Help me understand Call of Cthulhu

[numtini]

Many of these have metacurrencies, I’ll grant you that. But I don’t get why positive modifiers and more options in armed conflict = no longer grim dark.

What kind of modifiers are you thinking of? Because bonus/penalty dice are all over the place in combat for things like cover, darkness, distance, multiple shots vs single shots, etc.

 

[Bae'zel]

What kind of modifiers are you thinking of? Because bonus/penalty dice are all over the place in combat for things like cover, darkness, distance, multiple shots vs single shots, etc.

It seems like I need to read the actual rules, because our DM didn’t apply ANY bonus dice for anything, despite our efforts to place ourselves in advantageous positions.

 

[Marc Radle]

Did you

It seems like I need to read the actual rules, because our DM didn’t apply ANY bonus dice for anything, despite our efforts to place ourselves in advantageous positions.

Did you say at one point the GM was fairly new to the Call of Cthulhu game?

 

[Bae'zel]

Not every one wants a combat simulator out of CoC.

LOL WFRP 1e is hardly a combat simulator.

And I never said I wanted detailed combat rules.

I want a game where when a player goes out of their way to give themselves some kind of narrative advantage in or out of combat (taking extra time, using connections, gaining higher ground, learning about the enemey before engaging them, leveraging a tight space, ganging up, flanking whatever) they can get some kind of benefit in the rules. CoC only seems to have penalties (or the rare GM-ruling instances of extra die re-roll for the tens).

I think that this might be a pointless conversation.

 

[Bae'zel]

Pretty sure this is the rub. CoC is not in any way a combat-oriented game and doesn't spend a lot of time in its rules doing lots of fancy things with combat. Just look at the amount of space spent on skills, lore, spells and ancient tomes and horrible beasties. Most investigators are scholarly types who don't spend a lot of time around guns unless it's occupation. Combat's almost a footnote, though it's covered enough to get the job done. Combat certainly happens, but it tends to be short. CoC is primarily aimed towards investigation, preserving sanity and AVOIDING combat so that investigators live long enough to prevent/delay horrible things from happening to our existence. If you're playing CoC primarily to do combat simulation, you're playing the wrong game.

Okay, fair enough: but why do I have so much more fun with OSR games that also have minimal combat rules? Or Trail of Cthulhu? Or PbtA Cthulhu-adjacent games?

Okay I think I understand. THis isn't going anywhere; the goal-posts keep shifting:

- you want a combat-heavy game!

- you want a game that's thematically less lethal or grim dark!

- you want a game that's a reality simulator!

I can't seem to express myself properly. So I'll bow out. I might as well be arguing sacred cows with D&D fans.

 

[Wolfpack48]

LOL WFRP 1e is hardly a combat simulator.

And I never said I wanted detailed combat rules.

I want a game where when a player goes out of their way to give themselves some kind of narrative advantage in or out of combat (taking extra time, using connections, gaining higher ground, learning about the enemey before engaging them, leveraging a tight space, ganging up, flanking whatever) they can get some kind of benefit in the rules. CoC only seems to have penalties (or the rare GM-ruling instances of extra die re-roll for the tens).

I think that this might be a pointless conversation.

Please read the rulebook.

 

[chuckdee]

Okay, fair enough: but why do I have so much more fun with OSR games that also have minimal combat rules? Or Trail of Cthulhu? Or PbtA Cthulhu-adjacent games?

Reverse that. Why don't you have fun with CoC with minimal combat rules? What do they have that this doesn't? Because the ones you have called out don't have the same kinds of modifiers or rules that you are calling CoC out for to my knowledge, so I'm curious.