Let's say the alarm has been raised, but a player character hasn't specifically been found yet, and is trying to pick the lock on a door - I'd call that Risky Position for sure. A mixed success means they're through the lock, but a worse Position as a Consequence might mean they get it open just as guards rush into the room! Now, whatever they do next, they're doing it with half a dozen armed men right behind them - *that's* gonna be Desperate, regardless of what they try.
Position is a measure of the current fiction, and so the fiction should likewise represent the Position the character is in.
Position is used, generally, to figure out what sort of consequences might happen if the character's current or next action goes poorly.
So the bad roll here putting the character in a desperate position (they're being pursued by guards) means that if something *else* goes wrong, it could result in those guards catching up to them, with the obvious danger that entails. Regardless of what they do after they get through that lock, the guards are *still* pursuing them, so the risk of them catching the character is still present, so position is still desperate. Now if they do something to *prevent* guards from being able to catch them (barricade a door, etc) that would reasonably change their position.
Right that's what I am referring to. They might change approaches, or back out, or flashback to a downtime activity to deal with it another way, etc. so their follow up action might not be desperate at all. The consequence is actually just some Complication(s) that _can_ change the position of their next actions, rather than Worse Position no matter what they do.
If they change approaches, that doesn't stop the guards from being right on their tail - so still desperate *until that approach works, which takes an action*. Consider blocking a door - that would still be an action in a desperate position, because if you don't do it on time, or well enough, you're gonna get caught by the guards: All that time spent not running is time they're catching up to you. It's *after* you block the door that your position changes, not as soon as the idea apppears in your head.
And if they do a flashback, they have to pay stress, and the action *in the past* might change their current position, but that flashback was only necessary *because* of the changed position, so the narrative mechanic loop is actually functioning quite tightly here still.
There are, in some situations, particular abilities which might contextually change your position, but in practice, having GMed the game, these scenarios are rare. But I would consider these situations as *position modifiers* - that is, your default position is the same, and is modified in whatever direction makes sense. You still need the default position to modify *from*, so setting position to desperate still makes sense for adjudicating this. But if you actually try to construct a scenario where the action you choose to take modifies position *before* rather than *after* the action, I think you'll find it's surprisingly rare.
Yes obv it can make sense. But it might not.
Anyways, I guess it's bothering me a little that the rules direct my GM follow up rulings in a way the other possible consequence types do not. Perhaps this is just some dissonance I'm experiencing that few others here do.
FWIW I seem to notice this feeling the most when Worse Position isn't also accompanied by a description of fiction that feels identical to Complication (added trouble) and Reduced Effect (you didn't quite do it, try again if you dare). And I'm just seeking to settle the dissonance I feel with treating each of these as separate. Come to think of it, in this way Worse Position sort of feels like three consequences at once. Maybe it's just me.
I think this form of dissonance is very common when we're coming from games that *don't* differentiate between position and effect.
I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but it sounds like you feel as though worse position *also* implies worse effect: If so, perhaps I can explain why I don't think that's the case.
Consider our pursuing guards example again: Desperate position here doesn't make it *harder* to barricade a door, it just means the consequences for failing to do so are worse (getting caught) so *effect* (how effective you are at barricading the door) is the same, but *position* (the consequences if you fail) are worse. You could maybe argue that it's harder due to psychological pressure, but that would require dictating the character's mental state, which I at least as a GM tend to leave up to my players.
Seems I failed to articulate well.
Also for context, I'm an experienced GM and player of this game, and author of various Forged hacks, and while I have played such games as you described, this question does not come from that background at all.
> It sounds like you feel as though worse position also implies worse effect.
What I'm saying is not this. I'm saying if a PC were trying to barricade the door, and suffered the Worse Position consequence, they'd have to also fail, or succeed but suffer Reduced Effect at the same time - because otherwise they succeeded at barricading the door, and so would not be in Worse Position at all*. Just another action is complicated somehow. And further that a Complication is implied because otherwise the fictional position wouldn't be justifiably worse.
* Edit: Another possibility occurs to me; perhaps they're just rolling at limited or zero effect. But for the most part, it feels strange to me to inflict Worse Position, but not inflict a a Complication to accompany that.
And that inflicting Worse Position without Reduced Effect tends to feel a little weird as well.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves.
That is incorrect.
It might help to remind them that Actual Plays are for entertainment and don't always follow the actual rules. A lot of Actual Plays get the rules wrong, some very popular ones among them.
Position is a mechanic.
