Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Odhanan" data-source="post: 3317002" data-attributes="member: 12324">That's an assumption. Not all PCs are alike, with the same backgrounds and knowledge of this or that component of the game. I have personally played CoC characters aware of the existance of the Mythos with strong paranoid tendencies. Maybe you wouldn't allow such characters at your CoC table, but that doesn't make it a rule. However, I never said the character could possibly know about the zombies. I don't know all the details of the game. What I meant was that playing a paranoid armed character is perfectly acceptable to me given the context of CoC. Maybe he was afraid of something "out there"? Maybe he had problems with nazis, like Indy? Maybe the mob? Who knows! But if the character has enemies and for the player it means the character is especially paranoid, I'm okay with it. Wrong. You can have psychological derangements like paranoia without having a SAN of 0. A character would go to the hands of the Keeper if his SAN reached 0, and not before. I believe that in this particular instance what didn't happen was the briefing prior to the game to have everyone on the same page as to the types of characters appropriate to the game, their equipment and psychological outlook thereof. Further, from the brief summary we have here, I think the one player who's enjoyment of the game was spoiled overreacted. You want to discuss about things that break your suspension of disbelief? You surely can do so, but after the game. That's one of my few table rules. You don't make a tantrum during the game: the game time is precious enough as it is, indeed.</blockquote>

Verification