What’s good about Call of Cthulhu 7th Ed? (and what’s not)

[TheSword]

Hey folks. Trying to learn Call of Cthulhu 7th Ed. Never played before but very familiar with the mythos (stories, entities, tropes).

What is good about the game/edition?
What is really good fun?
What are the hardest things to adjust to but work when you grasp them?
What just doesn’t seem to work properly?

Would love some pointers from those that have played it or been the Keeper?

Also I’m working my way through the core book and the investigators guide? Any other key rulebooks that I should get? Not worried about adventures, I have that sorted.

 

[MGibster]

In 7th edition, they let the Keeper know they had to avoid putting necessary clues to advance the plot behind skill checks that could be missed. It might sound obvious, but for new Keepers it's just good advice. If you want some setting information, I happen to like Arkham. It details the town and area around the fictional town of Arkham, MA in the 1920s including information on residents, various locations, and even some adventure seeds. Obviously not a great book unless you want to run a game in Arkham.

 

[billd91]

There are quite a few nice changes that update the play while still leaving most earlier publications reasonably compatible.

• Characteristics can be generated the old fashioned way (some 3d6, some 2d6+6, etc) but everything then gets normalized by multiplying by 5 to put it on the same percentile die terms as your skills. That makes characteristic rolls pretty easy to do with the ubiquitous d100s. There's also a point-buy method.
• Professional skill points are determined just by EDU anymore. Some might be determined by other stats, which is useful for a bit of optimization as a profession for which DEX would be useful may now have some of its professional skill points determined based on the character's DEX.
• It's easier for players to determine their wealth now by investing in Credit Rating. It was a roll in previous editions.
• Unarmed combat skills have been consolidated into Brawling as a broader skill.
• The resistance table is gone in favor of comparing degrees of success, which is a nice addition.
• Pushing rolls and luck. You can push a failed roll (which I don't really recommended if your skill is <50% unless you're desperate) and you can spend luck points to improve rolls.
• A version of advantage/disadvantage has entered the game. You may have bonus/penalty dice which mean you roll more dice when making a check. You roll additional dice for the 10s place in the percentage result. Bonus means you take the better one, penalty the worse.

But of the things that I don't think work too well - it's mainly the chase rules. They're overly complicated.

Overall, I'm digging it.

 

[TheSword]

Thank you for the info! Very useful. How easy is it to die? Are players pretty fragile and are there balance issues between say soldiers and actors? Where the latter has much less impact?

Also, have you seen the Pulp rules? I’ve read a lot of the stories but some of my players main experience is through the Eldritch Horror board game, which feels much more pulpy.

 

[Clint_L]

I've played CoC since it's first edition, but I just got the Arkham Horror RPG and I am switching over. I think CoC is a really dated design. It's too granular; you want a horror RPG to keep the focus on the story rather than on figuring percentages and skill checks that are way too easy to fail. I appreciate that the newest edition cautions GMs against gating key information behind skill checks...but that is really an indictment of their design.

CoC is fairly lethal. Players should generally be looking to resolve problems without having to fight their way through, though every published adventure that I've seen still generally requires that some challenges be resolved through violence. To me, CoC combat still feels too much like D&D combat (or especially Rolemaster), but much deadlier.

Arkham Horror has a dice pool, resource management method of resolving tests, and also allows for limited but meaningful player narrative contributions that allows players to respond constructively to build an exciting narrative. The game has much better flow than CoC, IMO, and does a better job of keeping the focus on the story, while the press your luck aspect of dice management really suits horror and contributes to building rising tension.

 

[harunmushod]

I like the basic system, Basic Roleplaying, and I like the things they added or changed in 7th edition. Basic Roleplaying has to be one of the simplest yet flexible core mechanics in RPGs with a unified and easy to understand percentile system.

I also like the content of the adventures. They are generally well thought out, atmospheric and look great.

I don't like the organisation of Chaosium's scenarios. Generally poorly organised in comparison to OSR or even D&D material, with a need to flick through pages on a regular basis or rewriting it (which is what i do before taking it to the table). I also don't like the disconnect between attributes and skills in the CoC version of BRP but that's fixable using the modifiers in the core Basic Roleplaying system.

The sanity mechanic was a great innovation in its day, but the one in Delta Green feels more realistic.

 

[TheSword]

I've played CoC since it's first edition, but I just got the Arkham Horror RPG and I am switching over. I think CoC is a really dated design. It's too granular; you want a horror RPG to keep the focus on the story rather than on figuring percentages and skill checks that are way too easy to fail. I appreciate that the newest edition cautions GMs against gating key information behind skill checks...but that is really an indictment of their design.

CoC is fairly lethal. Players should generally be looking to resolve problems without having to fight their way through, though every published adventure that I've seen still generally requires that some challenges be resolved through violence. To me, CoC combat still feels too much like D&D combat (or especially Rolemaster), but much deadlier.

Arkham Horror has a dice pool, resource management method of resolving tests, and also allows for limited but meaningful player narrative contributions that allows players to respond constructively to build an exciting narrative. The game has much better flow than CoC, IMO, and does a better job of keeping the focus on the story, while the press your luck aspect of dice management really suits horror and contributes to building rising tension.

Does Arkham Horror require very tightly curated encounters and scenarios to work? Do you have to design encounters to work in the system or can it handle easy conversion?

I have the adventure selected. I’m wary about converting a system I don’t know well to another system I don’t know well.

I’m also worried about my players bouncing hard of systems that are too abstract. Dice pools always make me feel like the game takes over, though maybe I’m doing it a disservice.

 

[Committed Hero]

I like the Luck mechanic. It's another dwindling resource like Sanity, but the player has more control over its use.

However, the same reason it exists is the same reason the Push mechanic does: the more times you have to roll for a success, the more the game will derail when unlikely results happen.

 

[eyeheartawk]

There are quite a few nice changes that update the play while still leaving most earlier publications reasonably compatible.

• Characteristics can be generated the old fashioned way (some 3d6, some 2d6+6, etc) but everything then gets normalized by multiplying by 5 to put it on the same percentile die terms as your skills. That makes characteristic rolls pretty easy to do with the ubiquitous d100s. There's also a point-buy method.
• Professional skill points are determined just by EDU anymore. Some might be determined by other stats, which is useful for a bit of optimization as a profession for which DEX would be useful may now have some of its professional skill points determined based on the character's DEX.
• It's easier for players to determine their wealth now by investing in Credit Rating. It was a roll in previous editions.
• Unarmed combat skills have been consolidated into Brawling as a broader skill.
• The resistance table is gone in favor of comparing degrees of success, which is a nice addition.
• Pushing rolls and luck. You can push a failed roll (which I don't really recommended if your skill is <50% unless you're desperate) and you can spend luck points to improve rolls.
• A version of advantage/disadvantage has entered the game. You may have bonus/penalty dice which mean you roll more dice when making a check. You roll additional dice for the 10s place in the percentage result. Bonus means you take the better one, penalty the worse.

But of the things that I don't think work too well - it's mainly the chase rules. They're overly complicated.

Overall, I'm digging it.

Pretty much a perfect encapsulation of why it's the best. Unifying everything to percentages and getting rid of the resistance table are things they needed to do for decades especially.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Best: Cthulhu.

Worst: Still using a rules system that, kinda sorta functions, but has been surpassed for ease of use by basically any other task resolution game system of the past two decades.
Much like you could still count on your fingers to do long division instead of using a calculator or app, if you wanted, but why would you choose to do that to yourself?

And agree that the chase rules are horribly complex, the “D&D grappling” of COC. For a genre that involves frequent chases, COC needed to do a way better job here.