The Forge Archives

I've been reading over the PDFs for Dogs that I just recieved while waiting for my book to arrive in the mail and planning a few of the first episodes of what I want to do in the campaign I'm putting together. For the first session, I want to create a dilemma to help the players see how they can guide the game and separate their personal sense of morality from what their characters need to do. The situation that I want to create, briefly, is this:

In the town that the Dogs come to, the population is unhappy with one of the citizens there. A woman is the subject of much scorn from her peers. She owns a farm within the boundaries of the city, insofar as much as a woman is allowed to own anything, and behaves in ways outside of the accepted role of an unmarried woman. She lives with another girl and, while she does not hide the fact that the two of them have a relationship outside of what the law allows, she is trying her best to keep to herself and not upset the town. Superstition on the townspeople's part gives rise to even more rumors, one being that her farm has produced bountiful crops unlike the other farms in the area, because the woman is also practicing witchcraft, which is untrue. The woman, despite living in sin in the eyes of the Faithful, still considers herself to be a follower of the King of Life, but is following him in what she feels is her own way.

Now, the question that I have when I create this town is: Can both the woman and the townspeople be at fault and under some amount of "demonic influence"? And if not, who is at fault then?

As I see it, the Dogs could resolve this in a number of ways, which is what I'm trying to allow for. I already know what the demons want, which is for the townspeople to kill the woman and create a doctrine of prejudice that allows for more murders to happen. But I'm not sure who the demons are playing to lead to that result.

One way that it could go is, with the demons creating the situation through the woman as a catalyst:
Pride: The woman is happily living outside the boundaries of acceptable society.
Sin: The lifestyle of the woman is a sin in the eyes of the King of Life and is making the townspeople suffer, manifesting as, for example, the lack of crops in their farms.
False Doctrine: By allowing the woman and her partner to remain within the city, they are accepting it as part of their society. The demons may also be fueling the hostility against her by allowing her farm to thrive.
False Priesthood: Continuing to do so will allow more demons into the city, causing more hostility towards the woman. If they do not act soon, the demons helping her may destroy their town.
Murder: The townspeople rise up against her and hang her as a heretic.

It could also be true that:
Pride: The townspeople feel that the lifestyle of this single person is the cause of their hardships.
Sin: Their prejudice and anger by the townspeople against her are feeding the demons.
False Doctrine: While the woman is commiting a sin, the townspeople are overstepping their roles by casting judgement against her, whereas that is for the King of Life to do.
False Pristhood: The townspeople, sanctioned by the Steward and under the influence of the demons fueling their hatred, move on the home of the woman...
Murder: ... Rising up against her and hanging her as a heretic.

Either way, the end result is the same unless the Dogs intervene by finding a solution that does not involve murder. Clues would be dropped to support both of these chains of events as being true, but I would like to make it so that neither of them is shown to be what's really happening because the influence of the demons in this case should be mysterious and part of the background, but indeterminable to the specific events. Because I expect that my players are going to be more likely to side with the woman than an angry mob, I'm probably going to drop more clues to lead them away from a preconcieved idea. The chain of events that they reveal will be somewhere between these two cases, I hope, based on which paths of investigation they follow up on and the evidence that they discover should form their decision of how to correct the problem.

So, what I'm asking here is am I correct in thinking that it is possible to have two completly different but both plausable and, in effect, both true cases for what the demons are doing? If it doesn't work that way, how do I say which is correct and which isn't and not lead my players to one conclusion right off the bat? Do you think that this idea of ambiguity is constructive or destructive to the story? Give me any feedback you can.

Thank you.

well, best thing to do is just map out the town based on the Pride, Sins, etc. and most importantly the list of "what does each person want the dogs to do?" (what do the demons want the dogs to do, etc.)

you should only have one list per town.  this just informs you as you play your NPCs, it's not a chart of "how things are gonna go."

the best thing about this game is that there's no "correct" way for the players to solve the issues presented here. Even if you specifically have written what the "Pride" is, for example, the Dogs are going to make the judgements about what they see as Pride.  There is room for ambiguity because it's their job to make it clear and make a judgement.

they'll end up suprising you.

in the first town that our GM made, there was a similar implied homosexual relationship between two boys  (it wasn't clear to anyone else in the town, unlike in your situation).  the GM had no idea how we as players were going to react to or deal with that, and whatever we did it wasn't "right" or "wrong" in his eyes.

I think it's the same Demonic Influence manifesting as different sins. I would discard your clue dropping hat. Just have the lesbian proprietor reveal her relationship and livelihood in a scene. And reveal the judgement and resentment over her fortune on the part of the townsfolk. The idea of Dogs is not to have a path for the Dogs. As GM, you should be open to the players taking either side or another altogether. But there's no need to lead them into choice; just drop What's Wrong in their laps and Escalate. More than likely, they'll jump at the first chance to impact the progression.

