Quote from: Gib;565288I agree with GW, and that leaves me feeling slightly soiled.

I'm not responsible for your inability to control your own bodily functions.

I am always right.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;565333I am always right.

The sound of one hand, having sex.

CoC is one of my all-time favourite RPGs but I don't see me buying 7e.

I've got mixed feelings about the changes - some sound interesting (e.g. sanity) but I think the ethos behind the game system is completely different. It sounds like there's a lot more system.

For me, one of CoC's major strengths has always been how intuitive the rules are and the way they become invisible during play. 7e sounds as though it is abandoning this approach.

Quote from: Gib;565336The sound of one hand, having sex.

There's one Koan I'll never look at the same way again.

Quote from: Scott Dorward;565272My plan was to use something like a Google+ hangout with Tabletop Forge, or maybe Skype, and run a one-shot as a single session. Would that suit you?

I could take 4-6 players. I prefer smaller groups, as it gives everyone a bit more spotlight time.

Sounds good to me.

I haven't had time to read the whole thread. However, I played a CoC7th game, "Hounds of Love", GMd by Mike Mason at Continuum 2012. It was very recognisably CoC, but flowed much better IMO, had some great game elements that actually INCREASED the tension (e.g., pushing the roll), and was one of the best horror gaming experiences I've had; the rules went more to the background and the story came more to the fore.

Apologies to the grognards, but from what I heard at the seminar and experienced in play, I hope Chaosium go with it. Then again, I don't have as much time invested in CoC having come to it only a few years ago, and I'm now also steeped in Trail of Cthulhu, which CoC7th reminded me a lot of.

P.S. Another thing to look out for is Robin Laws "Hillfolk". I played a game with him and it was an absolute hoot. Much better than I expected.

Quote from: Stainless;565715I'm now also steeped in Trail of Cthulhu, which CoC7th reminded me a lot of.

See I have some problems with the approach of Trail of Cthulhu (which I own and read. Narrative logic, dissociated mechanics, etc etc). That's the reason why I stuck with CoC all these years despite the multiple variant games and spinoffs. I'm not against yet another take on Mythos gaming, but in my mind they should do the same thing Trail did (and did right): create its own game and property, separate from CoC itself.

Quote from: The Butcher;565031Then you're not using Consequences.

One of the two FATE games I ran (Starblazer) had consequences. And I don't see how those have fuck all to do with negotiating the stakes; they're just a type of damage mechanic, they're what the DM decides happens to you when you take enough damage.

Unless you're really trying to argue that "I'll scratch out these two points of damage and get a minor consequence, so I can stay conscious instead of being taken out" is the equivalent of "if I win the roll, then the Morgoth will suddenly realize that I'm his long lost half-brother and will hand me over rule of the grand duchy, even though none of that has fuck all with what you planned as GM, or made any sense at all in the setting, or was ever brought up before by my character in the game".

As for the other FATE game I was running, it didn't have consequences, it used Stamina points.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Scott Dorward;565143No, I don't work for Chaosium. As Jadrax mentioned, I've been playtesting the new rules for a few years, including using them to run games at conventions.

Also Paul Fricker is a friend of mine, and we game together fairly regularly. I know Mike fairly well too.

A few years? Shit, that is a lengthy development period!

So are you at liberty to tell us more clearly, was this a Monte-Cook-esque fuckup of saying things the wrong way and coming off sounding like you're doing something you're not?  Is this mechanic in fact something far more conventional and not a "storygaming" mechanic where the player gets some kind of narrative control over the world, but only his own actions?

RPGPundit

Quote from: Scott Dorward;565144There is no negotiation of stakes in 7th edition.

It's interesting that The Butcher mentioned Consequences from FATE. The fallout from failing a Pushed roll works in a similar way, except not as abstracted.

Can you explain that in more depth, perhaps with an example?
Does the GM choose the fallout, or the player? If it is the GM, is he constrained in what he can choose?

RPGPundit

In the game Mike Mason ran that I was in (Hounds of Love), there was a situation where the horror had already started and it was pretty clear that our dogs were pivotal to it. We thought we heard distant barking so one of the players asked to do a listen roll so he could work out where the sound was coming from. He failed the roll. Ordinarily, the rules would suggest the GM to say something like, "Sorry you can't hear anything more, or it's so distant that you can't get a direction from it." Instead, the player asked to push the roll and was told that if he failed again, something bad would happen. He agreed and failed again. The outcome was that suddenly, much closer than anticipated, one of the dogs appeared and attacked. The effect was to add a bit of trepidation and dread into the game with a sudden 'shock' when it all went wrong. It was actually very effective and I think added greatly to the genre simulation.

Quote from: RPGPundit;565735Can you explain that in more depth, perhaps with an example?
Does the GM choose the fallout, or the player? If it is the GM, is he constrained in what he can choose?

RPGPundit

Quote from: Stainless;565749In the game Mike Mason ran that I was in (Hounds of Love), there was a situation where the horror had already started and it was pretty clear that our dogs were pivotal to it. We thought we heard distant barking so one of the players asked to do a listen roll so he could work out where the sound was coming from. He failed the roll. Ordinarily, the rules would suggest the GM to say something like, "Sorry you can't hear anything more, or it's so distant that you can't get a direction from it." Instead, the player asked to push the roll and was told that if he failed again, something bad would happen. He agreed and failed again. The outcome was that suddenly, much closer than anticipated, one of the dogs appeared and attacked. The effect was to add a bit of trepidation and dread into the game with a sudden 'shock' when it all went wrong. It was actually very effective and I think added greatly to the genre simulation.

If that's how it actually plays, then I wouldn't have any problem with it.  I think this might in fact be a case of the person doing the publicity fucking up in terms of how they were describing things.

RPGPundit

That's how one of the designers played it and was exactly how I interpreted their description of it from the seminar the previous day. It works well. The main issue will be with inexperienced Keepers giving either trivial or too extreme consequences for pushing the roll. It will need good Keepers advice and examples.

Also forgot to mention, that in this game was Pete Cakebread (of Cakebread and Walton) and Angus Abranson (of Cubicle 7 and now Chronicle City). Both are pretty experienced roleplayers and/or designers. Both appeared to have a good time and were complementary of the rules changes.

Quote from: Stainless;565749In the game Mike Mason ran that I was in (Hounds of Love), there was a situation where the horror had already started and it was pretty clear that our dogs were pivotal to it. We thought we heard distant barking so one of the players asked to do a listen roll so he could work out where the sound was coming from. He failed the roll. Ordinarily, the rules would suggest the GM to say something like, "Sorry you can't hear anything more, or it's so distant that you can't get a direction from it." Instead, the player asked to push the roll and was told that if he failed again, something bad would happen. He agreed and failed again. The outcome was that suddenly, much closer than anticipated, one of the dogs appeared and attacked. The effect was to add a bit of trepidation and dread into the game with a sudden 'shock' when it all went wrong. It was actually very effective and I think added greatly to the genre simulation.

Sounds like Schrodinger's dog.

Quote from: JRR;565825Sounds like Schrodinger's dog.

That's what I was going to say.