Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A Question Of Agency?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8153731" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>You mean the tactical decisions that don't do anything unless the dice are engaged? And, you're seriously claiming that rolling a clutch 20 is not interesting?</p><p></p><p>The mistake you're making here is thinking that Blades just works on an RNG. There's an element of chance to checks, absolutely -- and this is part of every RPG out there, to a greater or lesser degree. Blades appears to have more checks than, say, a D&D game, but there's some very big structural issues to this. For one, Blades doesn't bother with low-interest things. If a check is made, it's because it matters. Secondly, the game is structured so that the majority of play is within the Score portion, where action is frenetic, so lots of risky actions are taken and checks are generated. There aren't session long RP sessions with no rolls in Blades because that's not the fiction the game is designed to create. So, the appearance of more reliance on rolls is a bit false, because the game either skims over parts where checks aren't needed or just says yes to them. It's not that Blades has more dependence on checks, but rather that it focuses play on areas where checks happen.</p><p></p><p>D&D has a huge number of checks in any combat heavy session -- far more than Blades does in a given session usually happen in a single combat, much less a few. Four Party members vs four monsters for 3 rounds is usually going to be around 20 individual die rolls, if we're ignoring area of effect... effects. I'm pretty sure there about that many rolls in my haunted house session -- which was a long and complex score -- and we got a lot more done with those.</p><p></p><p>So, yeah, trying to pin RNG on Blades is absolutely ignoring how RNG is used even more in D&D. When you have rolls that are, "I swing, I hit AC 19, I do 14 damage," then you get in a lot more because these take less time but aren't terribly interesting. In Blades, a roll directly engages everyone at the table because when the dice stop, the situation will absolutely be changed, and not in a 14 fewer hitpoints way.</p><p></p><p>Okay, look, here's where you've gone wrong -- the point of the interaction was NOT to find out if the painting was magical. That's just a bit of flavor in this context. Instead, it was to find out if the painting was <em>useful to the PC's goals</em>. It being magical was just the fictional positioning to be useful. What actually happened in the game was that the painting was NOT useful to the PC's goals. This cannot be a Czege Principle violation because 1) the player didn't narrate both ends of the deal -- proposed problem and the solution; and 2) the player didn't get the solution they wanted. You've locked onto being able to say the painting is important because that's one of the big differences between Blades and D&D -- in D&D only the GM has this authority. But, just because the player was able to say that this thing is important does NOT mean that they got what they wanted from it. Here, the player absolutely did not get what they wanted -- in fact, they didn't come out of the manor with anything that would help this goal because the resolution to the intent -- can I find something useful to my goal with the University -- was tested and failed and was binding. The player could just shrug and turn to the next painting down the hall and start this over -- the issue was resovled.</p><p></p><p>No -- I'll absolutely talk about where Blades has issues. It's a very narrow genre emulator, so if you don't like the themes, you're out of luck. It's so tightly integrated across all levels of play that it's challenging to successfully modify. It puts a lot more pressure and weight on the players to drive play -- it is not at all passive for players. You can get into some failure spirals, which can be pretty brutal -- failure leads to desperate situations where failure has real teeth and can render long term problems (serious wounds take <em>time </em>to heal, for example). It's not everyone's cup of tea -- just ask [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER].</p><p></p><p>But those aren't the ones you're bringing up -- you're mired in your very narrow take on how games run and you're trying to fit Blades into the shape you're familiar with. I quoted myself from three years ago making the same arguments you're making now! The difference now is that I have actual experience with the games in question, and have that experience with the idea that I'm trying to learn how they work rather than look for ways to support my pre-existing biases. The other difference is that you seem to be perfectly fine with the double standard, which is something I tend to very much dislike in general, and probably why I started listening -- the only way I could continue to argue after a bit of knowledge would have been to employ the special reasoning.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8153731, member: 16814"] You mean the tactical decisions that don't do anything unless the dice are engaged? And, you're seriously claiming that rolling a clutch 20 is not interesting? The mistake you're making here is thinking that Blades just works on an RNG. There's an element of chance to checks, absolutely -- and this is part of every RPG out there, to a greater or lesser degree. Blades appears to have more checks than, say, a D&D game, but there's some very big structural issues to this. For one, Blades doesn't bother with low-interest things. If a check is made, it's because it matters. Secondly, the game is structured so that the majority of play is within the Score portion, where action is frenetic, so lots of risky actions are taken and checks are generated. There aren't session long RP sessions with no rolls in Blades because that's not the fiction the game is designed to create. So, the appearance of more reliance on rolls is a bit false, because the game either skims over parts where checks aren't needed or just says yes to them. It's not that Blades has more dependence on checks, but rather that it focuses play on areas where checks happen. D&D has a huge number of checks in any combat heavy session -- far more than Blades does in a given session usually happen in a single combat, much less a few. Four Party members vs four monsters for 3 rounds is usually going to be around 20 individual die rolls, if we're ignoring area of effect... effects. I'm pretty sure there about that many rolls in my haunted house session -- which was a long and complex score -- and we got a lot more done with those. So, yeah, trying to pin RNG on Blades is absolutely ignoring how RNG is used even more in D&D. When you have rolls that are, "I swing, I hit AC 19, I do 14 damage," then you get in a lot more because these take less time but aren't terribly interesting. In Blades, a roll directly engages everyone at the table because when the dice stop, the situation will absolutely be changed, and not in a 14 fewer hitpoints way. Okay, look, here's where you've gone wrong -- the point of the interaction was NOT to find out if the painting was magical. That's just a bit of flavor in this context. Instead, it was to find out if the painting was [I]useful to the PC's goals[/I]. It being magical was just the fictional positioning to be useful. What actually happened in the game was that the painting was NOT useful to the PC's goals. This cannot be a Czege Principle violation because 1) the player didn't narrate both ends of the deal -- proposed problem and the solution; and 2) the player didn't get the solution they wanted. You've locked onto being able to say the painting is important because that's one of the big differences between Blades and D&D -- in D&D only the GM has this authority. But, just because the player was able to say that this thing is important does NOT mean that they got what they wanted from it. Here, the player absolutely did not get what they wanted -- in fact, they didn't come out of the manor with anything that would help this goal because the resolution to the intent -- can I find something useful to my goal with the University -- was tested and failed and was binding. The player could just shrug and turn to the next painting down the hall and start this over -- the issue was resovled. No -- I'll absolutely talk about where Blades has issues. It's a very narrow genre emulator, so if you don't like the themes, you're out of luck. It's so tightly integrated across all levels of play that it's challenging to successfully modify. It puts a lot more pressure and weight on the players to drive play -- it is not at all passive for players. You can get into some failure spirals, which can be pretty brutal -- failure leads to desperate situations where failure has real teeth and can render long term problems (serious wounds take [I]time [/I]to heal, for example). It's not everyone's cup of tea -- just ask [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER]. But those aren't the ones you're bringing up -- you're mired in your very narrow take on how games run and you're trying to fit Blades into the shape you're familiar with. I quoted myself from three years ago making the same arguments you're making now! The difference now is that I have actual experience with the games in question, and have that experience with the idea that I'm trying to learn how they work rather than look for ways to support my pre-existing biases. The other difference is that you seem to be perfectly fine with the double standard, which is something I tend to very much dislike in general, and probably why I started listening -- the only way I could continue to argue after a bit of knowledge would have been to employ the special reasoning. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A Question Of Agency?
Top