Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 9317813" data-attributes="member: 2303">On the issue of planning, the we have run it is that we do a rough planning together between GM and players. The players describe their smooth planned action (yes in BitD we are all about heists), the GM tells us what is reasonable and what is not, and the plan is adjusted. Then we make the engagement roll, and it is the GMs job to throw complications at us.I will give our favorite heist as an example. We're shadows (thieves) and only two players this session, a hunter and a lurk. Us players dreamt up that there are occasional carnivals in Duskvol (we're in the Silkshore district) and on one of the floats, a mcguffin is on display that we want to steal. So the lurk enters the interior of the float before it is launched. There she loosens the strings holding the mcguffin (the GM decided it was a sword). The hunter hides on a nearby rooftop and shoots a slingshot at the sword, causing it to fall to the ground. The lurk replaces it with a cheap copy we had made in advance. This scenario was almost completely made up by us players, but the GM rode along with us and added complications along the way - in the end it didn't happen exactly like this, but we did get away with the sword.For the second score on the same session, we get a supernatural event. A ghost turns up in our hideout and demands we give the sword to its faction. We had already sold the sword, and thus had to steal it again. This was the GM improvising based on a random event, which was much more significant than normal as we had collected a bunch of heat.Both these scores were played in a session of about 4 hours, which is absolutely amazing to me who is used to either of these scenarios taking at least one session in a game like DnD.Edit: Hunter should be Hound.</blockquote>

Verification