Talon säännöt

Julkaisen omat "talon sääntöni" (rules of the house, eri asia kuin houserules), koska ajattelin että erilaisten harrastusryhmien (ei vain roolipelaajien ja lautapelaajien, kuten minun tapauksessani) voi olla hyvä sellainen muotoilla ja oma versioni voi toimia mallina muille.

Erityisen tarpeellinen tällainen sääntökokoelma voi olla sellaisille, jotka vasta muodostavat peli- tai muuta ryhmäänsä. On hyvä, että tietyt asiat on selkeästi sanottu etukäteen - sen pitäisi vähentää ongelmia jo ennakolta, auttamalla oikeanlaisen ryhmän jäsenistön valikoitumisen.

Omissa säännöissäni on tietysti yksityiskohtia, jotka koskevat vain minun kämppääni, mutta nekin voivat toimia esimerkkeinä muille asioista, joita voi olla hyvä huomioida.


TALON SÄÄNNÖT

(0) Joka ei näitä sääntöjä hyväksy, pysyköön poissa. Jos joku haluaa näihin jotain lisätä, ehdottakoon lisäystään minulle niin hyvinkin saatan sen listaan lisätä.
Jos itse rikon näitä sääntöjä, moittikaa minua välittömästi ja mieluiten keskeyttäkää minut ennenkuin ehdin niitä rikkoa.
Kaikki ovat kuitenkin ihmisiä, eikä pienistä "rikkeistä" tuomita raskaasti. Sääntöjen tarkoitus on vain ohjata käytöstä toivotulla tavalla.

(1) Asunnossani ei saa käyttäytyä asiattomasti, vaan tarkoitus on _keskittyä peliin_ hyvässä ilmapiirissä. Jos on ärtynyt tai kovin väsynyt jo ennen sessiota, kannattaa sessio jättää väliin ja ilmoittaa asiasta esim. tekstarilla. On kaikkien etu, että paikalla on vain (kohtalaisen) virkeitä ja (jossain määrin) iloisia ihmisiä. Tai ei ainakaan nukkuvia tai korviaan myöten vittuuntuneita hyypiöitä. :-)

(2) Kiellettyä on häiritsevä käytös, kuten esim. liiallisen humalatilan aiheuttama ääliömäinen käytös (alkoholia saa käyttää asiallisesti, kuten minäkin joskus saatan tehdä, mutta alkoholiin on turha vedota puolustukseksi).

(3) Kiellettyä on myös ihmisryhmien solvaaminen tms. lapsellinen käytös. Vammaisuus, ihonväri, koulutus, sukupuoli, uskonto/katsomus, (asiallinen) poliittinen mielipide jne., kuten Suomen perustuslaissa luetellaan, eivät ole perusteita syrjinnälle. Ainoastaan natsipaskoja, yms. epäeettisiä ihmisiä / ryhmiä saa solvata. :-D

(4) Poliittisten tai uskonnollisten mielipiteiden esittäminen (paitsi tietysti osana peliä, tosin semmoiset eivät yleensä peliin kuulu) on myös kiellettyä.

(5) Peliin liittymättömät jutut täytyy jättää ainakin pääasiassa peliajan ulkopuolelle. Varsinaisen pelisession kestoa täytyy vielä miettiä. Yleensä olemme pelanneet aika pitkään, mutta olen harkinnut tämän ajan lyhentämistä, jotta peliin keskittyminen ei kävisi raskaaksi.

(6) Sessioihin osallistuminen ei tietenkään ole pakollista, vaikka onkin toivottavaa, että pelaajat olisivat mukana mahdollisimman usein. Myöskään sessioiden aloitus- ja lopetusajat eivät tietenkään ole velvoittavia. Kukaan ei ole velvollinen selittämään liikkumisiaan muille, vaikka ei sitä tietysti ole kiellettykään.
Pelaamisen saa toki myös lopettaa milloin tahansa, eikä tätäkään päätöstä ole pakko perustella (vaikka minusta olisi kyllä kiva kuulla syyt, jotta voin mahdollisesti korjata virheitäni). Lopettamispäätöksestä olisi toki hyvä ilmoittaa mahdollisimman pian ainakin minulle (ei ole pakko kertoa muille).

