TheRPGSite

So, Yog-Sothoth, winners of a silver ennie for podcasting this year, tape a bunch of their sessions of call of cthulhu and put them online.

They have done all of The Masks of Nyarlathotep and are now doing Horror on the orient express.

This is the latest:-

http://www.yog-sothoth.com/docs/horror-orient-express-11-milan.mp3

The gang are travelling to Milan after an adventure where they recovered a scroll containing detail of the maguffin they are doing a collect the pieces of plot quest for.

And nothing happens. Nothing happens because all the characters are fucking useless. None of them has any motivation or skills to undertake the quest.

The only one capable of even considering offensive action is the complete munchkin (the professor, who speaks all the languages of the places the train goes to and lots of research skill).

The bad guy turns up and threatens them. But because they are fucking useless they can't do anything except rely on GM bending of credibility to not kill them. And when the professor looks like he might get upset and do something proactive, the rest of the characters just tell him he hasn't got a hope so they might as well just go on with the plot.

Hell! One of the caracters spends the entire session drugged in to unconciousness! Because she tried to do something interesting last episode but was so inept the subplot just died out!

Its this kind of shit, which I know only to well, which means I insist on playing Special People with kewl powerz.  

You need something to bargain with. Or else all you can do is sit there and do nothing.

Well, they sound like they're having fun. I agree with you; I'd prefer a little more action, but maybe they just like the socializing.

Quote from: laffingboyI agree with you; I'd prefer a little more action

Yeah - but you don't get the action because the characters are so ill suited to the adventure.

I reckon they either need to accept playing The Mummy and play characters who can wisecrack while cutting zombies in half, or else get to doing something like Jeeves and Wooster comedy where the plot revolves around getting out of marrying an overbearing/unbearable woman and ensuring aunt Delia doesn't find out here prise begonias died whie you were supposed to be watering them. Or possibly a nice cosy murder mystery.

(As an aside, there was one almost scary bit in their run of Masks of Nyarlathotep (when they were trapped underground and things started to move) and the girls instantly shut it down - they radiated 'we don't like this - we are going back to the surface and we are not going anywhere dangerous again'.)

Fascinating tool for analysis recordings.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI reckon they either need to accept playing The Mummy and play characters who can wisecrack while cutting zombies in half, or else get to doing something like Jeeves and Wooster comedy where the plot revolves around getting out of marrying an overbearing/unbearable woman and ensuring aunt Delia doesn't find out here prise begonias died whie you were supposed to be watering them. Or possibly a nice cosy murder mystery.

No. There´s another way.
Grow up. Face the danger. Use modern society to fight the horrors from the beyonde! Sacrifice yourself for the children, all the while lying to them. See your aging mind and body detoriate, but continue fighting.

That´s the strong emotional tie CoC makes possible.

BTW, statistically a double barelled shotgun should dispatch Creature the fastest. Use that knowledge to gain spells, burn your sanity for mankind to stop the monsters. See above.

I'm not going to listen to that podcast in order to prove to you that the elephant gun (2d6+6, IIRC) saw abundant use in our campaigns.

For an even more proactive approach to dealing with cultists & minions, google the legendary rpg.net actual play reports by American Badass.

I'd tell you about my 2-year CoC campaign with excellent players and a satisfying ending, but I suppose I'd just be a statistical anomaly.  Because obviously - all CoC games are exactly like this podcast.

-O

Quote from: SettembriniNo. There´s another way.
Grow up. Face the danger. Use modern society to fight the horrors from the beyonde! Sacrifice yourself for the children, all the while lying to them. See your aging mind and body detoriate, but continue fighting.

Well no, because every time they try something like that they either get killed or its patently transparent that the GM is only avoiding killing them because that would spoil the fun.

They could switch out the adventures so instead of nameless cults with hundreds of followers and vast, formless beasts there is one serial killer on a island, but in order to realistically have a chance of fighting these plots they would have to be Van Helsing.

He could be a dour Van Helsing with lots of angst, but he would still need powerful kung fu.

They are out of their depth. It's like Fred Blogs from Milton-Ernest fighting Hitler circa 1941 - he could help, by joining up and carrying heavy objects, but he couldn't parachute in to the Eagles Nest, take out a division of SS and then beat up CyberHitler single handed.

Being out of your depth is part of what CoC about. The game requires more subtlety than your typical fantasy jaunt-- firepower and bravado are as much hindrances as assets in an average game.

If I wanted to play an empowered monster hunter punching elder gods in the face then I suggest you look to another game. There are plenty out there.

Quote from: DrewBeing out of your depth is part of what CoC about.

And being out of your depth is what leads to passive, reactive players who don't do anything except be led around by the nose. Because they have no alternative.

Exhibit A: The podcasts of Yog Sothoth.

Exhibit B is altogether to much of my gaming before realising that playing characters who are playas results in far more satisfying play.

QuoteIf I wanted to play an empowered monster hunter punching elder gods in the face then I suggest you look to another game. There are plenty out there.

I have. Enjoy being a sheep with no initiative.

Quote from: Erik BoielleAnd being out of your depth is what leads to passive, reactive players who don't do anything except be led around by the nose. Because they have no alternative.

Heh. And you say I have no initiative?

QuoteExibit A: The podcasts of Yog Sothoth.

Yep. One example of play defines a 25-year-old game and the millions of hours of enjoyment derived from it. :rolleyes:

QuoteExibit B is altogether to much of my gaming before realising that playing characters who are playas results in far more satisfying play.

Don't blame CoC for your lack of imagination. If you can't have a satisfying experience without being an empowered monster-slapper then I'd say the problem is you rather than the system.

QuoteI have. Enjoy being a sheep with no initiative.

Priceless. You utterly fail to grasp what the game sets forth to do. I shouldn't be surprised though, you were the bloke who claimed that no-one had even heard of Lovecraft before the rpg.

Poor show, Erik. Thoroughly predictable though.

There seems to be a false dicotomy under construction in this thread; I think that there is a midpoint with CoC. looking at Lovecraft's fiction you can actually see it, too. In the story Call of Cthulu, inspector LeGrasse tracks down some cultists and kicks some ass. Sure the sailor guys all go nuts/die later on when they see R'leyh but- they manage to ram Cthulu with a boat. That's gotta count for something. and in the Dunwich Horror, the good guys actually win. The narrator in the Horror Over Innsmouth becomes a fishguy, but he investigates the town first, and IIRC (it's been a while) the feds come in and blow the shit out of everything later on. Feds might not be the typical viewpoint characters in HPL, but they exist in his universe. Hell even the guys in At the Mountains  of Madness have a kickass adventure in the Antartic before they go crazy...
I think it's best to start with managable, smaller scale threats, and work up to the unmanagable if that's how you get you're groove on- but in no way should anyone feel that action or even victory and hope are completely antithical to the setting.

