Questions about Multiple Sanity rolls

[Trotyl]

In the Chapter 8: Sanity there is an optional rules named Multiple Sanity rolls, which ramps up the SAN loss by making additional rolls and choosing the max one.

 

The optional rule states:

The rules state that the Sanity point loss for a monster remains the same whether one monster or a multiple monsters are encountered. One option that ramps up Sanity point loss is to ask the player to roll Sanity loss once for each monster and then use the highest number rolled. This approach works well when multiple monsters of different types are encountered simultaneously.

Harvey encounters 3 deep ones and Father Dagon all at once, and is required make one SAN roll. Harvey’s player fails the SAN roll and must roll for Sanity point loss once for each monster. She rolls 1D6 once for each deep one, results in 2, 4 and 5. She also rolls 1D10 for Dagon, resulting in 4. Harvey loses Sanity points equal to the highest value—5 points.

 

My questions are:

1. As Multiple Sanity rolls being an optional rule, so with this rule disabled, what should happen if investigators see different types of monster simultaneously? Say we're in the same scenario of 3 deep ones(0/1d6) and Father Dagon(1/1d10). As the rule is said to be "ramps up Sanity point loss", so I believe the default sanity loss should be smaller, but how should that being determined?
2. How would a SAN loss in Multiple Sanity rolls being recorded? More specifically when adopted to Getting Used to the Awfulness section, would the 5pt in the example only counted for deep ones, or both deep ones and Father Dagon? When investigator encounters Father Dagon again should the max SAN loss be limited to 10-0=10(as SAN loss not directly from Father Dagon), 10-5=5(as final loss of the mix exposure) or 10-4=6(as individual SAN roll to Father Dagon) due to the existing encountering?

[EricW]

I don’t like this rule, if you take the best of 3 1d6 you have a 43% chance of a 6, and a 70% chance of a 5 or 6.

Rolling a 1d10 once you only have a 60% chance of rolling 5 or above.

While there should be a penalty for seeing more than one horror at once, I think a high probability of max san loss from rolling multiple dice and taking the highest number is poor game mechanics.

Seeing half a dozen deep ones should not be worse than seeing Dagon.

Edited February 22, 2020 by EricW

[Darius West]

On 2/22/2020 at 1:59 PM, EricW said:

I don’t like this rule, if you take the best of 3 1d6 you have a 43% chance of a 6, and a 70% chance of a 5 or 6.

Rolling a 1d10 once you only have a 60% chance of rolling 5 or above.

While there should be a penalty for seeing more than one horror at once, I think a high probability of max san loss from rolling multiple dice and taking the highest number is poor game mechanics.

Seeing half a dozen deep ones should not be worse than seeing Dagon.

I don't think it is a terrible game mechanic, but it does rather let the players off.  On the other hand, players don't get let off much, so maybe this isn't the worst rule, balance-wise.

I have always played that if you have creatures of the same class in a group, you take base SAN damage for the number of critters.  In the example above I would say that for seeing Deep Ones, the maximum SAN loss is 6, but there are 3 of them, hence the SAN loss for them is 3-6 (1d4+2) not 1d6 as it would be for seeing 1 critter.  If there were 6 deep ones, you would take a base 6 SAN, but no more for the next one.  You might raise it for seeing what appears to be endless deep ones to 1d6+6, for a huge crowded cave of them.  As Dagon is demonstrably a different order of magnitude, he requires a separate SAN check, even though he is basically just another deep one, albeit larger than the others, but he is a demigod, and his presence would be felt differently.

Given the fact that opening that door and seeing all this is likely to send the characters screaming off the deep end, you might want to give them a chance to hear the awful inhuman chanting, and find a different way to approach the problem.  You seldom lose more than 1d3 for even the worst sounds.  Blindness can be an advantage for keeping your SAN in CoC, but unless you are Zatoichi, you will be crap in a fight.

Edited February 24, 2020 by Darius West

[EricW]

12 hours ago, Darius West said:

I don't think it is a terrible game mechanic, but it does rather let the players off.  On the other hand, players don't get let off much, so maybe this isn't the worst rule, balance-wise.

