There’s also the aspect that the player makes a choice. While it’s in practice just the cup game, it opens the door to the feeling that the choice mattered. It gets the player’s mind a little closer to having taking some action in the game directly.
Sometimes a big part of game design is not as much the mechanical output of the action, but the feeling it instills in the player.
That only works if you assume players do not understand rock, paper, scissors.
The idea is for a player to try to figure out which things the other player is doing, whether that’s an adversary that’s really fast to try to outsmart them or whether they think that the GM is likely to want Confusion be the twist and play to counter that.
In a situation where the player just doesn’t know enough to make an informed choice they’ve got their own numbers, their traits, advancement potential and the choice of how they’ll describe their action to fall back on.
But take all the context away then it’s a weighted arbitrary choice best made by acting randomly.
Even then I added a GM tip near the end to emphasise an additional Madness complication for failure for players that are blatantly doing this. (This part was actually inspired by your analysis of C’naiur interacting with early Kellhus).
Playtesting has been fine with this aspect of the game. The problems have been learning Magic being far too slow, traits have been overhauled and armour needs redoing from scratch.
I’m glad to hear that someone likes P2E! I’ve only just gotten the books and haven’t run a campaign yet.
I have some friends who do run a P2E game and the DM says that the combat feels more clunky than DnD!
The way he describes it makes me think that his group is trying to do things in more of a DnD way than the way that P2E wants you to play.
He does have specific issues with the statuses and says that having to look them up continually slows things down.
Aside from the 5e game I’ve had since forever I’m also playing in a game of City of Mist. Which is like a noir take on the pbta formula. It’s been a really fulfilling campaign, as we all come from completely different spheres and geek spaces so we’re all bringing different approaches to the table but all have the same sense of ratcheting the intensity of the story for each other, we’ve developed such a good sense of how each other works and how far to push despite our differences. It’s really fulfilling and the pbta have really facilitated some fantastic moments and character arcs.
Like generally I hate talking about the plot of ttrpgs, but some of our sessions have been laced with so much tight dramatic irony they almost feel like they a TV plot when I look at our collective notes/session summary. At the very least we are all invested enough that we can write interconnected narratives through our roleplaying instead of the competing monologues of most rpg campaigns I’ve sat through.
It’s been a long time since I played DnD, but the core of both games is still hitting things with swords. We’ve fought a bunch of different monsters and I get the vibe that actually experimenting with damage types and statuses matter more. I agree that statuses need to be retinkered. The chart that gives a brief summary has no actual rules, so it’s almost useless. Statuses are only detailed in an appendix at the end of the book and the descriptions are way too wordy so it’s split across 6 pages.
We’ve been playing Blades in the Dark with the same crew basically all quarantine and have actually leveled up significantly.
We have several alt characters, are a Tier II, and just finished a “season finale” score.
This is easily one of my favorite systems.
Our goal now in the second season is to professionalize as a gang, expand our holdings, and work our way up to the big time (Tier III).
That would make us roughly as powerful as the Bluecoats (the actual police in this world). We… have a grudge against them. And we’d rather they not exist. We’re real good friends with the Graycloaks (ex-cops who were less corrupt and framed by the more corrupt Bluecoats, working to expose that corruption) and the Red Sashes.
I’ve also been playing and enjoying PF2.
The game definitely has a different tactical conceit when approaching combat than PF1/D&D3.x. In the earlier iterations, the game allowed/encouraged some classes to completely consume the niches of some/all other classes (depending on build) while not really sacrificing anything themselves. PF2 is pretty explicitly situated in the idea that it is a group game and group tactics are essential.
Likewise: In earlier iterations, standing in a single spot and swinging your sword was often the best thing you could do. With the way that crits/crit fails work in PF2, that can sometimes be an actively detrimental strategy.
tldr: If you approach PF2 combat like you would’ve PF1/3.x, you are likely going to have a rough time.
PF2e sounds like it solves some of the issues with 5e, and has a lot of the customizability that 5e definitely doesn’t. I never played 1e, but I read a lot of it, and all the characters options sounded super cool – but also like it would be a nightmare to run. And I’ve heard that 2e is crunchier than 5e, so it still sounds like a lot of work to run, which is what I’m trying to get away from and a big part of why I’ve switched to Savage Worlds.
Sounds like there’s a lot of Blades in the Dark action going on around here! I’ve heard nothing but good things. Never had the opportunity to play any FitD (or PbtA, which is related I think?) – if anyone’s planning on running a one-shot or anything like that, hit me up, I’d love a chance to try. I’m willing to run something in return. 
If you’re looking for something in the PbtA realm, I can’t recommend Monsterhearts 2 enough. Easily one of my favorite games.
Appreciate it! I’m more interested in FitD than PbtA I think, and I’m not actively looking for a game, but I’d definitely give it a try if it came up.
Momsterhearts 2 is a great game yeah but I’d never play that with a new group, or anyone I didn’t know well enough. There’s a tendency for that game to drive you to a vulnerable place and I need to really trust my fellow players to even begin to enjoy that.
Totally fair and understandable!
On the flip side, I was able to use it to show someone that there were tabletop games for her. Her husband and their friends are all life-long D&D people and that’s all they had ever asked her to play with them. She hated D&D and thus thought she hated tabletop. I was able to talk to her, get her interests in the kinds of fiction she liked, and ran a kind of spontaneous Monsterhearts game. She absolutely loved it. It was a real feels good kind of moment.
I’ve been digging into the systems and I totally agree with your assessment of PF2e and DND5e.
As someone who grew up playing ADND into 3.5/PF1e the lack of fine grain customization is a bit weird in 5e, but I really get it. How many times did you, or someone else, agonize over what feat to take next? For nearly every freaking level?
How many times did you just take the great cleave as a fighter because you didn’t really want to think about it too much?
The packaged archetypes are nice in that way.
There’s a reason why I think that GURPS isn’t the most popular system.
sorry to necro, but I’d heard from some people that P2E wasn’t great. I’d initally been interested in checking it out, but sort of got waved off of it. Aside from the smaller numbers and fewer interactions, what other advantages did you see for the system? it felt a bit more fiddly when I was reading over the rules, so I’m interested in how well it executes at the table.
Currently running an eberron reskin of the Kingmaker module for a few friends of mine. It keeps reminding me that I secretly want a Civ RPG, and if anyone knows of one, please let me know.
We encourage necro.
you encourage skeletons; that’s a separate thread
All I can say is it feels like it has much more intentional design. Level ups are less convoluted. Feats are cleaned up. Combat flows better.
It feels like a product designed to be played rather than one bloated with delusions of simulationism.