What is the point of GM's notes?

[Campbell]

From reading your first paragraph I would have thought you would have liked Inspiration in 5e. It is a minor reward that gives a player permission to play their character a bit rather than wholly to group success. It's not overwhelming and you can only hold a finite amount of inspiration. I'm curious what you don't like about it?

Mostly I think it's a reward for characterization rather than character. You are rewarded for fitting an existing conception of a character. It feels performative to me in a way that Blade's more open ended "You expressed your beliefs, drives, heritage, or background." and "You struggled with issues from your vice or traumas during the session." do not. The examples provided in backgrounds feel pretty nonconsequential to me.

It's also a lot of overhead in the midst of play for not much payoff. I have tried using it in play when I ran 5e and we always just ended up forgetting about it.

 

[Imaro]

nd

Mostly I think it's a reward for characterization rather than character. You are rewarded for fitting an existing conception of a character. It feels performative to me in a way that Blade's more open ended "You expressed your beliefs, drives, heritage, or background." and "You struggled with issues from your vice or traumas during the session." do not. The examples provided in backgrounds feel pretty nonconsequential to me.

Okay, I am really trying to parse and understand this but I'm having some difficulty here. First let me say I get that we like what we like and don't like what we don't like... but I am trying to understand your reasoning. So here are some questions for clarification ifyou feel like answering them...
1. Isn't playing a character doing the things that characterize said character, if not what do you consider it?
2. It has been a long time since I read or played BitD so to make sure I'll ask...do you decide on your beliefs, drives, heritage, background, and vices/traumas before, after or during a session?
3. What is the difference in a nonconsequential vs. consequential flaw? I think alot of the flaws in 5e are ripe for exploration through actions. Could you go into more depth as far as how the traits in BitD differe vs those in 5e?

It's also a lot of overhead in the midst of play for not much payoff. I have tried using it in play when I ran 5e and we always just ended up forgetting about it.

I've found the opposite to be true, for the most part my players immediately point out when their traits come into play during a session and it frees me up as DM not to have to worry about it.

 

[Imaro]

On a side note I didn't have much success or enjoyment when I ran BitD for my group but these discussions have made me curious about re-reading it again and perhaps trying another campaign.

 

[Campbell]

@Emirikol

I think talking in terms of what's required to achieve a certain result is not all that useful. We can achieve what we set out to achieve even if we are engaging in less than optimal techniques or even counter productive techniques. Also the optimal techniques for one set of individuals might be different than what works for a different group. Sometimes it can even be time sensitive.

My personal experience with the people I play with is that amount and depth of play stays relatively static across games, but in games where we have mechanical support things feel more tense, stakes are higher, and characters tend to develop in more unexpected ways. In games without mechanical support players tend to engage in lower stakes yet still interesting conversations, push for their goals less, and tend to stick more to preconceived notions of who their characters are.

 

[Campbell]

@Imaro

Your heritage and background are somewhat defined, but your beliefs and drives are never like these defined things in Blades. Basically what the questions do is give you a chance to reflect on play and see if we learned something new about the character. The important distinction for me personally is that question asks did you express it in some way. It does not have to be living up to your heritage or what we already know about your character.

Trauma and Vice are more defined. Your Vice is how you recover stress, Your traumas come from losing all your stress in a score and they are like one word things like Cold. I find that without thinking about because they have such prominence in play it's much easier for me to think about.

Generally I like stuff like Intimacies in Exalted, Goals in Stars Without Number or Aspirations of Chronicles of Darkness even better. You are rewarded for caring about what your character cares about.

 

[innerdude]

My personal experience with the people I play with is that amount and depth of play stays relatively static across games, but in games where we have mechanical support things feel more tense, stakes are higher, and characters tend to develop in more unexpected ways. In games without mechanical support players tend to engage in lower stakes yet still interesting conversations, push for their goals less, and tend to stick more to preconceived notions of who their characters are.

** innerdude checks his game room for NSA-level surveillance equipment, because clearly @Campbell has been watching his group **

** accusing stare **

In all seriousness, though, this is 100% the same with my group, especially the bolded bit. Thinking back to the Shaintar campaign in Savage Worlds (where I was a player, not the GM), this observation is surgically on-point. Character advancement in Savage Worlds is focused exclusively on the character's mechanical "schtick". Everything about it is ability/statistics driven; there's nothing in the rules to push/pull/nudge/direct character motivations.

I'm thinking of one character in particular, played by my best friend, who I've previously described as a talented actor who's done numerous stage productions (and even been paid for it on occasion). I bring this up, because of all the players, he was the one whose character I most expected evolve, because actor creatives are generally very prone to try and dig into character motivation. It's part and parcel with the skillset.

Yet at no point in 16 months in the campaign did his character evolve beyond his initial conception. At the start of the game, his character was an irascible, impatient-but-kind-hearted brinchie (think: feline humanoid) with paladin-like spell features.

By the end of the game, he was an irascible, impatient-but-kind-hearted brinchie with more powerful spell-like features and wicked-tough unarmed combat skills---but all character development was along an axis of "preconception." This is who my character is, I'm going to play to that.

Zero evolution along the character growth axis---This is what my character wants---how is that going to play out and change how I view my character?

 

[Aldarc]

By the end of the game, he was an irascible, impatient-but-kind-hearted brinchie with more powerful spell-like features and wicked-tough unarmed combat skills---but all character development was along an axis of "preconception." This is who my character is, I'm going to play to that.

Zero evolution along the character growth axis---This is what my character wants---how is that going to play out and change how I view my character?

"Play to find out what happens," IMHO, isn't just about the unfolding of the story; it's also about playing to find out and discover the character you're playing.

 

[Maxperson]

"Play to find out what happens," IMHO, isn't just about the unfolding of the story; it's also about playing to find out and discover the character you're playing.

Why can't it be about either one? It seems to me that would be a table decision, rather than something everyone has to conform to.

 

[Fenris-77]

Play to find out what happens isn't limited one or the other, or both. It'll work just fine in any combination. It's more about not playing with preconceived ideas about how things are going to turn out.

 

[Imaro]

I think this is an interesting video, and gives a pretty good take on Traits, Ideals, Bonds and Flaws as used by myself and probably a large number of D&D players. It's definitely relevant to the turn the conversation has taken in the thread.