klecser

Weird, I was able to get in as a non-subscriber. It's being advertised as all fans?

Come join us on Twitch!

Smoking Ruins should be out in dead tree pretty soon...

1 hour ago, davewire said:

I’ve been rereading the entire Dream Cycle recently and just got a copy of the 5th edition Dreamlands sourcebook. Does anyone have any suggestions for some good pre-written Dreamlands modules?

The tricky part is that full scenario books can be hard to find, or scenarios are isolated within other collections. The Dreaming Stone, which is difficult to find, is a classic supplement. In addition, Dennis Detweiler's Sense of the Sleight of Hand Man contains a lot of lore and situations that are great fodder for any Dreamlands scenario ideas or campaign arcs. I carved a lot of material from this supplement for my Dreamlands section. There are some interesting artifacts and characters to draw from.

I'd also recommend that, if you'd like more, just spend some time reading scenario synopses of various collections. Many of them have one Dreamlands scenario as part of them.

New Comet has consistently given frequent updates and has had very short delays. I've appreciated their professionalism and attenuation to Backers. Some companies understand why that is important. Some struggle to understand why it is important, I'm afraid. Not everyone gets how important PR is. Ben understands.

55 minutes ago, davewire said:

As you appear to be a fan of Golden Goblin Press, I was wondering if you had a copy of their 7th Edition Cthulhu Invictus sourcebook. I studied Roman history in college so the Invictus setting has always intrigued me so I’ve been planning to get a copy of that book. Unfortunately, I never got a copy of Chaosium’s original version, but I’ve heard good things about GGP’s quality.
I joined their Kickstarter for Britannia & Beyond and so I’d say I’m already pretty much sold on getting a copy of Cthulhu Invictus added on to my pledge, but I’d appreciate any insight.

You'll have to wait until Britannia & Beyond completes for an overview of that. I pledged extra in advance on that KS to bank funds for the main CI 7th guide. It's one of the few I don't have in my collection and the plan is to get it as an add-on. Maybe ask @Bud's RPG review if he has a copy and is interested in showing off an overview. Bud has a lot of plans on his plate right now, so it may not be feasible and I'm not intending to "volunteer him" for something that he doesn't want to do!

4 hours ago, lordabdul said:

I often find that past a given level of "backstory complexity", the players start getting lost -- they misunderstand what's going on, miss it, or worse. These are the types of adventure where, at the end, I talk with them about all the stuff they missed and what really happened behind the scenes... which happens often But there's a fine line between " oh wow so that's what was going on!" (similar to rewatching a movie and catching things you missed the first time) and "so it really didn't make any sense because they're mad/alien/whatever?". They love the first one. They don't love the second one so much, although they're OK with it when it comes with truly alien motivations (Delta Green Mythos monsters are very much of this type... it's fine that the Mi-Go don't have methods and agendas that can be understood). 

I think you've hit at one of the key challenges of Keeping any game, which is Keeper desire/perception doesn't always align with player experience. And, as you say, communication is key. I know a GM who builds really intricate relational connections between NPCs that we, as his players, completely miss the majority of the time. They are fully logical, yet so complex that the discovery is just tedious by the time the denouement/revelation lands. He never really asks us about the extent to which we follow his web of connections and when it transpires in a game it goes something like this: We aren't really reacting to this amazing connection he has set up. It was far too subtle. We sit there and stare at him and he is very clearly waiting for our "a ha" moment. And then, usually in game, he starts slowly re-feeding us all details until we figure things out. The whole time he has this sardonic grin on his face, and by the time he steps us through all the information that we were "supposed to" pick up on initially, he expects us to be amazed by what he has written. And we just aren't. That isn't to say we don't have fun in his games. We do. He just finds his intricate logical webs far more interesting than his players do.  You may say that "if communication is key, why not bring this up?" The short answer is that he is incredibly sensitive, prone to taking even the most gentle criticism personally, and it just isn't worth the drama. We have fun in other ways (he is an absolute master at interesting combat encounters) and usually only game with him once or twice a year. And that is the danger, if the logic is so detailed and/or complex it is very, very easy for players to miss details. This is why moving critical clues around is so important in CoC. Sometimes getting a clue really isn't "optional" and the story is much more about the fun of how the clue is discovered, than whether it is or is not. This is the reason why I think Gumshoe is attempting to solve a problem that never actually really existed. A good CoC Keeper has always understood that clues should not be "high stakes" if they are critical to the plot.

Quote

As far as human NPCs are concerned, I always try to make them have some kind of sense. There's method in madness, as they say. The logic may be strange and skewed, but there's a logic. It makes for more interesting villains, and it also gives me guidelines to make the NPCs react to the PCs' actions -- if I can't understand the mad cultists' motivation and logic, then anything can happen and that doesn't help me improvise. Half the time, though, I make up random stuff based on this framework, and then the players poke holes in that, and then I need to write more material between sessions to plug those holes, and then they poke more holes, etc. This push-and-pull kinda helps coming up with schizophrenic motivations, sometimes.

This is a good point. I'm not saying that stories should have NO sense elements. You are correct in that some layer of logic is needed. I think when you combine all these examples together, the Keeping axiom that emerges is that depth or breadth of logic doesn't really matter if it isn't accessible and fun to players. I know a lot of GMs that keep their logic under lock-and-key in their head. They seem to be "challenging" the players, in an adversarial sense, to unravel their logic. And the players may not have necessarily being given clues that "hit," so to speak.

In the context of the original thread, the question is: Under what level of logic are the players and Keeper, mutually, going to enjoy the established logic of the "hunt?

