ragr

No worries, Ronnie. Good luck with the work and catch you some other time maybe.

GMT, Ronnie. I haven't moved. You'd be welcome to join us again and we're up to two players now.

Places, like people, sometimes go wrong. They turn off the path and head into the shadows; becoming something other than normal. Black places filled with blank rooms, closed doors and empty hallways lined with dust. In these places your voice catches in your throat, the air seems to hum and things happen. People get hurt, objects vanish. Bad feelings flow like the loose tap in the bathroom and hate hangs in the air like old paint. It smells of time and circumstance and something just a little beyond the world. It smells like surrender... I'm going to be running the above DG scenario on the dates below using Zoom with a TotM playstyle. Roll dice at home, video essential. It will use self generated pcs not pre-gens - we can work that out collaboratively. It will run for 2-4 players and I have two confirmed players so far.. The tone is mature, gritty and realistic. Cert 18. The dates are all Mondays 7:45 pm - 10:15 pm April 11th/25th May 9th/23rd/30th If anyone is ready to commit or wants to know more then feel free to post below or drop me a PM. Rich

What sort of cheating?

It's the basic level that all investigators possess at the start of character generation. This skill can be used at that base level or points added to the skill during the character generation process. If you add nothing to it it can be used at that score during play and if used successfully (unlikely) can be "ticked" for improvement during the investigator development phase.

You'll be best off by guiding the player to create a "field agent" type character and suggest that they invest in skills that will help with the front line of investigation; things like Spot Hidden, Stealth for the physical acquisition of clues but also Persuade and Fast Talk/Charm for dealing with npcs. They will probably also need a fair amount of physical skills in case the fieldwork gets dirty and violent. The character can then have a small network of support npcs who deal with the more technical side of things when the investigator brings the clues to them for adding detail, things like Astronomy, Science, Occult etc. Those npcs don't decide what the clue means they just reveal what they are as you don't want the player to use the npc as a safety blanket; you don't want the investigator to keep coming back to the npc throughout the scenario. You could also consider using some of the Pulp Cthulhu rules, especially the Luck rules, which can provide a measure of outcome control for the player without erasing the danger as they still have to make choices about when to use them. At the table it's really just a matter of ensuring that when something potentially investigator killing is close that you signal it so the player has options. My experience of 1-1 indicates that the biggest difference from a "party" game is that you're looking to make the one investigator be and feel competent to investigate rather than blundering about like a fish out of water. If you're using existing scenarios then check the SAN losses; if the scenario has sudden, heavy losses then avoid using it; if it has a few low and slow drip losses then it's the kind of creepy or odd scenario that'll probably work well 1-1. That's what works for me.

For sheer lunacy it has to be Jack Nicholson in The Shining. For bouncing back and forth it would be Toni Collette in Hereditary.

It's only come up in a minor way so far in the Masks campaign I'm running. As we go forward I think it will become more prominent and may, as you allude to, make that particular investigator all but immunised against the effects of Sanity loss; the player wants to take some time out in the journey to Egypt to learn one of the spells picked up in London so the Talent will have obvious benefits when wielding magic. There may be some balancing factors that are more outside of the purview of mechanics so it'll be interesting to see if and how those develop; I'm not going to restrict the Talent now as it was chosen in good faith by the player and there is still the threat of death rather than insanity and it's possible that a perceived immunity to the latter may precipitate exposure to the former. If you asked me outright though I would say that I do think it's OP.

A part of me wonders whether there was an intention to slap a pre-condition or a restriction on Resilient and that assumption made it through to the example but was missed from the talent description. Resilient seems a little strong when compared to a lot of the other Talents, which is what piqued my interest; not to mention the fact that one of my player's investigators has selected it for MoN.

I may be missing something obvious here but; On Page 25 of Pulp Cthulhu it lists Resilient as; may spend Luck points to shrug off points of Sanity loss on a 1 for 1 basis. Under Luck spends on page 61 the example for Halving Sanity Loss states: Dirk sees an awful monster and fails his Sanity roll. The Keeper rolls and gets the maximum Sanity loss of 20 points. Dirk’s player decides that now is not a good time for Dirk to lose it, and so states he is spending 40 Luck to halve the Sanity loss to 10 points. Dirk also has the Resilient Talent; his player decides to spend 5 further Luck to reduce the Sanity loss by 5. Dirk is now losing only 5 Sanity points but has spent 45 Luck points in doing so. (Note that this is the wording form the errata update.) My question is: Why doesn't Dirk just spend 20 points of Luck from having Resilient rather than spending 40 on halving the loss and then another 5?

Space now filled.

Thank you for the kind words, Ronnie; it was a pleasure having you on-board. Are you still okay for this run too?

I'm going to be running the above DG scenario on the dates below using Google Hangouts; roll dice however you see fit, video essential. It will use self generated pcs not pre-gens.The tone is mature, gritty and realistic.The dates I've put aside for it are all Mondays and I've gone for 4 which should be the maximum needed. It’s planned this far ahead due to my needing to fit work in around gaming.December 14th & 21stJanuary 11th & 25th.7:45-10:15 (GMT)I have one spare seat at the table and if anyone is interested or wants to know more than feel free to post below. Rich

Personally I'd just use a Language roll for the language being faked and the same with trying to work out a regional identity. The result of the roll might pinpoint things more accurately. I tend to the simple though.

I didn't put anything in the gap between Peru and New York. I asked the players to explain whether and how they'd stayed in touch with JE in the intervening period and what they'd be up to in respect of their various professions. I then asked them to use the Training rules on pg98 of the Keeper's Book to mechanise any improvements they'd been working on. It worked out okay and when they met up again prior to the fateful meeting with JE it felt like things had changed a little with them but the shared experience of Peru remained; we staged a reunion dinner scene.