I have always played that if you have creatures of the same class in a group, you take base SAN damage for the number of critters.  In the example above I would say that for seeing Deep Ones, the maximum SAN loss is 6, but there are 3 of them, hence the SAN loss for them is 3-6 (1d4+2) not 1d6 as it would be for seeing 1 critter.  If there were 6 deep ones, you would take a base 6 SAN, but no more for the next one.  You might raise it for seeing what appears to be endless deep ones to 1d6+6, for a huge crowded cave of them.  As Dagon is demonstrably a different order of magnitude, he requires a separate SAN check, even though he is basically just another deep one, albeit larger than the others, but he is a demigod, and his presence would be felt differently.

Given the fact that opening that door and seeing all this is likely to send the characters screaming off the deep end, you might want to give them a chance to hear the awful inhuman chanting, and find a different way to approach the problem.  You seldom lose more than 1d3 for even the worst sounds.  Blindness can be an advantage for keeping your SAN in CoC, but unless you are Zatoichi, you will be crap in a fight.

I understand the intent, my concern is if you apply the rule you are more likely to lose significant san looking at half a dozen deep ones than looking at Dagon.

Even you 2 + d4 the odds aren’t as bad as best of 3D6.

Probability is tricky, best of dice rolls tilt probability far more radically than most people appreciate. Even total chaos can take on an appearance of order if it is repeated often enough, in the right way.

 

 

[Darius West]

18 hours ago, EricW said:

I understand the intent, my concern is if you apply the rule you are more likely to lose significant san looking at half a dozen deep ones than looking at Dagon.

Even you 2 + d4 the odds aren’t as bad as best of 3D6.

Probability is tricky, best of dice rolls tilt probability far more radically than most people appreciate. Even total chaos can take on an appearance of order if it is repeated often enough, in the right way.

I do understand how the probabilities skew, I promise you.  I suppose the question is whether you are more intimidated by the half dozen cryptids or the really big one who is the cherry on top.  The loss for seeing Dagon is 1/1d10, so you automatically lose 1 point.  The system I have proposed means you can lose a minimum of 1 SAN for the whole experience with good rolls, and a maximum of 16 (which is huge).  Dagon is quite likely to cost you more SAN than the 6 Deep Ones, and if it doesn't work out that way, it is probably because the character didn't really grasp that Dagon was more than just a very big boss deep one.  Potentially Dagon can cost you 10 SAN on his own, but really the spill of deep ones who will probably drag you down will be the ones who are really wrecking your SAN.  The smell and the touch alone... 

The whole encounter averages out at 4.5 for the Deep Ones and 5.5 for Dagon if the SAN rolls are failed for both.  That seems about right to me.  You might disagree, but Dagon isn't a high hitter in terms of deity SAN loss.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Darius West

[Trotyl]

On 2/22/2020 at 10:59 AM, EricW said:

I don’t like this rule, if you take the best of 3 1d6 you have a 43% chance of a 6, and a 70% chance of a 5 or 6.

Rolling a 1d10 once you only have a 60% chance of rolling 5 or above.

While there should be a penalty for seeing more than one horror at once, I think a high probability of max san loss from rolling multiple dice and taking the highest number is poor game mechanics.

Seeing half a dozen deep ones should not be worse than seeing Dagon.

Hi Eric,

My first question is a bit more strait-forward, when fully following the Rulebook, but not using the Multiple Sanity rolls optional rule, should the SAN check points be (1/1d10 only) or (1/1d10 + 0/1d6) when seeing both the Dagon as well as other deep ones at the same scene?

[EricW]

On 3/2/2020 at 6:04 PM, Trotyl said:

Hi Eric,

My first question is a bit more strait-forward, when fully following the Rulebook, but not using the Multiple Sanity rolls optional rule, should the SAN check points be (1/1d10 only) or (1/1d10 + 0/1d6) when seeing both the Dagon as well as other deep ones at the same scene?

I'd suggest just rolling for the worst horror on display. Adding up all the san loss for all the different horrors implies seeing a few 10s of different minor horrors is worse than seeing Azathoth, which seems unlikely. Perhaps seeing an infestation is worse than just seeing one horror, but you could also argue the thought "maybe there's more than one of them!" is part of the "see single horror" san loss. Even a single san roll can be brutal, I don't think there is a need to make it worse.