Jump to content

klecser

Members
  • Content Count

    393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by klecser

  1. There are a couple pretty simple life axioms that people can follow to have a sense of perspective about their hobbies. One is that if you aren't in the driver's seat, you don't get to drive the car. Nobody likes a back seat driver. You don't get to pick other people's ice cream flavors. And if you are the sort of person who complains about the ice cream flavor another person chooses, you need to reevaluate your priorities. If the ice cream shop starts doing really well off that flavor you don't like, with an ad campaign that you don't like, complaining to the ice cream store about selling it and how they sell it is nothing but noise. It's a great way to get the shop and the shoppers to ignore you.
  2. I'm confused as to why you might think this is a problem.
  3. I just ran five people through What's In The Cellar at an FLGS. Nine people showed up. I had to arrange an overflow game for four of them (they were good sports about it). Three of the people who played referenced the Critical Role episode as what inspired them to try CoC. They had a blast experiencing the tension. One player set himself on fire failing a Pushed roll. He loved it. This is all the justification that I need that a "all players welcome" mentality is what is going to grow this game. And if growing the game isn't one of your personal goals, kindly step out of the way of the rest of us who plan to take action to grow it.
  4. If a Keeper can't make their games "creepy" with the material that Chaosium puts out, that is on the Keeper, not Chaosium. Believe it or not, I'm capable of starting with a canvas provided for me and painting a solid picture. I don't expect RPGs to be paint-by-number.
  5. To what extent should anyone's generalized distrust of expertise guide any policy? To what extent should anyone's lack of experience with diversity in gaming drive their opinions about what level of diversity is "appropriate" in gaming? From my perspective, this is all about how some people with very little verifiable table experience with diverse perspectives seems to want to set policy for everybody else about diverse perspectives at the gaming table. What exactly makes Keepers without any successful experience with political correctness the judge, jury, and executioner for the hobby? People may object to that question, because how do I know they haven't been successful? I don't. I also don't consider "politics isn't allowed at my table" to be success. It's avoidance, not success.
  6. It took a lot of courage for you to post this. I hear you. You aren't the only one that I've heard from who has expressed concern to me. I repeat the concern that @Addison raised: it appears as if there is uneven moderation. I find it a hard sell that anyone reads consistent, insulting, hurtful language from a particular individual, and no action is taken whatsoever by mods. Maybe I should unhide that person so that I can report. Because just in the quotes, I'm seeing some pretty shocking language that is not being mirrored in the comments of others involved. Whether intended or not, it can be perceived as enablement. Is that perception wrong? Then change the perception through action. I can only speak for myself. My goal here has been to encourage gaming for ALL. That has generally been Chaosium's message as well. That concept seems to be so frightening to some people that they are willing to post in ways that chase people away. Which is a PR problem for the game. So why is it tolerated on the forum? Chaosium games should welcome all people. Period.
  7. This is what bothers me. If you say that "social issues shouldn't have any bearing on role-playing games," you are either 1) devaluing those social issues or 2) unaware of those social issues. And no matter which of those is true, I don't see people being able to offer a positive table environment to people. That is, unless, you only game with people who have the same views as you. People have different views. And when you say "ideas that people want to explore that I don't want to explore shouldn't have a place at a role-playing table," you are gate-keeping the hobby. You are effectively saying that the only ideas and perspectives welcome at the table are ones that don't "bother" you. And you aren't welcome at the table if you want your views expressed in the game. I'm suspicious that that is what we are really talking about here. At least, that is basically the message that I am receiving, and that attitude is really bad for the hobby. If we're gonna be fully real here...Call of Cthulhu has a "good 'ol boy" problem. I stopped posting on Yoggie because you could impale yourself on the upward pointing noses. Many games have this problem. I think that, since CoC has been around for so long, it may be more pronounced. There are a lot of people that take HPL criticism incredibly personally. I see many players of the game that act like if you aren't already "part of The Club," you aren't getting into the Club. That is POISON for games. And the reason I'm posting here is to prevent that attitude from dominating the discourse. It won't attract new players. To be fair, I've also encountered many positive people in both places. But the negative ones are just SO negative. It is unfun, a lot of the time. If Call of Cthulhu fails to grow, it won't be Chaosium's fault. It will be the fan base's fault. I don't think many players understand how caustic they are to the average new fan. And this thread pretty much sum's it up for me: "You play the game MY way, without any of your foofy political correctness, or you don't play AT ALL. It's my way, or the highway." That is not a sustainable perspective for growth of the hobby.
