Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8026336" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>Well, they may acquire some metagame knowledge....it depends on the circumstances. Whether that's a problem or not depends on the participants. You would likely consider it a problem. I would most likely not.</p><p></p><p>For me, the benefit of rules transparency on play far outweighs any drawback of players having some metagame knowledge.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Having engaged players may be the only aspect of a game that I might agree is broadly agreed upon. How they are engaged and what they are doing and all the other elements that make a game better or worse.....well, this thread alone gives a strong sense to me that there's a lot of variety in that regard.</p><p></p><p>I agree that [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER] 's game sounds like it was a lot of fun, and it seems the participants thought so, too. And yet, Blades is a game where the mechanics are almost always known to the players. Any time the player declares an action for their PC, the GM will provide them with their Position (how risky the action is given the circumstances) and the Effect (the strength/scope/size of the outcome of the action). So before dice are rolled, a player knows how risky the action is and what will happen if successful, and based on their PC stats, they know their chances of success. None of this is ever hidden from the player, and once it's stated out loud, the player can then decide to proceed and make their roll, or they can pursue another action.</p><p></p><p>No Force is possible in this regard, precisely because of the way the game works.</p><p></p><p>Now, could a GM try to force a particular outcome through their role of determining the consequences on a failure or a partial success? Yes, that is possible to some extent. I think [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] offered an example that he found dissatisfying, but it seems that GM was adjudicating things more in favor of the PCs. If a GM tried to force things in some negative way for the PCs, I think it would be obvious. Also, the players have the ability through PC resource to override the GM's ruling on a consequence......so they could literally overturn that decision. In such an instance, the main issue would be the potentially unnecessary use of Stress to resist the consequence.</p><p></p><p>I think GM Force mostly comes up in Blades as part of the initial set up and in certain parts of the game where the GM may craft situations for the PCs to address (whether as a Score or as an Entanglement). However, these instances where the GM is introducing content of his own choosing, there are still some strong principles that are meant to be followed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8026336, member: 6785785"] Well, they may acquire some metagame knowledge....it depends on the circumstances. Whether that's a problem or not depends on the participants. You would likely consider it a problem. I would most likely not. For me, the benefit of rules transparency on play far outweighs any drawback of players having some metagame knowledge. Having engaged players may be the only aspect of a game that I might agree is broadly agreed upon. How they are engaged and what they are doing and all the other elements that make a game better or worse.....well, this thread alone gives a strong sense to me that there's a lot of variety in that regard. I agree that [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER] 's game sounds like it was a lot of fun, and it seems the participants thought so, too. And yet, Blades is a game where the mechanics are almost always known to the players. Any time the player declares an action for their PC, the GM will provide them with their Position (how risky the action is given the circumstances) and the Effect (the strength/scope/size of the outcome of the action). So before dice are rolled, a player knows how risky the action is and what will happen if successful, and based on their PC stats, they know their chances of success. None of this is ever hidden from the player, and once it's stated out loud, the player can then decide to proceed and make their roll, or they can pursue another action. No Force is possible in this regard, precisely because of the way the game works. Now, could a GM try to force a particular outcome through their role of determining the consequences on a failure or a partial success? Yes, that is possible to some extent. I think [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] offered an example that he found dissatisfying, but it seems that GM was adjudicating things more in favor of the PCs. If a GM tried to force things in some negative way for the PCs, I think it would be obvious. Also, the players have the ability through PC resource to override the GM's ruling on a consequence......so they could literally overturn that decision. In such an instance, the main issue would be the potentially unnecessary use of Stress to resist the consequence. I think GM Force mostly comes up in Blades as part of the initial set up and in certain parts of the game where the GM may craft situations for the PCs to address (whether as a Score or as an Entanglement). However, these instances where the GM is introducing content of his own choosing, there are still some strong principles that are meant to be followed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Realistic Consequences vs Gameplay
Top