Hi. I recently borrowed this game from a friend of mine. I really like what I see, especially how the game (from conflict to town creation) gradually escalates from personal to social to action. Very smooth design, and it's nice how this game adds weight to social interaction; that adds incentive for characters to reason with and sympathize (somewhat) with "the enemy" first, instead of the "kill, KILL, KIILLL!!" that some game mechanics reinforce.

Because this is such an elegant game design, I was thinking about setting up a Doglike setting of my own. I have a question, and wanted to consult the game designer and fans of the game: was there a reason dice types stop at d10? Would it wreck the game on some level if d12s or even d20s were incorporated? Does anyone here have any advice to offer if I do actually decide to incorporate them? I have a good reason to ask this, and will explain if anyone is interested.

It stops at d10s because it used to go to d12s but in playtesting we saw no need and stopped at d10s anyway.

Getting blowed up used to inflict d12s Fallout. Isn't that funny?

Tell your reasons!

-Vincent

Originally I got an idea in my head: I love magic, I love wizards, I like Ars Magica, but the mechanics and spell lists are way too crunchy for me.

I heard about your game, and about how supernatural details are streamlined into the system such that it's a matter of narrating what happens and letting the dice fall as they will. Whee!

But as I read it further, I thought, "Hmmm. While I think it might be fun to run Ars Magica using this system, this is flawed. Something's missing, even though Ars Magica has House Quaesitor. AHA! I know what's missing: where's the sin? Withoput the sin, where's the moral conflict, and the corresponding role for the Doglike characters? Why don't the wizard types go back to staying in their little labs and let the rest of the world rot?"

Let's face it; in ArM, wizards do not have a culture, they have a counterculture loosely held together by a code of conduct and mutual self-interest. Plenty of reasons to not separate, but almost nothing to actually bring them together. If I had my players playing Quaesitores, it wouldn't make sense for any other wizard to treat them as anything other than a nuisance. And who'd really put up with that, when they can just sit in their labs and do their own thing?

So I had an idea: somewhere after the fall of Rome, the Hermetic philosophy transubstantiated into a Religion of the Book, complete with it's own thou shalt nots, thou shalts, and a pretty generous portion of thou shouldst be to go with it.

Anyway, the reason I was asking was because, let's face it, nothing says drama like big explosions and special effects. ;-) Whether it's a jar of nitro, some dynamite, a Gatling gun or a cannon, or Ye Olde Balle ov Abysmal Flame, somehow d10s just don't seem high enough. But at the same time, I'm wondering if the Fallout rules will adequately convey just how badly the shit has hit the fan if it Escalates that far. (It should, but I was curious if you'd tried it and found out it didn't work.)

Also, does it seem potentially problematic to have Ceremonial actions count in Sees and Raises for non-Ceremonial actions? (The glory and the problem with magic in this setting.)

If anyone is interested in further details, let me know. I'd like to bounce around some of the details I've got in the back of my head, but I don't want to bore anyone to tears.

I've been playing Ars Magica since 1990, so no tears of boredom here. By "Ars Magica" I mean games with wizards based on Ars Magica's - we ditched Ars Magica's actual rules long, long ago.

The Order has some sins already: don't meddle with mortals, don't meddle with faeries, don't meddle with the infernal. I think you could build some covenant-in-social-breakdown rules out of those. If I were to set up to play the Quaesitor game using Dogs, that's where I'd start.

I think it would be very fun to have slightly different character creation rules for investigator-type Quaesitors and for their enforcer-type Hoplites and Flambeau muscle. I also think there'd be room for Redcap PCs in the game, gifted and non-. Those could even be the background choices: Quaesitor, Hoplite, Flambeau lackey, gifted Redcap, nongifted Redcap, instead of complicated, strong etc.

But yeah, having overwhelming damage and destruction inflict d12s Fallout will probably do exactly what you want it to do. Give it a try and let us know.

Also, does it seem potentially problematic to have Ceremonial actions count in Sees and Raises for non-Ceremonial actions? (The glory and the problem with magic in this setting.)

Actually Vince, what I was going to do was transport Ars Magica into a western setting (same as DiTV standard), and have them change into a Religion of the Book. Why? Because, darnit, I think it would be interesting to try. While I could try to use the setting as is, I can't help but think the setting would be lacking if it didn't have a religious aspect to bind the communities closer, and something for them to strive towards.

