Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by trystero

  1. I second these, having just run the scenario last night and run into some of these issues, and will add two more: While the scenario itself provides no dates beyond "the 1920s", the guestbook-page handout suggests that it takes place in mid-to-late January. It would be good to add this information to the introduction so that Keepers aren't caught out by this, as I was. Further to the above, it doesn't seem credible to me or my players—playing in Beverly, Massachusetts, right about where Arkham is supposed to be—that anyone would have come to northern Massachusetts with the intention of fishing in the middle of winter; the lake (which is more of a pond) would most likely be frozen, for one thing. We collectively agreed that the scenario would be more plausibly set later in the spring. One issue that @smithh65 raises, about Jacob Trent's vehicle, was a non-issue in my game; I assumed he'd hitchhiked, and that his lack of a vehicle was part of the reason he was still at the motel instead of off summoning the police to look into Abe's disappearance.
  2. In the version of "Edge of Darkness" included in the Call of Cthulhu edition 5.6 rulebook (the oldest version I have access to at the moment), the date of Marion Allen's death is given as August 1883 (no specific day) in both the journal and the newspaper-article handout.
  3. Or correct the text to "Creation of a Gate requires the permanent expenditure of POW in a sacrifice equal to the log to base 10 of the distance the Gate connects in miles, minus one (to a minimum of one), multiplied by five." This keeps the table intact.
  4. I have a list of mentioned-as-upcoming CoC releases in the wiki on RPGGeek: https://rpggeek.com/wiki/page/Call_of_Cthulhu_7th_edition_upcoming_releases And the RPGGeek database should include entries for all extant releases: see the "Linked Items" section on this page: https://rpggeek.com/rpg/23113/call-cthulhu-7th-edition
  5. I would be tempted to use the "Becoming a Believer" rules (Keeper Rulebook, p. 179) for this scenario; people might be able to put off the psychological impact by telling themselves it's just a costume, but the bill will fall due at some point or other.
  6. p. 66, Dappled Light statblock, Language section: "Tradetalk" should be split between lines as "Trade-talk" rather than as "Tra-detalk".
  7. Both the 5th-edition Stormbringer rulebook and Dragon Lords of Melniboné include this note on their respective copyright pages: I take this as a sign of good intentions on Chaosium's part; they'd hardly ask artists to reach out if they were knowingly involved in unlicensed usage of their work.
  8. There's a forum thread over at RPGGeek called "The Dark Side of Chaosium", in which a friend of the Finnish artist Petri Hiltunen reports that Chaosium's previous management used Hiltunen's art without permission in the 2001 fifth edition of Stormbringer. (I don't know whether the accusation also extends to the use of his art in Dragon Lords of Melniboné or not.) I haven't any information either way except what's been offered up in that thread, but thought it worth linking here in hopes that someone from Chaosium management can contact Hiltunen to investigate and resolve the issue. (Obviously there's no suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of the current management, but I do hope they're interested in addressing this concern.)
  9. Welcome to the club! I was very resistant to the idea of the 7th-edition rules changes based on the early reports I'd heard, but am very glad that I checked out the ruleset anyway; it's ended up being my favourite iteration of the system, with some great new ideas that I wish were rolled out to other BRP games. My group and I are very happy with this edition.
  10. Round 4: Per the rule on p. 314 of the rulebook, "Rune magic spells always take effect at strike rank 1." I don't see any rule which suggests that using MP as part of a Rune spell casting affects the SR, so I believe Bodran's Heal Wound spell should take effect on SR 1, not SR 7. I'm also in the camp of "make the roll for the spell when you've completed its casting time, rather than when you start it."
  11. I read it as making the Dodge skill roll before the attack, since the Dodge result determines whether the attacker suffers a penalty die on their Firearms roll or not. I'd apply the penalty die (if achieved) to all attackers with firearms for the round, but that's purely a personal judgement and not anything supported by the rules.
  12. I use the Major Wound rules for humans (cultists, etc.) and other real-world creatures, and tend to ignore them for otherworldly horrors.
  13. trystero


    Hard "g", "ener" as in "energy", "tela" like "tailor" without the final "r". Gehn-uhr-TAY-luh.
  14. trystero


    "Orlanthi": last syllable rhymes with "bee". "Pavis": first syllable rhymes with "pay", though it doesn't sound wrong if that syllable instead rhymes with "bah".
  15. trystero


