Has anyone here played Dogs in the Vineyard? I'm going to

Nobody actually play pretentious high-concept indie RPGs like that. They exist to be read through once, to make you go "huh, that's weird", and then you delete the PDF copy you downloaded and go play a fun game instead. I've heard people ask about DitV often, but I've yet to meet anyone who've actually played it.

>>49509238

Haven't played it yet, but want to. I've heard good things from folks who have.
I hear it makes for a great replacement for Dark Heresy's shitty rules.

>>49509584

What's pretentious about it?

Idea is cool as fuck but it's a bit shitty. Vincent Baker himself even said it had too much dice rolling. Apocalypse World is much much better.

>>49509834

Pretentious is a buzzword, it doesn't really mean anything anymore.

>>49509834

It pretends that all the bells and whistles attached to it are integral to the system when in reality it's not very elegant and in practice it can be even tedious.

>>49509929

>I disagree therefore it's nonsense

Pretentious has a pretty clear definition and I think that anon used it correctly. It is a pretentious game because it is all hyped up as some sort of revolutionary new system but it's actually not very good.

>>49509978

What didn't you like about it?

>>49510206

Actusl play was incredibly slow and like that other anon said, too much fucking dice rolling. I enjoy some systems with a fair amount of rolling but ditvy is excessive.

>>49509238
>pregnant before marriage
Disgusting.

>>49509978
I don't remember anything pretentious about the rule book, it's pretty strait forward.

>>49509861
I like the dice rolling, since the scenes and escalations are acted out it's slow enough to allow for the extra dice.

I mean, it's a lot of dice compared to Apocalypse World that abandons DM rolling and switches from a dice pool to a target number. I like the tactical narrative that comes from it, it feels like a natural and thought out back and forth.

>>49509978
>It pretends that all the bells and whistles attached to it are integral to the system when in reality it's not very elegant and in practice it can be even tedious.

That just sounds like "I don't like this thing" all dressed up in its Sunday best.

>>49510991
Well, at that point, any argument against a thing can be dismissed as somebody saying 'I don't like this thing', which is a great way to never actually have to engage anyone and to always be right.
Good gig, if you can get it.

File: wp.jpg (25KB, 268x400px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 268x400px

>>49509238
Played it, loved it, ran a long campaign using it

OP, what do you want to know about it?

I always figured it was meant to be like Speaker for the Dead..

>>49511008

The problem is there's not a whole lot to engage with there. "It's not elegant" is just raw opinion, the only response someone could muster would be basically "nuh uh."
"It pretends the bells and whistles are integral to the system" is kind of an argument from tone, that's also pretty slippery.

>>49511371

>i need a proper business letter describing to me in objective detail why this system isn't good

Yes sir coming right up sir

File: meatwad.png (47KB, 250x253px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 250x253px

>>49511701

Okay, that's fair.

Dogs is very idiosyncratic. It's Western genre, but not really. Religion plays a dominant role. The mechanics incite one-upping between players.

As such it is in a line with Dead of Night, The Mountain Witch, or Don't Rest Your Head: it isn't generic but a very specific game. It does that well an invites players to have fun in the way it outlines. It does not bend well to modification or shifting focus.