Topickiller“Get someone to take a risk you’re unwilling to take”
It seems fairly straightforward. But the Gambler avatar and the book Godwalker both seem to have different takes on it. I guess it depends on what “get” means to you.
From the Gambler: “(S)omeone who was both a Gambler avatar and a chaos mage couldn’t invite someone to gamble with him without violating his entropomancy taboo. This is because Gamblers always think they can win.
They think they have an edge. It could be skill, guts, a psychological edge, the fact that they have a plan — anything. But because he believes he has an advantage, asking someone
to gamble with him is tantamount to
asking him to take a risk the Gambler himself wouldn’t — the risk of playing against the Gambler.”
This seems to say you can’t really enter into any conflict of wills with another individual if you believe you have an advantage – or at least, not without breaking your Entropomancy taboo (on the assumption that you’re unwilling to engage a superior individual).
Godwalker features two of its main characters constantly trying to taboo each other into doing things by phrasing their requests as “maybe it’s too dangerous for you to not do X.” This seems to imply that Entropomancers can basically be dared to do anything – which isn’t what I read at all, it seems more like “get” has been replaced by “allow.”
I know what my gut tells me, but what do others think.
lllithid“This seems to say you can’t really enter into any conflict of wills with another individual if you believe you have an advantage – or at least, not without breaking your Entropomancy taboo (on the assumption that you’re unwilling to engage a superior individual).”
I think it all comes down to the issue of “conflict”. An Entropomancer can get into a fist fight as easy as anyone else, just because its a contest of bodies and wills against another person (even if the other person is better, bigger and stronger), doesn’t make it a “Gamble” so to say.
Entropomancers go into situations to charge up, believing that fate alone is going to decide the outcome. If they know for certain that they have an advantage, its not a gamble, its a contest..which isn’t a problem for them.
And if it comes cown to it. An Entropomancer can simply “not employ their skill” and leave the issue up to ch ance. An Entropmancer can be a great card shark, but if he’s playing to charge up..he has to play differently then if he’s playing for money.
Gamblers on the other hand. Don’t believe “Fate” does anything for them. They go into every situation, viewing it as a “Contest”. Either against the house, against another person, and so forth.
En Entropomancer is willing to leave his fate up to “Fate”, while a Gambler, isn’t as willing to trust “Fate”, and instead perfers to “Stack the Deck” as it were.
At least, I think this is how it is. If not, it makes a little bit of sence right?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.