In Defiance of Fate

[LeperColony]

I have just started an online Through the Breach campaign, and it's going pretty well so far.  There are things about TtB that are pretty silly, like Fixed TNs, but they are also easily improved (by making contested flips, for instance).  However, as I read through the materials, I am getting an increasing sense that the game has been strongly centered around a very particular style of play favored by the original writer.  Several sections of various books read like his polemic against particular styles of gaming (re: his section on Fudging or, as he calls it, "cheating"), but it is the built in expiration date of campaigns that I find most troublesome.

On page 208 of the Fate Master's Almanac, it says that campaigns are only intended to last five sessions per Fated, plus whatever set up and wrap up sessions are required for narrative purposes.  Put another way, they are to last until all the Destiny Steps of each Fated are exhausted.  Aside from the sheer arrogance of being told how long I'm supposed to play an RPG, I find this format needlessly limiting.  Omenbringer has linked Mack talking about how he only enjoys D&D up until level 5-6, and so he has written TtB to end at a similar point.  That may be fine for him, but I, like many other gamers, enjoy RPGs for the freedom of opportunity inherent in the genre. 

However, the very model of advancement in TtB assumes you will be using his race to the bottom system.  So in my current campaign, I am designing adventures to fit one of three general molds:

A Coincidence is a session designed mostly tangential to a Destiny Step.  In D&D terms, they are the run-of-the-mill adventures, not necessarily designed to focus on or advance any of the Fated's Destiny Steps.  These are good for setting up plots, following side quests or blowing off some steam.  Wyrd's Penny Dreadfuls fit well into a Coincidence session.  The standard award for these games is an Experience Point.

A Foreshadow is a session that involves a Fated's destiny, but does not necessarily resolve it.  These are more clearly custom tailored to the specifics of the current campaign and the Fated (singular or plural) being Spotlighted, but the events are more preliminary in nature.  The standard reward for a Foreshadow session is an advance along the Pursuit track (and an XP).

A Destiny is a session that resolves a Fated's Destiny Step.  As the culmination of several game sessions, an existing plot line typically be resolved.  This allows for another to be introduced, either as a follow up to the last or as an entirely new dilemma.  The standard reward for a Destiny is the same as resolving a Destiny Step (and an advance, and an XP).

The three session types are, to a certain extent, interchangeable.  The Fate Master could have planned and prepared for a lighter Coincidence, only to have what he thought was a diversion turn out to have serious implications, as a result of the Fated's choices.  It is then an easy matter to award the session on the basis of a Foreshadow or a Destiny.  And vice versa. 

Ultimately, I feel that a Through the Breach campaign should grow in a more organic manner than originally foreseen in the printed materials.    

 

 

[Shadowopal]

I like your system.  I too have a long term gaming group and had to do some mucking with the advancement schedule.  Fortunately, the rules work with it fairly well. As for the TN.... Give it a go. It really isn't bad. 

[LeperColony]

About TNs, it really, really is.  Fortunately, the fix is very easy.  But there's already a long thread filled with super long posts on this issue, so I'll leave it.

 

Regarding advancement, I get what they were going for originally.  But it just feels too much like I'm being told how to play.  Like yours, my group is longer term, our plots are on a slower burn, and sometimes people just want to monkey around.  A campaign where you have five sessions per character (assuming none of the Fated resolve a step in the same session as a companion) just isn't going to provide for that.

[solkan]

On the other hand, when you say "open ended" some people hear "This campaign is going to last a few weeks, and then there won't be any resolution when people get bored and want to do something else."  Because when people want to "just monkey around" they have other games they can play. 

 

[LeperColony]

Which is why my system is still superior.  Prefer the format out of the book?  You can still do it by just making every session a Destiny.

 

Malifaux is a wonderful world, and Through the Breach is generally very well written.  But as Omenbringer and others have pointed out, it comes with a lot of baggage from its original writing staff, who seemed to have very particular opinions on how games should be played, and an intention to ensure everyone else conforms to it.  But I think you will find that gamers are a largely nonconforming lot.