If it is skewed to one side or the other, the other side just isn't going to have fun. Keeping is a dance, in this way. People don't mind being lead, so long as the experience is fun.

4 hours ago, lordabdul said:

So.... sounds to me that, instead of treating this as an unfortunate plot hole that needs to be kept for the sake of the genre's tropes, it can actually be an excuse to write a decades-spanning campaign!

What opportunities are there for, over time, "explaining the unexplained," rather than assuming that the loosely explained is some kind of error? How can "problems" be turned into opportunities?

Thank you!

One of the Investigator Handbook's main selling points is that it contains an information-rich gazetteer of the 1920s. Softcover version currently on sale if you're looking to save on retail! https://www.chaosium.com/call-of-cthulhu-investigator-handbook-7th-ed-softcover/

Edit: Updated to switch PDF Links of above to physical product. Added PDF of 7th Edition Mansions of Madness Volume 1, since I explicitly mentioned the prior iteration as a solid intermediate scenario collection.

I strive for immersion and authenticity whenever possible. My players are about to engage in more train travel between Boston and New York. I've tried in vain to find images of actual train schedules of the era. If it is close to 1923, that is fine, but getting the actual year just aides in the immersion. Alternatively, if anyone knows of specific CoC supplements that contain Boston/New York train schedules, that would work too.

Help?

What a spectacular surprise. Mansions of Madness is one of the most well-regarded classic scenario collections. It is one of my personal favorites. "Exploring the big house" is a primal attraction to CoC for a lot of people. And I like the idea of splitting it into two collections with lots of new material. Veterans get updates and something new. Bravo Chaosium. You sneaky sneaksters.

My group just wrapped up a nine-session arc in the Dreamlands. We had a lot of fun. I ultimately decided I needed to move it back to the Waking World because I was running out of ideas that would keep is consistent with the wider campaign arc. I'm definitely looking forward to the new edition!

Check it out, if interested!

On 5/2/2020 at 3:09 AM, tendentious said:

I just like to rationalise the state of the world with the game that I happen to be playing. With MoN, it just struck me that most of these villains should have fairly comprehensive libraries that they didn't buy through auctions.

Story-telling is inherently irrational. Any story demands whatever set of parameters are needed to affect us emotionally as people so we invest in it. I will never understand this modern trend of demanding rational from the irrational. The truth is that the story does whatever it needs to do in order to be fun. Now, you make a good point that different people find different things fun. I'm just concerned that this demand for rationality in story-telling is ultimately self-defeating, because there has never been an underlying expectation of rationality in human story-telling. Story was crafted by early humans to make them afraid of animals or situations that could kill them. They appealed to a bias toward primal instinct, not rationality. And our myths and legends have largely carried on this tradition.

Now, as to your specific request, another question that could be asked is: To what extent are different stories within this "world" all happening at the same time, versus individual one-shots? It depends upon how you imagine it. It seems that you are imagining it as all stories exist, simultaneously. Another way to imagine it is that every story is an isolated incident. I'm thinking of the end of Clue where you get the "but it could have happened this way." To me, seeing someone obtain a tome in one story doesn't inherently mean that every other story in which a tome is discovered is happening concurrently. I view many of these stories as potentially isolated "what ifs." Whether Lovecraft intended it one way or the other doesn't really matter, in my opinion. It is up to each individual to interpret literature through their own lens. There are a lot of people who seem to think that people "must" consume Lovecraft in a certain way, and I find that perspective to be unfair.

My perspective aside, I've really enjoyed reading your posts.

2 hours ago, kross said:

While I agree this project is GROSSLY, even RIDICULOUSLY overdue, I'm not sure what more you could want from SHP beyond a refund. 

Follow through.

Just wanted to point out we are now two years and four months since closure of a Kickstarter for a single scenario that was being "revised" and Sentinel Hill Press' response to criticism is "seek a refund." Classy.

Makes perfect sense to me.  I think you answered your own question.  My advice to all Gamemasters, of all games, is always to trust yourself. If your players are hung up on whether or not you gave the wrong modifier to a firearms roll in low light conditions, you have bigger problems than your modifier choice. I'm willing to venture that most players are going to have an internal dialogue of "makes sense" and "this is a challenge to our goals!"

14 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

That was the sense I took it to mean, I thought the joke of my being cheeky on one hand (to Jörg) and claiming offence to being called cheeky on the other hand (by you) was obvious. Especially on the day of being a fool... Oh well... My bad... Perhaps we are all a little more serious these days.

Sorry, remember that I am a classroom teacher and the world is kinda topsy turvy and with a lot of intense reinvention right now. 😕 

8 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

 

Irreverence, excuse me?

This is my bad Bill. I had come to learn irreverent to mean "cheeky," but in looking up a variety of definitions, it's clear that it's main definition is much more closely aligned with "disrespectful." That is not what I meant. I meant cheeky. I was attempting to compliment Joerg's humor and I messed up. I'm sorry.

17 hours ago, Joerg said:

Thanks! For the time being, you'll have to use episodes one and two on repeat to reach 24 hours, but we are working on our next installment.

I appreciate this hefty irreverence. Also, you can always use any of my comments.

I'm really enjoying listening to Wind Words Ep. 2 today. I could listen to you guys muse all day long!

-A fan

The simple answer to your question is that the "right" answer is whatever is right for your game. You don't need our permission to be fair and creative. Your idea makes sense.

Edit: Sorry, I missed MOB's pinned post above. I stand by my comments of congratulations below though!

Check it out.

Congrats to @Chris S for this second edition and thank you Chaosium @Rick Meints and @Mike M for supporting the expansion of a second edition!

Counterpoint: I will take having to tie rather than getting a higher level of success in most circumstances.