In my first world, I botched on levitation, and ended up encased in the planet, with only my face sticking out. I was completely trapped in the planet. I was, in effect, "Wearing" the planet at that point. If I had versed out, would the entire planet have come with me? I know that would probably be the referee's call, but is it within the realm of possibility that it could have happened? If so, would all the people on the planet come too? How would something like that be handled? That could definitely make for an interesting verse out.
What You're Wearing Right?
(14 posts) (5 voices)-
Graham
MemberI think being encased in something and wearing something are probably two different things. Like, if you were Han Solo in that carbon melt, but the melt was held sturdy by metal chains, you would verse out with out the melt.
Plus, I doubt a referee in that situation would attempt to make you botch out or attempt to make you settle a conflict.
Wed Sep 12 2007 11:51 am # -
You wouldn't verse out with the planet in that situation any more than you would if you had drowned in quicksand or been buried alive. For something to be "on-person equipment," it needs to more than on your person; it must also be your equipment.
When you're wearing a shirt, the simple fact that you're wearing it is enough to establish your claim to it. The same goes for anything in your pockets. Being buried in the earth is not grounds (forgive me) for a claim that you own the Earth. If, however, you had somehow strapped the planet to your back and were carrying it away when you versed out (Where In The Milky Way is Carmen Sandiego?), you might be able to persuade me.
Graham - I expect that Han would remain in the carbonite, but that the chains would remain behind. I'm open to arguments, though, and it might depend on the cause of death and/or how long he'd been encased.
Wed Sep 12 2007 12:59 pm # -
JohnA1nut
MemberThat makes sense Scott. I was wearing your wingnut necklace, but it wasn't my equipment, so you got it back.
Let's just say for the sake of argument that I HAD made a personal claim to the planet, and considered it my equipment. What would happen then? I asked MJ a similar question once. "What if your weight limit increased so much that you could take the planet with you?" His answer was simply "If you felt that you owned the planet, then yes."
Wed Sep 12 2007 5:01 pm # -
Tadeusz
MemberLets say I'm Emperor of the Galaxy, and I'm on my private resort planet when assassins get me...and I take my private resort planet with me....and I think I only passed out into my soup after the dart hit, but in actuality I took my planet to a new universe....pretty wild...
Wed Sep 12 2007 5:13 pm # -
Tad - wild indeed, especially if you contrive to verse out the assassins as associates. This only works, though, if you're somehow wearing the planet (exceedingly unlikely) or you're already an insanely elder verser - in which case I shudder to contemplate the assassins.
John - you could claim the planet all you like, but unless it could be considered on-person equipment, it wouldn't go with you. Firstly, it's not enough to say "I claim the planet;" you must have some valid basis for making the claim. After all, having fallen into the King's treasure vault doesn't mean you own the gold you're sitting in. Throwing a sack of gold over your shoulder and running for the hills is a valid claim ("I stole it, so it's mine now"), even if it's likely to be contested by the King.
Similarly, being buried in the earth is not enough to say you own it. Really, to be able to claim something as on-person equipment, it has to fulfill one of these criteria:
a) It is in direct contact with and is in active use by you
b) It is somehow suspended from or balanced upon your person such that its location and movements are dependent on your own.
c) It fulfills requirement (b) with respect to some other object which is already considered on-person equipmentCars you are driving and lawnmowers you are pushing verse out with you under criterion (a), but remote-controlled cars and the bed you're sleeping in do not. Clothes you are wearing and cement blocks on your feet verse out with you under criterion (b), but the rocks of the landslide under which you are pinned or the jungle vines trailing down out of the canopy to rest on your shoulders do not. Things in the pockets of clothes you're wearing and golf clubs in the trunk of cars you're driving verse out with you under criterion (c), but not the crews of ships you're piloting unless the crew is non-sentient or enslaved.
Wed Sep 12 2007 9:08 pm # -
JohnA1nut
MemberScott, you're really good at explaining this stuff. You're going to make a great parent someday, if you're not one already. You also answered the next question I was going to ask; "What if you versed out whilst piloting a radio controlled airplane?" It is under your control, but not on-person, so I was kind of confused by that. Thanks dude.
Wed Sep 12 2007 9:39 pm # -
Thank you, and you're welcome. I enjoy explaining things. I'm not a parent, but if all there is to parenting is teaching, I'll be immensely relieved. (As it is, I suspect it will be more challenging than I can really grasp right now . . .)
In the case of the remote control airplane or car, of course, there's a decent chance that it'll fall under your weight limit anyway (I'm assuming we're discussing miniature devices rather than military tech).
Edit: It's also important to remember that if something is solidly attached to something that can't move, it's probably not equipment, regardless of the criteria I outlined above. If you're actively operating a laser turret mounted on the roof of a sci-fi fortress, you don't get to take the turret with you - nor do you get the fortress. A related point is that if Han versed out while piloting the Millennium Falcon, the ship would be on-person, but if Luke verses out while manning one of the Millennium Falcon's turrets, it is not - only one person can "wear" the ship at a time (right now it's Han), and the turret is part of the ship.
