Re: Oh no! Not the Succubus Club!

salem wrote:

> now, the question i have: if the first assumption is correct, jut how
> much stuff do they have, to give to someone? surely if they have
> enough items to make a LARGE swing in the balance of the game, then
> they'd not actually be in a 'losing position'? and thus the judge
> could deny the trade on the grounds of 'not playing to win'.

A few vampires in torpor, maybe one ready, 5 or 6 pool, a hunting ground,
with a significantly stronger prey? That strikes me as a reasonably losing
position If all of that suddenly got moved to my prey, I'd say that was a
pretty large swing. Especially if the losing position guy was the prey of my
prey (who now has 11 or 12 more pool, a VP, more vampires, more stuff,
without expending any resources or actions).

> admittedly, tis means more judge arbitration, but then, that's what
> judges are for.

Not for my money, primarily. Judges are there to make the game run smothly
and settle rules disputes. Making arbitrary decisions about the obscure
motivations in obscure situations is like, the last thing I'd want to do as
a judge. Or want a judge to have to do. Why encourage this?

> if you point out that you think the deal your prey and
> grandprey are about to do with the succubus club is probably in
> violation of the play to win rule, the players might agree to not do
> it, so you won't even have to call the judge over. if they disagree,
> then call the judge, and they'll judge.

Which is a pain for everyone involved. Why put judges through more of a pain
than they need?


Peter D Bakija
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6

"The gun is good! The penis is bad!"
-Zardoz