Can you challenge someone later?

IE, Al adds the Trait "unattractive" to the heroine, and you miss it at the time... later you realize he did this and want to challege him, since she has the Traits "sexy" and "good physique", and had them when he added his "unattractive" Trait.

What is the shelf life of a potential challenge?

Another example would be a scene gets a "Fade to Black"

If you don't challenge it now, but a few scenes later want to go back to that same scene, can you *then* challenge the Fade to Black?

If not, what are the different ways to "get around" a Fade to Black?
Is there any way to do this apart from a rules gimmick?

Also, if a person is Framing a scene, can they be challenged? Say if there's a character you *don't* want present, and the player tries to include her in his Framing?

Thanks.

First, Challenges are not Interruptions, so when the Challenge is finished the player who was subjected to it continues their turn. So, this is not an Interrruption of Framing. Which is a long way to say that you can do a Challenge of things introduced in Scene Framing.

The way I do it you can Challenge things later. This isn't official. Given this idea, it's pretty clear that if something isn't Challenged right off the bat, that it becomes Fact, and therefore is doubled in it's own defense. IOW, Challenge right away, and the thing cannot be used in it's own defense. Challenge later, and it can. My reasoning is that this can be done backass. That is, the text does say that I can create something that contradicts something else, and if it's not Challenged, that it stands. Thus I could just state that a given fact is not true as it's own fact. The original fact is doubled in any subsequent Challenge. Thus the effective rule matches mine.

For the Wiki, where people might not be "present" to see something get created, you have 24 hours to Challenge normally. If you wait longer, for each subsequent day Coins spent in defense are increased by one multiple. Thus, over time things become more concrete. You can always Challenge later. It's just that you'll have to be pursuasive rather than powerful to make it work.

So, technically, you can Challenge a Fade to Black. If not Challenged immediately, it will be doubled in any subsequent Challenge. But if there's any opposition, it's just cheaper to open a new scene with the same location, subsequent to the last one. Fade to Black doesn't prevent this, it only prevents a scene being reopened cheap.

Mike

Mike's pretty much right on. I think its implied in the book, but I'd have to check to be sure (I know it was in some version, because I remember writing something that addressed just this).

I generally use a players turn as the rough guage of time between which a statement can be challenged freely and when it has become Fact. This allows players to make all kinds of statements narratively and then pay for them en masse at the end rather than having to step by step through each Coin.

Once it is Fact it can still be challenged but then its subject to the 2:1 doubling rule.

I see no reason why a Fade to Black couldn't be Challenged like anything else. The Fade to Black costs a Coin which essentially enshrines it as a Fact, so once again its subject to the 2:1 doubling rule. Fade to Black is generally used (rarely used) when a particular scenes ending is so cool, that you wish to enshrine it and not have it spoiled by being dragged on past its prime. If a would be challenger can convince the other players that his idea would enhance rather than spoil, he might successfully negotiate opening it back up that way.

So, technically, you can Challenge a Fade to Black. If not Challenged immediately, it will be doubled in any subsequent Challenge. But if there's any opposition, it's just cheaper to open a new scene with the same location, subsequent to the last one. Fade to Black doesn't prevent this, it only prevents a scene being reopened cheap.

This isn't a rules question, just a strategy question...

If you were fond of a character, would it be a good strategy to Interrupt as soon as possible after your fave char is introduced to the scene, spend 1 coin to take control, and then end your turn? That way, no one can do things to it that you don't approve of, no need to challenge. Plus, any Complication inolving the character generate Coins for you.

Of course, if you don't let anyone "play" with "your" character, they will stop intoducing it in their scenes, and if the only Importance the character will have is the Traits you yourself add to it.

Can you Take Control without Interrupting, if it's not your turn? I am thinking, no.

Well...Mike's getting a bit squirrly there.

If I'd faded a scene to black and Mike comes by and says "Ok, I'm not going to continue that scene...I'm going to start a new one...yeah...and it'll be in the same place as the last one, but thats just a coincidence...yeah, yeah. And lets see, oh look the same people are there...yeah, that's the ticket". ;-)

I'd Challenge.
And I'd claim Fade to Black as a Fact to back my Challenge.

