Grade the Forged in the Dark System

[Eyes of Nine]

I'm 2 sessions into a|state, the only FitD game I've ever played. Session 1 we created characters. Session 2 we created our corner. This Monday (fingers crossed) we'll actually play the downtime-mission-downtime loop at least once.

After which I think I'll have a much better idea of whether I "like" this system or not. I will say a|state setting is very evocative - that has nothing really to do with the rules. It seems to have a lot of little subsystems and economies going on, which tbh is a bit overwhelming. But none of the other players have ever played a FitD game, and the RPG experience total overall across all players is pretty low. So as long as they have can lean into a) the weirdness of the setting and b) their characters schtick - they'll have fun I think

 

[hawkeyefan]

I voted for “It’s alright”. My experience is with two FitD games: Blades in the Dark and Scum and Villainy. I liked Blades in the Dark a lot, but the game’s mechanics have a sweet spot. If the PCs get too many dots, they start succeeding too often. At higher tiers, the game starts getting silly. We finished at tier V, which meant the military was the only realistic threat to us. There needs to be some more structure around when to retire and start a new season. From what I understand, newer games have much lower caps on the number of dots you can get in an action rating. I thought Scum and Villainy was okay, but it seemed less tightly designed compared to Blades. I’m also pretty sure that group was playing it wrong in places, which stripped the game of a lot of its difficulty.

I honestly think the best solution to this is to encourage troupe play. Have players create multiple gang members. Have them only pick one to go on any given Score. This also encourages retirement and the Prison Claims game because characters can take the fall for Wanted levels and the player doesn’t miss out.

Importantly, it also spreads the XP and advancements over more PCs, but keeps the pace of the Crew the same. So this way, by the time the Crew is Tier IV or V, it’s a large crew and it feels accurate, but none of the individual characters is as powerful as with a smaller crew.

I did a little of this, and I think the next game of Blades I run, I’m going to encourage it a lot more.

I'm 2 sessions into a|state, the only FitD game I've ever played. Session 1 we created characters. Session 2 we created our corner. This Monday (fingers crossed) we'll actually play the downtime-mission-downtime loop at least once.

After which I think I'll have a much better idea of whether I "like" this system or not. I will say a|state setting is very evocative - that has nothing really to do with the rules. It seems to have a lot of little subsystems and economies going on, which tbh is a bit overwhelming. But none of the other players have ever played a FitD game, and the RPG experience total overall across all players is pretty low. So as long as they have can lean into a) the weirdness of the setting and b) their characters schtick - they'll have fun I think

I’ve not yet played a|state but I picked up a copy and read it. Honestly, the setting is almost tailor made for the FitD system.

Please let us know how it goes once you get some actual play under your belt.

 

[John Lloyd1]

This is just funny, given the guys who created Dungeon World also said they'd stopped using Fronts, not even that long after it came out.

As someone who has Dungeon World on order, tell me more...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Let's start with this one. Player Tinkers during downtime and builds 2 mailbombs. During free play he wants to send 1 to the police station to try and kill a jerk bluecoat that's giving them a hard time and 1 to a gang the players have no real beef with (to try to draw focus away from them).

Other players realize they can do awesome stuff outside scores and start doing stuff too. One decides to go all serial killer and kill random peeps so that when he kills other gang members it doesn't appear affiliated to any gang.

Then they start wanting to gather information not to use in scores but to use to enhance their free play mayham and chaos that they then seek to use to their advantage in more free play. If you are lucky you maybe sometimes you can coax them into a score.

Or let's say they decide to do free play stuff to try and help in a score. So bomb player places bomb in free play near the location and times it to go off to coincide with their next score there. That should ideally be handled as a flashback - but how do you stop this?

So tell me, how do i get them out of their free play planning and carrying out their free play plans and on to a score? Or am I missing something that should be preventing this? Or should I just not care if they rarely ever do a score? Or if doing the free play stuff they can actually preplan things for scores instead of using flashbacks/etc?

ok, FIRST of all, info gathering, which is one of the things which happens in free play, has a limit, you only get to use this action a certain number of times before the next score happens. This is also true of the other substantive actions you can take during downtime, they have a 'turn cost', you get a certain number of these actions (and it is a small number, 2 per PC IIRC) and these include things like healing your stress, which you pretty much MUST do if you want to survive! You CAN buy more turns, using IIRC coins or rep, but there's a finite supply of each, and they are only generated during scores!

So, pretty soon the players are done, they MUST go on to the score. Beyond that, if they start doing 'score-like things' then I'm damned well going to say "OK, hold on, that's part of a score, lets go over here and finish up with Joe and Fred's downtime and then you can do X, but you're going to roll for position and we're in score time."

And that's all she wrote! BitD has perfectly good rules for when you transition from FP to score to downtime. I mean, sure, there can be a few situations that are a little fuzzy, but they're far less substantive and problematic IME than you are trying to posit.

