Dungeon World Meets Blades in the Dark

[Manbearcat]

I've been thinking about this a lot the last few years. A poster on here, @loverdrive , recently wrote a beautiful game that is a marriage/hack of these two games, but it doesn't do exactly what I've been thinking about.

I figured I'd put a thread out there where I can (a) put my ideas, (b) people can give feedback/their ideas, (c) and I can iterate.

I'll go ahead and get rolling.

There are many things that need to be tackled first, and I'm going to post some prelim thoughts, but here are the first things I feel need to be resolved before you work downward on the hiearchy:

* What is the Structure of play?

* What are the Factions thematically?

* What is the Stress analog?

* What is the Heat/Wanted Level analog?

* What is the Bluecoats analog?

* What is the Vice analog?

* How does the Payoff incentive structure work?


The Classes and Crew Analog (likely "Companies" which could range from Mercenaries to Scoundrels to Wardens to Holy Warriors to etc) and other things like this are well done on the totem pole. Those can easily be fleshed out and slotted in, but not before the other parts.

So with that, my first post below is going to be my thoughts on Structure.

 

[Manbearcat]

STRUCTURE

I'm envisioning Blades Structure but reskinned in a Torchbearer type way but with Dungeon World moves. Further, at the outset of play, you do just like Dungeon World. You make a map and you leave blanks. That map will have The Town which is the "home base of operations" for the Company at the beginning of the game. This might stay the home base throughout the game or the PCs might change their home base of operations (there will be incentive to stay there and incentive to move on). Creation of the Town will include layout/Wards and Factions (7-10 at the outset which includes infrastructure/government, essential trade guilds, rival Companies - which can include classic Thieves Guilds, Warlock Cabals, et al).

Beyond The Town, the only other thing that goes on the map at the initial session are the immediate topographical features directly outside of the town (perhaps its surrounded by Bleakwood Forest). The rest of the fleshing out of the map will happen through play (more on that below):

So here are my initial thoughts.

Town Phase

This is the analog for Blades' Free Play/Information Gathering phase. Here, the following happens:

* Companies look for Adventures (the Score analog) just like a Blades' Crew looks for Scores. This process will start filling out the map.

* If between Adventures, Company PCs get 2 * Downtime Activities (just like Blades except not a discrete phase).

* If an Adventure takes place in Town, the Entanglement that is rolled after the Adventure phase will be Town-related.

* Post-Adventure Payoff will take place here (all relevant accounting procedures).

Journey Phase

* If the Adventure takes place outside of Town, a Perilous Journey is required to get there.

* The rules for Perilous Wilds will be used here. For each day of Journey, there will be a Scout > then Navigate > then Make Camp (in which a Manage Provisions and Take Watch move will be made). This sequence of moves will determine (a) if there are an Dangers or Discoveries that have to be dealt with along the way, (b) the resolution of any Dangers/Discoveries, (c) the attrition of resources for the coming Adventure. This phase will also further flesh out the map.

* Most Adventures will be 1 day from Town, but some might be 2, or even 3. Each day requires a sequence of Journey moves to be made, which means that Loadout for each character (which I'll work on later) will have progressive devotion to Journey supplies the further out the Adventure is from the Town. However, Payoff will scale appropriately. The further the Adventure from town, the more Danger, the bigger Payoff.

Make Camp Phase

* This will be a mini version of the Town Phase, but in the wild. When in the wild (whether its a Journey or at an Adventure site), your Make Camp Phase will feature (i) 1 * Downtime Activity and (ii) a Take Watch move.

* Take Watch will determine if any Dangers or Discoveries take place during the Make Camp phase.

* Making Camp is not free. It will be resource-intensive, Danger-intensive, Loadout allocation-intensive. As such, it will be naturally restricted and an outgrowth of decision-points (do I want to Loadout more/pay a Porter in order to enable Make Camp?...do I want to spend the Coin...do I want risk the Danger?). For instance, if you have 4 characters going out into the wild, you'll have (at least) 4 Loadout Boxes that have to tick for Make Camp. If you want to be able to Make Camp * 3 (2 * Journey and 1 * Adventure), then you'll have brought 3 * Make Camp boxes to tick. Again, Load-out intensive and resource-intensive (it costs to secure those boxes to tick). Without those boxes to tick, you can't take advantage of 1 * Downtime Activity (which will be all of the things one would imagine from Recover to Prepare Spells/Commune to Salvage to Fortify etc).

