Fear and Madness

[DrBargle]

I searched the forum, perhaps ineffectively, and couldn't see a thread discussing the topic, so: do any of you use the fear and madness system from Necromantic Arts? Have you tried it? How did it go?

As a WFRP veteran, I'm thinking that the rules could add something to the game, and can't see a problem with them at a read through. But if people have tried them and found otherwise, I'd be happy to learn from your mistakes.

 

[jwpacker]

I searched the forum, perhaps ineffectively, and couldn't see a thread discussing the topic, so: do any of you use the fear and madness system from Necromantic Arts? Have you tried it? How did it go?

As a WFRP veteran, I'm thinking that the rules could add something to the game, and can't see a problem with them at a read through. But if people have tried them and found otherwise, I'd be happy to learn from your mistakes.

Here I assumed you were talking about bolting on the Sanity rules from Call of Cthulhu. Or are they one in the same? If not, you might consider them as well.

 

[DrBargle]

The Necromantic Arts fear and madness rules are a bit more simple that CoC (insanity is the point of CoC, isn't it?) - revolving around a Persistence test opposed by the 'fear rating' of the monster/situation. A goblin might have a fear rating of 10, while a zombie might have a fear rating of 50. All these can, of course, be modified by the situation - a horde of goblins festooned in human heads might well have a higher fear rating.

I don't want the PCs to inevitably be driven mad ala CoC, but I do want to make zombies a little more frightening than their 1 CA would suggest to a canny player. The player might be canny,and understand the mechanics of the world as per the rulebook, but he's not in a cellar with the moaning dead - his character is.

 

[alex_greene]

Best to roleplay these, IMO. Rules for angst and horror get in the way of a fun game.

"I launch an attack against that Thing slouching towards us."

"Sorry, you failed your fear test and you must flee shrieking into the night."

"Aw. What about the others?"

"They passed. They attack. The Thing slouches no more. It deflates under the pinpricking of sharp iron objects like a balloon and expires fartily."

"Hey, wait ..."

Other Players: "Scaredy cat!"

 

[havercake lad]

I use the ones that were printed in a Mongoose Elric book. It makes deamon summonming more hazardous for novices and raving insanity befalls several key characters in the novels such as Yyrkoon and Theleb Kaarna.

 

[hanszurcher]

Fear and madness rules definitely create memorable game situations.

I haven't used the Necromantic Arts rules but have been planning to give them a spin in the Legend of Cephalune Hills game that's been bouncing around my head. I'd probably only give Fear Ratings to Horrific and Supernatural Foes.

But, being a long time Call of Cthulhu player, I'd really love to use those rules. With the addition of Aplomb from L'Appel de Cthulhu.

 

[hanszurcher]

I use the ones that were printed in a Mongoose Elric book. It makes deamon summonming more hazardous for novices and raving insanity befalls several key characters in the novels such as Yyrkoon and Theleb Kaarna.

I thought the Elric book only referenced the Necromantic Arts book for sanity rules?

I like the idea of having insanity be a possible consequence of hazardous magic.

 

[DrBargle]

The player of the character who ran away should maybe have put a few more points into Persistence then ;-)

As for 'aplomb' - has that made it into any English language version of CoC? What a great idea.

 

[rust]

Best to roleplay these, IMO. Rules for angst and horror get in the way of a fun game.

I do not think so. Stats and rules and dice decide whether a
character can resist a spell or a social skill, so it would seem
logical to me to use the same method to decide whether the
character can resist a psychic shock. It at least avoids deba-
tes with players who insist that their mighty hero would ne-
ver be charmed, persuaded or frightened.

 

[alex_greene]

I think my players would have to take exception to having control of their characters removed from their hands and placed in mine as a result of a poor dice roll. They'd kind of object vehemently to their characters either suddenly fawning over the Lamia or running away screaming from some slouchy Fart-Thing, or succumbing to the Dominate spell and slaughtering some innocents, all because they rolled a 00 on their Persistence roll.

 

[hanszurcher]

...
As for 'aplomb' - has that made it into any English language version of CoC? What a great idea.

No, not yet. There has been talk of it possibly appearing as an option in the upcoming Call of Cthulhu 7th Ed. *knock on wood*

The new edition of Delta Green is also getting customized Sanity rules (as well as it's own BRP-based system).

