[DitV] Crap vs. Meaningfulness, and Partial Crap?

[Jason Newquist]

Got a couple related topics on crap fer ya!

Topic #1

One of the players in my DitV game, currently in chargen, proposed this:

"Dog-eared, broken-spined, heavily-marked Book of Life - 2d6"

He said, "To anyone else, it's crap, but it's meaningful to me. It's important, a keepsake.  Does the fact that it's treasured trump the fact that it's crap, or vice versa?"

I said, "Hmm. Uh.  It's importance and meaning comes at least in part from you listing it on your character sheet in the first place.  Once it's on your sheet, you need to ask yourself how bringing it into play would affect the conflict.  Does it complicate things, or give you a real boost?"

He said, "The extra dice make it more of a boon, right?  That's what I think I want, even though it's actual crap."

There's lots of genre examples in this area.  The tattered, crap portrait of the man's wife which, seeing it, gives him the guts to stand and fire his gun.  Etc.  Right?

So that's the end of it, right?  This thing here's 2d6 crap.  Is that what you would say?

Topic #2

Then the player says, "Actually, what I really want is for the thing to sometimes be crap, and sometimes not."  I go, "Explain."  He continues, "Like, if the Book is brought into play when it's really personal.  As a reference book, it's serious crap, missing pages and all that.  But when the wind's blowing its pages and my eyes land on just the right passage -- in that case, it delivers just what I need.  That's what I really want."

Which leads me to wonder, if you take a Belonging at a certain level of dice, might they come into play at certain lower levels of dice?  It sounds like this player gets some milage from holding his finger on this kind of modulator, so at the very least I'm willing to say, "Sure.  It's a 2d6 book, but you can use it as crap any time you like.  Track it yourself, and have fun."

Does that make sense?  What would you say on these two topics?

Thanks,
Jason

[Simon Kamber]

What I'd do here is to treat it like the crap it is, thing-dice-wise. So, 1d4 for the book. Then, I'd give him an applicable trait to match. There's two reasons for this:

1) It's what the rules say. With dogs, I've started to get used to trusting the rules, which is quite a jump from previous RPGs for my part.

2) It emphasizes the difference. A Book of Life with 2d6 is an excellent book of life. If the Book of Life is at 1d4, but the character has a trait that goes "my old, battered book of life is precious to me", the book is a crappy book of life which is important to the character. It's quite a difference in psychology. (plus, it allows for a solution to topic #2 within the rules).

[Eric Provost]

Hmmm...

I'd say this;

If the book is terribly important to the character,  then it's not actually crap, is it?  I mean, torn up & tattered dosen't necessarily make something crap.  And, perhaps, if that same book were handed to someone who didn't love it so much, then perhaps it could be defined as crap, but not to the one that loves it.

Another way to handle it might be to say that, yes, yes it is crap, but "I love that crappy Book of Life of mine - 2d6", so that when it's called into play, the player could call upon his Trait of loving the book (could one have a relationship with thier book?), and the 1d4 crapness of the book.

I think that both of these options fall squarely within the rules.  

I look forward to Vincent's take on this question.

-Eric

[Lance D. Allen]

I'd go with Tech and Simon, I think.

My first instinct was to let him assign whatever dice he wants to the book. But if he wants it to be a genuinely crap book, but one with significance to him, then it makes sense to make it a genuinely crap book (1d4) with special significance (I treasure my battered ol' Book of Life, 2d6).

And.. hell, if he's motivated by the dice at all, tell him that's 2d6+1d4, rather than just 2d6 or 1d4.

[CCW]

I think the approach already mentioned is likely the way to go.  Another option though, might be to call it "inspirational book" (or something like) 2d6, but treat it as an improvised thing when used for research.  Research is an unintended purpose from the player's point of view, if not from the (imaginary) printer's.  

Charles Wotton

[Tobias]

Note that mixing dice is a no-no, in vanilla DitV.

But a 2d6 book would do exactly as you want (sometimes excellent, sometimes poor - it can roll 1,1 as well as 6,6)...

The solution of 2 traits, with example, sounds elegant, IMHO.

[lumpley]

Generally you should base the dice a belonging gets on the way other people would react to it. If they'd be like, "that's one crappy Book of Life," give it a d4. If they'd be like, "look how well- and lovingly-used that Book of Life is," give it 2d6. It might look the same either way, but do other people react to it with disdain or with reverence?

I like the "crap belonging, quality trait" solution too.

-Vincent

[Jason Newquist]

Fantastic.  Thanks, fellas.

-Jason