Adventure Phase

* This will either be in town or in the wild.

* It will be handled just like Blades' Scores. Each PC will have a Loadout, selected Hirelings/Cohorts will be present (eg Porter/Donkey, Minstrel, Man-at-arms, Guide, et al), and an Engagement Roll will be made to cut right to the action/first obstacle (whether you're in the wild or in town).

* Once the Adventure is completed (successfully or not), there will be Entanglements rolled for. If you're in the wild, Entanglements will be related to your return journey home. If you're already in town, entanglements will be town/faction related.

---

Loop back to Town phase.

Thoughts? Questions?

 

[Fenris-77]

A couple of initial thoughts off the top if my head.

One, I might restrict the list of DT moves available for Camp use, or differentiate them from the list available in town.

Two, making camp without the resources means stress is a natural outgrowth of the resource model you're suggesting.

Three, I might make the loadouts here a little different than Blades. My first thought is to have the party fill however many slots they want with something I'll call 'supplies'. The remainder can be handled like Blades loadout. This gives a little push to resource management. I'd probably add a camp move to scrounge supply too.

Four, Things like wagons or horses could be something that the party has to acquire in-game which would place a natural gate on exploration because to start they can only take what they themselves can carry. Once the party acquires Porters, or horses, their reach increases.

Five, the initial town and surroundings seems like a cool place for a die-drop system of some kind. I might design the town the same way. Or off random tables. Could increase replay value.

Six, a useful analog for Heat could actually be Reputation (which I think I mentioned elsewhere at some point and called Legend?). The more famous the party is, the more trouble they attract (because the gods take notice or some such).

That's what I have off the top of head, all just spitballing. I really like the base you've laid down here.

 

[Ovinomancer]

So, as a systems engineer, I see a bunch of design absent requirements. What is this system to do? What are it's goals? Too often these aren't written down, and so design occurs that's clever but doesn't address needs. And, don't worry, you can always revisit requirements.

 

[Manbearcat]

That all looks really good and much of that are things percolating in my head.

Quick things briefly to fire off because I’m time limited.

* I'm envisioning a Supplies box part of Loadout like the below:

SUPPLIES (2 Load for 3 Boxes) - Enables 1 * Downtime Activity during Make Camp Phase.

Bringing supplies almost ensures a character is going to be at Medium Load. This really incentivizes (a) Company Advancements/Claims that increase Load for PCs, (b) having a Porter Cohort as part of the Company, (c) spending Downtime in Town to Acquire an Asset when you go on an Adventure (Donkey/Wagon and Wagoneer), (d) individual PC abilities that increase Load (and synergy with Heavies).

* The Town Phase will feature all of the typical Blades Downtime Activities. For Make Camp, I'm (preliminary) envisioning:

Recover: As per Blades, 4 Tick Longterm Project Clock to reduce each instance of Harm on your sheet by 1 (1 goes to 0, 2 goes to 1, 3 goes to 2). A Healer PC or Cohort would amplify this.

Fortify: Whatever your discipline (whether its praying to your deity, attuning to the natural world, meditating through ritualized exercise, etc), bolster your mind, body, or spirit for the coming day. Make your Action Roll to gain 1 Special Armor (to resist a Complication your Action Roll is under).

6 = 1 box against any Complication, regardless of Position.
4-5 = 1 box against a Risky/Controlled Complication under your Action Roll.
1-3 = 1 box against a Controlled Complication under your Action Roll.

Downtime Project: Begin a downtime project clock and make a move to tick it or make a move to tick an existing clock.

