I like my Call of Cthulhu games to have some degree of verisimilitude with reality... I find that makes the horror stuff even more horrifying. But one thing that takes me right out of the suspension of disbelief is when players instantly reach for the shotgun when they discover a cultist. I'm serious... I've had players find some black candles and an evil-looking tome in a basement and they immediately go and murder every last unarmed man, woman and child in the house. I've thrown the police against players that are quick to draw their firearms but it doesn't seem to dissuade anyone at the end of the day and it actually pisses off some players.
It's just bad roleplaying to be frank. If players feel a group is dangerous, then they should go to the police. Or they should at least capture a cultist alive and interrogate him for more answers. But the response is always "the only good cultist is a dead cultist." The players are acting like insane psychopaths.
Then that gave me the idea... if it is insane to shoot at someone just because you suspect they are evil, then why not just make murder a sanity-loss situation? Why not make gunfights in general take a toll on sanity? That might send the message to the players to use their freaking heads instead of their sidearms!
So here is what I am thinking. Tell me if it is a great idea or it will break the game entirely. Rules are for 6e (no 7e answers please):
[table=width: 600]
[tr]
[td]Sanity Loss[/td]
[td]Situation[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]0/1[/td]
[td]Each round that guns are fired at humans (regardless of number, only test once)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D3[/td]
[td]Each round a player character fires a gun at a human (instead of previous sanity loss)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]0/1D4[/td]
[td]Be present when a human is killed (but not by you)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D6[/td]
[td]Kill another human in self-defense[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D10[/td]
[td]Kill another human while the player-characters are the instigators of the violence (instead of previous sanity loss)[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
What do you think?
Quote from: Theros;1115273It's just bad roleplaying to be frank. If players feel a group is dangerous, then they should go to the police. Or they should at least capture a cultist alive and interrogate him for more answers. But the response is always "the only good cultist is a dead cultist." The players are acting like insane psychopaths.
I dont really want to comment on your sanity system because CoC is not really my bag. On the other hand I do want to ask if there is ever a good reason why a party should get the Police involved?
In the best case scenario the Police arrest all of the Cultists and the Adventure is over. In the worst case scenario the Police are hilariously unprepared for dealing with the Mythos resulting in a much higher death count then if the party just shot everyone.
And that is not even accounting for the games where the Police are part of the Cult which means that now the Cult knows who the PCs are (and most likely where they live).
So my question would be, does going to the Police ever work out well?
That's an interesting way to handle muderhoboing or dissuade violence in general, and if you wanna be uber realistic even killing in self-defense could have a psychological toll IRL. Though, I haven't really played CoC in ages so can't really say much about those specific numbers. That being said...
Quote from: Shasarak;1115276I dont really want to comment on your sanity system because CoC is not really my bag. On the other hand I do want to ask if there is ever a good reason why a party should get the Police involved?
In the best case scenario the Police arrest all of the Cultists and the Adventure is over. In the worst case scenario the Police are hilariously unprepared for dealing with the Mythos resulting in a much higher death count then if the party just shot everyone.
And that is not even accounting for the games where the Police are part of the Cult which means that now the Cult knows who the PCs are (and most likely where they live).
So my question would be, does going to the Police ever work out well?
...^These are really some good questions to keep in mind about getting the police involved in a horror setting scenario. You go hunting some cultists in some remote town somewhere and what you wanna bet the cops are on the take? Also, even if they're not, WTF where you even doing breaking into some property hunting people down, then getting the cops involved? You trying to get arrested?
SAN loss for violence is an option, but characters from military or underworld careers wouldn't be as affected.
The bigger problem with killing cultists is they leave bodies, and questions.
1) Strangers (the PCs) come to town.
2) They shoot up some cultists and stop the Big Evil. Yay heroes!
3) Those cultists were various town elders who had families, responsibilities, and friends.
4) Somebody is gonna put two and two together and realize the PCs killed the important locals.
5) The PCs are gonna be on the run from cops, FBI and angry families and nobody is gonna believe their story.
That's the big difference with Delta Green. You're government sanctioned murderhobos so if you gotta blast a dozen people to keep a demon-frog monster from entering our reality, you fill out the forms in triplicate and the cleaner teams sweep all the evidence under the rug. But if you're just a Scooby Gang with shotguns, you have no backup and no legal defense.
Quote from: Shasarak;1115276I dont really want to comment on your sanity system because CoC is not really my bag. On the other hand I do want to ask if there is ever a good reason why a party should get the Police involved?
In the best case scenario the Police arrest all of the Cultists and the Adventure is over. In the worst case scenario the Police are hilariously unprepared for dealing with the Mythos resulting in a much higher death count then if the party just shot everyone.
And that is not even accounting for the games where the Police are part of the Cult which means that now the Cult knows who the PCs are (and most likely where they live).
So my question would be, does going to the Police ever work out well?
I am not sure I understand your question... How is murdering all the cultists any better than getting them arrested? It's obviously worse... you cannot question dead cultists, and now you have committed a crime that is sentenced with capital punishment. And what better way for the players to announce their existence to the cult than by starting to murder cultists? Seriously, that will draw the strongest possible response from the cult. When you start killing people, you turn the investigation from something sneaky to outright, open warfare with cultists, police and perhaps other groups bearing down on the players. How can you possibly conduct an investigation in that context? You've just Leeroy Jenkins'd the investigation.