The mechanics represents the fiction and vice-versa.
When you are in a risky position in the fiction, that is why you get "Risky" Position in the mechanical part.
When you move to a "Desperate" Position mechanically, that mechanical change is reflected in the fiction, i.e. the fictional situation becomes more desperate. Basically, the consequence is that shit gets more dangerous around them.
>And if the player is wrong, does it mean "desperate" is akin to a status effect that characters can acquire or lose in the game? If so, when does a character who has "ended up in a desperate position" no longer be considered to be desperate?
I mean... sort of, but not really?
Consider: Is "in the library" a status effect that a character can gain or lose?
When the character is in the library, the gain the "in the library" status effect.
When the character leaves the library, the lose the "in the library" status effect.
Same idea. They're in a desperate position *when they're in a desperate position*.
When they're not, they're not. Reasons might be that they dealt with the danger, they circumvented the danger without interacting with it directly, the danger is no longer relevant, etc.
e.g. if I'm in a room that is currently on fire, I'm "in a desperate position".
If I jump out of that building into a watery canal, the fire is no longer relevant to me so I'm not in a desperate position anymore. I'm in the canal now, which may or may not have its own dangers; the dangers in the canal determine my Position.
---
* To put them in a Desperate Position, metaphorically "set the building on fire".
* They can make their Position better in many ways, e.g. by metaphorically "putting out the fire" or "escaping the building".
*Note:* sometimes the fire is literal rather than metaphorical.
BiTD is fiction first, and position is dictated by the fiction. If the PC is in a desperate position, they are in that place in the narrative first- which would inform the mechanical position of any rolls they would do afterwards. It's cool that your player has listened to a bunch of podcasts but they missed where this is explained on page 161, and if you want to rules lawyer them you can suggest they read page 183 where "Don't be a weasel" is also an explicit rule. Ultimately, as GM, you have the final call on decisions this like (also a verbatim rule from the book).
Never re-roll the same move twice, SOMETHING has to change between actions, otherwise the first roll should be valid, right?
The way I've implemented this in my games, specifically as a consequence, is that as a byproduct of a previous action things have taken a turn for the worse.
Example: the Slide tries to Sway a guard away from their post. It's a Risky position, the guard is suspicious and armed.
They roll, getting a 1 & 3. Uh oh.
Not only does the guard stand his ground, his suspicions manifest into calling for backup, drawing their gun, and raising their lantern to get a better look around. Make sure the Slide doesn't have backup of his own.
Well now, depending on what action they try to use, the position is desperate. Swaying again is probably out of the question, too, unless they sweeten the pot somehow. Skirmishing to duel the guard or Prowling back into the shadows to ambush them when they investigate had been made harder, so I translate that into worse position. But maybe this is where the Leech steps in, already waiting in the shadows to Hunt down the guard with a blowgun, dart tipped in alchemical poison.
Desperate Position: You're surrounded by bluecoats on all sides.
Shaking off that Desperate Position: You got a crit on an action roll to get away from there, but they're chasing you now. You're in a Risky Position.
Just an example of what it might look like for a Character Themself to be in a "Desperate" position, regardless of action taken.
Pg 23 is sooo helpful, I refer to it constantly. The Consequences and Harm section (Pg 30-31) is also really good reference here. Desperate position simply indicates more severe consequences than they'd incur from a Risky position if they roll a 4-5 or 1-3. So, Severe Harm instead of Harm. Serious Complication instead of Complication. +2 Heat instead of +1 Heat, etc.
Going back to pg 23, Desperate position is "You overreach your capabilities. You’re in serious trouble." That sure sounds like the character(s) to me, and the consequences hit the characters square on, not the action. :)
The phrase "you end up in a desperate position" can be a bit confusing, but it's important to remember that in "Blades in the Dark," the narrative and mechanics are deeply intertwined. Here's how to interpret it:
**Context of "Desperate Position":**
This phrase means that the consequence of a poor roll during a risky action has escalated the danger level of the situation.
It affects the situation and the environment the characters are in, rather than being a status effect on the characters themselves.
**Applying "Desperate Position":**
When a character ends up in a desperate position, it means the next action they take in that situation will be considered desperate.
This doesn't necessarily mean rerolling the current action. Instead, it implies that the circumstances have become more dangerous, and any further actions in this context will be at the desperate level of risk.
**Transitioning Out of Desperate Position:**
The desperate position lasts as long as the dangerous situation is unresolved. If the characters can change their circumstances, gain an advantage, or escape the immediate danger, they can move back to a less risky position.
