What makes a successful horror game?

[Ruin Explorer]

Oh, yeah. If you're just going to die or fail there's no tension and most horror scenarios are designed so your characters have a chance of success.

I was going to mention something about being in the right mindset. How many of us played Vampire in the 90s as a bunch of angsty teenagers running around in black trench coats armed with Desert Eagles and katanas? That totally killed any horror vibe.

I think the issue with VtM 1E and 2E is that they were never primarily horror games. Particularly not 2E.

It'd be a re-writing of history to say they were - a common one, and indeed one a later White Wolf engaged in, but still. And I'm not just saying that, you can open up VtM 2E and go through it - I did a few weeks ago. Horror is absolutely not a priority, it's just in the mix. In fact, what's very clear from the text is that the favoured mode of play, the favoured focus of the VtM writers and designers was essentially "intrigue", i.e. vampire politics and machinations and power struggles (including with other supernaturals, and in maintaining the Masquerade). Most of the suggested campaign conflicts are about that. The chapter on the styles of play (which basically break down to adventure, intrigue and personal horror) strongly suggests that VtM is strongest at intrigue, and that it is weakest at personal stuff, and requires an exceptional DM and players (it doesn't call them that, they're "Mean Streets", "Illuminati" and "Bourbon Street" because it was the 1990s and style matters man!).

So I think it's pretty forgivable that a lot of people played VtM that way, because really, how many people are interested in personal horror and body horror as a theme for multiplayer RPG sessions? It's not a theme that even works well in that context - 1 on 1 or blueblooking/journalling/chatrooms are much better venues for that kind of horror. Virtually every functional, in-person VtM group I came across was:

A) Trenchcoats and katanas

B) Vampire politics/intrigue focused (LARPs almost always were)

C) Horny as hell RP that was ostensibly politics/intrigue focused (Anne Rice style)

Which is part of why when the appropriately named "Vampire: The Masquerade Revised" (it sure was revising something...) came out (after Rein*Hagen et al left), and basically tried to kill off both "Trenchcoats and katanas"-style play and "Anne Rice"-style play (despite the latter being explicitly a massive influence on VtM 1/2E), in the name of promoting personal horror and body horror above all else, even revising basic vampire lore to do so, it wasn't very persuasive (and was also kind of anti-zeitgeist rather than surfing the zeitgeist).

The only times I saw body horror/personal horror work in a VtM situation were online RP in forums and chatrooms. I've never seen it work in a sustained way in person. I'm not saying it can't or never did - but I agree with VtM 2E's assessment that it would take an exceptional group and Storyteller to manage that, especially for a sustained campaign, not a few sessions likely ending in the Final Death of the vampires involved.

Sorry, going a bit off topic but I think it's important to note VtM wasn't really a horror game - it was a gothic-punk game, with a focus on intrigue. On no level was it well setup for horror - not mechanically, not in terms of how it was written and presented, not in terms of supplements (Revised did better supplement-wise, for sure, but 1E and 2E? Nah), and not in terms of what most players were actually interested in.

Of course a lot of RPGs experience this kind of discontinuity, drift, and attempted changes of direction with new editions.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

My perception of VtM was it was largely about sex, not horror (although you could say the same about Dracula).

 

[DragonLancer]

I ran numerous games of VtM 3rd edition during the late 90s and it was never about horror. Vampire was a game of politics and intrigue in specific setting. Everyone realised that and that was how it played. Even when I played briefly with other groups, it was the same. It worked better that way in my opinion.

I've also been a big CoC fan since I picked up 3rd edition in 1987. I've run that for 30 years and it is still difficult to get the horror element right. I found the best way to do it was to treat it as more paranormal/supernatural horror elements and just touch onto the Lovecraftian in the background. Players, especially those not overly familiar with HPL's work, find it easier to immerse themselves into the game that way.

In fact CoC was the one game where I did manage to elicit a fear response. One published scenario back in the late 90s, I had a player actually pick his chair up and move to the other side of the table because he didn't want his back to the living room door. The suspense of the game actually got to him (he did enjoy it before anyone things it went too far).

Generally though, I don't think horror works that well in RPGS. Unlike characters in a movie, show or novel, the players are in no danger and it comes through. Sure, you can play your character as if they are fearful, but the player doesn't experience it. Games like D&D where horror elements are not part and parcel, don't often work well for it either.

 

[MGibster]

My perception of VtM was it was largely about sex, not horror (although you could say the same about Dracula).

