Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

The power scale for players in CoC is nearly non-existent. IF they survive long enough, they might acquire some magic, some superior clue finding abilities and some resistance to Mythos encounters. But by and large, players are meat in CoC and Mythos creatures are the meat eaters. All the guns and skills barely hold up against Mythos creatures, and spellcasters are on a short track to gibbering insanity.

So players that crave power are going to be disappointed in CoC, pretty much from the outset. CoC is great for advanced roleplaying, or total beginners with no idea what they're in for. The people in between....the ones wanting to game a system and be awesome, it's not a great match.

[Neonivek]

For the most part Call of Cthuhu isn't about advancement because by its very nature unless you adjust things in your player's favor... they will eventually die or essentially die (either health, which is extremely likely, or sanity, which is guarenteed)'

Originally I wanted to play Hero system (Fantasy Hero specifically) but they dislike games with open creation systems.

[nenjin]

Well, it seems like they have at least a decent idea of gaming and what they want. It's just in the descriptions you gave, a few people didn't sound like the kind of people who wanted to walk into a CoC game and get pwned. CoC is all about the atmosphere and roleplaying....which didn't sound like what these guys were geared toward.

[Vorthon]

So... The campaign I'm gonna be running should be starting soon, and, I'm just waiting on the last one or two players to put together their characters...

So far, it's a very unusual party (Decided to start at second level):
A Chaotic Neutral Kobold Ranger, who worships a goddess of war, bloodlust and rage. (FUN!)
A Neutral Human Sorceror, who worships a goddess of knowledge and magic.
A Chaotic Neutral Felin (A homebrew race of mine. I posted the details on them several pages back) Cleric, who worships a trickster goddess. (DMPC)

...We're screwed...

[scriver]

Sounds like a great gang.

[Captain Mayday]

Here's an alternative Neo.

Shelve any serious content you've worked up so far. (I.e. content you want people to play through maturely and appreciate.)

Craft a new, less serious set of adventures for these guys.

Use them to get experience. Roll with the punches. Don't get committed to any story outcome. Just basically give them a loose plot and turn them loose.

Why will this be good for you? It will teach you how to deal with the worst kinds of players while still keeping your cool. It will teach you to react to asinine, player-created situations with grace and fun. The biggest reason destroyers wreck a DM's fun is because DMs are committed to the worlds they create. So do the opposite. Be uncommitted. Not in the lazy or "I don't give a fuck" way, but in the "You stab the King in the face?.....Ok, here's what happens...." way.

Every DM wants to run their Magnum Opus. Sometimes, based on the players, it's not the time for it. And TBH, some really fun campaigns have resulted for me both as a DM and as a player when the DM let go of control and just let the story evolve.

I don't know how much evolution will really happen with your group....but rather than going into a session feeling like it's already doomed to suck at some point...go in with a completely open mind, and game plan. You might find you get more entertainment manipulating the players through their own decisions than you do trying to make them march to orderly beat of a drum.

I've never run a game on rails. I wouldn't even know where to begin. It all seems like a lot of work, and players go off track the first chance they get anyway.

[Darvi]

Unless you've got guys in your group who behave like my brother ("so, my Chaotic Good gargoyle starts beating up the nearest guard". Five minutes into the game), I don't see any problem with that.

[Vorthon]

Update on the party. It's now composed of the following:
A Chaotic Neutral Kobold Ranger, who worships a goddess of war, bloodlust and rage. (FUN!)
A Neutral Human Sorceror, who worships a goddess of knowledge and magic.
A Chaotic Neutral Felin (A homebrew race of mine. I posted the details on them several pages back) Cleric, who worships a trickster goddess. (DMPC)
A Chaotic Good Dwarf Barbarian who worships a god of war and has a thing for axes.

...We're really screwed...

[Darvi]

Still no problem. As long as nobody says "Yeah, I'll stab our quesgiver in the back and take our loot" this should be a pretty fun party.

[Neonivek]

Don't be too afraid of Neutral

MOST players (as in the majority) of players who chose neutral only do so to mean "I am good but not THAT good" as a way to be capable of doing bad things while at the same time being unrestricted. (In otherwords people play Neutral characters as GOOD characters with flaws)

Mostly because the perception of good, instead of being altruistic, is being goody good cardboard super hero with no room for vice.

[nenjin]

I've never run a game on rails. I wouldn't even know where to begin. It all seems like a lot of work, and players go off track the first chance they get anyway.

Like most things, it depends on the group. On rails isn't a good term to use for roleplaying anyways. It's pejorative in video games, it's pejorative here.

