Problems with Blades in the Dark

I've written quite a few play-fueled posts about Blades in the Dark, indexed here. I enjoyed the experience of running a one-shot, followed by an open table campaign lasting several weeks, but also felt extremely worn out after each session, and found myself dreading the next. At first I thought it was just down to general nerves, but this segment from a video of a conversation with Ron Edwards (of The Forge fame/infamy), titled "Constraints for consequential play" (link should start at 7:49), diagnosed a shortcoming of the system that really corresponded with my experience. I don't necessarily agree with the entirety of his views or characterization, but the main thrust feels right.

A good metaphor to extract from the video is an imagined situation where you are playing a ballgame, like soccer or basketball, and are thrown the ball, only to have it immediately empty out, so you have to fill it up again before you can continue. A lot is made of the explicit negotiation process whenever players want their characters to do anything challenging in Blades, but even once Position and Effect have been agreed upon, and an Action Rating roll is made, I've felt the same thing that Pawel bring up in the video, that I have to exercise my mind to improvise something that will implement the expected outcomes, both good and bad. Even if I have enough to work with from what has already been established, there is such a variety, from Heat, going through starting clocks, ending clocks, to actual Harm, that the game doesn't really force you to contend with what's happening now in a way that just flows into the next step without a lot of work by the gamemaster. And that's before you bring in Resistance rolls, which can downright eliminate Consequences, or mitigate them significantly.

One way I can see to fix this could be to agree in advance on certain constraints on the possible Consequences. For example, require that adversarial clocks are all introduced on Score start, and then the Consequences have to include Harm when using physical Action Ratings, in addition to potential contributions to clocks. There's discussion in the Blades book about the level of lethality that results from this kind of status quo establishing itself naturally through play, but I think setting it up in advance is a better way to address this issue. This is especially true in the context of an open table, where there isn't a consistent group to crystalize into any particular style. Contrast this with other aspects of the game which don't require this - the out-of-Score state of the PCs, Crew, NPCs, Factions, and relations between them in the world is easy to represent mechanically, as well as reassess at start of play, even with no consistent game group.

Moving beyond the context Edwards brought up, while keeping his metaphor, as I noted in my previous Blades post, another place where I felt a lack of constraints or structure is Free Play. The game book suggests that it should naturally lead towards a Score plan and an engagement roll, but in my experience, again, it requires that type of reinflation of the ball. It might be better to insist that if the players do not come up with a Score for their characters, hostile factions will act against them and they will have to react to this. Which to me suggests that a structure missing from the game is the reverse Score, namely, having the PCs have to deal with NPCs coming to cause them trouble, steal things from them, or what have you, with an appropriate adjustment to the subsequent Downtime phase.

Finally, the overabundance of variety also shows itself in the setting of Doskvol and the Shattered Isles, that the game mechanics are strongly tied to. For me, at least, it's too busy. Post-apocalypse, ghosts, crime, corruption, cults, all tied to action ratings. I understand that the fact that killing is such a big, supernatural, immediate deal (because each death is signaled by a gong, resulting in a crow coming to the scene of the crime with scary Spirit Wardens in tow) is important for forcing certain constraints on character actions, a vital counterweight to the baseline almost super-powerful things they can pull off in the fiction, but the way it's done is just too contrived for me. This is an aspect I'm not sure can be fixed without hacking things significantly, or starting from a different Forged in the Dark game entirely.

None of this is insurmountable - but I have so many other, different systems to learn, and my own adventure ideas to develop, that I will probably not be pursuing this further in the near future. Do get in touch if you have come up with solutions to these problems, or if you're inspired to test something I've suggested.