Blades in the Dark Actual Play

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
Thanks for the heads up! I'll be heading there forthwith...

I hope I caught you in time, but I would strongly consider preordering the hardcover from their BackerKit! Hardcovers ship next month. This is a book I'm definitely looking forward to getting in print. John Harper is using some really intricate grey scale techniques for the art in the book that should look awesome in print. From viewing the PDF in two-page spread mode in Acrobat I can tell it is going to be a really nice looking book.

As an additional bonus when you preorder you get the PDF for no more moneys! There's only like a $10 difference.

Alright. Done shilling for now!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

darkbard

Legend
I hope I caught you in time

You did. I get as far as watching a few minutes of the video play and decided I want to set aside time to watch the full session (90 minutes or so) before ordering. And you're right: getting the HC for an extra $10 is definitely worth it. Thanks for reminding me that what I saw last night when I Googled the game sounded like a pretty good package deal!
 

Originally posted by Manbearcat
Much of what is going on (from a basic resolution standpoint) in Blades is what we've been doing in other PBtA games, just more formalized and codified. Position and its status of Desperate, Risky, and Controlled have "always existed", its just that they've been handled implicitly during play or explicitly in the course of conversation rather than having the game jargon to rely on (I prefer Blades way of doing it).

So in Blades your going with the game-tech Consequences of:

Desperate = Harm 3 (or deadly), 3 ticks on a Clock.
Risky = Harm 2, 2 ticks on a Clock.
Controlled = Harm 1, 1 tick on a Clock.

Then you're extrapolating from there using rough equivalents for the various situations where Harm and "Clock-ticking" aren't the best Consequences (which will be a fair amount of the time) for stuff going wrong. And a fair amount of play is about whether players want to accept the proposed Consequences or make Resistance Rolls to suffer Stress but lessen the Consequences you give them (so you just step down to the next equivalent fictional escalation of the situation). Effectively this gives them the power to turn the classic 6- result into a 7-9 by (almost surely) paying some Stress (with a narrow chance of paying 0 and a narrower still chance of clearing 1 Stress).

Push, Devil's Bargain, and Resistance is a huge, player empowering, part of the machinery of the game. They give the players a lot of control over (a) the manifestation of their archetype and (b) the trajectory of the fiction. And this power comes in a very non-intrusive, low-overhead fashion. And honestly, I think most people hung up on process-sim wouldn't have any problem with these widgets because they pretty much stem very naturally from such a mental framework (at least Push and Resistance do).

Failed Risky (and Controlled to a lesser degree) Actions, Resisted Desperate Consequences, and Devil's Bargain (among some other things) are going to be your primary 7-9 snowballing-narrative machinery (note that 2 of those 3 are in the hands of the players!).

In the final analysis, even though I've only run it for about 10 hours of play, I feel confident in saying that, procedurally (and in some of the focus on some truly bloody awesome mini-game stuff), its a bit different than AW, but the feel of play and the snowballing of genre-coherent, exciting action is very much the same. Its sequential set-up is a lot like Torchbearer, so there is that component as well. Then there is the Vice component of play which is akin to Nature in TB or Beliefs in BW. They don't just have to be scoundrel-orthodox habits like Pleasure and Gambling. They can also be things like Faith and Obligation (to a noble cause). So long as they get you into interesting situations/genre-coherent trouble, that is all that is necessary. And you've also got the classically BW xp earned when things are at their worst (Mark xp on a Desperate Action roll). I'm confident you'll enjoy it mightily either GMing or playing.

And if at some point you guys want to try to play online, I should be able to give it a go. I've got free time now and again.

Originally posted by chaochou
I've posted sometimes about my methods for running AW - it always involves a lot of questions. I find a good combination is asking for a descriptor followed by loaded, action generator... like "So who's that old drifter you keep seeing on the edge of town..?" and let them get into describing him or her and then something like. "Yeah, so what did you do that's got her headed your way with a loaded shotgun and a pack of hounds?".

I'd say that was pretty standard Apocalypse World - a back and forth which roughly results in 'Announce future badness'.

Now I haven't got close to the GM section of Blades yet but I wondered if you could give an example (or more!) of your own play, where there might be negotiations, bargaining, interpretation of rolls, consequence, resistance, stress - in other words the resolution system in action.