I accept podcasts of good sessions as a counter argument.

Quote from: AosThere seems to be a false dicotomy under construction in this thread; I think that there is a midpoint with CoC. looking at Lovecraft's fiction you can actually see it, too. In the story Call of Cthulu, inspector LeGrasse tracks down some cultists and kicks some ass. sure the sailor guys all go nuts/die later on when they see R'leyh but- they manage to ram Cthulu with a boat. that's gotta count for something. and in the Dunwich Horror, the good guys actually win. The narrator in the horror over innsmouth becomes a fishguy, but he investigates the town first, and IIRC (it's been a while) the feds come in and blow the shit out of everything later on. TFeds might not be the typical viewpoint characters in HPL, but they exist in his universe. Hell even the guys in At the Mountains  of Madness have a kickass adventure in the antartic before they go crazy...
I think it's best to start with managable, smaller scale threats, and work up to the unmanagable if that's how you get you're groove on- but in no way should anyone feel that action or even victory and hope are completly antithical to the setting.

There's definitely scope for action adventure in CoC, and the story examples you cite are all applicable examples of such. Saying that isn't so (as Erik is) is just another limited view of what the game can be about.

However, the system and setting are primarily geared toward investigative horror stories where the protagonists are in constant danger of being overwhelmed. Much like early-career WFRP, in that respect.

Quote from: AosThere seems to be a false dicotomy under construction in this thread; I think that there is a midpoint with CoC. looking at Lovecraft's fiction you can actually see it, too. In the story Call of Cthulu, inspector LeGrasse tracks down some cultists and kicks some ass. sure the sailor guys all go nuts/die later on when they see R'leyh but- they manage to ram Cthulu with a boat. that's gotta count for something. and in the Dunwich Horror, the good guys actually win. The narrator in the horror over innsmouth becomes a fishguy, but he investigates the town first, and IIRC (it's been a while) the feds come in and blow the shit out of everything later on. TFeds might not be the typical viewpoint characters in HPL, but they exist in his universe. Hell even the guys in At the Mountains  of Madness have a kickass adventure in the antartic before they go crazy...
I think it's best to start with managable, smaller scale threats, and work up to the unmanagable if that's how you get you're groove on- but in no way should anyone feel that action or even victory and hope are completly antithical to the setting.

Some blame I think attaches to adventure design. Good rules of thumb are:-

1: No hordes of cultists

Stealth adventures are notoriously difficult to do - one blown stealth role and its a TPK. They only work in computer games because you can either reload or the AI goons reset to not looking for you after an unrealistic ammount of time. And they are blind. And deaf. And telegraph their moves.

The same goes for lots of aliens. Alien had one alien - characters not badass - Aliens had many aliens - characters badass.

2: No evil sorcerors.

If a worldy sorceror decides to fry you, and you arn't fafhrd or the grey mouser, you are fucked.

I think a lot of blame attaches to the Dark Lord mythos - Everyone knows the plucky rebels beat the evil dark lord and his stormtroopers.

But if you stat up the plucky farmboy (75pts - skills in farming) and the Stormtroopers in GURPS (150 pts - skills in firearms, athletics and small unit tactics - travel in platoons of 40, equiped with armour, communications and artillery and air support) its not gonna work.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI accept podcasts of good sessions as a counter argument.

I'm not trawling the net listening to podcasts for you Erik, especially when all you need do is sit down and play the game for an hour to find out how wrong you are.

Can you do that? Have you even read the game? Or is this another one of your spurious opinions based on limited exposure and prejudice?

Quote from: DrewThere's definitely scope for action adventure in CoC, and the story examples you cite are all applicable examples of such. Saying that isn't so (as Erik is) is just another limited view of what the game can be about.

However, the system and setting are primarily geared toward investigative horror stories where the protagonists are in constant danger of being overwhelmed. Much like early-career WFRP, in that respect.

You are correct, of course, and I think that Sandy Peterson had that in mind when he put it together. But there is room to move, though,

Quote from: DrewI'm not trawling the net listening to podcasts for you Erik

I'm not expecting you to. Just sit down and tape one of your own. All mine were shit, like those. So were a bunch of the goddam vampire games where we just said SIR YES SIR to the uber npcs.

Quote from: AosYou are correct, of course, and I think that Sandy Peterson had that in mind when he put it together. But there is room to move, though,

Indeed, but the game as written keeps characters capabilities very close to the normal human baseline. It takes considerable setting and system drift to play it Buffy style.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI'm not expecting you to. Just sit down and tape one of your own. All mine were shit, like those. So were a bunch of the goddam vampire games where we just said SIR YES SIR to the uber npcs.

Then I'd say you had a poor GM, although Vampire was notorious for encouraging that style of play. CoC is a different game, though.

And if I were currently in a CoC game I would tape a session for you. I'm not though, and there's no way I'm going to disrupt my groups schedule just to please some random bloke off the internet.

Read the book. Set up a game. Bring your imagination to the table and see what transpires. You may be surprised.

Quote from: DrewIndeed, but the game as written keeps characters capabilities very close to the normal human baseline.

Which means you either need to accept normal human plots that don't involve the foiling of plots by nameless cults (and certainly not a string of them in exotic locations around the globe, culminating in a climatic final battle in a rocket pit), or ditch it for something else.

(I'm thinking something like The Visit, a heartwarming comedy set during visiting hours in a mancunian prison. Although to be honest, even thats a little OTT being a story. Maybe something less intense, like the exciting adventure of buying a house - said to be the second most stressful event to happen to most people, after bereavement.)

Either is fine, but it is a choice that I think needs to be made.

Quote from: Erik BoielleWhich means you either need to accept normal human plots that don't involve the foiling of plots by nameless cults (and certainly not a string of them in exotic locations around the globe, culminating in a climatic final battle in a rocket pit), or ditch it for something else.

(I'm thinking something like The Visit, a heartwarming comedy set during visiting hours in a mancunian prison. Although to be honest, even thats a little OTT being a story. Maybe something less intense, like the exciting adventure of buying a house - said to be the second most stressful event to happen to most people, after bereavement.)