And it seems obvious to me that are clear situations where calling the police would work once the players have done enough investigation to have basically solved the scenario. Then they call in the "cavalry," the police, to arrest the cultists and wrap up the scenario. By that point in the adventure, they should well know 1) whether the police are involved and 2) whether calling the police will just lead to a bloodbath.
My own personal style is that if either of the latter two situations is the case, then I will always create an alternate path to victory that doesn't involve the characters going on a shooting spree.
Besides, cultists are never, ever the "final boss" or the true problem. Killing them all never, ever "solves" the problem. If it does, then your referee is probably a crap Keeper. There is very little point in killing cultists, despite the fact that it seems to often be the first move by players.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1115281SAN loss for violence is an option, but characters from military or underworld careers wouldn't be as affected.
I'm not a CoC fan, so I don't know if they do it this way, but...
In many games, military & underworld characters do usually suffer some kind of hit to sanity for violence and killing, but usually good systems let you build up a tolerance so that you don't go start raving mad from repeating (or repeatedly being exposed to) the same minor act over and over again. An example of this is Dark Heresy (2e) where you can ignore Fear tests (a major source of insanity) up to 1/2 your Insanity bonus (the 10s digit of your Insanity points) and the Jaded talent that (in some versions) causes some insanity points when you learn it but then makes you immune to Insanity points inflicted from 'mundane' violence. Eclipse Phase (2e) has something similar where mental traumas eventually toughen your mind against gaining further stress against what you've already been exposed to, but at the cost of reducing your ability to handle other forms of stress and penalties to Persuade checks.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1115293I'm not a CoC fan, so I don't know if they do it this way, but...
In many games, military & underworld characters do usually suffer some kind of hit to sanity for violence and killing, but usually good systems let you build up a tolerance so that you don't go start raving mad from repeating (or repeatedly being exposed to) the same minor act over and over again. An example of this is Dark Heresy (2e) where you can ignore Fear tests (a major source of insanity) up to 1/2 your Insanity bonus (the 10s digit of your Insanity points) and the Jaded talent that (in some versions) causes some insanity points when you learn it but then makes you immune to Insanity points inflicted from 'mundane' violence. Eclipse Phase (2e) has something similar where mental traumas eventually toughen your mind against gaining further stress against what you've already been exposed to, but at the cost of reducing your ability to handle other forms of stress and penalties to Persuade checks.
That clashes with the overall Lovecraftian theme of humans as helpless and incapable of dealing with reality. You are basically allowing characters to be inured to violence, which will encourage players to use violence. Great for the 40k universe, of course.
Why not a fan of CoC, out of curiosity?
Quote from: Spinachcat;1115281SAN loss for violence is an option, but characters from military or underworld careers wouldn't be as affected.
The bigger problem with killing cultists is they leave bodies, and questions.
1) Strangers (the PCs) come to town.
2) They shoot up some cultists and stop the Big Evil. Yay heroes!
3) Those cultists were various town elders who had families, responsibilities, and friends.
4) Somebody is gonna put two and two together and realize the PCs killed the important locals.
5) The PCs are gonna be on the run from cops, FBI and angry families and nobody is gonna believe their story.
That's the big difference with Delta Green. You're government sanctioned murderhobos so if you gotta blast a dozen people to keep a demon-frog monster from entering our reality, you fill out the forms in triplicate and the cleaner teams sweep all the evidence under the rug. But if you're just a Scooby Gang with shotguns, you have no backup and no legal defense.
Exactly, but players get pissed when they have to answer to the reasonable, predictable consequences of their actions. Even if a cultist is evil, it is still murder in the eyes of the law.
Honestly, the other option is to never run a scenario that has any cultists in it. That would work too. So few of Lovecrafts stories actually had cultists in it... Rats in the Walls? Nope. Colour Out of Space? Nope. At the Mountains of Madness? Nope. Of course, the players will still EXPECT to find cults and will be paranoid around NPCs, which is fine, but I don't have to give them the excuse to go on a murderous rampage.
It's been over a decade since I read it, but Unknown Armies (1ed) has a sort of madness meter for Violence (and other horror tropes). I don't remember exactly how it went but I think that if you reach a certain score in Violence you either need a check to see if you recoil from using further violent actions, or if you embrace the violence and every problem looks like a nail-target to your 9mm-hammer.
Extra bookkeeping for sure, but has anyone used this system and likes to give their impressions?
As UA is sorta d100 based, could this system be used in CoC?
Quote from: Theros;1115289I am not sure I understand your question... How is murdering all the cultists any better than getting them arrested? It's obviously worse... you cannot question dead cultists, and now you have committed a crime that is sentenced with capital punishment. And what better way for the players to announce their existence to the cult than by starting to murder cultists? Seriously, that will draw the strongest possible response from the cult. When you start killing people, you turn the investigation from something sneaky to outright, open warfare with cultists, police and perhaps other groups bearing down on the players. How can you possibly conduct an investigation in that context? You've just Leeroy Jenkins'd the investigation.
And it seems obvious to me that are clear situations where calling the police would work once the players have done enough investigation to have basically solved the scenario. Then they call in the "cavalry," the police, to arrest the cultists and wrap up the scenario. By that point in the adventure, they should well know 1) whether the police are involved and 2) whether calling the police will just lead to a bloodbath.
