Daniele Di Rubbo@paulczege, I have the “usual” questions about #TheClaythatWoke. Can I go on asking here? #claytalk
All the others: you can find the “first round” on Twitter: https://twitter.com/DanieleDiRubbo/status/1082778358952402944
Paul Czege@paulczege, thanks! Let’s follow the previous enumeration:
8. Can a minotaur NPC be an intrinsic?
9. Can I insert in the story and show a named minotaur as an NPC, or do you think he could deprotagonistize the players’ minotaurs?
10. If a minotaur NPC goes frantic near my minotaur, do I still have to test my silence? And can the game master simply declare that a minotaur NPC goes frantic?
11. The externals are always intrinsics. However, I guess they never count towards the three intrinsics the game master has to keep active in each moment. Am I right?
12. I did some preparation, just in case I have to run a demo.
I have this intrinsic with quid quo pro thinking: he is an ass who is dismissing his former employees to recruit cheaper manpower, uniquely for his own gain.
He’s definitely making “self-justified decisions with effects that others have to deal with”. Is this enough to mark him as an intrinsic with quid pro quo thinking or am I missing the “rationalize […] that you don’t deserve consequences for your actions” part?
13. In our last session, we played a situation in the jungle with both the Still Voice and the Red Voice in it. The Still Voice was acting as a host of ghosts of deserters of the Everwar, while the Red Voice was possessing their former comrades who wanted to execute them for their treason.
It really was a charged and cool situation to play!
Have you ever had inflections with more than one Voice involved at the same time?
14. During our last session, a herd of NPC minotaurs went frantic near Luca’s nameless minotaur and we asked ourselves: can a player decide their minotaur voluntarily loses control and goes frantic?
Simone, the game master, thinks one can, but maybe they must renounce every Silence token they have, in analogy with the situation in which a player’s minotaur renounces higher employment and better life circumstances, and forfeits all their the Name tokens (page 94).
15. Normally you choose the Foremost following the procedure described on page 93.
However, during our last session, Luca’s nameless minotaur followed the herd of frantic NPC minotaurs on his free will (he previously resisted to the frenzy test). We considered Luca’s minotaur as part of the group of NPCs (we just followed what seemed to make sense with the fiction to us) and determined the Foremost as usual.
How do you determine the Foremost in these cases?
16. In the campaign I’m playing with my friends Antonio and Alberto, during my preparation, I wrote a jungle encounter with the Red Voice in which the Voice possesses an intrinsic NPC. Since an encounter with a Voice is always an unnatural encounter, surely it will result in an inflection. Therefore, I wonder: in this case, shall I put in the Krater both the Courage token (for the intrinsic) and the Red Voice token (for the Red Voice)? Or shall I put in only the Red Voice token?
@paulczege Yesterday we had a new session, therefore I have new questions, too.
17. 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?
18. 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?
19. 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 #DogsintheVineyard.”
“I don’t know,” I told him, “but I suppose we could ask Paul.”
And here we are.
20. 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?
21. 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?
22. 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?
@danieledirubbo
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 Degringolade 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.
@paulczege Thanks for your answers, as always. 😉
Probably you missed question n. 17 and n. 18. 😅
Daniele Di Rubbo (@[email protected])
@paulczege Yesterday we had a new session, therefore I have new questions, too. 17. 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?
23. 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?
24. 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?
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.
@danieledirubbo
Making a decision like this is about reading the emotional context of the situation and events leading up to it. I imagine Simone read it accurately.
Making a decision like this is about reading the emotional context of the situation and events leading up to it. I imagine Simone read it accurately.
25. During our last session, Antonio’s minotaur met an NPC in the jungle and asked him to bring him to the “circle of stones.” This was completely new in our game, so I asked Antonio: “What is this ‘circle of stones’?”, and he answered: “Once, an old man told me, when he was a child, a group of minotaurs brought him to this circle of stones, etc.” (continues…)
(continued…) Later, they went to the circle of stones and performed a socio-religious ritual there. Of course, Antonio’s minotaur – as well as Antonio, as his player – was under the spotlight in that scene and I, as the game master, was towed along by him during those scenes.
Lastly, at the end of the session, during the nameless conversation, Antonio played a minotaur who revealed other stories about the circle of stones. (continues…)
(continued…) I have no problem with games in which player can make setting statements but, in this game, it raises some questions to me: firstly, can a player make these statements or is it outside his narrative authority? Secondly, I have my preparation, which completely falls outside from this new setting revelations. Should I include them in it, somehow?
26. When a minotaur leaves the jungle with at least 2 Name tokens, the gamemaster should assign him “higher employment and life circumstances” (page 94). In the next session, I have to do it both for Antonio’s and Alberto’s minotaurs (the latter now has a name, anyway).
My question is: how do you usually present the new situation to the players? How do you let them the possibility to forgo it, as the rules allow?
27. Yesterday evening we played an inflection with the Red Voice in which my minotaur was in the spotlight. I played my tokens, Luca played one of his Silence tokens to help me. We got the outcome: “An abiding gift and a Gift token.”
Now, the rules say: “The drawing minotaur assigns the individual outcomes indicated by the Krater to himself and/or to other player minotaurs who contributed tokens to it for the draw” (page 71).
(continues…)
(… continued)
The question is: if I had assigned the outcome both to my minotaur and Luca’s one, would we both be rewarded with an abiding gift and a Gift token?
28. This is purely hypothetical, instead, and it was a question from Simone.
Let’s assume the same situation as in question n° 26, but let’s say I didn’t have my Life token while Luca’s minotaur still had it, and I got the outcome: “If you had no Life token in your supply prior to the inflection, then death; otherwise your caution, fear, inability, or self doubt brings an unfavorable outcome.”
(continues…)
(… continued)
I could have chosen to assign the outcome to Luca’s minotaur (and even without spending a Name token, because Luca’s minotaur is a PC). In this case, should we had applied the outcome “your caution, fear, inability, or self doubt brings an unfavorable outcome” (because Luca’s minotaur had the Life token) or the outcome “death” (because my minotaur didn’t have the Like token)?
@danieledirubbo
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.
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?
(continues…)
(… continued)
• 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”?
@danieledirubbo
I would call that a player token.
I would call that a player token.
@paulczege #claytalk Thanks, again. ☺️
@danieledirubbo
If it's not clear it's not a player token, I would assume it is a player token.
If it's not clear it's not a player token, I would assume it is a player token.
@danieledirubbo
Did you get the outcome you wanted?
Did you get the outcome you wanted?
Yes, I did, as Simone ruled out. I was persuaded by his argumentation, but I was also—you know—in a conflict of interests.
Therefore, we did as Simone said, but we decided to ask you if we did it correctly.
@danieledirubbo
If you put in your Life token and a Mind token, and drew out your Life token and three Skulls, then "You act with physical confidence or skill for a dramatic outcome in your favor, and get a Name token."
Did you roleplay the outcome to include physical confidence?
Before answering to you, just to be sure, did you get also the second part of questions n. 23 and n. 24?
Daniele Di Rubbo (@[email protected])
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?
@danieledirubbo
It's weird how these threads get broken on Mastodon. I didn't see those at all.
It's weird how these threads get broken on Mastodon. I didn't see those at all.
@paulczege Yes, I’m sorry about it. I confess I’m not a master of Mastodon and thus, probably, I made something wrong.
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.
Can you see what we meant?
@paulczege #claytalk Do you have any thought on this?
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.
@danieledirubbo
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.
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.