Either is fine, but it is a choice that I think needs to be made.

Part of the attraction of the game (and the horror genre in general) is playing relatively normal people catapulted into extraordinary situations that fundamentally alter their worldview.

Managing these sorts of game involves the application of simple, common sense GM'ing techniques that most people I've met mastered during their teens. If you can't see how you could make it work at the table then I've nothing further to add.

Incidentally, theres a recording of a game run by Sandy Petersen here:-

http://www.yog-sothoth.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=511

1: The characters are SOLDIERS and have GUNS and a MISSION

2: He shamelessly uses horror movie techniques to isolate the characters (their radios don't work - and the keys to the Humvees mysteriously go missing when they want to make a run for it - and Army Humvees don't have keys!)

3: Theres actually nothing activly trying to kill the characters. Theres some weird shit happening, but its not as immediatly dangerous and a sorceror or a gang of raging cultists.

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell no, because every time they try something like that they either get killed or its patently transparent that the GM is only avoiding killing them because that would spoil the fun.

They could switch out the adventures so instead of nameless cults with hundreds of followers and vast, formless beasts there is one serial killer on a island, but in order to realistically have a chance of fighting these plots they would have to be Van Helsing.

To be fair, most published Cthulhu adventures - especially in recent years - have leaned towards the "lone serial killer on an island" or "small cult of deluded fools who might summon a monster by the end of the investigation, if the investigators drag their feet too much" model. Masks of Nyarlathotep and Horror on the Orient Express are very much atypical Cthulhu modules, mainly for the sort of reasons you cite.

Quote from: DrewHowever, the system and setting are primarily geared toward investigative horror stories where the protagonists are in constant danger of being overwhelmed. Much like early-career WFRP, in that respect.

This made me giggle.

The WFRP magazine Warpstone (http://www.warpstone.org/) had a series of "Making of" articles by the original designers of the game.
The direction they had been given for the general feel of the world and the first adventure series (The Enemy Within) was "make it like CoC".

Quote from: Dirk RemmeckeThis made me giggle.

The WFRP magazine Warpstone (http://www.warpstone.org/) had a series of "Making of" articles by the original designers of the game.
The direction they had been given for the general feel of the world and the first adventure series (The Enemy Within) was "make it like CoC".

Exactly, although my sentence structure does make it look like WFRP inspired CoC, doesn't it?

My first contact with CoC was in TSR UK's Imagine back when I was a nipper. Issue #13, April 1984:

http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/periodicals/imaginescans/imagine13.html

Excellent stuff.

For all it's worth, my own guidelines for successful C&C play
- opponents are humans not creatures. Play should focus on foiling/helpling/subverting/whatever their antics. Mythos creatures should stay in the background 90% of the time.
- said adversaries are actual human beings with fathomable motives. They're using the Mythos as a mean, not an end. Of course, they're misguided fools to do so and all this will end in blood and madness anyway, but it will take much longer.
- since they're actual human beings and not psychopaths, they will balk at such thing as killing (the PCs) in cold blood. They will be recpeptive to negociation attempts. Heck, the PCs may even end up sympathizing with them (but see above).
- Anything bigger or nastier than a goul must be used with utter parcimony. If it is inconvenient to warn the players about what's coming, obvious avenues of retreat should be provided. BTW : would you walk 10 miles to crush some bug ? No ? Well, why should a Great Old One do so ?
- If you need a bit of action/adventure, the Dreamlands are your friends.
- Not emulationg HPL's stories is a feature, not a bug. It doesn't make much sense except for one-shots with small groups.

It's all in Delta Green's intro. Really.

Weekly, running a succesful d20 CoC campaign since 2003. With the same goddamn PJs.

Quote from: WeeklyFor all it's worth, my own guidelines for successful C&C play
- opponents are humans not creatures. Play should focus on foiling/helpling/subverting/whatever their antics. Mythos creatures should stay in the background 90% of the time.
- said adversaries are actual human beings with fathomable motives. They're using the Mythos as a mean, not an end. Of course, they're misguided fools to do so and all this will end in blood and madness anyway, but it will take much longer.
- since they're actual human beings and not psychopaths, they will balk at such thing as killing (the PCs) in cold blood. They will be recpeptive to negociation attempts. Heck, the PCs may even end up sympathizing with them (but see above).
- Anything bigger or nastier than a goul must be used with utter parcimony. If it is inconvenient to warn the players about what's coming, obvious avenues of retreat should be provided. BTW : would you walk 10 miles to crush some bug ? No ? Well, why should a Great Old One do so ?
- If you need a bit of action/adventure, the Dreamlands are your friends.
- Not emulationg HPL's stories is a feature, not a bug. It doesn't make much sense except for one-shots with small groups.

Sound advice.

Quote from: Weekly- Anything bigger or nastier than a goul must be used with utter parcimony. If it is inconvenient to warn the players about what's coming, obvious avenues of retreat should be provided. BTW : would you walk 10 miles to crush some bug ? No ? Well, why should a Great Old One do so ?

Hell yes to this (and all your other advice).

In the longest CoC campaign I participated in (I took part for some while in the legendary decades-long campaign that Mike Lay, one of the contributors to Beyond the Mountains of Madness, has been running), the arrival of one of the big monsters would be an indicator that we had seriously screwed up. Most of our adventures were against human adversaries, and the rest tended to be against adversaries on a human scale - ghouls, deep ones, vampires, anything that will succumb to gunfire just like anyone else and isn't powerful enough to kill multiple PCs in a single combat round.

This is excellent -- thanks for posting the link!

Quote from: Erik BoielleFascinating tool for analysis recordings.

I absolutely agree -- I've been listening to Hal and crew with their RPGMP3 podcasts and making notes of what does, and doesn't work with the game.  Infinitely more useful than reading an "actual play" report that's so highly editorialized by the person posting it.

If anyone has other links to recordings of actual game sessions, I'd be very interested in getting them. :)

Quote from: Warthur"small cult of deluded fools who might summon a monster by the end of the investigation, if the investigators drag their feet too much" model.