  8. Feel free to use the ignore feature. What you call "divisive," I call holding people accountable for gatekeeping the hobby. I'm thinking that some people aren't used to having their ideas questioned.
  9. I really admire the fact that you (and others) are trying, g33k. I think its pretty clear that we're wasting our time. They aren't interested in learning. The fact that someone equates "batshit insane" with "neurodiverse" shows what kind of social experience we're dealing with. I think this thread has accomplished what it needs to accomplish: to show the community that the incredibly aggressive attitudes espoused by some do not need to exist in role-playing groups. Don't like something? Don't participate with it. But just know that you being ignorant of something doesn't make it wrong. Meet more people. Part of this reaction can be explained by a simple limitation of life experience. Salt of the Earth. Just because someone hasn't experienced something doesn't mean it isn't a thing.
  10. I don't even call it Sanity. In my game, the mechanic is replaced with a "Cosmic Trauma Resistance" (CTR) meter that essentially functions the same way, but it is all about how characters deal with the trauma they get from the Mythos. "Make a CTR check." My entire group is non-neurotypical, and subtle changes like that make the world of difference. Call of Cthulhu attracted them because (with some massaging) it allowed us to explore cognition in a fictional space. We know the history. We're re-writing the Mythos as we see fit. So, leave it to the other crowd to just assume that we aren't cognizant of these things. Maybe people aren't aware of it because they never asked? Because they assumed we run a progressive playbook that we get when we join? "I can't imagine it, so it can't be a thing." "I don't see the market being viable, so we should resist the market." The evidence is there (Harlem Unbound, the success of the Inner Darkness KS). The writing is on the wall. You can either accept the evidence, or pretend like it doesn't exist. At the end of the day, the question g33k posed is the real critical one. Whether someone likes something or not isn't the issue here. The question is why people would stop other people from liking what they like? Why do you feel a need to try to STOP people from approaching something a certain way? The argument most frequently lifted is "it will chase people away from the game." Nope. All evidence to the contrary. So what now? What is your big justification for stopping people from having fun if it isn't YOUR way? Why is this YOUR space and not EVERYONE's space? You know that freedom means everybody, right? Not "freedom so long as I get to define what the freedom is."
  11. This thread makes me want to pick up The Lost Expedition as my next AoC product...
  12. Went to The Little Shop of Magic and LOVED it! Thanks @Simlasa
  13. Isn't it amazing that the ones who cry foul the loudest about how "sensitive" people are, turn out to be the most sensitive ones in the room? I won't reiterate any of the points made above by Qizilbashwoman, Ian Absentia, and others, because they basically said what needs to be said. But I do want to come full circle to point out that this whole pseudo-schism started by people 1) stating facts that some people just don't want to talk about, 2) people apparently NOT talking about HPL "enough" in the CR video, or 3) conflating silence or stating of facts with "trashing" of HPL. It just seems like a Kobayashi Maru situation for some people. You talk about HPL with reverance, and you're "safe." You talk about him, rather than NOT talking about him, and you're "safe." You give the "right" balance of the facts that allow us to not have to confront anything that makes someone uncomfortable, and you're "safe." I mean, it's just a constant moving of the goalposts. All with the lovely gaslighting that it is really OTHER people who should be admonished for desiring safe spaces. What makes the person who admonishes safe spaces and decries political correctness feel safe is just "common sense." And what makes other (different *gasp*) people, who like safe spaces and respectful language feel safe is a breach of freedom? Come on. Give me a break. Who's really being the "sensitive" ones here? Honestly. *rolleyes* I'm actually glad this happened because this situation has taught me who I should even bother with and who I shouldn't. Some people just aren't worth your time.
