[Dogs] OMG Actual Play!

[Matt Wilson]

I've successfully moved the rest of the way across the country, after a long and agonizing stop in Milwaukee. Now I'm alive and well in Jersey City, just 30 minutes from midtown Manhattan and a whole big whirlwind of games. This is part one of four play reports I have to make so far. Woo!

Immediately the awesome and excellent John Stavropolous (whom some of you may have met at Forge Midwest) invited me into a one-shot game of Dogs. This was Monday, July 16. John was GM, and players included me, John Hastings and James Nostack.

Aside from a very brief bit online, this is the second time I've ever played Dogs in the history of the existence of Dogs. The first time wasn't so great, but this time was pretty damn excellent.

A lot of what I like about Dogs has been discussed like crazy over the past three years, so I won't talk about that. I will say that John's actions as GM were pretty cool, and I leaned forward and paid attention. One thing I really thought was cool: he named the significant NPCs beforehand and suggested them as people to take relationships with. Immediate investment, and it made for a whole lotta complications when play started rolling.

I imagined my character as a sort of hitler youth version of a Dog, the too-picked-on kid who now has power to abuse. So I took a relationship with the veteran dog, a woman maybe seven years older, who was living in the town. I noted in the relationship that he had had a crush on her and idolized her. That made things interesting when we learned that--speaking in town creation terms--her pride was behind all the problems in the town. Plus, the woman who taught my character all his excellent verses was among those immediately affected by this dog's decisions. Very interesting, and that's just my character, one of three with heavy ties to the town.

I also printed out some choice bits from the book of verses Jason made, and used those to great effect when berating the poor townspeople. My character was a real dick. It was great.

Great moments included a seduction attempt that ended in gunfire (no one was actually shot, though). If I recall, nearly every conflict remained verbal, occasionally involving dramatic physical gestures like tables being knocked over. There's one bit that I'd do over as a player, and that would have involved a guy that bullied my character and some punching and kicking. But there's always more towns, right?

John used a few of the new rules V posted for Afraid, including NPCs and floating dice. Seemed to work great, although he'd be a better voice for that.

[Adam Dray]

I love the Hitler youth concept you grabbed onto. Very spooky.

And regarding seduction in Dogs, I recently ran a game where one scene focused on a Dog "pumping" an Easterner prostitute for information. The conflict hinged on whether he could so overwhelm her with his lovemaking skills that she gave up vital information to him. It started at Talking and escalated to Physical. The Raises and Sees were full of double entendre and were occasionally nearly pornographic. The prostitute finally had to Give, and the player decided that he denied her orgasm at the last moment unless she'd tell him everything she knew. I played the NPC woman. The Dog's player was male (playing a male character). I thought the scene was hot in a distant sort of way and we got a lot of laughs out of it, and a few players expressed "ew, ick, yuck! hahahaha" type reactions. It was fun and no one was really bothered by it.

[dikaiosunh (Daniel)]

Not to contradict Adam, but I was in the Dogs game with the prostitute, and was actually a bit bothered by it.  I can't speak for the other "eww/yuck/haha" player, but my "hahas" were mostly of the nervous "hahaha... when will this be over?" variety.

I wouldn't want to impose my views on everyone at the table, and it wasn't a matter of prudishness - rather, I felt that the player drove the scene in a very adolescent-wish-fulfillment sexual direction that sat uneasily with the seriousness with which other sexual activity was treated at the table (e.g., regarding a rape in one character's past), as well as the clash with "liberal" Easterner morality in general.

People's cups of tea differ, but I guess this is the potential social cost of playing games where people are encouraged to bring their actual cares to the table... I left with an inclination not to game with that player again.

- Daniel

[JackTheOwner]

Now, when I think about this, dogs could be very good hentai game.
Escalation to orgasm and so.
Belongings like
Big Dildo with turbo vibration 2d8+d4
Whip d6+d4

Ceremonial
"I going down" d6

It seems to be a little sick, but still i could be a good game for...
Ok, it is very bad idea.

[Moreno R.]

Mmmm... Dogs are supposed to be virgins (and it's implied that they should STAY so until they leave), and the religion attitude about sex is one of the few descripted in the book. Sex without marriage is always a sin.

This doesn't mean that a Dog can't use sex to make someone talk, but it shouldn't be done matter-of-fact, "a normal day in the office": it's a big deal, that dog is desecrating his office and sinning against the Lord. Or he is an apostate tha believe that the book of life is wrong. What the other dogs think about it?

Anyway, the though that a virgin 18-years old could "overwhelm a prostitute with his love-making skills" is the mother of all adolescent-wish-fulfillment sexual fantasies....

[Adam Dray]

I hadn't considered that, Moreno. That's a fantastic point. And, in the game I ran, I explained that the Dogs were virgins before we made up characters. I think that got forgotten during play. I should have pushed the matter there. Not as a moral judgment on the Dog, but at least force the player to make a statement of some kind by his choice there rather than letting it be glossed over as if trivial. I've entirely hijacked Matt's thread though. I'm stopping now.

[Web_Weaver]

Hey Matt,

What caught my attention was this:

So I took a relationship with the veteran dog, a woman maybe seven years older, who was living in the town. I noted in the relationship that he had had a crush on her and idolized her. That made things interesting when we learned that--speaking in town creation terms--her pride was behind all the problems in the town.

This is something I have not used to such effect before in Dogs, and between you and the GM you really managed to bind your Dog to the situation at hand.

Sure, at each town it is customary and advisable to decide who you are related to in the town, but you did much more here than saying "I'll take that woman as a relation". This makes me realise that I could do much better in this department in future towns.

So, to clarify, was this a pre-gen thing set up by the GM to kick the game into action, or did this situation emerge naturally? Was it a combination of both? Was the crush that you "noticed" handed to you?

I can see all kinds of potential in having a few minutes of chat with each player before a town, exploring any relationships taken in more detail than I have tended to before. So as A GM instead of saying who wants to be related to Jane the Steward's Wife I should also be providing a little more colour, and as Player and GM we could be exploring more contextual questions like  "when has the Dog met her before?", "what feelings does the Dog have towards her?".