This is a good way to get passive players to stop turtling (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Glossary#toc152) and put their characters in danger.  Make sure they understand it's not that the cultists might summon a monster... they will summon a monster.  And monster's job #1 is eating the player's characters.  Make sure they understand that if they sit back and do nothing, something nasty will come and find them. :)

Quote from: StuartThis is a good way to get passive players to stop turtling (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Glossary#toc152) and put their characters in danger.  Make sure they understand it's not that the cultists might summon a monster... they will summon a monster.  And monster's job #1 is eating the player's characters.  Make sure they understand that if they sit back and do nothing, something nasty will come and find them. :)

Heck, the monster isn't always even necessary for this. If it becomes clear to the players that the Order of the Black Cosmos has done, is doing, and will continue to do horrible things in the name of their dark god, it doesn't matter whether that god's real or not: inaction isn't an option. The police don't give credence to the party's conspiracy theories... or are too horribly overstretched to investigate the matter themselves... or are pawns of the conspiracy, because although the Black Cosmos only has six members, those six members happen to be the Mayor, the chief of police, the local judge, the head of the local Masonic lodge, and so forth. The cultists can't ask the people they hold sway over to directly collaborate with the Order, or to do anything wildly illegal - that'd just expose them - but they can, say, ask beat cops to be extra-vigilant in making sure those troublemaking conspiracy kooks don't cause trouble.

Actually, I think it would be better to have the Mayor, Chief of Police and local Judge as PCs battling troublemaking cultists from out of town.

1: They are more likly to care what happens

2: People will expect them to deal with it

3: Attempts to solve the problem/get on with the adventure will be met with approval by NPCs instead of hostility

4: They have something to work with (asking the beat cops to be extra-vigilant, frex)

I dunno - its just not healthy to have the response to 'I investigate!' be 'the local cops rough you up and dump you on the edge of town'. Its almost pavlovian. You are training your players out of taking the lead.

Quote from: DrewIndeed, but the game as written keeps characters capabilities very close to the normal human baseline. It takes considerable setting and system drift to play it Buffy style.

Fallacy of the excluded middle. There's a lot of room between "insurance saleman" and "magically enhanced/magic wielding uber ass-kicker." It's called competence.

YOU CAN BE NORMAL AND STILL BE COMPETENT IN ACTION!

Use competent characters and get a decent GM. CoC can rock, I assure you.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceFallacy of the excluded middle. There's a lot of room between "insurance saleman" and "magically enhanced/magic wielding uber ass-kicker." It's called competence.

YOU CAN BE NORMAL AND STILL BE COMPETENT IN ACTION!

Use competent characters and get a decent GM. CoC can rock, I assure you.

-clash

By "very close to the normal human baseline" I meant characters that are not in possession of some kind of superhuman/supernatural edge. Poor phrasing on my part, I guess.

And yes, Cthulhu can indeed rock with characters who are competent in a scrap.

Quote from: DrewBy "very close to the normal human baseline" I meant characters that are not in possession of some kind of superhuman/supernatural edge. Poor phrasing on my part, I guess.

And yes, Cthulhu can indeed rock with characters who are competent in a scrap.

OK! Coolness! :D

-clash

Well, I'd note that in the above podcast the characters are

1: A stage magician
2: A retired colonel
3: An archeologists widow
4: Her maid
and
5: A sometimes smuggler of european antiquites

If these were a bunch of hardened ex-trench fighters from the first world war or even policemen, I wouldn't have a problem, but they are Normal People In Over Their Heads (except for the munchkin professor), and it don't bloody work.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI dunno - its just not healthy to have the response to 'I investigate!' be 'the local cops rough you up and dump you on the edge of town'. Its almost pavlovian. You are training your players out of taking the lead.

Which, obviously happens in every CoC game ever!

...except mine and most others...

-O

Quote from: Warthurthe arrival of one of the big monsters would be an indicator that we had seriously screwed up.

Yep, this has been common wisdom since I first heard of the game, back in the 80's.
Now, for long term play, there's something to be said for character competence. Average Joes are well and good for canonic play with expendable PCs, but big campaigns groups need a bit of preparation. For instance, Delta Green does it by requiring characters to be employees of federal agencies. In my own campaign, PCs had to be Great War veterans (French characters, so no big deal). I ended up with 3 former combattants of various skill (special forces soldier, colonial troops officer, aerial observer) and a competent combat medic (former volunteer nurse). Strangely, casualties tend to be low...

Quote from: WeeklyStrangely, casualties tend to be low...

QuoteDaniel: Hey - you ever get into fights when you were a kid?
Miyagi: Huh - plenty.
Daniel: Yeah, but it wasn't like the problem I have, right?
Miyagi: Why? Fighting fighting. Same same.
Daniel: Yeah, but you knew karate.
Miyagi: Someone always know more.
Daniel: You mean there were times when you were scared to fight?
Miyagi: Always scare. Miyagi hate fighting.
Daniel: Yeah, but you like karate.
Miyagi: So?
Daniel: So, karate's fighting. You train to fight.
Miyagi: That what you think?
Daniel: [pondering] No.
Miyagi: Then why train?
Daniel: [thinks] So I won't have to fight.
Miyagi: [laughs] Miyagi have hope for you.

:-)

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, I'd note that in the above podcast the characters are

1: A stage magician
2: A retired colonel
3: An archeologists widow
4: Her maid
and
5: A sometimes smuggler of european antiquites

If these were a bunch of hardened ex-trench fighters from the first world war or even policemen, I wouldn't have a problem, but they are Normal People In Over Their Heads (except for the munchkin professor), and it don't bloody work.

Then the people in the podcast are:
a: designing poorly thought out characters
b: because they had no guidance from their GM
c: who's a pretty poor excuse for a GM anyway

That stage magician should be able to use knives in his act! Many juggle them or throw them!
That retired colonel doesn't know how to shoot a gun? That's ridiculous!
That smuggler has never got into trouble on the docks? Why is he still alive?

The archeologist's widow and her maid are troublesome, but the others could compensate, especially if they could do something useful, like a bit of nursing.

The GM should have sent these characters back to the players with a "Useless Character!" stamp on them.

-clahs

amen...i was thinking the same exact thing.  I'm all for player freedom, but damn.  (well, they're free to make lame and inept characters, so there's that...)

-k

Quote from: flyingmiceThen the people in the podcast are:
a: designing poorly thought out characters
b: because they had no guidance from their GM
c: who's a pretty poor excuse for a GM anyway

That stage magician should be able to use knives in his act! Many juggle them or throw them!
That retired colonel doesn't know how to shoot a gun? That's ridiculous!
That smuggler has never got into trouble on the docks? Why is he still alive?

