Hey, folks, just wanted to let everyone know that I've uploaded a revised version of the Dust Devils playtest PDF. It now includes rules for Stakes, damage recovery and also includes two blank character sheets on the last page. I also managed to slim it down a hair -- now it weighs in around 1 MB even though I added a page or two. Please forgive my relatively slow-ish server. It'll get there eventually!

Download it here: http://dragons.carlisle.ia.us/downloads/dust_devils.pdf

Have a good one!
Matt

Thanks!

When will you start throwing out 'genera plug ins'?

Good question. I'm damn near worn out from spitting this thing out in less than a week. I'll try to get to it soon. Need to refresh my creative juices, so to speak.

Enjoy the revised version!

Have you thought of a fantasy/horror style plug in that would provide the feel of High Plains Drifter or the first Stephen King The Gunslinger stories. Something not as campy as Deadlands, and a little less-specific and detailed?

furashgf, check out the origional thread for this awesome game:

http://indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1497

Just that idea (and several great others) were kicked around back there.



And while I'm thinking about it,

Matt, where would you prefer to get your feedback on this? IN which forum... and here or over at rpg.net?

Matt,

I did a quick proof of your PDF. Comments are as follows:

On page 1 under Traits you have an example which reads "Touch as Nails". That should read "Tough as Nails."

On page 2 under Devil you have a sentence which reads:

"For example, if a character whose Devil is that he's a mean drunk, he might lose cards whenever conflict involving liquor comes along."

That doesn't scan properly. I would suggest replacing the words "if a character whose Devil" with the words "where a character's Devil"

Under The Draw you refer to being able to "draw back". Is that poker terminology? I worked out that you meant discard from hand and redraw from pack but I think that could be clearer if so.

On page 3 under Stakes in the second paragraph you have a line reading "The Dealer should offer Stakes for any situation the he ..." That should be "that he".

Also, in the final paragraph of that same section you use the example "massacred and Indian village". That should be massacred "an" Indian village. The word "a" should also be inserted between the words "cards drawn as" and the words "result of his Devil" in the final line.

Under When the Chips are Down, third pointer, you say "Assume narration a hand". You need to insert an "of".

On page 4, under Hazards & Damage, there should be a comma after the word combat I think, and combat should be pluralised. I.e. "Characters who lose combats, conflicts or other hazardous challenges".

And that's all I noticed. Hope you don't mind me flagging this stuff. Overall I thought it was a very professional looking PDF with great use of language. Substantive comments on the game will follow...

Bailywolf wrote:

Matt, where would you prefer to get your feedback on this? IN which forum... and here or over at rpg.net?

Balbinus wrote:
Matt,

I did a quick proof of your PDF

<snip>

Hope you don't mind me flagging this stuff. Overall I thought it was a very professional looking PDF with great use of language. Substantive comments on the game will follow...

Groovy. I'll clip my rpg.net comments and paste them here to centralize things... and keep my lazy ass from hazing to retype anything.

Here we go:

1st Message- (resonding to the difficulty in killing someone with one deal)

Here is a metagamey solution:

Use the rules as written for normal shoot-em-ups and dust offs... while introducing 'sudden death' rules for mooks (those three guys who couldn't whistle Dixie) and for duels to the death- winner takes all.

Both parties have to agree for Mortal Stakes... and this is the only way to kill off Major NPC's- by risking your own life on one Hand of cards.




Some examples fresh on my mind:


When The Man With No Name gets the crap pounded out of him by the Rojos gang... he doesn't get killed because his player refuses to accepet Mortal stakes- he's outnumbered, and would surely buy it... or perhaps, the Rojos refuse the stakes because they need him alive... but later, when he goes toe to toe with Ramone... it's Mortal stakes on the line.

Against the four thugs at the begining of the movie, he plays for normal stakes... but they are unnamed mooks, so they buy it with TMWNN's winning hand.

When The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly square off for their three way duel (fixed though it is! Both The Bad and The Ugly think they are fighting two opoenents...while The Good knows all he has ot worry about is The Bad... who is splitting his attention between two enemies... what a bastard our Blondy is). It's mortal stakes all around. Angel Eyes is a master gunfighter- hard as nails, mean as hell, smart, and fast. But with one shot, TMWNN lays him out, and with another finishes him off.



