Band of Blades: The Road to Skydagger Keep (Inactive)

Game Master Douglas Muir 406

Okay! Are we ready to roll, then?

(Marshal -- are you OK to send the Stags on the secondary?)

Oh, yes, Stags on the secondary is good with me.

For the Engagement roll on the primary mission, is it a base 1d then you add or subtract dice? And finally did the commander spend Intel or the Quartermaster Horses? Without Intel or Horses I think we are just at 2d assuming we start with 1d as a minimum. Correct?

Base: 1d
Loyalty: +1d
Total: 2d

For the secondary mission is the Quartermaster supplying Black Shot? And again did we spend Intel?

Base: 1d
Loyalty: +1d
Total: 2d

It seems like Kaviya and I were both looking at the Bartans.

(I would playa Panyar, but they have the -weirdest- names.)

I guess one of us should pick the Cooking Kit, eh?

Also, I assume we're all taking a medium load, since we get demerits for taking a heavy load, yeah?

For my two utility load, I'm tempted to just take two loads of Black Shot. =3

Also also, no, Attero is not wounded.

Marshal, don't forget the Office gievs another +1d for the strategist ability. And yes, engagement roll starts with 1d for pure luck, I think. Or at least thats how it works in BitD.

In trems of spending Horses for the Recon mission or Black Shot for the Assault mission, I'm more concerned about the assault mission just becuase the engatement roll is everything. the more dice we can give it the better :)

And yes, we should all take medium load for the Recon

Man, the secondary mission Engagement roll (page 132) is brutal. Don't get too attached to these squaddies...

For the Engagement roll on the primary mission, is it a base 1d then you add or subtract dice? And finally did the commander spend Intel or the Quartermaster Horses? Without Intel or Horses I think we are just at 2d assuming we start with 1d as a minimum. Correct?

Base: 1d
Loyalty: +1d
Total: 2d

For the secondary mission is the Quartermaster supplying Black Shot? And again did we spend Intel?

Base: 1d
Loyalty: +1d
Total: 2d

My understanding is that the loyalty die is the base 1d (there is no base die like there is in Blades in the Dark), that's how we interpreted it in the other game I'm playing, and I think that is implied by the example on page 232. The Emerald Dancing Wind has strategist, so should add a die to the secondary mission for that.

I believe that we started with no intel, so don't have that to spend. I do have to say that based on prior experience, keeping intel for high level intel questions or spending them on special missions were better experiences.

When asked about horses for the recon mission, The Quartermaster responds, "Nyet! Do you think I can just @&#%@ horses from my @$#!$?", repeating what he said for the advance. He must be tired and going through the motions.

When asked about supplies for the assault mission, The Quartermaster considers for a moment and says, "You boys will need some black shot. Feel free to @*#@$ it up some undead @%*@#, but save the classic stuff for Churda. He isn't dead... yet."

Since we haven't done it already, here is a roll for the advance. (1 pressure, no horses used).

Advance to the Western Front: 1d6 ⇒ 2

It seems like Kaviya and I were both looking at the Bartans.

(I would playa Panyar, but they have the -weirdest- names.)

** spoiler omitted **

I guess one of us should pick the Cooking Kit, eh?

Also, I assume we're all taking a medium load, since we get demerits for taking a heavy load, yeah?

For my two utility load, I'm tempted to just take two loads of Black Shot. =3

Also also, no, Attero is not wounded.

Yes, no one should be in heavy load. I can see arguments for both light and normal load. Silver Dancing Storm has traveler, so can get the benefits of light load while carrying normal load.

Before we decide load and loadout, we do get a level 0 intel question. Example questions are on pg. 123, and typical questions that I've seen asked are "What would a useful item to bring on this mission?" and "What two approaches could we use here on this mission?" One possibility (up to DM's call) is perhaps to ask, "Do we expect to face undead on this mission?" That is a hedge, as it is possible that what we'll face instead of undead are human scavengers or the Baron's men.

Man, the secondary mission Engagement roll (page 132) is brutal. Don't get too attached to these squaddies...

I've already experseed reservations on the whole 2ndry mission conept so I won't repeat myself again :)

Can someone give teh Lorekeeper the names of the Rookies in the squads we're about to send out to certain death pls? Tx

So it looks like the engagement roll is 2d for the Scout mission and 4d for the Assualt mission, is that right?

Have I missed something? Because it looks to me like paying the price for 2 dead Rookies is worth it. There's no morale penalty because success gvies us 4 morale anyway, and it was an assault mission which means the officer and the heavy were both wearing armour which brings their harm down to zero.

Also, story. I want revenge on that traitor. I want the lorekeeper to write a tale of how the Legion awlsya pays its debts in full.

Also aslo, who wants to be the one to tell Aterro "so sorry, but for numbers reasons it's better that you failed in this mission than met with GLORIUOUS TRIUNPH"?

