Dogs in the Vineyard

I'm really loving a lot of the mechanics in this game. But I'm new to GMing and having issues. How do I decide the dice pool of environmental combat/skill checks that aren't associated with an NPC?

For example, say the barn the PCs are sleeping in burns down. They players are clearly rolling Body+Heart, because it's physical but not fighting. But how do I decide how many dice the fire gets?

Other urls found in this thread:

i.yuki.la/tg/1456335950493.pdf
1d4chan.org/wiki/Campaign:End-World
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Page 47

"When a character launches a conflict, and there's no clear opposition, I roll 4d6 plus the Demonic Influence."

Demonic Influence depends on what the Dogs have discovered in town.

Injustice: 1d10
Demonic Attacks: 2d10
Heresy: 3d10
Sorcery: 4d10
Hate and Murder: 5d10

Actually, the first thing I should have asked is 'Why is the barn the PCs are sleeping in burning down?'

Did an NPC light the fire to try and kill the Dogs? In that case, you would use the NPC's stats.

MORMON PROPOGANDA THE GAME

good system though

This. OP, give us some examples of non-confrontational conflics and we'll try to help you puzzle it out. I'm not an expert by any means, but I've run a lot of Dogs and my players seem to like it.

Oh wow, I remember reading this system years ago.

I need to go hunt down a pdf.

I got you, senpai.
i.yuki.la/tg/1456335950493.pdf

I've never been clear on a problem I have, with this system. Hypothetical:

Two gunman with the exact same stats minus one difference get into a gunfight. The one difference? One of the gunfighters is missing a hand. So exact same stats, except one is missing a hand, for which he gets a d4 "disadvantage."

How is that a disadvantage? Doesn't the system reward the missing-hand gunfighter, if they are otherwise equally matched? Isn't the whole disadvantage system kinda nonsense?

So the idea is that small dice are usually bad.

Throwing lots of d4 means you're likely to take fallout, as opposed to just giving in. In a gunfight, fallout is taken in d10, which can quickly kill your character.

Right, but functionally it doesn't work out that way.

Lemme repeat the hypothetical:

Two people exactly the same in all respects. Have the exact same dice pools. Now cut off one of their hands and they get a d4 for it. Now pit them against each other. Now it's: Dice Pool A vs. Dice Pool A +d4.

How is his d4 a disadvantage? Isn't it, instead, him getting an extra die because he is missing a hand, and him actually be rewarded for it, in the hypothetical I just presented?

Although technically with that example, it'd be arguable that missing a hand would play a factor in the fight at all. A better example would be the trait of "has bad eyesight" at 1d4.

Call it that if you like--that's fine. It's still a "disadvantage" that is rewarding the player in an otherwise evenly-matched competition.

>MORMON PROPOGANDA

Not...even a little bit. It's based somewhat on Mormonism, sure. Mormonism with the numbers filed off, maybe. But the game clearly intends for you to lay bare all the faults and flaws with the religion and to decide the upside is still enough to warrant following it.

The other thing you're missing is that it's profoundly statistically unlikely for 2 people to roll 6 or more dice and receive the exact same rolls.

Having the same dice pool is different from having the exact same dice outcomes.

I think the hypothetical you're describing is valid, and when looking at it objectively, it is a bit wonky, but I think it's just that the game designer deemed it unlikely enough to not be a big deal.

To be fair to that guy: Mormonism encourages that, too. It's a crazy ass religion. Most of its adherents are purely pragmatic, and I've never met a one who didn't think John Smith was a con-artist who established a cult of philanderers.

>It's still a "disadvantage" that is rewarding the player in an otherwise evenly-matched competition.

You can trust me on this. I've played in several DitV games (mostly Dark Tower related) and I almost always chose the complicated backstory with lots of low-number dice.

It's not an advantage because you're more likely to roll low and have to see with multiple dice which means you're probably going to end up taking fallout. That being said, yes, he could roll high and everything will work out great. This is the nature of RPGs (and real life, in a fashion). Sometimes the dice go your way. Sometimes you eat the bear.

What is the setting? From the OP pic it seems Western with some kind of religious overtones (from you guys, guessing the religion of choice is Mormonism). Would it be impossible to play this with my group of edgelord militant atheists?

I just don't get how it's ever a disadvantage in any situation. You're facing a challenge of dice pool X. How is having your dice pool ever worse for having "that same dice pool, plus a d4?"

I don't get where the disadvantage is, in that. You've got "Dice Pool," or "Dice Pool +d4." When is "Dice Pool sans d4" better? Because never.

How does having an extra d4 ever disadvantage you from having the same dice pool, but without that additional d4?

I like the setting and the game and the idea. I honestly just can't figure out this mechanic. It doesn't make any sense. When is having fewer dice ever better?