Which he could then Challenge THAT and so we'd first have to decide whether the Fade to Black applied before settling my Challenge.

More questions....

The game text says "Challenges can occur for any reason..."

The open ended nature of that worries me.

Consider:

People bid to Frame the next Scene. Al bids 10 of his 12 Remaining Coins. Brad bids 0. Chuck bids 9. Dave bids 0. Al wins. Brad Challenges, saying "I forgot how important this scene was to me." Brad has 7 Coins, and the other players are not going to participate in this challenge (or are split evenly).

At this point, with Al's 10 Coins tied up in his bid, Brad can throw 6 Coins in the Challenge, and beat Al's remaining 2 Coins.

Or, if you rule that Al can use all his coins, Al has to use at least 5 to win the Challenge, meaning has only has 7 Coins left - not enough to support his Original Bid of 10 Coins. What happens?

I think its much easier and better to limit what can be challenged
Perhaps the limit should be Facts. But the "lawful" employment of the game rules should not be open to Challenges. They always can have "gimmicks" proposed, of course.

So, therefor, if only Facts can be challenged, then Al's winning bid cannot be Challenged, as that is an effect of the game rules, not a Fact. Problem solved.

Agree?

Specifying a Location in Framing a Scene counts as a Fact, right?

And more questions....

A players on his turn declares a Mini-scene.
He gets Interrupted.
Does his Mini-Scene automatically close, or can the interrupting player add to it?
I am guessing that its the former.

So, if the Interrupting player really wants to add something new to that Mini-scene now, he needs to Interrupt, (which closes the Mini-scene) and open his *own* Mini-scene, identical to the first guy's Mini-scene?

Thanks.

Lots to cover. The advantage of reopening a scene is that you get all the components in for free. You don't have to pay to reenter them. A Fade to Black is just a "fact" that the scene will not continue. As such, it should be discarded like any other fact that gets in the way. As Ralph says, he could Challenge. But he won't if it makes sense to to refrain. That is, in the interrim his opinion could change.

As to what can be Challenged. Again, you're just proving that competition is problematic. As long as story is the goal, nobody is going to Challenge Framing like you say. That would damage the flow of the game, and the story, and, as such be subject itself to Fine Challenges for "abuse". Only if it becomes "allowable" under the aegis of competition is it problematic.

The problem with the whole "lawful" thing is that there will be times where that's not perfectly clear. Which would require a Challenge to see if there should be a Challenge, etc. So, Gimmick the version you like in, if you like, but, again, I think you're asking for trouble. Remember that a player can always remove a Gimmick, or add in one that will allow such abuses anyhow.

For example, if you do that, then you're also saying that it's tacitly OK to Challenge Challenges for simple gain. That is, to Challenge, you have to have a Fact that is being threatened. But whether or not a Fact is threatened in actuality has to be able to be established itself by Challenge, because there's no other authority. But this can, therefore lead to an infinite succession of Challenges, where each player Challenges the other's assertions as infinitum. Basically a player can filibuster. Again, this will only not happen if there's a value placed first and foremost on the story, and not on competing to get to tell it.

The competition thing seems problematic to me on many levels. Does an economy work if only one person has all the money? No. If you really wanted to tell your own story, you could. Universalis provides a framework for an equal sharing of a story, not for stealing one from out from underneath the other players.

Now, a little competition between players is fine, and can do interesting things to a story. But it has to be the secondary priority.


A Location is a Component, and so, yes, also a Fact.

Mike

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for continuing to answer all my questions.

A lot of them I *think* I know the answer to, but it's only by verification that I can make certain.

There *will* be more questions. :)

Sindyr wrote: This isn't a rules question, just a strategy question...

If you were fond of a character, would it be a good strategy to Interrupt as soon as possible after your fave char is introduced to the scene, spend 1 coin to take control, and then end your turn? That way, no one can do things to it that you don't approve of, no need to challenge. Plus, any Complication inolving the character generate Coins for you.

Of course, if you don't let anyone "play" with "your" character, they will stop intoducing it in their scenes, and if the only Importance the character will have is the Traits you yourself add to it.

Can you Take Control without Interrupting, if it's not your turn? I am thinking, no.