Fabricate/Forage/Salvage: So long as you have the raw materials, the tools on hand, and the capability, describe what you're doing (hunting/gathering, fletching, cooking, magically concocting/fabricating, etc) and roll Hunt, Discern, Illuminate, Tinker, or Attune (whichever applies):

6 = 2 Ammo or 2 Rations or 1 Adventuring Gear
4-5 = 1 Ammo or 1 Rations
1-3 = You come up empty handed

Prepare Spells: Roll Attune and prepare your Cantrips/Rotes and Spells equal to:

6 = Your Tier +2.
4-5 = Your Tier +1.
1-3 = Your Tier.

 

[Manbearcat]

So, as a systems engineer, I see a bunch of design absent requirements. What is this system to do? What are it's goals? Too often these aren't written down, and so design occurs that's clever but doesn't address needs. And, don't worry, you can always revisit requirements.

Dungeon World's aesthetic, tropes, and principles (No Myth Story Now w/ setting construction during play, each PC is unique to the world, Play to Find Out, Fill their Lives with Danger and Adventure) + a combination of Blades' and Torchbearer's Structure/Architecture.

So it should feel like a Dungeon World game (Protagonism, Setting and Story generation, snowballing action resolution), but with the aforementioned structure and decision-points that are the type of weightiness (tactical and strategic) that spin out of a game of Blades and Torchbearer.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Dungeon World's aesthetic, tropes, and principles (No Myth Story Now w/ setting construction during play, each PC is unique to the world, Play to Find Out, Fill their Lives with Danger and Adventure) + a combination of Blades' and Torchbearer's Structure/Architecture.

So it should feel like a Dungeon World game (Protagonism, Setting and Story generation, snowballing action resolution), but with the aforementioned structure and decision-points that are the type of weightiness (tactical and strategic) that spin out of a game of Blades and Torchbearer.

This is a proposed design solution. It's not answering the question of what things are considered critical for this new system to be successful.

Requirement elicitation is both the single most important thing in design and also the single hardest thing to do. This is because it's hard to get the specificity and understanding necessary to get good requirements. And, since an RPG is a system, systems engineering (which is the study of engineering as a process to successfully create complex systems) is applicable. So, requirements -- these should be SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Testable/Traceable. Specific covers requirements needing to have a level of detail and not be general statements. Look at a given requirement and see if it can be decomposed -- if it can, do so. Measurable is pretty obvious -- don't come up with requirements you cannot evaluate, like "is pleasing." Achievable is totally obvious. Realistic means that requirements should be within the scope of your time/effort budget, and pairs with Achievable. And, finally, Testable/Traceable means that you can look at the final result and trace your requirements to the result (or test it, which doesn't really apply to games unless you're talking playtesting, but that's a whole other can of worms about good testing rigor).

You've got some general statements, here, but these can be decomposed. I'd suggest doing so, that way you don't waste design effort on a clever mechanic that doesn't go to actually satisfy your design goal. It also helps getting stuck "in the weeds" on things that are nice but not critical, and allows you to chart a critical path so some piece of minor, but loved, clever design doesn't act to block overall design by trying to force it to fit.

 

[loverdrive]

Recover: As per Blades, 4 Tick Longterm Project Clock to reduce each instance of Harm on your sheet by 1 (1 goes to 0, 2 goes to 1, 3 goes to 2). A Healer PC or Cohort would amplify this.

I am a bit surprised, as healing is one of things that gets hacked most often!

Otherwise, I would love to see what you will come up with. If in the future you'll need help with layouting and maybe art, don't hesitate to ping me.

 

[Manbearcat]

I am a bit surprised, as healing is one of things that gets hacked most often!

I'm curious about your surprise. Do you mean why I'm (at least presently) leaning toward cribbing AW and Blades Harm and Recovery model whole hog vs going with DW's HP model (or some other derivation)?

If you're interested in my thinking on that, it goes like this:

* The Harm model is more visceral.

* The Harm model + Resistance (Saving Throws) mechanics + Armor Boxes (be it Class Features or Gear Features) + Downtime Activities creates very compelling, layered, decision-points and tactical/strategic overhead.

* Healers (Clerics, Paladins et al) deploying Cure x, y, z Wounds or Lay On Hands (and the like) easily interfaces well with the Harm model. Its just getting the balance right.

That is where I'm at on it!

Otherwise, I would love to see what you will come up with. If in the future you'll need help with layouting and maybe art, don't hesitate to ping me.

