Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[zakael19]

Like I don't understand how this is so hard or controversial: a consequence creating an interesting plot twist or an event the players have to react right now creates more engaging and dynamic gameplay than some tick on some gauge that might or might not matter later. Do people genuinely disagree with this?

Yes, obviously we do.

The game does not need to always punch the characters in the face on a 4/5 or even a 1-3. Sometimes it makes more sense in the fiction to say "oh cool, this is the first sign the guards have that something is off - they're starting to quest about but haven't like, triangulated you yet."

And I think that is questionable advice as it keeps the situation static and passive.

A forward progressing situation is definitionally not passive! The interlocking systems of Blades are meant to show very competent people getting in over their heads, and often barely making it out. As said above, that 5/6 clock for "Cornered!" shows that you barely scraped out! And you should have spent lots of stress! Traumed out! Etc!

 

[TwoSix]

Like I don't understand how this is so hard or controversial: a consequence creating an interesting plot twist or an event the players have to react right now creates more engaging and dynamic gameplay than some tick on some gauge that might or might not matter later. Do people genuinely disagree with this?

Pacing. There are benefits to allowing to tension and pressure to build, especially in the context of a game built on heists and scores.

Forcing an immediate, in situation consequence that causes the situation to be reframed every time a roll fails isn't ideal. Sometimes you need to let things breathe; a clock is a tool to balance out making a roll consequential without shoving the current narrative sideways.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yes, obviously we do.

The game does not need to always punch the characters in the face on a 4/5 or even a 1-3. Sometimes it makes more sense in the fiction to say "oh cool, this is the first sign the guards have that something is off - they're starting to quest about but haven't like, triangulated you yet."

So I think "soft moves" are fine, as they telegraph the danger, and give opportunity to course correct, but clocks often take this too far, as there just is a series of meaningless soft moves and the actual danger never materialises.

A forward progressing situation is definitionally not passive! The interlocking systems of Blades are meant to show very competent people getting in over their heads, and often barely making it out. As said above, that 5/6 clock for "Cornered!" shows that you barely scraped out! And you should have spent lots of stress! Traumed out! Etc!

It is passive. It is just using metaish resources to manage metaish clocks. Pondering who can burn stress and who can use special armour and should we use them on this tick or only the next might be engaging gameplay to some (though not to me) but it certainly does not create engaging fiction! Yes, actually getting a trauma would be a meaningful consequence, but trying to avoid it is again just gauge management* which is not that interesting.

(* And IIRC they made it easier in Deep Cuts, though we don't use that. )

 

[zakael19]

So I think "soft moves" are fine, as they telegraph the danger, and give opportunity to course correct, but clocks often take this too far, as there just is a series of meaningless soft moves and the actual danger never materialises.

Uh. How many clocks do you have ticking? I'll generally have like. One? Linked to the current score. "Demon manifests" or "Alarm called in" or "Reinforcements arrive." The rest of the time my threats are pretty immediate. As @TwoSix that gives me that soft consequence + decision space for the players + pacing to reflect the rising fictional implications. It's a form of honesty - I'm not arbitrarily going "the guards show up!" I signaled that and you kept rolling.

Yes, actually getting a trauma would be a meaningful consequence, but trying to avoid it is again just gauge management* which is not that interesting.

(* And IIRC they made it easier in Deep Cuts, though we don't use that. )

Why would you avoid getting trauma? It's half the fun of the game... Once my Songs players realized that Scars were cool and awesome actually, they started a race to see who would get one first! There was genuine disappointment when one person finally won.

Idk, clearly our experiences are so different either I'm just more aligned with the core systems / they're not a good fit for you, or the way they're showing up at your table isn't well execute, or some combination.

(not sure what "it" is in Deep Cuts, the "gauge management?" In DC, you get your stress back via Downtime in full, because you rack it up like crazy during the score. DC maximizes the focus on cost over any concern about failure; everything costs more)

 

[Fenris-77]

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.

 

[Deset Gled]

The 'fiction' is what matters, not the clocks used to track it.

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.

Isn't it equally fair to point out that lots of fiction can be quite inconsequential, too? There are lots of minor interactions or side bits that never amount to anything, don't actually move plot forward, and ultimately get forgotten at the end of a session like popcorn after a movie.

IMNSHO, this is quickly approaching the point of the discussion where putting things in terminology buckets doesn't really mean much. YMMV.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

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.

Yes, but I am specifically talking about the clocks that measure when a bad thing happens and are filled as consequence of bad rolls.

 

[Fenris-77]

Isn't it equally fair to point out that lots of fiction can be quite inconsequential, too? There are lots of minor interactions or side bits that never amount to anything, don't actually move plot forward, and ultimately get forgotten at the end of a session like popcorn after a movie.

IMNSHO, this is quickly approaching the point of the discussion where putting things in terminology buckets doesn't really mean much. YMMV.

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.

 

[Fenris-77]

Yes, but I am specifically talking about the clocks that measure when a bad thing happens and are filled as consequence of bad rolls.

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. Whatever is happening right now might impact a clock, or it might not, but the clock doesn't run play at the table, it's the other way around, the clock is just a tool to help adjudicate consequences for whatever is happening.

Clocks measure overall progress toward X which is always a background to whatever is actually happening at the table.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Uh. How many clocks do you have ticking? I'll generally have like. One? Linked to the current score. "Demon manifests" or "Alarm called in" or "Reinforcements arrive." The rest of the time my threats are pretty immediate.

Yeah, you need to go with a variety of consequences, with Clocks being only one such option. You need complications and Harm and whatever else makes sense… spread things out.

For Clocks, I may have more than one active as part of a Score… but I make sure they’re doing different things. So one Clock might be like the common “Alarm Raised” Clock… then I might have one that’s related to a specific PC. Maybe something like “Lose Contact” if they brought a friend along and the Score is more dangerous than expected. Something more specific to a single PC.

So yeah… keep the in-Score Clocks to a minimum and try and keep them focused on different kinds of things.

Yes, but I am specifically talking about the clocks that measure when a bad thing happens and are filled as consequence of bad rolls.

It sounds to me like the GM is using too many Clocks… perhaps even offloading things that should be immediate consequences to a Clock. If so, then the criticism definitely makes sense.

Do you think that’s the case?