    WĪ-tər (homophone for English adjective "whiter", rhymes with "brighter" and "lighter") TARSH-īte (rhymes with "marsh-bite") SAR-tər-īte (rhymes with "tar-fur-bite") I'm American and rhotic, and so pronounce all four of the "r" letters, where non-rhotic English speakers would, I believe, only pronounce the second "r" in "Sartarite".
  16. I agree. Once the investigator enters play their skill levels are set and no longer tied to their characteristic scores.
  17. Some suggestions: Terms, fourth bullet: "dur" -> "due" Limbs, point A: "cumulated" -> "accumulated" or "cumulative" (?) Limbs, point B: should "cannot exceed the LHP" be "cannot exceed twice the LHP"? Limbs, point 😧 this might be better placed as the first point in this section to make the order of operations clearer. First you check to see whether the damage meets the 3×LHP threshold for maiming or severing, then you cap damage at the 2×LHP threshold before applying it to LHP and THP. Example 3, point 1: "will reduce it to below –4 LHP" -> "will not reduce it to below –4 LHP" (?) Example 5: the numbering of the points should start at 1.
  18. I do wish that RQG was a bit more like 7th-edition CoC, myself. I'd love to see "fight back" as a third defense option (in addition to "dodge" and "parry"), and would similarly love to have percentile characteristics that can be directly opposed to each other or to skills, ditching the Resistance Table. That said, they're not so different; you can definitely blend the bits you like in each game. It's just a bit more work.
  19. …and, in my CoC experience, because you can carry two of them, sawn-off and loaded with slugs, and use them to apply a simple test when any sort of Thing menaces you: Step 1. Empty all four shotgun barrels into the Thing, preferably at point-blank range. Step 2. If it's still moving, you can't kill it; run away.
  20. It's so cute! Lovely that we finally got cthulhu into something's scientific nomenclature.
  21. Stokes wrote Lover in the Ice, which I encountered in its Delta Green adaptation. It's inventive and brilliant and quite uncomfortable to read (if sexual assault is a trigger for you, steer well clear). It's one of those "I want to run this for my group… but also, I don't want to run this for my group" scenarios. I may have to check out No Security based on that and your recommendation. Odd that there's no PDF option for the full book. For those who don't want to search, the five individual PWYW scenarios that Jakob mentions are: Bryson Springs The Fall Without End The Red Tower Revelations The Wives of March
  22. So we have three conflicting explanations of how disease spirits operate: Core rulebook p. 370, Possession section: "When a spirit reduces a corporeal entity’s magic points to 0, the spirit may possess the entity", and then in the bulleted list, "Covert Possession: The possessing creature exerts no influence upon the actions or consciousness of the natural owner of the body, but shares the physical form. Examples include disease spirits…". To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit must reduce the victim's MP to 0 through Spirit Combat Once the victim is diseased, the disease spirit remains in covert possession of the victim until exorcised or until the victim's death This is somewhat similar to the version from RQ3's Creatures Book, p. 35, albeit without the special "MP vs. targeted characteristic" mechanic for spirit combat Glorantha Bestiary p. 166, Disease section: "The first time this spirit succeeds in spirit combat that is not successfully defended against, it infects the victim with the acute version of any disease it carries. For each subsequent success, it infects the victim with another disease or with the next degree version of a previous infection. After the disease spirit has infected its victim with the chronic version of each disease carried, the disease spirit will try to withdraw to infect a new victim." To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit only needs to win one or more Spirit Combat exchanges, rather than reducing the victim all the way to 0 MP The disease spirit does not take possession of the victim Glorantha Bestiary, p. 169, Disease Spirit entry: "…if the disease spirit succeeds in an attack when the victim fails, the spirit can try to infect the target with any of the diseases it is carrying. This infection requires another roll overcoming the target’s Spirit Combat skill, as if the disease spirit was trying to possess the victim. If successful, this does not force the victim’s spirit from the body but infects the victim with the acute form of any disease carried. A second success infects the victim with the next degree of the disease…" To inflict a disease on the victim, the disease spirit needs to win one or more Spirit Combat exchanges and win a secondary opposed Spirit Combat contest for each, rather than reducing the victim all the way to 0 MP The disease spirit presumably does not take possession of the victim This is the version from RQ2's Cults of Terror, p. 31, though in that book the rolls were POW vs. POW contests rather than opposed Spirit Combat contests @Jason Durall, which one is right?
  23. @Tupper, I chose another 2 points intentionally, to illustrate the difference that Jason's answer above makes. Here's my understanding of how my example works, in more detail: Before combat, uninjured: My arm is at 3 HP (its full value), and I'm at full total HP. Life is good. After a 7-point arm hit: My arm takes 7 points of damage and drops to −4 HP (and I'm incapacitated and can take no action beyond healing attempts, because the arm has now taken at least 2× its original HP). But total HP loss from a single arm or leg hit can't exceed 2× the location's HP, which in this case is a 6-HP limit, so my total HP only drop by 6, not by 7. After another 2-point arm hit: My arm takes another 2 points of damage and drops to −6 HP (and is severed or maimed, because it's now taken 3× its original HP). My total HP drop by another 2, so I'm down 8 total HP. So the first hit does 7 points to the arm, but only 6 to your total HP. The second hit does 2 to the arm and 2 to your total HP. Again, this is my understanding; I'm interested to hear whether others see it differently.
  24. So it sounds as though the 2×location HP limit on total HP loss for arm and leg injuries is the only case where it matters whether damage was done by a single attack or multiple attacks. A single attack can't cause total HP loss in excess of this limit, but a later attack can do so. Or, in other words, if I have a 3 HP in my arm location and I'm hit by an attack doing 7 points, I only lose 6 total HP, but if I'm hit again in that arm for 2 more points, I still lose another 2 total HP and my arm is still severed or maimed. Thanks, Jason; it's good to have this matter clarified, even if it's not in the book. I hope the PDF edition can be updated to reflect this ruling.
  25. As much as I think the new layout is pretty, I still miss the plain simplicity of Times body text, Univers and Benguiat headers found in the original and classic CoC releases. Those were readable above all else, and great when skimming.
  • Create New...