Wed Sep 12 2007 10:10 pm # -
Scott's answers are solid here. (You have no idea how pleased I am with that.)
The short answer on the planet is really that you are not wearing it because it does not move with you, but you with it. That's a very thin difference sometimes--if you are riding the back of an elephant, whether or not you have control of the elephant might make the difference. (It does not in Hephalump's case, because she has become a follower of Graeme and goes with him because she chooses to be with him, not because he controls her.)
You could take a planet that was within your weight limit. The Architect might be able to take such an object, but he has no use for it. Remember, the increase is not twenty pounds but ten percent with each verse-out. It takes the twenty-sixth world to reach a ton, but by the fiftieth world you're at ten tons, and a hundred tons by the seventy-fifth world, a thousand tons in only ninety-eight worlds, and each something less than twenty-five worlds kicks it up another decimal place. The table in the book goes as far as seventeen point two six million tons at two hundred worlds. Elders like the Architect have been to many times that many. Whisp has a spaceship that goes with him, that is somewhere out in space beyond his reach most of the time. Versers in that category can take far more than they can carry, and the vehicles don't always work which puts them in the spot of trying to decide whether to stay near a useless vehicle or risk being separated from it.
--M. J. Young
Thu Sep 13 2007 2:24 am # -
JohnA1nut
MemberHere's one that concerns the weight limit, that has had me puzzled for a while. Suppose your equipment was exactly at your weight limit when you versed, except for a tiny bit. Suppose the weight of 3 bullets in a box of 9 mm bullets was all you were over. Would you lose the entire box of ammo, would you lose 3 bullets from the box of ammo, or is there a tiny amount of "wiggle room" since you wouldn't be more than an ounce or two over the weight limit? In the last instance, you would take the bullets, despite it being just over your limit. I realize that the referee would never know the difference in such a case, but I am talking about a real-world verser. Any thoughts?
Thu Sep 13 2007 5:16 am # -
I imagine that the weight limits of a "real-world verser" wouldn't be precisely the same from individual to individual - and that these minor differences would (by some odd coincidence) be exactly equal in magnitude to the degree of uncertainty in the mind of a fictional verser's referee.
Even so, if I as referee had actually tallied up a player's equipment's weight, it would only have been because I either a) suspected or b) knew he was over his limit. If the difference came out to a single ounce (meaning I'd overestimated how much the player was taking), I would strike the lightest item on the list that looked like it weighed over an ounce. I would not strike only part of an item, nor would a drop an entire ammo box weighing several pounds unless it was the lightest item on the list.
Actually, I probably wouldn't tally the weights down to the ounce, so he'd either be at least a pound over or not over at all. And as I said above - I don't think the scriff is any more precise than I would be.
Thu Sep 13 2007 9:10 am # -
JohnA1nut
MemberScott, I know we do not share the same religious beliefs, but the "referee" of the real-world verser I am refering to would be God. God would know they were an ounce over. You're right though. I don't think this could be answered, because we don't know how God would answer it. MJ is the author, he's probably the closest to God that we have here, because as the author, MJ is God to his characters. To his characters, he actually has far more power than God, but that's more than I want to go into at the moment. Let's just see what MJ says.
Thu Sep 13 2007 3:55 pm # -
I say
- Scott's answers, as usual, are rather sound, and I don't generally measure to the nearest ounce, either. As he says, it's only if you're quite obviously over weight that I'm going to take the time to look at it.
- This is in part because the weights of most of the things you're taking are already approximations. How much does that spare shirt weigh? If I say a pound, do I know it weighs a pound, and not fourteen ounces or twenty ounces? I could weigh one of my shirts, but if I weighed three different shirts I'd probably get three different answers. I'm not going to dock you several bullets on the notion that the sum of my approximations puts you over by a few ounces.
- I have no problem with removing one bullet from the box to make weight. They are not attached to each other, and being in the box is no different than being in the duffelbag or suitcase or backpack. Your sheet might list it as "a box of fifty bullets, 5#", but that's just a convenience so I don't have to list
- Carboard box, ~3"x2"x1.5"
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box
- Bullet, 30 cal. rifle, in cardboard box....
- I'm the game author, but I am not your referee at the moment, and as such it's not my decision. If your referee adds up everything and decides you are three ounces over so he's going to leave your duffelbag behind, I think that's egregious and not what the rules intended, but then, referees do have ways of separating players from their equipment if desired, and it's within his prerogative to view anything listed as one item as one item. I would hope that he would at least scatter the contents wherever the bag would have been.
--M. J. Young
Thu Sep 13 2007 10:15 pm #
Reply
You must log in to post.