Vox Populi Forum
While the subject matter may not be to everyone's liking, this guy does an admirable job with the topic.
Link to Reviewer:
This dude is a fan boy (or is it boi) and loves the game. He makes the best case possible delivered in a clear, and interesting way. The production value is very good / excellent. Forgive my snark, I enjoyed his videos.
He gets confused with "proof" and "an anecdote" but I can see past that.
What we learn is the 7th Edition of Call of Cthulhu is indeed as convoluted and incomprehensible as we thought. (And, they didn't skip any versions ... so there were 6 more just like this.)
As the reviewer notes, they sort of want ONLY the Keeper to know the rules and you just roll and he/she tells you what happens.
So, why make the thing so damn reverse polish convoluted. I've had semesters in fluid dynamics that were less confounding.
Might I suggest a simplification:
1) a bad thing happens
2) a bad thing happens but you dodge out of the way
3) something that seems ominous happens
4) oddly, nothing seems to happen but you're sure it did so you draw no comfort that nothing happened.
5) a good thing happens but discovering it, you are still driven out of your gourd
6) a good thing happens and somehow you don't get consumed by it.
Roll as needed.
But, for the advanced rules, add this:
Pick 2 of the following items:
(1) Shuffle through the rules
(2) Roll a few times behind a screen and look like something bad happened
(3) Draw a rough map
(4) Repeat something from before and act like you missed something
(5) Hand out a copy of a random obituary
(6) Suggest players buy some things from the 1930's catalog of stuff
(7) Hint that a secret society is involved (if you don't have one says something with Green, Scarlet, Gray, Brotherhood, or Church in the name).
(8) Refer to the Internet or something that didn't exist in the 1930's and laugh at how backwards stupid they were.
In the description of getting shot with a gun, the reviewer describes how to interpret the rules and in no circumstances does the weapon deliver less than 90 points of damage. Yet, the player can only sustain 8 points ... so ... the players is dead 11 times over. Why again did we bother to do the math? The good news is if you only did 3 points or less, they would only be unconscious and dying. Three points is the amount of damage that the average ally cat can do bumping into the character on the street.
But, but, but the investigation you say ... that's the heart of the game. Click, click ... find that video.
In that, he says the rule is when doing an investigation that should the players reach a point where they can't solve the mystery, they can ask the Ref for direction. An investigation roll is given that has a base chance of success of 100% ... which is to say why are we rolling since ... the entire spectrum of all results is between 1 and 100.
Ahh, so we can see how you the characters are impacted by being given the details of the investigation?
It takes a lot of time but somehow you just figure it out ... boom ... fight the face sucker.
It would have been nice to give some rules, flowcharts, playing aids on investigations. Even just there are 10 possibilities and each round, you remove one from the list. Perhaps that is in the rules.
I considered it a positive thing. Whenever I looked at the rules and read them, I was asking myself why would anyone do this? And Mike who loves the game would launch into myriad details ... but couldn't get the central tenant along that ... there is no central tenant ... it really is just random randomness (for the mechanics at least).
I'm comforted in knowing I didn't miss anything.
Where Fools Dare to Tread -- red (posted: 5/12/2019)
Uh, I did write my own Mechanics ... see Post ... Really .... -- Iron Conrad (posted: 5/12/2019)
I liked your mechanics -- red (posted: 12/5/2019)
Seems like an interesting series of Articles ... -- Iron Conrad (posted: 5/12/2019)
As if I need another Challenge -- red (posted: 5/13/2019)