Basicly, for the chance for that fast-draw kill against another named oponent, one has to risk the same death for oneself

One more detail!

Represent a person's life with a single black poker chip. Throw this into the pot, and if no one sees your wager, you get a bonus card as the only one willing to take the risks.

I've just been over Dust Devils in detail while The Outlaw Jose Wales played on the ol DVD. I can now make some additional suggestions:


> Simple Action Resolution. All that reshuffling gets to be a pain. For simple actions which can't inflict any kind of damage, a faster mechanic is needed. I'll throw out one I used with Beans:

High Card

Deal cards equal to an attribute or knack, the oposing character's atribute or knack, or a fixed difficulty 1-5. The task is related to one of the suits, and the winner is based on the best card delt as follows:

1. Trump suit and high value
2. Trump suit against any other suit
3. Trump color and high value
4. Trump color against any other color
5. High value.

Jokers can change the suit of the highest card in the hand.




> Unnamed Character rules: Gangs. Treat Gangs as a single character for the purpose of interacting with them. Stat them out with attributes and knacks. When a Gang suffers damage, each loss of an attibute point translates into the loss of members- dead, fled, pissing their pants, or hidin' under a wagon.

Competence:

Feeble: 1 Attribute point for every 2 members
Average: 1 attribute point for every member
Skilled: 2 Attribute points for every member.


So, a 10 man Skilled Gang would have 20 atribute points when acting as a unit. As those poits are whiddled away, men are taken down- one man for each two points lost.

This way, characters can blast their way through hordes of onery bastards without the dealing and book keeping getting crazy.

I like your suggestion of quicker "Trump" hands to resolve conflicts without damage.

However, I'm of two minds on this one. On one hand, this might speed things up. Say the challenge is breaking down a door, which should probably be a Hand + Guts deal. The dealer decides that the door is pretty sturdy, and it's going to take a lot of Hand to break it down. So, he sets trump as Spades, then sets a difficulty number of anything between low (The Duece) and high (Ace) with face cards or the ace for very difficult challenges. The player receives a number of cards equal to the two relevant traits (as always, even though the Dealer decided Hand was more important for Trump), plus or minus any Trait or Devil modifiers. All the player has to do is a lay a single card that exceeds the difficulty number. If the card he lays is also Trump, then the results are extradinary. If the player accomplishes this, he narrates the scene. Otherwise, the Dealer narrates.

On the other hand, maybe ALL conflicts, regardless of scope, can result in "damage," which in many situations can be described as loss of face (loss of Heart) or even feeling like a jackass for doing something stupid (loss of Eye). If so, then the original mechanic as outlined in the playtest version is needed, because only poker hands (multiple cards) could inflict "damage," according to the rules.

On the other hand, maybe ALL conflicts, regardless of scope, can result in "damage," which in many situations can be described as loss of face (loss of Heart) or even feeling like a jackass for doing something stupid (loss of Eye). If so, then the original mechanic as outlined in the playtest version is needed, because only poker hands (multiple cards) could inflict "damage," according to the rules

(Some suggestion I wrote at RPG.net).

I didn't understand what you meant by "draw back". Does this mean discarding cards from the player's hand? Where do they go? Back to the top of the draw deck or to a discard pile?

Also, the system for Knacks doesn't seem to be entirely there. Can a player choose any number and any level of Knack?

I disliked the character generation of spending X points to buy attributes. Instead, how about allocating a hand of cards to each player for character generation? That way, life deals you a hand of cards, it's up to you to play them.

Also, I'll suggest the attributes be reduced by one, as simply applying the right attribute to the situation, should, like a descriptor or Trait, get a card. A higher rating (above zero), gets more cards. This means instead of 13 attribute points, the modification gets 9 attribute points. That should make instant kills a bit easier.

Playing a card with the same suit as the attribute gets a +1 attribute. So if I place a Diamonds card on Eye, my character has +1 Eye.

Playing two of kind in same suit, gets a +2 attribute. So if I play 2 Clubs on Guts, my character has +2 Guts.