The archeologist's widow and her maid are troublesome, but the others could compensate, especially if they could do something useful, like a bit of nursing.

The GM should have sent these characters back to the players with a "Useless Character!" stamp on them.

-clahs

Quote from: flyingmiceThe GM should have sent these characters back to the players with a "Useless Character!" stamp on them.

-clahs

FWIW, I agree.

I ran a 2-year d20 CoC game, and I had...

* An occultist, who ended up learning a spell or two
* A psychic
* A short-lived musician, then construction worker, then ultimately ultra-cautious shaman-type
* A soldier
* A motorcycle-riding, sword-carrying, modern knight-templar wannabe.  (It was weird, but he turned out pretty kickass.  Too bad the character got killed up in northern Canada...)

I had them all be members of a non-governmental group dedicated to investigating the paranormal.  It worked as a basic frame on which to hang a campaign.

-O

Quote from: WarthurHeck, the monster isn't always even necessary for this. .

You can also start in media res. The 'Shit just happenend to you, people. Now survive !' model works quite well.
I launched my last game by affecting the PCs with a mysterious illness that made them sleep for days in a row, along with a bunch of 50 random NPCs. I'm still wondering why they chose not to to trust those nice military doctors who were trying to help them but to follow vague clues they gathered during a shared dream...

Quote from: flyingmiceThen the people in the podcast are:
a: designing poorly thought out characters
b: because they had no guidance from their GM
c: who's a pretty poor excuse for a GM anyway

That stage magician should be able to use knives in his act! Many juggle them or throw them!
That retired colonel doesn't know how to shoot a gun? That's ridiculous!
That smuggler has never got into trouble on the docks? Why is he still alive?

The archeologist's widow and her maid are troublesome, but the others could compensate, especially if they could do something useful, like a bit of nursing.

The GM should have sent these characters back to the players with a "Useless Character!" stamp on them.

Well, in part because of the massivly unhealthy culture surrounding CoC, its almost a status game about who can have the most inappropriate/useless/'normal' character.

So much as looking at a Tommy Gun, for instance, marks you as a hated munchkin who should be playing DnD. Hell, playing someone who can do more than wonder around saying 'Not another boring library' marks you out as a hated munchkin.

Complicating this is that the magician, for instance, is played by the GMs wife who doesn't really have much interest in combat. Which is fine, but they need to either start playing by scoobie do rules (and stop having heavily armed murderous cultists wondering around (at least ones that arn't played for comic relief)) or they need adventures that are actually intended for normal people instead of a bloody swat team.

Quote from: Erik BoielleSo much as looking at a Tommy Gun, for instance, marks you as a hated munchkin who should be playing DnD. Hell, playing someone who can do more than wonder around saying 'Not another boring library' marks you out as a hated munchkin.

I keep hearing about these kinds of artsy fartsy players.  I've run more CoC at cons than in regular campaigns and I never encountered them.  Maybe its a regional difference or a con thing, but I could hand any random player a Badass Shotgun Priest and everything was aces.

Quote from: jrientsI keep hearing about these kinds of artsy fartsy players.

I was one. The Yog guys are others.

Hey - I fell for the hype and tried to live by other peoples propaganda.

To an extent this is why I hate the online posing so much - its caused me unending grief.

Quote from: jrientsI keep hearing about these kinds of artsy fartsy players.

I've never really seen them either. When we've run with normal characters (as opposed to military or similar along the lines of Delta Green), it was either as a horror game - they'd get in over their heads in bizaare circumstances and many or most of them would die, or as make-do adventurers, where the mousy art dealer starts packing heat and learns to cast spells.  In the latter case, we'd often try to solve things without a great deal of combat.  But we'd break into places, steal things, travel to find clues, and get in fights when appropriate.
 
From Erik's description, the podcast group sounds very unusual, weak and useless characters being ineffectual but surviving due to gm fiat.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI was one. The Yog guys are others.

Hey - I fell for the hype and tried to live by other peoples propaganda.

Then, frankly, it sounds like a personal problem to me.  

I have played a lot of CoC and never ran into the problem that you described.  There was always an abundance of Great War veterans with guns around in my playing group. And like Jeff I have played a fair bit of CoC at conventions and never really seen that attitude either, so I gotta wonder whether it is the artsy fartsy mode of play that is the aberration here...  


TGA

I'm just surprised no one has mentioned Cthulhutech yet... :D

Quote from: Erik BoielleI was one. The Yog guys are others.

Hey - I fell for the hype and tried to live by other peoples propaganda.

To an extent this is why I hate the online posing so much - its caused me unending grief.

Wait - I thought this was about the problems with CoC.  Now we find out it's about your problems with the CoC groups you played with and/or listened to podcasts about.

But hey - keep moving those goalposts!

-O

Quote from: obrynNow we find out it's about your problems with the CoC groups you played with and/or listened to podcasts about.

Well, CoC as played by me and my groups yes. Is that an issue?

(And you had a a motorcycle-riding, sword-carrying, modern knight-templar wannabe?

What a total munchkin. Thats so not lovecraftian. Wouldn't you have been happier with DnD? Was he called Neo, perhaps?

:-) )

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, in part because of the massivly unhealthy culture surrounding CoC, its almost a status game about who can have the most inappropriate/useless/'normal' character.

So much as looking at a Tommy Gun, for instance, marks you as a hated munchkin who should be playing DnD. Hell, playing someone who can do more than wonder around saying 'Not another boring library' marks you out as a hated munchkin.

Complicating this is that the magician, for instance, is played by the GMs wife who doesn't really have much interest in combat. Which is fine, but they need to either start playing by scoobie do rules (and stop having heavily armed murderous cultists wondering around (at least ones that arn't played for comic relief)) or they need adventures that are actually intended for normal people instead of a bloody swat team.

Hmmm - I've been playing and (more often) running CoC since the dinosaurs died out, and I never met a player who wouldn't be glad of a little combat skill. It's more likely I'm saying "You might need a bit of Research and Occult here, Joe" than "You really need more skill points in some sort of firearm..."

-clash

Quote from: obrynWait - I thought this was about the problems with CoC.  Now we find out it's about your problems with the CoC groups you played with and/or listened to podcasts about.

But hey - keep moving those goalposts!

-O

Right. The problems aren't with CoC at all. They are with the players and GMs.

-clash

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, CoC as played by me and my groups yes. Is that an issue?