And you shall. And while I very much appreciate the kind offer, this isn't something I'm looking to publish (but if I was and I was looking for the type of help you're citing, you're certainly one I would go to given your talent!). I'm merely looking for a highly functional hack (with the conceptual framework I have above in mind) that will do what I'm wanting. If others are inclined to play it, they can have at it!

 

[loverdrive]

I'm curious about your surprise. Do you mean why I'm (at least presently) leaning toward cribbing AW and Blades Harm and Recovery model whole hog vs going with DW's HP model (or some other derivation)?

I'm not questioning your choices, I trust in your abilities.

It's just a bit surprising, because the most common houserule I've seen in Blades is somehow changing how recovering from harm works. People often find it too much debilitating and there's a running joke in BitD discord that every FitD game starts with modifying recovery rules.

 

[Campbell]

I'm not questioning your choices, I trust in your abilities.

It's just a bit surprising, because the most common houserule I've seen in Blades is somehow changing how recovering from harm works. People often find it too much debilitating and there's a running joke in BitD discord that every FitD game starts with modifying recovery rules.

I generally think that's a mistake. I like when Recovery feels like a real choice and something you have to suffer through. My experience with Beam Saber for instance was that recovering felt too automatic.

 

[Manbearcat]

FACTIONS

I'm not questioning your choices, I trust in your abilities.

It's just a bit surprising, because the most common houserule I've seen in Blades is somehow changing how recovering from harm works. People often find it too much debilitating and there's a running joke in BitD discord that every FitD game starts with modifying recovery rules.

Ah. I see.

Im not acquainted with that so much in the running of it or AW. However, @hawkeyefan did mention that one of the things he had to work on early in his GMing of Blades was too deep of a reliance on Harm as a Complication.

I’m very much in the opposite camp. Harm is definitely the last thing I go to as a Complication (I find Harm not particularly interesting much of the time). Unless it’s “you’ve got a sword coming to the gut, a Molotov cocktail at your feet, the glacier’s crevasse is snaking under your feet and the collapse is going to mean a horrific tumble”, Harm isn’t on my mind. And on a success with complications I’m often thinking about another way to change the fiction adversely besides reduced Harm (though I go with reduced Harm if that is where my brain is at).

That’s interesting to know (and a good example of me being ignorant to the greater culture)!

 

[Manbearcat]

FACTIONS

Here is where my brain is presently.

* Akin to My Life With Master, the table creates the early Tier (1), mid Tier (3), endgame Tier (6) Antagonist for the Companions. However, unlike MLwM, (a) this is an abstraction...an idea that will sharpen as play persists and (b) they’re diverse fantasy archetype had guys. This would also have some 4e inspiration as it divides the game into Heroic, Paragon, Epic. For instance:

Tier 1 - Corrupt Government
Tier 3 - Werewolf Cult
Tier 6 - Possessed Fire Giant

* Then about 7 Factions (which are going to be in The Town or outskirts) need to be codified with higher resolution (Tier, one sentence that captures M.O. and backstory, Quirk...play will sort out the rest). Probably 3 govt/infrastructure and 4 others. Like Blades, the process of building the Company would result in a Faction as an ally and a few as rivals at the beginning of play.

Example:

Captain Tarvel’s Toughs (Tier 2): The Captain lost his wife and child to The Bandit King. He can’t kill the King twice, so taking it out on the Toughs will have to do. Most say the Town’s Watch is better for it. Most.

 

[Manbearcat]

STRESS

Since the tropes/themes here will be less scoundrel and more hero, my inclination is to call Stress either Resolve, Mettle, or Grit. Courage or heroic tenacity in the face of high fantasy peril is what I’m after, and those 3 do the trick.


TRAUMA

I’m thinking Toll for this. Heroing ain’t easy.

And I’ll revise the list somewhat from the existing 8 Traumas, definitely including Distanced for characters with Divine patronage or for those who are committed to a ideal and the carrying out of it was too punishing.

 

[Manbearcat]

HEAT/WANTED LEVEL

When I initially was spitballing this in my head a long time ago, I was thinking Legacy, Renown, or Doom. It needs to be something where the Company's (and I may call this Companions...still not sure) actions have earned them notoriety and, in turn, that notoriety has earned them trouble.