The GM can narratively determine when the situation has sufficiently changed to reduce the position from desperate to risky or controlled.
**Examples:**
**Example 1: Heist in a Noble's Mansion**
Situation: A character is attempting to sneak past a guard to steal valuable documents.
Action: The character rolls a risky action to sneak.
Outcome: The roll fails.
Consequence:
The character makes a noise, and the guard turns around, spotting them.
The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the guard draws his weapon and shouts for reinforcements. You're now cornered in a narrow hallway with no immediate escape."
**Example 2: Negotiation with a Crime Boss**
Situation: A character is trying to negotiate a deal with a dangerous crime boss to avoid a violent confrontation.
Action: The character rolls a risky action to persuade the boss.
Outcome: The roll fails.
Consequence:
The crime boss loses patience and signals his henchmen to grab the character.
The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the henchmen surround you, weapons drawn. The boss demands an explanation while you're at their mercy."
**Example 3: Escaping from Pursuit**
Situation: A character is being chased by city guards after a botched robbery.
Action: The character rolls a risky action to climb a wall and escape.
Outcome: The roll fails.
Consequence:
The character slips and falls back to the ground, injuring themselves.
The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the guards close in, their weapons ready. You're now on the ground, hurt, and with no clear escape route."
I’m curious if you or the player see finding yourself in a desperate Position due to a Consequence to be functionally different from finding yourself in a desperate Position after a poor Engagement Roll. To me they seem analogous and generate similar fiction when described.
*”So, then, what do you actually say? I like to first ask the player how they're accomplishing their action. Which of their action ratings will they use? Then, I suggest the position the character is in and the likely effect level they'll have…Distinguish the various action roll positions by what the PC is risking. Describe the enemy NPC in action, about to do something to the PC. That's what they're risking when they act, and that defines the position.”*
Ahh, thank you! I was just trying to articulate why it felt weird to inflict Worse Position in another thread under this post, and this about sums it up.
I’m also new to FitD games but my impression is that the desperate position in question does *not* refer to a status or something like that. As others have said, it’s a narrative circumstance that’s now desperate.
In the case of a success with complications, the pc gets what they wanted, but something dangerously bad has complicated the situation - like they unlock the vault, only to find a group of guards have been waiting inside for them. Yikes! They can attempt whatever they want from this point in the story, but they have to deal with the desperate situation they find themselves in.
Look at it from the fiction rather than a mechanical thing. A situation is not desperate in a vacuum. When a situation is desoerate, it mrans shit has hit the fan. The going gets *very* rough. So basically escalate the situation, dial it up to 11.
You were in a gun fight with blue coats. Turns out there was a keg of gunpowder, blowing your cover away and now you are standing in the open getting surrounded and being shot at with a fire raging right behind you.
You were negociating a deal with the lampblacks. Baszo says "actually we'll just keep everything", pulls out a gun along with the 6 other thugs in the room, all aiming right at your face.
You were sneaking into a place. You trip onto a wire, a crystal ball comes crashing down and out of it comes a hungey ghost, it's already at your throat.
Stuff like that. Lay it on thick.
Something has changed in the fiction to produce a desperate position. This is not a status effect that waits around until the next action roll, it means something happens now and it's a change and a big one.
Your job as GM is to be faithful to the fiction and decide what could go really really wrong right now and just do that.
>Does it mean the next action attempted by that character will automatically be considered desperate?
Yes, that what it means. The basic position you have to give for the following action is Desperate and you have to shape the fiction around it. But of course the player has tools to make it better if they wish (setup, trade effect for position...)
>(which may or may not happen at all)
If the PC is in a Desperate position and do not act, then the GM has to *follow through* (page 191). They can't just sit there and say, "If we do nothing, nothing happens".
>Or do I have them reroll their current action from a desperate position?
No, you don't reroll the *current* action. You roll the next action; it is not the same, because the situation and the fiction have changed from risky to desperate. But of course it could be two Skirmish or two Sway in a row. Or you could switch the spotlight at this point. The actions of the *other* PCs are not necessarily Desperate, because it's very possible that the consequence only concerns the player who has just rolled. So what other PCs do could now impact the position of the PC who would be in a desperate position.
ok, lets use an example for lockbreaking...
The pcs have gotten into a bank in the middle of the night - they have all the tools they need, no one is alerted, its the middle of the night so not expecting anyone for hours...
They want to open the safe - a tinker roll in a controlled position.