And similarly for three of a kind, giving a +3 attribute. So if I play 3 Spades on Hand, my character has +3 Hand.

And similarly for four of a kind, giving a +4 attribute. So if I play 4 Hearts on Heart, my character has +4 Heart.

Attibutes with no cards placed against them, default to zero.

Naturally, a Joker is a Wild Card, and counts as any card necessary.

Perhaps each player can draw up to, say, 6 or 7 cards. If they want to draw more, their character must have some sort of flaw or enhanced Devil for each extra card drawn.

Not sure yet how to fit skills in. Maybe use the number on the card, minus five as the level of skill, and place that as a skill. So if I've got a 6 Clubs, that's one skill of +1.

Perhaps each skill has an associated attribute, and cards matching that skill's attribute can be played to get +1, +2, +3, or +4 for that skill as above for attributes. For this situation, a second card draw for generating skills? The first card draw was for attributes. Again, to draw an extra card, requires taking a flaw or enhancing the character's Devil in some way.

Here's some suggestions for appropriate attributes:
Shootin' - Hand
Ropin' - Hand
Readin' 'n' Ritin' - Eye
'Rithmatic - Eye
'Trappin' - ?
Ambushin' - Guts
Politickin' - Heart
Safe Crackin' - Guts
Riding' - Hand
Dancin' - Heart

Bailywolf wrote:
> This way, characters can blast their way through hordes of onery bastards without the dealing and book keeping getting crazy.

For even more feeble gangs of opponents, perhaps like Indians in some Westerns, have players play a card relating to an appropriate attribute to defeat one opponent and add their rating in a appropriate attribute/skill, to beat a difficulty number (opponent's attribute + skill + 5 ?). So a player shootin' an indian, just needs to play a Spade card. If the player doesn't have an appropriate card, the player may play two cards instead (lowest one counting). Each round, the player may receive one card to refill their hand. This way players can run out of cards, and be fresh out of ideas.

Basically, playing a card with a suit that matches the suit of the attribute or skill, is like a pair or two of a kind, which beats an Mook-like opponent with only a high card (just attribute or skill alone). This keeps up the poker part of the game.

More for descriptors. Two descriptors could be added, Profession and maybe Race/Culture.

Examples of Profession are:

Brave;

Cowboy;

Gambler;

Blacksmith;

Cook;

Gunslinger;

Outlaw;

Buffalo Hunter;

Shaman;

Preacher;

Private detective (Pinkerton);

Soldier;

Saloon Gal;

Teacher;

Prospector;

Indian Scout;

Settler;

Rustler;

Farmer;

Trapper; and so on.

Examples of Race/Culture:

Indian;

Easterner;

Westerner;

Chinaman; My apologies to any Asian readers.

Mexican;

Spaniard; and so on.

Players pick one of each to describe their character. When a character's action would logically benefit from a skill in a Race/Culture or a Profession, the player gains an extra card. So a Brave knows Ridin' (bareback), Shootin' (with a bow), Fightin' (with a tomahawk), Native Talk, and so on.

Andrew Martin wrote:
I didn't understand what you meant by "draw back". Does this mean discarding cards from the player's hand? Where do they go? Back to the top of the draw deck or to a discard pile?

Andrew Martin wrote:
Also, the system for Knacks doesn't seem to be entirely there. Can a player choose any number and any level of Knack?

Andrew Martin wrote:
I disliked the character generation of spending X points to buy attributes. Instead, how about allocating a hand of cards to each player for character generation? That way, life deals you a hand of cards, it's up to you to play them.

Andrew Martin wrote:
Also, I'll suggest the attributes be reduced by one, as simply applying the right attribute to the situation, should, like a descriptor or Trait, get a card. A higher rating (above zero), gets more cards. This means instead of 13 attribute points, the modification gets 9 attribute points. That should make instant kills a bit easier.

Playing a card with the same suit as the attribute gets a +1 attribute. So if I place a Diamonds card on Eye, my character has +1 Eye.

Playing two of kind in same suit, gets a +2 attribute. So if I play 2 Clubs on Guts, my character has +2 Guts.