Alright, I'm going to relay the first moments of the first Score we had in the games I GMed.

- The Crew were Shadows (Thieves and spies). Playbooks were Hound (Ranger-ey), Lurk (Infiltrator-ey Rogue), and Slide (Face Rogue). They had the following Crew Upgrade and Ability:

Underground Maps and Passkeys
: You have easy passage through the underground canals, tunnels, and basements of the city.

Second Story: When you execute a clandestine infiltration, you get +1d to the engagement roll.

- The Score: A wealthy noblewoman's daughter fell in with a gang who sold her off to a ruthless band of sex peddlers (HFS; Hooks For Slugs) to pay off a debt. She wants her freed and returned and she has the coin to make it worth the risk.

THE ENGAGEMENT

The Plan: Stealth - Trespass unseen. Detail: The point of infiltration.

The Bluecoats' (City Watch) courage is easily taken from them, but one thing most of them won't tolerate is illicit sex trade with non-consensual minors so their operation is very underground. Still, the HFS is extremely dangerous and there isn't a chance the authorities would make a move against them on their own turf.

During the Gather Information phase of play (precedes The Score), the Crew uncovered that the HFS sex den was a half-collapsed subterranean mine/canal system; an offshoot from the Coalridge Mine Proper. One of the HFX clients (a now blackmailed Bluecoat) even gave them the layout of the complex including hosting rooms and a secret point of ingress via an old coal chute.

THE ENGAGEMENT ROLL

1d for sheer luck
+ 1d for each Major Advantage
- 1d for each Major Disadvantage

So we settled on +1d because the plan's detail exposed vulnerability, +1d because the operation is particularly bold and daring, +1d because their Underground Maps and Passkeys should get them to the den and the point of ingress easily enough, +1d for Second Story, and -1d for a higher Tier target.

So that is 4d6. A 6 was rolled (only one so not a Critical). That earns them: "You’re in a Controlled position when the action starts."

So I frame the PCs right into the action with the situation set up for success (it went something like this):

"You worm your way up the grimy ancient chute and peak out into the S&M Closet off the main hall where the hosting rooms are. The weird stink and eerie green glow of unrefined electroplasm haunts the dark of the cramped space as a small hanging lantern creaks on its hook by the door. A gaunt and disheveled lackey is going through a box of macabre devices until finally he finds what he is looking for; <keeping it clean for the faint of heart>. He hefts it over his shoulder and reaches high, struggling to unhook the electroplasm lantern. 'Damnable thing', he mumbles."

CLOCKS

So I had 3 Clocks for this Score; a pair of Linked Clocks for the PCs (Find Her at 6-ticks and Get Her Out at 4-ticks) and The Jig is Up (6-ticks) for HFS.




Lets start with that [MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION]. See how it all comes together so far?
 

Yes, I can see the mechanics at work...

And it's also interesting to see the judgements being made. For example, is the plan bold and daring? I'm not sure I'd have said so, although I don't recognise the enemy gang. But there's nothing contentious about that kind of interpretation taking place.

I assume the linked clocks are going to be filled up with some kind of successes (at what?) while the HFS clock will fill up with failures.. but again at what? This is simply set up and framing. Without a view of the action resolution system in play, it's hard to agree whether the initial situation is indeed controlled or not!
 

Yes, I can see the mechanics at work...

And it's also interesting to see the judgements being made. For example, is the plan bold and daring? I'm not sure I'd have said so, although I don't recognise the enemy gang. But there's nothing contentious about that kind of interpretation taking place.

As far as the enemy gang goes, you wouldn't recognize it. We chucked The Wraiths (because they were pretty much what the PCs were) and added a sex slavery/prostitution racket gang (the HFS) at Tier 1.

Yeah, there are plenty of judgement to be made in the system and while establishing Position is much more codified than it is in standard AW or DW, there are still judgement to be made (and possibly disputes to be sorted out). The Engagement Roll certainly has its share of judgement including the one you mentioned ("Is this bold and daring?"). For the most part though, judgement calls in Blades hews pretty closely to classic PBtA stuff (what is reasonable, when is a move/action roll triggered, how effective can stuff be, kind and level of danger for consequences, xp triggers, etc etc)

I went with "yes" for both objective and subjective reasons:

Objective - The sex den has 10-15 ruthless toughs, several lackeys, and dangerous clientele at any one time. Also, while ingress is guaranteed in this case, egress certainly isn't. Assuming the "snatch and grab" works, they aren't going to be able to take the girl out the tight, vertical chute. They're going to have to go out the front door or find an alternative!