Yes, actually, Eric. If there's a problem with the game itself, the only way to fix the problem is to change the game. If the problem is with the game-as-played, you can just change the way it is played.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceRight. The problems aren't with CoC at all.

I wouldn't go quite that far.  Many (maybe most, don't have book handy now) of the occupations are non-action types.  I could see someone getting the idea that action is not what the game is about, despite stat areas for weapons.
 
But I've never been in such a group.

Quote from: Erik BoielleAnd you had a a motorcycle-riding, sword-carrying, modern knight-templar wannabe?

What a total munchkin. Thats so not lovecraftian. Wouldn't you have been happier with DnD? Was he called Neo, perhaps?

Just as a counterpoint, I'm pretty sure that if I had the lodge member list handy I'd be only a couple phonecalls away from finding a knight templar who owned both a motorcycle and a sword.  I know I've been to knightings with a motorbike or two in the parking lot and most high degree masons I know own a sword.  Hell, when I was knighted they just gave me one of the spares out of the equipment room.

Quote from: jrientsJust as a counterpoint, I'm pretty sure that if I had the lodge member list handy I'd be only a couple phonecalls away from finding a knight templar who owned both a motorcycle and a sword.  I know I've been to knightings with a motorbike or two in the parking lot and most high degree masons I know own a sword.  Hell, when I was knighted they just gave me one of the spares out of the equipment room.

.


...

..

.


...


Americans...

:-)




That said, I don't know masons, but being able to reliably carve up zombies moves you out of norm terratory and in to survivor turf (to riff on AFMBE), and is a different kettle of fish.

I mean, Alien is norms, Aliens is survivors, if you get my meaning.

Quote from: WeeklyNow, for long term play, there's something to be said for character competence. Average Joes are well and good for canonic play with expendable PCs, but big campaigns groups need a bit of preparation. For instance, Delta Green does it by requiring characters to be employees of federal agencies. In my own campaign, PCs had to be Great War veterans (French characters, so no big deal). I ended up with 3 former combattants of various skill (special forces soldier, colonial troops officer, aerial observer) and a competent combat medic (former volunteer nurse). Strangely, casualties tend to be low...

To be fair, if you start off a campaign with a few gentle investigations the players can start developing their skills (thanks, BRP system!) and start drifting away from being Average Joes. There does come a point where their accumulated Cthulhu Mythos knowledge and sanity losses makes them dangerously fragile - which is the point where you semi-retire them, and use them as informants, researchers, and occasional spellcasters and backup for the current active party.

Quote from: Erik BoielleThat said, I don't know masons, but being able to reliably carve up zombies moves you out of norm terratory and in to survivor turf (to riff on AFMBE), and is a different kettle of fish.

In the event of a zombie attack you could do helluva lot worse than the fellas in my lodge.  During my year as Worshipful Master nearly every active member was a cop, ex-cop, and/or ex-military.  Most lodge nights at Western Star #240 I was clearly the whimpiest guy in the room.  The whimpiest looking guy in the room, on the other hand, was special forces during the tail end of the Vietnam conflict.  I knew Doc for at least 5 years before I even knew he had been in Nam, much less in special forces.

Quote from: jrientsIn the event of a zombie attack you could do helluva lot worse than the fellas in my lodge....

This would be a good setup for a game.  
 
A lodge that is more than a bunch of old guys bowling and driving tiny cars in parades.  They slowly and secretly select community members to protect the community from supernatural forces. The lodge would have ancient lore that's been passed down and have connections to the national organization.  It would also have connections to local government so would have as much cooperation as could be given without arousing suspicion.

Quote from: NicephorusThis would be a good setup for a game.  
 
A lodge that is more than a bunch of old guys bowling and driving tiny cars in parades.  They slowly and secretly select community members to protect the community from supernatural forces. The lodge would have ancient lore that's been passed down and have connections to the national organization.  It would also have connections to local government so would have as much cooperation as could be given without arousing suspicion.

Reminds me of the Adept series by Katherine Kurtz.

Quote from: WarthurReminds me of the Adept series by Katherine Kurtz.

I picked those up at yardsale last year but still haven't read them.

They're good-natured pulpy fun.

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, CoC as played by me and my groups yes. Is that an issue?

(And you had a a motorcycle-riding, sword-carrying, modern knight-templar wannabe?

What a total munchkin. Thats so not lovecraftian. Wouldn't you have been happier with DnD? Was he called Neo, perhaps?

:-) )

Was I skeptical about it?  Sure.  Was it munchkin?  Hardly!  He ended up being a wild west, ultra-Catholic, interesting character.  He added a lot to the game.

-O

The last Cthulhu game I ran was back in my college days.  It had:
* A mortician
* A mob assassin
* A criminal/thug
* A drunk riverboat captain

Oddly enough, the assassin came the closest to getting killed (by getting into a shoot-out between the mob guys and the cops).

The riverboat captain started to lose his grip on his sanity after reading a mythos book, but only so far as to become obsessed with drawing a particular symbol over and over again (kind of like the guy in Dark City).

Everyone, even the mortician, had a gun and at least minimal combat stats.  They all ended up surviving and stopping the evil voodoo cult.

My campaign was definately not arty, but not over-the-top action, either.  I use Dashiell Hammet, not Lovecraft, for my inspiration for CoC games.

Quote from: obrynWas I skeptical about it?  Sure.  Was it munchkin?  Hardly!  He ended up being a wild west, ultra-Catholic, interesting character.  He added a lot to the game.

Almost as if the game worked better with fewer normal people out of their depth and more John Mclanes...

Quote from: jgants* A mob assassin

Munchkin...

Have you considered a more low brow game like dungeons and dragons?

(incidentally, my point is little more than that you can see how this unhealthy attitude could lead to whole parties of drooling incompetents who can't tie their shoelaces let alone foil a nameless cult - who wants to be a munchkin?)

Something I always wanted to use in a campaign (Cthulhu or otherwise) but you are free to use.

The Shriners run a series of charity hospitals specializing in treating children with horrid diseases and physical deformities who cannot get the care they need elsewhere. They have a sterling reputation for their work in these hospitals, and have gained a measure of fame and respect for their charity work in this area. People will bring their poor waifs from all over the country, if not the world, to receive treatment. I've been in one for a good period of time, and I've seen first hand the work the dedicated doctors and staff do to help truly suffering children. Their work in the osteopathic and neuromuscular field is particularly well received. They're borderline miracle workers in many instances.

