You either push yourself (taking 2 stress) or you accept a devil's bargain. This simplifies the dice rolling procedure slightly so there are fewer steps and choices. Characters can still help each other, using the assist teamwork action. Instead of a bonus die, assistance now improves the position of the assisted character. See page 17.

8. Character Sheets.All of the character sheets and the Crew sheet have been tweaked to reflect the new rules. Time to print again. :)

head58
Apr 1, 2013

Interesting that the placeholder headers for alchemy have been removed entirely, but it's still there on the Leech's sheet. I was hoping that section would be more filled out in this version. How the heck are alchemy and tinkering supposed to work?

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


Long term projects perhaps?

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

Stress and consequences seem way too deadly/debilitating now, and it doesn't make much sense since consequences were tied to certain stress levels, so how can you take the specific level of consequence without knowing that now? Definitely don't like that change.

Golden Bee
Dec 24, 2009

I came here to chew bubblegum and quote 'They Live', and I'm... at an impasse.
For as fawning as the first post is, this game seems to have stalled out both in forum interest and mechanical efficiency. This is version 3 of wildly revising the core mechanics, right?

Cyphoderus
Apr 21, 2010

I'll have you know, foxes have the finest call in nature

Golden Bee posted:

For as fawning as the first post is, this game seems to have stalled out both in forum interest and mechanical efficiency. This is version 3 of wildly revising the core mechanics, right?

Certainly. The latest update mentions things progressing well, and that might be true in terms of getting closer to print, but, mechanically, it seems we're getting a bunch of "horizontal" updates and no progress forward towards a definite design.

People were saying it's better to revise a game after public playtests than not to, but at this point it seems as if the first version of the rules were barely playtested at all. Either that, or John Harper is really, really indecisive.

Doodmons
Jan 17, 2009
I don't know about anyone else but even considering this game is very much My Jam, until the rules are finalised at least as much as the core game mechanics being set I can't really get that invested in it or muster up the effort to follow it because if I decide I like it that game might literally not exist by the time of the next revision. Until a version of the game comes along which I can be pretty sure looks like what I'll end up having paid for, I'm not really that interested in reading it. I would if I had the spare time to do proper playtests and submit feedback - but I don't, and I'm willing to bet many other people don't either. I bought a game that I thought I would enjoy and it basically doesn't exist yet, so... ehh?

Edit: That's not to say what I've read of these playtests looks crap. Far from it. It's just I have no idea what's going to carry over so even if I like some bits, I can't really consider those "in the game"

homullus
Mar 27, 2009

If I had known the rules would be changing this many times and going this far from what was available in the KS, I wouldn't have backed it.

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

homullus posted:

If I had known the rules would be changing this many times and going this far from what was available in the KS, I wouldn't have backed it.

Realistically, the die rolling mechanic has gotten simpler, skills got better, and overall stuff has been added (like tier, holds, turf, etc), which are good. The only thing I don't like are how stress and consequences are done now, and I have a feeling they might get changed back or cleaned up anyway.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
I like Blades, I ran 1-and-a-half mission PbP, and I don't regret my backing at all, but I don't feel like committing to running it again for a while specifically because the core game is still changing.

Dzurlord
Nov 5, 2011

Fenarisk posted:

Realistically, the die rolling mechanic has gotten simpler, skills got better, and overall stuff has been added (like tier, holds, turf, etc), which are good. The only thing I don't like are how stress and consequences are done now, and I have a feeling they might get changed back or cleaned up anyway.

Yeah, I have a similar knee-jerk response to stress and consequences and such but I want to fiddle with them until I can really grasp how they work out in numbers before I talk about it on the G+ group that the author actually reads. He's been super good about taking feedback from there so far, so I share your feeling about them getting rolled back.

That said, I do kind of like how overindulging works now - if you wipe too much Stress, you've gone too far. :D

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


My group has been playing it semi-weekly (whenever schedules line up) since pretty much the end of the kickstarter and every time stress mechanics get updated a few of us go "oh man it looks so terrible and harsh now" and we just play through and it turns out its not so bad. Granted we've got about 2 fatigue each and are only a Tier 1 gang, but hey, poor choices were sometimes made on our parts.

