Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9659743" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Yep. The three Agendas (=core, over-arching goals as GM, which you should always pursue and do everything you can to avoid opposing) are:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Portray a fantastic world</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fill the characters’ lives with adventure</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Play to find out what happens</li> </ul>The first (and to some extent the second) are in your point (i), while the third (and to a certain extent the first) are part of (ii). Further, some of the GM moves (which again, I never "speak the name" of such moves) include things like "Reveal an unwelcome truth", "Show a downside to their class, race, or equipment", and "Turn their move back on them", all of which are part of learning more about something, and often, specifically learning more about the characters.I'm given to understand that Blades in the Dark started its life as a PbtA game, but went further afield, changing enough of the fundamental mechanics and structures to be a similar but distinct thing. Sorta like how Gamma World and D&D grew from similar soil, but went in wildly different directions, even when later efforts aped from earlier ones (e.g. how GW7e is clearly mechanically related to D&D 4e, but the two are not the same.)It's almost always acceptable for the player to provide input, if they think it would help, but the answer itself is given by the GM, at least for this roll. I have definitely worked with player suggestions for Spout Lore stuff, especially if the answers are in an area I personally don't know super well but the person I'm talking to does. So, for example, if I had a lawyer in my group, and a Spout Lore check about law came up, while it's still on me as GM to answer the question, the lawyer's input would be invaluable to me since I don't know law anywhere near as well as an actual lawyer would!An example where the player has more direct input would be the Wizard's Ritual move, which I have genericized (don't have any Wizards in the party at present, but if someone decided to play one, I'd replace it with something appropriate, or make Wizards really really good at it, or in some other way compensate them for the loss of that move, since it really is a lovely thing to have.) Here's the Ritual move:<h3>Ritual</h3>When you draw on a place of power to create a magical effect, tell the GM what you’re trying to achieve. Ritual effects are always possible, but the GM will give you one to four of the following conditions:    It’s going to take days/weeks/months.    First you must ______________________.    You’ll need help from ______________________.    It will require a lot of money    The best you can do is a lesser version, unreliable and limited    You and your allies will risk danger from ______________________.    You’ll have to disenchant ______________________ to do it.Note what it says there: Ritual effects are always possible. That's a hard, binding rule on me as GM. I am not allowed to tell the players they simply cannot achieve a ritual effect, unless doing so would grossly violate reason/sense/etc. (we are presuming people participating in good faith). But, by that same token, I am at liberty to specify up to four of the above conditions, and a particularly powerful effect might require particularly onerous conditions. Also, note that the player must (as the bolded part--the "trigger phrase"--says) "draw on a place of power to create a magical effect". That means they need a place of power, and if they don't already have one on hand, they'll need to find one before they can even attempt this.So, say they want to resurrect a long-dead champion of the kingdom, so she can fight off the evil sorcerer she slew long ago (hence "champion of the kingdom"). That's a pretty damn powerful effect, to restore life and vigor to someone who died, presumably of natural causes, centuries ago. So maybe I say they'll need help from the Church of Bahamut (which they aren't on great terms with because this group isn't at all shy about some skullduggery), they'll risk danger from the Sorcerer's second-in-command who has taken up residence inside the hero's tomb, and they'll have to make a great sacrifice to show Bahamut that he should relinquish this honorable soul back to the land of the living for one final deed of derring-do (read: disenchant something powerful and personally valuable, such as the Fighter's ancestral blade or the Wizard's staff of power.)Here, the players have 100% control over what the ritual itself accomplishes. I can't touch that. But I can set costs--perhaps costs that the party might not be willing to pay. Maybe the Rogue isn't really willing to apologize for stealing that silverware from the bishop's home. Maybe the Wizard and Fighter aren't willing to part with their treasured valuables. Or maybe they think taking on the Sorcerer's second-in-command won't be that much easier than taking on the Sorcerer himself, so they might as well just do it themselves.But generally you would want to pick costs that are challenging but interesting, costs that inspire them to new adventure, rather than costs that make them not want to engage. My highest goal is always to kindle and support player enthusiasm, so costs which are dull or leave the player crestfallen would be a monumental failure on my part. Instead, I want to make them excited to try something creative, to have them feel like when they show their creativity it matters.</blockquote>

Verification