CoC: Everyone is dead.

[mmadsen]

Actually, increased firepower doesn't help much. What ensures party survivability in CoC is intelligent use of resources available. No amount of firepower should be able to help them out in the climactic conflict, their intelligence should be their strongest asset. Even magic is a bad idea.

In that specific adventure though, what "intelligent use of resources" would've solved the problem? And it looks like increased firepower would've solved the problem, intelligent or not.

I'm not recommending that; I'm asking how it wouldn't be the case.

 

[Horacio]

More firepower can help you sometimes in Cthulhu... but only sometimes. Most of times monsters aren't bothered by weapons, or your Sanity doesn't let you use them, or [...] or [...]
or [...] or your own companions kill you before you become a crazy monter.

 

[Wasteland Knight]

Although we joke about a Total Party Kill as the ideal outcome, is there any way they could've reasonably survived? Is increased firepower the difference between life and death?

Actually, I would put forth that TPK is not a joke in CoC, but rather a way of life. I have yet to do more than skim CoC d20, but from years of Chaosium CoC I can say two things:

1. Character lifespan (in sessions) can sometimes be counted on one hand and quite often on two.

2. The death of the entire "party" of investigators is pretty commonplace.

I suppose this is what separates CoC from other rpgs. It's not about your character heroically beating up the bad guys, rescuing the innocents, and grabbing the loot. It's about puny, insignificant mortals stumbing about and occaisionally discovering something they were not meant to know. It is about the slow erosion of your character's sanity and their gradual descent into insanity.

 

[SpuneDagr]

I think the biggest problem was that my party was not really a cohesive group. They were just 3 characters who happened to be in the same place at the same time. That and there were just 3 of them. The last guy had to study for finals or something and couldn't make it.

 

[Wicht]

In that specific adventure though, what "intelligent use of resources" would've solved the problem? And it looks like increased firepower would've solved the problem, intelligent or not.

Increased firepower would NOT have solved the problem. Would have made the action louder but the outcome would likely be the same.

I don't want to give away a spoiler but there is a simple, mostly non-violent way for the characters to all survive built into that particular adventure scenario, the characters just have to figure out what it is.

 

[NemesisPress]

Actually, I would put forth that TPK is not a joke in CoC, but rather a way of life.

The only problem is that if you run games this way, no one [in their right mind of course : ) ] will continue to play.

There should always be a way out (though not necessarily a way to succeed) and it's the GM's responsibility to help the players out if they need it.

If a character dies (in some way other than a voluntary heroic self-sacrifice) I consider the GM to have failed.

 

[Horacio]

The only problem is that if you run games this way, no one [in their right mind of course : ) ] will continue to play.

Why do you suppose Cthulhu players are sane?

If a character dies (in some way other than a voluntary heroic self-sacrifice) I consider the GM to have failed.

Not in Cthulhu, my friend... In Cthulhu characters are expected to die horriblely, or to go insane, or to suffer a far worse fate. It has been like that since the first Chaosium Cthulhu, for more than twenty years. ..

 

[Wasteland Knight]

The only problem is that if you run games this way, no one will continue to play.

If a character dies (in some way other than a voluntary heroic self-sacrifice) I consider the GM to have failed.

Funny, I've had many a character driven insane, eaten, sacrificed, or come to some other sort of nasty end, yet I continue to play. Of course, this might only mean that Horacio is right about CoC players and sanity

NemesisPress - In case you didn't know, CoC, and the genre of Mythos fiction for that matter, is based upon the works of H.P. Lovecract. Reading some of Lovecraft's work would give a better handle of what CoC is and isn't. Like I said before, it's not about "solve the puzzle, beat the bad guy, grab the loot, and LEVEL UP!". Maybe then you wouldn't consider virtually every CoC GM to be a failure.

 

[Darkness]

If a character dies (in some way other than a voluntary heroic self-sacrifice) I consider the GM to have failed.

That's not a very realistic assessment - especially when speaking about CoC.

For one, this depends very much on genre; what you're proposing seems about right for Hollywood-style games - that is, campaigns that are even a bit more "heroic" than D&D is (on the average). For CoC, though, this is quite inappropriate.

Also, what if a character screws up royally and ends up dead because of his own mistakes? Do you still consider the GM to have failed in such a situation?

 

[sfgiants]

I think the key thought in all of this is that CoC can be used in a lot of ways. Personally, I enjoy a bit more action, and hope in a CoC game. It may be great to play a game and roll up a new character every session, but you must be working with some seriously good roleplayers. I see discouragement happen, and characters quickly become a bunch of numbers. CoC can be whatever the gm wants. It doesn't have to be a new character every session and it doesn't have to be a heroic, level up, grab the loot game. However, the system works equally well for each style. No one way is right. Play it the way you like and you can never be wrong.