Really? We're talking about creatures that penetrate their victims, exchanging bodily fluids. How anyone can connect that to sex is unfathomable. Interestingly enough, on the Reddit forums within the last few days I've seen a few threads about how uncomfortable the metaphor of sex and abusive relationships are used in Vampire 5th edition. I refrained from popping in to say, "It's a horror game, guys." It's okay to want to avoid certain subjects, but it's like going to a Friday the 13th movie and complaining about all the blood.

As @Autumnal wrote, transgression is an important part of horror. What does that mean though? It means it challenges our social norms and expectations which tends to make people uncomfortable. There are multiple violations of social norms that pop up in Curse of Strahd. There's human trafficking of children who are turned into edible drugs and cannibalized, there's Strahd's obsession with controlling a woman who does not want his attention, there's genocide, and it just keeps going on from there. God's Teeth for Delta Green revolves around child abuse and the cycle of violence.

 

[overgeeked]

Re: horror as genre vs horror as tone. It's both. Some genres are defined by plots, others by characters, others by setting, and others by tone. Comedy and horror as genres are based almost exclusively on the tone they present. There are some distinct plot, character, and setting elements, but they're both almost pure tone. Which is why they blend so well with other genres.

Sci-fi horror just makes sense. It doesn't create dissonance for someone who comes across that notion the first time. It's easy to imagine what that would look like. Same with a romantic comedy, or a space western, or any one of dozens of other mashup genres. This is because you're mashing up a tone-based genre with a setting-based genre, or a plot-based genre with a character-based genre, etc.

Where you start to get a little dissonance is mashing up two genres that slot into the same space. Like a mystery and romance, both genres based mostly on plot, one will dominate and the other will become a subplot. Or you get tonal whiplash in some horror-comedy stuff. It's also why it's so easy for horror to fall into comedy. Just a little too much blood, just a little bit of overacting, and you're suddenly in camp or horror-comedy.

Re: referees, players, and mechanics. The referee can absolutely make or break a horror game. Obviously. But they can only do so much. Any referee who can spin a horror yarn at the table so well that they entrance their players completely and never need to look to mechanics at all should immediately start writing horror. In the almost 40 years I've been playing horror RPGs I've never met a single referee who's that good. Ever. And I've played with a lot of referees.

Player buy in is absolutely a must, but that buy in can come, to some degree, from the mechanics.

If the referee or players are cracking jokes regularly or not taking it seriously, you're either no longer playing a horror game or you're playing a horror-comedy game. Nothing wrong with either, horror-comedy is one of my all-time favorite genres, but the tone of horror is absurdly fragile. That fragility can be protected by mechanics.

I'm a firm believer that system matters. System matters because it provides that narrower range of options and explicitly pushes a particular style of play. System provides limits to the imagination and points it in a particular direction. In other words, system provides focus. But, the thing most people miss is that system is not the only way to provide focus. The referee can provide that focus. The players can provide that focus.

But, and this is incredibly important, the system can shore up players and referees who aren't 100% invested in the genre or particular story. Because if the players aren't quite feeling it, the system can help quite a lot by providing mechanical points of tension for the player to feel. Players get really invested in their characters, so screwing with the character tends to make the player feel something. The PC loses hit points, the player feels tension and maybe dread at losing their PC. Or sanity or stress or bonds or any one of a dozen other mechanics. This works because while the player might not be fully invested in the horror genre or horror story being played out, they will almost always be invested in their character.

For an example of system mattering in the context of horror, look at the death moves from Daggerheart and compare those to death in Mothership. In Daggerheart, when the PC hits zero HP the player gets to pick one of three options. Make an action that automatically crits before they die, go unconscious but live, or make a roughly 50/50 roll to heal up or die. In Mothership, when the PC hits zero HP (technically marks their last wound) the referee secretly rolls a 1d10 and hides it under an opaque cup. Only if the other PCs check the body will the result be revealed.

While the 50/50 roll in Daggerheart is tense in the moment, it doesn't build or maintain tension over time. I think that's one key to really good horror mechanics. Things like dwindling resources can absolutely build and maintain tension over time. So even if the players aren't 100% invested in the horror of the story, they most likely will be invested in what's going on with their character. Same is true with things like ticking clocks. The player is sitting at a table playing a game. They're not in any danger or rush, but if you put a ticking clock on something, suddenly the players lean in and become more invested. The player feels that pressure and tension. I think Nordic LARPs call that bleed. That can absolutely suck players into the horror.