Quote from: Ronin;357030I never gotten a chance to check Kult out. Could you expand on why its under rated David?

Well, the mechanics were kind of dodgy but the setting itself was really interesting. If I'm not mistaken it predates Unknown Armies by a couple of years and the two share many themes. One of which, is that the deeper to you go into the rabbit hole, the looser your grip on sanity. I think it was Reckall who likened it to a horror Matrix.

A creative GM could run a whole range of adventures in this setting. David Cronenberg SFish horror adventures, straight up monster hunts and the more subtle Jap Horror scenarios all exist comfortably in this setting. Not to mention the obvious/viseral Clive Barker stuff.

And of course there is the idea of the first City. The cage of torment. Think of the mysterious metropolis of Dark City and The Strangers and you get where this is all going....

Edit: I just realized that I didn't really answer your question, Ronin. I guess why I feel that it's underated, is because most people think of it as some sort of White Wolf knock off, when it's a much richer ...the word, sinister, comes to mind, setting than the World of Darkness.

Regards,
David R

I think Kult also turns some folks off, once they look into it, because the kind of horror it focuses on is very dark and personal... compared to the fun monster bashing of Chill and CoC... or the emo politics of WOD.
I can see how people might not see it as 'fun'.

I voted Call of Cthulhu, but I loved Kult back in the day. A friend of mine ran it, and it was probably one of the most over-the-top horrific games I ever played in.

Unknown Armies. Two of the most fun campaigns I have ever been part of online used Unknown Armies, and I really found the system clean and simple to use. I really like BRP and nWoD as well (they are, respectively, three of my favourite systems of all time), but the obsession and mental-health mechanics are absolutely perfect for horror games.

Quote from: David R;357216If I'm not mistaken it predates Unknown Armies by a couple of years and the two share many themes.

More than just a couple of years, in fact: the very first edition of Kult was originally published in '91, while UA didn't come out before '98. (Incidentally, I voted for Kult, as well. Leaving aside any arguments about what's objectively "the best" game for this sort of thing, it features the single most impressive horror setting that I can think of.)

Quote from: David R;357008I voted for Kult. An underrated game on so many levels.

Regards,
David R

Word. For me, no other game beats Kult in sheer intensity. I dearly love CoC and WoD, but I've never ran such horror games like Kult games.

Somebody up-thread mentioned D&D being a poor system for Ravenloft...when I mentioned it I was thinking of AD&D 2nd, which I thought was not too bad.  I also have the Ravenloft material for D&D3.0 - material I really like (in most cases), but that was definitely poorly suited to the 3.0/3.5 ruleset.  Anyone else have that experience?

Quote from: Bobloblah;357475Somebody up-thread mentioned D&D being a poor system for Ravenloft...when I mentioned it I was thinking of AD&D 2nd, which I thought was not too bad.  I also have the Ravenloft material for D&D3.0 - material I really like (in most cases), but that was definitely poorly suited to the 3.0/3.5 ruleset.  Anyone else have that experience?

I ran Ravenloft in 2nd and 3rd, and though both systems were bad for it.  That said, I love the setting material a lot.

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;357480I ran Ravenloft in 2nd and 3rd, and though both systems were bad for it.  That said, I love the setting material a lot.

I never ran 3e for it, just 2e.  But yeah, love the setting, don't think the system is a great fit for that kind of environment.  Not that one can't have a lot of fun with it still or anything.

My opinions are based on the following:

* D&D combat is way too abstract for a game of horror.  Combat needs to be short, descriptive, and (above all else) very deadly.  Something a lot closer to 1/2e Warhammer.

* D&D is very advancement-oriented.  Zero to hero clashes with the whole gothic horror mood the setting was going for, which depends heavily on the PCs always being normal or slightly special and very outclassed by anything supernatural.  Systems where PC advancement is much slower, like BRP or GURPS, makes more sense.

* Horror settings generally use the kind of adventures that would be very skill focused which is the opposite of D&D's heavy class focus.

* D&D is very medieval in focus.  Ravenloft had some medieval, but many of the civilized domains were rennaissance or later.  They didn't even address the whole "guns" thing until well into the life of the setting.

* Most of D&D's classes don't make a lot of sense in the setting - at least not straight out of PHB.  The traditional fighter works in medieval domains, not so much in rennaissance ones.  Theives and rangers kind of make sense.  Paladins and druids don't work at all.  Clerics and bards have the wrong "flavor".  And having traditional wizards in the setting makes no sense at all.

Now, a lot of this could be mediated by making whole new archetypes for the setting.  Have a rennassaince type swashbuckler class to complement the fighter.  Turn bards into gypsies.  Take away the spells from rangers and clerics.  Remove wizards and replace with psychics (though with a better system than 2e's psionics).  The only kind of magic in this kind of setting should be dark sorcery, witchcraft, and necromancy - all of which should be ritual based and come with a heavy price for its use.

TSR actually did kind of try to do some of this late in the 2e lifespan with the "Domains of Dread" HB and the "Heroes of the Mists" expansion.  But, it was kind of too little, too late, and still pretty half-assed because, again, the system just wasn't envisioned for that kind of game.

For sheer fun as a setting, Nightbane with some of Beyond the Supernatural 1st edition mashed in.

Otherwise, Call of Cthulhu with double HP for modern day American Torchwood set in Innsmouth and Black Mesa (that was a joke ha ha fat chance).

Quote from: Casey777;357534For sheer fun as a setting, Nightbane with some of Beyond the Supernatural 1st edition mashed in.

Otherwise, Call of Cthulhu with double HP for modern day American Torchwood set in Innsmouth and Black Mesa (that was a joke ha ha fat chance).

I love NB

BtS 2e for me - it's not just about the horror, it's about the people who refuse to be victimized and stand up and fight.

Sure you can say the same about CoC, but, dang it, for all his flaws, Siembieda gets adventure.

Savage Worlds of Solomon Kane

I prefer to run horror games in systems that aren't built with it as a primary goal, like D&D or Spycraft. One of the most effective ways to introduce horror is as an anomoly or an unknown. If its a part of the known ruleset for the players, it seems to not feel quite as effective to me.

Some friends of mine swear by Dread (the Jenga-based game), but I personally find the idea of the Jenga tower as a resolution mechanic to be a bit distracting.

As far as Palladium is concerned, I very much enjoyed Beyond the Supernatural. Nightbane, on the other hand, I never liked. But another one that's worth considering in this genre is Systems Failure, which I think counts as both Horror and Post-Apocalyptic gaming. Its also probably one of the most brilliant RPGs Palladium ever made.

RPGPundit