(OOC) Fitz's Folly (ToA PBP)

Artus and Dragonbait may not be able to back up any threat at the moment, it's true.

Harb can do the damage, but he can't keep up with her if she can do that bonus move every turn.

gargoyleking said:

Harb can do the damage, but he can't keep up with her if she can do that bonus move every turn.

Click to expand...

I think that it's limited use? But the PCs may not know this

Hey team,

so there is now information in the OOC that I didn't have before, operating at the IC and OOC levels. I'll be honest: I expected none of this when Imogen took the ring. I'm trying to play her consistently, but not at the expense of you, the other players.

Anyway, I am not "ordering" Kobold to give it back, (or whatever) but ...

Click to expand...

That's a big but.
I do not see why giving the ring back to someone wearing it (who is known to have it) is better than us carrying it AND NOT WEARING IT and working to destroy it, or (failing that) keep it from the factions. I really don't. I understand the One Ring story-model from LOTR, but that's not the situation here, so far as I know.

FitzTheRuke said:

I can't really see a way forward for this game (that involves Imogen as a PC) if she keeps it. It's not impossible that she could learn to keep it under control like Cimber has (she is strong willed, after all). But he has had a hundred years to get where he was with it. The ring wants to freeze the world in icy death. It hates everyone and everything. Like Imogen, a lot of factions think that they can use its power for their own ends. Cimber uses it to his benefit, sure, but mostly he's trying to keep it away from people who would destroy the world with it (either on purpose or under its thrall).

Click to expand...

All of this is framed in terms of her wearing and using the ring.

I didn't know the ring's larger ambitions. I guess there's a difference between a sentient legendary magic item and an artifact (which will have special conditions to destroy); and I don't know which this is. But my instinct (as I've told Fitz) is not to simply return to the status quo ante and give it back. That feels deprotagonizing, turning away from elements in the story that are clearly important. I would like us to work together on this, and face the problem together.

But, at the same time, I am not feeling buy in from you all on this.

FitzTheRuke said:

To be fair, I don't think they would have put it in the adventure if they didn't think there would be a possibility of a PC getting a hold of it.

Click to expand...

I stand by that I'm not 100% against anyone having it, but I think 1: It's too "early" (level-wise), 2: It's too "hard" (to control it)

Click to expand...

I am finding this hard to get past; we're in this situation and it didn't take much.

If it's too early, the thought of carrying but not wearing a non-magically-detectable object seems a good solution. As long as we are silent (and we would be, right?), then the only one who would tell anyone looking for it is Cimber and Dragonbait.

If it's too hard to control, again, I think carrying but not wearing it makes sense.

I also know that Harb has a quest related to Cimber. I knew that when I took the ring, but if the details had been said, I had not remembered them.

and 3: It's too contentious. In particular because you have to *betray* an honest ally for it.

Click to expand...

This too is new information. Cimber appeared honest, but the characters could not know that he was. Once we know the ring is sentient, we have even more reason to doubt him -- he wore the ring, and did not take it off for a century.

We're all playing our characters. I get that. I've gone non-violent as soon as I could. Imogen asked for Harb to back down and Chrysagon for a promise, neither of which happened for reasons I am sure you could explain if asked, but I am not asking. Just believe that Imogen's reasons are as principled as your character's reasons are.

If Imogen were to walk in with the ring and stand there refusing to give it to Cimber what would happen? He might kill her. I've had her hide the ring to avoid that, but i can take that part of the action back, and she can have it on her, still in the inner pocket of her skirt, if that's what (as players and/or as DM) you all want. If two of you say so here, and I'll cross out the relevant parts of IC 1048.

She is not going to fight. She thinks there is a better solution than giving Cimber back the ring. But this is holding up the game and I do not want to lose momentum in a game that I am really enjoying.

Kobold Stew said:

Cimber appeared honest, but the characters could not know that he was. Once we know the ring is sentient, we have even more reason to doubt him -- he wore the ring, and did not take it off for a century.

We're all playing our characters. I get that. I've gone non-violent as soon as I could. Imogen asked for Harb to back down and Chrysagon for a promise, neither of which happened for reasons I am sure you could explain if asked, but I am not asking. Just believe that Imogen's reasons are as principled as your character's reasons are.

Click to expand...

You have to realize that from our PC's perspective, Miss Imogen took the ring without warning and then attacked (via cone of cold) someone who was, at the least, a temporary ally, and then unleashed an ice bear that could have killed us all. It doesn't feel principled.

Rodrigo also knew your character coveted the ring and was concerned.

So the rest of the party is now very leery of Miss Imogen - what was she trying to do, and what is she now trying to achieve? What are her motives? Is she still under the ring's influence? If she hid the ring, the party may not believe Imogen's claim that she doesn't have it anymore.

Cimber was an honest friend to you. You being aware of it or not has no bearing on that. (It doesn't make any difference if you consider it new information or not.) My point is, intentional or not, you've betrayed a friend.

Frankly, while campaign was designed around the idea of the multiple factions working together as a sort of ad-hoc alliance for this. To Harb's eyes, Miss I played her hand way too early and showed that she can't be trusted. He's a neutral kind of guy and would probably not have taken issue with a party member claiming the ring if Cimber died. But she really did betray an ally, in his eyes. Even if possibly only a temporary one. That said, everything she's done since then has re-inforced that belief.

Harb is focused on the primary mission. Fighting over an evil, mind controlling ring can only distract from that.

[MENTION=23]Ancalagon[/MENTION] Yes, I understand and accept all that. You, as a player, know what happened and have been told what I am thinking.

[MENTION=59816]FitzTheRuke[/MENTION] Yes, this is also true. Other Sticks had suspicions (or have said they had suspicions) of him, too. Miss Imogen has not betrayed any of the PCs.

[MENTION=6865745]gargoyleking[/MENTION] I don't know what "played her hand way too early" means. We've been with these characters a calendar year at this point. Whatever in-game time has passed, I do not agree that a year into play there is not the opportunity for a significant character choice.

No one is discussing my proposal that we keep the ring but not wear it.

I also do not have clear indications on whether you want me to walk back the hiding of the ring. Whatever happens, she is not going to lie about it: she will say it is hidden, or she will say that she has it but believes it is better not being worn with us than being worn by Cimber.

Kobold Stew said:

No one is discussing my proposal that we keep the ring but not wear it.

Click to expand...

I think that's because you sound like a junkie. "I'll just hold this (addictive substance) but I won't use it!"

Kobold Stew said:

I also do not have clear indications on whether you want me to walk back the hiding of the ring. Whatever happens, she is not going to lie about it: she will say it is hidden, or she will say that she has it but believes it is better not being worn with us than being worn by Cimber.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone wants you to walk back anything. Personally, I prefer to let a post lie once it's there, unless it contains vast inconsistencies due to misunderstandings.

We should just play on and see what happens. I think a party can survive with two characters not liking or being distrustful of each other, as long as they have bonds with others in the group. Harb and Imogen can be distant from each other while held together by Chrysagon and Rodrigo (and the mission, which is still more important than this squabble.)

Play on, then.
(I'll try not to take the junkie comment personally, and presume you do not want a serious answer.)