I suppose if the players are the only ones contributing to the fiction, and the GM doesn't think anyone or anything involved in the conflict might do something to hinder someone from standing back and just taking potshots at people... then sure, exactly as you say.
They could, sometimes. But it is bizarre to think that always and every situation the GM constructs the situation so that the use of other skill is blocked by the fictional positioning. Most of the time this is not the case.
I am listening to your criticism. What I'm suggesting to you would be ways to address the criticism at your table. You seem determined to argue rather than consider the advice. I don't know why? To prove the book can be clearer? Sure, the book can be clearer. To prove others have this issue? Sure, others have this issue.
Who cares about that? If the issue exists, I think it makes more sense to discuss what can be done about it.
I mean I am not the GM in this game. I know what I would do differently if I were, and if I ever run Blades or an adjacent game, houseruling the skill section to minimise the overlap and split some overly broad skills* would be the first thing I'd do.
(* Prowl, so in a game of thieves and heists you have one skill that covers all the athletics and stealth, and you can also attack with it in right circumstances? Also, study is both research and reading people. Annoying thing to combine, as there are many common character archetypes that should not be good in both of these.)
But I am also thinking this from game design perspective. Why would you design this intentional overlap. It is the most baffling design choice in the Blades to, as whilst I may have overstated the amount of confusion it causes, it nevertheless annoying and completely unnecessary.
Creatively angle for use of better skills is just the wrong way to look at it, I think. Finding creative ways to address challenges? Sure. Again... fiction first.
Literally the same thing.
Many of the Player's Best Practices. They begin on page 182 of the book. Here's some snippets.
EMBRACE THE SCOUNDREL’S LIFE
- No matter how cool or how capable the PCs are, the heat will pile on, entanglements will blindside them, the powers-that-be will try to kick them down with no regard.
- Either way, your character is not you. Their fate is their own. We’re the advocates and fans of our characters, but they are not us. We don’t safeguard them as we might safeguard ourselves or our loved ones. They must go off into their dark and brutal world and strive and suffer for what they achieve- we can’t keep them safe here with us.
GO INTO DANGER, FALL IN LOVE WITH TROUBLE
- You’re a daring scoundrel on the mean streets of a haunted city. You’re not a risk-averse, ordinary citizen.
- Don’t shoot down risky ideas.
- Aim the action of the game toward what’s cool and fun and don’t feel like you have to manage every little risk. There will always be trouble and consequences of some kind. You’ll drive yourself batty if you try to avoid it all.
And I read this the characters being daring in the fiction. And they are. They are doing daring heists, picking fights with powerful people and getting into all sort of trouble. My character even more than others.* But I don't read any of this to me that the players should still not try to play smartly and use the system for their advantage.
(* I need to sometimes limit foolhardiness of my character a bit, as in this game the fallout is even more communal than in most others, and whilst I might be fine with my character dying or suffering, I don't want to cause it to the characters of the other players too much.)
DON’T BE A WEASEL
- As a player, you have the privilege of choosing which action to roll. But with this privilege comes a responsibility—choose the action that matches what your character is doing—not simply the dice pool you would like to roll.
- For example, when you roll Tinker, it’s because you tinker with something. When you roll Sway, it’s because you sway someone’s opinion. If your crafty Leech shows off a cool gadget they made in order to sway a potential client, then the Leech is Swaying them. They’re not “using Tinker” to impress the person. That’s not how actions work.
- That’s why they’re called actions, not skills. They’re about what you’re doing, not what you know.
- If you’re the type of player that really needs to use their best dice pool all the time, take the Slide’s special ability Rook’s Gambit. It will cost you stress—but at least you won’t be a weasel.
And see what this actual weasel example is. Trying to persuade with tinker. That is an obvious no go, and no one is talking about stuff like that; we are talking about the edges
of the intentionally overlapping skills. Like I have said this many, many times, and it starts to get frustrating to repeat it.
TAKE RESPONSIBILITY
- You are a co-author of the game. If you want shortcomings and flaws to be part of the ongoing story, show your own character’s failure to make good decisions. If you want the world of Doskvol to be deadly, accept deadly harm when it’s time for your character to die.
- As a player, you have an expressive role to play at the table, not just a tactical one.
Characters make bad decisions all the time. Hell, if they weren't they would not be characters in this game, they would be doing something sensible instead. And of course the players embrace their expressive role, most of us are LARPers, there is a lot of expression and drama. But none of this says that players should be blind o the rules and not use mechanics smartly. In fact, "not just tactical" implies that this tactical role exists too!
Yes, and this is the kind of discussion that should happen at the table from time to time. That's fine. Personally, I'd lean toward Skirmish since it's a battle to the death... and Finesse doesn't really seem to be what Vader does. But a player could argue that Obi-Wan is using dexterous manipulation or maneuvering against his opponent, and so Finesse might be fine.
Then why ave people been arguing for pages that it doesn't happen? Like we might disagree how often it happens and I am sure it is group dependant, but it does, and this is the point people keep ignoring:
the game is intentionally written so that it happens!
