As I understand the rules, you are allowed to take things from family members on your first verse, provided they wouldn't mind you taking them without asking. Here's the thing though. If it were a life or death situation where I needed something, I know my brother would let me have anything he had. He would give me anything I needed, no questions asked in a life or death situation. He might not be so quick to part with things if it wasn't THAT important though. Does versing out count as a life or death situation? I know he wouldn't mind me taking his things in life or death, but probably would mind normally. Where is the line drawn? I've already versed, so it's not like it matters to me now, but I was wondering. Thanks.
Considering you literally die and begin a new life, I would say it counts. I think that restriction is mostly there to keep you from looting your family members for everything they own, even if it's 200 pounds of random useless crap you couldn't possibly need, or things so immensely valuable (your grandfather's sack of German gold coins, perhaps) that they would slap you for even thinking about.
I am forced to disagree with the Johncensus. The purpose of the restriction is to determine the strength of your claim to the object - is it or is it not your equipment. There may very well be a philanthropist living up the street who would would certainly give you ten or twenty cans of food if you were starving, but that doesn't mean you could sneak into his house in the night and make off with them. Even if he was the sort of generous soul who really wouldn't mind if you snuck into his house and took his food, I wouldn't let you raid his pantry for equipment unless he knew you personally and had made it clear to you that you could raid his pantry whenever you liked. "You can use my gun any time, as long as you give it back eventually" is good enough, even though you never will give it back; "you can use my gun, but only if you ask me first or if your life depends on it" is not.
Another way to think of it is that this isn't life or death - it's life and death and then life. Really, it's more like an extended vacation from which you will never return.
"Hey, honey, have you seen my gun?" "Didn't you know? Your brother took it with him when he left for that ski trip - he said he'd need it." If your brother responds with, "Oh, okay, that's fine then," you had sufficient claim on the gun to verse out with it. If he instead replies, "That rat-fink no-good sneak! I was gonna go hunting with that!", you've overstepped your claim.
So I guess this is kind of a referee's call? I personally would allow it as a referee, because as I said, my brother wouldn't mind if he knew what was awaiting me. Scott wouldn't allow it. Osevens apparently would. So kind of a referee's call on this?
No, Scott is right. This isn't what you could get from people in a life-and-death situation; it's what you could take with you on your way to school or work or vacation.
It's the same reason why you can't take the library book--even if you were never going to return it, it is not your book.
Put it this way: my kids get video games for Christmas. Every one of those games had someone's name on the label, but if any one of the kids grabbed any game and took it over to his friend's house to play, there would not be any problem with that. It would be different if one of my kids took his brother's coat, or car, or camera, or cell phone, or something he bought for himself and keeps safe. It's a question of whether this is an object that is really sort of shared with you, or an object that really you would have to ask before taking if you didn't want to get in trouble.
If you should have asked, you can't take it.
--M. J. Young
Something else I wanted to ask here. My brother has an extensive gun collection. The thing is that a good portion of the guns, at one point or another, did belong to me. I would buy a gun and I didn't like it, or I needed cash, or whatever reason, and sell it to my brother. Right off the top of my head, I can think of 3 pistols and 2 shotguns that my brother has that once belonged to me. I fully accept the fact that he now owns them and has full claim to them, but at one time, they did belong to me. Would that count in any way shape or form if I wanted to verse out with one of them? I sold him a 45 automatic some years ago, because the ammunition was too expensive for me to buy. It is now his gun, but at one time, I was MY gun. Could I verse with that 45 based on that? Or would it be a dice roll or what? Curious.
Something else I just thought of. Suppose you loaned someone your coat, and they were wearing it when you versed. Obviously, it is their "On Person Equipment" but could you take it? That would kind of suck for the person wearing the coat, to have it disappear off of their back in the cold. Is that how it would work?
I think that whether you could take your brother's guns has been addressed.
My brother collected knives when we were in high school/boy scouts. If I had a knife, I gave it to him and he put it in the box with the others. If I needed a knife, I let him know I was taking one out of the box. I think that for years I carried a BSA pocketknife in my pocket with my brother's initials carved or burned into the side. They were his knives, but they were sort of our knives.
If you gave your brother guns with the tacit understanding that he would certainly let you borrow them back any time you needed one (help yourself and let me know that you took it), then you could take them. If you sold the guns to him with the understanding that you were giving up all claim to them, then they're not really yours, they're his.
And yes, if someone else is wearing your coat on your initial verse-out, they lose it. If on a later verse-out you lent someone your coat and they are wearing it, they lose it. However, if someone took your coat and either they intend to keep it or they incorrectly thought you were giving it to them, it goes to a comparitive will power check--you have to be more stubborn than they are. This can get interesting, particularly if the other person is an independent verser, since as long as the two of you are contesting the object you can continue to roll for who gets the coat any time either of you verses out.
--M. J. Young
You bring up something else here. You told me that if it was the tacit understanding that you could borrow them whenever you wanted, you could take them. Here's the thing. My brother and I have an agreement that if he still has the gun, and I want to buy it back, I just show him the price he gave me for it, and it's mine once again. I've done this more than once, but not for a while. Does that count as a claim to the gun? I've already versed, so I don't know why I'm even asking, but this kind of fascinates me.
I would say no. The fact that you have to pay for it to get it back means that you can't take it without paying for it.
--M. J. Young