(Not it.)

Have I missed something? Because it looks to me like paying the price for 2 dead Rookies is worth it. There's no morale penalty because success gvies us 4 morale anyway, and it was an assault mission which means the officer and the heavy were both wearing armour which brings their harm down to zero.

Also, story. I want revenge on that traitor. I want the lorekeeper to write a tale of how the Legion awlsya pays its debts in full.

Also aslo, who wants to be the one to tell Aterro "so sorry, but for numbers reasons it's better that you failed in this mission than met with GLORIUOUS TRIUNPH"?

(Not it.)

From my understanding, the only way to reduce harm on secondary missions is through the scout specialist ability Ready For Anything.

That said, I agree and I would honestly vote for success too. Chudra doesn't seem interesting for a recurring villain standpoint and the story feels better with the Legion paying the price, especially with the Silver Stags out there.

Karina Zayatevya wrote:

Have I missed something? Because it looks to me like paying the price for 2 dead Rookies is worth it. There's no morale penalty because success gvies us 4 morale anyway, and it was an assault mission which means the officer and the heavy were both wearing armour which brings their harm down to zero.

Also, story. I want revenge on that traitor. I want the lorekeeper to write a tale of how the Legion awlsya pays its debts in full.

Also aslo, who wants to be the one to tell Aterro "so sorry, but for numbers reasons it's better that you failed in this mission than met with GLORIUOUS TRIUNPH"?

(Not it.)

From my understanding, the only way to reduce harm on secondary missions is through the scout specialist ability Ready For Anything.

I thought the reasont the scout gets special abilites to redude harm is because she only gets the option of armour with a heavy load? I''m pretty sure everyone else gets *some* formo f armour with a medium load. If there's no way of avioding harm from a secondary mission then they're just a sucker's bet. You're better off taking the penalty fro not doing them and hoping to win the primary missions. I understand this is a survival horror game and I'm fine with my *characters* getting depreessed and hopeless and even dying. But the mechanics of this game are starting to depress *me,* and if i wanted that all I need to do is watch the news or look out the window :/

Sounds like the Secondary Mission succeeds. 2 Rookies dead from the Stags, 2 Harm to Aterro and the Officer.

OK. Give me the names of the squad and I will write up the mission for the records.

None among the Stags have been named yet as far as I know. Go ahead and make them up as you like.

I've just realised it wasn't you - it was DMDM who named the corporal. I''m getting mixed up. Sorry :)

Ze Quartermaster wrote:

Karina Zayatevya wrote:

Have I missed something? Because it looks to me like paying the price for 2 dead Rookies is worth it. There's no morale penalty because success gvies us 4 morale anyway, and it was an assault mission which means the officer and the heavy were both wearing armour which brings their harm down to zero.

Also, story. I want revenge on that traitor. I want the lorekeeper to write a tale of how the Legion awlsya pays its debts in full.

Also aslo, who wants to be the one to tell Aterro "so sorry, but for numbers reasons it's better that you failed in this mission than met with GLORIUOUS TRIUNPH"?

(Not it.)

From my understanding, the only way to reduce harm on secondary missions is through the scout specialist ability Ready For Anything.

I thought the reasont the scout gets special abilites to redude harm is because she only gets the option of armour with a heavy load? I''m pretty sure everyone else gets *some* formo f armour with a medium load. If there's no way of avioding harm from a secondary mission then they're just a sucker's bet. You're better off taking the penalty fro not doing them and hoping to win the primary missions. I understand this is a survival horror game and I'm fine with my *characters* getting depreessed and hopeless and even dying. But the mechanics of this game are starting to depress *me,* and if i wanted that all I need to do is watch the news or look out the window :/

It may not be evident yet, but the rules do give the players the tools to usually overcome the hardship that comes at them. This story is not like Blades in the Dark, about the plucky upstart that slowly grows. It is about ups and downs of a long, uncertain war, and there will be losses, but through perserverance and cunning, we can recover and heal from the losses, though that recovery is never without its own costs. I can say that from my experiences, we should be able to pull through, especially given the route that we have chosen.

From my understanding, the only way to reduce harm on secondary missions is through the scout specialist ability Ready For Anything.

I agree with Karina 100% and I will absolutely need to be shown the rule that says this.

No offense, dude, but I'm starting to think that some of your interpretations might not be RAI. (The fact that there's isn't a rule saying that someone else doesn't get to play your character is irrelevant. Seeing as how an RPG that thrusts all the characters into a collective commune is so incredibly divergent from common practices that any game that did that would definitely say that in black and white. There also isn't any rule that says I don't fly, but that doesn't mean that will happen. IMHO. YMMV.)