  14. And I appreciate that. I wasn't criticizing. Just sharing my perspective. Good point about numerical advantage.
  15. The in-book rules are only one factor for me. I'm not a game canonist. I rely on the books for the assumption of play-testing and inspiration. I also don't want to make a decision that I end up regretting, regarding balance. This isn't Amber, where the Court members can conjure up anything that they want at-will. So, if I were to do it, I'd probably increase the Magic point cost so that in-combat Dreaming would be a "daily."
  16. I like your style. Keep having fun!
  17. Many spells are intended only for groups of people to cast. Rather, dozens of people contribute Magic Points. Of course, groups of Investigators can pool MP too.
  18. I think it also needs to be "capped" according to the rules of "size and complexity" that has been defined in H.P. Lovercraft's Dreamlands. It isn't Genie wishes. So for me the challenge is figuring out how to make the cost balanced so that it's use is fun, but not so overpowered as to be "boring."
  19. The thing that matters to me most is that the game we all love is opened to EVERYONE, not just people who conform to an exclusive perspective or persuasion. Whether people understand it or not, what we say on this Forum influences how much the game grows. And if the game growing means finding ways to accept players, even when you disagree with them, that should be a critical goal of what we do here. It is quite possible, after people watch the Critical Role episode, new prospective players will find their way to Chaosium.com, and by extension to this Forum. And some of us are here simply trying to emphasize that EVERYONE is welcome in Call of Cthulhu. And, in response, some forum members have been saying really unwelcoming things like "it is bad Keeping to attenuate to social issues at your table." Anyone who is a successful Keeper knows that that is just false. It also sends the message that different perspectives and experiences aren't welcome in the game and shouldn't be welcomed in the game. I've been contacted by forum members thanking me for defending respectful Keeping. But for every person who thanks people who defend gaming for all and respect for realistic experience, there are new people that see voices defining this as an unwelcoming place and they may never play the game because of it. Don't like people who don't think like you? Fine. But sure as heck don't chase them away from the rest of us who are willing to listen and work with them! It isn't our job to babysit your insecurities. This is EVERYONE'S game. Coming full circle, the Critical Role video has given us another of many recent opportunities to expand the game to new players. And some people here seem eager to protect "their" space against perspectives they don't like, even if it means all of us losing prospective players. I won't stand for that kind of poisoning of the well if I can show people they are welcome here. I'd like to think that Trifletraxor wants prospective new players to feel welcome on this forum. I salute them for making it available to all of us and to Chaosium, but that also means that how we represent the accessibility of Call of Cthulhu matters.
  20. Has anyone considered NPCs/adversaries possessing the Dreaming skill and Investigators getting into a "Dreaming battle" with said adversaries? Adversary produces a brick wall. Investigators Dream some means to get through or over it?
  21. It's worth noting that, while nclarke is correct that people play a wide variety of editions of CoC, all of the new material is being produced for 7E. There honestly aren't that big of a differences between the different CoC versions. 7th edition converted characteristics to a 100 scale instead of 3-18. Its just multiplying characteristics times five. 7th edition established three main difficulty levels for everything. It used to be you roll under varying multiples of your skill values to succeed. This has reduced the mental math greatly and speeds up table play. 7th edition combined combat skills into two main skills and consolidated some other skills. In older iterations, combat skills were much more split apart 7th edition also added some modern-style mechanics that keep a table fun like advantage/disadvantage (called bonus/penalty dice) and the option to spend luck to affect rolls. Ask a grognard how mad they are that someone dared to do that. 7th edition has theatre-of-the mind, number-line controlled Chase rules that haven't existed in prior iterations. There may be a few other things, but those are the main ones. Some of the grognards want to act like 7th edition ruined "their" game, but it is, in the opinion of many, a far more streamlined and modernized system. It'll be fun to see who flies off the handle to challenge that statement.
  22. Some people get handed a hundred-dollar bill and complain about how it is folded.
  23. I seem to recall someone at Chaosium saying that they considered this the "definitive edition" of Call of Cthulhu.
×
×
  • Create New...