Why Relationships With People?
David Artman:
Or, to be more specific, why would I ever want to establish my unassigned Relationship dice with an individual in a particular Town?
OK, I see the basic benefit of doing so on the fly, to gain mechanical advantage in a particular conflict. I can even (sort of) see how it might foster more emotional investment by a player in a Town/situation. But those are ephemeral as all hell; an hour later (real time) and it's dead dice on my sheet, and I'm left with merely the thin hope that the GM will somehow bring the individual back into play at a later date. Dice Ex Machina, as it were. :) And suppose the person dies during play (remind me: do the rule let me redistribute the dice?)?
Meanwhile, I could establish a Relationship with a Sin (and ping it probably every other town, more than once per town) or with a Demon (and be a bolt-blasting, eyes-a-glowin' power ranger for The Lord!!!). Even establishing with another Dog is better, considering how often (in a regular play group) I'll be either arguing with him, helping him, or trying to save him.
Sell me on "One-Off Relationships!" I feel like I'm missing something (or maybe I'm just too munchkin to let dice go "to waste").
David
Dog of War
Ben Lehman:
There is a gamer's impulse -- and I think it comes from the world of imagining that every game is going to turn into a vast, sprawling, 20 year campaign -- to hoard resources, and to favor the long-term over the short term. If this is, in fact, the case, you shouldn't put dice into relationships with people. Over 50-100 sessions of play, you will get more benefit for relationships with organizations, sins, and most especially demons (relationships with demons are the best things ever, mechanically.)
But there are good reasons to use relationships with people. If, for this town right here, you want to make a difference, they are the most effective use of your relationship dice, because they are much easier to use. Consider the circumstances needed for a relationship with a sin:
1) What's at stake is your commission of the sin.
2) What's at stake is someone else's commission of the sin.
So, if you have a relationship with Murder, you get those dice if you are trying to murder someone, if someone is trying to convince you to murder someone, or if you are stopping someone from murdering someone. Note that there's nothing in there about getting confessions out of a murderer, making a murderer feel bad, redeeming a murderer in the eyes of the town, what have you. It's a very small chance of actually coming up.
Consider, now, what's needed to bring in a relationship with a person:
1) That person is your opponent in the conflict.
2) That person is at stake in the conflict.
3) Your relationship with that person is at stake in the conflict.
Can you see how this is a much wider variety of options? So dropping a 3d10 relationship with that one girl, well, yes, she may not be there next town, but chances are high that you'll be getting a lot more use of that 3d10 in this town than you would if you took a relationship with "the sin of wrath" or whatever she's guilty of, and if that's what's important to you that's what you want.
(also, note that a relationship with a dead person is nearly as good as a relationship with a living person.)
In practice, I've found that "this town right now" matters a lot more to me than "all the theoretical towns I might encounter in the future."
This is setting aside that it's totally feasible to take people with you from town to town. Considering that, a relationship with a person becomes even better, particularly taking relationships with the outcast, the downtrodden, and the oppressed.
yrs--
--Ben
David Artman:
OK, making some sense: short term efficacy I can understand. Though, in my "defense," I never thought of hoarding resources so much as ending up with four or five Relationships that were just so much detritus on the character sheet--more "keep the decks tidy" than "hording power," I feel. (Before we go there: I don't see that detritus as "fondly recalled history, right there on the sheet" like some folks might: I can keep a log separately just fine without have a bunch of 'dead links' on my 'main page,' so to speak.)
As a follow-up, what about "Relationship: Mountain Folk"? They, at least, have a chance for recurring encounters (or, at the least, easy insertion into many Towns). Or are they more akin to, say, a Sin or Demon? I mean, can I play a Dog with 4d10 Rel: Mountain Folk called "Runs With Guns," famous, loved (or feared), and respected by Mountain Folk throughout the West? Is it pingable with any particular Mountain Folk then, or only when "the Whole of Mountain Folks" collectively or "Mountain Folkness" generally is what's at stake?
Just tryin' to get a handle on these, as we are literally gonna start a Dogs (or Banthas) game, like, in four hours. :)
David
devonapple:
Depending on how your GM runs things, you may be able to draw on the memory of that relationship in a similar but unrelated conflict. "I helped Suzy get over that problem, and if I don't do the same for Tanya and her problem, I'll never be able to look her in the eye."
I suppose if somebody was trying to demoralize a Dog, convince him that he's isolated, those Relationship dice can come into play "No, I have strong connections to these three people... I changed their lives... 3d6!"
I doubt that this will work, as I haven't yet played/run the game -- I imagine this technique would actually unbalance things if adopted, as every player could rhetorically draw upon some memory of a Relationship. So, take this with a grain of salt, as my proposal is unseasoned (ha ha) by experience.
Ben Lehman:
Hey, David:
Cool. I'd recommend rereading carefully the rules about when you can use each type of relationship (sin, demon, organization, person.) The Mountain Folk as a whole are an organization, and thus more restricted than a single person.
yrs--
--Ben
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page