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.

Galaga Galaxian posted:

New version of the Quickstart, v4. Also, the game is definitely "behind schedule" and not going to make the original November 2015 estimate. No big deal, IMO, its progressing very well.

I'd rather have the game November 2016 and it be amazing. Everyone's already said it: this game seems to be due for tons of annealing yet, and while each subsequent edition is playable, it's getting better at a crawl. I hope Harper takes six more months and makes it great instead of rushing it and delivering it closer to the current state.

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

Even when he hammers out the core rules and he's happy with them, there's still waiting for a ton of additional gang types along with their turfs, and maybe another playbook or two. The only thing that makes me sad is having to wait longer for some of the good hacks like the Cyberpunk one, because at this point anyone working on one from the stretch goals probably gave up and is waiting for him to finish the rules concretely.

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


A recent kickstarter update a couple days ago included some new stuff, specifically crew sheets for Cults and Smugglers (as well as a slightly revised Thieves crew sheet). In addition there was a sampling of new abilities independent of specific playbooks, including one that seems to point to the existence of a Ghost playbook.

Smugglers looks pretty fun.

Lemon-Lime
Aug 6, 2009
New quickstart rules (v5), and Harper has decided these are the final rules:

quote:

The rules are finished! That's right, version 5 is the final iteration of the core mechanics. Nothing significant will change going forward (maybe just a number here or there if we find an error). If you've been waiting for the rules to stabilize before you start playing with the Early Access PDF, your wait is over.

:toot:

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


Another update has come down. Including one big piece of news:

quote:

Are you ready for this? The rules are finished! That's right, version 5 is the final iteration of the core mechanics. Nothing significant will change going forward (maybe just a number here or there if we find an error). If you've been waiting for the rules to stabilize before you start playing with the Early Access PDF, your wait is over.

Changelog for the new version:

quote:

VERSION 5 CHANGELOG
Most Changes in this PDF update are in dark red text.
1. Healing Rules! I've fleshed out the healing rules on their own page and provided an example of their use. See page 21.
2. Going to War. At -3 faction status, you're at war. This results in several difficulties, detailed on page 14and also summarized on the faction status tracking sheet.
3. New Entanglement: Flipped. Sometimes your allies switch sides. See page 30.
4. Te amwor k. I've rewritten the Assist and Set-Up maneuvers to improve their use in play. See page 17.
5. Vice. You now may choose what your character does when they overindulgetheir vice. See page 19.
6. Resistance Roll. When you roll a criticalon resistance, you clear 1 stress.
7. The Slide. I re-wrote several of the Slide's special abilities to make the playbook a bit cooler. See page 36.
8. The Cutter, The Lurkand The Houndhad a few special abilities tweaked and shuffled around. If you have a player who is already playing one of these, they can keep any shuffled abilities they already have as veteran advances.
9. The Spider. New PC playbook! The Spider is a devious mastermind. See page 37.
10. The Ghost. New PC playbook! What happens to you when you die? See page 52.
11. Extra Crew Sheets. I've added the Breakers, Cult, Hawkers, and Smugglers in this update. Also, all crews now start with a free training upgrade.
12. Crew Advancement. I tweaked advancement a bit as well as the cost of some crew upgrades. When you advance, you get either a special ability or two crew upgrades. See page 18.

Evil Mastermind
Apr 28, 2008

For people who missed the kickstarter, John just put the current draft up on DriveThru, which will be updated up to and including the final version.

Iceclaw
Nov 4, 2009

Fa la lanky down dilly, motherfuckers.

Evil Mastermind posted:

For people who missed the kickstarter, John just put the current draft up on DriveThru, which will be updated up to and including the final version.