(7) Tupakointi pelisession aikana on ei-toivottua ja myös kiellettyä muualla kuin talon pihalla sijaitsevalla tupakkapaikalla. (Tupakointi on siksi ei-toivottua, että olen herkkä tupakan hajullekin. Parvekkeilla tai edes aivan ulko-oven edessä ei saa polttaa, koska savu kulkeutuu niistä paikoista asuntoihin.)

(8) Jos ja kun peliajoista täytyy välillä spostin välityksellä sopia, toivon että kaikki ilmoittavat mahdolliset estymisensä ja paremmin itselleen sopivat peliajat koko peliporukalle (yleensä hoituu helposti vastaamalla spostiini Vastaa Kaikille -toiminnolla). Näin säästyy minulta vaivaa ja kaikilta aikaa. Tämä on varmaan sääntölistan vähiten tärkeä kohta. :-)

(9) Jos ja kun pelaajia on enemmän kuin yksi, siitä seuraa, että muut pitää ottaa huomioon myös oman pelaamisen suhteen, eli älkää omiko pelinjohtajan (GM, minä) huomiota, vaan antakaa muille tilaisuuksia ja rohkaiskaa vaikka tarpeen tullen muita. Kunnioittakaa muita pelaajia ja mieluiten myös pelinjohtajaa, vaikka tämä välillä tumpeloikin ja on muutenkin välillä liian inhimillinen tehtäväänsä nähden. ;-)

(10) Minusta on hyvä, jos pelaajat tarpeen tullen antavat neuvoja toisilleen (esim. jos joku pelaaja ei keksi mitä hahmonsa voisi tehdä). Toivon, että tämä sopii kaikille pelaajille, mutta jos ei sovi, se kannattaa kertoa etukäteen. Toisten ohjeita tai neuvoja ei saa pitää itseään tai hahmoaan rajoittavina, loukkaavina, tms. (ks. kohta 11). Annan CoCissa pelaajien myös pohtia johtolankoja yms. yhdessä aika vapaasti, vaikka hahmot eivät välttämättä olisikaan yhteydessä toisiinsa.

(11) Muiden puheet yms. pitäisi tulkita mahdollisimman myönteisesti, kuten yleensäkin. Yleensä riidat (missä tahansa) johtuvat väärinkäsityksistä, eivät siitä että joku on oikeasti kusipää. Tämä kohta on mielestäni hyvä yleisohje elämään, mutta lisäsin sen tähän, ettei tästä tulisi "10 Käskyä". :-D

(12) Kaikki pelipöydälle asetettu ruoka on yhteistä, paitsi jos se on jonkun mukanaan tuoma ateria. Ok, nyt vaan yritän keksiä listaan pidennystä... :-)


En kirjaa roolipelaamisen perusasioita (kuten "Pelinjohtaja on roolipelin Jumala"), vaan odotan semmoiset tunnetuiksi. Tarpeen mukaan voin kyllä niissä opastaa. Pelattujen pelien varsinaisia sääntöjä pelaajien ei tarvitse tietää. Olen tarinan keronnan tyyliltäni kohtalaiseen realismiin taipuvainen ja ohitan pelien säännöt (jopa omat sääntöviritykseni, a.ka. houserules) milloin tahansa siltä tuntuu. Minulle voi antaa palautetta mistä tahansa melkein milloin vain (mieluiten sessioiden ulkopuolella, esim. spostin kautta), kuten vaikka yllä olevasta listasta, pelinjohtamistyylistäni, pelin sisällöstä, toiveista, yms. Roolipelaajilla on usein erilaisia odotuksia ja käsityksiä pelaamisesta.

Don't shake hands - learn to bow like the Chinese!

For years I've hoped we stupid Westerners would finally learn to bow instead of shaking hands (thus exchanging some of our germs with other people). Now I'm glad to note that at least here in Tampere, Finland, city officials seem to have adapted a policy of not shaking hands with customers. Unfortunately, nobody there seems to have thought of replacing that (bad) habit with another one, such as a simple bow. (I mentioned this to the officials I met, but don't expect that to have any effect, as I'm not a consultant hired by the city.) But I hope they'll learn - I hope we'll all learn.

