Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8246602" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Yes, I would think so. It certainly would seem that way to me. But I know that often gets a lot of push back because it's a shift in thinking from the way many games do that, where any kind of setting detail is subject to GM approval. And yes, &quot;ask questions and build on the answers&quot; is a principle carried over from PbtA to FitD. I think Blades takes it a little further in that beyond just helping to establish setting details, there are points of player input which can shape the game even more dramatically. When the crew picks a Score, they do so by selecting a Plan and a Detail. The Plan is the kind of mission they want to perform: Assault, Deception, Stealth, Occult, Social, or Transport. Then whichever Plan you choose, the players pick a Detail. This is something specific which informs how the Plan will work. So if you choose an Assault, then you would provide a Detail like &quot;we're going to attack the building from behind&quot;, and if you choose Stealth, then you might say &quot;we're sneaking into the compound from the tunnels underneath&quot;.This gives the players a lot of say about what the thrust of play will be. It also gives the GM ideas on what kind of obstacles may be appropriate and what additional details may matter. To compare it to D&amp;D, the players have the ability to help shape &quot;the map&quot; for what they're going to do. I don't think this is the kind of authoring that many tend to think of when this comes up, but it's a pretty important point of player input.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8246602, member: 6785785"] Yes, I would think so. It certainly would seem that way to me. But I know that often gets a lot of push back because it's a shift in thinking from the way many games do that, where any kind of setting detail is subject to GM approval. And yes, "ask questions and build on the answers" is a principle carried over from PbtA to FitD. I think Blades takes it a little further in that beyond just helping to establish setting details, there are points of player input which can shape the game even more dramatically. When the crew picks a Score, they do so by selecting a Plan and a Detail. The Plan is the kind of mission they want to perform: Assault, Deception, Stealth, Occult, Social, or Transport. Then whichever Plan you choose, the players pick a Detail. This is something specific which informs how the Plan will work. So if you choose an Assault, then you would provide a Detail like "we're going to attack the building from behind", and if you choose Stealth, then you might say "we're sneaking into the compound from the tunnels underneath". This gives the players a lot of say about what the thrust of play will be. It also gives the GM ideas on what kind of obstacles may be appropriate and what additional details may matter. To compare it to D&D, the players have the ability to help shape "the map" for what they're going to do. I don't think this is the kind of authoring that many tend to think of when this comes up, but it's a pretty important point of player input. [/QUOTE]

Verification