However, @Fenris-77 brought up the idea of Legend. That is clearly better than all 3 because (a) it captures everything in 1 and (b) it flat out sounds cooler.

So, then.

Legend is acquired just like Heat is in Blades; at Payoff and during the Adventure in the form of Complications or Devil's Bargains (still thinking on what to call this...Destiny's Price?).

Wanted Level is possibly where Doom will go (Impending Doom).

So, for instance:

The Company/Companions are returning from an Adventure in the wild (vs in the town). They just met a horde of barbarian raiders that have been assailing caravans/hunters outside the city and who are trying to unit the other tribes for a siege on the Town. The parley was successful but complicated. The leader of the horde swore an oath to have his 2nd in command have the tribe move on if one of PCs could slay him in single combat. If the PC is slain then the other PCs will have to swear allegiance to the Barbaric Horde (and there are no takesy-backsies here...this would mean that the Companions (a) gain +3 Faction with the Horde - allies and (b) become -3 Faction with The Town).

The PC slays the Barbarian Warlord. In the process, they hit Impending Doom 2 due to the Legend accrued with 2 Legend rolling over. So their Entanglements (will likely sub Encounter for this) roll on the journey back (the journey is elided except for this) might look like this:

Impending Doom 2 = 2d6 rolled

Legend 0-3 Table (1st entry is wild, 2nd is town)

1-3 = Cohort/Gear/Travel Trouble or Salty Watchmen
4/5 = Hunted or Secrets of the City
6 = Favors of the Worst Kind

So lets say the 2d6 resulted in a 4; Hunted. Go to Entanglement Menu:

Hunted: A beast or bandits beset you on the way back. One PC takes 2 Harm (Saving Throw for 1 Harm) or play it out and see what happens.

---

REP (LEGEND), HEAT (DOOM), AND WANTED LEVEL/ENTANGLEMENTS/INCARCERATION

At the start of the playtest I'm going to begin soon, below will be the initial iteration of the configuration/interactions of all of the above:

* Rep is Legend (not Folklore).

* Heat is Doom (not Legend).

* There is no Wanted Level or Incarceration as per standard faire Blades, but there will be a Post-Adventure Entanglement rolled. The procedure and thinking on this is below:

1) Legend and Doom fit on the same 12 point track; Legend from left to right and Doom from right to left. Like orthodox Blades, these will be accrued primarily due to Adventures (but Entanglements will intersect here as well).

2) Getting your Legend meter filled to 12 + requisite Coin will be the requirement for Tiering up (like Blades).

3) Doom will obviously be an obstacle to that (occupying the meter from the opposite direction).

4) Unlike Blades, there will be no Downtime Activity to Reduce Doom. Doom will only be reduced by a special Doom Adventure that targets a Menace (these are Fronts). These will not earn Doom. They will earn reduced Legend which is exchanged for Doom reduction at an exchange rate of 2:1 (the same exchange rate of liquidating Stash to produce tangible Coin in Blades).

So, for instance, the Adventure earns 2 Legend + 1 per Tier above Company. Tier 2 Menace is Adventured against. 4 Legend is earned. 4 or 2 of that can be exchanged for Doom reduction or 2 Legend + 1 Doom Reduction or 0 Legend + 2 Doom Reduction.

Coin gained is as normal.

5) The procedure for Post Adventure Entanglements will work like this:

* A Fortune Roll is made to determine which PC will have a targeted thematic Entanglment which takes place either on the journey back (if Adventure is in the Wild) or in the Town (if Adventure is in the Town).

* The GM will pick one of the PC's Bonds or their Alignment (one that has not been interacted with in this game session) to frame a conflict around.

* The GM will reference the Company's present Doom to determine the level of Menace faced.

0 Doom = Tier + 0 Menace
1-3 Doom = Tier + 1 Menace
4+ Doom = Tier + 2 Menace

* The conflict will either be elided (with a decision-point/cost paid) or it can be played out (perhaps the player doesn't want to make that decision-point or doesn't want to pay that cost and feels they can pay a lesser/different cost in the playing out of the scene); player's choice.

