I usually don't blog my planned changes (instead I just explain what I did after its done, and its there) - most of the time I feel very certain about changes I implement - but now I am not so sure! See I think also knew there was a slight weakness to the position and effect discussion that didn't feel fitting for Runners: the tendency for a discussion about an action to turn to the matter of position and effect and go something like this..
The GM says that's going to be Risky, then it turns into a back and forth to find a "Controlled" approach that is just as "effective," only for them to seek a "Desperate" version of that approach, then.. they seek ways to involve additional PCs to "increase their scale" hoping for "greater or extreme effect" (even though things are now actually not the same, or not as dangerous now), and then describe a flashback to help them get yet "more effect".. and then, and then!
This kind of fictional framing and reframing to find maximum effect can be very time-consuming and tiring as a GM or player, due in part to the existence of three possible position and effect ranges in any combination - which is compounded by the language surrounding that discussion. Don't get wrong, the effect slider will always remain separate from risk, but I think the terms are just.. too meta, not very fiction first, and pulls me just a little too far out of character for my liking. Instead, I envision players being able to discuss this kind of thing with more natural language, like "okay you will do it if you succeed," and we know pretty much instantly intuit that "it" means what they just described doing. And we could just express that "someone will need to follow up on that to complete the task - or you can act together to potentially do more" rather than "you will have limited effect" which sounds kind of disappointing, leading to the back and forth I just described.
So to achieve that, I am working on merging Controlled with Risky - so that either way it's the same chart, leaving fewer levers to pull. That is: those two would become the default position for all actions, similar to Risky and Controlled but actually more flexible than either of those positions are alone. This would become the default position - the one that does less than is actually possible. When "you take a chance," make an action roll. And when you "aim to do the most you can with a given approach or act despite great danger," then I think the action should be considered to be desperate, (a lever that the players or the GM can pull) and would point to the same severe consequences as before.
This should help simplify the language surrounding these topics, a small piece of game tech I think I want to include in Runners. Maybe this is a non-issue for your games, and you can't bear for this game to mess with the Blades vernacular by never mentioning Controlled? Or maybe you have also noticed this and have feelings about it? Something else? Either way I hope you will speak up in the comments below to help me move forward in the right direction!