And what value does it add? I see none, whether you think it is trivial, minor or major delay or annoyance, it is unnecessary.
But this type of discussion should happen only occasionally, and should be pretty quick. If a player said to me Finesse, I'd likely just go with it and not even pause... it seems at least relevant. If the player said to me "I want to Wreck Vader", then I'd say "wait, what? Why wouldn't it be....?" and we'd discuss.
I mean they would probably say it because wreck says "you could try to overwhelm an enemy with sheer force
in battle," and if I am playing Chewbacca ripping Vader's arm off or grabbing a big pipe off the wall and whacking him with sounds rather appropriate and wrecky to me. Might be desperate position, then again, facing Vader if you're not a jedi yourself sounds pretty desperate regardless...
Dude. I'm not the one complaining about it, am I?
Indeed. But you keep making statements about the game that do not seem to quite align with the text. Like you think it would be weird to use wreck in combat when it literally says that you can or think that you need to choose between reducing heat and healing, when in reality there are obvious ways that let you do both.
Like in thse discussions it often feels that people who "get" these sort of games actually have their own understanfing and practices that are not actually in the text, and then people who jus buy the book and try to run the game based on the text run into problems. And this of course is quite common and happens with many games. Like I am absolutely sure that why my D&D 5e game is so smooth and succesful is because of me importing knowledge, experience and best practices from other games and decades of experience, rather than following the advice printed in the books. So I feel something similar is going on here.
But depleting Stash should have an effect. It represents how well off you seem. If you Stash is constantly being spent on Downtime Actions, then your PC is likely looking pretty shabby. This would then impact how he's perceived by others... so this way, that decision comes with a cost.
Yes, sure, but that hardly is dramatic and compelling choice. LIke whether I have 12 or 14 dots in the stash hardly is significant.
No, it's not what I'm talking about. It's not about how I as a player describe my action. While that may play a part, what I'm actually talking about is the situation that has already been established in play.
So to lean on the duel example... two characters face off, swords drawn, ready to settle their rivalry once and for all... okay, here we go! The player then says "I spin around sneakily to try and Flank him, so I use Prowl" I'm going to say "He can see you. How are you sneaky?" and the player may then say "Well, maybe I feint to try and get him to commit, and leave me an opening" and I would then say "okay, that sounds more like Finesse or Skirmish, doesn't it?"
The situation in play matters. All your examples make it seem like your game is a white board of no details until the players offer them as part of action declaration.
No, not at all. It is just that you keep imagining clearcut situations (which certainly exists,) when actual play is full of ambigious ones. Like sure, if you are duelling one guy prowl is pretty hard sell, but when there are othercombatants, which by their own actions cause chaos, and there is environment and teraain and moving and running people, then there certainly will be situtioans where it starts to become quite plausible. Like I repeat it agian: the overlap exists, it is in the rules, it is intentionally there. So it is super weird for people to pretend that these situations do not happen; of course they do, the game was designed to create them!Like if you don't think it is an issue, that is one thing, but this denial is just outright bizarre.
The bolded part is what I don't really agree with. Sure, creative use of an Action can be fine, but fishing to constantly use your best Action Rating is, to me, not the measure of a skilled player in Blades, and clearly doesn't align with Players Best Practices.
No one said constant fishing. Merely choosing the best one in common situations in which the skills overlap,
like they're designed to do!
I tell you one example from our last game. We were sneaking into a heavily guarded mansion of our enemy, who we planned to assasinate. There was group check for sneaking. And whilst my character is the sneaking expert, we briefly discussed it as players and decided that another chracter would lead the sneaking. Reason for this was that this chracter had no stress, and mine had some, and that we expected a dangerous fight later, and my chracter is the best fighter, so we wanted him to be able to burn stress in the fight. Do you think this is is the sort of considerations players should do in this game, or no?
The thing is, that this game has surpisingly complex mechanics, and there are all sort of resource management and game widgets that are a bit meta, so I don't think it necessarilymeans that the chracters are nort being bold and daring scoundrels that take risks if the players are trying to leverage these mechnics somewhat smartly.
Maybe try listening instead of arguing.
If I want to try Burning Wheel, and it's not quite working for me, and I'm not sure why, I know who I'd likely reach out to for advice. Then when it was offered, I wouldn't just argue against it non-stop. I'd actively consider it, and ask questions.
Now, I realize you didn't request advice in this case. But you presented a view of the game that I don't think is entirely accurate, and in discussing, I think there are some clear reasons why... so I've made suggestions. I think the back and forth has gone on long enough... so unless you have any actual questions, I'll probably stop replying at this point.
I think listening and not arguing should go both way. Like I don't even tink the ambigious skills are a colossal problem, it just is very unnecessary one. But it is strange that people just deny that existence of the overlap and the obvious outcomes of that. Like it is right there in the text. Though I still don't know why.
And I think this happens every time when anyone criticises the game or says they have any issues with it; the validity of the criticism is just denied.
