Search results

And a player immediately says she counteracts what the NPC does.

It's hard to picture a game in which a GM wouldn't have to control how NPCs react to the party. The test would come when a player contradicts what the GM plans in such an instance,

S.A.V.E. I think.

"In this game you take the role of Xs who do Y. Look at media Z for examples." I think if you are not writing for newcomers, there's no need to explain what an rpg is.

Of the choices, Monster of the Week has worked for me. With the caveat that I played a Chosen. I think a strong-willed player might take over the game using that class - or at least turn it into a game of Buffy.

I don't think you have to go that far. The GM is a player*. Strictly speaking, she is the only player the others have to interact with.

Trail of Cthulhu is set in the 1930s; the new edition will have a Nazi-stomping sample adventure. In the contemporary setting they have been eliminated, but Delta Green is about killing Nazis from 1940 on.

Dread just works, even though/because you're not trying to get frightened by an in-setting element. My vote is Fear Itself, assuming the mystery you are solving is a good reveal.

If your life is so bad that you need to cheat at rpgs, have at it.

I ran an X-Files esque adventure where a pair of velociraptors was migrating south and killing the occasional victim. Once they figured out the direction and speed, the agents knew where they could be cornered.

The dame came through my round door like a square peg, three feet of legs outta three-and-a-half feet of trouble. I took a long drag of Old Toby, it was gonna be an even longer night.

Only because a rectum is already straight. Cavalry <> Calvary

There can be other challenges to an encounter beyond keeping your PC alive or slaying all the opposition. I would also cite Tatters of the King as a combat-light CoC campaign. As well as the four purist adventures for Trail of Cthulhu written by Graham Walmsley.

There can be more endstates to an encounter than victory or death.

It should be at least discussed prior to play. Some players put a lot of thought and time into their characters and could be really discouraged into doing it again. Even an X of Cthulhu campaign - as opposed to a one-shot - with quick death ignores the descent into madness which makes the...

When I am forced to make a timeline, I now make them go in reverse order. That way, players who are less interested in the setting can read a bit and know the general gist of what's happening now. They aren't put off by things that happened eons ago and probably don't affect their character's...

I don't know - the clearer the concept of the NPC, the easier it should be for a GM to react to the PCs' actions. I suppose there is always a risk that the NPC's plans are unstoppable, or that they can use secret knowledge of the PCs against them unfairly. But that's not unique to the system.

Could you run a game about revealing a setting's secrets? I suppose a mystery does this on a small scale. Or you could take the Supernatural route, adding a tiny bit of connective tissue at the end of each session.

If it's given that players don't read the setting and GMs don't read the backstory, the chances for incompatibility are high.

At a minimum you can think about what will happen in the setting without the PCs acting. Even the earliest books have moves for fronts and their NPCs. In between sessions you can decide what important NPCs know about the PCs' activities and consider what they might do to address them.