One thing of note that will clear up some of the hesitancy of the town is to make False Doctrine a very concrete phrase, for example:

It is okay to have relations with another woman, so long as I keep my business quiet.

-or-

We have the right to judge those who differ.


Concrete statements for False Doctrine clears up some things, rather than situations.

Also, it seems to help me to, when doing the Pride and Sin to list the sub-heading from the book, then list the details.

It's a good solid set-up, but a bit of clarity in your progression will make it easier for you to judge how much has been uncovered, as well as making it easier to actively reveal the town in play.

I think you're going about this in a way that won't give you the strength of the tools.  Specifically, you have one question in mind, and you're just listing all of the stages of sin as descriptors of that question.  The thing is, if the Dogs aren't interested in that specific question which you are offering, you're going to have a disconnect, because there is nothing else in the towns history for them to look at and judge.

The value of the progression of sin is that it creates a history that inherently has a lot of possible questions, all intertwined.  So then, when the Dogs come and start investigating, they will automatically gravitate to the problem that they find interesting, and view the rest of the towns problems in relation to it.  So, as a for-instance:

[*]Pride:  Sister Abigail had to become capable, because her daddy was from Back East, and his book learnin' didn't do much to keep a farm running.  But she found that she liked the freedom that it provided, to run the farm, to choose what she wore (for practicality) and to avoid suitors (too busy).  Rather than value the work as a way to praise the King, she pridefully valued it for what it did for her.
[*]Injustice:  Brother Jacob is desperately in love with Abigail, but cannot court her.  He can't fulfill his role as a young man, and is immensely frustrated as a result.  Also, the Steward, Brother Cuthbert tried to turn Abigail from her pride, and was offended when (surprise, surprise) she responded pridefully.  He forbade his dauther, Sister Mindwell, to associate with her... so Mindwell was barred from her role as a young woman of tying the community together.
[*]Sin:  Jacob turns to drink to drown his sorrows.  Mindwell secretly disobeys her father to bring comfort and friendship to Abigail.  Cuthbert abandons Abigail, believing (in his heart of hearts) that she is no longer a member of his Branch.  Abigail begins to harbor love in her heart for Mindwell and her kindness.
[*]Demonic Attacks:  The demons prosper Abigail's farm, and other farms falter.  They fan the flames of hatred toward Abigail.  Brother Jacob, particularly, begins to speak out against her as a sinner.  He gathers angry young men to have meetings about it, and liquor passes hands, combining with rage in a volatile mixture.
[*]False Doctrine:  Cuthbert ejects Abigail from a church meeting.  Jacob sees this as justification, and that night his boys burn down her barn.  They believe "The sinful among us must be ejected, by force."  Mindwell goes to comfort Abigail the next day, and their comfort turns to lust.  They believe "Love between two women is sanctified by the King, if that love is true." (Note:  For that to work, their love must actually be true... which doesn't mean it ain't sinful, mind, that's for the Dogs to decide)[/list:u]There you've got (I think) a situation where nobody is clearly in the wrong, until the Dogs come in and decide which sins were most important, which injustices justified a sinful response, whose pride caused which injustice, and so on.  This just gives the Dogs a lot more room to tell you what sort of story they want.

They could, for instance, blame the unnamed father for having neglected his duties on the farm, and forgive everything that happened since as the inevitable consequence of that failing.  They could blame Steward Cuthbert for having failed in his duties.  They could decide that Jacob is the bad seed in the town (drinking, disunity, arson... he's got quite the laundry list of crimes) and that killing him in the town square will solve all the issues.  Or, if they feel like addressing the question of women's sexuality, they could marry Abigail to Jacob, but also have Mindwell adopted into the family as Abigail's sister, so that they both know that the only proper love between women is familial.  Or chastise the town for their bigotry against true love, but tell Abigail and Mindwell that they have to knock off the nookie, which just ain't kosher.  Or put a bullet in Abigail's brain.  Or whatever.

PercyKittenz, welcome!

Do those answers work for you?

-Vincent

Thanks for all the feedback. I've been busy the last couple weekends so I haven't been able to reply, but I've been reading the advice that you've posted.

Everyone seems to be in agreement that towns shouldn't be structured with a specific timeline of events, which is something that I seemed to get into my head while reading the book. It was my impression that the progression of sins is a sort of storyboard to structure the session around. What I had been intending was to use it as a way to keep the pace of the story going so that I can plan to have the game reach a climax toward the end of the chain of events, assuming that the Dogs don't put a definite stop to the story before then.

I can certainly see how the story can be done without the need for different storyboards. TonyLB's suggestion was very good, though I don't think I'd use all of the specifics in his version, though they could certainly be used in a different kind of story.

