The Hoarder

hoard-debt looks like it can go negative.  That's the design, right?

Yes!

If you never use your hoard and always feed it, it'll go negative. There's no set lower bound, but the mechanics won't let it go below -5 and won't let it easily go below -3.

I love this:
- I can give things away as gifts, and they probably come back to me later.
- When I take a thing from my hoard, it expects I give it back.

That is an invitation to trouble in the best way.

I want to play my Tom Waits hoarder so bad.

I was gonna donate anyway but when I saw there was a new playbook it was a given!
And it's a pretty good playbook too. Winner!

Okay, a bit late to the party, but I have a question...

Is there a reason that Ambiguous and Transgressing aren't options for this playbook? Are hoarders only Man, Woman, or Concealed? Or is this an oversight?

I'm curious.  Appraising Eye modifies read a sitch and read a person so that you can ask specific questions "in addition to your other questions".

Am I adding those questions to my lists, and I can spend hold to ask them, as normal?  Or does that mean that I spend hold on my questions ... and then I can also ask the Appraising Eye question?

Or does that mean that I spend hold on my questions ... and then I can also ask the Appraising Eye question?

Yeah, this. It's a free ask.

That's funny, I read it the other way. In addition to your other questions you may ask x, I read as you may spend hold to ask a question, in addition to the other questions you may ask this one.

I read it as a free ask too, but yeah.  It can definitely be read either way, so I thought I should check what it is officially.

It's written in an ambiguous manner, to be sure. But I think simply adding an option to reading a sitch or person is really weak for a move. That's why I presumed it was a free ask, and would play it that way in game.

They're free asks.

Sweet.

(That was my feeling too, Pooka.)

Cool, that wasn't how I read it but I think I actually like the move a little better that way. Seemed weak the way I understood it.