 

[rust]

They'd kind of object vehemently to their characters either suddenly fawning over the Lamia or running away screaming from some slouchy Fart-Thing, or succumbing to the Dominate spell and slaughtering some innocents, all because they rolled a 00 on their Persistence roll.

I suspect that the same players do not object whenever a
lucky dice result enables their characters to achieve some
critical success ? :lol:

 

[hanszurcher]

I think my players would have to take exception to having control of their characters removed from their hands and placed in mine as a result of a poor dice roll. ...

Do you usually allow your players to dictate the outcomes of failed rolls?

 

[alex_greene]

They'd kind of object vehemently to their characters either suddenly fawning over the Lamia or running away screaming from some slouchy Fart-Thing, or succumbing to the Dominate spell and slaughtering some innocents, all because they rolled a 00 on their Persistence roll.

I suspect that the same players do not object whenever a lucky dice result enables their characters to achieve some critical success ? :lol:

I think the loss of control of their characters might lie behind their objections, and the thought that they have to suffer consequences for actions they themselves did not initiate, but for a 00 on the dice.

If they'd rolled a 01, control of their actions would have remained with them; not so with a failed roll to determine what they do next. Basically, this kind of dice roll boils down to who runs the characters this round - the players or the GM.

 

[DrBargle]

Players lose control of their characters all the time.

"My character hits the goblin with his axe."

"Roll the dice."

"I've rolled a '0' and a '0'"

"No, he doesn't. Not only that, but...."

 

[DrBargle]

I think my players would have to take exception to having control of their characters removed from their hands and placed in mine as a result of a poor dice roll. They'd kind of object vehemently to their characters either suddenly fawning over the Lamia or running away screaming from some slouchy Fart-Thing, or succumbing to the Dominate spell and slaughtering some innocents, all because they rolled a 00 on their Persistence roll.

Actually, can I ask - in your games, do things such a Lamia or Dominate spells exist? Are PCs immune to their effects?

 

[alex_greene]

I think my players would have to take exception to having control of their characters removed from their hands and placed in mine as a result of a poor dice roll. ...

Do you usually allow your players to dictate the outcomes of failed rolls?

I don't let the dice dictate the result of the test. In the case of whether the characters stay their ground or bolt, go mad or die, I let the players know the risk, and I give them the choice. Do their characters have what it takes to stand their ground, do they go mad, do they soil themselves and run away, whatever. If they go with making that choice for themselves, I tell them the consequence - if they stand their ground, they die; if they gaze at the Lamia, they lose their minds to lust; if they choose madness, they acquire some symptom which will impair them.

And if they can't make up their minds, then I let them roll the dice and let the random dice determine what happens.

The dice become the final arbiter - not the first.

And sometimes you have to trust your players to be more mature, and not so hidebound by the need to follow rules all the time.

 

[alex_greene]

It has vampires.

Also, I used to run Vampire: the Masquerade and Vampire: the Requiem, and blood bonds, Dominate, Majesty and Nightmare can be horrendous tools in the hands of an NPC like the Prince or an Elder Primogen. If it's just dice pools versus some poor schmo's Blood Potency dice pool, even with a burnt Willpower point it could be six dice against the NPC Elder's ten or more.

So things like this cropped up pretty frequently in the game, whether the characters had to fight through some Nosferatu's Dread (Nightmare 2) or overcome a Ventrue's Conditioning (Dominate 4).

 

[alex_greene]

The characters understand that. They take their chances with that. They risk the weapons breaking in combat, their hand jarring if their weapon hits stone and the impact goes right up their arm at the weapon's sweet spot or they leave themselves wide open for the creature to shive them between the ribs. They are still in charge of what their characters do; but these are external events over which they have no control.

But losing their characters' actions, having someone else run their characters for them because the book says they have to roll the dice here and there are no other options? While they sit back for a round or two and watch as someone has them act possessed and screw up their characters' lives, their contacts, destroy their families?

That is way different.

They choose. They get to do all of this with their characters if they lose the fight to retain control, but they are the ones who run their characters down.

 

[jwpacker]

I hope to never have to tell a player how he has to run his character. But I'm sure as heck okay with telling him that, based on a roll, this is the general overall result, and letting him role play the results.