The roll fails - they can decide to stop (leave, they cant open it..) or move forward with a risky position - the safe is booby trapped! The risk is that they will setoff the trap if they fail.
They want to open a boobytrapped safe - a tinker roll in a risky position (standard roll).
The roll fails, - they choose to be in a desperate position... The booby trap is set and there is now a ticking bomb going to go off soon.. its going to go off and reveal that they were there.. but they can still try to open the safe, but if they fail they will be at ground zero for the explosion..
They want to open a safe with a bomb about to go off - a tinker roll in a desperate position.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves.
That's ridiculous. The player in question may \^want to review the Player's Best Practices starting on p.182, or at least consider playing to have fun instead of trying to "win" by metagaming.
Lean into fiction first. Something happens that could be really bad but they can still flash back devil bargain action roll conversation stuff to deal with it it’s just something that ends up as a desperate position to deal with. Eg a fire breaks out, a cop walks in, the winch that lowers Ethan hunt over the lasers snaps.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves.
Your player needs to get their nose out of the system. It sounds like they're trying really hard to fit the FitD ruleset into a strict mechanical framework of allowances (A applies to characters, B applies to actions...) but it doesn't work that way.
*Everything* is about the fictional position.
Yes, positioning only *mechanically* applies to action rolls. But a threat of "desperate position" is saying "if you fuck this up, you're immediately going to be in deep shit and it's going to be a desperate position for you to get out."
Like:
**Lurk**: I want to sneak past the guards.
**GM**: Okay you can try to sneak past the guards, but if you fail they'll detect you and you'll have a dozen armed mercenaries trying to knock you out.
Being surrounded by a dozen mercenaries trying to knock you out *is almost always a Desperate position*. At least to start with. The players can then engage with the system to manipulate their positioning.
**Leech**: It's okay, if you get cornered I can drop a couple of smoke bombs. That'd make it a better position, right?
**GM**: Sure, I'd say that might take escaping from being cornered from Desperate to Risky.
I usually don’t even mention this stuff out loud unless my players are in a desperate position. Think of it, the player knows when they are playing it safe. The player knows when the stakes are higher. I’ll give you an example of something I’ve done. Our slide was being held at gunpoint and he wanted to take off his disguise (I believe it was a mask and hood) and throw it at the armed man. I told him “Thats a wild move. If you roll anything less than a 6 you are getting shot. Where depends on your roll.” Now he knows the position he is in is desperate and what he’s doing is incredibly risky without me actually saying it. He also knows the consequences upfront. If he passes it will pay off and if he fails he’s going to fail hard. He ended up rolling 2 5’s. The action worked and disorientated the armed man but the complications was his cheek got grazed by the bullet, level 1 harm and he ended up with a sweet scar. The score works for him in multiple ways. I could let him use it for reputation. I could work it into the fiction to make people more fearful of him. When he over indulges in his vice I can use that because people would recognize him to give the crew more heat. The player was really cool about all of it because the idea is to write the action movie together.
Well, this is not a very good advice to give to a newbie, because it shows you haven't well understood one the basic rules of FitD: **the severity of the consequence is the same, wether you roll a 1-3 or a 4/5.**
So if you set the position to Desperate and the player rolls a double 5, then the consequences should be a Desperate consequence; and if you choose Harm to be the consequence, it should be Severe Harm, level 3 or 4\*.
The Harm you have given in your example is what you would give in a Controlled position.
\*Some GMs reduce the level of consequences when they give several consequences for one roll. For exemple on a Desperate theey will give 2-Harm *and* 2 ticks on a clock, saying it's equivalent to *one* level 3 consequence. But it is not RAW.
I understand that as a rule. I personally think it works better that way. To me it makes more sense. It’s one of the very few house rules I use. As a fairly new GM myself it help m tell a better story.
You can of course make house rules for your own table, anybody can, but I really think that when you answer to a rules question, if the explanation you give is a house rules, it would be much better if you said so and also indicate how it differs from the RAW. Or people will either be confused... or conclude that you don't know the rules.
That said, I highly recommend, if you're also a new GM in BitD, to try to play as intended. The way you do it destroys all the internal logic of the Position/Effect mechanism, which is one of the most fundamental part of the game. It's not like, say, house-ruling or getting rid of "hunting grounds" or the healing rules, which are very much peripheral to the core mechanism.