Great, picked it up right away. But I don't have anyone to play with. :smith:

Josef bugman
Nov 17, 2011

Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund
Try it as PbP on here, minimal social stigma for it failing too!

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.
Just read / skimmed v5. Several systems have improved:
  • The overindulgence revision to the vice mechanic is neat in terms of both trigger and result.
  • Entanglements and payoffs got nicely polished.
  • The revised heat system (with the addition of incarceration) feels cool.
  • The downtime mechanism got nicely cleaned up.
  • The expanded and finished classes mostly feel coherent and flavorful.
  • The crew playbooks all feel unique and excellently done

That said, I'm sad about this being the "final draft". I'm not really happy with the end product. It feels bloated and spartan at the same time; it's a game that knew what it wanted to be, then tried to be something else, and landed somewhere in the middle. Previous quick-start releases, for all their other flaws, often seemed far more focused.

I could go into specific points, but all of them boil down to: "why did you complicate X this way?" In the system as it is, aimed at narrative action, why all these little bits, bobs, ups, and downs?

I guess I keep thinking back to Vincent Baker's comment:

Apocalypse World, p. 268 posted:

Here’s a custom threat move. People new to the game occasionally ask me for this one. It’s general, it modifies nearly very other move:

Things are tough. Whenever a players’ character makes a move, the MC judges it normal, difficult, or crazy difficult. If it’s difficult, the player takes -1 to the roll. If it’s crazy difficult, the player takes -2 to the roll.

Several groups in playtest wanted this move or one like it. All of them abandoned it after only one session. It didn’t add anything fun to the game, but did add a little hassle to every single move. So it’s a legal custom move, of course, and you can try it if you like, but I wouldn’t expect you to stick with it.

As I've been reading v5, I keep asking myself the following: could I dump dominant/risky/desperate and play this with 2d8+attribute?
  • Let the tiers be 8-, 9-12, 13+ and the effects be 0, 1, and 2 for those
  • Run clocks the same way
  • Let +1d manifest as a +1 to the roll
  • Effect enhancement and potency play their old gigs
  • Use d6s in the appropriate way for Entanglement, or just expand the tables by 3 items each.
Would that game be more fun? It'd be simpler, that's for sure. I dunno.

Like I said, I'm mostly just sad. This game looked so awesome at the outset, and reading through, it seems like it landed somewhere else.

(That said, if I can, I'll try playtesting v5 this weekend and report back.)

QuantumNinja fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Jan 12, 2016

Harrow
Jun 30, 2012

I just picked up the early access version on DriveThruRPG and I really like what I'm seeing, though I don't have much to base it on. I'm actually interested in your critiques, QuantumNinja, because I'm considering hacking this for use in a very different setting/time period and I'm wondering what you'd have done differently, or what previous versions did better.

Harrow fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Jan 13, 2016

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

Harrow posted:

I just picked up the early access version on DriveThruRPG and I really like what I'm seeing, though I don't have much to base it on. I'm actually interested in your critiques, QuantumNinja, because I'm considering hacking this for use in a very different setting/time period and I'm wondering what you'd have done differently, or what previous versions did better.

In a few months all the stretch goal hacks are coming out, so look for those. Some of the notable ones are cyberpunk and I think a pirate one. There's also a dungeon crawling adventuring company one but we will see how that goes.

Harrow
Jun 30, 2012

One question I have after reading this thread and v5 of the rules: how is Effect determined based on an Action roll? I read earlier in the thread about some sort of separate roll to determine Effect after a successful Action roll, but I don't see anything about that in the current rules--was that removed? If so, is it entirely up to the GM to interpret the circumstances/degree of success and assign the Effect level?

Fenarisk posted:

In a few months all the stretch goal hacks are coming out, so look for those. Some of the notable ones are cyberpunk and I think a pirate one. There's also a dungeon crawling adventuring company one but we will see how that goes.

I was just thinking that a dungeon crawl hack seems pretty natural.