Somebody with a missing hand is more interesting than the same person who's not missing a hand, and it allows you (the player) to grow that Missing Hand 1d4 into a The Man With One Hand 2d10 trait.

But on the other hand I agree with you, the fallout rules are probably the least-consistent part of the game. I don't like how players have choices between "Reduce your stat dice", "lose an item", and "add a new trait".

Okay, sure, I'll buy that. But calling it Mormon Propaganda sounds like you're trying to say the game thinks everyone ought to be Mormons. Which isn't the case.

I played one of the Mountain Folk who was adopted by some of the Faithful and he struggled with the spiritual nature of his heritage versus the spiritual nature of his upbringing.

>Would it be impossible to play this with my group of edgelord militant atheists?
Nah, I'm probably the GM for this user and I'm pretty sure the whole group was edgelord militant atheists. Here's our Kingwank campaign:

1d4chan.org/wiki/Campaign:End-World

Your player characters are essentially Inquisitors of a Faith similar to early Mormonism.

They're escaping religious persecution in the East with their "science" and hedonism by frontiering West into mid-19th century pre-statehood Utah.

>Dark Tower related
I have no idea why this never occurred to me

Yellow Feather In His Hair is a fag ^_^

Oh I don't think it's propaganda at all. I think the setting is totally rad. It's specialized to what the authors know, and that tends to be what makes settings, you know: good.

Thanks pal.

You play one of the Faithful living on the frontier. Your people moved out west because they could not practice their religion comfortably in the decadence of the east. You are one of the Dogs (the title is really the Watchdogs of the something something, I can't remember) and your job as one of the young - they're always teenagers or a bit older - faithful is to go from town to town and help out. You mediate problems. You solve disputes. You root out heresy and sin among the flock and bring them back to the light. The people you help generally recognize your decisions as mostly divine law.

The game encourages you to live with your decisions through Fallout that affects your dice pools or even creates new ones. What this means story-wise is that if you waltz into town and decide the best way to deal with a man who stole his brother's cattle is to shoot that man in the street, the people might grumble but the will not call you out on it. And you have to live with the effects that murder has.

The quick version of the character generation rules is on this page Just ignore the part about Ceremony (that's homebrew).

Haha, fuck. I forgot about Yellow Feather In His Hair until you said that and I brought up my old sheet. I love the way DitV sheets read. It's just character history spilled out onto a page.

Traits

1d4 Demons may have destroyed my original family
1d4 I dislike fist-fighting and physical altercations
2d4 I still remember the old ways of my people
1d6 I am God's Watchdog
1d6 I impressed the Mountain People with my conviction
1d6 The King of Life once spoke to me in a dream
1d10 My Mother taught me to read from the Scripture
1d10 I am a crack shot with my rifle

Relationships

My older brother Jedidiah who taught me to shoot and always
stood up for me. 1d8

Hunting Wolf, the leader of a local tribe of Mountain People 1d6

Yellow Feather in His Hair, Hunting Wolf’s son, resentful
of the New People 1d4

1d4 Quinton, my fellow Dog, who nearly killed a boy when he shouldn't have raised his gun.

Has anyone ever going full dark heresy and had literally no one ambiguous non metaphorical Demons turn up wreck shit?

It's not, people just aren't use to explicit real world religions in RPGs, despite happily role playing a DND cleric.

It's not even with the numbers off. It's a fictional alternative history sect of Mormonism. But it still based off the book of latter Day Saints.

>non-ambiguous, non-metaphorical demon

That's one of my favorite ways to play, actually. Play the whole thing straights. These are God's Watchdogs, flaring with holy fire to smite the demons that skulk in the shadows of the west.

In a more standard game, it's even something you can build up to.

That's always how I tried to sell it to my player.

> you're the old West version of the Space Marines! You play as members of the militant church rooting out super evils
>only instead of being armed with Boltguns and chainsaws, you're armed with religious pamphlets about public morality and community values!

Some people have proposed using this system for a Culture RPG where the players are Special Circumstances agents. That's pretty militant atheist.

Thanks for the info.
Sounds cool as fuck but I don't think my group would be able to play it straight and they might be suspicious I'm trying to convert them as I'm the only religious person in the group, not Mormon though so that may help

You could probably do it in a semi sarcastic 'haha, this is what religious people actually believe' sort of play.

Not saying you'd want to.

Then play down the religious aspect of it.

Also, if they are that insecure, they suck as people.

The game mechanics of DitV are surprisingly adaptable, and with a little work can fit a wide range of things beyond the "morality police" zone that a lot of dogs fans think is the only thing the game can do.

As it says in the book, it works really well where the players are a sort of authority figure with the power to investigate, accuse, and deal with people who don't live up to the code...whatever that code might be. You could play mafia goons outing snitches, or internal affairs trying to clean up the precinct, or even members of an ancient order of space monks with laser swords trying to figure out what that disturbance in the...life...energy...web...was.