As for Ceremonies for non-religious conflicts, what I mean to say is that Ceremonial actions make an obvious template for using magic in this game. Do you think it could cause problems having Ceremonmial actions that can pop into any conflict with just a bit of imagination? (Instead of Escalating to guns, Escalating to magic, etc.)

Also, if it wouldn't be a misuse of forum-space, I'd like to bounce around some ideas for the setting and get feedback. If it would be forum-abuse, let me know and I'll save it for an actual play report.

Oh no, that wouldn't be forum abuse at all. Please feel free.

I've been thinking really hard about how Hermetic magic would fit into the place of ceremony. Here's a question: what would you list on your character sheet? The Arts? Individual spells? Nothing Hermetic, just like you list nothing ceremonial in Dogs (unless you want to)?

There's no room in Dogs' rules for spell difficulties, as they exist now. Is it okay if Ball of Abysmal Flame is as "easy" to cast as Palm of Flame?

I think I'd want magic to be something you escalate to, like gunfighting. But there's another question: would you escalate from not-fighting magic to fighting magic? If I've already cast Frosty Breath of the Spoken Lie on you, and I then cast Pilum of Fire on you, have I escalated?

And my last question: when do I get dice for my Parma Magica - every time you cast a spell at me, or just once per conflict?

I think it's possible to adapt Dogs' rules to every combination of answers to these questions. Of course some combinations will require more adaptation than others.

-Vincent

Sorry for the delay! Night shift blows...

lumpley wrote: I've been thinking really hard about how Hermetic magic would fit into the place of ceremony. Here's a question: what would you list on your character sheet? The Arts? Individual spells? Nothing Hermetic, just like you list nothing ceremonial in Dogs (unless you want to)? ... There's no room in Dogs' rules for spell difficulties, as they exist now. Is it okay if Ball of Abysmal Flame is as "easy" to cast as Palm of Flame?

Vincent wrote: I think I'd want magic to be something you escalate to, like gunfighting.

Vincent wrote: But there's another question: would you escalate from not-fighting magic to fighting magic? If I've already cast Frosty Breath of the Spoken Lie on you, and I then cast Pilum of Fire on you, have I escalated?

Vincent wrote: And my last question: when do I get dice for my Parma Magica - every time you cast a spell at me, or just once per conflict?

Forgot to mention: in this offshoot, your Sacred Instruments replace the jar of consecrated earth given to the Standard-game Dogs.

I'd probably do two layers of Magic from an escalation standpoint. Minor Magic d8 and Major Magic d10. One might also do Epic Magic d12.

Spooky, did you used to have a name in your sig? I can't believe that I don't know your name.

In-game, guns get an additional d4 thrown into the pool, correct? Well in this game, I'm thinking about allowing that d4 to actually straight-out add to the total rolled on the two highest dice. This is for guns, explosives, and spells whose primary purpose is damage.

lumpley wrote: Spooky, did you used to have a name in your sig? I can't believe that I don't know your name.

lumpley wrote: I don't get it. Do you mean that, when your Raise is hurting someone, you get to put forward three dice, and one of them's a d4?

lumpley wrote: Can I recommend playing the game straight at least once before you start in with the mechanical changes? Guns and ceremonies work.

-Vincent

Spooky Fanboy wrote:
Okay. Say you've got a situation where you're rolling 2d10+1d4 for a gun. In DiTV-standard, you roll two dice and take the highest. What I'm proposing, you'd take 2d10 (say they come up 6 and 7), add them together (13), and then add your 1d4 to that total (say 2, so your introduction of the gun comes up a value of 15.) This would, I hope, emphasize the gun, the hex, and explosives as tools of ill omen.

I got the feeling Spooky was referring to adding the extra 1d4 to the fallout number, thus making things more lethal.

I've had the book for a week or two now and I've found the fallout system to be one of the more interesting things about the game mechanics. In order to have a chance to gain "experience fallout," you have to take regular fallout. Plus, while you stand a better chance of getting experience if all your fallout comes from just talking, it'd be rare to justify improving your "I'm a good shot" trait that way. If you take the fallout dice into a follow-up, then you get fewer complications if you resolved the previous conflict with guns instead of talking.

Hello Sailor wrote: I got the feeling Spooky was referring to adding the extra 1d4 to the fallout number, thus making things more lethal.