Subjective - The alternatives they explored were much more indirect; (1) Blackmailing a major Bluecoat Inspector into action by exposing the blind eye that allows the illicit sex trade to exist...(2) paying off and then enlisting an HFS lackey to smuggle her out into the canals with the soiled linens.

I assume the linked clocks are going to be filled up with some kind of successes (at what?) while the HFS clock will fill up with failures.. but again at what? This is simply set up and framing. Without a view of the action resolution system in play, it's hard to agree whether the initial situation is indeed controlled or not!

Yup, exactly. Effect levels for PC actions that push toward "Find Her" or "Get Her Out" would yield 3 ticks (Great), 2 (Standard), 1 (Limited) with the fiction moving forward accordingly.

Same thing goes for the HFS "The Jig is Up" Clock but with Consequences. Desperate Positioning in an Action related to the Clock and negative result? You're looking at 3 ticks on the Clock so you're probably thinking about a Resistance Roll to downgrade the Consequence (if you can spare the Stress).

Pretty tired, so hitting the sack. Probably tomorrow I'll post more on the initial framing, the initial PC Action and resolution and then we can talk more about Positioning (and if you feel like I gave them enough for Controlled or if you think you would have asked for a bit more if you were at the table!).
 

I'll post more on the initial framing, the initial PC Action and resolution and then we can talk more about Positioning (and if you feel like I gave them enough for Controlled or if you think you would have asked for a bit more if you were at the table!).

Without wanting to stifle discussoin on the initial framing, action and resolution (I really want to hear about those) I think it's interesting to consider what represents controlled, risky and desperate.

Each score is going to be intrinsically tense and dramatic - and I'd suggest even seemingly trivial changes might give our rogues considerably more opportunity, or more trouble. I took your initial description:

manbearcat said:
"You worm your way up the grimy ancient chute and peak out into the S&M Closet off the main hall where the hosting rooms are. The weird stink and eerie green glow of unrefined electroplasm haunts the dark of the cramped space as a small hanging lantern creaks on its hook by the door. A gaunt and disheveled lackey is going through a box of macabre devices until finally he finds what he is looking for; <keeping it clean for the faint of heart>. He hefts it over his shoulder and reaches high, struggling to unhook the electroplasm lantern. 'Damnable thing', he mumbles."

And I added at the end: "In the distance, echoing through the tunnels you can hear a woman singing a bittersweet lullaby."

Or alternatively; "In the distance, echoing through the tunnels you can hear the angry bark of hounds drawing closer."

And I was wondering whether I'd feel they had shifted the situation enough to change from one category to another. Certainly, my instinct would be that your initial framing is 'risky' and I might have added the singing to give our heroes a guide through enemy territory. Would the fact the enemy has a pack of hounds and a handler nearby make this desperate? Not sure, but very interesting to think about :)

Interruption over - we return to the scheduled programme...
 
Last edited:

Without wanting to stifle discussoin on the initial framing, action and resolution (I really want to hear about those) I think it's interesting to consider what represents controlled, risky and desperate.

Each score is going to be intrinsically tense and dramatic - and I'd suggest even seemingly trivial changes might give our rogues considerably more opportunity, or more trouble. I took your initial description:



And I added at the end: "In the distance, echoing through the tunnels you can hear a woman singing a bittersweet lullaby."

Or alternatively; "In the distance, echoing through the tunnels you can hear the angry bark of hounds drawing closer."

And I was wondering whether I'd feel they had shifted the situation enough to change from one category to another. Certainly, my instinct would be that your initial framing is 'risky' and I might have added the singing to give our heroes a guide through enemy territory. Would the fact the enemy has a pack of hounds and a handler nearby make this desperate? Not sure, but very interesting to think about :)

Interruption over - we return to the scheduled programme...

