Gente Che Gioca > Gioco Concreto
[Il Silenzio dei minotauri] Alcune domande a Paul Czege
Daniele Di Rubbo:
About gifts: can you put a gift token in the Krater even if you’re not using a gift in the fiction, or do you have to use a gift in the fiction to put a gift token in the Krater?
The English language text says, “[T]he player minotaur’s subsequent token contribution [to the Krater] is unconnected to any actions he may have taken, and is wholly about aiming for desired outcomes.”
This is true for Gift tokens and all tokens. Whatever you put in you put in, independent of the preceding fiction. Then roleplay what the drawn tokens indicate.
Yesterday I got the single skull token outcome from the Krater. Since I’ve been impressive in a dangerous situation recently, we applied the new outcome, which was the one with the single name token.
The question is: shall I also add a name token to my set of tokens, even if I didn’t get it from my four-token draw, or shall we only consider it as an outcome, without adding the name token to my set?
The English language text says, “[A]ny outcome that says ‘treat as’ means just for matching the current Krater’s outcomes.”
So that Skull token doesn’t somehow actually turn into a Name token that you get to keep. You treat it as a Name token for determining the Krater outcome, and then return it to the gamemaster’s supply, as a Skull token.
My friend Simone told me: “I wonder if, while you are writing new movings for the NPC and new jungle encounters, you have to look for some kind of thematic progression, like the one you look for when you write subsequent cities in Dogs in the Vineyard.”
“I don’t know,” I told him, “but I suppose we could ask Paul.”
And here we are.
I think as gamemaster you just do this naturally. You’re informed by the fiction that has come before; you’re invested in the forward momentum of the characters, and you just create NPCs and circumstances that enable them to go forward as characters.
While I was re-reading the rules about the foremost (page 93), the awareness that a PC philosopher minotaur can never be the foremost, whereas an NPC philosopher minotaur will always be the foremost, stroke me with strength. I wonder: is there some thematic significance I’m missing about this decision?
Some design decisions are gut decisions. This one just felt right to me. The stated group decision for campaign play is whether the Watchers will ever bloom again. But play is also about an unstated one regarding the the philosopher archetype’s creation of and commitment to the life code of Silence. I run philosopher NPCs as foils for the players. They’re difficult, conflicted, imperfect authorities.
There may be a bit of My Life with Master in making an NPC philosopher always the foremost. If I choose to include a philosopher among the minotaurs when they gather in the jungle, then I’ve decided I have a purpose for an NPC who is a difficult, conflicted, imperfect authority in the current life circumstances of the minotaurs. If I don’t have such a purpose, I probably don’t include a philosopher.
Daniele Di Rubbo:
Another question from Simone.
In the rulebook, nothing says, when you are in the jungle, you cannot raise you Silence tokens above the starting number of three. However, we think you cannot. Is it right?
There’s no limit in the rules on how many Silence tokens you can have. If you have an argument that there should be a limit, I’ll listen.
Our main argument against the no-limit interpretation was: so you haven’t any mechanical incentive to leave the jungle, once you reach your third Silence token.
During my last session, the minotaurs were in the jungle all the time.
At the end of the session, we did, as always, the nameless conversation. However, we wondered: is it normal some nameless minotaurs know what the protagonists did when they were in the jungle?
We assumed rumours run and all the rest, and we did the scene as normal, but I wonder how do you manage such situations. How can NPC minotaurs talk about something that happened without anyone else watching?
That’s a good question. It’s a situation that doesn’t come up very often. If the minotaurs have encountered other NPC minotaurs in the jungle, some of whom may have left the jungle or not, or possibly talked to others, then you have some NPCs who can talk about things.
Or, it could be a conversation about events happening in the Dégringolade while the minotaurs are absent, with a reference to one of them. “I wish that guy was around. He would know what to do.”
Also, there’s time travel. Some future minotaur storyteller is telling a group of minotaur children a story about something that happened in the jungle a hundred years ago.
Yesterday we had an inflection in which Simone, the gamemaster, played four Skull tokens and one Silence token (for one intrinsic with weird beliefs and quid pro quo thinking present in the situation), whereas I played my Life token and a Mind token hoping not to draw it. I was clearly aiming to the “You act with physical confidence or skill for a dramatic outcome in your favor and get a Name token.”
I drew two Skull tokens, my Life token and my Mind token. I was in despair because, to make the combination valid, you need “one player token left in the Krater.” We had one Silence token left in it, but it was the one the gamemaster played for the intrinsic, and not one of my tokens.
However, Simone told us he thought, for “player token”, you meant “any token which is not a No token or a Skull token,” so we considered the outcome valid.
Did we do it right?
I see. I think I would have ruled the other way. It wasn’t a token you contributed, so it wasn’t a player token left in the Krater.
Simone has two questions about this ruling:
* Since I was in doubt between playing a Mind token or a Silence token, how would have you distinguished between my Silence token and the Silence token the gamemaster put in the Krater for the intrinsic? How could you have told if the one I didn’t draw was one or the other?
* In the case another player helped me with some of their tokens, if one or more of their tokens were still in the Krater after my draw, should we have considered them “player tokens”?
* If it’s not clear it’s not a player token, I would assume it is a player token.
* I would call that a player token.
During our penultimate session, Iaconte (Saverio’s minotaur) wanted to put some sleep-inducing substance in the beverage of an empyreus who was kissing his ward, a young girl whose name is Linesha.
Simone, the gamemaster, told him: “To me, you’re totally against the ‘do not want’ precept of the Silence. Please, give me one of your Silence tokens.”
Saverio gave it to him. The problem was it was Iaconte’s last Silence token; therefore, he went frantic immediately after. Saverio’s recrimination was: “I was trying to do something meaningful, but I couldn’t even complete it because I had to go frantic first.”
Did we play that situation properly?
I would have done it like Simone did. But if the player seemed frustrated I would have let him take a small action before going frantic. Maybe putting the sleep powder in the beverage. Maybe saying something to Linesha.[/list][/list][/list][/list]
Navigazione
[0] Indice dei post
Vai alla versione completa