[IaWA - OOG] Tales of False Fortunes

1246

Comments

  • Posted By: yellowparis
    Troels' answer
    Well, yeah, that's pretty much right. The GM's minor duty is the playing of NPCs (technically, there could be no NPCs in a game, though that'd be pretty dull for the GM). The major duty, then, is ensuring fair balance of power between characters and players. That could include denying a proposed addition to back story.

    If you are inserting something that is only to do with your character (Wanda's mother) or that is only color (witches), that's unlikely to come up. If you say something that affects other main characters, it invites scrutiny. If the relevant players don't have a problem with it, though, there's nothing to worry about.
    Vincent's answer in the thread suggests to avoid backstory - if not then make it subject to universal approval/any veto.
  • I'd vote yes if one can dish out some convincing narrative. I'm not firm in my belief though, so I could be swayed by a convincing argument.

    My only hesitation right now is that the person (Wanda or Ilsa in case) who is being bad-mouthed (so to speak) is risking dice and more by entering the conflict. If Ilsa entered this conflict and lost, she'd possibly lose dice, right?

    Hasn't this already happened as well, such as when Sig was trying to turn Andreas against Ilsa? Ilsa entered there, but her only relationship to the conflict was the impression she made on Andreas.
  • Oh, and don't forget about the Inn scene. If writer's block is messing you up, you can always change Ilsa's actions to something easier to write. (Though I like the seduction idea)
  • edited November 2007
  • edited November 2007
  • edited November 2007
  • I've lost initiative in Mansion and will reroll as answerer once Bergen's challenge roll/challenge is established.
  • edited November 2007
    I don't think I'm on the owe list am I - might have been when you forgot about the dice side count.
  • Okay, so I beat everyone but Wanda, and was over half her roll.

    So I can "Give" at this point and Bergen believes Ilsa was involved but not Wanda? Didn't lose to her badly enough to suffer dice loss. That's fine then.
  • For Owe list - among those rolling against me, both Bergen and Ilsa had more sides and neither doubled me on first roll of conflict, so I think that means I'm owed.
  • edited November 2007
  • Ah I see, except the rules say GM characters never go on the owe list, that's in the wiki as a Vincent-sourced statement.

    I will strike myself off the owe list immediately to roll a d6 on top of my 5 then.
  • edited November 2007
  • Given how you've played NPC's in the past, with everyone and their uncle coming in against Sigismund whether they were in the scene or not, figured might as well go for killing everyone then anyway.

    The rules say: Defending myself: physically, armed or unarmed; even attacking another, if she's capable of fighting you back. That's capable not "choosing to". A target that doesn't fight back is the best of all targets to attack, why would attacking then not work?

    Pretty clearly, I'm attacking them seeking to inflict fatal damage. Do you have a specific citation for "if someone doesn't choose to fight back, you can't use Defend to attack them?"
Sign In or Register to comment.