Jump to content

klecser

Members
  • Content Count

    603
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by klecser

  1. Noteworthy that another way to spend wealth is this game is to hire help. Part of that wealth can go to salaries to get people to do things that you need done. I could imagine a wealthy Investigator providing a salary for someone to maintain a clip file of newspaper articles. The advantage being that the game becomes less about the trip to the library or newspaper but to their own curated collection. That doesn't mean that there wouldn't be intrigue involved. Some articles can exist in obscure newspapers that are not part of the collection. Not every player likes trudging through the mundane as a part of the experience. Finding the balance of what style of game the Investigators and Keepers like is really what confronting the "wealth issue" is all about.
  2. Arm-chair quarterbacking anything usually does not result in the kind of acceptance people seek.
  3. Do you think that a Greater Independent Race would ever be subject to the same SAN checks as a human would? Would they be completely immune to SAN losses from other Greater Races/Lesser Races? Would they still roll SAN checks on Outer God sightings and Avatar of Outer God sightings?
  4. A cheaper option exists if there is an Office Max, Office Depot, Staples etc near where you live. Submit the PDF to their online system (they have settings that allowyou to cut out the pages you don't want) and have them print on whatever kind of paper you think best emulates the Starter sheets. Maybe glossy or semi glossy? Takes a little work, but it should be just a couple dollars for 4-5 of each.
  5. I really hope I have an aberration. I'm hoping others will post and say "nope, mine looks fine!" There is only one handout that I would consider "unusable" in the back. The others are all clear. And as mentioned before, the maps and handout images in the text all mostly look fine. I think most Keepers are going to have the PDF. However, I can imagine someone only buying a hard copy in an FLGS and getting home and not even being able to photocopy a handout that is unreadable. And then being forced to buy the PDF to run it effectively. Now, I think Chaosium would help out under those circumstances, but it is better for all if my copy is a fluke.
  6. Well, I received my hard copy of Deadlight AODT. I'm well known as a pretty staunch supporter of Chaosium, and will continue to be, but this is an example where I am disappointed. I don't say that lightly because I'm pretty forgiving and take most setbacks in stride. The artwork in the PDF has very clear contrast, and I have no trouble discerning the characteristics of the images on the "painted" pieces of artwork. On my hard copy, all of these images are very difficult to discern detail on. It ends up looking like a jumble of dark greys melded together. The handouts and maps are ok in print. Examples: page 17: The only reason I can make out a car on the right of the image is because of the headlights. Page 38: The woman looks like a uniform shadow with no discernible detail. Page 41: One giant mess of grey. I can tell someone is in a window in a house. I've attached some images. Note that my phone camera actually makes them look better than they look on visual inspection, IMO. I am curious as to whether others that received their hard copies have this same problem. Perhaps I just got a bad copy.
  7. I sent a message to customer service when I got my coupon for Deadlight because it told me that I had to spend an additional 1.99 to use the coupon. So, there may be some kinks to work out with it? Update: My issue is that I had purchased both in PDF but only wanted Deadlight in hard copy. Dustin sorted it for me, as always!
  8. Mind posting the one with allowance for HP and SAN?
  9. Through Chapter 1 so far and the only error I've found so far is: Page 18, The Question of Literacy and the Alphabet sidebar, the text overlaps the border art at the bottom of the box.
  10. You are succeeding at being rude. And I invite you to share your own editing of your own works before making this claim of others.
  11. @MOB, does this mean weeks or months? Are we "on the boat" from Lithuania? It will help me plan whether to hold for a big order or do smaller orders. Thanks!
  12. Respectfully requesting a sticky from @MOB.
  13. The most recent full edition is 2003? Am I missing something? Are you referring to the Dark Ages section of Cthulhu Through the Ages? Edit: Ok, it seems that there was a limited release Ashcan version of Cthulhu Dark Ages at Gen Con 2015. It seems to me like this book was rebuilt from the ground up, but @MOB would need to confirm that. Edit 2: The more I look into this the more confused I get. This may NOT be that different from the 2015 Gen Con Edition.
  14. Fantastic. I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to be Addison. We've been hearing snippets for months and Addison asks and hears: "PDF in a few days!" Nice timing.
  15. I think that even one loss of ten POW to be significant enough to make a character think twice about getting the benefit. I guess the point here is that you choose how to effectively administer it. If you want to increase the cost of a spell, do it. Another consideration here is that you can always craft consequences that players don't forsee. If you think your players are "abusing" Return Thee To Safety, introduce a new consequence. Players never know and see all. That is an axiom of this game. If your group is new to CoC, it is imperative that they understand sooner rather than later that this is not a "all knowledge, all the time" RPG.
  16. I honestly don't think it does. IIRC, both the Keeper Rulebook and Gand Grimoire both suggest many alternatives for failed spell castings, but I don't remember there being a unified way to do it. Serious question: Why SHOULD there be a unified way to do it?
  17. It was a protective spell designed to stop another spell that was never actually cast? I'd have their hair, nails, and skin grow thick, like armor, to reflect the cosmic energy that wasn't used to protect from that spell. They gain some amount of DR, but they are so hideous that they take a penalty die on all social rolls except intimidate. And if that isn't enough, maybe people need to make SAN rolls when they see them too.
