Quote from: Dimitrios;658529Given Chaosium's knack for jumping on bandwagons just as they're about to go over a cliff (*cough*, CCGs, *cough*), I wonder if this means that Kickstarter is about to collapse.

This isn't Chaosium's first kickstarter.  Their kickstarter for Horror on the Orient Express was a great success.

Quote from: Stainless;658499I played in a game at Continuum 2012, GM'd by Mike Mason and with Angus Abranson and Pete Cakebread in the group. We all agreed it was a hoot. The changes to the rules were good fun and we certainly had a spooky CoC experience. I have no hesitation in wanting to play that system and if the book is reorganized, so much the better.

Hey, a post from someone who actually has played 7e!

This positive recommendation alone outweighs all the speculative whining in this thread.

Quote from: Akrasia;658805What is this?  Do you have a link?

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=26681

Quote from: Benoist;658811http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=26681

Merci!

Quote from: Akrasia;658808Hey, a post from someone who actually has played 7e!

This positive recommendation alone outweighs all the speculative whining in this thread.

I also name-dropped Angus and Pete as they know their RPGs and have good publishing and designing cred. They both had a great time and we enthusiastically discussed the system during the break in the game. I think Angus was a little more reserved, probably anticipating the grognard reaction, but we all agreed it was a good rpg experience, and the scenario was definitely horrific. The one example of pushing a roll that I recall was excellent; really made a horror and panic situation.

What Mike and Paul talked about at the open session I also found encouraging.

But then again, I've been playing gumeshoe games for the last couple of years and have absolutely no issues with its approach. There's a re-learning curve that most don't have the patience/attention span/inclination to get through. But once through it becomes seamless and natural. Our weekly gumeshoe games have no more OOC breaks in the immersion than any other traditional game. In fact, I would say significantly less as there is less rules consulting/lawyering/etc.

Raiders of R'lyeh, far from forgist, will be an attempt at a sandbox game.

So what's the deal with pushed rolls? Being able to roll failed skill tests again. Surely that can't be ruled since it's entirely context dependent. If i fail to hack a pc, i might have all the time in the world to try again, or i might not, or i might have accidentally tripped the system defences - and still might have a chance to try again.

I guess(am I'm really guessing here) that that's how the pushed rolls work: if you fail at hacking the computer you can push your roll into a success. But it will trigger security measures. You miss your swing at the cultist and push the roll at the cost of breaking your weapon.
At least I hope it's this kind of mechanic. I use it already in my games(my players don't call it "pushing rolls", they call it "bastard Keeper"), but I don't ask them before I adjust the narrative according to random dice-rolls.

...boy, a lot of dirty words in there:D

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;659419So what's the deal with pushed rolls? Being able to roll failed skill tests again. Surely that can't be ruled since it's entirely context dependent...

It is context dependent, and requires a judgement by the Keeper that the second attempt makes sense.

I very much like the sound of the mechanic.  It should make some situations exciting!

Wait...arn't you supposed to fail on CoC?  

Quote from: RPGPundit;659068Raiders of R'lyeh, far from forgist, will be an attempt at a sandbox game.

What's the point of this statement?

I'm getting the impression your not a "consultant" on RoR, but a "shill."

Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;658471... I have little hope that Lynn, Sandy and the other ancients at Chaosium will make it worth while, and worth the high price..

Sadly, Lynn died several months ago.

Quote from: CRKrueger;658513Durall's good, but there's only so much the poor man can write.

Thanks!

Quote from: Bill;658666Perhaps it's not a big deal. 'Automatically' finding clues is not really much different than an easy skill roll.

After a couple of disasters trying adventures with a mystery in the 1970s, I started simply giving the party the (necessary to solve the mystery) clues if they interact with the location/person with the clue in any meaningful way. Note that they can sill miss such clues if they never interact with the location/person and neither the meaning of the clue nor the fact that something is a clue is necessarily obvious. I discovered being sure the party has access to all the clues needed to solve the mystery makes for far less frustration for both players and GM.

Some extra clues can be well-hidden and require great luck or skill to find -- these extra clues are typically "bigger" in that finding one provides a bigger piece of the puzzle in some way. But even if the party never finds one of the extra clues, the standard clues provide more than enough info for careful players to figure out the mystery.

When I looked at Gumshoe I was shocked that someone thought making sure the party has the clues was a major design insight.

Quote from: Grey Wanderer;660135What's the point of this statement?

I'm getting the impression your not a "consultant" on RoR, but a "shill."

I can assure you that not only is the Pundit a PAID consultant on RoR, but also that he has added tremendous value and insight to the game’s ongoing development.

Quote from: Benoist;658784Not to mention (I hope) no Conflict Resolution mechanics, players and Keepers are too dumb to learn how to put clues in play and get them, and other Forge-twinks.

Agreed. I'm sick of solving issues with adventure design with the rules for the game.

If an adventure would grind to halt if you don't spot the critical clue, don't write the adventure that way. It's not hard at all.