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.

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.