Of course it's possible that it will just take a long time. The officials here, according to a sign I read, have stopped shaking hands for the duration of the "current threat" or something, apparently believing that this is an unusual situation that will soon change as everything returns to normal. I doubt this will happen. Instead, I'm pretty sure that there will be more and more viral threats, especially as long as people keep shaking hands. And cultural things like that are hard to change rapidly. The farming methods in Asia should be changed much more urgently than our custom of shaking hands, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

I can only hope people all over the world start learning new customs and habits, instead of just panicking about the most recent case of flu or other candidate for the next Black Death.

Deadliest Warrior TV-sarja

(Kirjoitin tämän sähköpostiin, mutta päätin sitten kopioida tännekin. Tämä selittänee tyylin. Kyseessä ei siis ole oikea arvostelu.)

Huvittavaa, mutta samalla ärsyttävää, on katsoa tätä sarjaa. 1450-luvun ranskalainen ritari vastaan 1700-luvun englantilainen merirosvo - kumpi voittaisi? (Sarjassa tehdään tällaisia vertailuja, yksi vertailu per jakso.) Ihan hauska ajatus, mutta kun ohjelma pitää tehdä puhtaasti viihteellisesti ja samalla esittää tieteellistä, nin valetieteellistä paskaahan siitä tulee. Väite että "merirosvoilla oli yleensä vähintään 4 tai 6 pistoolia" sai mut repeämään - millähän ihmeen perusteella?! Ihanko niillä oli standardoitut vaursteet? :D Sarjan tekijät eivät muutenkaan välitä historiasta mitään, vaan kaikki esitellyt soturit ovat Hollywoodin versioita. Muskettipistoolin kuula ei lävistänyt levyhaarniskaa, miä hieman saa minut epäilemään haarniskan historiallisuutta - taisivat käyttää vähän liian paksua / modernia metallia. Kaikki muukin - erityisesti viittaukset (ilman selityksiä) tietokoneohjelmaan, joka lopulta ratkaisee voittajan - on yhtä huvittavaa ja epäilyttävää. En siis suuresti suositele.

Introssa muuten esitellään monikossa, että ohjelmaa tekemässä on lääkäreitä, tieteilijöitä, yms., mutta siellä on vain yksi lääkäri ja tieteilijänä on "biomechanical engineer", eli ei perinteisen määritelmän mukaan ihan tieteilijä kylläkään, mutta lähellä kylläkin. Tuossa muskettitestissä tosin tyyppi mainitsi jotain ritarin lentämisestä pyllylleen (kun kuula ei läpäissyt haarniskaa), mikä ei kyllä ainakaan iskun voimasta voisi mitenkään tapahtua. Levyhän ihmaisi suurimman osan energiaa ja sen takana on pehmuste. Sitäpaitsi, missään luodissa ei ole nin paljon energiaa, että sen voimasta ihminen kaatuisi (kuten myytin murtajat hienosti demosivat, se vaatisi, että ampujakin lentäisi pyrstölleen). Eli eipä ilmeisesti ole suuresti tällä "tieteilijällä" ballistiikasta kokemusta, minkä takia voi kysyä, miksi ihmeessä ei etsitty oikeaa asiantuntijaa sarjaa tekemään? Ehkä siksi, että idioottimainen machoilu ja viihteellisyys jota sarjan nähtävästi täytyy olla pullollaan, olisi semmoisille vastenmielistä.

Mikähän ihme siinä on, että idiootit TV-sarjojen tuottajat yms. pystyvät pilaamaan hyvätkin ideat? Olisivat vaan tehneet oikeasti historiallista tutkimusta ja kunnollisia testejä, eli kunnon dokkarin, nin sarja olisi erittäin suosittu ainakin erilaisten pelien ja taistelulajien harrastajien keskuudessa. Kellehän sarja on oikein tehty?

How I Would Throw a Funeral

Yes, I meant "throw", as in "throw a party". After all, a funeral is really just one type of party (albeit, not necessarily a happy one - although in my humble opinion, it should be). For that reason, any general advice for throwing parties should be considered. Such as on this page: http://www.ehow.com/how_135180_throw-party.html

I don't pretend to have any great insight into this subject (or any other), but I have been forced to participate in several funerals that left me with the feeling they were badly executed. For a big part, this was because they were traditional, Finnish funerals, with the Lutheran church's representatives taking care of most of the practical issues. What apparently hasn't occured to many people, is to ask the simple questions "What is the purpose of the funeral?" and "Whom is the funeral for?" - and then to follow this reasoning to question all the tradition that goes with it.
Most of this, as well as the following meager advice, applies to other kinds of parties as well, such as weddings, for example - mutatis mutandis, of course.