Aterro "so sorry, but for numbers reasons it's better that you failed in this mission than met with GLORIUOUS TRIUNPH"

Atter stares balefully at the speaker of these words, so foreign to his ears, so grating to honor and duty and the sense of everything that he is.

"Prayer cleanses the soul, but pain cleanses the body.

It appears you need to be cleansed."

=3

Ze Quartermaster wrote:

From my understanding, the only way to reduce harm on secondary missions is through the scout specialist ability Ready For Anything.

I agree with Karina 100% and I will absolutely need to be shown the rule that says this.

No offense, dude, but I'm starting to think that some of your interpretations might not be RAI. (The fact that there's isn't a rule saying that someone else doesn't get to play your character is irrelevant. Seeing as how an RPG that thrusts all the characters into a collective commune is so incredibly divergent from common practices that any game that did that would definitely say that in black and white. There also isn't any rule that says I don't fly, but that doesn't mean that will happen. IMHO. YMMV.)

Dude, I take offense.

About the marshal rule, on the top of pg 127, the rules say.

"For primary missions, pull out any available playbooks for people to assign to the mission, and prepare blank Rookie or Solider playbooks as appropriate for any players who don't play one of the assigned Specialists. Your group can use any method you want for determining who should play which character, but if there's a disagreement, you (the Marshall) has final say."

This explicitly says that troupe play is allowed. You are right, the group gets to determine who plays what-- except that the Marshall is the one who makes the final adjudication.

About intent, you can read Stras Acimovic, talk about troupe play here:
https://bitd.gplusarchive.online/2019/01/22/band-of-blades/. Go read it, and it'll be clear that he is proposing troupe play, like Ars Magica back in the day.

Like I said before, this relative fluidity of character ownership is part of the game, but every group can decide how they want to handle it in practice. And here is the thing, I mentioned how Stras laid it out and, when you challenged me on it, I backed off. That you are bringing it up here strikes me as poor faith in your part.

As far as RAI, I am a kinda of a junkie of the game. My daughter has accused me of being obsessed about it, and I'll plead that I am really intrigued by lots of the Forged in the Dark and Powered by the Apocalypse games. I've listened to about five sessions of Actual Play (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjmIwhDNUR0&list=PLNuXiEYyM4iu1ydhFaJu n-5_r9AcpHSRD) run by Stras, and I follow closely the forums at https://community.bladesinthedark.com/c/forged-in-the-dark/band-of-blades/8 .

And if you listen to those broadcasts or follow the forums, you'll see that you cannot resist harm on secondary missions. In the second episode of the actual play, that group foolishly sends two specialists on a secondary mission, they fail the engagement roll, and they mark down without hesitation lvl 3 harm. You can also find reference https://www.reddit.com/r/bladesinthedark/comments/gr1nki/band_of_blades_sec ondary_missions_and_resisting/ and https://community.bladesinthedark.com/t/frustration-with-secondary-mission- failure/1152/8.

And, if you as a group want to change the rules however you'd like, feel free, that is the beauty of games like these. I have conceded in the past when you or DMDM wanted to do things differently from how I understand it. I was willing to play it out with those different rules. But quite frankly, I had already found the nature of play by post to not suit me very well. I was staying on because of my appreciation of the game, and because I thought I could be helpful here.

It is apparently was not meant to be.

I am sorry DMDM, but I don't think I can keep playing in this campaign, best of luck all.

I'm sorry you feel that way. It wasn't my intention to annoy you, I'm just finding the game system here so different from games I'eve played before, including the BitD system, that I'm questionning stuff that seems weird and/or "unfair" against the players. I'm finding some of it, especially the secondary mission bit, seems almost designed to be frustrating so I dont think it's unreasonble for those of us who haven't played this before to be a bit thrown by it.

I've apppreciated your expanations of the game system and I hope you'll reconsider your diecision. But if not then all the best.

I'm sorry you feel that way. It wasn't my intention to annoy you, I'm just finding the game system here so different from games I'eve played before, including the BitD system, that I'm questionning stuff that seems weird and/or "unfair" against the players. I'm finding some of it, especially the secondary mission bit, seems almost designed to be frustrating so I dont think it's unreasonble for those of us who haven't played this before to be a bit thrown by it.

I've apppreciated your explanations of the game system and I hope you'll reconsider your decision. But if not then all the best.

I can honestly say that you, Sarah B., never annoyed me. I understand where you are coming from. My wife, who plays in my home game, had similar reservations, and my daughter won't play it at all. It is very reasonable to be off-put by the game part of Band of Blades. I can only say that the alienness of the game deeply connects with me, both in my literary sensibilities and in my armchair historian fever dreams, and that I have found playing Band of Blades to be inordinately satisfying. I do think that altering the game along the lines you desire could, at the same time, deviate from the intent of the game (as well as my preferences) and make the game more fun for you.