My own personal style is that if either of the latter two situations is the case, then I will always create an alternate path to victory that doesn't involve the characters going on a shooting spree.
Besides, cultists are never, ever the "final boss" or the true problem. Killing them all never, ever "solves" the problem. If it does, then your referee is probably a crap Keeper. There is very little point in killing cultists, despite the fact that it seems to often be the first move by players.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that murdering the cultists is the better option, but that police would not be equipped to handle actual supernatural threats or the idea that mystical rituals can actually summon monsters from another world. Having weird freaky believes or owning strange "cultist" paraphernalia is not against the law, but breaking and entering is. Unless you have the dead bodies of victims killed by the cultists or people kidnaped by them locked in a cellar there's nothing to arrest them for, but there might be cause to arrest you if you broke into someone's property illegally.
Quote from: Shasarak;1115276I dont really want to comment on your sanity system because CoC is not really my bag. On the other hand I do want to ask if there is ever a good reason why a party should get the Police involved?
In the best case scenario the Police arrest all of the Cultists and the Adventure is over. In the worst case scenario the Police are hilariously unprepared for dealing with the Mythos resulting in a much higher death count then if the party just shot everyone.
And that is not even accounting for the games where the Police are part of the Cult which means that now the Cult knows who the PCs are (and most likely where they live).
So my question would be, does going to the Police ever work out well?
Quote from: Theros;1115296Exactly, but players get pissed when they have to answer to the reasonable, predictable consequences of their actions. Even if a cultist is evil, it is still murder in the eyes of the law.
Yeah, that's the thing, being in a cult isn't illegal, except maybe in a Muslim country if the members are ex-Muslims. If the cult has done crimes, like kidnapping/sacrificing people, then sure, going to the police should be a legitimate strategy for getting them shut down, if that is the objective I as Keeper had in mind for the scenario. But usually the cult is just going to be one layer to peel back to get at the Mythos horror beneath.
Quote from: Theros;1115296Honestly, the other option is to never run a scenario that has any cultists in it. That would work too. So few of Lovecrafts stories actually had cultists in it... Rats in the Walls? Nope. Colour Out of Space? Nope. At the Mountains of Madness? Nope. Of course, the players will still EXPECT to find cults and will be paranoid around NPCs, which is fine, but I don't have to give them the excuse to go on a murderous rampage.
Well, there's Call of Cthulhu, where a major part of the narrative is a description of a police raid on a cult, and where it's left clear the cult is still around and scarily powerful. Shadow over Innsmouth is essentially about a cult that has taken over a town. The Whateleys of the Dunwich Horror are sort of a mini-cult. But AtMoM, being set in Antarctica, indeed has no cultists.
Quote from: Marchand;1115307Well, there's Call of Cthulhu, where a major part of the narrative is a description of a police raid on a cult, and where it's left clear the cult is still around and scarily powerful. Shadow over Innsmouth is essentially about a cult that has taken over a town. The Whateleys of the Dunwich Horror are sort of a mini-cult. But AtMoM, being set in Antarctica, indeed has no cultists.
Despite being the namesake of the RPG, others have argued that The Call of Cthulhu is not an archetypal Lovecraftian story, so I'll leave it at that. But in the case of Dunwich Horror, the Wizard Whatley really doesn't conform to what CoC RPG adventures (or at last many players) understand to be cults (expendable minions that are gunned down in droves). And I'll take your comment about ATMoM to be sneering. I'd like to point out that the framework of the story did not in the least stop Chaosium from shoving coteries of human foes into the adventure that is based upon the story (i.e. Beyond the Mountains of Madness). It stands to reason that if cultists were oh so important for Lovecraft's method of storytelling, he could have too included them in ATMoM, despite its setting on the very bottom of the Earth.
Quote from: Theros;1115295That clashes with the overall Lovecraftian theme of humans as helpless and incapable of dealing with reality. You are basically allowing characters to be inured to violence, which will encourage players to use violence. Great for the 40k universe, of course.
Why not a fan of CoC, out of curiosity?
I don't like the theme (look at what you put as the first sentence in your above response), game premise, setting(s), or the mechanics. It doesn't offer anything that really appeals to me more than any other investigation game, and the Mythos itself is unappealing to me.
The new DG lets you "harden" yourself to the SAN-loss that accompanies violent violence, but if you're going ward-to-ward headshotting babies and old people, then *plink* *plink* *plink* you're still going to be chipping away at your sanity until you snap.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1115281SAN loss for violence is an option, but characters from military or underworld careers wouldn't be as affected.
Because they all went insane long ago... now they're just malevolent sociopaths looking for their next fix of violence.
Quote from: Theros;1115273What do you think?
The concept doesn't seem unreasonable to me. The implementation might need some work.
1. One implication of the table is that most violent career criminals (PC or NPC) either already are or soon will be insane. Which would make them legally not guilty of murder by reason of insanity. I don't particularly like that implication.
2. Practically speaking I'd expect you'll end up with players arguing that after the PCs attack, most instances of case 5 should really be case 4 since the cultists are now trying to kill the PCs back. I'd find having that argument tedious, but unilaterally denying their point is apt to lead to cranky and resentful players.
3. Some characters should have some ability to be hardened to those types of SANITY losses. Which, and When, and How will take a bit more workup and starts to move you from the simple CoC Sanity system to something with more than one thing you are tracking, possibly similar to descriptions I've heard of Unknown Armies. You and your players may (or may not) want the added bookkeeping.