The following is some more specific advice I've thought of.

I would have no actual burial as part of the funeral, unless really needed. In that case, I'd either do it afterwards with the select, small group only, or before the guests arrive to the memorial service. Of course, cremation in the presence of the family might be one option. If at all possible, I'd have the dead buried in the most ecological way possible, which usually means burial in cloth, not casket.

But I would prefer to have the remains in a coffin or an urn present during the memorial service. It would be as if the person is still there, and people could rhetorically address speeches to him or her, if they wish.

Of course, funerals are in reality held for the living, not the dead. The dead no longer suffer. That is something to be glad about. Nor do they care what sort of funerals they get. The living may still suffer, and the funeral may be necessary to alleviate their emotional suffering. Funerals serve several purposes, such as giving "closure" to those who knew and possibly loved the deceased, bringing together such people, and providing an opportunity to celebrate a life that's ended. In this grim world just the opportunity to have a party should not be looked down upon either. An important thing in all this is to remember that there may be several different kinds of people who all need the same closure. When planning and executing a funeral, co-operation with all these people is well adviced. Participation in the procedings may be important for some, unimportant for others. It seems common sensical to at least ask the people who were close to the deceased, what they think. If possible, a meeting for planning the event might be good, but with contemporary information technlogy, and "postmodern" life style separating people from each other by great distances, it might be unnecessary and impractical.

It's not possible to give universally useful practical advice, except this: do what seems best. Personally, I'd have no religious service with its empty rituals. I'd rather skip such pointless things and move straigh to the memorial service. This would allow one to remove the problems associated with travelling between the different places, like from a chappel & cemetary to a restaurant. Often it's hard to find parking spaces, and the whole process of moving from one place to another takes time that could be spent doing something more meaningful. And the empty rituals are for most people just boring waste of time anyway.

The memorial "service" should have a structure planned out beforehand, at least if it involves any performances. A eulogy, or several, could be presented, and they should be announced in the invitation card along with other possible performances, so everyone would know what to expect. I in general would avoid formalities, but professional speakers could be hired . There are secular humanists who practice that for a living, but undoubtedly even some priests, with proper instructions, could pull it off.

There you have it. In short, it's all about asking why the funeral is to be held, for whom, and what is it supposed to achieve. Throwing away useless tradition and reaching into the common human emotions and allowing them to be expressed is probably the most important aspect for each individual participant. To celebrate the life that ended, the achievements of the deceased, is a way to honour that person, and our common humanity. No superstitious trappings are needed, and for a growing majority, such things are more of a hindrance than any sort of benefit by now. In the end, a funeral is just one type of party, where people with something - or someone - in common can come together and celebrate.

Mikael el-Hakim (i.e. Waltari) uskonnosta

Seuraava lainaus on odotellut pöydälläni jotain käyttöä jo varsin kauan. Kun en kerran sille muutakaan keksinyt, päätin kopioida sen tänne.

"Todellinen uskovainen pitää omaa uskoaan ainoana oikeana, olipa hän kristitty, juutalainen tai muslim, ja tapuminen kunnioittamaan toisten uskoa tahtomatta tappaa heitä sen tähden merkitsee vain ihmisen sydämessään luopuneen uskostaan. Epäilemättä maailmassa on jo koko joukko valistuneita ihmisiä, jotka ajattelevat kuten sinä, mutta heidän lukumääränsä on aina pysyvä pienenä ja heidän on pakko pysyä pysyä viisaasti vaiti, koska vain ahdasrajainen, kiihkoileva usko kannustaa ihmisen tekoihin eikä suinkaan valistunut viisaus.
[...]
Uskonsa menettäneen on aina varminta pysyä vaiti, koska ihmisten suuri joukko haluaa ikuisesti uskoa ja uskon väistämättömänä seurauksena on toisten tappaminen uskon eroavaisuuksien vuoksi."
- Mikael el-Hakim suurvisiirille
Mika Waltarin teoksessa Mikael Hakim (s. 338; WSOY, 1949)

RuneQuest III (Deluxe) Fixes

I played RuneQuest III (or Deluxe) for a very long time. It's a "pen & paper" role playing game, for those who haven't heard of it. I've understood it's actually the first RPG designed specifically for a specific fantasy world, Glorantha. Later, Chaosium made a Basic Role Playing system based on RQ. BRP is basically variations for different styles of gaming, such as Dark Fantasy in Elric (or Stormbringer before that), or cosmic, Lovecraftian horror, as in Call of Cthulhu (CoC).

