[FitV] First impressions using the Dogs in the Vineyard System
Dan Maruschak:
Quote from: Altaem on May 24, 2011, 05:19:05 AM
Conflict:
Stakes: Do we take the merc firefly vs Are we captured?
We roll a bucket load of dice and then some.
We have 3 PCs, supported by 6 NPCs.
There are 4 Opposing NPCs on the ramp + an unknown number still on the ship.
In addition to the stuff other people have already mentioned, I have a purely mechanical question: how many entities are getting "turns" in your conflicts? Are you making each NPC an independent entity, or treating them as a group as the rules suggest? Are you playing all of your conflicts as an entire party of PCs against the GM or are you sometimes splitting the PCs up for smaller conflicts? In my experience the DITV conflict system is fun when it's constrained but gets cumbersome with a lot of participants. Trying to "go big" can have the paradoxical effect of making things grind to an unexciting crawl and I'm wondering if that's what you're experiencing.
Altaem:
Every "player" got one raise per turn. That is each of the 3 PCs, and a single raise for me.
I was playing the Mercenaries mechanically as a single (vastly powerful) NPC character.
The supporting NPCs were covered as a single use 2d8 trait which could be brought in once during the conflict.
On each of my turns I would raise against any/all PCs I had line of sight to. With Donnie making short work of the mercs inside the ship Gabe suffered the worst of it.
Quote
At the risk of kneeing a sacred cow in the ribs, I have never quite understood why people think Dogs in the Vineyard is a good template/system for Firefly-inspired play.
I'm thinking it looked better on paper. The western theme and escalating conflicts fit perfectly.
Very little of the DitV how to play the GM apply to Firefly. It's not like the townsfolk come running up to the crew with every little problem.
I've got round that by placing the entire game world under imminent reaver threat.
By making the ship a highly valuable asset I'm able to have NPCs swarm the players with requests and job offers.
At this point I'm stumped at how to keep the interactions high when they come to a comparatively peaceful world.
Noclue:
The problem is that Mal should fly off and get paid, but his conscience makes him stop and help people. Whereas, the Dogs are obligated to help, but their conscience may very well be telling them the best thing to do is to drop their gun and flee.
Callan S.:
From a distance, dogs in the vineyard moral vector seems to be culture Vs culture/religion Vs religion. Ie, do you think your culture/religion is so great your willing to pull a gun and blow someones head off for not following yours? While here, the mercs in the other ship have no competing cultural agenda, nor do the PC's seem to have a cultural agenda to clash against even if the NPC's did.
Speaking of that, the players seem to basically be playing in a gamist like mode. I mean the stakes are if they take the ship or are captured? They have no issue with murdering the mercs to obtain material goods? They are morally empty (or atleast the conflict "Do we take the merc firefly vs Are we captured?" is) - it reminds me of an account of tunnels and trolls, where a player said 'is everyone alright with slavery?', simply because the plan was to use a slave to deactivate a trap. Ie, there is no moral vector - the only vector is the, basically sociopathic one of 'Will I win?'. Which isn't to knock gamism, but simply describe the situation as it is.
I mean, murder is like a base currency of narrativism. Once the idea of murder has no particular value, the only thing left is to win.
Ron Edwards:
Callan: Well said.
Best, Ron
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page