Thread by @rdonoghue

So, last session, the dice LOVED the players.

This time? They were devil spawn driven by hate.

Which made for a great session propelled by a whole lot of failing forward.

Generous failure is a powerful play tool. Important to consider that the purpose of failure is not to fail, it is merely to resolve uncertainty, just like every other outcome.

Key tip about failing forward - the failure itself can provide forward momentum, but never forget how consequences play into this. Consequences should ideally push action (something valuable is threatened) or escalate tension (reduce margin for error). Or both.

Noteably, this is why injury is my consequence of last resort (in Blades, especially) - it *can* escalate tension, but mostly it just kind of sucks more, so it is a drag rather than a propulsion.

It is also part of why I love being generous to players - The more they have, the more things there are to threaten, endanger and take.

Some people view that as cruel GMing.

They would be right if the only reason to give players things was to take them away. That would be pretty toxic.

You need to also delight in them *having* these things, and *respect* them.

If the GM gives a player a magic sword, but then keeps it from mattering in play, and then has it stolen, that's a bad dynamic. It wasn't play, it was a *tease* on the GM's part, and that's crap.

When you give the player the magic sword, you are signing up for creating opportunities for the magic sword to be part of the player's awesome. And when you threaten it, they will be invested rather than just roll their eyes at you being an ass.

It seems contradictory, but my experience is this - the GMs who can most successfully go all in pushing players *hard* are the ones who go equally all in on having the players' backs.

Gotta do both. Only doing one is a path to crap. A disturbing common path to crap.

Tangential, but one more useful thing when GMing Blades.

As a GM, it is very easy to think of reasons why something won't work. These are not unkind reasons, or asshole reasons, they are just a reasonable result of the situation as you envision it.

Sometimes it is worth squelching that instinct. Specifically when a player is very strongly engaged in a course of action. Take all those reasons why it can't work, set them aside, and then go to the dice. Let the roll decide if they matter.

If the dice are unkind, you have a reasonable explanation. If the dice are kind, you have extra details for why the success was that much more awesome.

This is not "Say 'yes' or roll the dice" because saying "no" is part of the job. But there is still skill and judgement applied to when and how you say no, and when you say something else.

Anyway, I am exhausted, and have bled off my post gm-ing buzz into twitter, so now I sleep. Night folks!