(I know there was an attempt to create RQ 4, which had some good ideas, and that it never got published. I also know of the Mongoose version of RQ, which in my opinion does not do RQ justice, although it too has some good ideas. I have never read the rules for the earlier editions of RQ. When I'm referring to RQ in this post, I'm referring to RQ III, also sold in the RQ Deluxe package.)

RQ was made for Glorantha, a world of mythology. In fact, I've thought of Glorantha not as a "real" fantasy world in the way most fantasy worlds are intented, but rather as the setting of mythical, epic tales of the people of some fantasy world. It's decidedly a High Fantasy world, meaning that it's full of magic, monsters, gods, and other things that are - for a good reason - considered "fantastic", rather than realistic. But the system of RQ is still pretty realistic as RPGs go. And I find myself regretting that I sold all my RQ material some time ago.

What sets RQ apart from most other games is that all characters in RQ use magic. There are several different types of magic, such as Divine Magic, Spirit Magic, Ritual Magic, and Wizardry. Or maybe that last mentioned was called Sorcery, I can't remember. The funny, and in a way, historical thing about it is that Wizardry in Glorantha was practiced by monotheists who worship the Invisible God - clearly a religion inspired by Christianity. It's funny, because renaissance mages considered themselves Christians. :-)

I'll try to get to my point now. I was always unhappy about some aspects of RQ, which is also why I eventually sold it (I had played it for over 10 years consequtively, and not for years when I sold it after running out of cash). I've been looking for better RPGs, but found that there actually doesn't seem to be a perfect RPG around. Who would've thought. ;-)
Harn Master (HM), for example, as good as it is, has problems of its own. Ars Magica has some good ideas about magic, but doesn't seem to work as a game very well. About a dozen other games I've looked into have seemed mostly trash. HM is the game I now use in my fantasy games, CoC in horror games (despite the problems I'm having with it). But I've renewed my respect for RQ III, and think it could be improved into one of the best RPGs ever, and especially into the best high fantasy RPG ever.

I'll list those problems I saw in the system, and then sketch how I would fix them. There really are just five big problems I have with the system.

(1) Hit Points and injury system.
RQ has a hit location system, with the body divided into seven zones (for humanoids like humans and giants, more or less for others). Each zone has a number of Hit Points (HP) equal to a portion of General Hit Points (GHP). This latter, I think, may be my own term. The GHP are calculated from the Characteristics, which makes a lot of sense, and clearly separates RQ from games like Dungeons & Dragons, where HPs are gained by "levelling up" or other such horrid nonsense.

But while RQ works as it is, it can - and should - be improved. Instead of using those HPs as points that are lost due to damage, they should be used as indicators of toughness, or resilience to damage. That is, 5 HP in a leg should not be lowered to -2 HP when hit by 7 points of damage. Instead, the 7 point hit should be recorded in a list of injuries, and the severity of the injury would depend on the HP in the location struck. Thus, for a location with 5 HP, it would be pretty bad, but for a giant's similar location with 25 points it would be much less.

GHP should only be used for the effects of bloodloss, and perhaps to asses the effects of poisons and diseases.

The effects of injuries should be altered. In RQ, an arm is chopped off if it suffers a blow of twice the HP in damage (max damage is always twice the HP, so the 5 HP leg can only go to -5 HP). This is too easy, and should occur when the damage exceeds three times the HP (a 4 HP arm suffers more than 13 points of damage in one chop). After all, a limb is rendered unusable much more easily than it is severed.

But for added realism, it would be nice to have some "critical damage" rules, perhaps a table, to be used when a location suffers much damage. This could be ignored when playing very high fantasy, but would be great for more realistic games. I'm talking about effects, like reduced strenght in the limb, or other things like that. I also know it would be difficult to flesh out well, and don't see it as a necessary addition - just something that would be nice to have.


(2) Damage Bonus, Weapons and Armour.