That said, these hospitals are also a ready-made source of virgin blood and children to sacrifice.

Just sayin'.

Quote from: Erik BoielleAlmost as if the game worked better with fewer normal people out of their depth and more John Mclanes...

I'm still confused what point you're making.  The game works fine both ways.  It's wonderfully flexible like that.  Mine had a decent mix of firefights & investigative creepiness.  Others may swing more one way than another.

...which is what everyone in the thread except you has been saying the whole time.

Quote from: You, responding to someone elseMunchkin...

Have you considered a more low brow game like dungeons and dragons?

(incidentally, my point is little more than that you can see how this unhealthy attitude could lead to whole parties of drooling incompetents who can't tie their shoelaces let alone foil a nameless cult - who wants to be a munchkin?)

That wasn't your point at the start of the thread, though.  Your point seemed to be that CoC is fatally flawed because it dares allow for rather mundane PCs.

You seem to really, really want to shoehorn all CoC players into your prejudices.  Who am I to stop you, though?  I mean, your game with a crappy GM and that podcast obviously better show how CoC is really played than about a dozen people telling you that those are nothing like their experiences.

-O

We played BRP CoC again last month and although the session was awesome, the rolls were a bit whiffy.

Seanchai

Quote from: Pierce InverarityFor an even more proactive approach to dealing with cultists & minions, google the legendary rpg.net actual play reports by American Badass.

Or not.

Seanchai

Never got beyond chargen with CoC, but let me see if I have a handle on this.

CoC invented as a horror game where a lot of the fun was, basically, watching your character die in interesting ways, or go insane. For this kind of play, it doesn't matter much what kind of character you make, you just have to be willing to walk into danger and enjoy watching the consequences.

Probably out of a combination of factors, i.e.:

a) Players who wanted more continuity and character identification, maybe because they were carrying over assumptions from other games;

b) Chaosium wanting to expand the game out of a niche that tended to imply occasional/alternative play, and turn it into a "main course campaign" game...

As I said, because of these factors, people wanted characters who'd survive fairly well from session to session. But not everyone absorbed the difference in character types that were suited for long term play. So you had a paradigm clash where people were highly attached to their characters yet unwilling to construct them in a manner that would give them a good chance of surviving through a series of "interesting" sessions. (This may have been reinforced if Chaosium never revised chargen to reflect different needs for different kinds of play. Did they?)

Result: either the players refuse to do anything interesting, or the GM has to resort to all sorts of improbable contortions to lead the characters safely through interesting situations.

Yes? No? Maybe?

Quote from: Elliot WilenNever got beyond chargen with CoC, but let me see if I have a handle on this.

CoC invented as a horror game where a lot of the fun was, basically, watching your character die in interesting ways, or go insane.

Not in my experience. You wanted to SOCK IT TO THEM, just like in any other game. It's just that, more than in many other games, part of the sockery involved a) sleuthing; b) given the power of some of the sockees, dealing death or burial from a safe distance (dynamite); and c) given the annoying lawfulness of modern society, stealth and subterfuge.

But whether you played it Holmes-ish (Cthulhu by Gaslight) or Indiana Jones-ish (Masks), CoC was never about horror as psychodrama, or the tragedy of eventual madness and stuff.

Your PC's SAN total is getting too low because his Mythos is getting too high? Excellent. He gets to be the librarian/sage/spell caster at Investigator Central aka Lord Cavendish's manor, and you roll up a new one for the fieldwork.

Also, CoC was supported from the get-go with regular, globe-spanning campaigns. Shadows of Yog-Sothoth was the first official campaign I ever played and one of the first published for any game. So, CoC was not designed specifically for one-off play. It was all about the layers of the onion, and R'lyeh at the bottom of it all.

Oh, well. So, who came up with the idea of making characters that can't SOCK IT TO THEM?

Beats me.

No, wait...

The Germans!

Seriously. Ask Settembrini or Dirk. CoC tea-time-style is how it got drifted in Germany as soon as the translation was out (which was fairly early). That podcast sounds exactly like that.

But that's drifting! Remember, Sandy Petersen went on to work on Doom and Quake. No tea-time here.

Quote from: Elliot WilenOh, well. So, who came up with the idea of making characters that can't SOCK IT TO THEM?

Plugged if I know! Seems like a pretty dumb thing to do...

-clash

Quote from: Elliot WilenCoC invented as a horror game where a lot of the fun was, basically, watching your character die in interesting ways, or go insane.

I'm not sure I'd put it that way. The fun of CoC, to my mind, is the risk of your character dying or going insane. Moreover, there's also the risk of getting a less-than-happy ending if things don't go well. These were a change from the paradigm at the time and especially from the dominant game, D&D.

Seanchai

Quote from: Elliot WilenNever got beyond chargen with CoC, but let me see if I have a handle on this.

CoC invented as a horror game where a lot of the fun was, basically, watching your character die in interesting ways, or go insane. For this kind of play, it doesn't matter much what kind of character you make, you just have to be willing to walk into danger and enjoy watching the consequences.

Probably out of a combination of factors, i.e.:

a) Players who wanted more continuity and character identification, maybe because they were carrying over assumptions from other games;

b) Chaosium wanting to expand the game out of a niche that tended to imply occasional/alternative play, and turn it into a "main course campaign" game...

As I said, because of these factors, people wanted characters who'd survive fairly well from session to session. But not everyone absorbed the difference in character types that were suited for long term play. So you had a paradigm clash where people were highly attached to their characters yet unwilling to construct them in a manner that would give them a good chance of surviving through a series of "interesting" sessions. (This may have been reinforced if Chaosium never revised chargen to reflect different needs for different kinds of play. Did they?)

Result: either the players refuse to do anything interesting, or the GM has to resort to all sorts of improbable contortions to lead the characters safely through interesting situations.

Yes? No? Maybe?

No, the published campaigns as noted above are long running globetrotting affairs, the core book has advice aplenty on keeping characters alive and running longer term games but nothing much on disposable characters and one shot killfests.

Lots of CoC fans portray it as a game where if a PC survives three sessions it's a miracle, but that's not supported by the game as actually written and it's not how lots of us play it.

My last CoC game saw not a single PC fatality nor even any madness, some san was lost and they found that the world did not work as they thought but there is plenty of room for follow up.

Played well it's a gradual game, with characters deteriorating over time, dying or going mad only if they are stupid or unlucky, and retiring for others to carry on the fight once they get too ground down.