My own setting, if I ever end up running that game, would probably require a hack of its own, since I doubt anyone's already making a version of this for an alternate-history World War I where magic is real. But the basic core of this system seems like it would fit perfectly with what I'm trying to accomplish, so my plan is to playtest it with my group for a while and then see if I want to hack it to fit the game I'd been planning. It helps that my group is stacked with Dishonored fans so Blades in the Dark's own setting will be a pretty easy sell.

Harrow fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jan 13, 2016

Iceclaw
Nov 4, 2009

Fa la lanky down dilly, motherfuckers.
The Band of Blades hack might be up your alley.

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.

Harrow posted:

I just picked up the early access version on DriveThruRPG and I really like what I'm seeing, though I don't have much to base it on. I'm actually interested in your critiques, QuantumNinja, because I'm considering hacking this for use in a very different setting/time period and I'm wondering what you'd have done differently, or what previous versions did better.

I think my post summed it up: there is a ton of complexity where there could be none, and a lack of complexity where some could help. I feel like the entire core mechanic could be replaced with a pair of d8s, for example. Other examples include four tracks for health, 30 factions to keep track of as a GM (even just 1/3 would be annoying to do clocks for), a two-axis system for GMs specifying how rolls might go (fixed in previous versions!), 12 attributes (more than Shadowrun), an under-specified GM clock economy ("add some ticks, or don't, or whatever, when some rolls <5"), and flat itemization.

More importantly, all of these congeal into 5-7 complicated subsystems. Maybe these are excusable, individually, since none is unlivable. But together, I can only ask: "Why?"

While the first release was a half-complete game with a narrative-first promise and some middling problems, the latest is full of bloated subsystems that decries that promise. I mean, think about this: we have four tracks for health, but each of the three dozen items gets a single-sentence description, all crammed on a single page. Like I said, it's bloated in some ways and spartan in others. At the end of all of that, I gotta ask: "Why? Why all of this complexity where I shouldn't care, and none of it I might?"

As such, it's left a bad taste in my mouth.

Harrow
Jun 30, 2012

QuantumNinja posted:

I think my post summed it up: there is a ton of complexity where there could be none, and a lack of complexity where some could help. I feel like the entire core mechanic could be replaced with a pair of d8s, for example. Other examples include four tracks for health, 30 factions to keep track of as a GM (even just 1/3 would be annoying to do clocks for), a two-axis system for GMs specifying how rolls might go (fixed in previous versions!), 12 attributes (more than Shadowrun), an under-specified GM clock economy ("add some ticks, or don't, or whatever, when some rolls <5"), and flat itemization.

More importantly, all of these congeal into 5-7 complicated subsystems. Maybe these are excusable, individually, since none is unlivable. But together, I can only ask: "Why?"

While the first release was a half-complete game with a narrative-first promise and some middling problems, the latest is full of bloated subsystems that decries that promise. I mean, think about this: we have four tracks for health, but each of the three dozen items gets a single-sentence description, all crammed on a single page. Like I said, it's bloated in some ways and spartan in others. At the end of all of that, I gotta ask: "Why? Why all of this complexity where I shouldn't care, and none of it I might?"

As such, it's left a bad taste in my mouth.

Four tracks for health? All I see is harm, or do stress and trauma count, too? (Those seem like separate systems to me.) I'm probably missing something.

Anyway--coming at it totally fresh, it seems like a consistent and coherent game to me, but I haven't played it yet. I intend to, and maybe my opinion will change. I agree that it's weird how little description items get, and the book seems organized very strangely, and there are some areas where the rules and/or recommendations are unclear to me just based on the wording (does the Whisper's Tempest ability require an Attune roll or what? How does the GM determine effect level? Just how does Planning work?).

I think what I like, at first read, is:
  • The Attribute/Action division system. I like how that's set up and how it's independent of playbook.
  • Most of the playbooks.
  • How harm and stress work, along with using vices to relieve stress.
  • Clocks. If I'm understanding them correctly, I'm way into the idea as a way to track the players' progress both for the GM and for the players. It also seems like an elegant way to piece together and play through a heist as you go.
  • Crew advancement is super neat and something I might want to graft onto other systems. I like the idea of the party advancing as a group while they advance individually.
I may have a different opinion after running a session or two, though.