4. Probably the most important concern I have is that you seem to be trying to address an out-of-game problem (your players are acting like murder hoboes) with an in-game solution. I'd want to talk with my players and get them on board with an addition to the Sanity rules first. Then the Sanity loss is a reminder of what we've agreed to about play style and an additional risk/reward decision rather than a great, big club to hold over their heads to make them play the right way.
Quote from: Theros;1115296Exactly, but players get pissed when they have to answer to the reasonable, predictable consequences of their actions. Even if a cultist is evil, it is still murder in the eyes of the law.
If you are talking about the CoC universe then what exactly is reasonable and predictable?
The only Lovecraft story that I can think of involving an official response of sorts was when the army was called in to deal with the Deep Ones.
Quote from: Theros;1115308But in the case of Dunwich Horror, the Wizard Whatley really doesn't conform to what CoC RPG adventures (or at last many players) understand to be cults (expendable minions that are gunned down in droves).
Despite no specific depiction the story does mention cults a few times... such as when Armitage is trying to decipher the code Wilbur's diary is written in, noting it's an ancient cypher used by forbidden cults.
The Thing On The Doorstep is another that, while not depicting a cult, does mention groups that Asenath/Ephraim Waite is dealing with.
It seems to me that human cultists and their activities would be the entry level to most investigations into the machinations of the Mythos on Earth... even if a lot of what the cults are doing is just a muddled guess at what the Old Ones actually desire.
The specific numbers could be haggled over, depending on the table, but overall a great idea! :)
CoC already has similar SAN saves for Investigator's first time witnessing a corpse, so why not when Investigators attempt to make their own? :D
Also I liked the named limits to testing, so it cannot be spammed by punitively narrow-sighted GMs; good anticipation of pedantic (bad faith?) usage. Even CoC says those "corpse witnessing" SAN tests (and the like) tend to inure Investigators in an adventure arc to future similar incidents in session. That way the game removes license from spammed splatterpunk as a vindictive GM's weapon... and also makes 20th Cen wars playable for investigations. ;)
Thanks for sharing!
edit: Bren's 4th point is crucial, "In-game solutions to ou-of-game problems" is chasing the dragon. Better to be direct and have The Talk (tm) to same-page players on their expected responsibilities. ;)
Quote from: Theros;1115273What do you think?
And yet, if your cultists attempt to murder the party, they would suffer no such penalties. (Is a functioning cult even possible if you apply the sanity rules to the cultists?)
I think what you have going on is really a case of differing play styles, and neither one is wrong. They may well be incompatible, though, which is why it is good to clearly establish the ground rules for a campaign.
To the OP before implementing your house-rules make sure to talk to the players and see if they agree to their use. Nothing kills a campaign and/or friendships than house rules dropped out of the blue at random in a campaign.
Second if the players agree also give them a sense of hope. Yes I know Lovecraft stories are about perpetual doom and gloom and how humanity is basically screwed. Still give them some hope. Let them gun down some cultists if said cultists are of course attacking them first.
Third be prepared to possibly walk away as Lurkndog has pointed out the players and yourself may have differing styles of play and one cannot simply assume players will just accept the houserules. A new group may need to be found.
Quote from: Theros;1115308Despite being the namesake of the RPG, others have argued that The Call of Cthulhu is not an archetypal Lovecraftian story, so I'll leave it at that. But in the case of Dunwich Horror, the Wizard Whatley really doesn't conform to what CoC RPG adventures (or at last many players) understand to be cults (expendable minions that are gunned down in droves). And I'll take your comment about ATMoM to be sneering. I'd like to point out that the framework of the story did not in the least stop Chaosium from shoving coteries of human foes into the adventure that is based upon the story (i.e. Beyond the Mountains of Madness). It stands to reason that if cultists were oh so important for Lovecraft's method of storytelling, he could have too included them in ATMoM, despite its setting on the very bottom of the Earth.
Yeah, it was snark.
I have shot down your attempt to argue cults are somehow un-Lovecraftian, with one key point being that the Lovecraft story "Call of Cthulhu", after which the game is named, includes a big old gunfight with cultists.
You've obviously read some Lovecraft and yet you still tried to argue this point, which suggests you have some sort of beef going on about cults. I only came here to set the record straight; I don't give a monkey's if people use cultists in their games or not.
Quote from: Lurkndog;1115357And yet, if your cultists attempt to murder the party, they would suffer no such penalties. (Is a functioning cult even possible if you apply the sanity rules to the cultists?)
You are correct, the already insane cultists wouldn't really incur a penalty from losing more Sanity. Many, probably most, cultists already are insane, some cultists (and all the cult leaders) have already had their SAN reduced to 0. Once SAN hits 0, there are no penalties beyond turning a PC over to the GM to run as a madman or insane villain. And the GM is already running those crazy cultists.
Quote from: Bren;1115388Many, probably most, cultists already are insane, some cultists (and all the cult leaders) have already had their SAN reduced to 0.
I would think such cults exist on a spectrum in regards to just how much of the Mythos has been revealed to them, how much they understand it. Looking at real world religions and cults that spin off of them... there are various degrees of divergence and zeal. Some Mythos cults, I'd imagine, are the dabblings of high society misfits, bored dilettantes, who only believe a fraction of what's described in the expensive old books they collect.