One of the worst things in RQ (and consequently, all games using BRP) is the way Damage Bonus is done. Especially when combined with the injury system and weapon damages, this causes some pretty ridiculous things. The basic idea of a damage bonus based on the character's strenght and size is a very good one. But the game gives such massive bonuses that it makes the whole thing ridiculous.

For example, a big and strong human has a damage bonus of d6. A knife does something like d4 or d3+1 damage (a dagger does d4+2), so in his hands, it would do d4+d6. He could just use his fist to punch for d3+d6 damage! And a weaker man wielding a big sword would only do d10+1+d4. Something isn't right here...

Also, as the bonuses change significantly in discrete steps, it means the game has "magic numbers" that the players will want their characters to reach. For example, a character with the total of strenght (STR) and size (SIZ) of 30 will want to raise his characteristics by a total of 3 points, to reach a higher damage bonus.

The fix is basically simple, although hard to do in practice: the damage bonus should be simply the average of STR and SIZ, or perhaps (STR x2 + SIZ) / 3, if that's not too difficult. This would mean a really big change in the system, but I think it could be done without too much trouble.

Another way would be to simply reduce the Damage Bonus greatly (as they did in the attempted RQ4).

The weapons need a complete redoing as well. And so do the armours. It would be a good idea, perhaps, to have different methods of striking or using the weapons (and btw, no different skill for attack and defense, just different modifiers for these actions). Different damage types could also be used. But it's also a valid idea to keep things simple, because no greater detail is necessary in high fantasy. But in any case, especially considering the redoing of the injury system and damage bonus, all things related need to be changed so they make a working whole.


(3) Characteristics improvement.

This is the smallest of the problems I see in the system. Some Characteristics are too easy to improve, and can be improved too much. Dexterity (and Appearance too, IIRC) can be improved to original DEX x1.5, so a DEX 16 character could improve it to 24, while a DEX 6 character only to 9. Other Characteristics are connected in a way that doesn't work well either: Strenght, Constitution, and Size can all be increased to the level of the highest among them. So, a character with STR 4, CON 14, and SIZ 13, could increase all three to 14. Or maybe SIZ can't be increased, I can't remember well. But surely it's silly to think that the others could be raised to the level of SIZ. Even if we ignore SIZ, the connection between STR and CON is too strong and limiting.

I don't have a really good fix for this, but it could be something like any Characteristic could be improved given the available of usable methods, but they could only be improved by a limited number of points, certainly no more than to 1.5 times the original, but often not even that much. Perhaps an arbitrary limit of 3 or 5 points would do as the absolute maximum addition.


(4) Free INT and Wizardry basics.

I've finally reached the problem that used to bug me the most in RQ. Free Intelligence or Free INT. Wizards in RQ can manipulate spells based on the number of Free INT points they have. Free INT is equal to INT - the number of Wizardry or Spirit Magic spells "held in the mind" or memory of the person. The idiotic result is that the wizard is the more powerful the fewer spells he remembers! (He certainly would have others means of storing spells, such as spell matrices, but the ridiculousness of this point still remains.)

The way Free INT could be used was based on very good ideas, though. Wizards manipulate their spells to increase their Intensity, the Range of their effects, or the Duration of the spell. They could also cast multiple spells at once. Free INT is used as a limit to how much of this manipulation can be done.

The greatest problem with this is that even a newbie wizard with high INT can cast immensely powerful spells (if he just succeeds in the casting) - the skill of the caster is irrelevant to the power of the spell in this system.

Luckily, there's a simple and I think good fix to this. After all, wizard spells in RQ are separate skills. Instead of Free INT, use the spell skill's "Skill Index" (SI), to use a term from Harn Master. This is the number of full tens in the skill. So, a spell with skill of 56% has SI 5, and can be manipulated with up to 5 points. Similarly, limit the number of points used in each type of manipulation to the manipulation skill's SI. So, Intensity 77% means the wizard can intensify a spell to 7 point max, even if his SI in the spell is 12. (This is unlikely. Usually the wizardry skills are higher than any spell skills.)


(5) Skill Improvement.

