Trail of Cthulhu experiences

Mouseferatu · Apr 3, 2010

Starting next week, I'm going to be playing in a brief (maybe just three or four games) ToC campaign. I've never played the game, and while I read through much of the rulebook, it was some time ago.

I'm not looking for mechanical advice--we'll be going over the rules--and I'm quite familiar with the source material, but I'm very interested in hearing about any experiences anyone's had in actually playing the game. How did the system work in actual play? What sort of feel did it give the game? What sorts of playstyles did it seem to support/encourage? And mostly, what'd you just find fun or cool about it?

Thanael · Apr 3, 2010

I never played ToC but you might want to check out Yog-Sothoth for Lovecraft & Cthulhu Forums-Trail of Cthulhu

Doug McCrae · Apr 3, 2010

I played in a short campaign about a year ago. It's Cthulhu so the system is pretty much irrelevant. Most play is investigative. The major innovation of the Gumshoe system is that clues are found automatically (though I think only if your skill is high enough). There is no die roll, which eliminates the problem of an investigation being halted dead by a failed spot hidden or library use check. One unusual feature is that some skills, not the investigative ones, stuff like combat, are Vancian - your rank gives you a certain number of points to spend, which recover after a rest.

As I said, system is very unimportant in an investigative game such as Cthulhu. I don't regard Trail as bad, it's fine. It's just that it's pointless. The game would proceed much the same with any system. The automatic-clue-detect idea is a minor houserule at best imo, not enough to justify a whole new rpg.

PaulofCthulhu · Apr 3, 2010

Thank you for the link.

This may also be of interest:

Trail of Cthulhu: The Devourers in the Mist RP Audio Game

Crothian · Apr 3, 2010

I like it. I think the games we played with it tended toward even more investigation then normal. Combat what little we did seemed even more deadfly then the normal game.

One thing I like is the way the players resources diminish. It feels a little like dread that way to me. I like that the game supports creative uses for skills allowing players to say "This is the way I want to use the skill."

Remus Lupin · Apr 3, 2010

I keep hoping to have occasion to play it, but most of the folks I play with are happy with either BRP or d20, so I'm waiting and reading. I'm hoping to one day to get an Armitate Files campaign started. That's a good resource.

Anselyn · Apr 4, 2010

Doug McCrae said:
As I said, system is very unimportant in an investigative game such as Cthulhu. I don't regard Trail as bad, it's fine. It's just that it's pointless. The game would proceed much the same with any system. The automatic-clue-detect idea is a minor houserule at best imo, not enough to justify a whole new rpg.

I agree with this - if you've got the right DM who is very pro-narrativist gaming. If you haven't .... then ToC is a system to lead them that way. As I understand it, a lot of the rulebook is to help one consider how to run a game when getting the clues is certain - interpreting them is the body of the game.

I've found it an immersive roleplaying experience, with a certain pleasure that comes from knowing that a character is definitely competent at some things.

Mechanically, there's a little more to it (in my experience) than stated above.

I. If you have an investigative skill then you will automatically get some results. (Your Assess Honesty tells you that she is lying)

II. If you spend a point then you can get higher level/quality results. ([After decision to spend a point] Using your assess honesty, you notice that she has a nervous tick that shows whenever she lies about her relation with Big Frank. She rubs what appears to be a sore point on her arm)

III. You can spend a point to make a contribution to the flow of the story. ([I spend a History point] "I studied these catacombs during my Masters. I know that if we take this passage then we'll come up in the crypt of St Paul's"

[Aside: I always liked Classic Traveller for it passive use of skills. Any character with Engineering 2+ will know that the power plant failed during the inversion of the fifth flange gate

LostSoul · Apr 4, 2010

I played years ago - a playtest, maybe? - so I don't recall all that much. It was only a few games, three I think.

The thing that sticks with me was watching sanity and stability slowly tick-tick-tick away, but there was some reason why my PC wanted - had - to keep going on. I think it was the Drive? It's been a while, I can't remember exactly how the mechanics worked.

I was impressed at how easy it was to play a character who, even in the face of madness, was willing to push on.

Kwalish Kid · Apr 4, 2010

There are a couple of things to think about when running ToC, that I gleaned from my play of it.

A. Pay attention to the drives!

Make sure that the players know their characters' drives and that it should matter. Try to work aspects of their drives into scenes and descriptions of the scenes.

Later in the game, they should not be surprised when they have an option to run away from the horror from beyond, but that they can't take that option because of their drive. This makes the players participants in their own demise---they chose their drives, after all.

B. Set up clues in advance that you can throw in when the PCs spend points in appropriate skills. The clues should be ones that make the PCs seem important when delivered, and, in at least some cases, they should be ones that the PCs can call back to in later scenes for a bonus to some general skill.

If you think of the kind of clues/bonuses that you want to give out later, then you can make some kind of general clues that you can weld onto a player's description of their character's actions. This would be what the superlative GM might do. One with lots of time.

C. Having a couple of handouts for what happens when sanity or stability drops are helpful to the players.