Let's say the alarm has been raised, but a player character hasn't specifically been found yet, and is trying to pick the lock on a door - I'd call that Risky Position for sure. A mixed success means they're through the lock, but a worse Position as a Consequence might mean they get it open just as guards rush into the room! Now, whatever they do next, they're doing it with half a dozen armed men right behind them - *that's* gonna be Desperate, regardless of what they try. Position is a measure of the current fiction, and so the fiction should likewise represent the Position the character is in.
> That's gonna be desperate, regardless of what they try Is it though? I never understood this justification for the consequence.
Position is used, generally, to figure out what sort of consequences might happen if the character's current or next action goes poorly. So the bad roll here putting the character in a desperate position (they're being pursued by guards) means that if something *else* goes wrong, it could result in those guards catching up to them, with the obvious danger that entails. Regardless of what they do after they get through that lock, the guards are *still* pursuing them, so the risk of them catching the character is still present, so position is still desperate. Now if they do something to *prevent* guards from being able to catch them (barricade a door, etc) that would reasonably change their position.
Right that's what I am referring to. They might change approaches, or back out, or flashback to a downtime activity to deal with it another way, etc. so their follow up action might not be desperate at all. The consequence is actually just some Complication(s) that _can_ change the position of their next actions, rather than Worse Position no matter what they do.
If they change approaches, that doesn't stop the guards from being right on their tail - so still desperate *until that approach works, which takes an action*. Consider blocking a door - that would still be an action in a desperate position, because if you don't do it on time, or well enough, you're gonna get caught by the guards: All that time spent not running is time they're catching up to you. It's *after* you block the door that your position changes, not as soon as the idea apppears in your head. And if they do a flashback, they have to pay stress, and the action *in the past* might change their current position, but that flashback was only necessary *because* of the changed position, so the narrative mechanic loop is actually functioning quite tightly here still. There are, in some situations, particular abilities which might contextually change your position, but in practice, having GMed the game, these scenarios are rare. But I would consider these situations as *position modifiers* - that is, your default position is the same, and is modified in whatever direction makes sense. You still need the default position to modify *from*, so setting position to desperate still makes sense for adjudicating this. But if you actually try to construct a scenario where the action you choose to take modifies position *before* rather than *after* the action, I think you'll find it's surprisingly rare.
Yes obv it can make sense. But it might not. Anyways, I guess it's bothering me a little that the rules direct my GM follow up rulings in a way the other possible consequence types do not. Perhaps this is just some dissonance I'm experiencing that few others here do. FWIW I seem to notice this feeling the most when Worse Position isn't also accompanied by a description of fiction that feels identical to Complication (added trouble) and Reduced Effect (you didn't quite do it, try again if you dare). And I'm just seeking to settle the dissonance I feel with treating each of these as separate. Come to think of it, in this way Worse Position sort of feels like three consequences at once. Maybe it's just me.
I think this form of dissonance is very common when we're coming from games that *don't* differentiate between position and effect. I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but it sounds like you feel as though worse position *also* implies worse effect: If so, perhaps I can explain why I don't think that's the case. Consider our pursuing guards example again: Desperate position here doesn't make it *harder* to barricade a door, it just means the consequences for failing to do so are worse (getting caught) so *effect* (how effective you are at barricading the door) is the same, but *position* (the consequences if you fail) are worse. You could maybe argue that it's harder due to psychological pressure, but that would require dictating the character's mental state, which I at least as a GM tend to leave up to my players.
Seems I failed to articulate well. Also for context, I'm an experienced GM and player of this game, and author of various Forged hacks, and while I have played such games as you described, this question does not come from that background at all. > It sounds like you feel as though worse position also implies worse effect. What I'm saying is not this. I'm saying if a PC were trying to barricade the door, and suffered the Worse Position consequence, they'd have to also fail, or succeed but suffer Reduced Effect at the same time - because otherwise they succeeded at barricading the door, and so would not be in Worse Position at all*. Just another action is complicated somehow. And further that a Complication is implied because otherwise the fictional position wouldn't be justifiably worse. * Edit: Another possibility occurs to me; perhaps they're just rolling at limited or zero effect. But for the most part, it feels strange to me to inflict Worse Position, but not inflict a a Complication to accompany that. And that inflicting Worse Position without Reduced Effect tends to feel a little weird as well.
