Fudge Factor is back (again)

With the end of classes just around the corner, I've been avoiding my homework by working on Fudge Factor, a free, online magazine for Fudge. The first new article went up last Sunday… watch for a new one by this Monday.

I need to quit thinking about [[http://www.septemberquestion.org/lumpley/dogs.html|Dogs in the Vineyard]] and work on getting the next article ready.

Dice, dice, my kingdom for some dice!

Okay, I've talked my players into trying out [[http://www.septemberquestion.org/lumpley/dogs.html|Dogs in the Vineyard]]. It wasn't hard. Karen was already interested in it before I ever mentioned it, Bill had gone and looked at it when I mentioned it on the Fudge List, and Chris will try just about anything.

So I looked at the state of my dice. Dogs requires lots of polyhedrals, recommending fifteen to twenty d6's, and eight each of d4, d8 and d10. Dogs conflict resolution requires throwing huge handfuls of dice at a time and then keeping the result on the table.

Have I mentioned that I essentially haven't played anything but Champions and Fudge since about 1987? I have buckets of d6's for Champions and a bucket of Fudge Dice (which are basically d3 labelled minus, blank and plus). Of the dice I own and am willing to play with, I fall woefully short of meeting the needs of Dogs. I've got a bag of old crystal dice and even some original D&D boxed-set dice from the early eighties… but none of them are "play quality" by today's standards.

I like to collect dice, and this being a chance to collect types I've not had an excuse to buy for ages, I thought I'd just buy a bunch of new ones. I've got a lot of d6's, but they have pips, and if all the other dice I'm using have numbers, I'd like them to match. And to make things easier, I thought I'd get each type of die in only one color… all the d6's ivory, all the d4's blue, etc.

So I go searching for dice on the web. Probably the best place I found was http://www.dicepool.com/. They've got a great selection, but their stock is shallow… I couldn't find any style in which they stocked 20 d6's with numbers instead of pips. In most cases, down in the basic solid-color, they couldn't even give me five of a particular color.

Looks like I'm going to have to go straight to Chessex. They've got an online catalog, but no shopping cart. I'll have to email them my order and phone in my credit card number. But at least I'll be able to buy 20d6 all in the same color. :)

Of course, I got this far without thinking about price. At fifty cents a die, 46 dice plus shipping is $28.95. Ouch… double what I paid for the PDF of Dogs.

I'm almost tempted to buy a couple hundred bucks worth and sell "Dogs Sets" on eBay.

My life is going to the Dogs

I've been hearing so much about it, I finally had to buy [[http://www.septemberquestion.org/lumpley/dogs.html|Dogs in the Vineyard]] from the small, small press of [[http://www.septemberquestion.org/lumpley/lumpley.html|Lumpley Games]]. Dogs is an odd little game, based in the Mormon communities of pre-Civil War Utah. The PC's are the "dogs" of God's "vineyard," riding from town to town, tending to the flock and weeding out the bad influences. With large-caliber six-shooters if necessary.

Dogs is among the new breed of avant-guard games exploring alternate conflict resolution systems and rules-light play, which is why I was interested in it. I've not had the time (due to school) to really follow the discussions at [[http://www.indie-rpgs.com/|The Forge]], though I'm hoping that changes now that I'm about finished with school.

What's interesting is, not only did I find the resolution system to be intriguing, I found the whole thing to be very interesting. The basis of all the conflict is relational, and because of the Dogs' role in the story of moral and just judges, the PC's are strongly encouraged to begin conflict with talk and avoid escalating to guns unless absolutely necessary. The whole setup is ripe for conflicts between friends and relatives, all set in the context of sin and religion. And the kicker at the end… something that seems so obvious when I read it, but hadn't occurred to me: take what the characters came down in favor of ("sinners deserve a second chance") and tighten the screws on the characters' principles in the next setting ("_this_ sinner, this sin, does he deserve a second chance".) Force the character into deciding a tougher case, where mercy or judgment isn't nearly so clean-cut as it was in the last town.

Oooh, the thought of it makes me shiver with gamemasterly delight.

And I think the bit of the setup that really makes it work is that the Dogs are "above the law" of the town, so to speak. They interpret God's law, and though they are under Elders that oversee their work, nobody in the town can effectively argue with them. In a sense, they are God's hand at work in the towns they visit, and it's an incredible responsibility. And it's such a perfect roleplaying setup… the characters aren't freelance mercenaries, out to get whatever then can from the world. They have a specific job, tied into a strong moral code, and they have to be loyal to the King of Life and their interpretation of scripture. They have to be good (they wouldn't have been chosen as Dogs if they weren't), but they're in tough situations that may result in needing to shoot a heretic among the Faithful in order to save a town from demonic oppression.

My wife thinks it has a post-apocalyptic feel. I think it could work very well there.

Now I need to go read Sorcerer and Trollbabe. I have zero interest in the setting of the latter, but I hear so much about the conflict resolution system that I want to see it.