If its alright with you, I'd like to stay with the interruption before we move on to scheduled programming (subsequent action and resolution) :p Setting initial Position for Score Engagement Rolls is a big deal and fertile ground for conversation (and it overlaps with setting Position on other Action rolls).

Just quick rules stuff for anyone reading along so they can understand what the text has to say:

Blades in the Dark 19 - 20

Controlled
- You have a golden opportunity. You’re exploiting a dominant advantage. You’re set up for success.

Choosing the position is an important judgment call and stylistic choice for your game. More controlled action rolls mean generally safer and more dominant scoundrels. More desperate action rolls give the game a gritty, underdog kind of feel. There’s no ironclad rule about how to choose positions. It’s meant to be an expressive element of the game. Make the choice that feels right to you and the rest of the group. If you’re ever unsure about which position to pick, ask the other players.

With that out of the way...

I like your two examples above (and how they might relate to influencing Position) and your thinking on the initial Position I set makes sense.

I think the nature of the initial framing actually corresponds well (in a different way) to your lullaby-singing girl (especially if they walked in on the girl's mother singing that song during that meeting - which would have occurred during Gather Information/Free Play phase). Let me tell you my thinking and you tell me what you think (and maybe how you think the clarifying conversation at the table would have played out if you were a player at the table).

So the scoundrels don't have a schematic of the vice den. So this lackey (obviously serving as some kind of custodian) should know the lay of the place; where the bad guys are, patrols/infrastructure stuff, where the girls are kept, what leads where, etc. They need to find the girl and a way out. I'm thinking this is a prime opportunity to get the ball rolling downhill in a way that isn't very threatening, but still has some manner of risk associated with it (should an Action roll go horrifically) and maybe set the stage for an interesting Devil's Bargain (a Clock for when this guy gets loose if they tie him up in the closet?).

What do you think?
 

This lackey (obviously serving as some kind of custodian) should know the lay of the place; where the bad guys are, patrols/infrastructure stuff, where the girls are kept, what leads where, etc. They need to find the girl and a way out.

I'm thinking this is a prime opportunity to get the ball rolling downhill in a way that isn't very threatening, but still has some manner of risk associated with it (should an Action roll go horrifically) and maybe set the stage for an interesting Devil's Bargain (a Clock for when this guy gets loose if they tie him up in the closet?).

I can see the reasoning, all good - and I'd have no doubt done things a little differently, which is also fine and to be expected :)

What occured to me when I read this was that player perception of their situation is probably already coloured by the fact they know whether their outcome is controlled, risky or desperate.

There's an interesting idea that you could (as an experiment) frame three different groups into identical situations - but one thinking it is 'controlled', one 'risky' and one 'desperate' and see how they play out. It's conceivable the desperate group might be in the mindset that they are moments away from being spotted by the lackey, while the controlled would see an opportunity to gather intel from an easy mark.

So I'm intrigued by the idea that the engagement roll becomes, in a certain way, self-fulfilling as it bleeds into the player's assessment of risk as the scene opens.
 

darkbard

Legend
Gents, it appears that the precipitating conversation for these recent posts initiated elsewhere. Any chance for a link for those of us who are reading along (at least one!) but with very limited time for investigating right now?
 

Gents, it appears that the precipitating conversation for these recent posts initiated elsewhere. Any chance for a link for those of us who are reading along (at least one!) but with very limited time for investigating right now?

Hey mate.

It was just a couple of PMs that were the equivalent of a back and forth like:

SOMEONE: GEE...I LIKE PUDDING!

SOMEONE ELSE: HEY...I LIKE PUDDING TOO! DURRRRR!

SOMEONE: LET'S TALK ABOUT BLADES IN THE DARK BECAUSE THE PUDDING THING IS SETTLED!

SOMEONE ELSE: OK LETS!

Then you have post 13 above where I linked the two pieces of conversation that led to my post.

Well here are a couple of other things said that may be interesting:

So I suspect you're quite a bit further than page 11 at this point, so this is likely redundant for you. Just 3 quick things though:

1) "What happens" is dictated by the initial establishment of Position (fictional positioning and formal limits/gravity of Consequences) and Effect Level. At this point, we should know if something brutal like Harm 3 ("Lose Your Trigger Finger") is on the table. Here players can negotiate to trade Position for Effect.

