Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8154938" data-attributes="member: 16814">What outcome do I desire in noting that a spontaneous player ask doesn't fit the current fiction well enough to get a normal effect?  You're spinning, here, ignoring things to make a claim that is unsupported by the evidence.  For one, I cannot anticipate that a player would make the ask when framing the situation that the players chose for the score (location).  Second, I can't block or prevent, all I can do is increase the cost and there only if it fits the open fictional situation at the table.  In other words, everything I'm make my decision on is known to the table and should be obvious to all.  How this lets me push things to a desired outcome (which I can't even guess what it will be at this point because I don't have the action to tell what could happen on a success or failure) is beyond me.That's not what I said at all.  I said that they have to fit the genre, and fit the fiction.  If it doesn't fit the genre, the table will say no, and we need to have an out-of-game discussion about this -- does the player not want to play within the genre, is there a misunderstanding, is there passive-aggressive stuff that needs to stop right now?  If it doesn't fit the fiction, then the cost goes up to try it.  Then there's a check.  And then, the "solution" is likely just a step in the direction of a solution rather than the end itself.  I mean, you did read what I wrote, yes?And, the dichotomy you're presenting is false.  The player can't just whistle up a solution to any problem and roll some dice and get it AND the GM can't easily or secretly direct play.  The easily part means it would require a sustained effort by someone gifted in manipulation to do so, because they'd have to engage social engineering approaches -- the game's not going to help them.  This is bad behavior outside the game, so it's ridiculous to pin it on the system.  The secretly part is the one that most impossible -- everything in the game is in the open and accessible to all.  If you can't convince the players to ask for it for you (the manipulation part), then it's going to be obvious what's happening.  Just like it's obvious when a player asks for something unsupported by the fiction, it's obvious when a GM starts narrating outcomes similarly.The worst manipulation the GM can do is soft-pedal things.  They can let off the adversity hose and say "yes" more often, or not pay off threatened consequences on a failure.  But this isn't driving an outcome so much as it is just trying to be nice to players.  You still can't get a preferred outcome over time, you're just letting the PCs off easy when you shouldn't.  And, to be fair, this is a hard part of GMing a game like Blades -- you have to keep pouring it on if it's the result.LOL, I thought this, too, but I have more surprising in my Blades game than in my D&D games -- because the surprises are surprises to everyone at the table, not just to the players.  You're wildly incorrect.  And, no, agency doesn't mean authority, although they are related.  Having authority over a thing may come with agency, but only if it matters to the game.  Having authority to choose to act in-character, for instance, is authority, but not player agency.  It's agency in the real world, but not in the game.  This is because it doesn't impact the gamestate at all, just your fellow players at the table, in the social space.</blockquote>

Verification