 

[Manbearcat]

BLUECOATS

This is where my mind is at presently..."the truth is...there are no Bluecoats."

Like Impending Doom above, I'm thinking of making the Bluecoats merely be a manifestation of Doom.

When required by the system, Doom will manifest as an obstacle/conflict that is Company/Companions Tier +2 (or Tier 6 when the PCs are Tier 5 or 6). So at the beginning of the game, when they're Tier 0, a Tier 2 Faction or a Magnitude 2 Event/Monster or a Magnitude 1 Monster w/ increased Scale (Magnitude 1 monsters at * 2 the number of PCs) would give them a problem.

 

[Fenris-77]

I have some thoughts about Legend and how it could be used in the game to drive the fiction. First, and this is a bit of an aside, the party in this hack isn't going to have the kind of narrative direction that a Blades gang does based on the gang's type (Assassins, Grifters etc). My thought there was to build some of that direction into the playbooks themselves. Perhaps a system where the party itself chooses what kind of approach might generate XP. Alternatively, this could be represented by an accretion of motivations from the playbooks. So each playbook could have personal XP triggers (call them inner triggers) as well as party XP triggers, so the party gains XP based on the range of characters that make it up and their collected outward motivations.

This notion that the party 'identity' is a collection of character-based ideas is what's leads me more specifically to Legend and how to approach it. Perhaps it would work to have playbook specific options that replace incarceration, which is the big problem related to Heat. So when Legend reaches a certain point, when the party has drawn enough of the gods' attention, or whomever, the characters in the party determine the nature of threat or complication that appears. I'm calling this Legendary Complications below, but there must be a cooler term than that. Perhaps Challenges, IDK.

There are a ton of ways this could be handled, but tying it directly to the characters has one immediate benefit that I really like. If you tie the complication directly to one character, perhaps whichever character has the highest current doom, you can produce consequences that are really personal not just for that character, but also for the party. Let's say, for instance, that it's the Cleric who has the highest Doom when the party's legend hits that tier. The Cleric playbook contains Cleric specific Legend consequences or threats, which could (and probably should) be tied not only to the playbook, but also to some character specific choices about background or whatever. This gives the Cleric a real spotlight moment and I think really drives home the idea that the growing legend has personal consequences. Let's be general and say that these Legendary problems will involve significant threats, threats at the high end of what the party can deal with. It might be appropriate to also offer some significant benefit for overcoming them. So each playbook could have, along with Legendary problems, also have a selection of abilities/gear/whatever that are only gained through those Legendary complications.

Stepping back to mechanics for a second. lets say we call the successful resolution of a Legendary complication a 'Legendary Deed'. This would provide a mechanic to spread that spotlight around, in that Legendary complications could be assigned based on highest current doom paired with lowest current Deeds. Essentially every party member gets a kick at the can before anyone gets a second one. (I realize that this doesn't account for failed legendary complications, but I hadn't figured that bit out yet).

Stepping back yet another level, this would mean the game has two core axis of conflict. First are the conflicts the party chooses to engage in, both in terms of adventure but also the faction game. Second would be their growing Legend, which is trouble that comes to find them. If the second is tied to previous party actions and the specific characters I think this does a good job modelling the actions have consequences idea at the level of setting.

 

[Manbearcat]

SCORES

Not outlined in the lead post, but I wanted to touch on my thoughts on this right quick. Obviously (as mentioned prior), Adventure will replace Score. Types as below:


Assault - Attack a hideout or enemy force head on. Detail: The point of attack.

Delve - Spelunk or explore a mysterious site. Detail: The legend (physical map to locale and its story).

Escort - A caravan of merchants from major trade hubs or a vulnerable family out of danger. Detail: The route & means.

Range - Set out into the wild to map its uncharted depths. Detail: Cartographer's call.

Ritual - Adjure or bind a demon, engage a celestial power, connect or disconnect worlds. Detail: The supernatural method.

Slay - A legendary monster. Detail: The lair.

Social - Negotiate, bargain, persuade, or threaten. Detail: The social connection.

