Hi!!

Nocker wrote:
First, some questions on Conflicts.
1) Do you express the stakes as binary questions, or just as a concept that is at stake ?
More "Do you save Sister Patience from influenza ?" or more "The life of Sister Patience" ?
More "Do Brother Matthew drive the Dogs back off the bridge ?" or more "the bridge" ?

About this, I would like to hear from Vincent, too, because I am not sure what is the general "right" answer. I play using binary questions, with no pre-narration or information about the "how"  (for example: the thing at stake could be "I kill him", but the exact way this will happen is left to the conflict results (so, no "I strangle him" or "I beat him to death")

2) How do you handle a PJ who wants to Give In (maybe because he doesn't want to take that bullet and hasn't the dice to Block/Dodge) but other PCs are on his side, and they don't want to Give In ? If he can, how to manage Cut You Losses, how to manage the stakes ?If he can't, who has the authority to make the PCs' side Give In ?

Usually, this is not a problem because if the other dogs want you to stay in the conflict they can help you with their dice, so they get fallout instead of you.  But anyway, if someone want to leave the conflict, he simply leave it. There is no discussion, no way to stop him: he leave, period.  They have to explain what they do in the fiction, in detail, but this is not a problem (he can flee, he can stop, he can drop unconscious, he can sometimes even stay in the conflict in the fiction, but he cease to have any effect on the stakes). The other player simply continue without him, if they want.

Read again the rules: the stakes are won by the last one standing.  Even if he is the last one and the other other dogs dropped out. At the end "there will be only one", the GM or one (or more) of the players.

If the PC want to force the other players to drop out of the conflict, all he have to do is fighting them (but, in this case, he is still in the conflict: he simply changers target).

There are no "two sides" in the conflict, is not "the party against the GM": everyone fight alone, everyone declare his target for their raise, everyone decide for himself. The stakes goes to the last one standing (or the last ones standing if they are allied)

And now, questions about running one-shots of Dogs. One-shots at near-conventions. That is, when you made a town without knowing the PCs, and there won't be any game beyond that one.
1) Do you talk about the setting and how much ? And about the rules of the Faith, and how much ? And the training of the Dogs ? And the Hierarchy of Sin ? Or maybe you talk about them only if someone asks ?

1) The First town is always like that. You prepare it before the character creation. Maybe you make some little adjustment during character creation (like saying that that NPC or the other are cousins of some PC or something like that) but that's all: don't try to be "outsmart yourself trying to me too much smart", don't think that you can make the town "better" by creating the town around the PC. Use the procedure in the book, point by point, exactly as written.  And then use what they DO (not what they say about their character) as fodder for the second town...

2) A convention is different from a one-shot with friends. I this latter case, play a city as normal, explain the game (quickly, don't get stuck in the details). You usually can do a lot more in play at home with friends that you know. If you are in a convention, people will be late, people will have to leave early, there is a lot of noise and you don't know the people around you. So, keep it simple.  "simple" for you, too, so there is not a genera answer: explain what you can explain fast and clearly and leave the rest. I usually explain the culture in 5-10 minutes (there is not really a lot to say...) and I drop a lot of character choices (all well-rounded characters, I don't even talk about the other options. no relationships at the beginning (but I explain they can use these dice during the game), and I don't waste time explaining the conflict rules before the initiation conflict (you will have to explain it again...). Keep the number of players low, too.

2) I'm interested in the way John handles Relationships at Cons (see this thread). But it creates a Town where the sheer number of relationships with Dogs can become unrealistic, doesn't it ? In the John's Little Valley, how do you explain that there is so much relationships with the same people, for the PCs, and furthermore, many in common ? Did they all grow in this town ?

I don't know, I never used that method, I usually simply tie two characters in town (one of them is the Sorcerer, usually) to two of the dogs, and it's enough.  (Ah, I almost forgot, but talking about the Sorcerer reminded me:: always, always, always go to hate and murder on the first town. Not doing so is the both the most common error and the worst one, especially at conventions. It can make the difference between a memorable game and one where people get bored trying to decide if someone's marriage is valid or not. Even when you play at home, if you don't start with hate and murder you will have nothing from the players to use in the following town)

If you have problems explaining why there are all these relationship, it's easy: the Faith is young. The PC's generation is probably the third one, at most, and everybody was born from a few people who came in a few caravans. Most of them would form relationship during the travel, if they are not in the same family to begin with (and most of the people would be, the Faith has not television to spread the words of the King of Life very far from one's house.). Add to this that every branch keep very detailed records about who married who, and probably the dogs get a detailed list of everyone they are related to in every town of their watch, even if they never even heard of them.  And the teachers will suggest them to actively search these people in each town as an useful source of informations...