That said, Erik is a fan of metal gaming, balls to the wall action and gore, CoC is not a game aimed at him and I don't think his views on it are terribly relevant given he's not remotely the target audience.

Similarly, I don't like over the top anime, so my views on Exalted are of less interest than those who are into that stuff.

Quote from: BalbinusPlayed well it's a gradual game, with characters deteriorating over time, dying or going mad only if they are stupid or unlucky,

This can also make it scarier. If you're likely to die in the first session, you don't invest is the character at all and you don't have time. If you might die after growing used to the character after several sessions, then there's more tension.

Quote from: BalbinusThat said, Erik is a fan of metal gaming, balls to the wall action and gore, CoC is not a game aimed at him and I don't think his views on it are terribly relevant given he's not remotely the target audience.

Well, much of my gaming has low key character stuff. Or at least 'realistic' gurps. So I know it really well.

Things like the podcast bug me because I've done that. Alot. And I think I know whats wrong (the players being trained to be less and less proactive with time).

I still like talking more than combat, which computers do better, but really I like big pantomime scenery chewing, essentially because I think it is more fun.

You get to, yknow, DO STUFF.

The thought of my bad gaming actually make me feel somewhat nauseous. The thought of another bunch of characters standing around looking at a plot saying 'well, what can we do about it' or 'i'm not going in there - it's dangerous', well, DEATH FIRST!

---

Player proactivity is a tender flower, and one that must be nurtured by layering on them as much authority and/or responsibility as possible!

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, much of my gaming has low key character stuff. Or at least 'realistic' gurps. So I know it really well.

Things like the podcast bug me because I've done that. Alot. And I think I know whats wrong (the players being trained to be less and less proactive with time).

I still like talking more than combat, which computers do better, but really I like big pantomime scenery chewing, essentially because I think it is more fun.

You get to, yknow, DO STUFF.

The thought of my bad gaming actually make me feel somewhat nauseous. The thought of another bunch of characters standing around looking at a plot saying 'well, what can we do about it' or 'i'm not going in there - it's dangerous', well, DEATH FIRST!

Ok, fair enough.

The podcast though, what makes you think it's typical?  It's just one group, and by the sounds of it they had fun so they were gaming right (since having fun is gaming right in my book).

The core book actually suggests each player possibly having two characters, one bookish and one more actiony, in my games each player has one but there tends to be a mix of action types and bookish types.

Part of the fun of the game is being out of your depth, but how much out is a factor of player taste.  In my last CoC game I think three of five characters had some combat skill, though I think they didn't use them at all (instead they spread rumours about the bad guys with a crime gang and got the head cultist stabbed outside his hotel, sometimes I love my group).

The fault lies not in the game but in ourselves, or in the case of the podcast in people having fun that ain't our fun.

What's so bad about fun that ain't our fun if we don't have to participate in it?

Quote from: Erik BoiellePlayer proactivity is a tender flower, and one that must be nurtured by layering on them as much authority and/or responsibility as possible!

True enough, that I do agree with.

Quote from: BalbinusThe podcast though, what makes you think it's typical?  It's just one group, and by the sounds of it they had fun so they were gaming right (since having fun is gaming right in my book).

Well, my analysis of it is that they have the most fun when they have goals to achieve and means to leverage to get there.

Er, for instance last episode the Grace character went insane, thought everyone was out to get her and so decided to steal all the parties money and run off with an unsuitable man.

Her player lit up, got really in to it but eventually became disappointed because her character didn't have the skills to get away with it. Then she spent the ENTIRE NEXT SESSION drugged in to unconciousness.

Won't try that again!

This episode, the professor wanted to go on a rampage of revenge and take the fight to the badguy. The rest of the players told him not to be silly because that man was a bad ass evil sorceror and we are just normal people in over our heads so what can we do about it?

Won't try that again!

They'd love this stuff. They really would. But at the moment the message is clear - stick out and get hammered down.

(And Fin would really love to cut loose like an action hero with a tommy gun in each hand - he just doesn't think the others would like that. And he might be right. And every time he's tried in the past in CoC he's been gunned down. but still.  The girls get most excited by shopping and finding suitable men for their characters to marry, so possibly one could work out a compromise).

And its not like this stuff would upset the GMs carefully laid plot. The poor chap would be more than happy for the players to leap on something and run with it. But they wont.

I think its typical because it sounds a lot like my games.

Quote from: Erik BoielleI think its typical because it sounds a lot like my games.

Please do not confuse what is typical for you with what is typical.

Just sayin'...


TGA

Quote from: NicephorusThis can also make it scarier. If you're likely to die in the first session, you don't invest is the character at all and you don't have time. If you might die after growing used to the character after several sessions, then there's more tension.

That's a good point.

Seanchai

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, my analysis of it is that they have the most fun when they have goals to achieve and means to leverage to get there.

Er, for instance last episode the Grace character went insane, thought everyone was out to get her and so decided to steal all the parties money and run off with an unsuitable man.

Her player lit up, got really in to it but eventually became disappointed because her character didn't have the skills to get away with it. Then she spent the ENTIRE NEXT SESSION drugged in to unconciousness.

Won't try that again!

[much good stuff clipped]

Ah, I take your point.

I've had that happen to me, it's no fun to be in real life sitting at the table with no way to interact or affect the game, and it does teach entirely the wrong lessons.

Well, all I'll say is CoC does not have to be that way, unfortunately there are some really toxic memes (to borrow a phrase) surrounding CoC and this is one of them and sadly is not so uncommon.

It's bollocks, but it's insidious bollocks I'll give you that.

I misread you earlier in the thread actually, what you identify is a problematic way to approach the game though I don't think one has to go tommy guns blazing as the only alternative, that gets a bit fallacy of the excluded middley for me.

Quote from: BalbinusAh, I take your point.

I've had that happen to me, it's no fun to be in real life sitting at the table with no way to interact or affect the game, and it does teach entirely the wrong lessons.

Well, all I'll say is CoC does not have to be that way, unfortunately there are some really toxic memes (to borrow a phrase) surrounding CoC and this is one of them and sadly is not so uncommon.

It's bollocks, but it's insidious bollocks I'll give you that.

I misread you earlier in the thread actually, what you identify is a problematic way to approach the game though I don't think one has to go tommy guns blazing as the only alternative, that gets a bit fallacy of the excluded middley for me.

Maybe this is a Euro meme? I've never seen CoC played this way here in the states...

-clash