itch.io

Having read through the first book, i.e. the stuff on narrative play, I really like a lot of the ideas here (especially the Tempting Fate mechanic). But the way Bonds are currently implemented are kind of a dealbreaker for me, even though I like the idea of them.

As Radstarsaur said below, the Bonds themselves are really inconsistent in what they're meant to portray. Pathfinder and Seeker, are core character motivations - why they adventure. Wolf, and Brave, are more surface personality traits - how they adventure. A lot of classic JRPG heroes would be described equally well by both Pathfinder and Brave, because they're describing different aspects of a character. The rest are all over the place. Harlequin and Outsider are more broad character archetypes than actual personalities, Highborn and Elder are just very specific backgrounds, and then Mighty and Mender are so vague that I'm pretty sure they only exist so that there were mechanical classes for muscle and healer type characters.

Now, normally, I would just ignore the flavoring of stuff like this and just pick the mechanics that fit my character idea best. But that leads me into my biggest problem with Bonds, which are the Ideals. They're not only just as inconsistent, but they're also unchanging, and tied directly to progression! Even disregarding the inconsistencies, (why do some classes' third ideals involve failing or mistakes, but others are about succeeding?), the way Ideals are now coerce a player into picking very specific roleplaying choices. If I play a Mighty character, why would I ever play them as feeling overwhelmed and terrified in a bad situation when doing so screws myself out of gaining XP? If I play a Harlequin, how can I have an arc about them using dishonesty to protect themself and slowly becoming more honest when their Ideal says they will always address challenges with subterfuge and deceit? As it stands, the system makes the GM grade you on how well you play into the game's pre-written archetypes, with no room for nuance or changing characterization over time. It mechanically incentivizes one-note, static characters.

The change I really want would be some alternative roleplaying XP gain that isn't tied to Ideals at all, since I personally find ideals to be too prescriptive and overly simplistic for characterization. Not everybody will agree with me there, though, so barring that, there needs to be more flexibility in the Ideals themselves. Players should be explicitly allowed to write their own set of ideals for any Bond they pick and rewrite them as appropriate for their character's development. Something like a create-a-Bond system would also be great, though I understand that might undermine the Broker capstone.

Thanks for reading my text wall. Hope this is addressed in the future. Best of luck with development!!