My last thought on the matter is this-- the rules of the game form the "bad guy" so that the GM truly does not have to be the face of the opposition and is allowed to be on the player and character's side, serving as an interpreter for the world rather than antagonist. In my home game, we truly feel that all of us, the GM included, are in a shared struggle to see through this story and are very much on the same side, against the fiction, and I think there is beauty in that.

I can also honestly say that this is not the first time that Atlas has annoyed me, though this is the most significant time. I am conflict averse, and try very hard to not be passive aggressive, choosing only one or the other. Perhaps I should have said something earlier.

But most of all, I am finding that allocating time for the writing involved in PBP to be deeply problematic for me. I should have realized it sooner, and said something sooner still. I've found in the last week that, given how slow my writing process is, being Lorekeeper in a campaign and being in a PBP game doesn't fit with my current life.

I do feel bad about leaving you all in the lurch. Hope you can all continue on, and best of luck.

Oh, gosh.

I go away for one day... Well.

Dean, it sounds like your decision is final. I'm sorry to hear it; I was enjoying playing with you, and your input on the rules was extremely helpful.

Also, I agree with your interpretation -- the game is the enemy, the players are trying to beat it, and the GM is not a hostile. The fact that BoB is using the same ruleset as BitD distracts from the fact that it's a very, very different kind of game. The closest thing I can think of offhand is a cooperative board game like Pandemic (or better yet, Pandemic Legacy) (or maybe Arkham Horror) where the players are scrambling to finish a set of difficult tasks before the clock runs out, and the deck keeps throwing problems at them.

More in a bit.

the game is the enemy, the players are trying to beat it, and the GM is not a hostile. The fact that BoB is using the same ruleset as BitD distracts from the fact that it's a very, very different kind of game. The closest thing I can think of offhand is a cooperative board game like Pandemic (or better yet, Pandemic Legacy) (or maybe Arkham Horror) where the players are scrambling to finish a set of difficult tasks before the clock runs out, and the deck keeps throwing problems at them.

With that having been said, do you want to run a character?

this is not the first time that Atlas has annoyed me, though this is the most significant time. I am conflict averse, and try very hard to not be passive aggressive

I had written a rather long post responding to this, but, upon reflection, I'll not.

It's not worth it. If your love for an "obsession" can be undone by a single sentence that you can't be bothered to counter with fact and reason, then you're not mad because you're right.

But because you're wrong.

Dean C wrote:

this is not the first time that Atlas has annoyed me, though this is the most significant time. I am conflict averse, and try very hard to not be passive aggressive

I had written a rather long post responding to this, but, upon reflection, I'll not.

It's not worth it. If your love for an "obsession" can be undone by a single sentence that you can't be bothered to counter with fact and reason, then you're not mad because you're right.

But because you're wrong.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. I'll save the flaming for a direct message to you atlas, which you can choose to block.

I'll take my leave, thanks Doug for the experience, and letting me try play by post. I am sorry I failed you.

Yep, I just got this message from him, which I choose to share:

As far as obsession is concerned, I prefer to share my obsession with people I enjoy playing with. I enjoy playing with my home group to bits. It is the most enjoyable campaign I've played (and second best role-playing experience). I do not enjoy playing by post. And now, most of all, I do not enjoy playing with you.

As far as fact and reason here, I've spent more words than I should have to show you one of the creator's intent about troupe play and secondary mission harm, but evidently you cannot be bothered to accept that it is reasoning, most likely because you can't accept that another person's considered position that happens to disagree with your sensibilities is reasoning. Feel free to disagree with it, but understand that you don't know what the hell fact and reason are besides your small small world."

I've found that there's a certain kind of person that claims to use fact and reason, while not actually using any, but does use lots and lots of insults.

So... St Peter and Jesus are playing golf. St Peter tees off and the ball lands in the green, just short of the hole. Jesus teees off and the ball lands short, it's just about to land in the water hazard when a fish jumps out the water and grabs the ball in its mouth. An osprey swwoops down, sccops up the fish and flies off. As the osprey flies over the green, lighting strikes it and it drops the fish. The ball runs out of the fish's mouth and lands in the hole. St Peter turns to Jessus and says:

"Did you want to play golf, or jsut f~#% about?"

I'm here to play a game and have fun, not sit around while a couple of guys wave their d*cks at each other.

DMDM, if there's still a game here and not some playground crap, please let me know.

So, you're comparing me to Jesus? Ha! Alright I'll take it I'll take it. :)

And the d!ck measuring is all done now so I wouldn't worry about it. (I mean, it was like comparing a common house candle to a Tomahawk cruise missile, but we don't need to get into any details. ;)

Um, there is a gameplay question for the Loremaster? Would you like to write up how our valiant troops wrought great slaughter at the bridge, or would you like me to?

DM: If this game is closed, could you mark as Inactive? Thanks.