Quote from: Koltar;363713Still strikes me as a very horrible thought.

The Premise to DITV always seemed annoying to me.

 Then again - the TREK version doesn't involve burning towns or passing a religious judgement.

 That planet on its people were put on a 'hold' or caution because they still have a form of slavery there. No members of the local population were killed by Starfleet personnel. Hell, the ship commander even gave the local leader a warning that a small army was heading his way from a northern competing city-state.

- Ed C.

Prime Directive is meant to prevent the crews from passing any judgement, but truth be told, ST characters spend a lot of time doing things that boder breaking the Directive, or breaking it.

Thing is, Dogs are not hold by an external law. What they decide is automatically right. The Lord is never going to manifest Himself to tell them they're doing it wrong.

Though there are some common points, there are also fundamentl differences.

I dunno' Ed, all this seems very thespy. It sounds like it was an interesting adventure and the most important thing is of course the players had fun. What I want to know is, what was the decision making process like ? Did they come up with these plans together or the did the Captain just give the orders? Was there some PC Vs PC conflict about how to resolve things ?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Koltar;363742I've seen it.
have the DVD.

Not one of their better episodes.

It's extremely heavy-handed, yes. The Yangs and the Kohms -- I get it.  Still, not out of keeping with any number of episodes.

Also, you know, Dogs in the Vineyard isn't a bad game, in either premise or execution.  It has a bad reputation in some circles, but mostly by association (with either The Forge or Mormonism, or both).  Don't let that bug you.  I'm not suggesting that you run out and buy a copy, but don't be afraid to let the general concept influence your games, especially if you're running episodic mini-campaigns like you're describing.  As long as you're not shorting your players and you're all having a good time, it's all good.

!i!

I like Star Trek, and I like Dog in the Vineyard. And yes, the Dogs are the ultimate authority ON SITE, but that doesn't mean that the big bosses back at the Temple might not take an exception if/when they find out about how a town was burned down. Its important to remember that there IS that one more layer of authority on Earth before you get to God calling the shots. In that regard, consider the Temple authority to be Starfleet Command. Then I'd say it'd be a pretty clean fit.

That said, I've always thought DitV works almost perfectly for Firefly, for example.

Quote from: Werekoala;363790That said, I've always thought DitV works almost perfectly for Firefly, for example.

Very true.  And, of course, Firefly is just someone's Actual-Play-log from their Traveller game, so it almost comes full-circle.

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;363793Very true.  And, of course, Firefly is just someone's Actual-Play-log from their Traveller game, so it almost comes full-circle.

Which explains my unhealthy love for Firefly.

Yeah, as several people have pointed out, Star Trek original series is an almost perfect fit for Dogs in the Vinyard. But don't go questioning your assinine prejudices if it really hurts that much.

Yeah, God forbid anyone ever makes a moral judgement in a game, heavens no!

Some people really enjoy a "tough moral choice" situation when it sort of just happens but would be weirded out at the idea of having that kind of situation actually represented in the rules, I think? If so, that's a fair perspective. I don't personally agree, but I understand where they're coming from.

Different people can want similar things but take very different approaches towards the goal. I tried Dogs in a group, it pretty much ran like you described your Trek situation, my dude almost shot a man in cold blood but backed down and left in disgrace, fun was had by all. I mean, "making moral judgements" isn't really that auteur or pretentious since, like you say, almost any Trek episode can be thought of in those terms.

The difference in mechanical terms was that rather than sort of putting the system over to the side while we did that stuff, we could affect "that stuff" directly with the stuff on our character sheets, and the consequences of my PC's actions ended up going back onto the character sheet as Fallout. I'd imagine with GURPS Trek that tension of "situation rife with conflict, outcome uncertain" and making judgements that could come back to bite you in the ass is totally there, still. It's just represented more in the setting elements than in the system.

Quote from: Peregrin;363733It was just a joke, dude.  

It wouldn't be funny if it didn't have a seed of truth to it, so whether or not you meant to raise it, there was an issue there that I thought was worth addressing.

Quote from: Werekoala;363797Which explains my unhealthy love for Firefly.

:worship:

As far as I can tell, Dogs in the Vineyard is "Mormonism" via Hollywood (Not literally)

Quote from: Werekoala;363790I like Star Trek, and I like Dog in the Vineyard. And yes, the Dogs are the ultimate authority ON SITE, but that doesn't mean that the big bosses back at the Temple might not take an exception if/when they find out about how a town was burned down. Its important to remember that there IS that one more layer of authority on Earth before you get to God calling the shots. In that regard, consider the Temple authority to be Starfleet Command. Then I'd say it'd be a pretty clean fit.

I just want to say, I think this is also an interesting point. There are still a lot of ways that I find DitV annoying in its attempts to square the circle re: simulation and storytelling. And I don't recall how the game itself recommends handling "Temple review" in terms of impact on actual play.

Nevertheless if in Star Trek, you played out the response of Star Fleet to the PCs' borderline judgments, or rather the response of certain factions or individuals in Star Fleet, as a conflict, you might have something there. But that would still have to be circumscribed by a higher authority above the pure mechanics, for it to work for me. In other words if the players see a court martial/bureaucratic ruling/whatever as a judgment call or political wrangle due to actual ambiguity within the setting, that's one thing. If they see the mechanics as a way to redefine the setting at will, then it's something else altogether, and highly anti-immersive. Same goes for the GM--a GM who declares a conflict on flimsy premise and then refuses to Give as long he's got the dice, is going to destroy the integrity of the setting.

I think that is the biggest misconception about DitV - that the players have a completely free hand to do whatever they want, using God's Will as their justification. Doesn't work that way (or at least, it shouldn't). They are given their authority by the Elders of the Temple who get THEIR authority from God (supposedly), and the Dogs are the "paladins" of the faith, if you will, who still have to answer to the Elders. I think they're supposed to go back once a year or something and make a report if I remember correctly (been a couple of years) - but at least in my recollection, there isn't a carte blanc to do what thou wilt.

That'd be WoD.

Of course you could always have your Starfleet officers find and judge a Utah in 1890 planet.

That'd be the next system over from the OK Corral planet.