Unpopular opinions go here

[Thomas Shey]

This is a style and preference dividing line though.

I don't disagree. But if you make a generic comment about "rules not helping bad GMs", the response to that doesn't get to be about style and preference. Because that applies to a broad swath of people or it doesn't, and if it doesn't then you need to qualify it.

I totally get that for some people, games that are more open, more rulings based, vague in places, not heavily codified, are less fun. That is a totally legitimate opinion. But the opinion @Warpiglet-7 and others are expressing is also quite valid.

Not when talking about other people without qualification it isn't. It specifically isn't valid for just that reason. If you make a generalization, then expect to get called on it as a generalization.

 

[MGibster]

So, for a hypothetical example, if on the fly during play I rule that a character can cast a targeted spell while in darkness then a precedent is set for the remainder of that campaign (which in my case is many years) which says that targeted spells can be cast in darkness; and the rules will be updated (at some point) to reflect this.

This is how I operate as well. Though there are times when I make a quick ruling at the table so we don't spend a lot of time talking about rules instead of playing. And sometimes I come back later, announce that my ruling was flawed, and tell the players how things will be moving forward.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Having non-Human races in games is largely pointless.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You're talking to the person who would cheerfully tear up the D&D magic system from the roots if he was paid to rework the game, so you've come to the wrong address.

Sounds good. Love to hear your ideas.

 

[Scribe]

Having non-Human races in games is largely pointless.

 

[billd91]

And you know what? I always appreciate running into people who love a game and are still able to recognize the flaws. Admitting CoC has flaws doesn't diminish what is arguably one of all all time great RPGs.

This kind of thing, specifically missing a bottleneck clue, strikes me as less of a flaw in any individual game and more of a change in the expectations in the hobby as it has developed over the last 50 years. A lot of earlier games, CoC included, didn't seem to much care if the PCs succeeded at everything or not. Sometimes, you just simply failed and played out the consequences whether it was a TPK, missed secret doors, tomes of obscure but critical knowledge that couldn't be read, jump drive failures, failed survival rolls in character gen, etc. PC life was cheaper.

But I think people in the hobby have developed/evolved a lot more sophistication in how to handle things - and not all of them with game rules, but with scenario design. Bottleneck clues, at their basics, are weak design and leave a scenario much more brittle in the sense that they cause breakdown by one failure. There are much better ways of designing scenarios that make them more robust, particularly for varied groups of players, multiple clues (the 3 clue rule), less linear design, etc. And that's largely regardless of the rules. Masks of Nyarlathotep is a relatively robust campaign regardless of the Call of Cthulhu edition because there are many ways that clues can lead you around to solving the mysteries that missed clues also pointed you to.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Sounds good. Love to hear your ideas.

Assuming the rest of the system was left the same, I'd probably start with something like the True20 powers system and work out from there (as I don't consider that was adequate, but it at least leaned in the right direction).

 

[Micah Sweet]

Assuming the rest of the system was left the same, I'd probably start with something like the True20 powers system and work out from there (as I don't consider that was adequate, but it at least leaned in the right direction).

I'm actually not familiar with the mechanics of True20, although I've heard of it of course. Is it an effects-based system?

 

[Thomas Shey]

This kind of thing, specifically missing a bottleneck clue, strikes me as less of a flaw in any individual game and more of a change in the expectations in the hobby as it has developed over the last 50 years. A lot of earlier games, CoC included, didn't seem to much care if the PCs succeeded at everything or not. Sometimes, you just simply failed and played out the consequences whether it was a TPK, missed secret doors, tomes of obscure but critical knowledge that couldn't be read, jump drive failures, failed survival rolls in character gen, etc. PC life was cheaper.

But I think people in the hobby have developed/evolved a lot more sophistication in how to handle things - and not all of them with game rules, but with scenario design. Bottleneck clues, at their basics, are weak design and leave a scenario much more brittle in the sense that they cause breakdown by one failure. There are much better ways of designing scenarios that make them more robust, particularly for varied groups of players, multiple clues (the 3 clue rule), less linear design, etc. And that's largely regardless of the rules. Masks of Nyarlathotep is a relatively robust campaign regardless of the Call of Cthulhu edition because there are many ways that clues can lead you around to solving the mysteries that missed clues also pointed you to.

Its not just clues either; there are all kinds of cases where single-points-of-failure (to use an engineering term) are terrible ideas. I found that one out the hard way in a TORG scenario many years ago.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm actually not familiar with the mechanics of True20, although I've heard of it of course. Is it an effects-based system?

Semi. The powers system is skill based and conceptual, so you'd end up having all the fire spells come from a Fire category (with relevant skill) with modifiers based on precisely what you were doing with it (I'm agnostic as to whether the individual effects would require some separate buy-in or just things you could do once you bought the Fire Mastery skill and then other factors would effect difficulty). A true effect based system would require a lot more heavy buy in, and works better if you've built the rest of the system to support it.