Quote from: rmeints;1038084... The previous edition of Masks was 248 pages. The new edition is 672 pages. ...

Wow, that sounds like quite an effort!

Quote from: Hermes Serpent;1038541I'm not Rick but have been running CoC for many years and do a lot of CoC con games as well (CoC cmpaigns are very different from one-shot scenarios or con games). Doing a one shot of The Haunting no way is experienced enough to  successfully play Masks. However if they are experienced role players they will enjoy themselves until them die. Masks is more pulpy than many CoC scenarios and better suited to players who prefer that style but investigation savvy investigators will get a lot more out of it and survive longer than players who have very little experience of CoC investigation scenarios.

I'd suggest that they have at least another three or for scenarios, preferably using 7e if you are using the new Masks, under their belts before attempting Masks.

Awesome. Thanks for the advice!

One of the things that's a bit frustrating about games in the BRP system is that there's no quick and easy way to gauge relative survivability and power level (e.g. no character levels, no "number of careers" like Warhammer, no point total like GURPS or HERO, etc.). I believe Pete Nash once said he had run so much BRP that he could just judge at a glance; unfortunately I'm not as experienced yet, so I appreciate the feedback.

My players like the CoC investigations, but they also like pulp action, which (obviously) they haven't experienced yet. I'll plan to run some 7E scenarios to get them up to speed.

For those scenarios might I suggest some of the ones in The Things we Leave Behind from Stygian Fox. Ladybug is very good as is Hell in Texas. A Time to Harvest from Chaosium in pdf via their Cults of Chaos program is a good shorter campaign in six parts.

Quote from: Hermes Serpent;1038661For those scenarios might I suggest some of the ones in The Things we Leave Behind from Stygian Fox. Ladybug is very good as is Hell in Texas. A Time to Harvest from Chaosium in pdf via their Cults of Chaos program is a good shorter campaign in six parts.

My investigators are based in Boston right now (one Parapsychologist, one Police Detective, and one Miscellaneous [Dilletante]) and they may not want to travel at first. Then again, I have to get them ready for world travel if I'm going to run Masks at some point. I'll have a talk with them and see what they think.

(I tend to run the game as scenarios, rather than open world.)

I'll check out the recommendations though. Thanks again!

Quote from: rmeints;1038274Politely meant short answer: Basically, no.

The PCs will visit the same locations (the same core plot) as the older editions of the campaign. The new material is intertwined with the old material and is essentially inseparable although the players may (as they could always do) choose to not visit / participate in a particular location/plot point. The new material is not optional - it either deepens, corrects, adds layers to the original (e.g. some character details in the original have been changed for historical, representational, or plot purposes). The only exception to this is the optional Peru prologue chapter, which is a prologue but not a component of the core campaign.

I hope that helps.

It certainly clarifies things. There were two ways you could have done this: the new material could have been entirely optional (like side-quests or filler), and I certainly think that would have been a less interesting choice, though safer for you.
On the other hand, making the new material into an essential part of the adventure is much trickier! It has to really blend in well, and of course the quality has to be as good as the old material!

It would be interesting to see if you succeeded at that.

Quote from: Atsuku Nare;1038480Hey Rick, one quick question if I may:

I have a group of players who have only finished The Haunting under 5.6 edition CoC. I received the 7th edition books for my birthday, and am planning to convert them over to it.

Will they be experienced enough to tackle Masks of Nyarlathotep, or should they have more mileage before attempting it?

Thanks!

They are easily experienced enough to tackle Masks of Nyarlathotep. I've run it for people with no Call of Cthulhu experience, and it was great. Assuming your players are willing to commit to playing long-term, it is a great place to start. You have a great hook to get any random group of PCs working together, and they start with a big pile of clues to follow.

The campaign runs better the less jaded your players have gotten to the genre. Just run with it. It's already a long campaign. There is no need to stretch the experience out by sticking a whole bunch of random adventures on the front.

As for the new edition, I'm skeptical about the idea of adding a new chapter on the front. The beginning of Masks of Nyarlathotep is a such a punchy beginning to a campaign. The players get some quick action and get presented with a lot of lined of investigation right away. Burying that great beginning behind an earlier chapter sounds questionable.

Quote from: Baulderstone;1039168... As for the new edition, I'm skeptical about the idea of adding a new chapter on the front. The beginning of Masks of Nyarlathotep is a such a punchy beginning to a campaign. The players get some quick action and get presented with a lot of lined of investigation right away. Burying that great beginning behind an earlier chapter sounds questionable.

I'm curious about that "prologue" chapter. It says it's optional and not part of the core campaign, which seems like an interesting approach but I wonder how that works - is it an mini-adventure for other PCs that somehow avoids giving spoilers if new players were to then run new PCs in the campaign? Is it meant to be run separately? Or not run at all - maybe it's just an account of an earlier episode?

An idea I think sounds fun but probably not what they mean, would be to run a prologue one-shot episode with different players, set before the campaign, and have the results of play and the players' notes/correspondence/actions end up as artifacts/clues/effects for the later campaign. That's one of the main things I like about running my own homebrew world for multiple parties - having the history of actual past play underlying the current campaign.

Quote from: Baulderstone;1039168As for the new edition, I'm skeptical about the idea of adding a new chapter on the front. The beginning of Masks of Nyarlathotep is a such a punchy beginning to a campaign. The players get some quick action and get presented with a lot of lined of investigation right away. Burying that great beginning behind an earlier chapter sounds questionable.