Then the players sort out if anyone is giving assistance (+d for 1 Stress) to the initiating PC, if a player wants to "Push" (+d, + effect level, take action while incapacitated for 2 Stress) or if a Devil's Bargain is offered (+d for trouble/cost).

2) This stuff interfaces with PC build (Attribute Rating > Action Dots in the game's moves). So all the fictional triggers and all the prospective outcomes that you have above can definitely be in play, they just need to interface with the game's moves. So "Smoking Velveta's Pipe" could trigger that menu of consequences depending on (1) above, but it would interface with either Consort, Sway, or Study (most likely) depending on that what the PC is trying to accomplish/their approach.

"Lost a Finger" would at least be Harm 2 and definitely Harm 3 if its "Lost Your Trigger Finger". The severity is dictated by Position. Maybe things are "Desperate"; you don't have enough time to load/cock properly...you're surrounded...the gun is poor Quality or prone to misfires. The GM gives the player a couple of options for results (one includes the Harm 3). The player doesn't like any of the results; "That all sucks...I'm Resisting that." The Consequence is lessened (maybe Harm 3 "Lost Your Trigger Finger" goes to Harm 2 "Concussed" or Harm 1 "Ears Ringing") or gone automatically and the player makes a Resistance roll to see how much Stress they accrue.

I'm actually not that much further than page 11. Around page 30/31. I keep reading and going back and re-reading, and I'm finding it quite a complex game to build a mental framework for. A lot of interrelated moving parts. A next gen Apocalypse engine.

But I see what you're saying. AW uses 'moves' to define the action - although the basics ones are deliberately left quite generic ('seize by force' or 'read a sitch') and then you (can) fill in blanks with bespoke moves for specific situations and actions.

In Blades the entire system is basically a codified custom move generator. You establish position, you establish effect, you define aid, you discuss potential additional complications and then roll. That seems borne out by the playbooks, where characters don't really get 'moves' in the AW sense - they get bonuses or extra options within a more generic resolution methodology.

It looks to me like there's always going to be work to do after the roll to figure out what it all means. Traditional AW moves sometimes act as little mini-resolution packages (like my examples). But not all the time. Probably the hardest part of AW for me was to take five after a roll to figure out what it meant in the fiction... like that moment when the bones hit the table and all eyes are on you for an answer.

It's not easy not to have the answer, but just to say: "let me think about that... gimme a couple of minutes and let's see..." and then search around for an idea in the moment, something that feels right for the time and the roll and what has been bouncing round the table that evening. It can put a burden of ideas on the MC/GM - not unsurmountable, but sometimes quite draining.

I'm getting that sense from Blades - there's not much to fall back on here in terms of stock moves. Everything in it has to be custom brewed, including the outcomes of each roll (and then trade offs for consequesnces, harm, stress, resistance). In that sense it looks like it takes some verve to play well.

It looks to me like there's always going to be work to do after the roll to figure out what it all means. Traditional AW moves sometimes act as little mini-resolution packages (like my examples). But not all the time. Probably the hardest part of AW for me was to take five after a roll to figure out what it meant in the fiction... like that moment when the bones hit the table and all eyes are on you for an answer.

It's not easy not to have the answer, but just to say: "let me think about that... gimme a couple of minutes and let's see..." and then search around for an idea in the moment, something that feels right for the time and the roll and what has been bouncing round the table that evening. It can put a burden of ideas on the MC/GM - not unsurmountable, but sometimes quite draining.

I find this sometimes GMing BW. I quite often ignore the rule that says that failure consequences must be spelled out in advance, and rather follow the practice that Luke Crane describes in the Adventure Burner, of letting the failure be implicit in the situation and only emerge if actually required by the roll.

But sometimes the implicit consequence is often buried quite deep in the situation!, and can require some effort to dig out. I can imagine a game that puts that sort of load onto every roll (or even many) would be demanding to referee.

[MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION] , good post and I agree with what you've written. I'll have more commentary tonight and I'll relay the next part of the game conversation and we can talk about "engagement roll becomes, in a certain way, self-fulfilling as it bleeds into the player's assessment of risk as the scene opens" (as you put it).
 

Remove ads

Top