Recent content by Fenris-77

That's not an uncommon take. But for games like Blades and AW it really does matter. Both games and their various progeny take the conversation that stands as the heart of RPG play (all RPG play) and make it the central axis around which everything else turns. Really, it's just a different point...

In the defense of lots of people, Blades and/or PbtA can be a real issue to grok when you come from different kinds of games without a real compass for how these new games are 'supposed' to work. I bounced so hard off of position and effect the first few times I tried to read it it's not even funny.

Yes and no. The fact that the core of the game is framing and fictional positioning isn't really up for grabs. To what extent a given table might tightly tie that fiction to the mechanical results is variable but not as a result of some kind of ambiguity in the rules. I suspect a lot of GMs...

@Crimson Longinus - I completely get why you'd say this based on the rules. The GM does indeed introduce the idea of possible harm (or whatever) in the back and forth about the action. However, that presupposes that there is a consistent fictional outcome for the action in question. This doesn't...

You need to trademark that shizz.

This is the exact opposite of how actions are adjudicated. Our two different readings of the rules on this point explains a lot. The mechanics explain (frame, make game sense of) the fiction, not the other way around. Without the specific fictional outcome there is nothing to adjudicate or apply...

These are the mechanics by which the consequences are measured and tracked, not the actual consequences. If you ignore the fictional positioning of the whole action declaration/adjudication loop everything gets wacky. Declarations and consequences are always and forever specific to the...

@zakael19 Both action declarations and the GM adjudication are based on the framing of the specifics of the situation at hand. That the result might also be appropriate to move along a longer term goal is a secondary consideration. Clocks are for tracking the cumulative effect of a series of...

This is absolutely not what the rules offer.

Sure, but your tastes in this regard, as with the tastes in the post you are replying to, are really neither here nor there in terms of the game taken more generally. Downtime stuff doesn't usually take entire sessions (although is certainly could) - the game presents it as more like bookends to...

My man, that stress gauge is going to fill faster than you'd like regardless of which rules you are using.

But your whole explanation of how clocks are the main framing mechanism for play is simply incorrect. They do often measure when something is going to happen, and sometimes that's a bad thing, but if it's on a clock it's by definition not up front and center for the current play at the table...

I'm using fiction in the specific way the game does (I'm not big on that usage, but whatevs). The fiction here means, first, what's happening right now in the setting. Only after that is it concerned about longer range things like clocks. Your use of fiction is a little different.

So just to throw this out there, clocks don't dictate danger at all other than specifically in terms of the longer-term action they are measuring.

My clocks are better than yours, so I'm pretty sure that the guard filled yard you describe is actually mine rather than yours.