Hello, well finally last night I got to run a full (if a little short) session of Dogs. It was an impromptu thing when one member of the regular game couldn't make it. I had a feeling Dogs would be quick and easy to run with no prep, and I wasn't wrong! I made up this simple Town in the 30 mins or so whilst also making up the characters. I'll post a play report also if I get a chance.

Dust Creek.

The town Steward, Jacob is a good man, but perhaps slightly too proud of his achievements in bringing a level of prosperity to the town. Dust Creek has grown over the last 5 years from a small village to a small town. A year ago his wife Ann died of a fever. It hit Jacob hard. And he hit the bottle.

Pride: Jacob believes as Steward and as the one who has brought such good to the town that it is ok for him to drink. Sure, he knows it’s a sin, but he’s a good man of the Faith and he’s strong enough to keep it under control.

Sin: Jacob has taken to drowning his sorrow in a few glasses of JD every night before bed, helps his mind stop thinking about the loss of his poor beloved Ann. Some of the townsfolk have found out about this. Most respect Jacob enough that when he tells them it’s ok for him to drink they believe him. Some aren’t so sure.

Injustice: It’s ok for Jacob, but it’s NOT ok for the rest of them… even if they have their reasons too.

Demonic Attacks: The crops have been poor for the first time in years. And unfortunately one of the Granaries collapsed recently, making things worse.
This winter, in an effort to bring money into the town, the T.A granted a liquor and gambling license to a local land owner, Ivan. Ivan has set up “The Fancy House” an immoral den of drink, gambling and girls. The Faithful stay away, and Jacob has done his best to get the place closed down, but there are enough travellers passing through and enough non-Faithful to keep the place well in business.
And last of all old Henry the blacksmith was injured in a most peculiar way… Jacob came down to get his horse shod. As the Steward entered the smithy, the forge fires flared up unexpectedly with a gust of wind from the door. Old Henry was startled and hit his hand with the hammer, breaking it badly. The bones were set wrong by the town vet and now Old Henry suffers pain constantly.

Sin: Old Henry believes that, like Jacob, he has a legitimate reason for drinking. He’s started chugging back a little gin every now and then to help with the pain in his hand. His wife Marigold thinks he’s wrong to do so. She buys the line about “its ok for the Steward, as he’s the Steward”. She thinks “The Fancy House” is the cause of the problem. Henry’s been buying his liquor from there.

Key NPCs and what they want from the Dogs:

Jacob, the Steward. Has opened up Dust Creek to demonic attack by his drinking. Still in other ways a good and Faithful man. Respected by his brethren. He wants the Dogs to identify “The Fancy House” and Ivan as the source of Sin in the town. If possible he would like the Dogs to put a stop the sinning going on there. He doesn’t want them to find out about his drinking as he thinks they wouldn’t understand. He won’t point out that Henry is drinking unless pressed, as despite his public stance that no one else can drink, he thinks Henry is probably justified too.

Old Henry, the Blacksmith. He wants the Dogs to heal his hand so he can stop being in pain! He also wants them to publicly legitimize his drinking. He feels that if it’s ok for the Steward, then it’s ok for him, as he has a reason also. He’ll tell the Dogs about it if pressed, but won’t straight away volunteer the information about his and Jacob’s habits, he would be likely to try and gauge their response before opening up.

Marigold. Old Henry’s wife. She’s a good and Faithful woman who thinks Henry’s sinning. She believes Jacob when he says it’s alright for him, and would be unlikely to mention this to the Dogs lightly; she wants the Dogs to concentrate on putting Henry back on the straight and narrow. She’ll also point to “The Fancy House” as the source of the Towns problems this year. She doesn’t like the place at all, as it’s Henry’s source from his booze.

Ivan, the owner of “The Fancy House” He wants the Dogs to stay out of his business. He’s got a license from the T.A for what he does, and he don’t see nothing wrong with it. He’s not a member of the Faith, adhering to one of the corrupt old religions from back East, some kind of decadent worship from his original country.

The Demons: The Demons want one more person to fall under the influence of alcohol… then they’ll have three and it’ll be False Priesthood. Basically the Demons operate by causing pain and offering alcohol as a pain-killer. They’ll try the same tactic again.

Why have the Dogs been sent?

They have been asked to bring materials and to give aid in rebuilding the collapsed Granary.

What would happen if the Dogs never came? As the crisis in the town deepens, and food stores run lower, the easier it will be for the Demons to lure people to drink. As several Faithful folk of Dust Creek actually know about Jacob’s drinking its only a matter of time and things getting bad enough, before one of them starts saying negative stuff about him, despite the general feeling that he’s a good and strong leader. Someone’s bound to get hurt in the ensuing disagreements and recriminations. And of course violence and murder is the Demons ultimate goal.

I noticed as I was looking for pointers to formatting this whilst writing it up that the whole abuse of alcohol thing is quite similar to the West Cotton Fields Town! I can't recall if I'd read it prior to playing, I wonder if I was subconsciously influenced..? :)

Drew

You've got a good, solid town here. As you've already played, I suppose it would be moot to give advice on playing the town.

It seems to me that the NPCs have a good bit they'd like to keep secret; Did this turn out all right? My concern is the tendency in my own group and in others I've read to make a lot of conflicts just about finding out what's going on.

Other than that, I'll wait for the Actual Play report. I'm always curious to see how different groups of Dogs approach a given situation.

I second the part about the secrets. I think it's always best to have someone who's open about it. That way, you can get conflicts about more important things than information that they will inevitably have to get anyway.

Also, the "why have the Dogs been sent". What's the deal here? As I understand it, they're there to be Dogs, kiss babies and expose sin. Menial labour like rebuilding a granary is only done by Dogs if it's really neccesary.

Hi guys, thanks for the comments.

As it turned out, none of the conflicts were about getting the secrets out of the NPCs. One of the first things I had decided was to let the info out without too much dice rolling. (See p92 "Actively Revealing the Town" in DitV for why) Now this doesn't mean they got the info just like that, they had to talk for quite some time with the NPCs. Infact they didn't find out Old Henry had been drinking by being told it. Hmm I'll finish writing up the play report and you'll see what I mean.

"Why the Dogs have been sent" explanation: My group didn't quite get the whole "The Dogs just travel around visiting people randomly" thing, so purely as a rationalisation of their visit I just said "Ok, this town needs the Dogs to visit because.... er... you're bringing building supplies for the collapsed Granary." it didn't really feature in play at all because immediately they started going for the sinners! Any one else using this town could easily just strip out that element.

rrr wrote: As it turned out, none of the conflicts were about getting the secrets out of the NPCs. One of the first things I had decided was to let the info out without too much dice rolling. (See p92 "Actively Revealing the Town" in DitV for why)

Nikola,

There's a difference in having an NPC who's lying, and an NPC who just won't tell you anything without a conflict. The former is okay, if not overdone; Spending half the game trying to figure out what precisely is going on isn't really a good thing. The latter, for the same reason, is anathema, at least to me.

Wolfen wrote: There's a difference in having an NPC who's lying, and an NPC who just won't tell you anything without a conflict.