The Forge Archives

Independent Game Forums => lumpley games => Topic started by: Supplanter on November 15, 2009, 06:09:45 PM



Title: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: Supplanter on November 15, 2009, 06:09:45 PM
I can hardly believe I'm asking this one, but the group expressed some interest in the official ruling on the following matter, and I am the designated person who posts such things here.

So, in the first session Ben - not his fake name - played Kirigalzu, a tempter demon. He got on the owe list, way down there somewhere. Since then, Ben has played a different character each time, carefully crossing his guys off the list for extra dice to avoid playing them again. EXCEPT! He missed that Kirigalzu entry, and then he had to miss last week's session. And, yes, Kirigalzu is at the top of the list. Ben has no desire to play Kirigalzu, or any other of his previous characters - not even the ones who didn't die horrible deaths.

So like, what now? Officially. We did not find the situation covered in the book. I would think you don't make someone spend 3-4 hours playing a character they hate, but that may be the brain damage talking. ;)

Aside from the obvious option of just skipping to the next name on the list, it occurred to me that we could let Ben choose the first card even if he doesn't play Kirigalzu.

TIA.

Best,


Jim


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: David Artman on November 17, 2009, 08:39:46 AM
Check the rules again (I don't have my book on me): Does it say the player of the character at the top of the We Owe list *may* play that character? Conversely, does it say that player "chooses one Oracle," which implies an imperative not an option?

We'd never force someone to play the same character, regardless of the rules. Further, if someone ELSE wanted to play a character on the We Owe List, and the original player didn't object, we'd be good with that, too. And, hell, we're pretty loose about interpreting Oracles to reintroduce characters NOT on the WOL, so I guess we're just permissive hippie freaks. ;)


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: lumpley on November 17, 2009, 09:45:23 AM
Get a haircut!

The rule is that the player has to play that character, even if he doesn't care to.

Obviously I'm not going to come to your house and insist, and it obviously won't break the game if you play by some different rule (unlike some of the game's rules). But I do recommend that rule as a good one.

-Vincent


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: jessecoombs on November 17, 2009, 01:55:53 PM
He could always play a different version of the same character. Older, younger, a clone, an alternate reality version, a magically controlled version, etc, etc.

Just figure out what he didn't like about Kirigaizu and make a version of the character that doesn't have those traits. This can be a lot of fun.


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: David Artman on November 17, 2009, 02:20:59 PM
It's mandatory in the RAW, huh? Didn't (k)no(w)tice that...

Andy! You have to play that ghost again, man; even if its Best interests are all fulfilled. ;)

(I got a haircut--razor-shaved skinhead, now. So I can now be a Nazi GM!)


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: Brand_Robins on November 18, 2009, 05:16:17 PM
Vincent might not have the guts to come to your house and beat you if you don't play by the RAW, but I do.

I mean, I get it, not wanting to play the character again. And, honestly, I wouldn't force it.

However, given that Ben-o's been never letting characters return, it could be used as one of those "try it once, its only one session" challenges that sometimes yield good results. Letting the system shake up your preferences from time to time can be a good thing.


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: Supplanter on November 18, 2009, 07:45:42 PM
Thanks, Vincent. I will explain the Law, and let the community decide whether to live within it. I do see some value in the approach, along the lines that obnoxious Brand Robins fellow suggests.

What the hell does "RAW" stand for?

Best,


Jim


Title: Re: [IAWA] Another We Owe List Q
Post by: David Artman on November 19, 2009, 08:12:39 AM
Rules As Written