The movie The Ninth Gate portrays a whole ecosystem of occultists... some merely academics, collectors, delusional hedonists, but others who are very seriously committed. Even within a cult, I'd expect levels of casual involvement along with the true believers.
There have been plenty of real world religious folks who have gone to war and killed for their beliefs... were they all insane? So I'm not sure a violent Mythos cultist must necessarily be all that further around the bend.
I also figure that Mythos cults mix with other local beliefs, that few are 'pure' in their revelations... so some cult that mixes radical Pentacostalism with snake handling and a bit of Yig worship seems plausible, IMO.
I don't support Chaosium anymore, but when it comes to Lovecraft's Stories vs. Lovecraft RPGing, there will be massive chasms of difference and that's cool. Regardless what system you use, you will pick and choose what you want from HPL and what you will leave behind to make your game work at the table.
Also, as for HPL's nihilism, humanity is doomed and the gods could not care. But that doesn't mean the end is nigh. The Earth is a big place and lots of terrible things can happen in the shadows long before society falls to monsters. Its quite possible for human heroes to win and live out their lives with terrible knowledge, but perhaps no more danger...except what's in their minds.
Quote from: Theros;1115296Exactly, but players get pissed when they have to answer to the reasonable, predictable consequences of their actions. Even if a cultist is evil, it is still murder in the eyes of the law.
Thus, the "tone of the campaign" conversation between GM and players is all important.
There's "real world" consequence concepts, and there's cinematic, heroic unreality where action heroes can leave piles of corpses and the cops shrug their shoulders because they were all bad guys so who cares?
Both options can be great fun, but as always, make sure the GM and players are on the same page.
Quote from: Simlasa;1115318Because they all went insane long ago... now they're just malevolent sociopaths looking for their next fix of violence.
There is truth to this as well.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Investigators aren't okay. Delta Green teams aren't chosen randomly, and serving among them makes you more and more incapable of just rejoining society, let alone the regular military.
In many way, Dark Heresy got this right. The Inquisitors recruit highly driven, talented disposable people and sends them into the blender and promotes those who survive and succeed...which leads to ever increasingly unstable people at the top of the command chain!
Personally, I'm good with the PCs become Monsters themselves. Is John Wick or Rambo really okay? Can Indiana Jones really sleep soundly at night knowing what he knows?
Quote from: Theros;1115273I like my Call of Cthulhu games to have some degree of verisimilitude with reality... I find that makes the horror stuff even more horrifying. But one thing that takes me right out of the suspension of disbelief is when players instantly reach for the shotgun when they discover a cultist. I'm serious... I've had players find some black candles and an evil-looking tome in a basement and they immediately go and murder every last unarmed man, woman and child in the house. I've thrown the police against players that are quick to draw their firearms but it doesn't seem to dissuade anyone at the end of the day and it actually pisses off some players.
It's just bad roleplaying to be frank. If players feel a group is dangerous, then they should go to the police. Or they should at least capture a cultist alive and interrogate him for more answers. But the response is always "the only good cultist is a dead cultist." The players are acting like insane psychopaths.
Then that gave me the idea... if it is insane to shoot at someone just because you suspect they are evil, then why not just make murder a sanity-loss situation? Why not make gunfights in general take a toll on sanity? That might send the message to the players to use their freaking heads instead of their sidearms!
So here is what I am thinking. Tell me if it is a great idea or it will break the game entirely. Rules are for 6e (no 7e answers please):
[table=width: 600]
[tr]
[td]Sanity Loss[/td]
[td]Situation[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]0/1[/td]
[td]Each round that guns are fired at humans (regardless of number, only test once)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D3[/td]
[td]Each round a player character fires a gun at a human (instead of previous sanity loss)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]0/1D4[/td]
[td]Be present when a human is killed (but not by you)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D6[/td]
[td]Kill another human in self-defense[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1/1D10[/td]
[td]Kill another human while the player-characters are the instigators of the violence (instead of previous sanity loss)[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
What do you think?
I think you are trying to use Rules to fix a Player problem and that never works.
A suggestion, before implementing this rule, create scenarios where the cultists are evil but
need to be kept alive because they have the knowledge needed to destroy the Big Bad when it appears. Or they know where other cults are and can identify those cultists. Or need to be kept on friendly terms to get them to divulge this vital knowledge.
Worst case, it fails and the Players remain murderhoboes but at least you got some more role-playing out of them.
Quote from: Simlasa;1115390I would think such cults exist on a spectrum in regards to just how much of the Mythos has been revealed to them, how much they understand it.
The cultists to which a sane and reasonably balanced investigator applies 12-guage shot are the ones who are sacrificing unwilling victims to summon/appease/entertain their dark chaos gods. They aren't garden variety kooks and casual believers.
QuoteLooking at real world religions and cults that spin off of them... there are various degrees of divergence and zeal.
The real world may not be a very good model for cults in a Call of Cthulhu RPG. In the real world there is no such thing as the taint of the Deep Ones, nor do people end up changing form into a ghoul because they spend too much time whispering to things in a grave yard before deciding to share a meal, nor can you cause someone to shrivel up and die or render them into their essential salts and then raise them from the dead, nor can you actually summon up one of the thousand avatars of Nyarlathotep to gain blasphemous, mind altering, and efficacious knowledge.
QuoteSome Mythos cults, I'd imagine, are the dabblings of high society misfits, bored dilettantes, who only believe a fraction of what's described in the expensive old books they collect.
