*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 20, 2014, 06:15:19 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 69 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: [Capes] New (needed) rules  (Read 1566 times)
Nocker
Member

Posts: 24

Newbie in Indie scene


« on: December 15, 2009, 08:25:09 AM »

Hello there,
Here is two house rules I submit to your appraisal.

1) During our last Capes game, we have discovered a possible lack in the rules. We faced a situation which resolution by the rules didn't satisfy us. We then created a house rule to fix it and it so easily matched that I can't resist to discuss it here.

Here is the scene.
One of us was playing the king of the molemen, some under-ground people digging and lurking who were trying to make retaliations on the Justice Brigade for their previous defeat, and in the mean time recover their digging machine. Another one was playing the molemen as a whole. I was playing XP-Z6 a robot member of the Justice Brigade and the last one was playing The Wizard, another member of the JB. One of his Exemplar was Alexandra, his pretty-but-dumb assistant.

In the end of the scene, the last Conflict in place, which everybody pretty much ignored all along the scene was "Event : Alexandra is at the mercy of the molemen king". During the scene, the molemen became the servant of the Justice Brigade, after a big temptation sequence, triggering the wrath of the king upon his traitorious and coward subejcts. In the beginning of what turned out to be the last Page, the molemen player Claims one side of the previously blank (1 - 1) Conflict, and the king player Claims the other. The molemen player narrates something about killing the assistant, in order to remain the only servants of the JB (they are not shareful), while the king declares wanting to kidnapp Alexandra to breed with her a new generation of molemen, in his underground castle. Nothing left to Claim for the two of us, saviors of the poor girl.

Then we play out the thing. Molemen player uses an ability on his side, then king uses an ability on his own. And then this is the turn of The Wizard. His player complained that he doesn't want to ally one or the other of the current sides, and yet he was forced to by the rules, if he ever wanted to act on Alexandra's safety. Strictly by the rules, the only solution for him is to act on one of the two sides, and then Stake one Debt to Schism from this side with a portion of one of its die. But what if the story doesn't allow such a temporary alliance ? The Wizard player thinks his character wouldn't make the tiniest move that could help either existing side. So he needed a third side, that could only appear with an alliance, by the rules. Endless debate, and then The Wizard player proposed a house rule : a character could Stake one Debt as his action to create a side on an Event Conflict. It's consistent with the necessity to Stake to be able to create a new side by Schisming (Super-heroes have what it takes to take a new way, impose their vision, not being simple followers, contrary to mundane people. A cop in this situation could have only join the king or the molemen, or create another Conflict, unable to make his choice between these two evils. But a super-hero can say "I have my own idea about this, and I'll fight to make it stand").

But when we think about later, it turned out to be very good and we couldn't find a flaw in it, in regard to the system. So we decided to keep it, and I'm here to propose it to you.
Here it is again : "A character can spend his action in Staking one Debt in a new side of an Event, created by placing a new die on it with the 1 on the top". What do you think of this rule ? Will there be problems, by using it ?


2) The strict impossibility to kill bothered us in the Comics Code. We made our own derived Comics Code about the death of the characters :
A "protagonist" token can be placed by any player on any character at the beggining of a scene, and it will stay until this very player decides to remove it. In the Comics Code, there is the rule "No Protagonist will die". So it has the same effect as the "No Exemplar will die", "No super-vilain will die" and "No Super-hero will die" but with much more flexibility. It allows players to say "I don't want this character to die", for any reason (he likes it, he has plan for it...). So as long as somebody wants a character to stay alive, the Comics Code forbid to kill him, with all the rules that come with it : Gloating, etc. What do you think of this rule ? Can you see any problem arising by using it ?
Logged
5niper9
Member

Posts: 65

My name is René.


« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2009, 10:47:36 AM »

Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!