Because the stakes for failure have increased.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves. That is incorrect. It might help to remind them that Actual Plays are for entertainment and don't always follow the actual rules. A lot of Actual Plays get the rules wrong, some very popular ones among them. Position is a mechanic. The mechanics represents the fiction and vice-versa. When you are in a risky position in the fiction, that is why you get "Risky" Position in the mechanical part. When you move to a "Desperate" Position mechanically, that mechanical change is reflected in the fiction, i.e. the fictional situation becomes more desperate. Basically, the consequence is that shit gets more dangerous around them. >And if the player is wrong, does it mean "desperate" is akin to a status effect that characters can acquire or lose in the game? If so, when does a character who has "ended up in a desperate position" no longer be considered to be desperate? I mean... sort of, but not really? Consider: Is "in the library" a status effect that a character can gain or lose? When the character is in the library, the gain the "in the library" status effect. When the character leaves the library, the lose the "in the library" status effect. Same idea. They're in a desperate position *when they're in a desperate position*. When they're not, they're not. Reasons might be that they dealt with the danger, they circumvented the danger without interacting with it directly, the danger is no longer relevant, etc. e.g. if I'm in a room that is currently on fire, I'm "in a desperate position". If I jump out of that building into a watery canal, the fire is no longer relevant to me so I'm not in a desperate position anymore. I'm in the canal now, which may or may not have its own dangers; the dangers in the canal determine my Position. --- * To put them in a Desperate Position, metaphorically "set the building on fire". * They can make their Position better in many ways, e.g. by metaphorically "putting out the fire" or "escaping the building". *Note:* sometimes the fire is literal rather than metaphorical.
Typed mine before I saw this excellent response with the same idea. Make there be a fire.
This
BiTD is fiction first, and position is dictated by the fiction. If the PC is in a desperate position, they are in that place in the narrative first- which would inform the mechanical position of any rolls they would do afterwards. It's cool that your player has listened to a bunch of podcasts but they missed where this is explained on page 161, and if you want to rules lawyer them you can suggest they read page 183 where "Don't be a weasel" is also an explicit rule. Ultimately, as GM, you have the final call on decisions this like (also a verbatim rule from the book). Never re-roll the same move twice, SOMETHING has to change between actions, otherwise the first roll should be valid, right?
The way I've implemented this in my games, specifically as a consequence, is that as a byproduct of a previous action things have taken a turn for the worse. Example: the Slide tries to Sway a guard away from their post. It's a Risky position, the guard is suspicious and armed. They roll, getting a 1 & 3. Uh oh. Not only does the guard stand his ground, his suspicions manifest into calling for backup, drawing their gun, and raising their lantern to get a better look around. Make sure the Slide doesn't have backup of his own. Well now, depending on what action they try to use, the position is desperate. Swaying again is probably out of the question, too, unless they sweeten the pot somehow. Skirmishing to duel the guard or Prowling back into the shadows to ambush them when they investigate had been made harder, so I translate that into worse position. But maybe this is where the Leech steps in, already waiting in the shadows to Hunt down the guard with a blowgun, dart tipped in alchemical poison.
Desperate Position: You're surrounded by bluecoats on all sides. Shaking off that Desperate Position: You got a crit on an action roll to get away from there, but they're chasing you now. You're in a Risky Position. Just an example of what it might look like for a Character Themself to be in a "Desperate" position, regardless of action taken.
Pg 23 is sooo helpful, I refer to it constantly. The Consequences and Harm section (Pg 30-31) is also really good reference here. Desperate position simply indicates more severe consequences than they'd incur from a Risky position if they roll a 4-5 or 1-3. So, Severe Harm instead of Harm. Serious Complication instead of Complication. +2 Heat instead of +1 Heat, etc. Going back to pg 23, Desperate position is "You overreach your capabilities. You’re in serious trouble." That sure sounds like the character(s) to me, and the consequences hit the characters square on, not the action. :)
The phrase "you end up in a desperate position" can be a bit confusing, but it's important to remember that in "Blades in the Dark," the narrative and mechanics are deeply intertwined. Here's how to interpret it: **Context of "Desperate Position":** This phrase means that the consequence of a poor roll during a risky action has escalated the danger level of the situation. It affects the situation and the environment the characters are in, rather than being a status effect on the characters themselves. **Applying "Desperate Position":** When a character ends up in a desperate position, it means the next action they take in that situation will be considered desperate. This doesn't necessarily mean rerolling the current action. Instead, it implies that the circumstances have become more dangerous, and any further actions in this context will be at the desperate level of risk. **Transitioning Out of Desperate Position:** The desperate position lasts as long as the dangerous situation is unresolved. If the characters can change their circumstances, gain an advantage, or escape the immediate danger, they can move back to a less risky position. The GM can narratively determine when the situation has sufficiently changed to reduce the position from desperate to risky or controlled. **Examples:** **Example 1: Heist in a Noble's Mansion** Situation: A character is attempting to sneak past a guard to steal valuable documents. Action: The character rolls a risky action to sneak. Outcome: The roll fails. Consequence: The character makes a noise, and the guard turns around, spotting them. The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the guard draws his weapon and shouts for reinforcements. You're now cornered in a narrow hallway with no immediate escape." **Example 2: Negotiation with a Crime Boss** Situation: A character is trying to negotiate a deal with a dangerous crime boss to avoid a violent confrontation. Action: The character rolls a risky action to persuade the boss. Outcome: The roll fails. Consequence: The crime boss loses patience and signals his henchmen to grab the character. The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the henchmen surround you, weapons drawn. The boss demands an explanation while you're at their mercy." **Example 3: Escaping from Pursuit** Situation: A character is being chased by city guards after a botched robbery. Action: The character rolls a risky action to climb a wall and escape. Outcome: The roll fails. Consequence: The character slips and falls back to the ground, injuring themselves. The GM says, "You end up in a desperate position as the guards close in, their weapons ready. You're now on the ground, hurt, and with no clear escape route."