[solkan]

21 hours ago, LeperColony said:

Aside from the sheer arrogance of being told how long I'm supposed to play an RPG, I find this format needlessly limiting.

This is the part where it becomes difficult to take seriously.

In that response to that perceived arrogance, you propose your own system, committing the same crime you accuse the author of committing.

 

[LeperColony]

7 minutes ago, solkan said:

This is the part where it becomes difficult to take seriously.

In that response to that perceived arrogance, you propose your own system, committing the same crime you accuse the author of committing.

 

It's clear you're very committed to the a lock-step interpretation of Through the Breach, which is fine for you.  But you may want to consider reading more closely before you accuse anyone of arrogance, because I was very clear that I was describing the system I am using in my own game.

21 hours ago, LeperColony said:

So in my current campaign, I am designing adventures to fit one of three general molds:

What part of "in my current campaign" represents the same arrogance of telling other people how to play?  Can you explain that? 

[Mason]

Let's all place nice, everyone.

We all have our own opinions, but please keep the discussion civil.

[LeperColony]

I don't think anything I've said qualifies as uncivil.  All I did was respond to an inaccurate characterization by completely dismantling it.  Civilly!

[Dirial]

34 minutes ago, LeperColony said:

All I did was respond to an inaccurate characterization by completely dismantling it.

Wow, I completely missed that!

*starts reading thread from the top once more*

[LeperColony]

I mean, I'm certainly open to being shown how describing what I am doing in my own game is somehow arrogant or wrong.

[mythicFOX]

<modhat> 

I'm open to you all being nice to each other, or else I'm closing the thread and sanctioning people.

As a pointer:  if you have to explain that you weren't trying to be uncivil then at the very least you could have worded your posts better.

</modhat>

[Lucidicide]

Speaking as someone who's written for the game, I've heard of a lot of players ignoring the Destiny Per Session mantra. I think more stick to it (and some greatly prefer it), but there are also a number of games were a Destiny Step gets stretched out over a few sessions to create longer games.

I think that every RPG is created to be "hacked" by the GM, and TTB is no different. The game gives you a lot of tools to work with, and you should pick the tools that are comfortable to you.

In terms of the OP, your breakdown makes sense, but I would definitely encourage you to consider a Coincidence having a Pursuit advance. There are a lot of fun Pursuits out there, and it's more meaningful of a choice when you know at the end you're "leveling up" in a certain Pursuit. But, I suppose it depends how up front you are at the beginning about what type of session it is.

I'm just not sure what you are gaining out of slowing down Pursuit advancement, other than a weaker party.

[LeperColony]

1 hour ago, mythicFOX said:

<modhat> 

As a pointer:  if you have to explain that you weren't trying to be uncivil then at the very least you could have worded your posts better.

</modhat>

To be fair, I didn't explain I wasn't trying to be uncivil, I was asserting that I was in fact not lacking in civility.  I definitively addressed a negative personal assertion without resulting to insult, so I think I'm fair in my evaluation.

1 hour ago, Aaron said:

In terms of the OP, your breakdown makes sense, but I would definitely encourage you to consider a Coincidence having a Pursuit advance. There are a lot of fun Pursuits out there, and it's more meaningful of a choice when you know at the end you're "leveling up" in a certain Pursuit. But, I suppose it depends how up front you are at the beginning about what type of session it is.

I'm just not sure what you are gaining out of slowing down Pursuit advancement, other than a weaker party.

I am open to making more Pursuit steps available.  My concern was that the players would advance through too many Pursuit steps if one were always awarded. 

Since I'm looking for a more open-ended experience, one downside is that I don't know how many sessions there will be.  This makes it difficult to estimate the ratio between the three types of sessions, and to properly gauge the scale of the game.  I don't want to end up with characters who have 100 Pursuit steps, for instance.

Oh, and by the way imo, Into the Steam is the best book in TtB, so please keep it up!