I'm trying not to spoil the campaign, but there's an NPC who draws the players into the campaign.  It's a conceit in previous printings that this is supposed to be an NPC who the characters trust and like.  All this preview episode does is help to establish this trust and like by featuring the NPC in an adventure.  I believe something similar was included in the Masks of N- Companion, which I have a copy of but haven't read yet.  As such, the adventure can be skipped if you really want to, I expect.

Quote from: jcfiala;1039227I'm trying not to spoil the campaign, but there's an NPC who draws the players into the campaign.  It's a conceit in previous printings that this is supposed to be an NPC who the characters trust and like.  All this preview episode does is help to establish this trust and like by featuring the NPC in an adventure.  I believe something similar was included in the Masks of N- Companion, which I have a copy of but haven't read yet.  As such, the adventure can be skipped if you really want to, I expect.

That might work if the adventure is free of the supernatural to keep the integrity of the NPC's background. It would have disadvantage of narrowing the PC backgrounds to people with previous adventures in Peru. As you say, it can be ignored. I've run the campaign multiple times, and I have always been impressed with how well first sessions go with MoN, so I am just skeptical of inventing an abstract "problem" with a classic campaign and deciding to fix it.

Trying to improve historical accuracy also seems a misguided goal. It's an extremely pulpy adventure that didn't pretend to be historically accurate at the time. It suggests to me that the people altering the campaign don't really get it.

Anyway, I hope it's good, and as long as the original remains available for sale, I guess it is fine either way.

Quote from: Atsuku Nare;1038480Hey Rick, one quick question if I may:

I have a group of players who have only finished The Haunting under 5.6 edition CoC. I received the 7th edition books for my birthday, and am planning to convert them over to it.

Will they be experienced enough to tackle Masks of Nyarlathotep, or should they have more mileage before attempting it?

Thanks!

I see no reason that most players fairly new to Call of Cthulhu would not be experienced enough to tackle Masks. If your players are new to roleplaying games in general then they may find the campaign a bit harder to get through at first, but that doesn't mean they couldn't tackle it as long as the GM isn't brand new to RPGs too. If you have doubts, there a numerous free scenarios for CoC available on the web you could run for a few sessions if you wish. Of course, you could run them through just the Peru Prologue adventure and see how they do with that.

Quote from: waltshumate;1038543There have been a number of discussions, on sites like RPG.net, about MoN being problematic, was anything changed to appease any of these people.

Previous editions of Masks did have some problematic issues with them, no doubt. This isn't unique to Masks. Most large scale RPG campaigns tend to have them to a greater or lesser degree. We at Chaosium value feedback on our games. That feedback could very possibly be used to improve future editions of that game. In short, we do revise our products when real flaws are reported. That said, I wouldn't characterize revising our products based on customer feedback as some form of appeasement. I'd characterize it as valuing customer feedback and a desire for product improvement.

Quote from: rmeints;1039258Previous editions of Masks did have some problematic issues with them, no doubt. This isn't unique to Masks. Most large scale RPG campaigns tend to have them to a greater or lesser degree. We at Chaosium value feedback on our games. That feedback could very possibly be used to improve future editions of that game. In short, we do revise our products when real flaws are reported. That said, I wouldn't characterize revising our products based on customer feedback as some form of appeasement. I'd characterize it as valuing customer feedback and a desire for product improvement.

I notice you didn't comment if something was actually changed.

Quote from: rmeints;1039254I see no reason that most players fairly new to Call of Cthulhu would not be experienced enough to tackle Masks. If your players are new to roleplaying games in general then they may find the campaign a bit harder to get through at first, but that doesn't mean they couldn't tackle it as long as the GM isn't brand new to RPGs too. If you have doubts, there a numerous free scenarios for CoC available on the web you could run for a few sessions if you wish. Of course, you could run them through just the Peru Prologue adventure and see how they do with that.

Excellent to hear! My group is very experienced with RPGs (I think we have something like 160 years of gaming all added up), but new to Call of Cthulhu. They did have a rocking good time with The Haunting, and have been chomping at me for more.

Masks of Nyarlathotep and Shadows of Yog-Sothoth seem to be CoC's super-campaigns (with Orient Express added now, as well). I was planning on letting the Investigators get eaten by R'lyeh, but instead I'll spring a couple more adventures on them and then hopefully the new Masks will be out.

Thanks again!

Quote from: RPGPundit;1039531I notice you didn't comment if something was actually changed.

That was not intentional. Many small details in the campaign have been modified to fix plot holes, inconsistencies, and other issues reported.

Let me expand on that just a bit, without hopefully sounding too petty, too trite, or attempting to grandstand.

We at the Chaosium have overhauled all manner of things within the company over the last 3 years. In some respects, almost everything.

We have seriously and intentionally "upped" our game. Our books are now all full color hardcover books. We pay more attention to art, editing, and layout. We have tried to communicate and connect more with the RPG community, which is our family. We listen. We respond. We pay our creatives on time and in full. We reach out to our critics and try to understand what they are telling us. We make mistakes. We are not perfect. We strive to have fun. We have always invested ourselves in our games, as many of you have. In the end, we only wish we had more time to talk with you all more.