tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232794383425434281.post1279174532983094780..comments2023-10-18T14:53:50.744+01:00Comments on Brighton and Hove Role Players: Lawrence Bacon Must Die!Prince Marikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03240493922014277196noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232794383425434281.post-59621341639726430722012-02-04T19:45:32.303+00:002012-02-04T19:45:32.303+00:00Having just played in the above campaign Kelvin de...Having just played in the above campaign Kelvin describes, I can say I thoroughly enjoyed it. I was not really aware of either any railroading or any crack papering going on from a highly skilled GM. The ending was more akin to Miller's Crossing than Call of Cthulhu, with a deadly and brutal firefight going on in frosty Scottish woods, but enjoyable all the same. As the player of the character that administered the coup de grace to Alexander Robey, I can safely say the party would not have agonised long about removing that particular piece from the puzzle! There were two seasoned players of CoC in the party as well as one playing in his very first, and I wondered whether the group's speed of execution was partly to do with our familiarity with the milieu?Stuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01863160473105489597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232794383425434281.post-40155286970933950472012-01-31T03:33:57.209+00:002012-01-31T03:33:57.209+00:00"...did they still have fun in doing -- as mi...<i>"...did they still have fun in doing -- as mine have done -- the sensible thing?"</i><br /><br />Absolutely! I've run that scenario twice; the first time, the group (a different set of players) went through the Carcosa bit and everyone died. When I mentioned this during the post-mortem after this latest running, everyone expressed shock that the previous group had done that and were more than happy having done the sensible thing.<br /><br />Of course, the scenario did not hinge on the group going through Carcosa and there was still a climax to play through (one that featured a PC furiously playing a violin solo on a broken ankle, of all things). You might want to cook up a suitable climactic "clan bust" a la "Call of Cthulhu" to end things with a bang. It won't be as cool as the climax as written, perhaps, but your players won't know the difference (til afterwards, at least).David Larkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04133630988557116729noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232794383425434281.post-5671244578872118812012-01-29T19:03:22.805+00:002012-01-29T19:03:22.805+00:00That's good advice, thanks! The chap who intro...That's good advice, thanks! The chap who introduced me to <i>Call of Cthulhu</i> all those years ago would often to a post-mortem explanation of the scenario after we'd finished it, and I enjoyed seeing how things "should" have happened, so I may very well do so with <i>Tatters</i>.<br /><br />My key concern is that the finale -- whether it's the one in the book or one that arises from play -- is enjoyable for the players; when your group torpedoed the end of "Tatterdamalion" did they still have fun in doing -- as mine have done -- the sensible thing?thekelvingreenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01928260185408072124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232794383425434281.post-2946657612800540752012-01-29T18:06:49.538+00:002012-01-29T18:06:49.538+00:00I think your dilemma is a perfect encapsulation of...I think your dilemma is a perfect encapsulation of the pros and cons of the two approaches to campaigning (sandbox vs. scripted). On the one hand, you wanted to encourage player agency so you opened up the plot and made it more sandboxy. But then the players did exactly what you do in a sandbox and came up with a workaround you would never have expected and "beat the game"--and kudos to them! You were right not to fudge the dice or bust out Quantum Byakhees.<br /><br />But on the other hand, as you say, the cool climax written into the adventure is now kiboshed unless you do some really fancy GM acrobatics (and then what's the point of opening up player agency?). It's the very heart of the railroad: "Hmm, this climax is really awesome; how can I <i>ensure</i> it happens?" I ran into a similar issue just this week, running a CoC one-shot as I prepare my next campaign. The scenario was "Tatterdemalion" from <i>Fatal Experiments</i>. The climax also features a trip to Carcosa, but there's a built-in way to GTFO and return to Earth as soon as the PCs arrive. Bizarrely, the scenario authors assume the party won't take it, largely based on a chain of logic that involves intimate knowledge of how <i>gates</i> work <b>and</b> the party assuming the trip back would work differently than the trip over. Naturally, the party did the sensible thing and skedaddled back to Earth (and still managed to save the day), but in so doing, they missed out on a tour of Carcosa and a climactic appointment with the King in Yellow, both of which would have featured much mind-bending fun. Or there was this adventure I ran (for a D&D campaign) from an issue of <i>Dungeon</i> that assumed the PCs would engage in a thrilling chase, hopping from boat to skiff across a marina, in pursuit of a person of interest. Instead, one of the PCs had a dart laced with drow sleep poison and simply shot the NPC as he tried to book it, knocking him out and forestalling a large chunk of the written adventure. So it goes. It's just a risk you take when you run pre-fab scenarios.<br /><br />As a GM, I don't mind showing the group what was behind my smoke and mirrors after the fact, so if I were in your shoes, after the anti-climax of busting up the cult I'd tell the group exactly what happened and congratulate them on a job well done--but I'd also mention the climax that <i>should've</i> happened, just for everyone's amusement.David Larkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04133630988557116729noreply@blogger.com