The Forge Archives

Independent Game Forums => lumpley games => Topic started by: TonyLB on June 18, 2005, 09:58:48 AM

Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: TonyLB on June 18, 2005, 09:58:48 AM
Writing up a post on this thread (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=15730), I realized something that I think is going to be a great tool for me in Dogs.  Many of the best sins are the ones that are motivated by the absolute purest of intentions.

Love, even True Love, between inappropriate people is a sin.  Driving the sinner from your midst in order to cleanse the town (if you're not a Dog) is a sin.  Disobeying a tyrannical, irrational, sinful request from your father is a sin.  Obeying a tyrannical, irrational, sinful request from your father... also a sin.

Sin is not a character failing.  It is an affliction.  This is such a freeing realization for me, because I like to play nice, likable, sympathetic characters.  Now I don't have to create some character flaw that led them into sin, I just have to create a situation where sin is either inevitable or a result of kindness and human decency.  Which, yeah, the book has been telling me this whole time.  But I had to wrap my own mind around it, on my terms.
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: Joshua A.C. Newman on June 21, 2005, 05:05:38 AM
My rule for coming up with situations in my current game is "Are these characters really pathetic and desperate enough?" There's one guy who I made kind of flat and villainous. The Dogs fucked him up good, but he escaped, so there's gonna be a Town that's all his own complex, and about how his greed has led him to be spiritually indebted to wives, children, staff, and the other people he takes for granted, and how if they ruin him, they'll ruin the kith and kin, too.

Tough decisions are only fun if they're actually tough.
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: TonyLB on June 21, 2005, 09:10:46 AM
Yeah, but you can do it the other way around as well.  You can make people strong, and good, and decent, and have their situation be impossible.  Desperate without pathetic, y'know?

The one I've been thinking about:
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: Joshua A.C. Newman on June 21, 2005, 01:16:25 PM
Boy, that's a good one. I just might nick some o' that.
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: Darren Hill on June 21, 2005, 06:56:19 PM
Quote from: TonyLBYeah, but you can do it the other way around as well.  You can make people strong, and good, and decent, and have their situation be impossible.  Desperate without pathetic, y'know?

That's the way I prefer it too. I've nicked the setup you describe. :)
One thing that some of my players are finding it hard to grasp - that Dogs IS a Western. They are put off by the religious aspect, and overlook the fact that the situations that they deal with - like the one you describe - are exactly the sorts of things that fuel many a Western plot.
As well, how many westerns have this plot: a violent stranger turns up in town, gets (usually relucantly) thrust into that town's problems, and then sorts it out ? (Usually by killing anyone who gets in his way, of course.)
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: PercyKittenz on June 27, 2005, 10:51:28 PM
Wow, that's awesome. You've really captured the dilema that I'm trying to demonstrate in my plot, which is that everyone does what they feel is "good" and that in and of itself is a conflict. The plot that you outlined is both epically exciting and something that I think any player can see as being a very real thing. How would you introduce the Dogs to that situation, though? What are the outcomes that they could produce?
Title: The Sin of Goodness
Post by: TonyLB on June 27, 2005, 11:17:25 PM
Dogs walk into town, and the whole town is buzzing about having an actual gunfight for tomorrow noon.  Then I answer questions, get them up to speed on what's been happening (and what everyone thinks of it) as quickly as possible, and step back.

As for what outcomes they can produce... why, just about anything.  I think they'd be hard pressed to end up with everyone fully happy, though.  But hey, "happy" isn't in their job description unless they decide it is.