Solve - Find a safe passage from here to there, track down a lost site, resolve a mystery. Detail: What needs finding.

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

 

[Manbearcat]

I have some thoughts about Legend and how it could be used in the game to drive the fiction. First, and this is a bit of an aside, the party in this hack isn't going to have the kind of narrative direction that a Blades gang does based on the gang's type (Assassins, Grifters etc). My thought there was to build some of that direction into the playbooks themselves. Perhaps a system where the party itself chooses what kind of approach might generate XP. Alternatively, this could be represented by an accretion of motivations from the playbooks. So each playbook could have personal XP triggers (call them inner triggers) as well as party XP triggers, so the party gains XP based on the range of characters that make it up and their collected outward motivations.

This notion that the party 'identity' is a collection of character-based ideas is what's leads me more specifically to Legend and how to approach it. Perhaps it would work to have playbook specific options that replace incarceration, which is the big problem related to Heat. So when Legend reaches a certain point, when the party has drawn enough of the gods' attention, or whomever, the characters in the party determine the nature of threat or complication that appears. I'm calling this Legendary Complications below, but there must be a cooler term than that. Perhaps Challenges, IDK.

There are a ton of ways this could be handled, but tying it directly to the characters has one immediate benefit that I really like. If you tie the complication directly to one character, perhaps whichever character has the highest current doom, you can produce consequences that are really personal not just for that character, but also for the party. Let's say, for instance, that it's the Cleric who has the highest Doom when the party's legend hits that tier. The Cleric playbook contains Cleric specific Legend consequences or threats, which could (and probably should) be tied not only to the playbook, but also to some character specific choices about background or whatever. This gives the Cleric a real spotlight moment and I think really drives home the idea that the growing legend has personal consequences. Let's be general and say that these Legendary problems will involve significant threats, threats at the high end of what the party can deal with. It might be appropriate to also offer some significant benefit for overcoming them. So each playbook could have, along with Legendary problems, also have a selection of abilities/gear/whatever that are only gained through those Legendary complications.

Stepping back to mechanics for a second. lets say we call the successful resolution of a Legendary complication a 'Legendary Deed'. This would provide a mechanic to spread that spotlight around, in that Legendary complications could be assigned based on highest current doom paired with lowest current Deeds. Essentially every party member gets a kick at the can before anyone gets a second one. (I realize that this doesn't account for failed legendary complications, but I hadn't figured that bit out yet).

Stepping back yet another level, this would mean the game has two core axis of conflict. First are the conflicts the party chooses to engage in, both in terms of adventure but also the faction game. Second would be their growing Legend, which is trouble that comes to find them. If the second is tied to previous party actions and the specific characters I think this does a good job modelling the actions have consequences idea at the level of setting.

Let me just say that I LOVE all of this.

This is really great stuff.

This feels like actuating 4e's Character Themes, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies mechanically. I love this idea.

I'll have to think more on how to make Legend a discrete, character thing. Its probably easily enough pulled off via each PC having their own Legend and Impending Doom Tracker. Then the question is, how is it determined which Tracker gets rolled post-Adventure during the Entanglement (Encounter?) phase?

I'll have to think more on this, but this is really great stuff.

I also love the idea of diversity of archetype/theme being incentivized via the xp model.

Really great stuff. Thanks @Fenris-77 . These are the sorts of contributions I'm looking for.

 

[Fenris-77]

I was still considering Legend above to be a party thing, but assuming at the same time that each character is a part of that Legend and so, functionally, has Legend equal to the party total. You could certainly make it exclusively discrete I suppose, but I kind of like the idea that the Legend is a group thing as well. There are a ton of ways that could be connected to each character though. I think it will take some iteration and maybe playtest to really get a feel for it.

Maybe each character has a Legend tracker, and those collectively pool into into a party Legend tracker? If you up the scale of the party tracker or differentiate it somehow that could work. You could also tie trauma (Toll) to Legend if there's a discrete character tracker. There's also an opportunity to make Toll somewhat discrete by playbook as well. Perhaps a base number of shared Tolls, plus some playbook specific ones, an idea which could interface with playbook specific abilities and whatnot. The cost of hero-ing hits different characters differently.