For example, Takeo once went to a park in the government district during DT, I think it was to meet a contact or something. While there he heard some Red Sashes (who were actually our allies at the time, or ironically were being recruited as such by the other crew members at that moment) assaulting a woman. He took offense at that, and diced a couple of them up. I mean, it was pretty 'active' stuff for DT/IG, but whatever. Eventually that and some other things lead to us getting a minion that was a vampire.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

I'm 2 sessions into a|state, the only FitD game I've ever played. Session 1 we created characters. Session 2 we created our corner. This Monday (fingers crossed) we'll actually play the downtime-mission-downtime loop at least once.

After which I think I'll have a much better idea of whether I "like" this system or not. I will say a|state setting is very evocative - that has nothing really to do with the rules. It seems to have a lot of little subsystems and economies going on, which tbh is a bit overwhelming. But none of the other players have ever played a FitD game, and the RPG experience total overall across all players is pretty low. So as long as they have can lean into a) the weirdness of the setting and b) their characters schtick - they'll have fun I think

A|state is a fantastic setting, and I think the way Handiwork implemented FitD is really smart. Especially some of the downtime actions they added (like, if you have nothing else in mind, doing a Patrol of your corner). I'd also love to tweak it to run a Mega-City One game, ala Judge Dredd, but where you're trying to help your block, and the Judges are certainly not your friends. But I think my players want a break from FitD, so that'll have to wait.

If you have any questions or want any FitD tips, though, just give a shout!

 

[Kannik]

Hi all! I'm travelling and behind on updating the Grade on the opening post... aiming to get to that tonight!

 

[FrogReaver]

ok, FIRST of all, info gathering, which is one of the things which happens in free play, has a limit, you only get to use this action a certain number of times before the next score happens.

This isn't true at all. As you note, info gathering is a free play activity, but it’s not a downtime activity. Page 8 with the graphic shows this. Chapter 5 page 153 and 159 summarize downtime activities as Acquire Asset, Recover, Reduce Heat, Long-Term Project, Train, Vice. There are limits on downtime activities, there are not on free play activities.

This is also true of the other substantive actions you can take during downtime, they have a 'turn cost', you get a certain number of these actions (and it is a small number, 2 per PC IIRC) and these include things like healing your stress, which you pretty much MUST do if you want to survive! You CAN buy more turns, using IIRC coins or rep, but there's a finite supply of each, and they are only generated during scores!

This part is true, but info gathering is not a downtime activity so none of that applies.

Beyond that, if they start doing 'score-like things' then I'm damned well going to say "OK, hold on, that's part of a score, lets go over here and finish up with Joe and Fred's downtime and then you can do X, but you're going to roll for position and we're in score time."

Scores are very structured.
1. Players must provide 1 of 6 plans from pg 127. (assault, deception, stealth, occult, social, transport). Each also needs a unique detail provided (ex. the point of attack or the method od deception, etc)

2. Scores provide payoff (coin+rep) and the opportunity to perform more of the limited downtime activities. (see start of chapter 5).

You've not described how the actions my players were taking fit that structure, nor how getting coin would make sense for these actions. I'm with you in the sense I'd love to turn those into scores, but I'm not seeing how the rules support doing so.

Then even if I turned them into scores, the particular obstacles you could set up for doing something like sending a mailbomb aren't actually clear.

And that's all she wrote! BitD has perfectly good rules for when you transition from FP to score to downtime. I mean, sure, there can be a few situations that are a little fuzzy, but they're far less substantive and problematic IME than you are trying to posit.

Considering you've confused free play actions and limitations on downtime actions, either forgot or failed to mention how the specific actions in my example make sense in the structured score/payoff cycle, then I'm starting to think I have a better grasp of the rules as written.

For example, Takeo once went to a park in the government district during DT, I think it was to meet a contact or something. While there he heard some Red Sashes (who were actually our allies at the time, or ironically were being recruited as such by the other crew members at that moment) assaulting a woman. He took offense at that, and diced a couple of them up. I mean, it was pretty 'active' stuff for DT/IG, but whatever. Eventually that and some other things lead to us getting a minion that was a vampire.

Right, note that you didn't make the score about him dicing them up.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So I will say it a different way, read the first 10 pages of the BitD rule book PDF (I assume the paging and such is the same in printed versions, if such a thing even exists). What else is one to say?

So why did none of the stickied and linked DM advice for BitD from that era reflect that? Why does nobody really agree with you? Why has everyone else pointed that the book is pretty unclear and disorganised, even if they feel that to differing degrees? Why are multiple other posters who run BitD saying they don't agree with you?

If it's so obvious as you pretend, none of that would be happening. Not even with RPG nerds. When rules in an RPG are genuinely obvious, everyone is leaping to say how obvious they are, and that's not I've seen here, nor elsewhere re: BitD in recent years. Further, one might note that many RPGs have a flaw where they explain a principle or three early on, and then undermine some or all of those principles with their actual text and structure later. Sounds you're describing exactly that, without acknowledging it.