(snip)

Andrew Martin wrote:
Bailywolf wrote:
> This way, characters can blast their way through hordes of onery bastards without the dealing and book keeping getting crazy.

For even more feeble gangs of opponents, perhaps like Indians in some Westerns, have players play a card relating to an appropriate attribute to defeat one opponent and add their rating in a appropriate attribute/skill, to beat a difficulty number ... (snip)

Andrew Martin wrote:
More for descriptors. Two descriptors could be added, Profession and maybe Race/Culture.

Andrew Martin wrote:
Players pick one of each to describe their character. When a character's action would logically benefit from a skill in a Race/Culture or a Profession, the player gains an extra card. So a Brave knows Ridin' (bareback), Shootin' (with a bow), Fightin' (with a tomahawk), Native Talk, and so on.

I've been mulling over an occult extension for Dust Devils. Dangerous, potentialy soul destroying magic from the dawn of time. Not CoC spell=insanity exactly (too cut and dry, anyhow).. here is the rough.

There are 9 unique combinatinos of 2 of the 4 main traits in the game, so I wrote up a brief Trick for each combination. Things like Harm, Heal, Change, Charm, Call, Move, Sense etc. Each covers pretty obvious supernatural ground. You use Call to summon forth hunting spirits to chase an outlaw. You use Heal to cure a drunken gunfighter's DT's, you use Harm to turn "Back Woods" Blake Calhoon's guts into scorpions.

Magic requires a Knack for it. Each magical Knack allows you to use as many Tricks as you have levels of that knack. These are chosen when the Knack is described or imporved. Knacks can cover any kind of occult lore, and the sorts of things you can do with your Tricks relate to the description of the magical knack.

Magic using characters must also encorporate the occult into their Devil somehow. It need not be the major focus of their Devil, but there is something about practicing the Dark Arts that gets inside you, hunkers right up to your worst secrets, and makes them worse.


When using magic, a full draw is played normaly. Damage suffered from failing Magic is always Nasty (lasting at least the whole session). The damage caused by magical actions takes specific forms depending on the suit it effects:

Hand- hand damage from magic takes the form of stigmata, mutations, corruption of the flesh.

Eye- eye damage inflicts delusions, halucinations, and visions.

Guts- Paranoia, phobias, suspicion, and fear all come crawling up from Guts damage.

Heart- Heart damage manifests as perversions of emotion; love becomeing a love to torment, hate the desire to emulate.

The upshot is that damage inflicted on some other bastard with magic is just as bad.


Unlike normal actions, there is no free Drawback when using magic. Each level of a magical Knack provides a Dodge. A Dodge is some kind of ritual or symbolic act that insulates you from the horrible forces which underly all magic. The more Dodges you use, the better able you are to control the magic and prevent it from destroying you.

Dodges are things like Chanting, Sand Painting, Dance, Incantation, Concentration, Extra Time, Sacrifice, Diagrams, Potions, Foci etc. Each Dodge you use allows a single drawback.


If killed by failed magic, you are transformed into a creature of the shadow world; a lost soul. Your Devil takes his due. Literaly.



When using magic against mundane characters, you have a certain advantage. Most cowpokes no matter how hard and dangerous are going to piss their briches soon as watch their buddies flesh be devoured under a cloud of demon-butterflies.
Without some magic yourself, you get delt three less cards that normal to act againt it unless you can bring your descriptors or Devil into play. Each relevnt descriptor reduces the card peanlty by one, and if by resisting the magic, you are fighting your devil, you reduce it by another. So, if I'm "Tougher than sun dried leather and fast as scorpion tails" and my devil is Terrified of Meaningless Death, and I'm hit for no aparent reason with some kind of Harm trick in a SanFran back alley... I could use a full Deal to fight it.




That basicly covers to majority of my napkin scribbled notes.


Matt, does this jive with your thoughts? In the initial run of posts on this game, "special toppings" were discussed- gimme me a Western with Steampunk and a Side of Cuthulu. I hope this kind of thing is still a design concenr... I'm still very excited about Dust Devils. It has more potential to capture the things I love about The Western than just about any game I've yet seen.