I'm not exactly sure about a couple things. I wrote this story because I had thought the players would enjoy it, but I can't be sure. If they don't enjoy it, how can I leave it open-ended enough for them to find something to draw them in? While the town must certainly be multi-faceted, I can only give the players the things that I've already specified as being the problem that the town is having. Also, when the game is meant to be episodic, how do you keep the pacing going so that the players can solve the problem (or not) within a reasonable amount of time if you are not continually escalating the events that take place?

Let me ask whether I'm understanding you correctly:  You're reading the progression of sin as things that will happen while the Dogs are present?  i.e. that Pride will occur in act #1, injustice in act #2, sin in act #3 and so on?

For reference, I'd always assumed that most everything had already happened by the time the Dogs got there, which is why everyone is so riled up.  And they all work very hard, very quickly, to bring the Dogs up to speed on their versions of events (which are always more or less true, if often incomplete) because they want some specific judgment from the Dogs that they think is justified by what happened.

So I run (by contrast) that pride, injustice, sin and whatever else have all already happened before the curtain rises.  It's all done, and can't be undone.  All that you can do is to render judgment.

Hey PercyKittenz.

I'm with Tony - there's some kind of misunderstanding going on here, either yours of the game or mine of what you're saying. So, this is just to make sure:

When the PCs arrive in a town, it's at the moment your writeup describes. Consider the writeups in the book. When the Dogs arrive in the Boxelder Canyon Branch, for instance, they find things exactly as the writeup says: the aunt wants to keep her whiskey a secret, the uncle wants the Dogs on his side vs. the steward, the little brother wants the dogs to tell him who to trust but not comment on his drinking, etc.

As GM, you have no plan at all about how things are going to go. You're like, man, I wonder what the PCs are going to do with this?

QuoteI wrote this story because I had thought the players would enjoy it, but I can't be sure. If they don't enjoy it, how can I leave it open-ended enough for them to find something to draw them in? While the town must certainly be multi-faceted, I can only give the players the things that I've already specified as being the problem that the town is having. Also, when the game is meant to be episodic, how do you keep the pacing going so that the players can solve the problem (or not) within a reasonable amount of time if you are not continually escalating the events that take place?

Unless I'm badly misunderstanding you, those are precisely the things that the rules are going to do for you. That's the rules' job - to make sure that everyone's investing in what's happening and to make sure the pacing is good.

As you'd guess, I have lots more to say on the subject, but first let me know if I'm on the right track.

Oh, and what's your name, by the way?

-Vincent

Oh, no, no. That's not quite what I was trying to get at. The way that the rules made sense to me is that the Dogs come into town somewhere between the first step (pride) and the last step (murder), but where, exactly, changes from town to town. The things that have happened in the past make up the backstory of the town and lead up to the present situation. The things listed that haven't happened yet are what would happen if the Dogs don't do anything to stop the degredation of the town, either by choosing not to intervene or as if they never went to the town in the first place. Is that correct? I'm guessing I misunderstood something as well.

And my name's Brandon.

Let me explain a bit of how I've been thinking about this problem. The thing that resonated with me in the reading of the rules is that a role-playing session is like a TV show. If you've seen the show "Quantum Leap", I'm thinking along parallel lines to that. When the hero, Scott Bakula, in this case a Dog, enters this week's episode he's dropped into a bad situation. But just because he's now there to fix things doesn't make everything better, in fact things usually get a lot worse. Throughout the course of the episode Scott Bakula the Dog is trying to figure out what he can do to turn the situation around, but the nature of conflict is working against him so up until the heroic climax where everything works out, he's dealing with an escalating problem that's getting more intense the less time he has to fix it. So to keep things this exciting, you need to lay out ways in which things can go wrong while the heroes are struggling to make them right. Edit: Also, I want to point out that, unlike on TV, the story won't necessarily last all the way until the final sin if the players are successful enough to step in and stop things before they get that far... but the further down the path they go, the greater the consequences of failure will be, and the more exciting it'll be when they succeed.

If you follow the set-up, there's allowances for that.

But basically, you're supposed to stop the progression of sin at the point when the Dogs arrive in town. You may want to make a few notes about some things that may happen during the Dogs' stay to make it easier and more interesting to "active demonstrate the town in play" such as confrontations between townsfolk, etc. but that's not part of the progression of sin.

For the rest, there's a part on the town workup called "What would happen if the Dogs never came" where you can summarize the final descent of the town into sin and depravity.

Don't worry about needing the final steps of the progression to make sure there's tension. Just drop a few bangs (events that force the PCs to react, but not with any sort of pre-defined paths or choices) into the write up in case things start to drag, but otherwise, let the Dogs do their thing. If my group is any indication, conflict and tension will follow the Dogs like chortling demons, no matter where they go.