Trail of Cthulhu

[Avatar]

I like the players to remain in general control of where the focus is pointed and try my absolute hardest not to lead them around the plot.

ToC is so not the game for you then as this is exactly what the system is intended to do in spades.

[zackspacks]

Thanks to Kaiserjez for this review. I must admit I have always wondered what the system was all about. Having played normal CoC in various guises though for the last quarter of a century though, I have no problems with the system as it currently stands, so I won't be purchasing this. I actually don't have a problem with the different mechanic,as any half decent GM can always work around any problem, with either system to avoid any pitfalls (ie required Spot Hiddens or Lib Uses to continue ). I will probably feel the same if/when Savage Cthulhu comes out.

Having said that, I would be happy to play in either system, but don't feel a desire to purchase another system to do exactly the same thing.

[Kaiserjez]

Where the general trend within new games is for players to form their own scenes and have narrative control over *SNIP (to save space)*

An easy fix for adding narrative control in ToC is to allow PC's to narrate details if they spend one of their investigative pool points. Your PC is a massive art history buff and there's nothing happening plotwise to interest you? Spend a pool point and narrate something in.

[Kaiserjez]

Stolen from a post by Greywood on RPGnet -

Trail of Cthulhu specifically mentions that it is not intended to make CoC obsolete, but as an alternative rules set for players and keepers "who privilege investigation, and who want mechanics to do likewise".

[Avatar]

The irony is that the concept of the supernatural investigator wasn't inspired by the tales of H.P. Lovecraft, and was based on those of Carnacki The Ghost Finder by William Hope Hodgson.

Well worth picking up if you haven't already read them.

[Murgh Bpurn]

I'm getting ready to run a game of ToC using Fantasy Grounds. I'm new to GMing ToC, as are the players to playing. I shall report back with my findings!

[Kaiserjez]

Simon Rogers (Of Pelgrane Press fame) has chipped in with his tuppence worth on RPGnet, here's the quote

There are two ways to use the clue mechanic in ToC, depending on the style of game you want to run. Lovecraft characters are never befuddled by a lack of clues, in one story a character finds a clue under a rock!

So, the first way is to use the core clue method to drive the investigation, but while the Investigators are following a trail of clues to unravel a mystery, the players aren't doing that at all - for them it's all about the journey their characters take in the face of indifferent and incomprehesible horror. This is more Purist.

The second way is that the clues are that - actual clues. There is a mystery not just for the characters, but for the players. Core clues will take you on, but the players will have to decipher handouts and interpret cryptic comments to be able to face down the ancient evil. This is more Pulp.

Personally, I go somewhere in the middle. I also find the system good for improvising; when a player suggests the use of another skill you haven't considered, or take an avenue you haven't explored, you can go with it easily.

Adventure design is core to the system. The adventure design integrates with character creation and all the rules to ensure a smooth-running game. While the original premise of the system was to change investigation from being like finding traps in D&D, and it does solve that issue, that's not just what the game is about.

For example, the Keeper's Investigation Matrix and character record table ensure that the adventure matches the characters' skill set and the players' interests.

As for whether CoC is about investigation - the introduction to the 5th Edition I seem to remember says it is fundamental to the game.

The full thread is here.

[DigitalMage]

Or suggest that the GMing advice section in CoC should include something similar but neither of those make the game an irrelevence or nonsense.

This is a very pertinent point for when the next revision of CoC comes out. For all I know it is already spelt out in one of the supplements, but it needs to be front and centre and very explicit "If a player character has 30% or more in a skill, they will automatically succeed in challenges that would otherwise stall the plot".

I am just reading the D&D 4e Dungeon Masters Guide and it gives this sort of advice that I was suggesting CoC needed.

D&D 4e DMG p26:
If there’s information the PCs absolutely must have in order to continue the adventure, give it to them. Don’t make them have a chance to miss the information by failing a skill check or not talking to the right person or just not looking in the right place. The players should be able to uncover important information by using skills and investigation, but for crucial information, you need a foolproof method to get it into the players’ hands. Tell them.

In fact I am impressed with the all that I have read in the DMG so far, there is a whole section on Dispensing Information, as well as Narration, Pacing, Props etc. And like one of the Star Wars RCR books it details the different types of play styles and explicitly says that there is nothing wrong with any of them - i.e. there is no BADWRONGFUN.