If it makes for a better game for you and your players, then by all means imagine away. If there is an outer circle, they are dupes and willing pawns who haven't yet engaged in ritual sacrifices to summon beings from beyond our reality...who then actually manifest.
Regardless, the loss of sanity by the dupes, kooks, and willing pawns just pushes those NPCs further down the path towards being either a willing victim or a willing villain, but in no case does the loss of sanity (due to violence or any other cause) remove that NPC from play. In your prior post, you seemed to suggest that the OPs proposed sanity losses for violence and murder wouldn't work if the Keeper applied it to both the PCs and the NPCs. Clearly that is not the case.
I'm curious, are you actually playing or running Call of Cthulhu?
Quote from: jeff37923;1115393I think you are trying to use Rules to fix a Player problem and that never works.
A suggestion, before implementing this rule, create scenarios where the cultists are evil but need to be kept alive because they have the knowledge needed to destroy the Big Bad when it appears. Or they know where other cults are and can identify those cultists. Or need to be kept on friendly terms to get them to divulge this vital knowledge.
Worst case, it fails and the Players remain murderhoboes but at least you got some more role-playing out of them.
Yes, The Talk
(tm) is the right answer to same page play expectations of players. And your advice of increasing NPC asset value should normally work. :) But Theros is lamenting that these players beeline to "Only good cultist is a dead cultist," even if they merely suspect it. This might need more than The Talk to
reinforce prudence. :(
But after such a mature chat about expectations, and explaining the tonal shift of play from Judge Dredd to mere mortal CoC investigators (doing heroics in *spite* of consequences), this sort of houserule could reinforce the new expectations. :)
Quote from: Bren;1115399The cultists to which a sane and reasonably balanced investigator applies 12-guage shot are the ones who are sacrificing unwilling victims to summon/appease/entertain their dark chaos gods. They aren't garden variety kooks and casual believers.
So you're saying the PCs would never get it wrong? Set fire to a bunch of run-of-the-mill high school Satanists by mistake? The OP's description of his Players suggest such things might be likely...
QuoteThe real world may not be a very good model for cults in a Call of Cthulhu RPG. In the real world there is no such thing as the taint of the Deep Ones, nor do people end up changing form into a ghoul because they spend too much time whispering to things in a grave yard before deciding to share a meal, nor can you cause someone to shrivel up and die or render them into their essential salts and then raise them from the dead, nor can you actually summon up one of the thousand avatars of Nyarlathotep to gain blasphemous, mind altering, and efficacious knowledge.
Sure, those things happen... but does that necessitate that every wannabe Mythos worshipper has such success? Does talent and dedication play no part in it? You read some scraps of the Necronomicon and POOF! you're a dread sorcerer? What about someone who reads a dread text and decides it's all a bunch of nonsense? (Imagine Scientology is actually the TRUTH of our world, but many of us hearing its tenants continue to mock the idea of Xenu).
Again, I'm thinking of The Ninth Gate and its depiction of rich cultists who go all out with the trappings and still don't have much of a clue regarding what they're really dealing with. Also, the tomb robbers in The Hound, who collect all sorts of nefarious items but aren't active cultists/believers, not overtly insane... until they dig up something truly malevolent.
QuoteIf it makes for a better game for you and your players, then by all means imagine away. If there is an outer circle, they are dupes and willing pawns who haven't yet engaged in ritual sacrifices to summon beings from beyond our reality...who then actually manifest.
I'm mostly going off of what I've read of RW secret societies and cults, where there are indeed 'levels' of involvement... inner circles of deeper secrets. A bottom level cultist might think they're involved with a charity that runs soup kitchens... and not notice the disappearance of a few of the customers each month. 'The Church of Starry Wisdom' doesn't sound all that malevolent on the surface, does it?
QuoteRegardless, the loss of sanity by the dupes, kooks, and willing pawns just pushes those NPCs further down the path towards being either a willing victim or a willing villain, but in no case does the loss of sanity (due to violence or any other cause) remove that NPC from play.
Not sure what you mean there... who you're arguing with.
QuoteIn your prior post, you seemed to suggest that the OPs proposed sanity losses for violence and murder wouldn't work if the Keeper applied it to both the PCs and the NPCs. Clearly that is not the case.
Did I? I don't see where I promoted that notion. I do generally like things like the Madness Meter from Unknown Armies, where PCs can drift between extremes of insanity or numbness.
QuoteI'm curious, are you actually playing or running Call of Cthulhu?
Yep... though, from your hostility, I take it I'm not doing it in a way you'd approve of.
It makes sense any cult would have members of various levels of belief and involvement. You have initiates and acolytes and true believers. Definitely those who are more posers vs. those more devoted. If you read about Occultism in the early 20th century, and how it was a fad among celebs and hipsters of the day, there's no question there's a wide range between those who enjoyed dressing up and having a spooky time at a seance vs those allegedly involved in human sacrifice for demon summoning.
Having that real world gradation among believers would be fine in a horror game.
But its equally cool for your horror game to draw people by D&D alignment. Sign on to the Cult of Dagon? Great, you're Chaotic Evil and fully vested with cult powers and you're proper shotgun bait.
Just different types of horror campaigns.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1115405Just different types of horror campaigns.
Yeah, it's all just matters of taste. In something like Chill, which I see as a somewhat lighter flavor of horror... more of the 'creature feature' variety... I'd probably want fewer shades of gray.
