Discussion about this post

User's avatar
SGH's avatar

Just wanted to add in a quick note on an element of GM and player decision-making surrounding the Minor Arcana cards revealed during the session.

You may have noticed that for the first minor arcanum (the aethereum plaques in the pools), we saw both the front -- which has the description and the steps required to unlock it -- and the back, which has the power the arcanum contains and the move associated with that power, whereas for the second we only saw the front, leaving the specific power a mystery.

Which approach is correct? The short answer is either. This was covered in a discussion that the creator participated in on the Stonetop Discord, and his rationale is really insightful: It depends on what the player is looking for when they come to the table. Some players want to experience a mystery, as their character would. Other players want to know upfront how the power that's unlocked would effect the story they're telling, and how the power would shape their performance in that story. Both motivations are valid, and it helps to have a flexible approach that supports both, even on an arcanum-by-arcanum basis.

In our case, revealing the specifics of Id'Otez's Galvanic Infusion would help y'all think about what was going on in this complex, and provide some interesting foreshadowing for what else might be found down here. In the case of the Makerglass Chime, I thought it might be more fun to speculate on the function of the chime, and have a bit of mystery present (even if the arcanum never gets unlocked, ultimately).

Expand full comment
Tom Pleasant's avatar

Fantastic session! Love it!

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts