Cool. The revisions help with most of my mechanical concerns, yeah. There's an interesting dynamic here in the raising of the La Bête score if you use it entirely... again reminiscent of MLwM, I suppose. I like this version. I also like how much less likely it is to lower Companions' scores.
Yikes, you've pumped the Beast, haven't you? One suggestion - rather than adding ten dice, perhaps you might simply steal the active player's (remaining) La Bête dice, and take and roll everyone else's La Bête as well. Makes it scale with group size, but that's OK, their ability to respond en masse, which is the only way they have a hope in France of winning, scales likewise. Also note that the Beast is no longer nastier vs. companions with a high trust in their wolves; the only reason they're at more risk is simply because players will be wanting to bring them in at least once per round to reduce the Battues. I liked that increase in risk to them, and would like to see it brought back in.
With the Beast this much increased, I think you need to revisit the rules for introducing more wolves into the scene. As it stands, if I'm the last player to go in the round (and everyone else took their turns as normal), introducing a high-point Companion is madness, because there'll be nothing we can do if you decide to invoke the Beast.
As a thought: maybe instead of each wolf only being able to show up once per round, give multiple appearances a cost. For each time above the first that your wolf was in a scene this round, increase your La Bête by one. (Henri, do you not zink zere are beaucoup de loups zis spring?) Interestingly, this might imply that you can "rest up" by making zero appearances in scenes during a round, and drop one La Bête die, possibly down to the starting minimum of three; or soften that to rolling one La Bête die, and if it's a 1-2 or 1-3 then you get to remove it from your pool. This way of handling multiple appearances makes invocation of the Beast a much less certain outcome... but if you go with "the Beast rolls all your La Bête" then you've each given it another die, the moment you jump in, as well as making the Battues worse.
I also have this notion that the Beast might appear anytime the GM rolls three sixes, rather than once per session... talk about unpredictable horror. Just a thought, it's yours if you want it.
The rules for killing NPCs look good; I like the "dice speak for themselves" Meatbot Massacre approach.
The dismissing a Companion thing still bugs me, again because you can (instead of using this rule) just not call them into scenes; the GM can't override that, there's no way he can introduce a Companion into play. Not being able to mention them again is very pretty... but right now it's against the player's best interests to do so, which is generally not good design. If you were to use the not-introduce-your-wolf La Bête reduction thing I suggested above, then I'd retract my opposition to this rule, simply because you'd no longer be paying an additional price over and above the removal of their Companion score.
Overall, I think that if you want to make the true focus of the game be on the villagers, then you want to promote more scenes with the villagers sans (obvious) wolves or Beast. The "sit this one out" rule would help some, and you might want to also give players who choose this option some more narrative guidance over the non-wolfy scene. Allowing "wolf paces along making sure things go the way he wants and jumping in only if required" wouldn't be hard from a rules point of view - make it clear that the five dice are the player's side of the argument, as in PTA, not the wolf's stats. Can't get La Bête unless your wolf puts in an appearance, of course. In fact it strikes me that La Bête would work against your Companions in conflict, except where you step in, which would put yet another edge on that sword. (Nonwolf scene: GM gets the La Bête dice. Introduce your wolf: GM loses them, you get them.)
Also your post here makes me wonder if you don't want an endgame mechanic after all... for the Companions. Might want to give that some thought. You already have the seeds of it, in the "dismiss a companion" rule... that could be the nugget of something very interesting.
- Eric