I don't know if Blades was the first place I saw it, but it was certainly the game that made me internalise as a GM the principle of *assumed competence*. I feel this was a huge win for my GMing in general, so thanks for that.
I know I'm commenting on an old video, but I'm having trouble with this principle. I understand it, I really like it, but not executing it well at the table.. like you introduce an obstacle, and the player wants to try an action roll but they fail, and it's tough for me to describe that in a satisfying way?
@@trombonegamer14 Just remember that the player rolling low is not the same as their character suddenly forgetting how to do something in the world - it only indicates the outcome, not how that outcome occurred. The bad outcome still happens, but why, how and sometimes even exactly what, are contextual questions you have to include the PC's assumed skill (or lack) in as part of your mental picture. If a character is supposed to be good at something, answer your questions as though that is true. That's all it really means. It doesn't mean the characters can't make mistakes, or that they have to always look flash af, though maybe your players will enjoy that IDK.
I genuenly think the joypad analogy is so powerful. Most trad games rely on new players watching more seasoned ones to learn what you can do at the table, learning from them what "buttons you can push to do what". Clarifying this in advance is so good. Thanks John, as always, for the great video!
I've been playing Blades for more than half a year now and I've been diverging further and further from these principles. This is a great refresher, thank you!
I love how you come up with examples for how different action rolls can be used to overcome the same obstacle. I feel it can be hard for some new players to understand that obstacles.dont have to be approached the same way each time.
I'm amazed how few likes this video has. I guess few people really read the books. I am trying to gain mastery akin to my DnD exp (since I first played in 1985)
Thanks. As usual, hearing you clarify these elements was very informative. And the new sheets are great. Is there any chance you could do something on the most misunderstood and/or misapplied rules or concepts? I’m thinking mainly of the filling all your stress boxes “takes you out of the action” rather than dropping you from the score, but perhaps there are others you’ve noticed.
What does the "taken out of action, left for dead, or otherwise dropped out of the current conflict" mean "mechanically" if not out of the score? Perhaps, if this happened at the very start of a conflict, the PC could return towards the end at a pivotal moment.
@@TeemuSa I see it more as being taken out of that “scene” rather than being removed from the whole episode, if that makes sense. That doesn’t mean you can jump straight up and keep going, but I don’t think the intent was to remove the player from the whole rest of the score (unless it happened close to the end). In some ways, having a player return mid score with a new Trauma could be a new source of drama and excitement, which is one of the main goals of the game system: excitement through adversity! 😀
@@jamesthelimey1738 I like this. I definitely read it as "out for the rest of the score", but especially some traumas would play into this comeback in a later scene in a very memorable way.
I don't know if Blades was the first place I saw it, but it was certainly the game that made me internalise as a GM the principle of *assumed competence*. I feel this was a huge win for my GMing in general, so thanks for that.
I know I'm commenting on an old video, but I'm having trouble with this principle. I understand it, I really like it, but not executing it well at the table.. like you introduce an obstacle, and the player wants to try an action roll but they fail, and it's tough for me to describe that in a satisfying way?
@@trombonegamer14 Just remember that the player rolling low is not the same as their character suddenly forgetting how to do something in the world - it only indicates the outcome, not how that outcome occurred. The bad outcome still happens, but why, how and sometimes even exactly what, are contextual questions you have to include the PC's assumed skill (or lack) in as part of your mental picture. If a character is supposed to be good at something, answer your questions as though that is true. That's all it really means. It doesn't mean the characters can't make mistakes, or that they have to always look flash af, though maybe your players will enjoy that IDK.
More videos all the time always, please!
I genuenly think the joypad analogy is so powerful.
Most trad games rely on new players watching more seasoned ones to learn what you can do at the table, learning from them what "buttons you can push to do what".
Clarifying this in advance is so good.
Thanks John, as always, for the great video!
I've been playing Blades for more than half a year now and I've been diverging further and further from these principles. This is a great refresher, thank you!
If you mark all the buttons on the left side of the sheet during a session, it’s a Doskvol Blackout.
I love how you come up with examples for how different action rolls can be used to overcome the same obstacle. I feel it can be hard for some new players to understand that obstacles.dont have to be approached the same way each time.
Awesome vid for awesome sheets. Thanks for making them! Everything you talk about here is super helpful and appreciated.
Ah these are awesome. Can't wait to use the GM sheet and hand the scoundrel ones out to my players.
Glad you like them!
Thanks for doing this!
This is great I've just started running a game and the first session was a cluster fuck of errors... Now I see how fortune rolls come in
I'm amazed how few likes this video has. I guess few people really read the books. I am trying to gain mastery akin to my DnD exp (since I first played in 1985)
Let's goooooo!
Thanks. As usual, hearing you clarify these elements was very informative. And the new sheets are great.
Is there any chance you could do something on the most misunderstood and/or misapplied rules or concepts? I’m thinking mainly of the filling all your stress boxes “takes you out of the action” rather than dropping you from the score, but perhaps there are others you’ve noticed.
Yeah, that's a good idea. I plan to do some more of these types of videos.
@@JohnHarper Thanks for the reply. I’m looking forward to seeing them already. :)
What does the "taken out of action, left for dead, or otherwise dropped out of the current conflict" mean "mechanically" if not out of the score? Perhaps, if this happened at the very start of a conflict, the PC could return towards the end at a pivotal moment.
@@TeemuSa I see it more as being taken out of that “scene” rather than being removed from the whole episode, if that makes sense. That doesn’t mean you can jump straight up and keep going, but I don’t think the intent was to remove the player from the whole rest of the score (unless it happened close to the end). In some ways, having a player return mid score with a new Trauma could be a new source of drama and excitement, which is one of the main goals of the game system: excitement through adversity! 😀
@@jamesthelimey1738 I like this. I definitely read it as "out for the rest of the score", but especially some traumas would play into this comeback in a later scene in a very memorable way.
Hey, do you think it would be doable to provide us relevant flow charts for GMs and scoundrels ?
Really needed,m thx!