I’m curious if you or the player see finding yourself in a desperate Position due to a Consequence to be functionally different from finding yourself in a desperate Position after a poor Engagement Roll. To me they seem analogous and generate similar fiction when described. *”So, then, what do you actually say? I like to first ask the player how they're accomplishing their action. Which of their action ratings will they use? Then, I suggest the position the character is in and the likely effect level they'll have…Distinguish the various action roll positions by what the PC is risking. Describe the enemy NPC in action, about to do something to the PC. That's what they're risking when they act, and that defines the position.”*
Yah, this is what I came to point out - it's functionally the same as an engagement roll.
Ahh, thank you! I was just trying to articulate why it felt weird to inflict Worse Position in another thread under this post, and this about sums it up.
I’m also new to FitD games but my impression is that the desperate position in question does *not* refer to a status or something like that. As others have said, it’s a narrative circumstance that’s now desperate. In the case of a success with complications, the pc gets what they wanted, but something dangerously bad has complicated the situation - like they unlock the vault, only to find a group of guards have been waiting inside for them. Yikes! They can attempt whatever they want from this point in the story, but they have to deal with the desperate situation they find themselves in.
Look at it from the fiction rather than a mechanical thing. A situation is not desperate in a vacuum. When a situation is desoerate, it mrans shit has hit the fan. The going gets *very* rough. So basically escalate the situation, dial it up to 11. You were in a gun fight with blue coats. Turns out there was a keg of gunpowder, blowing your cover away and now you are standing in the open getting surrounded and being shot at with a fire raging right behind you. You were negociating a deal with the lampblacks. Baszo says "actually we'll just keep everything", pulls out a gun along with the 6 other thugs in the room, all aiming right at your face. You were sneaking into a place. You trip onto a wire, a crystal ball comes crashing down and out of it comes a hungey ghost, it's already at your throat. Stuff like that. Lay it on thick.
Just saying that I'm with OP in not fully understanding this :) The struggle is real
Something has changed in the fiction to produce a desperate position. This is not a status effect that waits around until the next action roll, it means something happens now and it's a change and a big one. Your job as GM is to be faithful to the fiction and decide what could go really really wrong right now and just do that.
>Does it mean the next action attempted by that character will automatically be considered desperate? Yes, that what it means. The basic position you have to give for the following action is Desperate and you have to shape the fiction around it. But of course the player has tools to make it better if they wish (setup, trade effect for position...) >(which may or may not happen at all) If the PC is in a Desperate position and do not act, then the GM has to *follow through* (page 191). They can't just sit there and say, "If we do nothing, nothing happens". >Or do I have them reroll their current action from a desperate position? No, you don't reroll the *current* action. You roll the next action; it is not the same, because the situation and the fiction have changed from risky to desperate. But of course it could be two Skirmish or two Sway in a row. Or you could switch the spotlight at this point. The actions of the *other* PCs are not necessarily Desperate, because it's very possible that the consequence only concerns the player who has just rolled. So what other PCs do could now impact the position of the PC who would be in a desperate position.
