4 thoughts on “Should I allow a Leech to be his own vice purveyor? (Of narcotics.)”

  1. My gut says “ugh, no, that’s a huge exploit and missing the whole point of a vice,” but I’m sure there’s an argument to be made that everything is great and everyone’s ideas are special and wonderful and should make us all happy.

    Wow I’m cranky today.

    So, here’s a more nuanced answer: if it isn’t something that would narratively produce the results of a Vice, it isn’t really a Vice. Like, for me, sex isn’t a Vice, but some people have to go to support groups for it, spend their entire savings finding purveyors of it, ruin their marriages, and so on. (See also alcohol, coffee, firearms, video games…)

  2. I give the players a +1 die when they involve some one else in their downtime activities. This increases the roleplaying opportunities, and encourages having a purveyor/vice partner. Which suits the purpose of having a purveyor in the first place.

  3. It’s not really game-breaking, it’s just boring. Part of the reason vice purveyors exist is to connect the characters to a vibrant city where everything is interconnected and people know other people who know other people … – there’s a reason that vice purveyors are one of the people that the GM should use to feed information about what’s going on to the players. Remove the vice purveyors, remove part of the PCs’ connection to Doskvol.

  4. Another thought: when the Entanglement roll comes up “a character’s vice purveyor gets nabbed by the bluecoats” or “a rival faction is making a move on a vice purveyor”, it would the Leech being sweated or roughed up.

Comments are closed.