That said, some people want to take part in a story as much as they want to run it. My formula has always been: have a plan but never be afraid to let things derail for a while. If you've done the work and detailed your world....there's literally no where the players can go that you aren't at least partially prepared for.

MOST players (as in the majority) of players who chose neutral only do so to mean "I am good but not THAT good" as a way to be capable of doing bad things while at the same time being unrestricted. (In otherwords people play Neutral characters as GOOD characters with flaws)

TBH, most wall flowers players I've known choose neutral. The ones that want the freedom to break the rules and not get called out for an alignment change are the ones who pick chaotic.

The fact you have not one but TWO chaotic neutral players says to me they read the description "crazy" of the alignment type and ran with it. I've never enjoyed chaotic neutral characters, because I've never seen one played satisfactorily. They're either huge walking cliches or a thinly veiled excuse for random grief.

[Neonivek]

The problem is the allignment system is sort of broken (Just read Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic Evil... Guess what: The descriptions outright contradict the system) and the only thing MORE broken then the allignment system is people's understanding of it.

Chaotic characters shouldn't even be random (I'd put an uttarly insane person as True Neutral mostly) they should be all about freedom and think of restrictions as being ghastly. Yet they are played more like someone who cannot function as an ordinary human being.

I don't blame the players though for chosing Neutral because DMs are just as bad. If your a good character... by ALL means your allowed to be flawed even as far as to do things that would otherwise be evil, as long as you don't make a habit of it, afterall the allignment system isn't Saint, normal person, and Satan. I once had a long conversation with someone about if it is even possible for a Lawful Good person to kill someone they absolutely hated even if they themselves weren't evil and retain their allignment.

The result was, and mind you this was one of the better DMs in terms of understanding the allignment system, after hours of discussion where he constantly affirmed they couldn't. Was that a good character COULD do evil things but they should consider it tragic that they ever had to, or were ever willing, to do so but that also a character who constantly did so likely was just doing lipservice to that allignment.

This is especially important to the Lawful and Chaotic allignments. A Chaotic character should MORE then be able to be intimidated into behaving while a Lawful character should be MORE then capable of breaking the law should it be important. The lawful and Chaotic allignments arn't taken very seriously by DMs as they are often used as "different sections of good and evil" instead.

It was the only reason I wasn't pissed at 4.0 for essentially eliminating allignment.

[Darvi]

(I'd put an uttarly insane person as True Neutral mostly)

I hate you forever now.

[nenjin]

I don't think the alignment system has ever been perfect, but it's on the player and the DM's interpretation of it to make it fun and interesting, and not boring and cliche'd.

Chaotic Good is my alignment of choice for my favorite characters because it's the best reflection of how I see myself. I don't mind breaking rules, rules in and of themselves aren't sacred. But it's context specific, and I'll usually opt for the thing that does the least damage to someone who didn't deserve it. I tend to play Thieves, btw.

Really alignment is about arguing your case, and that's why it's a sticky wicket for players. The situation you mentioned, I totally agree. A lawful good paladin should be able to kill a non-evil person as long as the LG paladin believed they did something to warrant it. The tragedy of it all and the bemoaning of being forced into that position is the price they pay to keep their alignment. It's not really the act that defines alignment, it's how the character and the player internalize it. It's up to the DM to decide when what a character believes is completely at odds with what the rest of the world sees. It wouldn't be the first time a crusader has become a villain and been the only one to never see it. You only really need to do that as a DM when a player is deliberately trying to abuse the freedom and ambiguity of the alignment system to say one thing and do another, consistently.

[Sowelu]

I could see some utterly insane people who are terrified of The Man being CN, and other utterly insane people who can't stand the madness of the world around them and need to retreat into way-beyond-OCD rules and procedures as being LN.  I don't think they could truly stray into good or evil, though, and maybe those other ones are even a little artificial...

If you go far beyond that point though, they become practically mindless.  Someone with INT 2 or WIS 2...can they even have alignment at all?  Hell, I don't know, animated undead can be evil but then that's just the magic talking.  Though they do have at least one of those scores, so...

My personal favorite alignment to play is LN.  Mainly because it makes everyone go "Wait, WHAT?".  Maybe you just care about yourself and your family and nobody else, but think that orderly society will help you better than anything else.  (IE, Republicans.)  Maybe you can go out adventuring and bring law to the wilderness, maybe as a bounty hunter, but it's just because you personally want to see it like that.  It makes you feel warm and fuzzy and safe and/or paid.