You're basically saying "everyone is wrong and stupid except me!", whether you intend that or not, that is your de facto position.

And I get that you're maybe not coming from the same place the as usual keen to say "GOTCHA!" PtbA and FitD people, but you're ending up in the same place nonetheless, aggressively accusing others of being dumb, blind, or liars, in only slightly more polite terms.

On the topic of fronts specifically, I don't know, maybe you have techniques of which I am ignorant. I don't know, but I would strongly counsel people wanting to run DW to build some fronts (after session 1).

I'm pretty sure it's just called "being a DM" - most of what a Front does you do in your head anyway if you're used to running adventures as anything but the straightest railroads, if you've got an idea who is out there and so on. It's just a clumsy, poorly-explained formalization of a natural process - and don't try and deny it's clumsy and poorly explained - the subreddit clearly shows otherwise - fronts are one of the things that confuse people most, and it's frequently noted that the book does a singularly poor job of explaining them. Anyway, you don't need Fronts at all. Sure, you're not running it RAW if don't have them, but the game itself on multiple occasions points out you don't have to run it RAW, and again, as I said, even not that long after release, the designers both said they didn't actually use them. One of them is in hiding these days since he got cancelled, but the other stated what he would do if he was making Dungeon World 2 (he isn't, though) and it was fairly hilarious, because it basically amounted to "strip literally every D&D-type connection or styling element or reward structure from the game and its mechanics" (and I'm pretty sure he mentioned not using Fronts there too).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It's alright I guess. I have been playing Blades for some time and I like it well enough, though I am not quite sure how much it is due the system and how much of it is despite of it. I certainly recognise some of the negatives people here have mentioned, such as the writers' room, feeling like you cause your own harm, and the rules being poorly organised. My personal pet peeve however is the intentionally confusing and overlapping skills. Why would you do that?

But overall, I think it works fine enough, and I like how the game knows what it is about, and directs toward the intended style of play.

Oh, and some of the abstractions are a bit weird. Like for example each person in light load (so not appearing to carry much) can carry three coins, but we can hide only four in our lair? How much space does this money take if four people can easily carry twelve coins between them, yet we can only store one third of that in our hideout? I cannot visualise that!

Despite all this , I am a bit intrigued to check out the Scum and Villainy. What are its main differences to Blades, and does it have a setting, and if so, how integrated it is? Like could I use it to run some low level scoundrels in Warhammer 40K setting without having to houserule half the game?

 

[Campbell]

So why did none of the stickied and linked DM advice for BitD from that era reflect that? Why does nobody really agree with you? Why has everyone else pointed that the book is pretty unclear and disorganised, even if they feel that to differing degrees? Why are multiple other posters who run BitD saying they don't agree with you?

If it's so obvious as you pretend, none of that would be happening. Not even with RPG nerds. When rules in an RPG are genuinely obvious, everyone is leaping to say how obvious they are, and that's not I've seen here, nor elsewhere re: BitD in recent years. Further, one might note that many RPGs have a flaw where they explain a principle or three early on, and then undermine some or all of those principles with their actual text and structure later. Sounds you're describing exactly that, without acknowledging it.

You're basically saying "everyone is wrong and stupid except me!", whether you intend that or not, that is your de facto position.

And I get that you're maybe not coming from the same place the as usual keen to say "GOTCHA!" PtbA and FitD people, but you're ending up in the same place nonetheless, aggressively accusing others of being dumb, blind, or liars, in only slightly more polite terms.

I'm pretty sure it's just called "being a DM" - most of what a Front does you do in your head anyway if you're used to running adventures as anything but the straightest railroads, if you've got an idea who is out there and so on. It's just a clumsy, poorly-explained formalization of a natural process - and don't try and deny it's clumsy and poorly explained - the subreddit clearly shows otherwise - fronts are one of the things that confuse people most, and it's frequently noted that the book does a singularly poor job of explaining them. Anyway, you don't need Fronts at all. Sure, you're not running it RAW if don't have them, but the game itself on multiple occasions points out you don't have to run it RAW, and again, as I said, even not that long after release, the designers both said they didn't actually use them. One of them is in hiding these days since he got cancelled, but the other stated what he would do if he was making Dungeon World 2 (he isn't, though) and it was fairly hilarious, because it basically amounted to "strip literally every D&D-type connection or styling element or reward structure from the game and its mechanics" (and I'm pretty sure he mentioned not using Fronts there too).

I think this critique belies a certain level of executive function that is like not universal. Stuff like faction clocks, relationship maps, fronts and Apocalypse World threats are very useful to me to help organize and reason about offscreen things. When I run other sorts of games I often lean on similar brief writeups because they help take part of the fiction and like load it in my short-term memory without getting overwhelmed.

The explanations in some games could definitely be better (especially Dungeon World), but the overall dismissal of how formalizing this stuff can be useful to some GMs is not very helpful. A lot of these GMing processes are not nearly as intuitive as many long-term GMs (especially those with very well-developed executive function put across).