Baragei Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 I suspect many of us old fans will soon be Old School BRPers as well by the looks... If you check your passport, you'll find it stamped with "grognard" from the minute you clocked in on this forum. I do share your(and other's sentiments) on the CoC7. Some of it is cool. Other things are not. Not even in the slightest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smiorgan Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I've already expressed my views of the rules changes on other forums...and they are similar to those many people have expressed here (and in the other forum). From a commercial viewpoint, my gut feeling is that this edition is going to be a trainwreck. Apart from pissing many BRP grognards, they're making their existing stock obsolete: this includes the variant settings (CoC Dark Ages, Cthulhu Invictus), as well as the latest stuff and (seemingly) some of the stuff they have in the pipeline. WotC has always had a phase-out period for the old editions, so that the latest products of the cycle don't get "burned". It may be 90% compatible, but I think they underestimate the difference in look and feel. Who's going to pick-up a book that looks outdated. And Chaosium is not ready to quickly pump out supplements for the new game in Mongoose style. I sincerely hope that I'm wrong here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mankcam Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 If you check your passport, you'll find it stamped with "grognard" from the minute you clocked in on this forum. lol Quote " Sure it's fun, but it is also well known that a D20 roll and an AC is no match against a hefty swing of a D100% and a D20 Hit Location Table!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seneschal Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Given the heat these discussions have generated, let's hope that the dictum "No publicity is bad publicity" holds true. Now, if only we can book successive knock-down, drag-out fights between Chaosium personnel and agitated fans on The Jerry Springer Show, 60 Minutes, and The Tonight Show. (Don't hit 'em too hard, guys. We've got another performance at 10.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrippyHippy Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) I've got no issue with some of the more subtle rule changes, but others just seem overbearing - especially when they are overtly included on the character sheet or NPC stats. The 'rules-lite' 7e character sheet looks more complicated than the full standard CoC rules. Likewise the bonus/penalty dice system just seems to add complexity to the rules, and I'd have preferred them to expand the use of Magic/Power points to include more general 'luck' style effects, rather than create a new Luck resource stat. If anything, I'd have preferred them to disassociate the Sanity aspect to the POW stat, and make it it's own stat - to remove the issue of powerful but insane sorcerers. They could also have forgone with the extra 50% skill category in my view and I certainly think the 20/50/100% notation is as convoluted as it gets really. Contested rolls could have been introduced more elegantly as the did with RuneQuest 6 (roll-highest-but-under-stat), and they could have just included all the Characteristic % rolls as per normal BRP. As it stands they've removed the 'complicated' Resistance Table and replaced it with something that appears more complicated. In all, I'm looking forward to getting CoC7e (I backed the kickstarter for $150), but the rules are not the ideal and seamless development that they could have been. It's a shame that the play testing set up had a few too many people willing to effectively discredit critics of the new system as being luddite-like, rather than actually address the issues of concern. It's far from a disaster, it's just not ideal - and the increased number of Mythos-based RPGs on the market these days is going to make the future interesting. C'est la vie. Edited November 27, 2013 by TrippyHippy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_octogono Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 After reading 7ed Quick Start Rules, I think it solves none of the alleged "problems" with the game. As someone said here before, adding dice tricks in addition to success levels is a very bad decision. Other long time issues are too many skills and the "missing clue = spoiled adventure" that many indie gamers love to point out. Also the push roll adds a second roll with apparently the same chance of success but with a complication or a "fail forward" result. How I would have done it: - Keep 3-18 characteristics, avoiding large numbers but use meaningful but simple char modifiers, similar to Magic World - Instead of pushed rolls use a re-interpretation of BRP rules: skill levels mean different basic knowledge or expertise. So... instead of using push rolls, if a roll is a failure, use the basic minimum use of the skill. Perhaps a skill threshold could be used, requiring the character to have at least that percentage in the skill to have a minimum success or success with a complication. This rule solves the "missing clues" problem. A vital clue in an adventure should have a very low skill threshold, so a failed Spot Hidden roll will grant a basic clue or info, by the rules. - Use only one success level at 1/2 skill. Resolve combat with oposed rolls as de QSR. - Reduce the number of skills. - Instead of adding dice for advantages or disadvantages roll the same dice but lower is the Tens die, if having advantage, and higher is the Tens die, if having a disadvantage. Quote Check my Lobo Blanco - Elric RPG (now in english!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_clapham Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 I'm not overly thrilled with the attributes expressed as percentages. The bonus die/ penalty die system is interesting. I would have been happier if they had kept closer to the core rules, cleaned up skills a bit, and added a stability attribute that you derived your sanity points from. A system of advantages/ feats to make the game more pulpy would have been nice too. Frankly it seems like what I want Call of Cthulhu 7th edition to be, I'm already creating with my pulp Legend project. I have the cleaned up skill list, hero points, combat actions and a system of advantages/ feats that are skill based. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jux Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Dissapointed about the new changes as well. I do think that CoC would benefit from two changes: getting rid of resistance table and reducing number of skills. - having a simple opposed skillcheck like in OQ, would do the trick (also OQ combat/healing rules) - it was so common in classic CoC to waist so much energy when creating a detailed character who knows accounting and astronomy and electronics or what not ... and then never needs it, ever. While OQ has nice short skill list, I think it would be too short for CoC. These are all basically knowladge skilles. What I would introduce would be "fields of interests" that character can mark/add bonus, which is based on the education. Savage Worlds, Realms of Cthulhu had such a neat option that based on the education one could list interests, which added bonus to general smarts roll. All the rest of "innovations" in 7th ed are terrible crap. All in all, I think my CoC7 will be mish-mash of OQ rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.