Fenarisk
Oct 27, 2005

QuantumNinja posted:

I think my post summed it up: there is a ton of complexity where there could be none, and a lack of complexity where some could help. I feel like the entire core mechanic could be replaced with a pair of d8s, for example. Other examples include four tracks for health, 30 factions to keep track of as a GM (even just 1/3 would be annoying to do clocks for), a two-axis system for GMs specifying how rolls might go (fixed in previous versions!), 12 attributes (more than Shadowrun), an under-specified GM clock economy ("add some ticks, or don't, or whatever, when some rolls <5"), and flat itemization.

More importantly, all of these congeal into 5-7 complicated subsystems. Maybe these are excusable, individually, since none is unlivable. But together, I can only ask: "Why?"

While the first release was a half-complete game with a narrative-first promise and some middling problems, the latest is full of bloated subsystems that decries that promise. I mean, think about this: we have four tracks for health, but each of the three dozen items gets a single-sentence description, all crammed on a single page. Like I said, it's bloated in some ways and spartan in others. At the end of all of that, I gotta ask: "Why? Why all of this complexity where I shouldn't care, and none of it I might?"

As such, it's left a bad taste in my mouth.

I feel like the factions are there as a complete list, and groups can pick what they want out of it, using as many or as few as they want. This is basically the setting book as well so it makes sense.

Four tracks for "health" isn't bad in my mind, as stress and harm are the ones that'll change a bit, and trauma and vice are long term and not often changing.

QuantumNinja
Mar 8, 2013

Trust me.
I pretend to be a ninja.

Yo I didn't say it was a bad system. There's a ton of cool poo poo, like I said in my first post about the fifth revision. But you wanted my complaints, so I trotted them out. Basically, I think it could be a lot better, and I'm sad about it.

Fenarisk posted:

I feel like the factions are there as a complete list, and groups can pick what they want out of it, using as many or as few as they want. This is basically the setting book as well so it makes sense.

Four tracks for "health" isn't bad in my mind, as stress and harm are the ones that'll change a bit, and trauma and vice are long term and not often changing.

There is a health track, a stress track, a trauma track, and a healing long-term goal track. I wasn't even counting vice. But my question is: what does having 4-5 tracks add to the game that having 1-3 wouldn't? You could fold the health penalties into the stress track with just a little effort, and the healing clock is just... well, okay I guess.

E: Okay, if we treat trauma as long-term (healing track certainly isn't, because it's resolved every session or two), then there are 3 health tracks and two long-term health tracks (trauma and vice). Again, is this really an important addition?

QuantumNinja fucked around with this message at 02:42 on Jan 14, 2016

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Harrow
Jun 30, 2012

QuantumNinja posted:

Yo I didn't say it was a bad system. There's a ton of cool poo poo, like I said in my first post about the fifth revision. But you wanted my complaints, so I trotted them out. Basically, I think it could be a lot better, and I'm sad about it.

Oh yeah, I get you. I'll probably end up agreeing with you after I play it, who knows. I'm happy to have your take on it going into a playtest so I know what to watch out for and what might trip me and my players up.

EDIT: I think I can see how it got where it is, though. It looks like it's really trying to emphasize the "running a crew" aspect of things--it's all very Lies of Locke Lamora, or at least that's the vibe I get. That mashed up with Dishonored. All of the things that actually happen while you're on an operation seem like what's handled in more narrative terms or with less nitty-gritty detail, while the crew management, projects, and long-term healing and trauma stuff get a lot of detail. It's kind of interesting and I'm not sure what to make of it. I think I'd be tempted to add more detail to items, possible loot, and that kind of thing were I to create a hack down the line.

I love this system's bones, at least on a reading, but I can see how it's sort of... lopsided.

Harrow fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Jan 14, 2016

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply