D&D General Why Editions Don't Matter

[FrogReaver]

I felt the same way about BitD when I ran it... even expressed it on these very forums and was basically told there was no way I had actually played BitD "correctly" if these were my conclusions. It's one of the reasons I don't really discuss it when it comes up now... Good luck

Out of curiosity, did you play it with players mostly accustomed to 5e as well?

 

[Imaro]

Out of curiosity, did you play it with players mostly accustomed to 5e as well?

Yep. It's been awhile since we played but if I am remembering correctly... beyond the theme/genre constraints and vagueness of magic... it didn't really feel like this vastly different thing to me and my group in play... especially in regards to GM constraint and duties.

 

[Maxperson]

How is he not? The GM decides the outcome. "How close are the Duke and his scary knights to tracking down the PCs" is the question.

Because what the PCs do can cause those folks never to find them. The DM can hardly narrate the outcome of something he doesn't know.

The GM considers a lot of factors per the description from @Xetheral .

Then he decides.

It's not an abuse of anything.... it's the process as described.

He can only decide what the duke is going to do. He cannot decide what the PCs will do or the outcome of what the duke initiated. The DM is forced to narrate a combination of what the DM is doing and reacting to, and what the Players are doing and reacting to. It's not a unilateral thing.

But what does that in fiction information do? It informs the GM, but does it limit what he can decide in some way? If he looks at all those factors and determines "There's a 75% chance the scary knights find the PCs within 24 hours if they don't leave town" and then the PCs don't leave town.... what happens?

Depends on what the PCs do. He made that determination without the PCs taking precautionary steps. If they do, then the DM has to re-evaluate, probably based on rolls by the party. The duke may never find those PCs if they don't leave town. He can't narrate unilaterally like that.

Now, if the players opt to do nothing to avoid the duke that they've pissed off 10 times, then that's a choice they made which affects what the DM has decided for the duke, resulting in that 75% chance of success. The DM is taking their choice to do nothing into account, so the players have collaborated with the DM in that narration, even if it wasn't an overt collaboration.

There's a 75% chance they're found
There's a 25% chance they avoid detection.

Or not, as I point out above. The DM can't know what the players will do when he makes that determination for what the duke will do.

The GM is just deciding what happens.

Not in a vacuum he isn't, and the narration is with player collaboration of some sort. The resulting narration is based on DM action and reaction, and player action and reaction.

 

[Oofta]

Sure, I was just saying that I don't see what it adds, but I was assuming that we were talking about legendary actions. If the source of something is meant to be uncertain, I get that... but I was assuming like a red dragon in it's lair isn't something worth maintaining a mystery about what's causing the magma. If it's an invisible goblin with a lever and not a lair action, I would likewise not share that with the players.



I'm not telling you anything about your game. I'm describing how not adhering to rules can damage a game for many participants. It seems you would agree with that since you say you follow the rules. But even if you didn't, and you broke every rule in the book, if your players are all enjoying the game and so are you, then it's all fine.

My point about that was that the areas of the game that lack structure such as combat can be equally frustrating to people. I was trying to demonstrate that.

I may reveal things to players, but I will always try to put it in context of what the PCs see or can know. That wizard with legendary resistance? They have a necklace with 3 glowing gems, the first time they fail a save and they use their legendary save one of the gems dim for example.

Other times I just don't tell the players because the PCs would have no way of gaining that option. It's never "damaged" the game. I don't think all detail in combat need to be transparent, nor do I think it adds to the game.

There's no one way to run the game of course.

 

[Campbell]

It's just not true that Blades does not provide meaningful guidance on what a 4-5 or 1-3 looks like. It has explicit instructions for each position (risk level). A lot of GM judgement is required in applying those instructions, but there are plenty there. Actions are explicitly laid out on p.23.

Action Roll​

• 1d for each Action rating dot.
• +1d if you have Assistance.
• +1d if you Push yourself -or- you accept a Devil’s Bargain.

Controlled—You act on your terms. You exploit a dominant advantage.

• Critical: You do it with increased effect.
• 6: You do it.
• 4/5: You hesitate. Withdraw and try a different approach, or else do it with a minor consequence: a minor complication occurs, you have reduced effect, you suffer lesser harm, you end up in a risky position.
• 1-3: You falter. Press on by seizing a risky opportunity, or withdraw and try a different approach.

Risky—You go head to head. You act under fire. You take a chance.

• Critical: You do it with increased effect.
• 6: You do it.
• 4/5: You do it, but there’s a consequence: you suffer harm, a complication occurs, you have reduced effect, you end up in a desperate position.
• 1-3: Things go badly. You suffer harm, a complication occurs, you end up in a desperate position, you lose this opportunity.

Desperate—You overreach your capabilities. You’re in serious trouble.

• Critical: You do it with increased effect.
• 6: You do it.
• 4/5: You do it, but there’s a consequence: you suffer severe harm, a serious complication occurs, you have reduced effect.
• 1-3: It’s the worst outcome. You suffer severe harm, a serious complication occurs, you lose this opportunity for action.

Consequences and Harm are laid out on p. 30 and here in the SRD:

Consequences & Harm | Blades in the Dark RPG

bladesinthedark.com

p. 170 - 181 provide examples of what sort of consequences may be appropriate for every action rating in the game.

This video goes over some of the finer points:

 

[Campbell]

All of this is of course besides the point that specific sorts of play structures enable different sets of play styles. Arguing over the margins of one specific game fails to actually address the conceptual argument.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's just not true that Blades does not provide meaningful guidance on what a 4-5 or 1-3 looks like. It has explicit instructions for each position (risk level). A lot of GM judgement is required in applying those instructions, but there are plenty there. Actions are explicitly laid out on p.23.



Consequences and Harm are laid out on p. 30 and here in the SRD:

Consequences & Harm | Blades in the Dark RPG

bladesinthedark.com

p. 170 - 181 provide examples of what sort of consequences may be appropriate for every action rating in the game.

This video goes over some of the finer points:

All of this largely besides the point of course.

Well. @Imaro you called it.

Okay. Last week player ended up on the roof with the enemies long rifle and was going to use it to shoot some muscle the other players were engaged with. I ruled situation risky with normal effect. He rolled and got a 4. I had him take out the target but the strong recoil made him drop the gun and it fell off the roof.

The game didn’t tell me to pick that consequence. I could have picked lesser effect and have it take out the enemies left arm instead of kill him. Or have the recoil hit the pc so hard it caused harm. Or have the bullet go through and hit and harm his ally below. Or I could have had the pistol toting bad guy get a lucky shot off on him. Etc. Tons of options.

The game really doesn’t actually offer advice on which fiction to pick does it? If not, then I was absolutely correct.

 

[FrogReaver]

All of this is of course besides the point that specific sorts of play structures enable different sets of play styles. Arguing over the margins of one specific game fails to actually address the conceptual argument.

I think most here are already on the same page with the first point. So now we are looking at some topic drift.

 

[hawkeyefan]

@hawkeyefan

Above is an excellent example by @Xetheral criticizing 5e while simultaneously liking it.

It’s not the only example but I thought I’d point it out as a common complaint has been that people object to criticism of 5e.

I like 5E just fine! I play it every week. Have a game tonight!

Every rpg has the GM direct what happens (there’s a few shared DM ones where maybe that’s not the case).

in blades in the dark anytime there is a failure or success with a complication, the dm is the one that’s looking at the fiction and setting the initial position and effect. The dm is the one defining exactly what complication occurs (the player wasn’t privy to the exact nature of the complication beforehand). *Note complication or failure happens roughly 5/6 of the time.

The GM in Blades sets position and effect, yes. Often, everyone involved may have a pretty good idea of what it will be (the same way how in D&D you may have a good idea that a DC will be high based on what's been established). Plus, position and effect are negotiable. If a player hears the P&E and feels something's off (again, based on what's been described) they can ask for it to be changed. Other players can offer input as well.

Now, upon failure or a success with complication, the GM does indeed come up with the consequences. The severity of the consequence is based on the Position and the result of the roll, and of course it should follow from what's been established in play.

Pretty much the only thing the dice are deciding is success or failure or complication and not the exact nature of what occurs.

There’s no procedure for how a blades GM actually produces any of that fiction. There are some principles to adhere to and a process to constrain the fiction to either success, failure or consequence, but no procedure to actually produce any particular resulting fiction. I know as one of my biggest struggles with blades is coming up with an appropriate fictional complication in certain scenarios.

No, there's a procedure. There's a whole chart. Again, it's about the severity. The GM does decide what the consequence may be, but he's limited to the scope indicated by the Position and the result of the roll.

And yeah, coming up with consequences can be tough... it's one of the hardest things to get used to in Blades. But with time and experience, it gets much easier.

On that note. D&D is often criticized for treating combat differently than other aspects of the game. Blades in the dark does exactly the same thing. Scores (basically their version of a scene/mission) follow different rules than downtime for example.

Well, yes, they're different modes of play. But they each have clear, player facing decisions. And ultimately, all rolls are made by the players and function largely in the same way.

I think often times things get evaluated as equally plausible. In which case some other consideration than plausibility takes precedence.

Okay, then what other considerations should the players be factoring into their reasoning. The duke and the scary knights are after us... what do we do? Well, it's late so I don't think the GM is gonna have them find us tonight.

Sometimes. DM's in 5e often do the equivalent of a fortune roll to help them determine what is occuring in a sandbox. When the players get involved there are usually some skill checks.

This wasn't offered in the example @Xetheral gave of their process. No dice were rolled. They weighed all the relevant factors, and then decided.

Aside from that, is this something that's suggested anywhere in the 5E books? I don't know if it is, but I certainly could be wrong.

Though I'm a bit confused why dice matter so much. Dice determine success or failure. Success is usually fairly clear cut (you do the thing you were trying), but dice don't usually tell you the nature of failure. That's true in 5e as well as a game like Blades in the Dark. On failure they at most constrain the DM to pick some consequence that makes sense with the fiction. The particular fictional nature of that consequence is fairly wide open.

This goes to the idea mentioned by @Campbell that it's tough to be both storyteller and referee. If the dice are used to determine, then the GM isn't the one deciding how things go. It's determined through an actual procedure. Likely one the GM has a lot of say about, but the final decision is one the GM disclaims and lets the dice make for him.

To me that same kind of criticism can also apply just as easily to blades in the dark. The GM does basically the same thing there.

No, because in the example with the Duke and the Scary Knights, the GM is deciding what the outcome is. Yes, he's weighed all the relevant factors, but then in the end, he just decides.

In Blades, as you yourself said, the dice determine success or failure. The GM then determines what failure (or success with a consequence) means.

 

[TwoSix]

I think most here are already on the same page with the first point. So now we are looking at some topic drift.

And now his watch is ended.