The basic idea of skills and their improvement in RQ is great! You gain Experience Checks by using skills - these have a possibility of increasing that specific skill. The higher the skill, the less likely it is to improve. Very reasonable. Unfortunately, the number of points added to the skill is too much (d6 in RQ, d10 in BRP). A lesson from Harn Master shows how to fix this: instead of just one check, the GM can award multiple checks (and checks should not only be awarded from succesful uses of a skill - surely one can learn the hard way also). Then, instead of rolling a die for each success, add just one point per success. This forces the skills to improve in a much more reasonable manner, steadily. Even a high skill can improve a little with significant experience, while a low skill can improve pretty much with the same experience.


These are the big issues, and it's not impossible at all to fix them. The others parts are fairly easy, while everything having to do with injuries is difficult. Now I just hope somebody does the work on those and publishes a (hopefully free PDF) version of the whole game, so I can try it with my players! :D

CoC Investigator's Guide

This is a guide for Investigators (Player Characters) in Call of Cthulhu horror role playing game. It consists of basic advice that should get you (the Investogator) through a typical CoC Investigation (Scenario).

Most of the game is about gathering information.
You start out with some basic information, such as being called to a scene of a crime. You should search the area carefully and interview possible eyewitnesses. Take notes. Especially, list all names of people and places (and other things) that come up. Also list all other clues you've found, as it's easier to remember them that way.

With your list, you need to start background checking and research. If you have many clues, start from the most promising first. For this research, you need to access various sources of information, such as the following:
- Libraries (and in some cases museums, exhibitions, &c.).
- Newspaper archives (recent and old news).
- Civic records (information about people, times of birth, death, marriage).
- Police records and possibly information directly from police investigators.
- Business records, and other records about organizations.

More specialized information can be found, if necessary, in the following places:
- Universities &c. for academic specialists (natural scientists, historians, or whatever).
- Hospitals and insane asylums, doctors' & psychiatrists' offices, &c. for medical info on some people.
- Indian reservations, occult fraternities, church congregations for information about prominent citizens and of course members of the group. You may need to inflitrate the group dishonestly.
- Possibly shops like antique stores, or second hand book dealers.

You may encounter some books that really freak you out. But they probably contain some useful information. So have somebody trustworthy (one of your companions in your investigation, if any) read it and tell you what they find. All else failing, read it yourself. It really might be useful for you, but you'll never be the same afterwards.

There may also be local sources of information that you know of (you might ask the Keeper). You are likely to find something there.

Sometimes you can also just ask around, as long as you don't ask the wrong questions, or from the wrong people. Eventually you'll have suspects, and will wish to interrogate them. First perhaps interview. But when you have something on them, you may even want to go beyond legal limits in this. Considering that this is a horror game, knowing too much could be dangerous, so be prepared for anything.

The basic structure of a typical CoC Investigation is pretty linear. You start from point A, and get some clues pointing to certain places and people B, C, and D. You do research on them, perhaps visit them, and get more clues. You follow up on them in the same fashion, until you've revealed the secret. Then you may have to fight the bad guy. If possible, try some other approach. But calling the cops is usually not an option you can take. You have to deal with the problem, or others might suffer even more. That's how it usually goes, anyway.

It's likely that some time during your investigation you run out of luck and go insane and / or die. That's the nature of a horror RPG. So, keep a journal (in-game, not necessarily for real), so your successor (your next Player Character) can find it and continue your investigation.

Often your means of investigation have to be illegal, and you obviously should resort to such means only when other avenues of research fail. But if you get caught, and can't bribe your way out, you may need legal assistance. It's good to have a lawyer as a friend, or to keep a lawyer on retainer for these situations. A lawyer can also be useful in ensuring your investigation will not end in your death.

There's some standard equipment you'll want to be carrying around much of the time, at least once your investigation has progressed a bit. These include a handgun or two, with additional bullets for them. For self defense purposes, of course. And handcuffs and/or light rope or string. Medical kit. Pocket knife. Camera, flash bulbs, and film. Notebook and pen. Some chalk. Other recording devices (dictaphone perhaps). Magnifying glass. Fingerprint kit. Flashlight and extra batteries. Matches and/or cigarette lighter. Cigarettes and chocolate (to be used as bribes). Handkerchief. Leather gloves. Rubber gloves. Bags (for evidence). Lockpick set, if you know how to use one. At home and/or in your car, you might want to keep a shotgun and maybe some other weapons.

Guns don't really solve anything, but they can keep you from being killed a little longer. Unless you accidentally (or during a moment of desperation) shoot yourself. But in this game, that might just be your best option anyway... ;-)