Alright, neat, I'll just swap the setting and try to get my group to play.
Also,
They absolutely are overly insecure and suck as people.

And I say the mechanics, like the conflict resolution system and the dice mechanics, are perfectly capable of doing so much more.

Restricting it to just games where the characters are a moral authority is really holding the system back, honestly.

Sure. We used it for Dark Tower and the two characters I made for those games weren't a moral authority on anything.

I'm actually toying with some sort of system to reward a player for good roleplay/narration.

My idea is that each session, each player gets a 2-sided token that could we could call "inspiration" or something.

Each player's inspiration token is face-down to start, and when they feel another player is narrating/roleplaying exceptionally well, they flip it face up and give it to them. A player with a face-up inspiration token can cash it in to do one of the following during combat/conflict:

• Add +1 to any single die in their pool or in play. The +1 persists until the die is discarded.

• Re-roll their entire dice pool (any time before they've played a dice)

basically adding small dice to your pool increases your chance of winning but also means you'll take more Fallout to do so, if you have a bunch of disadvantages related to say Gunfighting, then you will have a good chance of winning your Gunfights but they're all going to hit you much harder. So it's more of a trade-off than a straight-up disadvantage

That's pretty neat. For a hack I did I created a similar points system that was pretty similar, except points were dealt out by the GM, and for rerolls I let them reroll 1s instead.

Some other effects I let them have was lessening Fallout effects and, one I might reconsider though it is supposed to be a more high-powered game, tagging a trait for dice a second time.

Woof

But you are under no obligation to actually use those small dice, correct? If I remember correctly, you only get fallout when using three or more dice to check but there are no mechanics that force you to uset he low rolls. Instead, a disadvantage gives you more options, making your chances objectively better.

When you don't have any other dice left, your options are either "use your d4s and risk fallout" or "give in and don't take fallout".

So having a shitty eyesight gives you more choice, making it better than having normal eyesight.

>So having a shitty eyesight gives you more choice, making it better than having normal eyesight.

Yes, and your choice is to keeping going in combat where you're likely to earn fallout or to give in. And, honestly, you're not likely to be able to use all your dice in every situation.

The advantage that more dice give you is it makes the story more interesting. Try not to think of it in terms of winning or losing combat, but as coming out of a conflict unscathed no matter what the actual decision is. More small dice means you're going to be able to stay in a conflict longer, yes, but you're also going to be checking with more than two dice all the time, which means you're actually burning through your pool faster and earning fallout.

So, how does the source material cover the Mormon beliefs that Sasquatch is actually Cain, and that his mighty furry hairiness is actually the mark God put on him?

Or how the First Nations are, for some reason, Hebrew tribes from desert bible land?

>New gm running Dogs

Damn. You brave son. That game intimidates me into running it. I feel like I won't give the sticky moral conflicts justice.

It doesn't explicitly. You're free to do so.

The Mountain People are seen as God's people who fell into poor teachings. They're to be pitied or redeemed, though conflicts do arise.

So... the setting has some sort of land bridge between Camelfuckistan and North America?

No. No one said their religion is correct. You can play this game with zero miracles and magic. And if you DO want to have Watchdog Paladins blazing with holy light, banishing demons with prayer, ritual, and laying on hands, then you can also say that with the King of Life, all things are possible, including making some natives be descended from Hebrews.

Thanks!

I'm actually pretty comfortable coming up with moral conflicts. At the very least, I'm much better at coming up with them than solving them. And part of what I really like about DitV is that I'm just there to set up the pins. it's the players' jobs to actually knock them down and solve the problems.

The part that does have me a bit anxious is that in other games I've played in the past, I'm prone to rely on dice rather than narration. Sometimes my character would know what to say, but I as a player do not. Dogs doesn't lend itself well to glossing over weak narration.

Since it was relatively recent, JP's video of their one shot was great and really shows off the system well.

They took a boat, dumbass. Haven't you ever read the Book of Mormon?

That's actually how I found this game! I watched them play on Twitch and really enjoyed the mechanics.

Bump

A DitV thread is always cause to celebrate.

How am I supposed to read reformed Egyptian without the seer stone?

I don't know I think you need to have some sort of moral authority or otherwise preordained to community importance. Otherwise you won't get the issue of who are you and why do you care?

...

wow, that first one. I havent heard that one in a while. I mean even in the church people know its a load of crap but its funny reading it here

for the same myrid reasons you can have the PCs be involved in any other rpg

>Otherwise you won't get the issue of who are you and why do you care?
This I mean, seriously, what were you thinking asking that exactly? It's something done in every RPG ever. Dogs isn't unique in that regard in the slightest.

I'll probably run DitV next(well, either that or Kult using modified BRP as the system). Feels like my Only War game won't last much longer anyway, too many missed sessions lately.

Let us know how it goes