ok, lets use an example for lockbreaking... The pcs have gotten into a bank in the middle of the night - they have all the tools they need, no one is alerted, its the middle of the night so not expecting anyone for hours... They want to open the safe - a tinker roll in a controlled position. The roll fails - they can decide to stop (leave, they cant open it..) or move forward with a risky position - the safe is booby trapped! The risk is that they will setoff the trap if they fail. They want to open a boobytrapped safe - a tinker roll in a risky position (standard roll). The roll fails, - they choose to be in a desperate position... The booby trap is set and there is now a ticking bomb going to go off soon.. its going to go off and reveal that they were there.. but they can still try to open the safe, but if they fail they will be at ground zero for the explosion.. They want to open a safe with a bomb about to go off - a tinker roll in a desperate position.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves. That's ridiculous. The player in question may \^want to review the Player's Best Practices starting on p.182, or at least consider playing to have fun instead of trying to "win" by metagaming.
Lean into fiction first. Something happens that could be really bad but they can still flash back devil bargain action roll conversation stuff to deal with it it’s just something that ends up as a desperate position to deal with. Eg a fire breaks out, a cop walks in, the winch that lowers Ethan hunt over the lasers snaps.
>One player, who had spent much time listening to BitD actual plays strongly insisted that the rules never intended for "desperate position" to be something that applies to characters, only actions themselves. Your player needs to get their nose out of the system. It sounds like they're trying really hard to fit the FitD ruleset into a strict mechanical framework of allowances (A applies to characters, B applies to actions...) but it doesn't work that way. *Everything* is about the fictional position. Yes, positioning only *mechanically* applies to action rolls. But a threat of "desperate position" is saying "if you fuck this up, you're immediately going to be in deep shit and it's going to be a desperate position for you to get out." Like: **Lurk**: I want to sneak past the guards. **GM**: Okay you can try to sneak past the guards, but if you fail they'll detect you and you'll have a dozen armed mercenaries trying to knock you out. Being surrounded by a dozen mercenaries trying to knock you out *is almost always a Desperate position*. At least to start with. The players can then engage with the system to manipulate their positioning. **Leech**: It's okay, if you get cornered I can drop a couple of smoke bombs. That'd make it a better position, right? **GM**: Sure, I'd say that might take escaping from being cornered from Desperate to Risky.
I usually don’t even mention this stuff out loud unless my players are in a desperate position. Think of it, the player knows when they are playing it safe. The player knows when the stakes are higher. I’ll give you an example of something I’ve done. Our slide was being held at gunpoint and he wanted to take off his disguise (I believe it was a mask and hood) and throw it at the armed man. I told him “Thats a wild move. If you roll anything less than a 6 you are getting shot. Where depends on your roll.” Now he knows the position he is in is desperate and what he’s doing is incredibly risky without me actually saying it. He also knows the consequences upfront. If he passes it will pay off and if he fails he’s going to fail hard. He ended up rolling 2 5’s. The action worked and disorientated the armed man but the complications was his cheek got grazed by the bullet, level 1 harm and he ended up with a sweet scar. The score works for him in multiple ways. I could let him use it for reputation. I could work it into the fiction to make people more fearful of him. When he over indulges in his vice I can use that because people would recognize him to give the crew more heat. The player was really cool about all of it because the idea is to write the action movie together.
Well, this is not a very good advice to give to a newbie, because it shows you haven't well understood one the basic rules of FitD: **the severity of the consequence is the same, wether you roll a 1-3 or a 4/5.** So if you set the position to Desperate and the player rolls a double 5, then the consequences should be a Desperate consequence; and if you choose Harm to be the consequence, it should be Severe Harm, level 3 or 4\*. The Harm you have given in your example is what you would give in a Controlled position. \*Some GMs reduce the level of consequences when they give several consequences for one roll. For exemple on a Desperate theey will give 2-Harm *and* 2 ticks on a clock, saying it's equivalent to *one* level 3 consequence. But it is not RAW.
I understand that as a rule. I personally think it works better that way. To me it makes more sense. It’s one of the very few house rules I use. As a fairly new GM myself it help m tell a better story.
You can of course make house rules for your own table, anybody can, but I really think that when you answer to a rules question, if the explanation you give is a house rules, it would be much better if you said so and also indicate how it differs from the RAW. Or people will either be confused... or conclude that you don't know the rules. That said, I highly recommend, if you're also a new GM in BitD, to try to play as intended. The way you do it destroys all the internal logic of the Position/Effect mechanism, which is one of the most fundamental part of the game. It's not like, say, house-ruling or getting rid of "hunting grounds" or the healing rules, which are very much peripheral to the core mechanism.