AIR in HPL stories the Government is not corrupt, protagonists often do report Cult activity to law enforcement, and it gets effectively dealt with. In the spirit of HPL if you find convincing evidence of a Louisiana swamp cult worshipping Cthulu you take it to the State police and they'll do a raid with guns. Humans breeding with Deep Ones? The Navy have torpedos.
Quote from: Godfather Punk;1115297It's been over a decade since I read it, but Unknown Armies (1ed) has a sort of madness meter for Violence (and other horror tropes). I don't remember exactly how it went but I think that if you reach a certain score in Violence you either need a check to see if you recoil from using further violent actions, or if you embrace the violence and every problem looks like a nail-target to your 9mm-hammer.
Extra bookkeeping for sure, but has anyone used this system and likes to give their impressions?
As UA is sorta d100 based, could this system be used in CoC?
UA's Madness Meters remain my favourite sanity-mechanic, where every meter has a row of failed notches and a row of hardened notches. If bad shit happens and you roll poorly, you gain failed notches and become more frail and troubled. If you roll well you gain hardened notches and become more numb and sociopathic.
It would work just fine in CoC, but it is much less nihilistic than the steady drain of SAN-points. Nemesis is an ORE-based Lovecraftion game that uses the Madness Meters - it's neat. No more bookkeeping than any other system, just a willpower-check when deemed necessary.
As for the OP, a SAN-check for violence is reasonable, but I'm wary of overdoing it.The game is supposed to be about cosmic horror.
Quote from: Simlasa;1115402So you're saying the PCs would never get it wrong?
Nope.
QuoteNot sure what you mean there... who you're arguing with.
I don't know. I was wondering the same about you. You seemed to be taking issue with the response I made to LurkNDog, since that was the post of mine you first chose to respond to. If you aren't taking issue with that post, then I have nothing to argue about with you.
QuoteYep... though, from your hostility, I take it I'm not doing it in a way you'd approve of.
Not sure why you think that. I already said, in regards to the idea of cultists who are mere dabblers, "If it makes for a better game for you and your players, then by all means imagine away."
Quote from: Theros;1115273I've had players find some black candles and an evil-looking tome in a basement and they immediately go and murder every last unarmed man, woman and child in the house. [...] if it is insane to shoot at someone just because you suspect they are evil, then why not just make murder a sanity-loss situation?
I don't know which edition of the game you're using, but some of the editions will list as a possible cause of SAN loss things like seeing a dismembered corpse.
No edition says that the SAN loss is mitigated or removed by the fact of the player-character having
caused the death or dismemberment.
In general it is better to use the rules you already have before making new ones. The players complain less that way.
The players may argue that they should suffer no loss of SAN since they themselves caused the death or dismemberment, or carried out the torture. By this reasoning the player-character should take no hit points of damage if they choose to shoot themselves in the foot. That your mental distress is self-inflicted does not reduce it, if anything it will increase it.
As well as involving the police, you can have the player-characters get a reputation. For most scenarios to be completed, the player-characters must have the co-operation of NPCs. Play the NPCs as rationally as you would like the PCs to be: people tend not to want to co-operate with cold-blooded murderers.
You have given the players the rope. It is up to them whether they choose to hang themselves with it.
Take control of this game group, Theros. You are the Game MASTER, not the Game Builder-of-Consensus or the Game-Convenor-of-a-Participatory-Democracy, or the Game-Wiffle-Waffler. The Game MASTER.
You are in charge of this game, not some blubbery or scrawny dweeb with a scruffy beard staining his character sheet with his cheeto-smeared fingers in between his inane giggles quoting Monty Python.
You wear the Viking Hat!
By Gygax's crappy plastic rounded dice, man, take charge!
These days, I tend to give out san loss for killing other humans - but the amount varies according to:
1) the background of the PC
2) the reason for the killing
So if the PC is an ex-soldier shooting an oncoming cultist who is waving a large sword at them, I tend to make it a 0/1 check (or no check at all)
If it's a stay-at-home author who accidentally blows the head off an innocent child whilst trying to save said child from an evil cult, I'll make it a 1D3/1D8 check.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1115464I don't know which edition of the game you're using, but some of the editions will list as a possible cause of SAN loss things like seeing a dismembered corpse. No edition says that the SAN loss is mitigated or removed by the fact of the player-character having caused the death or dismemberment.
In general it is better to use the rules you already have before making new ones. The players complain less that way.
The players may argue that they should suffer no loss of SAN since they themselves caused the death or dismemberment, or carried out the torture. By this reasoning the player-character should take no hit points of damage if they choose to shoot themselves in the foot. That your mental distress is self-inflicted does not reduce it, if anything it will increase it.
As well as involving the police, you can have the player-characters get a reputation. For most scenarios to be completed, the player-characters must have the co-operation of NPCs. Play the NPCs as rationally as you would like the PCs to be: people tend not to want to co-operate with cold-blooded murderers.
Those are all solid points.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1115464You have given the players the rope. It is up to them whether they choose to hang themselves with it. Take control of this game group, Theros. You are the Game MASTER, not the Game Builder-of-Consensus or the Game-Convenor-of-a-Participatory-Democracy, or the Game-Wiffle-Waffler. The Game MASTER. You are in charge of this game, not some blubbery or scrawny dweeb with a scruffy beard staining his character sheet with his cheeto-smeared fingers in between his inane giggles quoting Monty Python. You wear the Viking Hat!