  18. The POW cost is a tremendous cost. The ramification of it is that you could cast that spell just one or two times and make your character completely unable to resist the effects of spells cast on them because of a weak POW. What will happen is that they will get potentially unbalanced advantages in one or two games and then render themselves very ineffective from then on. That might be a good lesson to learn. Right now, my players know over a half dozen spells between three characters. And they have only cast one of them once. Because they are too afraid to cast them. And that is exactly how it should be. They know the mechanics consequences of those that they've researched the most. And they've learned spells that they don't fully know the consequences of. There is no rule that says that players are entitled to RAW descriptions of spells. In fact, it is always best if the name used for the spell is completely cryptic and they can't look it up. Edit: Here is an analogy. And I'm not trying to patronize you or anything ColoradoCthulhu, so if this is second nature to you, maybe it will help newer Keepers anyway. In D&D, everyone has complete knowledge of all of the rules. As an adventure game, the culture of D&D is about managing resources that you know intimate details about to their fullest. I say "culture" because, although that is what is most common in D&D circles, it doesn't have to be played that way. But it is, I'm sure partly because it also creates a common language that people speak. Horror investigation is very different. The most fun is had in Call of Cthulhu the less you know. And that particularly means spells. Consider these example exchanges: Dungeon Master: You find a dusty book on a shelf. Contained within the pages are a spell that you can copy into your spellbook. Player Character: Cool, which spell? Dungeon Master: Ray of Frost Player Character: Cool! *starts looking it up in the book* Dungeon Master: I got you. It can be cast on a monster up to 120 yards away as an Attack and does 1d10 damage. [I don't know the exact stats.] [Riveting. Now, that is hyberbolic. And it doesn't have to be done that way. But anyone in the audience who has played D&D knows that this is common, especially among DMs developing skills.] Keeper: "After an intense period of study, and your mental stability wracked by these revelations, you uncover the secrets of an eldritch chant that calls upon the powers of some otherworldly force. You think, perhaps, that the chant could be used in a pinch to inflict harm on your enemies. Investigator: What does the tome name the spell as? Keeper: Forceful Deliverance of Enemies Investigator: What can I discern about what it does? Keeper: Not much, I'm afraid. There are horrid pictures of flesh being rendered. And there appear to be risks to you as well for tapping this source and inflicting this harm. Investigator (OOC): Where would I find this in the rulebook? Keeper: You have the information you received. [Knowing that Forceful Deliverance of Enemies is a unique name, not in the Keeper's Rulebook.] Now, kind Keepers wouldn't be this extreme, but the idea is to illustrate what might be possible and to model expectations with players. I like Call of Cthulhu because the change in style tends to put players into learning mode and, if they've come from D&D or other "mainstream" fantasy adventure games, they are more likely to learn and adapt to these new parameters if you use them from the beginning. Bringing this full circle, the point is that CoC Investigators shouldn't need to get total knowledge of any spell. This is part of what keeps balance. The spell, as written, is for Keeper's eyes only.
  19. Lloyd, you are the one who is overreacting right now. You posted a thread that you intended to be funny, and you worded it so subtly that the "funny" wasn't really detectable. So, I answered it seriously. And man, am I a monster for doing so, because I added a little commentary on a common issue of interpretation of expertise that you KNOW influences layperson interpretation of science, if you've studied it. And ever since that happened, rather than accepting the fact that you maybe could have worded your intentions more clearly, you've just been pitching a fit. You could have led the thread with "I've studied Physics and I find this nuance funny and interesting!" But no. You managed to post just about the most cryptic initial post you could have given your intentions. And now you're all surprised that your precise intentions happen to not have been read correctly? Come on, man. And @g33k, you have a solid handle on it. Don't worry. I'm never going to tease you with what I know and don't know.
  20. I'm a scientist, and a Christian, and I've never gone to either group to explain to them the error of their ways. If you are making a faith argument, I have no problem with that whatsoever. You asked what seemed like a direct scientific question. And I gave you a scientific answer. If you didn't want a scientific answer, that is perfectly ok. Just so we're clear...I'm not saying that a scientific answer to the Big Bang is the only viable answer. Faith answers exist as well. You framed your question/humor in a scientific manner. So I responded in kind. Methinks you're making some assumptions about my perspective. But you also haven't asked. I also think you misinterpreted my Bio. I've been playing role-playing games for 27 years. I'm not 27 years old. I'm 42. So, I was kinda like "He knows my age and has been studying Physics for 40+ years?..." Does your argument change knowing that I'm older? Do you respect my responses more or less, knowing that I'm not 27? Really, who is being unreasonable here? Lloyd, I haven't seen anything in my life that says that age guarantees intelligence, experience or empathy. It pains me that you went directly to "young American" as the main justification for your reaction. I reacted to what you wrote. You constructed an age and nationality that fits your dislike for what I wrote. How should I respond to that? You said uni, so I should assume you're a Brit and chuck a British stereotype your way?
  21. You seemed to be asking a serious question, and you got a serious answer. Which, if you've studied Physics longer than I've been born, you should know the answer to that question. If your goal was to bring it up in a humorous light, there isn't much in your message that seems to indicate that humor. You used the "surprised" emoji. Which would tend to indicate that you have a more serious take? Whatever, dude. You asked if the Big Bang violates the Laws of Conservation. It doesn't. I don't know how you wanted people to respond to that, whether a serious or humorous question... I'm interested to hear why my nationality matters. What fun stereotypes do you plan to tout out if I am? And are you willing to have those reciprocated? Because I won't reciprocate.
  22. I expect that this is the case as well. It is important for people to continue questioning and to be skeptical. The style of science education that teaches people that science is about memorizing answers is doing them a disservice. Science is a system of questioning. But it also has rules that define the parameters for fairness for that questioning.
×
×
  • Create New...