[DITV] Question about follow-up conflicts

[JC]

hi folks

had a most excellent time yesterday playing DITV over IRC!

but here's my question:

I've played about half a dozen DITV sessions so far (both player and GM), and I've yet to play a follow-up conflict

anyone else experience the same thing?

am I doing something wrong? if so, what?

are follow-up conflicts just very unusual?

are they interesting? am I missing out on something cool?

how should try to introduce them into my DITV games?

and if you could provide some actual play examples, I'd appreciate it

thanks!

[5niper9]

Hi JC,

I experienced the same thing in almost every Dogs game I played so far. Until yesterday.

Well, take a look at this : http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=24491.0.
The conflicts I describe in the later part worked perfectly and they almost settled themself after the first conflict got rolling.

I'm not really sure what to do to further this trend. I guess it will appear by "itself" when you play more often. Although there are a few things that enhance this feature: Small stakes, passionate NPCs and passionate Dogs.
Small stakes should be obvious. When everything resolves after one conflict, there is not much potential left.
Passionate NPCs have agendas and the town creation rules set these contrary to the Dogs (-> conflict).
And passionate Dogs have ideas and agendas too and want the people to respect these.

are they interesting? am I missing out on something cool?

Well, they could be very interesting and cool. Like the Dog pushing a pregnant woman to win the roll and then going for the follow-up conflict to save the child in my actual play example. I really loved the scene.

[JC]

Small stakes should be obvious.

yeah, that\\\'s what I thought to myself just after posting my question

I\\\'ll try and look out for that

[5niper9]

I think most important is this:

Don't worry! Go play!

The awesome will follow.

[lumpley]

Yep! Don't worry, go play.

You have TOO played followup conflicts, even if you didn't notice. That is, you've certainly played conflicts where it would have been legit to carry over dice from fallout or a give, per the followup conflict rules.

But: don't worry! Go play!

-Vincent

[JC]

I see what you mean, but I think it's a good thing I worry a little bit

this is a game where you have to follow the rules to have a good time (also where you don't need to make up rules as you go, because the rules are solid)

and don't worry (were you really?): I'm playing, and I'm having a wonderful time with DITV!

[Filip Luszczyk]

this is a game where you have to follow the rules to have a good time (also where you don't need to make up rules as you go, because the rules are solid)

Nope, it's a myth, although a widely spread one

You totally can do whatever you want with the game and its rules and still have a good time. It's not like if you stray from the path you'll fall into a dark pit of badwrongfun. At worst, some purists will acuse you of SINNING by playing it WRONG

What makes the game itself good as it is, however, is that you actually can have a good time by following the rules to the word. And it's not the case with every single game out there.

Other than that, it's you who is supposed to have fun during the game - not the people reading your APs, not the author, and certainly not the book. As long as you have fun, you do things right. Only if you don't, there's a reason to worry about things (and that's when the book should tell you what went wrong).