By Gygax's crappy plastic rounded dice, man, take charge!
Whoo... just got chills of HackMaster glory days. Good post.
Quote from: spon;1115472These days, I tend to give out san loss for killing other humans - but the amount varies according to:
1) the background of the PC
2) the reason for the killing
So if the PC is an ex-soldier shooting an oncoming cultist who is waving a large sword at them, I tend to make it a 0/1 check (or no check at all)
If it's a stay-at-home author who accidentally blows the head off an innocent child whilst trying to save said child from an evil cult, I'll make it a 1D3/1D8 check.
Good idea. What about the wimpy, effete liberal arts professor who is hanging around the ex-soldier while he murders cultists? Presumably you could have a situation where the soldier (who is doing the actual killing) is taking 0/1 checks while the professor (who is just a bystander) is taking 1/1d6 checks (maybe 1/1d4 if he closed his eyes or tried not to directly witness the violence), right? If so, how would the party dynamic work, since the professor's player would not want the soldier to engage in violence so often?
Quote from: S'mon;1115409AIR in HPL stories the Government is not corrupt, protagonists often do report Cult activity to law enforcement, and it gets effectively dealt with. In the spirit of HPL if you find convincing evidence of a Louisiana swamp cult worshipping Cthulu you take it to the State police and they'll do a raid with guns. Humans breeding with Deep Ones? The Navy have torpedos.
Such is my recollection as well. But I like the idea that cultists are ultimately not the problem, but the symptom of the problem, and taking them out (however you do it) ultimately solves jack squat. The real problem is the thing (or things) that drove the cultists bonkers, and when the players go to investigate THAT, they will see just why those cultists became so insane as they inevitably walk down that path as well. The real problem should be a whole can of insanity and death that neither guns nor police can solve... a problem that "deals" with the investigators quite quickly.
That would be awesome! The professor would be bemoaning the soldier's constant use of violence whilst the soldier would be reloading and telling the prof that if he would prefer to be hacked to death, then next time the soldier will choose a different cultist to shoot! Grea role-playing opportunity.
Of course, that assumes that the cultists were actually about to murder the PCs. If the (ex-) soldier was killing people for fun, then another RP opportunity. Can you convince the soldier that he's doing more harm than good? If not, do you really want to continue to associate with him? Will you report him to the police? Or will you rationalise his behaviour as a price that must be paid to save the world/city/town/family/child. Awesome RP opportunities if the players are willing to go there.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1115464Take control of this game group, Theros. You are the Game MASTER, not the Game Builder-of-Consensus or the Game-Convenor-of-a-Participatory-Democracy, or the Game-Wiffle-Waffler. The Game MASTER.
He's running Call of Cthulhu, technically he's a Keeper. :D
Quote from: spon;1115472These days, I tend to give out san loss for killing other humans...
This too, is not unreasonable.
Quote from: Theros;1115475Good idea. What about the wimpy, effete liberal arts professor who is hanging around the ex-soldier while he murders cultists? Presumably you could have a situation where the soldier (who is doing the actual killing) is taking 0/1 checks while the professor (who is just a bystander) is taking 1/1d6 checks (maybe 1/1d4 if he closed his eyes or tried not to directly witness the violence), right? If so, how would the party dynamic work, since the professor's player would not want the soldier to engage in violence so often?
Yes variable sanity loss seems reasonable. The party dynamic is going to depend on the party, i.e. it's an out of game discussion where one player might try to convince the other player(s) that they should try not get the liberal arts professor involved or as a witness to these killings or it's an in-character discussion where the liberal arts professor PC could try to convince the bloodthirsty ex-soldier to try not to get him involved or as a witness.
Quote from: spon;1115477That would be awesome! The professor would be bemoaning the soldier's constant use of violence whilst the soldier would be reloading and telling the prof that if he would prefer to be hacked to death, then next time the soldier will choose a different cultist to shoot! Grea role-playing opportunity.
Of course, that assumes that the cultists were actually about to murder the PCs. If the (ex-) soldier was killing people for fun, then another RP opportunity. Can you convince the soldier that he's doing more harm than good? If not, do you really want to continue to associate with him? Will you report him to the police? Or will you rationalise his behaviour as a price that must be paid to save the world/city/town/family/child. Awesome RP opportunities if the players are willing to go there.
Yeah, what he said.
Quote from: Theros;1115475Good idea. What about the wimpy, effete liberal arts professor who is hanging around the ex-soldier while he murders cultists? Presumably you could have a situation where the soldier (who is doing the actual killing) is taking 0/1 checks while the professor (who is just a bystander) is taking 1/1d6 checks (maybe 1/1d4 if he closed his eyes or tried not to directly witness the violence), right? If so, how would the party dynamic work, since the professor's player would not want the soldier to engage in violence so often?
The same way it would work with an (ex-) soldier dealing with the shocking nuance and ambiguity of an esoteric subject -- let's say modern art ;) -- that the wimpy, effete, liberal arts professor is already quite well inured. One will be revolted, chilled, and angered at its horrific implication, while the other already came to terms with its reality in the world. Eventually both will cross that liminal threshold of horrific realization and make their peace with it.
:) Same, same.
edit: It's almost like CoC anticipated this sort of complementary reliance in investigations. :p